CDZ What is Race? What is 'White Race'? Where do These Concepts Come From?

[JimBowie1958]

I have meant to try this thread for a long time, but something always seems to happen to prevent that. Maybe that was a good thing, I dont know, but I finally have a few moments so I thought I would go ahead and give it a shot.

First, there are two concepts to get nailed down first.

1. Classification of objects is for the purposes of function, mostly, and tends to sort things based on function and behavior. If we categorize vehicles we tend to sort them by categories like 'truck', 'sedan', 'van', coups, etc, as these are reflective of the function, purpose and the intended behavior of the vehicle buyer. The color of the vehicles paint job would be a latter consideration normally.

2. Gray scale is a continuum of gradual change, with few if any white pixels and nearly all black at one end to the other end with almost entirely white pixels. As o ne transitions from one end to the other there seems to be a clear gradual change of the scales darkness, but if you bent the page and placed the two ends side by side you see a contrast that might suggest a basic essential difference that is not really there.

That out of the way, we have to look at the simple fact that racial 'science' has never been much more than a pseudo science. While one can use scientific methods to ID a skeleton by racial criteria, the criteria itself is arbitrary and based on little more than geographical location.

There is also no clear delineation between races, how many races there are or what ethnic groups belong to which. Most people recognize the three basic races, Caucasoid, Negroid and Mongoloid, but few realize that there are other categorizations as well, such as the Polynesians who some consider Caucasian and others consider Mongoloid and yet others consider an entirely separate race. Some say that there are seven races, in addition to the previous three we would also have Amerindians, Australoids, Polynesians, and Dravidians.

Now the term 'white' was in the old days used to mean northern Caucasians, and yet few would say today that the Greeks and Italians are not white. Certainly the US Census bureau does not consider Italians to be nonwhite. And yet many consider Latin Americans to be a strange new race called 'Hispanic' though they are almost entirely Caucasian and Mestizo and the later has been long considered a subgroup of Caucasian.

The racialist 'Identity Politics' ideology uses racial categories to define its constituent groups and they like to split anyone away from the majority population by any means available, so if you are white Hispanic, then you are not white, just Hispanic. If you are half white half black like Obama, then you are black. To them you are anything you prefer to be, even a different species, if that is what your heart tells you that you are.

But there is nothing that essentially defines humanity along racial lines. It is just ethnicity grouped together into arbitrary categories, like whether Dravidians are Caucasian, Polynesian or their own separate race.

It seems to me that it is ethnicity and culture that most defines who we are by how we behave according to the things we have been taught to believe from childhood. Not what is in your DNA.

 

[Arianrhod]

Odd no one's responded to this thread, given how obsessive the "race" discussion is in the other forums, or maybe that's the point. You raise a lot of good questions, and I hope someone can take up the challenge.

The way I see it, all humans are tribal, and in our common prehistory, the tribe needed to be protected not only from animal predators, but from any other humans who appeared "different." Some of us have evolved past that, others haven't.

That's the undercurrent, IMO.

 

[320 Years of History]

I'm not sure if this thread's title question seeks an answer derived from contemporary race theory, or whether it's looking for answers that issue mostly from cultural anthropology. If the former, you may find this helpful: Critical Race Theory: An Introduction. The suggested readings at the end of that document provide additional sources of information, as will this. If the latter, you may find this helpful: THE HISTORY OF THE IDEA OF RACE… AND WHY IT MATTERS. There again, the bibliographic reference list at the end of the paper will point you to additional sources of credible and cogent information.

Lastly, you may care to look over the various race/ethnicity documents noted on Questia: Cultures and Ethnic Groups. Questia is an comprehensive tool for locating excellent sources of accurate and well informed thought on myriad topics. It's among my "go to" sites when I seek unbiased, critically reviewed/accepted, and well founded scholarly information about a topic that interests me.

Sidebar:

FWIW, It's been my experience over the past decade that the easiest way to find a copy of a document noted in scholarly publications is to (1) copy the document author's last name and document title, (2) paste both into my browser's address bar (or Google search field), (3) type PDF after it, and (4) hit <Enter>.

It quite often produces precisely what I'm looking for. Occasionally, the document sought is a book rather than peer-reviewed paper. RE: books, it's "hit or miss." Sometimes a book is available for free on the WWW, sometimes it's not, on other occasions, it's partially available, in which case one must scan through what is available to see if (1) the limited content provided is given with enough context for one to know what is the point of its inclusion in the book, and (2) whether the content provided is indeed what one is contextually and literally in line with what one is looking for.

For example, if one is searching for information about, say Hitler, one may come across an excerpt from another person's autobiography wherein they describe his as being affable, concerned about the wellbeing of people in general, and generous to a fault. If, however, unbeknownst to the reader of the excerpt, the book's context and purpose is to offer a factual retelling of one person's interactions with Hitler when they were both adolescents, or in one-on-one non-political situations, the reader of that snippet would be grossly remiss to use that as a basis for asserting that the world misconstrued Adolph Hitler's personality and intentions.​

End of sidebar.

 

[dani67]

white or ..... is bullshit .

1: asian
2:african
3: aryan (german-iranian-.......)
4:nordic
5:semitic ( arabs- jewish-..... )
6: mix

 

[320 Years of History]

As for the matter of the ethnic/racial identity descriptor we think of as "white," you may want to look here: "Whiteness Studies: The New History of Race in America."

 

[JimBowie1958]

white or ..... is bullshit .

1: asian
2:african
3: aryan (german-iranian-.......)
4:nordic
5:semitic ( arabs- jewish-..... )
6: mix

I find it interesting that you distinguish between germans and nordic ethnicities.

Why? I have read some about them and I see very little difference between them. Many of the German tribes came from Scandinavia, like the Saxons and the Goths.

IT seems that the main difference is that the Germans crossed the Baltic Sea before the 'nordic' ethnicities did.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I'm not sure if this thread's title question seeks an answer derived from contemporary race theory, or whether it's looking for answers that issue mostly from cultural anthropology. If the former, you may find this helpful: Critical Race Theory: An Introduction. The suggested readings at the end of that document provide additional sources of information, as will this. If the latter, you may find this helpful: THE HISTORY OF THE IDEA OF RACE… AND WHY IT MATTERS. There again, the bibliographic reference list at the end of the paper will point you to additional sources of credible and cogent information.

Lastly, you may care to look over the various race/ethnicity documents noted on Questia: Cultures and Ethnic Groups. Questia is an comprehensive tool for locating excellent sources of accurate and well informed thought on myriad topics. It's among my "go to" sites when I seek unbiased, critically reviewed/accepted, and well founded scholarly information about a topic that interests me.

Sidebar:

FWIW, It's been my experience over the past decade that the easiest way to find a copy of a document noted in scholarly publications is to (1) copy the document author's last name and document title, (2) paste both into my browser's address bar (or Google search field), (3) type PDF after it, and (4) hit <Enter>.

It quite often produces precisely what I'm looking for. Occasionally, the document sought is a book rather than peer-reviewed paper. RE: books, it's "hit or miss." Sometimes a book is available for free on the WWW, sometimes it's not, on other occasions, it's partially available, in which case one must scan through what is available to see if (1) the limited content provided is given with enough context for one to know what is the point of its inclusion in the book, and (2) whether the content provided is indeed what one is contextually and literally in line with what one is looking for.

For example, if one is searching for information about, say Hitler, one may come across an excerpt from another person's autobiography wherein they describe his as being affable, concerned about the wellbeing of people in general, and generous to a fault. If, however, unbeknownst to the reader of the excerpt, the book's context and purpose is to offer a factual retelling of one person's interactions with Hitler when they were both adolescents, or in one-on-one non-political situations, the reader of that snippet would be grossly remiss to use that as a basis for asserting that the world misconstrued Adolph Hitler's personality and intentions.​

End of sidebar.

Thank you for your well detailed response.

You always give me a reading list it seems, which is cool as I like reading, particularly when I have a cold like now.

Were you ever or are you now a professor at a college somewhere?

 

[320 Years of History]

I'm not sure if this thread's title question seeks an answer derived from contemporary race theory, or whether it's looking for answers that issue mostly from cultural anthropology. If the former, you may find this helpful: Critical Race Theory: An Introduction. The suggested readings at the end of that document provide additional sources of information, as will this. If the latter, you may find this helpful: THE HISTORY OF THE IDEA OF RACE… AND WHY IT MATTERS. There again, the bibliographic reference list at the end of the paper will point you to additional sources of credible and cogent information.

Lastly, you may care to look over the various race/ethnicity documents noted on Questia: Cultures and Ethnic Groups. Questia is an comprehensive tool for locating excellent sources of accurate and well informed thought on myriad topics. It's among my "go to" sites when I seek unbiased, critically reviewed/accepted, and well founded scholarly information about a topic that interests me.

Sidebar:

FWIW, It's been my experience over the past decade that the easiest way to find a copy of a document noted in scholarly publications is to (1) copy the document author's last name and document title, (2) paste both into my browser's address bar (or Google search field), (3) type PDF after it, and (4) hit <Enter>.

It quite often produces precisely what I'm looking for. Occasionally, the document sought is a book rather than peer-reviewed paper. RE: books, it's "hit or miss." Sometimes a book is available for free on the WWW, sometimes it's not, on other occasions, it's partially available, in which case one must scan through what is available to see if (1) the limited content provided is given with enough context for one to know what is the point of its inclusion in the book, and (2) whether the content provided is indeed what one is contextually and literally in line with what one is looking for.

For example, if one is searching for information about, say Hitler, one may come across an excerpt from another person's autobiography wherein they describe his as being affable, concerned about the wellbeing of people in general, and generous to a fault. If, however, unbeknownst to the reader of the excerpt, the book's context and purpose is to offer a factual retelling of one person's interactions with Hitler when they were both adolescents, or in one-on-one non-political situations, the reader of that snippet would be grossly remiss to use that as a basis for asserting that the world misconstrued Adolph Hitler's personality and intentions.​

End of sidebar.

Thank you for your well detailed response.

You always give me a reading list it seems, which is cool as I like reading, particularly when I have a cold like now.

Were you ever or are you now a professor at a college somewhere?

You're welcome.

When I was a graduate business student, I was a graduate teaching assistant. I had my own classes and ran/taught them as I saw fit given the general guidelines of the department and professor to whom I was attached. In the early part of my career as a management consultant, I designed, developed and led many training programs. These days, the limit of my actual teaching activities pertains to mentoring selected young folks who show promise and who don't have the familial resources that can or will do so.

P.S./Edit:
Many of my mentorees, like some folks on USMB, gripe about my vocabulary and the amount of reading I encourage them to do in order to become a well informed individual. (I know you weren't griping in your comment above.)

 

[dani67]

white or ..... is bullshit .

1: asian
2:african
3: aryan (german-iranian-.......)
4:nordic
5:semitic ( arabs- jewish-..... )
6: mix

I find it interesting that you distinguish between germans and nordic ethnicities.

Why? I have read some about them and I see very little difference between them. Many of the German tribes came from Scandinavia, like the Saxons and the Goths.

IT seems that the main difference is that the Germans crossed the Baltic Sea before the 'nordic' ethnicities did.

yes.it was my mistake.part of german isnt aryan or they are mix

german :

40%

5%

2%

20%

25%

8%

 

[Syriusly]

I
The racialist 'Identity Politics' ideology uses racial categories to define its constituent groups and they like to split anyone away from the majority population by any means available, so if you are white Hispanic, then you are not white, just Hispanic. If you are half white half black like Obama, then you are black. To them you are anything you prefer to be, even a different species, if that is what your heart tells you that you are.

But there is nothing that essentially defines humanity along racial lines. It is just ethnicity grouped together into arbitrary categories, like whether Dravidians are Caucasian, Polynesian or their own separate race.

It seems to me that it is ethnicity and culture that most defines who we are by how we behave according to the things we have been taught to believe from childhood. Not what is in your DNA.

To a large part I agree with you- in a pure sense, race is largely meaningless- sort of like the term 'trees'- it is a convenient description of something that we can see- but cannot really define.

There is a DNA component- which is why some genetic groups have more melanin in their skin than others- and some have a higher prevalence to certain genetic conditions than others- and the total of those end up with us largely able to broadly sort people by 'color' but it really doesn't work.

But remember- it was not 'Identity Politics' which started this- that is a relatively new term. Here within the United States we have a fairly long tradition of attempting to identify people by certain racial identities- which shifted- as you noted- Italian was not always really white.
And laws were passed often upon those racial identities- laws regarding 'negroes' and 'mulatoes' and 'orientals', etc. And besides legal discrimination there was often discrimination based upon color- black, brown, yellow.

I think it is culture that most defines how we are brought up- not genetics(though genetics certainly does play a role), but we also have the free will to mold ourselves outside of what we were taught in our childhood.

 

[Syriusly]

I'm not sure if this thread's title question seeks an answer derived from contemporary race theory, or whether it's looking for answers that issue mostly from cultural anthropology. If the former, you may find this helpful: Critical Race Theory: An Introduction. The suggested readings at the end of that document provide additional sources of information, as will this. If the latter, you may find this helpful: THE HISTORY OF THE IDEA OF RACE… AND WHY IT MATTERS. There again, the bibliographic reference list at the end of the paper will point you to additional sources of credible and cogent information.

Lastly, you may care to look over the various race/ethnicity documents noted on Questia: Cultures and Ethnic Groups. Questia is an comprehensive tool for locating excellent sources of accurate and well informed thought on myriad topics. It's among my "go to" sites when I seek unbiased, critically reviewed/accepted, and well founded scholarly information about a topic that interests me.

Sidebar:

FWIW, It's been my experience over the past decade that the easiest way to find a copy of a document noted in scholarly publications is to (1) copy the document author's last name and document title, (2) paste both into my browser's address bar (or Google search field), (3) type PDF after it, and (4) hit <Enter>.

It quite often produces precisely what I'm looking for. Occasionally, the document sought is a book rather than peer-reviewed paper. RE: books, it's "hit or miss." Sometimes a book is available for free on the WWW, sometimes it's not, on other occasions, it's partially available, in which case one must scan through what is available to see if (1) the limited content provided is given with enough context for one to know what is the point of its inclusion in the book, and (2) whether the content provided is indeed what one is contextually and literally in line with what one is looking for.

For example, if one is searching for information about, say Hitler, one may come across an excerpt from another person's autobiography wherein they describe his as being affable, concerned about the wellbeing of people in general, and generous to a fault. If, however, unbeknownst to the reader of the excerpt, the book's context and purpose is to offer a factual retelling of one person's interactions with Hitler when they were both adolescents, or in one-on-one non-political situations, the reader of that snippet would be grossly remiss to use that as a basis for asserting that the world misconstrued Adolph Hitler's personality and intentions.​

End of sidebar.

Cool sidebar.

Thanks

 

[Elvis Obama]

Race is a by-product of fear, ignorance and guilt. We are, slowly, coming to realize this, but it's gonna take a looong time before we're gonna be blind to these minor differences.

 

[jwoodie]

When I was a graduate business student, I was a graduate teaching assistant. I had my own classes and ran/taught them as I saw fit given the general guidelines of the department and professor to whom I was attached. In the early part of my career as a management consultant, I designed, developed and led many training programs. These days, the limit of my actual teaching activities pertains to mentoring selected young folks who show promise and who don't have the familial resources that can or will do so.

LOL, that explains a lot.

 

[jwoodie]

Race is a by-product of fear, ignorance and guilt. We are, slowly, coming to realize this, but it's gonna take a looong time before we're gonna be blind to these minor differences.

Race is a replacement term for species when applied to homo sapiens. For example, polar bears and grizzly bears can mate and produce viable offspring, but they are still classified as different species.

 

[320 Years of History]

When I was a graduate business student, I was a graduate teaching assistant. I had my own classes and ran/taught them as I saw fit given the general guidelines of the department and professor to whom I was attached. In the early part of my career as a management consultant, I designed, developed and led many training programs. These days, the limit of my actual teaching activities pertains to mentoring selected young folks who show promise and who don't have the familial resources that can or will do so.

LOL, that explains a lot.

My better judgment is screaming at me right now, but I'm going to take a risk and ignore it....

What, for you, does the brief summary of my didactic and research experience explain?

 

[JimBowie1958]

white or ..... is bullshit .

1: asian
2:african
3: aryan (german-iranian-.......)
4:nordic
5:semitic ( arabs- jewish-..... )
6: mix

I find it interesting that you distinguish between germans and nordic ethnicities.

Why? I have read some about them and I see very little difference between them. Many of the German tribes came from Scandinavia, like the Saxons and the Goths.

IT seems that the main difference is that the Germans crossed the Baltic Sea before the 'nordic' ethnicities did.

yes.it was my mistake.part of german isnt aryan or they are mix

german :

40%

5%

2%

20%

25%

8%

Not to be insulting but that is all just nonsense. There are recessive genes regarding facial bone structure and I highly doubt that there is any one Nordic or German bone structure.

 

[JimBowie1958]

When I was a graduate business student, I was a graduate teaching assistant. I had my own classes and ran/taught them as I saw fit given the general guidelines of the department and professor to whom I was attached. In the early part of my career as a management consultant, I designed, developed and led many training programs. These days, the limit of my actual teaching activities pertains to mentoring selected young folks who show promise and who don't have the familial resources that can or will do so.

LOL, that explains a lot.

My better judgment is screaming at me right now, but I'm going to take a risk and ignore it....

What, for you, does the brief summary of my didactic and research experience explain?

It explains why he cant cognitively digest most of your posts.

 

[JimBowie1958]

To a large part I agree with you- in a pure sense, race is largely meaningless- sort of like the term 'trees'- it is a convenient description of something that we can see- but cannot really define.

Yes, like the Crepe Myrtle, is it a tree or a bush trimmed to look like a tree?

The only functional value to the concept of race is in understanding cultural differences and biases.

There is a DNA component- which is why some genetic groups have more melanin in their skin than others- and some have a higher prevalence to certain genetic conditions than others- and the total of those end up with us largely able to broadly sort people by 'color' but it really doesn't work.

And much of that has to do with their exposure to sun as a child growing up. I have known blacks with both parents dark skinned whose own skin was so light they could pass for white and had very visible freckles. I think the mothers exposure to sun while carrying the child also has some impact, though I have no idea as to why.

But remember- it was not 'Identity Politics' which started this- that is a relatively new term. Here within the United States we have a fairly long tradition of attempting to identify people by certain racial identities- which shifted- as you noted- Italian was not always really white.
And laws were passed often upon those racial identities- laws regarding 'negroes' and 'mulatoes' and 'orientals', etc. And besides legal discrimination there was often discrimination based upon color- black, brown, yellow.

Identity Politics did not start racism, true, but it is 90% of the reason that it still persists. Hispanic cultures seem to not hold much stock in it as much as norther European Protestant cultures do or did. This large variance would suggest the concept of race isnt needed or persistent in and of itself. It is simply a tool useful to divide the working class, obfuscate important issues and justify injustice.

I think it is culture that most defines how we are brought up- not genetics(though genetics certainly does play a role), but we also have the free will to mold ourselves outside of what we were taught in our childhood.

I totally agree with that statement.

 

[Divine Wind]

Race is a by-product of fear, ignorance and guilt. We are, slowly, coming to realize this, but it's gonna take a looong time before we're gonna be blind to these minor differences.

Part of the problem is we have tens of thousands of years of xenophobia programmed into our genes. It's natural for tribal groups to be leery of strangers or those who are "different". Not correct, but natural as a survival trait.

 

[320 Years of History]

When I was a graduate business student, I was a graduate teaching assistant. I had my own classes and ran/taught them as I saw fit given the general guidelines of the department and professor to whom I was attached. In the early part of my career as a management consultant, I designed, developed and led many training programs. These days, the limit of my actual teaching activities pertains to mentoring selected young folks who show promise and who don't have the familial resources that can or will do so.

LOL, that explains a lot.

My better judgment is screaming at me right now, but I'm going to take a risk and ignore it....

What, for you, does the brief summary of my didactic and research experience explain?

It explains why he cant cognitively digest most of your posts.

LOL