LET'S TALK ENDOGAMY, NONMIXING, FOR A MOMENT.
Wade comes down hard on genetic diffference deniers, who claim that it is all culture writ on identical tabula rasas.
"They make accusations of racism against anyone who suggests that cognitive capacities might differ between human population groups." Wade, p. 201
I am definitely a Wade racist. And of course, it is not merely about the one aspect discussed here, cognitivity.
Human racial populations differ in every way from one another. An enormous number of characteristics differ more or less across all races.
I am also a David Reich Racist. He rejects this terminology, yet his book is littered with passages where he acknowledges that this would be another way one might describe his work and findings.
He and Paabo use clines and other terms and talk about populations and their differing characteristics, but they still get called on the carpet as white racists, by fellow social scientists, folks like those who signed the Reply in Harpers, those who subscribe to the Amherst CLG, or what DK calls the Postmodernism 101 perspective.
REICH LIKES TO BEAT THE MIXTURE DRUM. But his accounts of different endogamies plays a huge part in his book too.
"Some large degree of reproductive isolation is the necessary condition for a population to take its own evolutionary path." Wade, p. 200.
On the other hand, it seems that one could theoretically be quite endogamous, but in an unchallenging environment, for 50, 000 years, and not evolve very much or none. One could digress.
The emergence of modern humans, high genetic diversity, long evolutionary development, extreme adversity.
No comments:
Post a Comment