> > I think that you're saying that other people are defining Black as a race wrongly because they aren't defining Black in terms of ancestry/genetics. > Corre

> > I think that you're saying that other people are defining Black as a race wrongly because they aren't defining Black in terms of ancestry/genetics. > Correct. I don't think you're matching the "common usage" of "race" when you define it as synonymous with ancestry. You can use genetics to track your ancestry, but you're using ethnic categories when you trace your ancestry to "German mixed with English+Tennessee Chicksaw American Indian". "German" isn't a genetic category, it is an ethnic identity which you can trace your ancestry to. Maybe the better question is, how are you defining different races? If you're using ethnic categories, then you aren't splitting people based on genetics (though you can use genetics to guess at your ancestry). If you're use genetic similarity, then you will clump people across ethnic categories. Try to divide the Germans from the other nations on the genetic similarity chart linked below. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_history_of_Europe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_history_of_Europe