That may have been inspired by this blog post:

In each case, you don't struggle to find great legions of table-thumping hacks loudly demanding to be allowed to speak about these issues without being crushed by the mighty machine of modern liberalism. They're all over the broadcast and print media, bleating about their fictional victimisation.

Let's be blunt here. If the PC Brigade are strangling discussion of these controversial issues, they're not very good at it, are they? I mean, at present, they can't even get a light entertainer sacked for saying he wants to see innocent citizens shot dead in front of their families. A terrifying New-Age Gestapo, this is not.

Your and ciphergoth's links hardly inspire confidence that such thoughts would be met with calm and fair-minded criticism.

Do you have a link? What was said?

So far as human decision-making in a society run by humans goes, I completely agree.

Too cliched for me. The null action could also be a "policy implication" under some worldviews in that case, as could affirmative action 2.0 on a massive scale or something else very much acceptable to mainstream ethics.

Really? Assuming you are a conventionalist name a utility function that will generate these policy implications under the assumption that

American blacks consistently underperform whites on IQ tests, not because of cultural differences, but rather due to (statistically significant) genetic inferiority.

and I will tell you why the policy implications of your utility function aren't what you thing they are.

Right. These are suppressed LW opinions, so we shouldn't be expecting an endorsement of genocide. Those public policy implications might very well be a new affirmative action plan, or something much stranger and less expected.