This post is an elaboration on certain things discussed in my post entitled Legitimate Grievances.
Prior to all further discussion, I ask that you imagine what the world would look like if there were, in fact, meaningful differences in trait frequencies between human populations such as, for example, between whites and blacks. Imagine that these variations were subtle, but pronounced enough to explain the differences in life outcomes and behavior that we all observe between blacks and whites. Would such a world look different from the world we currently inhabit? If so, what would be so different about it?
I pose this thought experiment in order to perhaps allow you to confront the possibility that you’re actively prohibiting yourself from honestly entertaining this line of thought.
In any case, first and foremost and prior to all further discussion, I ask that you imagine, hypothetically, how the logic in your head would work out if there were the case that hardwired, biologically-rooted cognitive attributes did in fact vary between human populations.
I ask you to consider this discussion in abstract terms because it would be too much of me to ask that you actually believe.
You have to realize how difficult it is for any of us to see empirical truth for what I is simply by dint of its obviousness. Our beliefs are not contingent on objectivity; they are contingent on utility. It would almost be better to refer to one as ‘verbalizing that’ rather than ‘believing that’.
There is perhaps no better example to illustrate the persistent difficulty that people have in verbalizing that the emperor wears no clothes than that of special relativity’s emergence in spite of the reigning paradigm at the time–that of the ‘aether’. The genius of Einstein was that he was able to articulate as much where everybody else gazed at their navels in obeisance. (All of the equations for special relativity are easy to derive once you accept that the speed of light really is constant for all observers; the genius of Einstein was his ability to buck the burrowed-ostrich-head consensus.)
Remember, I am in many ways a student of science, and of the philosophy of science. Under pretty much any demarcation of science from pseudoscience people have ever thought up, if you changed all the nouns in the race+fitness discussion to non-politically-incendiary words, the theory of racial sameness would come out as the less-sound option. This, however, is a larger discussion.
The difficulty we face is that people essentially find it impossible to acknowledge generalized differences between themselves and ‘others’ without simultaneously throwing the ‘others’ under the bus.
The implications of our society operating under false pretenses of racial sameness are staggering, and this needs to be realized by anybody who will hopes to see that the emperor has no clothes. Antiracism will be ending in the coming years. It is our job to wean society smoothly off of it and conduct the transition properly.
Remember that I try to make it very clear throughout my arguments that I don’t claim to know precisely /how/ the races are different (though there is ample evidence for the fine structure of differences) but simply that, goddamnit, there almost certainly are differences that ought not be ignored. This is why I am decisively opposed to deliberate eugenics. What I’m advocating, therefore, might be characterized as “not dysgenics”. I’m advocating for the equal application of human rights for all races, and efforts to reign in on the rampant racial propagandizing in culture.
The influential within our society do not, I believe, ‘believe in’ the dogma of racial sameness that they push and which has ossified into the mass religion of antiracism. Rather, they ‘verbalize it’ even though its falsity is basically an open secret, at least among any sufficiently discerning, evolutionist or materialist thinkers. They verbalize it, by my reckoning, because they see it as the lesser evil, as the only levee holding back the floodwaters of a Nazi-style objectification and denigration of the ‘other’, the ‘not-like-me’. However, as I discuss in my so-called Marxist (Marxish?) perspective, I believe that their verbalization of ‘all races are the same’ can also be construed in terms of optimizing resource allocation such that they retain their positions as the power brokers in society. They will have to soon begin altering their party lines if they are to continue as such.
As you may have realized already, I reject the idea that no middle ground can be had. As I have articulated in my motif of the cup that is at once half full and half empty, I believe it is possible to suspend judgment on the question of variations in gene frequencies between the fuzzy sets of human beings which we colloquially have come to call ‘race’. Remember, genes are the limiting factors, which come prior to all other limiting factors, which determine what kind of brain develops, with the brain existing as the physical substrate which makes possible thought the way a physical computer facilitates software!).
The average person is terrible at discerning any difference whatsoever between a generalization about a group and any individual whom that same average person perceives to being a member of that group. This is due to the limitations on the amount of cognitive processing one devotes to the task of making sense of or ‘sizing up’ an individual that they encounter. We tend to perceive the world in terms of pre-existing categories in our minds. This limit is determined subconsciously, I suppose, based on how useful it is to give a fuck about the person. This is why a bigot doesn’t think twice about their racial biases–his or her cognitive resources are typically too tied up in their daily grind to actively scrutinize their racial biases. This is also why those who are eat at the trough of the mainstream antiracist dogma will summarily downgrade the status they afford to me as a pee in the social contract–because they quickly tag me as a ‘racist’ and distance themselves from me accordingly whereas, in reality, my perspective is much, much more nuanced and, I would contend, outright admirable.