Myrddin compares my purported racism to N.K. Jemisin’s at the Mad Genius club:
[Vox]-style racism is far less direct. So
far, he’s pointed out that according to the Theory of Evolution (to
which he does not subscribe, but he never brings THAT up at the time
because he is a pro a-hole), different races are not equally
homo-sapiens (which does not mean that they aren’t equally validly human
or equally worthwhile, but he never brings THAT up at the time because
he enjoys being a pro a-hole). Other than that, his primary ‘racism’ is
the frequent claim that when wildly different cultures mix, the results
tend to be explosive.
Jemism’s style, on the other hand, seems to be “whites are
intrinsically racist because they are white.” To which my only response
can be “If you will judge evil regardless of my actions, what possible
motivation could I have to appease you?”
So… a bit of a stretch, yes, in that if he’s a racist, he has plausible deniability. She really doesn’t.
He is far from the only one to observe that Ms Jemisin is, and always has been, an unrepentant black racist who angrily blames all white people for a broad panoply of material evils for which they cannot reasonably be held responsible. Will Shetterly
has similarly observed that Jemisin is of the Critical Race Theory school; she is about as moderate as Elijah Poole. Jemisin’s cartoonish behavior was precisely why I nicknamed her McRacist in the first place and I suspect one could produce a pretty funny cartoon strip about the Superheroes of the SFWA featuring McRapey, McRacist, and McCreepy.
However, I have to correct Myrddin on two points. First, my statement concerning the way in which different races are not equally
homo sapiens sapiens has absolutely nothing to do with the theory of
evolution. Although one could reach that conclusion, as it logically follows from conventional evolutionary theory, my statement is nothing more than the citation of current scientific evidence, namely, DNA differences observed
in the various human population groups.
Second, I have repeatedly pointed out that the existence of different
human sub-species and/or races does not make those different
sub-species and/or races any less validly human. A dog is a dog whether
it is a Bichon Frise or a Great Dane. A man is a man whether he is Yoruba or Prussian. My basic argument on race and
civilization can be most accurately summarized as the observation that if you wish to
pull a sled, you would be well advised to select Siberian huskies rather than
chihuahuas or pit bulls.
The deniability is plausible due to the fact that I am denying the nonexistent.
However, I have to correct Myrddin on two points. First, my statement concerning the way in which different races are not equally
homo sapiens sapiens has absolutely nothing to do with the theory of
evolution. Although one could reach that conclusion, as it logically follows from conventional evolutionary theory, my statement is nothing more than the citation of current scientific evidence, namely, DNA differences observed
in the various human population groups.
Second, I have repeatedly pointed out that the existence of different
human sub-species and/or races does not make those different
sub-species and/or races any less validly human. A dog is a dog whether
it is a Bichon Frise or a Great Dane. A man is a man whether he is Yoruba or Prussian. My basic argument on race and
civilization can be most accurately summarized as the observation that if you wish to
pull a sled, you would be well advised to select Siberian huskies rather than
chihuahuas or pit bulls.
The deniability is plausible due to the fact that I am denying the nonexistent.