Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Considering that most humans didn't diverge geographically and becoming what you referred to as races until the last 40,000 of our estimated 200,000 years on the planet such an argument is patently absurd.
Whatever happened 40,000 years ago is not relevant to the modern day in any way.
Perhaps, those who oppose diversity did not do their research of the importance of genetic diversity. Humans who breed within the same gene pool create genetic mutations, which can cause defects in human populations. Cross breeding is necessary from a biological view point. Do research. There are numerous studies on why race preservation is unhealthy and a threat to the human race.
I think this is laughable.
People should marry and breed with whoever they want, I don't think 'encouraging' or 'discouraging' interracial breeding is necessary.
So you all want us to look and be the same? Wouldn't that be boring?
Maybe you should stick to topics about libertarian political theory because this discussion might be a bit over your head... but if you are willing to open you mind... perhaps...
Asia, Africa, and Europe had a bit more genetic and ethic diversity than you seem to assume. Genetics notwithstanding I also find it fascinating how white Americans are so quick to describe Europe as being one big happy white family when the history of Europe is replete with wars based upon ethnic, dare I say it, diversity.
Anyway, as the OP is trying to make plain genetic isolation reduces genetic diversity, lack of genetic diversity in time leads to speciation. In short without the continued genetic diversity one "race" of humans stands the risk of extinction or even more interestingly, evolving into a separate species all together.
Your example of happy yellow people in Asia, whites in Europe and Blacks in Africa only describes about a few seconds in the timeline of human existence. A happy existence, while illusionary and ahistorical to begin with, the evidence is clear that the farther away a human population is from its African origins the smaller the level of genetic diversity. The smaller the genetic diversity the higher the possibility of the development of mongenic diseases.
I am so glad my ancestors moved me away from our "African origins". lol. If what you say is true, that Europeans and East Asians have the lowest levels of genetic diversity, than thank goodness for that. Europeans and East Asians have the highest life expectancy on the planet. Our populations aren't ravaged by AIDS, Sickle Cell Anemia, or any other widespread illness, which is not true for Africa.
I wouldn't say Europeans or East Asians lack any genes. I would say they successfully got rid of the undesirable ones.
perhaps, those who oppose diversity did not do their research of the importance of genetic diversity. Humans who breed within the same gene pool create genetic mutations, which can cause defects in human populations. Cross breeding is necessary from a biological view point. Do research. There are numerous studies on why race preservation is unhealthy and a threat to the human race.
I am so glad my ancestors moved me away from our "African origins". lol. If what you say is true, that Europeans and East Asians have the lowest levels of genetic diversity, than thank goodness for that. Europeans and East Asians have the highest life expectancy on the planet. Our populations aren't ravaged by AIDS, Sickle Cell Anemia, or any other widespread illness, which is not true for Africa.
I wouldn't say Europeans or East Asians lack any genes. I would say they successfully got rid of the undesirable ones.
They have higher life expectancy because of social economic advantages and better nutrition.
Sickle Cell Anemia is common to those in Sub Saharan Africa because of Malaria. Sickle Cell is a product of evolution to combat Malaria.
It's funny that we enjoy Blue Jays that stay looking like BlueJays.....GoldFinches that remain yellow...Hummingbirds that don't look like buzzards.......and yet some want to encourage all humans to look alike and lose other features specific to each.
I suppose that would eliminate prejudice but I have hopes that we may be able to do that eventually because humans are supposed to be so intellectually above other creatures.
While we can appreciate a pink rose produced from a red one and a white one, we still appreciate the red ones and the white ones.Is it so difficult to do that with humans?
But my point is that the OP pointed out that intra-racial breeding leads to genetic mutation. So either way we're screwed, since if we all mix into the same race we'll be back where we started.
Intra racial breeding doesn't lead to genetic mutation. Inter-racial breeding does produce offspring that are larger and healthier than their parents. If you are successful all you are doing is reducing genetic diversity. That's not good as there is too little genetic diversity in the human species anyway. In regards to genetic mutation, it occurs fairly regularly anyway irrespective of the race.
Again, socialists are always pushing this "super human" crap. It didn't work for hitler, it won't work for you either. Besides you cannot "breed out" tribalism from the human race. People will always find a way to seperate ourselves. Could any of us tell the differences of the hutu or tutsi tribes in africa? They were identical in appearance that didn't keep them from killing each other by one million in central africa back in the 90s.
The other concept to which the word tribalism frequently refers is the possession of a strong cultural or ethnic identity that separates one member of a group from the members of another group. This phenomenon is related to the concept of tribal society in that it is a precondition for members of a tribe to possess a strong feeling of identity for a true tribal society to form. The distinction between these two definitions for tribalism is an important one because, while tribal society no longer strictly exists in the western world, tribalism, by this second definition, is arguably undiminished. People have postulated that the human brain is hard-wired towards tribalism due to its evolutionary advantages. See Tribalism and evolution below.
Many tribes refer to themselves with their language's word for "people," while referring to other, neighboring tribes with various epithets. For example, the term "Inuit" translates as "people," but they were known to the Ojibwe by a name 'Eskimo' translating roughly as "eaters of raw meat."[citation needed] This fact is often cited as evidence that tribal peoples saw only the members of their own tribe as "people," and denigrated all others as something less. In fact, this is a tenuous conclusion to draw from the evidence. Many languages refined their identification as "the true people," or "the real people," dehumanizing the other people or simply considering them inferior. In this, it is merely evidence of ethnocentrism, a universal cultural characteristic found in all societies......
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
