4 ms·

Anecdata, but concerning: - My ex is an evolutionary biologist, and their professional events often have talks about how (or whether) to push back on eugenicis

by smt88 5y ago

Anecdata, but concerning: - My ex is an evolutionary biologist, and their professional events often have talks about how (or whether) to push back on eugenicists trying to twist your research. Her colleague had a paper that was all over white supremacist sites, even though her conclusion was the opposite of eugenic. - I know a Chinese American VC who firmly believes certain races are less intelligent than others because of their race. He went to Stanford and has no other conservative views, to my knowledge. - The most popular podcast in the world featured unchallenged eugenicist comments[1] based on debunked science. It's hard to prove a major trend, but a very mainstream media company (Spotify) having unchecked eugenicist content in their most popular podcast is certainly not something you could find in comparable media ~20 years ago. 1. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/technology/deleted-joe-rogan-episode-featured-guest-claiming-black-people-had-a-genetic-proclivity-to-violence/ar-AATyQCi https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/technology/deleted-joe-rogan...

beardyw 5y ago
Thanks, I learned more! I had no idea.
netizen-936824 5y ago
I think we should also take into account the rate, width, and ease of communication these days. The percentage of the population which subscribes to eugenics may have held constant (or not, I'm not making an argument one way or the other) and its just easier to hear more of their voices with our new communication tech. I'm also not saying the ideology isn't concerning either, I just think we need to consider looking at the issue from a few different perspectives to get a better understanding of the situation
- smt88 5y ago
  You may be right. I just don't think you can collect accurate data on this topic from any angle. I think we can at least feel confident that there is far greater ease of broadcasting eugenic ideas to credulous masses. We've seen from the anti-vax movement that a small handful (meaning fewer than 10) of determined, unscrupulous, and wealthy people can convince millions of people of pseudoscientific ideas.
yucky 5y ago
>believes certain races are less intelligent than others because of their race. He went to Stanford and has no other conservative views That isn't a conservative view though.
- smt88 5y ago
  > That isn't a conservative view though. It is in the US[1] and every other country I know of. But let's define "conservative" first. According to Dictionary.com, it means: > "disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change."[2] Or to put it another way: to be conservative is to want to maintain the status quo or even return to the past. And what is eugenics? It is an idea of the past. If you have a different definition of liberal or conservative, or you can find research that shows that conservatives have less negative views of the intelligence of non-European people, I would be interested to see it. Even common phrases -- "progressive" vs. "traditional" views on race -- are used as euphemisms, where "traditional views" are more prejudiced. This is why people talk about their racist grandmother and not their racist grandson. It is also why older people are more likely to see increasing racial diversity in the US as a bad thing[3], compared to other age groups. Old people are also more traditional, more conservative, and more Republican, on average. 1. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/03/31/the-gap-between-republicans-and-democrats-views-of-african-americans-just-hit-a-new-high/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/03/31/th... 2. https://www.dictionary.com/browse/conservative https://www.dictionary.com/browse/conservative 3. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/08/23/most-americans-say-the-declining-share-of-white-people-in-the-u-s-is-neither-good-nor-bad-for-society/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/08/23/most-americ...
  - yucky 5y ago
    > "progressive" vs. "traditional" views on race -- are used as euphemisms, where "traditional views" are more prejudiced That's not true though. Allow me to demonstrate. Ask any progressive the following question: Do you think the government and educational institutions should treat people differently based on the color of their skin - yes or no? Now watch that progressive either a)change the subject and evade answering the question.. or b)Justify their reasoning for why they think people should be treated differently based on their skin color. This is (by definition) support of racial discrimination. Many progressives have even gone so far as to claim the concept of racial equality is not progressive, demanding instead policies that seek to achieve racial equity, a concept that requires racial discrimination to implement. So progressives literally support polices that require racial preferences/prejudice. As to conservatives, they support equal treatment under the law regardless of race. At worst you could accuse some of supporting polices that could potentially have disparate impact. But progressives support actual racial discrimination. Which is worse, in your mind?

by smt88 5y ago

beardyw 5y ago

Thanks, I learned more! I had no idea.

netizen-936824 5y ago

I think we should also take into account the rate, width, and ease of communication these days. The percentage of the population which subscribes to eugenics may have held constant (or not, I'm not making an argument one way or the other) and its just easier to hear more of their voices with our new communication tech. I'm also not saying the ideology isn't concerning either, I just think we need to consider looking at the issue from a few different perspectives to get a better understanding of the situation

smt88 5y ago
You may be right. I just don't think you can collect accurate data on this topic from any angle. I think we can at least feel confident that there is far greater ease of broadcasting eugenic ideas to credulous masses. We've seen from the anti-vax movement that a small handful (meaning fewer than 10) of determined, unscrupulous, and wealthy people can convince millions of people of pseudoscientific ideas.

yucky 5y ago

>believes certain races are less intelligent than others because of their race. He went to Stanford and has no other conservative views That isn't a conservative view though.

smt88 5y ago
> That isn't a conservative view though. It is in the US[1] and every other country I know of. But let's define "conservative" first. According to Dictionary.com, it means: > "disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change."[2] Or to put it another way: to be conservative is to want to maintain the status quo or even return to the past. And what is eugenics? It is an idea of the past. If you have a different definition of liberal or conservative, or you can find research that shows that conservatives have less negative views of the intelligence of non-European people, I would be interested to see it. Even common phrases -- "progressive" vs. "traditional" views on race -- are used as euphemisms, where "traditional views" are more prejudiced. This is why people talk about their racist grandmother and not their racist grandson. It is also why older people are more likely to see increasing racial diversity in the US as a bad thing[3], compared to other age groups. Old people are also more traditional, more conservative, and more Republican, on average. 1. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/03/31/the-gap-between-republicans-and-democrats-views-of-african-americans-just-hit-a-new-high/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/03/31/th... 2. https://www.dictionary.com/browse/conservative https://www.dictionary.com/browse/conservative 3. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/08/23/most-americans-say-the-declining-share-of-white-people-in-the-u-s-is-neither-good-nor-bad-for-society/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/08/23/most-americ...
- yucky 5y ago
  > "progressive" vs. "traditional" views on race -- are used as euphemisms, where "traditional views" are more prejudiced That's not true though. Allow me to demonstrate. Ask any progressive the following question: Do you think the government and educational institutions should treat people differently based on the color of their skin - yes or no? Now watch that progressive either a)change the subject and evade answering the question.. or b)Justify their reasoning for why they think people should be treated differently based on their skin color. This is (by definition) support of racial discrimination. Many progressives have even gone so far as to claim the concept of racial equality is not progressive, demanding instead policies that seek to achieve racial equity, a concept that requires racial discrimination to implement. So progressives literally support polices that require racial preferences/prejudice. As to conservatives, they support equal treatment under the law regardless of race. At worst you could accuse some of supporting polices that could potentially have disparate impact. But progressives support actual racial discrimination. Which is worse, in your mind?