So defining race in anything other than describing appearence, should be useless as it provides no obviously useful information about a person/group of people, does it?
Also "race" is a debunked meaningless term, meaning 'genetic stock' before we actually knew anything about genetics. But let's humour it.
So why is 'race' used and how?
In short: Race is now used to symbolise a group of people in relation to skin colour etc. Ugh.
An example of this is used in the USA. you guessed it... Classism.
In African-Americans communities, many of which communities are comparatively poorer. Many black people throughout America are descendants from modern slaves. You would expect after a long time and many, many generations that the wealth gap would've healed between black and white communities, it didn't. Many black communities are still comparatively impoverished in the US. The economic system has so far not facilitated social mobility well at all. If the US had fluid social mobility, 'race' would not be as topical. Because why would it?; skin colour represents nothing about who we are morally, politically, or talents, interests or how we think as an individual/group. In the US, racial minorities have mostly retained the symbolism of poverty that still stagnates in many black/latino communities.
This can be seen (anecdotally) in the converse situation, where most black/Latino celebrities do not appear to experience racism to anywhere near the same extent as working class black/latino individuals. You think Will Smith had trouble getting a house in the Hollywood suburbs? In the same way white celebrities are treated to a significantly better standard than white working class people. The biggest factor here is that celebrities are overtly wealthy, regardless of being black, white or latino.
Skin colour has nothing to do with poverty. Being a descendant of people who had nothing, in a society without social mobility, does has something to do with poverty.
When you have all of the negative connotations that come with poverty, associated with a race of people (ie crime violence etc), some Tucker Carlsonesque genius is going to get scared and racist, and subsequently blaming skin-pigment for socio-economic issues.
Idk if this exactly answers you Q.
So defining race in anything other than describing appearence, should be useless as it provides no obviously useful information about a person/group of people, does it?
Also "race" is a debunked meaningless term, meaning 'genetic stock' before we actually knew anything about genetics. But let's humour it.
So why is 'race' used and how?
In short: Race is now used to symbolise a group of people in relation to skin colour etc. Ugh.
An example of this is used in the USA. you guessed it... Classism. In African-Americans communities, many of which communities are comparatively poorer. Many black people throughout America are descendants from modern slaves. You would expect after a long time and many, many generations that the wealth gap would've healed between black and white communities, it didn't. Many black communities are still comparatively impoverished in the US. The economic system has so far not facilitated social mobility well at all. If the US had fluid social mobility, 'race' would not be as topical. Because why would it?; skin colour represents nothing about who we are morally, politically, or talents, interests or how we think as an individual/group. In the US, racial minorities have mostly retained the symbolism of poverty that still stagnates in many black/latino communities.
This can be seen (anecdotally) in the converse situation, where most black/Latino celebrities do not appear to experience racism to anywhere near the same extent as working class black/latino individuals. You think Will Smith had trouble getting a house in the Hollywood suburbs? In the same way white celebrities are treated to a significantly better standard than white working class people. The biggest factor here is that celebrities are overtly wealthy, regardless of being black, white or latino.
Skin colour has nothing to do with poverty. Being a descendant of people who had nothing, in a society without social mobility, does has something to do with poverty.
When you have all of the negative connotations that come with poverty, associated with a race of people (ie crime violence etc), some Tucker Carlsonesque genius is going to get scared and racist, and subsequently blaming skin-pigment for socio-economic issues.
===========================