Race - a ' social construct'?

[green-man-2010.livejournal.com]

Okay a lot of flack and a lot of nonsense came up when Steve last posted, so lets have something a bit more serious, huh?

It is argued that Race is nothing more than a Social construct.
Hmmm... not so sure about this, myself. No, i am not saying that Black people have an inherent sense of rhythm, and that Swedes are better at philosophy than the French - all mental and artistic disciplines tend to be so hooked up towards the culture that produces them that it would be hard to say how much is nature and how much nurture was involved in any great persons life.

But when the cops are looking for a missing child or a fugitive from Justice, they start talking about people as "I.C.1s" - or whatever.

I am not really sure what each racial type is in police parlance, but I do know that on LUL, we get people go missing and we too have suspects we have to keep an eye out for.

"Missing child: black, female, aged 10." will give us a clue and eliminate a lot of false positives.

There are obvious physical differences between caucasians, blacks and asians. So long as we don't go assuming any particular group is more intelligent or less honest, we can pretty well demonstrate that racial groupings are valid concepts and not mere social constructs, i would think.

lets look at the animal kingdom .
Zoologists differentiate between Sumartran and Siberian tigers. The Siberian cats being measurably and noticeable paler and larger than their tropical cousins.
Isn't there the same difference in size and colouration among the human population of higher latirudes, as compared to the people who live in the tropics? explainable by such things as Bergmans rule, perhaps?

I would say that , although we do have anatomically different people walking around on the streets in most of the world's cities, it's no reason not to accept them as equals.
So what's with all this talk about ' race is a social construct' I keep hearing in some communities?

Comments

[sgiffy.livejournal.com]

But when the cops are looking for a missing child or a fugitive from Justice, they start talking about people as "I.C.1s" - or whatever.

People do not mean that skin color is a social construct. That would be silly. What they argue is that using it as an all important marker is something we made up.

Zoologists differentiate between Sumartran and Siberian tigers.

A better example would be house cats of different colors or size. There are just not that many differences between different races and really the way we group them is incredibly overbroad. There is more variation within so called racial groups than between them.

[sgiffy.livejournal.com]

For example while people from Ethiopia tend to be rather tall the Khoisan people are shorter than your average human, likewise ethnic swedes are much different from your average Greek person.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

And yet genetically, two chimpanzees in the same troop of 100+ chimpanzees will differ more from each other than humans from across the globe will. Humans have been through at least two genetic bottlenecks, albeit, that chimpanzees haven't, but still......

For that matter the main distinguishing feature between the DNA of Man and the DNA of genus Pan is that humans have one chromosome where two exist in the Chimpanzee geonome. The sole macro-level difference.....

[green-man-2010.livejournal.com]

But the Siberian tiger population is significantly different to the Sumartran one - based on local climate and other conditions. I don't know that one house cat that is black and white has any advantage over the tabby or brindled version in the 'suburban jungle'.

People do not mean that skin color is a social construct. That would be silly. What they argue is that using it as an all important marker is something we made up.
Eer, but this in not how they frame it.
In the past , it has not been " skin colour is no marker to high intelligence or high moral standards" . That makes sense and I agree with it.
Butthe way it was framed and explained to me was "Race is a social construct - there is no real sense in which people are ' white'. " Black was invented to put other people down "
Hey, I have even had people try telling me that beethoven was really black! No, seriously.
Black and white are skin genetic characteristics like brown or blue eyes.
I can accept the logic that there are variations, and that with migration and intermarraige going on for centuries , that the lines are blurred these days. but there is a physical distinction between certain populations. Even though this is no big deal in a job interview, it is significant in a police search for whatever reason it's being carried out.

[sgiffy.livejournal.com]

But the Siberian tiger population is significantly different to the Sumartran one

Right, but people are not that significantly different. You are talking differences along very few traits.

Black and white are skin genetic characteristics like brown or blue eyes.

So is height, but we don't talk about the short race and the tall race.

that the lines are blurred these days

The lines have always been blurred and never really existed. Humans started in Africa and spread out with minor variations occurring along the way.

but there is a physical distinction between certain populations.

Define population. How black is black? Aside from skin color which is a pretty minor trait and a few other equally minor things there is very little distinction between people and those distinctions do not track along what we call race.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Actually, genetically there's two human races-the Bushmen who fit into one Mitochondrial and Y-Chromosome set of haplogroups and all other ethnicities inside and outside of Africa who all fit into categories. For that matter all non-Africans share common mitochondrial and Y-Chromosome mutations.....

[singlethink.livejournal.com]

There are lots of halogroups.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup

[hannahsarah.livejournal.com]

It IS a social construct. There is no race, only different sizes, shapes and shades of human beings. To believe anything else is racist.

There's nothing wrong with saying "dark skinned, medium skinned, pale, rehead, brunette" etc. What's wrong is the VALUE JUDGMENT made on individuals, based solely on their physical characteristics.

Now, if you want to talk about judging groups based on group behaviour and culture, that's a whole 'nother kettle of fish. People often use "culture" and "race" interchangeably, and that is what makes everything turn into a wankfest. i.e. "Black culture" = "Hip Hop culture", except not really. See where the wank can start?

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Where the wank can get really ghastly is when one points out certain 800-lb gorillas liberal democrats ignore in their quests to have their cakes and eat them too. People pretend that the liberal democracies are for freedom when they are not and never have been, at least not outside some of the northern countries.

[someidiot.livejournal.com]

Now, if you want to talk about judging groups based on group behaviour and culture, that's a whole 'nother kettle of fish. People often use "culture" and "race" interchangeably, and that is what makes everything turn into a wankfest.

Yeah, this. What most people refer to as "race" is usually ethnicity or culture, and the words are definitely not interchangeable.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

And then you get into things like Nordicism.......

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

So I can hate Jews for their religion but not their semitism? I mean, as long as we don't hate based on race, it's ok right?

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

Judaism: Come for the covenant, stay for the usury!

[hannahsarah.livejournal.com]

You can hate anyone you want, for any reason. Just be intellectually honest about it, and ready to defend your position.

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

What's wrong is the VALUE JUDGMENT made on individuals, based solely on their physical characteristics.

Actually, I'm not sure anyone gives much of a crap about value judgments. Discrimination in the justice system, workplace, real state business, etc. seems to be the more concrete problem.

[green-man-2010.livejournal.com]

There is no race, only different sizes, shapes and shades of human beings. To believe anything else is racist.

Um , even within what some would term as a 'specific population' there are certain real genetic differences.

like for instance, if you are 'afro carribean' then you may find that you carrry the gene for sickle cell anemia. This mutant gene is quite unknown in the white UK population , but occurs in significant numbers among the Afro Carribean population.

Doctors are working on coming up with answers, but the genetic abberation does confer immunity to malaria - which probably explains its persistence in one group but not the other. so long as someone inherits from one parent , but not both , the gene offers a positive advantage in a malarial infested environment. only if two parents both pass it on does it become fatal or cause other complications.

There's nothing wrong with saying "dark skinned, medium skinned, pale, rehead, brunette" etc. What's wrong is the VALUE JUDGMENT made on individuals, based solely on their physical characteristics.
this is what I was trying to get at in the OP. thanks for putting it more clearly.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Yes, there are physical differences. The reality of what has been presumed to be "European superiority" was simply that Europeans were the Old World region that spread the mass death to the American continent. Had the Ming Dynasty chosen to do the same, well, microbes from Chinese would kill Indians just as easily as ones from Spain.

European power rose solely because of military superiority and a string of successful genocides. Progressives in the First World try their damndest to ignore this but the people in the Third and Second Worlds never forget it.

But to bring back out into the open a darker side of geopolitics today's squeamish liberal democracies like to forget and/or ignore, military superiority in its own right carries with it certain cultural and infrastructural institutions that go with it. Militaries and their strength never arise out of vacuums.

European geopolitical power emerged not from the virtues and inherent superiority of the liberal democratic system but because European military institutions and the associated socio-economic, and cultural frameworks gave them the superiority and the ruthlessness to wield it effectively.

To see what the Europe of the time *was* just look at Japan, where the leaders did exactly the same things European rulers did to safeguard their power and maintain their rule.

But in today's 21st Century after decades of de-colonization and the legacy of a half-century's worth of proxy wars between the superpowers racism has been long-since discredited.

Besides, biologically there are only two human races: the Khoisan....and everyone else, African and non-African.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

To go a bit further into the last point-all Non-Africans, from Indigenous peoples the world over to the great imperial ethnicities share the common Y-Chromosome mutation of M168, found only in regions of East Africa. Africa has, however, the B Haplogroup that belongs to the Pygmies of the Congo and the A Haplogroup which is the one belonging to the Khoisan.

Interestingly Mitochondrial haplogroups are far more diverse and numerous than are Y-Chromosome ones, which implies certain aspects about past sexual practices that would piss off the liberal democrats and most of the monotheists.....

[green-man-2010.livejournal.com]

Jared diamond explores this in 'Germs , Guns and Steel'.

he also points out that a bunch of peaceful hunter gatherers living on a remote island in the Pacific were attacked, enslaved and almost wiped out by the warlike Moari of New Zealand. Even more suprising , the remote tribe of peaceful hunter gatheres were descendants ot the Moaris who first settled the island.

Whatever had turned them from warlike farmers into peaceful victims of aggression was not in their genes.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

Yes, race is blatantly a social concept. Race as arbitrary divided up by who came from where at a specific slice in the timeline is very socially defined.

That's not to say there's not objective differences between people or that isolated groups have developed distinct features within their groups, but the idea of these separate 'races' as opposed to say, different cultures or genetic features or just tribes is an idea that can be traced back to the 16th century.

Of course, bigotry against those with features other than our own, whether it be status, physical features, or beliefs, is as old as humanity.

[green-man-2010.livejournal.com]

But iif there are objective physical differences between populations, then they are not ' arbitrary' divisions, are they?
Of course the notion that skin colour or anything else that is genetic is a marker to intelligence or character is morally and scientifically wrong. but the physical differences, I wouls argue are valid.

The idea that certain types of people are all stupid or dishonest - that's the social construct.

[root-fu.livejournal.com]

So what's with all this talk about ' race is a social construct' I keep hearing in some communities?

"Race is a social construct" is identical to modern myths such as "a person only uses 10% of their brain". Its something people quote out of context without understanding it.

Years ago, scientists made a politically motivated comment that a "geneticist couldn't tell the difference between a white and black person's DNA, simply by looking at them". This was mistakenly interpreted as implying there was no difference in race, that it was a mere "social construct" with no real genetic nor scientific bearing.

Years later, geneticists attempted to quantify genetic differences between different "races". They found as much as 5% difference(last I heard). That's about as much difference as from a human to a chimpanzee, depending on which research a person cites. It shows somewhat conclusively that race is NOT merely a social construct.

Unfortunately, a lot of people never got that memo.