Sunday, 15 July 2018

Why Do Liberals Reject Race Realism?

Liberals love to point to studies, as the late Lawrence Auster said

Christians say "In the name of Jesus Christ"
Muslims say "In the name of Allah" &
Liberals say "Studies have shown!"

They always tell us how they love science and inquiry, logic and rationality, however they exhibit some glaring omissions, biology for example. Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace, independently,  developed a theory called the Theory of Natural Selection, which states that different forms of life develop to occupy different niches within their environment. Liberals have always been very big supporters of the theory, however that enthusiasm has been remarkably inconsistent when it comes to people.

The idea that a plant or an animal developed through natural selection to fit it's niche is quite unremarkable. But if that is true of people then that means they are best in one such environment and not in all environments. And of course it does apply to people. Which means that different environments would breed people of not only different looks and bodies, but with different temperaments and intelligence's. If that is true then people are not universal creatures, instead they are distinct from each other. Each race is different as well as each sub-race, what most people call ethnic groups.

You don't have to do much investigating to discover that that idea is blasphemy to Liberals. No, all people are equal and thats that, no if, but's or maybes allowed!

The reason that Liberals take that view is that they are follows of Evolutionism. The idea that things start simple and over time become more complex. The term was popularised by the 19th century Philosopher Herbert Spencer who was enormously influential between 1860-1900. Over time the term Evolution replaced the more cumbersome but more correct term, Natural Selection. And many cannot tell the difference between Natural Selection, the idea that each living thing exists in it's own niche, and Evolution, the idea that life starts simple and over time becomes more complex.

Natural Selection is a scientific idea, however Evolution is a political idea. It was a way of explaining how progress worked and why it was the way of the future. So when Liberals see race realism they reject it because they don't see Evolution. They don't see simple things becoming complex, what they see is what everyone else see's. That living things, including people, have limits. Evolution says that those limits are temporary, they can and will be overcome. Natural Selection does not say that at all.

However Evolution is an idea and biology is reality and when Liberals find out the limits of reality they always insist that reality change. In that they are remarkably consistent.

Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
Why Did Business Turn Against the Family?


  1. I think part of the problem of existence and this topic is that ideologies" [I very loosely use the word], whether conservative, liberal, socialist, scientific, religious, etc. do not become dogmas that carry the 'we are right, you are wrong' tag. In general I don’t think free-thinking individuals always fit into any system of thought. That could be the equivalent of putting on a straight-jacket.
    However given that liberalism can fracture on so many issues one wonders if there is point talking about it or trying to define it. Notwithstanding perhaps I could say radical democrats assert the overriding value of equality to extremes whilst conservatives complain that these liberal devotions undermine traditional values and virtues and in essence social order. That means any re settlement and migration has to recognize essential cultural differences and the attendant adjustments it entails in a new country.

    Best wishes

  2. "if that is true of people then that means they are best in one such environment and not in all environments."

    White Australians have a high incidence of skin cancer. Some are living where they probably should not be.