DIY History | Transcribe | Hevelin Fanzines | Black & white, Summer 1944

Transcribe
Translate

Black & white, Summer 1944

Page 6

	Exceptions like Booker T Washington, George Washington Carver, and the two stfists in question, in no way disprove the general rule that Negroes show lower in inherited brainpower than average whites. But all of this is pretty far-flung reasoning.  Obviously it's not going to be much of a deterrent to a great many people; it may not be even for our type if it remains simply the recognition of an intellectual abstraction. So I have built up, to some extent by artificial means, tho the natural reaction to Negroes assists, an emotional bar against contacts with them beyond a certain limit.  More of this anon.

	I expect that I am indeed in the minority here, since most fans are idealists leaning to the Left, and since the majority of them, like the majority of Americans, live in the North and West where the problem is not acute. In many such places the small Afro element could probably be absorbed with little noticeable deterioration --- But don't forget that there are millions of them below the Mason-Dixon line and coming North every year, and quick to marry the mulattoes and quadroons that are the first stages in any amalgamation.

	Maybe there's no possibility of you yourself marrying another race.  But your example helps shape the mores.  There are people in the lower mental classes, and people who care nothing for what society will be like a few generations from now, who will conclude that if you can mix with them politically, economically, intellectually, et cetera, you can mix socially too. I can't think of any case where races have lived together for a long time and stayed distinct. The emotional bar mentioned slows down the process: thousands cross the color line every year, but a much smaller proportion in the South, where social disappoval is unequivocal. What reasons are there for anyone to marry outside hiser race? I guess in recent times the main reasons have been a mistaken idea that it will help racial understanding, desperation because no other spouse can be found, and perhaps in some cases on the level of "it gives me what I want". When we have dependable measurements of individuals' heredity, together with laws on the subject, then will be the time to consider each individual case on its own merits; until then, the rather slipshod color line method will have to do to hold miscegenation to a minimum.  Incidentally, isn't it the strangest sort of inconsistency to find an author going out of his way to defend miscegenation at one place in a story of which the central ideal is racial improvement --- miscegenation which Heinlein himself admits would tend to deteriorate stock.

	Ackerman is being absurd, and knows it, in putting me behind the straw man of Reverend Twiford. In sooth, a stronger case might be made by negrophiles if we were religious, the fatherhood of God over all of us often being said to imply the brotherhood of all men.

	The J is right in feeling that there was pride in the account of the incident on the train, but the pride was in the straighforward, objective reporting; the incident itself was simply unpleasant.

	I didn't intend to debate this issue publicly while we have a war on. The thing doesn't have to be settled immediately, though of course the sooner the better, other things being equal. Other things

Saving...

Exceptions like Booker T Washington, George Washington Carver, and the two stfists in question, in no way disprove the general rule that Negroes show lower in inherited brainpower than average whites. But all of this is pretty far-flung reasoning. Obviously it's not going to be much of a deterrent to a great many people; it may not be even for our type if it remains simply the recognition of an intellectual abstraction. So I have built up, to some extent by artificial means, tho the natural reaction to Negroes assists, an emotional bar against contacts with them beyond a certain limit. More of this anon. I expect that I am indeed in the minority here, since most fans are idealists leaning to the Left, and since the majority of them, like the majority of Americans, live in the North and West where the problem is not acute. In many such places the small Afro element could probably be absorbed with little noticeable deterioration --- But don't forget that there are millions of them below the Mason-Dixon line and coming North every year, and quick to marry the mulattoes and quadroons that are the first stages in any amalgamation. Maybe there's no possibility of you yourself marrying another race. But your example helps shape the mores. There are people in the lower mental classes, and people who care nothing for what society will be like a few generations from now, who will conclude that if you can mix with them politically, economically, intellectually, et cetera, you can mix socially too. I can't think of any case where races have lived together for a long time and stayed distinct. The emotional bar mentioned slows down the process: thousands cross the color line every year, but a much smaller proportion in the South, where social disappoval is unequivocal. What reasons are there for anyone to marry outside hiser race? I guess in recent times the main reasons have been a mistaken idea that it will help racial understanding, desperation because no other spouse can be found, and perhaps in some cases on the level of "it gives me what I want". When we have dependable measurements of individuals' heredity, together with laws on the subject, then will be the time to consider each individual case on its own merits; until then, the rather slipshod color line method will have to do to hold miscegenation to a minimum. Incidentally, isn't it the strangest sort of inconsistency to find an author going out of his way to defend miscegenation at one place in a story of which the central ideal is racial improvement --- miscegenation which Heinlein himself admits would tend to deteriorate stock. Ackerman is being absurd, and knows it, in putting me behind the straw man of Reverend Twiford. In sooth, a stronger case might be made by negrophiles if we were religious, the fatherhood of God over all of us often being said to imply the brotherhood of all men. The J is right in feeling that there was pride in the account of the incident on the train, but the pride was in the straighforward, objective reporting; the incident itself was simply unpleasant. I didn't intend to debate this issue publicly while we have a war on. The thing doesn't have to be settled immediately, though of course the sooner the better, other things being equal. Other things