Re: Re: Re: FW: Bell-curve racism for nations
G'day Doug, > michael perelman wrote: > > >Sabri, please be more respectful of Dr. Rushton. He will probably > win > >the Nobel Prize or even imortatlity, I believe, for having discovered > > >the inverse relation between IQ and penis size. > > I know this is a joke, Michael, but the bourgeois science thinks > Rushton is a fraud and an embarrassment. Before Hitler, racist > science got plenty of respect, but it doesn't really anymore. The > Bell Curve, despite its popularity, isn't mainstream science - though > it might be the hidden underside of liberal bourgeois tolerance (as > Zizek said of the relations among Laibach, nationalism, and fascism). > Racism doesn't have much scientific prestige - except maybe in some > economic models, where the entry of black workers is treated as a > decline in labor force quality. It's trickier to deal with bourgeois > ideology than it used to be. And the staff of the IMF is more > "diverse" than most First World left organizations. I realise that by the projected Rushton logic I should be endowed with a short fat one a foot long, but one thing that occurs to even me is that an IQ test is a cultural product with questionable cross-cultural applicability (and I'd LOVE to see how one arrives at the average IQ for Sierra Leone, for that matter). It also occurs that one criticism that can still be made of liberal bourgeois scientism (as manifest in neoliberalism in general and the IMF record in particular) is that it ethnocentrically universalises the particular with blithe abandon (eg stuff that has worked for a while in or for the hegemon will work for the minor dependent economy). So on that scientism criterion, I think there's a definitive parallel to be drawn (and, yes, I agree a few Marxists we both know - elsewhere - falter at that hurdle, too). I do reckon you've a point about diversity, even heterodoxy, in today's establishment, but aver it might be better made with reference to Wolfenson's World Bank. Waddyareckon? Cheers, Rob.
Re: Re: Re: FW: Bell-curve racism for nations
>michael perelman wrote: > >>Sabri, please be more respectful of Dr. Rushton. He will probably win >>the Nobel Prize or even imortatlity, I believe, for having discovered >>the inverse relation between IQ and penis size. > >I know this is a joke, Michael, but the bourgeois science thinks >Rushton is a fraud and an embarrassment. Before Hitler, racist >science got plenty of respect, but it doesn't really anymore. Cultural differences are made the explanans but the question of the persistence of cultural differences is left unasked, allowing racial assumptions to fill in the gap. Blacks have 1/10th the wealth of whites (defining wealth to include stocks, bonds, homes, cars, jewlery, etc; this is not wealth defined in Marxian terms). Why? At the very least, a racial world view could remain entrenched behind the curtain as economists reason from the assumption that those individuals who remain miserable proletarians as opposed to joining the wealthy have a very steep present time preference, i.e., lack of fortitude and foresight to forgo present consumption. For those who content themselves with the assumption that persistent cultural differences explain individual variance in time preference and thus the non random distribution of wealth across ethno-racial groups, all Rushton does is force them to their own implicit conclusion that such persistent cultural difference is most plausibly explained by probable heritable group differences. That's exactly where D'Souza ended up despite his attempt at a purely cultural theory of racial inequality. I suggest that the hostile reaction to Rushton is merely the return of the repressed. Rakesh
Re: Re: FW: Bell-curve racism for nations
michael perelman wrote: >Sabri, please be more respectful of Dr. Rushton. He will probably win >the Nobel Prize or even imortatlity, I believe, for having discovered >the inverse relation between IQ and penis size. I know this is a joke, Michael, but the bourgeois science thinks Rushton is a fraud and an embarrassment. Before Hitler, racist science got plenty of respect, but it doesn't really anymore. The Bell Curve, despite its popularity, isn't mainstream science - though it might be the hidden underside of liberal bourgeois tolerance (as Zizek said of the relations among Laibach, nationalism, and fascism). Racism doesn't have much scientific prestige - except maybe in some economic models, where the entry of black workers is treated as a decline in labor force quality. It's trickier to deal with bourgeois ideology than it used to be. And the staff of the IMF is more "diverse" than most First World left organizations. Doug
RE: Re: Re: FW: Bell-curve racism for nations
> > Sabri, please be more respectful of Dr. Rushton. He will > > probably win the Nobel Prize or even imortatlity, I believe, > > for having discovered the inverse relation between IQ and > > penis size. this explains why women are so smart. JD
Re: Re: FW: Bell-curve racism for nations
Sabri, thanks for making me laugh out loud! Gene Coyle Sabri Oncu wrote: > Michael writes: > > > Sabri, please be more respectful of Dr. Rushton. He will > > probably win the Nobel Prize or even imortatlity, I believe, > > for having discovered the inverse relation between IQ and > > penis size. > > Hey, > > I always wondered why my IQ is so low. Now I know!.. > > Sabri
