Passages uit bijdrage van Toby Young over de egalitaire ideologie van de
sociaal-constructivisten: uit Toby Young
(zoon van Michael Young) in OPINION: 2017 :
Liberal Creationism Toby Young
With a bit of luck, Post-Modernism
will be the last gasp of one of the 20th Centurys most toxic ideologies.
The Post-Modernist doctrine of social constructionism
isnt common-or-garden hostility to hereditarianism; this is super-charged
environmental determinism. Any suggestion that society is shaped by human
nature, as opposed to shaping it, is to invert the Post-Modern pyramid; any
hint that the diﬀerences between classes, races, genders, the sane and the
mentally ill, and so on, have a scientiﬁcally-discoverable basis that is in
some sense pre-social that these group differences are real, as opposed to
ﬁctitiousis to a violate a sacred nostrum. You are heretics and you must be
driven from the Temple. Let us start with individual diﬀerences.
One of the reasons the claims of intelligence researchers so
often provoke a hostile reaction is because their assertions about the
heritability of Spearmans g are often mistakenly understood to be a defence of
the status quo. How does this misunderstanding occur? When a progressive
liberal listens to a behavioural geneticist talk about the biological basis of
IQ and the positive correlation between IQ and socio-economic status, what they
think they are hearing is a Social Darwinist argument in favour of the current
distribution of wealth and power. The poor deserve their low SES because of
their low polygenic scores and the rich deserve their high SES because of their
high scores.That is,they assume the intelligence researcher is breaking Humes
Law: because something is, it ought to be.
And there is another, even more fundamental reason why this
is a ﬁght to the death as far as they are concerned their utopian, hard-left
They believe in the Marxist ideal of hard, end-state
egalitarianism equality of outcome rather than opportunity what they call
Its version of original sin is the power of som identity groups over
others. To overcome this sin, you need ﬁrst to confess, i.e., check your
privilege, and subsequently live your life and order your thoughts in a way
that keeps this sin at bay. The sin goes so deep into your psyche, especially
if youarewhite ormale orstraight, that aprofound conversion is required.
Now, the obvious objection to this fanatical egalitarianism
is that it is incompatible with liberal democracy, as we know from the bitter
history of the 20th Century. It can only be brought about and maintained in
a totalitarian dictatorship
.. Why does the attempt to impose end-state
equality always end with the curtailment of free speech,the imprisonment and torture
of political dissidents, widespread starvation and insome
casesstate-sanctioned mass murder?
Because the hard lefts political project is incompatible
with everything the human sciences teach us about mankind. I do not just mean
socio-biology and evolutionary psychology, with their Darwinian explanations of
why selﬁshness usually trumps altruism, of why we put the interests of our
immediate family above those of our extended family and our friends, why we put
their interests above those of the tribe, the interests of our tribe or group
above that of other tribes or groups, and so on. I also mean everything we know
about the differences between us and the inextricable link between our
individuating characteristics and our unique polygenic sores.
If it is an unalterable fact about human beings that some
are more genetically gifted than others, better able to exploit their
environment, to proﬁt where others fail, then the only way to create and
preserve end-state equality is through the constant use of coercive state
power. So long as men are not born equal (in the ability sense, rather than the
moral sense), so long as the lucky sperm club retains its exclusive membership
policy, the only way to maintain hard equality is through the curtailment of
human freedom by an all-powerful state, a state that is constantly intervening
to correct the inequities of nature. To paraphrase Kant, you can only build
something straight with the crooked timbre of humanity if you are constantly
smashing down heads and cutting oﬀ limbs with a hammer and a sickle.
So let me be more precise: the picture we have built up of
ourselves from the human sciences does not, by itself, mean end-state equality
is undesirable. But it sure as hell gives the lie to the claim that it can be
achieved without a massive escalation in state power, that after a period of
re-adjustment the state can just whither away. It is precisely because the
hard left wants to gloss over this cost that it has no choice but to reject the
ﬁndings of socio-biologists, Darwinian anthropologists, diﬀerential
psychologists, et al.
There is nothing new about this. We all know that social
determinism was one of the shibboleths of Soviet Science and Russian
geneticists like Dmitry Belyaev the Siberian fox guy had to practice their
dark arts away from the prying eyes of the Communist Party priesthood, like
alchemists in Medieval Europe. But it was one thing to ignore this body of
knowledge in Soviet Russia in the middle of the 20th Century. Imagine how much
harder the neo-Marxists in the humanities departments of Americas elite
universities have to try in the face of all the evidence that has accumulated.
To point out the role that genes play in peoples behaviour,
even if you stress the contribution of the environment as well, is to run afoul
of campus blasphemy laws. The fact that the scientiﬁc evidence in support of
your point of view is overwhelming just strengthens their resolve. That is how
cognitive dissonance works: the greater the distance between a persons beliefs
and reality, the more aggressively they react to anyone pointing out the truth.
As the student protestors chanted at Middlebury they literally recited this
from a piece of paper, like a liturgical incantation: Science has always been
used to legitimize racism, sexism, classism, transphobia, ableism, and
homophobia, all veiled as rational and fact, and supported by the government
and state. In this world today, there is little that is true fact. The choice
you face,then, is whether to stand your ground and ﬁght or retreat,whether that
means applying for a position at aWashington think tank, switching to a less
contentious ﬁeld of scholarship, or keeping your head down and hoping for the
best, periodically abasing yourselves at the feet of the cults High Sparrows.
If everything is reducible to power dynamics, the only
possible motive you can have for challenging Post-Modernist dogma is because
you have a self-interested reason for preserving the status quo, i.e.
maintaining injustice and oppression. Either you are on the side of the
oppressed or you are a shill for the patriarchy and white privilege and if
that is the case then they are morally justiﬁed in bringing you down by any
means necessary. It goes without saying that college administrators will not
come to your aid.
Young is the co-author of What Every Parent Needs to Know and the co-founder of
several free schools. In addition to being an associate editor of the
Spectator, he edits Spectator Life and is Director of the New Schools Network.
Follow him on Twitter@toadmeister and see www.nosacredcows.co.uk