Author Topic: Racial View of Western Philosopher from John Locke to Karl Marx  (Read 466 times)

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11043
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Quote
Black people were relegated to a separate and lower racial compartment along with Native American Indians and Asians

Quote
ideal face shape-the dolichocephalic, long-headed oval of Norman Rockwell's quintessential Americans, rather than the brachycephalic square or round.

Considering dolicocephaly superior is correct. But no one who considers dolicocephaly superior should consider "non-whites" inferior:

« Last Edit: October 27, 2023, 11:13:27 pm by 90sRetroFan »

antihellenistic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 588
    • View Profile
Francis Galton

Quote
Sir Francis Galton FRS FRAI (/ˈɡɔːltən/; 16 February 1822 – 17 January 1911) was a British polymath and the originator of the eugenics movement during the Victorian era.[1][2]

...

Galton was knighted in 1909 for his contributions to science.[10] In recent years, he has received significant criticism for being a proponent of social Darwinism, eugenics, and scientific racism; he was a pioneer of eugenics, coining the term itself in 1883.

...

...According to an editorial in Nature: "Galton also constructed a racial hierarchy, in which white people were considered superior. He wrote that the average intellectual standard of the negro race is some two grades below our own (the Anglo Saxon)."[25] According to the Encyclopedia of Genocide, Galton bordered on the justification of genocide when he stated: "There exists a sentiment, for the most part quite unreasonable, against the gradual extinction of an inferior race."[26]

Sumber :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Galton

antihellenistic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 588
    • View Profile
Georges Cuvier

Quote
Racial studies by Georges Cuvier (1769–1832), the French naturalist and zoologist, influenced both scientific polygenism and scientific racism. Cuvier believed there were three distinct races: the Caucasian (white), Mongolian (yellow), and the Ethiopian (black). He rated each for the beauty or ugliness of the skull and quality of their civilizations. Cuvier wrote about Caucasians: “The white race, with oval face, straight hair and nose, to which the civilised people of Europe belong, and which appear to us the most beautiful of all, is also superior to others by its genius, courage, and activity.”[60]

Regarding Negroes, Cuvier wrote:[61]

The Negro race … is marked by black complexion, crisped or woolly hair, compressed cranium, and a flat nose. The projection of the lower parts of the face, and the thick lips, evidently approximate it to the monkey tribe: the hordes of which it consists have always remained in the most complete state of barbarism.

Source :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism#Racial_theories_in_physical_anthropology_(1850%E2%80%931918)

antihellenistic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 588
    • View Profile
Franz Ignaz Pruner

Quote
Franz Ignaz Pruner (8 March 1808 – 29 September 1882); known as Pruner Bey during his stay in Egypt, was a German physician, ophthalmologist and anthropologist who was a native of Pfreimd, Oberpfalz.

...

Pruner studied the racial structure of Negros in Egypt. In a book which he wrote in 1846 he claimed that Negro blood had a negative influence on the Egyptian moral character. He published a monograph on Negros in 1861. He claimed that the main feature of the Negros skeleton is prognathism, which he claimed was Negros relation to the ape. He also claimed that Negros had very similar brains to apes and that Negros have a shortened big toe which is a character which connects the Negros close to apes.[1]

Sumber :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz_Ignaz_Pruner

antihellenistic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 588
    • View Profile
Arthur Keith

Quote
Sir Arthur Keith FRS[1] FRAI (5 February 1866 – 7 January 1955) was a British anatomist and anthropologist, and a proponent of scientific racism. He was a fellow and later the Hunterian Professor and conservator of the Hunterian Museum of the Royal College of Surgeons of England.[2][3] He was a strong proponent of Piltdown Man, but finally conceded it to be a forgery shortly before his death.[4]

...

...In 1931, with John Walter Gregory, he delivered the annual Conway Hall lecture entitled Race as a Political Factor. The lecture contained as its abstract: The three primary racial groups within the human species are the Caucasian, mongoloid and negroid. From analogy with cross-breeding in animals and plants, and from experience of human cross-breeding, it can be asserted that inter-marriage between members of the three groups produces inferior progeny. Hence racial segregation is to be recommended. However, the different races can still assist, and co-operate with, each other, in the interests of peace and harmony.[16]

Source :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Keith

antihellenistic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 588
    • View Profile
Henry Edward Garrett

Quote
Henry Edward Garrett (January 27, 1894 – June 26, 1973) was an American psychologist and segregationist.

...

...was involved in the International Association for the Advancement of Ethnology and Eugenics (IAAEE), the journal Mankind Quarterly, the neofascist Northern League, and the ultra-right wing political group, the Liberty Lobby.

...

In the 1950s Garrett helped organize an international group of scholars dedicated to preventing "race-mixing", preserving segregation, and promoting the principles of early 20th century eugenics and "race hygiene". Garrett was a strong opponent of the 1954 United States Supreme Court's desegregation decision in Brown v. Board of Education, which he predicted would lead to "total demoralization and then disorganization in that order."

...

Garrett wrote the introduction to Carleton Putnam's Race and Reason, published in 1961.[1] According to A.S. Winston, he "praised Byram Campbell's analysis of the Nordic as the ideal race."[1]

Source :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Garrett_(psychologist)

antihellenistic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 588
    • View Profile
Re: Western Democracy
« Reply #21 on: November 22, 2023, 07:55:31 am »
Real Libertarianism

Quote
Hans-Hermann Hoppe, professor of economics at University of Nevada Las Vegas, is a different kind of libertarian. He shares — even surpasses — the usual libertarian contempt for government intrusion and compulsion, but recognizes “free immigration” for what it is: forcing strangers into communities of natives who want to be left alone. Prof. Hoppe recognizes that the right to discriminate, to keep out undesirables, is a fundamental freedom that only the servile would ever give up.

...

As a libertarian, Prof. Hoppe is a strong advocate of free trade, but scorns the idea that it must go hand in hand with “free immigration,” which is conceptually entirely different. Free trade occurs only when there are willing sellers and buyers of goods; imports cross borders only when they are wanted. Immigrants walk across the border whether they are wanted or not. Even if there are employers who want immigrants, it does not follow that other citizens want to share parks, schools, shopping malls, streets, and movie theaters with them. Therefore, if capitalists really want foreign workers, they should keep them in self-sufficient company towns rather than force them on the public.

Prof. Hoppe recognizes that antipathy towards those outside one’s own group is perfectly natural, but it need not interfere with trade:

From the fact that one does not want to associate with or live in the neighborhood of Blacks, Turks, Catholics or Hindus, etc., it does not follow that one does not want to trade with them from a distance. To the contrary, it is precisely the absolute voluntariness of human association and separation — the absence of any form of forced integration — that makes peaceful relationships — free trade — between culturally, racially, ethnically, or religiously distinct people possible.

As Prof. Hoppe explains, whether domestically or internationally, “private property means discrimination.” When people have lost the right to discriminate they have lost the use of their property. Moreover, “a society in which the right to exclusion is fully restored to owners of private property would be profoundly inegalitarian, intolerant, and discriminatory,” which is why democratic societies fear this basic freedom.

Source :

A Libertarian for Our Side Posted on March 25, 2018

https://www.amren.com/news/2018/03/hoppe-democracy-god-that-failed-libertarians-race-immigration/

antihellenistic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 588
    • View Profile
Re: Leftist vs rightist moral circles
« Reply #22 on: November 24, 2023, 08:10:55 pm »
Enlightement Period. Period of Enlighting Barbarism

Quote
Given this, it makes sense that Enlightenment philosophers should so often turn to slavery as a metaphor for oppression. At times writers like Voltaire and especially Condorcet did address and attack the evils of African slavery: the famous passage in Candide where the eponymous hero comes across a miserable slave who mournfully informs him that “it is at this expense that you eat sugar in Europe” is one prominent example.26 For the most part, however, when Enlightenment writers talked about the evils of slavery they did so only in a metaphorical rather than a literal sense. The symbolic enslavement of Europeans by religious and royal oppression rather than the actual enslavement of Africans in the Americas was far and away their primary concern. For example, as Sala-Molins has trenchantly observed, nowhere in The Social Contract does Rousseau mention the French Code Noir of 1685, in which the royal government formally codified slavery in its Caribbean colonies.27 Voltaire was similarly much more interested in slavery as metaphor than in the actual plight of African slaves. In his 1736 play Alzire, or the Americans, set in sixteenth-century Peru, Voltaire condemns royal oppression and corruption but has little to say about Black slavery in that colony.28 This tendency to privilege the metaphorical over the actual experience of slavery spread far beyond the elite circles of Enlightenment writers. As Susan Buck-Morss has noted, the fact that the Dutch in the early modern era profited tremendously from the slave trade did not stop them from bitterly complaining about their enslavement by the Spanish Monarchy and portraying their fight for independence as a struggle against slavery.29 Simon Schama’s landmark study An Embarrassment of Riches tends to replicate this dichotomy, largely ignoring the “embarrassing” fact that much of Dutch prosperity came from investments in African bondage.30

How can one explain this contrast between the Enlightenment’s often militant opposition to slavery as a political metaphor and the lack of concern with the actual slaves during the eighteenth century? One reason could be that some of the movement’s leading figures directly profited from the slave trade. John Locke, whose Second Treatise on Government remains a classic statement of political liberalism, was a major investor in the African slave trade through the Royal African Company. 31 Others, such as David Hume and Voltaire, held investments that benefited from slavery even if they weren’t directly tied to the slave trade. Such examples merely reaffirm the broad importance of = slavery to European economies in the eighteenth
century.

More significant is the relationship between Enlightenment attitudes to slavery and to race. As Emmanuel Chukwudi Eze has demonstrated, Enlightenment writers devoted significant attention to the study of race and racial difference, often in the context of ethnographic research and
analysis.
Immanuel Kant, for example, wrote extensively about the different races of mankind as an ethnographer. As noted earlier, this study of race arose out of the Enlightenment’s heritage from the Scientific Revolution, in particular the desire to apply the same level of systematic classification to humanity that scientists had developed for the natural world. Increased European exploration of the broader world had also generated a variety of travel narratives and other first-person accounts that fueled the interest in the comparative study of different peoples. The Enlightenment thus occupied a seminal position in the birth of scientific racism.32

The comparative study of races generally ranked people from high to low in a hierarchical continuum. In 1684, French doctor François Bernier published one of the first modern books on racial theory, entitled A New Division of the Earth, According to the Different Races of Men Who Inhabit It. He argued that the world’s population was divided into four or five races, each with its own physical and mental characteristics. 33 Several Enlightenment scholars followed Bernier’s lead, considering how different peoples (usually Europeans, Asians, Africans, and “Americans,” or Native Americans) resembled and differed from each other in physical appearance and levels of intellect. Invariably, such rankings placed white Europeans at the top of the hierarchy, emphasizing their intelligence and physical beauty, while Africans were usually placed at the bottom of the scale when evaluated with these characteristics. In comparing different races, Immanuel Kant had this to say about Africans: “The Negroes of Africa have by nature no feeling that rises above the trifling. Mr [David] Hume challenges anyone to cite a single example in which a Negro has shown talents, and asserts that among the hundreds of thousands of Blacks who are transported elsewhere from their countries, although many of them have even been set free, still not a single one was ever found who presented anything great in art or science or any other praiseworthy quality.”34 While Enlightenment writers strove to go beyond a simple binary analysis of racial difference by their use of scientific observation and analysis, in many cases they tended to replicate the traditional division between civilized peoples and barbarians. Civilization and reason were therefore largely a province of the white races of Europe. As Eze has argued, “the Enlightenment’s declaration of itself as ‘the Age of Reason’ was predicated upon precisely the assumption that reason could historically only come to maturity in modern Europe.” 35

Source :

White Freedom The Racial History of an Idea Tyler Edward Stovall 2021 Princeton University Press page 107, 108, 109


antihellenistic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 588
    • View Profile
Western Marxist-Socialism

Quote
Tom Watson (1856 — 1924), went even further, calling blacks a “hideous, ominous, national menace.” In 1908 Watson ran for public office “standing squarely for white supremacy.” “Lynch law is a good sign,” he wrote. “It shows that a sense of justice yet lives among the people.” When he died, the leader of the American Socialist Party Eugene Debs (1855 — 1926) — certainly no conservative — wrote, “he was a great man, a heroic soul who fought for power over evil his whole life long in the interest of the common people, and they loved and honored him.”

The common people, certainly as represented by the Socialist Party, were not liberal on race. The socialists reached the height of their power during the early part of this century and at one time could claim 2,000 elected officials. They were split on the Negro question, but the anti-black faction was probably stronger. The party organ, Social Democratic Herald, argued on Sept. 14, 1901 that blacks were inferior, depraved degenerates who went “around raping women and children.” The socialist press dismissed any white woman who consorted with blacks as “depraved.”

In 1903, the Second International criticized American socialists for not speaking out against lynching and other violence against blacks. The Socialist National Quorum explained that Americans were silent on the subject because only the abolition of capitalism and the triumph of socialism could prevent the further procreation of black “lynchable human degenerates.” At the 1910 Socialist Party Congress, the Committee on Immigration called for the “unconditional exclusion” of Chinese and Japanese on the grounds that America already had problems enough dealing with Negroes. There was a strong view within the party that it was capitalism that forced the races to live and work together, and that under Socialism the race problem would be solved for good by complete segregation.

In their racial views, American socialists were in complete agreement with Karl Marx. He and Friedrich Engels both despised blacks and used the English word “****” in private correspondence even though they wrote in German. Marx called his rival for leadership of the German socialism movement, Ferdinand Lassalle, “the Jewish ****,” and described him thus, in a letter to Engels:

It is now entirely clear to me, that, as his cranial structure and hair type prove, Lassalle is descended from the Negroes, who joined Moses’ flight from Egypt (that is, assuming his mother, or his paternal grandmother, did not cross with a ****) . . . The officiousness of the fellow is also ****-like.

...

The author Jack London (1876 — 1916) was, in his day, the best known, most highly paid, and popular author in the world. He was a committed socialist but also a white supremacist. He wrote that socialism was “devised for the happiness of certain kindred races. It is devised so as to give more strength to these certain kindred favored races so that they may survive and inherit the earth to the extinction of the lesser, weaker races.” There were, however, some races that were not going to go quietly extinct. In a little essay called “The Yellow Peril,” London worried about what would happen if the 400 million Chinese were ever taken in hand by the 45 million Japanese and led on a crusade against the white man:

Four hundred million indefatigable workers (deft, intelligent, and unafraid to die), aroused and rejuvenescent, managed and guided by forty-five million additional human beings who are splendid fighting animals, scientific and modern, constitute that menace to the Western world which has been well named the ‘Yellow Peril.’

The English philosopher Bertrand Russell, (1872–1970) was another well-known socialist free-thinker, and eternal gadfly to all things conservatives hold dear — well, almost all things. On the race question he was entirely on Jack London’s side. In a 1923 book called Prospects of Industrial Civilization he wrote:

[The] white population of the world will soon cease to increase. The Asiatic races will be longer, and the Negroes still longer, before their birth rate falls sufficiently to make their numbers stable without help of war and pestilence . . . Until that happens, the benefits aimed at by socialism can only be partially realized, and the less prolific races will have to defend themselves against the more prolific by methods which are disgusting even if they are necessary.

These people were socialists, but that did not blind them to race. They were for socialism and progress but whites came first.

Source :

Posted on September 18, 2016 Don’t Write Off the Liberals Melinda Jelliby, American Renaissance, April 2000

https://www.amren.com/news/2016/09/dont-write-off-the-liberals/

antihellenistic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 588
    • View Profile
Reaffirmation on Degeneracy of John Locke's Classical-Liberal Philosophy and it's Consequences

Quote
In 1663, a year after slavery officially became a Virginia birthright and over a hundred years after Lucas Vásquez de Ayllón made his bumbling attempt to gentrify South Carolina, King Charles granted eight “Lord Proprietors” the rights to establish the British colony of Carolina and essentially rule the land as makeshift monarchs. One of the first acts of business was to enlist British political philosopher John Locke to coauthor the Fundamental Constitutions of Carolina. (Coincidentally, Locke—who is known as the “Father of Liberalism,” and whose philosophy on the fundamental rights of “life, liberty, and property” inspired a little document called the Declaration of Independence—was a major investor in the Royal African Company, the white-owned business that trafficked more enslaved Africans to America than any other entity.)* Locke enumerated the laws and rules for Carolina’s organizing document, including a clause that would come to forever be known as Article 110, which stated, “Every freeman of Carolina shall have absolute power and authority over his negro slaves, of what opinion or religion soever.”5 Carolina’s white supremacy was baked into the social structure as one of the colony’s founding principles, and slavery proliferated.

The proprietors of the Carolina territory faced a plight similar to the situation recently overcome by Jamestown’s venture capitalists. Not only did South Carolina’s new residents have to deal with a hostile indigenous population, but the indentured English farmers had never seen a climate and soil like this. When South Carolina’s early white residents saw what Virginia’s elite class did with a few pieces of human property and access to headrights, they checked the stock price for slaves and said, “Hold my ale.” The Carolina colony would build an empire of slavery.

Source :

Black AF History: The Un-Whitewashed Story of America by Michael Harriot page 57

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11043
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
The correct to understand Lockeanism is as an ideology of:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-right/plebian-hubris/

Rulers (even if also "white") are not to have authority over "white" plebs, but instead all "whites" are to have unlimited authority over all "non-whites".