if there are minor statistical variations in IQ among population subsets, there are still quite a few assumptions, generalizations, subconscious inferences and/or intellectual wackeries to get to inferior and subhuman
My intention is not to claimed the IQ variation will drag down to a discrimination level of dehumanizing other group. But my base argument is that such grouping will lead to assigning unique individual to a collective personality/quality that lead to generalization. The fact that the green eyes believe themselves to be more intelligent than the blue eyes population by referencing to the statistical result, this leads to the believe that this quality are inherited quality for being blue eyes or green eyes. This kind of fallacious generalization can be anytime mislead to racism.
Sound like an act of individual and collective narcissism
Isn't that the aspect of racism? Actually I gives this example from this famous experiment that demonstrates how easily it is to assigned "collective personality" to any kind of random physical grouping, this experiment might demonstrate the extreme case. We just creating a language here, where being a brown eyes means certain subset of personalities, while the blue eyes means the other subset of personalities. And race classification not at all absent from the assumed generalization. When we heard the words Irish, African, Asian, we somewhat unconsciously assumed more than just physical differences.
So what to do with these primordial traits of humans...it's not that easy to remove these old programs, just telling someone you are wrong generally does not work and worse, may produce a defensive response that only reinforces the [narcissistic] trait
Actually many form of past discrimination toward certain group of people are somewhat relieved by doing exactly that, when competent institution (academic institution for instance) makes a strong campaign that negates racial classification this surely will affect the public opinion that later on will push the government.
seems you are still equating "race" to "racism" and that this is the solution to the problem, that is, in any case where there may be a different attribute related to "race", we dismiss it as racism....isn't that a generalization as well? Also, are we making decisions to dismiss concepts rather than to further discuss them based on good and bad (?some "universal/objective/just" morality)?
Well this is why I bring up the classification based on eyes color as an example, we can assigned any socio-cultural attribute to unlimited number of possible classification, but such assignment are baseless and uncorrelated.
For instance to think that the Asian did well in Math is definitely not a racism, but it tell us two thing, first such conclusion is false positive, the second is, racism used the very same generalization pattern, but instead they use it to assigned negative attribute to the targeted group, and use the generalization to justify their discrimination and injustice treatment to the targeted group.
Classifying people on "blue-eyed" and "green-eyed" is not different from classifying them on Brits and Germans, basing on their appearance and spoken language.
The problematic part is not classification itself, but the "collective personality" assigned to group of people and prejudice against them.
Halfly agree Red Elk, assigning collective personality to racial classification is a problem, but classifying people based on race in socio-cultural level will eventually leads to that.
