Re: [Marxism] Bonds, Genes, Racism

["Naveen Jaganathan" <naveenkj3@xxxxxxxxx>]

Since your absurd argument about Barak Obama being the negation of racism in
America has already been addressed, let me take this one up.

> Naveen: That sociobiology is racist,
> and new tracts, however implicit in its racism is still racist should be
> obvious to anyone that has seriously looked at this subject.

>Sayan: Ah... the "it is obvious" (non)-argument.

Sayan,

May be you are unfamiliar with the history of Sociobiology.  It is not some
"scholarly" study motivated by academic interests, that ought to be answered
at only an academic level.  These "studies" had/have real world
consequences.  When Samuel Morton set out to study the cranial capacity of
different races, that "Science" was used to rank different races and
politically deny the inferior races their rights.  When studies were done on
facial construction and criminal behavior, that would be used to deny
immigrants' entry into the United States, based on who looked to be
"criminal." When the "Bell Curve" was published it was used by the likes of
Dinesh D'Souza to argue the cultural inferiority of Blacks, and to make a
case for why Blacks were better at athletics than academics. For D'Souza of
course racism had come to an end, (and history itself for Fukuyama!) and the
disparity between Black and Whites could only be explained through their
lack of cultural prowess.  For a good analysis of all of this, read
"Mismeasure of Man" by Stephen Jay Gould.  Gould not only demolishes these
arguments, he makes a very important point about Science.  That "Science"
cannot be an "objective" study in a racist society.  That everything in
Science is biased in way or the other depending on the political,
ideological pre-disposition of the scientist entering into study.

Gould, Lewontin, Levin et. al. set out to counter this bogus science and
have produced a number of remarkable works.  Formations like Science for
People (I'm sorry if I got the name wrong, it skips my mind) were formed to
bury Sociobiology and work towards Science that promoted the interests of
people over profit.  Every now and then Sociobiology rears its ugly head and
every time it does it needs to be smashed in the academia, and it needs to
be smashed by activists who live with the real world consequences of this
Science.  This much is elementary for folks in the "Marxist" tradition, or
so I believe(d).

There used to be a time when the Left would take a knee-jerk
anti-imperialist, anti-racist, anti-Sexist positions.  But after the Left
accepted the logic of Clinton's "humanitarianism," Clinton's logic of
"welfare reform," and the need for more cops on the streets and tough on
crime policies, the need for fewer abortions, etc., we now find ourselves in
a position where were have lost considerable ground to the right on a number
of these arguments -- and we are left with people denying racism, when Black
people and Bonds himself(!) are making such a charge.

I don't know what "Marxist," would defend sociobiology or prostitution (as
you did on another list-serv) and call it an "objective" analysis.


>  Sayan: That people in the fucking Left can't see
> call out racism when they see it in culture is disturbing.

> Naveen: Argument by assertion and argument by expletives. I see.

Yes... I have no patience to explain to why America is a racist society and
why everything in this society is tainted by racism.

--Naveen.



On 8/11/07, Sayan Bhattacharyya <ok.president+marxmail@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 8/11/07, Naveen Jaganathan <naveenkj3@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Sayan, What you wrote is so laughable that I can't even seriously engage
> you
> > on racism -- racism in sports, racism in science.  (Louis is right, you
> need
> > to stop being a troll, and posting crap to provoke a reaction.)
>
> Danielle was right -- you tend to make too many unwarranted
> assumptions about people and their motivations, as you are doing about
> me in this instance.
>
> > The point is,
> > individual motivations aside, sociologically racism pervades everything
> and
> > gives prominence to  the such views as "Bond's cheated"
>
> "Sociologically, racism pervades everything"? Maybe you can explain
> how Barack Obama, a black man, is a leading candidate for president?
>
> > That sociobiology is racist,
> > and new tracts, however implicit in its racism is still racist should be
> > obvious to anyone that has seriously looked at this subject.
>
> Ah... the "it is obvious" (non)-argument.
>
> >  That people in the fucking Left can't see
> > call out racism when they see it in culture is disturbing.
>
> Argument by assertion and argument by expletives. I see.
>
> ________________________________________________
> YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
> Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism
>



--
________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism