W.E.B. Dubois and Scientific Racism

Armed with impeccable academic credentials and a large media audience ( The Crisis at its height had a circulation of more than 100,000), DuBois used his influence to counter scientific racism. Among his main points was that racism was taught, rather than innate. He pointed out that black and white children played together peacefully when left alone. He cited U.S. census records to prove that black Americans were increasing in number and less prone to suicide and mental illness than whites. He noted that, while nineteen percent of lynching victims were accused of rape, it was black women who were the most endangered by sexual attack from white males. And significantly, he argued that racial scientism was a closed system, not open to new data, and so its proponents were in fact unscientific.

After a long life as an academic, author, and activist, DuBois died at the age of ninety-four as an expatriate in Ghana, in many ways disillusioned with the American experience of race. DuBois “may very well have been the most important figure in the American civil rights movement in the twentieth century,” said sociologist Kenneth Clark. His “direct and authoritarian challenge to scientific racism,” as Taylor described it, remains one of DuBois’s most enduring legacies.

Another story to be remembered @nlents and @jordan. Wouldn’t it be great if we covered his work in science class?

1 Like

Why would a minor matter of identity issues be covered in science class but not creationism?? creationism is said to be denied in science class because science class is about science. Not liberal politics.
Anyways there are great books on how evolutionists, right away and almost all, agreed with race as a foundation for evolution truth. they all insisted humans had intellectually/ I think morally , evolved in different rates since breaking off from some single group(some said it was several groups i think).
This is not taught or known today. its an embarrassment to evolutionism.
I was surprised how quickly after Darwins first book was evolution/race/smarts etc a great issue.
As if they deserately wanted to deny the historic Christian conclusion of all men made in gods image and of one blood from Adam.
In america only the establishment, university types would of agreed with evolution/race stuff as mostly the nation was hostile or unaware.
This guy was fighting a elite opinion and not popular opinion.
i’m not saying Darwin pushed this. it seems he did not agree there was any difference between race and smarts or rather no evolving race rates. Yet his relatives did and friends. I think he was unsure.
It would rattle the modern evolutionist world to see how close they were with race/smarts as a issue of evolution.
This subject is not worthy of science class unless a general issue of how evolution was used for ideas on evolving humanity.
A creationist should not seek just to embarrass them but show a greater conclusion on evolutionarys crazy logical pathways.

@Robert_Byers, polygenesis and racism started in theology, not science.


This is an important piece of scientific history, and therefore, important to the classroom.

As I often do, I’m having a little trouble following your train of thought here. Why is fighting racism a “liberal politics” issue? I think we can both agree as Christians that racism is deplorable (and I do not use that term lightly).


i don’t agree and history would never teach this.
Actually polygenesis is a word I don’t know.
Ideas of race and moral/intellect are entirely from 19th century upper class europeans with evolutionism as the guiding scientific justification.
it was not from normal people. people believed people groups were better or worse as we do now but not based on innate biological systems. Thats all Darwin, even if he was unsure himaself.
Christianity or the bible , especially protestantism, never taught these things.
our foundation was Ada/eve 6000 years ago. Then noah 4500 years ago. Never was concepts of brain genetics taught, or imagined.
Its all recent evolutionism . ( I don’t mean today although some do and others hint or are unsure)

No. History is for history class. Science is for science. This is not science history or important. its obscure to science .
It is just liberal politics being introduced into science class and all academia.
If you want to fight some wrong thing then fight in the right place. not a captive audience for science instruction.
Thats liberal propaganda. Sure it is.
what is deplorable is the censorship of creationism. REALLY! Its denying conclusions about truth based on a seeming reference to religion. SO its a rejection of religion which is illegal for the government/schools to be involved in.
I’m not being light either but trying to point toward the light.
I can’t believe folks would use science class for political agendas THEN tell creationists you can’t be involved because of religious agendas!! which it is not. Just truth!

I am going to ignore your unsolicited advice to focus on a single question.

Why is standing up to racism a “liberal” issue and not an issue of true Christian values?


Christian values are not for science class and christianity says nothing about race stuff. Unless a general idea to love your neighbour as yourself.
in fact science class is for Christians/good guys everywhere to stand up for freedom of enquiry(including speaking about same enquiries) in the common heritage of origins. State censorship today is the enemy of Christians and scientific enquiry. Sure it is. Here in Canada too.
In fact its from the left wing that censorship is mostly born.

You are absolutely wrong. Jesus ministered to Samaritans in two occasions - people the Jews of the day hated passionately. There are many passages of the Bible that teach against racism and prejudice. Check here to see what the Bible has to say about it:

I teach at a Christian university, so of course I teach Christian values in my science classes. Ethics is taught in science classes at secular universities, as well. I am surprised to read such a statement from you.


A christian university might have christian doctrines in science class but its irrelevant.Christian values are no more right for science class, anywhere, then math class. lets have a national vote!
Ethics is not politics. even then it is only a little.

The bible says nothing about race and prejudice as both concepts don’t exist in Gods word. tHey are human construtions from the left wing mostly in the last century.
YES it would teach love your neighbour as yourself as this was the reason for jesis Samaratian parable.
Thats just ordinary , historic, normal concepts of one people group with another.
by the way the lOVE did not mean there was no justifiable reasons to complain about Samaritains or them about Jews.
i remember reading Josepeous say , who lived in those days, that samaraitins pretendind to be jews when it suited some gain and non jews when dealing with romans etc.
I don’t know but probably. they had legitimate complaints against each other or prejudices.
The bible never talks about race as race was not a concept they understood to exist.
anyways science for science class and poltical/social/history classes for others.
surely I’m right.
Bring creationism to science class and not christianity or liberal politics or conservative politics.

Race a social construct made by leftists in the last century or so?

Now, I know that I should disagree with him peacefully and if anyone thinks my response is too… Anything, they can freely flag me.

Now, with that out of the way, I have to ask, are you really this much of an idiot or are you just pretending?

Did they teach you anything about history at school? Did they they teach you anything about centuries of racial slavery, or racism that persisted after slavery was abolished, that still persists today?

KKK? What do you know about them? Or any other similar cult?

I’m sorry, but this amount of monstrous idiocy is on the same level as holocaust denial.


Yeah, this comment really reminded me that attempting to have a discussion with Robert is simply an exercise in futility that will most likely leave me flummoxed and irritated.

Note Just in case it isn’t clear to readers, these are not @Djordje’s words, but a reiteration of @Robert_Byers


Matthew 7:6 Don’t give that which is holy to the dogs, neither throw your pearls before the pigs, lest perhaps they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.


Time to end as your angry etc. Yet I know people groups hurt peoples groups constantly. thats the story of humanity greatly. Yet it was not done in race constructs. those are recent evolutionist ideas or left wing ideas . When the bebrews meant to destroy the Cannanites, underr Gods orders, it was about people groups but not race.
there was in the bible no concept of race because it doesn’t exist.
its the wrong term in defining people and peooples complaints with people.
Its just a coincidence if opposing people groups are of opposite RACES. Again race is not a creationist concept since we all come from ADAM/NOAH.
By the way even evolutionists today deny their are races. Even they see a original tribe of humans that later diverged.
Another final point is that the terrm used today is Africans and thats not a racial term.
Anyways I was defending science class for science and then creationism also as for science class.
I am faithful to science class for science which evolutionists attack creationists as trying to bring in non science subjects.


Because the Supreme Court has interpreted the US Constitution as erecting a wall between the state and the church …

but NOT about a wall between Promoting Racism vs. Opposing Racism.