"Race"?

[TexasFreedom]

This is an honest question.

We've proven scientifically that there is only one human race. There is no 'white' race, or 'black' race, or any other. Scientifically it's all 1 breed, the human race.

So when someone accuses someone else of being a racist, it's automatically a false accusation. You can even accuse a foolish KKK member and it's not true because there are no separate races.

Now to my question, is there a better word to use to describe 'races'?

We have 'blacks', 'whites', 'hispanics', 'asians', etc. But is there a generic and accurate word to describe it? And I'm not talking religions such as muslim, Christian, etc. "Cultures" don't quite fit it, because you can have a German culture different from a French culture, so that is too specific.

And I do have a word for someone who is 'racist', that would be ignorant or a fool. But I mean this as a way to say there are differences without putting one over another. It's an honest question.

 

[lonewolf]

HUMAN race???

 

[Mountain trapper]

I personally think that there is much more important issues to be concerned about than race. I'm pretty tired of all this silly endless debate over race. I also believe in true equality for everyone. Unfortunately there are many people who use race as an excuse for their own low performance and as a way to get something for "nothing" from the taxpayers. And politicians like to use race as a way to divide people and to get votes. "Racism" is big business in this country. Follow the money.

 

[TexasFreedom]

AD, I 100% agree with you. And getting away from just 'racism' is part of my goal.

The reason I ask is that I'd like to use this as a change-the-topic method. Let's say I'm talking with someone & they're whining about racism/racists. I can respond & tell them that there is no such thing as 'racism', because there is only one 'human' race. So someone either hates all humans or none. And if there were another term that were more fitting (let's say 'culture' was more fitting), I can turn the conversation to that. It takes someone off their 'game', and makes them think about what they're saying which gives me an opportunity to help guide their thinking.

Does that make sense?

 

[jontte]

TF,it does,the term in science is I belive "homo sapiens",not homo black,hispanic,caucasian,asian or anything like this..
the difference comes more on cultural bases,than the color of your skin.

 

[DrHenley]

All the same subspecies in fact: Homo sapiens sapiens

Well, maybe we could make a case for a deviant subspecies Homo sapiens politicus LOL

 

[Maverick]

I'm not a racist but I can be judgemental, I judge those on how they treat me, color has no bearing on my judgment just the attitude. 'Racism' is nothing more than a pseudonym for 'excuse' regardless of what side of the fence one is on!

 

[Kevin L]

I hate racism.

If you'll be patient with me, let's examine some of the racists' ideas and see how they fall apart by their own standards.

Hitler believed that mixing of the races would dilute the offsprings' purity and resistance to disease.

All anyone has to do is look at dogs (and many other domestic animals and plants).

Veterinarians talk about 'hybrid vigour', which means that mutts are less likely to have hereditary health problems (like hip dysplasia), and may be more intelligent.

Kids who are mixed--let us say a kid born from a marriage between an African and an Israeli--will be less likely to have sickle-cell and/or Tay-Sachs.

Centuries ago, giving birth had a very high mortality rate. Part of the reason why this is fixed today is because of modern medicine, but part of it is because people used to live and die within 20 miles of their birth, and there was a lot of inbreeding.

Today, human genetics are stirred up from modern travel, and we benefit from it. This (as well as modern medicine) is part of why we live longer and healthier.

Also, maybe I'm just trying to justify my taste for exotic women. I'll date women from other races, or even marry a woman from another race if things work out that way.

I don't care what people think.

 

[user 6493]

race,,,,,humans come in a number of flavors,you can sit in your home in front of your keyboard and type I am not a racist,,,but look deeply at yourself we are all racist to a degree to pretend you aren't is not fooling anyone,,,,,whether it be you don't like blacks ,asians,,or the poor person down the street in the trailer park,we all look down at people and think we are better than them,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,my 2 cents worth

 

[lonewolf]

i'm not an out and out racist but I am worried about people who come to my country but have no love for my country.
it worries me when I go to markets and outdoor gathering further away from my location and all I hear is foreign languages.
not a problem where I live as there is no money here for immigrants and they tend to congregate in the big cities where there are already ghettos of their relatives. but I am worried for the future of my tribe and my country.
I think there IS a problem in my country with Islam but it has more to do with radicalisation and IS and terrorism than with the religion itself.
and snowflakes and normalcy bias.

 

[TexasFreedom]

There are some really good points in this thread. We all 'judge' people immediately. It doesn't matter if you see them in the street or if it's 'Rachel' calling you to sell you an extended car warranty.

And if anyone says 'they don't judge people', in fact they just did! Bob walks up, and John who "doesn't judge" just judged Bob to be worthy of getting an opportunity to be heard (ignoring such facts as Bob is a naked staggering drunk for instance!).

Maybe Doc has a good point, many people are homo sapien sapien, the problems are the "homo sapien welfare-us" and "homo sapien dictatoric-us" subspecies! We need more homo sapien capitalist-us types!

But I'm not really hearing a better term for what is worded as 'race' but more accurately defines it. The best I'm seeing is 'culture' and that is still not close enough for me. Maybe the term doesn't exist?

 

[Mountain trapper]

The terms race, racism, racist have been thrown around so much that they don't mean anything anymore.
I've been called "racist" before, simply because I don't believe that anyone should get special treatment just because of their skin color. I also don't think anyone should be coddled or pampered because of their skin color either. When I was still working I had the same work expectations for all my employees. A few times over the years the HR department would ask me accept low performance from certain employees based on race. My answer was always the same. I guess you could say that I was an equal opportunity terminator.

 

[Squirtgunsquirter]

I don't think it is racist to prefer the company of others like you. My GF enjoys going to an all female crochet club... I don't. Am I a misogynist?

Does racism exist? Sure. My GF's friend, who is black, asked me during a conversion about "race" if I considered myself to be a racist. I said, yeah, I suppose I am in some ways. It didn't end the conversation or destroy a friendship. That's part of my upbringing, that's how things were in the 70's and 80's, much more so than today.

 

[lonewolf]

the term "racist" is mostly used in the UK to stifle debate, if someone cant get their own way then they shout racist and the debate ends.
oh yes, and why is it only WHITE people that are accused of being racist, some muslims are worse than any white.

 

[Kevin L]

the term "racist" is mostly used in the UK to stifle debate, if someone cant get their own way then they shout racist and the debate ends.

A sleezy, underhanded tactic...but I can see why it would work.

 

[lonewolf]

A sleezy, underhanded tactic...but I can see why it would work.

it does, it works every time, usually by the left and labour thugs.

 

[Mundame]

AD, I 100% agree with you. And getting away from just 'racism' is part of my goal.

The reason I ask is that I'd like to use this as a change-the-topic method. Let's say I'm talking with someone & they're whining about racism/racists. I can respond & tell them that there is no such thing as 'racism', because there is only one 'human' race. So someone either hates all humans or none. And if there were another term that were more fitting (let's say 'culture' was more fitting), I can turn the conversation to that. It takes someone off their 'game', and makes them think about what they're saying which gives me an opportunity to help guide their thinking.

Does that make sense?

Not to me, really --- I always think, if there is no such thing as race, why do we talk so much about it? You are saying there is no such thing as race, but you started a thread about it, after all.

It's true that since Neanderthals went extinct or more likely were killed out, there has been only one species of human, in the old sense of genetic groups that cannot make fertile crosses with another similar species --- ligers and mules occur, but don't reproduce. Modern genetics seems determined to call different breeding groups with their own inbred characteristics species even if they still can interbreed with other "species." That would put human races squarely into the different species category. There is no use saying different races are not different: of course they are, or we wouldn't talk about it so much.

 

[Mundame]

the term "racist" is mostly used in the UK to stifle debate, if someone cant get their own way then they shout racist and the debate ends.
oh yes, and why is it only WHITE people that are accused of being racist, some muslims are worse than any white.

Same exact thing happens here in the U.S. Both. Blacks are much worse about racism than whites here, but no one is ever supposed to call them on that or mention it.

Because the leftist perceive whites as more powerful and dangerous and the ones who have to be held down, is my guess for why.

 

[TexasFreedom]

Not to me, really --- I always think, if there is no such thing as race, why do we talk so much about it? You are saying there is no such thing as race, but you started a thread about it, after all.

It's true that since Neanderthals went extinct or more likely were killed out, there has been only one species of human, in the old sense of genetic groups that cannot make fertile crosses with another similar species --- ligers and mules occur, but don't reproduce. Modern genetics seems determined to call different breeding groups with their own inbred characteristics species even if they still can interbreed with other "species." That would put human races squarely into the different species category. There is no use saying different races are not different: of course they are, or we wouldn't talk about it so much.

Mundame,

First you may not be aware of my view on this. I'm a Bible-thumping Christian. I believe evidence supports the earth being 6000 years old and that God created the universe in 6 literal days. I see evidence to support micro-evolution (you can breed for lap dogs or great danes) but that macro evolution (a chicken lays an egg and a mouse hatches) is impossible (and not proven with evidence). Having said that (and I'm not looking to argue those points) let me respond.

Scientifically we are all one human race, homo sapiens. There is no 'black homo sapiens' or white HS or asian HS. We judge these things mostly based on skin color. Why not classify people based on eye color or hair color or ear type? These are all characteristics within one race.

People judge too much based on mere appearances. It would be more accurate to look at inner-city dwellers vs rural. Or cultures. Or criminal history. I know black and white and hispanic people I would trust with my life. I have family members (white and hispanic and black) who I wouldn't trust to hold my wallet.

When people categorize by 'race', it leaves too much out of the picture. We are all guilty of it.

So my point is that race is technically-speaking bad term. I was looking for a more accurate term to use.

 

[Mundame]

Mundame,

Scientifically we are all one human race, homo sapiens. There is no 'black homo sapiens' or white HS or asian HS. We judge these things mostly based on skin color. Why not classify people based on eye color or hair color or ear type? These are all characteristics within one race.

Well, sure there are black homo sapiens. I've, ahem, seen them. Oriental homo sapiens, too. And others, some five in all, I think, depending on the system of classification. I mean, we see that clearly, and we talk about them as different races all the time.

We do classify people based on eye color or hair color!! It's on driver's licenses and all sorts of ID documents.

So my point is that race is technically-speaking bad term. I was looking for a more accurate term to use.

Words and concepts change rapidly. I was studying WWI for a long time, and at that time it was normal practice to refer to the French race, the British race, and especially the German race. And the Jewish race, of course, well into WWII. Now we would mostly call those differences cultural, but when people travelled less than now, I can see that differences in appearance and behavior would seem "racial." Anyway, that was the word people used in speech and books.

I've decided not to let people (mostly leftists) tell me what words I can or cannot say. You are right that race and all words around race have become "bad words," but if we let leftists tell us what we can't say, do, or think about, we'll be down to George Orwell's 500-word vocabulary of state-approved words in no time. I for one am not going that way.

 

[Mundame]

Mundame,
macro evolution (a chicken lays an egg and a mouse hatches) is impossible (and not proven with evidence).

Have you heard of that new cell-modification technique, CRISPR? Scary stuff --- apparently they can cure diseases at a genetic level, but they can also do verrrrrrry strange modifications such as designer-humans (maybe with fangs and horns on the head?). I have the book on it, "A Crack in Creation," but haven't read it yet. I mean to pretty soon. They think they can "improve" humans, but what improvement means may be a matter of opinion --- people will buy it, though. Everybody loves eugenics, if it's for their own children, at least.

 

[TexasFreedom]

Macro evolution is not man-made genetic modifications. I agree man 'playing God' is a dangerous thing.

 

[Kevin L]

Macro evolution is not man-made genetic modifications. I agree man 'playing God' is a dangerous thing.

I agree with you somewhat, but I can see the other side of the coin.

Man has been doing genetic engineering for tens of thousands of years via selective breeding. A lapdog Pomeranian is, in fact, a genetically modified wolf.

All of our best cattle, hogs, wheat, rice, apples, and so on are a product of genetic engineering.

A doctor named Semmelweiss introduced handwashing (in a dilute bleachwater) as a way of preventing sepsis (rampant blood poisoning from infection) when helping a woman give birth.

His ideas didn't catch on, in part because it disturbed "the natural order of things" since God decreed that Eve shall have her pains greatly multiplied in childbirth as punishment for tempting Adam.

In other words, hand-washing in bleach water to prevent post-partum infection violated God's laws.

In fairness to Texas Freedom's point, however, the Nazi regime tried to do genetic engineering on people by deciding who lives and who dies on the basis of race, and over six million of my people were killed because of it (along with Gypsies, homosexuals, Jehovah's Witnesses, and so on).

Also, another point about genetic engineering that is truly bad hasn't been brought up: there are times when a disorder or a disease can be an asset.

Sickle cell is a genetic disease that kills lots of people every year...yet people with sickle cell can be resistant (or even immune) to malaria.

Also, I wonder about autism. Autism is a genetic trait that renders some of its sufferers dependant upon institutions for their whole lives...yet some people with autism make tremedous contributitons to humanity. Albert Einstein, Bill Gates, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, Al Gore, Isaac Asimov, and Thomas Edison were all believed to be mildly autistic.

If we eliminate autism with the processes of genetic engineering (since autism is a genetic disorder), will we short-change ourselves in the future by denying ourselves the unique contributions of the autistic mind?

Another example comes to mind: color-blindness is a genetic disorder, yet I've heard that snipers with color blindness are extraordinarily lethal on the battlefield because they can see through camoflague since they don't see colors in the same way that everyone else does.

 

[TexasFreedom]

When I said 'genetic modfications, I meant taking DNA, changing it, and putting that back into the person. Far more than ever has been done in the past.

Other things like Autism, I don't think that's a genetic issue. Rather it has been linked to mercury in vaccines. I don't want to change people to solve a problem which is caused by man's mistakes.

 

[Kevin L]

When I said 'genetic modfications, I meant taking DNA, changing it, and putting that back into the person. Far more than ever has been done in the past.

Other things like Autism, I don't think that's a genetic issue. Rather it has been linked to mercury in vaccines. I don't want to change people to solve a problem which is caused by man's mistakes.

Mercury in vaccines as a cause of autism has been repeatedly debunked, however it turns out that this mecury may have caused other neurological problems, and might be responsible for an early-onset form of Alzheimer's disease.

Selective breeding is changing an animal's (or plant's) DNA.

Whether the DNA is changed by selective breeding or taking it out, changing it, and putting it back doesn't seem to make a difference as far as I can see, but maybe I'm wrong.

 

[Mundame]

Also, I wonder about autism. Autism is a genetic trait that renders some of its sufferers dependant upon institutions for their whole lives...yet some people with autism make tremedous contributitons to humanity. Albert Einstein, Bill Gates, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, Al Gore, Isaac Asimov, and Thomas Edison were all believed to be mildly autistic.

If we eliminate autism with the processes of genetic engineering (since autism is a genetic disorder), will we short-change ourselves in the future by denying ourselves the unique contributions of the autistic mind?

Another example comes to mind: color-blindness is a genetic disorder, yet I've heard that snipers with color blindness are extraordinarily lethal on the battlefield because they can see through camoflague since they don't see colors in the same way that everyone else does.

Yes! The color-blindness issue is so interesting: evolved for hunting, maybe. It's VERY common --- and only among males, the hunters as a rule. One in eight? Something like that, I was just reading about it.

I like the idea that certain "illnesses" or apparent disabilities, may be mutations that to some extent, work. At least as a small proportion salting the population. Autism, also maybe bipolar disorder with it's highs and lows. A lot of artists such as Handel with his "Messiah" for Easter are supposed to have been bipolar/manic-depressive and Handel composed his whole great work in a sleepless three days.

I suppose race is the same thing, mutations that evolved or at least simply were locked in from inbreeding in a restricted area. Whites, of course, are widely supposed to have evolved light to absorb Vitamin D from the sun in highly unfavorable northern climates. And red hair, only found naturally in far northern areas, is paired with skin so pale that redheads can hardly cope with strong sun in lower latitudes. I love stuff like that.

 

[Kevin L]

I like the idea that certain "illnesses" or apparent disabilities, may be mutations that to some extent, work. At least as a small proportion salting the population. Autism, also maybe bipolar disorder with it's highs and lows. A lot of artists such as Handel with his "Messiah" for Easter are supposed to have been bipolar/manic-depressive and Handel composed his whole great work in a sleepless three days.

I suppose race is the same thing, mutations that evolved or at least simply were locked in from inbreeding in a restricted area. Whites, of course, are widely supposed to have evolved light to absorb Vitamin D from the sun in highly unfavorable northern climates. And red hair, only found naturally in far northern areas, is paired with skin so pale that redheads can hardly cope with strong sun in lower latitudes. I love stuff like that.[/QUOTE]

Thank you.

My points against racism touch on these ideas, but let me make another point...not my own, but something I heard from Isaac Asimov in one of his talks.

Lets suppose that someone creates an accurate intelligence test that everyone accepts. Now, if we suppose that African Americans test lower than 'normal', then we have an excuse to deny them certian things since the extra opportunities would be wasted resources.

Let us suppose, however, that African Americans test as being more intelligent than White people.

Asimov argues that Whites would deny them opportunities anyway, since the Whites would be afraid that "they" would "take over". If anyone disagrees, then look at the stereotypes for the Jews (my ethnicity). We are stereotyped as being crafty, intelligent, and conspiring to "take over" the world, so we should be denied the opportunities that everyone else has.

So, if you're a race that's less intelligent, you should be denied opportunity...and if you're race is more intelligent, then you should be denied opportunity so that you don't "take over".

So, in the end, we've justified racism toward anyone who is different.

This is a reason why I'm not a racist. I don't want to see a kid who might become a brilliant doctor (maybe someone who finds a cure for cancer?) get condemned to be a janitor because (s)he has ancestors from Africa.

 

[Mundame]

Mercury in vaccines as a cause of autism has been repeatedly debunked.

To me it doesn't matter if it's true: it matters if it's free choice.

 

[Kevin L]

To me it doesn't matter if it's true: it matters if it's free choice.

I'm on the fence about this, as I've worked in healthcare for almost 30 years.

On one hand, medicine shouldn't be forced on an unwilling patient. We don't force Jehova's Witnesses to have blood transfusions (this has, apparantly, protected many of them from AIDS and certian kinds of hepatitis in the 80s before there were tests and screening procedures), we don't force Christian Scientists to take medications against their will, and we don't force devout Muslims to take pork insulin for diabetes...and I get all this.

Yet mandatory school vaccinations have, unquestionably, prevented horrible epidemics. Smallpox has been completely eradicated (and good riddance) in part because of mandatory vaccination.

Polio paralyzed hundreds of thousands of children every year, and now there are less than 700 cases of active polio worldwide. Of the three strains of polio, only one strain still exists "at large" and hasn't been eradicated...although the day seems near when infantile paralysis may be a thing of the past...mostly because of mandatory vaccination.

As a medical person, I get the resentment of having a medication forced on an unwilling patient. I'm also a pragmatist because I've seen what these diseases can do, and I tend to support things that work even if they're morally questionable.

This is why I'm on the fence about mandatory vaccination.

Even if you disagree with me, I hope you can see my point...as I'm biased in favor of life.

L'Chaim!!!

P.S. Just to show that I'm honest in how I portray the facts, note that there are exceedingly rare cases where certian polio vaccines can actually cause full-fledged polio, which may be spread to other non-vaccinated people. 15 cases of polio were directly caused by a polio vaccine in 2014...and the vaccine wasn't defective.

 

[Gazrok]

I'd prefer the term "culture" vs. "race".

Just as we have blacks who assimilate more into "white culture", there are whites who assimilate more into "black culture", etc. Skin color may play on some folks' pre-judged conceptions, but the real root of conflict is if the "cultures" are just different. Of course, there are many other examples than black/white, but just an illustration. I work with a black guy who is whiter than many white guys I know...lol. Likewise, I work with a white guy, who if you didn't see him, you'd swear he was black. So it's more of a culture thing, than race.