Race

Why do liberals call it a social construct?
When they say 'race has no biological basis in reality' do they mean 'race as the social construct implies it is has no biological basis in reality' or just plain denial?

DURRR HURRR NIGGERS NIGGERS DURRRR HURRRRR JOOS HURRRR

Libs call it a social construct because the goal of the cultural Marxist is to de-construct society to make way for communism. They want things that have been a given since time began (race, gender stc..) to be questioned.

>>3
>cultural marxism
This board is infested with retards.

>>4
You're proving yourself right.

>>5
Enjoying the irony? You should, really...

Genes are responsible for differences in races, the prehistoric era was not all cool iced pepsi and leather couches and for about 70000 years, after the last mass extinction, evolution continued as always. Human races whom have spent 1000s of years apart are not very distinct compared to races of antelope or crocodile whom have spent 100000s of years apart and differences between individual genes and abilities vary far more than differences between races.

Race as a social construct is an ambiguous term, for a clean slate marxist it could mean we are all completely equal in all things and differences in genes do not affect our abilities, for a rational objective scientist it would mean that irrational people enjoy exaggerating the differences between races. I would say elements of race are a social construct, others are not.

I know this is somewhat off topic, but is there any study between difference races? I mean, whether certain race's genes and DNA are more incline to be more physically strong, smarter etc.?

Genes vary so little amongst humans that the differences are meaningless. What's important is culture, both as a majority group and a minority.

>>8
No. Only the properties of individual genes are focussed on in genetics. The only science that pays attention to race is forensic science.

>>9
Genes do matter when people are pushed to their limits, for instance athletes. There are of course genes that can cause diseases and resistances. Why did you say something so stupid?

>>8
There are thousand of studies of racial differences, mostly in peer-reviewed journals...
http://www.ssc.uwo.ca/psychology/faculty/rushtonpdfs/Race_Evolution_Behavior.pdf
This sums up a few of the literature, though it contains several errors, most notably regarding penis size and testosterone (Blacks biologically live less -- as in die of old age sooner -- than Whites, testosterone differs with age, so the comparisons in almost every study made so far are bunk... though the general conclusion, that Blacks have higher testosterone levels is true).
About Blacks being physically stronger, there are several books about that too, just google them.
>>10
I work in medicine and race is very relevant here, despite stupid libfags' attempts to obfuscate it and even though race denial is hurting minorities more than anything because 'We're all equal lol' translates to minorities being, as is well-known, less likely to participate in biomedical research. Libfags really think the world is one big Disneyland ride...
Now that race can be genetically determined with 100% accuracy, there is absolutely no reason to not use it.

>>11
Obviously there are some strong feelings concerning the race issue and these demagogues perpetuate it, but if someone really is stupid enough to believe them do we want them practicing medicine?

>Now that race can be genetically determined with 100% accuracy
>I work in medicine
janitor or nurse?

>>13
It's true. Troll harder.

>>12
The problem is the anti-race propaganda, some of which rests also in academia, causes a lack of funding in genetic research, which in turn results in several people getting hurt by this.
>>13
None.
Is there something wrong with my statements?
http://www.plosgenetics.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pgen.0030160
You are either ignorant of modern genetics or blinded by your political views.

>>14
>>15
No, seriously, what do you do? Clean the garbage chute of a hospital? Get rid of medical waste?

>>16

I swear to god there is this one idiot who consisently ruins perfectly good discussions beacuse he doesn't like them and they don't jibe with his political possitions.

Please fuck off and grow up.

>>15

you claim anti-race propaganda causes a lack of funding in genetic research and yet you link to a racial genetics study with 66 separate references in the same post.  LOOLLL!

>>17

you sound like you've already assumed racial conclusions to be true.  you sound like the studies would simply fulfill your racist prophesies.  you sound like a faggot

>>18
As long as there are retarded campaigns like "There is no gene for race" http://www.humanracemachine.com/ http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/615/nogeneforracejq8.jpg (which is true, but there are GENES for race, their correlation structure inferring race) going about problems will ensue.

>>19

what problems?  wtf are you talking about?  scientists can study anything they want to.  there are scores of psychologists and geneticists making whole careers out of proving ultra-minor differences in people.

you're just mad because you can't make sweeping generalizations with the limited data you have.  you want to be able to claim racial superiority, but you know you'll be laughed because you have nothing but hollow evidence.  Raven's Progressive Matrices?  lol, this is supposed to be science not fake wavy lined faggot shit.

>>20
I was talking about minorities' medical problems of denying racial differences, in so far as they seldom participate in biomedical research and a lack of funding is created by those who loudly propagate egalitarian bullshit. The ultra-minor differences that you allege and are not supported by scientific evidence to be ultra-minor but by only blind belief in ultra-equality seem to matter when it comes to treating racially distinct people, you deluded sack of shit.

I can make sweeping generalizations with the data, which is not at all limited. You seem to be stuck in the 20's, and your views are trumped by modern genetics. What's with the hissy fit about racial superiority and highly g-loaded IQ tests? You're probably the one who believes in it, since you are so sure that studying racial differences will lead to those conclusions.

Libfags are truly a riot.

>>15
>>16
>>18
>>20
I get the impression you are trying to say "differences are so minor they do not justify racism", which is true, but nowhere in this thread has anyone espoused a racist belief. Do you believe his motivation for asking these questions revolve around racism? Perhaps his motivation is the truth and the need to criticise people who are wrong, especially liberals. In b4 same person.

>>21


To to assume g is a valid concept is utter folley.  Psychometrics and Phychology are such bullshit fields.  Obviously people have different genes, and those genes are often correlated along racial lines.  So yes, on average some races make breast milk with higher protein values or skin with more melanin. 
 
But genetics is limited with the human brain, because it's the most complicated single thing in the known universe.  Study it, but to assume some faggot geneticist is going to produce anyothing other than the most cursory of research is wishful thinking.  The brain is literally the interlocking of trillions of components, and most geneticists are no name faggots with something to prove.

no one gives a shit, do whatever tests you want, but our understanding is still too limited to make sweeping generalizations about race and intelligence.

>>23
Dude, I don't know much about g, except that it is known to predict academic, microeconomic, and macroeconomic phenomena alike, and in turn to be predicted by biological measurements like reaction time and brain MRIs. It's simply got a much larger evidentiary base behind it hence views that simply dispel g as irrelevant are fringe in academia, to my knowledge.

I read Gould's book "The Mismeasure of Man" (mind you, at the request of a liberal) and he made some really, really grave errors in the factor analysis chapter and the majority of sources he aimed to disprove were literately ANCIENT. He even went as far as fucking Samuel George Morton and Pierre Paul Broca.
But genetics is limited with the human brain, because it's the most complicated single thing in the known universe.
The brain is literally the interlocking of trillions of components, and most geneticists are no name faggots with something to prove.
Oh boy, is that some Irreducible Complexity that I see? Come on. Stop with the creationist bullshit.
our understanding is still too limited to make sweeping generalizations about race and intelligence.
I don't think that it is, but no one talked about that until you came along. I just asked why liberals deny race. So do you deny race because of its implications in g differences among races, that you find unthinkable and horrible, since this is what seems to be upsetting you?

Libfags would impede the cure for cancer if it helped prove race doesn't exist.

>>24,25
You racist fascists should just learn to live together with minorities, hold hands and dance under the multicultural rainbow like everyone else.

>>26
Fuck off, I liek genocide

>>26
I prefer to enslave ethnic minorities.

>>24

|be predicted by biological measurements like reaction time and brain MRIs.
give me a sauce that shows it's more than a correlation

|I read Gould's book "The Mismeasure of Man"
good for you.  i don't give a shit about Gould personally.  funny you should quote from a 27 year old book to try to disprove me.

|Oh boy, is that some Irreducible Complexity that I see?
I think Irreducible Complexity is somewhat valid for something like the human thought process.  when it was first proposed, g was just some minor theory that tried to show why some people do better in school than others.  somehow it got inflated into mythical proportions, to become the major uncharted mass of human intelligence which IQ tests seek to chart.  and you claim to speak with authority on this?

|So do you deny race because of its implications in g differences among races, that you find unthinkable and horrible, since this is what seems to be upsetting you?
I'm a liberal and I don't deny race.  In fact, I will guarentee you that different races have different genes, which cause a wide variety of differences in people.  I'm mostly just bothered by psychology, which is and will likely remain in the realm of statistical bullshit.  Psychology is to hard science as stamp collecting is to hard science.  It's little more than a endless limp wristed collection of statistics that shows correlations, but not causation.  That hasn't stopped scores of you blue-blooded faggots from trying though. 

g is a true construct, and you can appeal to its existence all you want.  But as of today, you can't satisfactory answer to major aberrations such as the Flynn Effect and unless you're willing to kidnap a bunch of women, place them in a control, kidnap their babies, raise them on an island, educate them in a uniform way and give them IQ tests, you'll be stuck in an endless nature vs. nurture debate.

Until you admit that, I'll just assume you another loser social scientist stuck in the academic bubble who didn't have what it took to get into med school. 

Why don't you whine some more faggot?

>>30
give me a sauce that shows it's more than a correlation
Why would I? It's not more than a correlation. No one expects it to be more than a correlation to be predicted by biological measurements like reaction time and brain MRIs.
funny you should quote from a 27 year old book to try to disprove me.
I read the 1996 version, the hissy fit about The Bell Curve version. Any NEW book that disproves what most of academia believes in, then? I'm assuming you're going to say Flynn's books...
I think Irreducible Complexity is somewhat valid for something like the human thought process.
I think not. This is sociology bullshit.
and you claim to speak with authority on this?
After just claiming not to be, wtf are you on about?
I'm mostly just bothered by psychology, which is and will likely remain in the realm of statistical bullshit.
Evolutionary psychology and sociobiology is pretty nice.
It's little more than a endless limp wristed collection of statistics that shows correlations, but not causation.
Biological correlations mean that g is a biological factor. It's that simple.
But as of today, you can't satisfactory answer to major aberrations such as the Flynn Effect and unless you're willing to kidnap a bunch of women, place them in a control, kidnap their babies, raise them on an island, educate them in a uniform way and give them IQ tests, you'll be stuck in an endless nature vs. nurture debate.
The Flynn Effect is environmental (not g-loaded, not an increase in g) and is probably related to the heritability of IQ increasing with age, children maturing sooner today than they did ages ago and Flynn not giving a fuck about that. There have been adoption programs and the IQ gap stayed the same.
Until you admit that, I'll just assume you another loser social scientist stuck in the academic bubble who didn't have what it took to get into med school.
I hate most social science, because it's filled with Marxist cunts. I've had what it took to get into med school.

lol people seriously arguing with racists

>>33-35
LOL @ liberal hissy fit

derp derp derp derp jews derp derp derp nigger nigger derp derp derp

RON PAUL /newpol/,

I have discovered an amazing site. Turn the volume for your computer ON, and go to http://blocked.on.nimp.org with Internet Explorer. After going there with Internet Explorer, go there with Mozilla Firefox.

what the hell happened with >>35

>>39 Was spam, and got deleted.

Also, new here. LOL @ libfags failing (>>34) and derailing the thread. What kind of psychopath can think that there is no such thing as race when you can meet a Black person you've never seen before and identify him as Black without fail, and same with East Asian and Whites?

>>40
It's called social engineering, which isn't necessarily devious, the problem is the conservatives have already cornered the market in honestly explaining to racists why they are wrong so they needed a new angle and they found it by abusing people's strong feelings about the matter and whipping up extremism. If anyone questions them they can tell their followers "the fact they criticise us proves they are motivated by racism", you can see it in this thread. They also do other faggotry that looks as though it is straight out of "1984" by George Orwell, such as mixing up the definitions of words and demonisation.

BAAAAAAWWWWW LIBFAGS BAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW I AM SPESHUL BEKUZ I HAVE PALE SKIN, AND I AM SUPPOSED TO HAVE BETTTAR AVERAGE AYE-KWOO SO THAT MEANS THE JEW DOCTOR WHO TOLD MY MOM I WAS RETARDED WAS LYING AND ITS ALL THE NIGGERS FAULT

>>41

I consider myself a fairly intelligent person but your post was so poorly written and without structure that I couldn't understand your point.