Race is a social construct

ATS can do many things. You can even learn something here. Unfortunately ATS has a dark side, which is in everything of course, but here in this forum the extremes of the human psyche coming to light day by day. I'm not talking about all right wing forists here, but there are extremists. The belief in the superiority of the white race. This white race does not exist.

"There are more differences between people of black skin than between people of black and light skin. And there are more differences between so-called Caucasians than between Caucasians and non-caucasians."

The genetic code does not determine 'race'. It is a purely social construct. In the history of modern mankind, 300,000 years ago everything converges somewhere in Africa. Not in a single couple: A network connects all the people who have ever lived on Earth - and that network is coded in the genes. Deciphering these genes has shown that any two people in the world differ from each other in one thousandth of their genomes. So the differences are very small.

"If you think of the human family tree today, the thick branches of the family tree are in Africa, and a small branch, which you find outside Africa, is the non-African. We are often closer related to certain Africans as Europeans or Asians than these Africans are to other Africans."

www.deutschlandfunk.de...:article_id=444263

I am German. But i do not feel superior, even if i wanted to, my girlfriend regularly draws my attention to my faults and weaknesses. Besides, i am not tall and i am not blond. I think most of the people here on ATS wouldn't match Hitler's image of the superior white - Hitler himself was neither physically nor mentally superior.

So what is it about? I personally think that this way of looking at life is on the one hand a protective wall against changes and the foreign and on the other hand an expression of personal weakness and self-hate. As soon as you get to know one of the hated people personally, you suddenly realize that they are not that different from you. And ultimately, the IQ does not decide whether you are a good person. Or does everyone here first ask about the IQ before entering into a friendship or love relationship?

IQ tests carried out in the first two decades of the 20th century showed each time how the IQ of Ashkenazi Jews in the USA was below the average. At the time of the Second World War, however, it was above average. Among children of mizrachim Jews in Israel, the first generation had an average score of 92.8, while the second had an average IQ of 101.3. Records of Chinese Americans showed average scores of 97 in 1948 and 108.6 in 1990, while African Americans closed the gap of 5.5 IQ points to white Americans between 1972 and 2002. The most important IQ theorist of the past 50 years is the New Zealander James Flynn. He found that IQ tests must become more demanding with each generation if an average of 100 is to be maintained. He found that average IQ scores in 1900, measured by today's standards, were around 70.

What has changed has nothing to do with genetics. Instead, people today are more often confronted with abstract logic, which is measured in IQ tests. Some populations encounter it more often than others, which also explains why their IQ scores differ. Flynn showed that the different average values of populations can be explained entirely by external influences. Despite the overwhelming evidence against her, racial profiling remains an integral part of the views of the U.S. Old Right, which they continue to use as a political battering ram for their small state agenda. Those who believe that the poor are poor because they were born stupid do not need much imagination to extend the thesis to entire populations affected by poverty.

Stefan Molyneux, a media star of the Old Right, once remarked in an interview with Nicholas Wade that different social consequences are a result of innate IQ values of different races - for example, the high IQ of Ashkenazi Jews and the lower IQ of blacks. Wade responded that prejudice played only a "small and diminishing" role in the social consequences among blacks. He then promptly condemned the "wasted development aid" for African countries.

Something must be done to counter these ideas. Not because they are "politically incorrect", but because they are wrong: The racial theory is simply bad science. More precisely, it is not a science at all. The alternative - one whose origin really lies in science - involves a broader concept of race. One that sees humanity as the only race in which some sections of the population are among the permanent losers. These are changing in a world where genes are being shared faster than ever as travel becomes easier and easier. Despite huge cultural, environmental and economic differences between these permeable populations, we still find the full range of humanity in each and every one of us: cruelty and goodness, cruelty and evil, madness and reason, stupidity and ingenuity.

www.zeit.de...

a reply to: oloufo

Um.. Yeah... I'm just going to go for it. You have chosen to speak for all of ATS and I guess people in general, but you should really speak for yourself.

I'm not disagreeing with you about the frivolity of IQ and the concept of race and all that, but you claim that ATS has a dark side and that it's got racists.

Well, who are the racists? Can you point them out? Or are you of the mindset that all white people are racists?

I really want to know what compelled you to type this up?

You could have posted your message without the preface addressing ATS as having white supremacists. But you have. So now you should probably point them out.

It has nothing to do with race. Its all about primitive tribalism. You can see the same thing happen with opposing football teams, opposing political parties, & competitive corporations. Tribalism is a part human nature. Tribalism is as common as breathing. Both are ingrained in our DNA. Everyone is a member of some sort of tribe, which one considers superior to other tribes, whether your a Chevy or Ford person, Apple or Android, Republican or Democrat, gay or straight, white or Black, etc.. Tribalism is a normal part of human nature & should not be confused as a social construct.

a reply to: AutomateThis1

Dude there was a thread the like two days ago that I just watched progress to the point that the members I always suspected of being racist showed up.
And if you can’t see it than that’s on you man.

Great OP btw

On average people are all similar
The normal distribution curve however reveals differences in the extremities.
On average, the extremities have large effects on outcomes.



Racism is a social construct, that no race has a monopoly over.

Those who consider others as 'inferior' seem inferior in a certain metric.

The most admiral trait of those who are indeed superior, is humility without deference.
The most admiral trait of those who are indeed 'inferior' is to strive to be better by 'standing on the shoulders of giants'

Those who act on emotion in this topic, are dangerous.

Those who wish to 'flatten the curve', present a problematic limit to the forward flow of civilization.

If it where a scientific fact that different capability are heritable, even within a 'race',
Where would the problems in fact arise.?

If parents spoil one child over another, what is the determination in 'equality' of outcome.?

a reply to: AutomateThis1

Don't wanna drift the conversation away from OP but I've made a thread addressing the 'alt - right' movement in the US being censored on social media, and it turned into a big ol pow wow in attempts to defend literal outright white supremacists and many members trying as hard as possible to disassociate themselves from said far right leaning groups while defending their hate speech. I'm gonna admit, part of my post was a social experiment and it worked.

OP is gonna be in for a good topic of discussion, or most people won't even bite. I like how they have addressed the whole IQ test nonsense that a lot of 'modern woke racists' as I call them try to push to keep the narrative alive. It's a constant goal post moving like the creationists and zealous religious nut jobs.

a reply to: JBIZZ

There's a lot of people who think Sub - Saharan African's aren't even humans, and that black people are a subspecies of humans. It's gone beyond tribalism, the realm of science and evolutionary ideas and miss-truths are being used to attempt to prove one skin color or 'phenotype' is superior to the other.

a reply to: oloufo

Race is a social construct. I used to teach this in my Univ classes. Below is what I taught in my classes until I retired, it is backed up with lots of science and biological studies, hard science. No one race is superior.

We all came out of Africa, everyone has DNA from the same woman way way way back in time.

Then we migrated.

This is where human beings became like dog breeds. Actually race as a concept is best defined as dog breeds. All dogs are dogs descended from wolves. But due to in-breeding became everything from a hairless chihuahua to a long haired mastiff. But a dog is a dog regardless of breed. Every breed has throw offs or genetic changes, dogs that look different and breeders take advantage of those differences to create new breeds.

So do people. These are biological families that show how this can and does happen.



I had a student in Hawaii who was positive she was adopted because she had blonde hair and fair skin while all her siblings with royal Hawaiian blood and had brown skin and black hair. She was convinced until 10 years later her blond haired fair skinned brother was born of the same parents. This happens.

Long ago when races developed the majority of people stayed within the same 20 miles or so of their "group" for their entire lives. Yes some people migrated, but in the same group. Yes some travelled, but they were the exception rather than the rule.

In the far north people with dark skin did not get enough vitamin D and tended to die off because of problems related to this. So skin became fairer and fairer. As they inbreed for many many generations the population began to look alike with fair skin and fairer hair.

In Africa, fair skinned children burned badly and tended to die off because of problems related to this.

In places like Hawaii, "tanned" like skin color allowed the vitamin D to absorb and protected from sunburn.

You get the idea. As people inbreed and inbreed, characteristics like eye folds, and lip shapes etc like dog breeds, people in the same inbreed group began to look more and more alike.

Everyone knows someone in their racial group with thin lips and fat lips, with wide noses and thin noses. This shows even within racial groupings that there are genes for all the "non-characteristic" traits of racial groups.

Inbreeding unfortunately, also causes genetic defects to spread and thus cause the "typical" issues we see with each racial group. Like we see with dog breeds who have typical genetic issues. This leads to basically a more genetically unhealthy group.


One other thing I used to teach which is TRUE: The healthiest and genetically strongest people are those of mixed race. This too is like dogs, mixed breed dogs are the healthiest and genetically strongest type of dog. So the "superior", if you will, type of human being is one of mixed race, not one belonging to any single racial group.

The more "pure breed" a human is the less genetically healthy or strong they are. The more "mixed race" a human is the genetically stronger and healthier they are.

So if you think you are superior because you are mostly black, the "original" color, like Nick Cannon and one of the leaders of BLM claim is true, you are wrong, you are genetically weaker. If you think you are superior because you are very fair with blonde hair, you are wrong, you are genetically weaker. I hope I have insulted everyone who claims superiority due to race, because in reality and on a biological level you are inferior to those of mixed race and the more mixed race one is the more they are genetically superior.

I disagree with the OP in that "races" (socially and genetically) do exist, like dog breeds exist. White people can be compared to Maltese dogs who are normally white. Black people can be compared to Pinschers who are normally black. But both are dogs and they are the result of inbreeding, and have definable genetic characteristics that have developed over time. However, neither is superior genetically to the other or to any other race. I want people to think of themselves genetically like dogs who are all descended from wolves, in that no one breed is better than the other - and to realize the more pure you are the less genetically and biologically healthy you are. The more variety of races a person has within them the genetically and biologically stronger they are. So the truly genetically inferior are those who can trace their lines as far back as possible to the exact same race, the racially pure, if you will.

The word 'Superior' should be reserve for mayonnaise.
People have different capabilities.
Red heads get sun burned easily and look, either too white or too red.

Race, is a Taxonomical categorisation for humans.
Bread is not.

Iq tests are racist and biased to white culture


a reply to: oloufo

There are multiple intelligences.

Germans eh.

a reply to: oloufo

Not to discount or minimize anything in your OP, but it seems to me that race is what it is... and for the most part, is shallow and superficial and petty.

I think the greater point to be made is that racial supremacy is a social construct. Especially under our Constitutional Republic in which every single one of us is equal under the law and Nature's laws -- whatever our individual strengths and weaknesses.

Our challenge isn't to convince people that they aren't better than anyone else... our challenge is to ensure that no one has power over anyone else, and that we are all free to pursue our dreams and achieve our goals without undue interference or influence from anyone else.

I don't care if someone thinks they're better than me for whatever reason... they can think what they will. (And, of course be wrong!) BUT they need to stay the hell out of my way and leave me be to live my best life according to MY standards. No one else's.

Here it is again.

Placing people into categories to show equality.

Hmmm 🤓

Maybe it has more to do with Neanderthal percentage than anything else? 😎

This premise is nothing more than a tool for social manipulation and behavioral control. It's promulgated by adherents of "soft sciences" and flies in the face of studies and data compiled by geneticists and biologists that in modern times have been cowed into silence.

Interestingly, the bulk of your post centers on "intelligence tests", which by their very nature can be skewed and adapted to present practically any conclusion that administrators of the test wish to reach. Poking holes in IQ tests is set up as an easy victory for the "soft scientists" and their sycophants.

You don't even need to get down to the nitty-gritty details of gene encoding, phenotyping, and cellular research; just trust your own eyes. Line up residents of North America, South America, Africa, the Arctic, Asia, the Pacific islands in a room. Yes, yes, get past all of the simple-minded banter about all being homo sapiens, all having language, social norms, blah blah blah. What do your eyes show you. They all. Look. Different. They have different skin color, eye color, hair color, facial features. Now if we can expand upon our thought experiment, and grow the room to sufficient size to hold enough subjects from each of the above category that comprise a reasonable statistical sampling of the entire human race, you'll discover even more differences beyond the superficial ones mentioned above. When we meticulously catalog physical characteristics, height, weight, dimensions of the skeletal system, blood type, prevalence/absence of certain pathologies/diseases. and plot the data on a graph, we'll invariably arrive at a picture that resembles a Normal Distribution, a.k.a Bell Curve. Plotting all of the data across the different races and applying the standard deviation, a picture emerges that is a stark rebuttal to your thesis. When we dig into the statistical slices in our graph, the areas in our graph don't neatly "line up". Why?? How can this be?! It's because....

Race is a //physical// construct.

Who are you going to trust: the "soft scientists", or your lyin' eyes? This is not debatable; it is a consequence of the physical reality of science, math and biology.

But now comes the really important part, it's the penultimate goal that the "soft science" peddlers wish to arrive at, and their credibility would be immensely improved if they would dispense with the "Race is social, maaan" fiction and stick to the science:

There's absolutely NOTHING intrinsically "right" or "wrong" about BEING PHYSICALLY DIFFERENT

Having more or less melanin, dark or light shaded eyes, tall or short, certain physical characteristics, is completely orthogonal to some kind of judgement or "value proposition" for a sub-categorization of the human race.

When we start ascribing subjective "goodness" or "badness" to the very real divergent physical traits of the Human races, THAT is when we're delving into the realms of "racism" and racial [super|infer]iority.

It's time to embrace the truth, facts and science: we are all of us among the Human races, "different". We need to trust one another to accept this natural condition, and live with the consequences of Darwin and natural evolution, without pride or prejudice.

Having the "soft science" acolytes preach a fictitious gospel about the nature of race as a social construct is counter-productive, and simply erodes their credibility. We need to all grow up, accept the science of things, and learn to value and respect one another, without the feeble attempts at propaganda and groupthink.

I think it boils down to.
'all things being equal, i deserve what you have based on my skin color.
and based on yours you had better be ok with that, or else'

"Race is a social construct you freaking white supremacist!"

-OP


And here I thought we might actually get a quality discussion.

originally posted by: rom12345
I think it boils down to.
'all things being equal, i deserve what you have based on my skin color.
and based on yours you had better be ok with that, or else'

This is what the Chinese government thinks. That the Chinese are the most superior race and that is why they are systematically destroying "inferior" races within their borders, through forced sterilization and actually killing them.

They have become the Hitler's of the modern age. (Not the average Chinese person, but the Chinese government)

They are doing all they can world wide to dominate the world because they think that the Chinese are smarter than everyone else and their race is superior to all other races.

Sadly, companies are bowing to this fascist and racist government, like the NBA and other major organizations are bowing to the demands of the Chinese government.

originally posted by: The2Billies

originally posted by: rom12345
I think it boils down to.
'all things being equal, i deserve what you have based on my skin color.
and based on yours you had better be ok with that, or else'

This is what the Chinese government thinks. That the Chinese are the most superior race and that is why they are systematically destroying "inferior" races within their borders, through forced sterilization and actually killing them.

They have become the Hitler's of the modern age. (Not the average Chinese person, but the Chinese government)

They are doing all they can world wide to dominate the world because they think that the Chinese are smarter than everyone else and their race is superior to all other races.

Sadly, companies are bowing to this fascist and racist government, like the NBA and other major organizations are bowing to the demands of the Chinese government.

The Chinese are in fact the Huns, a very homogenous gene pool

originally posted by: oloufo

The genetic code does not determine 'race'. It is a purely social construct.

Indeed.
At times when time scanning Pangea,
you can see Central Pangea and maybe one larger then Australia island and a couple little micro islands.

This then leaves a larger open ocean habitat to grow larger sea creatures that can threaten land creatures.

These larger sea creatures would slowly of pushed what ever indigenous large and smaller primates towards Central Pangea back then especially if there were sea to land creatures that could live on land temporarily to hunt and primarily exist in the sea or large ocean.

As time moves ahead that safety zone Central Pangea would naturally develop with the present indigenous beings - animals of all types including the ancestors who carried the DNA for current humans as they naturally avoided the Pangean Coast in order to survive. There may have been life on that larger then Australia island and on the micro islands. The micro islands supporting avian/large insect life primarily and the larger then Australia supporting avian/amphibious and reptile life with its enclosed lake and river systems and possibly some primate life that managed to end up and survive there.

I guess what 1 is getting at is at some point long ago it is true racial division didn't exist as it would of been counter productive to survival.

Now in this current time line 🤔that threat which demanded many of the on land human DNA producing ancestors to concentrate primarily on survival is nonexistent... Kind of.
So in these current time lines many can concentrate on less important things like racism and divide because we do not remember how important it was long ago for our ancestors to stick together and work together in order to just survive. Sadly as president Reagan said
basically outside threats can pull humanity together. As did outside threats pull Ancestors of humanity together long ago.

I wonder if the more division is chosen if threats arise as well to pull us back as 1...

Racial division is petty low mindedness...
Some of us know others don't know yet.

a reply to: oloufo

Humans are humans.


Once everyone gets that and stops trying to classify, sort, and create special categorizations to separate and create hatred the better.

Now, environment, morels, and national cultures / norms are a totally different topic.

a reply to: oloufo

Race isn't even a biological term. We don't use it for any other species. Why is it humans are divided into races based on geography any way.?Technically we should be using a term like distinct morphological subgroup, or phenotypic variation. Race is a useless term that means nothing anyway.