Hundreds petition to retract paper they call “unscholarly, overtly racist”

Instead of signing petitions full of buzzwords and posting solitary anecdotes on Twitter, opponents of the paper should write a rebuttal and refute the author's claims.

It’s funny that “people of color” has been altered to remove Asians. I guess Asians have achieved too much success in racist America? I wonder how they did it? Maybe this paper can shed some light. I better read it quickly, before the mob gets their way.

Lawrence M. Mead

Journal: Society

Abstract:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12115-020-00496-1

https://www.amazon.com/Burdens-Freedom-Cultural-Difference-A...

.... The United States is an individualist society where most people seek to realize personal goals and values out in the world. This unusual, inner-driven culture was the chief reason why first Europe, then Britain, and finally America came to lead the world. But today, our deepest problems derive from groups and nations that reflect the more passive, deferential temperament of the non-West. The long-term poor and many immigrants have difficulties assimilating in America mainly because they are less inner-driven than the norm. Abroad, the United States faces challenges from Asia, which is collective-minded, and also from many poorly-governed countries in the developing world. The chief threat to American leadership is no longer foreign rivals like China but the decay of individualism within our own society.

Burdens of Freedom Lawrence M. Mead Fall 2016 https://nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/burdens-of-f...

They would have some credibility if they occasionally attacked something truly ridiculous like String Theory, but it's easier to paint the bike shed that no one would ever have used.

Lawrence Mead (the author) is 77 years old (few years too old to be considered as a boomer)

Jonathan Imber (Editor-in-Chief ‘Society’ Journal) seems to be 71. (His CV says "London School of Economics and Political Science, 1972-73" and he was the Class of 1949 Professor in Ethics).

Just by looking at the references in his article it's clear that Mead is not kept up with the field since late 90s. It's blast from the past.

As populations age, people in scientific institutions and publications age as well. Unlike many other professions, academics can stay active and hang into important positions semi-retired until their 80's. There is nothing wrong with that in individual level, but if they keep occupying an overly large portion of important positions in science it becomes a bottleneck that sustains old outdated viewpoints.

It seems that Lawrence Mead's work was criticized and debated in the 80s and 90s and it was laid to rest. Instead of asking for a retraction, scholars should look deeply into the relevance of the journals, universities, and how up to date people in their positions are. It's perfectly understandable that organizations filled with people who started their careers in the 70s don't have BIPOC among them.