Race Is A Social Construct

#1
RACE - The Power of an Illusion
Ten Things Everyone Should Know About Race

Our eyes tell us that people look different. No one has trouble distinguishing a Czech from a Chinese, but what do those differences mean? Are they biological? Has race always been with us? How does race affect people today? There’s less – and more – to race than meets the eye:

1. Race is a modern idea. Ancient societies, like the Greeks, did not divide people according to physical distinctions, but according to religion, status, class, even language. The English language didn’t even have the word ‘race’ until it turns up in 1508 in a poem by William Dunbar referring to a line of kings.

2. Race has no genetic basis. Not one characteristic, trait or even one gene distinguishes all the members of one so-called race from all the members of another so-called race.

3. Human subspecies don’t exist. Unlike many animals, modern humans simply haven’t been around long enough or isolated enough to evolve into separate subspecies or races. Despite surface appearances, we are one of the most similar of all species.

4. Skin color really is only skin deep. Most traits are inherited independently from one another. The genes influencing skin color have nothing to do with the genes influencing hair form, eye shape, blood type, musical talent, athletic ability or forms of intelligence. Knowing someone’s skin color doesn’t necessarily tell you anything else about him or her.

5. Most variation is within, not between, "races." Of the small amount of total human variation, 85% exists within any local population, be they Italians, Kurds, Koreans or Cherokees. About 94% can be found within any continent. That means two random Koreans may be as genetically different as a Korean and an Italian.

6. Slavery predates race. Throughout much of human history, societies have enslaved others, often as a result of conquest or war, even debt, but not because of physical characteristics or a belief in natural inferiority. Due to a unique set of historical circumstances, ours was the first slave system where all the slaves shared similar physical characteristics.

7. Race and freedom evolved together. The U.S. was founded on the radical new principle that "All men are created equal." But our early economy was based largely on slavery. How could this anomaly be rationalized? The new idea of race helped explain why some people could be denied the rights and freedoms that others took for granted.

8. Race justified social inequalities as natural. As the race idea evolved, white superiority became "common sense" in America. It justified not only slavery but also the extermination of Indians, exclusion of Asian immigrants, and the taking of Mexican lands by a nation that professed a belief in democracy. Racial practices were institutionalized within American government, laws, and society.

9. Race isn’t biological, but racism is still real. Race is a powerful social idea that gives people different access to opportunities and resources. Our government and social institutions have created advantages that disproportionately channel wealth, power, and resources to white people. This affects everyone, whether we are aware of it or not.

10. Colorblindness will not end racism. Pretending race doesn’t exist is not the same as creating equality. Race is more than stereotypes and individual prejudice. To combat racism, we need to identify and remedy social policies and institutional practices that advantage some groups at the expense of others.

Copyright (c) California Newsreel, 2003
RACE - The Power of an Illusion
A three-part documentary series from California Newsreel
For more information or video purchase: www.newsreel.org or 1-877-811-7495
Visit the companion web site at http://www.PBS.org/Race
 

Rukas

Capo Dei Capi
Staff member
#3
^^ Its Harry_potter he asked his name to be changed to Hankaveli.

Interesting read, wheres Chronic when we need him?
 
#4
So why must we distinguish based on 'race-related' phenotypical characteristics? It is amazing how much a social construct has taken hold of the dominant thinking, and there is still so many people who actually think that it is genetic, I mean the need for of an article as late as 2003 refuting a concept that became internationally frowned upon after WWII says something about the way the majority thinks.

To test the strength of the social construct and for a little fun activity, next time you are talking to someone of your 'race', bring up someone from another, but refer to them not as "that black guy" or that white guy" as would be expected, instead, mention that black guy as "the guy with black hair", or "that guy with brown eyes" (if you catch my drift) and see how the person you are talking to reacts, considering how deep the thinking in terms of races is, that person would probably dismiss what you are saying, "why don't you just call him black?". When talking about one's own race, it is unlikely that a white person refers to another as the "white guy", they are more likely to be more specific in their description: "he has brown hair", "that guy with blue eyes". But when it is someone of another race, we aren't so deep, its merely superficial.

I hope someone was able to make out my point in that last paragraph.
 
#5
^ I see the point you're making in your last paragraph. Obviously if I was describing someone to the police I'd mention race, but among friends it's assumed that because I'm white the person I'm talking about is also white. I suppose it comes down to the idea that white people tend to have white friends, black people black friends etc.

I've always been interested in the motivation behind mankind deciding to make race a major dividing factor, rather than something like eye colour or hair colour or height. Imagine what the world would have been like had mankind never thought to categorise people by their skin colour.

"Being so weighed down with false meaning it were better that the term ["race"] were dropped altogether than that any attempt should be made to give it a new meaning." (Montague, 1964)
 

CalcuoCuchicheo

Little Miss Vixen
#6
HitEmUp21 said:
To test the strength of the social construct and for a little fun activity, next time you are talking to someone of your 'race', bring up someone from another, but refer to them not as "that black guy" or that white guy" as would be expected, instead, mention that black guy as "the guy with black hair", or "that guy with brown eyes" (if you catch my drift) and see how the person you are talking to reacts, considering how deep the thinking in terms of races is, that person would probably dismiss what you are saying, "why don't you just call him black?". When talking about one's own race, it is unlikely that a white person refers to another as the "white guy", they are more likely to be more specific in their description: "he has brown hair", "that guy with blue eyes". But when it is someone of another race, we aren't so deep, its merely superficial.

I hope someone was able to make out my point in that last paragraph.
Yeah I get what you're saying, but look, skin colour is easily visible, eye colour, & even hair colour, is not so easily ascertained.

And I'm white, but if I were in an area with mainly black dudes & I wanted to point out a white guy, I would indeed refer to him as "the white guy", even if I was talking to another white guy.

So practicality must also be taken into account.
 
#7
Little Miss Vixen said:
Yeah I get what you're saying, but look, skin colour is easily visible, eye colour, & even hair colour, is not so easily ascertained.

And I'm white, but if I were in an area with mainly black dudes & I wanted to point out a white guy, I would indeed refer to him as "the white guy", even if I was talking to another white guy.

So practicality must also be taken into account.
I Agree.
 

Latest posts

Donate

Any donations will be used to help pay for the site costs, and anything donated above will be donated to C-Dub's son on behalf of this community.

Members online

No members online now.
Top