GuessedWorker has a new contribution to the myth debate. It is based on this article by Madeline Bunting which addresses the political implications of new research in neuroscience.
I don’t see how this in anyway undermines O’Meara’s position. If the reigning liberal understanding of human nature is ultimately exposed as an elaborate myth, which it most certainly is, then that would only provide further evidence of the power of mythization in Western culture. The Left will respond to the new science by either 1.) attempting to suppress its findings (as in the case of sociobiology) or 2.) adapting the facts to service their own narrative. The Right (in all of its manifestations) will act in the same opportunistic way.
There is an element of self deception involved in presenting old fashioned British nationalism as based on the latest cutting edge developments in neuroscience, sociobiology or political theory. Like any other version of nationalism, the mythic ideal (and the discourse surrounding it) existed long before Salterism and the like appeared on the scene. The heartfelt desire of British nationalists to return to traditional mores really isn’t based on any collection of data points.
I don’t think there is a scientific argument to be made for, say, enjoying the experience of consuming an English breakfast, preserving and cultivating the English language, or feeling a sense of rootedness in a particular place. This has more to do with one’s aethestic sensibilities than empiricism.
In the U.S., there is no shortage of empirical commentators on race relations. Anyone who wants to parse GSS data or review racial differences in intelligence or crime statistics can easily find ample resources that address this subject matter. The other road is a less travelled one.