Forums / Discussion / General

how often do you guys see this, because i seem to see it a lot, especially on the internet.

I'm sorry. Are we implying that white american men aren't superior to all?

Thankfully I only see it on the internet. I seem to see it the most on youtube. Seriously, fuck those people that use "scientific" racism/sexism

I call it pseudo-scientific racism.

Somewhat related, this video is a good explanation that the very concept of race is irrelevant, and that "racial superiority" is pretty much idiotic.

Honestly, guys? My OCD compels me to double-check all of my beliefs constantly, even at most basic of levels. As a result, whenever I'm arguing with scientific fascists, I get this nagging feeling that they may be correct. I'm a woman studying physics, so I'm a living counterpoint to half of their bullshit, but that awful feeling still gets to me.

If I ever start spewing quasi-fascist stuff here, I hope a mod shoots me in the face.

The three main hubs of scientific fascism are /pol/ (more potent on 8chan, less so on 4chan); the comments sections of sites like Youtube, Breitbart, and Yahoo news (only occasionally, thankfully); and the network of race/sex supremacist websites in the darker half of the web, such as Stormfront. I'm quite familiar with these hotbeds, since these people used to be my allies.

Now, I've got good news and bad news: the good news is that roughly half of the people making the comments on these websites are trolls. The bad news is that this means that the other half are completely serious and sincere in their beliefs.

The case made by the racists tends to be weaker, so I'll address it right now. Their categorization of races into "negroid", "mongoloid", and "caucasoid" tends to be the basis for most of their assertions. They may believe, for instance, that negroids and caucasoids should be separated due to noticeable differences in the characteristics of these two race categories. Take a look at this gene map, however:

As you can see, categorizing people in such broad terms simply does not work, due to sheer genetic variance. This is further complicated by the fact that negroids are by far the most genetically varied race category – be sure to point this out to anyone who looks like they are about to go on a rant about "the blacks".

When you boil a scientific fascist down to their core, then it's pretty much guaranteed that you'll find a middle class white dude with a rampant superiority complex and a small penis. Scientific fascism is basically just another way for these people to tell everyone how awesome they are despite the fact that they have achieved nothing in life.

Particle Mare wrote:

and a small penis

What the fuck.

Unlike the variation of physical, mental, and physiological traits across human genetic clusters, this point is absolutely indisputable.

If I ever start spewing quasi-fascist stuff here, I hope a mod shoots me in the face.

It's a big responsibility, but I would proudly take the job of shooting you in the face if this event were to occur.

Ok, but in all seriousness, I know what you mean about self-doubting yourself even when arguing against one of the most idiotic concepts. I find that sometimes even when I'm arguing with someone who is obviously wrong, I can't really bring up a good enough counter argument as to why they're wrong, and thus I end up doubting my own opinions. I suppose that's the whole reason logical fallacies exist in most arguments. They're hard to argue against, even though they're so obviously wrong.

From the perspective of my humanities background, I think scientific racism and sexism are further proof that we need the humanities reintroduced more thoroughly and meaningfully into our education system. Education used to be and should be about what constitutes a good life and how one can live a good life. Education in the humanities teaches us to temper knowledge with humility and how to interact meaningfully and compassionately with the world around us.

Scientific racism comes from the sort of people who have not and never will respect the sanctity of human life. Because they are believers of scientism, namely the belief that science is the only way of knowing, it is much easier for them to dehumanize the "other" and justify hatred against the "other."

Ultimately, these people have never asked themselves "What constitutes a good life?" They lack the tools to explore that question and consequently lack the tools to seek and obtain genuine and lasting happiness. I would be afraid of them if they were in positions of power, but because most of them are likely just lonely, sad, and frustrated people, I can only pity them and their deafness to the beauty and complexity of the human experience.

I'm sorry I never seen this term before, so scientific racism refers to a pseudo-science that wants to determine superiority/inferiority between races(although races are a social construct)?

I thought it was it the use of science to prove that racism is inherent in human nature (in which I think it could be true).

Scientific racism is rather inaccurate with racial differences being primarily due to cultural factors.
Scientific sexism may or may not be justified, depending on the topic in question.

I don't see it that much, but I see it often enough for it to be a problem, and seeing it at all is definitely a problem. I've only heard one peson use it IRL, but it's just a friend who really likes dark humor and he was merely satirizing legit "scientific" racists because he's not actually racist at all (saying that since blonde hair and blue eyes are relatively new mutations for humans and threfore the next step in human evolution, therefore making them superior, you know the drill). Overall though, none of what they say is actual evidence at all and just some losers justifying their own stupidity and small-mindedness. The most "compelling" arguments are usually for sexism, but by compelling I mean less shitty than the ones for racism due to there being an obvious difference between the sexes while race differences are all aesthetic pretty much. Still, physical differences does not equate to mental and should not account for social standing. Both sexes are still both human beings and still have the same minds so sexism therefore shouldn't exist. Still, people make the arguments of hormones screwing with the mind, but you could make that argument for either side so it's just getting low at that point (more than it already is)

Generally the term "scientific sexism/racism" refers to when people make a generalized statement about a body of people and then use bogus statistics to "prove" they're right

For instance: If I were to say blacks were a race of thugs and crooks, and then back up that statement by with a statistic that 80% of people convicted of theft were black (arbitrary statistic for the sake of example) then I would be invoking scientific racism.

Now hold up just a minute.
Do actually think any of these fucks give two shits about good science? Oh no no no no. What they do is use a sham, phony-baloney distortion of science in an attempt to confirm their own Dark Age-level biases and convince the "unenlightened" (read: idiots) to their own side. On the other hand, real, constantly-attempt-to-falsify-hypotheses science shows (as in the example Particle Mare gave) that their methods and conclusions are garbage. That's why the idea of genetic intellectual racial superiority should not be (and to a large degree, is not, at least in the mainstream) accepted.
Science has done us pretty damn well, several hundred times better than any other way of seeking truth in my opinion. Don't discredit our reliance on it just because of humanity's bottom twenty percent.

Their "scientific" discussing of races on the internet is pretty useless when you think about it. Everyone is anonymous online until proven otherwise. We're all equals, nerds wasting their time on the internet. Until you show me how you look, we could be anything from white cis male to trans negro and it doesn't matter. And after you show me how you look then it still won't matter, because looks and genes can't cover for you when you act like an idiot. You are what you make yourself be, not what your genetic code makes you or how you identify as.

But I guess the internet is also the reason people like this exists, because of the Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory. They don't have to watch their mouths that much, and are more likely to develop opinions like that.

These people won't be able to do anything in an actual scientific discussion. There something is only considered a fact when it's proven 99.99% correct, and vague assumptions and "scientific" conclusions grabbed out of thin air mean nothing.

Calling something scientistic doesn't make it scientistic.

That's pretty much what always happens when people attempt to base ludicrous ideas on authoritative non-ludicrous sources. You've got people who passionately defend their Second Amendment right but don't gave a shit about others' freedom of speech or religion, and people who twist obscure Biblical passages to "justify" their bigotries while ignoring things like "love thy neighbor" or "thou shalt not kill." They don't see any alternative to deluding themselves with selective perception, because acknowledging the reality of their situation would mean realizing that their long-held beliefs have no real basis.

Crimson wrote:

Particle wrote:

If I ever start spewing quasi-fascist stuff here, I hope a mod shoots me in the face.

It’s a big responsibility, but I would proudly take the job of shooting you in the face if this event were to occur.

Excuse me but I'm quite certain it requires a man mod to shoot a load in someone's face. Once again giving us scientific evidence that men are the superior race. The science is rock solid.

Careful, bro. You'll upset the fedoras.

In all seriousness, though, you're totally right. Kids these days don't have values, except to value not having values.

Peoples these days values consist of two things: getting laid and making money.

@Serious Business @Dr. Coolface

I hope you two don't confuse libertinism with fascism. The two are diametrically opposed at the most basic of levels, like Yin and Yang.

Libertinism endorses secularism and hedonism. It is often considered to be the logical conclusion of any left-leaning strain of social thought. Fascism endorses religious fanaticism, obedience to authority, and extreme purity. It is right-wing social thought taken to its extreme.

Dr. Coolface, you've presented a fascist image (the scapegoating of Jews) and then railed against libertines. Keep in mind that /pol/acks and Stormfronters absolutely despise hedonism in any form, especially the sexual kind. They even have a special word for libertines: "degenerates". So to put it frankly, I don't quite understand the message that you're trying to communicate.

It doesn't matter whether or not there's hard data to back up these people's claims. What matters is that they believe what constitutes as hard data is the only way to measure the lives of theirs. I'm not saying that science doesn't have a place in education, but rather that if you only teach maths and science, you'll invariably and consistently raise up insufficient people.Science is a way of knowing, a way of perceiving the world, but if that's all you believe in, you will be led down a path that treats people like statistics, objects, data.

While religion can be a hedge against this venomous dehumanization, religion is not the only viable means of perception with which to hedge this sort of thinking. When a secular scientist says that he or she is, say, researching a cure for cancer because he or she believes that nobody should have to suffer cancer, that comes out of a humanistic desire to help others, which is a philosophical ethos.

In ancient Greece, philosophy was called the "Queen of the Sciences" because it helped then as it should help now explain (but often doesn't) the reasons why things exist, rather than just the empirical data behind it. In popular fiction, a good parallel for this problem can be found in Jurassic Park where Ian Malcolm says something like, "Your scientists became so preoccupied with whether they could that they didn't stop to think if they should."

@Particle Mare

I was posting against materialism and hedonism, suggesting that some sort of ideals, values, or virtues would be beneficial for society.

Also, antisemetic maymays ≠ fascism.

This is a scientific fascism thread, though. Scientific fascists hate hedonism, so are you planning to defend fascism? I don't see how your post would be relevant otherwise.