> Robert William Fogel, _The Slavery Debates, 1952-1990: A   
> Retrospective_. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 2003.   
> ix + 106 pp. $23 (cloth), ISBN: 0-8071-2881-3.  
>   
> Reviewed for EH.NET by Leonard Carlson, Department of Economics,   
> Emory University.  
> Fogel sees the debate about the nature of slavery in the South as   
> part of a larger intellectual debate between the "old" anthropology   
> (which saw races as being innately superior or inferior) and the   
> "new" anthropology of Franz Boas (which saw human beings as innately   
> equal but shaped by different cultural circumstances).  
  
  
I haven't read Fogel, but if he is assuming a "new" anthropology as stated   
above, he is assuming something that is just not true. Races ARE innately   
different, although I'd hesitate to use the terms superior and inferior.  
Specifically, it is by now well established that blacks [Africans] have on the   
average lower intelligence than whites. See the recent review of Rushton and   
Jensen, http://www.ssc.uwo.ca/psychology/faculty/rushtonpdfs/PPPL1.pdf, and   
Rushton's review of Richard Lynn's book on race difference in intelligence,  
http://www.ssc.uwo.ca/psychology/faculty/rushtonpdfs/2006%20PAID%20bk%  
20rev.pdf.  
  
East Asians, Chinese, Japanese, Koreans have on the average higher IQs than   
whites. These well established "old" anthropology facts have obvious   
implications for the economic success of various parts of world in a   
technological age which puts a premium on intellectual skills. It takes a act   
of willful blindness not to see the implications of these facts.  
  
Albert Himoe