While I see Mr. Poe's point very well and consider it a valid one, I also feel Mr. Pontikos has a valid idea: rejection not only of the expression "the black race," but also of the term "the white race," where discussions of race are concerned, especially ones meant to be free of the lie-engendering, truth-stifling, wholly destructive effects of PC.

As he shows very well in the blog entry and the photos he posts, Mr. Pontikos has seen the difficulty and confusion that arise, in discussions pertaining to race, from use of the racial term "black" to refer both to Negroes on the one hand, and to completely non-Negro racial and ethnic groups who have dark brown skin on the other. These other groups include dark-brown-skinned whites. Yes, there are whites having naturally dark-brown, even virtually black, skin -- such as certain Subcontinental groups. (I completely reject the unsatisfactory term "South Asian," invented by some D.C. immigration-service bureaucrat who didn't know his you-know-what from his elbow, to refer to the peoples of the Indian Subcontinent. Every single U.S.-government-bureaucrat-immigration-service-associated term which is outright wrong, or misleading, or inesthetic, or simply has a better traditional term which never should have been tampered with, or is otherwise poorly-conceived or unsatisfactory should be likewise utterly rejected and replaced. Don't await "government permission" -- just do it.)

The unsatisfactoriness of the term "black" for these discussions has occurred to many, myself included, and I feel it is better in such discussions to say "Negro" where "Negroes" are what is meant and X, Y, or Z where X, Y, or Z is what is meant; otherwise no useful communication can take place in the final analysis, and everything remains a blur.

Unless I am mistaken, then, the unsatisfactoriness of the term "the black race" is what Mr. Pontikos sees, and I and many others agree fully. But he goes further, and sees that in an analagous sense the term "the white race" is also unsatisfactory. This seems not only valid, but in a purely political sense appears at first glance to be a brilliant countermove to the race-deniers who, in what is at bottom naught but a Marxist strategy, try to deny the existence of all races, "black" and "white" included. The Marxmorphs will of course never stop this mischief until they've actually succeeded in abolishing all races especially the white one which is the one most standing in the way of their future "paradise."

For our side to grant the other side's contention that there is no "white race" and to instead insist henceforth on talking ONLY about an Anglo-Saxon race, a Bavarian race, a German-Saxon race, a Dutch race, a German Schwabian race, a Swedish race, a Baltic race, a Greek race, an Iberian race, an Italic race, a Sicilian race, a Slavic race, a Mediterranean race, a Balkan race, an Alpine race, a Hebrew race, an Iranian race, a Punjabi race, an Afghan race, etc., etc., etc., would be a position that would be infinitely harder for the Marxmorph race-deniers and their useful-idiot emperor-has-no-clothes college students being churned out by the millions nowadays to deny.

This may be an extremely brilliant move on Mr. Pontikos' part. They've asked for "no white race"? Let's give 'em what they've asked for.

This may be an extremely brilliant move on Mr. Pontikos' part. They've asked for "no white race"? Let's give 'em what they've asked for.

Interesting perspective on the political consequences of my position. However, I'm not entirely clear who "them" are. Incidentally, I prefer the use of the term Caucasoid, because unlike "white" which is defined in many different ways depending on whom one asks, Caucasoid is a valid biological category, whose main features have been known for a long time.

You are the same man that considers Anwar Sadat to have been Caucasoid. Not only was he black, he was half Sudanese. You cant get much more black than that.

The terms "white" and "black" are not very specific. I agree. However, the problem with "caucasoid" is that it is too general, including Europeans and East Africans in the same race. IT is a useless racial term in the sense that it has no relationship whatsoever to culture or heritage - two additional aspects of race. One can be significantly mixed race with African or Asian (or even predominantly African genetically, as is the case with East Africans) and still be considered physically and therefore racially caucasian. The term "negroid" is just as useless, of course, since most often it refers to the "true negroid" Bantu or extreme African and ignores or counts as caucasian all other Africans. The truth is that Africans vary significantly withut admixture of any kind, yet only the Bantu or extreme types are considered "real". Oddly enough, the Bushmen are significantly, if not predominantly, caucasian genetically and yet caucasians are not in any rush at all to claim them.

"Being Greek is all we really are, and it is more than enough."

Then why don't you go live there if it is enough to be Greek?

You folks are all full of garbage. This whole theory of "caucasian, negroid," etc. really is pulling at teeth. On the one hand, 99.9 percent of the human genome is exactly the same throughout this modern homo sapien race. So we're arguing about nary a percentage of a percentage. On the other, if you happen to be one of these "caucasoid" arabs, south asians, etc., today you will face unbelieveable amounts of discrimination. Thus, I'll pose my question to you- what is the use in hammering down race? You realize, independent of its social contingency, it disappears. I should tell you that Irish folks were once considered non-white in the united states. Indians once were. To be honest, any attempt to separate races into three general types is a relatively new practice whose roots can be traced back to colonial racism. It was a very useful tool to divide and conquer. The reality is that people have become so mixed within mass migrations over hundred's of years, even to assume there are three base races is really to ignore a very rich history of the human race itself. Scientifically speaking, there are far too many variations among the skull known as "caucasian, negroid, et., mongoloid" to really prove any such theory as this site in some ways seems to deal with.

i am dorian greek(arvanit) and for my tradition all present day europeans(at all planet) are ex-slaves and nothing more.

I agree that the term "white" is of little use today except politically, both positive and negative. Mostly because it is now more ambiguous than ever and some people with no racial education use it flagrantly to include fairskinned Mongoloids and racially mixed people.

Caucasoid, while having some scientific usage, is more about categorizing people by specific measurements. This too is of little use regarding "race", as in biological ancestry. Someone could be Caucasoid by certain measurements and be a mixture of all 3 major racial groups, or a mulatto, quadroon or hapa. So pairing Caucasoid with race, i.e., a local geographic or global human population distinguished as a more or less distinct group by genetically transmitted physical characteristics, is not very accurate. Ethiopians, as an example, may be categorized as Caucasoid... but according to genetic studies they are only 40% Caucasian in ancestry, while 60% Negroid.

I agree that the term "white" is of little use today except politically, both positive and negative. Mostly because it is now more ambiguous than ever and people with no racial education use it flagrantly to include fairskinned Mongoloids and racially mixed people.

Caucasoid, while having some scientific usage, is more about categorizing people by specific measurements. This too is of little use regarding "race", as in biological ancestry. Someone could be Caucasoid by certain measurements and be a mixture of all 3 major racial groups, or a mulatto, quadroon or hapa. So pairing Caucasoid with race, i.e., a local geographic or global human population distinguished as a more or less distinct group by genetically transmitted physical characteristics, is not very accurate. Ethiopians, as an example, may be categorized as Caucasoid... but according to genetic studies they are only 40% Caucasian in ancestry, while 60% Negroid.

A total analysis is more appropriate to classify people, not just a cephalic and nasal index or lightness of skin.

--
You folks are all full of garbage. This whole theory of "caucasian, negroid," etc. really is pulling at teeth. On the one hand, 99.9 percent of the human genome is exactly the same throughout this modern homo sapien race. So we're arguing about nary a percentage of a percentage. On the other, if you happen to be one of these "caucasoid" arabs, south asians, etc., today you will face unbelieveable amounts of discrimination. Thus, I'll pose my question to you- what is the use in hammering down race? You realize, independent of its social contingency, it disappears. I should tell you that Irish folks were once considered non-white in the united states. Indians once were. To be honest, any attempt to separate races into three general types is a relatively new practice whose roots can be traced back to colonial racism. It was a very useful tool to divide and conquer. The reality is that people have become so mixed within mass migrations over hundred's of years, even to assume there are three base races is really to ignore a very rich history of the human race itself. Scientifically speaking, there are far too many variations among the skull known as "caucasian, negroid, et., mongoloid" to really prove any such theory as this site in some ways seems to deal with.
Posted by: Nittin Roy
--

The Irish are Northwestern Europeans, phenotypically, genetically, culturally, linguistically, and historically. Most anti-Irish sentiment came from the English and uppity Americans in the North. The discrimination against the Irish was not universal.

The Indians, or Amerindians, were never considered racially white, and obviously are a branch of the greater Mongoloid race, migrating from Siberia thousands of years ago. Phenotypically, culturally, linguistically, historically, they are not Indo-European. You may draw your "white" idea from the fact that earlier American settlers referred to friendly Amerindians as "white Indians," and oppositional Amerindians as "red Indians."

As to race being imaginary and insignificant, you can contact geneticists who can pinpoint people's racial ancestry very accurately, anthropologists and forensic experts who can identify race just by bones and teeth, and the medical industry who are using race to better help individuals of certain ancestry. Race isn't just skin deep, it's bone deep.

Minor genetic differences can have significantly different results. Such as a moron and a genius. A chimpanzee and a human. A Nigerian and a Swede.

Anti-racism and the denial of race is also used as a "divide and conquer" strategy... and it's working. European and European-descended nations are currently being colonized by the third world, progressing towards genocide.

Whow ....here we are in year 2004 and some fairy fucking so called white MEN still engage in splitting hairs. Hey who cares who the fuck you are or where you came from. If so called NORDS!! ANGLO-SAXONS are soooo superior then why did it take the wogs to teach them to read and write less than two thousand years ago. Why did it take the wogs to teach them to build sewers, proper housing,....FUCK LONDON is a wog name, LETS be real you so called angalos are a bunch of hopeless nut cases. And so are the Scots, the fuckin Irish...who starved to death because their potato (which was brought to Europe by wogs) was diseased. LETS FACE it only wogs and Asians have a right to be racists! We are superior in everything imaginable. Without us you wouldnt even be able to read this writing...you keep on analysing us because you fear us... Remember this you smelly saxons..WHAT WE HAVE GIVEN YOU....RELIGION, READING AND WRITING, MATHS, ENGINEERING, your fucking clothes and your way of life...Can be taken away from you. GROW UP .....and check if your father is your real father....he might be BLACK