Category: Commentary, Critique, and Response

TESTIMONY

—“I was so offended when I read “elevated intelligence of East Asians and Western Europeans” in your response. But I get what you are saying now! I never really understood the after effects of Eugenics. In the social discourse its always framed as a bad idea that never took root. Oh Yes it did! I would like to read more about of your studies.”— (Quora Reader)

Thanks. We are not very different really. We hybridize too quickly when there is an evolutionary advantage. The primary difference is (a) degree of neoteny, (b) size of the underclass. ( c) the technology of ‘culture’ meaning group strategy, mythology, traditions, norms, and method of persuasion(argument). (d) technology in general spreads more rapidly than cultural technology or genes.

This means all human groups can (eventually) achieve parity if they limit the reproduction of the underclasses. This is, however, a very difficult thing to do if you need to alter a lare population (india). A very difficult thing for a government to do under democracy (modern europe, south america), and harder to do under a religion that favors the underclass (the middle east).

This is why only east Asians and Europeans did it in the past: 1) a powerful aristocratic class, 2) homogenous enough polities that it doesn’t pit tribes or clans against one another. 3) The desire to keep the costs of conflict down (economic self interest).