Karl-Olov Arnstberg’s latest Sunday essay is below; many thanks to our Swedish correspondent LN for the translation.

The translator includes this prefatory note:

Karl-Olov Arnstberg, born in 1943, is a Swedish ethnologist (former professor of ethnology at Stockholm University), author and debater. He has written several well-known books, including Typically Swedish. Prof. Arnstberg is known as a debater and commentator on issues related to, among other things, political correctness, the anti-Semitic conspiracy theory, cultural Marxism, and a critic of Sweden’s migration policy.

Prof. Arnstberg’s essays are posted at the blog Invandring och mörkläggning. A list of his previous translated pieces is at the bottom of this post.

Before I get to the translation, I’d like to offer a few remarks on the question of the biological basis of race.

The issue would not be so contentious if it weren’t for racial differences in intelligence. Discussing that aspect of the debate (without simply pre-emptively refuting it) is a career-ender for anyone in academia, the media, or politics.

It isn’t contentious that there are racial differences in, for example, athletic prowess. That’s because blacks are generally more accomplished in that area — not just in basketball and football, but also track and field and other athletic pursuits. And it’s also OK to find racial differences in, say, musical ability, because blacks are generally the ones with a better sense of rhythm. Not to mention better dancers.

But racial differences in intelligence? Uh-uh, better stay away from that. Otherwise you may never work in this town again.

More than fifty years ago, in (I think) 1972, I wrote a term paper on race and intelligence for a college course in physical anthropology. I drew on the work of Professor Arthur Jensen, who was in the process of being cancelled, even at that time. The Southern Poverty Law Center referred to him as the “father of modern academic racism”.

And for all I know, he really was a “racist”. But what difference does that make, if his data were good? If he didn’t falsify results, or leave out potentially contradictory information, and if his methodology was sound, then it doesn’t matter whether he considered non-white races to be inferior.

But Dr. Jensen got cast into the Outer Darkness, as have so many other people who have dared to point out what the data indicate about persistent, measurable difference in intelligence between racial groups that can be distinguished by genetic differences. In the fifty-two years since I wrote that paper, a huge mass of additional data has been accumulated, augmented by computer-assisted DNA analysis and other tools that allow researches to drill down into the differences among the races. Race-based differences in intelligence are now undeniable, but the entirety of polite society denies them, anyway, because the implications are simply too awful to contemplate.

I don’t have a job to get fired from or a career to be ended, so I can say what I want about these matters.

The general breakdown is this: Ashkenazi Jews are the most intelligent people on the planet. The Chinese and the Japanese are a few IQ points behind, followed by Northern Europeans and then Southern Europeans. After that come North Africans, Middle Easterners, and South Asians, and then American Indians. At the bottom are sub-Saharan Africans and Australian Aborigines.

These are statistical differences. They have nothing to do with differences among individuals. If Joe Biden and Thomas Sowell were ever to share a podium, we would see a brilliant man and a moron side by side. But it wouldn’t be the black man who was the imbecile.

There are geniuses and simpletons in every racial group. The differences lie in where the bell curve of IQ peaks for each group.

As a matter of interest, the curve for Europeans has longer tails — that is, Europeans have the greatest numbers of outliers when it comes to intelligence. There are more geniuses among whites, and also more idiots. The effect is also more pronounced among males than females — white men are more likely to be super-geniuses, and also infra-dolts.

If these differences in intelligence were ever to be generally accepted, it would simplify the making of public policy. Affirmative action would no longer be needed, and the relentless attack on merit-based employment practices could be abandoned. Every person could be educated and employed based on his or her demonstrated capabilities.

Unfortunately, that world is a remote dream. Human nature being what it is, I expect the current denial of reality to continue, and even get worse.

Now for the translated essay by Prof. Arnstberg:

Is race a social construct?

by Karl-Olov Arnstberg
May 12, 2024

For as long as languages have existed, the peoples of the world have probably had words meaning ‘people who are different from us.’ It has been common to refer to one’s own tribe as humans and everyone else as non-humans. Some of the world’s oldest books, such as the Egyptian ‘Book of the Dead’ and the Indian Vedas, contain racial divisions. The term race entered the English language in the late 16th century and was originally used to refer to people with a common origin and culture. In Europe, it became popular to group races based on skin colour — white, black, yellow, brown and red.

In the 18th century, the naturalists Carl von Linné [Linnaeus] and Johann Blumenbach divided populations into races based on morphology, i.e. visible physical differences such as pigmentation, skin shape and skeletal type. By the mid-19th century, scientists had realised that the different races were not only morphologically different but also had different personalities and intellectual characteristics. These differences made it possible to create a hierarchy, with whites at the top and blacks at the bottom.

This racial theory coincided with the colonisation of the New World by Europeans. In both South and North America, the invaders displaced and in many cases exterminated the original peoples. In the New World, they imported black Africans and incorporated slavery into their social systems. The consequences were devastating even after slavery was abolished.

In anthropology, the early 20th century saw a scientific backlash, not only against the idea of a racial hierarchy, but against the very idea that races exist at all. Its most prominent spokesman was Franz Boas, a pioneering anthropologist and fierce opponent of what he condemned as ‘scientific racism’. One of his students, the British anthropologist Ashley Montagu, emotionally ratcheted up the rejection in his book Man’s Most Dangerous Myth: The Fallacy of Race, first published in 1942. Since then, it has been translated into many languages and published in many editions. It states that ‘Race is the witchcraft of our time, demonology.’

As the American political scientist Charles Murray notes in his book Human Diversity: The Biology of Gender, Race, and Class (2020), he thereby set the rhetorical tone for today’s academic orthodoxy.

In the 1970s and 1980s, scientists’ aversion to the concept of race was given new ammunition in the form of two claims, based on research:

Continue reading →