From: mars1933@hotmail.com   
      
      When  did  humans  first  become  human?  The  answer  is  far   
   from  simple, because the question assumes that sometime in the past,   
   humans achieved modernity and were locked within an evolutionary   
   loophole where natural selection no longer applies. Despite the   
   absurdity of this scenario, and in stark contrast to empirical data,   
   it  is widely  believed that humans have not changed physically or   
   mentally for the past 50,000 years or so.   
      
      After the discipline of anthropology was  hijacked  by  Cultural   
   Marxism and it became crimethink to observe average group differences,   
   a preoccupation with tracing everything back to Africa developed.   
   Africa does have an outstanding archaeological  record  revealing   
   many  firsts:   
      
   the first bipedal hominids,   the  first  stone  tools,    and  the   
   first  anatomically modern humans that looked roughly like we do today   
   (a vertical forehead,  round  skull,  flat  face,  and  prominent   
   chin).    But  largely  due  to the politicization of anthropology by   
   Cultural  Marxism,  the  currently  accepted  evolutionary  paradigm   
   is  that  Africa  was  the  source  of  an  intellectual watershed   
   event sometime  between  100,000  to  50,000  years  ago,   
   and that it was only a matter of time before  this  new  breed  of   
   clever  Africans spread out and replaced all the dim-witted archaic   
   human populations in the rest of the world, such as Neanderthals.   
      
       The concept of behavioral modernity as it has been applied to the   
   Paleolithic seemingly arose out of the  Cultural  Marxist  obsession   
   with proving that Africans are just as good as, or even better than,   
   nineteenth-century White scientists who dared to rank societies and   
   point out that advanced civilization never developed in certain areas   
   of the world, such as south of the Sahara.   
      
        The problem with this paradigm is that, using the same set of   
   criteria proposed by those scholars pushing for an African origin for   
   modern behavior,  it  seems  to  have  originally  appeared  in   
   Europe  instead,  when modern  humans  first  arrived  there  and   
   replaced  Neanderthals.  Furthermore, the so-called modern behavior in   
   the African Stone Age is not qualitatively  different  from  that  of   
   Neanderthals, who were supposedly replaced by cognitively advanced   
   modern humans.   
      
       Why all the confusion and intellectual  gymnastics  to  argue  for   
   an  African origin for modern human behavior?  The  reason  can  be   
   traced  back to  the  early  twentieth  century,  when  an   
   anti-evolutionist  paradigm  was injected into anthropological   
   scholarship with strong political underpinnings. This eventually was   
   influenced and transformed by the Critical Theory of the Frankfurt   
   School, with  its  overtones  of  anti-establishment and anti-Western   
   sentiment aimed at the Marxist goal of liberating oppressed  groups.   
      
       This  new  movement  claimed  to  be  fighting  what  they   
   perceived  to  be  racism  on  the  part  of  Western  scientists,   
   but  it  has  been debated elsewhere whether such sentiments  were   
   sincere,  or  in  contrast were used as a means to advance ethnic   
   Jewish group interests while simultaneously de-ethnicizing non-Jewish   
   elites.   Regardless,  this  Cultural  Marxist  ideology  has  served   
   as  a  hindrance  to  scientific  inquiry and has resulted in   
   unfortunate situations where data are simply ignored when they do not   
   fit the accepted paradigm, which evokes the exclusionary tactics used   
   by the Boasian  intellectual  movement  against dissenters.   
      
       At the turn of the twentieth century, a spark was lit in the   
   academic world of anthropology that would drastically  change  its   
   course  and  politicize the discipline to serve as a mouthpiece  for   
   the  far  Left.  This spark, lit by Franz Boas, the "Father of   
   American Anthropology," introduced the concept of cultural relativism   
   and discouraged evolutionist and human biological studies. The Boasian   
   tradition would later dovetail with Critical Theory, created by the   
   Cultural Marxists of the Frankfurt School, in that dominant (Western)   
   societies and their supporting ideologies were seen as the primary   
   obstacle to human liberation.   
      
        This freedom fighter mentality against traditional Western ideals   
   and society  has  been  a  mainstay  in  anthropology  since  it  was   
   introduced  a  philosophical  juggernaut  that  crushes  all  dissent   
   and  has  resulted  in  the railroading of the discipline into   
   meaningless  postmodern,  unscientific pursuits  of  self-interest,   
   such  as  the field of feminist archaeology (which is  so 1980s and   
   has since been eclipsed by Black feminist archaeology).   
      
        Many of today's anthropologists are  infused  with  Cultural   
   Marxist cultural relativism and the desire to  be  a  freedom  fighter   
   railing  against mainstream thought. The irony of course is that   
   Cultural Marxism is  the mainstream,  completely  dominating  all   
   aspects   of   Western   academia and media.   
      
        Despite  major  scientific  advances  in  various  aspects  of   
   anthropology such  as  radiometric  dating  and  genomic  studies,   
   Cultural  Marxism  remains at the helm, firmly keeping the discipline   
   on the straight and narrow  path  of  disingenuous  cultural   
   relativism that overemphasizes the virtues  of  non-Western  societies   
   while simultaneously de-emphasizing the positive aspects of Western   
   civilization.   
      
      The  person  most  responsible  for  saturating anthropology with   
   Cultural  Marxism  was  Franz  Boas,  a  German-Jewish  émigré  who   
   found  his academic home at Columbia University in 1896, where he   
   stayed until his retirement in 1936. Boas had a profound impact on the   
   field of anthropology, and his politicization of the field began   
   overtly as a campaign  against  White  ethnocentrism  as  a  barrier   
   to  equality,  but  has  since developed into efforts to deconstruct   
   and pathologize White group cohesion while simultaneously encouraging   
   strong racial pride and cohesion in all other ethnic groups. Boas's   
   political  leanings  were  shared  by other  Jewish  intellectuals  of   
   the  Frankfurt School, which relocated from Germany to Columbia   
   University in New York City in 1934.   
      
       Shortly after establishing the department  of  anthropology  at   
   Columbia, Boas turned his attention to "the  race  problem,"  and   
   part  of  this  effort involved nurturing Africa-centric  studies  in   
   the  social  sciences.  Contrary  to  the  common  view  at  that   
   time that sub-Saharan Africa was a cultural backwater, Boas claimed   
   that "the Negro race had contributed its liberal share" of cultural   
   inventions and civilized accomplishments.  Boas claimed that African   
   cultural inventions  in  agriculture  and  iron  smelting were crucial   
   to "the advancement  of  the  human  race."  Subsequent   
   research  has  shown  that  neither  agriculture  nor  iron  smelting   
   was  an  African invention, despite decades of intensive investigation   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)