RE: Racist Rushton book

>I try to make a mental note on genetic- racial differences and so far have
>a list with just two of minor importance. Mongols differ from all other
>races in that they do not produce relatively large quantities of alcohol
>dehydrogenase and aldehyde dehydrogenase, which detoxifies or breaks down
>alcohol.
snip
>W Kirk.

In the first place, race doesn't exist.  It is a social construct, not a 
biological
one.

There is no "Mongol" race.  If one travels from Indonesia through East Asia,
including Japan, through Mongolia, up to Russia, one crosses a gradation of 
traits
with no clear cut boundaries as to when one allegedly leaves one "racial 
group" and
enters another.  Further, scientists cannot find any set of genetic traits, 
including
the production of alcohol dehydrogenase, that separate one group of humans 
from
another.  In this case, there are people who look more so-called Caucasian 
in
Mongolia and Russia than do Chinese "Han" but who also do not produce 
alcohol
dehydrogenase.

A similar case emerged with respect to resistance to malaria.  The 
resistance was
thought to exist among so-called "Negroes" until it was discovered that 
there are
"whites" in Greece (and elsewhere due to migration) who have a similar 
resistance.
Why?  They lived in areas that had malaria for an extended period (hundreds 
of
thousands of years presumably).

elson

>----- Original Message -----
>From: Spectors
>To: WORLD SYSTEMS NETWORK
>Cc: WORLD SYSTEMS NETWORK
>Sent: 07 December 1999 01:52
>Subject: Racist Rushton book
>
>
>To PSN & WSN:
>
>Apologies to those who are getting this twice.
>
>I'm also among those thousands, or tens of thousands? who received a free
>copy of the book by J. Philippe Rushton.  Rushton is an especially crude,
>gutter racist, who writes in a popular style and uses his academic
>credentials to promote the most simple-minded, pro-Nazi "Master Race"
>propaganda about black people supposedly being a "lower form of animal"
>than whites.  (If my language seems extreme to you, it is only because you
>either haven't seen Rushton's work or you don't grasp the "extreme"
>murderous consequences of this ideology.)  I won't go into the specifics of
>all his theory, but apparently, thousands, if not tens of thousands of
>copies of his book were sent out across North America to professors.
>
>As a propaganda blitzkrieg effort it is very clever. It will likely result
>in some people, not trained in the social sciences, becoming advocates for
>that book because it appeals to their superficial knowledge and deeply
>rooted racism.  It's a way for Rushton to become "the talk of the campuses"
>and try to gain academic legitimacy, talk show invitations, etc.
>
>One strategy might be to ignore it, but I think that would be a big
>mistake. The cat is out of the bag.  Here's another suggestion, off the top
>of my head.
>
>Every single person on these lists, and anyone else we know who receives a
>copy of this book should write a very sharp, sarcastic review for their
>school newspaper, condemning the book as a piece of racist mythology worthy
>of Hitler's propaganda machine and pointing out how massive funding from
>racist foundations can get even the worst trash published in "professional
>looking" books.  But the book should not only be slammed. It should be done
>in a way that gives it the disrespect and contempt that we would have if a
>Ku Klux Klan newspaper were published in the form of an academic-looking 
>booklet.
>
>If 300 or 600 school newspapers have articles like that, it could very
>quickly discredit this pro-Nazi trash that pretends to be social science
>and make it a laughing stock and an outcast.  Don't be afraid that such a
>strategy might bring out his supporters. Let them come! Don't be afraid to
>take them on politically -- better to get them out into the light and
>expose them. (However, I wouldn't DEBATE the specifics of Rushton's book in
>a regular debate format because that would give too much respectability to
>his racist myths by putting them on the same plane as genuine social 
>science.)
>
>There is an old Chinese saying about how to kill a dangerous snake:
>
>First, chop off its head. Then cut it into pieces. Then crush the pieces
>with stones. Then take the remains and burn them. Put the ashes in a sack,
>fill the sack with stones, and throw it deep into the ocean.
>
>My point is to do this thing right. Let's find out who is funding this
>book. Let's create a big stir around it. Let's make Rushton and his
>supporters the outcasts that they deserve to be by taking his blitzkreig
>and turning it back on him with the force of hundreds of sociologists, who
>can use this even to broaden, deepen and sharpen the critical thinking
>skills and the anti-racist understanding of hundreds of thousands of 
>students.
>
>Those are some ideas off the top of my head. I am interested in other 
>ideas.
>
>
>Alan Spector