RSS
Quillette offers:
On the Reality of Race & the Abhorrence of Racism Part II: Human Biodiversity & Its Implications
by Brian Boutwell
Or perhaps we should value human biodiversity the way we value biodiversity in animals and plants. We give more protection to rare and endangered variants than to common ones.
For example, consider Pygmies, who are much abused and brutalized by Bantus. It could turn out that Pygmies are different enough from the rest of humanity to constitute a separate species. (I’m not saying they are, just that that that remains a possibility.)
Morally, would Pygmies being their own species justify Bantu oppression?
Or, should Pygmies get more protection because they would qualify as an endangered species?
The latter seems to be the direction that our thinking has been going regarding animals and plants — the rare and different are accorded special considerations in environmental law — so why not recognize this in regard to humans as well? These days, naturalists make more money when they declare that, say, the California gnatcatcher is a different species than the Baja gnatcatcher.
But all the incentives in the human sciences at present are for academics to say, like Sgt. Schultz in Hogan’s Heroes: “I see nothing!”
The current conventional wisdom — that all humans must be genetically identical because it would be bad if they weren’t all the same — seems like an out of date fashion. It sounds like a song that FDR would have commissioned Woody Guthrie to compose about the Grand Coulee Dam.
Today, we prize diversity in the natural world, so why not prize it in the human world as well?
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Or, more self-interestedly for the Bantus who risk death in rickety boats to get their countries, the people of core Europe (the Franks as Ed West calls them). Maybe the people who created the countries much of the rest of the world risks life and limb to get to are worth preserving too? Can one think that without being a terrible person?
Likewise if outsiders flooding into Europe, NA, and Oz, threaten to change the very nature of those places that made them so desirable in the first place. shouldn't TPTB start planning on how to preserve them? And given that the entire world cannot come into European lands, you'd think they might develop a program whereby European peoples would be encouraged to multiply and then create settlements throughout the world to bring their special cultural cultivation to the denizens of those remote places who will never have the chance to go to the West.
Instead TPTB seem to relish the numerical and percentage decline of the very populations who created those desirable places you referred to in your post.Replies: @Dave Pinsen
Race is the beginning of separation of species. This was the spark that kindled the idea of evolution in Darwin when he saw this. The idea is you take one species and divide it into different areas. The first difference that appears is color. If they stay separated long enough they become two species.
I noticed you had left a comment there which was basically the same as what you wrote here. You seem to do this a lot.
I’m pretty sure Ukrainians and Germans are the same species, but Germans tend to create nicer places to live.
His comments on Australian aborigines have become notorious but they are more relevant.
This is very much a live issue. The equalizers have mandated 'closing the gap', following an expose of brutal treatment of uncontrollable teenage brutes in the Northern Territory correctional system.
The indigene 'leaders' themselves are not too sure if they really want all the dirty laundry exposed by a Royal Commission. The white do-gooders are stunned at the rebuff. They thought they were doing the right thing. Anyhow, it's all been resolved by putting a part aborigine judge onto the Commission.
Still, 65 IQ humanoids will run around with knives, clubs and matches; making areas unsafe for human habitation as we know it.
Or become East Germans.
Who knows.
What’s remarkable is that all those racial scientists from a hundred years ago; like Grant, Stoddard or Guenther, were basically right on the money, even without the benefit of modern genetic knowledge. It’s taken decades of incessant propaganda to prevent people from seeing what’s right in front of their eyes.
I sometimes feel like we’re just rediscovering “lost knowledge”, like Babylonian mathematics or Roman-style arch building or something.
It requires a strenuous effort to imagine the Parthenon or the cathedral of Notre Dame are just the same as one-storey mud huts and that identical worth-values can be assigned to their relative builders.
Actually, the current racial war that the Sandpeople are waging against us has its advantages too. Now we can see that treating them like civilised white Europeans doesn’t work. People are surely starting to piece together that culture is a function of biological inheritance. Every year that this nonsense continues, the more unpleasant the solution will be.
"It’s taken decades of incessant propaganda to prevent people from seeing what’s right in front of their eyes." Again, agree 100%. Add to that gigantic sums of money spent in the form of "racially reparative policies", unintended consequences, squandered political opportunities, and just plain old moral exhaustion.
Biodiversity proponents claim to value diversity and difference for their own sake. They don't value, say, beavers more because they build more impressive structures than ferrets or wolves, who don't build any.
Germany wasn’t ruled over by Turkic central Asians for six centuries … Yet …
Thank you for that observation. That does bring up the question about the relation between Germanic tribes and Slavic. I guess your point is there is more to it than skin color. I have to think about that.
The point I'm getting at is that everyone wants to live in "nice" places, but the groups that can be relied on to create nice places are few in number, not explicitly recognized as such by elites, and not specifically welcomed. It wasn't always this way.
A century and a half ago, Brazil recruited Germans to settle in its south. These weren't Max Plank's ancestors; these were rural Germans who were getting priced out of land at home. Today, despite the anarchic character of Brazil overall, those German-Brazilian communities are safe, clean, and prosperous.
Same with Japanese-Brazilian communities.
There are people from all groups who make good neighbors and contributors to society, but some groups really excel at being good neighbors. You'd think there'd be some effort to nurture those groups.
We do prize diversity in the human world – or at least in the west. We’re forever being told that “diverse & multicultural societies” are the best societies to live in. Government-funded bodies have diversity hiring quotas. There’s even a “Diversity Visa” to encourage under-represented ethnicities and cultures to migrate to the USA (seriously!).
I focused on color because that seems to be the first marker. Maybe there are others. Color is what got Darwin thinking and I also noticed the same thing. Take a species lets say squirrels and separate it. Put one set into the USA and the other into the USSR. After some time one comes out grey and the other brown. Same with birds in England. There are lots of examples.
I assume all animals are like this, maybe even ants, where there are physical variations of color, shape, and size, all within the family. Perhaps not all physical differences are apparent to casual scrutiny, but that doesn't mean they aren't there.
You mentioned squirrels, so I'll just quote from wikipedia to support my own knowledge:I just mention this because it's rather Razib Khan/HBD: each parent is a new node of means to regress to. Separate the parents, or a group of parents, from the main group, and you get a new mean and variation from the original entire group.
Amusingly, or chillingly, as you prefer, I see that the Eastern Grey Squirrel was introduced to England and Europe (1948), with a deleterious effect on the native Red Squirrels...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_grey_squirrels_in_Europe
They're quite blasé about "eradicating populations" of squirrels.Replies: @avraham
No, Steve, it’s the good ol’ totem pole again.
You see, when it comes to the human realm, it’s all about *who’s* doing the ‘oppressing’.
Bantus oppressing Pygmies? – why, that puts Totem Pole enthusiasts ( the entirety of academia – and the political class) into a quandary. Can’t say a word against an ‘oppressed’ group, even if they are the oppressors.
But – the moment a ‘western’ owned logging concession starts operating and pumping much needed money into the Congo, why, Hellfire and Damnation quickly follows.
I’m sure Darwin was not thinking of Germans and Ukranians.
His comments on Australian aborigines have become notorious but they are more relevant.
This is very much a live issue. The equalizers have mandated ‘closing the gap’, following an expose of brutal treatment of uncontrollable teenage brutes in the Northern Territory correctional system.
The indigene ‘leaders’ themselves are not too sure if they really want all the dirty laundry exposed by a Royal Commission. The white do-gooders are stunned at the rebuff. They thought they were doing the right thing. Anyhow, it’s all been resolved by putting a part aborigine judge onto the Commission.
Still, 65 IQ humanoids will run around with knives, clubs and matches; making areas unsafe for human habitation as we know it.
Well I think we all know the answer to this. Western thinking is that getting along is better than admitting group differences. Which has some merit, but is ultimately unsustainable due to its obvious affront to reality.
When I hear people say “we’re all created equal”, it’s nearly always spoken in the way a religious man would recite a prayer or mantra. Humanism need not turn into egalitarianism, but that seems to be the faith of the modern world.
A sanctuary for culture and ethnicity? What a radical thought!
The Indian Reservation system, despite its problems, does work toward this end.
This is easy to answer – the left believes (or wants to) that every group in the world could have achieved great things on par or better than European civilization, if only it weren’t for the oppressive hand of colonialism/white supremacy keeping these noble people down. Accepting the fact that some populations have traits that make them more capable than others would destroy that narrative and force acknowledgement that multiculturalism basically sets some people up for permanent failure relative to other groups rather than enhancing everyone’s prospects.
But if truly separated and left alone for a few millenia, the Germans may evolve into Übermensch.
Or become East Germans.
Who knows.
There are no fertility issues, IIRC, which would mean no. Even if Greg Cochran entertained the thought that you can interpret genetic distance to the rest as them having split off earlier than 200.000 ya, which is the hypothesized origin date of modern humans. But I think he mentioned that to press the point that the origin date of humans must be older.
https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2016/02/24/pygmy-split/
Russia was ruled by Mongols by a significant timespan. What the pre Mongol invasion Slavic people were like, I don’t know, but surely there is significant Asian genetic legacy that is not found as one goes further West into Europe.
“Today, we prize diversity in the natural world, so why not prize it in the human world as well?”
Because Hitler.
American politicians who've tried to work an up-with-Americans populism have found the going very tough. Think George Wallace, Pat Buchanan, James Traficant, Donald Trump, and perhaps a handful of Democrat presidential contenders of the past who've hit populist notes. The reductio ad Hitlerum comes quickly. The default setting of American politics ends up as the soft fascist governance of Wall Street and K Street, both of which are okay with social engineering as long as they get to game the consequences.
Along those lines Steve has blogged that liberals are running out of white kids who can be used to desegregate heavily black and hispanic schools. So we are already reaching a pint where some schools will remain 80 percent or higher black and or hispanic. Of course they complain this harms the educational experiences of those nonwhite kids.
Likewise if outsiders flooding into Europe, NA, and Oz, threaten to change the very nature of those places that made them so desirable in the first place. shouldn’t TPTB start planning on how to preserve them? And given that the entire world cannot come into European lands, you’d think they might develop a program whereby European peoples would be encouraged to multiply and then create settlements throughout the world to bring their special cultural cultivation to the denizens of those remote places who will never have the chance to go to the West.
Instead TPTB seem to relish the numerical and percentage decline of the very populations who created those desirable places you referred to in your post.
However, even within families, if you spend the time to get to know them, there are color variations, when you know what to look for. I’ve spent some time examining eagle photos taken over a span of years, trying to re-identify which birds are which, which are returning birds and which are newcomers. You’ve got band widths and spacings, different mottlings, more or less striping, lighter or darker browns, not to mention the slight variation in size, which, when you see the birds together, you can start to see which ones are bigger.
I assume all animals are like this, maybe even ants, where there are physical variations of color, shape, and size, all within the family. Perhaps not all physical differences are apparent to casual scrutiny, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t there.
You mentioned squirrels, so I’ll just quote from wikipedia to support my own knowledge:
I just mention this because it’s rather Razib Khan/HBD: each parent is a new node of means to regress to. Separate the parents, or a group of parents, from the main group, and you get a new mean and variation from the original entire group.
Amusingly, or chillingly, as you prefer, I see that the Eastern Grey Squirrel was introduced to England and Europe (1948), with a deleterious effect on the native Red Squirrels…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_grey_squirrels_in_Europe
They’re quite blasé about “eradicating populations” of squirrels.
“Today, we prize diversity in the natural world, so why not prize it in the human world as well?”
Because the industrial revolution has changed irreversably what it means to be human. Human differences no longer have much to do with successfully adapting to their environment. Because no group of humans faces extinction, other than by other humans. And when that happens, we already recognize that as genocide.
We (i.e humanity, in general) don’t particularly prize diversity in different dog species either, and for the same reason – there’s nothing to protect!
I sometimes feel like we're just rediscovering "lost knowledge", like Babylonian mathematics or Roman-style arch building or something.
It requires a strenuous effort to imagine the Parthenon or the cathedral of Notre Dame are just the same as one-storey mud huts and that identical worth-values can be assigned to their relative builders.
Actually, the current racial war that the Sandpeople are waging against us has its advantages too. Now we can see that treating them like civilised white Europeans doesn't work. People are surely starting to piece together that culture is a function of biological inheritance. Every year that this nonsense continues, the more unpleasant the solution will be.Replies: @ogunsiron, @JackOH, @Anonymous, @Anonymous
Most of us here know how brilliant someone like Galton was. Can we say that in general the humanities and social sciences attracted much, much brighter men 100 years ago ? Or is it that the top notch thinkers are the only ones that we remember at all ?
The race narrative serves the globalist agenda, otherwise it would be a fringe view like creationism. Celebrating diversity means rejecting the idea that there is anything special about your own race or nation. Having given up the identity you were born with, you are ready to purchase your new identity as an iPhone user or a Pepsi drinker.
Speaking of minorities who should be given special consideration and deserve protection, humans with blond hair number only 1 – 2 % of the world’s population while those having blue eyes constitute only 8% of the world’s population. By any objective standard, both are endangered.
Brown/blackies gloat and love to point out that inasmuch as both the above traits are recessive, then it is likely that they will ultimately disappear from the human gene pool. Of course, this isn’t deemed racist, it is simply realistic. By means of this sleight of hand they deny their implicit agency and so the race war continues apace.
Certain tribes of brown/blackies say this with a tone of vindictive glee, as though they will be perfectly happy to sacrifice the higher standard of living that the blond/blue Industrial/Scientific Revolution has wrought in exchange for a promised, largely-imaginary Age of Peace that will dawn just as soon as they get their mitts on the tiller. With little to offer but promises and, lacking fundamental navigational skills, it is unlikely that this will take place as envisioned.
You must have an empty life.
If this were true how would we account for men and women? Oh wait…….
The problem of people applying different rules to humans than to the natural world would be easily solved if humanity could get over the delusion that we are somehow separate from the natural world. We are animals, in most ways quantitatively different from the rest of the animal kingdom, but not qualitatively. We are genetically similar, inhabit the same closed system, and have identical needs for survival. Religious people have a set of beliefs that include a divine spark (or whatever the terminology) that sets humans apart. I disagree, obviously, but at least devout Jews and Christians also adhere to other, societally beneficial, ideas that go along with that. Atheist liberals have taken the simplest and most reductive approach to removing God from the culture that is unavoidably ingrained in them — they think if they just take out the icky religious words it’ll all be fine. Sadly, “All men are created equal” doesn’t mean the same thing as “All men are equal.” Evolutionary theory is only valid if we are animals too. “Scientific” liberals really don’t want to admit this, they’re too bogged down in being Christian believers with only the blind faith and no Christianity.
It’s a bit odd that there are so very few pygmies (are there any?) who have immigrated to the US.
I suspect that the entire “all races are the same under the skin” would be impossible to sustain if a prominent community of pygmies were in our midst. They appear to be on average at least 2 SDs lower in IQ than the white population. Now I’m always amazed at the transcendental powers of denial, which lift the enlightened to a new reality in which their beliefs are true. But seeing a group of people on a day to day basis who are physically so different, and intellectually so very limited, would be awfully hard to reconcile with sameness under the skin.
Well, 400 years of cohabitation with African Americans do not seem to have fully convinced Whites of the above.
You seem to think that is a problem. Why? That technique seems like a good way for iSteve to point his readers to interesting content elsewhere (and if he has a useful point why not reuse his writing?). The thing that intrigues me is why Steve does not link from there to relevant material here (contrast with Jayman’s comments).
I sometimes feel like we're just rediscovering "lost knowledge", like Babylonian mathematics or Roman-style arch building or something.
It requires a strenuous effort to imagine the Parthenon or the cathedral of Notre Dame are just the same as one-storey mud huts and that identical worth-values can be assigned to their relative builders.
Actually, the current racial war that the Sandpeople are waging against us has its advantages too. Now we can see that treating them like civilised white Europeans doesn't work. People are surely starting to piece together that culture is a function of biological inheritance. Every year that this nonsense continues, the more unpleasant the solution will be.Replies: @ogunsiron, @JackOH, @Anonymous, @Anonymous
Agree 100%. I’ve mentioned in some earlier comments of mine that ordinary people of 1916 or even 1956 readily and publicly noticed that peoples can be sorted by nationality, race, sex, physical ability, and what have you, and that helped you make good decisions about where you wanted to live, with whom you wanted to associate or do business, etc. There’s nothing malignant about that.
“It’s taken decades of incessant propaganda to prevent people from seeing what’s right in front of their eyes.” Again, agree 100%. Add to that gigantic sums of money spent in the form of “racially reparative policies”, unintended consequences, squandered political opportunities, and just plain old moral exhaustion.
School kids, identifying as Pygmies, might demand to be cut off at the knees.
“But seeing a group of people on a day to day basis who are physically so different, and intellectually so very limited, would be awfully hard to reconcile with sameness under the skin.”
Well, 400 years of cohabitation with African Americans do not seem to have fully convinced Whites of the above.
This is sort of an insincere argument though. Obviously in the current circumstances, the biodiversity justification meshes with the restrictionist or racialist imperative, but in other circumstances and times we would not be or not have been appealing to, but rather dismissing it and viewing it as an obstacle.
I sometimes feel like we're just rediscovering "lost knowledge", like Babylonian mathematics or Roman-style arch building or something.
It requires a strenuous effort to imagine the Parthenon or the cathedral of Notre Dame are just the same as one-storey mud huts and that identical worth-values can be assigned to their relative builders.
Actually, the current racial war that the Sandpeople are waging against us has its advantages too. Now we can see that treating them like civilised white Europeans doesn't work. People are surely starting to piece together that culture is a function of biological inheritance. Every year that this nonsense continues, the more unpleasant the solution will be.Replies: @ogunsiron, @JackOH, @Anonymous, @Anonymous
Grant, Stoddard, and Gunther were not exactly human biodiversity proponents.
Biodiversity proponents claim to value diversity and difference for their own sake. They don’t value, say, beavers more because they build more impressive structures than ferrets or wolves, who don’t build any.
I find it difficult to believe that “we” in the West actually prize diversity in the human world. We are continually told that we should do so, but if we really agreed with that position then it would not be necessary for the powers-that-be to continually teach us that we should do so. Most birds of a feather prefer to fly together.
I assume all animals are like this, maybe even ants, where there are physical variations of color, shape, and size, all within the family. Perhaps not all physical differences are apparent to casual scrutiny, but that doesn't mean they aren't there.
You mentioned squirrels, so I'll just quote from wikipedia to support my own knowledge:I just mention this because it's rather Razib Khan/HBD: each parent is a new node of means to regress to. Separate the parents, or a group of parents, from the main group, and you get a new mean and variation from the original entire group.
Amusingly, or chillingly, as you prefer, I see that the Eastern Grey Squirrel was introduced to England and Europe (1948), with a deleterious effect on the native Red Squirrels...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_grey_squirrels_in_Europe
They're quite blasé about "eradicating populations" of squirrels.Replies: @avraham
Thank you for that detailed and informative reply.
I sometimes feel like we're just rediscovering "lost knowledge", like Babylonian mathematics or Roman-style arch building or something.
It requires a strenuous effort to imagine the Parthenon or the cathedral of Notre Dame are just the same as one-storey mud huts and that identical worth-values can be assigned to their relative builders.
Actually, the current racial war that the Sandpeople are waging against us has its advantages too. Now we can see that treating them like civilised white Europeans doesn't work. People are surely starting to piece together that culture is a function of biological inheritance. Every year that this nonsense continues, the more unpleasant the solution will be.Replies: @ogunsiron, @JackOH, @Anonymous, @Anonymous
Stoddard is worth reading just to hear what an intelligent man sounds like. Even if one doesn’t like his racialist stuff, his book “Into the Darkness” about his years as foreign correspondent in pre-war Nazi Germany is fascinating for its first-hand insights into that time period.
There are differences among Slavs too. The per capita GDP of Poland is ~4x that of Ukraine.
The point I’m getting at is that everyone wants to live in “nice” places, but the groups that can be relied on to create nice places are few in number, not explicitly recognized as such by elites, and not specifically welcomed. It wasn’t always this way.
A century and a half ago, Brazil recruited Germans to settle in its south. These weren’t Max Plank’s ancestors; these were rural Germans who were getting priced out of land at home. Today, despite the anarchic character of Brazil overall, those German-Brazilian communities are safe, clean, and prosperous.
Same with Japanese-Brazilian communities.
There are people from all groups who make good neighbors and contributors to society, but some groups really excel at being good neighbors. You’d think there’d be some effort to nurture those groups.
I suspect that only a handful of Pygmies are aware that USA exists.
Because Hitler.Replies: @JackOH, @Harold
Agree 100%. The better elements of Hitler’s Germany and Mussolini’s Italy, such as healthy nationalist revival and community fellow-feeling, went up in smoke along with their excesses.
American politicians who’ve tried to work an up-with-Americans populism have found the going very tough. Think George Wallace, Pat Buchanan, James Traficant, Donald Trump, and perhaps a handful of Democrat presidential contenders of the past who’ve hit populist notes. The reductio ad Hitlerum comes quickly. The default setting of American politics ends up as the soft fascist governance of Wall Street and K Street, both of which are okay with social engineering as long as they get to game the consequences.
Because Hitler.Replies: @JackOH, @Harold
And when Obama endorsed redistribution of wealth, everyone reacted with utter horror, as if he was another Stalin.
Likewise if outsiders flooding into Europe, NA, and Oz, threaten to change the very nature of those places that made them so desirable in the first place. shouldn't TPTB start planning on how to preserve them? And given that the entire world cannot come into European lands, you'd think they might develop a program whereby European peoples would be encouraged to multiply and then create settlements throughout the world to bring their special cultural cultivation to the denizens of those remote places who will never have the chance to go to the West.
Instead TPTB seem to relish the numerical and percentage decline of the very populations who created those desirable places you referred to in your post.Replies: @Dave Pinsen
This is really the logical way forward, even if it echoes colonialism (though, unlike colonialism, it could be done with the consent of the locals). Some have proposed it as “charter cities”. I think something along the lines of old League of Nations mandates could work. Test the local kids, and send the sharpest ones to high schools and higher education in the West. Then place them at entry levels of Western-staffed hospitals, government ministries, businesses, etc. Repeat annually, and in 30 years the first native cohort is running the country and the mandate ends.
I often wonder whether the mainstream Western left will soon throw in the towel and acknowledge the obvious truth about different intelligence levels and personality traits between races.
That would make it a lot easier to advocate affirmative action, income redistribution, etc. The left would have a ready justification to try to uplift the downtrodden without the hypocrisy of their egalitarian claims.