The End of Right-Thinking Liberalism - A New Khanian Politics, 'OURS is the Superior Intellect'
AS digs in. (Like Dobbs, he's a Harvard man too - you know what they say, 'always tell a Harvard man, but can't tell 'em much'. Wait - it gets better - The-Bell-Curve guy was a Harvard man, too).
{holding head in hands}
Andrew complains about the lack of a "sane" discourse, but he is the one who seems to have little or no appreciation of why his 'argument' is narrow to the point of caricature; the science he continually, repetitively, and insistently presents is, by the scientists' own qualification, inconclusive and insufficient to broad claims; or why he continues to make 'scientific points' in a political blog, where one might ordinarily expect the associated, well considered policy implications.
Instead:
Well, slap me with a mackerel and toss me off a bridge, but ain't this confusing 'equality' (even the particularized French notions of equality?) with 'homogeneity'?
If not, hey, bring back the hereditary Brahmans - they've done so well for the millions of widows who are tossed away each year in India, just to pick one group, so that the superior hereditary line can continue unencumbered by surplus demands on hereditary family capital.
Wait, there is more.
The embrace of DNA evidence is supposed to refute a claim of an homogeneous human race.
I see. On some calculus, it has been an important current and historical tenant of left-liberalism, one that must needs to be debunked with flair and alacrity and regularity, that we should NOT look for whether a killer left traces that they were say, male or female?
Who knew?
Maybe - maybe? - there is a difference between saying 'race doesn't matter' and saying either 'your-genes-are-my-genes' or 'yes, use the DNA crime-scene evidence'?
Wait, there is more.
How disingenuous is that? From a history scholar, too!
Yes, surprise you to know that people have been wringing their hands about the moral consequences of scientific advance for a long time. (economic advance, too, for that matter). And they are not just "left-liberals".
Perhaps AS could take a spin over at Family Scholars website, for a current sampling, where they have made a monument out of how to think about reproductive science / technology.
Sorry, if this seems a bit snarky, but after people have ample space and time to re-think their position, and then, instead, they just ... dig in or rebuff friendly counsel, or whatever, what gives?
I thought that the post on "Adam's Rib" was an indicator of progress. I was wrong.
