Skip to comments.The Biological Case Against Race
Posted on 06/04/2002 5:24:31 PM PDT by cornelis
click here to read article
He said that in the shtetls of Central and Eastern Europe, it was the Rabbi who was encouraged to have many children, and the best of the offspring of the rest of the village went to his children as spouses. So, the kids of the smartest guy in town (most numerous also) got the best of the rest and mated.
Over generations they produced intellectually superior people. Unprovable, but interesting nonetheless.
Did I say "no worry?" No, I didn't. In fact I think there's plenty to worry about. Not about the NBA of course but the larger black culture in America that has many very harmful aspects.
Biology plays a large part in a player being in the NBA. Culture is why there is such a disproportionate number of blacks - far too much emphasis on sport, not nearly enough on academics.
The problem is the authors use of definitions in the article itself.
Using the term 'race' is a rhetorical construct the author uses to create a straw man to tear down and substitute basic biological theory with sociological theory. Its not quite intellectually honest or even particularly accurate.
The fact is there are no seperate races amongst humans but there are very identifiable and generally accepted ethnic groupings. This is just a simple fact. It is the same biological system that archeologists and forensic pathologists use to study human remains. There are several subgroupings that exist within those ethnic classifications and that is what accounts for our definition of race.
The objections of a minute few to the contrary, it is also the same rationale and school of thinking that has kept medical science back 10 years. Claiming that diseases like lukodistrophy and the auto-immune factors in diabetes were not genetically linked and instead were caused by outside physical factors has lead to much suffering for patients over the years. Thankfully the medical community is beginning to shake off the influence of these people and now people who suffer from crippling illnesses are being given the appropriate medicine and treatment they need.
But the fact remains that this article is essentially played out rhetoric given a new spin. Its really nothing new. More or less just recycled third rate sociology rhetoric.
From the rest of your reply, I take it you thought I was denying that environment has an impact. I wasn't, didn't and wouldn't. From your evident inability to read what I wrote, it crosses my mind that perhaps you have first hand knowledge of inner city schools.
I'm not sure if you will be able to understand this next thought, but give it a try, please. There is a difference between
Now you've gone on to attack me for being at the entire opposite end of the debate, suggesting I think it's all racially determined.
I don't expect to respond further to you on this. Debates with name-calling folks who can't read aren't usually very productive.
Genes can help shape the environment. It's not an either/or proposition.
Culture, here, as in most situations, follows biology. People create their culture, not the mad, looney, Socialist view that culture determines human type.
Get hold of an old Grey's Anatomy. I think that the PC crowd got them to take out the relevant text, some years ago. But back before all reasoned discussion of race became taboo in the centers of "Education," the different Negro heel structure was openly discussed. The Negro domination of jumping related sports is no accident. It is a cruel deception to try to explain away their clear superiority in that respect.
A more interesting contrast is that between the bulk of American Negroes--of West African origin--and those now competing athletically in the West from an East African--basically Negro/Hamitic crossed--in track and field events. The American Negroes--and their cousins from other lands--dominate the short distance events, and the jumping or hurdling events. The East African Negroes now totally dominate the distance events. The explanation is obvious. Survival in the Eastern grasslands, has depended for thousands of years on being able to run great distances. They have bred a race of distance runners. If it was culturally related--that is correctable within given biology by environmental incentives--there would be some exceptions to the rule, given both types are now competing worldwide in amateur sport.
The point is not to put anyone down. We have some great White distance runners, also. Those great White distance runners used to dominate the distance events, until the East Africans entered the picture. With all of the cultural manipulation, those great White distance runners still dominate American Negro runners in the distance events. The change is the new kids on the block--the East Africans--dominate both. It is only because of the sick, Socialist egalitarian compulsions, that so dominate academia today, that anyone has a problem with this.
I have no patience with it. It not only denies each of us our unique characteristics--good or bad;--it hurts those that the rationalizers claim to be helping. It is the cruelest possible deception, and leads to unconscionable demagoguery, by those who know how to exploit delusional thinking. (See The Rape Of Tolerance.)
See my last reply (#316). One can have all the same parts, but they are slightly different, with immense resulting differences in performance. Consider any sport, and you will find those who dominate have all the same parts as those who nature obviously intended to be something other than athletes. No two of us are alike mentally or physically. And the need to pretend or force the oneness of humanity is the need that has fueled every Socialist Totalitarian onslaught against human freedom in the 20th Century.
William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site
Really??, then why don't we see Amazon Stone Age Indians
They live in a densly vegitated environment where running long distances may not offer a distinct advantage?.
They have no predators and have developed a nice throwing ability (along with the tools needed to get it done) that makes running obsolete?
or Highland Asian Stone Agers from Mindanao doing the same?
Very adept at farming and perhaps too damned cold to allow for a running frame to evolve?
Like I said, I've got nothing that would definatively prove which environmental factor would favor long sprinting but you can bet that it is found wherever these sprinters originated.
I am not trying to make a political point here but I am interested in exploring the flaws in the "Culture, Environment, Geography Explains Everything" argument. Are you saying that once upon a time Caucazoid or Mongoloid race folks could have competed just as well but we became too civilized and less physically adept?
Maybe not. Perhaps caucaziods, once they actually became such that is, never had the conditions to develop the ability in the first place. Perhaps, at the same time my ancestors were losing their pigmintation the folks that were living in certain parts of africa were doing a lot of running for whatever reason, Lots-o-lions maybe.
If so did our environmental factors civilize us or vice versa.
IMO it could go either way. I think that early europeans became more adept at civilizing the environment while early africans continued to adapt to their environment. My ancestors had to modify their environment to survive while africans could survive in the same fashion they had been practicing for millenia.
I've heard of it and seen it. I could be mis-informed, I'll admit that. And I don't think jackson counts, he truley is of a different race, obviously some sub-human genetic expirament gone bad.
In any case, pie bald alone certainly does not signify a different race, only a little more distance between relatives, or one or two differnent genes out of 37,000. Figure the odds.
The odds are huge and I don't believe that we are diferent races. I think that if, for some reason, whites, blacks, reds, and yellows had spent a lot more time apart we would be separate races in the future. And in the scope of time it seems to me that the diferences we do see now are a pretty good indication that evolution does not suffer wasted energy.
He did say it well didn't he? And he really put into perspective the length which our socialist controllers will go to perpetuate the deception. i.e. they even go so far as to omit the clearly superior negro characteristics in their persuit of "perceived" equality.
I hold evo-theory in the harshest light, as anyone seeking the truth should. And as far as I can tell it stands up pretty well. Whether evolution results from environmental/cultural/geographical or natural/super-natural causes the evidence certainly bears out that evolution happens and happens rather quickly. Especially condiering we may have all spawned from one woman 150 thousand years ago D-Channel Link.
Brought me a nice laugh while enjoying my morning cheroot at my desk.
Whether you call the different subsets of man "races," "classes," "genomes" or anything you like, each recognizable type' of Mankind has a complex of traits--and admittedly the incidence of those traits within any group varies, and overlaps the incidence of those same traits in other groups.
Nothing in that statement means that we can not clearly distinguish between the Bushman of the Kalahari & anyone of another race. (And if lost in a desert, you would be well to hope that the Bushman comes along to help you. That is not intended as an insult to any other group; just an acknowledgement that the Bushman has developed exceptional survival skills in that environment.)
It is no compliment to mankind, that people keep arguing against efforts to classify the variations. With every other variable subject of human interest, we seek to achieve ever more refined classifications; that the opposite has become true as to Mankind is not evidence that we do not have variations, rather of the mischief done by compulsion driven egalitarians. (See Footnote On Egalitarian Compulsion.)
Why does this matter? For just about any concern any society has!
Pretending that people are interchangeable enables demagogues to turn one group against another, over issues of faux grievances. It distracts individuals from actually developing the talents they have, to jealously embracing the politics of envy & resentment. In others, it enables the demagogues to inculcate a sense of guilt.
Of course, it also is grist for the mill of those who would impose a World Order (an internationalist tyranny) over all Mankind, denying the nations of the earth the cultural heritages that have reflected the best of each people's centuries of struggle & social development.
For the involvement of those seeking World Government in this war on the recognition of human variation, see Myths & Myth Makers In American "Higher" Education.
Not sure whether I should feel stupid, apologize, or act to bump my latest offering, by posting it to you in this manner.
Hope that all is going well.