SV: Paired Horse and PIE breakup

Paul Kekai Manansala kekai at JPS.NET
Sun Nov 8 17:31:46 UTC 1998

Lars Martin Fosse wrote:
> Yaroslav V. Vassilkov wrote:
> >         Nowhere in the present-day European scholarly literature you can
> > find any traces of racial or ethnocentric prejudices (if you can - please
> > tell us, we shall discuss it).
> I don't know specifically about European literature, since it is written
> in a broad range of languages.
> However, just giving a few of the more extreme examples from the U.S.
> try reading _The Bell Curve_ or the numerous works of Philippe Rushton.
> Or even, on the lighter side, some of Arthur Schlesinger Jr.'s recent
> writings where he lauds Western culture as superior to that of others.
> Just a second there! I understood that Vassilkov was referring to linguists/philologists!

He certainly does not make that clear when he states "nowhere
present-day European scholarly literature."

>The Bell Curve was not produced by "us". It is a work with a totally >different professional background. And it has been massacred in several >places by people with a similar background.

Trying to pinpoint bias in linguistics work is a bit more difficult,
especially when this is done in a more subtle manner.  Yet one can still
find prima facie bias in various theories out there.  The idea of what
I call the "Mt. Ararat" origin of languages as postulated in various
circles is one example.  When linguistics mysteriously backs
up easily refutable genetic and anthropological theories, one has to be
very suspicious.

Also, it is more an idea of Western outlook altogether.  If there is a
tendency in academia to see Western culture as superior and central, how
can we trust any segment of it to be totally free of that bias?

> Also, you might try investigating the eugenic roots of a great segment
> of the modern anthropological and genetic community of today.  As late
> as the 1970s, many of today's top geneticists and anthropologists were
> members of open eugenic societies.  A great number are still members of
> those societies, which have changed their names and operate now on a
> cryptic level.
> As for the eugenic societies, such societies were certainly very popular in the period before the second world war, but were not specifically directed against people of other races (although such >people were certainly also targeted, as we know).

Having done personal research into eugenics, I cannot agree.  While some
segments of the Europe did apply eugenics to inferior members of their
own race, at the same time they looked as other races as being entirely
inferior.  In fact, racial intermixture was often seen as a cause for
"bad genes" in the white race.

The situation in the Northern European countries was also very much
different than that in the rest of Europe which was decidely pro-natal
when it came to Europeans. However, eugenics was seen as a viable
solution for peoples of color.

If you read eugenics literature closely, you will find that there is a
strong bias toward racial genetic inferiority/superiority.

Paul Kekai Manansala
>    Part 1.2       Type: application/ms-tnef
>               Encoding: base64

More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list