‹ First  < 10 11 12 13 14 > 
 
   
 

The necessary evil of racial identity politics for whites

 
burt
 
Avatar
 
 
burt
Total Posts:  15839
Joined  17-12-2006
 
 
 
20 January 2019 07:21
 
Abel Dean - 19 January 2019 10:45 PM

The benefits of truth tend to emerge only after we lose the delusions. If we can every lose the delusions, then the benefits, whatever they may be, are likely to serve everyone, not just whites. Being able to feed one’s family is not only white people’s cultural notion of success. In South Africa, white privilege is now being fought by seizing land from whites to give to blacks. When the same thing happened in Zimbabwe, starvation ensued across the rural countryside. When whites returned to the farmland, they were greeted with jubilant cheers from black natives who worked on the farms, as though it was the best day of their lives. Their lives were saved. Reuters has compelling video. It should be a wake-up call.

https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-zimbabwe-politics-farmer/ululations-tears-as-white-zimbabwean-farmer-returns-to-seized-land-idUSKBN1EF2US

Before long, what is currently only probable will become certain beyond reasonable doubt. The certainty will arrive not through legally-impossible group experiments but through genome-wide association studies that are currently beginning. When the knowledge emerges, I fear that it will not defeat the dogmas. Millions of American Latinos, blacks, Native Americans and white liberals would sooner believe that the science of genetics is a conspiracy of white supremacists, and they will believe any “whistleblower” who affirms that suspicion. If that sounds like a crazy prediction, then reflect on the fact that millions of liberals already believe crazy conspiracy theories about genetically-modified foods, and those beliefs don’t even relate to core liberal dogmas. People will believe anything to preserve their dogmas. We need to come to grips with the probable objective realities as they are, and fast. The dogmas need to be illuminated and shamed, focusing on the halls of academia.

Colleges ought to be remedies for ideologies. But, they instead tend to be the opposite. Many colleges are now unchallenged priesthoods for the ideology of antiracism, training the most intelligent students to be active thought leaders in defending and advancing the sacred beliefs of antiracism by any means. They don’t even think of antiracism as a potential bias. The more zeal toward antiracism, the better, they believe.

Now the real agenda appears, the ugly alt-right racism trying to masquerade as a search for “truth.” You are not interested in truth, only in promoting your own fear inspired beliefs.

Let’s get real: how much money, cash on the barrel head, are you willing to bet that your fearful prediction above comes to pass? Say within the next 10 years.

 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
20 January 2019 07:31
 
burt - 20 January 2019 07:21 AM
Abel Dean - 19 January 2019 10:45 PM

The benefits of truth tend to emerge only after we lose the delusions. If we can every lose the delusions, then the benefits, whatever they may be, are likely to serve everyone, not just whites. Being able to feed one’s family is not only white people’s cultural notion of success. In South Africa, white privilege is now being fought by seizing land from whites to give to blacks. When the same thing happened in Zimbabwe, starvation ensued across the rural countryside. When whites returned to the farmland, they were greeted with jubilant cheers from black natives who worked on the farms, as though it was the best day of their lives. Their lives were saved. Reuters has compelling video. It should be a wake-up call.

https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-zimbabwe-politics-farmer/ululations-tears-as-white-zimbabwean-farmer-returns-to-seized-land-idUSKBN1EF2US

Before long, what is currently only probable will become certain beyond reasonable doubt. The certainty will arrive not through legally-impossible group experiments but through genome-wide association studies that are currently beginning. When the knowledge emerges, I fear that it will not defeat the dogmas. Millions of American Latinos, blacks, Native Americans and white liberals would sooner believe that the science of genetics is a conspiracy of white supremacists, and they will believe any “whistleblower” who affirms that suspicion. If that sounds like a crazy prediction, then reflect on the fact that millions of liberals already believe crazy conspiracy theories about genetically-modified foods, and those beliefs don’t even relate to core liberal dogmas. People will believe anything to preserve their dogmas. We need to come to grips with the probable objective realities as they are, and fast. The dogmas need to be illuminated and shamed, focusing on the halls of academia.

Colleges ought to be remedies for ideologies. But, they instead tend to be the opposite. Many colleges are now unchallenged priesthoods for the ideology of antiracism, training the most intelligent students to be active thought leaders in defending and advancing the sacred beliefs of antiracism by any means. They don’t even think of antiracism as a potential bias. The more zeal toward antiracism, the better, they believe.

Now the real agenda appears, the ugly alt-right racism trying to masquerade as a search for “truth.” You are not interested in truth, only in promoting your own fear inspired beliefs.

Let’s get real: how much money, cash on the barrel head, are you willing to bet that your fearful prediction above comes to pass? Say within the next 10 years.

I would give it about 10% in the next ten years, and 20% in the next twenty years. I am being conservative because of the unpredictable nature of genetic phenomena intersecting with social phenomena. If genome-wide association studies proved scientific racism correct today, as improbable as that is from your perspective, what do you think would follow socially? Do you think millions of liberals would change their dogmas in light of the emerged fact that blacks on average really are genetically stupider than whites? People changing their core dogmas is of course unlikely. Or do you think almost everyone will just ignore the science as though it doesn’t matter? That would be a stronger possibility, but it seems unlikely after genotypic IQ tests become widely available and widely used.

 
hannahtoo
 
Avatar
 
 
hannahtoo
Total Posts:  7176
Joined  15-05-2009
 
 
 
20 January 2019 08:31
 

Mr. Dean is proposing that his prejudices are statistical, and therefore intrinsic.  Whereas the reverse prejudices are merely a product of history, and therefore have no validity.  He brushes away the injustices of subjugation as irrelevant to the resulting culture.  How very unhelpful his views are.

Yes we live in a scary time.  Never have there been so many people on earth.  There is, as was noted, no place for a group of white separatists to go to live in isolation.  Humans have always fought over resources and land and control of their societies.  Now we are elbow to elbow.  Can the wealthy, who take in 1000 times what the poor earn, expect to continue living in their bubbles? 

There will be a leveling.  In the late 1700’s, France had a revolution fueled by the suffering of the masses.  The monarchy, aristocracy, and clergy had their justifications for the status quo.  They built spectacular palaces and supported art, music, and science.  But the inequity could not last.  Bloody times ensued on the way toward a more just, though still imperfect, society.

I would win a Nobel Prize if I knew the solution to a peaceful future.  But I know it does not include a powerful minority treating the majority of humanity as inherently inferior.  There will be no wall high and strong enough to maintain that inequality.

If a group is interested only in their own perpetuation, they can have no security in the modern world.  We are certainly all in this together, and must put forward ideas that recognize our common humanity.

 
hannahtoo
 
Avatar
 
 
hannahtoo
Total Posts:  7176
Joined  15-05-2009
 
 
 
20 January 2019 08:35
 

Abel Dean:
...the emerged fact that blacks on average really are genetically stupider than whites…

There it is.  His core belief for all to see.

 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
20 January 2019 08:53
 
hannahtoo - 20 January 2019 08:35 AM

Abel Dean:
...the emerged fact that blacks on average really are genetically stupider than whites…

There it is.  His core belief for all to see.

It is one of my many beliefs at odds with the strong beliefs of the world at large, but not a dogma. There is at least a small chance that the genome-wide association studies prove me wrong—perhaps they will show that blacks have frequencies of alleles and epigenetic variants for intelligence or educational success that would predict equal or greater intelligence than whites, not lesser intelligence. It would be a surprise, and it would provoke giving Critical Race Theory a closer look. Perhaps their lower average intelligence really does follow only from implicit/secret systemic white oppression all over the world. But, for now, such an expectation seems like an expectation of a miracle of evolution. How do you expect that you will react if, against all odds from your perspective, the evidence shows beyond reasonable doubt that blacks on average really are genetically stupider than whites? Would you accept that evidence?

 
Garret
 
Avatar
 
 
Garret
Total Posts:  491
Joined  16-01-2019
 
 
 
20 January 2019 09:06
 

First you’d have to be able to provide a good genetic definition of black people.

You just made a claim that black people share specific genes that govern intelligence, so first you’d have to show that they all share those specific genes.

 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
20 January 2019 09:16
 
Garret - 20 January 2019 09:06 AM

First you’d have to be able to provide a good genetic definition of black people.

You just made a claim that black people share specific genes that govern intelligence, so first you’d have to show that they all share those specific genes.

For the purpose of such thought experiments, it is acceptable to use whatever definitions of racial “black” and “white” that you would typically prefer when you use those words, whether the definitions are fundamentally genetic or not, fundamentally biological or not, or fundamentally social or not. Genotypic differences exist even between social groups. How do you expect that you will react if, against all odds from your perspective, the evidence shows beyond reasonable doubt that blacks on average really are genetically stupider than whites? Would you accept that evidence?

 
hannahtoo
 
Avatar
 
 
hannahtoo
Total Posts:  7176
Joined  15-05-2009
 
 
 
20 January 2019 09:44
 
Abel Dean - 20 January 2019 08:53 AM
hannahtoo - 20 January 2019 08:35 AM

Abel Dean:
...the emerged fact that blacks on average really are genetically stupider than whites…

There it is.  His core belief for all to see.

It is one of my many beliefs at odds with the strong beliefs of the world at large, but not a dogma. There is at least a small chance that the genome-wide association studies prove me wrong—perhaps they will show that blacks have frequencies of alleles and epigenetic variants for intelligence or educational success that would predict equal or greater intelligence than whites, not lesser intelligence. It would be a surprise, and it would provoke giving Critical Race Theory a closer look. Perhaps their lower average intelligence really does follow only from implicit/secret systemic white oppression all over the world. But, for now, such an expectation seems like an expectation of a miracle of evolution. How do you expect that you will react if, against all odds from your perspective, the evidence shows beyond reasonable doubt that blacks on average really are genetically stupider than whites? Would you accept that evidence?

I’ve said numerous times above that we must judge people as individuals, not statistics.  Your system is unfair.

Remember, German “science” claimed that Jews were an inferior race.  They collected a lot of data to support their hypothesis.  They came up with a final solution to rid Europe of these lesser humans.  Their “science” was wrong, as well as cruel.  Now some Jewish groups are recognized to have the among the highest average IQs.  Could the modern white supremacists be as horribly wrong as the Nazis?

 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
20 January 2019 09:49
 
hannahtoo - 20 January 2019 09:44 AM
Abel Dean - 20 January 2019 08:53 AM
hannahtoo - 20 January 2019 08:35 AM

Abel Dean:
...the emerged fact that blacks on average really are genetically stupider than whites…

There it is.  His core belief for all to see.

It is one of my many beliefs at odds with the strong beliefs of the world at large, but not a dogma. There is at least a small chance that the genome-wide association studies prove me wrong—perhaps they will show that blacks have frequencies of alleles and epigenetic variants for intelligence or educational success that would predict equal or greater intelligence than whites, not lesser intelligence. It would be a surprise, and it would provoke giving Critical Race Theory a closer look. Perhaps their lower average intelligence really does follow only from implicit/secret systemic white oppression all over the world. But, for now, such an expectation seems like an expectation of a miracle of evolution. How do you expect that you will react if, against all odds from your perspective, the evidence shows beyond reasonable doubt that blacks on average really are genetically stupider than whites? Would you accept that evidence?

I’ve said numerous times above that we must judge people as individuals, not statistics.  Your system is unfair.

Remember, German “science” claimed that Jews were an inferior race.  They collected a lot of data to support their hypothesis.  They came up with a final solution to rid Europe of these lesser humans.  Their “science” was wrong, as well as cruel.  Now some Jewish groups are recognized to have the among the highest average IQs.  Could the modern white supremacists be as horribly wrong as the Nazis?

OK, that is a statement of how your thinking would not change with respect to individuals, and that is a partial answer, and it is better than nothing. What about for groups? Do you expect that your thinking would change with respect to groups? For example, maybe it would start to seem less likely (though perhaps not wholly impossible) that the socio-economic disadvantages of blacks around the world is caused mainly by systemic racism of whites against blacks. Do you agree?

 
Garret
 
Avatar
 
 
Garret
Total Posts:  491
Joined  16-01-2019
 
 
 
20 January 2019 10:25
 
Abel Dean - 20 January 2019 09:16 AM
Garret - 20 January 2019 09:06 AM

First you’d have to be able to provide a good genetic definition of black people.

You just made a claim that black people share specific genes that govern intelligence, so first you’d have to show that they all share those specific genes.

For the purpose of such thought experiments, it is acceptable to use whatever definitions of racial “black” and “white” that you would typically prefer when you use those words, whether the definitions are fundamentally genetic or not, fundamentally biological or not, or fundamentally social or not. Genotypic differences exist even between social groups. How do you expect that you will react if, against all odds from your perspective, the evidence shows beyond reasonable doubt that blacks on average really are genetically stupider than whites? Would you accept that evidence?

Either you are making genetic claims or you aren’t.  You keep bringing up genetics, and when I ask for specifics, you try to switch the topic to non-genetics.  I’m asking you about the genetics.  When you dodge, that just makes me think you don’t know what you’re talking about.

We don’t need to engage in a hypothetical of how I would react, because you can just show me the information and we can conclusively find out.  The first step in that claim would be a genetic definition of who is black.

If I tell you apples taste better than oranges, the first thing I need to be able to do is be able to tell the difference between an apple and an orange.

 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
20 January 2019 10:29
 
Garret - 20 January 2019 10:25 AM
Abel Dean - 20 January 2019 09:16 AM
Garret - 20 January 2019 09:06 AM

First you’d have to be able to provide a good genetic definition of black people.

You just made a claim that black people share specific genes that govern intelligence, so first you’d have to show that they all share those specific genes.

For the purpose of such thought experiments, it is acceptable to use whatever definitions of racial “black” and “white” that you would typically prefer when you use those words, whether the definitions are fundamentally genetic or not, fundamentally biological or not, or fundamentally social or not. Genotypic differences exist even between social groups. How do you expect that you will react if, against all odds from your perspective, the evidence shows beyond reasonable doubt that blacks on average really are genetically stupider than whites? Would you accept that evidence?

Either you are making genetic claims or you aren’t.  You keep bringing up genetics, and when I ask for specifics, you try to switch the topic to non-genetics.  I’m asking you about the genetics.  When you dodge, that just makes me think you don’t know what you’re talking about.

We don’t need to engage in a hypothetical of how I would react, because you can just show me the information and we can conclusively find out.  The first step in that claim would be a genetic definition of who is black.

If I tell you apples taste better than oranges, the first thing I need to be able to do is be able to tell the difference between an apple and an orange.

If I ask you, “Which tastes better: apples or oranges,” then I don’t need to be able to tell you the difference between an apple and an orange. You can answer the question while assuming your own definition for an apple and your own definition for an orange. And you can do something similar for “whites” and “blacks” in the thought experiment previously given. Just use your own definitions, whatever they may be, and proceed with the thought experiment.

 
Garret
 
Avatar
 
 
Garret
Total Posts:  491
Joined  16-01-2019
 
 
 
20 January 2019 10:38
 

If we have different definitions, and you say object A is an orange, and I say object A is an apple, wouldn’t our conclusions be at odds with each other, and wouldn’t we have difficulty communicating about the properties of apples and oranges?

If we can’t agree on a categorization of a thing, then we can’t agree on how that category of things compares to other things.

Based on what you just said, I can say the following:

There is no objective difference between the races and hence it is impossible to say that black people are more or less intelligent than white people.

Since you just said I can define these categories how I like, you would have to agree that the previous statement is correct.  If you want to show me wrong, then you would have to demonstrate that my categories are incorrect.

 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
20 January 2019 10:55
 
Garret - 20 January 2019 10:38 AM

If we have different definitions, and you say object A is an orange, and I say object A is an apple, wouldn’t our conclusions be at odds with each other, and wouldn’t we have difficulty communicating about the properties of apples and oranges?

If we can’t agree on a categorization of a thing, then we can’t agree on how that category of things compares to other things.

Based on what you just said, I can say the following:

There is no objective difference between the races and hence it is impossible to say that black people are more or less intelligent than white people.

Since you just said I can define these categories how I like, you would have to agree that the previous statement is correct.  If you want to show me wrong, then you would have to demonstrate that my categories are incorrect.

Yeah, the thought experiment does not work so well if you decide to drastically change definitions on a whim, much like if you claimed that applies are really citrus fruits after I give you permission to choose a definition that suits you, and that is a way to defeat the thought experiment, or at least a way to dodge it. If you would like to confront the thought experiment in good faith, then I suggest choosing whatever fuzzy social definitions of “black” and “white” that you use in your day-to-day life outside of race debates, at least temporarily for the sake of the thought experiment.

 
hannahtoo
 
Avatar
 
 
hannahtoo
Total Posts:  7176
Joined  15-05-2009
 
 
 
20 January 2019 10:57
 
Abel Dean - 20 January 2019 09:49 AM
hannahtoo - 20 January 2019 09:44 AM
Abel Dean - 20 January 2019 08:53 AM
hannahtoo - 20 January 2019 08:35 AM

Abel Dean:
...the emerged fact that blacks on average really are genetically stupider than whites…

There it is.  His core belief for all to see.

It is one of my many beliefs at odds with the strong beliefs of the world at large, but not a dogma. There is at least a small chance that the genome-wide association studies prove me wrong—perhaps they will show that blacks have frequencies of alleles and epigenetic variants for intelligence or educational success that would predict equal or greater intelligence than whites, not lesser intelligence. It would be a surprise, and it would provoke giving Critical Race Theory a closer look. Perhaps their lower average intelligence really does follow only from implicit/secret systemic white oppression all over the world. But, for now, such an expectation seems like an expectation of a miracle of evolution. How do you expect that you will react if, against all odds from your perspective, the evidence shows beyond reasonable doubt that blacks on average really are genetically stupider than whites? Would you accept that evidence?

I’ve said numerous times above that we must judge people as individuals, not statistics.  Your system is unfair.

Remember, German “science” claimed that Jews were an inferior race.  They collected a lot of data to support their hypothesis.  They came up with a final solution to rid Europe of these lesser humans.  Their “science” was wrong, as well as cruel.  Now some Jewish groups are recognized to have the among the highest average IQs.  Could the modern white supremacists be as horribly wrong as the Nazis?

OK, that is a statement of how your thinking would not change with respect to individuals, and that is a partial answer, and it is better than nothing. What about for groups? Do you expect that your thinking would change with respect to groups? For example, maybe it would start to seem less likely (though perhaps not wholly less likely) that the socio-economic advantages of blacks around the world is caused mainly by systemic racism of whites against blacks. Do you agree?

I think many of the problems around the world stem from the injustices of imperialism.  But history is very complex.  You propose a false either/or.  There are many other cultural and historical factors that have nothing to do with intelligence.

I was a teacher before I retired.  I still do tutoring.  I’ve worked with kids along the whole spectrum of abilities, from gifted to severely disabled.  One thing I learned was the difficulty of assessing intelligence.  Every year, we put together an advanced math group in the 4th grade.  Despite a battery of tests, from cognitive aptitude, to basic skills, to state standards, to teacher recommendations—quite a lot of information—it was an imperfect process.  The various metrics were often not in agreement.  Always, we missed identifying some gifted kids, and others in the advanced group did not live up to expectations.  So I maintain a healthy skepticism about any conclusions based on tests. 

Also, I don’t believe that intelligence is the most important factor in a person’s happiness or success.  My nextdoor neighbors have a daughter who has a low IQ.  They always took advantage of special ed programs and, later, life skills training and community involvement.  She grew up to be the sweetest young lady you could ever want to know.  A big fan of the local hockey team.  She was a volunteer in the local kindergarten.  In her 30’s, she married a young man who also has some disabilities.  Both of them work, and they live in their own home.  For years she been a busser in a restaurant and gets a ride to work, since she can’t drive.  Should we shun her and call her stupid because she is on the low end of the bell curve?  I’d say both society and the woman benefit from her integration in the community.  And that integration, all those hands up, are why she became the person she is.

Yes, these are personal anecdotes.  But I bet Mr. Dean has anecdotes that lead him to scorn black people.  And I’m glad we’re here to challenge each other.

In conclusion:  Intelligence is difficult to quantify.  Intelligence does not determine a person’s value. 

It makes perfect sense that Abel Dean doesn’t want to live in a community or country with lots of social problems.  You know what?  Nobody does.  Especially the people who currently live in such places.  That is what is motivating the vast majority of migrants to the US.

[ Edited: 20 January 2019 11:00 by hannahtoo]
 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
20 January 2019 11:23
 
hannahtoo - 20 January 2019 10:57 AM
Abel Dean - 20 January 2019 09:49 AM
hannahtoo - 20 January 2019 09:44 AM
Abel Dean - 20 January 2019 08:53 AM
hannahtoo - 20 January 2019 08:35 AM

Abel Dean:
...the emerged fact that blacks on average really are genetically stupider than whites…

There it is.  His core belief for all to see.

It is one of my many beliefs at odds with the strong beliefs of the world at large, but not a dogma. There is at least a small chance that the genome-wide association studies prove me wrong—perhaps they will show that blacks have frequencies of alleles and epigenetic variants for intelligence or educational success that would predict equal or greater intelligence than whites, not lesser intelligence. It would be a surprise, and it would provoke giving Critical Race Theory a closer look. Perhaps their lower average intelligence really does follow only from implicit/secret systemic white oppression all over the world. But, for now, such an expectation seems like an expectation of a miracle of evolution. How do you expect that you will react if, against all odds from your perspective, the evidence shows beyond reasonable doubt that blacks on average really are genetically stupider than whites? Would you accept that evidence?

I’ve said numerous times above that we must judge people as individuals, not statistics.  Your system is unfair.

Remember, German “science” claimed that Jews were an inferior race.  They collected a lot of data to support their hypothesis.  They came up with a final solution to rid Europe of these lesser humans.  Their “science” was wrong, as well as cruel.  Now some Jewish groups are recognized to have the among the highest average IQs.  Could the modern white supremacists be as horribly wrong as the Nazis?

OK, that is a statement of how your thinking would not change with respect to individuals, and that is a partial answer, and it is better than nothing. What about for groups? Do you expect that your thinking would change with respect to groups? For example, maybe it would start to seem less likely (though perhaps not wholly less likely) that the socio-economic advantages of blacks around the world is caused mainly by systemic racism of whites against blacks. Do you agree?

I think many of the problems around the world stem from the injustices of imperialism.  But history is very complex.  You propose a false either/or.  There are many other cultural and historical factors that have nothing to do with intelligence.

I was a teacher before I retired.  I still do tutoring.  I’ve worked with kids along the whole spectrum of abilities, from gifted to severely disabled.  One thing I learned was the difficulty of assessing intelligence.  Every year, we put together an advanced math group in the 4th grade.  Despite a battery of tests, from cognitive aptitude, to basic skills, to state standards, to teacher recommendations—quite a lot of information—it was an imperfect process.  The various metrics were often not in agreement.  Always, we missed identifying some gifted kids, and others in the advanced group did not live up to expectations.  So I maintain a healthy skepticism about any conclusions based on tests. 

Also, I don’t believe that intelligence is the most important factor in a person’s happiness or success.  My nextdoor neighbors have a daughter who has a low IQ.  They always took advantage of special ed programs and, later, life skills training and community involvement.  She grew up to be the sweetest young lady you could ever want to know.  A big fan of the local hockey team.  She was a volunteer in the local kindergarten.  In her 30’s, she married a young man who also has some disabilities.  Both of them work, and they live in their own home.  For years she been a busser in a restaurant and gets a ride to work, since she can’t drive.  Should we shun her and call her stupid because she is on the low end of the bell curve?  I’d say both society and the woman benefit from her integration in the community.  And that integration, all those hands up, are why she became the person she is.

Yes, these are personal anecdotes.  But I bet Mr. Dean has anecdotes that lead him to scorn black people.  And I’m glad we’re here to challenge each other.

In conclusion:  Intelligence is difficult to quantify.  Intelligence does not determine a person’s value. 

It makes perfect sense that Abel Dean doesn’t want to live in a community or country with lots of social problems.  You know what?  Nobody does.  Especially the people who currently live in such places.  That is what is motivating the vast majority of migrants to the US.

Yes, I have no disagreement with you on such points. I don’t think we should make the mistake of equating intelligence with a person’s social value on the whole, nor should it be a singular metric of each of our judgments of individuals, though it is tempting to do so. I expect that the far right will gain much more power when some of their most offensive claims are proved correct by science beyond reasonable doubt, and they will use their power for unbalanced ends. Their extremism should be held in check by leftists, but I fear that leftists will lose that opportunity by instead accepting anti-scientific conspiracy theories, relegating themselves to a perceived-loony political minority. So, I am trying to analyze what will happen when and if the molecular genetics conclusively proves the current leftist dogma wrong. My expectation is for the worst. My thought experiments are designed to test dogmas. Dogmatism seems to psychologically function in part by prohibiting even the temporary partial presence of a contrary belief in the brain. Not only will a liberal dogmatist refuse to believe in genetic racial psychological differences when the actual evidence stands strongly against the dogma of racial genetic psychological equivalence, but his or her brain will fail to host any sort of thought experiment to emulate such a contrary belief!

 
‹ First  < 10 11 12 13 14 >