"The History of White People": What it means to be white

[djmarbll]

Chef, a historical trace of the development and continuation of “race,” and more importantly, all that is attributed to it, in my personal preference, is a very good thing—not having read the book myself.

Africa, however, and any other geographical demarcation is a “social concept” as well. Now, I’m weary of any demarcation that separates the “social” from “scientific” in the first place so I’m “borrowing” “concepts,” regardless.

The implication in “scientific” could be construed to mean “natural,” if you will, a “knowing of the natural” that is not social, or “beyond” social. And so we have a long “history” of social/natural; “naturally” is there is no such thing as “Africa?” But then again, if human beings are “natural,” then what constitutes the distinction between our “naturalness” and our “social?”

And also, in these binaries, scientific/social, we have an implied hierarchy: the “scientific” is true, higher, the social is false, lower. But if we partake in the “social” where Africa and race do indeed seem to play a part, how do we reconcile the “scientific concept” that there is no race, or Africa for that matter, and the “social concept” where your black-ass from Africa is more likely to get thrown in jail, statistically—that is, “socially scientifically” (and isn’t that odd?-The science and the social?)—than my “white” “self?” Oh but it's just a "social concept" and not "scientific."

So where do we determine what is "social" and "scientific" when things we accept as geographically scientific (ie, Georgia, east Africa, Middle East, etc.) are actually geographical locations based on social constructs?

[djmarbll]

Oh........I suppose that is a matter of perspective. Depending on the levels of empathy or disdain many people will consider me any one of black or white, too black or white, or not black or white enough, whichever suits their politics best. Because of that (and because of necessity and authenticity) I battle on middle ground. Thus you will mostly get a lot of grey arguments out of me, seldom straight black or white ones.


Getting back to what you said there, on the surface what you propose may appear to be true depending on perspective and political interest. Personally, though, I would venture to say that power structures are a lot more complex and intricate than your IMO simple power/race dichotomy. For example, if you come to my country, you can observe that so-called white privilege is something that is awarded and revoked by a majority black power structure.

In my country the most powerful people are black. This may not mean much on a global scale (where these same people are comparably powerless), but in the smaller scheme of things if you are white and they take away your farm or put you in remand prison for three years without trial just to prove a point, then your white skin is a liability. The point I'm making is that power is relative rather than absolute.

...

The most powerful people are black in Germany? I do believe power is relative, but when a system is institutionalized that statistically favors one group of people over another based on a concept of race (Jim Crow in America or the farm example you brought in Germany), does that make racial justice relative as well?

[Moksha]

Off the top of my head, I would say the benefit is having a better understanding of world history against the backdrop of the last 3-400 years racism, in all of it's many forms, that has been perpetuated by Western "Civilization."

So, all the talk of compasses is moot, as your use of Africa isn't scientific at all, but rather purposely burdened by as many connotations as the concepts of race and white that you disparage in the same post.

You are politicizing geography just as others had politicized race.

[djmarbll]

Regarding all this East African/cradle-of-mankind stuff:

The factual aspect aside, of what social conceptual merit is it to constantly point out that we all came from East Africa?

...

I think it goes to the psyche of racial structure. If it was racially beneficial for the dominant culture to say Columbus discovered America and to also claim Columbus is from the same race that's in power, its validation for the race in power that they deserve to be in that position.

In the same breathe, for the non-dominant culture to say we all came from East Africa as a species, can serve to validate that there's a certain affirmation that lends credence a contribution of non-whites to the world that might otherwise get overlooked.

Now I remind you, I'm only talking in social and not scientific ideologies. I guess its a white supremacy vs. afrocentricity model. Neither side has a monopoly on the truth, but both work to validate their specific ethnic groups.

[Nay Sayer]

So, all the talk of compasses is moot, as your use of Africa isn't scientific at all, but rather purposely burdened by as many connotations as the concepts of race and white that you disparage in the same post.

You are politicizing geography just as others had politicized race.

I'm not sure I understand how my use of the term "Africa" is unscientific.

Certainly there is a landmass called "Africa" which sits on the African Plate and is seperate and distinct from other nearby land masses. Geography and Plate Tectonics are sciences.

Certainly there are people who are indigenous to the African continent. This can be demonstrated using various scientific disciplines like Anthorpology, Archaeology, and Genetics.

So, please explain, where have I been unscientific?

[Nay Sayer]

I think it goes to the psyche of racial structure. If it was racially beneficial for the dominant culture to say Columbus discovered America and to also claim Columbus is from the same race that's in power, its validation for the race in power that they deserve to be in that position.

In the same breathe, for the non-dominant culture to say we all came from East Africa as a species, can serve to validate that there's a certain affirmation that lends credence a contribution of non-whites to the world that might otherwise get overlooked.

Now I remind you, I'm only talking in social and not scientific ideologies. I guess its a white supremacy vs. afrocentricity model. Neither side has a monopoly on the truth, but both work to validate their specific ethnic groups.

There is a ton of science readily available to support the notion that all non-African people derive from an East African base.

There is, however, zero science that supports the assertion re Columbus.

Huge difference...

[dj-chefron]

Everyone who has posted made their points,some good, some that had me think and others where I said to myself . What I want to know and be honest. What does it mean to be white or caucasian?

[djmarbll]

I take it that saying that race is a social concept, not a scientific one, is just to say that the concept "race" as it figures in our every day thinking doesn't figure in any fruitful scientific theory. I don't know whether that's true. I suspect it is - however broadly you want to construe "scientific theory".

I agree. In America, race seemed to be used to differentiate those in power from those not in power based on skin color as it regards to slavery. Then people like Johann Freidrich Blumenbach (who in 1795 used the term Caucasoid, Negroid, and Mongoloid to differentiate the ethnicities with Caucasoid being the most honored), Samuel Cartwright (who created the mental disorder term "drapetomania" to describe black slaves in America who wanted to free as a mental disorder), and many other psuedo-scientists of the time used the "research" they found regarding anthropology, anthropometry, and craniometry to further show "scientific" evidence that the white "race" was superior. Of course all this research was proved to be unsubstantial and was later denounced by UNESCO in 1950, even though Jim Crow was still in full effect.
Today genetic code has shown that what we use to describe "race" has no scientific basis, even though many scientists used what was thought at the time to be scientific methods to show white superiority. I think this is what the social construct argument is based on. I personally like to think of race as a perpetuated myth that has caused untold suffering to the perpetrators of it and especially those who have been victimized by it. At least that way we can focus back on what the discussion should be, which is racism, and not a debate between social constructs and scientific ones.

[Moksha]

Everyone who has posted made their points,some good, some that had me think and others where I said to myself . What I want to know and be honest. What does it mean to be white or caucasian?

It means that when light hits the skin of some humans, the skin reflects wavelengths that are perceived by the rods in our eyes as a shade lighter than some arbitrary and changing division between "white" and other "races." This is combined with regionally specific ("European") facial features to divide humans into a group that social conventions has labeled "white", that human history has attached other meanings to.

[DeesKo]

Everyone who has posted made their points,some good, some that had me think and others where I said to myself . What I want to know and be honest. What does it mean to be white or caucasian?

You tell me.

Cau·ca·sian   /kɔˈkeɪʒən, -ʃən, -ˈkæʒən, -ˈkæʃ-/
Spelled[kaw-key-zhuhn, -shuhn, -kazh-uhn, -kash-] –adjective

Also, Cau·cas·ic  /kɔˈkæsɪk, -ˈkæz-/ Show Spelled[kaw-kas-ik, -kaz-]

1.Anthropology. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of one of the traditional racial divisions of humankind, marked by fair to dark skin, straight to tightly curled hair, and light to very dark eyes, and originally inhabiting Europe, parts of North Africa, western Asia, and India: no longer in technical use.

2.of or pertaining to the Caucasus mountain range.

3.of or related to the non-Indo-European, non-Turkic languages of the Caucasus region.

–noun

4.a native of Caucasia.

Now, considering the arguement that we're all from Africa, and the quote above from the freakin' dictionary we're all caucasian so now what?

This whole discussion, from the originally quoted author claiming Obama being elected made us realize there were multi-ethnic people on this earth, all the way up to rhodey's stunning revelation that white people control 90% of the resources while making up less than 10% of the population has just proven there are a lot of oxygen thieves in this world.

(not directed specifically at you Chef)

[Nay Sayer]

This is combined with regionally specific ("European") facial features to divide humans into a group that social conventions has labeled "white", that human history has attached other meanings to.

European facial features, are in fact, not European...

[AMc]

Everyone who has posted made their points,some good, some that had me think and others where I said to myself . What I want to know and be honest. What does it mean to be white or caucasian?

It means that people will notice a shade and automatically assume a whole lot.

[AMc]

Everyone who has posted made their points,some good, some that had me think and others where I said to myself . What I want to know and be honest. What does it mean to be white or caucasian?

It also means eating a whole lot of ham, green beans, and potatoes.

[Moksha]

European facial features, are in fact, not European...

Thus the quote marks around the word.

[Bill Blake]

Georgia's boarder with Florida has nothing to do with the use of a compass and everything to do with politics.

It has to do with demarcation.

[Nay Sayer]

Now, considering the arguement that we're all from Africa, and the quote above from the freakin' dictionary we're all caucasian so now what?

Caucasians are not indigenous to North Africa.

[Bill Blake]

Would you care to support this assertion with the relevant evidence?

Or are we just to take your word for it?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/convention

con·ven·tion   /kənˈvɛnʃən/ Show Spelled[kuhn-ven-shuhn] Show IPA
–noun
1.a meeting or formal assembly, as of representatives or delegates, for discussion of and action on particular matters of common concern.
2.U.S. Politics. a representative party assembly to nominate candidates and adopt platforms and party rules.
3.an agreement, compact, or contract.
4.an international agreement, esp. one dealing with a specific matter, as postal service or copyright.

ISN'T 5 INTERESTING?

5.a rule, method, or practice established by usage; custom: the convention of showing north at the top of a map.
6.general agreement or consent; accepted usage, esp. as a standard of procedure.
7.conventionalism.
8.Bridge. any of a variety of established systems or methods of bidding or playing that allows partners to convey certain information about their hands.

[Bill Blake]

called "Africa"

You said it. Not me.

[Nay Sayer]

ISN'T 5 INTERESTING?
5.a rule, method, or practice established by usage; custom: the convention of showing north at the top of a map.

Yes, that is interesting.

But do you know what it even more interesting?

You could show North at the bottom of a map and be just as correct as a map showing North @ the top.

[House]

i'm slapping this shit on a shirt!! you heard it here first, so step!!

Damn You

DAMN YOU TO HELL!!!!!!


(can a brotha get a percentage? I really am slipping)

[Bill Blake]

Yes, that is interesting.

But do you know what it even more interesting?

You could show North at the bottom of a map and be just as correct as a map showing North @ the top.

Considering how much you miss the “point,” I’m beginning to worry that no matter where it was put you’d be damned to find it.

You’re confusing language with referent. And language, again, is social.

[Bill Blake]

we accept

See? You sure about that Marbll?

[DeesKo]

Caucasians are not indigenous to North Africa.

mmmm

I found the actual definition of the word surprising as well, considering it's typical usage but I would have to say that dictionary.com has a better win ratio than you on rightness so I dunno about all that.

[Nay Sayer]

You’re confusing language with referent. And language, again, is social.

Language is social. Direction is not...

[Nay Sayer]

mmmm

I found the actual definition of the word surprising as well, considering it's typical usage but I would have to say that dictionary.com has a better win ratio than you on rightness so I dunno about all that.

Then ask Dictionary.com to name the "Caucasian" North African ethnic groups.