Category: Civilization, History, and Anthropology

—-”What is the importance of bloodlines, or genetics, in determining people’s ethnicity?”—-

Good question.

Like many terms that we conflate and misuse out of ignorance, convenience, or attempted deceit, it’s simply too difficult to catalog everyone’s Race (genetic macro families), Ethnicity (genetic subrace, and tribe), Class(genetic, social), Status(economic), Normative(civic behavioral), Cultural (traditions), National (legal and institutional), and Religious(Mythological) properties.

Prior to the past century, not everyone, but nearly, everyone remained within waking distance for the full duration of their lives, and lacked images, movies, and encyclopedias – and now the internet, by which to learn about other than their near neighbors. So gene pools have been relatively close, and expanded with the geographic spread industrial revolution.

So ethnic, normative, cultural, national and religious differences were substantial around the world – and those differences have declined as the agrarian, industrial, technical, and informational revolutions have ameliorated our differences due to (a) finance, (b) legal contracts, (c) aristotelian science, and finally (d) the spread of english language as lingua franca (common language of science, business, law, and politics.)

Science creates categories, relations, and values that cause conceptual correspondence between the physical world, the social, and the internal world of the mind – creating not only an easier means of communicating across peoples, but one that corresponds most parsimoniously with reality, and as such is less open to ignorance, error, bias, and deceit. So the spread of Aristotelianism (which we can think of the religion of the upper middle and upper classes) has brought the world closer together in frames of refernce and methods of thinking.

We are not as able to achieve this same commensurability across genetic barriers. And we have not had time to find a way of discussing each other’s differences that is not in and of itself an exercise in dominance or the defense of it.

In all human relations someone in superior and someone inferior. This is always the case. And in most cases the relationship is reciprocal, and in some cases the relatoinship results in both being better despite their relatives statuses than they were without the other person.

And this is the problem because in a mixed peoples with many background and many status signal systems, the competition for status signals makes people extremely defensive of their admittedly weak positions – so they organize for and against different means of judging status and status signals, and establishing dominance and submission arrangements. (And don’t kid yourself, you aren’t even aware of how much of this your doing at every moment of ever social interaction.)

At present the ambitious peoples from world underclasses who have not had the 3500 years of ingroup development of northern europeans free of external competition, nor experienced the western invention of government without rule, the western tripartism and mutual responsibilities, the renaissance, the enlightenment, and the counter-enlighetnments by the french(rousseau), germans(kant/hegel) and jews (the pseudo-scientism of marx, freud, boaz, cantor, mises) and the second french counter-enligthenment (derrida thru rorty).

And at present the underclasses are fleeing the constraints of their primitive infrastructure, primitve, institutions, primitive norms and traditions, in order to move to those places where they are unburdend by those limits, but still posses the racial, ethnic, genetic, social, cultural, and religous limitations of those cultures – and are not willing to pay the price of conformity in order to enter more advanced cultures, nor pay the price of low status as they learn to conform to the more developed cultures.

So when we say “Ethnicity” we generally mean Race, Subrace, or Tribe, but because of Nationalism (the development of ethnic states that imposed language, cultural, religious and legal norms) we generally conflate National Origin, the culture, institutions and religions of that nation state, with Ethnicity (genetics).

Technically speaking, your ethnicity is genetic. your culture is your culture. And your state is your state of origin.

The problem is, that people have enough problems remembering the various countries, are totally ignorant of the regions within them, and even more so unaware of the vast distribution of races, subraces, tribes, and clans and the status that they hold in their local regions, that does not transfer to the new ones.

So we just lump people together under the best most polite term we can ‘ethnicity’ which generally means ‘different from me’.

I hope this helps. 😉

Cheers

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-importance-of-bloodlines-or-genetics-in-determining-peoples-ethnicity

—-”At what level of lightness of skin can a person be called a white person?”—

“White“ is a politically correct term in common use because Aryan (referring to the Yamna culture’s revolution in bronze, horse, and wheel in northern Ukraine and southern russia, and developing in Poland) is politically incorrect. They are, and northern europeans largely are, a genetic subrace, from whom western civilization’s rather unique values ( individual heroism, individualism sovereignty, contractualism, evolved prior to and during the bronze age collapse, and continues to influence western civilization today (despite marxist-socialist-postmodernist-feminist attempts to end it, and therefore make the west ‘like everyone else’: free of markets and meritocracy.)

So it’s only partly about skin color. It’s a subrace, and that subrace’s civilization. Either you are a member of these gene groups or your not ‘white’ (Caucasian, indo european, northern european (urals to spain), and you and your ancestors have not been through the same environmental pressures producing the same distributions of traits.

SIX SUB RACES – DIAGRAM OF WEST EURASIAN GENETIC CONTINUUMS

An albino Arab, African, Indian, or Han has white skin because of a defect in his genes. A caucasian, Anatolian, Levantine, Mesopotamian has black hair, slightly darker coloring, and usually less aquiline features. (notice how jews are a mixture of Mesopotamian, levantine, north semitic, and have increasingly been successful at incorporating european genes. Semites, both north and south have

An ethnic indo european has white skin, more aquiline features, and evolved under different evolutionary pressures from the others. We don’t really know why but white skin appears to have developed about 20K years ago, for what was likely both a reproductive desirability, the result of highly asymmetric reproduction by some peoples, and possibly (we don’t know) because it was advantageous in the low sun conditions along the edge of the glaciers during the ice age. However, whatever the reason it was an extremely desirable trait and spread quickly.

Continuing through our little tribal catalog An ethnic southern european is an anatolian from the southern branch of indo europe ans and has either black hair more anatolian features, and or swarthier skin. An ethnic south eastern european is a blend of the early people from the metal culture of the east black sea, and the peoples closer to russia. A northern european has very white, bordering on translucent skin, and we categorize as ‘white’ the same way we categorize africans as ‘black’. Of the white northern europeans (the other indo europeans from the northern branch are all extinct), we have atlantics who are a mixture of the first europeans and later europeans. The scandinavians who came slightly later. The celts who built the largest european civilization to date, and bisected the northern and southern ‘I’ peoples, for whom the souther are not extinct. The Germans proper who intermingled with atlantics and celts and scandinavians, producing high, middle, and low german peoples. We have dark haired slavs, and light haired slavs, and they are the whitest people to date, because they are the oldest and least outbred people, with the least genetic diversity to ‘correct’.

The fact is we use ‘White’ because the word ‘Aryan’ was prohibited after the world wars and the Yamna or Yama, and Kurgan are names of artifacts not names of self description. Although the more we learn from genetics and archaeology the more correct the term ‘Aryan’ and the concept of the Aryan culture, and ‘sub race’ is scientifically correct. although we shoujld probably label them north, south and east, because all three diverged and only northerners survived – the others integrated and went extinct.

It will just take another fifty years before we can say that without fear of shouting down by social justice warriors (marxist-socialist-postmodernists). 😉

https://www.quora.com/At-what-level-of-lightness-of-skin-can-a-person-be-called-a-white-person