Astonishing Lie by Hillary regarding Trump "Choke"

[James A. Donald]

Darwin discussing whether to classify humans as one species or several:



     We will first consider the arguments which may be advanced in 
favour of classing the races of man as distinct species, and then and 
then the arguments on the other side.

     …

     The inferior vitality of mulattoes is spoken of in a trustworthy 
work as a well-known phenomenon; and this, although a different 
consideration from their lessened fertility, may perhaps be advanced as 
a proof of the specific distinctness of the parent races.

     …

     Now if we reflect on the weighty arguments above given, for raising 
the races of man to the dignity of species, and the insuperable 
difficulties on the other side in defining them, it seems that the term 
“sub-species”might here be used with propriety. But from long habit the 
term “race” will perhaps always be employed.

     …

     Through the means just specified, aided perhaps by others as yet 
undiscovered, man has been raised to his present state. Butsince he 
attained to the rank of manhood, he has diverged into distinct races, or 
as they may be more fitly called, sub-species. Some of these, such as 
the Negro and European, are so distinct that, if specimens had been 
brought to a naturalist without any further information, they would 
undoubtedly have been considered by him as good and true species

     Our naturalist would then perhaps turn to geographical 
distribution, and he would probably declare that those forms must be 
distinct species, which differ not only in appearance, but are fitted 
for hot, as well as damp or dry countries, and for the Arctic regions. 
He might appeal to the fact that no species in the group next to 
man–namely, the Quadrumana, can resist low temperature, or any 
considerable change of climate; and that the species which come nearest 
to man have never been reared to maturity, even under the temperate 
climate of Europe. He would be deeply impressed with the fact, first 
noticed by Agassiz (7. ‘Diversity of Origin of the Human Races,’ in the 
‘Christian Examiner,’ July 1850.), that the different races of man are 
distributed over the world in the same zoological provinces, as those 
inhabited by undoubtedly distinct species and genera of mammals. This is 
manifestly the case with the Australian, Mongolian, and Negro races of 
man; in a less well-marked manner with the Hottentots; but plainly with 
the Papuans and Malays, who are separated, as Mr. Wallace has shewn, by 
nearly the same line which divides the great Malayan and Australian 
zoological provinces. The Aborigines of America range throughout the 
Continent; and this at first appears opposed to the above rule, for most 
ofthe productions of the Southern and Northern halves differ widely: yet 
some few living forms,as the opossum, range from the one into the other, 
as did formerly some of the gigantic Edentata. The Esquimaux, like other 
Arctic animals, extend round the whole polar regions. It should be 
observed that the amount of difference between the mammals of the 
several zoological provinces does not correspond with the degree of 
separation between the latter; so that it can hardly be considered as an 
anomaly that the Negro differs more, and the American much less from the 
other races of man, than do the mammals of the African and American 
continents from the mammals of the other provinces. Man, it may be 
added, does not appear to have aboriginally inhabited any oceanic 
island; and in this respect, he resembles the other members of his class.

     In determining whether the supposed varieties of the same kind of 
domestic animal should be ranked as such, or as specifically distinct, 
that is,whether any of them are descended from distinct wild species, 
every naturalist would lay much stress on the fact of their external 
parasites being specifically distinct. All the more stress would be laid 
on this fact, as it would be an exceptional one; for I am informed by 
Mr. Denny that the most different kinds of dogs, fowls, and pigeons, in 
England, are infested by the same species of Pediculi or lice. Now Mr. 
A. Murray has carefully examined the Pediculi collected indifferent 
countries from the different races of man (8. ‘Transactions of the Royal 
Society of Edinburgh,’ vol. xxii, 1861, p. 567.); and he finds that they 
differ, not only in colour, but in the structure of their claws and 
limbs. In every case in which many specimens were obtained the 
differences were constant. The surgeon of a whaling ship in the Pacific 
assured me that when the Pediculi, with which some Sandwich Islanders on 
board swarmed, strayed on to the bodies of the English sailors, they 
died in the course of three or four days. These Pediculi were darker 
coloured, and appeared different from those proper to the natives of 
Chiloe in South America,of which he gave me specimens. These, again, 
appeared larger and much softer than European lice. Mr. Murray procured 
four kinds from Africa, namely, from the Negroes of the Eastern and 
Western coasts, from the Hottentots and Kaffirs; two kinds from the 
natives of Australia; two from North and two from South America. In 
these latter cases it may be presumed that the Pediculi came from 
natives inhabiting different districts. With insects slight structural 
differences, if constant, are generally esteemed of specific value: and 
the fact of the races of man being infested by parasites, which appear 
to be specifically distinct, might fairly be urged as an argument that 
the races themselves ought to be classed as distinct species.