I recognize that my position may be laced with hidden fallacies. But the cracks in my edifice are fresh, still hairline cracks, not like the gaping wide cracks in the edifice of Antiracism.
Important background info on this “position” of mine that I keep referring to: I believe that we should not push for straight up HBD arguments about /how/ the races are different, nor even necessarily /that/ they are different, but simply “that they probably are different, and therefore we cannot presuppose racial equality insofar as social policies are concerned; the potential ramifications of such policies in a world where even soft HBD arguments are sound are absolutely devastating; people should be free to discriminate based on race, free to choose with whom they associate, and institutions predicated on the theory of racial equality should be abolished, such as affirmative action.” My reason not for taking the putative fruits of HBD and running with them is that I don’t want to see Nazi-style eugenics take place, sboth for ethical reasons and because there is no gold standard for what constitutes an adaptive trait–even general intelligence, et c, cannot be relied on in absolue terms.
Regarding the risk of “backsliding” toward 19th-century racism: I think that social progress of the past 80 years–the good aspects of antiracism–are here to stay. I don’t believe it is possible in most strata of society for blacks for example to be categorically excluded or for white people to begin othering them the way they perhaps might have in the 19th century or prior to WWII. I believe that impermeable, rigid cultural boundaries are gone forever, rightfully so.
It is possible to build a culture wherein people have sovereignty over their empirical social worldview and are permitted to discriminate while also censuring them for being bigoted. Bigotry ought be left at the door—something I am entirely fanatical about, in fact. Prejudice—a natural cognitive faculty—ought be permitted to exist, although people should be very eager to let their prejudices be overturned when confronted with evidence to the contrary
For example, I am “deeply racist” but am also fundamentally opposed to bigotry and unfair prejudice against individuals.
I think a middle path, a higher road, is feasible. Public agnosticism is possible. I am even willing to publicize my own self-doubt regarding the supposed fine structure of racial differences. I am principally expressing doubt in the proposition “races are equal”; I do not wish to express certainty in the proposition “blacks and whites are unequal in X, Y, and Z capacities”.
Yes, people tend to see things in binaries, but we can at least tighten the gap so the racism of racists can become naturalized and perhaps of a softer kind.