We do have a name for it: foreigner. Meaning not from around here, and ancestors not from around here either. In a homogenous population like Japanese the dist

We do have a name for it: foreigner. Meaning not from around here, and ancestors not from around here either. In a homogenous population like Japanese the distinction seems trivial to observe. In Europe or the USA, with more heterogenous populations “foreigners” get harder to identify, and race gets based on superficial features rather than heritage. More than one stupid American politician has called out Spanish or Chinese speakers as foreigners even though their ancestors go as far back in the US as most caucasians. I once worked with a Nigerian woman who bristled and complained when our HR manager referred to her as “African American,” the politically correct term. Yetunde insisted on Nigerian, wanting no association with African Americans. Not the same race to her. That people around the world have very different definitions and boundaries when it comes to “race” tells you that it’s a social construct. [Before someone corrects me, I know Japanese doesn’t really describe a homogenous population or ancestry from a handful of ancient ancestors. Japanese only seem homogenous relative to the US and Europe. I live in east Asia among people who don’t see other “Asians” as members of the same race.]