SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Charles Murray, controversial author of The Bell Curve, which promoted links between intelligence and race, was shouted down by protesters at Middlebury College last Thursday. PBS reports:
Murray had been invited by Middlebury's student group affiliated with the American Enterprise Institute, a think tank at which Murray is a scholar. [...] Prior to the point when Murray was introduced, several Middlebury officials reminded students that they were allowed to protest but not to disrupt the talk. The students ignored those reminders and faced no visible consequences for doing so. [...]
After the students chanted for about 20 minutes, college officials announced that the lecture would not take place but that Murray would go to another location, which the college didn't name, and have a discussion with a Middlebury faculty member — livestreamed back to the original lecture site.
According to Middlebury officials, after Murray and the professor who interviewed him for the livestream attempted to leave the location in a car, some protesters surrounded the car, jumped on it, pounded on it and tried to prevent the car from leaving campus.
Other sources note that political science professor Allison Stanger, who agreed to moderate the discussion, was attacked while accompanying Murray to the car, ultimately requiring treatment at a hospital for neck injuries caused by protesters pushing her and pulling her hair.
Murray himself later gave an account of his experience on the AEI blog. He emphasized that Middlebury's administration and staff displayed in exemplary ways their encouragement of free speech:
Middlebury's stance has been exemplary. The administration agreed to host the event. President Patton did not cancel it even after a major protest became inevitable. She appeared at the event, further signaling Middlebury's commitment to academic freedom. The administration arranged an ingenious Plan B that enabled me to present my ideas and discuss them with Professor Stanger even though the crowd had prevented me from speaking in the lecture hall. I wish that every college in the country had the backbone and determination that Middlebury exhibited.
But Murray notes that the outcome was very different from his previous controversial appearances:
Until last Thursday, all of the ones involving me have been as carefully scripted as kabuki: The college administration meets with the organizers of the protest and ground rules are agreed upon. The protesters have so many minutes to do such and such. It is agreed that after the allotted time, they will leave or desist. These negotiated agreements have always worked. At least a couple of dozen times, I have been able to give my lecture to an attentive (or at least quiet) audience despite an organized protest.
Middlebury tried to negotiate such an agreement with the protesters, but, for the first time in my experience, the protesters would not accept any time limits. [...] In the mid-1990s, I could count on students who had wanted to listen to start yelling at the protesters after a certain point, "Sit down and shut up, we want to hear what he has to say." That kind of pushback had an effect. It reminded the protesters that they were a minority. I am assured by people at Middlebury that their protesters are a minority as well. But they are a minority that has intimidated the majority. The people in the audience who wanted to hear me speak were completely cowed.
The form of the protest has been widely condemned even by those who vehemently disagree with Murray, as in the piece by Peter Beinart in The Atlantic that claims "something has gone badly wrong on the campus left." He argues strongly that "Liberals must defend the right of conservative students to invite speakers of their choice, even if they find their views abhorrent."
Meanwhile, student protesters have responded with their own account, disclaiming the hair-pulling incident as unintentional and "irresponsible" but condemning the Middlebury administration for their "support of a platform for white nationalist speech." They further claimed "peaceful protest was met with escalating levels of violence by the administration and Public Safety, who continually asserted their support of a dangerous racist over the well-being of students."
Personal note: My take on all of this is that the actual subject of Murray's Middlebury talk has been lost in the media coverage, namely his 2012 book Coming Apart, which (ironically) is a detailed discussion of the problems created by a division of the intellectual elite from the white working class. He explicitly dilutes his previous connections of social problems with a black underclass by noting that many of the same issues plague poor white communities. While his argument is still based on problematic assertions about intelligence and IQ, the topic of his book seems very relevant given recent political events and issues of class division. There's some sort of profound irony in a bunch of students at an elite school refusing to allow a debate on the causes and results of division between elite intellectuals and the (white) working class. I personally may think Murray's scholarship is shoddy and his use of statistics frequently misleading (or downright wrong), but I don't see how that justifies the kind of threats and intimidation tactics shown at this protest.
(Score: 0, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @03:29PM (24 children)
If it were, then you wouldn't be able to get a reading of your genetic heritage, and various groups of people wouldn't be more at risk for certain diseases, etc.
Black people are better at being outside in the son doing manual labor, and white people are better at living in dark climates with very little light. That's the just the superficial stuff; there is zero purpose in lying to people by telling them that they are all the same when they are quite obviously not.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @03:38PM (4 children)
You should have attempted only your first point. People with African heritage are at a greater risk for breast cancer and sickle-cell anemia. You'll find credible references on this easy to come by.
It's "sun," btw, if you're referring to the giant fusion reactor in the sky. For that point, allow me to throw out seasonal affective disorder. Here's wikipedia [wikipedia.org], but it doesn't include data that might support your point. Can you demonstrate that people with African heritage are at a greater risk for SAD?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @03:45PM (3 children)
... are not worth engaging.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @03:48PM
Well that was easy.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Wednesday March 08 2017, @04:30PM (1 child)
SAD isn't a strawman here. You failed to elaborate what you meant by "better at living in caves" so he took a guess.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @04:39PM
Here [nutrition.org]:
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @03:46PM (15 children)
If it were, then you wouldn't be able to get a reading of your genetic heritage, and various groups of people wouldn't be more at risk for certain diseases, etc.
You are wrong about that too, there is more genetic diversity within commonly defined racial groups than there is between them. An illustration of this fact:
In one example that demonstrated genetic differences were not fixed along racial lines, the full genomes of James Watson and Craig Venter, two famous American scientists of European ancestry, were compared to that of a Korean scientist, Seong-Jin Kim. It turned out that Watson (who, ironically, became ostracized in the scientific community after making racist remarks) and Venter shared fewer variations in their genetic sequences than they each shared with Kim.
Race Is a Social Construct, Scientists Argue [scientificamerican.com]
Another example is sickle cell anemia. [psychologytoday.com] Pop science says it is racial, because its more common in african-americans than in white americans. But in africa there are entire countries where it is no more common than it is among white americans and there are parts of southern europe where it is just as common among the local populations as it is among african-americans.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @04:13PM (14 children)
Just as there are whole populations of people whose genetic heritage condemn them to a higher risk of sickle cell anemia, there are also whole populations whose genetic heritage condemn them to lower IQs.
I'm not arguing that because some black populations have genetically lower IQs that all black people have lower IQs; I'm arguing that it's WRONG to tell those affected populations that they can be just as good at theoretical particle physics as Ashkenazi Jews, if only they just worked harder in school. It's a horrible lie, and it's creating a great deal of strife for everyone.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Wednesday March 08 2017, @04:16PM (3 children)
there are also whole populations whose genetic heritage condemn them to lower IQs.
That may or may not be true, but even if it is, that "genetic inheritance" has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH SKIN COLOUR. The genes that govern the brain and intelligence are not the same ones governing melanin production.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @04:27PM (2 children)
You are not arguing against what is being said.
What is being said is that there ARE differences in populations; the only thing that is a social construct is the notion that all humans are equal and would have the exact same outcomes were it not for some nefarious "structural" conspiracy in the organization of society.
That being said, it may very well be that having black skin in America is a very good proxy for having some genetic trait, such as sickle-cell anemia or difficulty with higher mathematics.
(Score: 2) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Wednesday March 08 2017, @04:33PM (1 child)
OK, the word "populations" here is a deceptive one. I suspect you are thinking of "populations" as is "a bunch of similar looking people living in the same geographical area". I'm thinking of "populations" as in "a bunch of people who share some genetic traits but don't necessarily look like or live near one another".
Also, please see elsethread for a debunking of the "sickle cell anemia correlates nicely with skin colour" myth.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @04:47PM
I am the one speaking of populations in terms of genetic heritage, not something superficial like skin color.
Furthermore, people who look similar and live in the same geographical area tend to share the same genetic heritage.
You'll note that I wrote "having black skin in America". In America:
You are not arguing against me; you are arguing against a straw man.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @04:26PM (9 children)
I'm not arguing that because some black populations have genetically lower IQs that all black people have lower IQs;
What you are doing is begging the question. You simply assert that some "black populations" have genetically lower intelligence. You might just as well say that some "white populations" have genetically lower intelligence.
It is true that if you cherry pick any group of individuals for intelligence and you'll get a group that has lower intelligence. But you can't usefully go in the reverse and say being white is predictive of lower intelligence any more than you can say being african is predictive of having sickle cell anemia.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @04:30PM (8 children)
You are making things up; you are constructing a straw man.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @04:40PM (7 children)
What is that now? 3 different accusations of "strawman!"
Its funny how you are reduced to declaring that everybody else is arguing a strawman when in fact all of these "strawmen" are the direct and obviously intentional conclusion of your postulation. Especially when you say things like, "having black skin in America is a very good proxy for having some genetic trait, such as ... difficulty with higher mathematics."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @04:54PM (6 children)
I said "it may well be the case"
Here, allow me to put back in place those parts you cut out in your attempt to build a straw man:
Indeed, nobody disagrees that having black skin in America is a very good proxy for having sickle-cell anemia. There could well be other traits of note; that is the point.
Equality is a social construct. Real variations should not be ignored.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @05:29PM (2 children)
> There could well be other traits of note; that is the point.
Yeah and the one "trait of note" you just happened to single out is intelligence.
Its pretty funny watching you try to have your racist cake and eat it too.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @05:38PM (1 child)
What is wrong with you?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @06:03PM
And thus the circular argument that proves itself with no actual proof.
We are talking about racial differences in intelligence so its totally possible there could be actual racial differences in intelligence...
(Score: 2, Flamebait) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday March 08 2017, @06:52PM (2 children)
Now when you say "real variations should not be ignored," *what* precisely do you mean by this?
It's insulting as fuck that you think we don't know the subtext of what you're saying. You're sure as hell not implying "well we should pay attention to things like Vitamin D deficiency and sickle-cell anaemia in this population." No, you're saying, without outright saying it because you're a goddamn coward, "Some people are worth less than others because they're less intelligent, and this is TOTALLY a dark-skin thing, yew guise."
Fuck you sideways. Human worth is not determined by intelligence, and this is coming from someone with an IQ of 140-145 or so. All our art, all our science, all our medicine, all of it is only to improve human flourishing, or what's the point of it? You've got your priorities entirely backwards.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 09 2017, @12:20PM (1 child)
You seem to be the first one in this thread to equate lower IQ with less worth as a person.
Subtexts are subjective, and regularly assumed by those with a strong personal narrative around a particular subject (see also: "if you're against elite bankers, you must be anti-semitic"). People regularly see subtexts which the author did not intend to express, as in just about any literature critique where the author is not available to comment.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday March 09 2017, @07:42PM
Let me spell it out for you: in no other context does anyone give one flying fuck about the "real variations" between populations, stratified by race, except in medicine. That's it. The only ever time it comes up is when people want to 1) play up the supposed aggregate IQ differences and 2) use 1) to justify making untermenschen out of said population.
It never comes up otherwise. And somehow I doubt every single person posting here about this is a haematologist.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 3, Insightful) by aristarchus on Wednesday March 08 2017, @06:43PM
and white people are better at living in dark climates with very little light.
Silly racist! Here, let me fix this for you!
white people are better at living in tanning salons with very little intelligence
I am always impressed with how profoundly stupid and incapable of critical reasoning racists truly are. Even Runaway knows this racist stuff is pure bullshit by the lumpen proletariat in an attempt to compensate for the fact that they are so inferior. This is why we cannot have white supremacy! The South (racism, not the actual South of the United States, but Texas always make me wonder) will lose again!!!!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 08 2017, @07:15PM
And all that has nothing to do with intelligence.
(Score: 3, Funny) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday March 08 2017, @07:35PM
Black people are better at being outside in the son...
Well crap, you were doing fine with the racism. But, say goodbye to your book deal now!