Agree with Keith.  Our ideals seem to run ahead of what our genetic
endowment allows us to do. 

arthur

-----Original Message-----
From: Keith Hudson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 4:06 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Le Pen's success


Le Pen's success in being voted in as one of the two candidates for next
month's Presidential election in France is headline news in every single
one of our newspapers this morning (and, I'm sure, in French newspapers
too). The headlines proclaim a sense of amazement and shock that this crude
anti-immigrant right-winger should have had so much success so far.

(The left-wing parties will be telling their flocks to vote for Chirac,
even though he's a strong wight-winger and faces serious corruption
allegations. Apparently posters are already appearing in Paris saying:
"Vote for the Thief, and not the Fascist".)

I'm amazed and shocked that newspapers and politicians are -- apparently --
amazed and shocked.

Next month we are going to have elections for local councils in England and
the British National Party (very similar to Le Pen's) is going to stand in
several northern towns and cities where there is constant racial unrest
between the indigenous English and Indian/Pakistani immigrants (and also
bitter hatreds between Hindus and Moslems among the latter). Without any
doubt, the BNP candidates will score sizeable votes and some candidates
might get elected. And then the newspapers and politicians will purport to
be amazed and shocked again!

Of course, the newspapers are just stirring up controversy for the sake of
circulation. (I am sure that their experienced journalists are not in any
way surprised by these events.) It's the apparent naivete of the
politicians that's so significant. (Though again, I am sure that
experienced politicians are not really naive -- it's just that their
comfortable world has been disturbed.)

All this shows that many opinion moulders who should know better don't have
much idea about the essentially tribal nature of our species. This in-group
out-group behaviour is one of our strongest genetic traits. We'll never
lose it. If the present cultural differences subside, then we'll invent new
ones.

To try and prevent an onslaught of criticism from those one or two FWers
who might misinterpret me on purpose, I am *not* saying that we should
accept tribalism passively and put up with fierce racial riots in our
northern towns or 20ft steel walls presently existing between Protestant
and Catholics areas in Northern Ireland. All I am saying is that if our
politicians were better educated in our evolutionary origins and
anthropological history, then they could design legislation a great deal
more intelligently than they do now. (Out of 600-odd MPS in our House of
Commons, there are less than six with any sort of scientific degree, and
not a single one as far as I'm aware with any sort of qualification in the
biological sciences.)

Keith Hudson 




  
__________________________________________________________
"Writers used to write because they had something to say; now they write in
order to discover if they have something to say." John D. Barrow
_________________________________________________
Keith Hudson, Bath, England;  e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_________________________________________________

Reply via email to