Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Deleted because Ty has more patience than me. Oi vey.
|
It was also a pretty dumb comment.
As a result of listening to Harris’s podcast with that young writer, I wound up listening to his podcast with Murray, to hear what was so incendiary. There, Harris and Murray discussed a later book by Murray in which Murray argues that a white underclass is emerging via wealth inequality and assortative mating. He doesn’t come right out and say this white underclass is genetically disadvantaged, and I haven’t read the book and don’t intend to, but let’s say he did say that. Let’s say Murray posited that we’re developing a “redneck” line of genes. I’m fine with allowing that line of inquiry. (I think it’d be flawed, but what’s the harm in inquiring? Worst case, you acquire potentially useful data.) What would your view on that be? Would you view that as something offensive, dubious, or would your bourgeoise sensibilities and politics be fine with it?
