RSSWritten in Blood
From Roman infanticide, to the transatlantic slave trade, and the racial politics of Nazi Germany, people have long relied on biological justification for the subjugation, oppression and murder of other human beings. So when scientist set out to map the approximately 25,000 genes of the human genome they were doing more than drafting the blueprint of humanity. They were also working to tackle a belief that has plagued man’s social existence—the question of whether certain races are genetically superior to others.
Today, the debate rages on. Just last year, Nobel winning biologist, Dr. James Watson, who headed America’s role in the international Human Genome Project, came under fire for suggesting that blacks are not as intelligent as whites. In the medical community, some favor sorting humans based on race because of assumed genetic health differences. Others claim dividing individuals based on genetic differences is arbitrary.
Working to quell the debate, direct the the public’s imagination and the scientific community’s characterization of the biological significance of race, A multidisciplinary group at Stanford University recently published 10 guiding principles on using racial categories in human genetics . Question: Do these recommendations carry any weight or are they meaningless? If meaningless, what will it take to debunk the belief in genetic racial superiority?
Here are the principles as translated by NewScientist Magazine. Click here to read the open letter first published in Genome Biology.
1. All races are created equal
No genetic data has ever shown that one group of people is inherently superior to another. Equality is a moral value central to the idea of human rights; discrimination against any group should never be tolerated.
2. An Argentinean and an Australian are more likely to have differences in their DNA than two Argentineans
Groups of human beings have moved around throughout history. Those that share the same culture, language or location tend to have different genetic variations than other groups. This is becoming less true, though, as populations mix.
3. A person’s history isn’t written only in his or her genes
Everyone’s genetic material carries a useful, though incomplete, map of his or her ancestors’ travels. Studies looking for health disparities between individuals shouldn’t rely solely on this identity. They should also consider a person’s cultural background.
4. Members of the same race may have different underlying genetics
Social definitions of what it means to be “Hispanic” or “black” have changed over time. People who claim the same race may actually have very different genetic histories.
5. Both nature and nurture play important parts in our behaviors and abilities
Trying to use genetic differences between groups to show differences in intelligence, violent behaviors or the ability to throw a ball is an oversimplification of much more complicated interactions between genetics and environment.
6. Researchers should be careful about using racial groups when designing experiments
When scientists decide to divide their subjects into groups based on ethnicity, they need to be clear about why and how these divisions are made to avoid contributing to stereotypes.
7. Medicine should focus on the individual, not the race
Although some diseases are connected to genetic markers, these markers tend to be found in many different racial groups. Overemphasizing genetics may promote racist views or focus attention on a group when it should be on the individual.
8. The study of genetics requires cooperation between experts in many different fields
Human disease is the product of a mishmash of factors: genetic, cultural, economic and behavioral. Interdisciplinary efforts that involve the social sciences are more likely to be successful.
9. Oversimplified science feeds popular misconceptions
Policy makers should be careful about simplifying and politicizing scientific data. When presenting science to the public, the media should address the limitations of race-related research.
10. Genetics 101 should include a history of racism
Any high school or college student learning about genetics should also learn about misguided attempts in the past to use science to justify racism. New textbooks should be developed for this purpose.
28 Comments, Comment or Ping
"A Mom"
I personally think that races are genetically different in certain things. This may have to do with where we come from like climates things like that. When it comes to making one more superior as a race because of knowledge, abilities to do things, etc. is a bunch of mess. This is what is used to seperate us as people. It also gives me the feeling that the people that do these kind of studies and spread these conclusions are the one with self hate. This is away of making themselves feel better about themselves and their peers.
[Reply]
Malia
Great article TROUBLMAN!!! I think it’s all relative. Asians are genetically inferior in sports but they are genetically superior intellectually. I don’t know the answer, but I think if certain races are genetically superior in one trait then others are likely to be genetically superior in other traits. Blacks tend to enjoy advantages in “real time” responsiveness—hence black strengths in running with the football, playing basketball, and in jazz, rap, dance, trash talking, preaching, and oratory……
[Reply]
mrschocolatestuff reply on July 22, 2008 12:30 pm:
i dont think intelligence is genetic. intelligence is learned or acquired. we- meaning americans- are lax when it comes to education and learning because we- meaning americans- believe we are the best in everything. so why should we push?
asians work with traditional values, structure, and stict discipline when it comes to education. they push themselves and their children to believe and know they are the best and to hell with what others say.
while they are pushing way past americans on so many levels, we are sitting in the cut laughing at them when they are definitely laughing at us.
[Reply]
Malia reply on July 22, 2008 1:00 pm:
Since intelligence is on that what’s-evolved list, then why couldn’t some segment have higher intelligence, and other segments lower?
[Reply]
mrschocolatestuff reply on July 22, 2008 1:03 pm:
all races should have the same evolutionary pressure for intelligence. Remember that geographically, genetically and in terms of natural selection the entire human race was very localised until very recently, only a few million years. Even after mankind spread to take over the world, more or less, it is just as advantageous to be smart and black, and smart and white. And hence, any sort of divergence in this region is simply due to random action.
Of course, this doesn’t mean there are no such variations across races. Indeed there are. But statistical studies (and that’s all we have in the abscence of discovery of an intelligence gene) show that in this category at least, there is as far as we can tell no difference. Without such a link between intelligence and race, all such discrimination have no scientific basis.
But it’s tougher when there IS some difference between races. Then the morality becomes more strained. Let’s take lung capacity. As you may know, people from high-lying areas tend to have a larger lung capacity than those from lowland regions. Part of this has indeed been shown to be genetic, though of course exercise and living in low air pressure regions can offset that. So what happens about this? In certain athletic sports, people from the alps say do have an advantage over people without. Should we then enact discrimination?
The way most modern societies deal with this sort of situation is that they ignore it. They neither use negative discimination, nor positive discrimination. They let each athlete preform as they would. Such racial differences are assumed to be within the tolerances of individual variation. Few such athletes are around anyway, so overall we get away with it. But innately, the world is not fair.
So yes, the possibility of there being a scientific grounding for racial discrimination does exist, and some races can turn out to be better at certain jobs than others. But fortunately, in this world, that is generally not the case. An assumption of equality is fortunately not too naive, and indeed is neccessary as geographical barriers of the world breaks down. But if we were unlucky enough to be in a scenario where mankind has truly diverged to such an extent that such specialisation is apparent, then society would have to make some tough decisions. The whole structure of society may be drastically different.
[Reply]
S.H.I.E.L.D. reply on July 22, 2008 1:06 pm:
We all agree that some people are naturally more intelligent than other people don’t we? So, what happens if we take all of the stupid people, put them in north america, all of the les stupid people, put them is south america, all the median intelligence people and put them in europe asia, put all of the above average intelligence people and put them into africa, and then put all of the Brilliant people and put them in Australia. We then stop all travel between those continents completely. Leave it for 4 or 5 generations, completely forget that we ever set up the situation artificially, and take the analyse the results.
You will see that the people from north america were markedly less intelligent than the people from australia (perhaps I shouldn’t have used real places…I am not actually trying to …make fun of anyone here… [;p]) Since we had decided to completely forget that we set the situation up, we would then conclude that the Australians had evolved to be more intelligent than the north american people.
The point I am making is that evolution doesn’t need a long time to do anything, it just needs a selective pressure, or an isolation event. We already have parts of our population evolved into higher intelligence than other parts. Evolution is ready for an isolation event or a new selective pressure. Perhaps in the past this has occured to the isolated ‘blacks’ or to the isolted ‘whites’ or the isolated ‘Asians’ etc. I believe it to be quite possible that a race is, on average, more or less intelligent than any other given race.
Just remember, averages are just averages. They still don’t mean everyone is equal.
Even if it was shown that black people were on average more intelligent than asian people for instance, then it would still be possible for the most intelligent asian to be more intelligent than the most intelligent black person….
[Reply]
TROUBLMan reply on July 22, 2008 1:46 pm:
It’s easy to confuse socially constructed and environmental outcomes for genetics. Most people do. But how does your example prove that the gene that marks intelligence has become . The social affects of being around intelligent people are what can be determined in 4 to 5 generations. The genetic change takes much longer and wouldn’t be spread across each individual the region because genes don’t spread as fast as cultures.
[Reply]
Traci
It is a fact that no one person is any better than the other. Genetic studies should be used to understand diseases and not superiority. It is true that certain races are more susceptible to certain diseases that others but that holds true for all races therefore making an attempt to attribute these conditions to inferiority is a true display of ignorance. Any scientific study being used to support the theory that there is a superior race only perpetuates racism.
[Reply]
Malia reply on July 22, 2008 12:28 pm:
I’m with you Traci. Genetic studies should be used to understand diseases and not superiority. When they have experienced one alleged scientist [beginning] a discussion by rationally talking about genetic differences between races, and winding up by saying blacks are inferior to whites, they are not going to wait for the next geneticist to finish. That next geneticist may very well be discussing the dangers of sickle-cell anemia, but as soon as he starts discussing genetic, racial differences, the audience smells racism and his message fails to reach them. It is wrong. It is unfortunate. It is also very understandable. Combatting this mentality requires not just education in science, but also education in human nature.
[Reply]
"A Mom" reply on July 22, 2008 5:12 pm:
I also agree. Some of these people that come to these conclusions are like Hitler anti-semitic. This is their way of separating us as people.
[Reply]
LoverOfPeace
Those who say humans are wholly a product of evolution, genetic programming and conditioning nonetheless seem to insist that the varieties humans come in — races, gender, nose shape, boob/thingy size etc. — are not contrary to some supposed principle of equality inherent in humanity.
[Reply]
mrschocolatestuff
one must realize that ‘race’ is not created by God but my man. everyone is His children- there is no race involved. we are of different colors of the spectrum.
race was created by man to help catagorize and define. it’s a very intangible concept. to answer- i think whenever or whomever decided to create these catagories it was only for science purposes not social purposes. it’s a yes/no answer. gotta think that someone took a chance and decided they were better or superior and targeted others who were not like them.
for science- yes. negroid, caucisoid, mongoloid, etc. this was to place those with specific features to help trace back to origin.
for social- no. black, white, etc. using color, cultures and behaviors to get a better grip of who’s who..
[Reply]
TROUBLMan reply on July 22, 2008 1:51 pm:
Great point. The concept of race has changed over time and is still an unfixed conception. While race is in a constant flux, genes stay fixed. Genetic changes are a lot more rare than changing racial categorizations. Again, great point.
[Reply]
Felicia
What I don’t understand is how someone can be certain there aren’t superior races if he/she believes that humans are entirely a product of material processes. In that view, the universe hasn’t guaranteed equality between the races, and there is nothing special about humanity over any other physical manifestation in creation. So why then couldn’t the Black race be utterly inferior to the White race, or men superior to women, or any other twist evolution wants to give life?
[Reply]
mrschocolatestuff reply on July 22, 2008 12:57 pm:
Because superiority in terms of evolution is not an absolute measure, but rather is dependent on the environments we live in. Superiority in this way, in the game of natural selection, is based on survivability. While, say black skin is useful in places of high solar radiation, white skin may be useful in the more northern areas. Thus, evolutionarily, white people are more survivable than blacks in the north, and vice versa around the equator. This hence does not translate to one race being “better” than the other, but rather shows how the individuality and variation of mankind came about. Everybody is well adapted to their respective environments, and absolutist concepts like superiority can not arise scientifically. So, the idea of “nothing special” special about humanity, which you used, also means there is “nothing special” about men, or whites, or whatever.
And overall, the degree of variation amongst races, and between men and women is very small. When you decide superiority, you can only decide subjectively. So while you may consider men to be superior to women etc, the concept does not exist in nature. And the method of preventing racism is to change the subjective criteria with which you decide human superiority to things that we have in common, like intelligence, shown scientifically to be independent of race, rather than skin colour. That’s the only way modern society can continue in stability, with our cherished values intact.
Equality, superiority and inferiority don’t exist in genetics. Subjective equality isn’t an assumption. It is a goal to change the way we judge equality to make subjective equality a fact.
[Reply]
Ev
First off, skin color doesn’t make someone a mamber of a different species. This whole thing is like linking ’superiority’ to shoe sixe or hair color.
Secondly, you would have to define ’superior’ objectively…good luck!
[Reply]
Malia reply on July 22, 2008 12:56 pm:
Well, sickle cell annemia is thought to be an african genetic adaptation to malaria. With modern medicine such an adaptation is no longer necessary and can be lifethreatening. Therefore, in some sense you could argue that certain races do have genetic superiority in the modern world. At least, as far as inheritable diseases are concerned.
[Reply]
S.H.I.E.L.D.
I do not understand why anyone ever tries to fool themselves into the belief that all humans are equal. Its a pretty absurd idea. Nature doesn’t make things equal. Equality is not a natural goal.
No, the key concept is that we treat everyone equal, not believe that they are. Because it is blatently obvious to any casual observer, that Tiger woods and I are not equally good at golf, nor is someone with downs syndrome equal to Richard Feynman, nor is Brad pitt equal to how I look etc…
Equality is not inherent in nature at all. It is a social imposition on our thoughts. We choose to impose this concept onto our thoughts, because it allows us to function more fairly.
And yes, I believe that particular ‘races’ have particular tendencies to be a particular way, different to other races. ie: Black people ‘tend’ to be dark skinned, for example… So no, no races are identical, and therefore not ‘equal’. Perhaps congruent is a better description.
As has already been pointed out anyway, and it is the most important point, ‘Superior’ is usually a subjective concept, or is only objective when put into a particular environment. And even when it is objective, chances are, we aren’t able to recognize the objective nature of it…
[Reply]
TROUBLMan reply on July 22, 2008 1:39 pm:
Yes, equality is not a part of nature. Scientist have found varying genetic diversity among other species. But in terms of humans, we are 99.9 percent genetically identical. Evolution does take a long time. The “selective pressure” that you mention in your earlier comment are the .1 percent, which makes us different.
[Reply]
nathaniel x vance
The TRUTH is that all races in the physical are definitely NOT created
equally! Can you imagine someone saiding that all animals are created
equally and each have the same potential?
However, if you mean to say that all SOULs are created equally in
potential , then I say that you may be correct!
Our physical bodies varies but the stuff of the soul once formed or
created is the same!
http://www.zetatalk .com/density/ d30.htm
Please do read.
[Reply]
TROUBLMan reply on July 22, 2008 1:29 pm:
The animal analogy is a stretch. We’re talking about distinctions among the same species. Race is a social construct defined by skin color and heritage. Without these external differences humans are 99.9 percent identical at the level of DNA.
[Reply]
Amexem INDIGENOUS Aboriginal
It has already been overly proven and therfore overly obvious that the original natural hue-man/hue- woman is known to have been in existence for approximately 150,000 years. It has also been overly proven and overly obvious that the unnatural genetically- dysfunctional Kaukasoid Albino-Mutant European White KIND of species of a race has only been in existence for only approximately 20,000 years (by way of some form of an unnatural FREAK genetic mutation or unusual graftation of some sort). An apple will logically always be more significant (superior) than the apple salad as you could clearly not make the apple salad essentially without the original apple itself. THIS IS JUST PURE COMMON SENSE. THIS IS ALSO PURE LOGIC AND NATURAL REASONABLE SCIENCE.
All of you high school/college so-called educated “Colored Black” dummies come on this network and try to somehow be nice and make ammends to this FREAK Race known as WHITE People. You are not the CREATOR of this Natural Universe or the Creator of it’s natural creations. You appear to have NO CLUE to pure genetic common sense. Have you any of you “wanna be” Barbie Dogs and Kaukasoid Kens ever cared to wonder why when the natural sun hits these unnatural “diseased” Krackers, they begin to turn back into the “unnatural” feces (meaning Waste or Sh%t) that they really scientifically are?
NATURAL INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL “MELANINATED” HUE-PEOPLES ARE THE ORIGINAL NATURAL PROGENITORS OF ABSOLUTELY EVERY OTHER RACE AND KIND OF A RACE ON THIS NATURAL EARTH (including you mixed up Muts, Half-breeds, Crossbreeds, Mulattos, and unnatural Albino-mutant “Genetically- Retarded” Devil-Ass krackers).
YOU DAMNED RIGHT WE ARE SUPERIOR
FREE YOUR BLACK MINDS AND YOUR BLACK ASSES WILL FOLLOW
STOP PRAISING AND LICKING THIS SICK KRACKER’S ASS (Grow the F%ck up)
[Reply]
TROUBLMan reply on July 22, 2008 2:58 pm:
First off, let it be known that I am a proud black man.
I understand your racial rhetoric may help you substantiate your self-esteem but where’s your evidence. It’s cool to talk loud and act like you know, but what experiments have you conducted, or what scientific date have you read. Your racist nonsense is the same shit the KKK and every other white supremacist group says about us. And at the end of the day, neither of you have any legitimate evidence to support the destructive bullshit you both speak.
Most people wouldn’t have allowed this comment to be moderated because of your overtly racist rant. Me, on the other hand, I am the type to challenge you not for the sake of my self-esteem but for the sake of knowledge. If you have proof. Bring it to us. And if you’re so superior why down the so-called diseased, unnatural, genetically- retarded, “Muts, Half-breeds, Crossbreeds, Mulattos, and unnatural Albino-mutant–oh let’s not forget Devil-Ass krackers.”
Whether you realize it or not, you support the same racism that has been used against you for centuries. Can’t fight fire with fire. Think about it.
[Reply]
Q. reply on July 23, 2008 7:52 am:
TM,
you’re better than me, cuz i wouldn’t have even responded to that mess..
kiss my converse..
[Reply]
troublsome
I think that the superiority of a specific race is determined and constructed by society. i also think that every race genetically inherit certain traits and characteristics that make them unique and special in their own way. I also think that there are those characteristics that have been developed into stereotypes geared towards specific races. That’s no one’s fault but ours. We can’t be afraid to go against the grain, and step outside the box… I agree with you AMEXEM INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL, you damned right we are superior, and not only do we have to free our minds, but most importantly stop making excuses…
I think at the end of the day we will be one single and eternal race, and none of this shit will matter. No Social Status, Currency, or anything like that. Unfortunately we are fighting this war with the world and we might as well put up a great fight that we all know that we can do a great job at…
[Reply]
"A Mom" reply on July 22, 2008 5:36 pm:
My point to Amexem indignous Aboriginal is: Maybe your mind is free and maybe you are not making excuses for what you are saying. But just like anything you can’t teach with anger. This network is not about nice, it’s about bringing people together in conversation all kinds of people. We are not about singling people out but bringing people in. Sorry but you sounds like you have a complex (Just my feeling).
P.S. No ass kissing around here, opinions, some factual some not. We all about learning from each other.
[Reply]
troublsome
When I said to Stop Making excuses it wasn’t aimed at Amexem. I was talking about us as black men and women. Our strength is diminished and taken away when we blame others for our position on the totem pole….
[Reply]
"A Mom"
I’m aware of what you were saying to blacks, but just as I said. Sometimes the way you come off can mimic the same things that you are talking about. If racisim is wrong, why be racist? (using this as an example.)
[Reply]
Reply to “Written in Blood”
SEE ALSO
♦ Terry - Concerning Blackness
December 4, 2007
♦ TROUBLMan - G.I. Bros
April 8, 2008
♦ TROUBLMan - Not My Family
March 28, 2008
♦ Ronnie B. TROUBL - Niggas R Us
March 5, 2008
♦ TROUBLsome - BaracKKK
February 19, 2008