By Peter S. A reference to the book Race by professor John Baker on the Nationalist Unity Forum website last week caught my attention: what, I thought, is it real? A book on race and racial differences written by a professor at Oxford University? It barely sounds possible.
So I ordered one, more out of curiosity than anything else – and boy, was I surprised when it arrived. Almost telephone book in size (and weight), this has to simply be the greatest book on race ever written — and I don’t mean that lightly.
Its scope is stunning, and its cold, calculated logic and direction irrefutable.
Professor Baker, who, I was sad to hear, passed away in 1984, also prepares the reader for the subject in the most interesting way possible: a historical review of the study of race, from the earliest anthropologists and scientists (going back to classical times right through to the 20th Century) before moving on to the actual biological basis of race.
Once there, Professor Baker uses biological facts to demonstrate the differences between species, races, phenotypes and irrefutably demonstrates the existence of different taxa (types) of races in both the animal and the human world.
Skulls of Eskimid (A) and Lappid (B) — From Baker, Race
The next section of this mighty book then looks at selected racial groups in detail, discussing Europeans (Europids); Jews; “Celts”; Australian Aborigines (Australids); Bushmen (Sanids) and Negroes (Negrids).
This is not to say he does not deal with other races, but his choice of focus is, as he says, to “reveal the “absurdity of the notion that skin-colour is the only racial difference.”
Some of the racial differences he lists are astonishing, to say the least. Apart from the ones one might expect (such as cranial capacity), Professor Baker details a host of others which include differences in type and distribution of sweat glands, body odour, sexual organs, arm and leg to body length ratios and more.
Under the section on Negroes, Professor Baker devotes two chapters on “foreign influences on Negrid culture” and “indigenous culture.” This he draws from the only available sources: the impartial observations made by the earliest European explorers of the Dark Continent and what can be deduced from later archaeological excavations.
A frank, and remarkable, discussion then follows on what exactly can be classed as indigenous technology in Africa, and what was imported. This has important significance not only for academic interest’s sake (and his discussion on the origin of the Great Zimbabwe ruins are of particular interest), but also for the last section of his book, titled “Criteria of Superiority and Inferiority.”
In this section, Professor Baker discusses cognitive ability and how it is measured, the history of such tests and their outcomes—which all consistently show that certain groups of South East Asians have the highest intelligence levels of any race, followed by Europids, then Central Asians (Middle Easterners), then North and South American Amerinds, then sub-Saharan Africans and Australian Aborigines last.
The last two chapters of his book discuss racial difference in achievement and civilisation, as measured against utterly impartial criteria, which are worth repeating in full here:
“It may be suggested, then, that in societies ordinarily regarded as civilized, the majority of the people comply with most of the following requirements.
1. In the ordinary circumstances of life in public places, they cover the external genital organs and the greater part of the trunk with clothes. (This is mentioned first, because the fact of a person’s being naked or clothed is usually his or her most immediately obvious feature.)
2. They keep the body clean and take care to dispose of its waste products.
3. They do not practise severe mutilation or deformation of the body, except for medical reasons.
4. They have knowledge of building in brick or stone, if the necessary materials are available in their territory.
5. Many of them live in towns or cities, which are linked by roads.
6. They cultivate food-plants.
7. They domesticate animals and use some of the larger ones for transport (or have in the past so used them), if suitable species are available.
8. They have knowledge of the use of metals, if these are available.
9. They use wheels.
10. They exchange property by the use of money.
11. They order their society by a system of laws, which are enforced in such a way that they ordinarily go about their various concerns in times of peace without danger of attack or arbitrary arrest.
12. They permit accused persons to defend themselves and to bring witnesses for their defence.
13. They do not use torture to extract information or for punishment.
14. They do not practise cannibalism.
15. Their religious systems include ethical elements and are not purely or grossly superstitious.
16. They use a script (not simply a succession of pictures) to communicate ideas.
17. There is some facility in the abstract use of numbers, without consideration of actual objects (or in other words, at least a start has been made in mathematics).
18. A calendar is in use, accurate to within a few days in the year.
19. Arrangements are made for the instruction of the young in intellectual subjects.
20. There is some appreciation of the fine arts.
21. Knowledge and understanding are valued as ends in themselves.”
Using these criteria, Professor Baker points out that almost every race except those in sub-Saharan Africa and Australia have climbed at least partially up this civilizational ladder. He describes, for example, from the diaries of the explorer Doctor Livingstone, an entire village in central Africa turning out to the see the wheels of his cart in 1871—a technology which they had never seen before.
Professor Baker points out that in many other cultures, important aspects of this civilizational ladder were missing, with the most interesting example he gives being that of the Aztecs and Incas, which despite building in stone and possessing advanced calendars to count the days, engaged in ritual cannibalism and never had the wheel; and of the Bushmen who, despite their relatively low status in all other fields, achieved rock paintings equivalent or better than that of any other similar culture in the world.
The book concludes with a definitive repudiation of the “environmental” theory of racial differences.
“It would be wrong to suppose that civilization developed wherever the environment was genial, and failed to do so where it was not. Indeed, it might be nearer the mark to claim the opposite.
“It has been pointed out by an authority on the Maya that their culture reached its climax in that particular part of their extensive territory in which the environment was least favourable, and in reporting this fact he mentions the belief that ‘civilizations, like individuals, respond to challenge’.
“The Sumerians found no Garden of Eden awaiting them in Mesopotamia and the adjoining territory at the head of the Persian Gulf, but literally made their environment out of unpromising material by constructing an elaborate system of canals for the drainage and watering of their lands.
“A very large number of Aztecs and members of several other Middle American tribes lived and made their gardens on artificial islands that they themselves constructed with their hands. These are nothing more than particularly striking examples of the fact that the environment on all but the most primitive human beings is to a large extent man-made; and it is made not by instinct, like that of certain animals, but by the use of reason.
“No specialist in the physical geography of America, ignorant of its human history, could guess that the Andes with the narrow coastal strip beside the mountain range constituted the environment of the highest culture that the Indianids ever attained in any part of the continent. It is true that less cultured tribes may be pushed aside into exceptionally unfavourable environments, but the idea that environment determines culture, whether at the pre-civilized or civilized state, is untenable.”
This book was first published before the science of DNA was as developed as it is today, and it is a tribute to the publishers of this, the third edition, that an additional and fascinating section dealing with DNA and how that science has proven that race is a biological reality. Included is a full DNA map of the world, showing the racial distribution of distinctive genetic types.
This is possibly one of the most remarkable books I have ever read. It is factual, scientific, logical and unanswerable. I cannot commend it enough to anyone who is interested in discovering the truth about race and ethnicity, and who wants to discard the insane blinkers of modern liberalism.
2
What hasn’t been mentioned in the review is that Baker (writing before Political Correctness assumed full flower) doesn’t balk at describing some sub -spieces (ie races) as being higher or lower forms.
.
As an Oxford Biologist and FRS, his key method is unflinchingly scientific in that he treats the human animal as just that: an animal. He illustrates primitive characteristics in various animals and then shows the same pattern in human sub-species.
(‘A taxon is regarded as primitive if it retains physical charcteristics that were possessed by remote ancestors but have been lost in the course of evolution by most members of the taxa that are related to related to it’).
‘
The australids (Aborigines) are exceptional in the number and variety of their primitive characters and the degree to which they are manifested. Baker describes 28 such characters resembling those of Pithecanthropus.
‘
And so on.
‘
One can understand that this type of discussion is unfashionable, but nevertheless the idea that mankind is uniiformly equal and that manifestations of inequality must be stamped out also leads to great injustice, oppression and unhappiness..
It is worth mentioning that the Nobel Laureate Sir Peter Medawar said of Baker’s book that ‘No book known to me tries to encompass everything relevant to race with such thoroughness, seriousnes and honesty…
‘
The idea of race or raciality has been systematically depreciated for political or genuinely humanitarian reasons, and it is high time that someone wrote about race as Baker does, ie in the spirit of a one-man Royal Commission.’
‘
Amongst other plaudits the book was described by the prominent psychologist Prof. Arthur Jensen of the Univ of California as ‘a most impressive display of profound scholarship and vast erudition in every main aspect of this important topic.’
This is one of the problems that beset both Racial Nationalists, Civic Nationalists and the PC brigade.
We are the Human race .We have different sub species Just like all mammals If I was lost in the Kimberly Australia . And Aboriginal would be my choice of the best chance to survive.. All these different sub races have their good points. Mostly geographical. Once they are all put in a melting pot. Everything is lost . We all become a lesser person .
So the left, of the rabid variety will have to answer some direct question at some point. Because integration, assimmilation, are anti nature and in fact racism at its worse.