Dr Alice Roberts is a very comely young woman, it must be said; but having watched her present the final episode of The Incredible Human Journey on BBC2 this evening, I do wonder what peculiar thoughts must be passing through her pretty little head. Why? Well, throughout the programme she kept referring to "our ancestors" when speaking about the initial peopling of the Americas many millennia ago. Now, if you have managed to escape going to school in the past twenty years or so and thus avoided the politically correct nonsense that must pass for history these days, you will realise that we in the UK (with the exception of a tiny number of individuals who hail from native American stock and settled here in very recent history) have no kin relations with the aboriginal populations of the Americas whatsoever. We are not their descendants, and they are not ours.
So, why employ the phrase "our ancestors"? Surely it would have been factually accurate and more appropriate to refer to them as "the ancestors of the native American peoples"? Well, her preference for this peculiar linguistic usage was revealed during the closing section of the programme when she stated that "we are all Africans under the skin" thus repeating and reinforcing the only publicly permissible line with respect to race in the UK these days: that race is superficial and only skin deep. She also implied that our future was to be one in which we recognised this unity, and embraced it on the physical level. I would mourn such a passing of our species diversity, for a future without the European variant of female beauty as exemplified by the person of Dr Roberts herself, would be an impoverished one. Likewise, I daresay that most East Asians and Africans would feel a similar sense of loss if their physiological types were to be doomed to extinction.
The diversity of genetic lines and morphological variations within the human species which manifest themselves clearly in the major racial divisions is something worthy of preservation and of true celebration. Humans have adapted themselves to a wide range of environments and developed regional concepts of beauty determined by sexual selection for secondary physiological characteristics. If we were to imagine the arrival of a biologist from another planet, he, she (or it) would have no problem in discerning the clear racial divisions that exist within the human family, just as we recognise different breeds of sheep, cows and dogs. Race is not a social construct: it is a genetic and biological reality.
Recognition of the reality of human diversity and difference does not entail hatred of "the other", although alas, the doctrinaire leftist assertion that it does is the one that is publicly accepted and propagated, as is a denial of the value of the rich fund of genetic variations contained within the human species. In my opinion however, it would be a tragedy if humans were to be reduced to a single miscegenated mass. Whether the dogma of the desirability of mass miscegenation can be dislodged from its current position of supremacy is debatable, given the shrill tone of those who would use violence to ensure that it takes place. It is to this project of racial dissolution and intermixing that the BBC subscribes, and pushes in all of its programming with the backing of the Government. Thus do we stumble towards a genetically impoverished future in which the Caucasian variant of human beauty sadly faces state-sanctioned and aided extinction.
Post a Comment
Comments that call for or threaten violence will not be published. Anyone is entitled to criticise the arguments presented here, or to highlight what they believe to be factual error(s); ad hominem attacks do not constitute comment or debate. Although at times others' points of view may be exasperating, please attempt to be civil in your responses. If you wish to communicate with me confidentially, please preface your comment with "Not for publication". This is why all comments are moderated.