Steve Sailer, Steve Sailer's iSteve Blog, October 8, 2009
From Nature, October 8, 2009:
Let’s celebrate human genetic diversity
Science is finding evidence of genetic diversity among groups of people as well as among individuals. This discovery should be embraced, not feared, say Bruce T. Lahn and Lanny Ebenstein.
A growing body of data is revealing the nature of human genetic diversity at increasingly finer resolution. It is now recognized that despite the high degree of genetic similarities that bind humanity together as a species, considerable diversity exists at both individual and group levels (see box, page 728). The biological significance of these variations remains to be explored fully. But enough evidence has come to the fore to warrant the question: what if scientific data ultimately demonstrate that genetically based biological variation exists at non-trivial levels not only among individuals but also among groups? In our view, the scientific community and society at large are ill-prepared for such a possibility. We need a moral response to this question that is robust irrespective of what research uncovers about human diversity. Here, we argue for the moral position that genetic diversity, from within or among groups, should be embraced and celebrated as one of humanity’s chief assets.
The current moral position is a sort of ‘biological egalitarianism’. This dominant position emerged in recent decades largely to correct grave historical injustices, including genocide that were committed with the support of pseudo scientific understandings of group diversity. The racial-hygiene theory promoted by German geneticists Fritz Lenz, Eugene Fischer and others during the Nazi era is one notorious example of such pseudoscience. Biological egalitarianism is the view that no or almost no meaningful genetically based biological differences exist among human groups, with the exception of a few superficial traits such as skin colour. Proponents of this view seem to hope that, by promoting biological sameness, discrimination against groups or individuals will become groundless.
We believe that this position, although well intentioned, is illogical and even dangerous, as it implies that if significant group diversity were established, discrimination might thereby be justified. We reject this position. Equality of opportunity and respect for human dignity should be humankind’s common aspirations, notwithstanding human differences no matter how big or small. We also think that biological egalitarianism may not remain viable in light of the growing body of empirical data.
Many people may acknowledge the possibility of genetic diversity at the group level, but see it as a threat to social cohesion. Some scholars have even called for a halt to research into the topic or sensitive aspects of it, because of potential misuse of the information. Others will ask: if information on group diversity can be misused, why not just focus on individual differences and ignore any group variation? We strongly affirm that society must guard vigilantly against any misuse of genetic information, but we also believe that the best defence is to take a positive attitude towards diversity, including that at the group level. We argue for our position from two perspectives: first, that the understanding of group diversity can benefit research and medicine, and second, that human genetic diversity as a whole, including group diversity, greatly enriches our species.
I think a third argument is even more important: all truths are connected to all other truths, so if you aren’t allowed to think about a major truth, much of the rest of your thinking will be faulty.
For example, say Lahn was a physicist writing to undermine the ban on mentioning gravity in physics classes:
Let’s celebrate gravity!
Science is finding evidence of gravity. This discovery should be embraced, not feared, say Bruce T. Lahn and Lanny Ebenstein.
A growing body of data is revealing the existence of gravity. It is now recognized that despite the many situations in which gravity is not relevant, in many others it is important (see box, page 728). The physical significance of gravity remains to be explored fully. But enough evidence has come to the fore to warrant the question: what if scientific data ultimately demonstrate that gravity exists at non-trivial levels? In our view, the scientific community and society at large are ill-prepared for such a possibility. We need a moral response to this question that is robust irrespective of what research uncovers about gravity. Here, we argue for the moral position that gravity, from within or between planets, should be embraced and celebrated as one of humanity’s, not to mention the Solar System’s, chief assets.
The current moral position is a sort of ‘mass egalitarianism’. This dominant position emerged in recent decades largely to correct grave astronomical injustices, such as the Moon’s subordinate status relative to the Earth. Similarly, gravity has been used to drop rocks on enemies, to pour burning oil on the besiegers of castles, and to chop off heads with the guillotine. Also, gravity has been misunderstood by scientists in the past, such as Aristotle. Mass egalitarianism is the view that the Moon doesn’t really go around the Earth because the Earth has more mass than the Moon, it just looks that way to ill-informed, hate-filled observers who haven’t been adequately educated in modern sensitivities about mass equality. Proponents of this view hope that, by promoting a belief in mass sameness, the Moon will cease orbiting around the Earth and both will hover motionlessly relative to each other in complete equality.
We believe that this position, although well intentioned, is illogical and even dangerous, as it implies that if you stepped off the edge of the Grand Canyon, you’d just hover in the air. We reject this position. Equality of respect for planetary and subplanetary dignity should be humankind’s common aspirations, notwithstanding planetary differences in mass no matter how big or small. We also think that the nonexistence of gravity may not remain viable in light of the growing body of empirical data.
Indeed.
[Editor’s Note: “Let’s celebrate human genetic diversity,” by Bruce T. Lahn & Lanny Ebenstein, can be read on-line or downloaded here.
Original article
(Posted on October 14, 2009)
Comments
Let’s not celebrate something that has only brought us strife, dumbed-down education, racial guilt, misunderstandings, aff-action lawsuits, the race card, crime, and overall lower quality of life. With blacks, everything comes down to race.
In the 1990s, I know that AR did a survey of its readers (?) which asked them who were the best and worst people in history for whites. I can’t remember who was best, but I know that Adolf Hitler was the #1 worst, and this article shows why — his obvious insanity and excesses enshrined “biological egalitarianism” as the scientific standards for decades afterward (and it still rules today mostly), ONLY because of the fear of the political party where it used to thrive the most.
Excellent points! The left is always touting the glories and wonders of diversity; then, when geneticists find evidence of differences between the races besides just skin color, the leftists shout, “Racism! Nazism!” Balderdash. They don’t want to hear it, and they especially don’t want US to hear it, not from fear of misuse of the information, but for fear of what it will reveal about their precious “people of color” — especially blacks.
If genetic research shows, as it has, that Ashkenazic Jews collectively have the world’s highest IQs, with East Asians close behind, European-descended peoples next, and Africans at the bottom of the IQ heap, so what? It merely proves why some facts and events of many hundred years’ duration are the way they are.
The whole “let’s ignore the differences between races” argument reminds me of my own theory about human cloning: The conservatives don’t want it because they think it’s a mockery of God; and the liberals don’t want it because they’re afraid it will be used to create more White people.
“We believe that this position, although well intentioned, is illogical and even dangerous, as it implies that if you stepped off the edge of the Grand Canyon, you’d just hover in the air. We reject this position. Equality of respect for planetary and subplanetary dignity should be humankind’s common aspirations, notwithstanding planetary differences in mass no matter how big or small. We also think that the nonexistence of gravity may not remain viable in light of the growing body of empirical data.”
I did not intend to write here tonight. I am very tired and it has been a couple of extremely difficult months for me in general. But the above, has given me an unexpected burst of energy and passion, that were I not to put my thoughts down here at AR, I probably wouldn’t get to sleep tonight anyway; so here goes!
For all of their flowery words regarding individual and group diversity (including, dare I say even riveting on, the paragraph I quoted above for all its obvious truths especially,) in this article by Bruce T. Lahn and Lanny Ebenstein, I am left, as is expected, wanting and disgusted. Far too much emphasis is placed upon, yet again, “past wrongs.” So much so, that the issue of genetic diversity (both at the individual and group level) is lost in an unfortunately swirling ocean of sanctimonious and “politically correct” gibberish. Or put another way, one does not combat “biological egalitarianism” in a halfhearted and simpering manner!
The hard facts of life are as follows, when it comes to the inherently ludicrous concept of “biological egalitarianism:”
1.) The West as a whole is infected with it, and it must be inoculated;
2.) What is past, is past, when it comes to this topic, and sanguinely allowing an interracial genocide of whites does nothing but allow an inverted (for lack of a better term) past to be repeated;
3.) There is no compromise on this subject, the West with all of its own specialized and highly precious individual and group level diversity must be preserved at all costs.
Otherwise, we are simply leaping off the edge of the Grand Canyon, and just simply hoping to hover in the air as a civilization!
As always, God help us all!!!
What we face now is not only an ideological struggle, but a financial and social one. An entire industry has been built around the fallacy of racial egalitarianism: the “racism industry”. If the truth about human biodiversity became known, it would quickly become evident that entire branches of government, and many private organizations, were founded upon a fallacy: the myth of pervasive white racism against “people of color”. Hence, billions of dollars are at stake - and this is one major reason why we have mammoth forces working to stifle the truth. Follow the money folks!
“An entire industry has been built around the fallacy of racial egalitarianism: the “racism industry”… Hence, billions of dollars are at stake - and this is one major reason why we have mammoth forces working to stifle the truth”.
I tend to wholehearted agree with Jewamongyou around 90% of the time. This time I don’t agree at all. If science does prove whites are magically natually superior at all places of work, and if we continue as a nation to favor group rights and consciousness over individual rights (at least for people who aren’t white), this is all the more reason, and all the more proof that we do need a billion dollar racism industry.
Billions of dollars, is it? Frankly, the whole argument seems to serve the purpose of making whites out to be bigots and racists (not necessarily the science itself, but the manner in which it is argued). This is just feeding into the psychology of the racism industry all the more?
I like to think of things in terms of light races and dark races. Even as little as 1/32nd dark-race in you or your mate will make a difference. Genetic throwbacks happen ALL the time in pairings. There is no reason why a throwback could not happen determining brain-size or capacity for creativity / intelligence. Be very, very careful who you mate with. It seems bizarre that so much is fed into purebreeding horses, but nobody seems to give two hoots about raising high performing artistically minded White genii.
So, let me see if I get this right: It is dangerous to study the possibility of inate human genetic differences between races because Adolf Hitler used this as justification to slaughter millions of innocent people during WWII? Hmmm….that is a little like saying that all social welfare programs for the poor and working classes should be abolished immediately, because concern for the lower classes has been used in the past to justify all kinds of horrible Totalitarian measures, from the forced Ukrainian Famine to the “Killing Fields” of Pol Pot. Both the Right and the Left have done evil things. We should not stop research because of the excesses of fanatics. An evil person or group will always find an excuse to do wrong.
The cat of racial inequality is out of the bag and out wandering. If you know about the realities of race, you can pick up hints in conversations and news articles that others, including liberals, know it too. For all their maudlin tripe about “grave historical injustices” and “enriches our species”, these guys know what a price we’ve paid for racial fantasy. They also know that “misuse of genetic information” is actually the rational use of genetic information.
“In our view, the scientific community and society at large are ill-prepared for such a possibility.”
“In the 1990s, I know that AR did a survey of its readers (?) which asked them who were the best and worst people in history for whites. I can’t remember who was best, but I know that Adolf Hitler was the #1 worst, and this article shows why — his obvious insanity and excesses enshrined “biological egalitarianism” as the scientific standards for decades afterward (and it still rules today mostly), ONLY because of the fear of the political party where it used to thrive the most.”
I’m glad I’m not the only race realist to think that Hitler was the worst thing that ever happened to white people. Aside from killing millions and millions of white eastern europeans, he set back race realism by…oh, probably a century. Literally. The mass media in the 2030’s will probably have talking heads discussing the newest discoveries in genetic science, with undeniable proof that personality is heavily influenced by genetics, and that the genetics of personality cluster heavily around racial groups.
The deniers will kick and scream bloody murder and throw tantrums as we dismantle their religion, but eventually even the ivory-tower elites will realize that sometimes, scientific progress goes backwards. See also: economics and cosmology during the 20th century. Our understanding didn’t just stagnate, it actually decreased.
From the article:
“…We also think that biological egalitarianism may not remain viable in light of the growing body of empirical data…. Some scholars have even called for a halt to research into the topic or sensitive aspects of it, because of potential misuse of the information…”
If the latest Defense Bill passes, to speak or write of this theory will be considered Hate Speech subjecting one to professional suicide if not outright persecution and prison time.
Hate Speech and Defense Bill?? :
“…The Senate has yet to give final approval, which will probably take place early this week. Pres. Obama still has to sign the defense bill with the hate bill attached. Obama doesn’t like this defense authorization bill…. he’s burned that Congress has defied him. It forces him to approve what he has steadfastly vowed he would not approve –thousands of F-35 engines he says squander taxpayers’ money…”
Bon
I would be considered an “African American”, not that I think such labels are necessarily accurate given any particular person’s actual genetic makeup. Don’t get me wrong, I do understand that there are, most definitely, racial differences. I agree with the race realist perspective, as it is simply a matter of truth(regardless of the emotional consequences I might suffer in dealing with this truth). Of course, on the individual level, if time is granted, people should be treated as such(I am a proponent of group/racial profiling in most circumstances. It’s only logical if we’re being truthful).How does AmRen feel about having a black subscriber? We all know that minorities in this country do not appreciate white achievements, or white kindness and prey on white guilt. They’re ignorant, herd-like in thought processes and don’t value education or knowledge. I’m not one of those bastards. Honestly, I think I might be one of your most loyal readers. Debate has always interested me, and truth is the only thing that matters in the end. I really love your site, and wish that Jared T. would get more publicity, as he is one of the most well-spoken and direct advocates for scientific/statistical analysis of racial differences.
All of this is fine and dandy. But, it does not change our moral positon or really strengthen it.
We as a racial group have a right to survive unmolested. We have a right to our societies and the fruits thereof. Whether we are superior or inferior is a moot pint. We have the right to our land and our culture and not show diference to any other racial group that lives among us.
Those familiar with Bruce Lahn know that he has done pioneering work on the study of genetic differences in brain development among the different races. Some of you may remember the report posted on Amren a few years ago regarding his study that showed genetic mutations present in non-African populations that enhanced brain function. The study was initially done only on brain function and race was not the subject, but when he researched the genes of populations all over the world, he discovered certain genes linked to brain function to be conspicuously absent from sub-Saharan Africans. This caused an uproar and he was forced to pursue different work after that. The PC police have twisted his arm to get him to say that certain fields are too dangerous to study. He wasn’t even doing a study on race! He was studying the brain. So now even brain studies are verboten, because so called scientists are afraid of the results.
Here’s a quote from the WSJ article about the controversy that shows the typical cowardice of scientists:
“You have to follow the data wherever it leads, but speculating in this field is dangerous,” says Spencer Wells, head of the National Geographic Society’s Genographic Project, a five-year, $40 million effort to collect DNA samples from 100,000 indigenous people. Dr. Wells says the project team might try to find evolutionary reasons for physical differences such as why Danes are taller than pygmies. But Dr. Wells says National Geographic won’t study the brain. “I think there is very little evidence of IQ differences between races,” he says.
It’s unbelievable how far the liberals will go to protect their egalitarian religion. As someone with a strong interest in science, it sickens me that the field has become so polluted by this Marxist ideology.
Here’s the WSJ article fro those interested:
http://tinyurl.com/f9pt3
I absolutely agree with Jewamongyou that there is a huge race industry that would be adversely affected if racial differences were honestly addressed in this country.
However, I believe that everyone else of all races would benefit. For example, imagine the advances in medical research and how many sick people might be properly tended if racial differences were addressed.
Another possibility is that, by addressing racial differences, would enable educators/trainers to set up a race-based curriculum that worked with each race’s learning strengths. Instead we have this one-size-fits-all non-racial curriculum that doesn’t work much for anyone in this country. I am convinced that each race has a different learning style.
Integration has not helped blacks. There is even a lot of evidence to suggest it has hurt them. During segregation times, blacks were building thriving businesses and communities and educating their best and brightest just fine without whites.
I am convinced that the only thing that has changed and undermined blacks are the same evil cabal of race hustlers and white liberals that are bedeviling other whites.
Chris G., as long as you do not pollute White genetics you are a welcome reader.
Racial realism is a genuine pursuit.
I have nothing but respect for peoples of African descent that want nothing but to better themselves through autonomous self government and using the opportunities they have acquired now through western technology and wealth to create a society of high philosophy and art. I just do not agree with them breeding with Whites in an attempt to lighten themselves, as I have seen among blacks at the Ivy League university I attended, which was not lacking in any black talent. I think the tensions engendered by obvious physical differences and differences in fundamental behavioral patterns makes it far too difficult to live together. However I place the greatest respect upon any member of a racial group that respects his people enough to seek their betterment and protects his women without any desire to breed himself up, as you will.
It’s not “IF” the race realists are right…
The problem is that they ARE RIGHT! There are mental differences between racial groups! Whether it’s p.c. to state this or not!
Had there been no disparity between racial groups, they all would have advanced at roughly the same rate. Even without contact with other races. The reality being THEY DID NOT advance at the same rate of progress. Europe (White Caucasians) leading the pack ever since the period known as the Golden Age of Greece. Result is Whites were both envied and hated by people of non-White races. All bitterly envious of what our people accomplished versus their own inability to claim genuine deserved credit.
Asia, Africa, all other areas — benefitted ultimately from White people’s efforts. The benefits of civilization — better health, technology and learning — all were made possible by Europeans and later their North American counterparts. Claimed exploitation, particularly by Asians are laughable… in that these “poor exploited people” gained many times more than that in the learning and technology acquired from those hated Whites.
To John (re Post #8):
Hitler was a monster, no question about that. But, he was not a RIGHT-WING nut, he was as Left Wing as Stalin or Mao. Hitler espoused Socialism as did Stalin and Mao. He also favored gun-control. So did they. The Nazis controlled thire economy as did the Soviet Communist Party and Chinese Communist Party, respectively. The only salient difference between the Nazis and the Communists was differences in racial attitudes.
Or, consider the Vietnam War. Both North and South Vietnam were dictatorships, no question about that. The only difference is that South Vietnam had a capitalist economic system, and North Vietnam’s was communist, of course.
from the article:
True, although I’m sure plenty of people already suspect that there are variations between races when it comes to the genes that affect intellect, athletic ability, etc. They’re just afraid to stand up and speak their minds because the left-wing media, academia and other powers that be would try and shout them down with their half-truths and disgarded myths in regards to this. I’m sure the egalitarians will cry and scream bloody murder if science proves what amren readers already know to be the truth. Since government policies are based on the notion that the environment and only the environment is responsible for group disparities ranging from schooling, to crime, to poverty, to traffic stops by the police the egalitarians have their whole world view at stake. They know whites would no longer tolerate massive third-world immigration, costly up-lift programs to boost minority academic performance, welfare programs to boost nutrition amongst the (mostly low IQ) poor and affirmative action if genetic differences between groups were real and meaningful. That is why they work so feverishly to supress the truth at all costs.
Soprano Fan:
The racial attitudes are the very reason why Hitler and his political party are considered right wing, and Lenin et al. are considered left-wing. This hearkens back to what I said here in AR earlier about fascism, or more specifically, how one should interpret the concept. “Fascism” comes from Latin “fasces,” a Roman military symbol depicting bundles of like arrows tightened up in a yoke. Is fascism, like you argue, the tightness of the yoke, i.e. the centralized government power, or as the left argues, the likeness of the arrows, i.e. the tendency of fascism to prefer particular groups of people over and above the whole of humanity?
In response to the anonymous user. I do not wish to better ‘my people’. I wish to better myself. I am an individual. I believe that if more non-whites thought as individuals, the world would be a better place. I think the white cultures are examples of cultures of individualism. I think that, with education, all subscribers belong to a Culture of Education, that arises through logic and critical thinking. Logic is a universal language\truth. On the flipside, I understand that genetics plays a vital role in determining those who can be educated. I wonder what separates me from most of my fellow blacks. I guess educated blacks are all statistical outliers, stuck in no man’s land. Unfortunately, I suffer from the, admittedly justified, stereotyping of me that is a direct result of the behavior ‘my people’.
After some thought, I’ve come to the conclusion that whether it’s biology or environment that drives non-whites to their ignorant/uncivilized dispositions, neither will ever change. It’s simply an academic question, and not one with any application. Culture and attitude are just as hardcoded to groups of people as their genetics.
Human evolution has produced an inherent sense of “us/them” among humans, arising from selection pressures successfully surmounted. Diversity celebrations that award “prices to all” are not reality…nor morality.
As an African-American who sympathizes with our views, you are welcome. We all recognize that the black race has its share of excellent human beings. However, you will not find any individualists on this site. We are not individualists but racialists. Our race is central to our identity.
>>>>Anonymous wrote at 10:28 AM on October 15: Chris G., as long as you do not pollute White genetics you are a welcome reader….I just do not agree with them breeding with Whites in an attempt to lighten themselves, as I have seen among blacks at the Ivy League university I attended
The hypocrisy of white people is so astounding, that it becomes amusing. White people are the greatest race-mixers in history. It is white men who are responsible for bringing most of the mulattos in America into existence. It is white men who created the Mestizo race in Latin America. Mixing with whites has nearly decimated the Native American race in the US.
Most Aborigines in Australia are mixed-race, because of white men mixing with them. White men created the so-called “coloreds” in South Africa. White American men are always importing mail order brides from Asia and Latin America.
American laws against miscegenation were overturned by a white man who desired to legally marry a black woman in 1967, not the other way round (i.e. a non-white man wanting to marry a white woman). You should be directing your message to your fellow whites, telling them to stop being such miscegenators.
I want to compliment Chris G for his very lucid post as well as having the guts to speak up and admit the reasons Whites stereotype and look down on Blacks. He is right in his assumption: “I’ve come to the conclusion that whether it’s biology or environment that drives non-whites to their ignorant/uncivilized dispositions, neither will ever change.”
The sociopathic/criminal tendencies of Blacks have been only too well demonstrated… not just in America, but most assuredly by the way Blacks treat Blacks in Africa… those genocides, mutilations of members belonging to the “wrong” tribe. Even by their criminal tendencies displayed by Blacks who migrated to European countries. The bitter truth is that Blacks are themselves the cause of the contempt, visible or hidden, most Whites feel for the race.
I fully concur, however, that people have to be viewed as indiduals, as Chris pointed out. Weighed on an individual basis rather than on a collective one. Still, the bleak reality the “bad” Blacks tend to outnumber the decent ones by a substantial margin will always come to mind. Nor is there any hope of changing that perception.
25 DeepakNPatel, if you paid attention you’d know that we at this site DO criticize White males (men?) who mate with non-Whites.
Sofita, I’m pretty much an individualist myself. That is my natural inclination. To the degree that I have a racial consciousness it is something that has been forced upon me by a society that has gotten ever more anti-white in its public and corporate policies.
I have no objections to Chris G. hanging out here. It sounds to me like he’s just interested in the truth, whatever it is. Same as me.
We’re still going around in circles. Look: very powerful and organized people want us to become extinct. You can throw radical Whites out of mass movements in order to placate these people and convince them that Whites are good and harmless. But your actions will not placate them but only please them. We aren’t going to get out of this without a fight. It’s time to grow up and stop acting like goody goodies trying to please Parental Authorities. They aren’t going to relent until we make them.
As for the article, the tone is also conciliatory to the point of submissiveness. That I can forgive-they couldn’t get published otherwise. But let nobody be taken in by it either. We don’t have to “have affection” for Blacks as a Race as one prominent scientist suggested. We just don’t.
Hello everyone. Reading all of these posts I see that there is a lot of fear and hate breeding from this topic. It makes me sad. I am a white female by the way, and I care for children of all races.
I am a firm believer that the truth will always prevail. I believe that the findings from this research could possibly help us all, whatever color.
I would like to believe that this is the intent of the scientists as well. It is unfortunate that money, religion, politics, and or the haters out there have the power to keep these truths from surfacing, which could actually help out our future generations. (regardless of one’s race)
