Gene Expression

And the Mayor "blames the outlying suburbs for not building low-cost housing." Apparently as mayor of
Milwaukee he's unable to improve the city enough so that whites want to live there. Instead of blaming
crime-prone, blame the suburbs!

I don't have the exact citation, but I remember a few years ago some sociologists did a simple study, which
combined two factors. First, with some simple models they showed that small personal preferences could
result in self-segregation. (Basically, if whites and blacks each have a small preference for living with
their own race, then you get self-organization with the two colors seperating, without any real
discrimination.)

Then they interviewd a bunch of people and found that actual preferences were far over the levels needed
to produce segregation. I forget the exact numbers, but it was something like "Blacks didn't feel
comfortable moving into a neighborhood that wasn't at least 50% Black, while whites didn't like moving
into a neighborhood that was more than 30% black." Don't quote me on the numbers, but the basic point
is that indiciduals basic preferences combine to naturally result in racial segregation in housing, without
any explicit racism involved.

John Derbyshire has an old article outlining the two races in America: blacks and nonblacks.

ww.olimu.com/WebJournalism/Texts/Commentary/RaceInAmerica.htm

Whites will move into a black neighborhood as long as the neighborhood is gentrifying. For example, the
historic Uptown area of Dallas (just north of the Federal Reserve) used to be all black until the early '80s.
Then the family that founded the 7-11 Corporation bought a lot of land to the north of Uptown. This
began a process of gentrification which continues until today. Hardly any blacks now live in the old
neighborhood.

The fundamental issue is people's personal preferences driving all this segregation. This problem simply
cannot be solved by govt intervention as long as we live in a republic. This article simply re-hashed what
was already known.

Look at this aarticle:
http://www.msnbc.com/news/850495.asp?0dm=N16TS

Aparently, there is a requirement in the NFL that an owner has to officially consider a minority candidate
when hiring a coach. Dennis Green was later reported to be concerneed that he was just interviewed to
satisfy the requirement. I guess this is a no win situation if you are an owner in the NFL. Legislating
preferences is so tedious.

i read that article too. proportionality is funny. i guess the theory is that what makes a great player also
makes a great coach. something to it, but not to the extent that people might think.

The problem is that black areas are automatically considered "no go" whereas Asian or Italian
neighborhoods are perceived as colorful and welcoming to tourists, or in the case of Jewish
neighborhoods, a good place to raise kids ("the schools are good"). If anyone can give me an example
where "Africa-town" is considered a tourist attraction, or a welcome place to send your kids to school, let
me know.

We are beginning to develop African (as opposed to African-American) 'hoods in NYC; maybe they will
become tourist meccas. That remains to be seen.

Who might the 'crime prone' be, pray tell? Let me guess.

Most of the posts on this thread are merely rationalizations for residential segregation under the rubric
'everyone likes it that way.' The everyone being racists like themselves. People who are actually
interested in an integrated society look at income as the main criterion of whether a housing market is
nondiscriminatory. If nonwhites of the same income levels as whites are not buying homes in the same
areas then there probably is institutional or subjective discrimination going on. I say nonwhites because
the data on Hispanics and Asians is being misrepresented here. (It often is because Razib hates the
people he most resembles -- African-Americans -- and will say anything, no matter how false, to demean
them.) The article says Hispanics and Asians are 'beginning' to move into white areas, which means most
still live in segregated areas. In reality, there has been an enormous culture clash between the Hmong and
the mainstream there.

As for Dodo Diana's claim that 'Africa-towns' have never attracted whites as tourists, utter B.S. How does
she think Harlem got its reputation for heaven's sakes? Nor was it an anomaly. Black communities in
most cities long drew whites for entertainment, especially music.

One wishes some people would spend their time reading the excellent mainstream literature of America's
true mixed culture instead of the moldy, discredited treatises of scientific racists.

T Te: I asked for a current example. Harlem was a tourist mecca in the 20s (and to a lesser extent in the
30s) when it was a mixed neighborhood.

By the post-war era, Harlem was solidly black, and avoided by whites who didn't work there.

I grew up in Milwaukee.

The whites don't like the blacks, and the blacks don't like whites. So they don't live near each other.

I went to a majority white high school near the South Side. We went to a track meet on the North Side.
The black kids in the 'hood threw rocks at our bus.

I remember winning a chess tournament--I beat a black kid to do it. The black guy said that I won just
because I'm a white boy (I looked white enough to him). Like that made any difference. I beat him
because I was better.

this is the crap blacks and whites deal with in Milwaukee. Both sides know it. The real news is that the
black guy's comments made it into the article (he stays where he feels comfortable). That's how everyone
does it. If you're a white guy in that 'hood, you're mugged, carjacked or worse. If you're a black guy in the
white side of town, you're harassed and shunned.

David

Truth Teller should check out Prince George's County, Maryland. It's widely cited by "experts" as being a
black utopia. Some have even called it a "golden ghetto" because of the large number of blacks in the
middle class.

They are wrong. The public schools in the county suck, and violent crime is on the rise countywide. And,
of course, most of the violent crime is perpetrated by blacks against blacks, as well as Third World
immigrants.

Determined to force your bigotries into being fact, but it can't be done.

Harlem and other inner city entertainment districts thrived well into the '70s. They went into decline
during the movement of middle-class people of all 'races' to the suburbs. However, they have been
reviving with the return of the middle-class to downtowns and exurbs. Some regions, especially the West
and Pacific Northwest, are more residentially integrated than ever, with nonwhites moving to the suburbs
and whites moving into the city. That's the reality the U.S. Census reveals, not the racism motivated
nonsense you people post.

Diana, you are either a dunce or one hell of a liar. What will you do for an encore -- belittle a lovely little
African-American ballerina for not having straight hair?

Roger, I will believe what you say when you offer some objective data supporting it. Until then,
considering this is a racist site, I suspect you are as tainted as the other people on this thread.

David sounds like another wannabe white person who hates black people. Why am I not surprised?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A49090-2002Dec28.html

article about prince george's county-coming from the no doubt racist WASHINGTON POST (note that
they use "urban" to describe both DC and Prince George's)

Razib, lemme guess Litt- I mean Truth Teller's response to anything you (or anyone else he disagrees
with) have to say:
"The article is racist. The writer of the article is racist. Anyone who believes in facts that are contrary to
my opinions is obviously racist."

I have a question for Truth Teller, is it THEORETICALLY possible for someone to honestly believe in
HBD things like genetic differences in IQ among races and not be racist?

Of course not, fool. The fact someone would rush to claim racial superiority is in itself evidence of racism
since there is no support for that belief. Your belief in white supremacy is no different than the Raelians
belief in extraterrestial seeding. There is no evidence of either, but the adherents believe because they
want to.

Some in the mental health field believe racism is often a system of mental illness because it relies on
obsession, paranoia, projection and an exaggerated sense of self-importance. They may be on to
something.

Truth Teller is more than welcome to read the Washington Post online, and then come to his own
conclusions.

Better yet, he can do his own due diligence. Go to the following link, and choose Prince George's County
from the School Survey map. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/education/. The county's public
schools are atrocious. They are so bad that the county now has more than 100 private and parochial
schools.

Face it, Truth Teller, IQ is important, it can be measured, and blacks, ON AVERAGE, have lower IQs
than other races.

So why are you arguing with us?

Harlem and other inner city entertainment districts

Harlem was never an "inner city entertainment district." It was a mixed neighborhood until WWII, when
it became predominantly black. The entertainment district of NYC is the theatre district, in the West 40s.
There were a few entertainment emporiums in Harlem--very popular with people of all races--but whites
abandoned them by the late 30s. Calling Harlem an "entertainment district" makes as much sense as
calling Chinatown an "entertainment district" because it has Chinese operas and cinemas.

Of course, people of all races visit Chinatown. Not too many blacks, though. It's always struck me as a
curious fact: why, when you visit Chinatown, do you see comparatively few black faces. Has anyone else
noticed this, and if so, supply a reason?

thrived well into the '70s.

Nope. You are 20 years out of date. When I went to high school in the 70s, there was one boy who
trucked to Queens from Harlem. He was a Yugoslavian immigrant and his parents lived in Harlem.
Whenever he told the other students that, they were dumbstruck. The reaction was esp. true of black
students (my HS was at least 25% black.)

They went into decline during the movement of middle-class people of all 'races' to the suburbs.

Here, T Te directly associates "poor" with "crime" or perhaps "depraved." Historically this is not
necessarily true.

However, they have been reviving with the return of the middle-class to downtowns and exurbs.

Yes, Harlem is now "reviving" because a lot of black yuppies, and whites, are moving back in. I think
also that Asian entrepreneurship is playing an unsung part here.

As for my encore, I didn't create the fact that ballet is a white, patriarchal, European art form that
oppresses both women (fragile, pale, skinny women dancing supernatural creatures on painfully distended
toes) and righteous persons of color. What it is, man. It's a strange and formalized art form with its own
traditions.

The African-American girl playing Clara in the Nutcracker (a Christmas, and therefore anti-Muslim and
anti-Jewish, tale) is a true African-American, being Ethiopian-born. She already has fairly loose hair.
But an African or African-American with tightly curly or frizzy hair who wants to be a ballerina will have
to undergo radical chemical processing of the hair in order to be part of the sisterhood. I've heard and
read that it's terribly painful. OK, that's her choice, but isn't that what black militants for at least 30 years
have decried as "oreoization"?

Fine with me, if a black girl wants to become an oreo to become some 19th century white man's ideal of
beauty, but not with all the theorists of black pride that I have read. Modern ballets have moved
somewhat outside the 19th century limits of what a ballerina is but--they still do that hair tossing business
an awful lot. Deal with it.

Happy New Year, everyone.

I tried to set off T Te's comments in the above post with itals but it didn't work.

Truth teller, what kind of response is that? I'm a wannabe white person? Whatever. I'm mostly white,
everybody who's been reading the site for awhile knows that. If I hated black people, I'd hate my
grandmother, her brothers, and their kids (my cousins).

I'm the one "telling the truth." Milwaukee is, and always has been, a heavily segregated city where the
races don't mix readily. And the reason isn't solely white people hating blacks--blacks do plenty of
whitey-hating themselves.

How do I know this? I lived there for 15 years, including all of grade school and high school.

Have you ever been to Milwaukee? Lived there for any amount of time? Until then, you can kiss my
rather pale posterior.

Ha ha ha, this "Truth teller" is the same guy (Liberatour) that said that Chris Brand was a racist and a evil
white supremacist (LOL), for him everyone that not believe in axiom of the equality is a racist and a evil
(don't you find this like a kind of fundamentalism??).

Why you pay attention to this jackass??

Juan: because he gives me a chance to hammer home my arguments. I can't speak for other people.

What I'd really like to ask a black person this: does they think that it is appropriate for blacks to
participate in an art that originates in Europe, which requires them to cosmetically change one of their
most distinctive ethnic characteristics? I'm not sure that T Te is capable of considering such a question
dispassionately and logically.

A long time ago I read something that has stuck with me. I cannot for the life of me remember who had
stated it, so forgive me for not properly referencing the phrase. The phrase is: "I am merely the pond that
reflects the oncoming stone. I do not preach, I do not condone, I merely reflect what is coming towards
me". With that statement in mind I hereby unleash ad hominem verbal diarrhea on Truth Teller as a
response to his illogical ramblings and what amounts to trolling. If this sort of response is frowned upon,
let me know and I will cease.

To Truth Teller:

Although his writings most certainly contains a definite verve, Litt's, I mean Truth Teller's verbose
writings are, however, superfluous. One might say his writing comes off as a tad bit turgid. Perhaps his
writing is just a little orotund for my tastes. This undoubtedly reflects his pretentious nature and his own
sense of omnipotence. Truth Teller nonetheless displays a rare alacrity towards writing that is most
certainly encouraging; I must if anything, give him that. But his intransigent attitude towards weighing
the evidence and considering facts reported in peer reviewed scientific journals evinces obscurantism and
leaves me somewhat perturbed. Ergo, his writing becomes nothing more than a trite piece of kitsch
literature that leaves its intelligent readers discombobulated and occupying a state of utter obfuscation.
"Res Ipsa Loquitor" is a Latin phrase that Truth Teller would benefit from observing.

What transpires when one peruses Truth Teller's posts is that the reader is completely caught off guard by
it's utter lack of merit, not unlike a deer caught in the headlights of a vehicle. The erroneous thoughts and
absence of logic that permeate Truth Teller's writing are then free to enter the mind of the unwilling
subject, just as the poor little deer is subject to the onslaught of the oncoming vehicle or opportunistic
hunter. The result is nothing but an immolation of the reader's intelligence, just like the poor little deer is
slaughtered. What I am trying to illustrate here is that the vacuity of Truth Teller's writing is only
matched by the lacuna between his ears. His mind is a deep chasm, a bottomless pit, a black hole for
which intelligence is not allowed to escape. As for Truth Teller being a member of the contemporary
literati establishment, not to mention our true intellectual elite, I think not!

LOL

Juan wrote:
"Ha ha ha, this "Truth teller" is the same guy (Liberatour) that said that Chris Brand was a racist and a
evil white supremacist (LOL), for him everyone that not believe in axiom of the equality is a racist and a
evil (don't you find this like a kind of fundamentalism??)."

Time and time again, Truth Teller has been asked to provide some substantiation for his positions.
Time and time again, he offers none. He has no substantiatio b/c he doesn't have any idea of the actual
arguments and so cannot defend himself- isn't that right Truth Teller?

Truth Teller's basic thought process is not entirely different from the thought process of a fundamentalist.
Both depend on a very closed minded view of the world that is impenetrable via any outside interference.

An example of Truth Teller's thought process:
'Your facts are contrary to mine. I am clearly right so you must be incorrect and a racist.'

An example of any fundamentalist's (substitute Hitler, Bin Laden etc...) thought process:
'Your facts are contrary to mine. I am clearly right so you must be incorrect (& in the case of Hitler or Bin
Laden I could add '...you must be incorrect and so must die).'

Without knowing what the others who actually research Human Biodiversity are talking about, the only
avenue left is to reference himself or revert to ridiculous attacks on the personal character/ credibility of
otheres.

Juan writes:
"Why you pay attention to this jackass??"

You're right. But, this absurd closed minded thought process is very prevalent in America/ Europe right
now (i.e. the 'debate' in the EU over the death penalty or to a lesser extent immigration). The sheer
stupidity of Truth Teller is fascinating to analyze for that reason alone even if it has already grown too
tedious to witness.

I am waiting for his predictable response where he will ignore all of my actual arguments- except of
course to give me a pathetic personal attack.

his IP is banned. i'd rather not turn the boards into a "food fight" though he can still post in the regular
message board.

There is so much stupidity on this thread that I will touch on only some of it in the interest of saving time.

First, the premise of the thread, that people of color in Milwaukee PREFER to be segregated is not
supported by the article at all. People on this thread believe it is because they view life through racist
blinders. The story actually offers Milwaukee as a worst case scenario of a city where residential
integration, improvement in the incomes of people of color and an end to redlining have not occurred.
The quote most relied on to falsify the meaning of the article by the 'scientific' racists of Gene Expression
is turned upside down by them. The black mechanic is not saying he LIKES being marginalized and
segregated. He is saying that he no longer has the energy of his youth, has become demoralized and is
therefore resigned to local segregation. All of the indicia in the piece make a case for government and
private support of segregation in that city. Milwaukie could definitely be reformed with a bit of work. A
start would be removing the geographic barriers that separate ethnic areas from white areas, as was done
in much of the South. Next, since most of the minorities are poor there, better mass transit, so people can
at least get to their jobs, is a must. Third, home loans must be made more equitable. The rejection rate
for African-Americans definitely reflects discrimination. I suspect that is also true for Asians and
Hispanics.

Next, Diana, because I think she may actually best Duncie in the stupidity department. Ballet has
absolutely nothing to do with anyone's hair. Trying to claim it does is the shallowest of pretexts for
discrimination. Nor does Diana's backing down from her attack on the little girl because the child's hair
is only moderately kinky (as many African-Americans' is) win her any accolades. She never should have
made such baseless and biased remarks in the first place. Nor does her 'distraction' while watching an
African-American ballerina say anything about the dancer. It just shows Diana is such a racist that she
can't see anything other than 'an inferior race' when looking at a black person. As for her bogus claims
about altering hair, duh. I doubt hair straightening (which all 'races' do) is anymore painful than
permanents or coloring. Nor do I see any reason why anyone need straighten their hair to be ballerinas or
anything else. I've yet to hear a dance lover claim 'distraction' by the wonderful Judith Jamison's short
Afro. I have already debunked Dodo's claims about integration and social life in NYC, so let's move on.

A brief revisitation to the basic tenet of 'scientific' racism that lower scores on some aptitude tests by
historically oppressed groups such as African-Americans mean they are deficient in intelligence and
guilty of whatever pathologies said 'scientific' racists want to blame on them, is in order. EVERYTHING
about the premise is false. It is not established that the tests really measure intelligence or do so in a
manner reflective of all test-takers. The historical oppression of the groups means they got a late start in
remotely equitable education. Slaves were forbidden to learn to read and write. Few schools for
freedment were established and those were short-term and had limited resources. Segregation continued
the practice of inferior schools, including often opening black schools for fewer months than white
schools. There has been increase in aptitude scores for minority students during the last three decades,
which coincide with the integration of schools. The pathologies 'scientific' racists try to impose on
blacks and Hispanics have much more to do with wishful thinking than reality. The average American of
color lives an utterly ordinary life, except for being subjected to discrimination.

Welcome to reality, folks! (Lurkers: Watch the GEs scurry away from it as fast as they can.)

Some banned IP.

I am assuming Truth Teller is male; he/she is free to correct me if I am wrong.

The only person who scurries away is Truth Teller, most notably when he is asked to back up his
arguments or claims with evidence.

Who defined scientific racism? Who is categorized as a scientific racist? Are Jensen and Eysenck
considered scientific racists? I suppose only Truth Teller and those of his ilk are free to pass judgment as
to who are scientific racists.

Is it racist to say that on average, blacks of West African descent have dominated the 100 m dash in the
second half of the twentieth century? And if it isn't scientifically racist to observe that difference, then why
is it scientifically racist to observe ethnic population differences in certain cognitive abilities or crime
statistics?

Since it is a fact that blacks have dominated the 100-meter dash in the second half of the twentieth
century, I must be a sport racist in regards to peoples of non West African descent for merely observing
that fact. I must hate white people and especially South Asian and East Asian people since when
compared to West Africans they are simply not competitive at the highest levels of the sport.

Since Truth Teller is still calling individual members of this blog "stupid", I feel he has laid down the
gauntlet to partake in another round of verbal diarrhea. Truth Teller seems to be something of a mystic.
He knows, by some arcane process, that some or maybe all of us are racists. Seeing as I have found myself
miraculously imbued with this power, I will use it to, once again, dissect Truth Teller's personality.

Truth Teller seems to be imbued with an insouciant demeanor, which manifests itself in his logic,
evinced through his writings on this thread. He seems to be not ebullient but effusive which, regrettably,
often results in writing that is rather fetid and interminable. What's worse is that he is nothing more than
a dilettante; a mere amateur who fugaciously jumps from subject matter to subject matter as capriciously
as his cognately erratic personality allows him. These personality traits, I'm afraid, do not allow him to
ameliorate his arguments and thought processes. And amelioration is something his arguments could
definitely benefit from. The most salient point that I would want to inculcate upon your impressionable
young minds is that Truth Teller's writings are purely diaphanous. Just like the man himself, his
arguments are superficial to the core.

Truth Teller offers nothing more than the nugatory ramblings and opinions of an ignominiously churlish,
irascible, and miserable little soul whose main arguments are nothing but a pernicious invective resulting
in their almost certain ad-Hominem feel.

discrimination exists-but it is a minor part of life in my america. i speak as a black person (truth teller's
definition). of course, i "want to be white" so my opinion matters not :)

T Te: Thank you for reading my former blog, and for paying such close attention to what I wrote about a
subject that is obviously dear to your heart: the problem of integrating racial minorities into America's top
ballet companies.

T Te didn't debunk anything about integration in NYC, s/he just couldn't deal with the picture I drew in
my last comment, so his/her response is "let's move on." Fine, but I think that any objective person
reading this thread will think that is quite a weak response.

Nor did T Te give a current example of an "Africatown" that is a tourist mecca, as any city's Chinatown
is.

T Te claims successively that ballet has nothing to do with the look of a person's hair, denies that having
to chemically process kinky hair is painful, says that all races have to straighten their hair, and anyway,
the texture of a person's hair shouldn't affect their ability to become a ballerina anyway.

First of all, the vast majority of whites and all Aisans do NOT have to straighten their hair. Kinky hair is
an ethnic characteristic of sub-Saharan Africans, fact.

I guess that many advances have been made in the years since I heard these hair-straightening horror
stories, from black girls themselves. It all goes to prove that blacks struggle to fit themselves into
white standards of beauty. I think there is something tragic about this, and that they shouldn't do it.

But any black woman who proudly insists on keeping a 'fro can't be a ballerina. Judith Jamison was a
great dancer; she wasn't a ballet dancer. Saying that people "shouldn't" focus on the hair
texture of a ballerina is circular logic. Ballet isn't a sport; it's an aesthetic experience, and a ballerina who
deviates from the ideal isn't going to be employed, even if she can do the steps. That's the reason Alvin
Ailey founded a dance company in which a 6-foot tall black woman with a 'fro could be a first dancer.

My suggestion to T Te is that he get very rich somehow, and endow his own ballet company where he can
employ a choreographer who doesn't care whether his girls can yank their hair loose and have it tumble
down to their waists.

Men find that very sexy.

Yeah, Truth, given a choice, people will choose to integrate.

HAH. Did you go to a racially mixed school? Ever notice how the kids voluntarily separate into racial
groups at lunch time?

Ever notice how churches are nearly always either all black or all non-black?

Is it so hard to imagine that people might choose to live with other people of their race/ethnic
background? I don't think New Holland in Michigan was originally founded by Tibetans. Or New Ulm in
Minnesota by Sicilians.

Geez

David

"Yeah, Truth, given a choice, people will choose to integrate. HAH."

If I didn't believe this could be so, I would be posting over at American Renaissance instead. Humans have
already come a long way in this regard. Look at the murderous tribal behaviour of chimps (I believe chimp
behavior carries important information about humans). Ok, now look at the similar tribalist behavior of
the yanomamo, and other small civilizations (I believe primitive societies carry important information
about human behavior). Jared Diamond talks about how two strange New Guineans who meet eachother
in the forest will make stretched attempts to discover how they might be related, just so they don't have to
kill eachother. Look at Aghanistan or the Balkans with their endless and mutually destructive ethnic
feuding. Now look at how Europe (esp. Western Europe) is interrealating/ cooperating. Look at France
and Germany, and how that relationship has changed during the twentieth century.
The fact of the matter is, is that people are killing abortion doctors and others are murdering people who
hurt animals. Why? Because humans are altruistically malleable enough to consider things as ridiculous
as a microscopic cluster of cells and a dumb chicken as more fundamentally equal than some tribes people
can even consider their geographical neighbor. I don't care how many black kids sit together at lunch, the
truth is is that whites and blacks cooperate daily in this country for purposes that transcend racial
preference and altruistic cohesion. Human races can inhabit a shared altruistic circle when they find a
higher premise to coexist for. This is not hypothetical, it is demonstrated daily. If the world were attacked
by aliens tomorrow, I think you would see, how quickly and dramatically the us vs. them paradigm would
shift.

Its evolutionary role in human affairs aside, racial altruism is destructive to the future of the human race,
and to the idea of man ever peacefully coexisting. I am not skeptical that it can be transcended (though,
like rape and murder, never perfectly extirpated. We are, after all, referring to the same biomechanism
that ensures people will care most for their own children), and that applies to America as well as to our
ever more connected and expanding world, where everybody is quickly being crowded into everyone else.

as far as integration/segregation goes-i think personal choice, rather than government fiat is the key.
change is natural and normal-but it involves EVOLUTION, not REVOLUTION. excepting intermarriage
and integration to occur in one generation between blacks and whites is a utopian fantasy. as a long term
process, it is plausible as other factors than race (genetic enhancements, religious affiliation) become more
important.

demanding justice involves one generation of laws-implementing it is the work of centuries.

"racial altruism is destructive to the future of the human race"

I don't understand this. Please explain.

Jason--

I don't care whom little Johnny sits next to at lunch either. I'm merely noting that people feel most
"comfortable" with members of a similar racial/ethnic group. They typically associate more with each
other than with "others" when given a choice. Will this change? Maybe. How long will it take if it does?
longer than the nearly 40 years since the Civil Rights Act.

I don't think that's a very controversial prediction.

David

"I don't understand this. Please explain."

Certainly. Even if I can't express the ideas very clearly, I will direct you to some better sources. (off the top
of my head) William Hamilton, the man who's work set off E.O. Wilson to develop sociobiology, noticed
that bees would (counter-intuitively) sacrifice themselves for their siblings at the expense of making their
own chill'uns. The reason for this is that in the quarky world of bee-dom, a bee will pass on more of its
genetic material through its sibling than it will through its own offspring. Thus we have kinship selection,
the theory behind who gets our most natural favor- mainly the person who will most ensure the greatest
amount of our selfish genes get to live on. This is thought to apply concentrically outward, so that as a
mother might have a greater stake in the survival of her own child, an Italian guy might have a greater
stake in the survival of another (however distantly related) Italian guy, than in the survival of any given
Korean guy. This creates what might be called an ethnic nepotism, whereby people are compelled to cast
their lot and favor with those that are increasingly genetically similar. Thus the black kids in the cafeteria.
When I said this:

"racial altruism is destructive to the future of the human race"

What I mean is that humans can no longer afford to keep clustering by race b/c its about the biggest dead
end philosophy.
If they wanted to (with collective desire), it's probable that "white" people could eliminate every last non-
white on earth at this point in history. Of course, once that horrific precedent is set, is anyone really
expected to believe that that's where that ends? The germanic people, and the slavic people and the
semitic people would then eliminate eachother acting on the same destructive instincts that set off the
elimination of the swarthy others. Like a Borgesian nightmare,this is infinitely divisible. As an example,
look at how near genetically identical Papaun tribes associate. Does anyone think a Pashtun and an Uzbek
are all that different? That is the future of ethnic nationalism. I feel that the world is moving (and should
work harder)towards what could be called a post-ethnic-nationalism, where kinship, or altruistic circles
are increasingly (and artificially) built on shared ideals than on degrees of blood relation. As a good
example of what I'm talking about here, I submit to you the 100th Battalion's 442nd Regimental Combat
Team- a force of Japanese-Americans that fought for the US (internment camps and all) against Japan. It
was one of the most highly decorated units of its size during WWII. This a small representation of
human's fighting for the greater well-being of ourselves and our future, over the viceful endowments of
nature.

For more on ethnic nepotism read Van den Berghe's 'The Ethnic Phenomenon'. (just look at the
'customers who bought' section, and you'll see why I can't resist this guy):

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0275927091/qid%3D1028356219/sr%3D1-
3/ref%3Dsr%5F1%5F3/103-9757953-8251841

For an Internet read:

http://rint.rechten.rug.nl/rth/dennen/ethnocen.htm

Egad! I just noticed Steve Sailer is a reviewer on the book I linked! He's only one of two people. It amazes
me the wavelength that many of us share here. Here is a good quote taken off the page:

"To maximize their reproduction, genes in program organisms to do two things: successfully compete
against, and thereby contribute to the reproduction of organisms that carry alternative alleles of the genes
in question, and successfully cooperate with (and thereby contribute to the reproduction of) organisms that
share the same allele of the genes. In simpler terms, the degree of cooperation between organisms can be
expected to be a direct function of the proportion of the genes they share: conversely, the degree of conflict
between them is an inverse function of the proportion of shared genes." van den Berghe, Pierre The
Ethnic Phenomenon, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, Inc., 1981, p. 7"

You can read the first 22 pages free.

Hello Jason, Van den Berghe is a good writer

Have you read his review of Tatu Vanhanen´s "Ethnic Conflicts Explained by Ethnic Nepotism"?

Is very good:

http://rint.rechten.rug.nl/rth/dennen/vanhanen.htm

Thanks Juan,

but that wasn't reviewed by Van den Berghe, but by another sociobiologist who deals in ethnic conflict,
Johan M.G. Van der Dennen. His book here:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0412337703/qid=1041602983/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/103-
5603183-8730263?v=glance&s=books

I'll look into those books, meanwhile y'all should check out the book I've been touting on the other
comment thread:

http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=2293

which describes ethnic conflict and globalization w/out reference to genes

Diana should not really take on topics about which she has no earthly idea. Judith Jamison was a trained
ballet dancer who had never studied jazz dance but switched to that dance form after an audition with and
encouragement from Alvin Ailey. As a trained dancer, I can tell you all the other stuff she says about
dancing is, as my father would say, hogwash!