[Gil]

Originally Posted by Johannes de León

When it comes to Racialism, the question always arises. Where to draw the line?

Racialism understood as "the separation of humankind into different races according to physical characters" is problematic due to several reasons:

a) Races are always defined by phenotype and by the existence of patterns. THese patterns are not as well defined in humans as they are in, for example, dogs, because humans interbred thousands upon thousands of times. Someone claiming "purity" is just creating an illusion: there is no such thing, from a phenotypical point of view, as "pure".

b) Races defined by genotype are more precise but variable or diverse. A member of the R1b haplogroup can have brown hair and brown eyes and a medium pigmentation or blond hair and blue eyes and a rosy pigmentation but still they are closer than two persons of the same phenotype but with different genotypes.

c) What use can be given to racialism, of the phenotype or the genotype, in our world setting? Segregation by type? What benefit would that give us? I understand and support the preservation of all human types in the same way that I support the preservation of all dog races: variety is what makes us unique and marvellous creatures, a breed of "mutts" lacks individuality and character.

d) If indeed a segregation or "forced preservation" do occurs in what sense would that be made? Ok, now everyone with dark hair and medium skin go here, everyone with rosy skin but with black hair go here, etc.... it makes no sense at all.

Originally Posted by Milesian

think I'll put on a loincloth and go an live in a cave somewhere

Meh, loincloth sounds rather african, you should go live in the nude.