The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
More South Asian Media Backscratching: Alok Jha Reviews Angela D. Saini
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From the (UK) Observer:

Superior: The Return of Race Science by Angela Saini – review
This timely book looks at the toxic origins of racism, which science continues to embrace

Alok Jha, Mon 27 May 2019 06.00 EDT

This is an urgent, important book. It contains a warning: you thought racism might be on its way out of science? That the arc of society, bending towards more progressive, tolerant values, had long banished the scientific search for ways in which one grouping of people is inherently more talented, clever or physically able than another? You thought wrong.

Race is a relatively recent concept, says science journalist Angela Saini, in Superior. One of the first uses was in the 16th century as a way to refer to a group of people from a family or tribe, it did not have the connotations it carries today. It largely did not refer to physical appearance or colour, for example. She explains that, even until the 18th century during the European Enlightenment, skin colour was thought to be a shifting quality based on geography: people living in hot places had darker skins, but if those people moved to colder climes it was thought their skin would get lighter in response.

The beginnings of race science seem to emerge with the Victorian frenzy for categorising life. Swedish botanist Carl Linnaeus, who developed the now familiar binomial nomenclature to classify living things (Homo sapiens, for example) , was among the first to start categorising humans in a way that we might call “racial”. Linnaeus laid out four categories in 1758 that corresponded to the Americas, Europe, Asia and Africa, recognisable by their supposed characteristic colours: red, white, yellow and black. A generous person might argue that Linnaeus was just trying to do what taxonomists do, but Saini explains that his classifications went further than just appearance: Linnaeus described indigenous Americans not only as having straight black hair and wide nostrils, but also being of a subjugated nature, as if that were their natural state. He further included human sub-categories for monster-like and feral people.

In an eye-opening section, Saini outlines just how many of the greatest lights of biology are implicated in the gradual accretion of ideas that we would now find unpalatable and unscientific. Even Charles Darwin fell for human categorisation, seeing “gradations between the ‘highest men of the highest races and the lowest savages’… Men were above women and white races above others.” Thomas Henry Huxley – Darwin’s bulldog and famed pugilistic defender of the theory of natural selection – was an out-and-out racist. Not all humans were created equal, he argued, and in an essay on the emancipation of black slaves, he wrote that the average white person had a bigger brain: “The highest places in the hierarchy of civilisation will assuredly not be within the reach of our dusky cousins.”

… In 1950, Unesco even convened 100 scientists, policymakers and diplomats who put out a statement aimed at dismantling the idea of race, to put an end to racism and racist research: “Scientists have reached general agreement in recognising that mankind is one: that all men belong to the same species, Homo sapiens.” Good had won over evil.

In fact, argues Saini, race science never went away. Instead it festered in the shadows, funded by murky foundations and individuals with barely disguised links to white supremacists. This area of work even has its own peer-reviewed journal, which supposedly seeks to publish studies on the apparent differences between people. All in the name of academic freedom to conduct dispassionate inquiry into the human condition.

… Every new biological discipline is quickly co-opted to the task. Take genetics. In the 1994 book The Bell Curve, Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein argued that African Americans were less intelligent than white Americans and that genetic differences between ethnicities were a big factor in that difference.

Scientists agree there is an important genetic component to intelligence. And research from the US in the 1980s – quoted in The Bell Curve – shows that if you ask people to self-identify their ethnicity and then measure, for example, educational attainment or IQ, you get different average levels between different ethnicities. However, this does not show that one ethnicity is genetically predisposed to be more intelligent than another. This is largely because the most up-to-date genetic sequencing work shows that African Americans have a substantial amount of European genetic ancestry – they could even be called African European Americans according to some geneticists.

Gibberish.

Jha hasn’t thought arithmetically about his argument at all. Try to put some numbers to his assumptions and you’ll see it’s nonsense.

The logical implication of Jha’s argument is that the true white-black gap in IQ is even larger than the IQ gap we see in America due to African-Americans averaging 20% white.

The reality is that 23andMe customers who self-identified as black had 385 times as much sub-Saharan DNA on average 23andMe customers who self-identified as white.

So, racial self-identification matches up pretty well with racial DNA results. And when it doesn’t, using the DNA results rather than self-identification isn’t going to make The Gap go away.

Alok Jha is science correspondent for the Economist and author of The Water Book (Headline).

 
• Tags: Books 
Hide 111 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. I can remember, decades ago, when The Economist was a responsible journal actually worth reading. Now it’s pretty much like all the others.

    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
  2. El Dato says:

    … In 1950, Unesco even convened 100 scientists, policymakers and diplomats who put out a statement aimed at dismantling the idea of race, to put an end to racism and racist research: “Scientists have reached general agreement in recognising that mankind is one: that all men belong to the same species, Homo sapiens.” Good had won over evil.

    I think I read that Asimov novel.

    Scientists agree there is an important genetic component to intelligence.

    What gets rejected by one reviewer or another as “anti-science” or “science” is really a matter of taste.

    However, this does not show that one ethnicity is genetically predisposed to be more intelligent than another. This is largely because the most up-to-date genetic sequencing work shows that African Americans have a substantial amount of European genetic ancestry

    Asians don’t exist. Africans don’t exist except as ur-African-Americans.

  3. @HammerJack

    I think we all need to have a second look at what these self-styled conservative publications were putting out over the last few decades. I did that with back issues of the Spectator and I have to say “conservatism” looked a lot more like an ideological Potemkin village when I did so.

    • Agree: Buzz Mohawk
    • Replies: @Forbes
  4. Anon[222] • Disclaimer says:

    Isn’t India, with its dna identifiable castes, pretty much the most racist country in the world?

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @Autochthon
    , @Mr McKenna
  5. What’s so humorously ironic about the whole ‘race science’ argument is the left uses and understands the term in the exact same way we on the right (and everybody in between) use it and understand it. It’s pure sophistry. It’s just that they say the word with quotes around it and we don’t.

    Off topic. Steve have you written about Zahler’s latest film Dragged Across Concrete? I think it’s more professional than his last film Brawl In Cell Block 99 but continues some of the same un-pc themes. For example, Mel Gibson plays a somewhat sympathetic white cop whose white daughter is the (purely innocent) victim of continuing (unjustified) harassment in their shitty black neighborhood. The mere fact that you have black males being mean for no good reason (as happens in reality) toward a white female is something unusual in film. Zahler makes no apologies or justification for it.

    Armond White writes about it in NR here.
    https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/03/dragged-across-concrete-conservative-action-movie/

    and Max West has written about it here on Unz.
    http://www.unz.com/article/dragged-across-concrete-2019-and-the-art-of-cinematic-trolling/

    • Replies: @Lurker
    , @HammerJack
  6. Roger says:

    A generous person might argue that Linnaeus was just trying to do what taxonomists do …
    Even Charles Darwin fell for human categorisation …

    Not only that, but those guys committed the sin of categorizing plants and animals also! They even distinguish between male and female.

    • Replies: @Autochthon
    , @Hypnotoad666
  7. This is largely because the most up-to-date genetic sequencing work shows that African Americans have a substantial amount of European genetic ancestry – they could even be called African European Americans according to some geneticists.

    The reality is that 23andMe customers who self-identified as black had 385 times as much sub-Saharan DNA on average 23andMe customers who self-identified as white.

    How does your fact contradict the claim that African Americans have significant amounts of European DNA? The article didn’t claim that American whites had significant amounts of sub saharan african dna.

    That final paragraph is gibberish just not for the reason you say.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    , @NYMOM
  8. Anon[252] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    Yes.

    Middle East might be comparable though.

  9. Alok Jha

    Not to be confused with that Mid-Atlantic phenomenon known as Locust Valley Alokjha.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  10. FPD72 says:

    Jha misstates The Bell Curve concerning racial differences in IQ. The authors clearly state two things: (1) About 60% of the IQ differences between individuals within the same racial group is heritable, and (2) There is a 15 point (1 SD) difference between average white IQs and average black IQs.

    The authors DID NOT STATE that the difference between average white and black IQ is due to heritability. They didn’t deny it, but they didn’t affirm it either.

    Jha is either intellectually dishonest or lacks reading comprehension. My money is on the former.

  11. Hail says: • Website

    this does not show that one ethnicity is genetically predisposed to be more intelligent than another. This is largely because the most up-to-date genetic sequencing work shows that African Americans have a substantial amount of European genetic ancestry

    Non sequitur.

    There is also an Intra-Black Gap in which lighter Blacks (i.e., with higher shares of European ancestry) gapped their way to the top of that Gap while gap-disadvantaged darker Blacks languish at the bottom of the Gap.

  12. … using the DNA results rather than self-identification isn’t going to make The Gap go away.

    This is the only way The Gap will ever close:

    We just have to live with it.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  13. @Buzz Mohawk

    That group looks like the number 63 in binary: 0111111.

    Of course, some of them are sure to be non-binary.

  14. @Guy De Champlagne

    The logical implication of Jha’s argument is that the true white-black gap in IQ would be even larger than the gap we see in America due to African-Americans averaging 20% white.

  15. Anonymous[153] • Disclaimer says:

  16. Race: the scientific reality we are not supposed to see.

    Our current situation:


    Nonexistent White race surrounded by nonexistent non-White races at the center of Galaxy M87

    Racial denial is a defense mechanism that exists in opposition to a supposedly non-existent White race that apparently can only be seen by its effect on other races.

    • Replies: @Autochthon
  17. Of course, the real point of the review (and, to a lesser degree, of Saini’s book) is to say things that are indeed true and then trust readers to draw conclusions that do not follow logically.

    For example:

    In 1950, Unesco even convened 100 scientists, policymakers and diplomats who put out a statement aimed at dismantling the idea of race, to put an end to racism and racist research: “Scientists have reached general agreement in recognising that mankind is one: that all men belong to the same species, Homo sapiens.”

    Quite true, of course. Linnaeus of course knew that.

    But, of course, the author expects his readers to draw the conclusion that there are no significant racial differences among humans.

    Which does not follow at all.

    Evweryone also knows that chihuahuas and German shepherds are members of the same species and yet differ very dramatically in countless traits. So, the logical conclusion would be that subspecies may (or may not) differ very dramtically and yet be members of the same species.

    But, his readers know the “proper” but unstated conxlusion they are supposed to draw from an uncontested truth.

    It’s worth thinking about how widely this reliance on group norms to draw invalid conclusions is nowadays:

    The globe has warmed in the last couple centuries (certainly true); therefore, we face catastrophic global warming (which does not follow).

    Slaves deserved reparations from those who enslaved them (morally plausible); therefore, descendants of slaves deserve reparations from people who had no slave-holding ancestors at all (does not follow at all).

    Some atheists are bad people (true, of course); therefore, Christianity (or Islam or Hinduism or whatever) is true.

    Another example of relying on social norms to ensure invalid reasoning:

    However, this [the black-white test gap] does not show that one ethnicity is genetically predisposed to be more intelligent than another.

    Again, quite true: it merely raises the question as to whether the difference is due to environment or heredity (or some mixture). Only further research can show the causation (and I certainly do not pretend to know the answer).

    But… “unproven” does not mean “false.”

    The fact that genetics has not been proven to explain the black-white gap does not mean that genetics is not the cause: it merely leaves the question open.

    I’ve noticed that this mistaken assumption is stunningly widespread: it is quite common in debates on the Web for someone to say “You haven’t proven that…” as if that proves that your claim is wrong. (Most true things cannot be “proven” in a brief exchange on the Web!)

    A lot of this nonesense could be exposed if people merely felt a duty to lay out their argument explicitly. But of course that would defeat the whole purpose of the exercise (and tends to make the True Believers very, very angry!).

  18. … In 1950, Unesco even convened 100 scientists, policymakers and diplomats who put out a statement aimed at dismantling the idea of race, to put an end to racism and racist research: “Scientists have reached general agreement in recognising that mankind is one: that all men belong to the same species, Homo sapiens.” Good had won over evil.

    “No good deed goes unpunished”, as they say. I can picture all those technocratic gentlemen now in their bow ties and double-breasted suits. They gathered to be grand sports and drop the eugenics policies and racial theories they almost universally supported before Hitler flipped his wig and invaded Poland.

    UNESCO delegates in 1950 were stereotypical mid-20th century liberals and now we have stereotypical South Asians citing the fine print to get everything they can out of us, plus an apology and our jobs. Stereotypes exist because they’re so often true.

    • Replies: @PiltdownMan
  19. Anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    In turn, not to be confused with “BJ Backjaw”, prominent on some good female vocalists like Eydie Gorme and Emmylou Harris, in turn not to be confused with “manjaw”, q.v., Gwen Stefani, Megyn Kelly.

  20. Logan says:

    In 1950, Unesco even convened 100 scientists, policymakers and diplomats who put out a statement aimed at dismantling the idea of race, to put an end to racism and racist research: “Scientists have reached general agreement in recognising that mankind is one: that all men belong to the same species, Homo sapiens.” Good had won over evil.

    I agree with every word of the quote. But it has absolutely nothing to do with whether human biodiversity exists. Which can, and should, be determined by the scientific methods we apply to all other questions.

  21. Logan says:
    @FPD72

    I doubt whether there has ever been a book more misrepresented than The Bell Curve.

    It is normally touted as a book written to prove that blacks are inferior. In fact, the racial issue is quite peripheral to their main argument, which is that IQ determines a very great deal about life outcome and that our society is becoming more and more inhospitable to those with lower IQ.

    • Agree: TTSSYF
    • Replies: @HammerJack
  22. Lurker says:
    @Malcolm X-Lax

    The mere fact that you have black males being mean for no good reason (as happens in reality) toward a white female is something unusual in film.

    Something unusual – almost unheard of in fact.

    • Agree: Malcolm X-Lax
  23. Anonymous[344] • Disclaimer says:
    @FPD72

    It helps to be both if you want to work for the prestige press.

  24. Anonymous[344] • Disclaimer says:

    Was there any evidence in the recent University entrance study that Steve discussed about the differing effect that objective policies would have on South and East Asian-descended students? Every study I’ve seen lumps them together, but if you look at extremely high-end tests(like the Putnam and IMO), East Asians dramatically outperform South Asians(and everyone else).

    One of the recent recurring themes here is South Asian Wokeness. I can’t help but wonder if South Asians are better at the sort of virtue signalling that appeals to university admission officers than their Chinese counterparts. Under the sort of contrived admissions system the study talked about, the Asian percentage would decrease, but would the Asian student body become more Chinese and less Indian?

  25. Tiny Duck says:

    He truth is that white people are a problem

    All other tac s love each other

    Only white men do bad stuff

    All People of Colorvagtre

    Your children will not like life is you

  26. @PhysicistDave

    Very good.

    Your comment is flawlessly…

    One question that often arises is: Does the journalist know better, or does he really agree with the illogical conclusions that he is stating? To put it another way, is he deceptive, or is he stupid?

    Remember, the Gell-Mann amnesia effect makes it clear that journalists often don’t understand what they are writing about (and specifically that more knowledgeable people mistakenly assume otherwise). One could say journalists so often get things wrong that they, as a class, have mediocre reasoning abilities.

    • Replies: @PiltdownMan
  27. syonredux says:

    Race is a relatively recent concept, says science journalist Angela Saini, in Superior.

    Genes are even more recent.See, antiquity doesn’t count for much in science…..

    One of the first uses was in the 16th century as a way to refer to a group of people from a family or tribe, it did not have the connotations it carries today.

    And computer used to mean a guy who did calculations, not a machine. Meanings change over time.

    It largely did not refer to physical appearance or colour, for example. She explains that, even until the 18th century during the European Enlightenment, skin colour was thought to be a shifting quality based on geography: people living in hot places had darker skins, but if those people moved to colder climes it was thought their skin would get lighter in response.

    Which means that we have a better understanding of the mechanisms that control skin color….

    Scientists agree there is an important genetic component to intelligence. And research from the US in the 1980s – quoted in The Bell Curve – shows that if you ask people to self-identify their ethnicity and then measure, for example, educational attainment or IQ, you get different average levels between different ethnicities. However, this does not show that one ethnicity is genetically predisposed to be more intelligent than another. This is largely because the most up-to-date genetic sequencing work shows that African Americans have a substantial amount of European genetic ancestry – they could even be called African European Americans according to some geneticists.

    American Blacks are approx 20% European (on average). By my reckoning, that makes them mostly Sub-Saharan African.

    Now, if you want to do some dangerous science, try comparing IQ scores of Blacks who possess varying degrees of European admixture…..

    • Replies: @Beckow
    , @guest
    , @Autochthon
    , @Aft
  28. Anonymous[316] • Disclaimer says:

    Abrahamics and Brahmanics forged an alliance.

    Speaking of Western cultural and pseudo-scientific imperialism, ‘anti-racism’ is the new pseudo-science spread by the West.

    ‘Anti-racism’ did not originate in the non-West. It is a Western idea, and its radical form is just as stupid as the radical form of racial science.

    Don’t people like Saini not see the irony of them championing ‘anti-racism’? That is a late modern Western Idea. It certainly isn’t intrinsic to Indian culture that was steeped in concepts of caste and blood.

    Sensible road is to reject radicalism of both racial science and ‘anti-racism’.

    Radicalism is the real problem. It blinds

  29. NYMOM says:
    @Guy De Champlagne

    I think that the author could be supporting the genetic theory of intelligence; however, w/o meaning to be since I read that Africans do have lower IQs than African-American…so European genetic ancestry does have some implications.

    African Americans are different from Africans as African Americans do appear to be more hostile and aggressive in our society and more prone to aborrent behavior but even this could be explained by their genetic heritage…Meaning, I am not 100% sure that their lower educational attainment is not due to their aggressive behaviors as opposed to a lower IQs….

    Aggression and intelligence are two different things I think…

    More research is needed…

  30. Dtbb says:

    Just got my refreshed results from ancestry DNA test. It got rid of all the noise and reduced the countries involved down to four and even selected areas of the U.S. which matched perfectly to my family tree. How much better will the results be in the future?

  31. Forbes says:
    @Cagey Beast

    Yup. I did my second look and dropped my subscriptions to the Economist and National Review, and most recently the WSJ.

  32. Forbes says:
    @FPD72

    Why not both intellectually dishonest AND lacks reading comprehension?

    Endorse the unifying power of “and.”

  33. Race is a concept only Untouchables use, right Mr. Jha?

  34. guest says:

    “You thought racism might be in its way out of science?”

    No. But I’m not in denial.

    For a fact, “racism” was successfully hushed up in science for many decades. Or at least outside those areas where it had undeniable utility. Then genes saved us. Now race can’t be shut up.

    Unless we halt genetic research, that is. Which is not impossible. We’d have to smash AI, as well.

  35. guest says:
    @FPD72

    The race part of Bell Curve is only one chapter long, right? How hard could that be to read and comprehend?

    • Replies: @Unladen Swallow
  36. “A generous person might argue that Linnaeus was just trying to do what taxonomists do…”

    Is Alok Jha a generous person? No. Does he appreciate the generosity of his Western hosts? No. He hates them for it.

    • Agree: Dtbb
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  37. guest says:
    @PhysicistDave

    The dog breed thing is perfectly analogous to human subspecies. Think: you may have Neanderthal genes in you right now. Meaning homo sapiens mated with them. Why aren’t they one with the rest humanity? We set them apart, but not so far apart that they’re not of the same species.

    If Neanderthals and Denisovans can exist, why not blacks and whites? Or some other categorization. The same Fuzzy Boundary Problem exists.

  38. Beckow says:
    @syonredux

    if you want to do some dangerous science, try comparing IQ scores of Blacks who possess varying degrees of European admixture

    Truly dangerous. But what can a civilization based on an ideology of ‘equality‘ do? The issue for the elites is how to manage the massive gap between the fundamental ideas that they pretend to believe in, and the reality of a multi-cultural society where some are objectively less than the others. Not easy, and probably not solvable.

    Biology requires a minimum level of compatibility for a functional group to exist – similar enough, with enough common features, habits, predispositions, and IQ. Once that is gone the lesser members of that society get very angry, their conscious or subconscious drive is to destroy, or at least to hurt that society. They don’t want it to continue as it is – what that mad Indian high-caste maniac is angry about cannot be fixed, or even addressed. And there are endless others, bitter parvenus from the Third World who cannot fathom living with the realities as they are – they will push until they destroy the West. Or until something stops them and asks them why are they insisting on moving and living in the evil ‘white supremacy‘ societies. If we are all equal, why isn’t Punjab like Switzerland?

  39. guest says:
    @syonredux

    The 16th century is actually a long time ago, at least as far as modern science is concerned. I don’t know what connotations this guy’s referring to, but this is a dishonest assertion. It meant a group of people with common heritage. That’s what race means now, too.

  40. South Asian backscratching at its finest:

    (NB to NYC residents: Amazon Kindle Fire just “corrected” backscratching to backstabbing. A most Freudian slip!)

  41. @Ghost of Bull Moose

    Is Alok Jha a generous person?

    Is Alok Jha a real person? The name sounds like some backwater river transport.

  42. Hail says: • Website
    @Reg Cæsar

    Is Alok Jha a real person?

    “Alok Jha of the Economist”

    Anagram:

    Slick heathen mojo afoot.
    A fool hijacks onto theme.
    Oh, teaches folk anti-mojo.
    Aloof heathen omits jock.

  43. @Anon

    You’re thinking of (((another place))).

  44. @Roger

    #AristotalianEmpiRACISMSoWhite

  45. @Buzz Mohawk

    Linda, from HR, is on the phone for you; ashe says it is important….

  46. @PhysicistDave

    Actually, I am pretty sure the real point of both the review and the book are to ensure money and connections enough for their authors to live in nice neighbourhoods full of Europeans in nations built by Europeans and send their spawn to the best schools therein….

  47. @Roger

    They even distinguish between male and female.

    It’s funny how leftists think there is only once “race,” but 37 genders (that was last week anyway, there may be more by now).

    They are racial lumpers and gender splitters.

    Also, there are no gender differences. Unless you are Trans or gay, in which case you were “born that way.”

    Pick a lane, people.

  48. @syonredux

    [During the] European Enlightenment, skin colour was thought to be a shifting quality based on geography: people living in hot places had darker skins, but if those people moved to colder climes it was thought their skin would get lighter in response.</Blockquote

    This assessment is exactly correct – not for individuals in their lifetimes, except in the reverse (light skin will produce melanin in response to tropical sunlight, darkening), but evolutionarily, it is in fact exactly how come those of us with lighter skin have it. (And not because of temperature as such, of course, but because of light, which correlates with temperature latitudinally….)

    So it’s a goofy attempt at a zinger, akin to “During the days of Ptolemaic astronomy, the planets were thought to move around the sun based upon relatively fixed orbits….”

    As Steve sometimes writes:

    Okay, then.

  49. @Reg Cæsar

    Is Alok Jha a real person? The name sounds like some backwater river transport.

    Alok Jha is not amused.

    • Replies: @Laugh Track
    , @Aft
    , @Cagey Beast
  50. @PhysicistDave

    I agree very much with your excellent comment with one exception.
    I rarely see the logical fallacy you state:
    “Some atheists are bad people (true, of course); therefore, Christianity (or Islam or Hinduism or whatever) is true.”
    I see very often:
    Some Christians are bad people (true, of course); therefore, Christianity (or Islam or Hinduism or whatever) is false.

    • Agree: Prodigal son
    • Replies: @PhysicistDave
  51. Anon[316] • Disclaimer says:

    Interesting that Modi is almost never seen in Western suit. In this, he has something in common with Iranian and Saudi leaders.

    https://www.google.com/search?biw=1440&bih=708&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=bsIiXYC3KY23tQa-uYUQ&q=modi+india&oq=modi+india&gs_l=img.3..0l10.294206.296328..296569…0.0..0.115.994.5j5……0….1..gws-wiz-img…….35i39j0i67.ii-VdgMiUaU

    • Replies: @PiltdownMan
  52. rec1man says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    Jha surname refers to Bhumihar Brahmin sub-caste of Bihar , a huge state in North India

  53. Of course South Asians are most anxious in debunking race science. Per Richard Lynn the average IQ of India is only 81, which is a major hit to the ego of these chest-thumping bullshit artists of the East, and blasts a gaping hole into the story they’re trying to sell: that all Indians are best and brightest, highly skilled immigrants here to save our tech industry from fat, lazy, stupid Americans.

    The more Indians we import, the lower our average IQ will go. In two decades it’s already gone from 102 to 98. As they are the new Jews who are clannish and love to go into law, media, academia, C-suite and politics, the US is increasingly resembling India, i.e. a totally ungovernable mess.

    • Agree: HammerJack
    • Replies: @nebulafox
  54. @PiltdownMan

    Alok Jha is not amused.

    We can afford to be witty about these folks, only because we are not in the same room as them and don’t have to deal with them directly every day. Work in an office or organization that is full of the coalition of the fringes and you have to accommodate each of them and their ideological belief systems constantly and ongoingly. That’s why the constant invocation of “diversity” and “inclusion”. The more the diversity, the more you need to be inclusive. Stating uncomfortable truths or pointing out obvious lies is not allowed, as it would be divisive or “hateful”. It’s just our turn now to be the 1980s Czech shop keepers forced by social pressure to post the portrait of their Great Leader on their wall.

  55. A locked jaw: Can be triggered by tetanus.

    Alok Jha: Can be triggered. Is cretinous.

  56. Race is a relatively recent concept, says science journalist Angela Saini, in Superior. One of the first uses was in the 16th century as a way to refer to a group of people from a family or tribe, it did not have the connotations it carries today. It largely did not refer to physical appearance or colour, for example.

    Those aren’t its connotations today, either. His dissembling is even stupider than Saini’s.

  57. The beginnings of race science seem to emerge with the Victorian frenzy for categorising life. Swedish botanist Carl Linnaeus, who developed the now familiar binomial nomenclature to classify living things (Homo sapiens, for example) , was among the first to start categorising humans in a way that we might call “racial”. Linnaeus laid out four categories in 1758 that corresponded to the Americas, Europe, Asia and Africa, recognisable by their supposed characteristic colours: red, white, yellow and black. A generous person might argue that Linnaeus was just trying to do what taxonomists do, but Saini explains that his classifications went further than just appearance . . . .

    In other words, he was doing what taxonomists do. Only a total moron thinks that skin color and race are the same thing.

    • Replies: @Joseph Doaks
  58. jewish academics and journalists do this all the time, so nothing new.

  59. @PhysicistDave

    Quite true, of course. Linnaeus of course knew that [mankind is one: that all men belong to the same species, Homo sapiens.]

    Where to draw a line to divide species is a judgment call, and those 100 scientists made their statement after being subjected to relentless propaganda. It was political, not scientific.

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/species-do-not-exist-2/

    When I read Ernst Mayr, I do not find support for the conclusion that all humans are the same species. Hell, there are still Neandertal hybrids walking the earth, and they can interbreed with “modern” humans (as they’re “full-blooded” Neandertal ancestors could and did), yet they’re somehow a different species, though they’re presumably more closely related to “modern” humans (h.s.s.) than are the indigenes of Australia or sub-Saharan Africa.

    Mayr said that the species is a population adapted to a certain niche, and if the members of different species could interbreed with each other, too much genetic variability would occur, reducing the success of the adaptations.

    “The basic biological purpose of the species,” said Mayr, “is the protection of a harmonious gene pool.”

  60. gregor says:

    The UNESCO statement on race was written primarily by anthropologists and sociologists, many of them Jewish, in the wake of WWII and as a direct repudiation of Nazism. Does anyone really think that sounds like a recipe for objective science?

    I would also note that many scholars such as C.D. Darlington, R.A. Fisher, and Carleton Coon expressed strong disagreement with the statement.

    Darlington

    There is a danger that any statement about race issued by people who disagree with the Nazi views on race expressed 20 years ago by Hitler, Rosenberg and Streicher will be designed as a reply to those views. Since the Nazi views were emotional in expression and political in purpose, any discussion of them by scientists should be explicit, and explicitly separate from the expression of scientific opinions. Otherwise their opinions will be confused by emotional and political issues.

    Fisher

    Sir Ronald Fisher has one fundamental objection to the Statement which, as he himself says, destroys the very spirit of the whole document. He believes that human groups differ profoundly “in their innate capacity for intellectual and emotional development” and concludes from this that the “practical international problem is that of learning to share the resources of this planet amicably with persons of materially different nature, and that this problem is being obscured by entirely well intentioned efforts to minimize the real differences that exist.”

    But the statement also purports to be an authoritative body of scientific doctrines, and this is quite a different matter. Without touching upon the content of these doctrines, and quite apart from whether of not meet with approval, I must register my fundamental opposition to the advancing of scientific theses as such, and protest against it.

    The experiences of the past have strengthened by conviction that freedom of scientific enquiry is imperilled when any scientific body, into the position of doctrines.

    …the statement as it stands appears to draw a distinction between the body and mind of men, which must, I think, prove untenable. It appears to me unmistakable that gene differences which influence the growth of physiological development of an organism will ordinarily pari passu influence the congenital inclinations and capacities of the mind.

    From Fisher’s Wikipedia article

    …he has been described as “a genius who almost single-handedly created the foundations for modern statistical science” and “the single most important figure in 20th century statistics.”

    He is known as one of the three principal founders of population genetics.

    I’ll take Fisher over the likes of Morris Ginsberg, Claude Levi-Strauss, and Ashley Montagu.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
  61. @guest

    If you only read critical reviews, most of which were inaccurate, and didn’t bother to actually read it yourself you could do that. I would be shocked if he did more than lightly skim it.

    • Replies: @HammerJack
  62. @gregor

    Fisher pretty much invented modern statistical significance testing in 1925-1935. A lot of people want to get rid of it now due to “p-hacking”. My impression is that Fisher was so far out of the whole world in the 1920s that his solution was pretty much adopted en masse by scientists without adequate discussion of its shortcomings, because his idea, while not perfect, was such a giant advance that everybody wanted to get to work right away.

    • Replies: @gregor
  63. Anonymous[256] • Disclaimer says:

    ‘Race is a relatively recent phenomenom’.

    Well, if you call 3 billion years+ recent, about half the lifespan of the universe, ‘recent’ – that is the elapsed time since the first replicators started to partition themselves off into distinct gene pools and lineages.

  64. I’m pretty sure race research will not be anathema when Indians or Africans have outnumbered and are running the world.

  65. @FPD72

    “Jha is either intellectually dishonest or lacks reading comprehension. My money is on the former.”

    He must be reasonably bright to do physics at Imperial – but he’s seen the demand for woke science journalists. After all, full professors like Cordelia Fine can write equally illogical stuff and get given prizes.

    His entire career (ITN news, Guardian, Economist) depends on not seeing some things. A quick browse of his twitter feed reveals pretty conventional Goodthink.

    Logic in an Observer/Guardian column about race and IQ is not necessary. The important thing is to come to the correct conclusions, and that’s what he’s done. Clever and ambitious chap.

  66. … people living in hot places had darker skins, but if those people moved to colder climes it was thought their skin would get lighter in response.

    And so it does eventually get lighter … through natural selection.

    Thomas Henry Huxley – Darwin’s bulldog and famed pugilistic defender of the theory of natural selection – was an out-and-out racist. Not all humans were created equal, he argued, and in an essay on the emancipation of black slaves, he wrote that the average white person had a bigger brain: “The highest places in the hierarchy of civilisation will assuredly not be within the reach of our dusky cousins.”</blockquote

    One wonders if this is where his cousin Aldous Huxley got the idea for his imaginary races of alphas, betas and deltas.

    In 1950, Unesco even convened 100 scientists, policymakers and diplomats who put out a statement aimed at dismantling the idea of race, to put an end to racism and racist research: “Scientists have reached general agreement in recognising that mankind is one: that all men belong to the same species, Homo sapiens.” Good had won over evil.

    So we get science-by-Nicene-Council, where they all affirm the proper articles of faith. Preposterous!

  67. @Anon

    I don’t recall ever seeing an Indian leader in Western clothes. I think it goes all the way back to Gandhi.

    • Replies: @isteve_reader
  68. Aft says:

    What insanity is this

    Race is a relatively recent concept, says science journalist Angela Saini, in Superior. One of the first uses was in the 16th century as a way to refer to a group of people from a family or tribe, it did not have the connotations it carries today. It largely did not refer to physical appearance or colour, for example.

    The Romans noticed and wrote about their own “race” deteriorating. The Greeks spoke of the personality qualities of the different peoples even within their own “race.” The early Old Testament certainly seems race-aware….

    How stupid or crazy can this woman be

  69. Aft says:
    @PiltdownMan

    “50 Ways the world could end” and “How to Live Forever” are just two of the books by this intellectual giant of the science journalism world.

    Looks like the type of guy who’d go on a No Country For Old Men style killing spree

    • Replies: @Escher
  70. Aft says:
    @syonredux

    Done and done:

    https://www.mdpi.com/2624-8611/1/1/4/htm

    The results were transformed to an IQ scale: White (M = 100.00, N = 7569), primarily White–biracial (M = 96.07, N = 43, primarily Black–biracial (M = 94.14 N = 50), and Black (M = 89.81, N = 1381). Next, among self-identifying African Americans, a statistically significant negative correlation of r = −0.102 (N = 637) was found between interviewer-rated darker facial color and vocabulary scores. After correction for the reliability of the measures, this correlation increased to r = −0.21. Corrections for the validity of color as an index of African ancestry would raise this correlation to around r = −0.48. This association among self-identifying African Americans was not accounted for by confounding factors, such as region of residence and interviewer race, or by parental socioeconomic status and individual educational attainment. In the multivariate models, the standardized betas for color and crystallized intelligence among African Americans ranged from β = −0.112 to β = −0.142. Based on the coefficients from the multivariate analysis, it was further found that cognitive ability was a significant mediator in the context of color and education, while education was not in the context of color and cognitive ability. It is concluded that these results further substantiate the statistical relation between intelligence and biogeographic ancestry in African and European American populations.

  71. @Buzz Mohawk

    One question that often arises is: Does the journalist know better, or does he really agree with the illogical conclusions that he is stating? To put it another way, is he deceptive, or is he stupid?

    I think the latter. Flawless illogic (if you’ll pardon the riff) perhaps does not arise from a state of self-awareness. If it did, the journalist would require as great mental labor and brilliance to create the string of misleading “reasoning” as he would to reason correctly. And were he that bright and devious, he would be engaged in a more lucrative or productive profession, perhaps as a politician or diplomat, rather than as a lowly journalist.

    Besides, they aren’t called “ink-stained wretches” and “hacks” for nothing. They write well, but often, they’re not the sharpest tools in the shed. Strictly my highly prejudiced personal opinion, of course. I’ve known a few, a couple of them since college.

    • Disagree: YetAnotherAnon
  72. @Tiny Duck

    You’ve really got to admire Tiny Duck’s flawless Esperanto.

  73. @Logan

    Ironically, though, the rise of many current Democrat candidates as well as the likes of Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, and even Donald Trump implies that the low-IQ are being well represented in the corridors of power. Not to mention, we’re importing as many of their kindred spirits from the third world as fast as we can.

  74. @Malcolm X-Lax

    black males being mean for no good reason (as happens in reality) toward a white female is something unusual in film.

    Is it even legal to depict such a thing? We’re all trained to get squeamish at any thing like that. Granted, those of us who have spent time in cities wrecked by blacks are familiar with it in real life. But we certainly don’t expect realities like that to make it to the silver screen. Well anyway, if it’s not illegal now it soon will be.

  75. @PiltdownMan

    Caption: “You gonna get raped …. metaphorically, by the HR department”.

    That’s a look that says “I am very much knowing my rights! It says right here in the UNESCO document of 1950, section 12, subsection c, that you must hand over your plum jobs or you are a bloody racist!”. Maybe I’m reading a lot into it?

  76. @Unladen Swallow

    Been so long since I read the book, but I felt that its two strongest messages (‘conclusions’) were that 1) intelligence matters in life and 2) it is distributed normally, not uniformly.

    Frankly I can see how either or both of those conclusions might enrage the masses in the Current Year. I can also see how the masses we’re importing might not even understand conclusions like those.

  77. @Anonymous

    Sensible road is to reject radicalism of both racial science and ‘anti-racism’.

    Well, the scientific road would be to accept whatever conclusion the data point to, whether you like it or not.

  78. Ragno says:
    @PhysicistDave

    Everyone knows that chihuahuas and German shepherds are members of the same species and yet differ very dramatically in countless traits. So, the logical conclusion would be that subspecies may (or may not) differ very dramtically and yet be members of the same species.

    “Ay, in the catalogue ye go for men; as hounds, and greyhounds, mongrels, spaniels, curs, sloughs, water-rugs, and demi-wolves are clept all by the name of dogs.
    The valu’d file distinguishes the swift, the slow, the subtle,
    The housekeeper, the hunter, every one
    According to the gift which bounteous nature
    Hath in him clos’d, whereby he does receive
    Particular addition from the bill that writes them all alike. And so of men.

    Wm Shakespeare, The Tragedy of Macbeth – Act 3, Scene 1

  79. @rec1man

    Jha surname refers to Bhumihar Brahmin sub-caste of Bihar , a huge state in North India

    Looks like they practiced suttee:

    These are my kind of Brahmins:

  80. @ben tillman

    “Only a total moron thinks that skin color and race are the same thing.”

    Seems there are a lot of total morons out there.

  81. Escher says:
    @Aft

    LOL. He does look like Anton Chigurh.

  82. nebulafox says:
    @Tired of Not Winning

    I mean, it’s kind of silly to apply a metric like that toward a place like India, where you’ve got 22 different languages that often don’t even share the same alphabet or family. You’ve got states toward the south that are reasonably developed (think Mexico or Malaysia-not Western Europe/US/East Asia rich levels, but solidly UMC by global standards) and places like Bihar that are Africa level grindingly poor.

    So, I wouldn’t be surprised if there were massive gaps in average IQ based on what part of India we are talking about. I have noticed you definitely get the more skilled developers from certain parts of India, particularly Andhra and other southern states.

    On Chinese vs. Indians, I think the answer is more mundane than people here estimate. It is cultural. Indians-like Jews-tend to place a high value on verbal skill and locquaciousness. The Chinese don’t. Not better or worse, just different.

  83. @rec1man

    “Jha surname refers to Bhumihar Brahmin sub-caste of Bihar , a huge state in North India”

    I think you may know more about caste than I, but what about this link? Are we talking of the same people? Apparently there’s some dispute about the Brahmin status of Bhumipars, but none about Maithilas.

    https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/Jha_(surname).html

    “Jha is a surname of Nepal and India, originating from the Mithila. People having Jha as their surnames belong to the ‘Maithil Brahmin’ caste. They are typically native to Northern part of Bihar and eastern Uttar Pradesh. ”

    Lots of stuff on the Mithila and their marriage customs on Wayback here.

    http://www.csuchico.edu/anth/mithila/genealogist1.htm

    “The worst thing that can happen to a Maithil Brahman is to have his name and line struck from the books. This is, essentially, outcasting, for it will be impossible for him to marry his children to Brahman families recorded in the panjis.”

  84. @Cagey Beast

    The Unesco 1950 Statement on Race was a product of the post-war years, with the race science of the Nazis fresh in the mind, universal equality of man an aim of the UN (and promoted by the United States, as an American idea that was universal), and Lysenkoism also fresh in the minds of people.

    The statement was revised three times in the Fifties.

    It makes for fascinating reading. Here is the 1952 version The Race concept: results of an inquiry. It includes dissents by Fisher, Coon and others (p. 36)

    It is impossible to imagine such a forthright document on race (whether for or against) by any official body today, let alone an arm of the United Nations.

    https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000073351

    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
  85. @rec1man

    Wikipedia says they’re actually Brahmin wannabes— not actual Brahmins.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhumihar

    • Replies: @rec1man
  86. @PiltdownMan

    Nirad Chaudhuri, in his wonderful memoir “Autobiography of an Unknown Indian” (or maybe it was another book of his that I read 30 odd years ago) described how it was typical of the educated Indians pushing for independence to wear homespun as a political statement. But they still loved English cricket whites. His views changed; He lived the last 20 odd years of his 102-year life span in Englan typically wearing a bowler hat.

    The dedication to his memoir:

    To the memory of the British Empire in India,
    Which conferred subjecthood upon us,
    But withheld citizenship.
    To which yet every one of us threw out the challenge:
    “Civis Britannicus sum”
    Because all that was good and living within us
    Was made, shaped and quickened
    By the same British rule.

  87. Race is a relatively recent concept, says science journalist Angela Saini, in Superior. One of the first uses was in the 16th century as a way to refer to a group of people from a family or tribe, it did not have the connotations it carries today. It largely did not refer to physical appearance or colour, for example. She explains that, even until the 18th century during the European Enlightenment, skin colour was thought to be a shifting quality based on geography: people living in hot places had darker skins, but if those people moved to colder climes it was thought their skin would get lighter in response.

    One of the more bizarre SJW responses to the history of biological science is that they essentially regard as enlightened primitive scientific beliefs that are obviously false.

    Sure, back before Linnaeus and others scientists espoused some form of Lamarckianism. How can this clear scientific error be held in esteem? It was some kind of scientific misconduct to reject this view, and recognize that, say, color of skin was inherited and not going to change purely because of an environmental change?

  88. peterike says:

    In fact, argues Saini, race science never went away. Instead it festered in the shadows,

    In the shadows? Is that the same shadows wherein dwell the hordes of undocumented future citizens we always hear are desperately “living in the shadows”?

    Of course, the immigrant “shadows” mean “openly hanging out in the hot sun of the Home Depot parking lot when not picking up their children from public schools or using their food stamps,” and the race science “shadows” are inhabited by people trying to do real work without losing their careers. I’d say one is shadowy than the other.

    • Replies: @PiltdownMan
  89. Anonymous[249] • Disclaimer says:
    @FPD72

    Jha misstates The Bell Curve concerning racial differences in IQ. The authors clearly state two things: (1) About 60% of the IQ differences between individuals within the same racial group is heritable, and (2) There is a 15 point (1 SD) difference between average white IQs and average black IQs.

    The authors DID NOT STATE that the difference between average white and black IQ is due to heritability. They didn’t deny it, but they didn’t affirm it either.

    If they made claims about the heritability of IQ differences within racial groups, why didn’t they make claims about the heritability of IQ differences between racial groups?

  90. anonymous[405] • Disclaimer says:
    @rec1man

    The GDP per capita of Bihar is about $500, the poorest in India (nationally is $2,000 per capita).

    Yet 20% of Bihar is high caste. It’s very unlikely that the high caste of Bihar or North India has an average IQ even reaching 100. Or else Bihar should do just as well as South Africa ($8,000 per capita) where a small minority of 10% with an average IQ of 100 lifts the entire country.

  91. rec1man says:
    @PiltdownMan

    They are considered a lower grade of brahmins, ( but still brahmins ) , because they took up farming, and unlike most brahmins also branched off into Mafia activities, caste militia , own guns etc

    Phenotypically, they look like other North Indian brahmins

    IQ wise as in academic performance they score like other North Indian brahmins

    more to the point

    in most parts of India, your Surname indicates your caste and your region of origin

    Desai = Gujurati Brahmin
    Mishra = Hindi Brahmin
    Jha = Bihar Brahmin
    Mukherji = Bengal Brahmin

    Chetty = Tamil / Telugu Merchant
    Gupta = Hindi Merchant

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  92. @isteve_reader

    isteve_reader wrote to me:

    I see very often:
    Some Christians are bad people (true, of course); therefore, Christianity (or Islam or Hinduism or whatever) is false.

    Yeah, fallacies like this can be used in both directions. As an atheist myself, I have often been in discussions with other non-believers where someone says “All those Christians want to do _______.”

    And, then I end up defending (contemporary American) Christians by pointing out that they are about as tolerant as any other group of Americans. Indeed, evangelical Christians are often more libertarian than most other Americans: because of their traditionalist orientation, they tend to take the Founders seriously.

    But, “the world is a complicated place and human beings are the most complicated of all” is a message people on all sides often do not want to hear.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
  93. @Reg Cæsar

    I thought it was a spicy lentil glop you scoop up with your hand. Don’t forget which one!

  94. Anonymous[249] • Disclaimer says:
    @rec1man

    Desai = Gujurati Brahmin
    Mishra = Hindi Brahmin
    Jha = Bihar Brahmin
    Mukherji = Bengal Brahmin

    Chetty = Tamil / Telugu Merchant
    Gupta = Hindi Merchant

    Do the Merchant classes have higher IQs than the Brahmins? One would think the intellectual selection pressures would be higher on the Merchant classes.

  95. @Anonymous

    The “alliance” you say these two groups have is of recent vintage; even 20 years ago I don’t recall many Dot Indians prominantly pushing pseudoscientific ideas about race or IQ.
    Recent years have brought us the hideously antiwhite, open boders radical WA state Congressman Pramila Jayapal, talk show host Sonali Kolhatkar, Jeet Heer of The New Republic (who apologized for his magazine devoting almost an entire issue to The Bell Curve back in the ’90s) and leftwing “journalists” like Alok Jha propagandizing for people like Angela Saini.
    I’ll say this about the two groups- they’re both wealthy minority groups who are highly ambitious when it comes to the political sphere and are found disproportionately on the Left- including the far Left. They both also have high median verbal IQs and are highly adept at spewing obfuscatory mumbo-jumbo filled with half truths and contortions of the truth to advance their harebrained ideas. They’re also rank hypocrites- They have a long history of endogamy and snobbery to those outside their groups (and to an extent still do in their diasporas) but love preaching egalitarian univeralism to other people.

  96. gregor says:
    @Steve Sailer

    Fisher invented stuff as he went; his methods were developed incidentally to deal with the problems he was working on (biology and heredity). Decades later these things become standard “methods” that get taught to psychologists who just want to know where to click in SPSS and get their cutesy priming paper published.

    I suspect that the controversy over statistical methodology is a massively overrated problem relative to the problems of 1) incentives in academia, 2) lack of common sense, 3) extreme political constraints in the social sciences. In social science, many of the really important patterns are strong enough that you don’t need fancy statistics to figure it out. In many cases personal observation is adequate.

  97. Corvinus says:

    “Race is a relatively recent concept, says science journalist Angela Saini”.

    Gibberish? Hardly, Mr. Sailer. Here’s something for you to chew on…

    “The Romantic notion of human difference and the positivist view of the natural order fused into the concept of ‘racial type’. A type came to mean a group of beings, linked by a set of fundamental characteristics and which differed from other types by virtue of those characteristics. Each type was separated from others by a sharp discontinuity; there was rarely any doubt as to which type an individual belonged. Each type remained constant through time. And there were severe limits to how much any member of a type could vary from the fundamental ground plan by which the type was constituted. Biologists came to think of human types, in other words, as fixed, unchanging entities, each defined by its special essence.”

    “As the American physician Samuel Morton, the leading polygenist and the most celebrated scientist of his day, put it ‘From remote ages, the inhabitants of every extended locality have been marked by certain physical and moral peculiarities, common among themselves and serving to distinguish them from all other people.’ The human family, his fellow polygenists, Josiah Clark Nott and George Robbins Gliddon argued, offers no exception to this general law, but fully conforms to it, ‘Mankind being divided into several groups of Races, each of which constitutes a primitive element in the fauna of its peculiar province.’ ‘History’, Nott and Gliddon believed, ‘affords no evidence of the transformation of one Type into another, nor of the origination of a new and Permanent Type.’”

    “The echoes of Herder’s concept of volksgeist are unmistakeable. Herder, the great believer in emancipation and equality, the great scourge of racism and colonialism, would have been horrified at the arguments of Morton, Nott and Gliddon. Yet, through the concept of type, Herder’s cultural essence took on biological garb, and in doing so became an argument not for a plurality of cultures but for a natural hierarchy within society.”

    “The journey from volksgeist to race captured a significant shift in perceptions of human beings. Humans were no longer evaluated in terms of their moral or political qualities, but were appraised principally according to their physical characteristics. In the eighteenth century, Enlightenment philosophes judged people largely according to their moral capacities. By the second half of the nineteenth century, biology determined identity and fate. It was, in the words of historian Nancy Stepan, ‘a move away from an eighteenth century optimism about man, and faith in the adaptability of man’s universal “nature”, towards a nineteenth century biological pessimism.’ And such biological pessimism marked a shift ‘from an emphasis on the fundamental physical and moral homogeneity of man, despite superficial differences, to an emphasis on the essential heterogeneity of mankind, despite superficial similarities.’”

    Source–> https://kenanmalik.com/2013/02/17/the-making-of-the-idea-of-race/

    • Replies: @nebulafox
  98. Corvinus says:

    and then wash it down with!

    The Alt Right assumes that the creation of the United States was undeniably monolithic. “Europeans” came to North America, conquered and settled. But they were other than united in the beginning by common ideologies. Europeans had their own “redoubts”, ethnically and/or culturally, in the Thirteen States. Remember, the Germans, the Irish, the Italians, the Slavs, the Poles–ALL had been considered at various points in time of unworthy of assimilation and citizenship. HOWEVER, they gradually blended into a new group–Americans–as they immersed themselves into building their political and economic institutions. And, accordingly, the Founding Fathers left open the door for future generations of Americans to weave other groups of people into the American fabric–European and non-European.

    The notion of “whites” or “European-whites” being bound together came about as a result of Social Darwinism and imperialism in the late 1800’s–the distinction that separated “us” from “them”. In this manner, the “lowest-rung” whites were deemed superior in social standing than their darkie counterparts, while at the same time knew full well their “pecking order” within the European hierarchy. The following source offers extensive evidence to prove this point.

    http://science.jrank.org/pages/10962/Race-Racism-in-Europe-French-Revolution-Nation.html

    “One of the first and most important thinkers of the nineteenth century to elaborate this view of society was Joseph-Arthur de Gobineau, who began publishing his L’essai sur l’inegalité des races humaines (Essay on the inequality of the human races) in 1853. Gobineau’s history presented human development for the first time as a contest of races. His book was heavily researched in an attempt to draw together the most up-to-date scholarship of the new realms of science, especially German archaeology and philology and French anthropology. He concluded that contemporary nations were the patrimony of a racial past defined by the conquest of weaker races by stronger ones. He posited three great races, the white, the black, and the yellow, that engaged in constant battle. For Gobineau, the victor and true driving force of human history was the white, or European, race. Yet, this victory came always at a price. Lesser races never disappeared. Instead, they mixed into the conquering races, leaving a weaker whole. The mixture, in fact, elevated lower races, in which he included the yellow and the black and their lingering influence among European peasantry and urban working classes, while the white race was degraded.”

    “Georges Vacher de Lapouge, in his study of European skulls in 1888, saw three European races and ordered their quality and value: European Man, Alpine Man, and Homo Contractus. He argued that none of these races directly correlated with a specific nation, but his descriptions of their behaviors and religious ideas were clearly meant to correspond to Germany, Southern Europe, and the population of European Jews. The naturalized German citizen Houston Stewart Chamberlain wrote in 1899 that the German race struggled to maintain its purity because of the Darwinian form of natural selection that caused Germans to feel a revulsion toward intermixing with lesser races. Overall, this putative science of race uncoupled nationalism from its liberal roots, implying that those who lived within a national community did not necessarily belong. One could act, speak, or feel German or French but never be German or French.”

    “In newly unified Italy, northern Italians in Lombardy saw the threat of southern peoples, the Sicilians or Neapolitans, as racially enervating. They were thought to be different because of their hot-blooded, less rational characters—elements believed to emanate from their hotter climate and their proximity to Africa. Similar ideas existed in Spain toward those from the south, in particular Andalu sia. In northern Spain, notions of racial purity became important adjuncts of the Basque nationalist movement that sprang up in the late nineteenth century. The presence of foreign guest workers, or maketos, from other parts of Spain, was perceived as a threat to Basque purity. Sabino Arana, an early founder of Basque nationalism, proposed miscegenation laws in 1901 to prohibit the marriage of Basques to Spaniards.”

    “Imperialism helped solidify a view of the world as a hierarchy of races with Europeans at the zenith and all others arrayed below. One ugly symbol of this worldview was the “human zoo” that appeared throughout fin de siècle Europe in international fairs and other public spectacles. This kind of menagerie, replete with dioramic portrayals of humans living in their “typical” habitat, produced wide-eyed amazement among Europeans of the late nineteenth century and established racial hierarchy not just as an elite, scientific view of history but also as a popular one. By the 1880’s and 189’0s, race existed as a concrete idea recognizable to any European. Race became an essential element of national strength—and required defense and protection.”

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  99. Individuals with the last name Jha are from the Brahmin community of the Mithila region which spans North Bihar and the adjacent region of Nepal. They are the dominant caste in this region and tend to be a clever and successful people.

    Bihar is a historically mismanaged state, sharply divided on caste and religious lines, but has been making progress with good governance since 2005. North Bihar (the part North of the Ganga River) is home to vast rivers that come out of the Himalayas hitting the flat plains at a sharp angle. It is therefore extremely flood prone when the snow melt combines with the summer monsoon, further contributing to its historic lack of development.

    In the western and central part of Bihar (Bhojpur and Magadh regions) the dominant caste were the Bhumihars, who were landowning Brahmins who had given up being priests. This was a relatively recent shift, probably in the last few hundred years. The Bhumihars also had a strong history of military service. As the wikipedia notes, there’s some controversy over the Brahmin status of Bhumihars, but most Bhumihars would not be bothered by this as they tend to marry exclusively within their own community and aren’t looking for jobs as temple priests. The benefit of modern day genetic testing shows extreme levels of Steppe ancestry in the Bhumihars which is a common finding among all Indian Brahmins.

  100. @peterike

    In the shadows? Is that the same shadows wherein dwell the hordes of undocumented future citizens we always hear are desperately “living in the shadows”?

    Of course, the immigrant “shadows” mean “openly hanging out in the hot sun of the Home Depot parking lot when not picking up their children from public schools or using their food stamps,” and the race science “shadows” are inhabited by people trying to do real work without losing their careers. I’d say one is shadowy than the other.

    Be kind. Standing in the shadows can be a terrible fate.

  101. Corvinus says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    How about actually trying to muster up a sound rebuttal to two solid sources rather than push your default button–ad hominem?

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  102. nebulafox says:
    @PhysicistDave

    >But, “the world is a complicated place and human beings are the most complicated of all” is a message people on all sides often do not want to hear.

    Explaining to political partisans-on either side-that your average, run-of-the-mill believer in the Muslim World is simultaneously an ordinary person that does his best to keep his head down, do the right thing, and does not generally view Westerners as demons while also believing some rather un-PC things about how society should run or about certain demographics (Jews, feminists, atheists, flamboyant homosexuals) that would deeply, deeply distress the same kinds of liberals who ostentatiously defend their non-Enlightenment castrated, programmatic faith is an oft-impossible task.

    It’s also led me to have a lot more sympathy for Muslims who are genuinely trying to figure things out and reconcile their faith to modernity as best they can (which, being human, is always filled with hypocrisy and imperfection, but also with genuine good will), than for these same Western liberals who, in reality, indulge Islam so much because it is exotic, they don’t have to deal with it, and it is great for deplorable bashing.

  103. nebulafox says:
    @Corvinus

    “Gibberish? Hardly, Mr. Sailer. Here’s something for you to chew on…”

    Self-awareness is limited with this one.

  104. Corvinus says:
    @nebulafox

    “Self-awareness is limited with this one.”

    Well, Mr. Sailer does pride himself on NOTICING. The problem is that he is also subject to confirmation bias. Just trying to help him view the entire picture.

    Now, what say you about the two quotations? Anything of substance on your part?

  105. @Corvinus

    In the interest of equality, I gave you the same treatment I’d just given our other avian friend, Tiny.

    It seemed more entertaining than “tl;dr”.

  106. @nebulafox

    You have to admit, his cut-and-pasting is an upgrade over when he tries to reason on his own. “Yeah but…” and “nuh uhhh”

  107. MBlanc46 says:

    I thought that Economist writers were better than that.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments are moderated by iSteve, at whim.


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?