I'd like to toss out a possible example to illustrate this. In the mid-1970s, I read a political essay that mentioned a study that was done on communication patterns of American whites and American blacks. Generally, people standing close to each other and conversing do not both look at each other at the same time, since that could be construed as a threat. Instead, with whites, the listener mostly looked at the speaker to show attention, while the speaker mostly looked away while talking. With blacks, however, it was mostly the other way around. With them, the speaker mostly looked at the listener, while the listener looked away.
From personal experience, I would say that is definitely true for whites, but I'm not sure about blacks. Shortly after reading the essay, I found myself sharing a seat on a bus with a cultivated young black man a bit older than I was, and we talked a little. I tried the experiment of looking at him when I spoke, and away from him when he spoke. He didn't seem disturbed either way, but it drove me just about crazy, and I couldn't keep it up more than two or three turns. It felt to me like I was being completely rude to him.
For me, it seems like there is always a bit of discomfort in speaking with black people that isn't there when speaking to Asians or American Indians. It might be because of historical ethnic resentment and personal race-attitudes, or it might be because of innate patterns of interaction that don't quite mesh.
Suppose that, during the past couple of hundred thousand years, conversational language became a thing among our ancestors, and the rhythm had to be worked out evolutionarily to show attention while avoiding threat-stares. In sub-Saharan West Africa, the pattern evolved to look at the other person when speaking, and to look away when they spoke. In northeastern Africa and the Middle East, the opposite pattern evolved. Both were equally good, and it was random which was chosen. But now, whenever an African and a Eurasian get together to speak, they both look at each other at the same time, and both look away at the same time. Threat, snub. Threat, snub. Both are being perfectly polite by their own neurological system, and both go away feeling that the other is the rudest human being they have ever met, glaring at them in evident hostility when they should be looking away, and cold-shouldering them in apparent contempt when they should be looking at them.
I've never heard anything about this after that one tangential mention in the essay, but if true, and a general difference between Eurasians and Africans, then it would go a long way toward explaining a lot of our racial frictions, and the discomforts that seem to exist between Africans and nearly everyone else, without casting either side as the villain. Does anyone have any knowledge about this alleged difference?
Jul 4, 2022·edited Jul 4, 2022Liked by John Carter
' cheerful racism'
🤣 makes me think of how unusual my sons childhood friendships appeared to me, I grew up in the North in a town of 500, in a territory whose biggest city had only 30,000 people. I didn't see a black family until I was 14! Multiculturalism was the theme, my son (born in 91) had such a diverse group of friends but not for a moment did their differences go unnoticed amongst them. It was just more fodder for the usual razzing and they were hilarious with their verbal jabs at eachother. Cheerful racism nails it.
Very rough conversation to have; people's brains immediately shut down as soon as we even begin to consider the implications of building a society that considers racial talent distributions.
Of course, our modern economy is fake, and huge amounts of jobs amount to sterile corporate harems where excess women are paid to do meaningless paperwork.
My friend Autistocrates wrote a brilliant series on Leftist psychology, which is quite fascinating.
But he also has a fascinating article here, about how most of modern work is designed to create pointless busywork.
"The primary goal of most work is not to produce any kind of value but to keep you busy, waste your time and energy and keep you under control. Combined with debt-driven consumption, the common man is kept perpetually stuck in a state of frustrated drudgery that sees him too weak, busy and dependent to put up much of a fight against those in power."
I'd like to toss out a possible example to illustrate this. In the mid-1970s, I read a political essay that mentioned a study that was done on communication patterns of American whites and American blacks. Generally, people standing close to each other and conversing do not both look at each other at the same time, since that could be construed as a threat. Instead, with whites, the listener mostly looked at the speaker to show attention, while the speaker mostly looked away while talking. With blacks, however, it was mostly the other way around. With them, the speaker mostly looked at the listener, while the listener looked away.
From personal experience, I would say that is definitely true for whites, but I'm not sure about blacks. Shortly after reading the essay, I found myself sharing a seat on a bus with a cultivated young black man a bit older than I was, and we talked a little. I tried the experiment of looking at him when I spoke, and away from him when he spoke. He didn't seem disturbed either way, but it drove me just about crazy, and I couldn't keep it up more than two or three turns. It felt to me like I was being completely rude to him.
For me, it seems like there is always a bit of discomfort in speaking with black people that isn't there when speaking to Asians or American Indians. It might be because of historical ethnic resentment and personal race-attitudes, or it might be because of innate patterns of interaction that don't quite mesh.
Suppose that, during the past couple of hundred thousand years, conversational language became a thing among our ancestors, and the rhythm had to be worked out evolutionarily to show attention while avoiding threat-stares. In sub-Saharan West Africa, the pattern evolved to look at the other person when speaking, and to look away when they spoke. In northeastern Africa and the Middle East, the opposite pattern evolved. Both were equally good, and it was random which was chosen. But now, whenever an African and a Eurasian get together to speak, they both look at each other at the same time, and both look away at the same time. Threat, snub. Threat, snub. Both are being perfectly polite by their own neurological system, and both go away feeling that the other is the rudest human being they have ever met, glaring at them in evident hostility when they should be looking away, and cold-shouldering them in apparent contempt when they should be looking at them.
I've never heard anything about this after that one tangential mention in the essay, but if true, and a general difference between Eurasians and Africans, then it would go a long way toward explaining a lot of our racial frictions, and the discomforts that seem to exist between Africans and nearly everyone else, without casting either side as the villain. Does anyone have any knowledge about this alleged difference?
Good stuff! Subscribed
' cheerful racism'
🤣 makes me think of how unusual my sons childhood friendships appeared to me, I grew up in the North in a town of 500, in a territory whose biggest city had only 30,000 people. I didn't see a black family until I was 14! Multiculturalism was the theme, my son (born in 91) had such a diverse group of friends but not for a moment did their differences go unnoticed amongst them. It was just more fodder for the usual razzing and they were hilarious with their verbal jabs at eachother. Cheerful racism nails it.
Started thinking like that many years ago after watching the movie District 9.
Brilliant article! I have already thought myself to much the same conclusion, but you present it with such wonderful memetic imagination!
Very rough conversation to have; people's brains immediately shut down as soon as we even begin to consider the implications of building a society that considers racial talent distributions.
Of course, our modern economy is fake, and huge amounts of jobs amount to sterile corporate harems where excess women are paid to do meaningless paperwork.
My friend Autistocrates wrote a brilliant series on Leftist psychology, which is quite fascinating.
But he also has a fascinating article here, about how most of modern work is designed to create pointless busywork.
"The primary goal of most work is not to produce any kind of value but to keep you busy, waste your time and energy and keep you under control. Combined with debt-driven consumption, the common man is kept perpetually stuck in a state of frustrated drudgery that sees him too weak, busy and dependent to put up much of a fight against those in power."
https://autistocrates.substack.com/p/the-nature-of-work