The desire of intellectuals for some grand theory that will
explain complex patterns with some solitary and simple factor has
produced many ideas that do not stand up under scrutiny, but which
have nevertheless had widespread acceptance — and sometimes
catastrophic consequences — in countries around the world.
The theory of genetic determinism which dominated the early 20th
century led to many harmful consequences, ranging from racial
segregation and discrimination up to and including the Holocaust.
The currently prevailing theory is that malice of one sort or
another explains group differences in outcomes. Whether the lethal
results of this theory would add up to as many murders as in the
Holocaust is a question whose answer would require a detailed study
of the history of lethal outbursts against groups hated for their
success.
These would include murderous mob violence against the Jews in
Europe, the Chinese in Southeast Asia, the Armenians in the Ottoman
Empire, and the Ibos in Nigeria, among others. Class-based mass
slaughters of the successful would range from Stalin’s
extermination of the kulaks in the Soviet Union to Pol Pot’s wiping
out of at least a quarter of the population of Cambodia for the
crime of being educated middle class people, as evidenced by even
such tenuous signs as wearing glasses.
Minorities who have been more successful than the general
population have been the least likely to have gotten ahead by
discriminating against politically dominant majorities. Yet it is
precisely such minorities who have attracted the most mass violence
over the centuries and in countries around the world.
All the blacks lynched in the entire history of the United
States would not add up to as many murders as those committed in
one year by mobs against the Jews in Europe, the Armenians in the
Ottoman Empire or the Chinese in Southeast Asia.
What is there about group success that inflames mobs in such
disparate times and places, not to mention mass-murdering
governments in Nazi Germany or the Pol Pot regime in Cambodia? We
can speculate about the reasons but there is no escaping the
reality.
Groups that lag behind have often blamed their lags on
wrong-doing by groups that are more successful. Since sainthood is
not common in any branch of the human race, there is seldom a lack
of sins to cite, including haughtiness by those who happen to be on
top for the moment. But the real question is whether these sins —
real or imagined — are actually the reason for different levels of
achievement.
Intellectuals, whom we might expect to counter mass hysteria
with rational analysis, have all too often been in the vanguard of
those promoting envy and resentment of the successful.
This has been especially true of people with degrees but without
any economically meaningful skills that would create the kinds of
rewards they expected or felt entitled to.
Such people have been prominent as both leaders and followers of
groups promoting anti-Semitic policies in Europe between the two
World Wars, tribalism in Africa and changing Sri Lanka from a
country once renowned for its intergroup harmony to a nation that
descended into ethnic violence and then a decades-long civil war
with unspeakable atrocities.
Such intellectuals have inflamed group against group, promoting
discrimination and/or physical violence in such disparate countries
as India, Hungary, Nigeria, Czechoslovakia and Canada.
Both the intellectuals’ theory of genetic determinism as the
reason for group differences in outcomes and their opposite theory
of discrimination as the reason have created racial and ethnic
polarization. So has the idea that it must be one or the other.
The false dichotomy that it must be one or the other leaves more
successful groups with a choice between arrogance and guilt. It
leaves less successful groups with the choice of believing that
they are inherently inferior for all time or else that they are
victims of the unconscionable malice of others.
When innumerable factors make equal outcomes virtually
impossible, reducing those factors to genes or malice is a formula
for needless and dangerous polarization, whose consequences have
often been written in blood across the pages of history.
COPYRIGHT 2013 CREATORS.COM
Von Mises Jr| 3.14.13 @ 7:56AM
Dr. Sowell is surely the leading expert on race conflict as I have read his books "Race and Culture," "Conquests and Culture," "The Economics and Politics of Race" as well as a few of his books on Preferential Policies and Affirmative Action.
But I would venture to say that the same applies to "class" conflict. Of course class is typically in a single race especially outside the modern Western World. In the West, it can be traced back to serfdom. Tocqueville wrote of the intellectuals combining with the Nobles to pit the serfs and poorest in France against the Petite Bourgeoisie. The latter are the equivalent of today's small business owners. The objective was to subdue new wealth and return to serfdom.
So to this day, we hear the war drums against the "Top 1%, that "Didn't Pay Their Fair Share" and the "Fat Cat's" on Wall Street.
So whether it is race or class, there is a discernible pattern of human nature. And it is not flattering.
AlanAnti-RoveCheneyBrooks | 3.14.13 @ 8:12PM
This from Bob K. demonstrates the gullibility:
"But it seems skin color is a non-issue in this issue. It is and has always been an economic grab by Argentina. First fishing, and now it's heating up again with oil possibilities."
DUH!
alice921| 3.17.13 @ 4:09PM
Its definitely the most-financially rewarding Ive ever done. Make money with Google. last monday I got a new Alfa Romeo from bringing in $7778. I started this 9-months ago and practically straight away started making more than $83... per hour. I work through this link, http://tw.gs/YbVcey
Jacob McCandles| 3.14.13 @ 11:54AM
Step one: create an "us" and a "them". The rest, as they say, is history. The "us" will imagine or inflate a percieved injustice, like the lighting of a fuse. If the left would stop with the identity politics, we could all be Americans. It would help if we had a common enemy, but alas the left is cozy with the islamists.
snipelee25| 3.14.13 @ 1:13PM
Interesting that Dr. Sowell ignores the current battle - that being among various Muslin sects.
Of course, the next battle will be between the "public" and the "public servants".
Bob K| 3.14.13 @ 1:41PM
Professor Angelo Codevilla already wrote about that battle here in his "The Ruling Class."
See "America's Ruling Class and the Peril's of Revolution."
http://spectator.org/archives/.....ss-and-the
JD| 3.14.13 @ 1:48PM
Race is not the only identity that can be abused in the way Sowell describes. While modern American Leftists anoint themselves Champions of Tolerance, their entire agenda is justified by declaring that the Evil of certain groups in America is causing all of our problems. They determine this exactly as Sowell describes - with results-based "analysis" augmented only with anecdotes. Their "logic" does not stand up to scrutiny.
cicero| 3.14.13 @ 2:41PM
As is always the case, one needs only follow the money, or the power. The one element common to all who place themselves in the intellectual/elite catagories is that they know, for a fact, that they are smarter and wiser than everybody else. As a result, they are endowed with the right to tell everyone else how things should be, and as a result, be compensated for their state of wonderfulness. The problem comes in when they never know when to stop aggrandizing themselves. They can't just take a little wealth to themselves - they have to take it all. They can't arrogate themselves to just a little power over a function they may know something about - they have to control everything.
The real problem is that, in a democracy, the majority have the voting power to give them what they want, and can be had cheaply.