I think this is very well put. It’s that the ramifications of intelligence having a genetic role that may align with races are just too uncomfortable to contemplate. Some believe that the world should be egalitarian, and assume nature has the same bias. It doesn’t.
And I still don’t see how people can accept how genetics can account for differences we can see on the outside, while being so certain that an organ on the inside—the brain—is off limits for any race-aligned differences.
And yes, people constantly conflate evidence with proof. It’s as if the only evidence they will accept is proof.
Such a low bar, that no one has argued with… yes, it’s possible that the genetic explanation may have some merit. It just has not been demonstrated yet- not even close.
I don’t think anyone has made this argument.
For such a claim, I’m demanding good evidence. In particular, I’m demanding actual genetic evidence. This shouldn’t be surprising- it’s a claim about genetics, and it’s a claim tied to the most brutal events in human history. It should have high standards of evidence!
I’ve participated in a bit of off-topic digression. We’ve done the argument over the genetic explanation before, and we’re not making any new ground.
I’ll reiterate my point in the OP- we have good reason for calling things racist, and we have good reasons for making “racist” such a strongly negative accusation. Just because someone thinks they actually have a good reason for a racist claim or belief does not mean it suddenly becomes not-racist… racist things are racist, regardless of how strongly one believes them. Pretty much everyone with racist beliefs throughout history thought they had good, solid evidence for believing it was so. But the beliefs and claims are racist, regardless of how one came to that belief.
At some point in an undergrad history class I did a mini-research-project on schools in newly-liberated North Carolina. Union forces coming in were astonished at the number one demand of newly freed slaves: schools. Black kids thronged any school set up. So, for that matter, did poor white kids. The initial successes at providing integrated schooling fell apart, however, due to white racism: poor whites objected to the idea that white children (sometimes their own, more often not) would go to school alongside black children, and the opposition grew so violent that the schools were shuttered. (This was specific to one area–maybe Hanover County? It’s been some years since I read it).
Anyway, what followed was a century plus of massively subpar schools for black children, coupled with terrorist attacks on black citizens who tried to organize for better conditions. You do enough of that, and maybe it’s just barely possible that a community loses trust and confidence in the institution that was so desperately desired at first.
Here’s where the problem is. The bolded word should be racial, otherwise you’re begging the question in a big way. You’re trying to turn your argument into a tautology, as you do right after your ellipsis. Yes, racist things are necessarily racist. Duh. The problem is that only some racial things are racist. You either don’t allow for some racial things to be non-racist at all, or you disagree with people on where that line is drawn. But it’s not helpful at all to offer an argument that all racist things are racist, and then try to make all racial things racist with a little verbal prestidigitation.
Racial claims that say or imply one race is inherently smarter/dumber or more/less moral than another are racist. I don’t think the word “racial” is particularly useful, though. It’s racist to claim that black people are inherently less intelligent, on average, regardless of why one believes it.
Even if it’s true? Using the thought experiment that MaxTheVool offered up, IF a group of super advanced aliens came to earth and could show you proof that intelligence aligns very well with what we refer to as race, would that statement that one race is more intelligent than another still be racist?
Sort of an anti-shibboleth: if you can say the phrase with a straight face, the red flags go up.
Seriously, the only time someone says that phrase is when they’re wanting to excuse racist claims. I have never heard someone say, for example, “Sickle Cell disease shows up more often among folks with Sub-Saharan ancestry than among folks with Nordic ancestry, but racial isn’t racist.”
The bar you seem to set, that it’s not racist to believe “blacks are dumber” as long as one thinks that one has good evidence for it, is so high, that many slave-owners (and Nazis) wouldn’t meet it. Most people with racist beliefs are pretty damn sure that they have good evidence for it… but their beliefs are still racist. It doesn’t matter why one makes a racist claim- even if you think it’s true. It’s racist whether one thinks it’s true or not… and of course they think it’s true!
I thought I answered this earlier. Maybe it wasn’t to you. Anyway: hair texture, melanin content of skin, eye shape…
That is to say, there is a very strong correlation between kinky hair and Blacks. Eye almond eye shape (epicanthic fold) and Asians.
But this discussion is really just a waste of time, isn’t it? I mean, if you’re of the mind that races don’t exist, how can you even discuss this except to say that"races do not exist"? And if an acknowledgement of races is all one needs to qualify as a racist, Dude, watch out, because there are racists all around you wherever you are.
But you are wrong. This thing we call race is really of no mystery except to the deniers. It’s not as neat, I’d agree, as talking about tightly defined populations, but it is a useful shorthand. Otherwise 95% of what American group voted for Barack Obama?
If one cannot make statements about the differences in races, it follows that they think that there are no differences that align with race.
I do appreciate your King of Hay People, though. Nice.
I haven’t said “one cannot make statements about the differences in races” (and we’ll skip the race vs ethnicity vs population group vs etc discussion). I’ve said that claiming one race/ethnicity/group/etc is inherently smarter/dumber and/or more/less moral (or aggressive/violent/criminal etc) than another is a racist claim.
Saying there are no races is not remotely the same as saying all races are equal. That’s just complete mischaracterisation of the argument presented. Classic strawmanning.
