[PaulCameron]

Question: Are ethnicities (nations) socially constructed? Or is it a timeless phenomenon?

Background: I was involved in a heated debate the other day with my friend regarding the existence of ethnicities. The position I held was that ethnicities are rarely something else than social constructions, my argument revolved explicitly around the notion that ethnic groups are produced and reproduced by social circumstances such as war, economic-status, religion, etc.

This production is moreover actuated, or could also be prevented by the geographical location of the region, and as an example I used Middle East. This region has been the home for various cultures, kingdoms and battlefields; in addition, it is also an easy accessed region, and compounded with that it provides new emigrants with fertile landscape, it is also an attractive region.

Wouldn’t it therefore, in the light of these factors be adventurous to claim that these factors have not affected the genetic composition of the region? I mean, kingdoms have vanished, and people who previously adhered to that culture are now integrated into the new culture?

I know that “elite dominance and language replacement” argue that a language and culture replacement does not necessarily need to result in a genetic replacement, but if we consider Middle East and the various wars, slave-trade, etc., that have pervaded the region, it would not be far-fetched to claim that language replacements have also been followed by genetic replacement particularly in Middle East.

For example, I have a totally different mtDNA and Y-DNA than other Kurds I have shared with, paralleled with that I share higher levels of my genome with, for instance, an Englishman, than some Kurds, wouldn’t it be correct then to say that ethnicities are only constructions? At least they way we perceive them?

[new-nickname-zanovo]

Neither. Ethnic groups are the natural result of people separating from each other at some point.

[D6b2v1HA]

Neither. Ethnic groups are the natural result of people separating from each other at some point.

Or joining together. English people are the result of Angles, Saxons, Celts etc interbreeding and losing their individual cultures.

[dayclaccikere]

In some cases, and to some extent overall, I would say that ethnicities are socially constructed. It is mostly just a matter of identity, and views do vary about who belongs to which ethnicity sometimes. Some think that you have to be "full-blooded", while others think that "neighbours" who grew up among them are fine as well. Then there are those who like to think that anyone who was born in their country belongs to them.

We have of course the Latin American countries, and the African Americans, where genetic ancestry varies among the individuals within the groups, but they still identify as certain ethnicites.

[BostonDoctorTTT]

There are nations which =/= the ethnie(s) that comprise them. The survival rate for such nations is questionable, maybe this is for another topic?

The ideal of an ethnie begins with a separation, escalates over some indefinite period of time to a practical social construction respecting certain geospatial contexts and finally culminates in special kind of cluster which encompasses close genetic, cultural and linguistic affinity, outliers notwithstanding. The time interval for this process depends partly on the motivation and resources of the founding entity. Ethnies are emerging and subducting as time progresses.

[22CreessGah]

Ethnicity is the fruit of self-awareness of cultural specificities, and recognition of each other.

Or joining together. English people are the result of Angles, Saxons, Celts etc interbreeding and losing their individual cultures.

Or the strongest subjugating others as happened here in Sweden (Svears).

[Pheboasmabs]

Hispanic and latino are perfect examples of completely manufactured ethnic groups.

[yasalaioqe]

Ethnic grouping is natural and instinctive.

When a man goes to jail then he almost always joins a group of his own race, and of his own ethnicity, for protection. This immediately demonstrates that 'Trust' is intuited upon those who look most similar. The best example of this, is, seeing an identical twin. Presume that you had an identical twin, but were separated at birth. If you later saw "yourself" walking toward you as an adult. You would become surprised, and probably stop that person, to meet your "copy". Regardless, you are drawn to the identical appearance (of yourself). Same with "Racism" and "Ethnicism".


Furthermore, the "family unit" automatically proves Ethnic grouping. As families genetically begin with biological identity (mother + father = child) ~ trust begins on a familial level. Perhaps the only arguments against this are, adoption, and abandonment. One most intuitively trusts his own family.

Thus Ethnic/Racial groupings are immediate extensions of family.

At bottom, it's always about trust, often based upon (sometimes false) Stereotypes.

Again, people automatically presume that because people look similar, or the same (identical twin example), that they should become trusted. No matter that this maybe Irrational; people still act on these principles.

[TZtrDuso]

I think they are partially constructed due to the statement 'we are bound to those we hate'. The enemy provides cohesion for the social group under stress. Because it is representations of the self that are being projected, there must be recognized kinship at an unconscious level. The familiar enemy remains feared - but familiar - strangers. Thus those groups from which we most passionately distinguish ourselves are those groups from which we most separably bound. We end where they begin.

The identity-creating process results in the world being divided among groups with varying degrees of animosity, escessive self-regard, and fear of others. We need enemies to keep our treasured - and idealized - selves intact. Enemies, therefore are to be cherished, cultivated and preserved; if we lose them. our self-definition is endangered and our cherished group is threatened. Hence the reason why Turks and Greeks passionately dislike each other like the Trojan War has never ended.