Why Race is a not a Social Construct

[kiko]

With the recent killing of George Floyd & Officer David Dorn & the racism toward Orientals throughout this planet because of Covid-19, I been questioning whether seeing race as a "social construct" is really solving racism.

Since the last 100 years, scientists, theologians, politicians, philosophers, etc, have been seeing the concept of race as a social construct, starting with anthropologist Franz Boas & philosopher
José Vasconcelos, both of Jewish ancestry, then you had the National socialists, with their racist ideas, after WWII, the UN was formed, & since the 1950s, among anthropologists, biologists, psychologists, & sociologists, the concept of race has fell apart as a biological fact, by the end of the 20th century, most anthropologists (except for half of physical anthropologists) already believed that race doesn't exist at all, but it's a social construct.

But we are already now 20 years into the 21st century, & racism is still a huge problem throughout the world, people see differences everyday, so is this "social construction of race" really helping our species, the answer is simply NO.

Yes, Race is indeed a biological fact, it's a genetic category, my parents are both mestizos, three of my grandparents are mestizos, my parental grandfather was Caucasian, If I marry a Caucasian woman, my children will be predominantly Caucasian.

I did many DNA tests, with 23andMe, Ancestry, FamilyTreeDNA, MyHeritageDNA, Gedmatch, WeGene, & a few other companies, all came out a mix of Caucasian & Native American, with a bit of Sub-Saharan African, with traces of Neanderthal ancestry.

Why are Forensic Anthropologists (like the TV show Bones, for example) are very good at identifying the racial identity of a deceased person.

Why do different racial groups get different diseases, why are some racial groups better at some sports than others, why do different racial groups score different on IQ than other races (on average), & why do genetic clusters prove the biological reality of race.

So what's the point of this thread, is that race realism is indeed a fact, race does exist, we must respect & honor our racial differences, human biodiversity is a great thing, I don't believe that I'm better than anybody else, I don't feel superior to anybody else, I have friends & relatives of every race out there, I come from a very mixed-race family, all the Genus Homo is made in the image of God, we are human beings, it's time to end this nonsense, God loves all humanity, so may god bless you guys & have a good day.

[Pɪᴇᴛʀᴏ Cʜᴀʀᴅᴏɴɴᴇ]

You acknowledge the existence of race, which is good. This is extremely important to understand the struggle of certain races to survive, such as the White race.

We're losing our territories in North America due to immigration and reproduction of the darker populations. How can we live peacefully in a mixed nation since these same darker populations blame us for virtually everything that has gone wrong in this country and in the world?

I don't want my children to be despised for being part of the race that founded their own country. I don't want them to feel guilty of being Whites. It wouldn't be good to hear that my children were discriminated against during the affirmative action process.

Considering that race is a biological reality, have you ever asked yourself whether there are differences in intelligence and behavior between the White race and the Black race, for example? If such differences exist, what effects would it cause in our society? Would it be for the better or for the worst? You observe our current society and will rapidly find out the answer.

As a race, we have the right to separate and discriminate in order to protect our own kind. Every race can have their institutions that look after their interests, but not Whites.
Isn't that weird?

I hope you get it.

[Supercomputer]

Franz Boas was a proven liar and a propagandist. Anti racists are the biggest morons. They think race is a social construct but ethnicity is real, when it's exactly the opposite.

[Supercomputer]

If race is a social construct why are there companies like 23 and me telling you which race you are to the last percentage? The double think of these anti-racists is mind boggling.

[Lucas]

Franz Boas was a proven liar and a propagandist. Anti racists are the biggest morons. They think race is a social construct but ethnicity is real, when it's exactly the opposite.

Actually is worth to know that his most important work that children of immigrants to US are different than parents (for example Jews more longheaded, but Sicilians more brachy and so on) is complete bullshit.

First of all he didn't studied proper families but random guys which were born outside US and those born in America from given ethnicity.
But most importantly those two groups were always of uneven number of samples. Sometimes foreign group or US group was represented just by few, even one person, comparing to bigger second group. Which could lead to false conclusions.
It wasn't a statistics but just random numbers. Just find his work, it is on-line but don't have it at hand now, maybe later I will post "table with results".

[Kamal900]

Yes, races are biological constructs created by mother nature and so on, but I find terms like "black" or "white" to be very cringy since race is more than just skin coloration which is why I tend to use the term, Europeans, instead to designate the Europeans peoples as a separate Caucasoid genetic cluster or sub-race. I would also like to point out that within the European race, there are several sub-races or genetic clusters that makes them close and yet distinct at the same time. Like, you can't say that Spaniards or Greeks for example resemble say Dutch or Germanic peoples of Europe in general. The same can be said about middle easterners as well where South-West Asiatics like Arabians, Egyptians and Levantines, esp Muslims cluster more closely with North Africans while West Asiatics like Perisnas, Kurds, Turks and so on are more closer to Europeans. Here's a 2013 genetic study on Levantines:

. We then used fineSTRUCTURE [16] which employ model-based Bayesian clustering to construct a tree that infer population relationships and similarities using ChromoPainter's coancestry matrix. The population tree (Figure 3A) splits Levantine populations in two branches: one leading to Europeans and Central Asians that includes Lebanese, Armenians, Cypriots, Druze and Jews, as well as Turks, Iranians and Caucasian populations; and a second branch composed of Palestinians, Jordanians, Syrians, as well as North Africans, Ethiopians, Saudis, and Bedouins. The tree shows a correlation between religion and the population structures in the Levant: all Jews (Sephardi and Ashkenazi) cluster in one branch; Druze from Mount Lebanon and Druze from Mount Carmel are depicted on a private branch; and Lebanese Christians form a private branch with the Christian populations of Armenia and Cyprus placing the Lebanese Muslims as an outer group. The predominantly Muslim populations of Syrians, Palestinians and Jordanians cluster on branches with other Muslim populations as distant as Morocco and Yemen. It should be noted here that the results depend significantly on populations included in the analysis as well as recent admixture events, and so should be treated as an approximate guide to similarity, rather than a full population history.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3585000/

[Nassbean]

It all depends the definition you give to "race" but if you base it on phenotypes, craniometry and genetic distances then yes races exist but that would also imply that a german and a pakistani are part of the same race ...I doubt those racist members here will gladfully accept this lol

[Ford]

It all depends the definition you give to "race" but if you base it on phenotypes, craniometry and genetic distances then yes races exist but that would also imply that a german and a pakistani are part of the same race ...I doubt those racist members here will gladfully accept this lol

It would also imply that people of similar genetics and same ethnicity can belong to different races.

[Nassbean]

It would also imply that people of similar genetics and same ethnicity can belong to different races.

when it comes to craniometry do you have any example for this ? I don't see how genetically similar populations can be different when it comes to craniometry

[Lucas]

It would also imply that people of similar genetics and same ethnicity can belong to different races.

Certainly if we talk about major races it is not a case. SSA and Europeans or East Asians are very different both in craniometry and autosomal genetics. And if we have mixed pop like Horners or Kazakh, both old anthropologists and modern genetics classified them as nearly 50/50 mix.

If we talk about phenotypes among European nations, then yes. British "Atlantid" and "Keltic Nordic" could have very similar calculator results.

[Dorian]

It all depends the definition you give to "race" but if you base it on phenotypes, craniometry and genetic distances then yes races exist but that would also imply that a german and a pakistani are part of the same race ...I doubt those racist members here will gladfully accept this lol

Pakis like NAs,Ethiopians and all these "metrically caucasoids" are mixed-race...bad example

[Chaos One]

Yes, humans are like D&D Races. For example, when you choose your race (because in fact you choose it before you were born, of course) you get +1 bonus on stats and some skills. Really nice.

[Zeno]

Race is a biological and undeniable reality. Humans in this planet aren't the same, because our DNA sequences, which define everything, are not only different amongst the different races of people, but amongst each and every individual. How can we possibly say we're all the same, when we have different organisms from each other as individuals and as races? Belonging to the same species # being the same altogether. How am I the same with blacks? How am I the same with my fellow Greeks even?

[Nassbean]

Pakis like NAs,Ethiopians and all these "metrically caucasoids" are mixed-race...bad example

all populations are mixed and even if what you said make sense they still are craniometrically similar to europeans and part of the caucasian/caucasoid cluster

[Nassbean]

Race is a biological and undeniable reality. Humans in this planet aren't the same, because our DNA sequences, which define everything, are not only different amongst the different races of people, but amongst each and every individual. How can we possibly say we're all the same, when we have different organisms from each other as individuals and as races? Belonging to the same species # being the same altogether. How am I the same with blacks? How am I the same with my fellow Greeks even?

only extreme leftists would disagree with you but science simply highlight the fact that we're the same specie with of course its own diversity

[Aldaris]

For this exact reason,


It all depends the definition you give to "race"

There is no such implication:


that would also imply that a german and a pakistani are part of the same race

Under some, guess so, under all of them? No.

[Nassbean]

For this exact reason,



There is no such implication:



Under some, guess so, under all of them? No.

well there is not hundreds of definitions

[Aldaris]

well there is not hundreds of definitions

There's none, to be precise, if that's supposed to mean it's some universally accepted taxonomical rank like species. I could indeed find you hundreds of examples of that term being used in a slightly different way, such that it would not apply in other examples, just in the academic literature alone. But I'm definitely not going through that hassle. Sorry, Naz.

[JamesBond007]

If a forensic anthropologist finds the skeleton remains of a nigger, caucasian and asian (mongoloid) he can differentiate between the races therefore races exist quod erat demonstradum .

[JamesBond007]

well there is not hundreds of definitions

Well the Germans would be more brachycephalic than the British and Spanish etc...

[JamesBond007]

well there is not hundreds of definitions

*edited out double post*

[Luso]

Race is a biological and undeniable reality. Humans in this planet aren't the same, because our DNA sequences, which define everything, are not only different amongst the different races of people, but amongst each and every individual. How can we possibly say we're all the same, when we have different organisms from each other as individuals and as races? Belonging to the same species # being the same altogether. How am I the same with blacks? How am I the same with my fellow Greeks even?

The fact is you're 99.99% similar to all Greeks and all other humans because we are all part of the human race. Genetic tests like 23andMe are only going back 500 yrs so the argument that these prove races exist is futile. It doesn't explain the migration of humans out of Africa to other parts of the world over thousands upon thousands of years which is what accounts for the mutational and regional phenotypical differences we see today. That is in-fact a very small portion of our actual genomes that are being tested for population based estimates... We are all similar in that we are all part of the human race and species but the phenotypical and regional differences we see in modern times is quite small in comparison to how similar we are to each other.

[Zeno]

The fact is you're 99.99% similar to all Greeks and all other humans because we are all part of the human race. That small gap between filling the 100% you is what creates the phenotypical divide. It also has to do with mutations region to region and thousands of years of genetic regional drift change. We are all similar in that we are all part of the human race and species but the phenotypical and regional differences we see in modern times is quite small in comparison to how similar we are to each other.

Tlr; i'd argue the small gap between making you 100% you and everyone else is what creates a large phenotypical divide between people. Genetically in the genome everyone part of the human race originates from Africa and shares similar genetic descendant from the same peoples who are responsible for migrations. These migrations to isolate areas and across the world allowed for mutations and regional differences to change the phenotype over thousands of years. The argument that genetic tests such as 23andMe proving races exist is not very sustainable as these tests go back max 500 years... + they are not 100% accurate they are just population sampling from small sections of your genetic code.

We're not similar, you fucking brainlet.

Each individual looks vastly different in appearance than his fellow. Each and every one. That is owned to the fact that each and every individual has different DNA sequence.

Where the fuck did you get the "99,99% genetic similarity" figure from? The fucking 1999 survey in which 270 individuals were tested and from each individual only 100 million out of the 6 billion bases in the DNA genome were examined? Well, in 2006, a greater number of bases in each individual were tested, in particular 400 million bases, and the difference was shown to be larger: 83% similarity. Just from increasing the number of examined bases from 100 to 400 million. If all 6 billion bases in each individual were examined, then no similarities would be found. Because the DNA sequence of each individual on Earth is unique. And that's manifested in appearance and all bodily functions. You and I might belong to the same species, but we don't have the same DNA, and as a consequence of that, we don't have the same appearance and the same bodily functions. We are not the same. We both just belong to a much, much broader group called homo sapiens.

[Daos777]

Dog breeds are a social construct. My cane corso is the same thing as a poodle. Same shit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Nassbean]

Dog breeds are a social construct. My cane corso is the same thing as a poodle. Same shit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

well the difference is that dog breeds are the result of thousands of years of artificial selection while we can't say the same for humans

[Daos777]

well the difference is that dog breeds are the result of thousands of years of artificial selection while we can't say the same for humans

It's selection regardless. In the case of humans it was environmental and sexual selection that made the races different in bone structure, hormone levels, intelligence, ect..

[Nassbean]

It's selection regardless. In the case of humans it was environmental and sexual selection that made the races different in bone structure, hormone levels, intelligence, ect..

Not really because this artificial selection implied the selection of very specific traits (even intelligence) so it's way more effective while with humans in many cases this selection was "reduced" by cultural practices (you would need eugenism to reach the level of dog breeds)

[Daos777]

Not really because this artificial selection implied the selection of very specific traits (even intelligence) so it's way more effective while with humans in many cases this selection was "reduced" by cultural practices (you would need eugenism to reach the level of dog breeds)

But the differences between the races are enough to differentiate a Sub Saharan African for example from a European or Asian, aren't they?

[Nassbean]

But the differences between the races are enough to differentiate a Sub Saharan African for example from a European or Asian, aren't they?

Indeed but then your notion of race is quite superficial and based on apparent traits

[Aldaris]

Dog breeds are a social construct. My cane corso is the same thing as a poodle. Same shit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The point of that quote originally wasn't anything like that, that's a SJW distortion/misunderstanding. What it actually means is that there's no notion of race wowen in the fabric of spacetime and that we categorize stuff by the term 'race' based on discovery. Not confusing that with cladistic relationships which are an entirely different issue, it's supposed to mean that it is us who put that label on things, not nature itself. And in this context, it's actually correct. It's as of a social construct as is species, kingdom, whatever, all you have to do is being consistent with cladistics and then you're free to draw the lines whenever you want. Our taxonomical system is one of the many viable ones, it's just a particulary convenient one. Not just for humans, I might add.

[Luso]

We're not similar, you fucking brainlet.

Each individual looks vastly different in appearance than his fellow. Each and every one. That is owned to the fact that each and every individual has different DNA sequence.

Where the fuck did you get the "99,99% genetic similarity" figure from? The fucking 1999 survey in which 270 individuals were tested and from each individual only 100 million out of the 6 billion bases in the DNA genome were examined? Well, in 2006, a greater number of bases in each individual were tested, in particular 400 million bases, and the difference was shown to be larger: 83% similarity. Just from increasing the number of examined bases from 100 to 400 million. If all 6 billion bases in each individual were examined, then no similarities would be found. Because the DNA sequence of each individual on Earth is unique. And that's manifested in appearance and all bodily functions. You and I might belong to the same species, but we don't have the same DNA, and as a consequence of that, we don't have the same appearance and the same bodily functions. We are not the same. We both just belong to a much, much broader group called homo sapiens.

Calm down :rolleyes: Just because someone has a different opinion doesn't mean you have to go full liberal triggered mode, it is embarrassing. See the thing that you suck at doing is not getting triggered which makes you look like a beta male cuck (tip: hit gym). Okay, so you think that a ssa's human genome in its entirety is much different from a caucasian? See? You are already wrong. You are minimizing thousands of years of genomic history of our human race into small portions of recent regional, and mutational changes in small sections of our DNA.

Study:

https://i2.wp.com/sitn.hms.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Fig1-raceConception-2.png

"Estimating our ancestral composition down to 0.1% seem to suggest that there are exact, categorical divisions between human populations. But reality is far less simple. Compared to the general public’s enthusiasm for ancestry testing, the reaction from scientists has been considerably more lukewarm. Research indicates that the concept of “five races” does, to an extent, describe the way human populations are distributed among the continents—but the lines between races are much more blurred than ancestry testing companies would have us believe (Figure 1B).

A landmark 2002 study by Stanford scientists examined the question of human diversity by looking at the distribution across seven major geographical regions of 4,000 alleles. Alleles are the different “flavors” of a gene. For instance, all humans have the same genes that code for hair: the different alleles are why hair comes in all types of colors and textures.

In the Stanford study, over 92% of alleles were found in two or more regions, and almost half of the alleles studied were present in all seven major geographical regions. The observation that the vast majority of the alleles were shared over multiple regions, or even throughout the entire world, points to the fundamental similarity of all people around the world—an idea that has been supported by many other studies (Figure 1B).

If separate racial or ethnic groups actually existed, we would expect to find “trademark” alleles and other genetic features that are characteristic of a single group but not present in any others. However, the 2002 Stanford study found that only 7.4% of over 4000 alleles were specific to one geographical region. Furthermore, even when region-specific alleles did appear, they only occurred in about 1% of the people from that region—hardly enough to be any kind of trademark. Thus, there is no evidence that the groups we commonly call “races” have distinct, unifying genetic identities. In fact, there is ample variation within races (Figure 1B).

Ultimately, there is so much ambiguity between the races, and so much variation within them, that two people of European descent may be more genetically similar to an Asian person than they are to each other (Figure 2)."


you ask: "Where the fuck did you get the "99,99% genetic similarity" figure from"


It is common knowledge... but I'll let you in on it: "The popular classifications of race are based chiefly on skin color, with other relevant features including height, eyes, and hair. Though these physical differences may appear, on a superficial level, to be very dramatic, they are determined by only a minute portion of the genome: we as a species have been estimated to share 99.9% of our DNA with each other. The few differences that do exist reflect differences in environments and external factors, not core biology.

Importantly, the evolution of skin color occurred independently, and did not influence other traits such as mental abilities and behavior. In fact, science has yet to find evidence that there are genetic differences in intelligence between populations. Ultimately, while there certainly are some biological differences between different populations, these differences are few and superficial. The traits that we do share are far more profound"
(SOURCE: https://www.genome.gov/about-genomics/fact-sheets/Genetics-vs-Genomics) "All human beings are 99.9 percent identical in their genetic makeup. Differences in the remaining 0.1 percent hold important clues about the causes of diseases. Gaining a better understanding of the interactions between genes and the environment by means of genomics is helping researchers find better ways to improve health and prevent disease, such as modifying diet and exercise plans to prevent or delay the onset of type 2 diabetes in people who carry genetic predispositions to developing this disease."

LMAO it doesn't matter that it was discovered in 1990's it is a fact.

[Zeno]

Calm down :rolleyes: Just because someone has a different opinion doesn't mean you have to go full liberal triggered mode, it is embarrassing. See the thing that you suck at doing is not getting triggered which makes you look like a beta male cuck (tip: hit gym). Okay, so you think that a ssa's human genome in its entirety is much different from a caucasian? See? You are already wrong. You are minimizing thousands of years of genomic history of our human race into small portions of recent regional, and mutational changes in small sections of our DNA.

Study:

https://i2.wp.com/sitn.hms.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Fig1-raceConception-2.png

"Estimating our ancestral composition down to 0.1% seem to suggest that there are exact, categorical divisions between human populations. But reality is far less simple. Compared to the general public’s enthusiasm for ancestry testing, the reaction from scientists has been considerably more lukewarm. Research indicates that the concept of “five races” does, to an extent, describe the way human populations are distributed among the continents—but the lines between races are much more blurred than ancestry testing companies would have us believe (Figure 1B).

A landmark 2002 study by Stanford scientists examined the question of human diversity by looking at the distribution across seven major geographical regions of 4,000 alleles. Alleles are the different “flavors” of a gene. For instance, all humans have the same genes that code for hair: the different alleles are why hair comes in all types of colors and textures.

In the Stanford study, over 92% of alleles were found in two or more regions, and almost half of the alleles studied were present in all seven major geographical regions. The observation that the vast majority of the alleles were shared over multiple regions, or even throughout the entire world, points to the fundamental similarity of all people around the world—an idea that has been supported by many other studies (Figure 1B).

If separate racial or ethnic groups actually existed, we would expect to find “trademark” alleles and other genetic features that are characteristic of a single group but not present in any others. However, the 2002 Stanford study found that only 7.4% of over 4000 alleles were specific to one geographical region. Furthermore, even when region-specific alleles did appear, they only occurred in about 1% of the people from that region—hardly enough to be any kind of trademark. Thus, there is no evidence that the groups we commonly call “races” have distinct, unifying genetic identities. In fact, there is ample variation within races (Figure 1B).

Ultimately, there is so much ambiguity between the races, and so much variation within them, that two people of European descent may be more genetically similar to an Asian person than they are to each other (Figure 2)."


you ask: "Where the fuck did you get the "99,99% genetic similarity" figure from"


It is common knowledge... but I'll let you in on it: "The popular classifications of race are based chiefly on skin color, with other relevant features including height, eyes, and hair. Though these physical differences may appear, on a superficial level, to be very dramatic, they are determined by only a minute portion of the genome: we as a species have been estimated to share 99.9% of our DNA with each other. The few differences that do exist reflect differences in environments and external factors, not core biology.

Importantly, the evolution of skin color occurred independently, and did not influence other traits such as mental abilities and behavior. In fact, science has yet to find evidence that there are genetic differences in intelligence between populations. Ultimately, while there certainly are some biological differences between different populations, these differences are few and superficial. The traits that we do share are far more profound"
(SOURCE: https://www.genome.gov/about-genomics/fact-sheets/Genetics-vs-Genomics) "All human beings are 99.9 percent identical in their genetic makeup. Differences in the remaining 0.1 percent hold important clues about the causes of diseases. Gaining a better understanding of the interactions between genes and the environment by means of genomics is helping researchers find better ways to improve health and prevent disease, such as modifying diet and exercise plans to prevent or delay the onset of type 2 diabetes in people who carry genetic predispositions to developing this disease."

LMAO it doesn't matter that it was discovered in 1990's it is a fact.

Yep, this is the outdated study I was referring to. The newer studies debunk this.