[HBDers] consider themselves the ultimate skeptics, willing to discard the noble lies of race and gender.We strive to see things as they are, and realize our ability to affect meaningful change by proposition is extremely limited. Demographics are destiny, but despite doing what we are able to do on that front, each day we cede a little more ground.
From my vantage point, the best thing for the West is for guys like me to snag the right woman and let the procreation commence. But the solipsist in me scoffs at the idea of shackling myself to all the accompanying responsibilities. Arguments that I'd be happier and more satisfied in so doing are unconvincing--I'm exceedingly pleased with all aspects of my life and the way I currently go about living it. Other than somehow finding a way to cram a few extra hours into each day, there's nothing I'd like to change. It is only out of a feeling of duty, perpetually threatened by a creeping sense that it has no foundation in concerns over my subjective well being, that I hold out plans of getting to "work" sometime in the vague future. These two aspects of my existence present quite the contrasting dichotomy, but I suspect my sentiments are not unique among readers.
There are the little things, though. One tactic I've found to be efficacious in spreading the HBDer worldview is to initially tie everything to Darwin. This observation could easily be made into a Christian Lander post about how to talk about evolutionary psychology with white people. There is scarcely a scientific figure SWPLs claim more intellectual affiliation with than The Beagle traveller. The comparison with Christians vis-a-vis Jesus is not unwarranted. An atheist who knows what books the synoptic gospels refer to, is able to name ten Old Testament prophets, and can drop lines verbatim from the Beatitudes--all with genial, if only putative, sincerity--is a long way toward planting seeds of doubt in the mind of a true but ignorant believer. In contrast, if the atheist takes the aggressive, condescending tact of a Richard Dawkins, he's probably only going to intensify the believer's faith.
Anyhow, for SWPLs, Darwinian credentials preclude one from being identified as a creationist of the 'religious right', with all the accompanying social positions that insinuates, and they won't want to be called out on what they don't know. Don't say outright that human populations are different (that's racist!); start by talking about how a hobby horse of yours is appreciating biodiversity, and how On the Origin of Species: By Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life and Descent of Man (no need to commit the full title to memory, since most people are not even aware of Darwin's latter work) are among your favorite books. Remark how the increasing emphasis Darwin put on sexual selection as he got older really fascinates you. Parenthetically, DavidB's posts at GNXP are great refreshers if it's been awhile.
You've now hopelessly outgunned the middling SWPL, who will be apprehensive about challenging your motivations going forward out of fear of being exposed as much less familiar with Darwin's actual work than you are. Since HBD observations generally agree with personal experience, the SWPL isn't going to be fighting much cognitive dissonance, either. With Darwin providing cover, you are free to converse (relatively) honestly.