Sunday, November 06, 2005


French-Canadian psychologist J.P. Rushton has just put out a new paper elaborating on themes he has been discussing for some time. The Abstract of the paper is below:

"Genetic Similarity Theory extends Anthony D. Smith's theory of ethno-symbolism by anchoring ethnic nepotism in the evolutionary psychology of altruism. Altruism toward kin and similar others evolved in order to help replicate shared genes. Since ethnic groups are repositories of shared genes, xenophobia is the `dark side' of human altruism. A review of the literature demonstrates the pull of genetic similarity in dyads such as marriage partners and friendships, and even large groups, both national and international. The evidence that genes incline people to prefer others who are genetically similar to themselves comes from studies of social assortment, differential heritabilities, the comparison of identical and fraternal twins, blood tests, and family bereavements. DNA sequencing studies confirm some origin myths and disconfirm others; they also show that in comparison to the total genetic variance around the world, random co-ethnics are related to each other on the order of first cousins."

The paper will of course arouse great ire in any Leftist who reads it on the grounds that it treats preference for one's own race as natural. And yet precisely that conclusion is in fact old hat among psychologists. There was for a while a controversy about it but by 1986 we find in Roger Brown's popular social psychology textbook (titled simply Social Psychology) the conclusion that "ethnocentrism" and its associated phenomena are "universal ineradicable psychological processes". And given the usual Leftist inclinations of psychologists, the evidence had to be pretty overwhelming for that conclusion to be arrived at. So it is only the know-all Leftists who in fact know nothing who would jib at Rushton's basic point. Where Rushton's work is interesting therefore is not his discovery of the naturalness of race-preference but rather his explanation for it. He shows where it fits into theoretical biology as an aspect of both kin preference and altruism. Bringing several different phenomena together within a single theoretical framework is of course a great goal in any science so Rushton's conclusions are impressive if only for that reason. The entire paper is quite readable and I think anybody who looks at the variety of evedence Rushton masrshalls in support of his conclusions will find it hard to argue with them. See here (PDF) or here for the full paper.



Senate OKs benefit cuts : "A battle over deep cuts to popular federal programs like Medicaid and food stamps promises to intensify next week in the House despite relatively smooth sailing in the Senate. On Thursday, the Senate passed a measure calling for mild cuts in the health care programs for the elderly, poor and disabled, while leaving the food stamp program untouched. For now, the House bill generates $54 billion in savings, in part by imposing new fees on Medicaid patients, eliminating about 300,000 people from food stamp rolls and cutting enforcement funds against parents who duck child support.... The Senate bill, which passed 52-47, also would permit exploratory oil drilling in the Alaskan refuge, prompting five Republicans in the GOP-controlled chamber to vote against the bill."

Airports: A glimmer of sense: "The government plans to offer airline passengers nationwide the chance to avoid extra security checks by paying a fee and agreeing to a background check. Transportation Security Administration chief Kip Hawley, who announced the plan to Congress on Thursday, said his agency also is studying other ways to reduce security delays. That includes possibly rescinding the post-Sept. 11 prohibition on passengers' carrying scissors and small knives onto planes. ... The program, tested at five airports for more than a year, would allow most people to avoid random pat-downs if they pay a fee, clear a voluntary background check and provide some form of biometric identification, such as a fingerprint. The program is intended to let frequent air passengers avoid delays and to free up security screeners to focus on other travelers."

Feisty oldster gets probation in airport case: "A woman has been sentenced to a year of probation for responding to an airport pat-down search by grabbing the screener's breasts and asking, "How would you like it if I did that to you?" Phyllis Dintenfass, 63, also was fined $2,000 Tuesday by a federal judge and ordered to perform 100 hours of community service. The retired technical-college teacher was convicted in July of assault on a federal employee. Prosecutors said Dintenfass' hairpins and trouser button set off a metal detector in 2004 at the airport in Appleton. A screening supervisor with the Transportation Safety Administration then placed the backs of her hands under Dintenfass' breasts. Dintenfass became offended and grabbed the screener".

Australian Leftist government gets tough on welfare: "The State Government's increasingly hard line on social services has been extended to public housing and tenants will no longer be guaranteed a home for life. Those waiting to get public housing will face tougher asset tests as the Labor Government tries to cut waiting lists and tackle the state's escalating housing crisis. Only the most needy will have access to subsidised housing.... The changes reflect Labor's plans to give priority in public hospitals to the poorest patients and to force wealthy patients to contribute more. Premier Peter Beattie has signalled an end to free public hospitals, including possible co-payments and means tests.... Nearly 36,000 people are on the waiting list for public housing. More than 105,000 people already live in about 52,000 subsidised homes and pay as little as 25 per cent of the household's gross weekly income in rent.... Under the most controversial change, tenants will be reviewed every few years to ensure they are still eligible for housing. Those whose circumstances have improved will be given a year to find housing in the private sector... The number of people on public housing waiting lists has increased by 47 per cent in the past five years".

Hollywood shoots itself in the foot: "There’s no question Hollywood is reeling. Film attendance is down a wrenching 12 percent from last year, and a May USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll found that nearly half of American adults go to movies less often than they did in 2000. Some pundits have blamed the rising price of tickets, but in constant dollars a ticket costs less than it did 25 years ago. Others believe that it’s all those DVDs that people are buying—except that DVD sales are slumping, too. The most likely explanation is the left-wing politics. “You can date the recent box-office decline from the end of the summer last year, with the intensification of the presidential campaign,” notes conservative film critic and talk-radio host Michael Medved. “It wasn’t just Hollywood’s hostility toward President Bush; it was the naked, raw partisanship.”

American TV looks down on the worker: "Yet the economic explanation cannot fully account for the inordinate number of shows about doctors and lawyers. If the networks were seeking only to maximize their profits, they would air shows about corporate CEOs, business managers, and entrepreneurs. But they don't. Despite the best efforts of Virgin Music founder Richard Branson and Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban, only Donald Trump has succeeded with a show about the business class. Perhaps another explanation can fill in where economics fails: the cultural one. Screenwriters and producers come from the professional classes. So it makes sense that they would make shows about their own kind".

For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald


Practically all policies advocated by the Left create poverty. Leftists get the government to waste vast slabs of the country's labour-force on bureaucracy and paperwork and so load the burden of providing most useful goods and services onto fewer and fewer people. So fewer useful goods and services are produced to go around. That is no accident. The Left love the poor. The Left need the poor so that they can feel good by patronizing and "helping" them. So they do their best to create as many poor people as possible.

The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch)

Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.


No comments: