The word “race,” denoting lineage, comes from a French translation of haras (silent “h”) into the Italian razza — which in Italian of that time applied to animals, not people. This points to current English and Italian usage being derived and adapted, respectively, from the French.
A human race is defined as a group of people with certain common inherited features that distinguish them from other groups of people. All men of whatever race are currently classified by the anthropologist or biologist as belonging to the one species, Homo sapiens.This is another way of saying that the differences between human races are not great, even though they may appear so, i.e. black vs white skin. All races of mankind in the world can interbreed because they have so much in common. All races share 99.99+% of the same genetic materials which means that division of race is largely subjective, and that the original 3-5 races were also probably just subjective descriptions as well.
The Major Divisions of the Human RaceMost anthropologists recognize 3 or 4 basic races of man in existence today. These races can be further subdivided into as many as 30 subgroups. Ethnographic division into races from Meyers Konversationslexikon of 1885-90 is listing:
|
Caucasion:
Skull: Dolicephalic(Long-Head),High forehead,Little supraobital development.
Face: Mainly Leptoproscopic( Narrow)Sometimes Meso- or even Euryproscopic, Neither Facial nor alveolar prognathism occurs except among some archaic peoples.
Nose:Long,narrow,high in both root and bridge.
Mongoloid:
Skull: High incidence of Brachycephaly(Short Round Head)
American Indians while Mongoloid are often Dolicephalic.
Foreheads slightly lower than that of the Caucasoid.
No Supraobital development.
Face: Wide and short, projecting cheek bones, Prognathism rare. Shovel shaped incisors common especialy in Asia.
Nose: Mesorine(Low and Broad in both root and bridge.
Negroid:
Skull: usually Dolicephalic, a small minority are Brachycephalic.
Forehead most often high, little supraobital development.
Face: Leproscopic (to a much lesser degree than the Caucasion), Prognathism common in most Negro populations.
Nose: Low & broad in root and bridge with characteristic depression at root.
Another popular division recognizes 4 major races
The world population can be divided into 4 major races, namely white/Caucasian, Mongoloid/Asian, Negroid/Black, and Australoid. This is based on a racial classification made by Carleton S. Coon in 1962. There is no universally accepted classification for “race”, however, and its use has been under fire over the last few decades. The United Nations, in a 1950 statement, opted to “drop the term ‘race’ altogether and speak of “ethnic groups”. In this case, there are more than 5,000 ethnic groups in the world, according to a 1998 study published in the Scientific American.
What is Race?
What is Race? When some people use the “race” they attach a biological meaning, still others use “race” as a socially constructed concept. It is clear that even though race does not have a biological meaning, it does have a social meaning which has been legally constructed.
Biological Construction
By . . .”biological race,” I mean the view of race espoused by Judge Tucker, and still popular today, that there exist natural, physical divisions among humans that are hereditary, reflected in morphology, and roughly but correctly captured by terms like Black, White, and Asian (or Negroid, Caucasoid, and Mongoloid). Under this view, one’s ancestors and epidermis ineluctably determine membership in a genetically defined racial group. The connection between human physiognomy and racial status is concrete; in Judge Tucker’s words, every individual’s race has been “stampt” by nature. . . .Despite the prevalent belief in biological races, overwhelming evidence proves that race is not biological. Biological races like Negroid and Caucasoid simply do not exist. A newly popular argument among several scholars, is that races are wholly illusory, whether as a biological or social concept. Under this thinking, if there is no natural link between faces and races, then no connection exists.
There are no genetic characteristics possessed by all Blacks but not by non- Blacks; similarly, there is no gene or cluster of genes common to all Whites but not to non-Whites. One’s race is not determined by a single gene or gene cluster, as is, for example, sickle cell anemia. Nor are races marked by important differences in gene frequencies, the rates of appearance of certain gene types. The data compiled by various scientists demonstrates, contrary to popular opinion, that intra-group differences exceed inter-group differences. That is, greater genetic variation exists within the populations typically labeled Black and White than between these populations. This finding refutes the supposition that racial divisions reflect fundamental genetic differences.
Notice this does not mean that individuals are genetically indistinguishable from each other, or even that small population groups cannot be genetically differentiated. Small populations, for example the Xhosa or the Basques, share similar gene frequencies. However, differentiation is a function of separation, usually geographic, and occurs in gradations rather than across fractures.. .. . . The notion that humankind can be divided along White, Black, and Yellow lines reveals the social rather than the scientific origin of race. The idea that there exist three races, and that these races are “Caucasoid,” “Negroid,” and “Mongoloid,” is rooted in the European imagination of the Middle Ages, which encompassed only Europe, Africa, and the Near East.. . Nevertheless, the history of science has long been the history of failed efforts to justify these social beliefs. Along the way, various minds tried to fashion practical human typologies along the following physical axes: skin color, hair texture, facial angle, jaw size, cranial capacity, brain mass, frontal lobe mass, brain surface fissures and convolutions, and even body lice. As one scholar notes, “[t]he nineteenth century was a period of exhaustive and–as it turned out–futile search for criteria to define and describe race differences.”. . . Attempts to define racial categories by physical attributes ultimately failed. By 1871, some leading intellectuals had recognized that even using the word “race” “was virtually a confession of ignorance or evil intent.” The genetic studies of the last few decades have only added more nails to the coffin of biological race. Evidence shows that those features usually coded to race, for example, stature, skin color, hair texture, and facial structure, do not correlate strongly with genetic variation. . . The rejection of race in science is now almost complete. In the end, we should embrace historian Barbara Fields’s succinct conclusion with respect to the plausibility of biological races: “Anyone who continues to believe in race as a physical attribute of individuals, despite the now commonplace disclaimers of biologists and geneticists, might as well also believe that Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and the tooth fairy are real, and that the earth stands still while the sun moves.”
. . . Unfortunately, few in this society seem prepared to fully relinquish their subscription to notions of biological race.. . .[including the] Congress and the Supreme Court. Congress’ anachronistic understanding of race is exemplified by a 1988 statute that explains that “the term ‘racial group’ means a set of individuals whose identity as such is distinctive in terms of physical characteristics or biological descent.” The Supreme Court, although purporting to sever race from biology, also seems incapable of doing so. In Saint Francis College v. Al-Khazraji, the Court determined that an Arab could recover damages for racial discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1981. . . Despite a seeming rejection of biological race, Justice White [stated]: “The Court of Appeals was thus quite right in holding that § 1981, ‘at a minimum,’ reaches discrimination against an individual ‘because he or she is genetically part of an ethnically and physiognomically distinctive subgrouping of homo sapiens.”‘. . . By adopting the lower court’s language of genetics and distinctive subgroupings, Justice White demonstrates the Court’s continued reliance on blood as a metonym for race. . . .In Metrobroadcasting v. FCC, Justice Scalia again reveals the Court’s understanding of race as a matter of blood. During oral argument, Scalia attacked the argument that granting minorities broadcasting licenses would enhance diversity by blasting “the policy as a matter of ‘blood,’ at one point charging that the policy reduced to a question of ‘blood . . . blood, not background and environment.”‘
Social Construction
. . . I define a “race” as a vast group of people loosely bound together by historically contingent, socially significant elements of their morphology and/or ancestry. I argue that race must be understood as a sui generis social phenomenon in which contested systems of meaning serve as the connections between physical features, races, and personal characteristics. In other words, social meanings connect our faces to our souls. Race is neither an essence nor an illusion, but rather an ongoing, contradictory, self-reinforcing process subject to the macro forces of social and political struggle and the micro effects of daily decisions. . . Referents of terms like Black, White, Asian, and Latino are social groups, not genetically distinct branches of humankind.
{ 94 comments… read them below or add one }
← Previous Comments
Its such as you read my mind! You seem to grasp so much approximately this, such as you wrote the ebook in it or something.
I think that you just could do with a few % to pressure the message house a little bit, however other than that, that is magnificent blog. A great read. I’ll certainly be back.
So…race is a social construct?
Bullshit – that line has been put together by moon bat, left wing lunatics.
Heidi Skum is a filthy race traitor whore. She doesnt deserve to be called German after opening her legs to that burnt nigger.
Let’s just call it “difference in appearance” instead of race then, to ensure peace.
We are all humans indeed but we look different depending on where we came from and how we evolved: different weather conditions call for an adaptation.
That’s why people from continent a look diffrent than the ones from continent b.
Good day!x
Ok well first off evolution is straight up bullshit. Its impossible for mans brain to have such a leap in intelligence nd I wonder where the missing link is? There isn’t….and it sounds so crazy hearing how in this “evolution” now u have these different beasts all scattered about nd apparently we started out black but those who migrated to near the poles nd weren’t reflected by uv radiation somehow turned white. Thiss they are calling multiregional evolution. What a load of crap! Nd yes I believe we are all equal nd come from the
Ancestor but who knows mayb we did come from different ancestors cuz it says in the bible after the deluge. But anyways I hope you know there is something called melanin which is a pigment found in our skin ears eyes nd hair. In the process of malanvensis melanin producing cells called melanocytes clearly produce melanin which determines the color of our skin nd dyes nd hair. Mutations occur nd high exposure to radiation is a perfect example of how albinism occurs(mainly through genes). But your looks nd everything has to do with your genes. I definitely believe in race. Nd this is what brings ethnicity which is greasy because its good to have diversity but its not good so think of
melanin pigment nd this determines our skin hair nd eye color. In a process called malogensis
i agree with you, lol you are amazing.
Actually, there are only and I mean only 3 races—caucasoid, negroid, and mongoloid. The difference is in the width of the forehead (brachiocephalic or broad headed) and nose of a skeleton among a few other things, but that is the determining factor for race. Having majored in anthropology in college, this is the way it is determined. In those groups are sub-groups defining each ethnic group. Each group has its own certain characteristics and sub-groups but they are each a human being. Don’t get caught up in all this garbage. We are each unique and loved.
You’re gonna ignore the fact that there is no genaological difference between the “races”. Did you read the article? Race is a social construct & there are only 3 because in European history when this idea of race was developed, all that was knows was Europe, Africa & the Near East. There is no gene or cluster of genes that make someone a Caucasian, Negro, Mongolian.
people with different races belong to the same planet, earth.
If one were to take that same lion on the plains of the African desert and allow it to be raised only by a zebra mother–”breast” fed–then that lion would associate itself as a “zebra” and would walk along the plains attempting to “graze” like a zebra but with tendencies to want to eat “meat”. The tendencies to want to eat “meat” would have been inbred in the lion’s genetic program of aggression towards survival. This lion would not know that it’s a lion until other lions having not been raised by zebra awaken it to the way “reality” is perceived by the majority of other lions. It would be a sad day for that particular lion, and it most likely would not survive. It is our mere perception that these areas exist, and as creatures functioning within a particular self-collapse of the electromagnetic wave function into the singularity of advanced intelligence we should move beyond the concept of “race” and think of ourselves as “one”.
When we look at the Planet we see every single problem that this Planet faces all comes from the concept of “human race”. In the “linear” sense, the “human race” has been the source of every “evil” that we have ever seen on this Planet. We can say this because in the “linear” sense we are the only creature on this planet that exists on a higher intellectual plane that have any concept of “evil” or “good”. We are not, however, the only creature on this Planet that exists with an understanding of “race”. Lower animals, lions, elephants, zebra, gazelle, etc… all exist and seem to form a mirror image of themselves without even having a mirror in front of them. A lion on the plains of the African desert cannot see itself in a mirror so as to know what it looks like comparative to those other animals in its environment. However, this same lion seems to know where to group itself. It seems to know not to group itself with zebra, for example. It does this through instinct built in from birth and its association with its mother. Its eyes see how its mother/father appears and it goes along as an adult looking for other animals that resemble them. It forms its attachments in this way. It is our mere perception that “evil”, “good”, “races”, etc … are “real” that actually creates these areas–we create these fields of energy when there is no “good” or “bad” or “race”. Everything is simply an experience that “is what it is”. We will continue this “linear” progression on the multidudinal scale, as this is has been chosen by the multitude of us before participation within the simultaneous Planet–Earth. We must move beyond arguments of “race” and other disctinctions that seem to separate “race” into varying versions of Homo Sapiens. We all belong to one “race”–Homo Sapiens.
Mitochondrial DNA does not and nor has it ever defined the “race” of an individual. If this is the case, then we could say that everyone on Earth is Black–as the history of mankind can be traced back to the mitochondrial DNA of the first woman who has been defined as a Black woman from Africa.
Cannot dispute that we are one species as we can and do interbreed.
However, the social divisions are to such an extent that they appear as separate races.
Even the Democratic Party subscribes to this. Otherwise, why ‘affirmative action’? This is evidence that they believe those of African descent are sub-standard.
By the way how do they know “LUCY” as white, black, or mongoloid as there are no genetic markers according to current thinking?
I do believe ‘diversity’ has been, and will continue to be the engine that drives our continued advancement.
It certainly works for science. Different language, and culture provide a vast array of thinking patterns. Something obvious to one may not be to another.
On the social side we seem to have entire societies with something akin to a criminal mind. Others that cannot break out of tribal cultures. And, others still, that are unable to conceive, and participate in the modern world.
With these it is suicide to be inclusive. This, regardless what the politically correct people say. I challenge anyone to prove this statement wrong. Change must come from within. If not, these societies and/or cultures must by necessity be excluded.
Obama’s voice and ability to lead people seems indicative of those Blacks that came before him–Martin Luther King and Malcolm X. Barack Husein Obama seems to have been a Muslim at one point in his life, as his name suggests it. He is a Manchurian candidate, belonging to the Illuminati. The man is Black.
Man, you really are uneducated. You even misspelled ‘Hussein’. Not only do you lack the ability to spell, but also the ability to think rationally.
Man?
Any one of African descent was/is a fool to have voted for this man. He has done more to segregate the blacks than any man in history. He has continued the Democratic Parties resolve to keep the black man on the plantation where, in their view, he belongs.
I could give you chapter and verse but you are blind to it so why bother.
You might read Mr. Walter Williams columns. As he is a ‘black man’ he might get through to you.
The genes that make us look like what we look like, are NOT the same as the genes we share as a species……come on…are you folks saying that lions, even though they are both cats, are the same “race”? The species, is called feline…those are the genes both cats share….what they do NOT share, is the ones that dictate body size/mass/limb to body ratio…like the one who can climb trees and the ones who can barely do so.and of course, the fur, stripes, manes on the male, etc….the time when the “ethnicity” issue comes in, is like the African elephant, and the Indian elephant comes in….or the bactrian camel vs the dromedary camel….they really ARE both elephants and camels….THEIR environments and nutrition caused the divide….I am always on the verge of shock, when I read the things people write about these issues….people bend and twist things around the amount of knowledge they have….but I have to tell you, that things cannot be learned in their entirety without a formal education, being instilled into a student who is capable of excellence….mediocraty is NOT the engine of true knowledge….
…ok. Let’s put it in terms the ignorants and racists will understand. Dog is a species. Within that specie, there are races. Each races has it’s specific features that evolved through the course of human evolution. Now, is there a superior race of dogs? One would argue that yes there are based on what they expect from a dog. However, 2 could argue all night long as to why the race of its dog is superior to the other because both would be looking at different features and character traits. Now, if you go to a pet-shop, what will you fall for? The dog who you think is the cutest or the one you’ll feel drawn to. There is no logical reasoning in that. It’s emotion and gut feelings. Why do I compare to dogs? Because, sadly, when it comes to races and our own race superiority, we act just like a bunch of dogs after the same bone. Proof that no race is superior because given the same circumstances, we’ll behave the same way and try to impose our domination which is a pretty primitive reaction in the animal world. So no. There is no superior race. Because if there was one, it would rationalize such behavior, and that is not the case. As I see in here, there are a lot of nut cases.
Holy Crap…….you sound like…well…I’m trying to be open minded here….but you have absolutely no sense being made in virtually anything you wrote.
Your dog analogy alone is so flawed that you almost have me feeling pity, and embarrassment for you. The DOG IS the race, CANINE is the species…where do you go to school? So, if what you say is true….wolves and domestic dogs are no of the same species….canine….what about lions and tigers? Are THEY 2 species, but somehow, both of the feline species?
Humans are a species, black, white, yellow (so to speak) tan (sephardic) and brown…are RACES….they are NOT ethnicities….your ethnicity, is what you CULTURAL sector is, you get that from your mother’s mitochondrial DNA….if your father is a caucasion and your mother is black….you’re black….if your mother is a caucasion and your father is black, you’re caucasion….Obama is white…his mitochondrial DNA is caucasion…..he merely has some black genes, just like a person who’s 1/2 asian and 1/2 caucasion….they look like whichever parent had the most prominent appearnce related genes….but are actually what the mother is….appearance genes, like eye color would always be what color the mother’s eyes were if genes that affect appearance were of equal status of the core genes. Additionally, the odor in which most animals can find their mother…like a seal on a beach, is generated by the gases that are produced by the mother’s bacterial decay….and that specific bacteria is the mitochondria.
Please, there are students who read these blogs…they deserve better
Obama is not White. He has no phenotypical characteristics associated with any “race” except that of the African. The bone structure of his face, the low brow and prominent wide nose, and brown eyes are all indicative of the native races of the African continent. His skin tone looks nothing like that of an “interbred” culture. My father’s mother was Native American (100% Cherokee) and his father was Black. Would that make hime 100% Native American? No, it would not. No more than it would make Obama a White man. I know people either whose father is Black and mother is White and they actually look Caucasian–either the eye color or skin color is different. Hair texture can vary. Also, the famous model Heidi Klum and Seal are great examples. Seal is of African descent and his children actually look interbred between both races. Obama doesn’t look anything but Black. He might be 1/4 White, but that’s it.
Ur race or a certain race as superior. Nd why is it that in the bible its said to have marriage only with the same people of their kind whom were the issrolites.
← Previous Comments