Inbreeding becomes politically correct

While this blog suggests clearing the ghettos and using bio-chemistry to instill better behaviors, Noah Feldman seems to want to go in the opposite direction:

The Way We Live Now – The New Pariahs? – The Rise of Anti-Islamic Bias in Western Europe – NYTimes.com
Even Britain, which has afforded Muslims a more welcoming environment, has had some worrying moments. A few years back, a Labor M.P. called for an end to “the tradition of first-cousin marriages” among Pakistanis and other South Asians in Britain. The basis for her suggestion was the claim that Pakistanis in Britain were more likely than the general population to suffer from recessive autosomal genetic disorders. Of course, so are Ashkenazi Jews, but you can hardly imagine an M.P. proposing to limit Jews’ marriage choices for this reason, especially given the historic Nazi allegation of Jewish genetic inferiority.

Matrimonial incest is a pretty good definition of the Gap. It’s also bad for the health of a people. Children of first-cousins are not as healthy as children in the general population. This is true, no matter how many times you cry “Nazi!”

5 thoughts on “Inbreeding becomes politically correct”

  1. You have to understand, Political Correctness works on a hierarchical system. The highest, and most holy doctrine is that of diversity. Diversity comes first, and trumps everything else.

    In the Netherlands, they seen a very large upswing in rape occurring against Dutch women by Muslims. To the surprise of many, a Dutch feminist made a statement which put the blame on Dutch women for dressing provactively. The idea of “the woman asking for it” goes against everything that feminists believe in. But in the religion of political correctness, putting blame on non-whites for doing something wrong may bring multiculturalism in question.

    Therefore, in this case, diversity trumps feminism.

    In the West inbreeding is looked down upon. People in West Virgina are insulted by the accusations that they’re a bunch of “inbreed rednecks.” But since this case of inbreeding relates to non-Europeans, it must be acceptable because calling this wrong may bring multiculturalism into question.

    Therefore, diversity trumps inbreeding.

    DIVERSITY UBER ALLAS!!!

  2. I wanted to blog on this article as well because he seems to be missing the point on multiple levels (he doesn’t describe the sometimes racist and defeatist policies in France and elsewhere that keep immigrants’ economic, social and educational opportunities few and far between (1) while underplaying the very real threat some of these immigrants pose to European peace and cultural values. He further doesn’t discuss the flood of immigrants from Africa and elsewhere swarming into Europe and the failure of immigration policy across the board there. At least the Euros are trying to address the problem (2) (Finally!).

    Yet, your point, for the long haul, is the more important one.

    Not to mention those same British subjects are often the victims of forced marriages that the British end up having to take action on (3).

    (1)
    http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007519
    (2)
    http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0620/p01s04-woeu.html
    (3)
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/21/AR2008062101782.html

  3. Also, Feldman doesn’t seem to understand that the Euros (like anyone) reserve the right to impress their cultural mores on immigrants, otherwise, those immigrants are free to go elsewhere and should be deported if they don’t understand that concept.

    The health costs, social consequences and prospect of a semi-permanent underclass are simply too high for the Brits or anyone to want or have to pay.

  4. Actually, endogamy remains a problem for Ashkenazic Jews, who today discourage first-cousin marriage (a practice that was encouraged in the Eastern European ghettos because of a quite rational fear that the population would die out otherwise) but encourage Jews to marry each other, despite the serious risks that bringing together recessive genes (i.e. Tay Sachs) pose to the group. Many Jewish leaders and parents, still feeling the scars of their parents’ and grandparents’ generation’s experience in the concentration camps, fiercely propagandize and argue that Jews who marry into other religious groups are carrying out Hitler’s work.

    This is one instance where I think the science of genetics should win out over so-called ‘religious’ beliefs (quite a few Biblical Jews, including Moses, married non-Jews!) and the severe psychological scars that have been left on the culture after the Holocaust. It’s tragic that the Jewish Forward has to have a section on genetics (http://www.forward.com/sections/genetics/) that describes awful genetic diseases that can be combatted simply by discouraging, instead of desperately clinging to, endogamy.

  5. Seerov,

    You have to understand, Political Correctness works on a hierarchical system. The highest, and most holy doctrine is that of diversity. Diversity comes first, and trumps everything else.

    I agree.

    I would not be surprised if the fundmenetal difference in political orientation is whether society should speak in many voices, or one.

    Eddie,

    Agreed that the article misses the point. Most of multiculturalism does, either failing to address real problems or making them worth.

    fl,

    Excellent comment. You’ve shared a lot of information that I think will help many people make of their minds. Way to go! 🙂

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *