rooster wrote:
A big reason white American in particular don't do well in Athletics is because they are quiters.They are not comfortable in situations where they are not the majority.In any sport when non whites begin to infiltrate and offer competition white men pick up their balls and go home.Think back to the 1920s,'30s,'40s,'50s when black participation was a trickle,whites were very prominent in the sprints. When black participation began to be significant starting in the 1960s,white men in particular began to quit.Look at the NFL, in the NBA the whites are mostly Europeans.White women are on US relay teams,when was the last time you saw a white man on a relay team.The same phenomenon occurs in politics,as soon as non whites begin to join a party the white men begin to flee the party. The GOP is now the white male party which was never the case until LBJ helped to pass the CRA,VRA in the '60s and white men began to flee the Democratic Party. European men don't seem to have this insecurity and they do very well because they don't quit just because a sport or event is predominantly black.Where is the white American Wharholm,Guliyev, Lemaittre.
Jon Entine once wrote that if Americans were not represented by blacks, they would end up behind Ecuador in the medal standings. I have always wondered why Americans are not surprised that many small European countries can produce athletes in events, in which US whites haven't had a decent representative for many decades, and why these small countries don't need blacks to finish before Ecuador. Even across the ocean, I can see that US whites immediately vacate every sport that blacks enter in big numbers. And the most grotesque thing is that they subsequently invent every possible biological explanations for such participation shifts.
