# Racial discrimination in Malaysia **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 8, 2009, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/racial-discrimination-in-malaysia/502358 "2009-07-08T19:35:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2009, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/racial-discrimination-in-malaysia/502358/41 "2009-07-09T13:22:16Z")
> [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > Asians outperform whites in the US, and ethnic Chinese outperform other Malaysians because, as a group, they are differently enabled genetically. > > The ONLY reason this sort of statement is rejected outright is that it is unpalatable and politically incorrect. However mother nature never promised to be either. > > If we were talking about breeds of horses or any other mammal sub-populations there wouldn’t be any tenderness to the topic. However with people our gut reaction is that it just can’t be so because we don’t want it to be so, and we begin to look for every other possible explanation. We look for historic reasons…we look for cultural reasons…we look for unfair measurement…we look for special excuses…anything but the obvious: success of various populations in various endeavors reflects an average innate ability for that endeavor. > > Genetics defines a maximum potential. Obviously external circumstances can allow that maximum potential to be realized, or limit it. If you give me greater opportunity and the best teaching I could be better at math, but never great at it. Genetics is not the only thing. But it’s a huge thing, and differences in genetically-determined maximum potential as well as genetically-determined frequency of the best-capable individuals is what drives both culture itself and success of individuals within a broader culture. > > Sure, a shopkeep might be from a wealthier family than a peasant farmer. But why is his family shopkeepers in the first place and the other from a family of peasant farmers? Why are some groups consistently dominant and others consistently taken advantage of? Why are the same populations successful whether they are minorities or majorities? I could look at scores from local high schools in Illinois and scores from most other countries I can think of and pretty much predict the chinese would be over-represented in the top tiers. > > Of course, the larger the cohort being described, the looser the genetic consistency; there are subpopulations within the nation of China who do very poorly and others who do very well, for example. It’s probably more accurate to say that those genetically enabled for higher maximum intelligence potential on average do better in any culture over time, and that populations where the genes expressing for that trait are more prevalent do better as a population. Because one of our tendencies as humans is to self-identify with a particular group, those sorts of traits tend to retain their distributions within “ethnic” or “racial” cohorts. > > In our society, where we put a value on diversity and justice for all, we must use race-based affirmative action if we want more equal distribution of the fruits of society among all its peoples. If we don’t actively do that, we’ll continue to see inequality among the self-identified cohorts and a persistent perception of injustice. > > It doesn’t matter if the maldistribution is from genetics and it doesn’t matter if we shouldn’t identify with races. We refuse to accept genetic explanations and we are atavistically inclined to identify by clans. Therefore, until either of those change, we need to make some active efforts aimed at giving a place at the table to underperforming populations even if there is some expense and unfairness to the better-enabled. As the OP’s example shows, the better-enabled will find ways to succeed anyway. Having visited China as well as Indonesia, and noted that the rural Chinese _in_ China appear to have a culture remarkably similar to that of the Malay - that is, a pesant farming culture - and were, at the time of visit (two decades ago) no better off than the average Malay - indeed worse off - I’d say that “genetically superior” isn’t an adequate explanation. Why are the “overseas Chinese” not peasants themselves, you ask? Well, the answer is pretty obvious - the Chinese that travel to a foreign country are those who, for whatever reason, wished to cease being pesants; and once there, there is little opportunity to set themselves up as pesant farmers - the lands they travelled to mostly already had farmers. To my mind the issue is not race, it is class, culture and history, and I seriously doubt that one could plausably argue that a person is doomed to be a member of a particular class because of their genetics. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2009, 2:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/racial-discrimination-in-malaysia/502358/42 "2009-07-09T14:39:50Z")
Since when did Malays and Chinese belong to a difference race? This thread is surreal. > [@Chief Pendant](#): > > Asians outperform whites in the US, and ethnic Chinese outperform other Malaysians because, as a group, they are differently enabled genetically. > > The ONLY reason this sort of statement is rejected outright is that it is unpalatable and politically incorrect. However mother nature never promised to be either. I have to say it’s arguments like this one that make it quite difficult for me to take the “Race A are intellectually inferior to Race B” advocates seriously. If even a pea-brained black woman like myself can spot the ridiculousness in the above, it’s no wonder that you and others who go around espousing these evidence-deficient theories are having a hard time finding acceptance in academia. It has nothing to do with politically correctness. It has to do with intellectual rigor and it’s lack thereof (which ironically is what you’re acribing to others…and really, can it get any better than that?) Everyone knows the religious person who, when faced with a phenomenon that _to them_ (but not necessarily to scientists) seems to lack a natural explanation, automatically jumps to the “God did it” theory. **CP** , your thought process is just as funny and just as irrational. There is no evidence that Malays and ethnic Chinese have any significant genetic differences. But you conclude this to be the source of the economic disparity. There _is_ evidence that Malays and ethnic Chinese have different cultures. But you don’t believe this to be the source of the disparity. Can you really not see why any scientist who takes pride in the letters behind his/her name would support this paradigm of thinking? ---
**Author:** ![Anduril](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c0e974/32.png) [@Anduril](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Anduril)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2009, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/racial-discrimination-in-malaysia/502358/43 "2009-07-09T14:50:48Z")
> [@imack](#): > > And when I’m done doing all your research for you, shall I read it to you as well? Sure. Or you could just give me the cite to back up your unsupported assertions. ---
**Author:** ![athelas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/5e9695/32.png) [@athelas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/athelas)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2009, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/racial-discrimination-in-malaysia/502358/44 "2009-07-09T14:56:48Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > Since when did Malays and Chinese belong to a difference race?..There is no evidence that Malays and ethnic Chinese have any significant genetic differences. But you conclude this to be the source of the economic disparity. I am not familiar with the literature on the genetics and intelligence of different Asian populations, but the first sentence I quote is fatuous. There are not a fixed number of races; rather, “races” are different extended families that are inbred to some degree, and can be represented as discrete genetic clusters. What we commonly refer to as races are actually collections of different subgroups. One example, which I’ve pointed out before, is this genetic map of [Europe](http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2008/08/genetic-map-of-europe-again.php), which shows that you can isolate different Europeans (French, Germans, Italians, Poles, etc) based on their genomes, despite their all being of the same “Caucasian” (or White?) race in common parlance. Now this does not mean that the difference in achievement between Malays and Chinese are _definitely_ genetic, but it is foolish to rule it out based on your kneejerk unscientific reaction. Culture is definitely also a possibility. But getting back to the questions asked in the OP, what do you think should be done about these persistent differentials? Forgetting for a minute the uncertainty of the root cause, is it permissible to discriminate against a persistently oppressed minority if they have the temerity to actually _succeed_? Again, this is a question of political philosophy much more than it is another rehashed nature/nurture argument. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2009, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/racial-discrimination-in-malaysia/502358/45 "2009-07-09T15:00:22Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > Since when did Malays and Chinese belong to a difference race? > > This thread is surreal. > > I have to say it’s arguments like this one that make it quite difficult for me to take the “Race A are intellectually inferior to Race B” advocates seriously. If even a pea-brained black woman like myself can spot the ridiculousness in the above, it’s no wonder that you and others who go around espousing these evidence-deficient theories are having a hard time finding acceptance in academia. It has nothing to do with politically correctness. It has to do with intellectual rigor and it’s lack thereof (which ironically is what you’re acribing to others…and really, can it get any better than that?) > > Everyone knows the religious person who, when faced with a phenomenon that _to them_ (but not necessarily to scientists) seems to lack a natural explanation, automatically jumps to the “God did it” theory. **CP** , your thought process is just as funny and just as irrational. > > There is no evidence that Malays and ethnic Chinese have any significant genetic differences. But you conclude this to be the source of the economic disparity. There _is_ evidence that Malays and ethnic Chinese have different cultures. But you don’t believe this to be the source of the disparity. > > Can you really not see why any scientist who takes pride in the letters behind his/her name would support this paradigm of thinking? Race, being a social construct, means that we can surely say that Chinese and Malays are different “races”. Scientifically, of course, there are no races of humans. But there are genetically distinct ethnic groups and “Chinese” and “Maylays” qualify in the same way that “Turks” and “Kurds” would qualify. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2009, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/racial-discrimination-in-malaysia/502358/46 "2009-07-09T15:08:08Z")
> [@athelas](#): > > But getting back to the questions asked in the OP, what do you think should be done about these persistent differentials? Forgetting for a minute the uncertainty of the root cause, is it permissible to discriminate against a persistently oppressed minority if they have the temerity to actually _succeed_? Again, this is a question of political philosophy much more than it is another rehashed nature/nurture argument. Such discrimination tends to be rife with unintended consequences. The situation I am most familiar with is the discrimination against Jewish doctors here in Canada in the first half of the 20th century (the concern was that too many doctors were Jewish, so in order to get into medical school Jews had to have much better scores than non-Jews). The predictable effect was to increase the perceived value and skills of Jewish doctors. A similar notion was mooted in the 1980s concerning Asians in engineering, which thankfully went nowhere. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2009, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/racial-discrimination-in-malaysia/502358/47 "2009-07-09T15:30:46Z")
> [@athelas](#): > > INow this does not mean that the difference in achievement between Malays and Chinese are _definitely_ genetic, but it is foolish to rule it out based on your kneejerk unscientific reaction. I haven’t ruled anything out. If anyone has done that sort of thing it’s **CP** , who declared that any explanation other than genetic is wrong. If you want to talk about kneejerk unscientific reactions and all, see his post. And it’s one thing to say there are genetic differences. It’s another to say that the genetic differences of two closely related ethnic groups are signficant enough to make that a more likely explanation for a societal observation rather than something less biological, such as culture. In regards to your **OP** , I don’t think I know enough about AA (either in intent or application) in Malaysia to know if it’s justified. But like **monstro** I don’t understand why you pointed to blacks and whites in the US to make your case, since blacks aren’t comparable to Malays (who are the “privileged majority” while blacks aren’t) and whites aren’t comparable to ethnic Chinese (who are the “discriminated minority”). Just curious: why didn’t you use American whites and Asians as a comparison? The analogy fits and the questions you raise have cross-applicability. Asians in the U.S. outperform whites in some areas and don’t in others. [Asians also benefit from Affirmative action in some areas and don’t in other areas.](http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/affirm/stories/affirm062198.htm) ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2009, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/racial-discrimination-in-malaysia/502358/48 "2009-07-09T16:13:20Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > Since when did Malays and Chinese belong to a difference race? > > This thread is surreal. > > I have to say it’s arguments like this one that make it quite difficult for me to take the “Race A are intellectually inferior to Race B” advocates seriously. If even a pea-brained black woman like myself can spot the ridiculousness in the above, it’s no wonder that you and others who go around espousing these evidence-deficient theories are having a hard time finding acceptance in academia. It has nothing to do with politically correctness. It has to do with intellectual rigor and it’s lack thereof (which ironically is what you’re acribing to others…and really, can it get any better than that?) > > Everyone knows the religious person who, when faced with a phenomenon that _to them_ (but not necessarily to scientists) seems to lack a natural explanation, automatically jumps to the “God did it” theory. **CP** , your thought process is just as funny and just as irrational. > > There is no evidence that Malays and ethnic Chinese have any significant genetic differences. But you conclude this to be the source of the economic disparity. There _is_ evidence that Malays and ethnic Chinese have different cultures. But you don’t believe this to be the source of the disparity. > > Can you really not see why any scientist who takes pride in the letters behind his/her name would support this paradigm of thinking? The evidence that they are genetically different is the immutability of the outcome in the face of (over-) correcting for opportunity, even at a policy level… Let’s put it this way: the fact that the “ethnic chinese” population is outperforming the rest of the population in malaysia reflects the fact that they are more capable based on their genes. That an effort would be made to given the non-ethnic chinese population a leg up (per the OP) reflects that there are two distinct populations which can be distinguished for the purposes of giving the majority Malay population a leg up. It’s a strawman and a confusion to simply attack the notion of “race.” Race is definitely poorly defined for reasons that have been discussed extensively here. What is correct is that populations which excel at the population (group…cohort…) level are differently enabled at a genetic level for those qualities which express the phenotypes required for that skillset. It is for this reason that efforts at ameliorating the situation do not readily produce different outcomes. I’m perfectly OK with calling the whole human race a single race. But it’s clear that there are populations within it that are differently enabled at a group level, and the evidence for that is the persistence of differing outcomes even when nurture is normalized between groups. You could have a massive no-expense-spared initiative to get asians, whites and inuits proportionately represented in the NBA and it would still fail… ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2009, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/racial-discrimination-in-malaysia/502358/49 "2009-07-09T16:52:36Z")
**Chief Pendant** : I don’t think you can compare overall success in the economic sphere with success at a given sport, like basketball. There are many, many factors that contribute to success in the economic sphere and it is entirely unclear that genetics, at the group level, is a significant factor even if it may be at the individual level. Success in professional a sport like basketball is going to be clearly disproportionate to those groups which are genetically predisposed to taller height. That is something one can easily control for, whereas the ingredients that add up to success in business are not. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2009, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/racial-discrimination-in-malaysia/502358/50 "2009-07-09T17:20:41Z")
> [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > The evidence that they are genetically different is the immutability of the outcome in the face of (over-) correcting for opportunity, even at a policy level… That’s not evidence of gene superiority.That just mean that whatever “it” is, “it” is strong enough to override articificial handcaps. In theory, one could still be smarter genetically and come out on bottom if they are sufficiently discriminated against. > [@](#): > > Let’s put it this way: the fact that the “ethnic chinese” population is outperforming the rest of the population in malaysia reflects the fact that they are more capable based on their genes. An assertion is not a proof, but rather an assertion. You might as well be saying with the same matter-of-factness that because we can’t pinpoint one single reason why some people get Alzheimers and some don’t, that’s evidence that “God did it”. Instead of a God-of-the-gaps logic, you practice a genetics-of-the-gaps logic. > [@](#): > > What is correct is that populations which excel at the population (group…cohort…) level are differently enabled at a genetic level for those qualities which express the phenotypes required for that skillset. It is for this reason that efforts at ameliorating the situation do not readily produce different outcomes. As an epidemiologist whose job comes down to designing population-based studies that are intended to elucidate the source of group disparities, I can tell you this: you absolutely, 100% wrong. I can also tell you have no practical experience in this area, because of the way you reach your conclusions. And I’m not saying this to be mean, honestly. If I were up here trying argue about quantam mechanics to a physicist, I’d expect him to be just as frank and harsh with me. Based on your logic, if there’s one population that is obese and there’s another skinny, there can only be one explanation. Genetics. Nevermind diet, nevermind exercise, nevermind values and attitudes towards food and body image. It’s gotta be genetic. I expect that you will balk at this characterization. But please explain how economic performance is any different than weight with respect to conclusions about group disparities and genetics. > [@](#): > > But it’s clear that there are populations within it that are differently enabled at a group level, and the evidence for that is the persistence of differing outcomes even when nurture is normalized between groups. You can’t for control for nurture in a cross sectional study. ---
**Author:** ![LonesomePolecat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a88e57/32.png) [@LonesomePolecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LonesomePolecat)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2009, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/racial-discrimination-in-malaysia/502358/51 "2009-07-09T18:00:47Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Race, being a social construct, means that we can surely say that Chinese and Malays are different “races”. Scientifically, of course, there are no races of humans. " Forensic and physical anthropologists still find race a useful concept. If someone told you that the difference between a Clydesdale and an Arabian stallion was merely a “social construct,” you’d immediately see that he was talking nonsense. But if the same person talks such rubbish about human beings, you regard it as an obvious, scientifically proven fact that no intelligent person would question. You might find this Slate article on [“Liberal Creationism”](http://www.slate.com/id/2178122/entry/2178123/) interesting. ---
**Author:** ![athelas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/5e9695/32.png) [@athelas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/athelas)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2009, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/racial-discrimination-in-malaysia/502358/52 "2009-07-09T18:07:01Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > If someone told you that the difference between a Clydesdale and an Arabian stallion was merely a “social construct,” you’d immediately see that he was talking nonsense. But if the same person talks such rubbish about human beings, you regard it as an obvious, scientifically proven fact that no intelligent person would question. Well, I would say that race is a social construct, but that doesn’t mean that races don’t exist. The idea of a chair is a social construct. If the universe had no humans, it would have no idea of a chair-shaped object as something you sit down on. Nevertheless, that doesn’t mean that the idea of “chairs” is incorrect or useless. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2009, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/racial-discrimination-in-malaysia/502358/53 "2009-07-09T19:30:40Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > Forensic and physical anthropologists still find race a useful concept. Yes and no. They find ethnic groups to be a useful concept. Scientifically, race = subspecies and we simply don’t have subspecies of humans by the normal, scientific definition of that term. > [@](#): > > If someone told you that the difference between a Clydesdale and an Arabian stallion was merely a “social construct,” you’d immediately see that he was talking nonsense. He would be. Those are carefully controlled breeds of horses. > [@](#): > > But if the same person talks such rubbish about human beings, you regard it as an obvious, scientifically proven fact that no intelligent person would question. There are no carefully controlled breeds of human beings. You can draw distinct lines between Arabian and Clydesdale horses, but you cannot draw distinct lines between populations of humans. That is a scientific fact. > [@](#): > > You might find this Slate article on [“Liberal Creationism”](http://www.slate.com/id/2178122/entry/2178123/) interesting. I’ve read that before, and I do find it interesting, but it does not support the statement that races exist in any scientifically meaningful way. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2009, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/racial-discrimination-in-malaysia/502358/54 "2009-07-09T19:42:08Z")
> [@athelas](#): > > Now this does not mean that the difference in achievement between Malays and Chinese are _definitely_ genetic, but it is foolish to rule it out based on your kneejerk unscientific reaction. Culture is definitely also a possibility. So far, I’ve seen exactly zero evidence that the cause of the difference _isn’t_ based on culture and history. Indeed, looking at the matter logically, it seems most unlikely that the difference in relative success could be due to genetics. If it was based on _genetics_, would not the average Chinese peasant still in China be smarter than the average Malasian peasant, and so better off? Yet for most of the 20th century, the exact reverse has been true (and for all I know it still is). Surely there is no genetic difference between Chinese in China and Chinese in Malaysia (except that the latter may have interbred to an extent with the Malays!). ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2009, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/racial-discrimination-in-malaysia/502358/55 "2009-07-09T19:51:01Z")
I’m not sure if anyone has touched on this, but there is a very large population of “[Overseas Chinese](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overseas_Chinese)” who form a significant trading network throughout Asia (and other places). They may be fully integrated into their local cultures but are able to draw on that international network that simply isn’t available to other ethnic groups. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2009, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/racial-discrimination-in-malaysia/502358/56 "2009-07-09T20:02:40Z")
I for one cannot believe that the economic success of any particular group (whether they form a “race” or not) can be easily traced to genetic differences. Look at GDP. If (say) the Chinese were “genetically superior” to Malays, and genetic superiority was a good explaination for economic success, why are the Chinese in China itself so much poorer than the average Malay in Malaysia? > **[List of countries by GDP (PPP) per capita](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita)** > > A country's gross domestic product (GDP) at purchasing power parity (PPP) per capita is the PPP value of all final goods and services produced within an economy in a given year, divided by the average (or mid-year) population for the same year. This is similar to nominal GDP per capita, but adjusted for the cost of living in each country. > In 2019, the estimated average GDP per capita (PPP) of all of the countries of the world was Int$ 18,381.\[a\] For rankings regarding wealth, see list of co... China: 5,963 Malaysia: 14,072 Or for that matter - why are the Chinese in China so much worse off than the Chinese in Taiwan? Taiwan: 30,881 ---
**Author:** ![athelas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/5e9695/32.png) [@athelas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/athelas)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2009, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/racial-discrimination-in-malaysia/502358/57 "2009-07-09T20:22:27Z")
It is a total strawman to say that genetic differences are completely, 100% deterministic; if nothing else someone dying of starvation will not be discovering new organic syntheses. But that does not mean that genetics are _never_ a constraint, and I would again encourage people to get back to the topic of what should be done policywise in the case of Malaysia. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2009, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/racial-discrimination-in-malaysia/502358/58 "2009-07-09T20:30:37Z")
> [@athelas](#): > > It is a total strawman to say that genetic differences are completely, 100% deterministic; if nothing else someone dying of starvation will not be discovering new organic syntheses. But that does not mean that genetics are _never_ a constraint, and I would again encourage people to get back to the topic of what should be done policywise in the case of Malaysia. The problem is that genetic differences between racial or other identifiable groups appear to be zero percent deterministic, insofar as the matter can actually be tested in real world conditions - at least in the case of the Chinese and Malays. Why bother with them, if they don’t seem to make any difference at all to actual success or failure? Isn’t it better to discuss history and culture, which appear to be pretty well 100% of the factors which actually matter? I disagree that the matter is not relevant to the case of policy. If the issue is one of genetic differences, obviously that will drive a certain policy agenda; if it is a matter of history and culture, it will drive a different one - genetics cannot be altered but culture can be. ---
**Author:** ![athelas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/5e9695/32.png) [@athelas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/athelas)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2009, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/racial-discrimination-in-malaysia/502358/59 "2009-07-09T20:49:04Z")
Policy is a pretty blunt instrument, as shown by the straightforward quotas currently in place. What would your proposal be in either case (genetic vs. environment)? ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2009, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/racial-discrimination-in-malaysia/502358/60 "2009-07-09T20:59:24Z")
> [@athelas](#): > > Policy is a pretty blunt instrument, as shown by the straightforward quotas currently in place. What would your proposal be in either case (genetic vs. environment)? I agree that quotas will do no good in either case. If, as I suspect, the matter is cutlural, the best approach is through education. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/racial-discrimination-in-malaysia/502358.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/racial-discrimination-in-malaysia/502358.md?page=4)