Shanda’s answer to “Why is Charles Murray's white nationalist book so intriguing to some people? The man preaches N…” > Likes and Comments
Like
"There is no need to act to remove injustice, sexism, racism, homophobia-the causes of distress are not social, they are internal, personal defects."
It's not a question of whether or not there is a "need" to "remove" various beliefs in society. It's a question of what the effects of removing them will be. Had you read the book, you might have noticed that the authors point out that as we make society more equitable, then the degree of heritability for the remaining human differences will increase. If society could perfectly equalize nurture and opportunities, thereby leveling the playing field, we would still have winners and losers, and the losers would no longer have an unfair society to blame.
America today is objectively less racist, sexist, homophobic, and unjust than it was 50, 100, 150, or 200 years ago. The farther back in time we look, the more racist, sexist, homophobic, and unjust people generally were. Even today's racists are generally afraid to articulate their racism plainly, so like Trump they resort to dog-whistling. Occasionally we see lower-level Republicans, who lack Trump's edge-skating skills, come right out and say what they understand Trump to be implying, and they tend to lose their jobs as a result.
But even as society has progressed, the rising tide of opportunity has not equally lifted all boats. For every Oprah who has overcome the dual barriers of racism and sexism to achieve wealth beyond the power of white male privilege for most white males, countless of her gender and racial peers remain mired in the underclass. The only way to explain unequal outcomes resulting from increasingly equal opportunities is to hunt endlessly for ever-more-subtle and insidious forms of racism.
Thus we can predict that as society continues to become more just and fair and less prejudiced, ever-greater blame for unequal outcomes will have to be heaped on an ever-more-subtle residue of prejudice. The villains will have to become increasingly less aware of their racism.
back to top
date
newest »
newest »
"There is no need to act to remove injustice, sexism, racism, homophobia-the causes of distress are not social, they are internal, personal defects."It's not a question of whether or not there is a "need" to "remove" various beliefs in society. It's a question of what the effects of removing them will be. Had you read the book, you might have noticed that the authors point out that as we make society more equitable, then the degree of heritability for the remaining human differences will increase. If society could perfectly equalize nurture and opportunities, thereby leveling the playing field, we would still have winners and losers, and the losers would no longer have an unfair society to blame.
America today is objectively less racist, sexist, homophobic, and unjust than it was 50, 100, 150, or 200 years ago. The farther back in time we look, the more racist, sexist, homophobic, and unjust people generally were. Even today's racists are generally afraid to articulate their racism plainly, so like Trump they resort to dog-whistling. Occasionally we see lower-level Republicans, who lack Trump's edge-skating skills, come right out and say what they understand Trump to be implying, and they tend to lose their jobs as a result.
But even as society has progressed, the rising tide of opportunity has not equally lifted all boats. For every Oprah who has overcome the dual barriers of racism and sexism to achieve wealth beyond the power of white male privilege for most white males, countless of her gender and racial peers remain mired in the underclass. The only way to explain unequal outcomes resulting from increasingly equal opportunities is to hunt endlessly for ever-more-subtle and insidious forms of racism.
Thus we can predict that as society continues to become more just and fair and less prejudiced, ever-greater blame for unequal outcomes will have to be heaped on an ever-more-subtle residue of prejudice. The villains will have to become increasingly less aware of their racism.
And at some level I can't blame you - I thought it would probably be some racist screed but wanted to know the flavor of the nonsense, so I bought a used copy (so as not to enrich a racist). To my great surprise, it was a well reasoned book based on solid and cited research, presents a nuanced perspective (eg: citing research for both larger and smaller roles of heredity in intelligence), and humane values. It's mostly about the problems of stratification of society by intelligence; race is not the main focus. And it does not put whites at the top. And it advocates for treating all individuals without stereotypes, period. One may not agree with every point made, but overall it's a thoughtful discussion of important issues for everyone in society, not a biased attack on one race.