The Science of Race
Rashawn Ray

In the previous column, we defined race as ethnoracial, historically rooted distinctions or social constructions. Ethnicity, on the other hand, can be classified as a subgroup that shares a common ancestry, history, and/or culture. Now that we know how race and ethnicity are defined, let us discuss how race was invented.

Since race is real in its consequences, individuals assume that race must be real in its circumstances. While numerous studies show that no biological or genetic differences exist among races that have significant psychological, mental, or physical implications, most individuals profess that there are innate racial differences between groups. These include stereotypes such as Asians being smarter but shorter, Blacks being physically superior yet intellectually inferior, and whites of course being the standard and epitome of all humans.

Humans are one species regardless of skin color, dialect, eye shape, and/or hair texture. In fact, individuals show more genetic variation within races than among them. In other words, a Black person and a white person can be genetically more similar to each other than two white people or two Black people. While differences seem to develop through health disparities, IQ tests, and physical prowess, most of these differences are rooted in socialization, environmental factors, cultural variation, and perceptions of opportunities. Because individuals are all humans, we are one species and not multiple races. Taken together, the science of race is only skin deep.

So, the following questions are raised. How was race invented and by whom? Race was formally posited in the mid 1700s by Carl or Carolus Linnaeus, a Swedish taxonomist, who asserted that people looked different. Linnaeus argued that because people looked different, there had to be psychological differences associated with these perceived physical differences. Accordingly, Linnaeus split humans into four races—White, Yellow, Red, and Black—each associated with a major continent. The German naturalist Blumenback introduced three racial categories—Caucasoid, Mongoloid, and Ethiopian. It should be noted that Negroid, which means Black, later replaced the term Ethiopian. Thus, many of the Biblical associations between Christianity and Ethiopia and/or Blacks were lost.



It should also be noted that whites were the categorizing racial group. Thus, whites were placed on top of the racial hierarchy and used whiteness as the pure marker of perfection. Subsequently, other groups fall in line based on skin color from lightest to darkest. This was of course about 150 years after American slavery, thus an informal system of racial groupings already existed with whites being at the top and Blacks being at the bottom.

In his classic 1859 book The Origin of Species, Charles Darwin developed evolution, which asserts that through the survival of the fittest, the most superior species will evolve and adapt to their environment. This is where the term race is such an intriguing choice of words. By classifying groups as races, it insinuates that groups are indeed competing and racing to be the survival of the fittest.

Similarly, eugenics, which was derived by Sir Francis Galton in 1865 who was a cousin of Charles Darwin, asserts that through a unique combination of nature versus nurture whereby various interventions are constructed, the perfect human can be created to enhance intelligence levels, save society’s resources, and decrease human suffering. Some of these interventions include selective breeding, genetic engineering, in vitro fertilization, and forced sterilization. Eugenics movements have been criticized for justifying state-sponsored discrimination and human rights violations. Recently, some scholars have called for a resurgence into the study of eugenics through new forms of technology.

Nonetheless, external physical characteristics (e.g. skin color, hair color and texture, eye color) were perceived to reflect psychological and mental abilities that imply racial superiority or inferiority. These assumptions, however, are refuted because there are individuals of every racial group with the same characteristics. More importantly, there is no gene for race. Melanin is the determinant for skin color. Fat around the eyes determines eye shape. Furthermore, there are numerous genetic classifications that determine physical appearance. For example, in 2005 a British couple had fraternal twins—one Black girl and one white girl.





Still, stereotypes regarding physical characteristics persist through falsifying cranium weight and facial angles as a determinant for intelligence. In the 1790s and beyond, scientists constructed white brains to be larger than Black brains. Accordingly, racial groups were ranked. Blacks were on the bottom of the racial hierarchy and stereotyped as intellectually inferior and physically superior but lazy. Asians were stereotyped as intelligent but short. And of course whites were seen as the ideal. Interesting how these stereotypes still seem to reign today.

Through the formulation of theories and concepts to describe and categorize humans, race moved from being a rumor to being reality and unfortunately, race became a means to separate groups. Darwin's theory of evolution and natural selection became the scientific basis for providing that differences exist among racial groups. Galton’s Eugenics theory became the scientific basis to carry out preserving so-called racial purity. "Color prejudice thus became fused with beliefs in biological determinants to produce white racism” (Drake 1987). Accordingly, whites were deemed as the guardians of civilization, commonly known as the white man's burden. White man's burden means that whites are supposed to govern and preserve pure human life. This purity meant white life. Two examples are fitting here.

First, Nazi Germany’s “racial hygiene” programs during the 1930s and 1940s sought to preserve the human race by excluding all Jews. The Aryan nation, commonly associated with Nazi Germany and Adolf Hitler, categorizes themselves as the pure breeds. While the Nazis could not find consistent recognizable physical characteristics to distinguish Germans from Jews, they resulted to forcing Jews to wear yellow armbands and only have Jewish names. Germans were told to only marry and breed with blue eyed and blond haired humans. Interestingly, Adolf Hitler, the leader of Nazi Germany, was brown headed with dark eyes. Over 40,000 individuals including Jews, Gypsies, Jehovah witnesses, Blacks, and homosexuals were sterilized from 1934-1937.



Second, The Tuskegee Experiment is also an example of the eugenics movement. From 1932-1972 about 400 Black male farmers in Alabama were injected with syphilis without their knowledge or approval. These men were told that they had “bad blood” so that doctors and researchers could document the effect this disease has on humans until they die. This tragic event did not come to light until after the experiment was over with one doctor stating, “As I see it, we have no further interest in these patients until they die” (U.S. World Almanac). This is just the disease and the experiment that we know about. Imagine how many other people and/or potentially experiments there could be. Image how many other individuals these 400 men could have exposed this disease and other diseases to. This study sure makes you question the STD and AIDS rate in Black and lower-class communities.




Interestingly, most of these scholars who were classifying groups and placing psychological, mental, and physical characteristics on to them had never seen an African in person. Individuals find it shocking that human life originated in Mesopotamia, which is located in between the Tigris and the Euphrates rivers in Africa. From an evolutionary perspective, it has been asserted that Blacks are the closest to Apes, thus the inferior race. Comparatively, whites have been noted to be similar to birds and fish, which are lower on the animal hierarchy than apes. Taken together, these theories are refuted because Egyptians, who were the first civilization, were so sophisticated and intelligent that modern day scholars, scientists, nor technology can determine the inner workings of the pyramids or the Egyptians successful government and burial operations. Egypt is in Africa and until Greek and Roman invasions, Egyptians' skin color was similar to that of Blacks in America instead of Indians and Middle Easterners.




In sum, race started out as a rumor, as a myth. An important aspect of American history and truth has been hidden from you. You and the rest of the world have been bamboozled and hoodwinked into thinking that race has real circumstances that are rooted in genetic variation. Therefore, most of the Blacks that whites meet who do not fit the stereotypes that race insinuates must be one of the thousand exceptions. Moreover, once individuals get to know each other on a face to face, micro-level instead of as group categorizations, the more we realize how similar we are. Still, the myth of racial differences where transmitted across media outlets, pulpits, classrooms, and stages. Individuals have a tendency to react to preconceived notions of groups based on how they were raised, socialized, and/or limitedly exposed to socially rather than individual notions. Let me repeat my beginning statement. There are no biological or genetic differences that have psychological, mental, or physical implications.

Following the science of race, a follow-up question is raised. How was and is race socially constructed in society? The social construction of race was perpetuated in slavery and racist events such as the Holocaust and mainly rears its ugly head today through covert racism and whiteness. Next week's column will discuss the social construction of race using the North American slave trade and the Holocaust as empirical examples. We will also discuss the socialization of ugly, Black physical features versus pretty, white physical features by highlighting Barbie, Aunt Jemima, and the Bratz. We will also discuss the old and recent doll studies that are quite telling regarding the socialization of race.

References are available upon request