Race & ethnicities : left wing edition

We now all know races exist - well, hard to deny, except if you believe in some of Lewontin's fallacy, but we are too clever for this.

Some exemples of nice articles :

Moreover, we all know, too, that there is physical and psychological average differences between races.

So here is my question : I am a left leaning - really really left leaning if you know what I mean - anarchist.
It seems that in the left, there is kind of a problem with these new discoveries in science. I don't. It seems hard to deny it, really, it's like more and more evidence add-up everytime.

=> So here is my question, fellow anarchist - and even communists, yes - what should be our stance on it ?

Attached: IQ Lynn.PNG (1072x653, 188.6K)

Other urls found in this thread:


PS : sorry for the small grammatical errors and stuff like this.

Reason : english language + frenchmen = catastrophy.

no borders
no nations

It's fucking irrelevant.

What does it matter if one race is more X or Y than another, everyone should have the chance to prove themselves regardless.

Wy are races relevant to politics unless you intend to rely on eugenics (as in superior/inferior races) to further you goals?

This is unrelated to this topic.

Arguments linking race and Autism Level are largely ignorant of context, both historical and geographical. Not to mention it wades into eugenics territory and the belief that certain groups of people are inferior.
Dividing people by race is a spook and weakens unity and solidarity. If you're really a leftist, this would be something you'd understand to be dangerous to leftist causes.

Let us assume for the sake of argument that the claims typically made by white nationalists about genetically inherited intelligence in relation to different racial groups are true, or even just partially true, and that this is relevant.
Would this significantly change how we should organize, justifying state-enforced racial hierarchy, and even possibly segregation or ethnic cleansing?

In my view, no. Perhaps this would be a different conversation if we were still living in the 1800s, but we are right now on the verge of breakthroughs in genetic engineering.
It may soon be possible for us to edit genes in children before they are born using new technology known as CRISPR.
If scientific research could specify genetic patterns linked to intelligence or potential intelligence, you could target those genes for editing in new children.

Since the claim made by the white nationalists from what I've observed tends to be that there is only a tendency for members of different racial groups to diverge in intelligence on a genetic basis, the solution need not be entirely race-based. Using this technology, you could improve not only the general intelligence of black & brown groups which tend to be the main subject of scrutiny by white nationalists, but whites, Asians, and so on.

The issue here arises in equal distribution of the new technology. It will likely be reserved for the ruling class. I would like to point out to white nationalists that if they are concerned with the general level of intelligence among all humans, that the best way to raise the general level of intelligence is not to attempt to deport non-whites or segregate the races.

In fact the way to raise the level of intelligence among humans is to stand in solidarity with non-whites, and advocate equal distribution of new technologies such as genetic engineering. I don't think that the type of capitalist system most of humanity lives under is capable of coping with the rapid technological advances we are experiencing today.

In fact, I think that enforcing economic hierarchy will be harmful to all of humanity, including white people. If future technologies such as radical life extension and genetic engineering are a privilege reserved for the very-wealthy and powerful, all of humanity will suffer as the ruling-class entrenches its power. And that even includes most the petit-bourg white anons on /biz/, I'd bet.

On the other hand, if we as an interlinked set of societies decide to move past the capitalist order and abolish it, we will have in our hands the opportunity to raise the average intelligence level for billions of future humans.
To me, this sounds highly preferable to prolonged racial infighting between different types of humans.
But when presented with this argument, what will white nationalists respond with? Their response may prove whether their interest concerning these arguments really is a concern for humanity's future, or if it's just an excuse for ideology. I suspect a mix of responses from them.

Attached: 4reply.png (334x334, 137.79K)

Well, that's kind of my point of view. It is simply a great tool for science and social science - even if there is still a rejection of these data for now.

However, it seems that a lot of left leaning people seem to be absolutely hostile to its existance.

Like a taboo, which is weird. I don't get it. I can't even talk to most of my fellow anarchist militant friends about this lol.

Beeing equal and deserving a fair part of the modern life =/=beeing biologically the same.

Attached: ussr science.PNG (222x369, 194.18K)

There is nothing inherently reactionary to eugenics as a long-term goal, rather than the advocating of extermination of inferior races/cultures (imperialism, either soft or hard), but you have to clarify to what end exactly. You can consider a preliminary of this phenomenon with the current trend of globalisation of culture/habits, albeit on a capitalist setting.

I agree that in the context of scientific breakthrough in this subject, existing race of biological species will end up being irrelevant anyway.

But this is a long-term issue, in the short-term (as in world revolution and the establishment of communism) this is largely insignificant, there is not race "incompatible" with communism that should be worked against.

What is source of data on DPRK and warn torn Afrikan nations in your post exactly? I am having difficulty parsing it on my own.

Qu'est-ce que tu essayes de dire? What constructive purpose does eugenics serve if you are not aiming for so called 'scientific racism' or segregation?

Our stance should be of respect but also of understanding reality. It shouldn't happen ever again that leftwing or leftist-esque movements/guerrillas/orgs murder/target people out of ethnical or religious differences. Many times it will probably be necessary in the future, but when it comes down to only being for those identities then we've devolved into pure idpol which we should never do. No one chooses being white, black, mestizo, asian, etc so it should be obvious that we should respect and be able to consider any person willing to fight for socialism a comrade, regardless of their reace/ethnicity.
Also, speaking of those leftists that don't recognize these differences and are all about idpol and not at all about class/actual socialism, don't worry about them. They will never start a revolution, when a revolution actually starts it will be done by the proper socialists.

No idea lol. I should ask on the other /pol. But I don't like this place.

CRISPR seem to take forever, however. Even if it is talked a lot in the psychology-biology fields.

And yes, only the ruling class will have it, IF it works, which is far from reality atm.

Well, to be honest, it is a bit of a "pandora box". What will happen if this is achieved ? Hard to tell, I think.
Since genes evolved with culture etc, now, genes will have a more chaotic growth. Kind of dystopic if you ask me.

In a more general note, to debate other questions of other posters :
I understand that this statement causes division. However, this division seem to be real, on average.

And we are loosing a field of research that is growing VERY fast to the reactionnaries only because of a "new" dogma that everybody is 100% the same - I don't see any of our main thinkers saying this, but it seems that our political affiliation likes a lot this statement, because it is intellectually easier.

Your divison between "identity politic leftists" and socialists seem to be on point on this topic.
However, tbqh, I rarely saw a comrade ready to talk about it.
We lose ground to the right because some are "volontarely unable" to answer this simple arguments, sadly. A bit foolish in my opinion.

Fuck off with your "scientific idpol" you dirty Zig Forumsyp.

I can't tell if you're a fed or a redditor. Maybe both?

Fuck off retard, we have this thread every month and your Rick & Morty Score apologism never holds up. Just because you can cherrypick a bunch of studies doesnt mean that those studies are good let alone accurate.

Attached: 6229136e313a0f7e82fc4d1ef45a18ceb75d7a34c7b21797e6b2b39fd6dcc6b4.gif (300x225, 2.22M)

The first source is Lynn & Vanhanen, 2002-2006, and another from 2011. There are more, I just linked the most famous.

Well, race seem to exist, it is beeing proven more and more by science.
I think that it is usefull to aknowledge "differencial psychology" to help people out of poverty, for exemple. Or to have social politics, based on sociology aknowledging pyschology, that focuses precisely on what is helpful. Not necessarely by a WILD categorisation of people, but by seeing this group objectively, and so its potential, for an usefull social action.

There can be eugenics for new-borns without the need of segregation for the short life of living beings.

Has racial infighting between communists ever happened historically? This seems uterly counter-productive to the common cause.

On the very long-term, humanity will probably abandon their biological habitat and end up living - or rather "existing" - mechanically and might end up being remplaced by artificial intelligence (decision making/central planing).

Are you american by any chance? If so, it's pretty clear why these leftists aren't really heard or noticed in the US. Sometimes going as far as being segregated and rejected by idpol leftists. This is a pretty big issue worldwide, not just in the US however, the last thing we need are white socialists (or potential socialists) being alienated by these people and becoming white nationalists. It's actually not that uncommon, on Zig Forums I remember reading quite a few examples of whites that used to be socialists that became so alienated by these idpolers that they fell to white nationalism. It almost makes me feel as if the idpol left is a psyop to alienate whites. I'm still hopeful these people will vanish once shit really hits the fan.

Identity politics are only irrelevant for class struggle.

this is what im concerned about, that theyll start making threads posing as a widely accepted view here and then take them as evidence that communists are just as bad as fascists. We may be full of NEETS and losers but we still have the same basic anti-racist commitments as socialists everywhere. Look at this shit for example:

This has never once been the standard line on Zig Forums, one of the few things we have been unified on is effectively dismantling racialist arguments and Autism Level "science." Feel free to screencap this in the case that Zig Forums gets in the news accompanied by something totally unrepresentative of our views like this.

Tbh this shit, which is rarely argued in good faith, should very simply just be opposed because it's idpol; if you were to keep consistently with the Zig Forums line. If threads about Identity issues from other angles regularly are either locked or turn into baitfests, and as such are treated with contempt then I see no reason why threads like these should be given better treatment merely because they present themselves with a thin veneer of respectability & scientific enquiry, especially when the burden of proof is upon said posters to explain why such a notion is relevant to class struggle.

Don't get me wrong, it is often meaningless, but in the case of genes (as in psychological ability), it can be considered, but only after the revolution.

I trully studied the subject, thank you. If you are unable to hold a normal conversation, leave.

It you are happy to lose ground to reactionnary just because it is much more convenient to act "as if it didn't exist" for our ideology … good for you. And bad for revolution.

No, I am french. But I agree with everything you said.

Attached: 1538257265441.gif (538x572, 338.43K)

Of course, OP will not and cannot and will eventually reveal himself to be pigeonholed into arguing for reactionary positions if he attempts to.


It is relevant to class strugle because it makes us maintain our dominance on social science, would be a shame to lose this advantage.
Perhaps because I am still in the Uni, I find this place very important for the diffusion of our ideas.

Reminder : right wing in social science is very dangerous for us.

I agree that trying to quantify "intelligence" on nominal terms is risky at best and disingenuous at worst.

Maybe not in the past, but it's definitely happening now among leftists in many orgs. I meant it more as in "leftwing"esque movements like Serbs during the Balkan Wars that genocided many of their enemies (civilians included) for ethnic reasons. Also, yes I understand the Serbians weren;t particularly leftwing, but many people here support them for the wrong reasons, the Balkan Wars truly were a shitshow and I see no reason as to why you would support any side. It's already in the past though, we should look towards the future now.
I can't think of any examples now but it's also something we can't allow to happen in the future.

I don't disagree, for example I'm chilean and the majority of the working class in my country are brown/mestizo. In my case I'm also brown but part of the more upper-middle class, not many people in that situation here. The higher class/capitalists here are almost all white and if a revolution were to ever happen here, white nationalists could make up some shit like "the nonwhites are trying to replace us whites!" which would be utter horseshit. Despite it being mostly nonwhites vs whites, the conflict wouldn't be a racial but a class conflict. After all, even most of the army is composed of poor mestizos, and the army being a tool of the bourgeoisie to crush revolt would be pitted against their own class.

I used to work on artificial neural networks and the building of intelligence in controled setting and I can say the hardest part is the correct defining of the goal of machine "learning" through supervision.

You can assert that you want communism, but only for you own people (as in national communism or unironical "nazbol"), but this should be worked against in the context of global class struggle.

So this would just be a fallacious argument, identity is not a class.

If this is the case then this board also needs to reinforce it's positions on Social Science when it comes to other realms of questions of Identity. I perfectly agree with being educated on these issues so that we can put forward a narrative that either debunks or circumvents such issues, but you have to be very wary that this will naturally be viewed with suspicion and will be even more insidiously appropriated and diverted by the far right. A Radlib will just call you a Nazbol and attempt to dunk on you; but a Fascist will attempt to worm their way into the conversation and steer it towards their own ends.

Where are you from whereby Race Science is more dominant of a position to be contested than various other problems within Social Sciences? The only places I can think of whereby this would be a productive use of time outside of niche communities would be Central & South America

Honestly the reason why I get concerned when threads like this pop up is that they are usually engaged in with much more honesty than any of the issues that Zig Forums purports to maintain a line against, such as Bourgeois Feminism, Ethnonationalism, etc. etc. A blatant Intersectionalist will immediately be aggressively contended with, but threads such as this, which have a much more common reputation for being sliding by Fascists (esp pertinent considering we're on a website where reactionaries outnumber us 3 to 1 at least). Is this just a lack of education, or is it a deeper issue? Either way much more needs to be done to maintain a consistent framework that works against both Right & "Left" Wing Social Science issues and to ensure that our standard of education for the average poster is up to snuff. But whatsmore, is that we seriously need to prioritize our efforts towards the most productive uses of our time if we wish to engage in any serious intellectual exercises; what do we gain from being able to counter the Far-Right on the issue of race science when it is considerably less widespread than the Intersectional Left on the issue of race?

Not that difficult. Research is avancing - and it is fascinating, imo.

There is this book, that it explains it well. Easy to read. You can find it online easily, without paying, even less paying for Amazon.
> amazon.com/Intelligence-That-Matters-Stuart-Ritchie/dp/1444791877

Attached: facteur g en anglais.PNG (813x366, 85K)

Of course, socialism should be attempted to be established as globally as possible but we shouldn't discard that maybe a few nations here and there will just devolve into ultra-reactionary isolationism and just cease to exist, not only as nations but as societies.

That's correct, yes.

All right OP, I'll bite with your shitty racebaiting thread.

The answer that every single socialist on this planet should take is that it does not matter. Men and women of every race, screed, ethnicity, religion, upbringing, and even class, on every single continent on this planet, from the simplest layman and farmer to the most genius scientists and engineers have recognized the importance of the class war and have fought, bled, been jailed, and died in the name of the socialist cause. These people are my comrades in the struggle to end oppressions against all mankind.

The ridiculous, pointless arguments about intelligence and race are all inherently reactionary because they are in themselves asking to distract ourselves from the class war. What does it actually matter when the only revolutionary goal is that of engaging and winning the global class warfare? There are only two questions that should be asked, is a man aware of class warfare? If he is not, then he should be educated. Is the man on my side in the class warfare? If he is, then he is my comrade. Nowhere in this questioning does it ask what race he is or how intelligent they are, because history has shown that people from literally every standing in society have been able to grasp the meaning and importance of the class war.

There is not a single revolutionary reason to ask any question about this subject and not a single excuse for discussing it except to entirely reject it in the most certain and conclusive way possible.

Please tell me BO changed the filter for Autism Level to that now

Well, true, idpolitics, from "our side" seem to be a much worse problem.
My perception might be a bit distorted since a lot of discussions about it happen in university. You are right.

And as say above, even if the problem is lesser, ignoring this issue can turn a left leaning person to beeing a reactionnary. Only base on the feeling of "my old friends and comrades lied to me" (which is not true).

However I see the right wing narrative on science beeing pushed more and more. It can slowly infiltrate other social science. It's like most of people studying evolutionary psychology is right wing, at best centrist - which is still capitalist.

Races are not a category in any which usefull way. They are arbitrary and not well defined, as they cannot be, becclause biology doesn't work that way.


I'm this guy

And I think that the "Pandora's Box" comment is actually very pertinent, not only in terms of relation to Gene Editing, which may be very far off, but more in the general context of what happens to the conception of "Identity" as a series of Social Categories once Technology enables it's transcendence?

Of course, if we maintain a Materialist position insofar as we explore under which conditions such a technology could arise, if would only be natural for us to affirm that if it arises before there is another serious effort to move beyond Capitalist Society, it will naturally only be available to the Ruling Class, but this presents an Intriguing thought experiment. We already know that the Ruling Class maintains Solidarity through their Class as opposed to their Race, and that they regularly engage in creating, reinforcing & reifying Social Categories such as Race in a way that hinders the Development of Class Consciousness, this has already happened for hundreds of years and has countless examples across all stages of development in Capitalism. However, once they fundamentally transcend these Categories in a way that is objectively understandable by anyone, to what extend does this completely undermine their previous ability to manipulate the structures of Identity? Is it only through the Ruling Class blatantly transcending their own Biology as a Class that will create the conditions for Workers to transcend division based on race?

A more pressing example that I've thought about recently, and discussed with people who are politically diverse, is the question of how Gender/Sexuality itself is sort of starting to be transcended in some small ways. It sounds kind of preposterous as an example, but I think the prevalence of ERP Discords and how many people engage in them in a widespread manner is good evidence of this, and you can look back across the whole of the internet era when it comes to things like how anonymity & identity change when in virtual spaces that I think is worth talking about. I think this will only become more apparent as VR technology becomes more and more affordable, but it's not the main point of my post, and it's offtopic and not fully thought out.

Why do mods let such poltard baits up. But when u explain why Hungarian and other East European nations were roughed up a bit by Communists you get baned.

Yeah I can see where you're coming from, if this is starting to emerge seriously in Academia, would you say that it is on a trajectory to challenge the Liberal concensus in Social Sciences or is this still quite far off? I would be interested in understanding more about this because I have no higher education, and whether this is something that other comrades have noticed in Humanities.

I think even if it's just a local issue for places like Zig Forums where Fascists & Communists regularly interact, it may well be still important to us, and probably moreso than within Academic or Public settings.

Can you stop calling people "poltard" or whatever only because the subject doesn't interest you ?

That second paragraph. Better achieve this revolution before they found how to master gene editing via CRSPR.

Attached: cri de munch.PNG (282x345, 283.11K)

In psychology it is pushing hard. It will, eventually, infiltrate sociology. But infiltrate it badly, since pushed by reactionnaries. That would be a great loss, and a great step back in the mind of the public for the class struggle.

The evolutionnary psychology is filled with it - which is sad, since it is just psychology with a neo-darwininan point of view.

Our most direct political enemies use it widly, and it has some effect. I think of newspaper like Quilette, this kind of stuff you know.

It is obvious where op poltard comes from. Such bait bullshit threads should have nothing to do here


Read the whole discussion if you want, it is interesting. And then, you'll see that no-one is acting in bad faith here.

Quilette is actually very scary to me, just because they're very smart right wingers who know how to navigate the discourse and allow dissent in a way that is good PR for them, and they've even attracted some Far-Left authors because they're talking about politically uncomfortable issues for the rest of the Left. I still am not sure how much of a problem this is for the general politics of Communism though, because we'd have to prove a causitive link between this kind of ideology and how it's starting to infest Academia, and then furthermore how this Ideology is compatible with Ruling Class interests as something to push for, and how it would disseminate into the wider consciousness. Certainly, in the Anglo world I don't think that Reactionaries are spreading their ideas by appealing to Academic Vigour of them, they rely on taking advantage of the Left's failures, wider trends of things like "Settler Colonialism" and exploiting the Anxiety that can come from certain sections of Lumpen/Working Class and diverting it into Ethnonationalist rhetoric. Essentially my point is, the Far Right is doing just fine in making their Race Science bullshit appealing to the sections of Society that are receptive to it (Mostly Petit-Bourgs), and where exactly is the link between Academia and this somehow gaining more Legitimacy when it comes to the real Political Economy of the Ruling Class? Last I checked Imperialists didn't need to show everyone race science studies in order to justify murdering brown people, they can do it through other means.

Attached: 1315625368311.png (445x431, 6.23K)

Races are not relevant for this matter since we are talking about specific genes, not advocating for the superiority of a specific pool of genes (human historico-geographical community or "race") and also since this would imply competitivity between human communities, thus anti-thetical to global class struggle.

According to basic modern taxonomy, yes, Lewontin is wrong.

The ruling class doesn't seem to find usefull the fact of pushing ethno-nationalistic rhetorics … for now.
However, they are starting to push for individualism, Quilette style, or Jordan Peterson - feel bad to write his name here - style.

It seems easier to win against an idpol leftist, since it is just a deviation from class war, than someone contamined with this centrist-right wing individualism and bourgeois thoughts.

Addendum : when i say "id is a deviation from class war", I mean it is a corrupted and wrong version of it.

Individualism denies it totally, which is even worse.

Capitalists support individualism in its correlation with the market economy and its stragegical weakening of class struggle (but this is not incompatible with communism, for example anarchists), yet capitalism can turn nationalistic - instead of trying to achieve capital liberalism globaly - during crisis (there are countless historical examples). But this is to be differenciated with capital imperialism for ressources/influence, which isn't particularily nationalistic in nature (capitalism is global/borderless).

The g-factor is about general human intelligence, which is far from being mastered/reproducible within a controlled setting.

Artificial intelligence can already be useful for specific tasks, and probably will be until the singularity (AGI), then biological genes will be simply end-up being obselete.

Why doesn't anyone bring the fact that more than half of those countries are estimations.
Also even lynn acknowledges that Autism Level difference isnt just "one race is better than the other genetically" but rather mostly environmental and cultural causes that should be addressed.
This fact becomes more visible when you consider the modern genealogical discoveries about variation and human concept of race

Fuck off Zig Forums.

Intelligence by countries (geographical and political spaces) can't be related to genetics because of socio-economical factors and governemental policies (for example immigration).

Race is scientifically irrelevant. The potential magnitude of phenotype expression for a given genotype in capitalistically meaningful categories is almost zero when controlled for environmental effects. All people have equal potential to be meaningfully productive under capitalism.

Outside of a western capitalist framework the differences become even more meaningless.

Sorry, but this is wrong : even with controlled evironemental effects, nature plays a huge role.
Take a look at R.Plomin, S.Swagerman, Dearie etc. The twins studies progressed a lot.

That's why it is, in my opinion, important to adress this issues. Otherwise, the right will get us. As if "we lied".
This attack is the worst, and all this new "edgy" indivdualistic culture is a result. Try to reason a centrist - or slightly right wing - person about class war. Very hard.
(The ethno-nationalists are just a small phenomen for the moment, of course).

Yeah yeah, everybody I don't want to talk to comes from Zig Forums. You are on Zig Forums here, we discuss seriously and adress all issues.

Where did OP mention eugenics?
It seems like you're attacking a Strawman here.
Also, suggesting that imperialism leads to the extermination of "inferior" races as you call them (I would say "different") is in stark contrast to reality. Look at the world today. We live in an imperial world, yet the so-called "inferior" races (again, your words) far outnumber the whites, which I'm guessing is the implied "superior" race under imperialism.

Ignoring the reality of race, a reality based on scientific evidence is foolhardy. Suggesting that you will ever fully remove bias, based on even simple appearance differences, from human thinking is deluded. If a functioning system is ever to be devised, it will have to take into account the scientific evidence. A system that ignores reality and insists that the populations does as well will not last long.

Got a reference for that ascertation?
I would love to read the paper.
I haven't heard of a study that controls for environment as you suggest.