How to argue with a racist | The Voltaire Lecture 2019 | Dr Adam Rutherford 

Conflating criticism of religion with racism is a duplicitous move. I have valid concerns in regards to the tenets of Islam, Judaism and Christianity; that doesn’t make me a racist.

He claiming that Corbyn is an Antisemite makes me consider him being racist against Palestinians.

Great lecture. I enjoyed it very much. Racism was elevated when the Atlantic Slave Trade started and it has continued to fester in America because of the need for descendants of the colonizers to continue the psychosis of supremacy.

i'm at the point when i have given up engaging on the subject of race entirely with almost everyone. if you haven't worked out that racism is a thing you need to avoid in yourself, then you're not worth my time. by the way, finishing with the AWESOME Angela Davis was a lovely touch. I was raised in a "colorblind" environment. it doesn't work.

Well now in the UK you get thrown in jail for racist words online. Congratulations. Major progress good Sir.

Wonderful presentation! I enjoyed very much! It is very complex theme as presenter said, and he has done his best in limited time to explain it. It was lovely. Thank you humanists! I scrolled down to see some coments. Sadly, too many people are ready to criticize and not give support to this lecture. Perhaps next lecture from Humanist could be "why evil is more organized than good" ;). Humanism needs support, and in my opinion, this Planet can not support any more ego... any more critique in the name of celebrating individuality. People who want good need to be suported... no more "yes, but...". Just YES! It is beautiful to see that there is a movement of humanists to fight against lies, misinformations and prejudice that pollute general media! More humanist ideas have to be propagated! If evil can be organized and use tool called propaganda, so can good! ✌👍👍👍

Religion is not race.

The supervillan Stormfront on the show The Boys was named after stormfront radio. Holy shit.

Debate Edward Dutton

Regarding the Jesse Owens comment, Anyone who trys to deny that black africans are generally more dominant in athletics is really not seeing the elephant in the room.

This was rather disappointing and not the source of inspiring clarity and evidence that I had hoped for. If you used these arguments with someone who was interested in race and genetics I fear you would get a hard time. Too many mushy, unclear sections and gaps in arguments. Too many insults to people that might not be fair. The way to start arguing with a genuine racist is surely to point out the lack of any compelling practical reasons for researching racial differences and, especially, those solely due to genetics. Further headway is surely made by pointing out how apparent differences in productivity and morality between races are reduced as environments become more similar. I suspect that Dr Rutherford felt that, occupying the moral high ground and talking to a receptive audience, he didn't really need to have a tight or compelling argument, or avoid unfair insults.

This felt very politically driven, and not very scientific. You can tell by how he places a high burden of proof on the genetic explanations, but accepts "racism" as an explanation as a kind of default, that doesn't itself need direct evidence. That's an example of political bias, not science. For example. He claims that there are so few gold medalists in the 100m sprint that you can't really infer anything from such a small sample size. He ignores the rather obvious fact that it's not just the gold medalists. The top 100 sprinters in every given year are mostly black as well. So the sample size over 40 years is actually massive. He then switches to swimming and points out that a higher proportion of black people didn't learn how to swim. Immediately, without evidence, he then concludes this is "structural racism". Well no, it's not evidence of that at all. Black people have a much higher rate of single-parenthood than white people in every western country. That means black kids are less likely to have a parent teach them ANYTHING than white kids (due to sheer time constraints of single parenthood). Epidemics of single parenthood is actually a very recent phemonema, and does not coincide with the history of racism. It coincides with the welfare state and the economic support given to single mothers. (i.e something almost entirely pushed by left-wing people). I think Adam does a good job of showing why racism is making a comeback. People like him approach the subject with such a massive political bias, that they regularly end up making false accusations of racism against people and institutions that are completely innocent. That overuse of the accusation of 'racism' has lead to a diluting of the concept, where we now have millions of people who just don't take racism that seriously any more, and are much more likely to just ignore it than oppose it.

Iron, naming it the Voltaire lecture, when Voltaire would say (for the blacks) "And one could say that if their intelligence is not of another species than ours, then it is greatly inferior. They are not capable of paying much attention; they mingle very little, and they do not appear to be made either for the advantages or the abuses of our philosophy."

Rutherford shows that if you live in an environment, where, for example, running is important to your life, then evolution means that natural selection will select alleles that lead to better running ability. The environment determines everything, and genes and alleles change as a response to the environment.

He is only talking about white racism, that is racist itself.

I asked Claude 'why geographically separated groups show some genetic differentiation:'? It replied :- There are several reasons why geographically separated groups show some genetic differentiation: Isolation: Geographic barriers like oceans, mountains, or deserts historically limited gene flow between populations. Genetic drift: In smaller, isolated populations, random changes in gene frequencies can occur over generations. Founder effects: When a new population is established by a small group, their genetic makeup may not represent the original population's diversity. Local adaptation: Different environments can lead to natural selection favoring certain genetic variants. Assortative mating: People tend to mate with those geographically close to them, reinforcing local genetic patterns. Limited migration: Historically, long-distance travel was rare, reducing genetic mixing between distant groups. Cultural factors: Language, religion, or social norms can create barriers to intermarriage between groups. Time: These factors act over many generations, allowing differences to accumulate.

I really liked the analysis of historic racism, but I felt Adam was weak on establishing the extent of racism in the modern day. I think the lecture would have been improved with more detail on how racism is still endemic.

Great talk! More like this, please.

Is there a way to NOT argue with racists?

If race is a social construct then I must be a genius because I can tell race before its constructed: I can tell race at birth.

Go ahead please. Congratulations

Very glad that Dr. Rutherford has recovered from coronavirus!

Hold on a minute. I agree racism has not gone away but it is very wrong to leave a page stating 'Antisemitic and a racist " with a picture of Jeremy Corbyn is very, very wrong when it's a lie and unstabutiated. (sic)

This was fascinating. Thank you.

Hmmm I wonder why all the white sprinters were before the 1950s...

In "A Brief History of Everyone Who Ever Lived: The Human Story Retold Through Our Genes" He seemed to be arguing that there's no such thing as racial differences and that selective breeding has no effect in human populations (Reason for that: we are the world, we are the children) which pretty silly. It seems like his own background as a mixed person drives the idea that aren't any racial differences, even though there are average differences among populations.

there is an elephant in room when it comes to asking the question, would minority ethnicities allow/want their offspring to marry white or British. It is not just white people who have a history of discriminating in this respect and this too leads to division. Of course there is an onus on white communities to welcome minorities, but also those minorities to welcome white communities to mix

Not sure how being concerned about a marriage to a Muslim equates to racism. It's a conservative and bigoted reality denialist ideology. People's skin colour or whatever racialised features they might have don't say anything about the personal values of prospective spouse. People might be concerned if someone wants to marry a Scientologist or Amish.

What are these f downvotes? LOL Amazing lecture. Thanks Adam.

Is Islam a race? I'm equally skeptical of all religion and magical thinking.

Genetics make us who we are and we are fools to reject that for the sake of "humanist" ideals.

Doesn't he mean Intentional Racist? Living in a racist culture means we are subject to many types of racist thinking that we are not always conscious of at any particular point in time. We can have an anti-racist disposition and political perspective but this does not prevent us from performing a racist act, thought, emotional reaction or assumption etc. Historically there has not only been White Supremacy, there has been many types of racial supremacists, Japanese, Indian, Ottoman etc. Out-Group marginalisation serves the interest of power elites, it continues today. So it is important for white people to remember we cannot help being racists even when we struggle not to be. This may help us reach out to the Intentional Racist.

A curious blend of good science with non-stop blaring self-righteous holier-than-thou Woke piety.

Strangest thing I've noticed since I'm in the UK, is wherever I register, they ask me my race as a required data. Not used to it.

The authoratative and implicitly vindicating rhetoric of 'This is the science' is not a matter for work a day scienticists themselves to determine but the non science entities that enable and sustain it. At certain times, and like the arts, it is a de facto and covert arm of the economic, political, and other exigencies of the prevailibg era. It is long past its days of innocence.

Great lecture!

Gotta disagree with Dr. Rutherford's premise, namely the idea that 'race' is a real thing because people 'see' it in their lives. That's not at all true. People see DIFFERENCES, physical differences and because of literally decades of programming equate those differences to a different 'race.' And that's obviously nonsense and what's interesting is if you look at it with the mildest bit of scrutiny it makes no sense. By way of example, if you see a Dobermann and a Border collie absolutely NO ONE thinks (unless they're lunatics): Those are two different races of animal, each distinct. So why does that fairly obvious logic break down when talking about humans? Those two dogs are more different, visually speaking, than the average black, white, brown or yellow person yet somehow they're just dogs (different breeds, sure but dogs nonetheless). The idea of 'race' is indeed a made-up idea designed to categorize people as better than and lesser than and has little to do with the obvious physical differences, which Dr. Rutherford should realize.

Adam Rutherford. Thankyou.

Adam's hero Charles Darwin said that the creatures at the top of status hierarchies (whether they're based on physical strength, intellectual capacity, social skills, good looks, wealth or some blend of other qualities) are more likely to pass on their genes than people at the bottom of status hierarchies. Eugenicists take up this idea and run with it, suggesting a range of social policies aimed at encouraging people with the right combination of dominant characteristics to breed with one another. That's what every parent I know wants for their children: my friends all want their kids to go to top-tier universities or institutes of sport then on to top-tier employers where they'll meet similarly talented mates. We are ALL to a very high degree eugenicists - advocates of sexual selection - because we know eugenics works.

Most of the "racist" things described here are really common sense when anyone interacts with others and forms an opinion.

He's a great speaker but focused too much on the historical situation. Would have liked to have heard information on the link between race and intelligence.

We didn't all come from a single place in Africa. That is such an old theory now. We came from multiple regions of Africa, where we evolved separately.

Rutherford is an evolution denier. People evolved in Europe to have white skin and other adaptations. Aborigines in Australia were isolated from other populations and evolved. The Himalayas mark the boundary between South Asians and East Asians where each genetic grouping evolved differently. And isolated populations in Africa separated by geographical distance and/or the Sahara also evolved. But Rutherford is an evolution denier, who denies that isolated populations evolve in different ways.

Most Finnish people are lactose intolerant

Charles Murray was right.

Survive the jive better to listen too

It might be more accurate to call race a false idea. But with very real consequences. Pity that Dr. Rutherford stumbled at the end, referring to misconceptions as crutches. But are any of us completely free of bigotry?

Expected more instead the lecture was mostly mediocre not satisfied.

The all other races were grafted from the Asiatic black man African the other races are of mankind a kind of a man.

Thank you! It made a better person if me and I do not consider myself racist! I hope other people find it convincing and enlightening.

Why are you calling yourself Voltaire? Voltaire said that he defends the right to speak of people who disagree with him. You want to shut down everybody who disagree with you. Aren't you a bit hypocrites?

Communities are real. Cultural groups are real. Extended kinship groups are real. But race is not real. Races aren't even valid as cultural constructs. Adam says that "cultural construct" races are real, because he knows that race is still a big part of many people's identity, and he doesn't want to challenge that - but drill down, and embedded within every example of those "cultural construct" versions of race there are still big chunks of the old false pseudo-scientific biological beliefs. He refers to some of them, like the widespread belief among many African Americans that black people have denser bones and so can't float. That's clearly a false belief from the old biological racism, but it's also part of the cultural construct "black people". You can only pretend that the cultural constructs of "black people" or "white people" or "asian people" aren't based on the old, debunked claims that races are biological if you refuse to look at them closely. So yes, many people think of themselves as a member of a particular race. Yes, that's part of their identity. But it is still a false belief, something they have been taught about themselves which is not true. Racism, though, is very real. And we can't end racism while insisting that races are real - real in any way - because racism can exist only while racial categories are seen as valid. But all racial categories are, and have always been, pure gaslighting. And your own race, if that is part of your identity, is the result of that gaslighting. It is a false category imposed on you and your family and your community. And, difficult as it is to do, it's time to start to free ourselves from the false racial categories imposed on us by long dead strangers. You also identify with your community, with your nationality, with your profession, with your personality traits - there are many parts of your identity which are based on very real things. But race is not one of them. Communities are real. Cultural groups are real. Extended kinship groups are real. And of course, racism is a real belief system. But races themselves do not exist in the real world.

Amazing!

You need to be absolutely certain of what you are asserting when it comes to matters pertaining to the social construct of race if by your assertions you mean to bring about some relief from the pain that it inflicts on so many lives day in and day out...I'd suggest you think twice about why it is such a 'hot topic' on white supremacist websites...proving their superiority has very little to do with why that is the case...The name of the global system that every non-white person is subject to isTHE SYSTEM OF WHITE SUPREMACY RACISM. either those who have sufficient political and economic clout to legally classify themselves as white and the rest as non-white are 'supreme'(in the dictionary sense of the word) or they are not. the evidence says that they are in all areas of human activities: economics, education, entertainment, labor, law, politics, religion, sex, war/counter-war (N.Fi;;er, 2016)

does he address the difference between iq? some parts of Africa have averages as low as 60.

How to argue with the racial crime stats.

The racist watching this video are not going to like it, cant wait till some high school drop out working at Walmart comments on how this geneticist is wrong and how they know more than him. It should be funny.

LOL Voltaire was a racist.

From my experience racist peoples that i have met don't have problem with the color of peoples skin, but maybe they have. Idk If people will go back to our time in a thousand years i bet there will not be much citations regarding skin pigmentation (in a negative sense at least).

That bit at the end was a little awkward with the awarding the Voltaire medal but the trained seals seemed to quite enjoy it and the lecture ! Jolly Good Job for all ! I’m in the states so I’ll not be expecting a rap on the door from the local enforcers of correct speech as you folks are currently experiencing , not yet at least. Hip hip carry on , we shall see what tomorrow brings ! 🇺🇸🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🇬🇧

6:00, not only is that not a Conservative party leaflet, but Johnson's comments were in reference to Blair's Blairite brand of moralistic interventionism. I was trying to decide if I should buy your new book, I'm still undecided.

I bought his book after reading “who we are and how we got here”. Was super excited about reading more on ancient DNA and the accent of humankind. Fully wasn’t expecting it be all about racism. I felt duped. I wanna learn about science not your opinion on racism. But hey! Gotta earn some coin somehow right. Just don’t expect people to take you seriously.

👍

After reading Robin Di Angelo's book on White Fragility, I'd like to ask Adam, or anyone, if there is an acid test I can use to indicate if I am 'anti-racist' and what is it?

The milk chugging thing was supposed to be ironic btw.

He sounds like a racist to me.

This whole 1:11h speech is based on the false premise that having a preference is discrimination. Ridiculous.

Voltaire was a racist polygenisist. Ah, at 27:00 he remarks that himself. very ironic, indeed

Not one person is going to listen to Adam Rutherford and walk away thinking that Algerians, sub-Saharan Bantus and San people, Japanese people and Aboriginal people in Australia have no significant genetic differences. They might be convinced for 24 hours by listening to him and then reality will kick in. Because that's what reality does.....

Does Rutherford watch TYT? LOL

Ethiopians does not translate from the the Greek to ''burned face'' but when your audience is oblivious to facts, you can pitch in whatever crap fits your narrative ... omg , the ignorance all these people hang on to is amazing

More science, less sociology please. Literally nothing in this I hadn't heard before.