Your Email:

Subject:

Message:
Entry: Who's Infallible Here, Anyway? The Human Life Review Chooses Party Over Church Link: http://www.takimag.com/site/article/wars_and_rumors_of_war#5511 Post contents: Sid: Thank you, again, for your interesting comments. Actually, when I mentioned the topic of race I was certainly not referring to Comte de Gobineau, Houston Chamberlain, or even Madison Grant. Rather, I was referencing a large body of recent scientific literature on the topic, including works by J. Philippe Rushton (e.g. RACE, EVOLUTION, AND BEHAVIOR), Prof. Michael Levin (e.g. WHY RACE MATTERS), Prof. Arthur Jensen (e.g. THE G FACTOR), Herrnstein and Murray (THE BELL CURVE), H. J. Eysenck, Richard Lynn, and numerous other researchers. My point here was to point out that some on this list have attempted to portray anyone who takes such research seriously (even with questions) as a "racist." Similarly, anyone who believes that the work of Prof. Kevin McDonald, John Cuddihy, Prof. Albert Lindemann, Peter Nozick, or Norman Finkelstein (these last three are Jewish) seriously, is likewise labelled "antisemitic." I do believe that to engage in this kind of labelling is anti-intellectual. Indeed, to avoid mentioning and examining these works and suggest that anyone who raises these points is somehow beyond the pale, so to speak, is the red-herring here. I do believe my point stands. There are some on the so-called "right" who wish to censor conversations and avoid talking about difficult topics; and when those topics arise (as on this list), they are quick to label anyone who disagrees a "brown" or a "racist" or an "antisemite." And this, indeed, resembles certain activities current on the "p.c." Left. Sent at: 2008 08 29