Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
77 of 93 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Long overdue, July 3, 2004
I agree with Dr. Ralph L. Holloway, Professor of Anthropology, at Columbia University. He states that "Miele is exactly that antidote to the pernicious loss of respect for our own evolutionarily-derived biological diversity, and it will hopefully reach all who are ready and willing to think more clearly and empirically about our diversity and celebrate it. This reader has been very favorably struck by the careful and non-sarcastic exposure of some of our most common chestnuts regarding racial diversity, and in particular some of the sillier pronouncements regarding within- and between-group differences in genetic frequencies that have abounded in all of the media, academic and non.As more genetic research, particularly at the molecular level comes to our attention, it seems clear to this writer that this book will represent an important milestone in reducing the millstone of the myths that have accumulated denigrating and/or ignoring our genetic diversity. This book will certainly be a must for my students, and it is surely long overdue!"
|
|
|
208 of 263 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Solid science and common sense, January 6, 2004
Most people who consider themselves intellectuals pride themselves on how far removed their theorizing is from contact with mundane reality. After all, if daily life could provide answers to lofty questions, we might not need so many professional intellectuals. And that subversive thought must be suppressed at all costs!Consider the topic of race. The trendiest idea among intellectuals is that Race Does Not Exist. Last year, a three-night PBS documentary summed up the new orthodoxy: Race: The Power of an Illusion. That this strikes the vast majority of Americans as a self-evidently stupid notion only heightens its appeal to those who view themselves as superior because of their ability to mentally juggle esoterica. Geneticist Vincent Sarich, Professor Emeritus of Anthropology at Berkeley, and journalist Frank Miele, senior editor of Skeptic magazine, have stepped in to this debate with a new book Race: The Reality of Human Differences. It documents overwhelmingly that the weight of scientific knowledge is on the side of the man-in-the-street's commonsense view of race. Sarich and Miele demonstrate that all ten of the PBS documentary's summary statements on the nonexistence of race are wrong. Indeed, they bring so much firepower to bear against the series' assertions that it's a little like breaking a butterfly on a wheel. (Or, considering the mendacity of the PBS offering, a more accurate phrase might be "like crushing a cockroach with a cannonball.") Rejecting the straw man argument that the existence of race would require a race for everyone and everyone in his race, Sarich and Miele call races "fuzzy sets." They write, "Human races are not, and never were, distinct, mutually exclusive, Platonic entities into which every living person, unearthed skull, or set of bones could be pigeonholed." Miele is perhaps the best interviewer of scientists in the business. He's also a dog enthusiast, and his deep knowledge of breeds (which are artificially selected races) adds perspective to "Race." Sarich won't make himself popular with the politically correct at Berkeley, but he is a hard man to intimidate. A hawk nose and piercing eyes make him look like the world's tallest ayatollah. Approaching 70, he still has the dimensions of an NBA quick forward at 6'6" and a muscular 215 pounds. (In fact, he holds the world record for his age group in the small sport of indoor rowing.) Being the rare scientist who is also an enthusiastic fan of spectator sports makes Sarich far more aware of racial differences than his colleagues, who tend to only pay attention to unthreatening subjects for which they can win grants from the government or big foundations. In a 1989 book review in the New York Times, Richard Dawkins, author of The Selfish Gene, praised "the enormously important work of the American biochemist Vincent Sarich." As Sarich recounts in an autobiographical section of Race, as a graduate student back in 1967, he famously teamed with Allan C. Wilson to launch the use of the "molecular clock," which led to a revolution in evolution studies. At a time when experts on fossils believed that proto-humans had diverged from our closest ape relatives around 25 million years ago, Sarich and Wilson estimated, by counting the number of mutations that distinguished humans from chimpanzees and gorillas in a single serum protein, that our ancestors had broken away only about five million years ago. Although greeted with howls of protest from famous paleontologists, their figure has stood up well, and their molecular clock technique has become fundamental to both physical anthropology and population genetics. Stephen Jay Gould insisted we chant along with him, like Dorothy trying to get home from Oz, "Say it five times before breakfast tomorrow: ... Human equality is a contingent fact of history." As a staunch Darwinist, however, Sarich understands that natural selection requires hereditary inequalities. Sarich and Miele write, "Simply stated, the case for race hinges on recognition of the fact that genetic variation in traits that affect performance and ultimately survival is the fuel on which the evolutionary process runs." Sarich became the rare physical anthropologist expert on both genes and bones. So, when he saw PBS proclaim, "Despite surface differences, we are among the most similar of all species," he dusted off the measurements of 2,500 human skulls from 29 different racial groups and compared them to 347 chimpanzee skulls from the two separate species of chimp (the common chimp and the bonobo). Sarich discovered that the dissimilarity in head and face measurements between these species was less than half that found between the two most morphologically dissimilar human racial groups in the sample (the narrow-faced Taita of Kenya and the wide-faced Buriat of Siberia). Sarich concludes, "I am not aware of any other mammalian species where the constituent races are as strongly marked as they are in ours... except those few races heavily modified by recent human selection; in particular, dogs." The book is packed with fascinating information. For instance, in response to PBS's claim that, "Race is a modern idea. Ancient societies did not divide people according to physical differences..." Miele writes a definitive chapter showing, "The art of the ancient civilizations of Egypt, Greece, Rome, India, and China, and the Islamic civilization from AD 700 to 1400 shows that these societies classified the various peoples they encountered into broad racial groups. They sorted them based upon the same set of characteristics -- skin color, hair form, and head shape -- allegedly constructed by Europeans when they invented 'race' to justify colonialism and white supremacy." Will Race: The Reality of Human Differences change the minds of the prominent advocates of the Race Does Not Exist theory? No, because I can't imagine they'll even read it. One striking difference between the two schools is that the realists pore over the writings of the social constructionists, while the No Race theorists prefer to keep themselves ignorant of all troubling facts.
|
|
|
12 of 13 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Slow Progress?, February 9, 2008
Prevailing social dogma, from which dissent is effectively prohibited, asserts that "race does not exist." "Racism," however, does (a neat trick), thereby justifying institutional accumulation of data on race and the systematic implementation across the legal and cultural spectrum of laws and policies discriminating against a single group.
It is manifestly obvious to everyone, including race deniers, that race does in fact exist. Race denial is driven by ethnic and ideological animus, not scientific empiricism. The leading academic architects of the dogma--Franz Boas, "Ashley Montagu" (Israel Ehrenberg), Stephen Jay Gould, Richard Lewontin, and Jared Diamond--as well as the creator of PBS television's race denial documentary, Race: The Power of an Illusion (all are discussed in the book), belong to an ethnic group exempt from official discrimination, and share a Left-wing ideological tilt that is sometimes extreme (Marxist).
In an ideologically Orwellian atmosphere there is always a need for the statement of simple truths. This the authors set out to do.
Both are associated with Skeptic magazine, journalist Frank Miele, the author of Intelligence, Race, and Genetics: Conversations with Arthur R. Jensen, as senior editor, and Vincent Sarich, emeritus professor of anthropology at the University of California, Berkeley, as a member of the magazine's editorial board. Sarich's most notable career achievement is the co-development of the "molecular clock," a genetic technique for constructing phylogenetic trees and determining dates when species (or human races) diverged.
Do the authors succeed in their aim? This question must be answered on two levels: the societal, and the inner court of the mind.
On the first level they necessarily fail, as everyone must. "Race does not exist" is dogma maintained by laws and social sanctions. Societies that scorn freedom of thought do not permit proscribed positions to be rationally discussed in the public arena. Therefore, the authors' failure in the social realm is a foregone conclusion completely unrelated to evidence or arguments; it is purely a function of force. For this book to have an impact, a culture of intellectual freedom and honesty would have to exist.
What of the independent, rational (if there be such) mind, which power and group conformity don't yet control? There, the argument succeeds--though not without difficulty. The problem is that key elements of the authors' case rely heavily upon technical expertise in genetics, and are difficult for educated non-technical readers to evaluate. Nevertheless, there is sufficient common sense scattered throughout the book to insure that the authors ultimately succeed in making their case.
Miele and Sarich define races as fuzzy sets of "populations, or groups of populations, within a species, that are separated geographically from other such populations or groups of populations and distinguishable from them on the basis of heritable features."
Humans and chimpanzees are genetically 98.9% the same, and different human races 99.9% the same, race deniers assert. (Anthropologist Peter Frost calls this ploy the "small percentage fallacy.") And yet, say the authors, imagine "a random assortment of fifty humans and fifty chimpanzees. No one . . . would have any difficulty in reconstituting the original fifty-member sets by simple inspection . . ." Likewise, applied to 150 humans selected 1/3 each from Japan, Malawi, and Norway, "[a]gain, by simple inspection, we would achieve the same 100 percent sorting accuracy." Moreover, if the 100% rule is relaxed so the criterion is "nearer the 75 percent that has often sufficed for the recognition of races in other species, then obviously the number [of identifiable human races] would be very large." The great population geneticist Sewall Wright (died 1988), who asserted the reality of race throughout his life, likewise employed this technique.
A uniquely useful feature of the book is a table entitled "Three possible scenarios for race in the new millennium." For each scenario the authors objectively identify a list of accompanying advantages and disadvantages.
The first scenario they call "Meritocracy in the Global Marketplace"--globalization characterized by non-discrimination, including non-discrimination against whites. It embraces the physical extinction of European-derived populations worldwide, while de facto preserving non-whites. In other words, it represents current thinking, but with explicitly anti-white laws and policies removed. An international, racially intermarrying cosmopolitan elite will dominate. This is the authors' preferred option.
The reason why a globalist order, even with present anti-white laws removed, will lead to the extinction of whites (which, again, does not perturb the authors) is simple: the racial makeup of vast regions of the world, "including China, India, sub-Saharan Africa, and the Middle East, which have not changed in recorded history," are also not going to change anytime soon. "This is not the case in the developed world, however, where birthrates have been plunging for the past two centuries to the point that they are currently below replacement level . . ." Barring some radical change in ideology and social policy, "the United States and Western Europe each year will see an increasing percentage of the population composed of . . . immigrants . . . from the underdeveloped countries of the Third World." The "ultimate evolutionary irony" is that Europeans, "having conquered and colonized the world," "brought about their own extinction."
The remaining scenarios, both disfavored by the authors, are intensified "Affirmative Action and Race Norming" (anti-white discrimination) or "Resegregation and the Emergence of Ethno-States."
A thought-provoking section near the end of the book discusses bioweapons designed to kill only members of specific races--which genetics has rendered feasible. South Africa and Israel have researched the development of such weapons. (White South Africa, of course, no longer exists.) This says much about the race deniers' position: for if Jews are not a race, then bioweapons targeting Arabs or Europeans would also kill Jews. But such evidently is not the case.
In sum, a worthwhile book containing useful information and insights.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|