Alternately, blacks may just be less intelligent on average than white(possibly due to environmental factors). Also, Asians do better than whites, so no "minorities" don't do worse. Certain minority groups do worse.

This might be completely pulled out of my ass (and I'm interested to know if you can direct me to more information on this). In fact it's probably wrong, and I want to have explained to me exactly why that is, somewhere. I honestly hope it's wrong.

But lately I've been inclined to think that part of the reason for the geopolitical state of the world has to do with the differing distribution of raw intelligence in different populations (as for the magnitude of this effect, who knows?), and its effect on certain historical trends/patterns of populations. For example, Eastern Asian communities throughout history have been more reclusive and isolationist, fostering economic prosperity and developing their own technology, but also in a culture that today many people characterize as callous or indifferent to others. I.e. higher distribution of IQs = more logical thinking, less cooperation, and a cultural sort of superiority, like other lands weren't worth the time to even conquer. Meanwhile Europeans and Arabs had a sort of "middle-ground" distribution, characterized also by intense development and learning, but also with a stronger urge for conquest and interacting with other cultures (more curiosity) and sensitivity to people in general, which could be their reason for politically superseding Asia for a while (plus opium...). And meanwhile, Africa may still be so irrevocably fucked up because the population distribution is not intellectually equipped to handle such an economically and industrially complex world, and the mean IQ exists in a region that some studies have correlated well with more violent tendencies.