The Revolution Has no Need for Geniuses.

[Red Terror Doctor]

DNA co-discoverer Dr. Watson is a bigot. This case reminds me of the case of Antoine Lavoisier (the so-called "Father of Chemistry"). Lavoisier was guillotined during the French Revolution for counter-revolution.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england...don/7050020.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/7050020.stm)


http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentat...icle3075642.ece (http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/article3075642.ece)


http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/321/7252/12

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_D._Watson

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavoisier#Early_life

[LSD]

The Revolution Has no Need for Geniuses

That's the conclusion you draw from this story? :blink:

I seriously fear for your sanity if reading about one racist scientist leads you to "guillotines' and "counter-revolutionaries".

Not only does the revolution "need geniuses", it desperately needs geniuses. If we're going to succeed where every other attempt has failed, we're going to need novel solutions and radical thinking.

Anti-intellectualism is no more "leftist" than antisemitism. Indeed, the two have a great deal in common; both substitite romantic conspiratorial thinking for actual materialist analysis.

Not to mention that, historically, both have lead to shocking atrocities.

Or do you need to be reminded what happened in Cambodia? Here's a hint, the DK didn't think they "needed geniuses" either...

[darktidus]

Originally posted by [email protected] 09, 2007 06:16 pm


snip
I agree entirely.

[Marsella]

I don't see how this article has anything to do with the prospects of a revolution. :wacko:

And no, we don't need 'geniuses' to succeed in a revolution. That is an entirely individualist means of looking at it. We do need, however, to be critical and revolutionary about the old 'methods.'

For discovering a cure for HIV or a method to prevent cancers 'geniuses' are wanted.

Anyway, his statements were bigoted and simply wrong. They also stated in the article that he caused controversy in the past by 'saying a woman should have the right to abort her unborn child if tests could determine it would be homosexual.'

Clearly scientists are not immune from irrational prejudice.

[Red Terror Doctor]

Originally posted by [email protected] 09, 2007 06:16 pm

The Revolution Has no Need for Geniuses

That's the conclusion you draw from this story? :blink:

I seriously fear for your sanity if reading about one racist scientist leads you to "guillotines' and "counter-revolutionaries".

Not only does the revolution "need geniuses", it desperately needs geniuses. If we're going to succeed where every other attempt has failed, we're going to need novel solutions and radical thinking.

Anti-intellectualism is no more "leftist" than antisemitism. Indeed, the two have a great deal in common; both substitite romantic conspiratorial thinking for actual materialist analysis.

Not to mention that, historically, both have lead to shocking atrocities.

Or do you need to be reminded what happened in Cambodia? Here's a hint, the DK didn't think they "needed geniuses" either...
From wikipedia:


On the issue of obesity, Watson has also been quoted as saying: "Whenever you interview fat people, you feel bad, because you know you're not going to hire them."

While speaking at a conference in 2000, Watson had suggested a link between skin color and sex drive, hypothesizing that dark-skinned people have stronger libidos. His lecture, complete with slides of bikini-clad women, argued that extracts of melanin — which give skin its color — had been found to boost subjects' sex drive. "That's why you have Latin lovers," he said, according to people who attended the lecture. "You've never heard of an English lover. Only an English patient."

[Marsella]

Originally posted by Red Terror Doctor+November 10, 2007 05:13 am--> (Red Terror Doctor @ November 10, 2007 05:13 am)
[email protected] 09, 2007 06:16 pm

The Revolution Has no Need for Geniuses

That's the conclusion you draw from this story? :blink:

I seriously fear for your sanity if reading about one racist scientist leads you to "guillotines' and "counter-revolutionaries".

Not only does the revolution "need geniuses", it desperately needs geniuses. If we're going to succeed where every other attempt has failed, we're going to need novel solutions and radical thinking.

Anti-intellectualism is no more "leftist" than antisemitism. Indeed, the two have a great deal in common; both substitite romantic conspiratorial thinking for actual materialist analysis.

Not to mention that, historically, both have lead to shocking atrocities.

Or do you need to be reminded what happened in Cambodia? Here's a hint, the DK didn't think they "needed geniuses" either...
From wikipedia:


On the issue of obesity, Watson has also been quoted as saying: "Whenever you interview fat people, you feel bad, because you know you're not going to hire them."

While speaking at a conference in 2000, Watson had suggested a link between skin color and sex drive, hypothesizing that dark-skinned people have stronger libidos. His lecture, complete with slides of bikini-clad women, argued that extracts of melanin — which give skin its color — had been found to boost subjects' sex drive. "That's why you have Latin lovers," he said, according to people who attended the lecture. "You've never heard of an English lover. Only an English patient." [/b]
So therefore all intellectuals are redundant!

Fantastic logic&#33; <_<

[Red Terror Doctor]

Well, actually last time I checked Marx and Lenin predicted a proletariat revolutionary dictatorship not a revolution engineered by the intelligentsia&#33;

[Dimentio]

The intelligentsia is not the same thing as all scientists, engineers, and educated people&#33;

You are trolling, right?

Would people with glasses be executed or forced to harvest rice on the fields?

[Marsella]

Originally posted by Red Terror [email protected] 10, 2007 05:21 am
Well, actually last time I checked Marx and Lenin predicted a proletariat revolutionary dictatorship not a revolution engineered by the intelligentsia&#33;
http://fstdt.com/funnyimages/uploads/476.jpg

Which is quite ironic since the Russian Revolution did end up in the hands of the Russian intelligentsia.

And are you really that retarded that you think I said such?

You linked some articles about the prejudices of a certain scientist.

You then claimed, presumably from the heading, that the revolution, or any revolutionary society, has no need for &#39;geniuses.&#39;

LSD and myself were wondering how you could link two such obscure ideas together.

The heading of this thread should have read something like &#39;such and such a scientist fired for prejudice comments.&#39;

Now if you think that all scientists are redundant because of the comments of one person then you clearly have lost the plot entirely.

[Red Terror Doctor]

Originally posted by [email protected] 09, 2007 08:00 pm
The intelligentsia is not the same thing as all scientists, engineers, and educated people&#33;

You are trolling, right?

Would people with glasses be executed or forced to harvest rice on the fields?
No I am not "trolling."

I&#39;m trying to illustrate a point&#33;--point being that the workers should look to themselves for their own liberation NOT to intellectuals&#33;

[Red Terror Doctor]

P.S.

Another way of saying the same thing is to say:

The Bourgeoisie have no need of fools in order for the working class to overthrow them&#33;"
It&#39;s inevitable as the sun rising in the morning.

[Dros]

Dr. Watson is:

a.) a bigoted fuck.
b.) not a genius

Watson stole all of his data from Rosalind Franklin (the person who actually discovered the structure of DNA).

Einstein was a genius and a socialist (not a communist but it proves scientists can be at least progressive)

I don&#39;t think anyone said the revolution should be in the hands of the intellingencia. But the intelligencia can be revolutionary. And to say that the revolution shouldn&#39;t have geniuses is absurd. Don&#39;t you think Marx, Lenin, Mao, Engles (leader of your choice here) were geniuses. And also, why can&#39;t proletarians be geniuses?

Your possition seem to me to be slightly ludicris.

[Zurdito]

It was great scientific minds who developed our understanding of genetics to such a point that cranks like Watson could be dismissed. Without geniuses with the ability to disprove him, Dr. James Watson might be taken seriously by the masses.

[KC]

Which is quite ironic since the Russian Revolution did end up in the hands of the Russian intelligentsia.

And why is that?

[Dimentio]

Originally posted by Red Terror Doctor+November 09, 2007 08:14 pm--> (Red Terror Doctor @ November 09, 2007 08:14 pm)
[email protected] 09, 2007 08:00 pm
The intelligentsia is not the same thing as all scientists, engineers, and educated people&#33;

You are trolling, right?

Would people with glasses be executed or forced to harvest rice on the fields?
No I am not "trolling."

I&#39;m trying to illustrate a point&#33;--point being that the workers should look to themselves for their own liberation NOT to intellectuals&#33; [/b]
Like in... marxism-leninism? ^^

[Global_Justice]

Originally posted by [email protected] 09, 2007 08:37 pm
It was great scientific minds who developed our understanding of genetics to such a point that cranks like Watson could be dismissed. Without geniuses with the ability to disprove him, Dr. James Watson might be taken seriously by the masses.
thats a very good point. im not sure i understand the point the original poster was making

[Red October]

Originally posted by [email protected] 09, 2007 04:49 pm
im not sure i understand the point the original poster was making
I don&#39;t think they do either. They also don&#39;t seem to understand the difference between a genius and some jackass who makes unfounded racist remarks. And if you take it a little farther, it doesn&#39;t seem like they realize that proletarian can be geniuses too. A janitor or factory worker earning minimum wage can have a higher level of intelligence than a chemist or librarian. A revolution without geniuses would fail miserably.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

Originally posted by Red Terror Doctor+November 09, 2007 08:14 pm--> (Red Terror Doctor @ November 09, 2007 08:14 pm)
[email protected] 09, 2007 08:00 pm
The intelligentsia is not the same thing as all scientists, engineers, and educated people&#33;

You are trolling, right?

Would people with glasses be executed or forced to harvest rice on the fields?
No I am not "trolling."

I&#39;m trying to illustrate a point&#33;--point being that the workers should look to themselves for their own liberation NOT to intellectuals&#33; [/b]
That does not justify your response to LSD&#39;s statement. One intellectual making racist comments does not correlate with the original conclusion anymore than if a worker made racist comments.

The intelligentsia is not a distinct class. With little exception they are oppressed by the same ruling class as the rest of us. The strings controlling their funding and research are held by the bourgeoisie. Teachers, scientists, and engineers may be the lackeys of the ruling class, but we can actively see the same conflict between them and the capitalists as we do the workers. Teacher unions and administration battles are some of the most heated conflicts in present society.

[YSR]

Forward working class intellectuals&#33; Down with bourgeois racists&#33;

[Red Terror Doctor]

Originally posted by GeneCosta+November 10, 2007 01:43 am--> (GeneCosta @ November 10, 2007 01:43 am)
Originally posted by Red Terror [email protected] 09, 2007 08:14 pm

[email protected] 09, 2007 08:00 pm
The intelligentsia is not the same thing as all scientists, engineers, and educated people&#33;

You are trolling, right?

Would people with glasses be executed or forced to harvest rice on the fields?
No I am not "trolling."

I&#39;m trying to illustrate a point&#33;--point being that the workers should look to themselves for their own liberation NOT to intellectuals&#33;
That does not justify your response to LSD&#39;s statement. One intellectual making racist comments does not correlate with the original conclusion anymore than if a worker made racist comments.

The intelligentsia is not a distinct class. With little exception they are oppressed by the same ruling class as the rest of us. The strings controlling their funding and research are held by the bourgeoisie. Teachers, scientists, and engineers may be the lackeys of the ruling class, but we can actively see the same conflict between them and the capitalists as we do the workers. Teacher unions and administration battles are some of the most heated conflicts in present society. [/b]
You guys are discounting or outright ignoring the intellectual milieu that produced such a scumbag as James Watson (and his ilk). Do you think that Dr. Watson was created in a vacuum. He had to have had a lot of help and inspiration in becoming a racist neanderthal&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33; He had other professors instilling him with racist preconceptions, prejudices and attitudes.

[Tatarin]

You guys are discounting or outright ignoring the intellectual milieu that produced such a scumbag as James Watson (and his ilk).

Intellectuals can be capitalists or nazis if they want. They can even be socialists. But hey, most crimes are done by lower class non-intelligent people, right? So that must mean that everyone but intellectuals should not be allowed to decide in society.

[PigmerikanMao]

Originally posted by Red Terror Doctor+--> (Red Terror Doctor)
Originally posted by GeneCosta+--> (GeneCosta)
Originally posted by Red Terror Doctor

[email protected]
The intelligentsia is not the same thing as all scientists, engineers, and educated people&#33;

You are trolling, right?

Would people with glasses be executed or forced to harvest rice on the fields?
No I am not "trolling."

I&#39;m trying to illustrate a point&#33;--point being that the workers should look to themselves for their own liberation NOT to intellectuals&#33;
That does not justify your response to LSD&#39;s statement. One intellectual making racist comments does not correlate with the original conclusion anymore than if a worker made racist comments.

The intelligentsia is not a distinct class. With little exception they are oppressed by the same ruling class as the rest of us. The strings controlling their funding and research are held by the bourgeoisie. Teachers, scientists, and engineers may be the lackeys of the ruling class, but we can actively see the same conflict between them and the capitalists as we do the workers. Teacher unions and administration battles are some of the most heated conflicts in present society. [/b]
You guys are discounting or outright ignoring the intellectual milieu that produced such a scumbag as James Watson (and his ilk). Do you think that Dr. Watson was created in a vacuum. He had to have had a lot of help and inspiration in becoming a racist neanderthal&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33; He had other professors instilling him with racist preconceptions, prejudices and attitudes. [/b]
Although I would be willing to agree with you if you said we should not place the revolution in the hands of the intellectuals by faith- we don&#39;t necessarily need to decapitate them all as you implied in your OP. That would lead to horrible atrocities similar to those in Democratic Kampuchea. On the contrary, we need intellectuals, just not reactionary ones which is what this guy was. Not all intellectuals are racist pricks, we should instead judge on a person by person basis.


Tatarin
Intellectuals can be capitalists or nazis if they want. They can even be socialists. But hey, most crimes are done by lower class non-intelligent people, right? So that must mean that everyone but intellectuals should not be allowed to decide in society.
Uhh... I would rather not live in a technocracy. :rolleyes:

[Luís Henrique]

Originally posted by Red Terror [email protected] 10, 2007 02:49 pm
racist neanderthal
Self-defeating phrase of the year...

(Is that an item in chit-chat survey? If not, I blame apathy maybe.)

Luís Henrique

[Goatse]

This guy is clearly a troll...

[PigmerikanMao]

Originally posted by [email protected] 10, 2007 06:13 pm
This guy is clearly a troll...
I would go immediately out to denounce him as a troll just because he&#39;s willing to defend ideas different than yours. He has started no flame wars but has rather put up an issue and a opinion on it. Just because you don&#39;t like his ideas doesn&#39;t mean you should go out and accuse him of trolling- if anything, you&#39;re the troll.

[coda]

[QUOTE] Do you think that Dr. Watson was created in a vacuum. He had to have had a lot of help and inspiration in becoming a racist neanderthal&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33; He had other professors instilling him with racist preconceptions, prejudices and attitudes.


So very true. Even his DNA co-discoverer, Frances Crick had his own bad pseudo-scientific theories. he was pretty fond of &#39;positive eugenics&#39;--postulating that in the future the wealthy should be encouraged to reproduce more children to compensate for the bad/inadequate &#39;character&#39; poor people have on society. Alas, pretty soon the old cold war racists will all die out. Give it about 10 years.

[Red Terror Doctor]

[QUOTE] Do you think that Dr. Watson was created in a vacuum. He had to have had a lot of help and inspiration in becoming a racist neanderthal&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33; He had other professors instilling him with racist preconceptions, prejudices and attitudes.


So very true. Even his DNA co-discoverer, Frances Crick had his own bad pseudo-scientific theories. he was pretty fond of &#39;positive eugenics&#39;--postulating that in the future the wealthy should be encouraged to reproduce more children to compensate for the bad/inadequate &#39;character&#39; poor people have on society. Alas, pretty soon the old cold war racists will all die out. Give it about 10 years.
Thanks for pointing that out&#33; Goes to show that the old saying: "Birds of a feather do flock together&#33;"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Crick

[redarmyfaction38]

Originally posted by Red Terror [email protected] 11, 2007 04:37 pm

[QUOTE] Do you think that Dr. Watson was created in a vacuum. He had to have had a lot of help and inspiration in becoming a racist neanderthal&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33; He had other professors instilling him with racist preconceptions, prejudices and attitudes.


So very true. Even his DNA co-discoverer, Frances Crick had his own bad pseudo-scientific theories. he was pretty fond of &#39;positive eugenics&#39;--postulating that in the future the wealthy should be encouraged to reproduce more children to compensate for the bad/inadequate &#39;character&#39; poor people have on society. Alas, pretty soon the old cold war racists will all die out. Give it about 10 years.
Thanks for pointing that out&#33; Goes to show that the old saying: "Birds of a feather do flock together&#33;"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Crick
read this thread, loved it&#33;

ffs&#33; aren&#39;t we as "revolutionaries" supposed to explore every avenue of "scientific discovery"?

then, given the paymasters of the "scientists" meant to approach such findings with a "marxist" suspicion of how these "facts" came into being?

tis all good fun, but, imho, whilst we&#39;re having a laaugh, between ourselves, we need to be very careful.

inmho, accusing each other of this and that, does not allow us to debate properly our different analysises or approaches to given situations.
i know daMN well, i&#39;m guilty of attacking the swp leadfership, but i definately aint guity of attaCKINGT INDIVIDUAL COMRADES, be theysocialist or anarchist, that in mho is where we need to start, draw togethher all the trade unioists, the disaffected etc.

off to bed., :blush:

[ComradeR]

So am I to understand that RTD views all intellectuals as reactionary and an enemy of the left based on the views of a few individuals? if so then RTD is a fool. The Khmer Rouge shared similar views which lead them to kill anyone they saw as part of the intelligentsia, in their extreme view this included anyone with any education and even anyone who wore glasses.

[Ismail]

RTD, how do you feel about Marxism? You know, which scientifically examines the capitalist mode of production among other things. There is also dialectical materialism, etc.

Science is vital to human life. You&#39;re bound to have a few professors and such of course with views which today are viewed as bigoted, specifically ones born pre-60s.

[Red Terror Doctor]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12, 2007 10:51 am
So am I to understand that RTD views all intellectuals as reactionary and an enemy of the left based on the views of a few individuals? if so then RTD is a fool. The Khmer Rouge shared similar views which lead them to kill anyone they saw as part of the intelligentsia, in their extreme view this included anyone with any education and even anyone who wore glasses.
I don&#39;t support killing intellectuals or any one with glasses. I only urge everyone to ignore them and keep fighting for our rights. Just because a man is a genius like Crick or Watson does not mean we should be in awe of them.

[Jazzratt]

RTD, you&#39;re making a very big leap of logic "A genius has been a racist fuck, therefore genius is counter revolutionary". I&#39;d argue that we do need geniuses, not to act as some glorious vanguard of the revolution but simply to continue innovating after the revolution. I don&#39;t think you quite understand what the intelligensia are in terms of class analysis (here&#39;s a clue - it&#39;s not scientists or the like, most of them are workers).

I&#39;d hate to see what your revolution would produce - I feel the words "dark age" creeping up with malicious intent.

[LSD]

Why is this thread still alive?


I don&#39;t support killing intellectuals or any one with glasses. I only urge everyone to ignore them and keep fighting for our rights.

So, don&#39;t kill the intellectuals... we just "don&#39;t need" them, however one should interpret that disturbingly euphemistic phrase.

And when you say we should "ingnore" the "people with glasses", am I to take that that excludes those cases in which the "people with glasses" actually have something useful to say? Such as on, oh I don&#39;t know, revolutionary tactics or social reorgnization models?

&#39;Cause it occurs to me that we could really use some good ideas on those fronts.

Not that your plan of "fighting for our rights" isn&#39;t good, it&#39;s just that it&#39;s rather vague. Exactly which "rights" would we be fighting for? And how would we be doing it?

You see those are the kind of big questions that you want to sit down with smart people and consider. And it&#39;s doing just that, sitting down with intellectuals, considering tough questions that lead to the invention of things like communism and socialism and civil rights all those years ago.

"No need" for geniuses? We have every need for geniuses, we have a dire need that every intellectual, every worker, every human being with a brain use the magnificent powers of rational thought at their disposal to contemplate the very real very challenging problems we have before us.


Just because a man is a genius like Crick or Watson does not mean we should be in awe of them.

So when you said we have "no need for geniuses" what you were actually trying to say was don&#39;t blindly follow someone just &#39;cause they have a few PhD&#39;s on their wall.

Good advice, I suppose, but a tad obvious, don&#39;t you think? I mean, if that was your only point ...what was the point of this thread?

Were you under the impression that Dr. Watson&#39;s comments were engendering some sort of mass appeal? Or that anyone was taking them remotely seriously?

The man lost his job over this controversey, for crying out loud; I think it goes without saying that pretty much everyone disagrees with him here.

And I&#39;m still somewhat flabbergasted that your lilliputian mind has somehow linked this controversy to the role of intelligent people in revolutionary and postrevolutionary politics&#33;