If it can be proven through science that there is more to "race" than a mere social construct, and our political system can't handle this fact, then there is something wrong with our political system. Our political system is certainly a social construct, and in a collision between it and the reality of race, clinging to a flawed system makes as much sense as the Creationist arguments against evolution.
The coming public discourse on race is going to be uncomfortable for many, especially when sequencing of the human genome becomes cheap and easy. We would be much further along if people hadn't wasted so much effort denying that race exists. Perhaps it would be more fruitful for people who are race-deniers today to instead promote a coherent philosophy that explains why, despite our differences, we are all entitled to a basic set of human rights.
If it can be proven through science that there is more to "race" than a mere social construct, and our political system can't handle this fact, then there is something wrong with our political system.
... the article you quoted put Europeans into several different "races", which distinguished some genetic differences ...
It did, didn't it? The subject of intra-European genetic differences sounds like an interesting topic, and I look forward to reading the results of more research.
... but didn't account for things like intelligence, violent tendencies, etc. ...
True, but that wasn't the point of the study. The study showed a correlation between DNA structure and national origin. This compliments an earlier study showing how trivial it was to predict ancestral continent of origin using only 50 randomly selected SNPs. The researchers in the earlier study tasked a computer with no pre-conceived notion of race to find clusters within the samples, and those clusters correlated to self-reported ancestral continent of origin with greater than 95% accuracy.
It appears that race is real.
... your post indicates that you don't think people deserve equal rights.
That wasn't the point of my comment, nor is it something I believe, although we may differ on what "rights" all humans possess. I was merely suggesting that many people were wasting resources promoting a wrong idea: "race is merely a social construct".
Now instead of the straw man, look at the
Statement on "Race", which says:
Evidence from the analysis of genetics (e.g., DNA) indicates that
most physical variation, about 94%, lies within so-called racial groups.
Conventional geographic "racial" groupings differ from one another only in
about 6% of their genes. This means that there is greater variation within
"racial" groups than between them.
Your study doesn't tell us anything that's new or shocking: just what
is already known. Furthermore, by drawing distinctions between Norwegians
and Swedes, though those groups are socially accepted as being the same "race",
it bolsters the idea that the social definitions of races do not correspond
to genetic reality.--It is unlikely that the good of a snail should reside in its shell: so is it likely that the good of a man should?
In popular articles that play down the genetical differences among human populations, it is often stated that about 85% of the total genetical variation is due to individual differences within populations and only 15% to differences between populations or ethnic groups. It has therefore been proposed that the division of Homo sapiens into these groups is not justified by the genetic
data. This conclusion, due to R.C. Lewontin in 1972, is unwarranted because the argument ignores the fact that most of the information that distinguishes populations is hidden in the correlation structure of the data and not simply in the variation of the individual factors.
As for attacking a straw man...
only you and your buddies at stormfront are smart enough
... what do you suppose you were doing there?
"To this day that was the most bullshit caesar salad I have every experienced..." - triggerfinger