No that’s not what I meant. I meant that even if you and you wife are white north american caucasians you genetical differences might be bigger than with you and some black guy from your neighborhood.
If we would divide people to genetical races by some scientific measurements, it could be that you and your wife would be different races.
Science getting political is always a problem. That’s true.
Oh, we definitely are. I’m genetically nordic mostly, and she’s primarily north american indian, Cherokee.
My neices and nephews are mostly all mixed too, between my sisters one daughter being african american/white, and 2 nieces & nephews being white/oriental.
We have a pretty good mix.
This is how it usually goes.
There are some ethnic nationalists in Finland, who claim that everybody else than ethnically Finns should be exported from country.
When you look Finlands history and genetical data we’re all a mix of central- and easter europeans, swedish, russians, samean and whatnot. So what’s ethnically Finn?
In US the ethnic variation is much larger. Most of you have European heritage, but it’s mixed with all sorts of genes around the world.
You know what just occured to me?
If there aren’t any races, then there really isn’t any racism either.
Its just people not liking eachother.
How do you suppose that would go over in the intellectual circles?
Racism is based on false prejudice of race. Simple as that.
Example: I don’t approve values that most islamic cultures in middle east represent. But if I would adopt a baby boy from Iran and raise him as my son, he would not have ”misogynist gene” in him because he is ethnically from there.
But you said yourself there are no races.
There aren’t. Racism thinks there are.
Definition:
the belief that different races possess distinct characteristics, abilities, or qualities, especially so as to distinguish them as inferior or superior to one another.
Uses the word races within the definition.
I’m pretty sure I won this round based on your own premise.
No races = no racism.
Seems pretty clear to me!
We just solved centuries of misdeed and fuckery! Yay!
I don’t think so.
Let me try to explain it one more time:
In racism there are human races, and your race
defines the characteristics of who you are.
Science says there are too much individual variation and too little variation between ethnic groups for defining races.
So it’s racist to say that all latin americans have a poor working morale because they represent an imaginative ”race”.
What would be more accurate way of saying this: latin american culture does not value work highly (I don’t know if this is even true, hahah).
I’ll need to add that your genetics definitely define partly who you are (Every parent with more than one kids can see this), but it’s individual.
This has same logic as no Gods = no religions.
Now it just looks like you want to keep racism as a concept going.
Why would anybody do that?
. Just kidding.
I know why.
Edit: Ah okay, nevermind.
I’ll need to train now, thanks for the discussion!
I did reread one article concerning the subject. It’s in Finnish, so linking it here would be no use. It summarizes the topic really well:
There are races if you don’t stick to one definition. Historically, race has been used to describe ethnic and cultural groups. So the Ancient Romans might refer to the Germanic race, for example.
Yeah. I was talking about biological definition.
It’s the same question as sex (biological) and gender (cultural).
There are cultural definitions of race, but they’re as unclear, hazy and confusing as cultural definitions of gender. Like Roman’s definition of a Roman.
Latin American is a geographical demonym.
You probably got my point anyway.