Tks for your information on the above.
Is he trying to say developmenting countries are more advance in
medical feild and hoping spore will be one in future?
No. It's just one of Lee Kuan Yew's zany racist rubbish
theories. Mostly outdated and debunked racial crap from 1930s.
Lee Kuan Yew is from that generation and he is unable to throw
off those rubbish racist concepts.
This is a very serious intellectual handicap of Lee Kuan
Yew.
He reveals himself to be a confused, intellectual trashbag. You
can see how poor and confused his understanding of human
development really is.
Nothing but filth from Lee Kuan Yew.
Pui. Read Lee Kuan Yew filth also want to vomit.
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Lee_Kuan_Yew
Fundamentally,
Ardrey is a
racist, devoted to a belief in human inequality and unfreedom, an
enemy of social "disorder" which must be suppressed by authority
because man is a predatory, violent, aggressive creature, compelled
by irresistible hereditary compulsion to war over
territory. These are fascist ideas, and, in
this book, Ardrey is doing for America what Treitschke, H. S.
Chamberlain, Alfred Rosenberg, and others did for Germany:
preparing an intellectual basis for fascist political action.
Unfortunately, there is not space here to show this in detail, but
a few brief points will show the trend.
Ardrey speaks of 6 to 7 million mentally deficient Americans as an
example of "the accident of the night," when he must know perfectly
well that a considerable part of these have nothing to do with
inheritance but are the result of virus infections or other events
of an environmental nature which occurred after
conception.
Negro intelligence, which he renames "capacity to
learn," he insists, is inferior. To soften
the blow, he says that Negroes have "superiority of anatomical
endowment and neurological coordination," then asks, "If racial
distinction on the playing field is to be accepted, then can there
exist theoretical grounds for banishing distinctions in the
classroom? In the United States the evidence for inferior learning
capacity is as inarguable as superior performance on the baseball
diamond." He bases this of course, on the Coleman Report and,
equally naturally, runs into a conspiracy to prevent him from
getting a copy of this explosive document: "After some eight months
of trying, I pried a copy out of the U.S. Government Printing
Office. Why it had become unavailable became evident only after
long exploration of its 700-plus pages of statistics. The Negro had
failed in American schools catastrophically, beyond statistical
doubt or sentimental apology. . . . Worse still for the black was
the record of the Oriental-American, subjected in American life to
discrimination certainly as rigorous as the Negro, who consistently
equalled and in areas excelled the records of white students."
Naturally, Ardrey finds Arthur Jensen's article
"on the genetic inferiority of Negro intelligence" a persuasive
document and calls those who reject it
hysterical.
I can answer Ardrey simply by pointing out that his ignorance
totally disqualifies him from writing on the
subject. If he had compared Chinese-Americans with
Negro-Americans from several points of view (crime rate,
educational achievement, recourse to violence, mental ill-health,
need for government social and economic relief), he would have
discovered that the Chinese record is far superior to the Negro on
all of these. He would also have discovered that the Chinese family
is probably the most stable of any American minority, just as the
Negro family is the most unstable, and
that most students of these matters would attribute the difference
in various social indicators to the factor of family stability,
rather than to race or skin
color.
Moreover, if Ardrey had taken time to compare
the family life of the 15 percent of Negroes who do as well as the
upper 50 percent of whites, he would have found that the higher
achieving group came from more stable Negro
families. The Moynihan Report, despite its
obvious weaknesses, is as quotable as the Jensen paper, but Ardrey,
who constantly doctors his evidence by selection, does not mention
Moynihan. Ardrey's bigotry appears when he says that
Chinese-Americans are "subjected in American life to discrimination
certainly as rigorous as the Negro." This is
nonsense.
Forty-five years ago, about 1925, writers like Ardrey were arguing
the genetic inferiority of Negroes by using the intelligence tests
of draftees in World War I. These
bigots were silenced only when it was pointed out that the same
tests which showed the whites did better than Negroes also showed
that Northern Negroes did better than Southern
whites. In Ardrey's case, as usual, he can
be refuted from his own book. He admits that the Coleman Report
tests were "culture-bound" and intended to be so. In that case, to
use them to indicate genetic (that is, non-cultural) differences
reveals Ardrey for what the whole book shows: that he is a writer
who has no concern with scientific procedures.
http://www.carrollquigley.net/book-reviews/Robert_Ardrey_Current_Scheherazade.htm
