[lbo-talk] Re: language of contempt

Miles Jackson cqmv at pdx.edu
Sun Jun 11 19:23:18 PDT 2006


Michael Pollak wrote:
>
> On Sun, 11 Jun 2006, Dwayne Monroe wrote:
>
>> I'm certain we can travel beyond this brief and hastily constructed
>> Ultra RadFem vs. BNat comparison to find other analogs.
>
>
> I think in any other case -- class, status or military oppression --
> it's pretty obvious that it isn't based in genes. And although people
> can easily racialize national and ethnic differences, you can't point to
> a single enthnonation that's always been on top.

The use of biological explanations to justify the privileges of the dominant group is the swiss army knife of ideology in human societies. Whether or not some group distinction is "really" based on genetics is irrelevant; the crucial thing is that people in a given social context are taught that the social differences are due to biological differences, with the dominant groups inevitably possessing the "superior" traits.

--One relevant example we've kicked around on LBO before: the Herrnstein and Murray Bell Curve stuff. "Why are those people poor? They lack the heritable trait that the wealthy cognitive elite possess!"

Miles



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list