NationStates Jolt Archive

WHITE SKIN.
Where's The Cat-Tribe with that excellent list of why race doesn't exist?

Look mate, there are as many genetic differences WITHIN races and between them. Therefore discriminating on the basis of skin colour is no more valid than discriminating on the basis of hair or eye colour.

You're not a member of the Patriotic Youth League are you? :rolleyes:

Psst thats not a genetic difference ... besides he was asking for genetic traits that differ GERMAN ... not just WHITE from everyone else

If you're white you're either Germanic or Slavic, so feh.

Muslims aren't white.

If you're white you're either Germanic or Slavic, so feh.

Muslims aren't white.

Muslim is a religious group, not an ethnic group. I know blonde, blue eyed Muslims and red-haired green-eyed Muslims who burn if the sun so much as touches their freckled skin.

I believe you need to re-examine your argument.

Muslim is a religious group, not an ethnic group. I know blonde, blue eyed Muslims and red-haired green-eyed Muslims who burn if the sun so much as touches their freckled skin.

I believe you need to re-examine your argument.

Fine... ARABS are overrunning Europe. The fact that they're Muslims make it worse.

If you're white you're either Germanic or Slavic, so feh.

Muslims aren't white.

So Frenchmen aren't white? Last I heard, Hitler didn't think that Slavic people were white, either. He called them untermensch.

Fine... ARABS are overrunning Europe. The fact that they're Muslims make it worse.

are you in europe? whereabouts?

He asked for GENETIC differences

I am an ardent multiculturalist and anti-racist.
That said, can you list me the genetic differences between a rabbit and a lion?
I don't suppose you can.
That doesn't make them the same.

I am an ardent multiculturalist and anti-racist.
That said, can you list me the genetic differences between a rabbit and a lion?
I don't suppose you can.
That doesn't make them the same.

I may not be able to, but science certainly can tell the difference between species on a genetic basis.

There is evidently not enough yet to be able to reliably distinguish between one "race" and another on a genetic basis.

You'll note that we share 95 percent of our genes with the other primates. But there's a difference that is identifiable - albeit a very small difference. It is postulated that if there is a genetic difference between races, it will be a smaller genetic difference than the difference between male and female.

are you in europe? whereabouts?

I'm not in Europe, I live in Aus. But I'm from Baden, Germany.

I might add: a rabbit has 44 chromosomes, while a lion has 38.

I'm not in Europe, I live in Aus. But I'm from Baden, Germany.


Interesting.
You're say you're not fully an ethnic German, whatever that is, and you don't actually live in Germany... yet you're worried about the ethnic makeup of the country because of people who actually do reside there....

This is not making much sense to me.

So in any case, on the evolution of culture . . .

A little world history lesson: Colonialism. White europeans settled in Africa, the Americas and Australia and imposed their own culture on the peoples living there. Thoey used every means at their disposal, including murder, warfare and indoctrination. Yet, the places they occupied still have remnants of their original culture.
Fast-forward to 2005. Now those same Europeans, and their descendants in North America, are concerned that immigrants will shift their culture, using only passive methods? Not likely. If a culture is worth saving, it will survive. Other cultures may very well help break down racially-based thinking, though, and that would be for the better.
Also, from a practical standpoint- immigrants must adapt to our culture far more than we change to suit theres.

Where's The Cat-Tribe with that excellent list of why race doesn't exist?

Look mate, there are as many genetic differences WITHIN races and between them. Therefore discriminating on the basis of skin colour is no more valid than discriminating on the basis of hair or eye colour.

You're not a member of the Patriotic Youth League are you? :rolleyes:

There's no need to fear! [The Cat-Tribe] is here!

I am an ardent multiculturalist and anti-racist.
That said, can you list me the genetic differences between a rabbit and a lion?
I don't suppose you can.
That doesn't make them the same.

Of course, if you were to base an extreme world view on the differences between rabbits and lions, you should have some knowledge of those differences. :rolleyes:

*snip*

I'd love to see any evidence that Germans are a "race" -- even as socio-political concept.

Regardless, it is rather well established that there is no such thing as race biologically or genetically.

Race is a socio-political construct. As such, it is very real.

There is a great deal of scientific evidence -- particularly from the Human Genome Project and Human Genome Diversity Project-- that proves that there are no genetically distinguishable races. The scientific community is in general agreement that "race" does not exist as a biological concept.

There are some indications that it may sometimes be possible to roughly group people by certain genetic characteristics for medical purposes, but that such groupings to not correlate well with conventional concepts of race.

Here are the first 2 paragraphs of the American Anthropological Association Statement on "Race" (http://www.aaanet.org/stmts/racepp.htm)

In the United States both scholars and the general public have been conditioned to viewing human races as natural and separate divisions within the human species based on visible physical differences. With the vast expansion of scientific knowledge in this century, however, it has become clear that human populations are not unambiguous, clearly demarcated, biologically distinct groups. Evidence from the analysis of genetics (e.g., DNA) indicates that most physical variation, about 94%, lies within so-called racial groups. Conventional geographic "racial" groupings differ from one another only in about 6% of their genes. This means that there is greater variation within "racial" groups than between them. In neighboring populations there is much overlapping of genes and their phenotypic (physical) expressions. Throughout history whenever different groups have come into contact, they have interbred. The continued sharing of genetic materials has maintained all of humankind as a single species.

Physical variations in any given trait tend to occur gradually rather than abruptly over geographic areas. And because physical traits are inherited independently of one another, knowing the range of one trait does not predict the presence of others. For example, skin color varies largely from light in the temperate areas in the north to dark in the tropical areas in the south; its intensity is not related to nose shape or hair texture. Dark skin may be associated with frizzy or kinky hair or curly or wavy or straight hair, all of which are found among different indigenous peoples in tropical regions. These facts render any attempt to establish lines of division among biological populations both arbitrary and subjective.
Here is another summary of facts (and I recognize the last is not necessarily a scientific "fact"):

THINGS EVERYONE SHOULD KNOW ABOUT RACE (http://www.pbs.org/race/000_About/002_04-background-01-x.htm)

Our eyes tell us that people look different. No one has trouble distinguishing a Czech from a Chinese. But what do those differences mean? Are they biological? Has race always been with us? How does race affect people today?

There's less - and more - to race than meets the eye:

1. Race is a modern idea. Ancient societies, like the Greeks, did not divide people according to physical distinctions, but according to religion, status, class, even language. The English language didn't even have the word 'race' until it turns up in 1508 in a poem by William Dunbar referring to a line of kings.

2. Race has no genetic basis. Not one characteristic, trait or even gene distinguishes all the members of one so-called race from all the members of another so-called race.

3. Human subspecies don't exist. Unlike many animals, modern humans simply haven't been around long enough or isolated enough to evolve into separate subspecies or races. Despite surface appearances, we are one of the most similar of all species.

4. Skin color really is only skin deep. Most traits are inherited independently from one another. The genes influencing skin color have nothing to do with the genes influencing hair form, eye shape, blood type, musical talent, athletic ability or forms of intelligence. Knowing someone's skin color doesn't necessarily tell you anything else about him or her.

5. Most variation is within, not between, "races." Of the small amount of total human variation, 85% exists within any local population, be they Italians, Kurds, Koreans or Cherokees. About 94% can be found within any continent. That means two random Koreans may be as genetically different as a Korean and an Italian.

6. Slavery predates race. Throughout much of human history, societies have enslaved others, often as a result of conquest or war, even debt, but not because of physical characteristics or a belief in natural inferiority. Due to a unique set of historical circumstances, ours was the first slave system where all the slaves shared similar physical characteristics.

7. Race and freedom evolved together. The U.S. was founded on the radical new principle that "All men are created equal." But our early economy was based largely on slavery. How could this anomaly be rationalized? The new idea of race helped explain why some people could be denied the rights and freedoms that others took for granted.

8. Race justified social inequalities as natural. As the race idea evolved, white superiority became "common sense" in America. It justified not only slavery but also the extermination of Indians, exclusion of Asian immigrants, and the taking of Mexican lands by a nation that professed a belief in democracy. Racial practices were institutionalized within American government, laws, and society.

9. Race isn't biological, but racism is still real. Race is a powerful social idea that gives people different access to opportunities and resources. Our government and social institutions have created advantages that disproportionately channel wealth, power, and resources to white people. This affects everyone, whether we are aware of it or not.

Here are a few more sources of information:


Scientific and Folk Ideas About Heredity (http://personal.uncc.edu/jmarks/interests/Baltimore.html)
Race is inherited, but in a different fashion from biological heredity. Race is inherited according to no scientific laws, rather, by a commonsense or folk cultural system. Like the way we name our relatives, it’s not determined by biology, and doesn’t map very well onto genetic relationships. In fact that’s precisely what races are -- named groups, nothing more. ...

The key thing is to appreciate that race and genetics aren’t from the same worlds. So it’s not that one is good and the other is bad. It’s that one is scientific, and the other provides a means of localizing yourself and others in a very subjective world of social relations. The difficulty comes when we confuse them for one another. It’s not that race doesn’t exist, as I occasionally see it in the newspaper; it’s that race doesn’t exist as a biological entity. It certainly exists as a symbolic, social category; and that makes it more real and more important than if it were biological.Basically, we are all the same (http://www.pulitzer.org/year/1998/explanatory-reporting/works/2.html)
After analyzing thousands of DNA samples collected in smaller studies, experts are amazed at the genetic unity that binds our diverse, polyglot species. Any two people, regardless of geography or ethnicity, share at least 99.99 percent of their genetic makeups--a deep sameness that makes a mockery of racist ideologies such as Nazism.

Paradoxically, the minuscule .01 percent of our genome that does make people different doesn't shake out along visible racial lines. Instead, some 85 percent of human genetic diversity occurs within ethnic groups, not between them. The traits that so polarize our culture--the shade of our skin, the shape of an eye, hair texture--actually hide a dazzling and unexpected molecular tapestry that reflects our true origins. The European gene pool, for example, carries the story of where its members came from--and where they later migrated. It is a swirl of 35 percent African genes and 65 percent Asian genes.
Using Anthropology to Make Sense of Human Diversity (http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/k0305muk.htm)
Race and Ethnicity (http://cas-courses.buffalo.edu/classes/apy/anab/apy106/handouts/Race_and_Ethnicity.htm)
In the US the general public has been conditioned to view human races as natural and separate divisions within the human species based on visible physical differences (phenotype). It has now become clear to anthropologists that human populations are not unambiguous clearly demarcated, biologically distinct groups. Evidence from genetics (e.g. DNA) indicates that there is greater variation within "racial groups" (94%) than between racial groups (6%). The attempt to establish lines of division among biological populations is arbitrary and subjective.
What are the differences between races? (http://www.mnh.si.edu/anthro/humanorigins/faq/race.htm)
Attempts to create categories of biological races have centered on phenotypic differences. A phenotype is the entirety of traits that an individual possesses, including external characteristics such as eye color and shape, body size and shape, hair color and texture, and skin color. In recent years attempts have also been made to evaluate genotypic differences to justify biological races. Genotype refers to a person's genetic makeup. These attempts have tried to define clusters of characteristics in one population that are not found in other populations. These clusters supposedly would enable different populations to be divided into distinct races. Such attempts have failed, however, and what researchers have found is that biological variations exist on a cline rather than in delimited geographic clusters with gaps in between. A cline refers to a gradual change of a trait and its frequency from one place to another within a species or population. The change usually corresponds to some change in the environment across the geographic range of a species. Any boundary line drawn at a point along the continuum is therefore arbitrary. So, the idea of distinct races defined by hard-and-fast differences has fallen apart as anthropologists have studied the genetic and physical characteristics of human populations.
The Biology of Race (http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/Sciences/LifeScience/HumanRaces/BiologyRace/BiologyRace.htm)
Race is a concept of society that insists there is a genetic significance behind human variations in skin color that transcends out ward appearance. However, race has no scientific merit outside of sociological classification. There are no significant genetic variations within the human species to justify the division of “ races.”
The Human Genome and Our View of Ourselves (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/291/5507/1219?ijkey=z/aJLHX5GkJnA&key)
We're All Related to Kevin Bacon (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A21167-2002Dec6&notFound=true)
HUMAN DIVERSITY AND "RACE" (http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/dl/free/0072500506/23746/CHAPTER5.doc)
The Geometer of Race (http://www.greeninformation.com/The%20Geometer%20of%20Race.htm)

I should stop bothering with Germany and focus on my other ethnic half.

Maybe the Ukrainians will have better luck existing than the Germans did...

I'm sorry, Kievan-Prussia, but I believe you may have forgotten all of those invasions that occured in eastern Europe. Slavs may be considered caucasian, but that does not mean they don't have mixed blood. Think Attilla the Hun and Genghis Khan. Various invasions swept Russia, including the Ukraine, and many of the invaders liked the view and stayed. They made a habit of killing Slavic men and impregnating Slavic women. Most Slavs have at least a little Mongol blood in them.

You definitely can't argue that the Ukraine culture hasn't changed over the last 1500 years. Between the various Mongol invasions, the Vikings, the Orthodox Church, St. Cyril, the Soviets, and others, the only thing that has really remained constant are the perogies.

Check out a timeline of Ukrainian history, if you're interested:

http://ukraine.uazone.net/history.html