Existence of race and racism.
 

If race doesn't exist. Then neither does racism.
So why is it that the people who complain most about racism are the ones who also say "we are all the same"?
If we are all the same then how can there be any racism?

Premise 1) Race exists as a sociological entity therefore racism exists.

Premise 2) Race as a genetic construct does not exist because diversity within homo sapiens has not reached a point to sufficiently be divided into sub species.

race is a western concept, but that doesn't mean prejudice exists.


prejudice exists long ago, but not race. race is a new phenomena and is constructed by the west.

There's even racism between the races.

it's more like prejudice, not racism.

What's the difference?

It's prejudice.

Some monoracial countries divided themselves based on skin tone.

There was a point in history that the Irish and Italians weren't considered white.

The consensus seems to be that only "white people" can be racist while everyone else is just "prejudiced". I pointed out earlier today in another thread that everyone is/can be racist/prejudiced and I was repeatedly called a "Nazi" for having this opinion about basic human behavioral patterns that can also be referred to as tribalism. http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...s/rolleyes.gif

Who said it was only white people?

Everyone can be racist, but whites were the ones who institutionalized it(mazims and the like)

Its not a contradiction, racism may exist based on a false categorisation. Is it false categorisation- I dont know. I think races exist, but not just three but probably more, the trinity division is very dodgy to me. It only takes into account skin colour basicallly.

No… Caucasids and Mongolids can both have 'white' skin color; but we are different races.

So that is incorrect. Race is based on phenotype, behavior, and class division/oppression.

---------- Post added 2012-06-11 at 14:36 ----------

That's illogical. If "we are all the same" then race and racism cannot exist.

This proves the irrationality of anti-racist humanists. People divide each-other by groups, races, ethnicities, families, societies, cultures, etc.

People want to include others who are beautiful/strong/good/intelligent and exclude others who are ugly/weak/bad/unintelligent. This seems universal. Each human group/race wants to be "the best" and hold this position of 'superiority' over others. It's inherent in human nature.

"My group is better than yours!" This is sociology.

I think it was Margaret Thatcher who said: you can take out a Black from Africa, but you cannot take out Africa from a Black.

By the way: .

Ok, skin colour and/or shape of eyelids. It is superficial anyway. Its like you grouped all black dogs in one 'race' and all white dogs in white 'race', it would be a bit ridcolous init?

I dont know if 'behaviour' plays a role here, it smells Mary to be honest, I am not sure whether behaviour of village Europeans in 500 AD was much different from village Africans in 500 AD, its about who got civilisation first and so on.

---------- Post added 2012-06-11 at 22:45 ----------

I doubt she said that, but if she did, she lost a lot of respect in my eyes (even though she had none, so its negative value now).

But why is it that you might be this race in this country, but might not be in the next country?

You might be white in Brazil but black in America?
Aren't Indians and Arabs Caucasian? So why is it when Indians are in America they have to check off Asian? And Arabs check off white?

I always thought Turks were classified as white but in Europe I hear they aren't considered so?

In Thatcher's times this was very badly seen, but today Nobel prizes like James Watson talk about the difference of intelligence and behaviour between races straight out. And two things are objective, and I'd like to clarify I'm not racist at all:

1- Pick up some book about Physics, Chemistry, Biology... read it and you will realize is empty of Blacks.

2- There are no countries ruled by a majority of Blacks which had worked. Let's compare Jamaica with New Zealand.

Excusez moi

Are you implying you're not racist but then you're saying black people are stupid? http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...s/rolleyes.gif Go read a history book. I don't appreciate ppl ignoring historical realities and believing bigots like Watson to justify racism. It is this same logic which seeks to attribute a non-black source to ancient African civilizations. I believe if Africa had never been colonized and fair trade existed - the continent would have become far more successful than it is today. I would also like to point out that 7 of the world's 10 fastest growing economies (including Nigeria, Ethiopia, Tanzania and Zambia) are in Africa.

Race does exist, as a sociological concept. Just like "Santa's holiday is Christmas" exists. Racism exists as well.

Not hard.

"Human races" isn't the most scientific concept ever, Biologically, strictly because in Taxonomy, we usually don't further divide species with as little evidence for which we do humans.

Okay, this pocket or population of asshole-us is slightly taller, the rest relatively shorter, this one relatively redder, that yellower, this pocket or family more often have these kinds of eyes, that one, those kinds of faces, and yadda yadda etcetera.

For all you know you could be talking about an organism type that hasn't further genetically diverged in any significant manner, and yet many's pompous stupid asses (I don't mean people who haven't put much thought into it, God bless'em -- they're the best) assume that they have. Of COURSE there's genetic variation, it's the point of sexual-reproduction to not have all clones of self. For the kajillionth time.

And if you say "well yeah, I don't harp on the little stuff like with Europeans and Europeans, just the bigger stuff", you're talking about the same thing on a bigger scale, it's all relative.

No, no... I don't know about biology so I don't say a word by myself. I just listen to experts like Watson (by the way, Nobel prize...).

Anyway, I think the colonitazion of Africa was good, as the colonitazion of Mediterranean lands by Rome was good, because Africans could take advantage of western advances like Industrial Revolution.

http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ilies/wink.gif

By the way, about my last comment. It's best to get into stuff before randomly projecting one's ideas and opinions on to it, or the opinions of others, for that matter. Left or Right. Opinions and ideas can be random.

Kwestos wrote a good example, exampling in a simple manner what I expanded on above.

Edit: Biology wasn't the main focal point of this thread though I guess. As far as I can tell it's general (a genuine question of a person wanting to know why people say what they do in general). Though, I'm guessing thread was started with socio-political stuff in mind / in store maybe.