Science Strikes Back

Sociologists, anthropologists, and television commentators tell us that race is biologically meaningless, that the physical differences between Danes and Pygmies are insignificant evolutionary accidents. Race, we are told, is an artificial concept white people invented only a few hundred years ago to justify colonization and slavery. If we free ourselves from this delusion, we can all march hand in hand into a future free of “racism.”

Everything about this view of race is obviously wrong, but since so few of the people who know better are willing to say so, this nonsense is beginning to tighten its grip on the popular mind. Now a book has finally appeared that blows to bits every one of these tendentious arguments. Race is a long overdue corrective that deserves wide circulation.

An Instinct to Distinguish

Authors Vincent Sarich, emeritus professor of anthropology at Berkeley and Frank Miele, senior editor of Skeptic magazine, take aim first at the notion that it was 16th and 17th century Europeans who first noticed race and race differences. As the authors point out, humans appear to share with dogs, baboons, wolves, and killer whales an instinctive ability to distinguish their own group from outsiders. Three-year old children sort people by race without being taught to. Therefore, every human population that ever had contact with foreigners seems to have noticed racial differences, and most did not like funny-looking strangers.

Egyptian tomb paintings clearly differentiate four racial groups: Egyptians, Asiatic Semites, Caucasians, and sub-Saharan Africans. Nor are these simple depictions of physical characteristics to which the Egyptians were indifferent. The Twelfth Dynasty Pharaoh Sesostris III (c. 1887—1849 BC) wrote that blacks were dishonorable cowards, “poor and faint-hearted.” He even erected a stele at the southern boundary of Lower Egypt which still reads: “No negro shall cross this boundary by water or by land, by ship or with his flocks, save for the purpose of trade or to make purchases in some post.”

The Indo-European conquerors of India were light-skinned people who despised their dark-skinned subjects. The authors note that Ancient Vedic texts describing the wars of 1500 to 900 BC record how the Aryans “stormed the ancient cities of the hated broad-nosed Dasas, the dark-skinned worshippers of the phallus.” The word Dasa originally meant “enemy,” then came to mean “dark-faced,” and finally “slave.” The invaders established the caste system, the most elaborate anti-miscegenation program ever put into practice. The Sanscrit word for “caste,” varna, also means “color.”

Arabs launched the earliest slaving missions across the Sahara, and quickly noted racial differences. The Baghdad historian Abu-al-Hasan Masu’di (d. 956) offered a detailed and accurate physical description of blacks, to which he added that they had long penises and were given to merriment. He attributed their cheerfulness to “defective brains.”

Much more here

The above is linked in the latest lot of postings from Chris Brand

Posted by jonjayray on Monday, May 29, 2006 at 10:04 PM in
Comments (5) | Tell a friend

Comments:

Posted by John S Bolton on May 30, 2006, 06:04 AM | #

One intriguing aspect of this, is that for each year’s increment of racialization of public policy with worse quotas, there appears a corresponding upward increment in the propaganda for the supposed non-identifiability of race.
At the end of such an obviously dishonest divergence, there would be a society which determines absolutely everything according to race, while turning its cultural organs into loudpeakers propounding the absolute irrelevance of race.
These junctures of conflict are chosen for the irreconcilability factor, power comes from conflicts which can be made to continually increase.
Africa is poor because of lack of white colonization? If diversity is strength why isn’t the caucasian relative lack of natural malaria resistance, to be called strength for the african environment? Are those whites who do have good natural malaria resistance to be assumed, by some amazing coincidence, to be also the very ones who are the least able to bring investment to africa, today or ever?
Actually Diamond’s account in this particular is not altogether wrong, but the above analysis should indicate that genetic factors are operating. it is not a case of some foul environment needing a jumpstart and fly all on its own afterwards. If it were that way not only would it not matter which Europeans, there could not have been a Zimbabwe, or any crash like that.

Posted by Stanley Womack on May 30, 2006, 03:04 PM | #

Interesting that AmRen made no mention of the seminal role for European thinkers 200 years ago of the then 600-year-old writings by The Rambam, Maimonides. It was his writings that first articulated in an organized way the basis for the oft-maligned European writers on race. Just another cover-up at AmRen.

Posted by Amalek on May 31, 2006, 05:05 AM | #

Shucks, Mr Moses Maimonides would sure have looked white to Jared Taylor;-)

Next entry: Sunday Night with “Don Giovanni”

Previous entry: Centrelink bankrolls terrorist suspects

Existential Issues

White Genocide Project

Of note

General News

Science News

Science Categories

All Categories

The Writers

Each author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer; the hashes link to authors' homepages.

Links

Endorsement not implied.

Controlled Opposition

Crime

General

Immigration

Islam

Jews

Nationalist Political Parties

Science

Whites in Africa