Andrew Sullivan's Moral Sewer
19/10/05 09:11
Stephen Metcalf in Slate
vivisects the Bell Curve to reveal (yet
again) the statistical chicanery, and eugenicist
theory that supports it. Metcalf also featured a
quote from Andrew Sullivan congratulating
himself on introducing "the Bell Curve" back
when he was editor of the New Republic. The
Sullivan quote ends with, " And I'm proud of
those with the courage to speak truth to power,
as Murray and Herrnstein so painstakingly
did."
As Metcalf mentions, Sullivan is probably not a statistician. He would thus be unable to expertly judge the book's statistical methodology or validity. One also suspects that Sullivan has not spent his entire life in intimate proximity to a great cross section of black people. He probably hasn't a wealth of personal experience on which to rely in supporting his embrace of The Bell Curve's conclusions that black people are stupid. I take exception to the Stephen and Abigail Thernstrom's work because I do have a lifelong history of intimate relations with white people in cities and towns all across the country; and my three-plus decades of adult, intimate personal experience puts the lie to their conclusions.
With neither personal experience, nor statistical expertise to guide him, one has to wonder why Sullivan and his rightist ilk are so eager to laud The Bell Curve's proposition that blacks, as a group, are irredeemable intellectual inferiors. That conclusion invariably leads to the idea that any attempts to rectify or address discrimination will be pointless. Why are they so eager to label those who embrace this proposition as "race realists." "Race Reality" is a term akin to the Christian right's "Biblical Truth." It allows for no counter. "Truth" and "Reality" are inherently beyond the realm of logic, and thus will not support questioning. In essence the bow-tied right's embrace of The Bell Curve asks us to indulge in "faith-based revulsion."
The right cooed and rubbed The Bell Curve against its crotch because supposed "proof" of our inferiority justifies their contempt for us. It might erase the tinge they feel when, on seeing that the driver who cut them of is black, "nigger" instantly pops to mind. It might soothe the back-of-the-mind discomfort they get when the challenge from a black man seems far more dangerous or unacceptable than it would from a white one. Perhaps it would let them continue in the illusion of their own God-like perfection--immune from the animal distrust and fear that plagues the rest of us mere humans when confronted with someone of a different tribe. That way, their America remains perfect as well. Slavery? A fine use for them at the time. They were, after all, inferior. Jim Crow? That was a favor. They are, after all, inferior. Lesser heath care? No biggy, they are, after all, inferior. With proof of our "sub-ness," America shines just as bright--no moral taint on the old girl. All white men remain equal, as the Founders intended.
It's ironic that Sullivan is a great advocate of gay marriage. One can easily play The Bell Curve's game to suggest that gays are inherently and irredeemably promiscuous--or immoral, if you prefer. (Suggesting that promiscuity is equal to morality stretches things no farther than suggesting that IQ equals intelligence.) And gays being genetically promiscuous, marriage will do nothing to change our immoral behavior--so it would be pointless to offer it to them. Gays have no choice but to make a mockery of it.
After all, science is leading toward the conclusion that there are genetic markers for homosexuality--just as there are for race. Statistics show that gay men are, as a group, more promiscuous than straight men. So the "proof" is there. Gay men, as a group, are morally inferior to straight ones, just as blacks, as a group, are less intelligent than whites.
When Mr. Sullivan is prepared to defend himself from charges of inbred immorality--when he is ready to be embrace his status as a walking moral sewer due to his homosexuality, the rest of us will be willing to accept the The Bell Curve's equally dubious representations about blacks.
As Metcalf mentions, Sullivan is probably not a statistician. He would thus be unable to expertly judge the book's statistical methodology or validity. One also suspects that Sullivan has not spent his entire life in intimate proximity to a great cross section of black people. He probably hasn't a wealth of personal experience on which to rely in supporting his embrace of The Bell Curve's conclusions that black people are stupid. I take exception to the Stephen and Abigail Thernstrom's work because I do have a lifelong history of intimate relations with white people in cities and towns all across the country; and my three-plus decades of adult, intimate personal experience puts the lie to their conclusions.
With neither personal experience, nor statistical expertise to guide him, one has to wonder why Sullivan and his rightist ilk are so eager to laud The Bell Curve's proposition that blacks, as a group, are irredeemable intellectual inferiors. That conclusion invariably leads to the idea that any attempts to rectify or address discrimination will be pointless. Why are they so eager to label those who embrace this proposition as "race realists." "Race Reality" is a term akin to the Christian right's "Biblical Truth." It allows for no counter. "Truth" and "Reality" are inherently beyond the realm of logic, and thus will not support questioning. In essence the bow-tied right's embrace of The Bell Curve asks us to indulge in "faith-based revulsion."
The right cooed and rubbed The Bell Curve against its crotch because supposed "proof" of our inferiority justifies their contempt for us. It might erase the tinge they feel when, on seeing that the driver who cut them of is black, "nigger" instantly pops to mind. It might soothe the back-of-the-mind discomfort they get when the challenge from a black man seems far more dangerous or unacceptable than it would from a white one. Perhaps it would let them continue in the illusion of their own God-like perfection--immune from the animal distrust and fear that plagues the rest of us mere humans when confronted with someone of a different tribe. That way, their America remains perfect as well. Slavery? A fine use for them at the time. They were, after all, inferior. Jim Crow? That was a favor. They are, after all, inferior. Lesser heath care? No biggy, they are, after all, inferior. With proof of our "sub-ness," America shines just as bright--no moral taint on the old girl. All white men remain equal, as the Founders intended.
It's ironic that Sullivan is a great advocate of gay marriage. One can easily play The Bell Curve's game to suggest that gays are inherently and irredeemably promiscuous--or immoral, if you prefer. (Suggesting that promiscuity is equal to morality stretches things no farther than suggesting that IQ equals intelligence.) And gays being genetically promiscuous, marriage will do nothing to change our immoral behavior--so it would be pointless to offer it to them. Gays have no choice but to make a mockery of it.
After all, science is leading toward the conclusion that there are genetic markers for homosexuality--just as there are for race. Statistics show that gay men are, as a group, more promiscuous than straight men. So the "proof" is there. Gay men, as a group, are morally inferior to straight ones, just as blacks, as a group, are less intelligent than whites.
When Mr. Sullivan is prepared to defend himself from charges of inbred immorality--when he is ready to be embrace his status as a walking moral sewer due to his homosexuality, the rest of us will be willing to accept the The Bell Curve's equally dubious representations about blacks.