When will the BBC be held accountable for their lack of patriotism

what do you mean by it?

The bigger differences between a Chinese person and a Caucasian person are almost entirely down to different cultural experiences. And as you say there are far more similarities.

Different languages, different upbringing, different histories, different political contexts, different work patterns, different interpersonal social rules, different customs, different social structures. And many more things that are 'invented' but nevertheless which last over time. And although these things change, and can be tweaked over time, they form relatively stable patterns. They are what form cultures.

'National' cultures are part of this complex social structure, and the more informal parts of it get tied in to more formal 'state' parts: such as a flag, a map, a taxation system, an 'official' language (or in China's case, a few...), a series of traditions (mostly, as historians have pointed out, invented in the 19th Century in Europe's case).

Genetics might be easier and quicker to 'explain' these things, and certainly the cultural explanation is uncomfortable because it is a vast array of different causal factors. But however uncomfortable and complex, it is the truth. Genetics play a VERY very small part in the picture of what makes groups of people different...

Claig - Ok - we need to define our terms. What do you mean by 'Race'.

'And the skin colour may be the least significant diffence and isn't a predictor of other characteritics. Much as the colour of a car doesn't predict it's performance.'

I agree. There are other differences than skin colour. I am not saying that skin colour predicts anything, I am just saying that it is a genetic difference.

I am having trouble understanding what you mean. Can you explain why the difference between a Chinese person and a Caucasian person is not genetic? Obviously we are ignoring all of the things that they have in common, we are only discussing differences.

And the skin colour may be the least significant diffence and isn't a predictor of other characteritics. Much as the colour of a car doesn't predict it's performance.

Ah, common sense. Which is what, exactly?

claig, you can continue saying 'it's not just about this, or that' till the cows come home, but you're not actually telling us what you think it IS about.

Your argument is making some basic errors of reasoning: you're eliding a number of concepts, you're not providing evidence to support your claims, and you are assuming that one small part of your claim entails another, when it doesn't.

It is not accurate or logical on so many levels to say 'because we can identify people as Chinese or Welsh, therefore Chinese-ness or Welsh-ness must be genetic'. Nor is it logical or accurate for you to claim that it simply must be true, because it 'just is', which is effectively what you're doing.

I don't think it is about "social construct", I think it is about reality. The early cavemen hunters could distinguish between a wild boar and a bunny rabbit. I'm not sure they thought in terms of social construct, they just used their common sense.

Yes a child may think a red Mercedes is the same as a red Lada. they are both cars. But adults know that there are other differences as well. A white person and a black person are both the same because they are both people, but they also have differences.

Yes - an adult has had more time to absorb the social construct of 'Race' and the assumptions of our society.

Yes I agree, it is a way of categorising and making distinctions, but the categorisation is based on real differences.

A red Mercedes is the same as a red Lada if all you care about is the colour. It depends what you need to use your classification for.

If you are a paint shop then you care more about the colour than that make.

'It depends on your viewpoint. My daughter would consider both Winnie and Mathanxieties sister to be 'mummies' (Well she'd probably think of Winnie as a granny tbh) as the primary way she divide the world is into Mummies, Daddies and Children.'

yes, but she is a young child. An adult would think differently.

Of course there are differences, and of course some are genetic. But so are lots of other things. Skin colour and facial characteristics are just easy to use as identifying them is built into hardware as identifying individuals is a basic human ability.

'Race' is a concept that emerges from the human propensity to categorise.

'Take cars. You can divide them into small, medium or large or into red, yellow, blue etc. or into Mercededes, Lada, Rover etc.

They are all equally valid sorting schemes.

This doesn't mean that the colour of cars determines anything.'

but race is about more than just colour. A red Mercedes is not the same as a red Lada. It's not about colour.

Claig - "'As for physical characteristics somehow proving that there are different races -- highly dubious argument. I look nothing like even my next younger sister and we are both children of the same parents, and of the same 'race'.'

do you look more like your sister than you look like Winnie Mandela?"

It depends on your viewpoint. My daughter would consider both Winnie and Mathanxieties sister to be 'mummies' (Well she'd probably think of Winnie as a granny tbh) as the primary way she divide the world is into Mummies, Daddies and Children.

'Claig - Similarly, I can tell the difference between a Liverpudlian and a Glaswegian. But a Chinese person couldn't (at least not without training in our culture), thought they could tell the differnce between people from two bits of China where I couldn't.'

I agree, but that doesn't mean that there isn't a difference, just that it is not always discernible by everybody

'As for physical characteristics somehow proving that there are different races -- highly dubious argument. I look nothing like even my next younger sister and we are both children of the same parents, and of the same 'race'.'

do you look more like your sister than you look like Winnie Mandela?

'The Wilfred Owen poem is rightly scornful of armchair patriots.'

but it's not scornful of the patriots who die in foreign fields, whereas the Marxist website's poem is scornful of those who die in foreign fields and is scornful of their flag (the red, white and blue) and calls these patriots "nuts", while the poet thinks he is clever by trying to get his leg over.
No one, except a Marxist, would ever broadcast the "International Socialism" poem on Remembrance Sunday.

The Wilfred Owen poem is rightly scornful of armchair patriots.

As for physical characteristics somehow proving that there are different races -- highly dubious argument. I look nothing like even my next younger sister and we are both children of the same parents, and of the same 'race'.

Claig - Race is a result of how we classify various genetic, cultural and other differences. The fact that some of them are genetic doesn't mean there is a genetic basis to Race.

Take cars. You can divide them into small, medium or large or into red, yellow, blue etc. or into Mercededes, Lada, Rover etc.

They are all equally valid sorting schemes.

This doesn't mean that the colour of cars determines anything.

Claig - Similarly, I can tell the difference between a Liverpudlian and a Glaswegian. But a Chinese person couldn't (at least not without training in our culture), thought they could tell the differnce between people from two bits of China where I couldn't.

Welsh is a 'race'? So. Colin Jackson. Shirley Bassey. You think you could determine their Welshness. How would you go about doing that claig?

Chinese is a race? So you could 'distinguish' a Chinese person from, say, a Taiwanese person, or a South Korean? How, exactly?