Is the "white race" a biologically coherent concept?

[dperucca]

This topic is getting old.

[Smeagol]

Not really. That's like saying Brown = Caucasoid because there are more "Brown" (South Asian, MENA) Caucasoids than there are European Caucasoids.

The general definition of White is either 'European' or in some cases 'someone who passes as typical European'. That doesn't exist as a coherent biological concept. But yes, Caucasoids are a thing.

White is used by old anthropologists as being synonymous with Caucasoid. Read Coon, he calls almost all MENA people white. Just using the term to refer to people with very light skin would make it biologically irrelevant. Also, many MENA people are white and olive skinned like Europeans as well.

[Mortimer]

I believe in HBD, obviously, but I say the white race is a social construct.

Why should all European populations be labeled as one race, when they are biologically distinct, and differ significantly in skin color, temperament, and average IQ (Sicilians and Southern Italians have an average IQ of about 90, according to race-realist Richard Lynn, http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc...=rep1&type=pdf while Scandinavians are well over 100: the gap is almost as big as the black-white gap in the US.)

It's also noteworthy that the concept of a pan-European white race is relatively new. In antiquity, no Greek or Roman considered, for example, the Celts to be his racial kin. Even in first half the 20th century it was far from universally accepted. The Nazis and the Italians were profoundly racist against Slavic "Untermensch"--see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalplan_Ost and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger_Plan--many racial theorists across Western Europe attributed the poverty and illiteracy of Russia to biological inferiority.

Finally, even now no one can agree who is and is not white. Are Turks white? Are Syrians? Are Jews? Are North Africans? There is no settled answer to these questions among race realists, and cannot be because the white race is a social construct.

I agree.

[Mingle]

White is used by old anthropologists as being synonymous with Caucasoid. Read Coon, he calls almost all MENA people white. Just using the term to refer to people with very light skin would make it biologically irrelevant. Also, many MENA people are white and olive skinned like Europeans as well.

If we are going to treat Caucasoid and White as synonyms, then I agree with you. But I don't think it's appropriate to use White as a synonym with Caucasoid because the term White in common understanding is used in reference to Europeans. It's why Indians in USA are considered Asian and not White despite being Caucasoids, there was actually a court case on this. And calling a dark-brown Caucasoid "White" just feels wrong. Plus, you as a White nationalist know better than me that brown-skinned Caucasoids would never be accepted by White nationalists. I don't think it's worth it to try to label all Caucasoids with a single color, better to just say Caucasoid or invent a new word.

[Mingle]

not saying that I necessarily disagree with you but a lot of those people you talk about have a big non caucasoid component/ancestry and are often below 90% caucasoid genetically

MENA is a big territory and in if you take all countries of it you will have countries that border ssa and also almost border europe etc.

just compare gedmatch results alone of several mena peoples . there is a memeber he is yemenese I think ( salem) . look at his results he opened a thread . you will see there are big differences

regarding the topic : I find it silly that this is discussed again and again . I think the term white is too vague . but I have my own definition of how it would make the most sense

West Eurasian and Caucasoid are not synonyms. Caucasoid is a phenotype whereas West Eurasian has to do with genetics. There are also some people from Caucasoid countries who look off for Caucasoids. Not all MENAs can be called Caucasoid and not all South Asians can be called Caucasoid (actually a very significant portion of SAs aren't Caucasoid).

[JohnSmith]

If we are going to treat Caucasoid and White as synonyms, then I agree with you. But I don't think it's appropriate to use White as a synonym with Caucasoid because the term White in common understanding is used in reference to Europeans. It's why Indians in USA are considered Asian and not White despite being Caucasoids, there was actually a court case on this. And calling a dark-brown Caucasoid "White" just feels wrong. Plus, you as a White nationalist know better than me that brown-skinned Caucasoids would never be accepted by White nationalists. I don't think it's worth it to try to label all Caucasoids with a single color, better to just say Caucasoid or invent a new word.

I did not think Indians are just Caucasians many are kind of mixed race. I agree with you that White and Caucasian are not the same. To be honest I do not think many Lebanese and Cypriots are white. I will even go further I am American and partly Italian myself and I will say I have seen some people that are Italian that I would not really say look white. There is a parameter one must fit in looks to be considered white I think.

Even Taylor Lauter whom is suppose to be 100% Northern European I think does not look white. So this does not just apply to Lebanese and Southern Europeans.

[Hadouken]

West Eurasian and Caucasoid are not synonyms. Caucasoid is a phenotype whereas West Eurasian has to do with genetics. There are also some people from Caucasoid countries who look off for Caucasoids. Not all MENAs can be called Caucasoid and not all South Asians can be called Caucasoid (actually a very significant portion of SAs aren't Caucasoid).

why are they not synonymous ? your genes make you who you are and west eurasian genes are what makes you racially caucasoid . thats like saying that if you for example are 95% sub saharan you are not negroid . I dont get this

and those people from "caucasoid countries" who look off for caucasoid have a strong non caucasoid component and would end up being below 90% or even below 80% caucasoid genetically ...as I said already ...

whiteness is seen as the "club for cool kids only" kind of thing on anthrofora . and it is a new world term also . thats why there is confusion and also why logic and science is taken out of context for the own interpretation and making it an exclusive "only xy can enter" kind of thing

[Mingle]

why are they not synonymous ? your genes make you who you are and west eurasian genes are what makes you racially caucasoid . thats like saying that if you for example are 90% sub saharan you are not negroid . I dont get this

East Africans are only around a third West Eurasian, but many/most of them are Caucasoids by phenotype. Saying someone is 10% Caucasoid is like saying someone is 10% Alpinid, it doesn't make sense.

and those people from "caucasoid countries" who look off for caucasoid have a strong non caucasoid component and would end up being below 90% or even below 80% caucasoid genetically ...as I said already ...

Okay, and your point? I already said not everyone from MENA and South Asian countries can be considered Caucasoid.

[Kouros]

mispost

[catgeorge]

Culturally European with European DNA

White is used more in the USA than EU.

Third worlders in USA can be ethnic nationalists (Fractal for example) because in the new world pure ethnicity is difficult to identify due to cultural marxism.

These dilemmas are only starting to surface in the EU but not to the extremities of the New World.