How is a Jew a race now days?

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

Fraser Greenfield:
To start; the Juadism is a religion and if it ever was a term for a specific race, that window closed at least 1500 years ago.

Judaism has always been tied to a specific people. "These are the decrees, the laws and the regulations that the LORD established on Mount Sinai between himself and the Israelites through Moses."

Where does your number of 1500 come from?

Jews can be considered an ethnic group. A Jew can be any race and because of intermarrying there are likely Jews of every conceivable race. In many ways it is problematic to even consider all Jews as being a part of an ethnic group, but ethnic group is far closer than race.

pyrate:
Race is a social construct, not a biological one. A race is whatever we want it to be.

No, race is a biological construct (albeit with the occasional tint of cultural bias). The differences are negligible but genetically the differences between men and women are also negligible. What constitutes a race is rather vague but the justification is always biology. What you might be thinking of is ethnicity. THAT is a social construct.

pyrate:
Race is a social construct, not a biological one. A race is whatever we want it to be.

From a biological standpoint the genetic differences between humans is so small that 'race' as we know it does not actually exist. You cannot tell what 'race' someone belongs to by looking at their genetics. It is possible to narrow it down, as certain populations are more likely to have certain genetic traits and by combining enough of these traits you can get to a point where the chances are they belong to a certain 'race', but it is not 100%.

Absolute BS. DNA testing can and does possess the capacity to determine a person's race "with a tiny margin of error"(from linked article), but since far too many people want to believe in a magical unicorn version of the universe where there are selective evolutionary pressures strong enough to produce obvious skin-based phenotypic differences without affecting a whole variety of other traits as well, this test won't be used. Might come up with some unpleasant data for the "race is a social construct" crowd if they ran it through the crime scene DNA sample database.

http://www.wired.com/politics/law/magazine/16-01/ps_dna

lowhat:

pyrate:
Race is a social construct, not a biological one. A race is whatever we want it to be.

From a biological standpoint the genetic differences between humans is so small that 'race' as we know it does not actually exist. You cannot tell what 'race' someone belongs to by looking at their genetics. It is possible to narrow it down, as certain populations are more likely to have certain genetic traits and by combining enough of these traits you can get to a point where the chances are they belong to a certain 'race', but it is not 100%.

Absolute BS. DNA testing can and does possess the capacity to determine a person's race "with a tiny margin of error"(from linked article), but since far too many people want to believe in a magical unicorn version of the universe where there are selective evolutionary pressures strong enough to produce obvious skin-based phenotypic differences without affecting a whole variety of other traits as well, this test won't be used. Might come up with some unpleasant data for the "race is a social construct" crowd if they ran it through the crime scene DNA sample database.

http://www.wired.com/politics/law/magazine/16-01/ps_dna

Well that's true, but then you'll end up several 1000's human "races" instead of the common ones that stuck since the birth of eugenics in the 19th century. The second issue is that people don't understand the difference between genomics and genetics, you can find an African American genetically "different" than say a white American with a similar ancestry, but if they and their ancestors lived in the Americas for say 400 years(w/ interbreeding, environmental factors, viral migration etc.), their genomics would be closer to white Americans than native Africans.

The problem is that although 98% of Jews today to share a common ancestry, they are not in any biological or genetic classification are a race.
And there have been quite a bit of interesting studies on that subject:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002929710002466
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v466/n7303/full/nature09103.html

pyrate:

Not G. Ivingname:

pyrate:
Race is a social construct, not a biological one. A race is whatever we want it to be.

From a biological standpoint the genetic differences between humans is so small that 'race' as we know it does not actually exist. You cannot tell what 'race' someone belongs to by looking at their genetics. It is possible to narrow it down, as certain populations are more likely to have certain genetic traits and by combining enough of these traits you can get to a point where the chances are they belong to a certain 'race', but it is not 100%.

Well, genetics plays a part in it. "Races" tend to have certain genetic and physical traits that can be traceable and measured. Even beyond skin tones, height, hairiness and other such factors can be shown on average to be different in certain "peoples" more than others. Say, A Scandinavian person is more likely to have a larger amount of hair on their bodies than someone who's ancestors lived in Persia.

There is no single gene that people have because of 'race' though. The diversity in human genetics is next to none compared to the genetics of other creatures. We generally begin to group animals into sub-species when they have a Fixation Index (measurement of genetic difference) of 25-35%. Humans have an Fst of 10-15%. The genetics that determine our exterior appearance only makes up ~0.1% of our genetic code, yet this is what we typically use to determine race.

As for classifying Jews, I think they are a religion and culture. You can be a Jew without following Judaism and you can be a Jew without being born to Jewish parents. It is similar in how many people are culturally Christian without following Christianity.

I always found it interesting that such a huge differences in genetics could result in sub-species, but a much smaller one(4%) could result in two creatures having to work further up the tree to find a common element(ie humans and chimpanzees).

farson135:
snip

pyrate:
Race is a social construct, not a biological one. A race is whatever we want it to be.

No, race is a biological construct (albeit with the occasional tint of cultural bias). The differences are negligible but genetically the differences between men and women are also negligible. What constitutes a race is rather vague but the justification is always biology. What you might be thinking of is ethnicity. THAT is a social construct.

lowhat:

pyrate:
Race is a social construct, not a biological one. A race is whatever we want it to be.

snip

Absolute BS. DNA testing can and does possess the capacity to determine a person's race "with a tiny margin of error"(from linked article), but since far too many people want to believe in a magical unicorn version of the universe where there are selective evolutionary pressures strong enough to produce obvious skin-based phenotypic differences without affecting a whole variety of other traits as well, this test won't be used. Might come up with some unpleasant data for the "race is a social construct" crowd if they ran it through the crime scene DNA sample database.

http://www.wired.com/politics/law/magazine/16-01/ps_dna

http://www.science20.com/adaptive_complexity/what_our_genes_tell_us_about_race

That provides a decent overview of things.

You guys should probably read up on genetics a bit more. There is no biological evidence behind the idea of race.

image
image

Once again, this is how our genetics works. There are slight differences due to long term breeding resulting in clusters of people that share some traits. The differences though are tiny and overlap. Humans themselves are a single cluster, there is no distinct genetic difference between 'races'. For race to be a valid biological factor there would have to be a specific genetic sequence that identifies different races, but there isn't. The best we can do is identify many genetic traits and make an educated guess on the ancestry of that person.

Geneticists say that race is not a biological concept, it is a social construct. Random person on a forum says race is biological. I think I am going to go with the geneticists on this one.

pyrate:
There is no biological evidence behind the idea of race.

I think people often get confused between the morphological commonalities/differences that are used to 'define' race and race as a concept itself.

pyrate:
snip

Again the "genetic" difference between people is not genetic, it's mostly genomic there is a huge deference.
Genetics look at a specific gene(A group of base pairs which serve a biological function), either its existence, or specific mutations, most human genes are highly preserved which means that their tolerance for mutations is very small.
Genomics look at the whole genome, mostly at non-coding DNA(junk DNA), it is there where you see the major differences between ethnicities, for example groups with common heritage will have common DNA satellites.

pyrate:

Not G. Ivingname:

pyrate:
Race is a social construct, not a biological one. A race is whatever we want it to be.

From a biological standpoint the genetic differences between humans is so small that 'race' as we know it does not actually exist. You cannot tell what 'race' someone belongs to by looking at their genetics. It is possible to narrow it down, as certain populations are more likely to have certain genetic traits and by combining enough of these traits you can get to a point where the chances are they belong to a certain 'race', but it is not 100%.

Well, genetics plays a part in it. "Races" tend to have certain genetic and physical traits that can be traceable and measured. Even beyond skin tones, height, hairiness and other such factors can be shown on average to be different in certain "peoples" more than others. Say, A Scandinavian person is more likely to have a larger amount of hair on their bodies than someone who's ancestors lived in Persia.

There is no single gene that people have because of 'race' though. The diversity in human genetics is next to none compared to the genetics of other creatures. We generally begin to group animals into sub-species when they have a Fixation Index (measurement of genetic difference) of 25-35%. Humans have an Fst of 10-15%. The genetics that determine our exterior appearance only makes up ~0.1% of our genetic code, yet this is what we typically use to determine race.

As for classifying Jews, I think they are a religion and culture. You can be a Jew without following Judaism and you can be a Jew without being born to Jewish parents. It is similar in how many people are culturally Christian without following Christianity.

Even though it is >0.01% of our genetic code, it still creates a measurable genetic difference with certain traits, both that we can see and those that we can't, such as how much a person is resistant to certain illnesses. Remember, chimps have only 2% different genes.

Do we say we are the same as chimps? No we don't.

I will grant you that you can be culturally Jewish, I still don't see a good argument that anyone is ethinically jewish.

did somebody say "Jew"?

Fraser Greenfield:
To start; the Juadism is a religion and if it ever was a term for a specific race, that window closed at least 1500 years ago. I know some of us might find it a little disrespectful; but I find that a quote from Adolf Hitler tends to drive the issue home; even it comes across as somewhat ironic.
" We use the term Jewish race as a matter of convenience, for in reality and from the genetic point of view there is no such thing as the Jewish race. There does, however, exist a community, to which, in fact, the term can be applied and the existence of which is admitted by the Jews themselves. It is the spiritually homogeneous group, to membership of which all Jews throughout the world deliberately adhere, regardless of their whereabouts and of their country of domicile; and it is this group of human beings to which we give the title Jewish race.....The Jewish race is first and foremost an abstract race of the mind.........A race of the mind is something more solid, more durable than just a race, pure and simple...."

Let me finish that quote for you.

"The Jew remains a Jew wherever he goes, a creature which no environment can assimilate. It is the characteristic mental make-up of his race which renders him impervious to the process of assimilation."

Hitler here was explaining why the Nazis were so aggressive against the Jews in particular. According to Nazi racial ideology, the Jews were the product of an unnatural mixing of the "true" races; abominations, basically. And while the other races of the world had their places (subservient to the Aryan race, of course) the existence of the Jews would always be a threat to the order of the world and therefore they had to be exterminated.

In other words, in Hitler's mind, Jews weren't even worthy of the word "race". Nevertheless, Nazi anti-Semitism construed the Jews as distinct from the white race and modern anti-Semitism continues to today.

cobra_ky:
did somebody say "Jew"?

Fraser Greenfield:
To start; the Juadism is a religion and if it ever was a term for a specific race, that window closed at least 1500 years ago. I know some of us might find it a little disrespectful; but I find that a quote from Adolf Hitler tends to drive the issue home; even it comes across as somewhat ironic.
" We use the term Jewish race as a matter of convenience, for in reality and from the genetic point of view there is no such thing as the Jewish race. There does, however, exist a community, to which, in fact, the term can be applied and the existence of which is admitted by the Jews themselves. It is the spiritually homogeneous group, to membership of which all Jews throughout the world deliberately adhere, regardless of their whereabouts and of their country of domicile; and it is this group of human beings to which we give the title Jewish race.....The Jewish race is first and foremost an abstract race of the mind.........A race of the mind is something more solid, more durable than just a race, pure and simple...."

Let me finish that quote for you.

"The Jew remains a Jew wherever he goes, a creature which no environment can assimilate. It is the characteristic mental make-up of his race which renders him impervious to the process of assimilation."

Hitler here was explaining why the Nazis were so aggressive against the Jews in particular. According to Nazi racial ideology, the Jews were the product of an unnatural mixing of the "true" races; abominations, basically. And while the other races of the world had their places (subservient to the Aryan race, of course) the existence of the Jews would always be a threat to the order of the world and therefore they had to be exterminated.

In other words, in Hitler's mind, Jews weren't even worthy of the word "race". Nevertheless, Nazi anti-Semitism construed the Jews as distinct from the white race and modern anti-Semitism continues to today.

Evidently you've missed the point entirely. The point was that the term 'jew' applies to one who adheres to a certain culture even if from a biological standpoint the jews fit the description of 'ayran' or simply don't exist as a biological construct. I should point out that the term 'Ayran' included Slavs, Britons,Italians, Greeks,Indians, Arabs, Berbers, Armenians and a Iberians. It is not a limited spectrum or an exclusive club; just 40+ years of post war misinformation has allowed peoples perception of National socialist racial theories to become a blue eyed blonde haired parody it is today.

Cakes:

Fraser Greenfield:
To start; the Juadism is a religion and if it ever was a term for a specific race, that window closed at least 1500 years ago.

Judaism has always been tied to a specific people. "These are the decrees, the laws and the regulations that the LORD established on Mount Sinai between himself and the Israelites through Moses."

Where does your number of 1500 come from?

It's an educated guess; as by this time the Roman Imperium (or what was left of the Greek half) had reached it's greatest extent and had become a solidly Christian majority state. With no major state supported polytheism and 500 solid years of Roman occupation; its likely that judasim and its derivative faith had spread across the empire and beyond leaving the old definition of 'Jewish' behind.

Fraser Greenfield:

Cakes:

Fraser Greenfield:
To start; the Juadism is a religion and if it ever was a term for a specific race, that window closed at least 1500 years ago.

Judaism has always been tied to a specific people. "These are the decrees, the laws and the regulations that the LORD established on Mount Sinai between himself and the Israelites through Moses."

Where does your number of 1500 come from?

It's an educated guess; as by this time the Roman Imperium (or what was left of the Greek half) had reached it's greatest extent and had become a solidly Christian majority state. With no major state supported polytheism and 500 solid years of Roman occupation; its likely that judasim and its derivative faith had spread across the empire and beyond leaving the old definition of 'Jewish' behind.

Too bad actually studies disprove that..

Verbatim:

Fraser Greenfield:

Cakes:

Judaism has always been tied to a specific people. "These are the decrees, the laws and the regulations that the LORD established on Mount Sinai between himself and the Israelites through Moses."

Where does your number of 1500 come from?

It's an educated guess; as by this time the Roman Imperium (or what was left of the Greek half) had reached it's greatest extent and had become a solidly Christian majority state. With no major state supported polytheism and 500 solid years of Roman occupation; its likely that judasim and its derivative faith had spread across the empire and beyond leaving the old definition of 'Jewish' behind.

Too bad actually studies disprove that..

Sources?
Unless your studies claim Christianity and Byzantium simply didn't exist in 500AD and nor did it occupy the land of 'Israel' I think it's safe to say that Jewish diaspora had already taken place across southern Europe with sufficient intermarriage to mean that Judaism had no longer become a multiethnic or multiracial if you will; faith.

Fraser Greenfield:

Verbatim:

Fraser Greenfield:

It's an educated guess; as by this time the Roman Imperium (or what was left of the Greek half) had reached it's greatest extent and had become a solidly Christian majority state. With no major state supported polytheism and 500 solid years of Roman occupation; its likely that judasim and its derivative faith had spread across the empire and beyond leaving the old definition of 'Jewish' behind.

Too bad actually studies disprove that..

Sources?
Unless your studies claim Christianity and Byzantium simply didn't exist in 500AD and nor did it occupy the land of 'Israel' I think it's safe to say that Jewish diaspora had already taken place across southern Europe with sufficient intermarriage to mean that Judaism had no longer become a multiethnic or multiracial if you will; faith.

Every genetic study that was done on Jewish populations? I've linked several in this post already, look them up.

Grandcrusader:
I see often now days, people describe Jews of modern day Israel as a race. But how are they a race?
Most of them migrated there from post WW2.

So how is Jew a race?
I thought it was a religion. Calling it a race, is like calling a Christian and Muslim a race.

I hate to be the one to invokke Godwin's Law, but when the German people of old go out of their way to call you out, you're no longer just a religion. You're a people with a common history and past. Call it a side-effect of post-modernistic response if you like, but there it is.

Fraser Greenfield:

cobra_ky:
did somebody say "Jew"?

Fraser Greenfield:
To start; the Juadism is a religion and if it ever was a term for a specific race, that window closed at least 1500 years ago. I know some of us might find it a little disrespectful; but I find that a quote from Adolf Hitler tends to drive the issue home; even it comes across as somewhat ironic.
" We use the term Jewish race as a matter of convenience, for in reality and from the genetic point of view there is no such thing as the Jewish race. There does, however, exist a community, to which, in fact, the term can be applied and the existence of which is admitted by the Jews themselves. It is the spiritually homogeneous group, to membership of which all Jews throughout the world deliberately adhere, regardless of their whereabouts and of their country of domicile; and it is this group of human beings to which we give the title Jewish race.....The Jewish race is first and foremost an abstract race of the mind.........A race of the mind is something more solid, more durable than just a race, pure and simple...."

Let me finish that quote for you.

"The Jew remains a Jew wherever he goes, a creature which no environment can assimilate. It is the characteristic mental make-up of his race which renders him impervious to the process of assimilation."

Hitler here was explaining why the Nazis were so aggressive against the Jews in particular. According to Nazi racial ideology, the Jews were the product of an unnatural mixing of the "true" races; abominations, basically. And while the other races of the world had their places (subservient to the Aryan race, of course) the existence of the Jews would always be a threat to the order of the world and therefore they had to be exterminated.

In other words, in Hitler's mind, Jews weren't even worthy of the word "race". Nevertheless, Nazi anti-Semitism construed the Jews as distinct from the white race and modern anti-Semitism continues to today.

Evidently you've missed the point entirely. The point was that the term 'jew' applies to one who adheres to a certain culture even if from a biological standpoint the jews fit the description of 'ayran' or simply don't exist as a biological construct. I should point out that the term 'Ayran' included Slavs, Britons,Italians, Greeks,Indians, Arabs, Berbers, Armenians and a Iberians. It is not a limited spectrum or an exclusive club; just 40+ years of post war misinformation has allowed peoples perception of National socialist racial theories to become a blue eyed blonde haired parody it is today.

Evidently i have, because i still don't understand the point you're trying to make. No one was disputing the definition of the word "Jew" as a cultural identity.

As "inclusive" as it may have been, the Nazi definition of "Aryan" emphatically did not include Jews. Judaism was absolutely construed as a biological construct, that's why the Nuremburg laws defined Jews on the basis of heredity, with no regard for individual cultural or religious practices.

I should also point out that while the Slavs may have been considered "Aryan", the Nazis had absolutely no qualms about killing or deporting them en masse.

But the Hebrew are the original jews correct?
They were a dark people.
many white people converted over to Judaism, which is a religion.

This still makes them white people. so I still dont understand why somebody with a White Supremacy mindset would hate White Jewish people so much.

They White. The jew part is only religion, since most of them arent related to the Hebrew Israelite at all by blood.

cobra_ky:

Fraser Greenfield:

cobra_ky:
did somebody say "Jew"?

Evidently i have, because i still don't understand the point you're trying to make. No one was disputing the definition of the word "Jew" as a cultural identity.

As "inclusive" as it may have been, the Nazi definition of "Aryan" emphatically did not include Jews. Judaism was absolutely construed as a biological construct, that's why the Nuremburg laws defined Jews on the basis of heredity, with no regard for individual cultural or religious practices.

No; but now its starting to go off on a tangent; so I'll dish out some knowledge and be on my way. While the Nuremburg laws defined Jews on the basis of heredity, they did so by making use of written records of christenings and Synagogue/church attendance and registration rather than by bloodline as is often assumed. As a result many Mischlinge (partial Jews) were declared legal German citizens. Those who did not could apply for an exemption which would come down to the judgement of their local political administration; allowing them to acquire a German Blood Certificate. Even those of 'full' jewish ancestry could apply for an exemption provided they had proof they weren't 'Jewish' (e.g Proof of Army service, christening documentation anything that might suggest your not a practicing jew). So yeah though I'd point out the Nuremberg laws were not without loopholes...

I should also point out that while the Slavs may have been considered "Aryan", the Nazis had absolutely no qualms about killing or deporting them en masse.

They also had no qualms about letting them into the Whermact, Luftwaffe or Waffen SS. Also worth pointing out that the Nazis were more than happy to murder or deport their own ilk when presented with sufficient reasoning (Communist supporter, labour unionist etc). Anyway we are starting to go off on a tangent. As I said for the most part people only know about 1/2 or rather a parody of Nazi racial ideology. Even less when it comes to the purely political parts of it (Their interpretation of Fascism as well as 'Nazi Economics').

Verbatim:

Fraser Greenfield:

Verbatim:

Too bad actually studies disprove that..

Sources?
SNIP*

Every genetic study that was done on Jewish populations? I've linked several in this post already, look them up.

Congratulations you've proved to me you cannot understand scientific texts.

Hell I'll even quote one of your texts that supports what I've just said

"Jewish communities in the Balkans, Italy, North Africa, and Syria were formed during classical antiquity"
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002929710002466
That sound like Roman/Byzantium to you? Or maybe I should emphasis that forming 'communities' highly suggests they bred with the locals?

Just because one gene is more common in certain "Jewish" ethnic groups does not mean it's exclusive to them; had you read the texts you would have realized that. The lack of exclusivity of these genes supports my statements. Hell the fact that Tay Sachs disease and other such things exist in relatively high frequency in other European ethnic groups is strong evidence of this.

Fraser Greenfield:

cobra_ky:

Fraser Greenfield:

No; but now its starting to go off on a tangent; so I'll dish out some knowledge and be on my way. While the Nuremburg laws defined Jews on the basis of heredity, they did so by making use of written records of christenings and Synagogue/church attendance and registration rather than by bloodline as is often assumed. As a result many Mischlinge (partial Jews) were declared legal German citizens. Those who did not could apply for an exemption which would come down to the judgement of their local political administration; allowing them to acquire a German Blood Certificate. Even those of 'full' jewish ancestry could apply for an exemption provided they had proof they weren't 'Jewish' (e.g Proof of Army service, christening documentation anything that might suggest your not a practicing jew). So yeah though I'd point out the Nuremberg laws were not without loopholes...

I should also point out that while the Slavs may have been considered "Aryan", the Nazis had absolutely no qualms about killing or deporting them en masse.

They also had no qualms about letting them into the Whermact, Luftwaffe or Waffen SS. Also worth pointing out that the Nazis were more than happy to murder or deport their own ilk when presented with sufficient reasoning (Communist supporter, labour unionist etc). Anyway we are starting to go off on a tangent. As I said for the most part people only know about 1/2 or rather a parody of Nazi racial ideology. Even less when it comes to the purely political parts of it (Their interpretation of Fascism as well as 'Nazi Economics').

Agreed, there's no need to continue with this line of argument here. But with regards to the OP, there is a long tradition of racialized antisemitism originating in Europe, long predating the rise of Nazism. Jews are a race "nowadays" by virtue of more than a century of conditional exclusion from European "whiteness".

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked