6 ms·

> No one serious claims that there is no genetically identifiable basis for grouping people of similar geographical backgrounds. EU Council Directive 2000/43/E

> No one serious claims that there is no genetically identifiable basis for grouping people of similar geographical backgrounds. EU Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32000L0043 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:320... The European Union rejects theories which attempt to determine the existence of separate human races. The use of the term "racial origin" in this Directive does not imply an acceptance of such theories.

ajross 9y ago
That's mostly an argument about semantics. I avoided it by using the more precise notion of "grouping people by geographic origin". And even that's wrong, because all you can really group are a bunch of gene variants. Real people intermarry. The law you cite argues against defining "race" as an actual group of real people (which is wrong, for all sorts of reasons that I assume you don't want to argue here) and not just a statistical model of gene variants (which has support and is broadly uncontroversial even among commies like me).
- PeachPlum 9y ago
  I posted it because you said "no-one seriously claims" and the EU is doing just that. They don't even try and justify it in the document (there may be supporting documents, they aren't referenced so I don't know). I think perhaps they don't want to say "All these people are X, all these Y". They even have to say "just because we say there are no races, doesn't mean there is no such things as racism". It would deny science to say anything but "Phenotype and some behaviours are genetically inherited, and breeders choose based on those, therefore people geographically separated are different."
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

6 ms·

> No one serious claims that there is no genetically identifiable basis for grouping people of similar geographical backgrounds. EU Council Directive 2000/43/E

by PeachPlum 9y ago

ajross 9y ago
That's mostly an argument about semantics. I avoided it by using the more precise notion of "grouping people by geographic origin". And even that's wrong, because all you can really group are a bunch of gene variants. Real people intermarry. The law you cite argues against defining "race" as an actual group of real people (which is wrong, for all sorts of reasons that I assume you don't want to argue here) and not just a statistical model of gene variants (which has support and is broadly uncontroversial even among commies like me).
- PeachPlum 9y ago
  I posted it because you said "no-one seriously claims" and the EU is doing just that. They don't even try and justify it in the document (there may be supporting documents, they aren't referenced so I don't know). I think perhaps they don't want to say "All these people are X, all these Y". They even have to say "just because we say there are no races, doesn't mean there is no such things as racism". It would deny science to say anything but "Phenotype and some behaviours are genetically inherited, and breeders choose based on those, therefore people geographically separated are different."
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]