Prof. Sam Lehman-Wilzig: Race Shouldn’t Lead to Racism
Our world has been infected by the idea of “race” for at least 200 years – the belief that various peoples are basically different. In its most insidious version, it goes further: some (or “one”?) race is superior to all the others (e.g., Nazism).
Even in the contemporary era, supposedly having undermined superstition and scientifically erroneous ideas, we still see this mode of thinking almost everywhere. Many American MAGA (Trump) supporters hold to the “Great Replacement” theory that non-whites are taking over the United States, thereby undermining its past greatness (racial and otherwise). Britain has recently seen anti-foreigner, racist rioting in several cities. Some very religious Jews (especially in Israel) hold “Jewish superiority” beliefs, based on the Chosen People concept. (It need hardly be pointed out that if the Jews are the “Chosen People,” that could only be based on moral behavior and not on any intrinsic biological superiority; otherwise, how could Judaism accept converts?) And of course, anti-Semitism is suffused in racism – here, too, totally misguided, given the huge diversity of Jews around the world: skin color, behavior, culture, abilities, etc.)
All this might suggest that the concept of “race” is totally false, but that’s also not completely right. It’s necessary to understand what “race” means – and especially, what it does not mean.
All humans share approximately 99.8% of the same genes. Therefore, from a purely biological perspective, it’s ridiculous to make any clear demarcation between one race and another. Not only because of this huge genetic commonality but also because the 0.2% difference is not expressed clearly between races; instead, it is a difference between individual human beings. Put simply, two “Black” people can differ between themselves more than the difference between each of them and two other “White” people.
Nevertheless, this doesn’t mean that from a comparative “racial group” standpoint there are no differences at all. This is also patently false. Last month’s Olympics offered an excellent example. The Caribbean countries have long been dominant in track & field racing, completely out of proportion to their limited population numbers. Why? Because the strongest slaves taken from West Africa hundreds of years ago were specifically sent to the sugar plantations in the Caribbean colonies, where the work was backbreaking. Their descendants, as a matter of earlier “biological selection,” are an example of Darwin’s survival of the fittest. The same can be said of American blacks – there’s not one Caucasian on the U.S. Olympic basketball “dream team.” Reverse discrimination? Affirmative action on the court? Of course not! Merely earlier genetic selection still playing itself out (pun intended).
The Jews, especially descendants from their European forebears, are another example of such genetic selectivity. Over centuries of persecution and immigration, who would be most likely to survive as a general rule? Obviously, those who had greater intelligence (to flourish under difficult circumstances) and/or more initiative (getting out of an anti-Semitic country before it was too late). The end result: not physical prowess but rather intellectual excellence. This also was a function of Jewish culture emphasizing education. The brightest boy would be given in marriage to the daughter of the richest man in town – with a greater chance of survival (in societies where nutritional food was scarce) and consequently issuing forth more intelligent progeny in larger numbers.
Many “races” have distinctive advantageous traits, almost always a result of their unique (or quite different) environmental background. “Environmental” is not necessarily the physical ecology in which they evolved, although that too plays a part. Indeed, White racists should ask themselves the following question: if all of humanity emerged from (Black) Africa, why are you today white? The answer: as people moved further north they received less sunlight, so that (among other things) their black skin produced less Vitamin D. The result (here comes Darwin again): those with progressively lighter skin that absorbs sunlight better than dark skin, had a biological advantage. Over many generations that translated into “Whiteness”. So yes, Whites are “superior” – but only in absorbing sunlight. That’s hardly a good basis for claiming “White superiority”!
Is there a solution? Can racism be expunged? Probably not completely eliminated; “otherness” is too embedded in the human psyche. However, society could certainly do a better job teaching history, biology, ecology, anthropology, sociology, and other social sciences of relevance. To the untrained eye, these might seem to be “luxury” subject areas – not nearly as important today as computer programming, artificial intelligence, and the like. However, if we wish to keep society intact and not descend into brutal, race-related violence (rioting, political fascism, etc.), then anything that lowers racial flames by raising biological knowledge can hardly be considered an educational indulgence.
In short, the concept of “race” is not a total fabrication. But from there “racism” of any sort is a leap far too great. Human beings have many other ways to differentiate themselves: ideology, religion, culture et al. Getting rid of the most dangerous of all – racism – would be a good start to attaining greater social amity if not cohesion.
