Unity or conformity: What happened to respecting diversity?

No.

 

All Spanish are "Latin" equally. They speak a language derived from Latin. That's why we call them that.

However, there are no biological human races; there is more genetic diversity within a race than there is between any race you might define. Races are merely cultural constructs. There can be any number of them, depending on how you want to count it.

 

Yep I'm a funny guy.

Corporations win democracy (and liberty) loses.

http://www.guerrillanews.com/articles/article.php?id=813

http://www.projectcensored.org/

 

Oh, perish the thought my child! Me own mommy is a woman! I was referring mainly to sodomites.

I object to diversity recognition period, because it promotes division, not unity. African-American, Asian-American, Native-American, Hispanic-American, and whatever else is out there are terms that will keep the nation forever divided.

I think that there would have been more Anglo support for Ellian Gonzalez's family in Miami during that crisis if the Cuban community in that area considered themselves Americans instead of Cubans. But they fly the Cuban flag and play the Cuban national anthem on their Spanish language TV and radio programs as if they care nothing about being American.

Roy

 

All Spanish are "Latin" equally. They speak a language derived from Latin. That's why we call them that.</font>[/QUOTE]Well, actually you could say that... but that's a goofy term to distinguish what would really be "latin american", or everything South of the border. Those people classified in that manner could be either native, or mixed with the European races that came and conquered. For example, my name and lineage from my father's side is from Spain. Although his family is often generically called "Mexicans" they are all relatively pale and fair featured appearing European. The family first came to this area through Louisiana in the late 1600s. Our family name is very common in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California, but isn't too common in Mexico itself. The name originates from a town in the Cuenca, La Mancha region of Spain and sounds very Spanish.

But when the darker native people of Mexico and parts south are not mixed with the Spaniards, they appear much like the Eskimo, Asian, and other Mongoloid races.

Funny thing is though, for political purposes, many are quick to say they are "latinos", especially when it comes to the whole "who deserves California/Etc. argument. Really though, most of those people saying that (MeCHA/Aztlan/La Raza crowd) were descended from the conquerers (either as Spanish or Mestizo) that destroyed and/or bred the identity out of many of the native populations and spread upwards/outwards; having no more claim as early conquerers than later conquerers.

So, since the natives were converted to a latin language, saying all "Spanish" are "Latin" equally, really isn't accurate for racial classification. Latin and Spanish are really goofy terms with how they are applied now days, and I generally refer to the various races in question as Natives (of which there are many subs,) Spanish (from Spain, such as my paternal lineage,) and Mestizos (for mixtures of the Natives and Spaniards.)

In my family, my configuration is affectionatly referred to as the "half breeds." I am dirty blonde and green eyed, although my daughter has the Spanish olive skin and features (which definitely doesn't mirror the Swedish heritage of my wife!)

Now days though, racial classifications serve more to divide than unite. When I hear terms like "La Raza", "Brown/Black/Asian/Etc. Pride", I react the same way as when I hear "White Power." I think all of the terms hold racist meanings... it's just the "White Guilt" makes all of them socially acceptable except "White Power."

 

There are three basic races of humans: Caucasoid (such as Europeans and non-latin Spanish), Negroid (such Africans, Atlantic Islanders, and Aborigines), and Mongoloid (Asians, Orientals, Pacific Islanders, Eskimoes, Latin Americans, and Native Americans).

Most people are at least somewhat a mix of more than one race. In addition, those three basic races have subraces as well, such as the examples listed above. </font>[/QUOTE]Have you read "Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies" by Jared Diamond? If you are really into anthropology or geography, it is very interesting; otherwise it is a cure for insomnia.

I did a review/report of it one time and I summed it up with, "it is Diamond's attempt at rationalizing the racist problems with evolution as to not conflict with the politically correct mindset prevalent in modern academia."

 

Incorrect. The Spanish people (from spain) are white (caucasoid), and speak Castilian and/or Catalon. "Latin" people, otoh, are a mix of Spaniard and Native American. Most hispanic/latino people speak latin Spanish, with the exception of the Brazilian latinos, who speak Portuguese.

No, races are not cultural constructs. Typically, numerous cultures will be a member of the same race. Ploynesian, Chinese and Eskimoes, are all of the same race, but have different cultures. Italian and Norwegian are of the same race, but have different cultures.

 

Since we've been able to actually do genetic analysis of populations, scientists have learned that there are no biological races of humans. Because there is more genetic variation within human "races" than between them, there is no scientific way to distinguish them. ("racial science" theories, like those of the Nazis, are pure gunk)

Races in humans are mere cultural constructs.
"Race has no genetic basis. Not one characteristic, trait or even gene distinguishes all the members of one so-called race from all the members of another so-called race...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."
http://www.topdog04.com/000206.html

We've come a long way from Carlton Coon. I have an original edition of his "The Meaning of Race", in which he argues for the objective existence of races as subspecies. Genetics has shown that there is no evidence for such a conclusion.

Races in humans, are cultural constructs, which is why the number of "races" varies so much from culture to culture.

 

Where do you get your info from? The Study of genetics has determined that there are three basic races: Caucasoid, Mongilod, and Negroid. The National Library of Medicine confirms this (http://www.nlm.nih.gov), not to mention numerous anthropoligical, medical, and genetic science publications.

 

"Genetic differences of populations from different continents represent only about 10 percent of human genetic diversity" while "more than 80 percent of genetic variation is between individuals of the same population." Science (Oct. 15, 1999, Vol. 286, pp. 451-453).

If you are as likely to be a genetic match for an Australian aborigine as your next-door neighbor, ( and that's what the above says)then the concept of biological race has got to be wrong.

I visited the site you linked, but found no statement about race as a biological entity. Could you cite it for me?

Anatomically and genetically, the !Kung are the outgroup with us and negroids. So the "three races" notion won't work. But even then, there's a very good chance that you and a !Kung would be closer genetically than the !Kung would be to another of his group.

Brazil has innumerable races, none of which are less genetically different than the three you mentioned.

It's just cultural.

Luigi Cavalli-Sforza, who has done the most work in human genetics and gene distributions has moved from accepting race as a biolgical reality to declaring he can find no evidence for it in the human genome. And he should know. There are still some important holdouts, like Ernst Mayr, but they are falling away as the human genome project continues.

"From this and other research, he (Cavalli-Sforza) was able to demonstrate that "genetic and cultural data converge in furnishing a convincing explanation of human evolution".

These great themes are covered in his acclaimed books, The Great Human Diasporas: The History of Diversity and Evolution – which his son, television and movie writer Francesco, helped him to write – and Genes, Peoples, and Languages.

The latter title has been praised by fellow scientist Jared Diamond for, among other things, "demolishing scientists' attempts to classify human populations into races in the same way that they classify birds and other species into races".

Cavalli-Sforza himself has written: "The classification into races has proved to be a futile exercise." Genetic research, he has argued, undermines "the popular belief that there are clearly defined races" and will "contribute to the elimination of racism." The idea of race in the human species "serves no purpose". "

 

Oh, and the people of Spain show a great deal of genetic affinity to Africans, which is not surprising, since Africans ruled there for hundreds of years.

The Muslim world was (like medieval Europe) not racist, and genes flowed rather freely in Spain for a long time.