Re:How the Native American population changed since the last...
by Dylan16807 on Tuesday January 18, 2022 @11:51PM
(#29990089)
> In the theory under which “race” is meaningful, it is biological and distinct from (and orthogonal to) social “ethnic” categories, so claiming race on that basis is exactly as valid as the idea of race itself.
But even on that basis, 1/16 is not very meaningful.
> Now, if we admit that “race” is just a dishonest label assigned to certain ethnic categories...
...then we're looking at demographic groups, like the earlier comment asked about.
Re:How the Native American population changed since the last...
by stickyricky on Wednesday January 19, 2022 @12:02AM
(#29990166)
> 1/16 is not very meaningful.
To you... Many people find it meaningful including American Indian tribes which require ancestry of that amount.
Re:How the Native American population changed since the last...
by coldtea on Tuesday January 18, 2022 @11:28PM
(#29989974)
I'd say, it's a broader concept that includes many ethnic groups with similar geographical origins and/or backgrounds and shared ancestries. Not that precise of course and with fuzzy edges...
Re:How the Native American population changed since the last...
by bencollier49 on Wednesday January 19, 2022 @06:25AM
(#29992327)
I'm confused here - are you saying that ethnic categories are social constructs?
In the theory under which “race” is meaningful, it is biological and distinct from (and orthogonal to) social “ethnic” categories, so claiming race on that basis is exactly as valid as the idea of race itself.
Now, if we admit that “race” is just a dishonest label assigned to certain ethnic categories...