Racism

I am so so sorry

dilate

Yeah, which is partly why we have a responsibility to care for them. We removed them from their homes and fragmented their cultures. Colonialism was a terrible crime against the lesser races.

I'm not very liberal, at least in the way it's defined in American politics.
It does suck.

Obviously not. There are some predictions you can make as to the character/intelligence of a person based on their race and the way they dress but this should not inform the way you treat them barring a few scenarios where that would be acceptable. People are individuals. Some black people will be smarter than the majority of white people so if you prejudge them on the basis of race you will have made a mistake.

>the strong should be slaves of the weak

Probably a girl desu

Depends on how you define racism.
If it's recognizing the distribution of traits and populations in genetic vector space then surely there's a minimum reasonable level of racism. An obviously correct racist belief is that africans have darker skin than europeans.
If it's hate based on the conventional racial groups then making a scientific claim about race and IQ isn't racist even if it's controversial.

Racial differences exist, but the degree of overlap between them nullifies the implementation of hierarchies based on race alone.

Yes, those filthy swedish, danish, norwegian, finnish colonists, terrible colonials, they have responsibility to care for those poor africans they removed from their homes and fragmented their (non existing) cultures.. oh wait..

Attached: 1514751518128.png (499x513, 283K)

>the strong should be slaves of the weak
It's like caring for a retarded relative.

I'll pass my judgements down on each individual as I need to. There are too many individuals for me to concern myself with all of their potentials. Therefore I make assumptions about the groups they belong to. This allows me to make reasonable decisions at a glance.

To me, racism is denying an individual's proven potential just because of their skin color. Racism is not making reasonable assumptions to protect myself.

Hegel teaches us that equality for all people is actually a kind of inequality. True equality consists in recognizing the inherent inequality of people and being honest about that, not demanding we treat all people equally. Racism today exists explicitly, but the way in which it exists in developing countries is implicitly, such things as affirmative action, BET, black history month, holocaust remembrance day, may seem benign but they inherently perpetuate racism by considering these half measures as a effective and sufficient ways to address the inequalities.

Attached: E04B4A0B-B1F2-4DFB-B06D-61DC2F3CB09A.jpg (738x482, 365K)

Would you care for a retard who weren’t your relative?

Racism is an aggregate judgement if you subscribe to utilitarianism, and in this strict context is hence validated.

A medical professional would. Why not a stranger? Why arbitrarily draw a line in the sand based on blood? What if your family is retarded too? Too vague to be a precedent

I'm a hyper-racist

Discrimination is an inevitable fact of human interactions. We ought to accept this fact for the sake of our sanity.

Mind you, discrimination doesn't imply acting in violent or cruel ways towards people. That's an entirely separate issue.
But inevitably all people get discriminated at some points in their life and that can hurt on an emotional level. But there's nothing we can do, other than to stop being human and to turn into some kind of automatons that treat every person exactly the same.

Just a reminder that there is literally no scientific proof of "muh race realism" besides IQ tests, and even IQ tests have been debunked at being genuine measures of intelligence.
>b-but muh Jews
Christians were autistic about banking back in the middle ages because their thousand year old book told them not to do it, so they had the Jews (which were 2nd class citizens at the time) do all that kind of work. And then retard incels wonder why there are lots of Jews involved in economics and finance to this day.
>b-but muh niggers
Environmental factors such as poverty and lack of education can legitimately impair the brain and so that is why black people who have had to deal with institutionalized racism up until the 1960s live in poverty and since those impoverished areas still exist they thus seem naturally dumber. Western colonialism in Africa has severely impoverished African countries too obviously.
>b-but muh kikes secretly rule the world
One last food for thought. If white people are superior, why are there genes so recessive? If evolution is truly muh end all be all, then surely it would dictate that their genes are borderline useless and thus pick the superior black traits, hmm? So when ever your wife has a kid (assuming you incels will ever get a wife LMFAO) and that kid is half black, be proud that his genes are better than yours will ever be :^)

>What does Yea Forums think of racism?
It doesn't exist.
Either nobody, except a very small minority of people, is genuinely racist or literally everyone is.

Is observing that white people are worse runners than blacks "racist"?
Is observing that whites are better scientists than blacks "racist"?

To answer these questions the "left" has to buot a very elaborate and complex construction of what racism is.

of course not, why would I?

IQ is one of the most valid concepts in all of psychology. It's a strong model for the general purpose computational capacity of the brain. Environmental factors are a tiny fraction of the influence on adult IQ. You are denying real science because it makes you uncomfortable. And no the jews do not rule the world.

>even IQ tests have been debunked at being genuine measures of intelligence.
Not they havent. There are also the crime stats and various physical attributes, read Race, evolution, behavior. I realize you, as a dumbass who belongs on reddit, will not read it, but anyone lurking in the thread that wants information should.

Elaborate.

they are lacking a bit behind bro they will get there

Are you legitimately retarded?

>If white people are superior
Who says they are? That contradicts race realism entirely.
Just look at what Race realists think about Jewish or Asian IQ.

>If evolution is truly muh end all be all, then surely it would dictate that their genes are borderline useless and thus pick the superior black traits, hmm?
I don't get what you are saying, what traits are recessive? Blue eyes, blond hair? It seems obvious why they would be, at least to me.
But the argument isn't that white people have higher IQ's then black people, BECAUSE they have white skin, or blond hair.
The IQ of an average white black mixed child is, as you would expect in the middle between the white and the black IQ.

>So when ever your wife has a kid (assuming you incels will ever get a wife LMFAO) and that kid is half black, be proud that his genes are better than yours will ever be :^)
implying I didnt get cucked and my wife is black, my children probably would be smarter than her and taller than me.

You made this thread on /his/ too. Stop

>The Swedish Gold Coast (Swedish: Svenska Guldkusten) was a Swedish colony founded in 1650 by Hendrik Carloff on the Gulf of Guinea in present-day Ghana in Africa. It lasted until April 1663 when the whole Swedish Gold Coast was seized by Denmark, and integrated in the Danish Gold Coast.
>The Danish Gold Coast (Danish: Danske Guldkyst or Dansk Guinea) comprised the colonies that Denmark–Norway controlled in Africa as a part of the Gold Coast (roughly present-day southeast Ghana), which is on the petroleum and natural gas rich Gulf of Guinea.

individuals differ in physical and mental traits. they are still people. general trends of difference also occur in races. individuals can break the trend.

we also shouldn't pretend all people are equal, or that a strength in one area necessitates a weakness in another.

the white nationalist issue is completely separate. communities and countries need shared values otherwise they are just a shares zip code. race and heritage is just one way to create such a community

As another response to your sarcastic comment, recessive and dominant alleles are a biochemical detail and not related to the function of the genes in any way. They probably exist as another degree of freedom for the optimizing function of evolution.

I’d err on the side that everyone is a little racist, but by the same virtue that you prefer your family members to strangers.

i'm not racist but I couldn't care less about the threat of racism

Racism is morally wrong because it is wrong to condemn someone for their ineffable characteristics. However, two distinct gradations of racism can be distinguished, with differing levels of injustice.

Type A: This is hostile, active racism. It seeks to degrade, disenfranchise, and dehumanize the target race. This is the worse type. In this case confirmation bias acts to reinforce the racist's preconceptions whenever a member of the targeted race behaves in a way that conforms to stereotype, as is statistically inevitable in any case.

Type B: This is racism that favors the in-group and is naturally displayed by all classifications and ethnicities. One tends to favor those who resemble oneself, who bear a genetic resemblance. This general tendency is hard to eradicate or socialize out of existence. Exposure to other races does not eliminate it, and is a basic characteristic of human psychology.

>literally everyone is
Yes, technically everyone is racist. At least according to the only definition of racism that actually makes logical sense.

Racism as it is used by the people who bring it up the most, though, is usually just a synonym for rudeness.
But calling someone 'rude' doesn't quite have the same emotional charge and political power as calling someone 'racist'.

The overwhelming scientific consensus is that race is a social construct which doesnt map onto genetics in any meaningful way
You can either claim genetics=race or you can have your one drop rule autism

>seething 14 year old girl
thanks for always apriori proving why no one should listen to you

I should elaborate on Type B. This is more of in group preference rather than out-group disfavor. It manifests in the exclusion of the outgroup not by any intention, but by a logical byproduct of favoring the in group.

>which doesnt map onto genetics in any meaningful way
That is false.
Computers can map, through cluster analysis, DNA into clusters, this correspons very well with self identified race.

>The overwhelming scientific consensus is that race is a social construct
Do you have a a survey of scientists on that, or are you making stuff up?

The in group and out group are socially constructed rather than being based in some genetic hard wiring. Nice evolutionary psychology though, always great to see that. It's like the Stairway to Heaven of /pol/ threads

race is literally genetics, they're the same thing, race is measured by analyzing genomes for similarity. Trying to say this doesnt exist because people have a flawed understanding of the categories involved is beyond dishonest.

humans are incredible similar despite skin colors, so I ought to think the problem is more cultural than genetic
if there were neanderthals alive then maybe

Your two type system is unnecessary and eventually only begets more questions.
Racism simply means that you notice different groups of people and [inevitably] make some value judgments towards them.

No, race is a social system of categorization invented in the colonial period

If race doesn't exist how do you contend with the obvious fact that people of african descent have darker skin than people of european descent?

cell.com/ajhg/fulltext/S0002-9297(18)30363-X

It could also be said that racism was a concept invented in the post colonial period

Attached: 1564346253254.png (1272x862, 152K)

Are brown eyed people a different race to green eyed people? Why not? Explain what a race is in a way that is not social

You get better and less ignorant replies here than in /pol/

Somewhat agree

Attached: hitler and blondi.jpg (468x537, 116K)

This seems neither evidence of self identified race not responding to cluster analysis nor a survey of scientist?
It seems entirely unrelated, did you reply to the wrong person.

>Are brown eyed people a different race to green eyed people?
Yes. Next question.

your fault because of colonialism

A good system of race is a cluster analysis in genetic vector space. The observed correspondence between traditional racial groups and genetic clusters is evidence that the colonial categories were mostly correct. They weren't perfect which is where the critiques of race gain rhetorical ground but the basic categories remain useful.

>mfw molecular biologist
>mfw i see these articles (not publications), then compare them with GWAS studies where race must always be accounted for in genome analysis
These are political statements, not scientific ones. It's the same as back in 2000 when the Human Genome Project was just released, and everyone was afraid that we'd enter an age of eugenics. So they issued a statement that there is "no such thing as race" based on a whopping 3 analyzed genomes, and the public gobbles it up like pigs in a sty, while everyone with a bit more inside knowledge could see that such sweeping statements can never be made from such a small sample size.

Attached: Brainlet.jpg (645x729, 57K)

>This is more of in group preference rather than out-group disfavor.
For white Americans, high warmth towards whites in correlated with high warmth towards blacks.

Attached: Screenshot_20190728-163945_cropped.png (1235x872, 184K)

"there are clear observable correlations between variation in the human genome and how individuals identify by race"
literally disproves your own claims

>in
is*

KEK

Is it a social construct that makes chinese people look different and have different physical structures that black people in africa?

Not individually, but as a group yes.

No you don’t. You don’t judge every black persons skin color individually, you associate them all with this genetic trait. Stupidity is also a genetic trait, or lack thereof.

Yes, kind of. Perceptions of (relevant) differences are also socially shaped.
You need to approach the "social construct" argument differently. Saying something is a social construct doesn't mean it's false. Language itself is a social construct. We live by and through social constructs.

most people's idea of race is completely wrong.
for example western europeans have a closer common ancestor to the chadic africans than uralic Finnish and subsaharan africans are genetically closer to nords than they are to Madagascar Africans.
and the fact that humans don't need to adapt to their environment as much as other animals because they can craft clothes, tools, shelters, etc prevented a lot of changes that could have made humans more physically different.
if you want to know more and to know what you are talking about and not btfo'd by any person with a degree i recommend you read Wikipedia articles or research papers if you are a "skeptic".
look up topic like genetic similarity, neanderthals interbreeding, genetic variation, haplogroups, phenotype, gene expression, FST, how genes change through different generations, natural selection, etc while having some basic geography and historical knowledge.
Spoiler: you will change your mind

Attached: world_map_of_y-dna_haplogroups_.png (3000x1900, 887K)

then what the fuck is the point of saying 'its a social construct' if literally everything is a social construct by that definition

Let me simplify this for you brainlet.

Are the differences physical and in their body? Or are they perceptions of non-existence features?

it's not literally everything, dingus. race, gender, language, nations, corporations, are social constructs. oxygen, DNA, gravity, and whatever you had for breakfast this morning are not social constructs

Where's the crossing from berbers to south spain?

are species social constructs?

Yeah because everyone who says otherwise is disbarred, like the guy who discovered DNA who still refuses to repent

How many races are there?