In sports, as elsewhere in society, there is a tendency to explain differences in performance in terms of some alleged physical differences between races.
Some of these disparities have been among racial or ethnic groups, some among nations, and some among regions, continents, or whole civilizations. In the nineteenth century, real per capita income in the Balkans was about one-third that in Britain.
That dwarfs intergroup disparities that many in the United States today regard as not merely strange but sinister. Singapore has a median per capita income that is literally hundreds of times greater than that in Burma.
During the rioting in Indonesia last year, much of it directed against the ethnic Chinese in that country, some commentators found it strange that the Chinese minority, which is just 5 percent of the Indonesian population, owned an estimated four-fifths of the capital in the country.
But it is not strange.
Such disparities have long been common in other countries in Southeast Asia, where Chinese immigrants typically entered poor and then prospered, creating whole industries in the process. People from India did the same in much of East Africa and in Fiji.
Occupations have been similarly unequal. In the early s, Jews were just 6 percent of the population of Hungary and 11 percent of the population of Poland, but they were more than half of all the physicians in both countries, as well as being vastly over-represented in commerce and other fields.
By the late twentieth century, it was estimated that 17 percent of the people in the world produce four-fifths of the total output on the planet.
Such examples could be multiplied longer than you would have the patience to listen. In some cases, we can trace the reasons, but in other cases we cannot. A more fundamental question, however, is: Why should anyone have ever expected equality in the first place?
Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that not only every racial or ethnic group, but even every single individual in the entire world, has identical genetic potential.
If it is possible to be even more extreme, let us assume that we all behave like saints toward one another. Would that produce equality of results? Real income consists of output and output depends on inputs. These inputs are almost never equal-- or even close to being equal.
During the decade of the s, for example, the Chinese minority in Malaysia earned more than a hundred times as many engineering degrees as the Malay majority.
Halfway around the world at the same time, the majority of the population of Nigeria, living in its northern provinces, were just 9 percent of the students attending that country's University of Ibadan and just 2 percent of the much larger number of Nigerian students studying abroad in foreign institutions of higher learning.
In the Austrian Empire inthe illiteracy rate among Polish adults was 40 percent and among Serbo-Croatians 75 percent-- but only 6 percent among the Germans. Given similar educational disparities among other groups in other countries-- disparities in both the quantity and quality of education, as well as in fields of specialization-- why should anyone expect equal outcomes in incomes or occupations?
Educational differences are just one source of economic disparities. Even at the level of craft skills, groups have differed enormously, as they have in urbanization.
During the Middle Ages, and in some places long beyond, most of the population of the cities in Slavic Eastern Europe were not Slavs. Germans, Jews, and other non-Slavic peoples were the majority populations in these cities for centuries, while the Slavs were predominantly peasants in the surrounding countrysides.
Prior to the yearthe official records of the city of Cracow were kept in German-- and the transition that year was to Latin. Only decades later did Poles become a majority of the population of Cracow. Only over a period of centuries did the other cities of Slavic Eastern Europe acquire predominantly Slavic populations.
As late as97 percent of the people living in the cities of Byelorussia were not Byelorussians. Until this long transition to urban living took place among the Slavs, how could the wide range of skills typically found in cities be expected to exist in populations that lived overwhelmingly in the countryside?
Not only did they not have such skills in Eastern Europe, they did not have them when they immigrated to the United States, to Australia, or to other countries, where they typically worked in low-level occupations and earned correspondingly low incomes.
In the early years of the twentieth century, for example, immigrants to the United States from Eastern and Southern Europe earned just 15 percent of the income of immigrants from Norway, Holland, Sweden, and Britain. Groups also differ demographically.
It is not uncommon to find some groups with median ages a decade younger than the median ages of other groups, and differences of two decades are not unknown. During the era of the Soviet Union, for example, Central Asians had far more children than Russians or the peoples of the Baltic republics, and so had much younger median ages.
At one time, the median age of Jews in the United States was 20 years older than the median age of Puerto Ricans. If Jews and Puerto Ricans had been absolutely identical in every other respect, including their cultures and histories, they would still not have been equally represented in jobs requiring long years of experience, or in retirement homes, or in activities associated with youth, such as sports or crime.
Nothing so intractably conflicts with our desires for equality as geography. The physical settings in which races, nations, and civilizations have evolved have had major impacts on the cultures developed within those settings. Those settings vary enormously-- as do their cultural consequences.
How could Scandinavians or Polynesians know as much about camels as the Bedouins of the Sahara? And how could the Bedouins know as much about fishing as the Scandinavians or Polynesians?Essai sur l'inégalité des races humaines (Essay on the Inequality of the Human Races, –) by Joseph Arthur, Comte de Gobineau, was a book arguing there were differences between human races, that civilizations decline and fall when the races are mixed and that the white race was superior.
It is today considered to be one of the earliest examples of scientific racism. We ask you, humbly, to help us. We hope you enjoy this web site and what it represents.
If so, fantastic! The thing is we're an independent group of normal people who donate our time to . Count Joseph Arthur de Gobineau in the immediate aftermath of the Revolutions of , wrote a page book, An Essay on the Inequality of the Human Races, I will not wait for the friends of equality to show me such and such passages in books written by missionaries or sea captains, who declare some Wolof is a fine carpenter, some.
The inequality of human races. by Gobineau, Arthur, comte de, Publication date Topics Race relations, Civilization, Ethnology.
Publisher London: William Heinemann. Collection prscr; unclibraries; americana. Digitizing sponsor University of North Carolina at Chapel ashio-midori.com: The concept of race as a rough division of anatomically modern humans (Homo sapiens) has a long and complicated ashio-midori.com word race itself is modern and was used in the sense of "nation, ethnic group" during the 16th to 19th century, and only acquired its modern meaning in the field of physical anthropology from the mid 19th century.
The politicization of the field under the concept of. First French edition, Paris, , 4 vol "This dedication and the following preface apply to the whole work, of which the present volume contains the first book."--Footnote to "From the author's dedication ()", p.
xi Includes bibliographical references and indexPages: