Hello libfags

So suppose the hereditarian hypothesis of the IQ gap is conclusively proven (though I don't really understand how it's not atm), and that Blacks will be, on average, dumber for the the foreseeable future.
My question to libfags is this. If it happens, will libfags then
1) support a Rawlsian argument (claim that genetic advantages are undeserved and unfair, and thus enforce substantial and permanent racial preferences)?
2) still be in complete denial of reality?
3) understand that we don't owe them anything, never have, never will?
Thanks.

>>2

Lol- "closer to animals than men". So who exactly gets to decide how far along the genetic evolution scale each person is then?

"Unintelligent people...do not feel joy or pain in the same depth as superior men": lol- and you know this how?

"Ethically I believe more intelligent people are entitled to more prosperity, wealth and happiness": So what you actually mean is (assuming that you are intelligent yourself) that you ethically beleive that YOU are entitled to more happiness, wealth etc than those you believe to be 'inferior'. Hmm...well YOU would say that though wouldn't you?

Intelligence in what sense? IQ level's don't mean jack shit (except for how developed certain mathematics-based logic skills are), so how will you measure intelligence? People possess different forms of intelligence; with certain accedemically 'intellectual' individuals completely lacking in what can broadly be described as 'common sense'.
For example, I know certain students who are capable of elegantly articulating the most deeply philosophical concepts you could imagine with ease, yet they are incapable of carrying out retardedly simplistic practical tasks in everyday life.