Why Race Realist Politics Is Often Wrong

IC says:

Well, it is important for policy making. If it is genes, no child left behind policy is wasting money and should be discarded. Also criminal rehabilitation program is also waste of money.

This is the classic political agenda that tends to flow from HBD or race realist folks. All race realist and HBD’ers are committed to this sort of politics without exception. This is a rightwing political agenda of using the genetic reality of race as an excuse to reduce or eliminate social spending for races that score lower in school or commit more crime than other races.

As a man of the Left, of course, I oppose this sort of thing. Furthermore, almost all of their arguments are based on lies. Not one single dollar has ever been spent in the United States “trying to bring Blacks up to par with Whites.” The only thing we spend money on in the US is trying to educate Black folks. They get the same education as other races; in fact, they probably get a much worse education. Instead of blowing money trying to get them up to par with Whites, Black schools are classically underfunded. At any rate, all people of all races are deserving of a decent and normal education suited to their needs and abilities.

I’m afraid that this policy prescription is something like, “Blacks score lower on IQ tests, so let’s stop educating them altogether!” That is simply breathtaking. Even an ethnic group with an average IQ of 85 benefits dramatically from a K-12 education as opposed to no education at all.

It’s the same thing on crime. Although it is nowhere near proven, I believe that Blacks have an inborn elevated risk of criminal behavior. But even here, this is not destiny. There are even Supercultures that are such effective circus tents that they envelop and overwhelm the genetic tendency, rendering it inoperative. For instance, an African tribe numbering 1 million in Burkino Faso has a homicide rate equal to the Japanese. I assume they have the same inborn genetic tendency towards crime as other Africans.

Genes are rarely destiny as far as crime goes. All you will inherit is a tendency, and we all inherit a tendency to be criminals. I assume I inherited a fairly low risk, but others end up with a higher risk. Even among those with a high inherited risk, many will live law-abiding lives. Genetic tendencies are triggered, increased, subdued or neutered depending on environments that either allow one’s genetic legacy to be expressed or suppressed. Someone with a higher genetic loading towards criminality can certainly be rehabilitated the same as someone with a lower risk. It’s just that rehabilitation will be less successful with the high loading group.

I am afraid this is just another excuse for reactionary policy. “Nigger are genetic criminals, so spending money trying to rehabilitate them is useless, since as soon as we let them out, their genes will force them to commit crimes again. So lock the nigger criminals away forever and never let them out. And don’t waste one nickel of my taxpayer dollars with your libtard rehabilitation program.”

You can see where this crap is headed. The science of HBD is used as a fake fig leaf to give lab coat approval for reactionary politics that reactionaries want to impose anyway whether the science is there or not. The science gives them one more excuse for retrograde politics, a shiny veneer of academic approval.

No Child Left Behind was always insane. All children have a right to an education. There is no excess money spent trying to bring low scorers up to par with the rest. In fact, poor schools spend much less money than the rest. Both low scoring and high scoring students have the right to an adequate education.

If it can be proven that a given criminal rehabilitation program works, and especially if it is cost effective, then we should go ahead and do it. Anyway, even Black crime rates fluctuate wildly, so it’s not all genes driving the rates. Even someone with an elevated genetic tendency to be a criminal can be easily convinced to stop committing crimes, commit fewer crimes or commit less serious crimes.

Please follow and like us:
error3
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

24 thoughts on “Why Race Realist Politics Is Often Wrong”

    1. Is it not worthwhile to study how (and whether) individual and group differences are related to biology? Is it not interesting at least?
      There IS human biological diversity. That’s just a fact. What is disingenuous? All humans aren’t biologically identical..there is A LOT of variation, is there not? Certainly enough to ask the questions above.

      1. EXACTLY.
        But you see, Blacks and the PC crowd and the antiracists do not want us to even study this, ever, for even one second. And they have also insisted that no matter what we find, it will never amount to a hill beans anyway because we will never be able to link any biological variable to behavior.

    2. Its kind of a counter-movement to the mainstream sociological view that all differences are socially constructed, due to environment and socialization. Its also just a natural avenue of investigation for geneticists.

  1. When I made that comment, I based your prior post assumption.
    The truth is that I do believe enviromental factors in final outcome. My personal belief is that enviromental factgors help to certain degree. But should not use equal outcome as way to judge its effectivness. And should never use equal outcome as goal. Its effect only can be use for orang vs orange comparison. Comparing orang to apple is wrong way to evaluate it.
    As for policy, we should not train a cow behaving like dog. Only training a cow to best it can achieve.

    1. Cows are cows, dogs are dogs, and humans are humans. There may be differences within each group, but in no way can the differences between two groups of humans be remotely comparable to differences between species. Pseudo scientific BS, IMO.

      1. I rarely get involved in any discussion of HBD. I’m not qualified to form an opinion on what is or isn’t genetic in the realm of human behavior and intelligence. That being said, I believe you’re refuting a straw man. I don’t think I’ve ever seen any serious advocate of HBD claim that the different races of humanity are actually separate species.
        “…dogs are dogs,…”
        Or, to inject a little more detail into it: a Great Dane is a Great Dane and a Jack Russell is a Jack Russell. No one dismisses the significant (to understate the matter) genetic differences between these two breeds of domestic dog just because they belong to the same species.

    2. To use a math equation for the complicated situation
      P=G-1/E. P=final outcome, G=genetic potential, E=enviromental factor
      Make a plot y=P, x=E
      E is etremely useful at lower range. At higher end, E has diminished return. This reflects reality that Glandwell’s 10000 hrs rule is rediculous for most situation. We all know P is out genetic upper limit. E increasing will help us to get to P, but never passing above it.

  2. As we all know, race realists hate non-whites. That’s the key word. They hate em, so fuck em. Don’t give the non-whites anything. What a horrible way of thinking.

        1. So are many white nationalists, really white trash, LOL ? Is that just an unfair stereotype? In my own opinion, many of them are psycho, though quite intelligent. You can be sure they are incredibly evil, for sure.

  3. Race realism, which ultimately leads to trans-humanism (study and application of eugenics) is dangerous, cause of human nature. Sure a few kind race realists are out there, but the majority are like the Nazis. In my view, it’s very totalitarian to control people’s breeding. It’s bad enough when they tell Farmer Joe he can’t use his hunting rifle, but sterilizing him? LOL How about KILLING him outright? (No this isn’t some sub-conscious anti-white/Republican rage here.)
    As far as immigration goes, I agree with Robert we can’t let everyone in. However, I think most applications of eugenics and race realism are very scary, and not ethical.

    1. “Liberal race realism” is repugnant. Some of it’s true, some of it’s bullshit, but clearly the bullshit comes out on top. And I’ve never once seen described or provided from a LRR point of view, what the solution for black inferiority is. There may be some points made by Robert and co. about blacks that are (unfortunately) accurate, but Liberal Race Realism is endlessly negative. It just reads like a parade of white virtue while stomping on blacks. The only difference between racists and liberal race realists are that liberal race realists care about blacks (I guess). But even then, nothing positive is expressed from that. It’s easy to beat up on blacks and showcase them as an easy target, but it takes something more admirable than that to gain insight into what can be done about the challenges blacks face. I don’t exactly see white, black activism today the way I did when Robert Kennedy was their advocate.

    2. All that stuff you said about controlling people’s breeding and sterilizing them, that’s 20th century eugenics. In the 21st century, it would take the form of in vitro fertilisation, then they would scan the genome of each fertilised egg and choose the one most likely to have a high iq or whatever. There might also be genetic engineering.
      You may be against either or both of these things but its not forced sterilization. As I have said, I’m against the former and uncomfortable with the latter. But I think one or both might go ahead in the future.

        1. If that’s all you’ve done, then that does little to no service to this community. Instead, you tend to post about obscure or eclectic topics like hand built bicycles, dockbuilders, blacksmiths, and boilermakers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.