AT A GOVERNMENT FACILITY
On March 25, 1997, I attended a mandatory class entitled “Cultural Diversity Training” at the government facility where I was employed.* The class was taught by a clinical/industrial psychologist who was the director of an applied behavioral science firm. After this class was completed, I wrote the following letter to the instructor: “The seminars you led in Orlando last week were very enlightening. However, because of your generalities about race and very loose interpretations of history, I feel that they did as much harm as they did good. The chief aim of my life has been the acquisition of truth and wisdom from philosophical, religious, and scientific perspectives. Such things as ignorance, superstition, anti-intellectualism, and bigotry are a great offense to me, and I have made it my personal objective to oppose such things wherever I find them. I feel a kindred spirit with you as you set about combating bigotry, but I cannot support your methods, when truth is sacrificed to expediency. I hope that you will examine the enclosed material and amend your approach to these subjects accordingly.”
Richard L. Atkins
Enclosed: “Erroneous Black History Statements”
*Note: I was employed by the Naval Air Warfare Center, Training Systems Division, Orlando, Florida, from June 3, 1974 until my retirement on July 3, 1997. I was a project engineer in charge of the acquisition and installation of simulators and training devices at various military bases.
ERRONEOUS BLACK HISTORY STATEMENTS
in a Cultural Diversity Workshop
“The Africans who fought against Rome in the Punic Wars were black. They were led by the black general Hannibal.”
The people of Carthage, who fought against Rome, were semitic, not black. Their city was a colony of the Phœnicians in North Africa. Anthropologists designate the ancient native races of that region as Hamitic (Berber, Libyan, Egyptian).
“The Africans who overran medieval Spain were black.”
The Moors were Muslims of mixed Berber and Arab racial strains from the old Roman province of Mauritania in North Africa. They were not blacks. The term “black-a-moor” (“black Moor”) originally referred to any dark-skinned Arabic person, but it came to designate negroes (hence, Shakespeare’s Othello the Moor is often played by a black man). (Ref. The Random House College Dictionary: “Moor” and “blackamoor.”)
“The Inquisition is known in Spain as ‘the Cleansing of the Race,’ and this refers to their eradication of black people. Spain has a great admixture of black blood.”
“The Cleansing of the Race” has reference to the expulsion of the Moors from Spain in 1492 and the edict of Ferdinand and Isabella in that same year that drove all maranos (Jews and half-breed Jews) from the land. It was a religious purge that happened to involve the semitic races (Arabic and Jewish). This did not refer to blacks.
“The word ‘Semitic’ derives from the root ‘semi-’ which means ‘half,’ so the Semites are partially mixed with other races.”
This is false etymology. The word “Semitic” derives from Shem, the firstborn son of Noah, and that, in turn comes from the name of the lost civilization of Sumeria. The term is used to designate the peoples (Jews and Arabs) descended from the patriarch Abraham, who was born in the city of Ur, in the territory of Sumeria.
The reconstruction of black history is a legitimate undertaking, but it can exceed the bounds of rational objectivity. In fact, black history is rapidly becoming a fanciful mythology of that race’s accomplishments. And racist propaganda is even asserting black superiority by means of radical claims and unfounded speculations reminiscent of Goebbels’ pseudo-scientific “folk-history.”
At a Government-sponsored cultural diversity seminar on March 26, 1997, the main speaker drew upon concocted histories of the white, yellow, and black peoples to ridicule the family life of Europeans and Orientals, while extolling that of Africans. He said that the medieval European model was for a husband to keep four wives and to beat them into submission. Also he stated that the ancient Oriental model was for the wives to be subservient but in charge of the family purse. Then he claimed that in the African family of one man and four women, there was equality and a democratic spirit. The speaker explained that this is why the black family of today is run by a dominant female.
These observations were all broad generalizations that do not fit reality. Admittedly, it is true that women have always held an inferior position the world over, and in all cultures. That is what the recent United Nations Congresses of Women have been all about. But it is false to claim that Europeans had four wives. This is the Oriental and Muslim model, not the European (whether classical Greco-Roman or medieval Christian). Obviously, the speaker was trying to bring Europeans down to the level of African polygamists. The speaker then set the Oriental family above the European family by ascribing to the Oriental wives the care of the family’s wealth. This is not true. Oriental husbands in antiquity did not discuss business with their wives or let them make large monetary decisions any more than they do today. And as to the equality in African families, the speaker made the false claim that black women were not “chattel” as in the rest of the world. He should have been cognizant that the word chattel means “cattle,” and that the worth of African girls is still often calculated in how many head of cattle they bring their father.
A few years back, a televised educational mini-series entitled “Shaka Zulu” depicted the life of the Zulu king Shaka, and it showed his positive traits of leadership as well as the fact that he was vain, oppressive, superstitious, and a wife-dominating polygamist. Thus, this seminar speaker’s pitch for black family equality was simply a farfetched attempt to explain why black females run their households today. The real reason for this, as statistical data have shown, is that the male is often either irresponsible or absent.
The speaker encouraged his audience to laugh at themselves, and it is agreed that everyone should be able to recognize the foibles of their ancestors and laugh at them. But a racial joke based on a falsehood is, upon reflection, really a racist slur that has no place in a seminar on cultural diversity.
Richard L. Atkins
IN DEFENSE OF HISTORICAL INTEGRITY
In the office building where I worked in 1997, I passed the lobby on the 14th of February and observed the displays related to Black History Month. Looking over the portraits of notable black people, I was struck by the fact that such great literary figures as James Weldon Johnson and Zora Neale Hurston were missing. The exhibit seemed to concentrate primarily on political leaders. Also I was intrigued by the fact that the modern portraits provided finer features for the faces of some whose photographs were also exhibited. It was too-obvious “artistic license.” Then I saw a box of posters that were available to whoever wanted them.
When I drew out a poster from the box, I was flabbergasted to see that it was a portrait of Hannibal, depicted as a negro! (This is the great general of the Phœnician race who almost defeated the old Roman Republic.) To me this was the last straw. The previous year, a similar poster had been made available, entitled “Great Kings and Queens of Africa,” that had presented Cleopatra as a negress. Such disgusting license with the plain facts of history made my blood boil on both occasions, and so with this repeat offense I determined to do something to stop this desecration of the sacred annals of mankind.
These posters were in the form of calendars, and they were published by the Anheuser-Busch Company. The Cleopatra poster featured a prominent “Budweiser” label, and it seemed obvious to me that the motivation of the posters was increased beer sales and not the purveying of truth. I thought of the terrible influence these posters would have as black families displayed them and thus advertised beer-drinking along with false history in homes, schools, and churches.
Since this was a seeming endorsement of error by my employer, as well as a personal racial affront to me, I felt that the best recourse would be to take the matter up with my facility’s Equal Employment Opportunity office. So, I called the local Deputy Director and arranged an appointment with him. My interview was accordingly scheduled to take place the following Tuesday.
In order to present my case to the EEO representative, I put together some material regarding the true facts of history that he could read and thereby perceive the magnitude of the offense. (See attached “Black History Exhibit.”) To my surprise, he showed little concern for this desecration of history, and openly wondered why I should be upset over the matter. Then I pointed out how the Soviet Union had done the same thing with history, claiming that great achievements - like the invention of the airplane - had been accomplished by Russians. I also mentioned how the somber novel 1984 had showed that the minds of people could be warped in a totalitarian society by the rewriting of history.
He asked what I hoped to achieve by my protest, and I said that I wanted some official statement from my place of employment that I could send to the Budweiser people and demand that they stop spreading lies. Still not much impressed with the magnitude of the offense, he told me that I could get EEO grievance forms and start the formal complaint process. This I did.
That very same day, I had the forms completed and back to the EEO office. A counseling session was set up for the fourth of March, and this interview proved to be much the same as the previous one. Again I had to plead for the EEO counselor’s understanding of the grave offense of distorting history. During the discussion I read an excerpt from a small article written by Ed Koch in Readers’ Digest that asked the question, “Should we be rewriting history just to make people feel good? That’s not history; that’s psychiatry.” As the session progressed, I gained a bit of information that was astonishing to me. When I asked who had set up the exhibit, thinking it was some local committee of black employees, I was surprised to find out that the group responsible for setting up the display was the EEO office itself!
Then my interviewer asked what I required in order to correct the situation, and I repeated my request for a formal letter admitting wrongdoing and promising to be more circumspect in the future. When asked for more specific wording, I submitted the following statement that I wished to become a letter to me from the EEO office:
“The EEO office is aware that rewriting history just to make people feel good is not history. It is bad psychiatry and false propaganda. The unfortunate display of Anheuser-Busch posters that falsify the race of known historical characters has been brought to our attention. And since this is offensive to truth and to racial sensitivity, this office pledges that it will be more circumspect about such displays in the future.”
After several other meetings and more correspondence the matter was finally settled on November 12, 1997. (Note: I had already retired on July 3, 1997.) I was given a paper to sign called “Settlement Agreement in the Complaint of Richard Atkins, DON 97-61339-001.” The pertinent paragraph read as follows:
“The Naval Air Warfare Center - Training Systems Division will not display the following particular posters from Anheuser-Busch:
(1) “Great Kings of Africa,” with 1997 Calendar, and
(2) “Great Kings and Queens of Africa,” Item #026-240, with 1991 Calendar.
Concerns have been raised concerning the historical accuracy of such posters.”
It will be noted that the statement above does not much resemble the one I had asked for, especially in that it did not mention the factor of racial offense.
I mailed the following letter to the offending beer company. It was received by them, but a reply was never forthcoming.
December 17, 1997
Anheuser Busch Company
Attn: Public Relations Department
1 Busch Place
St. Louis, MO 63118-1852
The purpose of this letter is to advise you that the Department of Defense Civilian Personnel Management Service has determined that certain materials published by your company are racially offensive and not historically accurate.
The enclosed Settlement Agreement concurs with a complaint of the undersigned that Anheuser Busch calendars “Great Kings of Africa” (1997) and “Great Kings and Queens of Africa” (1991) are inaccurate in depicting the historical characters Hannibal of Carthage and Cleopatra of Egypt as blacks.
Research materials were provided by the compainant that establish that Hannibal was of Phœnician descent (Semitic racial lineage) and Cleopatra was of Macedonian descent (Hellenic racial lineage). These materials can be provided for your investigation, if you desire.
It is requested that your company acknowledge this error to the undersigned by official correspondence, along with a commitment to avoid taking liberties with historical identities in the future.
Richard L. Atkins
BLACK HISTORY EXHIBIT
North Africa was and is the domain of the white race. Its racial mixture since prehistoric times has been:
Egyptian (Hamitic, Coptic)
Greek (Hellenic, Macedonian, Ptolemaic)
Phœnician (Semitic, Punic, Canaanite)
Since the seventh century A.D. invasions of the Muslims, this region has been predominantly Arabic. The Negro race has never been very numerous in this part of Africa.
In Roman times, the chief cities of Northern Africa were Alexandria (Greek origin) and Carthage (Phœnician origin).
Alexandria: This great city took its name from Alexander the Great, a Macedonian. After the death of Alexander the world was divided between three of his generals, and it was Ptolemy that acquired the rich land of Egypt. The last of his lineage was Cleopatra, whose name in Greek meant “Glory of Her Land.” Thus the rulers of Egypt from the time of Alexander to the time of Julius Cæsar were not Egyptian natives. They were Macedonian Greek.
Carthage: The name “Carthage” is itself a Phœnician word that means “New City.” The people known in history as Phœnicians were in the Bible called Canaanites - or Tyrians, or Sidonians - after their chief cities of Tyre and Sidon. Their religion was Baal worship. Archæology and historical records have proved that the religion of Carthage was Baal worship. Child sacrifice, as was condemned in the Bible, was carried out at Carthage, and cemeteries full of jars with the ashes of children attest to that terrible vice.
Hannibal was a Baal-worshiping Phœnician, and his name meant “Grace of Baal.” His brother, Hasdrubal, like him, had a Baal-name. His name meant “He Whose Help is Baal.”
Errors of Black Reconstructions of History:
The Negro race can boast many great people and a true history of progress despite extreme ordeals and obstacles that they have had to overcome. These should be celebrated and venerated.
But posters have been constructed that show Cleopatra and Hannibal as being of the Negro race. This is false history. It is a blatant distortion of the truth. It is an attempt to take credit for the accomplishments of others. It is a delusion of the mind that is harmful to young people who may be taught to show disrespect for unimpeachable historical verities. Distorted history is nothing but propaganda.
Richard L. Atkins
THE LAWLESS TENDENCY IN BLACK AMERICANS
Black people in America have developed a contempt for law. This is very unfortunate, but it is also understandable. Too many times the law has been twisted and manipulated by the whites to keep them in their place of inferiority, and so it has come to seem like “the white folks’ law.” Biased juries have released white criminals and assassins in utter disregard for truth and justice, and thus the negro race has been forced to a position of anarchy and defiance of the establishment.
In his book, The Autobiography Of An Ex-Colored Man, the negro poet James Weldon Johnson candidly admitted that blacks tend to “defend their faults and failings.” And he observed that “This spirit carries them so far at times as to make them sympathizers with members of their race who are perpetrators of crime.”
Also, another black author, Nella Larsen, in her short story Sanctuary, tells of a fugitive negro’s being hidden by an old black widow. This woman justifies her decision in the following way: “Ah shuah don’ see nuffin’ in you but a heap o’ dirt...Still, ‘siderin all an’ all...how white folks is white folks, Ah’m a-gwine hide you dis one time.” And again: “But you allus been triflin’. Cain’t do nuffin’ propah. An’ Ah’m a-tellin’ you ef dey warn’t white folks an’ you a po’ niggah, Ah shuah wouldn’t be lettin’ you mess up mah feather baid dis evenin’, ‘cose Ah jes’ plain don’ want you hyah.” And finally after the sheriff has gone: “Git outen mah feather baid, Jim Hammer, an’ outen mah house, an’ don’ nevah stop thankin’ you’ Jesus he done gib you dat black face.”
It is this kind of a preferential attitude and this deliberate thwarting of law that resulted in the farce of the O. J. Simpson trial. And it is also a similar feeling about the white establishment that has led to the distortion of historical facts by black protagonists. Being cut off from their natural ancestral traditions in Africa, and in an effort to create a heritage for themselves, black pseudo-historians have stooped to thievery - of stealing a heritage from the annals of the white race. Seemingly without a qualm, they have claimed as their own such historical characters as Cleopatra, Hannibal, and Augustine! With utter disregard for the facts, they have brazenly converted all the ancient inhabitants of North Africa into negroes!
The effect of this false propaganda is the distortion of truth and a message to already unruly black students that the books they have been reading are nothing but lies. Now this does not make for either good citizens or for cultivated human beings, and such unprincipled methods can only succeed in further delaying black people from becoming useful members of society.
The guilt and past offenses of the dominant white Americans has been exposed for all to see and is now being duly acknowledged. And attempts at fair play are now the norm of all legitimate social systems. Racism has not been eradicated, but it is at least under the censure of the majority of the enlightened populace. And thus it becomes inherent upon the black people of this country to place themselves under the same allegiance to law and order and to the established authority of schools and scholarship that is expected of everyone else.
Richard L. Atkins
BLACK PEOPLE IN THE BIBLE
In pro-slavery pulpits in America before the Civil War, it was customary to proclaim that God sanctioned Negro slavery because Ham was cursed by Noah, his father, to be the perpetual slave of his brothers, Shem and Japheth. Also, preachers argued that the name Ham means “Black.”
The facts are these. The three sons of Noah were intended to represent the known peoples of the Mediterranean area:
Shem: the Semitic races (Jews, Phœnicians, Mesopotamians)
Ham: the Hamitic races (Egyptians, Libyans, Berbers)
Japheth: the Japhetic races (Europeans, Scythians, Persians)
Anthropologists define the Hamitic people as the original brown-skinned natives of Northern Africa before the Arabian conquest of that region. The most well-known example of this race is the people called Berbers.
Ham does mean “black,” but this refers to the soil of Egypt (just as Adam, “red,” refers to the clay from which he was made). The delta region of Egypt, biblical Goshen, was known as “the Black Land,” because of its rich earth. Thus “Ham” means “Egypt.”
(It is true that the Tables of Nations in the Bible do derive the black nation of Cush from Ham, but that is because of the proximity of Egypt and Ethiopia.)
THE MIXED MULTITUDE
When Moses led the exodus out of Egypt, the Bible says the Hebrew slaves were accompanied by “a mixed multitude” - probably slaves of other races who took the opportunity to escape to freedom (Ex. 12:33). No doubt, there were Cushites (Nubians, Ethiopians) in this assemblage. The layout of the Hebrew camp in the Sinai treck (wilderness wandering) was according to the Twelve Tribes of Israel, but there must have been another camp composed of the mixed peoples, which the Bible does not mention.
MOSES’ SECOND WIFE
Moses first married a Midianite woman by the name of Zipporah, the daughter of Jethro. On the way to Egypt, Zipporah reproved her husband for not being circumcised (Ex. 4:25). He probably sent her back to her father at this time. Later, when Jethro joined Moses during the exodus, Moses may have accepted his former wife back again (Ex. 18:2-5). In any case, the record says Moses took a second wife from the land of Cush (KJV, Ethiopia, Num. 12:1). She was doubtless one of the women from the “mixed multitude.” Scholars debate the location of Cush, but most identify it as Ethiopia.
An Ethiopian servant of the Hebrew king Zedekiah had the great compassion and courage to release the prophet Jeremiah from a cistern in which he had been thrown on orders of the king (Jer. 38:7-13). The name Ebedmelech means “Slave of the King.” (It resembles the Hebrew name Obadiah, which means “Slave of Yah,” and the Arabic name Abdullah, which means “Slave of Allah.”)
THE ETHIOPIAN EUNUCH
A high official in the court of Candace, Queen of Ethiopia, was converted to Christianity by the deacon Philip (Acts 8:26-39). The fact that he had been to Jerusalem shows that either he was there on official business, or else he had gone there to worship. That he could read the Hebrew language shows his scholarship and his likely devotion to the faith of Israel.
It is tempting to accept the legend that Judaism in Ethiopia resulted from the Queen of Sheba’s liaison with Solomon, but actually this is an error that arose from a confusion between the names of two territories: Seba (African) and Sheba (Arabian). The Rastafarian cult of Jamaica has made this presumed Jewish-Ethiopian linkage the heart of their faith. But this idea has no more credibility than the claim of some Negro racists that Jesus was black.
Post-biblical Ethiopia holds an important place in the history of Christendom, because this land provided a refuge for the Coptic (Egyptian) Church following the Arabic invasion. Accordingly, the Book of Enoch, that is part of the Bible canon of the Coptic Church, is called “Ethiopian Enoch” by scholars.
Simeon, whose surname means “Dark Complexioned” or “Black” was a leader in the Church at Antioch. His race is not certain, since a person can be called “Mr. Black” without being of the black race. Since his name is linked with that of Lucius of Cyrene (Acts 13:1), he may be the “Simon of Cyrene” who carried the cross of Jesus (Matt. 27:32).
Richard L. Atkins
Black athletes and entertainers have become very popular in America at the present time. Sadly, the example they have set for their admirers has not been commendable. When the rap group calling themselves “2 Live Crew” got into trouble over their lurid lyrics, they successfully defended their right to express themselves in this way by claiming that vulgarity was just normal ghetto vernacular. It is amazing that a black group would stoop to defending itself by deliberately tarnishing the reputation of their race. And one is also astonished that decent black people did not rise up and denounce these upstarts as a foulmouthed few. Sadly, in scanning the news media for the outraged responses that should have come from black ministers and their people, there seemed to be a universal silence. Only two conclusions could be drawn from this: either the slanderous allegation was true, or else there was nobody who felt this slur against black people keeenly enough to denounce it.
Then along came Judge Clarence Thomas of libidinous mind and lecherous effrontery, and once again the tainted reputation of the black race was exhibited for all to see. Adding to this, there was the admission of sexual profligacy by the HIV-stricken superhero Magic Johnson, as well as the forfeiting of the Miss America crown by Vanessa Williams for lewd behavior on film.
Another bad example was set for boxing fans by Mike Tyson. This famous fighter raped a girl in his hotel room, and he only served a minimum sentence - evidently because such misconduct has come to be expected of his kind. It would seem that “beating the system” is now the tactic employed by Afro-American lawbreakers and their sympathizers. Surely this is the case with the infamous O. J. Simpson race-related acquital.
Unfortunately, there are people who think black misbehavior is “cool,” and so every time another depraved or immoral act is performed by these people, there is a corrupting influence on society as a whole. Black women dress and act like prostitutes and pierce their body parts, and it becomes the style. Black boys invert their hats and clown around in gaudy clothes, and soon school children are aping them. The ghetto’s legacy of insurrection toward authority, coarse talk, obscene gestures, and dopeheaded depravity thus contaminates the very core of youthful society.
Given this deplorable situation, it would appear that it is past time for some serious soul searching by the folks with “soul.” It is time that those of African descent should take the high road, stand up for a purer lifestyle, and strive to end the sad image of black carnality. One wonders, are there no longer any prophets in the black pulpits of this land?
If a person were not racist before, he must soon accept that philosophy in the light of what goes on in black neighborhoods. It is an undisputable fact that the African slaves who were brought to America have been nothing but a source of corruption to their former masters. Given their freedom at great price, they have not risen to any great stature in modern society, and their people of wealth are merely athletes and actors. Rising to popularity, they have not helped others to better themselves, but only set poor examples for their fans to follow.
Under their influence music has lost its melody and degenerated into wild jungle noises of the night. And their songs of the ghetto consist of a disgusting effluvium of beastly grunts - or the luridly obscene mouthings of “rap music.” Also, the superior athletic ability these people possess, while undeniable, is not worthy of the obscene wealth and the overblown fame it brings. Certainly no gorilla of the gridiron should be on the same level as a great scientist, philosopher, or scholar. Otherwise, the barbaric scene of the Roman gladiatorial arena is merely being replayed to a new crowd of stupid spectators.
Perhaps, however, too much is being expected of people only a few generations away from savagery. It is a major lesson of history that the more vigorous cultures have been located in regions of the North. People from southern climes have contributed little to the overall progress of mankind. Lacking in ambition and moral fiber, the inhabitants of the Southern Hemisphere have produced no great civilizations, no fine works of art, no spiritually uplifting ideas, and no native geniuses. The author Saul Bellow asked, “Who is the Tolstoy of the Zulus? the Proust of the Papuans? I’d be glad to read him.” Instead, when there has been an invasion of poor immigrants from these regions into the more advanced societies, they have brought with them the seeds of corruption.
Thus it may be too much to hope that the negro race will strive after higher things on its own initiative. And failing this, there must be legislative and judicial systems with guts enough to make criminals, regardless of their color, accountable for their crimes. There must be educators who resist corruption of the English language. There must be journalists who denounce depravity without regard to fads of what is currently “politically correct.” And there must be holy orators in the pulpits of this land who declaim against bestial morality.
Now, what has been said here is admittedly racist. It is not politically correct, but it is still the painful truth. Even if a Hitler should say it, it would still be true. One should not fear to speak truth, regardless of whether or not it is the “proper” thing to say. One should follow the course of a Socrates or a Diogenes and take an uncompromising position on the side of rectitude. Something that is true should be acknowledged, even if it came from the Devil himself. Adolph Hitler was rightly considered to be a devil, but even he sometimes spoke the truth. For example, when he looked at so-called “modern art,” he recognized that it was worthless junk. Thus he spoke out against “...the trash of the more modern artistic development, which a nation of Negroes might just as well have produced.” (Mein Kampf, Ch. III) And evaluating the Jewish impact on the fine arts, he observed: “Culturally he (the Jew) contaminates art, literature, the theater, makes a mockery of natural feeling, overthrows all concepts of beauty and sublimity, of the noble and the good, and instead drags men down into the spere of his own base nature. Religion is ridiculed, ethics and morality represented as outmoded, until the last props of a nation in its struggle for existence in this world have fallen.” (Mein Kampf, Ch. XI)* One has only to reflect on the ill effects of Jewish-run Hollywood to admit that there is here at least an element of truth. And what can be said of Jewish movie makers can certainly be said of sewer-mouthed negro entertainers as well.
Richard L. Atkins
*Quotations from Mein Kampf are to be found on pages 70 and 326 in the Houghton Mifflin edition.
ALL ANIMAL SPECIES ARE DIVIDED INTO RACES.
Canines are sheepdogs, work dogs, spaniels, hounds, terriers, and mastiffs.
Human beings are Caucasians, Mongolians, Australians, and Negroes.
A LOOSE COMPARISON OF RACIAL TYPES
RACES ARE DIFFERENT
in appearance, (This applies
in physiology (organic makeup) to both dogs
in unique diseases and people.)
in muscular function (agility, dexterity)
in intelligence (Despite what
(logical reasoning) egalitarians say.)
(The identical aptitude of all human beings is a false assumption.)
(The same is true of the sexes.) (Despite what
“DIFFERENT” DOES NOT MEAN INFERIOR. (Despite what
Differences result from evolutionary adaptation to particular environ-ments, and a “successful” species or race is one that survives and prospers best in the specific geographical or cultural area in which it lives.
Thus, an “inferior” race would be one that failed to prosper in a given environment. Some native populations have become extinct when their terri-tory was invaded by people of another culture. These natives were “inferior” only in the sense that they could not cope with a new environment.
INTELLIGENCE TESTS ARE SPECIFIC TO A PARTICULAR CULTURE
An American or European IQ test will not fit the capabilities of Asians, Africans, Amerindians, or Polynesians.
The “best” intellect will vary between specific cultures. Likewise, the “best” features of canines will vary between different breeds: bloodhounds, greyhounds, sheepdogs, huskies, Saint Bernards, etc.
Is a bloodhound “superior” to a greyhound? No.
(The same argument applies to the sexes: is the male “superior” to the female? No.)
RACISM: belief in racial superiority; hatred or intolerance toward another race; ethnocentrism. Examples: Jews as the “chosen race,” Germans as the “superior race,” slave owners (or KKK members) as the “master race.”
CHRISTIAN VIEWPOINTS ON RACE:
1. Jesus accepted Gentiles despite sharp criticism by His countrymen (Matt. 8:11-12, Luke 4:25-28, 10:33, 20:16).
2. God is universal, the Father of all mankind. He is not just a Hebrew tribal God.
3. Physical and mental differences may logically infer variation in spiritual capacities as well. Paul recognized that some people are more spirit-ual than others (1 Cor. 2:15). There may be ten-talent, five-talent, and one-talent souls. Only God knows. Nevertheless, all who apply for entrance into the Kingdom are admitted, even at the last hour with little to show by way of aptitude or service (Matt. 20:12).
4. If God accepts all men, so must we. This was the lesson learned by Peter in his vision of the unclean animals let down from heaven in a sheet (Acts 10:9-28).
Richard L. Atkins