'Humans Are Not Equal': The Dishonest History of Race

This paragraph delves into the concept of race realism, which posits that distinct human races exist with inherent differences in abilities and behaviors. It challenges the idea by highlighting its historical roots, including a misquoted statement from Aristotle that was actually referring to Europeans, not blacks. The paragraph emphasizes how such beliefs have been perpetuated over centuries, even by influential figures like Charles Darwin and Carl Linnaeus, who categorized humans into races with Europeans at the top. It also mentions the flawed theories of other academics, illustrating the deep-rooted European bias in these classifications.

This section explores the evolution of racial theories, particularly focusing on the 19th-century works that expanded on the division of human races. It discusses the influence of Arthur de Gobineau, who introduced the concept of the 'Aryan race' and the idea of racial hierarchies, and his connections to influential figures like Richard Wagner and Houston Stuart Chamberlain. The paragraph also touches on the humor and irony in some racial theories, such as the belief that Persian women would seduce and corrupt Western men, and the dubious methodologies used to 'prove' racial superiority, such as skull measurements by Samuel George Morton.

This paragraph scrutinizes the methods used to measure and 'prove' racial differences, focusing on the work of Robert Bennett Bean and others who attempted to link brain size and shape to intelligence and civilization. It critiques the arbitrary criteria used, such as the size of the frontal lobe and the position of the foramen magnum, and how these were manipulated to fit preconceived notions of racial hierarchy. The paragraph also highlights the debunking of these theories by more rigorous and unbiased studies, revealing the ideological motivations behind such 'scientific' research.

The focus of this paragraph is on the debunking of the myth that brain size correlates with intelligence, particularly in the context of racial differences. It discusses the work of scientists like Pierre Paul Broca and others who used skull measurements to assert racial hierarchies. The paragraph points out the inconsistencies and the absurdity of these claims, such as the cranial index and the position of the foramen magnum, and how they were used to justify racist ideologies. It also touches on the broader implications of these theories, including their influence on political figures and social policies.

This section examines the global impact of racial theories, including the concept of recapitulation, which suggested that adults of 'inferior' races were akin to children of 'superior' races. It discusses the work of E.D. Cope and others who used these theories to justify imperialism and colonialism, particularly in Africa and other tropical regions. The paragraph also highlights the hypocrisy of these theories, given that they were used to suppress migration from certain regions while promoting the dominance of 'superior' races.

The final paragraph discusses the shift in scientific thought from recapitulation to neoteny, which challenged the previous theories by suggesting that the retention of infantile features in adults was a sign of higher development, not inferiority. It points out the irony of this shift, given that it contradicted the established prejudices of the time. The paragraph also touches on the persistence of these outdated ideas in certain circles and the ongoing struggle against racism and pseudoscientific justifications for racial hierarchies.