anti-fascism.org

[Andrew]

Yeah, but some people use the terms like "the human race" [will be destroyed], when it should be human species. (unless they are talking collectivly as in every race). but whatever sounds better, and sometimes it can be interchangeable, but is not 100% correct.

Are we somewhat getting into "breeds"? like this and that dog breed as in race? but they are from the same species? :-

[Mahdi]

Btw, if that's "just one persons opinion on what race means", then you are in the wrong by telling Kirov he's wrong, because you acknowledge both as being legitimate definitions of the word "race".

[Sardauker-Kirov]

I don't see white people as white people and I don't see black people as black people, to make this clear.

I don't give a damn what for colour they have.

A human is a human in my eyes, I am a human, Africans and Asians are human.

If a human had two horns on his head(WOOHOO)then I would call him a 'species' the fact is, everybody looks like eachother with slight cranium or facial signatures.

So what's next? Cats are different species too if their colours don't match?

[Andrew]

Not different species, but different races.

A shitzu dog is quite different from a rottwieler dog. They are of course different breeds.(maybe not races I dont know)

ooo, look what some definitions of breed is:

1. A special lineage

2. A special kind of domesticated animals within a species

3. Half-caste offspring of parents of different races (especially of white and Indian parents)

4. A lineage or race of people

[Acriku]

Lol, I'm quoting dictoinaries and university textbooks written by high profile psychologists, sociologists, historians, and genetic scientists, and you say I'm wrong because you can find a quote from a buisnesses website that caters to high school students?

Good work, that'l change my mind ::)

You only quoted one thing, where are these "psychologists, sociologists, historians, and genetic scientists" quotes?

Btw, if that's "just one persons opinion on what race means", then you are in the wrong by telling Kirov he's wrong, because you acknowledge both as being legitimate definitions of the word "race".

Not really, as I think your person's opinion is wrong, and my person's opinion is right. I also think Andrew is correct.

I don't see white people as white people and I don't see black people as black people, to make this clear.

I don't give a damn what for colour they have.

A human is a human in my eyes, I am a human, Africans and Asians are human.

I see them as human beings as well, but I also see them for what they are, and what I am, I am white and some people are black. I'm not in denial of it, atleast.

Cats are different species too if their colours don't match?

Do you know what a species is? Obviously not.

[Andrew]

Cats are different species too if their colours don't match?

Do you know what a species is? Obviously not.

I'm quite certain he is being sarcastic in that context Acriku. Well there is such a thing as race, just look up racism. There are different human races.

[Mahdi]

"You only quoted one thing, where are these "psychologists, sociologists, historians, and genetic scientists" quotes?"

All say the same thing, You want names and titles of there books?

Psychology, David G. Meyer

Sociological theory, David Ashley and David Orenstein

Sociology in out times, Diana Kendall, Jane Murray, Rick Linden

Merrim-Webster Dictionary

How's that for a start? A wee bit more knowledgable than a buisnesses website designed to cater to high school students, ya think? Oh wait, you already gave up trying to defend that.

"Not really, as I think your person's opinion is wrong, and my person's opinion is right. I also think Andrew is correct."

Changing your tune already?

Btw, according to your definition of race, technically I belong to a white race, a blue eyed race, a brown haired race, there's a sickle-cell anemia race, a race of turner syndrome sufferers, a race of alzheimers patients, a race of tall people, short people, etc, etc, etc.

All of those are "groups of organisms within the same species that are genetically self-sustaining and isolated geographically or temporally during reproduction".

Your idea of "race" is a bastardization of the actual meaning, no different than 60 years ago when simply being a citizen of a country meant you were of that countries race. Churchill even made a fairly famous comment about the "American Race". Do you believe that because someone passes a test they all of the sudden switch races from Russian to American? No? Why not? It's got someone famous saying so, which is your only basis for your definition of race.

[Andrew]

Another definition of race.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=race

Usage note:

The notion of race is nearly as problematic from a scientific point of view as it is from a social one. European physical anthropologists of the 17th and 18th centuries proposed various systems of racial classifications based on such observable characteristics as skin color, hair type, body proportions, and skull measurements, essentially codifying the perceived differences among broad geographic populations of humans. The traditional terms for these populationsCaucasoid (or Caucasian), Mongoloid, Negroid, and in some systems Australoidare now controversial in both technical and nontechnical usage, and in some cases they may well be considered offensive. (Caucasian does retain a certain currency in American English, but it is used almost exclusively to mean “white” or “European” rather than “belonging to the Caucasian race,” a group that includes a variety of peoples generally categorized as nonwhite.) The biological aspect of race is described today not in observable physical features but rather in such genetic characteristics as blood groups and metabolic processes, and the groupings indicated by these factors seldom coincide very neatly with those put forward by earlier physical anthropologists. Citing this and other pointssuch as the fact that a person who is considered black in one society might be nonblack in anothermany cultural anthropologists now consider race to be more a social or mental construct than an objective biological fact.

So yes you could be right Mahdi about all those different things described as being a race, although those are kind of more specific, and not originating from a certain geographical area. :-X

Maybe this thread should be split, as we seem to be debating about the existence of race?

This seems to be going nowhere for everyone. :(

[Mahdi]

Nice quote Andrew, it shows both sides of the coin. I say we agree to disagree as this isn't going anywhere.

[Acriku]

Just want to say one thing:

Btw, according to your definition of race, technically I belong to a white race, a blue eyed race, a brown haired race, there's a sickle-cell anemia race, a race of turner syndrome sufferers, a race of alzheimers patients, a race of tall people, short people, etc, etc, etc.

As long as the offspring always have blue eyes, which they don't, brown hair, which they don't, sickle-cell anemia, which they don't, etc. Genetically self-sustaining, Mahdi, remember.

[Mahdi]

Study your genetics Acriku. They are genetically self sustaining as long as you're selective with who you reproduce with, same with skin colour. A black mom might not have a black kid if the father is white. Genetically, and if you go back far enough in time, geographically, skin colour and hair colour are the same deal.

[Acriku]

Obviously a race mating with another race is not going to be self-sustained genetically. I meant within the "race."

[Mahdi]

Obviously a race mating with another race is not going to be self-sustained genetically. I meant within the "race."

Did you not read my post? Eye colour, hair colour, sickle-cell anomie, etc. etc, are all genetically self-sustaining. If you and your ancestors all have blue eyes and you reproduce with someone who's family all has blue eyes then your children are going to all have blue eyes. Jsut like skin colour, it depends on which chromosone you get is recessive, and which is dominant. In the case of blue eyes, they are both recessive, but both family's pass down the recessive gene, so the child will have blue eyes. blue eye's is one race, brown eyes is another race, according to your own definition of the term. Even Andrew acknowledges this.

[Acriku]

I just don't see a brown-eyed person mating with a brown-eyed person will get you a brown-eyed person for all offspring, and all of the offspring's offspring, and so on. Also, are they all geographically isolated? If so, then yes I would agree. If we come upon a population of animals geographically isolated with all having the same-colored eyes due, caused by their location, then yes that would be a separate race. But what I got from what you were saying, is that a person who has blue eyes is of the blue-eyes race. There, I believe, wasn't an isolation of a population with all blue eyes that mingled with other colored eyes to get what we have today. To elaborate, there has always been a mixing of eye color in our ancestor's mating, unless I'm mistaken.

[Mahdi]

Whether you see it or not, it's a scientific truth. Your ignorance of a fact does not disprove that it is a fact.

Geographically isolated? They were at one time, however thousands of years of intermarriage with the other eye colour/hair colour races has largely ended this, but not entirly. How many blonde Italians do you know? They're hair is almost always black. How many blonde Irish citizens? Nearly always red. How many Scandanavians have you heard being described as "grey-eyed"? Nearly always blue. The few that don't have, in there past, had none black/red hair/blue eyes in there ancestory.

Also, according to your definition, being geographically isolated (which they were at one point and still are in many areas, just to a lesser extent) being geographically isolated is not even a requirment, it is an option. The other being temporary isolation during reproduction. How many people do you watch get it on in an attempt to have a kid?

Your definition of a race: Group of organisms (all of the same species) (check) that is genetically self-sustaining (check) and isolated geographically (check) or temporally during reproduction (check).

[Acriku]

So, you do agree with the definition I have contributed?

[Mahdi]

No, I'm saying that according to your definition everything from gentic desease to eye colour is a differnet race.

"What race do I belong to? Well, I belong to the white race, the blue eye race, the brown hair race, the tall race, the sickle-cell anexia race, the alzheimers race...."

Don't you find that a little ridiculous? That's what you are saying.

[Caid Ivik]

Maybe you hit the point. White racists think about blackness as a visualisation of an ultimate disease, sign of hard crippling which makes you "unfit" to their view on society. Like a blister. Color itself isn't problem itself, but they think it shows them, that inside their target is. Semantical view, you know...