Despite Barack Obama's candidacy and his desire for a national discussion about race, race remains a key third rail of American politics. Anyone, of any ethnic background who discusses race in ways that do not conform to the prevailing PC wisdom is almost instantly accused of racism, which is a conversation stopper. The difficulties of discussing race in America are exemplified in an open letter, Ten Commandments' of race and genetics issued, in this week's Genome Biology:
1. All races are created equal
2. An Argentinian and an Australian are more likely to have differences in their DNA than two Argentinians
3. A person's history isn't written only in his or her genes
4: Members of the same race may have different underlying genetics
5. Both nature and nurture play important parts in our behaviors and abilities
6. Researchers should be careful about using racial groups when designing experiments
7. Medicine should focus on the individual, not the race
8. The study of genetics requires cooperation between experts in many different fields
9. Oversimplified science feeds popular misconceptions
I do not know how accurate No. 2 is, but it seems to me that 3-10 are perfectly reasonable, though exactly what is taught in "a history of racism" might be important to consider. In other words, is a history of racism only to include white racism, or will it include the traditional racism and other-hate promulgated at times by the Chinese, Japanese, Arabs, etc. Racism, a subset of other-hatred, has been ubiquitous in human history. It might be more worthwhile to offer a history of attempts to combat racism, but that is unlikely to be what the authors of the note intended.
Be that as it may, it seems that the most problematic is No. 1; what do the authors mean when they say that all races are created equal (notwithstanding the subtext of No. 2 that the entire concept is questionable)? In their letter, they expand upon each of their points. Here is No.1:
1. All races are created equal
No genetic data has ever shown that one group of people is inherently superior to another. Equality is a moral value central to the idea of human rights; discrimination against any group should never be tolerated.
There is a good possibility that this statement is incorrect. Further, the authors do not define superior, which is the crux of the problem.
Note the phrasing and the non-sequitors. All races are created equal is true morally if you believe, as our founders did, that all men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights.
(If we treat people as individuals rather than primarily members of identity groups, we no longer have to worry about one group being superior to another, but can accept that some people are luckier in their genetic endowment than others.)
Further, since genetics is increasingly elucidating data that show the concept of race to have genetic meaning, it follows that all races are not created equal in purely material terms. All men are manifestly not created equal when we begin to discuss abilities and genetic loading.
Genetic data suggesting racial and ethnic differences also has nothing to do with human rights; the idea that discrimination should never be tolerated is irrefutable but the modern interpretation of discrimination to involve assurances of equal outcomes suggest that the proponents of such anti-discrimination ideology firmly believe that all men must be genetically equal.
The troubling fact is that genetic data can, and does, show that different races, as groups, have different strengths and weaknesses. This is unarguable. For example, the sickle cell trait is much more common among people descended from African blacks. It confers an advantage over those without the trait for those who live in areas where malaria is endemic. It confers a severe disadvantage for those who inherit two copies of the trait and develop sickle cell disease. In this setting, living in areas where malaria is endemic, one would have to conclude that Africans are indeed superior at survival to those groups that lack the trait. In time, the understanding of this genetic, racial derived difference, will allow for better treatment and cure of both Sickle Cell Disease and malaria. (Of note, the trait is also found in some non-African populations, but that is moot for the discussion.)
In the same way there are a host of traits which are increasingly being linked to genetics that vary among populations and which offer various advantages and disadvantages for those who live in our modern world. Some of these genetically derived traits, products of the complex interaction between Nature and Nurture, are of such significance that in certain narrowly defined ranges it is possible to say that one racial group (or more often, sub-group) has superior adaptive abilities versus another group. And this is the terrible fear that these geneticists, psychologists, historians and philosophers who wrote the letter, are attempting to mitigate. As we learn more about the molecular basis of genetics we will be able to answer some questions that have always been misused by racists and are inherently dangerous. For example, if we could understand the genetic basis, as well as the types of nurturance, that offer the Chinese an advantage at math and science, we might well be able to eventually manipulate the genome (or "treat" the less superior variants) in ways to increase the abilities of those less fortunate in their choice of genetics and parenting.
The dangers should be obvious. Once the geneticists begin to identify the genes involved in intelligence, athletic abilities, artistic abilities, etc, and if such abilities are disparately distributed among genetic groups (ie, races and ethnic groups) it will be hard to maintain that all men are created equal in abilities and this is where the left, especially, founders. Since the left and its PC progeny do not believe in G-d, they have no foundation upon which to base their belief that all men are equal. They therefore have to insist by assertion that all men are equal and try to force the science to prove the contention even when the scientific data, incomplete as it is, refutes their basic premise.
Black Americans continue to believe that they are disadvantaged by virtue of their race while white Americans increasingly believe the playing field has been leveled. If the playing filed has been leveled then the failure of a significant part of the black community to succeed in America would have to be attributed to shortcomings within the community. Barack Obama's emphasis on the black community taking stock and repairing themselves (especially in terms of recommitting to intact families) is a tremendous step forward. However, the resistance to such ideas stems from powerful unconscious determinants. The great fear among many American blacks, unconsciously enacted on a daily basis in our high schools where to study and do well is considered "acting white", is that blacks in America are intellectually less able than whites. Young people who glorify the gangsta mentality act as if they believe they lack the requisite intellectual ablities to succeed in school. This is a tragedy that is increasingly self-inflicted.
It may well be that some day soon the geneticists will be able to tease out many of the genes responsible for higher intellectual functions. This is both an alarming and an exciting prospect but it begs the question of whether we as a society are mature enough and color-blind enough to use the information responsibly.
Recent Comments