The Paradox of Racism

Andrew Gelman, Slate, May 8, 2014

The paradox of racism is that at any given moment, the racism of the day seems reasonable and very possibly true, but the racism of the past always seems so ridiculous.

I’ve been thinking about this recently after reading the new book A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, Race, and Human History by New York Times reporter Nicholas Wade, who writes about the big differences in economic success between whites, blacks, Asians, and other groups and offers a sophisticated argument that racial differences arise from genetic differences that are amplified by culture.

Wade’s argument has three parts: First, along with the divergence of physical traits such as skin color and types of earwax, racial groups have genetically evolved to differ in cognitive traits such as intelligence and creativity. Second, Wade argues that “minor differences, for the most part invisible in an individual, have major consequences at the level of a society.” Third, he writes that his views are uncomfortable truths that have been suppressed by a left-wing social-science establishment.

The word “inequality” does not appear in the book’s index, but what Wade is offering is essentially a theory of economic and social inequality, explaining systematic racial differences in prosperity based on a combination of innate traits (“the disinclination to save in tribal societies is linked to a strong propensity for immediate consumption”) and genetic adaptation to political and social institutions (arguing, for example, that generations of centralized rule have effected a selection pressure for Chinese to be accepting of authority).

Wade is clearly intelligent and thoughtful, and his book is informed by the latest research in genetics. His explanations seem to me simultaneously plausible and preposterous: plausible in that they snap into place to explain the world as it currently is, preposterous in that I think if he were writing in other time periods, he could come up with similarly plausible, but completely different, stories.

As a statistician and political scientist, I see naivete in Wade’s quickness to assume a genetic association for any change in social behavior. For example, he writes that declining interest rates in England from the years 1400 to 1850 “indicate that people were becoming less impulsive, more patient, and more willing to save” and attributes this to “the far-reaching genetic consequences” of rich people having more children, on average, than poor people, so that “the values of the upper middle class” were “infused into lower economic classes and throughout society.”

{snip} All this is possible, but it seems to me that these sorts of stories explain too much. The trouble is that any change in attitudes or behavior can be imagined to be genetic–as long as the time scale is right. For example, the United States and other countries have seen a dramatic shift in attitudes toward gay rights in the past 20 years, a change that certainly can’t be attributed to genes. Given that we can see this sort of change in attitudes so quickly (and, indeed, see large changes in behavior during such time scales; consider for example the changes in the murder rate in New York City during the past 100 years), I am skeptical of Wade’s inclination to come up with a story of genetics and selection pressure whenever a trend happens to be measured over a period of hundreds of years.


In his book, Wade moves somewhat uneasily between racial groups and smaller entities, at first writing about distinctive characteristics of Caucasians but then later focusing on Europeans and “the West” as being distinct from Caucasians of the Middle East and India. Similarly, he moves away from considering East Asians as a race and instead focuses on Japan, China, and Korea, with other nationalities in the region being excluded from the favored club:

The Malay, Thai, or Indonesian populations who have prosperous Chinese populations in their midst might envy the Chinese success but are strangely unable to copy it. . . . If Chinese business success were purely cultural, everyone should find it easy to adopt the same methods. This is not the case because social behavior, of Chinese and others, is genetically shaped.

I suspect that had this book been written 100 years ago, it would have featured strong views not on the genetic similarities but on the racial divides that explained the difference between the warlike Japanese and the decadent Chinese, as well as the differences between the German and French races. Nicholas Wade in 2014 includes Italy within the main European grouping, but the racial theorists of 100 years ago had strong opinions on the differences between northern and southern Europeans.


One of Wade’s key data points is the rapid economic growth of East Asia in the past half-century: “In the early 1950s Ghana and South Korea had similar economies and levels of gross national product per capita. Some 30 years later, South Korea had become the 14th largest economy in the world, exporting sophisticated manufactures. Ghana had stagnated.” Wade approvingly quotes political scientist Samuel Huntington’s statement, “South Koreans valued thrift, investment, hard work, education, organization, and discipline. Ghanaians had different values.” And Wade attributes these attitudes toward thrift, investment, etc., to the Koreans’ East Asian genes.

This all fits together and could well be true. But . . . what if Wade had been writing his book in 1954 rather than 2014? Would we still be hearing about the Korean values of thrift, organization, and discipline? A more logical position, given the economic history up to that time, would be to consider the poverty of East Asia to be never-changing, perhaps an inevitable result of their genes for conformity and the lack of useful evolution after thousands of years of relative peace. We might also be hearing a lot about Japan’s genetic exclusion from the rest of Asia, along with a patient explanation of why we should not expect China and Korea to attain any rapid economic success.

In any era, racism is typically supported by comparing two groups that are socially unequal and with clear physical differences. But both these sorts of comparisons are moving targets.

Wade offers social and biological facts on his side. The key social fact is the persistence of social inequality, both within and between countries. Whereas a leftist might see such inequality as evidence of unfair social structures within a country and unequal economic arrangements among countries, Wade takes these as evidence for the devastating combination of genetic differences and genetically reinforced cultural differences. The key biological fact is that ethnic groups do differ genetically in many ways, not merely in those genes directly connected to physical appearance.

Racial explanations for inequality are just too easy and too convenient. Differences between Czechs and Slovaks, Hutus and Tutsis, English and Irish, northern and southern Albanians, and so forth–all these have been explained by locals as arising from inherent differences between the competing groups. From the perspective of the United States, though, such comparisons don’t seem so compelling–how different can the Flemish and the Walloons be, really?–and so racism is commonly supported by comparisons between countries.


Wade does not characterize himself as a racist, writing, “no one has the right or reason to assert superiority over a person of a different race.” But I characterize his book as racist based on the dictionary definition: per Merriam-Webster, “a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.” Wade’s repeated comments about creativity, intelligence, tribalism, and so forth seem to me to represent views of superiority and inferiority.


That said, I can’t say that Wade’s theories are wrong. As noted above, racial explanations of current social and economic inequality are compelling, in part because it is always natural to attribute individuals’ successes and failures to their individual traits, and to attribute the successes and failures of larger societies to group characteristics. And genes provide a mechanism that supplies a particularly flexible set of explanations when linked to culture.

Despite Wade’s occasional use of politically conservative signifiers (dismissive remarks about intellectuals and academic leftists, an offhand remark about “global cooling”), I believe him when he writes that “this book is an attempt to understand the world as it is, not as it ought to be.” If researchers ever really can identify ethnic groups with genetic markers for short-term preferences, low intelligence, and an increased proclivity to violence, and other ethnic groups with an affinity for authoritarianism, this is something that more peaceful, democratic policymakers should be aware of.

Wade could be right in his conclusions–maybe it’s true that Afghans and Iraqis are genetically distinct, compared with people of Western European decent, as a result of their adaptation to their “tribal societies.” Maybe East Asians really are, on average, intelligent but not creative. Maybe the famous cultures of poverty in the United States and elsewhere are associated with genes involved in impulse control, violence, and short-term thinking. Wade has very little discussion of the implications of his theories for race relations within the United States. I assume that in an attempt to avoid this aspect of controversy, he talks about the poor economic performance of Haiti but not about the lower incomes and social class of blacks and Hispanics within U.S. borders.

Wade’s arguments aren’t necessarily wrong, just because they look like various erroneous arguments from decades past involving drunken Irishmen, crafty Jews, hot-blooded Spaniards, lazy Africans, and the like.


I feel awkward giving this conclusion because it seems so relativistic, it makes me feel like such a social scientist. And I certainly don’t want to say that all racial arguments are equally valid. The theories of the book under discussion, for example, seem much more plausible than various crude racisms of the past. But that returns us to the paradox that today’s racism seems plausible in comparison to what came before. At any given time, racial explanations are a convenient and natural way to explain social economic inequality. Then, as relations between and within societies change, the racial explanations change alongside. The terms of race are simply too flexible given the limited information we have regarding the connections between genes and behavior.

Topics: , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • MekongDelta69

    Uh-oh. Article from Slate

    Ignore article…


    • Oil Can Harry

      Given their empty-headed writers they should be called Blank Slate.

      • Lagerstrom

        I found this article annoying to read. This fellow is not much of a writer.

      • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

        Blank slate is right. The author is just railing against what he knows to be logic, because racial differences are obvious. Blacks have violent and contentious temperaments, and most of this is inborn. If their behavior differences were not mostly inborn, American Blacks would be thoroughly Westernized by now.

    • Alexandra1973

      Yeah really!


      • TruthBeTold

        I like to know how my enemy thinks. One has to understand their logic, reason, ‘facts’, and opinions to refute them.

        I’m not participating in any debate with a ‘progressive’ without being armed with the ammunition they give me.

        • Alexandra1973

          After a while, though, it seems they all say the same thing, maybe worded a bit differently.

      • NeanderthalDNA

        I see why. It was a pretty horrific and terror filled article. I think this book might possibly be some kind of sociological/ideological “Origin of the Species”. Way too early to tell, yeah, yeah, need to SCRUTINIZE the reaction, but…

        If this was a rebuttal, which it reads like it was supposed to be…

        Weak. It was very weak. Ideologically it was quivering and shaky. Logically it was C- at best.

        This IS getting really interesting.

        • stewball


    • Fathercoughlin

      Does this bloke REALLY believe that blacks are EQUALLY as intelligent as whites??? I mean REALLY? REALLY??? Does he believ that bkacks are NO MORE violent than whites by nature? REALLY???

      • NeanderthalDNA

        He gave me the impression of having been utterly blindsided by the power of the arguments, in a sort of mental/ideological bardo state…alternating between rather tedious, weak, and stretched counter-arguments and admitting how surprisingly plausible it was…

        Struggling to maintain intellectual integrity, acceptable ideology, and income stream intact at the same time. Rough tango, that. How many masters CAN one man serve?

        • Nancy Thomas

          He has no intellectual integrity, otherwise he would have to own up to the fact that the concept of race has very sound scientific footing.

          • NeanderthalDNA

            He’s paying bills and he lives in the United Messianic Democratic Totalitarian States of America where dancing with the devil in the pale moonlight can result in difficulty paying bills.

            Who knows what’s floating around in his and hundreds, thousands, of others’ black boxes right now as they read the book and read about it?

            I believe a book CAN bring down a civilization, but can it save one, lol?

            Maybe by first bringing it down.

          • Nancy Thomas

            As I understand it, “The Gulag Archipelago” helped to bring down the Soviet Union.
            On the other hand, some earth shattering books are totally ignored. “The Culture of Critique” is one. I have yet to see a decent refutation of the book. Wisely, since they couldn’t refute it, they just pretend it’s not there.

          • Anon

            The soviet union wasn’t brought down. It was looted by people who lost interest in playing the game “who controls the world”. The USSR was, at its root, a type of investment scam. Literally, a ship with illegal gold was intercepted by the US navy (owned by…guess who). Rather than seize it, as was both US and international law, a little bribe money changed hands. That gold funded the murder of the Czars and a phony “revolution”. Several evil wars later….almost 100 million white people genocided. A phoney “cold” war and those people cashed out of the whole thing and moved on.

          • Nancy Thomas

            I thought the Bolshevik Revolution was funded by Wall St. (Schiff and co.)
            They might have cashed out, or been kicked out, but they certainly want back in. The Ukraine is all about the central bankers wanting control there, seems to me. In fact, EVERYTHING the world over is about the central bankers wanting control.
            But you’re right, wherever they go, dead white people are bound to happen.

          • NeanderthalDNA

            Well, it certainly remains to be seen, eh? It rips a gigantic whole in the “pedogocracy” section of the MDT kraken.

            Boasian/Marxian “social science” is predicated upon an unquestioning assumption that all humans are the same except for how they are culturally molded. 100% of the Boasian/Marxian pseudo-sciences is “nurture”, 0% “nature”.

            This book practically destroys that orthodoxy. Actually it does, logically, and the argument is powerful, backed by real science, powerfully presented.


          • Nancy Thomas

            You said it. The key is “pseudo science.” From Boas to Mead to Marcuse to Adorno to Freud to Gould…a long list of people pulling nonsense out of their rear ends with ZERO science to back them up. It’s STUNNING. All of their crap has been debunked at this point and it’s just a matter of getting the information out there. i think they’re dead meat at this point, especially with the genome research and clear evidence that race is solid science as well as OBVIOUS science.

          • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

            Engelman needs to read this article. Gelman surely does not reflect Ashkenazi brilliance.

          • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

            With a name like Gelman, I’ll bet that his Grandparents would have told him that the author is a very intelligent man, and would have upbraided him for his lack of pride in his Ashkenazi roots, and his failure to see the obvious cognitive inferiority of the Schvartze.

          • Nancy Thomas

            I was in a limo in Manhattan with some wealthy members of the tribe. We spotted some diversity on a street corner and this is what my limo companions had to say….”Look at those young negroes! They have so much energy! My my, look how they jump around! They just can’t help it! They can’t stand still for a minute!”
            And on and on. They thought it was hugely comical. And it was.
            I have to admit the commentary was very funny and droll.
            But at the same time it was no different than a southern redneck using the n word and making fun, and if those very same tribe members HEARD a redneck saying such things, they would point their fingers at that poor redneck and call him a filthy “racist.”

            I have a liberal friend (not a tribe member) who’s the same way. He says the most awful things about blacks and how they’re too dumb to come in out of the rain, while at the same time he pretends that he’s morally superior for being a “liberal.”

            The left, in general, is nuts. Just totally moonbat crazy. They deal in constant hypocrisy and self deception, and they seem to have a patent on craziness.

        • TruthBeTold

          I suspect when the ‘progressives’ get together, they’re going to tear this book to shreds, or at least try to.

          • NeanderthalDNA

            I read therein the beginning tweakings of a mild -to-full blown liblefty/messianic democratic totalitarian panic attack, with the ensuing moral panic…

            Because this is the most solid refutation of purist Boasian/”Marxian” social scientific ideology yet. That’s what it is, with all the earth shattering implications dangling there in the wind, LOL!

            Of course they will eventually have to attack. The are baffled and stunned right now. As I type this scores, hundreds, of book reviewers of all political stripes, both wannabe and legit, are reading this book or soon will or already have, and…

            This thing is a problem, Skippy.

            Don’t know how this’s going to play out.

          • TruthBeTold

            The are baffled and stunned right now.

            I imagine them with their eye bulging and their jaws on the floor.

            Something like this:

          • Geo1metric

            That or ignore it completely. By “tearing it to shreds, they create publicity. Even bad publicity is good. So they may just ignore. We’ll see.

      • Nancy Thomas

        No. He is defending irrational dogma.

      • TruthBeTold

        He likely believes they COULD be if we invested enough time and money helping them.

        ‘Progressive’ believe in nurture. Realists believe in nature.

    • NeanderthalDNA

      It was pretty waffly and pathetic all around. To his credit, the author could not outright dismiss the work.
      “if this had been written around the early 20th century, it would have been racist and it’s racist now, I think, but I can’t say it’s not true, it may well be, but uh…uh…God I don’t want to get fired…uh…uh…”
      There, that’s the cliff notes. Which is pretty amazing considering the material and the mainstream nature of the reviewer…

  • JohnEngelman

    One of Wade’s key data points is the rapid economic growth of East Asia in the past half-century: “In the early 1950s Ghana and South Korea had similar economies and levels of gross national product per capita. Some 30 years later, South Korea had become the 14th largest economy in the world, exporting sophisticated manufactures. Ghana had stagnated.” Wade approvingly quotes political scientist Samuel Huntington’s statement, “South Koreans valued thrift, investment, hard work, education, organization, and discipline. Ghanaians had different values.” And Wade attributes these attitudes toward thrift, investment, etc., to the Koreans’ East Asian genes.

    This all fits together and could well be true. But . . . what if Wade had been writing his book in 1954 rather than 2014? Would we still be hearing about the Korean values of thrift, organization, and discipline? A more logical position, given the economic history up to that time, would be to consider the poverty of East Asia to be never-changing, perhaps an inevitable result of their genes for conformity and the lack of useful evolution after thousands of years of relative peace.

    – Andrew Gelman, Slate, May 8, 2014

    In 1954 the history of China and Korea would demonstrated centuries of urban civilization along with indigenous writing systems and literature. The history of Ghana would not. A perceptive observer would attribute the poverty of China and Korea to the Second World War and the Korean War. For Ghana there was no similar explanation.

    • The Final Solution

      So I guess Germany became Europe’s largest economy after WW2 because of what, then? Why didn’t war create poverty in Germany or Japan? Why did those nations rise from the ashes so rapidly? Because of the Marshall Plan? No perhaps it was something else….

      • AutomaticSlim

        My landlord is German.
        He told me his country was very poor after the war.
        I have to believe the same of Japan too. Probably even worse as they took two nukes.

        I think the Marshall Plan helped the Germans quite a bit.
        And MacArthur helped the Japanese.
        They both would have pulled themselves up eventually, but we helped them a great deal.

        • The Final Solution

          Yes they were poor immediately after the war but what I think he’s talking about is persistent poverty being explained by war. But it isn’t that simple. You can’t blame the persistent poverty found in Asia or Africa on war. The average Chinese is still poor while Western per capita incomes have risen steadily over the last 75 years.

          • Jesse James

            Yet now for the first time in the West it is the stated goal of our political elites to reduce our standard of living downward to a “sustainable” and “fair” level of consumption closer to where Ghana or rural China is today. Any western leader who supports the UN Agenda 21 implementation should be removed from office and charged with treason.

          • SlizzardAjeosshi

            China had a stalinist system until 1978, once they moved in the direction of Taiwan and HK their per capita GDP grew spectacularly, even the countryside, albeit still very poor, is nowhere as bad as it was a generation ago and nowhere as bad as say Yemen or Pakistan.

            As others pointed out it’s a mix of good genes and the right institutional framework, nature and nurture have a strong covariance

          • JohnEngelman

            The per capita domestic product for Taiwan is $39,600. That places it over quite a few white countries including Germany.

        • JohnEngelman

          Liberals sometimes advocate “a Marshall Plan for the inner cities.” For a Marshall Plan to work there has to be something to work with. In the inner cities there is not. This is why the War on Poverty failed.

          • Reverend Bacon

            The Marshall Plan cost about $200B in today’s dollars, and it was successful. We’ve spent about $100T on the inner cities, and we’re nowhere. The better analogy for this hopeless cause is Vietnam, not WWII.

          • JohnEngelman

            The Marshall Plan was successful. I have never suggested otherwise.

          • Reverend Bacon

            I never thought you had. I just pointed out that we’ve already spent orders of magnitude more on these people, and gotten zero.

          • jane johnson

            That’s why inner cities need martial law, not a Marshall Plan.

          • IstvanIN

            The Germans and Japanese were a cultured and advanced people before the war. The black Africans for the most part have never been either. One is rebuilding, the other is more akin to multi-generational evolution.

          • Pro_Whitey

            Your point about the Japs and Krauts is key. I should have considered it more when I first supported the attempt to build non-crappy states out of Iraq and Afghanistan. The Marshall Plan was working with countries with established track records of highly civilized and civil behavior as well as economic and industrial sophistication. By contrast, you can’t build a nation on a muslim foundation, at least no nation we would want to live in. The same would apply to any sub-Saharan African state, except South Africa and Rhodesia when ruled by whites.

          • IstvanIN

            Both Japan and Germany had long histories of modern government, on both the local level such as Germany’s kingdoms, and on the national level under Emperors. At best Africans and Arabs are tribal.

        • So CAL Snowman

          I was always curious how the Japs could move back in to Hiroshima and Nagasaki so soon after having atomic bombs dropped on them. Wouldn’t those cities be radioactive wastelands, at least significant portions of those cities?

          • IstvanIN

            No, those bombs were not as bad as today’s nuclear bombs. Plus they were exploded very high in the air so most of the destruction was caused by the heat and wind damage.

          • Nancy Thomas

            i think they suffered from very high levels of all kinds of cancer.

          • Brian

            They got A-bombs, not H-bombs. And yield was on the order of 15-20 kilotons, not some 50-megaton whopper.

        • TruthBeTold

          It may have taken them longer but somehow I believe they could have done it on their own.

      • JohnEngelman

        The Marshall Plan helped. So did good genes. So did a homogeneous population. Homogeneous populations respond better to national traumas.

      • Geo1metric

        Yes, I think it has a lot to with where very large pools of investment go. One reason Europe and the US are stagnating right now is that most of the capital is flowing to Asia. Get used to it.

    • Oil Can Harry

      To be more exact, most of the world was poor before the Industrial Revolution.
      The economies of China and South Korea improved when they moved toward a free market system.

      OTOH black countries like Ghana and Haiti have always been poor and remain that way because of their low IQ population.

      • AutomaticSlim

        Very true.
        Regarding Ghana and the rest of Sub-Saharan Africa, even the genetic outliers, the 1% or so of blacks with slightly above average IQs (for blacks, anyway)…they are still savages. Savages who lead the lower IQ savages. Like Mugabe and Amin.

      • TruthBeTold

        Being poor and civilized are not mutually exclusive. One can be poor but live with dignity and provide basic comforts if one has the capacity to understand one can make things better and work to do so.

        I had a veiled conversation with my elder neighbor who is now deceased. We were talking about the differences between Buffalo’s white south side and the black east side. He said he grew up poor but his mother always told him, ‘soap is cheap’. Meaning there are simple thing one can do to improve your quality of life.

        Maybe the pre-IR British were poor but they built roads, brewed beer, ran pubs. Did Africans ever do anything to improve their quality of life; even now when they can adopt everything we’ve already developed?

        • IstvanIN

          Terrific post, even our West Virginia, in fact all of the US’s poor White population, has a lower crime rate than blacks. And manages to be much more civilized.

          • TruthBeTold

            In Buffalo, there are two white areas that are extremely poor. One is referred to as Lovejoy community and the other Island Island (because it’s surround by large railroad taking up miles of land. It’s dirty, dingy, and depressing. If blacks lived there (and they’re increasingly being relocated there) they would be screaming ‘environmental racism’.)

            But you rarely hear about any crime there. I have to go back years to think of a murder (involving drug dealing) in Lovejoy and I can’t think of one in Island Island.

            The houses aren’t the greatest (densely packed old structures) but for the most part they’re maintained.

            Drive through the black east side and it looks like the worst of Detroit.

            Black and white, night and day.

    • SoulInvictus

      The Korean War, massive ongoing cultural, military and financial intervention by a predominately white superpower… that’s the difference.

      For anyone not looking through the skewed lens of Engelman Asian Admiration Syndrome (EAAS ®), remove the US from the equation and there would be no
      South Korea. It would all be North Korea, and we see how that has turned
      out when they’re left completely to their own devices.
      Predictable subservience to brutal authoritarian leaders and widespread dark age peasantry.

      The same could be said for China. Without the traitorous and willing
      transfer of American manufacturing and capital, they would not be a
      world power by any stretch of the imagination. They don’t have the
      ingenuity (I know how you don’t value creativity but it’s true), they
      didn’t have the technology (until it was thieved and bought from the
      west), and they don’t have the resources.

      The more apples to apples comparison is North Korea and
      Ghana. Which you notably avoided. Because they are similar in result and
      it wouldn’t support your premise.

  • Oldcorporal

    It’s just about the type of review you could expect from the far-left “Slate” magazine. The arguments against Mr. Wade’s thesis don’t hold together very well, and Gelman’s “logic,” to be generous, is hard to follow. As usual, the left is scared to death that arguments for a major genetic component for the obvious differences between races might actually start to gain traction — leaving the left with egg on its face. All those insistent rationalizations, blown to bits! Poor, poor leftists …

    • Nancy Thomas

      Well, you don’t for one minute think that he and his partners in crime are going to absolve evil whitey for crushing underfoot millions of minority geniuses.

  • Chasmania

    “…the United States and other countries have seen a dramatic shift in attitudes toward gay rights in the past 20 years, a change that certainly can’t be attributed to genes. ”
    I dispute this assertion. I think that people today are pressured to, at least, mouth the platitudes of acceptance while still finding homosexuality as distasteful as persons 20 plus years ago. Twenty years ago and more you wouldn’t lose your job or risk your business for saying you disapproved, today it’s a virtual certainty.

    • So CAL Snowman

      Oh it’s all the mainstream media’s fault. 20 years ago the mainstream media wasn’t stuffing the “gay agenda” down our throats. It’s the same ploy they use with racism, if you disagree with the prevailing view that being gay is normal and preferential to being straight then you are a rabid Nazi/hillbilly/redneck and you should probably be flayed alive.

    • Oldcorporal

      I agree. And the ones who are feeling the pressure the most, and caving in the most quickly, are these knot-headed federal judges who are throwing out one state referendum’s results after another. The people of those states, a majority of the people, usually a sizeable one, voted that marriage is between one man and one woman. But these raven-robed cowards, glancing nervously over their shoulders at the “gay rights” mobs bearing down on them, are saying that the will of the people is “unconstitutional.” The gay rights bandwagon is so crowded now that people will start falling off it soon (I hope).

      • Brian

        The main problem I have with the gay rights agenda is not that I think it’s a sin or choice, nor do I have any wish to beat them or lock them out of jobs or housing…I suppose even gay marriage could be teeth-grittingly suffered through, although the very idea strikes me as comical. I’m really just tired of this 2% of the population, and their crusading straight enablers, sucking all the oxygen out of the room with this– like there are no other issues of more importance. And the effort they spend on hunting down thought criminals is absurd.

    • Brian

      Beyond that, Gelman is grasping at straws– ‘My uncle was malnourished as a child and he’s short, i.e. environmentally stunted growth…………….therefore genes have no influence on height’. He’s doubling down on dumb, because he has no other card to play.

      • stewball

        My father was also malnourished and had rickets. He grew into a normal sized man with a pair of legs he was proud of.

    • JohnEngelman

      Twenty years ago you may have lost your job for advocating gay rights.

      The growing acceptance of gay rights and interracial marriage have happened because there are no obvious disadvantages. There was no conspiracy by the Frankfurt School, Cultural Marxists, and the Tribe.

      • Jesse_from_Sweden

        Twenty years ago you may have lost your job for advocating gay rights.
        Today, you may lose your job if you are NOT advocating gay rights.

        No conspiracy? I’d say the pressure is probably worse nowadays, just that it’s been reversed.
        Anyone complaining about interracial marriage better do it silently and only to trusted friends, otherwise he’ll risk losing his job.

    • Jesse_from_Sweden

      For example, the United States and other countries have seen a dramatic
      shift in attitudes toward gay rights in the past 20 years, a change
      that certainly can’t be attributed to genes. Given that we can see this
      sort of change in attitudes so quickly (and, indeed, see large changes
      in behavior during such time scales; consider for example the changes in
      the murder rate in New York City during the past 100 years),

      The problem is that he doesn’t seem to be able to tell the difference between attitudes and behaviour.
      They are not the same thing.

      Also, why has the murder rate changed?
      Because medical science has improved.
      If you were shot in the gut 100 years ago, you probably weren’t going to make it.
      If you get shot in the gut today, as long as someone calls an ambulance, you’re probably going to live.

  • So CAL Snowman

    I’m not seeing the paradox . . .

  • TruthBeTold

    There is no paradox of racism. There’s only mental anguish fueled by accepting a truth one would rather deny.

    • Tom Thumb

      About this denial. At some point, does this constant denial of the obvious turn into some form of insanity?

      • TruthBeTold

        Before it became popular, I have long said that liberalism is a kind of mental illness characterized by an inability to accept realty.

        These people actively deny reality replacing it with theories and beliefs.

        They don’t want to believe the truth. They’re delusional.

        • Nancy Thomas

          No. They know very well what the truth is, but they choose deceit instead to fulfill their political agendas.

          • Geo1metric

            I’m not so sure about them not being delusional.

            Think about the fact that we have now a generation of people, baby boomers, who were raised on Make-Believe, that is tv.

            Now also think about the fact that a percentage of these people were highly susceptible to “suggestion”.

            These people are now, for the most part, in positions of power of some sort.

            They may very well be true believers.

            I agree that some percentage of these people “know very well” as you state, but I also think that there are the true believers as well.

        • Brian

          The main aspect of this liberal delusion is the moralistic fallacy– saying something ‘ought to be’, and then claiming that it ‘is’ that way. E.g. wouldn’t it be nice if there were no genetic differences of importance and all the social outcome differences we see, in school test scores or crime, are products of eradicable oppression and/or neglect? ……….Therefore, it must be that way, and let’s get to work ‘closing the gap’.

          To be fair, conservatives are prone to the converse: the naturalistic (or reverse moralistic) fallacy– saying something is, and then deriving the ought from it…i.e. appealing to nature or tradition. This is not as bad though, because at worst, you’ll justify doing things today the way you did it a century ago– at least you’re not actively making things worse from wishful thinking. Stubborn old-timers don’t cause as many problems as bright-eyed progressive crusaders.

          “When I hear ‘social justice’, I reach for my Browning.”

  • Very clever these Cultural Marxist lefties. This one tries to cast doubt on parts of Wade’s book, without ever really refuting the arguments. And by casting doubt on part of the book the writer hopes that all of the book is viewed with doubt. FAIL. This is straight out of the Cultural Marxist playbook. Do not be fooled, America!

    • Oil Can Harry

      Mr. Gelman is correct when he says we shouldn’t trace all racial differences to genetic causes.

      The problem is he and his p.c. cohorts claim genetics have NOTHING to do with racial differences.

      In fact these crackpots claim there are no races!

      • Nancy Thomas

        This is the only way they can blame whitey for the brown and black failures.

    • Fighting_Northern_Spirit

      Yeah, I laughed at sentences like this: I suspect that had this book been written 100 years ago…. Hey Gelman, how about addressing the points made in the book written today and not some hypothetical one pulled from your nether regions?

      • Nancy Thomas

        Good point. He waffled and flailed throughout the article. A bit too much truth for him to swallow, so he had to prevaricate.
        Look…he and his crew are masters of deceit. They suffer from a general pattern of ego inflation, and it’s so pronounced that they find it hard to imagine that the rest of us could POSSIBLY disagree with such enlightened beings!

  • rowingfool

    Gelman’s problem is that he is a political scientist and not a psychologist or geneticist. He is unaware of the massive amount of testing, data and sophisticated mathematic analysis that comprise the evidence for genetic explanations. The genetic explanation is based on inductive reasoning from evidence and confirmed by deductive reasoning from its neat fit with mathematic models e.g. bell curve and regression analysis. The more one studies the evidence, the more impressive the case becomes.

    He simply knows too little to even comment.

    • Nancy Thomas

      He knows more than he lets on. He’s a deceitful creep. A liar, as are all marxists. It’s a requirement.

    • JohnEngelman

      Social scientists have never adopted the scientific method. They have never developed an objective way of testing theories against reality.

      • W. A. Summers

        There is some extent to which they need not do so. For them to pursue what they view as strict science ( in terms of the rigors of, say, chemistry or physics) need not be mutually exclusive from a sidebar regard to anecdotal evidence and to career relevant biographical evidence pertaining to the scientists, etc. I have made a few postings on this site re the Milwaukee Project of the late Rick Heber. I am not repeating elements of them now. But when people bother to get a little “vo tech” and get into contextual details, a lot of insight emerges that is left in the shadows otherwise. Researchers who (out of “physics envy” ! ??) have focused only on the (long delayed) 1988 Report of the Project seem surprised to learn that the initial grant basic to it all was gotten by Heber in 1962—long before the “firestorms of Jensenism” were a storm threat to such research; they somehow miss out on the primary source material from local/regional newspapers that the Report was ready for publication by 1981; reportedly had been submitted for publication at the end of 1983….yet somehow emerged in publication in
        1988–a few months after Heber and 11 other Americans were killed in a mysterious plane crash in Rwanda in what now seems to have been a covert research project into racial differences in the development of human locomotion? It isn’t so much that they don’t have an objective way of testing theories—they just seem aversive to getting into “small facts”. ???

        • W. A. Summers

          Sometimes to identify when a research project began by noting when the initial grant was obtained is as conjectural as equating the date a novel was written with the date on which it was first copyrighted. In this instance, the inspiration for the Milwaukee Project came from careful regard by Heber about 1956-57 of operant condition during his excellent doctoral study program. The grant for the population survey basic to the Milwaukee Project was obtained in 1962. The Project properly understood did not have a lot of bearing on “nature” / “nurture”. Heber in his doctoral studies was fascinated with the possibility that mentally retarded mothers failed to stimulate ( in yoked behaviors like patty-cake, eye tracking games, etc.) their children at critical stages of development–resulting in developmental neglects that would “snowball” over time in their general depression of cognitive growth. As a businessman-consultant (his main role ), he appears to have been seeking a basis to market-consult into place a kind of “inoculation” against environmental damage early on to the genetic programming of a child’s mental development? Failing to note Heber’s motivations (a competitive and brilliant busine$sman-con$ultant ) and the genesis of the Project simply diminishes the understanding of it all. Relatively little has been written about the Milwaukee Project that doesn’t give exclusive focus to the data reported, the research design, etc. Nothing wrong with that. But why not “the rest of the story” ?

    • tetrapod

      Besides, Gelman’s not at all interested in advancing an authentic discussion of Wade’s ideas. He’s nothing more than a hack for the effete prisses at Slate.

  • Eagle_Eyed

    So she concedes there might be or even probably is real genetic racial differences but says we can never really make strong conclusions because, hey we’ve been (supposedly) wrong before.

    Just imagine if all the sciences performed this way. Sure, heliocentrism seems to have some good evidence for it but we once believed in an Earth-centric cosmology so who knows? And even though modern chemists have repeatedly demonstrated the usefulness and knowledge of the elements, we can never be too sure of these results because medieval scholars believed earth, air, fire, and water were the most basic elements. And so on…

    What is funny is that the alleged false stereotypes (drunk Irish, crafty Jews, lazy Africans) can still be supported today. For instance which group is most likely to be on welfare or unemployed? Which group is overrepresented regarding financial fraud?

    • baldowl

      I’m Irish. You’re dead-on. It’s the plague of my people.

      • JP Rushton

        I would love to see more studies in the differences of European populations.

        “Those Who Can See” had a blog post about early 1900s arrest records that showed Irish and I believe Polish people having the most drunken disorderly arrests.

        • Cannot Tell

          I know Eastern European men have a big problem with alcohol. I recall reading that the rampant alcoholism over there has been present for centuries.

          • Jesse_from_Sweden

            There are other reasons for that.

            Namely medical ones.

            Water tends to be contaminated easily, especially in wells and other things in populated areas.
            And water gets fouled if stored due to microorganisms etc.

            Alcohol on the other hand kills bactera. Drinking old vodka will make you drunk, but it won’t give you any diseases or parasites like drinking old water will.
            And if you drink alcohol on a daily basis, then you’re likely to develop alcoholism.
            Which isn’t a big of a problem as some might think, if you keep it under control and drink a steady amount that isn’t too much.

            Swedish soldiers in the Karolinian era got something like 3-4 litres of beer in their daily ration (together with bread, butter, meat and peas), just for the reason that water wasn’t healthy to drink.
            This goes doubly true for the ages where water treatment and sewage disposal was non-existant.
            But despite that amount of beer, it was a death penalty on being drunk.

            In other words, drink in steady amounts but not too much at a time.
            Alcoholism shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone…

          • Alexandra1973

            I’m half-Polish and I’ve never been drunk. I have heard about Russians and their vodka, though…and the joke about the Irishman who saw beer advertised at a pub, $5 all you can drink, and ordered $10 worth.

        • Kenner

          I’m half Irish and half Polish. I’m willing my liver to the Smithsonian.
          They can always use another doorstop.

      • Lagerstrom

        The English and Scots don’t mind drinking their heads off either.

    • Nancy Thomas


    • Nancy Thomas

      This is the same line of crap they’ve been spewing for decades, from Boas to Gould, that we “just don’t know enough” to make any conclusions. So for decades they study primitive cultures and decide that the primitives are wonderful creatures because they have “no violence or war” and because they “have no sex hangups” while evil whitey makes war with glee and looks down on the rest of the world. Silliness! One huge problem with this theory is that our economic system is that of a central bank/warfare model, and white people, REAL white people, don’t even have any control over it!

      • Brian

        Yeah, I love that old chestnut about the noble loincloth-bedecked savages are having a neverending Lennon-Ono peace-in. Among the Yanomami of S. America, “Violence is one of the leading causes of Yanomami death. Up to half of all of Yanomami males die violent deaths in the constant conflict
        between neighboring communities over local resources. Often these
        confrontations lead to the Yanomami leaving their villages in search of
        new ones. Women are often victims of physical abuse and anger. Inter-village warfare is common, but does not too commonly affect women. When Yanomami tribes fight and raid nearby tribes, women are often raped, beaten, and brought back to the shabono to be adopted into the captor’s community. Wives may be beaten frequently, so as to keep them docile and faithful to their husbands. Sexual jealousy causes much of the violence.”

        The only question is: how is this YT’s fault?

      • JohnEngelman

        Fossil evidence and written accounts of surviving Paleolithic and Neolithic peoples demonstrate that during most of distinctly human evolution a much higher percentage of males died violently than in the present. This is true even during the twentieth century with the two world wars.

        • stewball

          Hello John. Long time no see.

          • JohnEngelman

            Hey, dude. It’s good to see you too.

          • stewball

            Dude? For a female?

          • JohnEngelman

            Sorry guy, I mean gal.

            Either way, I am glad you are here.

          • stewball

            Thanks dude. 🙂

          • JohnEngelman

            Don’t stay a stranger. American Renaissance needs your input.

          • stewball

            I’m not needed. I don’t give much of an input. I’m not as brainy or intellectual as you lot. Only when something grabs me do I come in. But I haven’t seen you for some time either.

    • JohnEngelman

      Which group is overrepresented regarding financial fraud?

      – Eagle_Eyed

      Which group is that? Can you document your assertion?

    • pons_asinorum

      Imagine him making the same argument against the Climate Change orthodoxy.

  • Brady

    All scientific explanations change over time, based on changes in the existing body of existing scientific data, expecially in biology and the “softer sciences”. Not just racial ones.

  • TruthBeTold

    I was reading a short article and I came across this information about polar bears:

    With a diet rich in fat but few heart-related health problems, how do
    polar bears have it all? Scientists said today the answer is in their
    genes. Since the white furry creatures split off from their brown bear
    cousins some 500,000 years ago, polar bears have “undergone remarkable genetic changes” that allow them to eat a high-fat diet.

    500,000 years for brown bears to become polar bears. How much change could happen between human populations during the same time frame?

    • Who Me?

      Some more parallels–500,000 years for brown bears to turn white, and become more efficient at metabolizing the proteins in the diet available to them–ie more successful. Also white polar bears are in mortal danger of going extinct in today’s world. So are White people.
      Anybody also remember the “Knockout” game is also called “Polar Bear Hunting”?

    • Alexandra1973

      Simple. A diet rich in saturated fat won’t hurt you. The “wisdom” nowadays is low-fat, low calorie, which is bad for you.

      I’ve lost weight drinking raw goat milk. Full-fat. Lots of butter and coconut oil too.

      • Geo1metric

        Right. It seems now that “they” are learning that animal fat is good for the brain. Lots of fruit, veggies, some meat, regular exercise. the paleo diet.

        • Grantland

          Not so much the fruit and high-carb veg. Fructose is designed to make you fat – pregnancy/get though the winter. Inhibits leptin, the surfeit sensor.

          • Geo1metric


  • JSS

    “I feel awkward giving this conclusion because it seems so relativistic, it makes me feel like such a social scientist”

    Don’t flatter yourself. Your no scientist at all, not even a social one. Your just a useful idiot and liar.

    • Jesse_from_Sweden

      Social scientist.
      About as much scientist as a voodoo doctor is a doctor.

  • Kronolog

    All scientific thought of yesterday seems crude compared to the scientific thought of today: Alchemy seems crude compared to modern chemistry, geocentricism seems crude compared to heliocentricism etc.

    • Alexandra1973

      Except that science supports geocentrism. Michelson-Morley, for one. That in and of itself is a whole different subject. (No, I’m not a flat-earther.)

      Seems to be what goes on nowadays…”old” information gets tossed in favor of the “new” and the “old” information was actually correct.

      Like back in the day people knew the nature of blacks and acted accordingly. Now liberals claim to be so enlightened…never mind that it doesn’t matter what year or century it is, what was true then is true now.

      • Nancy Thomas

        I was stunned to learn that 90% of all interracial violence is black on white. You won’t find this mentioned in the MSM.

  • FozzieT

    Reader’s Digest version of Gelman’s review:

    “I can’t come up with any real refutation to Wade’s thesis, but the whole topic makes me feel icky. Wade’s a New York Times columnist, not some right-wing nutjob, so I can’t criticize him too much. But….RACIST!!!”

    • Nancy Thomas

      You made me laugh. Great paraphrasing. They always have to trot out the r word. That’s why it has less and less effect. One day soon it will only elicit shrugs and laughter. I’m already there by the way.

      • Lagerstrom

        I’m not quite there, I still groan slightly before laughing.

      • Geo1metric

        The r word is like the stamp they put on your passport when you enter a country. It gives you a “pass” or a renewal, into Liberaldom regardless of some verboten utterances you may have made.

    • JohnEngelman

      Shouts of “Racist! is the generic response to anyone who tells the truths of race realism.

  • E_Pluribus_Pluribus

    “…the racism of the day seems reasonable and very possibly true, but the racism of the past always seems so ridiculous.”

    “…the paradox that today’s racism seems plausible in comparison to what came before.”


    “What came before” — of the academic variety — was more sophisticated than Gelman allows. It was broadly accepted among scientists and physicians of the pre-WWII era. It did not have, however, have the underpinning of genetic research which makes “today’s racism” the formidable challenge to the orthodox left.

  • gubblerchechenova

    “But … what if Wade had been writing his book in 1954 rather than 2014? Would we still be hearing about the Korean values of thrift, organization, and discipline?”

    Wade and Gelman are both missing the point.

    True, South Korean economy was in the shits in 1954, not least because of the effects of the Korean War that laid the entire nation to waste.

    But even BEFORE the modern economic rise of S. Korea, it had a 2000 yrs history of intellectual tradition(though a very narrow-minded one based on Chinese model). It had developed its own script. It had moments of moderate advancement in science and governance. And Koreans achieved this without Western influence.

    In contrast, what did Ghana have prior to the arrival of the West? Even its economy in 1954 was the product of Western colonialism and investment.

    So, even before Western influence, Koreans had one of the most advanced(relatively speaking of course) civilizations in the world despite its isolation from much of the world.

    Ghananians, prior to the arrival of the West, didn’t have much of anything. Sure, they had some wonderful wood carving and stone sculptures. And they had some kingdoms too, but nothing on the level of Europe, India, or Sinosphere world.

    Indeed, even when we look at the miserable North Korea, its nuclear technology is far beyond the technological capabilities of free and democratic African nations. Gee, I wonder why that is. Why hasn’t any black African nation been able to build and operate nuclear reactors?

    So, Wade needs to take a deeper look. Judging Korea by modern rise of its economy is misleading.
    Similarly, it’s misleading to judge Jewish achievement only by taking measure of Jewish achievements in science and math in the late modern era. The fact is EVEN BEFORE Jews had their own enlightenment and became Einsteins, they had a long tradition in literature, scholarship, business, and etc, all of which would have been unlikely if the average Jewish IQ had been 90.

    Another thing. I don’t see why Wade’s point would disprove genetics?

    Take sports. When blacks had been prohibited from participating in most major sports, they were poorly represented in American sports. But once they were given equal access, they came to dominate.

    Gelman could argue..”but would you make a genetic case for black athletic superiority if you were in America back in the 1920s?”
    After all, most sports were white-dominated back then.

    But a careful observer back then would have made an argument in favor of black superiority back in the 1920s. He would noticed harder muscle on blacks and would have said, all things being equal, blacks will overtake whites.

    Similarly, any careful observer back in 1954 would have bet on Koreans. After all, Koreans had a 2000 history prior before the arrival of the West. They had developed civilization and developed a cult of learning.
    In contrast, Ghananian relied on an economy that had been built up by white colonialists.
    Also, prior to the arrival of the West, Korea(like Japan) had unified into a political entity and maintained central government over the entire peninsula. Obviously a sign of ability of organization and management.
    In contrast, the social organization of Ghana prior to the arrival of the West was primitive tribalism.

    So, only a fool would have bet on Ghana in 1954.

    See it this way. Israel back in 1948 was dirt poor. Jews fleeing from Europe had arrived in rags. But if you had to bet on Jews in Israel and Arabs in Yemen back then, who would you have chosen?
    If you know anything about Ashkenazi Jews, you would have voted for them even if they were dirt poor.

    This Gelman is a fool.

  • gubblerchechenova

    Jews at Slate attack Wade not because they really disagree with him but because his ideas undermine the very basis of their Liberal/Jewish power.

    • Nancy Thomas

      Exactly. You narrowed right in on it. It’s their labeling and demonizing that gives them power and creates fear. But the truth is that their heads are filled with nonsense. CRAP.
      I don’t think it’s working anymore. You can only control people for so long with lies and propaganda. That’s why they are resorting to police state controls now.

    • JohnEngelman

      Jewish power is based on the fact that Ashkenazi Jews have the highest average IQ of any racial group. Jews have no reason to fear Nicholas Wade’s book.

      • Geo1metric

        There are many, many more high IQ Gentiles in the US than high IQ Jews.

        • JohnEngelman

          That is because there are more Gentiles in the United States than Jews.

          This is also true:


          Ashkenazi Jews have the highest IQ of any ethnic group known. They average around 112-115, well above the European norm of 100…

          Their numbers among prominent scientists are roughly ten times greater than you’d expect from their share of the population in the United States and Europe. Over the past two generations they have won more than a quarter of all Nobel science prizes, although they make up less than one-six-hundredth of the world’s population. Although they represent less than 3 percent of the U.S. population they son 27 percent of the U.S. Nobel prizes in science…

          American Jews are also over represented in other areas, such as business (where they account for about a fifth of CEOs) and academia (where they make up about 22 percent of Ivy league students).

          – Gregory Cochran and Henry Harpending, from “The 10,000
          Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution,” Chapter 7: “Medieval Evolution: How the Ashkenazi Jews Got Their Smarts,” pages 188, 189, 190.




          Richard Lynn, The Chosen People: A Study of Jewish Intelligence and Achievement, Washington Summit Publishers, 2011, 408 pp. soft cover $39.00, hard cover $60.00.

          Prof. Lynn writes:

          [Jews] arrived as penniless refugees unable to speak the languages of their new countries; they were the “huddled masses” from the most backward region of Europe. Yet by the
          middle decades of the 20th century, the children and grandchildren of these immigrants were doing far better than their Gentile hosts on all indices of socioeconomic status and earnings and outperforming them by several orders of magnitude in obtaining elite academic distinction . . . .

          The development of IQ tests confirmed the impression that Jews were unusually intelligent, and Professor Lynn’s extensive review of the literature indicates that Jews in the US have an average IQ of 110 compared to 100 for other Europeans. This would help account for their outstanding
          performance in a variety of fields. Though Jews are only about 0.2 percent of the world population, half the world’s chess grandmasters, for example, and 16 percent of Nobel Prize winners for science have been Jews. For Professor Lynn,
          the purpose of his book “is to document and explain such achievements.”

          – Byron M. Roth, American Renaissance, November 2011


          • Geo1metric

            But it begs the question as to why Jews are so over-represented in not only the fields you mention but in the Ivy Leagues and other prestegious schools in the US. Something other than IQ is at play.

          • JohnEngelman

            Something other than IQ is at play.

            – Geo1metric

            Anyone who can believe that can believe that blacks are poor because of white racism.

            Jews have had to struggle against persecution and discrimination to achieve their success. They’ve earned it.

          • Geo1metric

            But I don’t believe that; I know why blacks are poor. What I don’t know is why there is over-representation of Jews when there are so many more Gentiles with high IQs.

          • stewball

            Because we’re brighter?

          • JohnEngelman

            Yep. That’s the reason all right.

        • stewball

          Ya think?

    • Viking_61

      We can’t have those goyim getting too smart now…

  • Nancy Thomas

    I’m shocked that a member of the tribe would react in this way.

  • KevinPhillipsBong

    “The paradox of [medicine] is that at any given moment, the [medicine] of the day seems reasonable and very possibly true, but the [medicine] of the past always seems so ridiculous.”

    I replaced “racism” with “medicine” to show how silly this argument is.
    There is no paradox. It’s called increases in knowledge. Of course more is known about race than was known in the past. That’s not a weakness of the model, it’s an argument in its favor.

    • Fighting_Northern_Spirit

      And it’s an accepted, expected and uncontroversial part of the scientific method…except when it steps on ideological toes.

    • jane johnson

      Nicely done!

  • Dave4088

    Gelman’s analogies are specious at best. Comparing economic thriftiness of Britons to contemporary Americans alleged widespread support of homosexual rights is apples and oranges and strains credulity. In reality there are many states passing resolutions against gay marriage and gay rights which keep getting struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court. Any support the homosexual lobby enjoys has been engineered by the media and university system and is not a.natural occurrence in the population.

    I also believe Gelman is a member of the tribe.

    • Urbane Neanderthal

      Slate is tribe from top to bottom.
      Creators, editors, owners. Not certain about Gelman, but would bet he is also.

  • jane johnson

    The reviewer seeks to use the inclusion of Italy in the “main European grouping”, citing racial theorists of a hundred years ago, who claimed that there are “differences” between northern and southern Europeans, to somehow prove that racial realism, no matter how plausible, is some sort of passing fad; that the facts in Wade’s book and the theories of the last century are mutually exclusive, and to be equally disregarded. That’s nonsense! As a second generation American of Italian descent, I can assure the Slatester that not only are there differences between northern and southern Europeans, but between northern and southern Italians as well. My people came from Genoa, in the north, and look more Nordic than Mediterranean, probably because the north was invaded more often FROM the north. No big mystery, and it certainly doesn’t diminish the validity of Wade’s conclusions.

    • NeanderthalDNA

      Ha ha! I love the I-talians! But yeah, my brother served there in the 70’s and came home with this northern Italian saying, actually a dig at Rome more than Napoli…

      Northern Italy is Europe, southern Italy is Africa, and there’s nothing in between…

      Ha! Mean!

      Have a good female friend, perfect blend of Southern White “mouth of the South” type and Jersey I-talian…She has a precious little girl, about two, in whom the I-talian has come out in more than one way. Looks very Italian, like out of a classical fresco, thence her mother’s nickname – the “mini-guinea”, or MG in text version.

      So one day the “mini-guinea” looks at momma, smiles sweetly, and announces matter-of-factly, “I bite!”

      She then bites the heck out of momma, massive redneck/I-talian loudness results. Cute stuff! Very Italian, I thought, for some reason. I bite, *chomp*, see? Not so much a threat as a simple statement of fact, you know?

      “This one has much promise.” I told momma…

  • Doomispixulated

    The book must be quite compelling as the Slate writer could not completely dismiss it as racist hatred without trying to give some lame diatribe to explain away its contents.

    I eagerly await the arrival of my copy.

    • TruthBeTold

      That was my thought too.

      It sounds like he’s grasping for any sliver to debunk the conclusions but he can’t.

      I’m sure when the ‘progressive’ liberal hive join forces, they’ll start tearing it apart sentence by sentence.

      But it does seem to stop them in their tracks (for now).

  • FeuerSalamander

    I have maintained that the definition of insanity is holding two opposite beliefs at the same time. We need no more proof that liberals are insane. “It’s possible ” “It’s impossible”, both at the same time eh?

    • kikz2

      cognitive dissonance….

  • FeuerSalamander

    Gelman- jew

  • Anon

    A valuable article, particularly for those of you who think offering a scientific or even a reasoned justification for so much as noticing race, is a good idea. Offering such is the same as assuming you need to offer justification. Asking for such a justification is the same thing as saying another isn’t allowed to do such a thing and may be given “permission” to do it if they can come up with a good enough excuse. Offering the former is a SHOCKING abdication of one’s power. And in this case, the power being given up is the right to even exist. The latter is a the type of presumption that should be the basis for out and out war.
    If someone comes to you and says essentially….prove to me you have a right to live…the correct response is made at the end of a sword….not with the tongue. And, make no mistake, someone who presumes to say such a thing to you will not accept anything you have to say. They have already decided you are worthless and subject to their will. That is an issue of power, not reason.
    And here we have an example. A person, of the opinion that, YOU do not have a right to exist, demands you justify such a right. Supposedly, they have a certain standard by which you can prove to them such a right. They agree that you meet that standard (in this case, the author agrees with the “science” because it is convenient to their agenda). Yet still rejects your justification to exist.
    Understand? The entire situation is in bad faith by people who mean you harm and don’t have the power to back that up if you resist (something they are actually terrified of). They are trying to trick you, often by using your own morality distorted horribly, into not doing so.
    If they did, in fact, have the power to act on this with impunity, they would simply burn you at the stake as a heretic.
    I would suggest that such science and reasoned argument, while interesting, are red herrings and don’t matter. What matters is power.
    An example. Two people who work for the same company argue over the matter. One is a “racist” and the other is a “liberal”. Does the argument matter? No. What matters is who is able to fire whom, over the matter.

  • John R

    Of course the libs feel threatened by this book. It is backed up by scientific logic, like The Bell Curve. It is like Galileo in it’s implications. Think about it: All of liberalism’s ideas and theories MUST have as their logical foundation the (unproven) assumption that all peoples and races are inherently equal to one another. Deny them that, and the whole structure of their argument about the world come tumbling down.

    • Geo1metric

      The Bell Curve, now this. Let’s hope this is the beginning, albeit slow, of an avalanche of other books, papers, theses, that will eventually bury these lying liars.

  • Peter Connor

    The paradox of stupidity, innumeracy and blind bias in the media–it’s everywhere! Steve Sailer’s “war on noticing” will continue indefinitely in the liberal mind.

    • kikz2

      hmmmm… war on noticing.. yeah, i can think of a few different instances of wars on noticing.. thanks for the meme…….

  • DudeWheresMyCountry?

    The anti-Whites are secretly frightened that scientific research will soon prove that genetic differences between groups explain why many non-White groups are not as smart, more violent and less able to plan for the future. They are worried the egalitarian, every problem is because of White people canard will no longer be a useful tool and that moderate Westerners will, in large numbers realize what we know to be true: no amount of aid or immigration will change that and there is no point in continuing with any of it. What non-Whites fear more than anything is The West saying, we tried, you lied and we are done with you. Go solve your own shortcomings… or die trying, without us.

    • JohnEngelman

      You in turn are afraid that scientific research will soon prove that genetic differences between groups explain why Jews and Orientals tend to perform better than white Gentiles in the class room and on the job.

      You can’t have it both way DudeWheresMyCountry. You can’t gloat about low test scores for blacks and Hispanics while ignoring high test scores for Jews and Orientals.

      • DudeWheresMyCountry?

        They can do whatever they want in their countries. They don’t outsmart me. They outsmart you. Sounds like you need to rethink about having it both ways little man. You need to go live in China, oh wait you won’t. You will only live in The West. You are a coward.

        • JohnEngelman

          When the insults start I know I have won the argument.

      • Martel

        Soon research will point out that evolutionary psychology is much more complex then simplistic measurements of IQ alone. Asians and Jews have shown difficulty integrating in European societies. A portion performs well , even excellent, when performing selfish tasks, but Asians and Jews have preferred segregation. Hopefully research on ethnic conflict will become more mainstream as well, all political trends indicate it will be. Multi ethnic societies are designed to fail.

        • JohnEngelman

          If Orientals, East Indians, and Jews have “difficulty integrating in European societies” why to they perform so well in European societies and in the United States?

          The only difficulties they have are created by white Gentiles who resent their success.

          • Martel

            So you blame the inability of many Orientals to speak proper English, to engage in ethnic activism, to prefer segregation, to hold on to barbaric traditions on white Americans?

            How do these powerful, resentful whites accomplish this and how can I learn to do the same?

            If white gentiles are as uniquely immoral as you make them out to be, their supposed resentment will only rise in the coming years. Naturally, your bias against white gentiles clouds your vision on these matters.

            I wonder if you are aware that, research clarifying why people of all ethnicities prefer segregation, already exists.

          • JohnEngelman

            I have never said that white Gentiles are “uniquely immoral.”

            Claiming that I do is an example of the straw man fallacy. In the straw man fallacy one distorts the argument of an opponent in order to make it easier to refute.

            As soon as Orientals become successful, which is to say after a generation or two they usually move out of ethnic enclaves.

          • Martel

            Its what you continually say, though not directly. You assign all flaws of the aforementioned groups to gentile whites. You can try to explain what a ”straw man fallacy” is, it doesn’t apply to this case.

            To claim I find Asians in the ”most expensive neighbourhoods” is preposterous, only a portion are able to afford such luxury. Nor are they moving out of ethnic enclaves, they are establishing ethnic enclaves as Asians prefer segregation.

            Could you answer the other questions or did trying to comprehend what a straw man fallacy constitutes take to much out of you?

            PS: So ashamed of your previous claim that you had to delete it?

          • JohnEngelman

            I am without racial loyalty, and I am without racial hostility. I evaluate individuals on the basis of their individual characteristics.

            Nevertheless, I also evaluate groups on the basis of average characteristics found in the groups.

          • Martel

            Clearly not, you developed a fondness for Asians and Jews throughout your life, and certainly some negative feelings about fellow whites. Perhaps you did not fit in well with whites, and stoic Asians accepted your presence in the days when having a white friend was advantageous. Who knows, but the comments you make are quite often not based on facts.

            Could you answer the previous questions?

          • JohnEngelman

            Your questions are rhetorical, and make assumptions you do not document. Although recent Oriental immigrants are rarely fluent in English, far more Orientals throughout the world can speak English than the number of white Gentiles who can speak Vietnamese or Mandarin.

            Orientals do not usually prefer segregation as soon as they become fluent in English and financially successful.

            Far from holding on to “barbaric traditions” Orientals have lower rates of crime and illegitimacy than whites.

          • Martel

            Why would white gentiles need to speak manderin or Vietnamese?
            You are aware of the social convention which expects people who live in a country to speak its language?

            Naturally you understand this as well, you simply had to show your discontent over the continued existence of whites once again.

            Orientals do prefer segregation, regardless of their language skills.Many do not even attempt to learn proper English. My questions are not rhetorical, please answer them.

        • David Ashton

          The brain functions measured by IQ tests may be predominantly gene-determined, but genes also affect other characteristics of the human organism relevant to the creation and maintenance of a culture. Engelman focuses only on the first aspect, albeit the most important.

          We can face clever enemies as well as work with clever friends.

      • Einsatzgrenadier

        If “Jews and Orientals” are so superior, why can’t they “perform better than white Gentiles in the class room and on the job” in their own countries?

        • JohnEngelman

          Jews and Orientals tend to outperform white Gentiles in “their” countries, and in the United States.

          • Einsatzgrenadier

            Then why is China a third world hellhole?

          • JohnEngelman

            The crime rate is quite a bit lower there. China is catching up fast.

      • Sasquatch

        Nobody here is opposed to Jews and Asians having their own successful nations, and if those nations best white gentile nations economically, scientifically, or culturally then so be it. What we’d like is to have our own nations again. See, we don’t want to die out and be outbred in our own lands, I guess we’re funny like that.

  • Brian

    Nicholas Wade in 2014 includes Italy within the main European grouping,
    but the racial theorists of 100 years ago had strong opinions on the
    differences between northern and southern Europeans….what if Wade had been writing his book in 1954 rather than 2014?…In any era, racism is typically supported by comparing two groups that
    are socially unequal and with clear physical differences. But both these
    sorts of comparisons are moving targets.
    Gelman is indulging in amateur hour. Of course these classifications are fuzzy and indistinct– ‘moving targets’. So what? One guy says there are three heights of men: short, medium and tall. Another prefers to have five groups, adding very tall and very short. Does that mean it’s all bunk and everyone is the same height?

    But that returns us to the paradox that today’s racism seems plausible in comparison to what came before.
    Yeah, kind of like the field of psychology. Freud is of historical importance, but his ideas aren’t given much credence now. And are we supposed to dismiss the current findings of astronomy just because Ptolemaic epicycles are discarded? Does Darwin get tossed out because Lamarck was barking up the wrong tree? Newton isn’t cast into Gehenna because Einstein revised him. This guy Gelman is a social scientist, and yet he fails to grasp that science starts out roughly on a subject, stabbing in the dark, and then homes in on the truth, with missteps along the way…kind of inevitable since science is done by humans. There is no ‘paradox’ here.

  • Brian

    Gelman is just obfuscating ‘necessary’ with ‘sufficient’. Perhaps five ingredients have to be in place for some civilizational advance to take place. Certain genetic tendencies are one, with the other four being a certain rate of literacy, prerequisite inventions, access to required raw materials, trading networks…. Orientals didn’t catch fire as early as the West w.r.t. the industrial revolution, but they did have the requisite genetic intelligence, and once the other conditions were met, they were off to the races. Some other groups may not have enough people with the right genetic traits for the advance (though they could be gifted in other ways), so no matter what else they have or do, they’re stuck in neutral.

  • SlizzardAjeosshi

    I am an optimist by nature so i can’t help but being thrilled by what i read which lead me to the following conclusions:

    a) a mainstream media outlet reviewed in detail a potentially explosive and toxic book

    b) The review was begrudgingly positive

    The wall is cracking, keep up the good work

    • Martel

      Major crack in the wall. I believe many scientists are tired of working under PC constraints too, true scientists are a special kind of people, they have no time for such nonsense.

  • WhiteGuyInJapan

    ” If [Chinese business success] were purely cultural, everyone should find it easy to adopt the same methods.”
    Insert any value you please. Rule of law, IQ, the sky’s the limit!

  • dcc2379

    A hundred years of IQ testing proves, beyond a doubt, there are differences in intelligence. Intelligence is a major predictor of success. An interesting question from the above study is the comparison of South Korea with Ghana. Why weren’t the people of North Korea, the same cohort as the South, used? Well, the Communist versus Democratic makes all the difference, not innate differences.

  • Pilgrim786

    “As an MOT, I am petrified by the notion that people will see me and my Tribe for what it is: rapacious predators and religious fanatics. Burn the heretic! Tickets to Heretic Burning! Get your tickets here!”

  • JohnEngelman

    New York City Jew, please post more often.

  • Racial explanations for inequality are just too easy and too convenient
    Well he has that part right…

  • none of your business

    Anon is absolutely right. The 1917 revolution was an investment scam to get hold of the natural resources of Russia and expand the power of you know who all over the world. It succeeded. You know who’s empire fell when the you know whose in charge realized they could steal even more by another revolution known as the dissolution of you know who’s evil empire. They have just about finished with America and plan to move on to China. I doubt the jump to China will succeed as the Chinese are even more racist and exclusionary than you know who. It should not have been called the soviet union. It should have been called you know whose union.

  • ViktorNN

    The only thing preposterous going on here is Gelman admitting that race is real but not being able to admit that race must have played some role in widely different historical accomplishments of the different races.

    Gelman can’t say he doesn’t like how Wade’s arguments about race confirm negative stereotypes while at the same time admitting race is real. Either race exists and plays a role in both negative and positive aspects of a group, or it doesn’t.

    Can’t have it both ways.

    Gelman loses.

    • Martel

      Give him a break, his brain probably fried while writing this junk.

    • Urbane Neanderthal

      Slate magazine is a leftist Jewish created, run and currently owned publication. The utra liberal Jewish owned Washington post is the parent company.

      It’s amazing to see something like this from a creation of Michael Kinsley (the left point of view from CNN’s crossfire program with Pat Buchanan representing the right.)

      No, it’s not perfect, but compared to the typical leftist demonization of anything resembling race realism it’s a giant leap forward.

    • tetrapod

      Oh so true.

      Mr. Gelman, you’re talking out of both sides of your mouth, hemhawing and fidgeting around — to the delight of the rest of us — at the realization that you have absolutely no counter argument to Wade’s position. I bet the latte metro fudge boys at Slate think you’ve hit one out of the park with your silly attempt at making the strength of Wade’s book a mere function of historical perspective. How typical of your kind to put up an obfuscatory smoke screen so you can slither away.

    • FransSusan

      Gelman loses, all right! One can intellectualize this race equality junk all one wants, but it will never, ever ever do anything but make one look as a fool! Gelman’s a fool! The most important thing we race realists can do for ourselves and the movement is to just say there’s nothing wrong with being racist and exclusionary. Period. Arguing with the likes of Gelman is futile.

  • none of your business

    About 70 percent of Jewish southerners owned slaves while only about 35 percent of Goy southerners owned slaves. Lehman brothers moved to New Orleans around 1800 and became slave brokers. Lehman brothers became the 2nd largest slave brokerage in the south. The great grandparents of the puritan abolitionists of New England made their fortunes in the slave trade. Their descendants did not have to work because of their inherited fortunes. So they became liberals and used their cause of abolition to instigate a war that killed 750,000 White soldiers and about 70,000 civilians White, black and Indian in the border and southern states. Civilians died because of malnutrition and side effects of war, not atrocities.

    • FransSusan

      In some instances, civilians did indeed die because of atrocities! There was a lot of raping and depredation going on during that totally unnecessary and destructive war that was not fought for ending slavery.

    • Alexandra1973

      I thought Lehman was an Amish name…? At least it is around here.

      • Geo1metric


  • none of your business

    Gelman, the name says it all. Interesting that a tiny subset of the White race that considers itself infinitely superior to all others but has spent the last 102 years claiming that black,brown and asian races are superior to the rest of the White race to which it belongs.

  • Viking_61

    All I had to do was look at the last name, “Gelman”, and I knew I would be throwing up after reading his commie hit piece.

  • Viking_61

    Jews founded the NAACP…. Does the name William Kunstler even ring a bell?

    • Alexandra1973

      You know what a “hireling” is?

  • none of your business

    I believe Ghana was the first black african colony to become independent around 1960. It was widely touted by black worshipping liberals as an up and coming nation that would soon be equal to White nations like Greece. Instead Ghana deteriorated and is now a tiny little disfunctional african country.

  • none of your business

    4,000 years ago, before the Roman,before the Etruscan invasions, the indigenous people of Northern and Central Italy were celts. Obviously those who weren’t dragged off to Rome to be slaves remained and their descendants look like the celts they are. Of course many N Italians are descended from the German and Celtic tribes who invaded later.

  • Sasquatch

    What the reviewer from Slate, and so many other critics of race realism, fail to consider is the very real and likely possibility that much of what they latch onto is explained by genetics being a NECESSARY BUT NOT A SUFFICIENT FACTOR.

    As in, my people, the Irish… for example, may have had the necessary genetics to fully integrate into English and American societies, or may have been only a couple of generations removed from reaching those genetics under the right selection pressures, but that this was not sufficient on its own to ensure that they did so.

    In other words, people with genetics which allow for advanced societies can end up living like animals, but people without those genetics will be living like animals no matter what.

    Just because the South Koreans and Irish and others he references were able to be “brought up to speed” in the span of a few short generations or decades, does not necessarily mean that Africans, for example, who are separated from Eurasians by a much, much larger genetic and prehistorical gulf, can do the same.

    The important other factor to consider here is where does the cultural confidence and the numerical superiority now reside? When my ancestors came to America, assimilating to the society here was pretty much not optional. It was sink or swim. That was back when the western culture which resided here and elsewhere had a lot of wind at its back and a lot of confidence in itself. It had no doubt that others needed to assimilate to IT and not the other way around. The numbers favored them, at least within their own territories, too. And the numbers did not look nearly so grim for them on a worldwide stage back then either.

    We now face a situation where the inheritors of western civilization no longer believe in it, and no longer reproduce. Yet, they magically expect everyone else who outbreeds them massively to somehow come into their lands, live peacefully, fully adopt their ways of life (they expect this whether they realize it or not, and are shocked when it doesn’t happen) pay for their social security, be law abiding, hold hands and sing kumbaya etc… this is deeply unrealistic.

    They encourage us to mix with blacks to form one race. Well, there are a hell of a lot more black genes floating around this planet than white ones, and we will be drowned out. There aren’t enough of us to breed them upward. They can only breed us downward. We don’t have the reproductive age people to spare to engage in genetic charity or helping play “catch up” because the band of genetics on the planet now which allow for advanced society is vary narrow, and narrowing.

    • FransSusan

      The corrupt, US government’s social engineering begun in the 60s that forced political correctness and worst of all affirmative action onto productive citizens is what created the downward spiral. This is an epic failure and it was predicted by a previous generation, my grandfather’s generation. He was born in the late 1800s. People of that generation knew what would happen if negroes were forced on a thriving society. And their predictions are correct.

      • Sasquatch

        Indeed. The number of things which our grandparents’ and great grandparents’ generations are demonized for now, but which they turn out to have been spot on the money about, is staggering.

  • FransSusan

    What this Gelman and everyone else needs to understand is that there’s nothing wrong with being racist and exclusionary. Humans naturally prefer to congregate with like-minded other humans. It’s the natural instinct to do so. This kumbaya movement that has been forced on us by a corrupt government is fake and absurd and obviously has not and will not work. It’s been over 60 years and zillions of dollars (taken from productive citizens) to try to make everyone equal to everyone else. It can’t be done.

    • Alexandra1973

      Hey, if at first you don’t succeed, keep throwing other people’s money at it!

  • NeanderthalDNA

    Yeah, now this starts coming out and they see their grandkids getting “ghettofied” before their eyes and the feeling must be abject horror and – conveniently for some truly masochistic Eloi types – rightfully placed self loathing!

    This will only get more interesting.

  • tetrapod

    It’s gratifying that someone of your intelligence and learning would take one of my observations and run with it like you’ve done. Most of the time I have to fit my forum posts in between business meetings and other distractions as best I can. I rarely have time to refine my thoughts as much as I’d like (or as much as they need!) before posting them.

    Your reply is rich with ideas, most of which I’m not knowledgeable enough to comment on. I do agree with you that the left is not only nihilistic, it is also unhappy with the tentative nature of scientific knowledge. It fails to appreciate that even the smallest gain in understanding can serve to inform our choices in the here and now, rather than waiting for an ever-receding future state of perfect understanding. What you have so aptly described is a tendency of leftists to see the comely young woman in front of them as already withered and feeble, which betrays some type of sickness at work within them. It’s not surprising so many of them are voluntarily walking that weary last mile to their self-created racial execution chamber.

  • Mentious

    When he talks about “the racism of the past” — he’s really referencing propaganda about the past. He wasn’t there.

    Those conditions of the past are always presented out-of-context (leaving out facts-on-the-ground). For example, the KKK is always talked about without reference to the lawlessness and black-on-white rapes that helped engender that organization.

    “Racism of the past” is always discussed without reference to what Whites actually experienced from blacks. The Southern situation, without reference to the real relationships between blacks/whites and the intimacy that was natural between them.

    When he discusses “racism of the past” he’s really talking about what some writer-with-an-agenda wrote about it.

    • Sasquatch

      Exactly. I find it amazing that so many people, myself included (for most of my life) are able to just swallow these tales of our ancestors being pure evil for no reason. One has to ask themselves why things happened. Why were certain groups repeatedly kicked out of European society after society over and over? Why were lynchings taking place? etc.

      The powers that be these days really like to present a completely one sided, white man evil, non-white man good caricature of these past events and institutions. For some it’s pure agenda, for others it’s fear that if they tried to present a balanced look at it, they’d be fired. Because these days, just even attempting to understand something and present it factually can get you fired because you were being “racist, sexist, homophobic.”

      • Geo1metric

        It surely is extremely dangerous to challenge the leftist orthodoxy these days.

        It’s called tyranny, and it seems to get worse by the day.

  • Geo1metric

    Try speaking out against homosexual “marriage”.

  • Geo1metric

    Then you are both freaks of nature. The most natural thing in the world is to prefer your “own kind”. Those who deny this are delusional, lying, or a freak of nature.

  • Geo1metric

    My point is obvious. Your statement is ridiculous.

    • JohnEngelman

      Your point is obviously mistaken. What matters is that Ashkenazi Jews have an average IQ that is significantly higher than that of Nordics. That is why they tend to achieve and earn more than Nordics.

  • De Doc

    The reviewer of Wade’s book has the same tendentious tone that others have had before him. Jared Diamond and S.J. Gould come to mind, but unlike Gelman, these two were at least formally trained in biology. Like them though, he dislikes Wade’s conclusions because they run counter to his world views that all humans, while showing a variety of physical differences, are all basically the same cognitively and psychologically. Thanks to genomics and far more refined understanding of genes in development, authors like Wade now can make the argument with the data in hand. The Chinese-Malay paradox still stands today as a valid comparison to argue nature over nurture, because nature inherently drive the means and manner of nurture. Those who refuse to learn this lesson will be doomed to repeat their ill schemed policies at social engineering.

  • Emblematical

    “…various erroneous arguments from decades past involving drunken Irishmen, crafty Jews, hot-blooded Spaniards, lazy Africans, and the like.”

    Yeah I know. Erroneous as anything.

  • Late breaking but predictable news.

    The New York Times has dismissed Nicholas Wade.

  • David Ashton

    I visited family in Derbyshire, England, this past weekend, and used another laptop to see the Friday News from this site. The router had a (Murdoch) Sky control against “Guns, violence, gore, hate” (obscenity and profanity not listed on screen). No “access” to American Renaissance was permitted. Presumably someone has this site banned as a “hate” site.

  • Geo1metric

    I am not an ideologue. Your statement is ridiculous because it is blatantly obvious.

  • Geo1metric

    Guess what, there are many people just like you in West Virginia and other rural states. If you were a little broad-minded, you would be aware of that. You are obviously quite ignorant.

  • fgbrunner3

    Mr. Wade’s views on human evolution are irrelevant. Mr. Gelman’s comments are also irrelevant. Intelligence test date suggest that there are profound differences in intelligence between various races or large groups of people. The genetic date suggest that the differences in intelligence have a genetic origin.

  • Sean

    This article is just a cheap strawman.

    “I suspect that had this book been written 100 years ago, it would have
    featured strong views not on the genetic similarities but on the racial
    divides that explained the difference between the warlike Japanese and
    the decadent Chinese, as well as the differences between the German and
    French races”

    That is an anecdote, not a rebuttal.

    They say the Earth is round but we used to think it was flat! See! Nothing is true!

    Guys, logic totally isn’t independent of content!

  • Jesse_from_Sweden

    As long as you keep your mouth shut and your head down you’ll be fine.
    Which holds true for North Korea as well as for how it was in the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany.

    But if the question ever comes up….if your employer decides to hold a rally in favor of gay rights after there having been some incident at the local college and you decide to “opt out” because you don’t want to advocate for gay rights?

    Then we’ll see if you’ll still keep your job or not…..