|
|
| Re: South African rugby player allegedly goes on axe-murdering rampage after daughter's rape (760294) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > OTChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: South African rugby player allegedly goes on axe-murdering rampage after daughter's rape |
|
|
Posted by JayMan on Sun Apr 3 11:42:41 2011, in response to Re: South African rugby player allegedly goes on axe-murdering rampage after daughter's rape, posted by LuchAAA on Sat Apr 2 12:02:10 2011. Would you, Jayman let your white girlfriend walk around alone in South Africa?Of course not. Common sense would argue that. I think some things need to be cleared up here. I realize that my talk of racial differences and my simultaneous decrial of racism may seem incompatible, and that has been the source of the confusion about my position, and I should have cleared this up earlier. Let me elucidate: Racism is the hatred, denigration and/or oppression of other races. Race realism is the acknowledgment of the facts about racial groups and the differences between them. The two are distinct. Racism should be condemned where ever it shows up, but race realism should be accepted as with any fact about the universe. The latter can sometimes lead to the former, especially if used to espouse some supremacist view and not as an accurate statement of the facts. Here's an example of the difference: saying "I hate niggers!" is racist; correctly pointing out that blacks (at least of West African origin anyway, where most blacks outside of Africa can ultimately trace their roots to, being the source of most African slaves) are taller on average than whites and drop out of school more often is race realist (although I prefer plain realist). The problem however, and what you guys suffer from (and most of society for that matter), is that an effort to not seem racist, you pretend that race does not exist or is irrelevant, or that there are no inborn differences between the races, the former of these certainly false and latter of these almost certainly false as well. But, race denial is the "acceptable" way of thinking. The prevailing view is one of "biological egalitarianism;" that there is more variation within a race than there are between the races, and those between group differences are only skin deep. This view holds that all groups are equal to one another, particularly in average cognitive abilities and distribution of temperaments. This is false; genetic and medical evidence clearly demonstrates differences between the groups, and evidence for differences in psychological traits also exists, and evidence strongly suggest that these have genetic roots. The story of this change is largely a study in human evolution—the final leg of this evolution. In current scholarly and public discourse this topic is taboo; the official doctrine is that all human evolution stopped about 40,000 years ago. But a quick look at a map of the global prevalence of lactose intolerance shows that this is clearly not the case:  You'll see me talk about race a lot, while ardently combating racism. I talk about race and race differences because it does explain a lot of the issues with society, and heavily impacts policy, from the obvious things like immigration and to education, to less obvious segments like taxation, poverty—both on a national and global scale, health care, socialism, perhaps even the financial meltdown. Race does matter. Where political and social commentators make their mistake—particularly conservatives—is that you criticize ills suffered by darker people and act as if the fact that they are darker people has nothing to do with the problem (because to suggest so be so racist). Unfortunately that's not productive. But, if this desire to not appear racist keeps rampant racism from returning, even if means suppression of the facts about race differences, perhaps it is a worthwhile trade off. |
|
|
|