 The US Constitution requires that a US Census be taken every ten years (including in 2010). As we discussed here on 11/28/09, the counting of Americans based on their purported biological "race" could be a critical factor in 2010, since this will be the first US Census since the US Department of Energy Human Genome Project announced that race does not exist. According to the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science, Office of Biological and Environmental Research, Human Genome Program: "DNA studies do not indicate that separate classifiable subspecies (races) exist within modern humans. While different genes for physical traits such as skin and hair color can be identified between individuals, no consistent patterns of genes across the human genome exist to distinguish one race from another. There also is no genetic basis for divisions of human ethnicity. People who have lived in the same geographic region for many generations may have some alleles in common, but no allele will be found in all members of one population and in no members of any other." Does this mean that it is impossible to capture the diversity in America? Absolutely not. When whites look at Blacks, they know who is Black and who is not by their skin color. When they encounter Latinos, they also use such cues as name, native language and native county, as well as native country of ancestors. As you can see from this paragraph, it is entirely possibe to gather the same information without resort to the disproved word referring to the disproved hypotheses of "race and ethnicity. Yes, "race" is also the term used to refer to a social construct, and "bitch" is also the word used to refer to a female dog. Both terms are inextricably linked to their origins and cannot, (let's be honest) be used without stigmatizing those against whom the words are used. The US Census has always stigmatized Blacks. The original Article I, Section II of the Constitution provided that Blacks would be counted as three-fifths of a person for the purposes of the census and Congressional representation. With the Fourteenth Amendment, the three-fifths language was removed, but the Census still counted Americans according to their "race", which was also the primary difference between those who had been slaves and free just a generation earlier. Now, that the US Government U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science, Office of Biological and Environmental Research, Human Genome Program has announced that biological "race" does not exist, does the US Constitution's Equal Protection Clause require the Government to remove the word "race" from Census forms, because the word "race" stigmatizes Blacks, refers to stereotypes about Blacks, a hypothesis about skin color that has been scientifically disproved (the stereotype that we Blacks are fundamentally biologically different from whites)? Laws referring to "race" and separating people on that basis must pass the US Supreme Court's strict scrutiny test. Not only does the Census refer to "race" but it stigmatizes Blacks, Latinos and Asians by telling us and whites that we are fundamentally biologically and substantively different because our skin color, facial morphology, hair color and hence "race" are not the same. Isn't the argument against the word "race" just a question of semantics? No, it's not. The unemployment rate among Blacks is typically twice that of whites. When we minorities are seeking employment, how can we ever overcome employers' sense that minorities "don't fit the company culture" while the US Government, the media and the Constitutionally mandated US Census are telling the nation that minorities are from a different subspecies? It's almost laughable, if it didn't contribute so greatly to the controversial nature of skin color in America and Blacks' inability to find our place here. Can people who are not from the same subspecies ever "fit in" at a corporation as well as people who are from the same white subspecies? If I were a white-skinned employer, following the Government guidance that minorities are from a separate subspecies, then I might consider it my OBLIGATION not to hire minorities, in order to avoid bringing in employees who could never fit into the company culture. Would you feel entirely comfortable hiring someone if you were told that they were from a different subspecies? It sounds like a push-poll question, doesn't it? And yet it is the conundrum posed by the US government that quietly announces that race and ethnicity do no exist, while continuing to use the words ubiquitously, even in the Census, as if the nation were full of people from distinct subspecies of humanity, like multi-colored aliens from various planets walking the streets. |
| francislholland :: The 2010 Census, Race, and Denigration |
At best, the US Government is giving mixed and scientifically unsupported messages on the issue of minority hiring. On the one hand, the Government seeks to require employers to hire applicants without discriminating on the basis that some applicants are from a different subspecies. Do you perceive any internal contradiction in that? I do. To hear the US Census tell it, it's like telling people that Blacks and whites are as biologically different as poodles and German shepherds. Different racial subspecies. And then the Civil Rights Act of 1964 requires that, even though Blacks are from a different "race" (subspecies), and Jews from a different "ethnic group, nonetheless, people from distinct subspecies must be given equal access to employment opportunities, just like poodles and German shepherds should be given equal access to police dog jobs. The exaggeration of the difference makes the law itself seem unreasonable. The words "race" and "ethnicity" in the 1964 Civil Rights Act greatly and unscientifically exaggerate the differences between whites and skin color groups and sociological ethnic groups, because the science available when the law was written had not disproved the hypotheses of "race" and "ethnicity". Since race doesn't exist, and since any use of the word is as offensiveas the word bitch, which has a perfectly valid unoffensive meaning that will inevitably be confused with it's outrageously offensive meanings, I propose that we excise the word "race" from the langauge of each of us, just as the Human Genome Project has excised the words "race" and "ethnicity" from our understanding of who we are as human beings and all that does not separate us. I've prepared the chart below to show how we can get more information from the census by avoiding stigmatizing overgeneralizing people with the word "race" and instead asking questions about what does exist: Please check your skin color/ethnic identity group below: Whitish, but not Latino. (people know if they identify as "white" Whitish and Latino Black/brown/coffee/beige/vanilla, but not Latino/Hispanic. (Only people who are from what once was called the "black race" are going to choose this alternative, and yet the alternative includes and implies that various colors are present within the "Black" sociological group. This resolves the problem of those who want to state that they are bi-racial, which science has rendered biologically meaningless. And people who believe they are bi-racial would probably discover through DNA testing that they have poly-chromatic and poly-ethnic heritage. DNA has taken the guess-work out of this.) Black/brown/coffee/beige/vanilla, AND Latino/Hispanic. etc. If anyone can help me to understand and correct why I cannot make the CorelDraw graphic below appear larger, without losing definition, I would very much appreciate it. I think you'll find it very interesting once you can read it. |
Thursday, 3 December 2009
The 2010 Census, Race, and Denigration
US Department of Energy Human Genome Project Anounces 'black race' Does Not Exist
Over at Pam's House Blend, we have been discussing the relatively new Department of Energy Human Genome Project declaration that the "black race" does not exist, the "white race" does not exist and, in fact, the biological hypothesis of "race" itself has been disproved by the total mapping of the human genome, showing that there is no genetic difference between Blacks and whites sufficient to constitute separate subspecies ('races') within in the human species.
As a matter of biological science, biological science has disproved the age-old hypothesis of race which, we must remember, was never anything more than a hypothesis developed long before DNA was discovered. And so "race" was a hypothesis in search of proof rather than the result of an empirical search for truth. We have to remember that the hypothesis of race was born before doctors became aware of bacteria and began washing their hands before conduction surgical operations. So, it ought to be no surprise that a theory of genetics developed before genes could be seen and identified turned out to be, quite simply wrong. As the march of science progresses, we develop new tools for ever more minute analysis of human matter and these new tools have demonstrated the falsity of an old hypothesis.
That really ought not surprise anyone, since we all know that a guess as to the length and width of a piece of wood is rarely as good as measuring the wood with modern tools. And a guess as to the age of a statue is not quite as good as carbon dating. As our tools become better our knowledge increases.
Rarely, however, has a scientific discovery had so many important ramifications for the United States of America. For example, the US Constitution requires that a census be conducted every ten years. As the following citations show, the Census is an integral part of determining the representation that each state will have in the US House of Representatives, and the Fourteenth Amendment modified the Constitution to make it clear that Blacks could participate more fully in US electoral rights.
The US Constitution's Article 1, Section 2 originally provided that.
As a matter of biological science, biological science has disproved the age-old hypothesis of race which, we must remember, was never anything more than a hypothesis developed long before DNA was discovered. And so "race" was a hypothesis in search of proof rather than the result of an empirical search for truth. We have to remember that the hypothesis of race was born before doctors became aware of bacteria and began washing their hands before conduction surgical operations. So, it ought to be no surprise that a theory of genetics developed before genes could be seen and identified turned out to be, quite simply wrong. As the march of science progresses, we develop new tools for ever more minute analysis of human matter and these new tools have demonstrated the falsity of an old hypothesis.
That really ought not surprise anyone, since we all know that a guess as to the length and width of a piece of wood is rarely as good as measuring the wood with modern tools. And a guess as to the age of a statue is not quite as good as carbon dating. As our tools become better our knowledge increases.
Rarely, however, has a scientific discovery had so many important ramifications for the United States of America. For example, the US Constitution requires that a census be conducted every ten years. As the following citations show, the Census is an integral part of determining the representation that each state will have in the US House of Representatives, and the Fourteenth Amendment modified the Constitution to make it clear that Blacks could participate more fully in US electoral rights.
The US Constitution's Article 1, Section 2 originally provided that.
(Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.) (The previous sentence in parentheses was modified by the 14th Amendment, section 2.) The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct.The US Constitution as modified by the Fourteenth Amendment's Article I, Section 2:
2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.
Monday, 30 November 2009
Department of Energy Says Black Race Doesn't Exist
First posted at Pam's House Blend and front-paged by Pam.Sat Nov 28, 2009 at 22:47:33 PM EST |
| (Of course many of us realize race is a social construct meant to both identify and denote who has control, power and access. What looks clear on paper is increasingly impossible with the blending of America. How should we discuss "race" when it comes to politics, power and, say, the census? - promoted by Pam Spaulding)
The US Department of Energy Human Genome Project says that the Black race doesn't exist. It also says that the white race doesn't exist and that there in no basis in the human genome for the belief that race ever existed. This is going to be a huge political debate as the 2010 Census approaches, and Republicans are already targeting Obama about it. I think this is important, so I've made a widget that directs readers toward this new Human Genome Project discovery that, as a matter of biology, there is no evidence for the existence of "race" and considerable evidence that "race" is arbitrary and misleading. I've made a widget for bloggers that leads people to this DOE page because I think the announcement that biological "race" doesn't exist is at least as newsworthy as an announcement that there are two moons circling around the Earth. You only have to Google the words "race" and "moon" to see that the word "race" is about ten times more important politically, culturally and socially to Americans than "moon," judged by the relative frequency with which we use the word "race" in our print media. Whether biological "race" exists or not is no mere semantic question, according to the journal "Nature Genetics." Nature Genetics states in the article entitled "Race and the Human Genome," With very rare exceptions, all of us in the US are immigrants. We bring with us a subset of genes from our homelands, and for many Americans, often first-generation but more commonly second-generation, the plural noun 'homelands' is appropriate. From this perspective, the most immediately obvious characteristic of 'race' is that describing most of us as Caucasian, Asian or African is far too simple. Despite attempts by the US Census Bureau to expand its definitions, the term 'race' does not describe most of us with the subtlety and complexity required to capture and appreciate our genetic diversity. Unfortunately, this oversimplification has had many tragic effects. Therefore, we need to start with the science . . . If a person with one Black parent is able to "pass for white", does that mean they aren't susceptible to sickle cell anemia? The "one drop rule" would say that they definitely are just as susceptible as everyone in the "black race", but science is progressing beyond the cultural notions of Americans that are vestiges from American apartheid. We simply cannot just guess anymore about science based on our biased culture; we are now able and compelled to discover and know based upon empirical science. |
| francislholland :: Department of Energy Says Black Race Doesn't Exist |
I'm asking bloggers to adopt the widget above, if only because: 1). The 2010 US Census is coming up and there will be debates about "racial" census categories, particularly since this is the first US census since the existence of biological "race" was definitively disproved; 2). The use of terms like "bi-racial" may well be attacked now that genetic science can demonstrate that most people have genetic heritage from various geographic regions across the face of the earth; 3). Based on the new genomic evidence, the US Supreme Court could accept a case requesting a restraining order against Census categories, arguing that there is no "rational basis" for dividing Americans into arbitrary "races" that have no basis in science and the Court could order the Government to use the term "skin color" instead. And so the "racial categories" certainly couldn't withstand the "strict scrutiny" analysis that is required in cases involving the division of Americans based on "race". 4). Although many Black people would prefer to ignore the evidence that biological "race" doesn't exist, the journal Nature Genetics has recently stated that the acknowledgement of that our biology is far more complicated than "white vs. Black" is essential to medical care for individuals based on their individual biology rather than based on lumping people into enormous and arbitrary color groups that ignore their individual patients. In an article entitled "Race and the Human Genome," With very rare exceptions, all of us in the US are immigrants. We bring with us a subset of genes from our homelands, and for many Americans, often first-generation but more commonly second-generation, the plural noun 'homelands' is appropriate. From this perspective, the most immediately obvious characteristic of 'race' is that describing most of us as Caucasian, Asian or African is far too simple. Despite attempts by the US Census Bureau to expand its definitions, the term 'race' does not describe most of us with the subtlety and complexity required to capture and appreciate our genetic diversity. Unfortunately, this oversimplification has had many tragic effects. Therefore, we need to start with the science . . .Even if you find the proposition that "race" doesn't exist troubling, I urge bloggers to adopt the button leading to the Human Genome Project page. It's essential to our health and the advance of medical science. It is likewise essential to becoming adults whose concepts of culture are based on science rather than having concepts of science that are tortuously twisted to fit anachronistic vestiges of color-aroused culture. |
| Tags: Race, (All Tags) |
  Send As Email  |
Department of Energy Says Black Race Doesn't Exist | 36 comments | Post A Comment
Department of Energy Says Black Race Doesn't Exist | 36 comments | Post A Comment
Saturday, 28 November 2009
Press Release: US Human Genome Project Announces "Race" Does Not Exist
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Atty. Francis L. Holland
Blogs: American Journal of Color Arousal, etc.
URL: http://amjca.blogspot.com
Phone: 55 (73) 9123-2538
Skype: FazInformatica2005
US Human Genome Project Announces
"Race" Does Not Exist!
"Race" Does Not Exist!
With the 2010 United States Census nearing, the word "race" will inevitably become a political lightning rod, with political groups debating what "races" should be included and excluded. Missing from the discussion is science: Why do we use the word "race" ubiquitously, in journalism and discussions, over 40 million times in print in the United States over the last year (according to Google), even after the US Government's Human Genome Project has announced that biological race simply does not exist?
Atty. Francis L. Holland of the American Journal of Color Arousal (AMJCA) has developed a new Easy-Widget that takes readers directly to the Human Genome Project webpage's discussion, explaining why the centuries-old hypothesis of biological "race" is not supported, and is disproved, by Government-supported DNA research (conducted during the Bush Administration). As the journal Nature Genetics stated in the article entitled "Race and the Human Genome,"
With very rare exceptions, all of us in the US are immigrants. We bring with us a subset of genes from our homelands, and for many Americans, often first-generation but more commonly second-generation, the plural noun 'homelands' is appropriate. From this perspective, the most immediately obvious characteristic of 'race' is that describing most of us as Caucasian, Asian or African is far too simple. Despite attempts by the US Census Bureau to expand its definitions, the term 'race' does not describe most of us with the subtlety and complexity required to capture and appreciate our genetic diversity. Unfortunately, this oversimplification has had many tragic effects. Therefore, we need to start with the science . . .
In an another statement, the US Department of Energy Human Genome Project simplifies for the public gist of the "Race and Human Genome" article above, stating unambiguously that empirical science has disproved the hypothesis of "race":
DNA studies do not indicate that separate classifiable subspecies (races) exist within modern humans. While different genes for physical traits such as skin and hair color can be identified between individuals, no consistent patterns of genes across the human genome exist to distinguish one race from another. There also is no genetic basis for divisions of human ethnicity. People who have lived in the same geographic region for many generations may have some alleles in common, but no allele will be found in all members of one population and in no members of any other.Atty. Holland argues that sociological definitions based upon the term "race" are so tainted by their relationship with debunked biological theories that the term "race" has become so hopelessly ambiguous as to be meaningless, irreconcilable and perpetually controversial.
The attached double-click Easy-Widget, hosted at WidgetBox (HTML below), says:
"Skin Color Exists. Black and white subspecies (races) of humanity are a false and anachronistic hypothesis. Learn More: Human Genome Project."
This easy widget takes readers directly to the "Minorities, Race and Genomics" webpage of the US Department of Energy, where readers can evaluate for themselves whether our public discussion and vocabulary have become hopelessly disconnected from the scientific advances that should be helping to guide our discussions.
Here is the HTML code for the "Skin Color Exists" Easy-Widget:
Atty. Holland encourages the thousands of blogs in the afrosphere to post this widget. Doing so challenges our daily conversations of "race" to include the fact that, as a matter of DNA-based biological science, "race" just doesn't exist, and using the tainted biological term in sociological discussions misleads and frustrates reconciliation efforts between and among people of different skin colors.
The debate is inevitable. How will the 2010 Census use the term "race" and will the term itself further mislead the public about basic DNA genomic science? These issues will be hotly debated throughout preparation for the 2010 and beyond.
So, how can the science be simply explained? "Skin color groups and national heritage are facts of political life. However, DNA and genomic science have revealed over the last decade that the hypothesis of "race" is not supported by science, even though we have relied upon this hypothesis as a virtual article of faith for over 400 years."
Contact: Atty: Francis L. Holland
Blog: American Journal of Color Arousal, etc.
URL: http://amjca.blogspot.com
Phone: 55 (73) 9123-2538
Skype: FazInformatica2005
References:
http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/elsi/minorities.shtml
http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng2150.html
http://amjca.blogspot.com/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/francis-l-holland/why-the-race-word-is-wron_b_66014.html
http://amjca.blogspot.com/2009/11/why-is-word-race-used-80-times-more.html
Tuesday, 24 November 2009
White Professor in Brazil Immediately Arrested for Insulting Black Student on Basis of Skin Color
Notably, it is not necessary under the Brazilian Constitution to prove that the professor "is a racist" before he can be imprisoned for his "racist" behavior during a particular incident. It is sufficient to demonstrate that he said the offensive words and that the words were associated with the victims "race" [skin color] As the Brazilian blog below points out, an outward "racist" "reaction" is sufficient for the culprit to be immediately arrested, with no need to prove that he always has this reaction and therefore "is a racist." It is sufficient that he engaged in "racist" behavior in the case in question.
A Brazilian blog called "Society Demands Justice" also reported the case, but without a link to a Brazilian source:
Tuesday, November 24, 2009Professor tem reação racista com aluna /
"Professor Has Racist Reaction Against a Student""Neguinha do cabelo chapado", este foi o discurso racista do professor Saulo da Cruz Ramos, na cidade de Ilhéus. A vítima foi a aluna Jamile Catarino Pacheco que ao ouvir as palavras de ofensa, não pensou duas vezes e procurou a delegacia para denunciar a atitude de Saulo.
Translated: Black little thing with pressed hair were the racist words that professor Saulo da Cruz Ramos in the city of Ilhéus. The victim was the student Jamilie Catarino Pacheco, who, after having heard the offensive words, didn't think twice before seeking out local law enforcement officials to denounce the professor's attitude [as expressed in his statements].
O professor, além de falar palavras de agressão para a jovem, disse que "nego com ele não tem vez". Ao sair da delegacia, os policias foram ao bar, onde Saulo estava e deram voz de prisão. A família de Ramos tentou fazer com que Jamile retirasse a queixa, mas não houve êxito. A estudante permaneceu com seu posicionamento e, como racismo é um crime que não tem fiança, o professor irá permanecer preso, até Deus sabe quando.
The professor, in addition to saying agressive words to the young woman, said, "there's no room for Black thing like like him [referring to a Black man present]. Leaving the police station, the police went directly to the bar, where the professor was, and announced that he was under arrest.
The professor's family tried to convince Jamile to withdraw her complaint, but they were unsuccessful. The student maintained her position and, since acts of racism are a crime for which bail is not available, the professor will remain imprisoned until God only knows when.
Que feio para uma pessoa que é vista como educador e tem conhecimento nas leis e informações sobre os direitos humanos.
Such ugly behavior for a person who is seen as an educator with knowledge of the laws and information about human rights.
1 comentários:
Infelizmente, se o professor for fazer a mesma coisa nos Estados Unidos, não ia ser crime. Tem muitas coisas faladas nos Estados Unidos que são criminais, mas chingamentos a base de cor não ficam entre as coisas ilegais.
http://francislholland.blogspot.com- 24 de Novembro de 2009 14:29
Sunday, 22 November 2009
Color-arousing Republican Senator Lamar Alexander Says Medicaid is a "Medical Ghetto"
“This bill is historic in its arrogance. Arrogant in its dumping of 15 million low income Americans into a medical ghetto called Medicaid that none of us or any of our families would ever want to be a part of for our healthcare.” Sour, Sorry Sen. Lamar Alexander Calls Medicaid “Medical Ghetto”I disagree that this is "racist" for fundamentally important reasons based in an underling biological fact; "race" does not exist and even though Lamar Alexander is appealing to the belief that "race" exists, it's still not "racism".
Lamar Alexander's words are an appeal to color-aroused ideation, emotion and political behavior. Jack and Jill Politics still uses the words "race", "racism" and racial, as if these have any meaning in light of recent science proving the terms to be utterly without basis in biology.
I'm from a new generation of thinkers and writers who don't try to describe everything as "racist" just because it's easier, more conventional and more familiar. Thankfully, when researchers discovered the existence of DNA (Deoxyribonucleic acid), they created an abbreviation that everybody could understand but that did not compromise the underlying science.
"Race" is a shorthand way of saying many different things that are utterly unrelated to and dismissive of the underlying science. Every iteration of the word "race", including "race", "racial", "racist" and "race-based" compromises the underlying science because the Human Genome Project has conclusively proven that there is no evidence of the existence of "race" anywhere in the entirely mapped human genome. So, the term "race" is not a reference to biology; it's a negation of everything we have learned over the past century (and particularly the past ten years) about our common genetic biology.
(Oh, you're only referring to "sociological race", but not "biological race"? Try to explain that to Americans in a thirty-second commercial! It's an impossibly complex concept that even people who have studied "race" in college don't really understand and assimilate.)
As I commented at JJP, every time you say the word "racism", you are effectively conceding that you are from a different sub-species than whites. Whites have very effectively taught you to campaign against your own interests by AGREEING WITH THEM that biological "race" exists.
Once you agree that Blacks are a separate sub-species, it's a natural step for whites and even Blacks to agree that Blacks are from an inherently inferior sub-species. (Does anyone really believe that the concept of "separate but equal sub-species" will ever gain any adherents? SHOULD it gain any adherents when the known science utterly disproves this sociological hypothesis?)
We can talk about how imputed "race" makes it possible to engage in discrimination based on what the discriminator THINKS is the "race" of another, even when it''s not. It's unlawful in many contexts to discriminate against someone because you BELIEVE they are Black, even when they only have a dark suntan, or you BELIEVE they are gay because of the way that they speak or dress, when they aren't gay. That's "imputed race" and "imputed sexual orientation".
Do you really believe we can explain to America that the reason we insist on using the word "race", even though we know "race" doesn't exist, is because of the imputed race practiced by people who DO believe that "race" exists? That might work if people who don't believe in biological race stopped using the word "race" altogether and started referring to "skin color groups. But, as long as even intelligent Blacks are using the word "race", you can forget about explaining "imputed race" to the American public.
Now, some people will bring in the perfectly legitimate argument that Lamar Alexander is "racist" because first he imputes "race" to Blacks and then he uses terms like "ghetto" to associate Blacks with this "imputed race"
Once you agree to the premise that "race" exists, it makes perfect sense to Blacks and whites alike that the sub-species called "the black race" must have huge differences (and deformities) relative to whites. Otherwise why would Blacks concede that we constitute a sub-species of the human species?
Does it matter that we are considered a sub-species of the human species? Would you want your five year old's grammar school teacher to explain to him/her and the rest of the class that your child is a member of a sub-species of humanity that is separate and distinct from whites? HAHA If you don't want your child's teacher to say it, then why do you insist on saying it yourself?
The truth is that much of our ideation in America and other countries is based over-interpreting the meaning of skin color and skin-color-associated physical characteristics, like hair type and facial morphology. But the Human Genome Project has discovered, by examining the entire human genetic map, that only oo.o1 percent of the DNA of Black is different from the DNA of whites. We are virtually identical in virtually every way, and so there is no genetic basis for us humiliating, demeaning and marginalizing ourselves by agreeing to be considered a sub-species of humanity, a "race".
People from the Human Genome Project met with Blacks to explain this new understanding, but Blacks seem to have ignored the new science in favor of the old prejudices,like people who prefer to use wood stoves because they're afraid of gas and electricity.
Unfortunately, even the most intelligent of Black people become lazy and seemingly ignorant when it comes to skin color. We would hope that intelligent Black people would explain to the masses that biological "race" was never anything more than a hypothesis -- one that was conceived before humans had any idea that DNA existed, much less what our DNA contained. The disproved hypothesis of "race" has done more to marginalize Blacks than any other concept in American history.
And yet it's still the lingua franca here at Jack and Jill Politics. Oh well. When our generation dies of or retires, our children will assume our institutions and they have grown up in an age where the fact that race doesn't exist is much easier for them to absorb and assimilate. It's just a shame that they have to live with our stubborn ignorance (perpetuating the belief in "race") until we are too old to speak and write any longer.
The truth is that even the most intelligent and educated of Blacks ignore science and steadfastly practice religious obeisance to anachronistic and disproved HYPOTHESIS about human genes. Isn't it time that our language begins to reflect what we've learned about the virtually total lack of difference between Black and white DNA?
Saturday, 21 November 2009
Too Many Blacks Showing Little Intelligence Where "Race" Is Concerned
I'm beginning to think that just as color-aroused illness effects whites, it prejudices Blacks' ability to think logically, making even some of best-educated of us blind to the obvious. For some four hundred years, we've lived as though there were fundamental biological differences between whites and Blacks, with skin color as a marker of those fundamental differences, and these differences were called "race".
It was hypothesized that Blacks and whites (and Latinos and Asians) constituted distinct "races", sub-species of humanity, and further hypothesized that there were any number of intellectual, cultural and biological differences founded in "racial" differences. At one time, we even believed that Blacks' and whites' blood shouldn't be mixed at blood banks.
At some point in the propaganda cycle, many people forgot that "races" were merely a hypothesis, a theory, and never a statement of proven fact. Scientists lacked the understanding of DNA (which was only discovered in the 1950's or so) and lacked knowledge of the human genome to conclusively prove or disprove the theory of "race", but most of the world's institutions were built upon the hypothesis that "race" functioned just as it was hypothesized.
Black college professors were hired to teach their students about "critical race theory" and many may never made it clear to their students that the existence of "race" as a biological matter was a hypothesis, not a self-evident, universal truth. Instead "race" theorists took it as a fundamental and even religious precept that the existence of different skin colors and facial morphology and hair type "proved" "races" existed.
That's fine. They were wrong. It turns out, based on DNA studies and the results of the Human Genome Project, mapping the entire human genome, there isn't any fundamental biological "racial" difference between people that can be perceived on the basis of superficial characteristics.
According to the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science, Office of Biological and Environmental Research, Human Genome Program,
This is where I think the most educated Blacks (including the President) show a tremendous blind spot. So wedded are many Black people to the 'word and hypothesis of "race", that they refuse to stop using the word or to make even minimal attempts to disambiguate theories of sociological "race" (sociology being inherently fluid) from biological "race." These educated and educating Blacks are wedded to the word "race" and don't believe that the term "skin color group," which exists, is ever a sufficient alternative for the word race. In their minds, "race" is the only acceptable term for both biological "race" and sociological "race." It is analogous to "hamburger" being the only acceptable word for both "hamburger" and "hot dog."
One would hope that the most-educated people in American society would teach the less educated, but the opposite seems seem to be occurring. Even as the young realize that "racial differences" is useless and destructive terminology, the educated speak as if they were ignorant of the fact. The less-educated often say that "we're all human", without needing scientific proof of the fact. In turns out that the simpler answer is also the scientifically correct one. "We're all alike" biologically, except for minute differences that explain our skin color, facial and hair characteristics, and even those are not reliably distinct.
In spite of all of the recent DNA and human genome evidence that "race" doesn't exist, the most educated Blacks insist on continuing to use the word "race" as if science and the advance of human knowledge didn't exist.
I think this shows that if intelligence is the ability to integrate and synthesize new information as it becomes available, then we would have to conclude that the the USA is one of the stupidest nations in the history of humanity, Blacks and whites alike. We have more information about human genetics than any previous generation did, and yet we still insist that the world is flat and ridicule or abandon those who disagree with us.
When the nightly news says that cigarettes cause cancer, we're able to assimilate that information, eventually ban cigarettes in public places, and try to stop smoking, as the President says he has, for the good of our health.
Compare that to "race". In 2002, seven years ago, the Human Genome Project announced that "race" doesn't exist, because there is no allele in all whites that can't be found among Blacks, and there is similarly no allele among Blacks that cannot be found among some whites.
"Ethnicity" as a biological matter is likewise a not a matter of science, but rather a sociological observation. There is no genetic matter that can be found among all Puerto Ricans that can't also be found among some whites, and vice versa.
Now, I admit that DNA is a relatively new science and many of us don't understand it very well. Many of us know as much about DNA as we know about ice on the moon. Because of its political dimensions, when we discuss "race" we discuss our opinions much more than we discuss or are interested in learning about and discussing scientific facts.
This is analogous to the condition of the women's rights movement in the 1960's. There was little knowledge of what women could do, since women had been carefully excluded from and/or marginalized in virtually every profession except motherhood and homemaking. We treated women as a sub-species of humanity with vastly distinct differences and disabilities that supposedly made women incapable of accomplishing what men could do. Even if they weren't incapable, it still made us inherently uncomfortable to imagine women engaging in these activities.
Women have made tremendous strides and Blacks have often wondered why white women seemed to outpace Blacks in the civil rights department. Part of the reason may be that white women have been accepted as members of the same human species as white men due to the women's rights movement, but Blacks, carrying the cross of "race," have never become generally accepted, even among the most educated Black and white Americans, as members of the same species as white men. Many of us still believe we are a sub-species.
Black studies departments opened on campuses across America to study "critical race theory", instead of "critical color-arousal discrimination theory." The result is that Black students, who are now professionals in every field of endeavor, remain convinced that biological "race" exists and are unwilling to consider the possibility that it doesn't, much less challenge whites who say that "race" exists. And so we have become our own overseers on the plantation of "race", internalizing the oppressors' scarlet letter "R", as if it were branded with a hot iron on our foreheads.
It's a commonly understood precept that if you want people to do something willingly, you have to make it easy for them. Teaching that "race" exists sociologically but not biologically does not make it easier for Americans to stop arguing about "race". The term "race" is inherently controversial because its history is rooted in an anachronistic and scientifically disproved hypothesis that whites and Blacks are fundamentally different biologically, and that therefore it makes sense to search for the "angry gene" and the "stupid gene" and the "poverty gene" among people of different skin colors. It's laughable, really.
Even when the life-preserver of the human genome evidence is thrown by white people to save us from our hypothetical inferiority, the most educated Blacks prefer to drown with the chains of "race" around their necks instead of renewing their minds with the life-preserver of proof that race never existed in the first place.
If a white person says on television, "Race doesn't exist," Blacks will fall upon that person like football team on someone with the ball in his hands. It's naive to say that race doesn't exist, Black intellectuals insist. These Black intellectuals really don't care whether they are arguing in favor of biological or sociological race and they make little or no effort to disambiguate. Therefore, the masses can hardly be blamed if they continue to believe in the newly disproved hypothesis of biological race.
Blacks did not begin to receive even marginally equal treatment from whites until we demanded it. Likewise, whites are not going to acknowledge that Blacks are not fundamentally biologically different until Blacks demand it. And most of us aren't ready to demand it. We're wedded to "race" the way battered spouses are metaphorically wedded to their batterers. We know intellectually that the beatings will never stop, and yet something in our self-image and our sense of efficacy, our enabling and codependency, simply won't let us let go.
God help us! Until we acknowledge that biological "race" does not exist, and determine that no ambiguity will be permitted on this point, we will continue to start the rhetorical and socio-political sprint with whites ten yards ahead of us.
It was hypothesized that Blacks and whites (and Latinos and Asians) constituted distinct "races", sub-species of humanity, and further hypothesized that there were any number of intellectual, cultural and biological differences founded in "racial" differences. At one time, we even believed that Blacks' and whites' blood shouldn't be mixed at blood banks.
At some point in the propaganda cycle, many people forgot that "races" were merely a hypothesis, a theory, and never a statement of proven fact. Scientists lacked the understanding of DNA (which was only discovered in the 1950's or so) and lacked knowledge of the human genome to conclusively prove or disprove the theory of "race", but most of the world's institutions were built upon the hypothesis that "race" functioned just as it was hypothesized.
Black college professors were hired to teach their students about "critical race theory" and many may never made it clear to their students that the existence of "race" as a biological matter was a hypothesis, not a self-evident, universal truth. Instead "race" theorists took it as a fundamental and even religious precept that the existence of different skin colors and facial morphology and hair type "proved" "races" existed.
That's fine. They were wrong. It turns out, based on DNA studies and the results of the Human Genome Project, mapping the entire human genome, there isn't any fundamental biological "racial" difference between people that can be perceived on the basis of superficial characteristics.
According to the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science, Office of Biological and Environmental Research, Human Genome Program,
"DNA studies do not indicate that separate classifiable subspecies (races) exist within modern humans. While different genes for physical traits such as skin and hair color can be identified between individuals, no consistent patterns of genes across the human genome exist to distinguish one race from another. There also is no genetic basis for divisions of human ethnicity. People who have lived in the same geographic region for many generations may have some alleles in common, but no allele will be found in all members of one population and in no members of any other." U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science, Office of Biological and Environmental Research, Human Genome ProgramMoreover, there are no "alleles" that can be universally found in one skin color group and never found in another. So one of the fundamental parts of what we need to accept about having brown skin is that our brown skin does not make us fundamentally different biologically from whites. Culture (in the sense of "that which is created by man") and our political and economic group differences make us different from whites - not biology.
This is where I think the most educated Blacks (including the President) show a tremendous blind spot. So wedded are many Black people to the 'word and hypothesis of "race", that they refuse to stop using the word or to make even minimal attempts to disambiguate theories of sociological "race" (sociology being inherently fluid) from biological "race." These educated and educating Blacks are wedded to the word "race" and don't believe that the term "skin color group," which exists, is ever a sufficient alternative for the word race. In their minds, "race" is the only acceptable term for both biological "race" and sociological "race." It is analogous to "hamburger" being the only acceptable word for both "hamburger" and "hot dog."
One would hope that the most-educated people in American society would teach the less educated, but the opposite seems seem to be occurring. Even as the young realize that "racial differences" is useless and destructive terminology, the educated speak as if they were ignorant of the fact. The less-educated often say that "we're all human", without needing scientific proof of the fact. In turns out that the simpler answer is also the scientifically correct one. "We're all alike" biologically, except for minute differences that explain our skin color, facial and hair characteristics, and even those are not reliably distinct.
In spite of all of the recent DNA and human genome evidence that "race" doesn't exist, the most educated Blacks insist on continuing to use the word "race" as if science and the advance of human knowledge didn't exist.
I think this shows that if intelligence is the ability to integrate and synthesize new information as it becomes available, then we would have to conclude that the the USA is one of the stupidest nations in the history of humanity, Blacks and whites alike. We have more information about human genetics than any previous generation did, and yet we still insist that the world is flat and ridicule or abandon those who disagree with us.
When the nightly news says that cigarettes cause cancer, we're able to assimilate that information, eventually ban cigarettes in public places, and try to stop smoking, as the President says he has, for the good of our health.
Compare that to "race". In 2002, seven years ago, the Human Genome Project announced that "race" doesn't exist, because there is no allele in all whites that can't be found among Blacks, and there is similarly no allele among Blacks that cannot be found among some whites.
"Ethnicity" as a biological matter is likewise a not a matter of science, but rather a sociological observation. There is no genetic matter that can be found among all Puerto Ricans that can't also be found among some whites, and vice versa.
Now, I admit that DNA is a relatively new science and many of us don't understand it very well. Many of us know as much about DNA as we know about ice on the moon. Because of its political dimensions, when we discuss "race" we discuss our opinions much more than we discuss or are interested in learning about and discussing scientific facts.
This is analogous to the condition of the women's rights movement in the 1960's. There was little knowledge of what women could do, since women had been carefully excluded from and/or marginalized in virtually every profession except motherhood and homemaking. We treated women as a sub-species of humanity with vastly distinct differences and disabilities that supposedly made women incapable of accomplishing what men could do. Even if they weren't incapable, it still made us inherently uncomfortable to imagine women engaging in these activities.
Women have made tremendous strides and Blacks have often wondered why white women seemed to outpace Blacks in the civil rights department. Part of the reason may be that white women have been accepted as members of the same human species as white men due to the women's rights movement, but Blacks, carrying the cross of "race," have never become generally accepted, even among the most educated Black and white Americans, as members of the same species as white men. Many of us still believe we are a sub-species.
Black studies departments opened on campuses across America to study "critical race theory", instead of "critical color-arousal discrimination theory." The result is that Black students, who are now professionals in every field of endeavor, remain convinced that biological "race" exists and are unwilling to consider the possibility that it doesn't, much less challenge whites who say that "race" exists. And so we have become our own overseers on the plantation of "race", internalizing the oppressors' scarlet letter "R", as if it were branded with a hot iron on our foreheads.
It's a commonly understood precept that if you want people to do something willingly, you have to make it easy for them. Teaching that "race" exists sociologically but not biologically does not make it easier for Americans to stop arguing about "race". The term "race" is inherently controversial because its history is rooted in an anachronistic and scientifically disproved hypothesis that whites and Blacks are fundamentally different biologically, and that therefore it makes sense to search for the "angry gene" and the "stupid gene" and the "poverty gene" among people of different skin colors. It's laughable, really.
Even when the life-preserver of the human genome evidence is thrown by white people to save us from our hypothetical inferiority, the most educated Blacks prefer to drown with the chains of "race" around their necks instead of renewing their minds with the life-preserver of proof that race never existed in the first place.
If a white person says on television, "Race doesn't exist," Blacks will fall upon that person like football team on someone with the ball in his hands. It's naive to say that race doesn't exist, Black intellectuals insist. These Black intellectuals really don't care whether they are arguing in favor of biological or sociological race and they make little or no effort to disambiguate. Therefore, the masses can hardly be blamed if they continue to believe in the newly disproved hypothesis of biological race.
Blacks did not begin to receive even marginally equal treatment from whites until we demanded it. Likewise, whites are not going to acknowledge that Blacks are not fundamentally biologically different until Blacks demand it. And most of us aren't ready to demand it. We're wedded to "race" the way battered spouses are metaphorically wedded to their batterers. We know intellectually that the beatings will never stop, and yet something in our self-image and our sense of efficacy, our enabling and codependency, simply won't let us let go.
God help us! Until we acknowledge that biological "race" does not exist, and determine that no ambiguity will be permitted on this point, we will continue to start the rhetorical and socio-political sprint with whites ten yards ahead of us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
