A more charged issue than racism there is not. No matter what your bloodline, it is nigh impossible not to step on some toes or inadvertently cause grave offense while exploring race and racial differences. Race is of enormous importance to the structure and functioning of this society, and most people define themselves at least in part by their race and ethnicity. Whether prideful or shameful, it is part of who they are. What's more, most people define others at least in part by their race and ethnicity. Or, perhaps more specifically, by the color of their skin. But for the handful of superficial ways races are classified by the lay public --the easily distinguished physical features separating Caucasians from Africans from Asians from Indians-- rarely is race truly being considered. Rather, it is culture. Racial classifications serve to exercise the ethnocentricism and xenophobia woven into American society. They let people articulate a dislike for others without acknowledging the true linguistic, religious and cultural aversion standing behind their feelings.

Perhaps we should begin by acknowledging that, by the standards of modern anthropology, race as a classification for humans is arbitrary at best and, from some perspectives, impossible. Classing humans by skin color is no more meaningful than by lactose tolerance, fingerprints, or resistance to malaria. Using any of those methods would divide the human population up in different ways, and no one arrangement has inherent significance. However, for our purposes we will consider race as a function exclusively of skin color and certain subtle physical differences. Not only are skin color and physical differences the traditional markers of race, but are also perhaps the only recognized by the laity.

Indeed, when most people speak of race they speak of obvious physical traits readily perceivable and easy to distinguish. The dark-skinned Africans with broad noses and tightly curled hair. The very light-skinned Europeans with narrower noses and straight hair of various colors. The brown-skinned Arabs and East Africans with black, straight hair. The tan-skinned Asians and Pacific Islanders with black hair and narrow eyes. One could go on, but it is these kind of genetically inherited and geographically distinctive traits that most people pay attention to. Obvious physical differences are, to most people, all race is.

Skin color is a favorite focus, although hardly the only variation. Human skin ranges, with some connection to distance from the equator, from a dark black to a very light tan. In between are all flavors of brown and tan, brownish yellows and brownish reds. In that your skin and, of course, your skin color covers your entire body it is perhaps easier to determine what skin color group one belongs to than anything else. And despite the enormous variation in color across the species and the capacity for stunning variation within races, often all it takes is a quick glance to place one in a color group. This ease of differentiation is what makes race as skin color so popular, and so difficult to effect. Skin color can be determined from vast distances, is virtually impossible to conceal or counterfeit, and serves as a very reliable indicator of racial classification. That is, of course, for the more uniquely pronounced races such as Caucasians, Africans, or Asians. With easy classification, though, comes easy discrimination. Perhaps a true advantage of race as lactose tolerance or as malaria resistance would be the difficulty in making those kinds of instant classifications. You could be a minority in a majority of lactose intolerant peoples, but it would be difficult or impossible to focus on an individual without the kind of unmistakable visual indicator that is skin color. But with the historical focus on skin color as race, this is what society has taught us to consider.

The facial features and physical dimensions that reflect skin color are likewise important, if less obvious and articulatable. Races represent pockets of a species geographically isolated long enough to begin evolving away from each other. Whether that movement conforms to the environment through natural selection, or the arbitrary wanderings of sexual selection and random chance, the body itself changes. Those changes are not limited to skin color, but affect muscle mass, fat deposits, height, skeletal structure, skull shape, the elasticity of tendons, body surface area and countless other variables. Some, such as facial features, are more easily noticeable and hence, more important to the public interpretation of race. One could even make the argument that facial features are more important than skin color. Indeed, the Caucasian who --if kept out of the sun-- would be the same pale, pasty white of this author could tan their skin to a deep brown and still never have their race questioned. And with the enormous variation within races, regardless of how light an African's skin is, they will probably never be confused for anything but African. This is the power of facial features. When the skin gives conflicting or questionable signals, one can determine racial group by facial features alone.

Skin color, physical features, and especially facial features are perhaps the only conscious consideration of race for the lay public. But is there more going on below the surface? Race is a convenient extension of the ethnocentricism and xenophobia built into most societies, and undeniably present in American society. The majority of people who would be considered racist by modern standards, are not actually concerned with race per say. They are concerned with culture. They are concerned with the cultural division between their culture or sub culture, and another culture or sub culture. The differences between black America and white America are vast. Certainly enough to create the "us" and "them" dichotomy commonly attributed to racial disparity. True white racists, those who feel that the Caucasian bloodline is superior to other races, are a slim if vocal minority. Most whites who dislike the black race, and would accordingly think themselves racist probably don't care what color African skin really is. They probably don't have any feelings on genetic superiority. They probably don't really mind racial interbreeding. They probably don't have visions of exterminating non-Caucasian races. What they mind, on the other hand, is a black American culture which is distinctly different from their own, which they don't understand, and which they can see becoming more prominent. True racists are rare. More common is mere ethnocentricism born out of fear and ignorance, but which must certainly be more benign.

The culture clash --or perhaps more commonly, the sub culture clash-- has deep roots. Differences, even between cultures as similar as black America and white America, are easy to find when they are being sought. Music is a point easily brushed aside as the entitlement of personal preference. Rap, rhythm and blues, jazz, blues and other flavors of African-American music have all seen mixed reactions from white America. Barring empirical evidence, it has been this author's experience that the same cultural racists discussed above reject black music not on artistic grounds, but the superfluous cultural prejudice one might expect. The act of embracing black music and art is an indication of at least coming to terms with the "alien" African American culture.

Language plays no small part in American pseudo-racism. Witness the hubbub over Ebonics some years ago, and the clamor that proposals to incorporate it into education raised. Language is the key to a culture, and likewise, a foreign language symbolizes the disparity between two peoples. People fear languages they don't understand, and are very suspicious of comments made in foreign tongues. Not only can it be rude and excluding, but also social interaction depends on the communication of defined symbols. When the symbols become meaningless, the social situations are difficult or impossible to follow. Ebonics, or the urban English so commonly associated with African-Americans (see, Standard African American English), is a barrier of miscommunication between black America and white America. While certainly not as separating as a language, the dialect oozes disconnection from white America. That separation only reinforces the cultural division, and accents the disparity between black and white.

It doesn't help that Africans are so easily differentiated from Europeans. America has assimilated foreign cultures before, but only European cultures. It remains to be seen if white and black America will ever converge, and if that will resolve racism. Historically, an influx of foreign people carrying an alien culture has always been met with derision. Some 30 million Europeans immigrated to the United States at the turn of the century. First came the Irish, then the Italians, then the Poles. Each were discriminated against, but some more than others. The Irish were held apart from continental Europeans and were seen even as non-white until the later half of the 20th century. Those separations were cultural, but assumed a racial tone until the Irish shook off the stereotypes and were accepted as white.

It is an old explanation, if not a publicly accepted one, that racism is often mistaken for mere cultural aversion. Not that ethnocentricism is that much better, but perhaps a first step to combating racism in America would be acknowledging what it truly is. The convenience of separating peoples by race might be too great to ignore, and the best we can hope for may be acceptance and convergence on a cultural level, rather than blindness on a racial level.

A mouth-watering contribution to the Noding things you've written before project.
This was originally for an anthropology class, of which I barely passed anyway, now that I think about it...