Thursday, April 7, 2016

Henry Harpending and "Semantic Cleansing."

Henry Harpending has died. One of the most popular blog posts here at Ex-Army [link] dealt with him with particular respect to the quote in the quibcag.

Anthropology has gone through a lot of changes over the decades, and a great deal of it has been perverted in the service of political correctness and the cultural marxist agenda of the left, but Harpending was one of the few in the field to keep things objective and scientific.

Frankly, most of what you're likely to read from the academic anthropology field today is palpable nonsense, repeating over and over the mantra that all of mankind is basically identical and fungible, and sweeping any evidence to the contrary under the rug and then burning the rug.

Maybe the most revolutionary notion he came up with, and which is elaborated on in the highly recommended book he co-authored with Gregory Cochran, The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution [link], is that human evolution has not slowed down since we invented agriculture and advanced culture in general, but has actually speeded up. Such an notion, of course, is contrary to the prevailing Zeitgeist of political correctness, and got Harpending (and Cochran) denounced by all the goodthinkers at the Ministry of Truth.

At Takimag [link], Steve Sailer writes:

The Scientist vs. the SPLC



The dumbing down of the establishment left is amusingly illustrated by how the Southern Poverty Law Center, America’s most lucrative hate group, put the great scientist Henry Harpending (1944–2016) on their “Extremist Info” blacklist as a “White Nationalist” on the grounds that
Henry Harpending is a controversial anthropologist at the University of Utah who studies human evolution and, in his words, “genetic diversity within and between human populations.”
(Do you ever get the feeling that SPLC staffers are just going through the motions for the money, or perhaps even intentionally trolling their own racket?)

Henry, who died over the weekend, was the rare college professor whose career justified the concept of tenure. The holder of a chair at the U. of Utah in anthropology, the subject perhaps most emasculated by political correctness, he enjoyed a double-sided career as a cultural researcher in the field and as a quantitative genetic theorist at the whiteboard. 
These days it’s hard to remember that in the mid–20th century anthropology was a subject of considerable glamour, with its two competing wings of physical/genetic anthropology (as exemplified by Francis Galton) and cultural anthropology (Franz Boas) both adding to its prestige. The Darwinians (such as Carleton Coon) argued in favor of nature and the Boasians (such as Margaret Mead) in favor of nurture, and there’s nothing much more interesting to debate.
The ’60s, however, proved disastrous to anthropology, as the left grew increasingly hysterical, seeing a balanced perspective giving weight to both nurture and nature as concomitant to Hitlerism. At Stanford, eventually, the war within the anthropology department grew so heated that provost Condi Rice resorted to splitting the baby into two departments: anthropological sciences versus cultural and social anthropology, which seemed more a branch of postmodern literary criticism.
Not surprisingly, as noticing the broad patterns of similarity and difference among humans increasingly required career-endangering courage, the public lost interest in anthropology.
Read the rest here:
http://takimag.com/article/the_scientist_vs_the_splc_steve_sailer/print#ixzz459PxKmRk

And at the Unz Review [Link], Peter Frost writes:

Farewell to Henry

1 comment:

  1. Of course, the illustration is profoundly Japanese, in that the turtle's head is clearly phallic. Penises are "big" in Japanese art and culture. There are big Shinto penis ceremonies, and women will be photographed climbing on huge wooden carved penises at these.

    The subtext is that as any Western man who has ever tried putting on a Japanese condom will attest, the Japanese penis is on average smaller than most. My father was an Air Force crewman at Kadena in the 1970s, and although I was too young to have any experience with Japanese rubbers at the time, it was a well known fact. My sister dated a couple of Japanese men and told me later that both were smaller than any other men she ever had experience with, and when I dated a Japanese-American woman years later she would often make pillow talk about how "you round-eyes are so big".

    And when I interviewed a famous former high class call girl and madam some years back for a local 'alternative' paper, off the record she confirmed this, saying that she had never seen a Japanese penis that could pass the "toilet roll test", i.e., extend past the end of a standard cardboard TP tube. She estimated she had serviced roughly a hundred Japanese men in Las Vegas and in Japan.

    The Japanese, of course, consider themselves a superior people, and I wonder if this penis fixation found in Japanese art and culture is not a kind of compensation for their realizing this quirk of human evolution.

    ReplyDelete