The old nature/nurture dichotomy reappears every now and then as people try to simplify multiple factors influencing human developmental and explain observed behavioural traits in ethnic groups.

It seems to be a human trait to fear/hate those who differ in some respect from one's core group and, in terms of evolutionary survival, this attitude may well have been adaptive; but human 'differences' in this sense which can cause human conflict can refer not only to skin colour and other ethnic physical traits, but also to mundane factors such as where one lives, grassland or desert, plains or mountain, urban suburbs or uptown/ downtown.

As a matter of fact, one sees that the greatest threat to any particular ethnic group is likely to come from one's own that is 'intra-racial' conflict. The nature/nurture debate is now being seen as having less explanatory power as more is known about driving forces in human behaviour. The Nazis even tried to 'prove' that some whites were naturally superior to others.

Tribal/inter-nation wars

Ethnicity protects no group from potential wars of annihilation. In geo-political relations there are tribal/inter-nation wars in Africa; North Korea vs South Korea; China vs Taiwan; India vs Pakistan; Russia vs Western Europe, and intra-group strife among all these. Ethnic cohesion depends not on race but on interests identified in common.

As soon as Usain Bolt rocketed into worldwide prominence in Beijing, bloggers in Europe and the United States (US) revived the nature vs nurture debate by saying that such feats are to be expected from African ethnics since the 'fast twitch' heritage of New World blacks was well known for a long time. So they managed to lump 'fast twitch' heritage, along with purely situational negatives such as tendencies to criminal violence, pauperisation/poverty in majority black societies and "lack of intelligence", comparable to other ethnic groups, as the natural heritage of Africans.

But as all the old verities are exploded one by one, those holding such antiquated views, despite the evidence of the latest cross-cultural studies and rational study of history, have become increasingly shrill, and one can see a focus on their greatest nemesis, US President Barack Obama and his family, even going so far as to attack his daughter Malia with gutter language for wearing a T-shirt with a peace sign in London. This is supposed to signify her agreement with her father's 'selling out' to Russia.

Hitler and the Nazis tried, and failed, after using one so-called 'scientific' method after another to prove that high intelligence depended on nature. They even carried out studies based on the 'one-drop' theory. That is, classing any Caucasian-looking person who had one-drop of non-white blood, meaning even one near-white ancestor, however far back on the family tree, as black, and so of lower intelligence.

Selective breeding experiments

To prove their racial theories, the Nazis captured 200 blond, blue-eyed women in Poland and used them in selective breeding experiments with German males of the Nordic type, but the offspring merely tended to the population mean in intelligence when tested.

Furthermore, Hitler regarded the largely dark-haired Romans as non-white 'swarthy' Mediterraneans due to what he described as "race-mixing" among Africans and other non-whites, but he was baffled at the fact that the Romans created the greatest classical European culture, while 'pure-blooded' Nordics (with long heads, blue eyes and blond hair) from the Scandinavian and Jutland peninsulas had no comparable achievement.

I am, etc.,

PATRICK BLAKE

mysterymonpatrick@hotmail.com