In an apparent recognition that a deceptively edited video clip run in a defamatory news article was not sufficient grounds for their having dismissed me from teaching, the New Jersey Institute of Technology (NJIT) has resorted to martialing alleged experts in biological science and history to denounce me. On October 10th, 2017, the Vector, NJIT’s school newspaper, ran a “Statement from the Department of Biological Sciences at NJIT Regarding the Case of Dr. Jorjani”. On October 25th, the Vector followed up with a “Statement by the Faculty and Staff of the Federated History Department at NJIT and Rutgers University, Newark Regarding Dr. Jason Jorjani.”
I suspect that the upper administration of NJIT convinced the chairs of these departments to get their faculty and staff to sign such deplorably illogical and poorly formulated denunciation statements. They wanted to assemble a potential pool of ‘expert’ witnesses for a court case over President’s Bloom’s libelous September 20th email and my subsequent September 25th suspension, which the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) has deemed to have been unjust and based on insufficient grounds. Their tactics are comparable to those of the Tribunal of the Holy Inquisition, calling to mind Paul Feyerabend’s argument that scientists can be at least as prejudiced and persecutory as religious fundamentalists.
That I am an advocate for the Neo-Eugenic use of biotechnology in Iran, and at that in response to an 800-year long genocide suffered by my fatherland, does not make me a “racist.” Nowhere have I ever claimed that the civil rights of Non-Caucasian Westerners should be curtailed or infringed in any way. Of the three books that I’ve written, one is dedicated to a Jew, another to an Iranian, and the third to a black man. Recall also that I resigned from the Alt-Right to devote myself to the Iranian Renaissance movement, and did so in protest of the direction that my former Alt-Right partners had taken by August of 2017. My true character and nature would become clear in the course of repeated trials on the way to the Supreme Court of the United States. Thanks to these two denunciation statements what was at one point a defamation case is now the best test case for academic freedom that anyone has seen in decades. Is that really where NJIT and Rutgers University want to take this?
The two denunciation statements concern an article titled “Against Perennial Philosophy”, a presentation originally prepared for an Iranian audience, which I adapted and published online at the now defunct RightOn, on October 21st, 2016. It was later merged into AltRight.com together with other RightOn content. “Against Perennial Philosophy” is actually largely critical of the Alt-Right, targeting the Traditionalist philosophical standpoint of many within the movement. It also seeks to dramatically expand the cultural horizon of the Alt-Right to encompass Iran. What is at issue are only four or five paragraphs out of this rather lengthy piece. In fact, I considered these few paragraphs to be so negligible to the overall argument of “Against Perennial Philosophy” that I cut them when I reproduced this text as an essay in my recent anthology, Lovers of Sophia. Here are the five paragraphs in question:
...This mentality has a genetic basis. You do not find in Asians, Arabs, Africans, and other non-Aryan peoples. After 1945 in the Western world it became politically correct to claim that “race” is a social construction that does not correspond to any biological reality. This is essentially a Marxist view. In the last five years, advances in gene sequencing technology and new archeological finds have destroyed this left-wing myth of human racial equality. It turns out that there were multiple co-existing Hominid species, which were vastly unequal in significant respects such as their cognitive abilities. So-called Homo Sapiens did not neatly and cleanly follow these extinct species in evolutionary history. Rather, different groups of Hominids that are now extinct mated with certain populations of Homo Sapiens and not with others. For example, many Europeans have Neanderthal genes but no Africans do. Many Africans and South Indians have genes from an extinct Hominid called the Denisovan, but no Europeans have Denisovan genes. Racial difference is real, and it matters. That Africans have an average IQ of around 75 whereas whites have an average IQ of around 100, and Africans who have mixed with whites (for example in North America or South Africa) have an average IQ of around 85 has to do not with education or social conditioning, but with different genetic inheritances from extinct Hominid species.
Before the Arab, Turkic, and Mongol conquests of Iran, in other words up to the end of the Sassanian period, the majority of Iranians were genetically identical to Europeans. Although some Persians and Kurds mixed with local non-Aryan Elamites and Assyrians, this was more than compensated for by repeated southward mass migrations of northern Iranian tribes such as the Scythians and Sarmatians, who looked – and thought – like Germans.
So if we ask why Iran never produced a Hegel after the Arab invasion, we have to remember that Hegel was German and not Greek. By Hegel’s time, the vast majority of Greeks had long since lost the genetic characteristics that they had in the time of Heraclitus, Plato, Aristotle, and all of those other geniuses that they produced in ancient times. They had already begun to lose that genetic character during the late Roman Empire, as had the Italians themselves.
I have little doubt about two things: Firstly, if Germanic barbarians had not invaded the Roman Empire from the north around the time that Christianity was destroying the intellectual life of Rome, there would never have been a Renaissance or Enlightenment in Europe. This took place in Northern Italy, France, and Germany, all territories where the vast majority of the population are genetically Aryan. These movements did not take place in Sicily, and that is significant because hundreds of years earlier – in the time of Pythagoras and Plato, Sicily was actually one of the most intellectually sophisticated parts of Europe. By Hegel’s time, however, Sicily had essentially become Arab despite remaining Christian. Without the barbarian invasions from the north, Italians today would be like the Christian Lebanese and Syrians or essentially like the majority of today’s orthodox Greeks. I also have little doubt that if Central Asia had still been Scythian during the period of the so-called ‘Islamic Golden Age’, and instead of the Turkic and Mongol invasions of people from the Asian race, Iran had been invaded by Scythians – not only would the Caliphate have been defeated, we would have seen the Enlightenment and Industrial Revolution take place in Iran instead of Europe.
The Arab-Muslim invasion was bad, but once this was compounded by the genocidal Turkic and Mongol conquests of Iran, a demographic shift took place that deprived Iran of the genetic basis for the production of a Hegel, Nietzsche, or Heidegger. Such men are less than one in a million, even in a genetically pure Aryan population. But their thinking goes on to impact millions in the broader intellectual culture of their nation. Now, I’m not saying that for this reason Iran will never produce thinkers on this level again. With the emerging technologies of embryo selection and genetic engineering, it would be possible, with the right leadership and government planning, to restore the pre-Arab and pre-Mongol genetic character of the majority of the Iranian population within only one or two generations. I’m sorry to have to suggest that this might be necessary in order to Make Iran Great Again.
Essentially this amounts to the following five claims: (1) Different extinct hominids interbred with various, relatively geographically discrete Homo Sapiens populations to different degrees as can be determined from genetic markers that appear in certain contemporary ethnic groups and not in others; (2) These extinct hominids had, among other variant characteristics, significantly different cognitive capacities, so that their differentiation on at least a sub-species level as reflected in the inheritance of phenotypically distinct and geographically clustered populations correlates to the well-established concept of human “racial” difference; (3) Iran (which literally means “Aryan”) was not just linguistically and culturally Indo-European, the Persians, the Scythians, and other Iranians were also genetically similar to their European cousins (which is unsurprising since Iranians are from Europe, specifically from Ukraine, and mass migrated both through the Caucasus and around the other side of the Caspian Sea, in various successive waves, to the plateau that they named “Aryana” [Ancient Persian] or “Iran” [Middle Persian] after themselves); (4) The Arab, Turkic, and Mongol invasions of Iran were genocidal in nature and the dramatic demographic shift that they brought about correlates to an eventual decline in the intellectual capacity and cultural brilliance of Iranian civilization; (5) Bringing about an Iranian Renaissance in the near future would consequently require, in addition to numerous cultural factors, Neo-Eugenic use of biotechnologies such as embryo selection and genetic engineering to restore relevant aspects of the ancient Iranian genetic constitution, such as those that correlate with IQ.
Interestingly, the statement released by the History Department at NJIT (and Rutgers) seems to ignore the subject of the genocidal invasion and brutal colonial occupation of the Aryan nation of Iran by Arabs, Turks, and Mongols from the 7th century to the 15th century. Like the Biology Department, they focus on race, genetics, and eugenics, and claim that my allegedly “pseudoscientific” views on these subjects have been responsible for 20th century genocidal policies such as “the Holocaust” – as if there has only ever been one holocaust, and as if the repeated genocides of Iran’s Caucasian population never took place. Please note their perverse tactics here.
As far as the biological aspects of the claims that I made in “Against Perennial Philosophy,” there is plenty of scientific evidence on my side. On March 17th of 2016 The New York Times, the same voice of authority used by NJIT to defame me, published an article entitled “Ancestors of Modern Humans Interbred With Extinct Hominins”, which discusses the mainstream scientific studies demonstrating that Africans do not have the Neanderthal genes that Europeans inherited whereas Europeans do not have the Denisovan genes inherited by Africans. In April of 2008, neuroscientists Gary Lynch and Richard Granger published a book called Big Brain: The Origins and Future of Human Intelligence, which focuses on the significant cognitive differences between these extinct human sub-species. Again, various ethnic groups have unequally inherited genes from them based on relative geographic isolation. It is perfectly reasonable to argue that the significant differences in IQ, which correlate to the phenotypic concept of “racial” difference, are among these unequally inherited characteristics. In their 2002 book IQ and the Wealth of Nations, psychologist Richard Lynn and political scientist Tatu Vanhanen, presented overwhelming evidence of ethnic differences in cognitive capacities that correlate to the relative industrial productivity and socio-economic welfare of groups of nations that cluster along “racial” lines such as Caucasian, African, and Asian. In 2006 they followed up with IQ and Global Inequality, which gave a detailed response to the scientific community’s critical reception of their first book.
Quite to the contrary of the History Department’s claim that these are “discredited scientific studies”, there has been a lively contemporary debate over race and cognitive capacity in the scientific community ever since psychologist Richard J. Herrnstein and political scientist Charles Murray published The Bell Curve in 1994. As I argued in Prometheus and Atlas, drawing from the work of Thomas Kuhn and Paul Feyerabend, science is an ongoing revolutionary process of discovery not a dogmatically established body of knowledge. Defenders of failing paradigms who want to make it seem as if the latter is the case are always politically motivated and usually dishonest. That is certainly true of the faculty members who signed these denunciation statements.
Consider, for example, their claims regarding Eugenics. The History Department denunciation of me as an advocate of eugenics mischaracterizes the entire Alt-Right as “a white supremacist movement” and then repeats the libelous claim that the deceptively edited hidden camera footage published by The New York Times shows my “apparent enthusiasm about the redemption of Adolf Hitler as a great world leader.” Aside from the fact that, as I have repeatedly explained, I do not endorse Hitler and his policies, National Socialism or Fascism have no intrinsic relationship with Eugenics. Neither does “white supremacy.” As Richard Lynn explains in his 2001 book Eugenics: A Reassessment, all of the leading nations of the Western world had Eugenics programs in the late 19th and early 20th century. The most aggressive programs were not in Fascist countries, they were in liberal or social democratic ones like the United States and Sweden. Nazi Germany played catch up. Furthermore, advocates of eugenic uses of new biotechnologies are by far most numerous in East Asian countries. Nearly 100% of the Chinese scientific, medical, and political establishment is in favor of Neo-Eugenics using embryo selection and genetic engineering in order to, for example, increase the IQ of its population. It should be noted that, together with Ashkenazi Jews, it is the Chinese who already have the highest IQ of any ethnic group in the world – not Caucasians.
This is relevant to the part of “Against Perennial Philosophy” where I discuss how the Mongols brought a “Confucian” mentality to Iran that is inimical to the daring dialectical debate and revolutionary intellectual discovery characteristic of Caucasians. Clearly, I am not basing this solely on those aspects of genetics that correlate to IQ. A large part of the negative impact of the foreign conquests of Iran was cultural. But I am also suggesting that there may have been elements of the genome of certain extinct hominids that correlate to psychological characteristics other than the mathematical and spatial reasoning measured by IQ tests. For example, some of the psychology of Neanderthals has been speculatively reconstructed from paleontological and archeological research, and we know that Africans do not have any Neanderthal genes, so they could not have inherited these psychological characteristics whereas some Caucasians may have. When the NJIT Biology Department states that there is only a “slight genetic difference” and then deceptively adds “between individuals”, whereas ethnic groups are in question here, it is also important to bear in mind that we share 50% of our genes in common with a banana and 99% with your average chimpanzee. So small fractions of less than 1% make a huge difference.
The real problem is that thinking along these lines at all is now a “thought crime” in the West. Again, not in China, where race is recognized as an undisputed reality and the establishment embraces the New Eugenics to reaffirm presumed Chinese supremacy. Recall that my article was originally drafted as a presentation for an Iranian audience, with a view to addressing a demographic shift caused by genocidal Arab and Asian colonial occupation of Iran. The Biology and History Departments have just reaffirmed that passage in the essay where I write, “After 1945 in the Western world it became politically correct to claim that ‘race’ is a social construction that does not correspond to any biological reality.” That we are dealing with politicized science is clear from the fact that the Biology faculty members recognize that their reference to recent epigenetic research is insufficient as a rebuttal to my claims. So they take recourse to citing the metaphysical vagaries of the 1948 United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights to the effect that: “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.” How is this a scientific statement?! It is pure metaphysics! Not that I reject metaphysics, but if we are going to enter the realm of metaphysical contemplation of the nature of the human soul, then I could demolish the antiquated Deist views on reason and conscience expressed here just as I did in the doctoral thesis that became Prometheus and Atlas. I wonder whether the faculty members who signed this know that I actually wrote my MA thesis on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. I’m an expert on it, and my analysis of the drafting debates was incorporated into World State of Emergency. It may also be relevant that I worked as a human rights activist lobbying the United Nations during the brutally crushed 2009 uprising of Iranians against their tyrannical regime.
The History Department statement clearly endorses the defamatory claims regarding my view of Hitler, and the Biology Department statement expresses an intent for me to be rendered academically unemployable in perpetuity: “This makes him unfit to teach at NJIT or indeed at any academic institution that considers its students to have equal value and potential.” I had stellar evaluations and many of my students wrote to the Dean to protest my being removed from the classroom. These were mostly minority students, including an Arab, an African, and an Asian student who were among my best. The intent of publishing these statements in the Vector, the school newspaper that refused to publish an extensive interview with me, is to reengineer my students’ view of me after the fact. Whereas I always fostered the most free debate and profound questioning in my classes, the faculty members involved in this operation are trying to thought-police these students that they have more power over than I ever did. All that these 49 faculty and staff members, of three departments at two universities, have done is implicate themselves in a potential defamation and academic freedom lawsuit.