RSS
Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) has been called the Father of Modern Science. So it is fitting that he was, perhaps, the first scientist to be censured and silenced by political forces represented in his day by the Catholic Church. The issue then was evidence Galileo presented supporting the Copernican heliocentric model of the solar system that contradicted the Aristotelian geocentric theory espoused by the establishment.
Elites have often used science to support the dominate ideology while suppressing evidence incompatible with their beliefs. One notable case was the rise of Lysenkoism in the Soviet Union during the reign of Joseph Stalin. Trofim Lysenko (1898–1976), a Ukrainian biologist, rejected Mendelian genetics in favor of the inheritance of environmentally acquired characteristics. This theory won favor because it fit well with the creation of the New Soviet Man: human nature was not innate, but as malleable and adaptable as were the characteristics of spring wheat.
The ideological orthodoxy of today is egalitarian multiculturalism, sometimes described as social or cultural Marxism. According to this doctrine the perceived differences between racial groups are superficial physical traits or cultural characteristics determined externally by history and the social environment. All ethnic groups have equal potential for social development. A multicultural society is the most desirable and progressive social arrangement. There are no legitimate group interests that would preclude social harmony in a diverse and inclusive society.
Over the past half century, as social Marxism has tightened its ideological grip on the main stream media (MSM), education, corporations and the government, very few public persons have challenged its canon. But a handful of social scientists, mainly psychologists, have, along with Galileo, gone where the evidence led them. Because psychology deals with intelligence and behavior, the field is especially important for egalitarians to control. This essay will take a brief look at five psychologists who have contested established dogmas, and paid a price for doing so.
Five Dissidents
Arthur Jensen (1923–2012) received a PhD from Columbia and after two years of post-doctoral research in Britain returned to teach at Berkeley where he had earned his undergraduate degree. Prof. Jensen’s conventional career ended in 1969 with the publication of an article in the Harvard Educational Review.[1]Arthur R .Jensen, “How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement,” Harvard Educational Review (Spring 1969) 39.1, 1-123. In this and a subsequent HER article Jensen claimed that efforts to raise IQ and academic achievement of low-IQ children had little long-term success. Individual differences in IQ are largely inherited. He cited data indicating that both genetics and environment need to be considered in educational assessment, and instructional strategies involving rote learning and memorization are most effective when teaching low-IQ children.
Reaction to Jensen’s articles was vehement and protracted. His classes were disrupted, his office and vehicle vandalized. Leftist groups demanded his firing. From Minneapolis to Melbourne his lectures produced riotous demonstrations. Despite the tremendous strain put upon him and his family, Jensen refused to retract his findings or switch to less controversial topics of research. Over his long career Jensen continued to study the nature and causes of racial disparities in academic achievement.
In the face of incessant criticism, his research has stood the test of time. Today some of his recommendations, such as early childhood (pre-K) intervention, have been implemented by educational reformers, without, of course, attribution to Jensen. Experimental charter schools that have developed highly structured lesson plans incorporating rote learning have had some success in raising scores of minority students on standardized achievement tests. Overall, however, the educational establishment has rejected Jensen’s conclusions and remains tenaciously egalitarian.
The refusal of the educational establishment to accept Jensen’s findings led to the search for other remedies to close the racial achievement gap. The most destructive and costly solution implemented was massive forced busing to achieve racially balanced schools. This failed policy cost billions, destroyed communities, and disrupted the lives of millions of Americans.
• • •
One scholar who found Jensen’s research convincing and thus realized that busing would be counterproductive was Ralph Scott, an educational psychologist at the University of Northern Iowa.
In the early 1970s Prof. Scott was involved in designing Home Start, a birth-to-kindergarten enrichment program for poor families in Waterloo, Iowa. Such early intervention was one of Jensen’s recommendations. Although Scott’s program was well received, the problems began when he advocated early intervention as an alternative to forced busing. In 1976 he organized a series of symposia entitled, “Constructive Alternatives to Forced Busing.” That is really all it took. To support Jensen’s findings and oppose massive busing could only mean one was a hateful bigot. The news media in several cities where the symposia were held alleged Scott had racist affiliations. Reporters, including Grace Lichtenstein of the New York Times, called administrators at Scott’s university to complain about his activities. This led to an investigation to see if there were grounds for dismissal.
Fortunately, Prof Scott’s tenure prevented termination.
While the university could not rid itself of Scott, leftist students and “colleagues” could make his life unpleasant. He and his family received threating messages including death threats. Follow professors denigrated Scott to their students, resulting in decreased enrollment in his classes. The university reduced his teaching assignments. The harassment and opprobrium lasted for decades until Scott’s retirement in 2014.
In 1988 Scott’s teaching and research came under scrutiny of the baleful eye of leftist academic activist Berry Mehler. Mehler, who received his undergraduate degree from Yeshiva University, is the Jewish director of the so-called Institute for the Study of Academic Racism (ISAR) at Ferris State University in Michigan. As part of his investigation Mehler had an assistant use a pseudonym to make calls to Scott posing as a reporter seeking an interview for the Baltimore Sun.
Characters such as Mehler bring up an interesting aspect of scientific censorship in America. Due to our liberal tradition and First Amendment rights, the establishment must employ surrogates to enforce ideological conformity. For anti-White NGOs such as the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), and the ISAR, however, the separation between private and governmental action is blurred. For example, the SPLC and ADL conduct training courses for law enforcement to help officers identify “right-wing extremists.” SPLC propaganda posing as educational materials is distributed in public schools.
The fact that a disreputable organization such as the Jewish-funded SPLC has any credibility is due, in large part, to the support it receives from the MSM. We see in the controversies covered by this essay how the media works in tandem with the so-called “watchdog” groups to attack dissident scholars. Over the last several decades, the bias in the MSM has led to widespread distrust of these news outlets among Americans. Despite this backlash and the rise of internet news, the MSM is still able to frame the dominate narrative, thus exercising tremendous influence on public opinion and policy.
• • •
Another distinguished psychologist to run afoul of the self-appointed thought police was Raymond Cattell (1905–1998). The author or co-author of 500 research papers and over 50 books, the British-born Cattell was, without question, one of the leading psychologists of the twentieth century. After receiving a PhD from King’s College London in 1929, Cattell eventually moved to the US and taught for many years at the University of Illinois. Upon retiring he continued his research and writing.
In 1997 the American Psychological Association (APA) nominated the 92-year-old professor for its highest honor, the Gold Metal Lifetime Achievement Award to be presented in Chicago during their annual conference. In the weeks prior to the event leftwing academics “waged an intense media blitz of distortions, rumor, and innuendo. These axe-grinding ideological adversaries worked vigorously behind the scenes to undermine the APA’s presentation of the Gold Metal Award. They accused Cattell of [among other sins] ‘racism and anti-Semitism’”[2]Kevin Lamb, “Malicious Smearing of a Psychological Pioneer,” The Occidental Observer, January 19, 2010.
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2010/01/19/the...oneer/ (see the SPLC for particulars). Two leftists leading the charge were above-mentioned Berry Mehler, and William H. Tucker, a psychology professor at Rutgers University –Camden, who has made a career of attacking fellow psychologists who have gone off the reservation.
Much of the material that disturbed the PC enforcers was contained in two philosophical works that Cattell wrote later in life: A New Morality from Science: Beyondism (1972), and Beyondism: Religion from Science (1987). Cattell advocated for a new religion and was critical of the “Judaic-Catholic-Christian complex.” Cattell had relatively little to say about race, but was, no doubt, a race realist. The real heresy came from his lifelong interest in the potential for eugenics. He also had a very evolutionary view of human culture believing that societies and nations should develop largely as autonomous units, the antithesis of globalism.
One of the techniques used to discredit Cattell was the tried-and-true tactic of guilt by association. While the left is still wailing about McCarthyism sixty years after their assault on Tail Gunner Joe, they have perfected the art of linking their opponents to other individuals they find objectionable and attributing the ideas of one to the other. Cattell’s “unsavory affiliations” included Roger Pearson, Wilmot Robertson, Revilo Oliver and Carlton Putnam, the dissident right intellectuals of his day.
As a result of the intense lobbying effort by the left, the APA postponed the presentation of Cattell’s award pending an investigation. The old professor defended his research and writing, but in the end decided to withdraw his name from consideration. He died a few months later in February, 1998.
• • •
Phillippe Rushton (1943-2012) was another British-born psychologist who departed from the politically correct consensus and paid a price. Rushton settled in Canada and spent twenty-five years as a teaching and research professor at University of Western Ontario.
The author of six books and over 250 articles, Rushton began his career studying altruism, eventually developing the Genetic Similarity Theory as an explanatory framework for why people behavior altruistically. He found that close genetic relationships, including outside the family group, promote altruistic behavior. This phenomenon operates on both an individual and collective level, and could help explain ethnic conflict.
Rushton believed that observable racial differences in IQ and behavior were attributable, at least in part, to genetic inheritance. In his best-known book, Race, Evolution, and Behavior, Rushton applied Life History Theory to explain racial differences. Life histories run on an r/K continuum from fast r, to slow K. “A life history is a genetically organized suite of characteristics . . . [that] allocate energy to survival, growth and reproduction.”[3]J. Phillippe Rushton, Race, Evolution, and Behavior: A Life History Perspective, (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 1995) 199. For example, the r strategy for reproduction includes a high quantity of offspring with little parental care, while the K strategy produces fewer offspring with higher levels of parental investment. Rushton suggested that Blacks tended towards an r strategy while Europeans and East Asians pursued more of a K strategy.
The reaction from the establishment to Rushton’s research findings was intense outrage. The Ontario premier, David Peterson, demanded Rushton be terminated from his position at the university. When that could not be done, the premier instituted a six-month investigation for possible criminal violations under Canada’s hate speech laws. Unfortunately Canada does not have the same constitutional protections as the US. But fortunately the investigation found that, while Rushton’s pronouncements were deplorable, they were not criminal.
As we have seen there are extrajudicial methods for punishing heretics. “Because of his scientific and political convictions, Rushton endured decades of social ostracism, professional discrimination, grotesque smears, mentally unhinged stalkers, attempts to have him fired from his job, and physical assaults at the hands of Canada’s egalitarian peace-and-love mongers.”[4]Greg Johnson, “Remembering J. Phillippe Rushton; December 3, 1943 – October 2, 2012,” North American New Right, October 5, 2012.
http://www.counter-currents.com/2012/10/remembering...shton/
• • •
Wisconsin-born evolutionary psychologist Kevin MacDonald is another social scientist condemned by the ADL, SPLC, and ISAR. After receiving a PhD in 1981 MacDonald taught for many years at the California State University – Long Beach. His early research and writing were noncontroversial, focusing on child development and European monogamy from an evolutionary perspective. In the 1990s, however, he began a study of Judaism as an evolutionary group strategy. Going where the research led him, MacDonald found that Jews have been extremely effective in promoting their ethnic interests at the expense of Europeans and European-American majorities. His scholarship produced a trilogy on Jewish social history.[5]Kevin B. MacDonald , A People That Shall Dwell Alone: Judaism As a Group Evolutionary Strategy With Diaspora Peoples (Praeger 1994).
Kevin B. MacDonald, Separation and its Discontents: Toward as Evolutionary Theory of Anti-Semitism (Praeger 1998).
Kevin B. MacDonald, The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth Century Social and Political Movements (Praeger 1998).
As a result of his studies MacDonald developed a strong ethnic identity and became an articulate advocate for the interests of White Americans. This obviously did not sit well with those anti-White groups seeking to define the scope of acceptable academic activities.
Starting in 2006 the SPLC mounted an all-out offensive to discredit Prof MacDonald’s work, and have him fired from his position at CSULB. The campaign began with emails to the Cal State Long Beach psychology faculty linking to highly critical comments on the SPLC website. Next, SPLC heavyweight Heidi Beirich visited the campus to gin up opposition to MacDonald among the university’s faculty and administration. Unrelenting, Beirich made another campus visit in April, 2008 in conjunction with charges from the ADL that the professor was promoting hate and anti-Semitism. This combined attack led to censure of MacDonald by various academic departments. In 2010 leftist students invaded MacDonald’s classroom to disrupt his teaching. In 2012 Mark Potok, SPLC’s “senior fellow,” wrote a defamatory article complete with misquotes and prevarications to make the case that, despite tenure, MacDonald violated the terms of his employment and should be terminated. The good professor was a real thorn in the SPLC’s side! The campaign against Prof. MacDonald did not end until his retirement from the university in 2014.[6]MacDonald recounts his eight-year ordeal at: Kevin MacDonald, “Campaign Against Me by the Southern Poverty Law Center.” www.kevinmacdonald.net/Beirich.htm
It should be noted that the five men featured here are not the only psychologists who have challenged the prevailing orthodoxy and been demonized for doing so. Glayde Whitney (1939-2001), Richard Lynn, Linda Gottfredson, and others could make the list.
Conclusions
So what larger lessons can be learned from the above stories? One of the most obvious is that the forces tasked with policing the social sciences and suppressing dissent, the anti-White NGOs, the MSM, and the leftist street punks, are well-organized and well-funded. It is truly shameful that in their time of troubles these men stood largely alone to face the left’s harassment and abuse. There was no supporting counter force to push back. Thankfully they had the courage of their convictions. They could have easily taken the careerist path and enjoyed the benefits of academic life undisturbed.
The above five were academic psychologists. Today the academy is, to an extent, a closed guild. Especially in the liberal arts and social sciences, graduate study is essentially proscribed to those on the right. To pursue a graduate degree, a student needs a faculty mentor to supervise his thesis or dissertation. That is just the first step. Then a young scholar needs to be hired and achieve tenure from a system completely dominated by the left. Of our five, four were tenured and one was retired before they ran afoul of the PC police. Except for Cattell who graduated in 1929, none could have started their career as dissidents.
Incredibly, despite the vituperative attacks from the left and the lack of institutional support from academia, the right is, in large measure, winning the scientific debate on racial differences and the costs of multicultural societies, especially for formerly dominant groups. But winning arguments and exercising power are two very different things. As we have seen with educational policy, the establishment is generally impervious to data incompatible with its ideology. Thus a second lesson is that scientific findings in and of themselves will not bring about needed change.
A third takeaway; the present system may be strong, but it is very brittle. It cannot bend, modify its policies, or compromise in response to the critique from the right. If it did so, its paradigm would shatter. The establishment’s only choice is to double down and unleash its curs, the twenty-first-century America’s equivalent of the Red Guard. The system perceives the White right as the only truly revolutionary ideology existent in the West today. No wonder elites hate and fear it.
This fear and hatred cannot be signs of confidence. The elites are not confident of validity of their dogmas and shibboleths, so their reaction is to attempt to eradicate free speech. They are worried their multicultural concoction could prove to be a volatile brew—all the more reason to maintain strict limits on acceptable thought. And as noted, the establishment finds it literally impossible to concede any point to the White identitarian right. While no one has a crystal ball, the election of Donald Trump, the rise of the Alt Right, and the increased frenzy on the left, point to an acceleration of the long-term trend of social and political polarization. It is going to get ugly and messy, but let’s be optimistic. The present censorship of science and distortion of culture cannot stand. The combination of scientific rationalism and passionate idealism that makes the West great will prevail.
Notes
[1] Arthur R .Jensen, “How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement,” Harvard Educational Review (Spring 1969) 39.1, 1-123.
[2] Kevin Lamb, “Malicious Smearing of a Psychological Pioneer,” The Occidental Observer, January 19, 2010.
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2010/01/19/the-malicious-smearing-of-a-psychological-pioneer/
[3] J. Phillippe Rushton, Race, Evolution, and Behavior: A Life History Perspective, (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 1995) 199.
[4] Greg Johnson, “Remembering J. Phillippe Rushton; December 3, 1943 – October 2, 2012,” North American New Right, October 5, 2012.
http://www.counter-currents.com/2012/10/remembering-r-phillippe-rushton/
[5] Kevin B. MacDonald , A People That Shall Dwell Alone: Judaism As a Group Evolutionary Strategy With Diaspora Peoples (Praeger 1994).
Kevin B. MacDonald, Separation and its Discontents: Toward as Evolutionary Theory of Anti-Semitism (Praeger 1998).
Kevin B. MacDonald, The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth Century Social and Political Movements (Praeger 1998).
[6] MacDonald recounts his eight-year ordeal at: Kevin MacDonald, “Campaign Against Me by the Southern Poverty Law Center.” www.kevinmacdonald.net/Beirich.htm
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
That’s the method employed in State Schools in Australia in the 1960s.
It may be great for low IQ children, but what use can it be for the others?
The issue then was evidence Galileo presented supporting the Copernican heliocentric model of the solar system
He did not have any evidence to the contrary of the Ptolemaic system. He was correct but w/o any proof it was just an opinion contrary to the teachings of the Church. The Church is not impressed with opinions.
We “Know” Copernicus Was Right; But Can We Prove It?
There were many attempted experiments with falling bodies and pendulums but measurement errors masked the evidence for Earth rotation around its axis until Foucault’s pendulum in 1851. The rotation of pendulum plane was observed in 17 century but it was not connected to the Earth rotation.
The first empirical evidence of Earth rotation around Sun came with Bardley attempt to measure star parallax which he failed to measure because he picked too distant star but instead he discovered star aberration in c. 1727.
Star parallax was finally discovered in 1838 by Friedrich Bessel.
The Church adhered to the principles of scientific discovery that Church itself discovered and formulated. Church did not believe in we “Know” but wanted empirical proofs which came 150-200 years after Galileo death.
Kepler’s laws and their explanation by Newton did not constitute the direct empirical proofs. There was no improvement in accuracy of calculations over the Ptolemaic method.
BTW, IMO 90% of scientists including physicists can’t come up on their own with a method proving the Copernican system. They do not why do they know what they know, so technically they are adhering to some received dogma no differently that the Church in 17 century.
This forty-years-long aggressive censorship campaign and witch hunt against race-IQ research, in all its facets, has been a very destructive attack on science. How do we stop it continuing — what are the best strategies for restoring scientific integrity?
These psychologists may have been hectored continually, but at least their work isn’t laughable.
The same can’t be said for social psychologists who have found that their studies can’t be replicated. NHST is falling out of favor. Look up ‘p-hacking’ and ‘researcher degree of freedom’. It is bad enough that studies fail replication. Worse for them is that more rigorous, Bayesian statisticians have explained how and why the studies don’t replicate.
Meanwhile, enormous effort and funding has gone into educational experimentation to reduce the gap in testing outcomes between racial groups. They have failed.
http://politiek.tpo.nl/2017/09/16/racisme-belangrijkste-wapen-links/le
Few here can read Dutch, I suppose, the title is ‘Racism has become the most important weapon of left’, whatever left means nowadays.
In the good old days left meant socialist, but since the European socialist parties became supporters of the neoliberal EU, the words left and right in politics in my opinion became meaningless.
Socialists never understood that globalism, that in fact is also the EU philosophy, the competition worldwide for jobs, excludes socialism, unless, and that is what European leftists nowadays seem to want, is that globalism means that the prosperous nations support all poor nations.
Unlimited immigration is part of this ‘leftist’ view, ‘we are prosperous just because we plundered the poor countries’.
This view also seems to be the basis of the new phenomenon ‘cultural marxism’.
There is some truth in this view, but if I look at my Dutch ancestors I cannot see any plundering of the poor, nor profiting of this plunder.
The mess in de former prosperous country of Zimbabwe, and the zimbabwesation of the still relatively prosperous South Africa, demonstrates, in my view, that not all poverty can be blamed on the west.
‘Race’, also a nebulous concept, therefore has been so politicised that no rational discussion is possible.
Again, “race” is a fiction and, thus, the problem. Propose a formal, serious treatment of race in terms of admixture and you will get some proper consideration. Until then, “race” implies “racial purity”, a fantasy for the so inclined.
Besides, there are also IQ differences between the sexes. It is amusing to see the racists tiptoe around that one…
What the heck has Marx to do with the current educational trends in the US, political correctness and evolutionary genetics? If you read his works ( I am almost 100% sure you have not, given the absurd association of Marx with this subject matter) you’ll be pleasantly surprised that he was as racist as you are, and not a pro-Jewish one.
Also, what has the Left (true communists and socialists) to do with this controversy about racial differences? Nothing. In fact, in the USSR the best students (obviously with higher IQ) were promoted and rewarded for their achievements and that is why from a backward peasant Russia the USSR skyrocketed into space in a generation. An amazing feat in scientific and technological development – all because the Soviets knew and prized the fact that some individuals and societies/races are more gifted than others and used them for the social good.
As to the “busing” policies it is ironic that you have not tweaked to the fact that such policy is/was in itself a recognition that there are racial differences in intelligence and aptitude. Apparently the rationale was that mixing the low achieving blacks with whites would bring them up to speed, as if by osmosis. I wouldn’t be surprised if such policy was an utter failure because mixing the high and low doesn’t bring a median, it only exacerbates the differences.
It looks like in the USA they have not stopped burning the witches: anyone who does not conform with the dominant dogma is ostracized or destroyed, from Salem to McCarthyism and the new PC fad. What’s new?
Race is a reality ignored at our peril. Only a nation that is racially homogeneous can survive, a nation that becomes divided up into racial minorities will be torn apart by conflict. This is what is happening in Europe due to indiscriminate immigration.
The banning of Scottish Dawn. The authorities are creating far-right terrorists. Given no other outlet and being denied justice they will turn to violence.
These groups are not the problem and would not exist if Islam and black crime had not been allowed to infest our nation. Blood and Soil what else is there; our land, our nation, our people. It has been this way ever since we evolved into humans. Hundreds of thousands of years; territory and offspring. We forget our animal side, a side that is all too obvious in our cities. Crime, murder and violence, these are not abstract concepts to be argued in political theories. They are a reality and human nature, just as much as our positive characteristics are.
The idea that if you treat people nice they will become nice is utter nonsense nice people were nice in the first place, the others are just plain nasty.
Insipid philosophers say that we must study history so that we do not repeat our mistakes. This is wrong thinking, we have to study our history in order to understand our nature; we are both angel and demon. Poke me with a stick often enough and I’ll bite your head off.
Well, at least the author closed by demonstrating a sense of humor. What’s so great about imagining one’s self as “great?” Yes, dear, Mommy thinks yer the greatest. Now run along now.
The criminalization of truth-seeking about the world’s most durable hoax, the jewish holocaust ™ has made it possible to criminalize other forms of aberrant “thoughts”. Of course, the jews would like to use psychiatric hospitals (a la jewish soviet union communism techniques) to “correct” the thoughts of those who refuse to reject the truth.
In fact, in today’s world, TRUTH cannot be used as a defense in any of the kangaroo courts that prosecute those who question official jewish holocaust ™ dogma.
This needs to change…
Race-mixing was a communist technique utilized to break down existing social structures in order to destabilize societies, making them ripe for communist expansion.
McCarthy was right…however, he could not go far enough into what was then the formative years of the deep state but was only partially successful in rooting out foreign (jewish communist) influences in the United States.
In the late 1950s and early 1960s, we used to have a saying “Behind every Negro, there is a Jew”. It is no secret that Jews were the mobilizing factor behind the so-called black “civil-rights” movement, and were the “handlers” of blacks who (were paid) protesters and civil-rights marchers.
It turns out that those whites of the 1950’s (myself included) that protested against forced integration were right, all along…
Blacks were doing much better when they had their own institutions, businesses, social organizations, residential areas, etc.
It was communists and other society destroyers (the “chosen” and other northern-based “carpetbaggers”) who are directly responsible for our present racial and social ills.
I grew up during the first “civil-rights” era and have a decidedly different “take” on this whole “civil-rights movement” era. In fact, I saw for myself, what went on during those turbulent times.
Despite the lies and fabrications by the so-called “mainstream media” the “civil-rights marches” in the South were not peaceful “gatherings” that were met with dogs and fire hoses, but were violent black confrontations that actually set back the “cause” of TRUE “civil-rights”. .
The so-called “civil-rights” demonstrations were waves of lawlessness that disrupted the lives of peaceful citizens. There were many black citizens in these areas that were against these “outsiders” coming there to cause trouble. These “civil-rights” marchers committed crimes, rapes, robberies and other crimes, and trashed the areas they were protesting in. I WAS THERE . . . Of course, the cameras were turned off during the episodes of violence. . .then just as now, the news media could not “let a crisis go to waste” . . .
It was mostly ACLU, $PLC and ADL types that riled things up. . .and then later on “melted into the woodwork” only to become “civil-rights” attorneys, race hustlers and poverty pimps.
One incident comes to mind–the death of Mrs. Viola Liuzzo–Mrs. Liuzzo was a Detroit housewife who traveled to the “deep south” (without her husband) to run around with “freedom riders” at night–this was a recipe that was asking for trouble. What business did she have running around with blacks at night in the South while she had a family in Detroit?? Why did she put herself “in harms way”??
I WAS THERE during the “civil-rights” disturbances and witnessed the misbehavior of these “civil-rights” groups (that never got reported). . .
Of course, the “victors” write the history. To the victors–how does it feel now that those you pushed and supported are now turning on you??
The so-called “news media” had an agenda then as it does now. White-on black crime (although relatively rare) is ALWAYS described as a “hate crime” where as black-on-white crime is NEVER described as a “hate crime”. . .Actually, ALL crimes are “hate crimes” . . .
Here are two true stories about “icons” of the so-called “civil rights” movement . . .
There is much more to the “Emmett Till” story that is not widely known. Of course, killing him made him into a “martyr” of the black “civil-rights” movement. but–it is not generally known that Emmett Till was a womanizer and attempted to take his cocky “Chicago ways” in dealing with women to the Deep South. Till had a “cocky attitude” and bragged about “getting it on” with white women–not a good idea in the South. . . According to published accounts, Mr. Till did not just “whistle” at a white woman, but manhandled and fondled a married white woman. In Southern culture, this is the ultimate form of disrespect. Despite Mr. Till’s relatives’ attempts to spirit him “out of town” to avoid retribution by the woman’s relatives and townspeople, his cocky attitude “got in the way”, similar to the way that “young master Trayvon’s” attitude got him killed. Despite being given numerous “chances” to apologize for his behavior, he was defiant to the end. IF he had apologized for his behavior, he would still be alive today. In fact, one of the three killers of Emmett Till was black…a fact that is conveniently omitted from published accounts.
It is interesting to note that Emmett Till’s father was executed by the U S military for multiple rapes. Maybe “the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree” . . .
Rosa Parks was not the “ordinary” black woman that so-called historians made her to be. She was an organizer for the NAACP (at the time, run by jews) and was “planted” in order to advance the cause of black “civil-rights” to which she was successful. In fact, the white man sitting behind Ms. Parks was a UPI reporter, contracted to record the event.
Approximately a year previous to Rosa Parks’ refusal to vacate her seat, a REAL ordinary black woman did the same thing. This black woman received NO publicity or support from the NAACP or other black “civil-rights” organizations. You see, she was an unmarried black woman with children. According to the black civil-rights crowd, this would not do. They wanted someone who was “squeaky clean” without any “baggage”.
Hence, Rosa Parks made (fabricated) history . . .
There are many more fabrications of history that were used to add “legitimacy” to the so-called “civil-rights” movement . . .
More to come . . .
Neither Ptolemy nor Copernicus was right or wrong. The simple fact is that there isn’t a center at all.
Doing the math with Earth as center works best for some purposes, and doing the math with Sun as center works best for other purposes. Sometimes it’s better to use the apparent center of the Milky Way as the zero point.
It’s just a question of convenience.
@ LauraMR: race is hardly a fiction. Take 100 random people, show them any black, Asian, and white person, and you’ll get the correct answer 100% of the time. Unless some of the respondents are Ray Charles and Little Stevie Wonder. They’ll have to guess, so the odds go down a little. Just because there is variability around a trait(s), doesn’t mean the trait doesn’t exist.
The best definition of race is probably the one used in genome-wide association studies. To improve statistical fit, geneticists working in this area always divide the sample of individuals into races, and only use one “continental ancestry” to analyse the data. This is because of the big differences across the genome for individuals with different “continental ancestry” i.e. race. It is very straightforward to categorise individuals in this way using DNA samples; that is probably the best definition of race.
Oh, yes. The Catholic Church was fair minded and impartial. Here’s another example of how they dealt with “hate-thought” back in the 16th century…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giordano_Bruno
“…and that is why from a backward peasant Russia the USSR skyrocketed into space in a generation.”
Actually, the USSR and the USA made off with Germany’s rocket program…including the German scientists who created that program.
Curiously enough, Lysenko seems to be enjoying a partial revival with epigenetics!! But toxic group-think in science that then ends up as toxic legislation is nothing new. Remember how the Carnegie, Rockefuller, ….. foundations and “star scientists” at Harvard, Stanford, Yale, Princeton, …. were involved in this.
Eugenics and the Nazis — the California connection – SFGate
http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/article/Eugenics-and-the-Nazis-the-California-2549771.php
So Marx was appropriated and abused by his own sect?
Gerald Warner: Impact of politically correct Britain – The Scotsman
http://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/gerald-warner-impact-of-politically-correct-britain-1-3128346
…. The Party Line is currently termed Political Correctness, but the outcome is the same: the reconfiguration of language to police thought and impose an ideology, the harassing of religion, the destruction of marriage and the family, and the coercive remodelling of culture to accommodate a fanatical aberration that defies human nature itself. Political correctness is cultural Marxism.
The term was coined by Anton Semyonovich Makarenko, Lenin’s education guru and favourite wordsmith (he also invented the phrase “dictatorship of the proletariat”). From the beginning, Marxists recognised there was a lot more involved in imposing totalitarian social control than nationalisation of the means of production, distribution and exchange. In Hungary in 1919, during the short-lived but murderous Communist dictatorship of Bela Kun, his deputy “commissar for culture”, Georg Lukacs, introduced a programme of “cultural terrorism” under which he imposed pornographic sex education on schoolchildren, promoting promiscuity, denouncing the family and encouraging pupils to mock their parents and religion. The question Lukacs posed was: “Who will save us from Western Civilisation?”……
You should travel a bit more. Black, Asian and White (plus Hispanic) are classifications invented in the US for political purposes. Not hard to find people in the world who do NOT fit any of these categories.
Well, assuming the Earth as center you get into a hairball cosmology with complex trajectories and arbitrarily large speeds and acceleration of the heavenly bodies, weird forces coming out of nowhere and complex exceptions to movements.
Assuming the Sun as center gets you out of the retard’s fever dream above and you suddenly can put everything on a little piece of paper and still get the same observational results.
Complexity of the Description: Reduce it relentlessly and you are on the Right Way.
It’s not a point of view. It’s a number as complexity is described in bytes.
Actually, the US had its own, completely ignored rocket man: Goddard.
And the USSR didn’t get all that much from the Germans (the Allies had snaffled most of the gear and the brains), but they had The Engineer: Sergei Korolev. Who pulled through in spite of having had the dubious honour of being an inmate in a soviet labor camp before becoming “useful” again.
LOLNO.
There is VERY marked difference between a reference system under acceleration (e.g. one bound to Earth) and one that is not (approximately one bound to the Sun, aka. a “Galilean System”).
Acceleration is ABSOLUTE. Like electric charge. Or gravity.
This is a pretty comprehensive list of the punished:
https://handleshaus.wordpress.com/2013/12/26/bullied-and-badgered-pressured-and-purged/
.. except that he stopped keeping track for a while. Latest entry, James Damore.
“Races” are probably most appropriately considered sub-species of humanity, just as many other animals are divided into sub-species.
Where sub-species adjoin geographically, they generally interbreed and thus the transition from sub-species A to B is gradual, not sudden. But that doesn’t mean the sub-species don’t exist, merely that some animals are not easily and unambiguously placed in one or the other.
If two sub-species are placed in a contained environment they will interbreed to the point the differences disappear, and eventually form something like a new subspecies.
Giordano Bruno deserved what he got. He was a heretic. The issue had nothing to do with science question.
Phases of Venus, observed by Galileo, rules out the Ptolemaic system.
Simply observe where all the low IQ, 3rd world “refugees” are trying to get into
White majority countries.
Sex IQ differences merely confirm the fact of IQ.
So called “racism” = realism
So remember, your Jews supports Israeli immigration laws which specify JEWS ONLY, while they demand massive 3rd world immigration into the US & Europe.
Next.
@ hyperbola: don’t confuse language with biology. Again, there is always some variability.
OK, you won me over. I’ll agree with you that race is “a fiction.”
Now all we have to do is get rid of all those quotas and set-asides. And let’s also force Princeton and other universities to not add points to the scores of blacks and deduct them from Asian students, which is something they do because of “race.”
We then have to mandate that doctors stop screening individuals for certain diseases because of their race. That means no more talking to black patients about their higher risks of prostate cancer, sickle cell, and diabetes.
I’d also like to see the definition of the word “race” altered in dictionaries to reflect the new fact that it’s just something people made up, willy-nilly, despite medical data saying otherwise.
Great argument!
https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1103/1103.2057.pdf
See page 31.
If it helps, I will say it again: Phases of Venus, observed by Galileo, rules out the Ptolemaic system.
Doesn’t disallow the Tychonic system, but then I didn’t say that it did.
The “USA” (even Colonial times) never burned a single witch. Colonists in America did not employ burning alive as a form of execution. Witches were hanged generally, or “pressed” to death, as in England. The indigenous native American people did have burning as a form of execution both among themselves and for white prisoners they wanted to off.
Your measuring cup- approach to evaluating race, has truth in it–we’re all a mixture, etc. etc. But most people have a pretty good idea of where they fit in the race puzzle. Various black, brown, and yellow “races” see themselves as “races.” Only some whites digress of late. In any case, it’s not going to make any difference using “admixtures” as a way of profiling people, or using the term “race.” Changing the official vocabulary to accommodate feelings has never worked much
Peine forte et dure was for refusing to plead, not witchcraft per se– I’m sure you know but just want to clarify for others.
Yes, this is completely true, but why did you say it in the first place? You clarified utu’s point by a minor correction and I clarified yours, happily no outright correction being necessary.
Very interesting. The intricacy of pro and con arguments. Phases of Venus from Galileo book are on p. 118.
Nelson Rosit? Sounds like an anagram…
“Giordano Bruno deserved what he got. He was a heretic.”
Presumably you’re joking?
No. I was not. Bruno was heretic and possibly English spy. Copernican cosmology was the least important issue. In England at that time he would be quarter and hanged for much lesser offense.
Our local government school is permeated with Cultural Marxist crap – they’re so stupid and insulated they really have no clue how awful they are.
Their test scores are at about the 14th percentile world-wide if you use their US test scores, then benchmark that against the PISA international tests.
The “Science” curriculum for kindergarten, the entire year – is to learn about three scientists. The first is Adolf Muir, without even an undergraduate degree nor science paper. To preach the gospel of common ownership of land.
The second is Susan La Flesche Picotte, the first American Indian physician. Also not a scientist, but just because being a woman and an American Indian, you get a quota of science dedicated to you, not any kind of scientific principle involved. Got to get that identity politics into science at the crack of the bat in Kindergarten.
Third, is Jonas Salk. There’s one bona-fide scientist in the lot. Fully one-third of the science curriculum on a science subject. Not bad for government work. It is not hyperbole to say that the majority of the Kindergarten science curriculum is cultural Marxism.
So we homeschool.
Itching to execute “heretics”? The majority of the US population is non-Catholic.
Your point is valid only to the extent of justifying the Church’s refusal to accept the Copernican theory. It certainly doesn’t justify the Church’s punishment of Galileo and the use of the threat of torture to force Galileo to recant. I’m sure almost any tyrant would claim not to punish dissidents if they can prove to the satisfaction of the tyrant the truth of their beliefs. By your standard Kim Jong Un is a respecter of free speech.
Reductio ad absurdum.
Another problem with the Ptolemaic theory is that it implies changes in the apparent sizes of the disks of the Moon and Sun. So does the use of Kepler’s Laws but to a much smaller extent. The Ptolemaic theory implies a variation in the size of the solar disk about twice that predicted by Kepler’s Laws. In both cases the effect is small and difficult to measure however in the case of the Moon the Ptolemaic theory predicts the apparent size of the Moon should vary by an easily observable amount. This empirical refutation of the Ptolemaic system at least in the case of the Moon does not require telescopic observation. Of course I suppose a diehard Ptolemaist could postulate an expansion and contraction of the Moon that exactly offsets it’s changes in distance from the Earth that the Ptolemaic theory predicts.
The first chapter of Shlomo Sternberg’s book on Celestial Mechanics has an interesting discussion of ancient systems of celestial mechanics and how they compare with modern theories.
What are you trying to argue? We are talking about early 17 century. They are in the midst of Reformation and Counterreformation and the Thirty Years War is raging on. People are killed all over Europe for their beliefs in both Protestant part and Catholic part under the slightest suspicion of heresy. And what are you actually arguing? What kind of doctrine of law? And since when the doctrine you argue from became a universal practice? Are you talking about the freedom of speech perhaps? Have you tried to exercise it recently? Like for example start advocating for Taliban or ISIS?
Any society that will punish you for holding the wrong religious beliefs will punish you for holding the wrong political views.
If Galileo didn’t rule out Tychonism, then he didn’t rule out geocentrism.
Galileo observed the phases and changing size of Venus, showing it orbits the sun, not earth. He also observed moons orbiting Jupiter. These two facts alone were in contradiction with the Ptolemaic system which had everything orbiting earth.
We’ve put men on the moon and sent probes to beyond our solar system and here’s a religious fanatic who uses the Bible to justify a geocentric solar system. Plus, he’s fine with killing “heretics.” Sheesh.
Superb piece, Nelson. BTW-one doesn’t need to be a dissident professor to incur the wrath of your colleagues in the academy. We have tenured professors at our local state university who’ve been harassed into leaving for greener pastures because they had the temerity to pursue their uncontroversial research interests. Why? Because ours is a less selective school where few students will notice a lecturer who’s not on top of his game, so department chairs and senior faculty get lazy, and don’t wish to be challenged by their juniors.
A phenomenal essay on the biggest threat facing us right now has a comment section loaded with autistes trying to re-litigate century old feuds among Europeans which are no longer relevant.
If we end up losing this thing, it’ll be because we couldn’t get out of our own way. FOCUS!!!
Colors in nature do not exist because everything is a spectrum… yadda yadda yadda
A meaningless statement when knowing that the red berry will kill you but the blue berry is edible.
The fact of the matter is useful categories can be made from arbitrarily defined numbers of clusters. It is a known theoretical problem with a variety of well-thought out and robust solutions within the machine learning space – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Determining_the_number_of_clusters_in_a_data_set
It has been applied quite well to the race-classification problem with the conclusion being that there are simple more than the big 5 races. I could easily accept that conclusion, simply because it would allow me more discriminatory power in my day to day dealings.
Note that I said useful, not eternally true or true apriori, but rather useful.
Phases of Venus and Jupiter moons were arguments for Tychonic system which technically was geocentric.
I would not have thought I would see a mention of Kolmogorov complexity discussing Heliocentrism in a comment section on Race Realism studies. What a fantastic site.
The issue wasn’t really the Copernican vs Ptolemaic system at all. The issue was 1) Galileo was a complete asshole whom everybody hated, and 2) he wrote a work of satire for the exact purpose of making the Pope look like a moron. The second made him a possible target of punishment (the Pope was a worldly prince at the time; freedom of speech wasn’t a thing; and Galileo was a resident of a power allied with the Pope), and the first made it unlikely anyone was going to ride to his defense.
The Church did what it does in such cases. It determined what caused Galileo to misbehave and then forced Galileo to give up the exact thing which caused him to misbehave. The Church had no particular problem with permitting scholarly exploration of the Copernican system. Copernicus was not persecuted. He was encouraged. Other Copernicans were not persecuted. It was only after Galileo, only after Copernicanism became a flag for enemies of the Church, that Copernicanism was persecuted. It’s like Germany outlawing the swastika.
The author clearly doesn’t know or care what he’s talking about. He’s just invoking Galileo to make us all understand that he’s on board the whole modernism train, that he’s not a heretic, that he buys all the earlier SJW lunacy: it’s just the latest iteration he has a problem with.
I think that’s going a little too far. That was probably part of his intention (which would have been extra stupid, because the Pope was one of the last remaining friends Galileo hadn’t turned off by that point) but it wasn’t the whole intention.
Thank you for writing your comment and adding more background to the story of Galileo. I wrote my first comment (#2) trying to set the record straight. I knew that by doing so I may end up trolling this discussion but I thought that using Galileo cliche is really tiresome so what the heck, let the author learn that using cheap shots does not pay.
This tribute omitted a very important piece of work which is “The Bell Curve” by Charles Murray and Richard Hernstein, perhaps the most famous work ever published about IQ and its relation to race. Both were ostracized and kicked to curb by the looney left since the day the book was published.
I suppose the rationale behind debunking the whole notion of IQ, especially when race based, is that it is too deterministic and unfairly stigmatizes groups of people. I have no problem with that except the same people who deny that IQ exists and is heritable are not entirely altruistic in their denial. There is money, in fact a lot of money, to be made in perpetuating the lie that IQ does not exist and is not heritable:
“Closing the Achievement Gap” education administrators, diversity officers, diversity hires, holistic admission officers, all the academics/journalists/writers/entertainers who teach/write about racism, social justice, “think tanks” who published a million and one studies on racism, sexism, discrimination etc. all need to debunk IQ so they can keep blaming everything on racism and keep their jobs. IQ denial is a billion dollar industry, millions of jobs are at stake. These IQ deniers will not give up without a fight. Their entire livelihood depends on them being able to continue perpetuating this lie.
Nelson: thank you for the very interesting and well put together article.
There are many things that I could respond to, but the comment would be as long or longer than your original article.
I should just like to point out a few (somewhat) random thoughts.
1. There is currently, a trend of increasing publications on race and IQ. I am somewhat wary of this uptick, which seems to be heading for (highly questionable) justification of normative racial differences in innate intelligence. I word this precisely for a reason.
While recent research shows potential for correlations between certain genetic site patterns to intelligence (as measured by IQ test scores), currently several insurmountable issues exist invalidating any causal suppositions between ‘race’ and intelligence:
i. zeroing out environmental factors from testing subjects’ entire lives to environmental influences extending back to all grandparents, and especially the influence of environmental factors on epi-genetic function. It just cannot be done.
If anyone doesn’t think environmental factors influence intelligence, then that someone probably forget that female mammal pre-eggs are formed when they themselves are in-utero; so the stressors the grandmother are placed under around the time of conception, gestation, birth and (especially) early childhood, will in fact impact intelligence of the subsequent offspring form that woman
ii. genetic persistence of (proposed) gene site patterns potentially correlating with intelligence within the test subject. While it is clear that you receive material from both parents, there is no demonstrated genetic persistence beyond:
a. Y-chromosome heredity and
b. mitochondrial DNA (mDNA),
therefore, (according to the application of the scientific method) there is actually no such thing as traceable ‘race‘ and no traceable genetic patterns beyond those specific examples, including gene site patterns supposedly correlating with intelligence.
2. I am much interested in the work of Dr. Sharon Moalem (Survival of the Sickest), and Spenser Wells (Journey of Man, Pandora’s Seed).
Recent research makes it seem likely that Darwin got it wrong and Lamark (Lamarkian inheritance, greatly ridiculed for years – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamarckism ) actually got it closer to recent research, indicating that environmental stressors cause genetic substitutions, which may result in genetic changes that CAN be passed on to subsequent offspring.
I recommend these authors/books.
An extremely well-argued treatment of race and behaviour (he does not talk about IQ though) is A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, Race and Human History by Nicholas Wade. Well worth a read; particularly good on race as a scientific category instead of or in addition to race as a “social construct” whatever that means.
It goes further than that…here in the USA, race-based “testers” are used by “fair housing” agencies to “root out” those landlords who prefer not to rent to blacks. In accordance with law, these testers are required to be of the race that they claim to be…white testers and black testers. These testers utilize telephone calls to ascertain “availability” of housing.
With virtually 100% accuracy, one is able to ascertain the correct race of a tester making the call. One can easily tell a black tester from a white tester without having to see them in person, with ease.
Peter, are there work-arounds you and your colleagues haven’t thought about yet? I think Poland under the Communist regime had “flying universities” to elude official censorship and suppression. Informal get-togethers of scholars, lectures in private homes, samizdat pubs, and the like.
I’ve weakly encouraged some of the profs at our local state university to popularize their academic specialties by aggressively seeking local speaking opportunities to whomever will listen. The idea was to cultivate friendly relations with local folks, and loosen the yoke of abusive department chairs.
Most of the censorship pressure comes from funding agencies and peer disapproval rather than department chairs. It is soft-power censorship rather than USSR type police-enforced censorship, so perhaps more effective in the longer term. The mainstream narrative that human biodiversity cannot exist, or if it does exist we should pretend otherwise, is soaked right into most academic’s whole outlook. So the censorship comes from the majority not a minority.
Peter, thanks. I’m not an academic or scientist, BTW, but I do observe in some detail our less selective local university’s ways of “handling” its academics who seem to be upsetting some apple cart.
” . . . [C]ensorship pressure comes from funding agencies and peer disapproval . . .”. FWIW, twenty years ago I would have disbelieved or been baffled by a statement saying the academy shuts down lines of inquiry that promise to clarify the nature of the world we live in. Well, that was then. I know now the academy will squelch the search for truth for dubious reasons, and I feel pretty lousy about having learned that.
First prove that these illusive differences exist. And not with Pioneer Fund “data” either.
Galileo understood the concepts of burden of proof and scientific rigor. Do you?
Why should the burden of proof be on those who allege differences? Where is the evidence for the equality hypothesis?
Why is Pioneer Fund “data” not data?
Did he?
The equality hypothesis, as you put it, is reality. If it weren’t people like you and the author wouldn’t have to waste your lives trying to prove otherwise. Suggesting that I have the burden of proof is similar to suggesting that flat earthers have to be proved wrong.
We did prove the Earth was round, back in the time of the Greeks. If this hadn’t been done there’d be no reason to assume it and the hypothesis of a flat earth supported by an infinite series of elephants would be a perfectly valid scientific hypothesis.
The burden of proof rests on those who make a new claim. The equality hypothesis is a new claim. Where is the evidence?
Try proving that you are not the unequal one. Or try proving that whites are equal to blacks in innate intelligence. Where is the evidence?
For almost 150 years the United States has been conducting an interesting experiment. The subjects of the experiment: black people and working-class whites.
The hypothesis to be tested: Can a people taken from the jungles of Africa and forced into slavery be fully integrated as citizens in a majority white population?
The whites were descendants of Europeans who had created a majestic civilization. The former slaves had been tribal peoples with no written language and virtually no intellectual achievements. Acting on a policy that was not fair to either group, the government released newly freed black people into a white society that saw them as inferiors. America has struggled with racial discord ever since.
Decade after decade the problems persisted but the experimenters never gave up. They insisted that if they could find the right formula the experiment would work, and concocted program after program to get the result they wanted. They created the Freedman’s Bureau, passed civil rights laws, tried to build the Great Society, declared War on Poverty, ordered race preferences, built housing projects, and tried midnight basketball.
Their new laws intruded into people’s lives in ways that would have been otherwise unthinkable. They called in National Guard troops to enforce school integration. They outlawed freedom of association. Over the protests of parents, they put white children on buses and sent them to black schools and vice versa. They tried with money, special programs, relaxed standards, and endless handwringing to close the “achievement gap.” To keep white backlash in check they began punishing public and even private statements on race. They hung up Orwellian public banners that commanded whites to “Celebrate Diversity!” and “Say No to Racism.” Nothing was off limits if it might salvage the experiment.
Some thought that what W.E.B. Du Bois called the Talented Tenth would lead the way for black people. A group of elite, educated blacks would knock down doors of opportunity and show the world what blacks were capable of. There is a Talented Tenth. They are the black Americans who have become entrepreneurs, lawyers, doctors and scientists. But ten percent is not enough. For the experiment to work, the ten percent has to be followed by a critical mass of people who can hold middle-class jobs and promote social stability. That is what is missing.
Through the years, too many black people continue to show an inability to function and prosper in a culture unsuited to them. Detroit is bankrupt, the south side of Chicago is a war zone, and the vast majority of black cities all over America are beset by degeneracy and violence. And blacks never take responsibility for their failures. Instead, they lash out in anger and resentment.
Across the generations and across the country, as we have seen in Detroit, Watts, Newark, Los Angeles, Cincinnati, and now Ferguson, rioting and looting are just one racial incident away. The white elite would tell us that this doesn’t mean the experiment has failed. We just have to try harder. We need more money, more time, more understanding, more programs, and more opportunities.
But nothing changes no matter how much money is spent, no matter how many laws are passed, no matter how many black geniuses are portrayed on TV, and no matter who is president. Some argue it’s a problem of “culture,” as if culture creates people’s behavior instead of the other way around. Others blame “white privilege.”
But since 1965, when the elites opened America’s doors to the Third World, immigrants from Asia and India–people who are not white, not rich, and not “connected”–have quietly succeeded. While the children of these people are winning spelling bees and getting top scores on the SAT, black “youths” are committing half the country’s violent crime–crime, which includes viciously punching random white people on the street for the thrill of it that has nothing to do with poverty.
The experiment has failed. Not because of culture, or white privilege, or racism. The fundamental problem is that white people and black people are different. They differ intellectually and temperamentally. These differences result in permanent social incompatibility.
Our rulers don’t seem to understand just how tired their white subjects are with this experiment. They don’t understand that white people aren’t out to get black people; they are just exhausted with them. They are exhausted by the social pathologies, the violence, the endless complaints, and the blind racial solidarity, the bottomless pit of grievances, the excuses, and the reflexive animosity.
The elites explain everything with “racism,” and refuse to believe that white frustration could soon reach the boiling point.,.,
Agree, sadly. What gains there have been are trivial, the costs in financial terms and moral chaos are terrible. America’s experiment in social engineering didn’t work and doesn’t work. Where do we go from here to achieve, for want of a better term, justice?
Regardless if race is an exact science or not,
there are obvious iq differences between groups.
Liberal elites are actually racialist. They know that African-Americans needed help to catch up. They created affirmative action.
But when it comes to the public life the elites cover it up. The popuation of Liberals denies differences and screams racist.
Also this man…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konstantin_Tsiolkovsky
The study of modern science was of course Newton.