Re: Is white racism nec. all bad?

Frank Forman (
16 Apr 1995 14:44:57 GMT

In <> (Arun Gupta)
>In article <3mpa5g$>,
>Frank Forman <> wrote:
>> Why not go read Rushton's book for yourselves, instead of hostile
>>reviews of it? When I said, "I offer the book in evidence," I meant
>>just that. Make up your own minds!
>> Rushton offered a tremendous amount of evidence for the r-K
>>(r meaning high reproduction and little nuturing per offspring; K
>>the reverse) as it applies to humans, penis size just being one
>>And for that he produced other evidence, including the testimony of
>>condom manufacturers.
>Why not go and read Hitler's "Mein Kampf" for "evidence" about the
>degenerate nature of Jews ?

This is not the topic under discussion. But if your job were to condemn
Hitler's reasoning, you should read what he had to say.

>What I posted is not a review of Rushton's book. It actually comes
>from a discussion of the "science" behind Murray and Hernnstein's
>"The Bell Curve". The point is that with the methods of "research"
>that Rushton, Lynn etc. follow, their findings are not better than
>ill-informed opinions.

But why is this discussion such a good one? I have not read it, but
from your quotation from it, Leon Kamin regards a couple of pieces of
evidence Rushton used to be dubious. What about all the other evidence
Rushton used? You won't know unless you read the book. Cases are often
established by a *preponderance* of the evidence, not by one or two

>-arun gupta

>> Again, I see lots of nit-picking and NO evidence that there are
>>innate psychological differences among the various subdivisions of

I am still looking for this evidence!

>> One very, very interesting thing I learned from the book, whose
>>significance may have eluded Rushton himself. That is that American
>>Indians behave like K strategists, even though they test lower on IQ
>>tests than American whites. Since American Indians are mongoloid
>>lots of caucasoid features, acc. to Coon), this means that race is
>>important independently of intelligence. It also means that the r-K
>>theory does not predict everything, as Rushton repeatedly said.

You have no comment on this either.