What are your arguments against "race is a social construct because the category of race does not correspond to biologically meaningful groups/entities" and "skin color differentiation is real but that doesn't mean that people with different skin colors are different races"?

submitted by [deleted] from self.debatealtright

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]antireddit 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

Its salos/blork3d. He does this literally every day. Im honestly not sure why. As near as I can tell hes obsessed with controlling the narrative.

Thats why he continually links to reddit posts he agrees with but depending on what sock puppet account hes using sometimes pretends not to.

He knows these questions have been answered repeatedly, sometimes a day or two prior, but he isnt posting to get answers. Hes making a statement

[–]CuteAsDuck 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I think you're making too many assumptions. I'm 1) a woman, 2) not sure where you got salos/blork3d from. I've only posted in this sub for about 3 times now and it's only been about race because I still get confused on the matter when everywhere I go I see "race is a social construct", "race means nothing", etc, etc.

[–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

"race is a social construct", "race means nothing"

They're lying or misrepresenting the data. Race is real. Even liberal geneticists know that the social constructionist narrative - which is mostly backed by social scientists and not geneticists by the way - is going to collapse: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/23/opinion/sunday/genetics-race.html

[–]CuteAsDuck 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

The article is interesting to me. It's been difficult to find unbiased articles like this, written by actual scientists, so I appreciate you sharing it with me!

[–]oneinchterror 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That article is far from unbiased. Even Reich has to put in a million little qualifications and disclaimers to his statements in order to cover his ass. It's definitely a step in the right direction though.

[–]DragonerneJesus is white 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

David Reich is a jew and he is not unbiased. For obvious reasons.

The entire article is about how jews can't ignore the scientific results about race much longer because otherwise the battlefield is entirely granted to us. Ironically, you turned to us, as the article warned about would happen, if the jewish mainstream kept ignoring the genetic science, which they've done.
Of course they are trying really hard to use their word salats to "refute" reality and this subject is actually what redpilled me to their dishonest methods.