Race = breed. Chihuahuas are not Great Danes. Both are dogs, and both display physical, mental AND temperament differences across the breeds. Pick any breed of dog, cat, horse, cattle, etc, and you will find that there are distinct differences across the species. It is the height of FAITH to claim that, of all higher mammals, humans are exempt from this biological reality. The fact that German Shepherds and Bulldogs can breed with one another does not change the fact that they are German Shepherds and Bulldogs, not Whippets and Dachsunds. Yes, still dogs, but not the same, and the differences are not “a social construct.”

RACISM makes the claim that these differences impart greater or lesser METAPHYSICAL value to the different breeds. One does not have to deny the biological differences in order to deny differences in metaphysical value. Anybody who tells you otherwise is full of it.

Before Islam or the Vikings came on the scene, trade was what created the prosperity of the ancients. That and technology, but few educates the masses on that.

The North had a huge Viking problem, which delayed issues in the Dark Age. Before the Dark Age, the Celts had quite advanced political and economic systems. They merely didn’t have a powerful enough Watcher or military to protect themselves.

The Celtic tribe survived all the way to Galatea, in Asia Minor, what is now known as Anatolia or Turkey. Meanwhile the Romans ran away from Briton with their legion tails tucked in between their legs.

Why has southern China been better than the north at pretty much everything except killing people? The Mongol contribution to civilisation seems to have slipped me by.

There’s something called water in the southeast of China. And with water one can use something called trade as well.

Mongolians came from the steppes, and as Russia knows, having a water frozen locked north harbor isn’t so great.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/03/16/senator-tim-scott-black-republican-trump-profile-217237

“When I list Trump’s history of race-based controversies–housing discrimination suits, the Central Park Five, lying about Obama’s birthplace, Mexican “rapists,” the Muslim ban–Scott bobs his head up and down: “I am not unaware of the president’s past,” he tells me. A long pause. “Do you think he’s a racist?” I ask. Scott shakes his head. “I don’t. I don’t,” he replies. “Is he racially insensitive? Yes. But is he a racist? No.” “

https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2018/03/15/why-are-men-violent-science-society/
by SEBASTIAN JUNGER
– Mr. Junger is the author of Tribe and War, and a co-director of the award-winning combat documentary Restrepo.

I don’t think anyone living today gets “points” for their geographical region’s culture any time before about 200 years ago.
The connections are too tenuous, benefits of good ideas too diffuse over large regions, and populations too movable.

PS that includes no reparations after 150 years or so for things that happened to your putative ancestors (and maybe didn’t happen to them anyway).

Which is precisely why the Assyrians and Greeks and Persians and Romans were trivial compared to the early Celts! What? They weren’t?

Northern European dominance is quite recent.

Why in the Americas were all the dominant civilisations in the warm bits, if your theory has any merit?

Why has southern China been better than the north at pretty much everything except killing people? The Mongol contribution to civilisation seems to have slipped me by.

Having enough food stored to get through the winter is critical.

Your knowledge of geography is somewhat bizarre.

Egypt and the Middle East is the prototypical society where food has to be stored seasonally through the dry spell. Many argue that is why centralised states first developed there. Europe has a much more even spread of crops.

Cultures like the Nabatean Arabs had to save water rather than food, and built some sophisticated systems to do so while the Britons were still riding chariots and covering themselves in woad. But apparently their culture, which lasted longer than the current western European one, doesn’t count.

An easier and more accurate way to summarize the recent advances in research is that “race” is an obsolete classification for ancestral genetic memories and inheritances.

Humans were never born equal. One is only equal if the same leader/power is over us all and treats us all as equals to each other.

Popular science and front men like Bill Nye the “science guy” with a bachelors in engineering have created a perception amongst the common masses. Specialists and researchers will find it will take time to deprogram the average person from the popular conception of DNA.

Notably, the number 1 evidence as race being a social construct is when Demoncrats constructed the concept of a “white race” to include a confederation of Irish Scots and other ethnic groups that were often at war with each other in Europe. This White Alliance was based upon pre KKK supremacist beliefs and designed against abolitionist social causes and black slave revolts.

So when Leftists talk about race being a social construct, that’s because they would know given their ancestors.

Computer models inaccurately trace DNA based upon family lines, because society and families follow the same pattern throughout one’s ancestors. Same migration patterns and haplogroups. Which is why red indians didn’t arrive from Alaskan land bridge btw.

There is a popular and commmon perception that skin color is by far the most important determinant of race. So, plenty of people claim it. It is no accident that the comment sparking this post involved skin color.

Scientiists do not believe it any more. But it is still fairly common among non-scientists. In fact, it also used to be a perception among scientists, with the early racial classifications reflecting that perception. Look up “color terminology for race” and you can see the history of this strain of thought in science and in popular parlance,, which persists in popular thought today.

More seriously, I think that this is a complicated and delicate topic that increasingly requires a knowledge of modern genetics. Doing the topic justice can’t be done in a comment. Even a long blog post isn’t usually enough. There are a few specialized blogs that get at the problem by greatly narrowing the scope of each post, and by assuming an audience with academic training in genetics. I’d rather see the subject left to them. Surely there are other interesting things for Neo to talk about.