By "loved ones" I didn't mean only his immediate family.
There were several reasons:
- Antisemitism was framed by the Nazis in biological terms.
- Science is a long-term project, whereas the fight against antisemitism was seen as immediate and existential.
- For various reasons, it was felt that Nazism could be better fought through a broad "antiracist" coalition than through a narrower struggle against antisemitism.
Boas died before WWII ended. If he had lived longer, he might have said: "Enough is enough. Let's wind down the war on racism." Or maybe not. In 1945, it wasn't obvious that antisemitism was finished.
And these things eventually acquire a life of their own. Antiracism doesn't come with an "off" switch. It's like an automaton that no longer obeys its master.
So-called anti-Semitism has always been a perfectly valid response to prior Jewish provocation. The evidence supporting this is so gargantuan as to be indescribable, but has of course been ruthlessly suppressed. The mere mention of it will send many a self-described “dissident” running for the hills. More to the point, all egalitarian ideologies share their origin in Christian ethics (soul equality). If it were not for all this Christian crap about the brotherhood of man and the fraternity of all peoples, we wouldn't be being demographic replaced in our own ancestral homelands. We had our chance to avert the world we’re now living in. Twice. And we failed abysmally. We betrayed the one and only country that was standing up against it. Our punishment, to toil and die under the tyranny of interest-based debt slavery, is richly deserved. Since the founding of the Federal Reserve in 1913, more than $50 trillion has been spent undermining the political sovereignty, economic stability and demographic homogeneity of white countries worldwide. International finance won WW1 and WW2.
"Ce qui est terrible sur cette terre, c'est que tout le monde a ses raisons."
We all have reasons for what we do. Those reasons may seem selfish, stupid, or short-sighted, but they nonetheless exist and determine our actions. If we want to understand this world, we must begin by understanding why people act the way they do.
In the case of Franz Boas, I have tried to describe his true beliefs without bringing them into line with present-day norms. The same goes for what he believed during the last decade of his life. I cannot do that if I assume a moralistic stance.
When we examine people of the past, we should not say: "Shame on you for being a racist!" Similarly, we should not say: "Shame on you for caring more about people in the here and now than about people eight decades hence!" That's the job of a propagandist, not a historian.
Whew! "Doublespeak" certainly is a good word for some of Boas's statements, as you noted. When I was an anthropology major in the early 1980's, "antiracist" activism was already very prevalent among the faculty and graduate students. There were still some older faculty who seemed more focused on objective study, but I had the impression that they were always looking over their shoulders. It has only gotten worse in anthro faculty departments, from what I hear.
I just wanted to thank you once again for all the amazing work you are doing publishing these posts. It must take you a lot of time and as I say, most academics don't bother doing this. It's having a big impact on me. What you're saying makes so much sense and I feel it's been a missing link in my thinking up until now. And of course it's been a missing link because we're not really allowed to talk about this stuff. I've been studying psychology and evolutionary psychology for 20 years now and it's been a long journey going from initially believing that everything is environmental to now realising that genetics affect traits in different cultures in different ways. This answers a lot of questions about why cultural integration has been so difficult.
By the way, my introduction to you was an article you wrote about sexual selection creating colour polymorphisms through sexual selection on women as a result of low male to female sex ratio particularly in the East Baltic region. I've been banging on about that for years to everyone since I read it. And people are always amazed by it. I reckon if you did post on that it would be very popular 🙂
Hi Peter. This is truly weird. When I click on your articles on my substack it's taking me to a separate link which doesn't have any of the comments below it. I just commented on it and I was the only person to comment. I don't seem to be able to access these articles that everyone is commenting on through my substack anymore. Basically the link it's giving me has altered "Peterfrost" in the hyperlink to "pfrost61". It's really weird. Thought you should know though. The only way I can access this version is by substituting "pfrost61" for "Peterfrost" in the hyperlink.
I know the problem, but I'm not sure how I can fix it. For reasons too long to explain, I created a backup copy of Peter Frost's Newsletter under the name Peter Frost's Journal with a different sign-in email address (which begins with pfrost61).
I should simply delete this backup, but I'm afraid I might end up deleting Peter Frost's Newsletter as well. So I've put it in private mode. Does that resolve the problem?
I appear to now be signed up to your backup account rather than the other one and this is the link it gives me. I can get to your other account by changing "pfrost61" to peterfrost in the link which is what I do when I want to get the proper account with the read aloud option and other people's comments.
Neither: I access everything through the app. And I am signed up to your substack through the app so I just click on your name under the people that I'm signed up to.
He allowed his personal ethnic interests to compromise his objectivity. He betrayed science.
If you had to choose between betraying your loved ones and betraying science, which choice would you make?
How is being honest about the reality of human evolution a betrayal of his family?
By "loved ones" I didn't mean only his immediate family.
There were several reasons:
- Antisemitism was framed by the Nazis in biological terms.
- Science is a long-term project, whereas the fight against antisemitism was seen as immediate and existential.
- For various reasons, it was felt that Nazism could be better fought through a broad "antiracist" coalition than through a narrower struggle against antisemitism.
Boas died before WWII ended. If he had lived longer, he might have said: "Enough is enough. Let's wind down the war on racism." Or maybe not. In 1945, it wasn't obvious that antisemitism was finished.
And these things eventually acquire a life of their own. Antiracism doesn't come with an "off" switch. It's like an automaton that no longer obeys its master.
So-called anti-Semitism has always been a perfectly valid response to prior Jewish provocation. The evidence supporting this is so gargantuan as to be indescribable, but has of course been ruthlessly suppressed. The mere mention of it will send many a self-described “dissident” running for the hills. More to the point, all egalitarian ideologies share their origin in Christian ethics (soul equality). If it were not for all this Christian crap about the brotherhood of man and the fraternity of all peoples, we wouldn't be being demographic replaced in our own ancestral homelands. We had our chance to avert the world we’re now living in. Twice. And we failed abysmally. We betrayed the one and only country that was standing up against it. Our punishment, to toil and die under the tyranny of interest-based debt slavery, is richly deserved. Since the founding of the Federal Reserve in 1913, more than $50 trillion has been spent undermining the political sovereignty, economic stability and demographic homogeneity of white countries worldwide. International finance won WW1 and WW2.
"Ce qui est terrible sur cette terre, c'est que tout le monde a ses raisons."
We all have reasons for what we do. Those reasons may seem selfish, stupid, or short-sighted, but they nonetheless exist and determine our actions. If we want to understand this world, we must begin by understanding why people act the way they do.
In the case of Franz Boas, I have tried to describe his true beliefs without bringing them into line with present-day norms. The same goes for what he believed during the last decade of his life. I cannot do that if I assume a moralistic stance.
When we examine people of the past, we should not say: "Shame on you for being a racist!" Similarly, we should not say: "Shame on you for caring more about people in the here and now than about people eight decades hence!" That's the job of a propagandist, not a historian.
Thanks for the interesting deep dive into Boas's evolution of wokeness.
A title might be The Blue Pilling of Boas.
"Was Franz Boas a race realist?"
The answer to the question is found in the qualifier 'was'.
Whew! "Doublespeak" certainly is a good word for some of Boas's statements, as you noted. When I was an anthropology major in the early 1980's, "antiracist" activism was already very prevalent among the faculty and graduate students. There were still some older faculty who seemed more focused on objective study, but I had the impression that they were always looking over their shoulders. It has only gotten worse in anthro faculty departments, from what I hear.
I just wanted to thank you once again for all the amazing work you are doing publishing these posts. It must take you a lot of time and as I say, most academics don't bother doing this. It's having a big impact on me. What you're saying makes so much sense and I feel it's been a missing link in my thinking up until now. And of course it's been a missing link because we're not really allowed to talk about this stuff. I've been studying psychology and evolutionary psychology for 20 years now and it's been a long journey going from initially believing that everything is environmental to now realising that genetics affect traits in different cultures in different ways. This answers a lot of questions about why cultural integration has been so difficult.
By the way, my introduction to you was an article you wrote about sexual selection creating colour polymorphisms through sexual selection on women as a result of low male to female sex ratio particularly in the East Baltic region. I've been banging on about that for years to everyone since I read it. And people are always amazed by it. I reckon if you did post on that it would be very popular 🙂
Hi Peter. This is truly weird. When I click on your articles on my substack it's taking me to a separate link which doesn't have any of the comments below it. I just commented on it and I was the only person to comment. I don't seem to be able to access these articles that everyone is commenting on through my substack anymore. Basically the link it's giving me has altered "Peterfrost" in the hyperlink to "pfrost61". It's really weird. Thought you should know though. The only way I can access this version is by substituting "pfrost61" for "Peterfrost" in the hyperlink.
I know the problem, but I'm not sure how I can fix it. For reasons too long to explain, I created a backup copy of Peter Frost's Newsletter under the name Peter Frost's Journal with a different sign-in email address (which begins with pfrost61).
I should simply delete this backup, but I'm afraid I might end up deleting Peter Frost's Newsletter as well. So I've put it in private mode. Does that resolve the problem?
Well I'm glad you know about it. I wonder if I'm the only person that's somehow been directed to the backup account? I hope so! Thanks for responding!
Do you remember the link that took you to the backup account? I may be able to change it.
I appear to now be signed up to your backup account rather than the other one and this is the link it gives me. I can get to your other account by changing "pfrost61" to peterfrost in the link which is what I do when I want to get the proper account with the read aloud option and other people's comments.
https://open.substack.com/pub/pfrost61?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=2byie1
Is this the link you receive in your email inbox when I post a new article on Substack? Or is this a link on X?
Neither: I access everything through the app. And I am signed up to your substack through the app so I just click on your name under the people that I'm signed up to.