Re: Race: real or imagined? (fwd)

Richard wrote:

>It is one thing to say that "race" has no biological basis, only
>sociological.  That's what the evidence shows. 

What is this? Can you expand on this? How can you define the biological
basis of being a woman, man, african american? If we follow your logic,
being an african american has a biological basis. This is exactly the
point socio-biologists use to justify racism. Politics, ideology, broadly
defined, underwrites biology. Socio-biologists do not define biology as
neutrally as you think they are. They define it subjectively in order to 
distort the reality of racism and sexism. Socio-biologists
POLITICIZE biology by NATURALIZING politics (capitalism, racism, sexism)

What is this politics that is built into the biological explanations of, 
let's say, gender differences? In this regard, soci-biologists are not
only saying that men and women are biologically different (women are
biological mothers, for example). I still wish they were one of those 
simple minded classical patriarchs like my old father. They are
saying much MORE DANGEROUS than that. They project the hierarchies,
competition, and inequalities that they observe in the social system onto
human nature and biology. By doing so, not only do they distort biology
but also reduce violence, exploitation, and all sorts of other crimes to
human nature which does not even deserve such a vulgar degregation.
Socio-biologists commit crime against human nature when they say:

1. Men are genetically superior to women. They rape women as a strategy
of transmitting their superior genes to their offsprings.


2. As Rushton said differences among diffrent race groups stem from 
differences in their brain sizes.


3. Women sexually attract men, and invite them to rape. Men's sexual
penetration to women's vagina is a natural expression of rape. (actually,
some radical feminists in the past supported ideas like that such as Susan
Brownmiller)


Thus, this discussion requires an evidence of what socio-biologists are
exactly saying, not what you think socio-biologists say. Can you tell
us whether you agree with this or not?


Peterson says in _Eugenics or Race_ (this was taken from Andy's post I
found in the achives of this list).

"If a nation with a more advanced, more specialized, or in any way
superior set of genes mingles with, instead of
exterminating, an inferior tribe, then it commits racial suicide." 



Mine