But you do think that an ideal would would be a segregated world, correct? Yes or no?I've argued that freedom of association is the way to go, not that segregation is the way to go. Segregation usually results from people exercising their freedom of choice on the issue of association, so it's a byproduct, not a goal.
Yes, you have lots of those studies. What you fail to mention are the multitudes of studies that find no significant hereditary effect. You cherry pick the science to find the conclusion you're after, just as racists have always done.I've plenty of studies which clearly validate the hereditarian hypothesis and which invalidate the liberal creationist model of the world. Genes matter. They matter in a number of ways.
I notice that you still haven't denied that you're a racist.
We had Jim Crow laws, i.e., institutional racism from 1876 until 1965, which is another 89 years, for the arithmatically challenged.
89 + 89 = 178 years, for the arithmatically challenged. Or close to 200 years of institutional racism.
Is that all you have... the "Family Wealth" argument coupled with the famous yet not provable "racial obstacles" argument?
Hate to break it to you. There are well over a million whites not born into families that have accumulated any wealth. There are millions of whites that have not been able to get a bank loan. There are millions of whites who have been unable to get a job.
Stating there are obstacles is easy. Anyone can STATE such a thing. Proving that these obstacles exist, rather than taking data and saying "See!! Racism!!!" is a different story. One cannot make a LEAP of assumption to blame racism on the problem just because of statistical data... Ive seen it time and time again, and it takes a leap of faith to claim racism is the prevailing factor.