>I think you confuse these theories
>with blindess to supposed racial
>variance when actually it proposes
>a more acurate account of
>what race is even moreso
>than popoular politics even allow.

You never explained the difference betweem your theory and colorblind theory. Why, for example, would call a culturally and physically diverse groupop of people "black" while refusing to name a culturally and physically diverse group of people "white"? If you don't believe in one racial category, they all crumble. And crumbling racial barriers is colorblind theory. Explain how your theory differentiates, please.

>
>" how could these discriminatory actions
>be penalized in a society
>that doesn't officially recognize race?"
>
>
>Our government can recognize racial ideologies
>just like any faith doctrine
>without accepting them-

You cannot "recognize race" or "racial ideologies" under colorblind theory. Either you believe white or black people are defined groups or you don't. if you don't accept the concept of race as a defining characteristic, by logical deduction you cannot recognize ideologies based on that which you do not recognize as existing. For example, the government doesn't officially recognize the existence of UFOs. Therefore, the government would not protect a party from discrimination based on a claim that they are a member of an extraterrestial group...or believe they are extraterrestial.

>If you were a jew and
>you went to get a
>job but a anti-semite wouldnt
>let you would the gpvernment
>need to take sides in
>the matter to determine that
>civil rights had been infringed
>on?

actually, the government (through the court system, part of our government, or administrative agencies) are the only source of relief when one is injured by discrimination (outside of vigilantism).

> certinly not, a supposedly
>objective body can distinguish itself
>from the beliefs of singular
>communities or opposing ideologies.

An objective body such as a court system? That's government.

> Likewise
>does the American government need
>to beilieve in and foster
>race classification to admit the
>crimes that are being enacted
>in its name-

what crimes? crimes committed in the government's name?

> of course
>not, but it will do
>just that if we dont
>cite them for the crime
>of imposing it by national
>order in the first place.

This is all extremely vague. Be direct in what you're stating.

>The difference with race ideology is
>that it bears no quantifiable
>measure- no substantial markings- it
>is not scientific by any
>means- it bears far less
>accuracy than ideas of culture
>and national origin

national origin is defined by arbitrarily defined borders. how is that more of a defining characteristic than race? basically, people in America think they're American because the society
they grew up in told them so -- through their parents, through the educational system, through the media -- but just being born within these borders means nothing without the social pressure to be nationalistic...for example, some might consider it "un-American" to burn a flag, others born within the same borders see it as an importnat form of protest. National origin is really no identicator of group identity, how a person will behave, etc.

>, issues of
>heritage- it is substantiated primarily
>in presumptions and hidden agendas
>and ideas that just arent
>true.

Such as? Why would national origin be based on ideas that are "truer" than race? How about cultural heritage, whatever that means?

> If thats the case
>then why is it being
>used as a factual/pragmatic means
>of a census

What about gender? Feel the same about that?

>, why is
>it being used to determine
>stratification of wealth and assistance
>among people?

Because race has been used to create economic disparities, through racial discrimination. Without knowing the economic statistics of individual racial groups, these disparities can't be measured...and without measurement cannot be alleviated.

>Why are we using it to
>run this country- and then
>wondering why the country's "race
>relations" are so fucked up-
>here's a hint- cuz the
>idea of race was fucked
>up in the first place!

Don't see how "national origin" is any more valid of a means of dividing people into groups.

>To answer your question race can
>be dealt with pragmatically in
>determining its effects on society
>and it should be.

My question was HOW, so that's not answering my question.

> However
>items like the census and
>all racial quuantifications and statistical
>data are not pragmatic in
>that they can only bare
>out the evidence of a
>characterization that is implicitly demeaning
>and untrue.

How is defining groups by race any more demeaning than defining groups by national origin?

>If you continue to allow the
>government to presume that lie
>as truth then whatever race
>discrimination is being dealt width
>will continue to move us
>1 step forward and two
>steps back as has been
>its consistent pattern for the
>last 500 years.

Us? what "us" are you talking about if you don't believe in race?

>If you want to realize race
>and not be blind to
>it- then you have no
>choice but admit that it
>was an illbegotten and demeaning
>notion that bears no substantiating
>scientific or natural capacity.

natural capacity? here's a question for you, chief. 99.99 times out of a hundred, two black parents create a black child. two white parents, 99.99% of the time create a white child. if you're saying that race isn't a biological characteristic, how do you explain that?

> The
>government must back away from
>this ideology as it is
>demaning and false- and furthermore
>stop imposing the ideology as
>if it were irrefutable fact.

The government isn't "imposing" anything. No one's forcing me to call myself black.

>
>Whatever discrimination that takes place will
>still be dealt with in
>the absence of the "race
>paradigm"

You still haven't explained how. Break down a hypothetical government program. My question is how do you deal with it. You still haven't answered HOW.

the key is understanding
>that that "race paradigm" is
>at the very root of
>the discrimination.
>
>K


Spread love,

Spirit
http://www.theamphibians.com

9 out of 10 people with two arms find something interesting about http://www.theamphibians.com
This summer: new audio, same odd sense of humor. Don't get "left" out, mossie your two-armed self on over and check it out.

Peace,

Spirit (Alan)
http://wutangbook.com