If your statement is that race is a pernicious, slippery and unscientific thing, I agree, but if it means anything, it doesn’t mean what you say it means.
I’d mostly agree with that except that ‘race’ is an entirely scientific construct – with roots in physiognomy inspired works such as John Beddoe’s (1862) The Races of Man (with a measure of ‘nigressence’) or J. C. Nott and G. R. Gliddon’s (1868) Indigenous Races of the Earth ‘science’ created and categorised racial difference. The construction of racial categories preceded this and most contemporary commentators tend to agree that the ‘othering’ (see Edward Said, Orientalism) of Sub-Saharan peoples coincided with and was used to legitimise Europe’s widescale early modern adoption of slavery. Nonetheless it was during the 19th century that scientific ‘proof’ consolidated ‘race’ as a viable category. It still persists, particularly in psychology: articles published in the last couple of years by Linda Gottfredson, J. Philippe Rushton and Arthur Jenson use racial genetic difference as an explanation of intelligence differences between populations. They are, of course, marginal figures and their findings rejected but it is wrong to suggest that ‘race’ is ‘unscientific’. Science helped to create ‘race’ and scientists persist in attempting to maintain it.
But yeah, STW is hardly a hotbed of racist activists. Even Capt.Fleshheart who leans at 45deg to the right has more good sense, taste and decency than to go down *that* stony path. I also baulk at the idea of censorship of any beliefs or views no matter how unpleasant, wretched or out of step with convention they are: too much great art and literature would be lost if we went around banning material that individuals found offensive. Shit, most music/film/literature that I own would be on the pyres.
