Journal of Negro Education

Social Darwinism, Scientific Racism, and the Metaphysics of Race

Author(s): Rutledge M. Dennis
Source: The Journal of Negro Education, Vol. 64, No. 3, Myths and Realities: African Americans
and the Measurement of Human Abilities (Summer, 1995), pp. 243-252
Published by: Journal of Negro Education
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2967206
Accessed: 17-02-2016 16:02 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Journal of Negro Education is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Negro
Education.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 208.94.128.55 on Wed, 17 Feb 2016 16:02:52 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Social Darwinism,ScientificRacism,and
theMetaphysicsof Race
Rutledge M. Dennis, Departmentof Sociology and Anthropology,George
Mason University
ofhereditarians
theearlywork
racismfrom
ofscientific
underpinnings
Tracing
thephilosophical
and
ledbyGaltonandBinet,
movement
testing
totheintelligence
andSumner,
Darwin,Spencer,
thisarticle
andMurray,
Herrnstein,
raceand IQ studiesofJensen,
lastlyto thecontemporary
andenactracistsocial
project,
topropose,
usedas a justification
thatscienceis often
maintains
and ofitsassumptions
ofSocialDarwinism
It beginswitha reviewofthephilosophy
policies.
in thisdebate:
theme
unbroached
a largely
andendsbyanalyzing
aboutraceandhumanabilities,
groups.
fordominant
racism
ofscientific
theconsequences
and enactracistsocial
topropose,project,
Sciencehas oftenbeenused as a justification
of ideas associatedwithracial
policies.The philosophicaland politicalunderpinnings
and credencewiththe
legitimacy
were firstgivenscientific
and inferiority
superiority
book,TheOriginofSpecies.In more
ofCharlesDarwin's(1859)revolutionary
publication
and Murray's
thepublicationof Herrnstein
surrounding
recenttimes,thecontroversy
inAmerican
andClassStructure
study,TheBellCurve:Intelligence
scientific
(1994)presumably
about
of powerfularguments
to thenationalconversation
Life,and thereintroduction
tofocuson questionspertinent
provideyetanotheropportunity
raceand humanabilities,
and consequencesofhumanabilitiesand potential.In the
to theorigins,maintenance,
main,however,such studiesand debatesrevealfarmoreabout thoseproposingand
advocatingracistargumentsthanabout the groupstowardwhom theyare directed.
ofthe
has been directed,and justlyso, towardconsiderations
Althoughmuchattention
should
moreattention
impactofgeneticpoliticson excludedand oppressedpopulations,
groups
thesepolicieshaveon thedominantand powerful
be placedon thenegativeeffect
them.
thatenactand implement
presentedin
bases ofthearguments
thattheintellectual
Thepresentarticlemaintains
rather,theyare germaneracismare morethanmereabstractions;
worksof scientific
processand thequestionof
indeed,theyare central-toboththeidea ofthedemocratic
ofSocial
a "just"society.Thus,itbeginswitha reviewofthephilosophy
whatconstitutes
Darwinismand ofits assumptionsaboutraceand humanabilities.It nextcritiquesthe
socialissuesand problemsaddressedor exhumedby thisideologyand examinessome
societyhavefounditstenetsso appealing.
ofAmerican
segments
ofthereasonswhycertain
of
and introduction
thedevelopment
surrounding
Third,in discussingthecircumstances
it analyzesa largely
testingduringthe earlydecades of the20thcentury,
intelligence
anduntappedthemeintheraceandhumanabilitiesdebate:theconsequences
unbroached
racismforAmerica'sdominantgroups.
ofscientific
JournalofNegroEducation,Vol. 64, No. 3 (1995)
Copyright? 1996,Howard University

This content downloaded from 208.94.128.55 on Wed, 17 Feb 2016 16:02:52 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

243

SOCIAL DARWINISM, IMPERIALISM, AND SLAVERY

BeforethesuppositionsofSocial Darwinismenshrinedtheidea ofEuropean superiority

as a key featureof natural evolution and selection,the association between color (race)
and intellectualpredispositionhad longbeen a topicfordiscussionamong manyEuropean
thinkers.Although Rose (1968) notes that the recognitionof racial differencesis longstanding and traceable throughbiblical and historicaltexts,Bernier(see Gossett,1963),
Buffon(1797), and later Gobineau (1853/1915)were to set a patternin racialistthinking
by linkingcolor to behavior and human ability.Notwithstanding,the racistlogic of these
thinkers,thoughmostlydeclarativeand deeply rootedin theidea ofEuropean supremacy
and "colored" inferiority,
lacked a grandand global philosophicaland politicalframework
withinwhich it could logicallyoperate.
Though Darwin (1859) focusedprimarilyon thebiological evolutionof animal species
and almost never addressed the cultural or social consequences of this evolution for
humans, otherslike HerbertSpencer (1874), who firstcoined the phrase "survival of the
fittest,"
reasoned thatDarwinistprincipleswere intendedto buttressthecase thatbiological evolution could be equally applicable to human societies. Spencer reasoned further
thathuman societies,likebiological species,operateaccordingto theprinciplesofnatural
selection,are governedby competitionand fitness,and evolve froman undifferentiated
(homogeneous) and primitivestateto one of differentiation
(heterogeneity)and progress.
Those too weak or ill-equippedto compete,or thosewho are unwillingand unable to do so,
he reasoned,oughtnot to be given an artificialboost to keep themon Nature's battlefield.
Spencer's ideas about the evolution and operation of human societies were held in
conjunctionwithhis strongbeliefsin laissez-faire
governmentand individualism.Though
theseviews gave his theoriesa decidedly conservativebent,politicallyhe was a noninterventionistand anti-imperialist,
a man whom Hofstadter(1992) describesas a somewhat
benevolentpacifistand internationalist
armchairtheorist.Greene (1963) tiesSpencermore
directlyto ideas equated withracistthinkingby notingSpencer'sbeliefthatracial conflict
was the key to social progressbecause it entailed "a continuousover-runningof the less
powerful or less adapted by the more powerful or more adapted, a drivingof inferior
varietiesintoundesirablehabitats,and occasionally,an extermination
ofinferiorvarieties"
(p. 85). Spencer's alarm over the potential threatof these inferiorvarieties to Western
civilizationwas a logical consequence of his desire to promote a societyof intellectually
superior citizens.Indeed, his great fearwas thatgovernmentswould interveneto keep
the less powerful afloat with artificialdevices such as social welfare policies, thereby
upsettingNature's natural selectionprocess.
During the antebellumperiod in the United States,William Graham Sumner (1963)
was thenation'sleading Social Darwinist;he was also thenation'sfirstsociologist.Sumner
adopted Spencer's ideas of laissez-faire
government,naturalselection,and survival of the
fittestand applied themto Americansociety.Essentially,he held thatwhat is is Nature's
stamp of approval of what oughtto be. Positioningthe peculiar institutionof American
slavery within Darwinist and Spencerian frames of reference,Sumner reasoned that
because slavery permittedsuperior groups the leisure to constructand develop more
refinedcultures,it actuallyadvanced the cause of humanity(Bierstedt,1981). He viewed
Americansociety,particularlytheAmericanbusiness class, as representative
ofthenatural
order of thingsand the living example of Spencer's fitnessthesis. Sumner took such a
stance without equivocation because he believed all individuals begin the competitive
socioeconomic race on an equal footing.Even if the competitionis unequal or certain
individuals are given an edge, itwas his contentionthattheelementofchance,along with
motivationand naturalability,were thedecidingfactorsin determiningan individual's or

244

TheJournalofNegroEducation

This content downloaded from 208.94.128.55 on Wed, 17 Feb 2016 16:02:52 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

a group's fate.When Sumner's rigidpoliticalbeliefsare coupled withhis view of slavery,

what emerges is not only an anti-humanistposition but also one that promotes social
and social cruelty.
indifference
It is clear fromthese briefaccounts of Darwin's, Spencer's, and Sumner's views how
theirideas helped to set the tone and mood forrelationsbetween the races as well as the
classes in American society.In theirworld views, talentand virtuewere featuresto be
identifiedsolely with Europeans. Yet, whereas Spencer mightbe called a "gentle racist,"
Sumnerwas not so gentle,thoughneitherof the two was nowhere near as rabidlyracist
as two English Social Darwinists of theirera, Karl Pearson (1901) and Benjamin Kidd
(1902). Kidd's and Pearson's ideas were responsesto therush on thepart of theEuropean
nations and the United States to establish colonies during the last decade of the 19th
expansionistswho viewed European,and especiallyEnglish,
Bothwere territorial
century.1
colonialism,imperialism,and othereffortsto controlthe naturalresourcesand people of
distantcontinentsas naturalcomponentsof theDarwinistprinciplesentailedin thestruggle forexistence,survival,and supremacy.However, unlike Spencer and Sumner,who
Kidd and Pearson saw English political,economic, and cultural
were anti-imperialists,
control of "inferior"races as not only necessary to England's political and economic
survival,but also importantforbringingcivilizationto the unenlightened.
The battleforcontrolover Africa,Asia, and South America,in Kidd's and Pearson's
view, was a battle,in theHobbesian sense, of "a war ofall againstall" among contending
European and American governments(Hofstadter,1992; Semmel, 1968). It was Pearson
who raised an issue thatis seldom verbalized but oftena hidden forcein racistthought:
the message conveyed to membersof the dispossessed among the dominant group that
theywill be the political and economic beneficiariesof racial discriminationand racial
exclusion due to theirnation's imperialisticpolicies. Thus, he surmised that poor and
lower-classWhitesought to become partnersin the imperialistventure,maintainingthat
the very survival of Westerncivilizationdepended upon such a partnership(Semmel,
1968).
The racialstrugglethatwas designed to prove European and WhiteAmericansuperiorityover Africans,Native Americans,Asians, and Latin Americanswas accompanied by
a battle just as importantto prove the meritsof capitalism,imperialism,and slavery.
However, itis evidentthatthematerialaspects ofracial dominationpreceded theideologithatemergedto buttresstherelationshipbetweenrace and human abilities.
cal justification
In both cases, the Social Darwinist argumentwas used to prove and validate already
existinginstitutionalstructures.Accordingto Hofstadter(1992):
AlthoughDarwinism was not the primarysource of the belligerentideology and dogmatic racism of the
in thehands ofthetheoristsofraceand struggle... In
latenineteenthcentury,itdid become a new instrument
the decades after1885, Anglo-Saxonism,belligerentor pacific,was the dominant abstractrationale of
Americanimperialism... .The Darwinistmood sustainedthebeliefin Anglo-Saxonracial superioritywhich
obsessed many American thinkersin the latterhalf of the nineteenthcentury.The measure of world
dominationalready achieved by the "race" seemed to prove it the fittest.(pp. 172-173)

Social Darwinismwas accepted in England and theUnited Statesbecause it supported

policiesand practicesthatbothcountriesjustifiedas congruentwiththeirnationalinterests.
Though England lacked the internalracial problemsthatexistedin the United States,its
vast empirerequireditto develop externalracistcolonial and imperialistpoliciesbased on
I During thisperiod,theUnited Stateswas more interestedin colonizingtheexistingland mass of theNorth
American continent.Notwithstanding,its venturesinto Latin America,the Caribbean, and the PacificIslands,
buoyed by the unchallengedhegemonyin these regions provided by the Monroe Doctrine,removed it from
directcompetitionwith Europeans forthe spoils of Africaand Asia.

TheJournalofNegroEducation

This content downloaded from 208.94.128.55 on Wed, 17 Feb 2016 16:02:52 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

245

Social Darwinistprinciples.In theUnitedStates,Social Darwinismwas directedinternally

toward both race and economics. Much of the American literatureon the inferiority
of
Africanpeople did not emergeuntilthe 1840s and 1850s,when the institutionof slavery
was being attackedin theNorthand when most industrialcountrieshad eitherabolished
the practiceor were in the process of doing so (Oakes, 1982).
SCIENTIFIC RACISM: THE IDEOLOGY OF

IQ

TESTING

During the last two decades of the 19thcentury,the beliefin natural selection,racial
purity,and racial struggle,elevated to a high level by the Social Darwinists,was given
new emphasis by Francis Galton (1892), the fatherof the eugenics movement.Whereas
liberals and conservativesof the time were divided with regard to which forcemore
decisivelydeterminedindividual characteristics-heredityor environment-Galton supported the formerwith a vengeance. So convincedwas he of the efficacyof eugenics,or
controlledand selectivebreeding,as a tool to raciallyregeneratehis native England that
he urged the adoption of the idea as a new religion (Semmel, 1968). Key to Galton's
hereditarianethos was his view that societymust dispense with the erroneous idea of
naturalequality among humans. His eugenics programencouraged childbearingamong
the "fitterstock" of Westernsociety,namely its wealthyAnglo-Saxonupper classes; and
discouraged it among those whom he considered "unfit,"namely those of the lower
classes and people of color.
In an effortto prove inherentdifferences
between the social classes in England,Galton
constructeda seriesoftestsfocusingprimarilyon sensoryand motorskillsassessment.The
movementto scientifically
"prove" thathereditaryfactorswere paramountto intellectual
endowmentwas acceleratedby the work of two Frenchmen,AlfredBinetand Theophile
Simon, who constructedthe firstpracticalintelligencetestin 1905. This instrument,the
Binet-SimonScale, was latermodifiedand extendedby Lewis Termanand his associates
at StanfordUniversityin 1916 to yield the Stanford-BinetIntelligenceScale, one of the
firstto utilize the concept of the "intelligencequotient" or IQ (Shanklin,1994; Singer &
Sattler,1994; Terman,1961). The modern fascinationwith testingwas partlya reflection
of the growingscientismemergingamong the academic disciplines,especially the social
or human sciences,which were being challenged by those who viewed the techniques
and methodologiesof the naturalsciences as representativeof "true" or "hard" science.
As a result,those scholars who studied people were spurred to constructtheoriesand
methods thatwould enable themto operate with the same degree of precisionachieved
by thenaturalsciences.For many,relianceon standardizedtestssuch as Binet'sand other
quantifiableassessments of intelligencewas one way of proving thatthe social sciences
could be as objectiveand impersonalas thestudyofchemistryorphysics(Lundberg,1939).
Another part of the fascinationwith intelligencetestingis evident in the ongoing
search for measures to validate Galton's thesis of Anglo-Saxon superiority.This idea,
which sought validation under the rubricof Social Darwinism, was mainly an "afterthe-fact"assertion-that is, Anglo-Saxons were believed superiorbecause theyenjoyed
political,economic,and culturalhegemonyover non-Anglo-Saxonpeople. However, its
verificationwas especiallyimportantin the United Statesduringthe firsttwo decades of
the20thcentury.Indeed, racial chauvinismprovided a philosophical and moral rationale
for differentiating
"native" Anglo-Saxon Americans from the millions of eastern and
southernEuropean, Asian, and Latin Americanimmigrantswho chose to become Americans duringthatperiod as well as fromthe millionsof AfricanAmericanswho were then
migratingen masse fromthe South to other parts of the country(Sowell, 1981). The
manner in which the test scores of these various immigrantand migrantgroups were

246

TheJournalofNegroEducation

This content downloaded from 208.94.128.55 on Wed, 17 Feb 2016 16:02:52 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

announced so as to give braggingrightsto the Anglo-Saxonmajorityatteststo the racist

nature of both the tests and theiruses (Stark,1989). Repeatedly,the ideology of ethnic
or racial superioritywould be called upon to confirmthe dominantgroup's worth and
standing,and testresultswould be cited to validate the rightnessof this ideology.
One does nothave to engage in extensivedebate on thevalidityoftheteststhemselves;
simple commonsenselogic, devoid of class or racial presuppositions,should alertthose
to thefactthatthelargelyrural
who assertIQ tests'abilityto verifysuperiorityor inferiority
and migratingpopulationswere culturallyand educationallynot
and peasant immigrating
akin to the dominant Anglo-Saxons,who had benefitof many generationsof selective
urban cultureand education.Hence, theverybasis forsuch comparisonsis null and void.
beliefin the
But that perspectivewould be logical and rational.The early 20th-century
genetic superiorityof the Anglo-Saxon was groundless and had more to do with the
ethnicand racial politicsof the timesthan with any scientificattestations.Whereas each
group had its "slot" in theethnictotempole, racialpoliticsgave even thelowestEuropean
American the opportunityand rightto a sense of racial one-upmanship in his or her
contactswith AfricanAmericans.Justas Social Darwinist theorieswere used to justify
European imperialismand colonialism,the thesisof Anglo-Saxonsupremacy,buttressed
by testresults,justifiedracial and ethnicoppression and exclusion in the United States.
Yet,likeSocial Darwinism,theIQ testingmovementdid notcreateor cause racial discrimination or oppressive behavior; it simply enabled certainWhites to betterjustifylongstandingideological assumptions,policies,and oppressivebehaviors.IQ teststhusbecame
ideological weapons in the campaign to label certainpersons so as to betterexploitthem.
In the U.S., the growingbeliefin science and scientificmethodologyas an avenue to
objectivetruthabout human abilitieslinked the acceptance of IQ test scores to ideas of
progress.For many WhiteAmericans,thevast coverage given testresultsonly confirmed
what they believed only ideologically: that there was a White ethnic hierarchy,and
stood atop all otherraces, especially the African
thatthis hierarchy,despite differences,
American.Indeed, the need to believe thatAfricanAmericanswere inferiorwas a view
deeply held by many of theirWhite counterpartsduring the early years of the current
century.The ethos surroundingthescientificracismoftheburgeoningintelligencetesting
movementpermittedWhitesto know and relateto Black Americansas abstractionsand
one-dimensionalfigures.Thus, thetestsaccomplishedtwo purposes: first,theyconfirmed
Whitesuperiority;and second, theystrengthenedtheidea thatBlacks should be excluded
fromthecore cultureofAmericansociety.However, theinstitutionofmeasures to ensure
these objectivesalso ensured that,among Whites,therewould continue to be a degree
of collectivesocial immaturityand massive flightfromrealitywith regard to Blacks.
In the late 1960s,much apprehensionwas generatedby the heightenedimmigration
ofAfricanAmericansfromthe South to urban southern,northern,and midwesterncities,
and by theirattemptsto translatethis population influxinto political,economic,educational, and cultural power. Following the traditionbegun by Galton, the psychologist
ArthurJensen(1969) declared thatnot onlywere AfricanAmericansintellectuallyinferior
between the two
to Whites,but that therewould always be a 15-pointIQ differential
groups. Though Jensenmay have viewed his raising of these issues as exploratory,the
negative insightsabout Black abilities presented in his articlewere enough to stir the
racial pot. In the minds of many Whites, his assertion that Blacks were incapable of
attainingthe same intellectuallevels achieved by some Whites only confirmedBlack
Advocates ofsegregationused Jensen'stentativedata to fightthedesegregation
inferiority.
cases lodged against many school districtsin the South (Turner,Singleton,& Musick,
1984). Opponents of compensatoryeducation were bolsteredby Jensen'sclaim thatsuch

TheJournalofNegroEducation

This content downloaded from 208.94.128.55 on Wed, 17 Feb 2016 16:02:52 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

247

percentageofAfricanAmericans,were not signifiprograms,which enrolleda significant

cant factorsin lessening Black-WhiteIQ differences.
Jensen's article,which followed on the heels of Moynihan's (1965) disheartening,
reporton the Black familyand issues related to crimeand delingovernment-sponsored
quency,out-of-wedlockbirths,crime,and povertyin the Black community,was a call for
Americansocietyto look more deeply at factoringgeneticsinto the intellectualprocess.
One can nothelp but assume, giventhewide circulationofJensen'sarticleand thenational
discussion it generated,that his findingsno doubt contributedto this climate of fear.
Indeed, following his reading of Jensen's study, Moynihan allegedly informedthenPresidentNixon to follow a policy of "benign neglect" with regard to AfricanAmerican
communitydevelopment.
Like the scientificracism of the earlier intelligencetestingmovement,the Jenseninitiatedrace and IQ debate came at a timeof massive migrationof Blacks fromthe South
to otherparts of the United States,but therewere otherinternationalfactorsthatplayed
an importantpart in settingthe tone and tenorof this debate, at least forBlacks. During
the earlierera, Africaand much of Asia were under the controlof colonial powers. By
the end of the 1960s,most of Africahad been liberated,eitherthroughwars of liberation
or by recognitionon the part of the colonial powers that theycould no longer hold on
to theirAfricancolonies. Additionally,the numbersof citieswith Black majorities,Black
mayors,and Black citycouncil membershad increased geometricallyduring the period
aftertheSupreme Court's 1954 Brownv. BoardofEducationofTopeka,Kansasdesegregation
ruling.Thus, BlackAmericanshad a frameofreferencein thelaterperiod thattheylacked
at the turnof the century.Not only could theysee thattheyhad abilities,despite what
IQ testscores demonstrated,but theycould look around theircommunitiesand theworld
and findevidence of theirenergiesand talents.The claim here is not to assertthe absence
of negativismin Black life; rather,it is to maintain that the intelligenceand abilityof
understoodor describedonlyby thenegative,especially
Blackpeople cannotbe sufficiently
insofaras the data on Black performanceand potentialare oftenskewed and the results
but theyrepresentonly
oftenmisinterpreted.
Intelligencetest scores may be significant,
a part of the pictureof a person's or a group's ability,possibility,and reality.
THE BELL CURVE: SOCIAL DARWINISM AND SCIENTIFIC RACISM REVISITED

In the contemporaryperiod,Herrnsteinand Murray's (1994) TheBell Curvemakes yet

another appeal to the American public and its policy makers to elevate genetics over
environmentas the pivotal factorin determininghuman abilities.As was also true for
previous Social Darwinist and scientificracist analyses, Herrnsteinand Murray's book
was published at a time when race and racial mattersstood at the centerof national
debate and discussion.2Even though racial analyses constituteonly about a thirdof its
contents,issues germaneto race setthestageformuch ofthedebate surroundingthebook.
Essentially,Herrnsteinand Murrayrepeat many of Jensen'sassertionsin their1990s
study.For example,thematteroftheallegedlyfixedIQ spread betweenBlacksand Whites,
firstenunciated by Jensen,resurfacesin The Bell Curve.The book also repeats Jensen's
positionthatcompensatoryeducation is both a waste of timeand public resources.However,what is moststrikingabout the similaritiesbetween TheBellCurveand earlierworks
of scientificracism is that the formerso blatantlyespouses a formof totalitarianand
reactionaryphilosophy that can only be seen in its purest formthroughthe lenses of
2 A simple review of Americanhistorywill reveal thattherewere very few momentswhen race was not a
major issue in this nation (Gossett,1963).

248

TheJournalofNegroEducation

This content downloaded from 208.94.128.55 on Wed, 17 Feb 2016 16:02:52 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Social Darwinism.For example,theargumentraisedby Social Darwinistsis thatindividual

characteristicsare shaped by genetics and thus are firmand fixed for all groups at all
times. In true Galtonian and Pearsonian fashion,Herrnsteinand Murray assert in their
work thatculture,intellect,and knowledge are raciallydetermined,fixed,and hence not
subject to devices of social reconstruction.Moreover, they also maintain that negative
aspects of group or individual behaviors are reflectionsof preordained dispositions
unchangeableby thegroup,theindividual,or the society.Like Sumner,theycontendthat
attemptsto changethebehaviorsor improvetheintellectofa givengroup or individualare
foolishand destinedto fail.In Herrnsteinand Murray'sview, Nature supersedes nurture,
"bright"makes right,and those who have the abilityto engage successfullyon Nature's
battlefieldcan and should do so, oblivious to the needs of others.
According to the logic of The Bell Curve,Blacks or othersocietal have-nots,because
test, ought not to be
they have failed the Darwinist/Spenceriansurvival-of-the-fittest
to "level the playor
compensation
compassion,
remediation,
consideration,
given social
ing field." This is Malthusian logic personified:Whitesowe Blacks nothingbecause, due
to the latter'sfaultygenetics,any and all effortsto radically change theirlives would
come to naught. It is a hard doctrine,one possessed by conservativeWhite elites who
take theirsuperiorityas a given, and who, fromtheirloftyheightsin academe or from
theirprotectedstatusat conservativethinktanks,issue eitherveiled or overtdeclarations
of Black inferiority.
THE SEEDS OF RACISM

The desire to subjugate speaks volumes about the tangible political and economic
gains accrued to those doing the subjugating.Attackson the abilitiesof the subjugated
can thus be seen as merelyan attemptto morallyjustifyactions thatoftenrun contrary
to the stated democraticprinciplesof the subjugators.In such a scenario,more important
than merelyassertingthat subjugated ones are inferior,the subjugatoris really boldly
assertinghis or her need to maintainothersin inferiorroles.
Many have pointedout thenegativeconsequences ofracistsocial policies and practices
forthe societies thatpromulgatethem. DuBois (1903/1961) reasoned at the turn of the
20thcenturythatWhite Americans'beliefin theirsuperiorityhad made them oblivious
to the sufferingsof theirfellow citizens; made a mockeryof the values of democracy;
promoteddishonestyin racial matters;and contributednothingtoward the development
oflogic,reason,and rationalityin Americansocial life.Hobson (1938) directedhis analysis
toward the negative consequences of imperialismfor imperialistcountries.The factors
he citesas negativemustbe viewed withinthecontextsoftheperceivedideas ofsuperiority
held by colonizing countriesand how those ideas become a motivatingforceto justify
the time,funds,and energyexpended to conquer, control,or annex the colonized. For
example,Hobson identifiesthe followingharm done to England as a resultof its colonial
and imperialistpolicies: greateracceptanceoftotalitarianpolicies,a negationofdemocratic
principles,lessened emphasis on internalpolitical and economic reforms,the depression
of wages forthe average worker,the drainingof the national treasury,and the mistaken
belief among the English working classes that they benefittedfromcolonies when in
realitythe surplus income derived fromcolonial resourceswas retainedby the imperial
and wealthyclasses.
The typical White American response to race and racism is denial and an implicit
defensiveness;thus,thereis a tendencyamong some Whitesto latchonto data thatmight
let persons of European descent offthe racial "hook." For these Whites,findingsthat
evoke sighs of relief.Such data
supportinherentand eternalBlack intellectualinferiority

TheJournal
ofNegroEducation
This content downloaded from 208.94.128.55 on Wed, 17 Feb 2016 16:02:52 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

249

make themfeel slightlybetterand not so guiltyabout harboringracistfeelingsor ideas

opposing racialinclusion.Butthesefeelingsand ideas are notmeaningless,hollow abstractions; theyhave consequences (Dennis, 1981). They are real and frequentlycome to life
in ways notenvisionedby theirpromulgators.Similarly,issues ofrace and human abilities
do not begin or evolve in a vacuum. Rather,they oftenemerge to respond to tangible
political,economic,or culturalsituations.The presentationofdata assertingBlackinferiorityor Whitesuperiorityis bound to cause a reactionand responsewithinthelargersociety.
Althoughthe average WhiteAmericanwill not or cannotread studies such as Jensen's
or The Bell Curve,afterthe politicians,policy makers,talk-showhosts, and othershave
provided theirsoundbitesand synopses of theseworks,thecomplexproblemsand issues
theyraise will have been unduly simplifiedand made thatmuch more dangerous. The
picturetheypaint,of Blacks and otherpeople of color as collectivebiological illiteratesas not only intellectuallyunfitbut evil and criminalas well-will provide the logic and
justificationfor those who would furtherdisenfranchiseand exclude racial and ethnic
minorities.Such logic would entail a rejectionof the idea of the open society.It might
also prompta small minorityof Whites to retreatto a pathological and fanaticalhatred
of non-Whites.Whetherthe recentburningsof AfricanAmerican churchesthroughout
the South is one of the signs of such a pathological sickness is yet unknown,but, in the
name ofscience,theactionsofprofessionalscholarsin thepresentera who feed thisracist
ideology with unsubstantiatedand insupportabledata are tantamountto yelling "fire"
in a crowded room.
CONCLUSION

As one navigates the politics of race and human abilities,one is temptedto view the
theoreticalploddings of eugenicistsand scientificracistslike Spencer or Sumner with a
degree of sympathy.They, at least, had no data and were largelytalkingfromthe tops
of theirheads; yet theytalked so much and so loudly theywere able to convince many
othersthatmuch of what theyutteredwas based on facts.We know now that this was
not the case.
Theircontemporaryapostles,however,presentus with lots of data, much of it mired
in pages of jargon,but what is clear in the end is thattheyknow just about as much or
as littleabout geneticsas did Pearsonor Galton.Theyseek in thepresentday to overwhelm
us withwhat theyclaim is thebeauty and purityof theirdata, but theirpronouncements
are just as ideologically driven and racially and politicallyinspired as those of their
predecessors. Yet, unlike Jensen,who was and is generallyvery careful in his extradata pronouncements,Herrnsteinand Murrayin The Bell Curvedo not hesitateto make
ideological assertionsthatcannotbe supportedby theirdata. In thissense, theyare more
akin to Spencer, Kidd, Pearson, and Galton than to Jensen.Additionally,though the
survivingauthor,Charles Murray (RichardHerrnsteindied shortlybeforethe book was
published),claims not to have writtenthebook withthepoliticsofrace in mind,a review
ofpreviousworksby both authorssuggeststhatquite theopposite may be true.Murray's
conservativeracial politicswere clearlystated in his 1988 book, LosingGround:American
SocialPolicy,1950-1980,and many ofhis earlierargumentsare repeated in TheBell Curve.
Thus, in these and many other ways, scientificracistslike Herrnsteinand Murray are
distantbut notstrangebedfellowsto theirphilosophicalforebears,and theycan be comparablyviewed as vulgarand dogmaticgeneticdeterminists
who appeal to theracialanimosityand hatred of dominantgroups to push theirreactionarypolitical agendas.
That human abilitiesare diverse seem obvious. What is made of thisdiversityis often
a politicalissue, especiallyin a societywhererace historicallyhas servedas a dividingline.

250

TheJournal
ofNegroEducation
This content downloaded from 208.94.128.55 on Wed, 17 Feb 2016 16:02:52 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

To illustratethispoint,closingparallels can be drawn betweenthe continuingvolatilityof

race in Americansocietyand the dangers of nuclear war discussed throughoutthe late
1940s, 1950s, and even today. One of the major themes posed during such discussions
was thatof the role of the scientistand otherwell-informedcitizens(Lifton& Markusen,
1990). Justas the nuclear threatwas predicated on the idea of the nuclear superiorityof
the East over the West and vice-versa,and just as thatnuclear competitionoftentook the
world to thebrinkofnuclear war, contemporaryassumptionsof racial superiority,
based
on the politics of geneticsand racistideology, threatento take our nation and world to
thebrinkof racial guerillawarfare.The appeal to logic and reason made by the scientists
and progressivepoliticiansduring the nuclear crisismust now be made by responsible
social analysts.Theircharge is to educate and informthe public, not to fan the flamesof
racial intolerance.
REFERENCES

New York:AcademicPress.
Bierstedt,
R. (1981).American
sociological
theory.
natural
history-Containing
a theory
oftheearth,
Buffon,
G. L. L. (1797).Barr'sBuffon:
Buffon's
etc.(J.S. Barr,Trans.).London:
minerals,
a general
history
ofman,ofthebrute
creation,
andofvegetables,
H. D. Symonds.
Darwin,C. (1859).Theorigins
ofspecies.
London:J.Murray.
and racism:The Whiteexperience.
In B. Bowser& R. G.
Dennis,R. M. (1981).Socialization
Americans
Hunt(Eds.),Impacts
onWhite
ofracism
(pp.71-85).ThousandOaks,CA: SagePublications.
Essaysandsketches.
New York:FawcettPublicaDuBois,W. E. B. (1961).ThesoulsofBlackfolk:
tions.(Originalworkpublished1903)
Galton,F. (1892).Hereditary
genius.London:Macmillan.
I. (A. Collins,Trans.).New York:
Gobineau,A. (1915).Theinequality
ofhumanraces,Volume
G. P. Putnam'sSons.(Originalworkpublished1853).
Dallas, TX: SouthernMethodist
Gossett,T. (1963).Race:Thehistory
ofan ideain America.
Press.
University
worldview.New York:New AmericanLibrary.
Greene,J.C. (1963).Darwinandthemodern
inAmerican
andclassstructure
Herrnstein,
R.,& Murray,C. (1994).Thebellcurve:Intelligence
life.New York:The FreePress.
London:Allen& Unwin.
Hobson,J.A. (1938).Imperialism.
inAmerican
R. (1992).SocialDarwinism
thought.
Boston:BeaconPress.
Hofstadter,
A. R. (1969).How muchcanwe boostIQ and scholastic
Harvard
Educaachievement?
Jensen,
tionalReview,
39,1-123.
civilization.
New York:Macmillan.
Kidd,B. (1902).Principles
ofwestern
E. (1990).Thegenocidal
mentality.
New York:BasicBooks.
Lifton,
R. J.,& Markusen,
New York:Macmillan.
Lundberg,
G. (1939).Foundations
ofsociology.
action.Washington,
DC: Officeof
D. (1965).TheNegro
Thecasefornational
Moynihan,
family:
and Research,
ofLabor.
Policy,Planning,
U.S. Department
American
socialpolicy,
1950-1980.New York:BasicBooks.
C. (1984).Losingground:
Murray,
Oakes,J.(1982).Therulingrace.New York:RandomHouse.
thestandpoint
ofscience.
London:A & C Black.
Pearson,Karl.(1901).Naturallifefrom
Press.
Rose,P. (1968).Thesubjectis race.New York:OxfordUniversity
andsocialreform.
New York:Doubleday.
Semmel,B. (1968).Imperialism
E. (1994).Anthropology
andrace.Belmont,
CA: Wadsworth.
Shanklin,
edition.In R.
Intelligence
Scale,fourth
Singer,N. G., & Sattler,
J.M. (1994).Stanford-Binet
& S. Scarr(Eds.),Encyclopedia
S. J.Ceci,J.Horn,E. Hunt,J.D. Matarazarro,
ofhuman
J.Sternberg,
intelligence
(pp. 1033-1038).New York:Macmillan.
America.
Sowell,T. (1981).Ethnic
New York:BasicBooks.
New York:Appleton.
Spencer,H. (1874).Thestudyofsociology.
CA: Wadsworth.
Stark,R. (1989).Sociology.
Belmont,

TheJournalofNegroEducation

This content downloaded from 208.94.128.55 on Wed, 17 Feb 2016 16:02:52 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

251

Sumner,C. (1963). Social Darwinism:Selectedessays.Englewood Cliffs,NJ:Prentice-Hall.

Terman,L. (1961). Themeasurement
ofintelligence:
An explanation
ofand a complete
guideforthe
use oftheStanford
revisionand extension
oftheBinet-Simonintelligence
scale.Boston:Houghton Mifflin.
Turner,J.,Singleton,R., & Musick, D. (1984). Oppression.Chicago: Nelson Hall.

252

TheJournalofNegroEducation

This content downloaded from 208.94.128.55 on Wed, 17 Feb 2016 16:02:52 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions