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.
Let's pretend you were a woman, that you were married, wanted a baby, but your husband was infertile. So you decide to go to a fertility clinic and find a "donor". Would you accept just any donor? Is all sperm equal?
Humans are a byproduct of their DNA, and you get your DNA from your ancestors. Thus you tend to be similar to your ancestors, not only in physical appearance, but in literally everything else, from temperament, to abilities, to intelligence, etc.
If race was only skin color, then an albino African would basically be the same as a European. But in reality, virtually every physical characteristic is different between a European and an African. Not simply the obvious things, like skin color and hair texture, but their muscles, their lungs, how they sweat, the ability to handle heat and cold, how much exercise they need, their dietary needs, how much sleep they need, even the length of gestation(Europeans require 40 weeks, Africans only 39 weeks). In fact, African babies develop much more quickly than white babies, they sit up faster, walk and crawl earlier, get their teeth earlier, they even grow faster.
I hate to even bring up skull shape and size because it'll immediately be dismissed as pseudo-science, but the most important part of your brain is the "prefrontal cortex". Which is at the front of the brain, right behind your forehead. It is strongly associated with socio-economic status.
But because there is so much variance in abilities, even within families, there is going to be significant overlap in the "talents". But what is generally true is that the children of highly-gifted people tend to be less than their parents. It is called the "Regression to the mean".
If you actually want to learn something. Just pick any bodily feature, go to google or some other search engine(because google censors most websites these days) and look up differences by race. I'm sure you've noticed a difference in sports for instance. If you watch the Olympics in the 100-yard dash, you'll notice that all 8 finalists will be black.
Most people don't even think about it. Those who do probably know the difference between fast-twitch and slow-twitch muscles. In any case, Asians tend to be completely absent most sports, and again no one really notices or cares.
Race is a way to classify people by the differences which are observable and measurable between distant and distinct populations. We're not all the same, and race isn't only skin color. The real question is, does it matter?
If race was meaningless then there would be a 50/50 chance that X was better than Y at Z. But in many cases that correlation is over 90%. That small overlap means there is no guarantee. Which means we ought to treat people as individuals where we can. But I don't know if that makes race irrelevant, since we can't always properly gauge the "content of someone's character" in impersonal settings or where snap judgements based on imperfect knowledge must be made. Especially when there are obvious tendencies and probabilities, and the dangers of "betting wrong" could be severe.
It seems a lot of people choose to be idiots in the name of fairness.
It is obvious to me that this is not an impromptu answer . This is something you are at least mildly passionate about and have done a deep internet search about previously . I say all this by no means to insinuate that you are a " racist " which would necessitate " proving " that racial classification of human beings and therefore your personal world view is valid . The only thing in your post that I find concerning is alluding to an ongoing conspiracy to keep this under wraps - " because google censors most websites these days ". By " Most " you mean the websites that do not conform to a George Soros funded leftist agenda I presume.
I glanced over the Pub Med links you put here . All of them do acknowledge their limitations including small sample sizes , self reported " racial " backgrounds , not controlling for things like personal or parental socioeconomic status, childhood exposures, trauma, or health habits . Not to mention , the small differences these studies found ( if these differences actually exist ) , do they really have real world consequences ?
I could go on and on about this but this basically summarizes your position -
Yes , racial differences not only exist but are biologically meaningful . This leads to differences in things like performance in a 100 meter dash or the general socio-economic achievement of a particular " race ". Because of the traumatic history of this concept ( especially in America ) or maybe for more sinister intentions which I shall not write here but you get the idea , the leftist/liberal academic and scientific community tries to either ignore it or keep it under wraps . YOU , personally have had enough of this wussyfying of our society in the name of political correctness and YOU are taking a stand .... Did I miss something ?
I don't necessarily blame you for thinking this way .
If you are still reading , here is my take on this -
Yes . Populations which have historically evolved in vastly different environments on our little blue planet are bound to have some differences . Yes , the vast majority of these differences are superficial meaningless things like skin color , hair texture , thickness of lips etc etc . Most of the supposed " racial differences " we observe in socially categorized populations in contemporary America are due to centuries of unequal treatment which continues today . None of this makes a Sub saharan african a fundamentally different type of Human than a Norwegian . A Norwegian will most likely grow in safer surroundings and eat a more nutritious diet . You put both of these people in a typical middle class American suburb for 3 generations and most of these " racial differences " would vanish .
As I said , I could go on and on and I will stop here.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 24 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,560 posts, read 16,548,014 times
Reputation: 6042
Quote:
Originally Posted by Masterful_Man
The "race is a social construct" and "race doesn't really exist" arguments are pretty common on the political left. So how can the political left support a race based movement, "black lives matter", when the left claims that race doesn't really exist?
How does the left reconcile this contradiction?
Societal constructs are just that, but unless 100% of the population treats them as such and denounces it, you have to live with it (work around it )
I say all this by no means to insinuate that you are a "racist" which would necessitate "proving" that racial classification of human beings and therefore your personal world view is valid.
I'm the most racist person on this forum, and I have no qualms with saying it. But because the word racist has been so hijacked to mean something completely absurd, most people like myself tend to call ourselves "race-realists" or "racialists".
Quote:
Originally Posted by dude5568
The only thing in your post that I find concerning is alluding to an ongoing conspiracy to keep this under wraps - " because google censors most websites these days ". By " Most " you mean the websites that do not conform to a George Soros funded leftist agenda I presume.
Every institution is fundamentally anti-racist. Whether race is real or not, talking about it doesn't solve anything. It just causes problems. The United States is a diverse country, and we do business with the entire world. We are allied with many people who are not white. How could we have won the Cold War without embracing all of humanity?
Google is an international business, not only is it not racist, but it caters to people in every language, every religion, every ethnicity, etc. Corporations have no country, they have no people, they have no culture, and they have no race. Racism is self-limiting, and it wants to tear this country apart. Thus anyone who wants the continued existence of the United States must be opposed to racism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dude5568
You, personally have had enough of this wussifying of our society in the name of political correctness and YOU are taking a stand .... Did I miss something?
In large part I just don't like dishonesty. Though I'm sure my motives align with my worldview. But what are my motives?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dude5568
Most of the supposed " racial differences " we observe in socially categorized populations in contemporary America are due to centuries of unequal treatment which continues today.
When I first came to this website I was a liberal, and there is some truth in what you're saying. People who have low socioeconomic status tend to score poorly on tests. Which causes people like you to say it is because they're poor. But couldn't they be poor because they score poorly on tests?
Your entire theory is self-validating. There is truth in it insofar as environments do have an impact on test scores. But they don't have a sufficient impact. Basically, it is true that wealthy blacks tend to score as well as the average whites on tests. But wealthy whites score that much better than wealthy blacks. The racial gap never actually narrows. Which is why the argument moves from purely environmental factors(nutrition, neighborhoods, schools, etc), to psychological factors(racism, legacy of slavery, trauma from the past, etc), which are so abstract they cannot possibly be measured. They either explain everything or nothing.
One of the things that bothered me when I first started discussing politics was this constant insistence that poverty causes low test scores. I was about as poor as you can get in America, and while I understand that poor people don't necessarily value education(and thus put out far less effort), I struggle to see how I would be "smarter" had I been rich. Nutrition might explain the gap between first-world and third-world countries, but nutrition cannot explain the gap in the United States.
In any case, if blacks were equivalent to Asians cognitively, wouldn't that make them superior to Asians because of their obvious physical advantages?
Again, the question isn't whether there are racial differences, there are, and they are biological and thus innate. The question is, why does it matter? Or in the famous words of Hillary Clinton, "What difference does it make?"
My family is not biologically, cognitively, or behaviorally identical to the white family next door. Acknowledging that doesn't mean anything, it is just true. Moreover, acknowledging a difference doesn't necessarily imply that either family is inferior or superior. Those are value judgements.
I just don't understand why people get so upset about this stuff. The so-called "white-supremacist" will acknowledge Asian achievement, and there is certainly far more Asian-privilege than white-privilege in this country. So what? Should I be angry? Should I assume Asians are somehow identical to whites even though everything points to, not so much? How do we even explain the gap? You obviously can't use a history of racism and trauma. So what is the excuse?
Race is real insofar as distant population groups are not genetically-identical, and not just in regard to the superficial. For some reason we can accept it when it comes to sports/athletics, but everywhere else we deny it and make a million excuses for it. I actually understand why we do it, but I find it cowardly and dishonest.
You remind me of Ezra Klein. You're making the same arguments, because your goal isn't to find out the truth, it is to make excuses. You don't want to know the truth. The truth is uncomfortable and makes everyone angry.
I'm the most racist person on this forum, and I have no qualms with saying it. But because the word racist has been so hijacked to mean something completely absurd, most people like myself tend to call ourselves "race-realists" or "racialists".
Every institution is fundamentally anti-racist. Whether race is real or not, talking about it doesn't solve anything. It just causes problems. The United States is a diverse country, and we do business with the entire world. We are allied with many people who are not white. How could we have won the Cold War without embracing all of humanity?
Google is an international business, not only is it not racist, but it caters to people in every language, every religion, every ethnicity, etc. Corporations have no country, they have no people, they have no culture, and they have no race. Racism is self-limiting, and it wants to tear this country apart. Thus anyone who wants the continued existence of the United States must be opposed to racism.
In large part I just don't like dishonesty. Though I'm sure my motives align with my worldview. But what are my motives?
When I first came to this website I was a liberal, and there is some truth in what you're saying. People who have low socioeconomic status tend to score poorly on tests. Which causes people like you to say it is because they're poor. But couldn't they be poor because they score poorly on tests?
Your entire theory is self-validating. There is truth in it insofar as environments do have an impact on test scores. But they don't have a sufficient impact. Basically, it is true that wealthy blacks tend to score as well as the average whites on tests. But wealthy whites score that much better than wealthy blacks. The racial gap never actually narrows. Which is why the argument moves from purely environmental factors(nutrition, neighborhoods, schools, etc), to psychological factors(racism, legacy of slavery, trauma from the past, etc), which are so abstract they cannot possibly be measured. They either explain everything or nothing.
One of the things that bothered me when I first started discussing politics was this constant insistence that poverty causes low test scores. I was about as poor as you can get in America, and while I understand that poor people don't necessarily value education(and thus put out far less effort), I struggle to see how I would be "smarter" had I been rich. Nutrition might explain the gap between first-world and third-world countries, but nutrition cannot explain the gap in the United States.
In any case, if blacks were equivalent to Asians cognitively, wouldn't that make them superior to Asians because of their obvious physical advantages?
Again, the question isn't whether there are racial differences, there are, and they are biological and thus innate. The question is, why does it matter? Or in the famous words of Hillary Clinton, "What difference does it make?"
My family is not biologically, cognitively, or behaviorally identical to the white family next door. Acknowledging that doesn't mean anything, it is just true. Moreover, acknowledging a difference doesn't necessarily imply that either family is inferior or superior. Those are value judgements.
I just don't understand why people get so upset about this stuff. The so-called "white-supremacist" will acknowledge Asian achievement, and there is certainly far more Asian-privilege than white-privilege in this country. So what? Should I be angry? Should I assume Asians are somehow identical to whites even though everything points to, not so much? How do we even explain the gap? You obviously can't use a history of racism and trauma. So what is the excuse?
Race is real insofar as distant population groups are not genetically-identical, and not just in regard to the superficial. For some reason we can accept it when it comes to sports/athletics, but everywhere else we deny it and make a million excuses for it. I actually understand why we do it, but I find it cowardly and dishonest.
You remind me of Ezra Klein. You're making the same arguments, because your goal isn't to find out the truth, it is to make excuses. You don't want to know the truth. The truth is uncomfortable and makes everyone angry.
What do you think of Indians (from India) who often have skin darker than most American Blacks? A good number of Americans use the term race and skin color interchangeably and I bet half of them couldn't tell a dark skinned Indian from a Black. We are way overepresented in IT, medicine, an at universities yet if we had been here during Jim Crow America, we would have been forced to live in "colored" neighborhoods. If racists like you become mainstream and bring Jim Crow back, would we still be allowed to live and work in predominantly White neighborhoods?
What do you think of Indians (from India) who often have skin darker than most American Blacks? A good number of Americans use the term race and skin color interchangeably and I bet half of them couldn't tell a dark skinned Indian from a Black. We are way overepresented in IT, medicine, an at universities yet if we had been here during Jim Crow America, we would have been forced to live in "colored" neighborhoods. If racists like you become mainstream and bring Jim Crow back, would we still be allowed to live and work in predominantly White neighborhoods?
Firstly, being racist doesn't mean anything, just like being a sexist doesn't mean anything. Are men and women the same? If not, so what?
Secondly, racists want separation. As I said, racism wants to tear countries apart. If racists got their way there would be no United States of America. So all this talk about Jim Crow and white neighborhoods is a waste of time. Jim Crow wasn't what racists wanted, it was a compromise to prevent the country from coming apart from race-war.
As for Indians, I really don't have an opinion about Indians, they're just Indians. Some in the south towards Sri Lanka are really dark. Some in the North closer to the Himalayas are fairly light. So are Indians all the same race? They, like the rest of humanity, are on a spectrum. You could even argue that they are different races, since the caste systems prevented most mixing. Thus creating genetic isolation over a long period of time. If someone said each caste was its own race, who is to say they're wrong? But by doing that all you're doing is making Indians hate each other.
Firstly, being racist doesn't mean anything, just like being a sexist doesn't mean anything. Are men and women the same? If not, so what?
Secondly, racists want is separation. As I said, racism wants to tear countries apart. If racists got their way there would be no United States of America. So all this talk about Jim Crow and white neighborhoods is a waste of time. Jim Crow wasn't what racists wanted, it was a compromise to prevent the country from coming apart from race-war.
As for Indians, I really don't have an opinion about Indians, they're just Indians. Some in the south towards Sri Lanka are really dark. Some in the North closer to the Himalayas are fairly light. So are Indians all the same race? They, like the rest of humanity, are on a spectrum. You could even argue that they are different races, since the caste systems prevented most mixing. Thus creating genetic isolation over a long period of time. If someone said each caste was its own race, who is to say they're wrong? But by doing that all you're doing is making Indians hate each other.
I'm Indian-American and upper middle class America is my culture and country that I identify the most with. I ain't going back to India and I aint living in a Black neighborhood. I am a law-abiding nerdy engineer and most of my friends are either White or second generation South or East Asian.
Race is just another word for skin color.....but oops, we Indians don't get counted towards Black affirmative action quotas even if we are ten shades darker than the African American guy next to us who happens to be half White. Yes, it's only about skin color but we are held to higher standards than Whites when it comes to university admission.
I'm Indian-American and upper middle class America is my culture and country that I identify the most with. I ain't going back to India and I aint living in a Black neighborhood. I am a law-abiding nerdy engineer and most of my friends are either White or second generation South or East Asian.
What is it that you want me to say? I don't think I said anything against you?
In any case, whether race is real or not, the only way the United States can continue to exist is for us to believe it isn't real, and to do what we can to get rid of it(blur the lines).
You seem to want the United States to exist, I don't. That is why I can be a racist and you can't.
Let's pretend you were a woman, that you were married, wanted a baby, but your husband was infertile. So you decide to go to a fertility clinic and find a "donor". Would you accept just any donor? Is all sperm equal?
Humans are a byproduct of their DNA, and you get your DNA from your ancestors. Thus you tend to be similar to your ancestors, not only in physical appearance, but in literally everything else, from temperament, to abilities, to intelligence, etc.
If race was only skin color, then an albino African would basically be the same as a European. But in reality, virtually every physical characteristic is different between a European and an African. Not simply the obvious things, like skin color and hair texture, but their muscles, their lungs, how they sweat, the ability to handle heat and cold, how much exercise they need, their dietary needs, how much sleep they need, even the length of gestation(Europeans require 40 weeks, Africans only 39 weeks). In fact, African babies develop much more quickly than white babies, they sit up faster, walk and crawl earlier, get their teeth earlier, they even grow faster.
I hate to even bring up skull shape and size because it'll immediately be dismissed as pseudo-science, but the most important part of your brain is the "prefrontal cortex". Which is at the front of the brain, right behind your forehead. It is strongly associated with socio-economic status.
But because there is so much variance in abilities, even within families, there is going to be significant overlap in the "talents". But what is generally true is that the children of highly-gifted people tend to be less than their parents. It is called the "Regression to the mean".
If you actually want to learn something. Just pick any bodily feature, go to google or some other search engine(because google censors most websites these days) and look up differences by race. I'm sure you've noticed a difference in sports for instance. If you watch the Olympics in the 100-yard dash, you'll notice that all 8 finalists will be black.
Most people don't even think about it. Those who do probably know the difference between fast-twitch and slow-twitch muscles. In any case, Asians tend to be completely absent most sports, and again no one really notices or cares.
Race is a way to classify people by the differences which are observable and measurable between distant and distinct populations. We're not all the same, and race isn't only skin color. The real question is, does it matter?
If race was meaningless then there would be a 50/50 chance that X was better than Y at Z. But in many cases that correlation is over 90%. That small overlap means there is no guarantee. Which means we ought to treat people as individuals where we can. But I don't know if that makes race irrelevant, since we can't always properly gauge the "content of someone's character" in impersonal settings or where snap judgements based on imperfect knowledge must be made. Especially when there are obvious tendencies and probabilities, and the dangers of "betting wrong" could be severe.
It seems a lot of people choose to be idiots in the name of fairness.
If you look at most powerlifters the best will not be black. But of course you won’t mention that fact.
The same thing with the majority of martial arts greats.
The African continent has some the shortest and smallest statured people on the planet while many of the worlds tallest people are from China.
You just like racist pseudoscience and you don’t like black people.
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.
