JQ Wilson on the Unabomber

[bhandari@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Rakesh Bhandari)]

>From today's NYT, 11/15/98.

James Wilson:
'There is nothing in the manifesto that looks at all the like the work of a
madman. The language is clear, precise and calm. The arugment is subtle and
carefully developed, lacking anything even faintly resembling the wild
claims or irrational speculation that a lunatic might produce.
'The reference to me is neither openly hostile nor wildly inaccurate:
"Eminent social scientists (eg James Q Wilson) has [sic] stressed the
importance of 'socializing' people more effectively."
'The Unabomber does not like socialization, technology, leftist political
causes or conservative attitudes. Apart from his call for an (unspecified)
revolution, his paper resmebes something a very good graduate student might
have written based on his own reading rather than the course assignments.
If it is the work of a madman, the the writings of many political
philosophers--Jean Jacques Rosseau, Tom Paine, Karl Marx--are scarcely more
sane.'

Now many of us must appreciate the recognition that departure from the
course requirements does not represent mental illness, though it does tend
to slow down the making of academic careers. At any rate, this is certainly
the most reasonable thing Wilson has ever implied. I do have a quibble with
Wilson and the Unabomber. Though in the wake of LA riot Wilson  stressed
the importance of socializing especially the young black male children of
single mothers through compulsory attendance in bootcamps and forced
employment in road work and waste disposal, I think what he has really been
arguing, along with his departed cowriter Richard Herrnstein, is that
because blacks, as a separate group from all other categories of people,
are incapable of being socialized, measures should be taken to reduce their
reproduction.  The Unabomber is wrong to think that James Q Wilson really
thinks it possible or wants to socialize especially young urban black men,
though of course the (implicit) warrant he gives for his (implicit)
eugenics is premised--and here the Unabomber is correct--on the normative
primacy he gives to "socialization."
For a critical examination of James Q Wilson, see the relevant chapters of
Peter Rigby's African Images: Racism and the End of Anthropology.
Rakesh

ps I have mentioned before William Darity, Jr's work on the eliminationist
programs towards the black underclass.