The New York Times admits Genetic Equality is a lie

Watson_James-D__DNA_Authority

The New York Times published an important article a few days ago, admitting that genetic equality was a lie.

Over 99 percent of our DNA is identical in all humans, but researchers focused on the remaining 1 percent and found thousands of DNA variants that are correlated with educational attainment. This information can be combined into a single number, called a polygenic score. In Americans with European ancestry, just over 10 percent of people with a low polygenic score completed college, compared with 55 percent of people with a high polygenic score. This genetic disparity in college completion is as big as the disparity between rich and poor students in America.

Of course, the NYT tries to put a “progressive” spin on this fact.

How can the power of the genomic revolution be harnessed to create a more equal society?

Discovering specific DNA variants that are correlated with education can help us in two ways.

First, these genetic results reveal the injustice of our so-called meritocracy. As a nation, we justify stark inequalities with the idea that people who stayed in school deserve more than people who didn’t finish high school or college — more money, more security, more health, more life.

But success in our educational system is partially a result of genetic luck. No one earned his or her DNA sequence, yet some of us are benefiting enormously from it. By showing us the links between genes and educational success, this new study reminds us that everyone should share in our national prosperity, regardless of which genetic variants he or she happens to inherit.

Although the author doesn’t make it explicit, this amounts to a genetic argument for Communism. It says hard-working people don’t deserve the prosperity their hard work brings them; they just lucked out with their “hard working” genes. This justifies taking their wealth and redistributing it to those cursed with “lazy genes” or “hard work disinclination genes”.

This is a diabolical Anti-Life ideology that abnegates all personal effort and all moral choice. If you made an effort, if you made the right choice, it was only because were gifted with the genes that made it possible. Nothing you do is meritorious.

Evolution, the Life process, rewards those with the attributes that lead to success; but Equality mongers think that the Life process has somehow got it wrong; and we should systematically seek out failure and reward it wherever we can, plundering the successful to finance misfits and losers.

Of course, it is in relation to race differences or immigration policy that genetic inequality really gets interesting. If we can find polygenic markers that predict educational and economic success, why not apply it to prospective immigrants? And are these “polygenic markers” equally distributed among races?

Alas, progressive science can’t help us out here, it seems.

Because researchers focused on differences within an ancestrally homogeneous group of people, their results have no implications for understanding racial disparities in education. Also, when researchers looked at African-Americans, the genetic variants only minimally predicted educational outcomes.

They deliberately limited their research to white people. To avoid stumbling on unpleasant truths? And when a few negroes were looked at, the predictive process somehow broke down. Too few “polygenic markers” to count?

Even assuming this was not a lie, wouldn’t it prove that race was real? If the process works for white people but not blacks, that proves there is some significant genetic difference between white people and blacks, does it not?

And note the cute phrasing used to talk about race without acknowledging that race exists: “ancestrally homogeneous”. We could use that phrase too. Of course, it could be deconstructed in exactly the same way that “race” has been deconstructed by challenging its boundary definitions and arguing that blurred boundaries render the concept meaningless. But the fact that researchers constantly feel the need to come up with coy synonyms for race indicates that the words point to some significant underlying reality.

Overall, this article amounts to the taking up of a fallback position for the Left, a retreat from an indefensible frontier as the forces of reality advance on their Castles of Illusion. But the fallback point isn’t defensible either. Reality is what it is; and research will eventually uncover it. Sooner or later, someone will look into the differences between non-ancestrally homogeneous groups. And then the walls of the castle will crumble too.

 

11 thoughts on “The New York Times admits Genetic Equality is a lie

  1. This analysis was excellent. Yes, the New York Times piece is definitely doing damage control by trying to make a case for communism out of the test results. It also seems they’re trying to establish another leftist meme, “genetic privilege”. It astounds me how many euphemisms the media can find or create so they don’t have to say “race”. It’s almost as if they think they can eliminate it from existence by not openly acknowledging it. My personal favorite is how they constantly use “ethnicity” as a synonym for race, when ethnicity has no basis in biology. Ethnicity is based in the customs, language, food and faith of a people, not their genetics.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. “https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/just-visiting/why-we-shouldnt-embrace-genetics-education” it’s bullshit.
    “They deliberately limited their research to white people. To avoid stumbling on unpleasant truths? And when a few negroes were looked at, the predictive process somehow broke down. Too few “polygenic markers” to count? turns out whites stack the the deck. https://www.africaresource.com/sci-tech-a-business/genetics/528-race-intelligence-and-iq-are-blacks-smarter-than-whites
    https://www.jacobinmag.com/2018/04/against-the-sat-testing-meritocracy-race-class

    Like

  3. “And note the cute phrasing used to talk about race without acknowledging that race exists: “ancestrally homogeneous”. We could use that phrase too. Of course, it could be deconstructed in exactly the same way that “race” has been deconstructed by challenging its boundary definitions and arguing that blurred boundaries render the concept meaningless. But the fact that researchers constantly feel the need to come up with coy synonyms for race indicates that the words point to some significant underlying reality.” or you know a necessary short hand.
    “Ethnicity is based in the customs, language, food and faith of a people, not their genetics.” then how are genetic frequencies corellated to ethnicity?

    Like

    1. Genetic frequencies aren’t correlated to ethnicity, they’re causative. Look at how similarly dysfunctional all of the myriad black majority countries on the planet are and then compare them with East Asian or white societies.

      Like

  4. “Even assuming this was not a lie, wouldn’t it prove that race was real? If the process works for white people but not blacks, that proves there is some significant genetic difference between white people and blacks, does it not?” Allen frequencies actually debunk claims race.

    Like

    1. Did you mean allele frequencies? In any event you’re wrong, genetic loci prove race exists if by race you are referring to sub-species.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s