Racism, Pseudo-Science, and Conservative Politics

Update: I would refer readers who sought out this post to also check out a newer one on penigma that addresses issues of race and culture:
 http://penigma.blogspot.com/2012/10/columbus-day-cultural-diversity-and.html

The discipline of Evolutionary Psychology has been widely criticized as being used as pseudo-scientific justification for extreme right wing political views. 

An example of this in action was the publication in May 2011 on the Psychology Today magazine's web site by evolutionary psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa, who wrote an article, "Why Are Black Women Physically Less Attractive Than Other Women", which you can read here, despite it being subsequently removed by Psychology Today. (He also asserts that blacks are less intelligent than other races and ethnicity.) Dr. Mikhail Lyubansky wrote a scathing criticism, also in Psychology Today, in response which begins:

Between the Lines
Perspectives on race, culture, and community.
by Mikhail Lyubansky, Ph.D.

Beauty May Be In Eye of Beholder But Eyes See What Culture SocializesIf you poll the masses, make sure you know who they are. Published on May 16, 2011 by Mikhail Lyubansky, Ph.D. in Between the Lines

I just conducted a study that found Black women are more attractive than women from other racial/ethnic groups. I polled myself, 3 different times over 5 hrs. The results are statistically significant and show strong test-rest reliability. I have pretty charts that summarize the data.

University of Minnesota math and biology professor PZ Myers also dissected the claims of Kanazawa, debunking them utterly, on his Minnesota blog Pharyngula (bonus points if you know the definition of Pharyngula) where he wrote:        

"I'm a little surprised that it's gone. After all, Psychology Today had no problem with his loving look at American politics in which he wanted Ann Coulter for president, because she would have nuked the Middle East on 12 September 2001. That's just the kind of guy he is...

Wait a moment there…where in this study is the objective evaluation of attractiveness? Because Kanazawa can stack up a bunch of scores and make graphs does not mean that they have suddenly acquired the property of objectivity.

Can Kanazawa make his interpretations even worse? Yes, he can. He has a real talent for this. He generously concedes that, although black women are fat and blacks are less intelligent, their shortcomings in those areas, which are associated with the perception of beauty, are inadequate to explain why black women are so ugly, especially since black men are judged attractive, and lord knows, they have inferior IQs. But then, no loss: he also thinks Africans are too dumb to live.

And then we have the objections to this racism from London School of Economics Professor Paul Gilroy, and University of Minnesota Morris professor Paul Myers, who claimed the purported research was pseudo scientific and harmful to marginalized groups.

Kanazawa's article was the last straw in a long string of offensive largely right-wingnut pseudoscience.  On May 18, 2011, a mere three days after he first posted the article, he was fired.

Today 18 May 2011, the University of London Union Senate (the umbrella union for 22 colleges within the University of London), the Union’s legislative body representing over 120,000 students, voted unanimously in favour of calling for a campaign for the dismissal of evolutionary psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa, Reader in Management at the LSE, and to condemn his poor research.


Kanazawa published an article on Psychology Today on Monday 16 May 2011 called “Why black women are less attractive than any other women”. Previous articles by Kanazawa include “Are All Women Essentially Prostitutes?” and “What’s Wrong with Muslims?” which estimates there to be “120 million potential suicide bombers worldwide”.

Sherelle Davids, anti-racism officer-elect of the LSE Students’ Union says:

“Kanazawa deliberately manipulates findings that justify racist ideology. As a Black woman I feel his conclusions are a direct attack on Black women everywhere who are not included in social ideas of beauty.”

Amena Amer, incoming LSESU Education Officer comments

“We support free speech and academic freedom, but Kanazawa’s research fuels hate against ethnic and religious minorities promoted by neo-Nazi groups. Not only does he use LSE’s credentials to legitimise his ‘research’ but this jeopardises the academic credibility of the LSE.”

The academic community has widely condemned Kanazawa’s flawed research and there should be no place for his unscientific bigotry at the LSE. Students stand united against his disgraceful conclusions and will not let this negatively impact good campus relations” says Community and Welfare Officer-elect Lukas Slothuus.
The Students’ Union welcomes the unanimous ULU decision to campaign for the dismissal of Kanazawa.

While PT has largely responded to the pressure brought to bear by largely African American groups such as ColorofChange.org, it has not prevented similar pseudoscience and bigotry from being disseminated as if it were factual on the right.  I find the kind of statements made in Psychology Today to be similar to those which are broadly derogatory of right wing targeted groups.  They are typical of the kinds of comments I have heard in the past from right wing figures like Rush Limbaugh, and seen on Fox News from commenters like Glenn Beck, promulgated as if they were factual.

The political Right likes to claim they are not racist, but their beliefs, assumptions, and use of pseudo-science, pseudo-history, pseudo-economics, and pseudo-religious justifications repeatedly demonstrate the exact opposite.