Is the majority of mixed-race risk factor for mental illness a result of genetics or the environment?

submitted by SoylentCapitalist from self.debatealtright

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Being mixed European is not the same thing as being mixed race.

1940s America was 90% white and mostly of NW European stock. Outside of the Southern states (where there were lots of blacks), it was 95-99% white in most areas. Furthermore, whites (mainly WASPs) controlled the upper echelons of society in government and business.

The 1924 Immigration Act and National Origins formula was in place at this stage, which stopped mass immigration from countries like Italy, Poland and Russia that had happened in the late 19th and early 20th centuries and gave overt preference via higher quotas to the British, Irish, Germans, Dutch and Scandinavians... because they were the majority of the US population. That isn't to say Southern and Eastern Europeans never assimilated or were somehow lesser, just that America was once a relatively homogeneous country.

America became a superpower in large part because of the geopolitical and economic circumstances, and no small part of that was due to its racial makeup.

Had America opened Ellis Island to millions of Subsaharan Africans, Arabs, etc instead of Europe, it'd be a shithole.

Just compare the United States to most countries on the American continent which were mostly colonised by Spaniards and a few other Europeans who miscegenated themselves out of existence with natives and black slaves. Most of Latin America is a third world shithole, and no, it doesn't matter that much whether the country is "socialist" (like Venezuela) or "capitalist" (like Brazil). A common trend in these countries is that the white areas (e.g. Southern Brazil, where Gisele Bundchen is from, it's very German) are much better than where the blacks and browns are like the big cities.

America was very fortunate to have racially conscious political, academic and cultural leadership for most of its history. Beginning with the founding fathers themselves who made it clear from the beginning that the US was intended to be a white nation in the 1790 Naturalization Act.

Brazil 2.0 is the future of the United States if nothing changes.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Being mixed European is not the same thing as being mixed race.

Actually, it is.

The idea of racial differences was one of the primary motivations of Darwin's "theory of evolution".

The original book title was, "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life" (1859).

It's worth mentioning the fact that Darwin was English. You probably already knew that.

One of the absolute lowest ethnic classes was the Irish; according to Darwin.

The Irish were similarly disliked when they immigrated to the US.

Being mixed European is not the same thing as being mixed race.

It's exactly the same.

It's all predicated on the same absurdly racist concept.

[–]SoylentCapitalist[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Brazil 2.0 is the future of the United States if nothing changes.

I agree for the most part, but I also think the different genetic admixture here will produce a different effect. What is the average IQ of Mesoamerican natives? Also, what is the most feasible solution to this problem? I feel simply maintaining a white majority of around 75% and keeping high IQ individuals, regardless of ethnicity, in the political and scientific fields while maintaining a better social structure is the answer. It isn't necessary for the US to balkanize or become an ethnostate, in my opinion.