Sunday, February 08, 2009

Acting White: The Real Charles Darwin

We are approaching the bicentennial of the birth of British naturalist, Charles Darwin, Thursday February 12, 2009. I have always found myself nearly alone as both black and an admirer of the man most commonly associated with the idea of ‘survival of the fittest’. I first learned of Darwin early in high school, from the Jesuits, and have never associated him with the racist labels too quickly attached in the crossfire of racial rhetoric.

Darwin dismissed the scientific arguments of more than one human species, a centerpiece to propositions of white superiority. To this day, and still consistent with his beliefs, science has yet to show more than rare mutative hints of physiological differences in our most recent version, homo sapiens sapiens. This is not to ignore the differing empirical deposits of humankind spread around the globe, but rather to say the drivers are not genetic difference, but rather genetic distribution. Our version of humankind simply has not been around long enough and/or isolated enough to genetically split off; compared to other species Darwin studied.

The most popular jabs taken at Darwin stem from the association of eugenics, a term coined by his half-cousin F.Galton in the year after his death in 1882. While Darwin acknowledged the existence of heredity, he was always clear on the folly of selective breeding in humans with the goal of a master race. He thought the idea of ‘hereditary improvement’ to be impractical, and that people would reject it. Genetic engineering ran counter to Darwin’s belief that sympathy was ‘the noblest part of our nature’ and incompatible with purposeful 'weeding'.

Darwin was strongly against slavery and the rank-ordering of humans into so-called races of sub-species. Nonetheless, others of his day, and long after his death, abused his ideas under the Darwinism brand, for exploiting people and circumstances for greedy purposes. He does not deserve this continued besmirching of his good name.

My own thanks go to the man whose work encouraged me to search for the connection between the distributions of intelligence we see around the world today, and how it came to be, beginning with our oldest known relative, an Ethiopian woman, mother to modern humankind, who lived and died 160,000 years ago in Africa.

The original Chuck D, a great man in my book.

James C. Collier

READ MOST RECENT POSTS AT ACTING WHITE...

Technorati Tags: , , , , ,

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

Not so fast on the idea that race doesn't exist:



http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2007/10/dnaprint?currentPage=1

http://discovermagazine.com/2009/mar/09-they-dont-make-homo-sapiens-like-they-used-to/article_view?b_start:int=0&-C=

GoldenAh said...

Ever wandered over to the blogs of "racial realists"? They're devoted to trying to tie race, DNA, social pathologies, criminality, and IQ together. It's apparently their sole purpose in life.

The cocksure stupidity is quite impressive. What would these critters do without African peoples to denigrate and persecute?

If I'm feeling a wee bit masochistic, I'll read a few. They also like to hang out, and harass, Malcolm Gladwell (at his blog).

ogunsiron said...

goldenAh :
If you care about african people so much then maybe you should consider that MAYBE, just maybe some of our problems stem from biological causes. I'm saying this because the case for tying some social pathology and crime to IQ and biological causes is strong and getting stronger every day. It'd be nice if some black people realized this .

GoldenAh said...

What I don't like is to be tied to pathological, dysfunctional, low intelligence individuals who happen to belong to the same "race." I do not look at any grouping of human beings as inherently inferior, superior, brilliant, or criminal, etc. We're all human animals with a fascinating, and probably necessary, variety of traits.

Nor am I an apologist for "black" criminal behavior. I view crime in this manner: the individual(s) who commits the act is the one who pays the price.

Do these jokers ever routinely ask: Are Caucasians genetically predisposed to racism, genocide, and mass destruction? Is it part of their DNA? Are they inherently evil? Does a lack of melanin denote a lack of compassion, sympathy and empathy? Is this desire to be considered superior, and God-like, a defect?

Why are they always so interested in persecuting African peoples? What is their eternal problem(s) with "us"? Weren't those African ancestors minding their own business when Caucasians came after them for mass murder, slavery, and colonization?

Why is it necessary to deem dark-skinned people, Africans, the African diaspora, and mixed-blacks the worst of all human beings? Who gains from that? I'm all for scientific research. If science truly reveals that IQ, crime stats, and whatever, indicate some groups lack certain "gifts", I'm not offended, distraught, or cowed by it.

I respect scientific theories, but not from people seeking to support their hostile, racist, self-loathing, and evil notions and intentions.

Sanity Personified said...

I respect scientific theories, but not from people seeking to support their hostile, racist, self-loathing, and evil notions and intentions.

Translation: I respect scientific theories, except when they say something I don't like.

Anonymous said...

We are seeing the summation of what was written in the Bell Curve played out here in the states as well as in Europe that is a vast and growing underclass that cannot make it in a scientifically technology driven society that requires higher and higher levels of intellect to compete. This pool of uneducated people will only get bigger and bigger as time goes on until the 'overclass' gets tired of taking care of them or is unable to do so. The following illustrate the fact that the US will be unable to maintain its status as a First World country. It is slipping into Second World status and is on its way to Third World status.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=88851

Anonymous said...

Many of us white folk are simply waiting for the next step in evolution that is man-machine interface. I have this on order right now I doubt that very many black people will be buying one anytime soon.

http://www.emotiv.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Singularity_Is_Near

No doubt there will be a few blacks that make the leap with us but most will not. Too tied up in Superstitionia.

Anonymous said...

Yes Darwin was opposed to slavery but then again he was a man of his time and is considered a maverick intellect believing the same things that David Duke seems to believe in.
Go figure.
http://www.racismreview.com/blog/2009/02/12/charles-darwin-did-he-help-create-scientific-racism/
n his view, the “civilized races” would eventually replace the “savage races throughout the world.” Darwin’s earlier and most famous book was entitled: The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. In such influential and momentous writings Darwin applied his evolutionary idea of natural selection not only to animal development but also to the development of human “races.” He saw natural selection at work in the killing of indigenous peoples of Australia by the British, wrote here of blacks (some of the “savage races”) being a category close to gorillas, and spoke against social programs for the poor and “weak” because such programs permitted the least desirable people to survive.

ogunsiron said...

GoldenAh said...

What I don't like is to be tied to pathological, dysfunctional, low intelligence individuals who happen to belong to the same "race."
__

Say you have a neighborhood where a small number of middle class blacks and a majority of whites middle class live. Imagine that the gov plants some low-income housing in the same neighborhood . Suppose it's 99% black underclass folks in those appartments. Predictably, life soon becomes unbearable in the neighborhood because of crime, failing schools etc. White people want to leave the place. Now what would be the typical reaction of the middle class black people ? They'd side WITH the black underclass and complain about the "racist" white people who don't like to live with blacks. From what I've seen , black people seem quite willing to be associated with dysfunctional, low intelligence, predatory human refuse who happen to be the same race ( race is real). For every Cosby who rightfully castigates the black underclass , how many apologists like the excecrable Michael Eric Dyson ?

__

I do not look at any grouping of human beings as inherently inferior, superior, brilliant, or criminal, etc. We're all human animals with a fascinating, and probably necessary, variety of traits.
__

Oh well. I don't think I'd like to live with a lot of, say , european gypsies . I guess i'm willing to miss out on them. lol .
__

Do these jokers ever routinely ask: Are Caucasians genetically predisposed to racism, genocide, and mass destruction? Is it part of their DNA? Are they inherently evil? Does a lack of melanin denote a lack of compassion, sympathy and empathy?

__

First of all being caucasian is only superficially about lack of melanin , which is a very recent trait.
About white european being more predisposed to racism, genocide ?
I don't know how easy that'd be to study but i have NO PROBLEM at all with someone asking those questions. Presumably there's an answer to those questions.
Maybe black scientists would be interested ? Of course i mean real scientists not nutcases like France Cress Whelsing (Isis Papers)or other morons like that.
__

Why are they always so interested in persecuting African peoples? What is their eternal problem(s) with "us"? Weren't those African ancestors minding their own business when Caucasians came after them for mass murder, slavery, and colonization?
__

Think about it. Why have european whites, arabs and to a lesser exent indians and chinese treated black africans so badly throughout history , overall ? Why are blacks generally not respected ? I think it's because they noticed that they could get away with the abuse very easily, that we were very weak . That's, imho, a huge part of the answer.
I've been thinking about the black man's history ever since i was a child. Part of my interest in these topics, besides my passion for knowledge for its own sake, is the need to answer for myself why black societies have been so weak overall. Make no mistake. We're weak as a race and have been a very long time. very much so. If 19th century genocidal racism were still in vogue, what could black people do about it ? Nothing. Nothing at all. Being weak is extremely dangerous. Ask the pygmies of central Africa why they get kicked around by all the other black africans ? They're even weaker than we are .
__

I respect scientific theories, but not from people seeking to support their hostile, racist, self-loathing, and evil notions and intentions.

___

You ought to consider that those who re hostile and racist may sometimes know what they're talking about. The point is not to agree with their hostility and racism. The point is to find ways to fix deficiencies so as to make the hostility and hate of nonblacks irrelevant . If black populations are as gravely affected by low IQ as it seems to be then we will not develop livable societies. We will always seek to live among nonblacks and they will always resent our presence. You may say that we used to have our own societies in Africa. True, but we were isolated from the rest of the world for the most part and migration wasn't an option, so there was no greener grass to compare to. Finally that's not self loathing. It's just unwilingness to be happy with mediocrity. That's all .

Anonymous said...

Ogun, we should find a way to contact each other.