Will all people of the world mix creating one race in the future?

But for now you only play the victim and blame others or the world in general for all the maladies. You have some strong believing "syndrome", giving you inclusive rights for the truth, and creating feeling as you're the victim against them, the others, the gays, the muslims, the liberals, the media, the pro gay scientists, etc, etc.
Can't you see the mental cage you locked yourself in, to keep the others away?

Dude, it's one thing when one is OK with something. He can be OK with muslims, gays, aliens, whatever, as long as someone keeps it for himself, and does whatever suits his needs with himself. BUT, once it goes public it's a normal thing to stand up against it, if you feel jeopardized. If he doesn't want to watch religious people do some insane rites, or he feels disgust with gays, or thinks alien sex movies are obnoxious, he has the right to say it out loud. Even more, if that is the opinion of the majority, others must go with it. Why should majority care to adopt to abnormal or extravagant characters? It is supposed to be other way. He is practically being caged from outside. That's the price to pay for being tolerant -‘Let ‘em have one finger, they take your whole hand’.
 
I don't think that humanity will ever end up becoming one "race", there will always be diversity (even mixed children are very diverse). Especially considering the giant leaps in genetic engineering that have been happening for the last 20-30 years. For example, it wouldn't surprise me if most parents of the future choose for their kids to have blue eyes or other characteristics which are nowadays considered rare and appealing. People might even start modifying their features to look like nothing like we see in any of modern humans, like reptilian skin or furry bodies.
 
I don't see how one race could ever happen. It's not like every person from one race prefers a person from another race, there are allot of people who are attracted to their own people.
 
I don't see how one race could ever happen.
Like it is happening in America, Canada, Australia the modern multicultural countries. Like it happened already in ancient Egypt where white people mixed with black Nubians. Like in Brazil where you can find every shade of human skin and every shape of a nose. Brazil is the best example how this happens.

It's not like every person from one race prefers a person from another race, there are allot of people who are attracted to their own people.
It doesn't need to be every person. It is enough even if small percentage mixes every decade. After couple of thousand of years the mixed genes will flow across whole society.

If you can check few genetic threads (here on Eupedia) about ancient and current Europeans, you would notice that all Europeans are a mixture of many ancient peoples (or subraces if you will) that moved into Europe since Mezolitic. There is not even one original "Mesolithic race" European anymore. There is no pure Neolithic European anymore either. We are all mixtures of the same ancestral components though in different proportions. This is what we get after about 6 thousand years of mixing.
Do your genetic test and we can tell you how mixed you are already.

If you don't believe it can happen in 2 thousand years, considering hyper mobility of today's and future society, and give it 10,000 years or 100,000 years. One thing is sure, people mix and will mix more in the future. Complete mixed society is only a matter of time, and there is no shortage of time in Universe.
 
If you don't believe it can happen in 2 thousand years, considering hyper mobility of today's and future society, and give it 10,000 years or 100,000 years. One thing is sure, people mix and will mix more in the future. Complete mixed society is only a matter of time, and there is no shortage of time in Universe.

This is a high likely scenario (unless we go through some cataclysmic event that cannot be dealt with, which puts humans in some kind of bottle neck situation or total eradication........we could have conquered Mars by then :) )
 
Like it is happening in America, Canada, Australia the modern multicultural countries. Like it happened already in ancient Egypt where white people mixed with black Nubians. Like in Brazil where you can find every shade of human skin and every shape of a nose. Brazil is the best example how this happens.


Do your genetic test and we can tell you how mixed you are already.
LeBrok, can you give statistics of mixed race couples in USA, Australia etc. compared to general populations?

And, for example, I do have my autosomal test, and I don't have any admix whatsoever from other major races.

Also keep in mind, those old mixes you refer were not result of some hippie happy coupling, but outcome of violence and conquest.
 
LeBrok, can you give statistics of mixed race couples in USA, Australia etc. compared to general populations?

And, for example, I do have my autosomal test, and I don't have any admix whatsoever from other major races.

Also keep in mind, those old mixes you refer were not result of some hippie happy coupling, but outcome of violence and conquest.

According to Statistics Canada about 4% of all marriages are mixed race. This is a double from 2% in 1990. Keep in mind that Caucasians are still majority 77%, therefore visible minorities are at 23%, of all Canadians, which reduced chances of mixed marriages.

Here is a very nice summary of Canadian multiculturalism in regards to mixed couples.
http://www.canada.com/Number+mixed+race+couples+rise+Canada+StatsCan/2928592/story.html

What surprised me in this report is that the highest ratio of mixing happens in Japanese community, about 75%? In huge contrast to very conservative demographic (not to say racist) policies of Japanese government "protecting" purity of Japan.

- Japanese had the highest proportion of marrying or partnering outside their visible minority group, with 75 per cent of those coupled off choosing a non-Japanese partner. Next are Latin Americans at 47 per cent, blacks at 41 per cent and Filipinos at 33 per cent.

People with higher education and higher income tend to mix more too.

- Among Canadian cities, Vancouver has the largest share of mixed couples, at 8.5 per cent, followed by Toronto with 7.1 per cent and Calgary with 6.1 per cent.

Like it or not, people are mixing, will be mixing and speed of mixing is increasing every year.

In a thousand years we should have one well mixed population, borderless nations and everyone speaking english.
 
Like it or not, people are mixing, will be mixing and speed of mixing is increasing every year.

In a thousand years we should have one well mixed population, borderless nations and everyone speaking english.

We won't be there to see but it won't happen not in 1000 nor in 10000 years :) This utopian leftist fantasy is against human group psychology. And no, I don't like it ;)
 
We won't be there to see but it won't happen not in 1000 nor in 10000 years :) This utopian leftist fantasy is against human group psychology. And no, I don't like it ;)

When Leonardo Da Vinci was designing his flying machine 500 years ago, many conservative people swore that people are not meant to fly and that will never ever ever fly. Look in the sky, there we are, and the world has not ended. ;)
 
We won't be there to see but it won't happen not in 1000 nor in 10000 years :) This utopian leftist fantasy is against human group psychology. And no, I don't like it ;)


It's irrelevant whether any of us like it or not. What is relevant is what genetics tells us about human history. There is no "pure" population. The Georgians, as people of the southern Caucasus, are a mixture of Near Eastern farmers who moved to the Caucasus (who were themselves a mixture of "Basal Eurasian" hunter gatherers and hunter gatherers from another human lineage, which then admixed with other hunter gatherers from yet another human lineage (ANE), and which lineage, by the way, has some correlation with a component present in south Asians.

On admixture runs of more recent, drifted, autosomal components, look up the Georgians:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArAJcY18g2GadF9CLUJnTUdSbkVJaDR2UkRtUE9kaUE#gid=2

In North America, in terms of Europeans of varying backgrounds, it's a total mishmash. I've said before that in twenty-five years you practically won't be able to find an American who is of 100% Italian descent. (Among fourth generation descendents of Italians, no more than 8% have exclusively Italian ancestry.That doesn't mean that part Italians don't identify as Italian-Americans, of course.) Even Jews, famously endogamous for 2,000 years, are marrying out at a rate of about 50%. If you don't want your children to admix with people of another ethnic group, the U.S., North America in general, should not be your first choice for emigration.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/why-is-jewish-intermarriage-the-highest-among-all-us-faiths/
http://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp312.pdf

As for inter-racial marriage in the U.S., "Interracial marriages in the U.S. have climbed to 4.8 million (1 in 12 marriages) in 2010[3] as a steady flow of new Asian and Hispanic immigrants expands the pool of prospective spouses.[5] In 2010, 15% of new marriages were interracial.[3] In 2010, 25% of Asians, 25% of Hispanics, 17.1% of blacks, and 9.4% of whites married interracially.[3] Of the 275,500 new interracial marriages in 2010, 43% were white-Hispanic couples, 14.4% were white-Asian, 11.9% were white-black, and the remainder were other combinations.[6 In the northeastern U.S. for example, Puerto Ricans, who carry AmerIndian as well as SSA ancestry, Cape Verdeans, Cubans etc., and especially the women, "marry out" at pretty high rates. Unfortunately, I think there's often a "racialist" motivation to this; it's called "lightening up". Pathetic, in my estimation. On the West Coast, Chinese and Japanese Americans marry out at a high rate. In California and the southwestern U.S., Hispanics marry out in large numbers.

For African Americans the situation is a bit different. Much of their admixture (up to 25-30% European in some cases) is the result of mingling from early in the history of slavery, and less than that now.

From Wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interracial_marriage
"[t]he social stigma related to Black interracial marriages still exists in today's society. Research by Tucker and Mitchell-Kerman from 1990 has shown that Blacks intermarry far less than any other non-White group[7] and in 2010, only 17.1% of Blacks married interracially, a rate far lower than the rates for Hispanics and Asians.[3] Black interracial marriages in particular engender problems associated with racist attitudes and perceived relational inappropriateness.[8]"

However, that isn't strange in situations where one group is seen as occupying a position lower on the "class" ladder. As that changes, so will the levels of admixture. Even at current rates, however, look at it this way: what will the population in the U.S. be like if there is this level of mixing for the next 1,000 years or 2,000 years even with no change in socio-economic status?

That is the nature of a dynamic society with immigration from diverse areas. I'm sure that China will remain pretty homogenous for a long time. There are how many millions of them now? Also, how many millions of Indians, and Africans? For their genotypes to substantially change would require vast amounts of admixture with Europeans, and there aren't enough of them, and they're not going to be moving to China any time soon. However, if there was some massive invasion of one area of the world by another, the rest of Asia or even the U.S. by China, everything would change.
 
I don't think that the world population will homogenize into a single ethnicity any time soon, or ever because of geographic barriers and isolation. There are always remote places where people don't mix with others, or at least at an extremely low rate. Look at Papua New Guinean tribes, Andaman Islanders, some Amazon tribes, etc.

If Andaman Islanders have managed to remain isolated from the outside world in crowded South Asia for perhaps 50,000 years, I doubt that such pockets of isolation will suddenly disappear.

Even if those isolated tribes gave up their traditional lifestyle and joined the rest of the world, it would take thousands of years before the whole world is racially homogeneous. The bigger the world population the more generations it takes to spread the genes. With vertical farming and other new technologies, the Earth could support over 30 billion people.

If humans suddenly started having more children everywhere (even in Africa) and the world population dropped fast to 1 billion or less, that could accelerate the homogenization process, if people remain increasingly mobile.

However, the most cosmopolitan areas are typically big cities, then smaller cities, leaving the countryside relatively unmixed. This is where ancestral ethnic groups will survive the longest. Once again, the more remote the countryside (e.g. Alpine valley village, Tibetan hamlet, small island with few outside visitors...), the longer the genetic isolation will endure.

In any case we would witness the creation of new ethnic group at the continental or regional scale, as has always happened. If you start in China with over 1 billion "pure" East Asians, you can't expect to end up with the same population in a few centuries as in sub-Saharan Africa where the starting population is "pure" African, no matter how much natural immigration.

Then people do not choose to migrate to another country by accident. Mexicans typically choose to migrate to the USA, rarely to China or even Europe. And conversely very few Americans migrate to Mexico. Much more Africans migrate to Europe than the other way round, and it is typically to Western Europe, very rarely Eastern Europe. With such migration patterns, even if people mix perfectly across racial lines (which hasn't been the case even in the USA after 300 years of Blacks and Whites living together) the ending population in Western Europe would be very different from the one in Eastern Europe. The same regional fractioning would happen everywhere in the world.

I do believe that new racial groups will emerge from racial intermarriages, but they just won't be uniform on the global scale. Given enough time, a new North American ethnicity will develop, but a different one from the West European, etc. Let's also note that the current trend of interracial marriages is strongest in Western countries (Latin America included, as it is actually where this trend started with the European colonisation), but relatively rare in non-Western countries, even developed ones like Japan and Korea. The Japanese do intermarry with other racial groups, but it is typically Western men with Japanese women, and most end up living in Western countries as Japan isn't exactly foreigner friendly. When Japanese men seek foreign brides to live with them in Japan, they are often Korean, Chinese or Southeast Asian (esp. Filipinas). This is why Japan will remain racially East Asian for longer despite intermarriages.
 
Last edited:
In America new genetically diverse cultural and ethnic identities formed. Latin America is a current example of this bi/tri/etc. futuristic world because Iberians, Amerindians, and Africans all mixed, yet most Americans are ignorant of this and view Latino as a type of pure race. In the USA white is used to define people, even culturally, because all the Euro ethnic groups mixed and assimilated into the same American culture.
 
Maciamo made some good points. There will always be isolated areas that remains more or less homogeneous. But am I correct to say that even in ancient admixtures have happened in high income economic areas of the world creating a new dimensions and standards in various aspects? Egypt, Mesopotamia (babylon and its chaotic languages, I think lebrok mentioned it at some point) Greece, Rome creating the mixtures we find today? Currently we have New york and London. I can only speak of London but being there you see people of all races in each and every part of its economy and I don't think that any of these cities would have achieved their present dynamics without so much mixing, new ideas and so on. Dubai is another one, and it hosts more outsiders then locals (with the difference that they will never be allowed to get citizenship there) China and India are maybe an exception, but then again I am not sure if they can be put on the same level as say New york or London. Of course there are many other cosmopolitan cities one can mention having the same effect. I think too much inbreeding, nationalism is more likely to make any nation weak in many aspects. Maybe I am wrong. Just thinking loud here.
 
Angela, those autosomal components you mention for Georgians are from different subgroups of the same race.

And again, you all try to hide/ignore the fact that most of the old time race mixing was due to conquest, violence and rape.

So enough with your agenda...

And no, I am not conservative.
 
Angela, those autosomal components you mention for Georgians are from different subgroups of the same race.

And again, you all try to hide/ignore the fact that most of the old time race mixing was due to conquest, violence and rape.

So enough with your agenda...

And no, I am not conservative.


Stating facts is not proof of some "agenda", and I never brought politics into the discussion. As Maciamo and I said, there are parts of the world, more isolated, or with huge populations and little immigration, where differences will persist much longer, absent some cataclysmic event, but in North America, for example, given a thousand years or so there will be a new admixed group, and whatever the sad facts of human history, in the here and now I assure you it's not happening because of conquest or rape. It's propinquity.

It also has nothing to do with any personal preferences of mine. Heck, I'm so antediluvian that I keep plotting how to get my daughter a job in Italy for a year or so in hopes she'll come home with an Italian husband, but then I'm not quite "American"!:grin:

As for Caucasians and Near Easterners, perhaps this is news, but there are any number of people in this hobby, quite well known some of them, who indeed do not think they are "white" or members of the "white" race. Strangely enough, a few of them are themselves SSA admixed. Human psychology is endlessly fascinating.

If we're talking about further back, the ancestral groups that mixed to produce "Europeans" did not look very much like modern Europeans; indeed, some of them probably looked pretty "Australoid" or "South Indian", but then phenotypes change based on the environment. I doubt environmental factors will have much effect going forward, however, at least not in industrialized countries, as we rather control for the environment.
 
Stating facts is not proof of some "agenda", and I never brought politics into the discussion. As Maciamo and I said, there are parts of the world, more isolated, or with huge populations and little immigration, where differences will persist much longer, absent some cataclysmic event, but in North America, for example, given a thousand years or so there will be a new admixed group, and whatever the sad facts of human history, in the here and now I assure you it's not happening because of conquest or rape. It's propinquity.

It also has nothing to do with any personal preferences of mine. Heck, I'm so antediluvian that I keep plotting how to get my daughter a job in Italy for a year or so in hopes she'll come home with an Italian husband, but then I'm not quite "American"!:grin:

As for Caucasians and Near Easterners, perhaps this is news, but there are any number of people in this hobby, quite well known some of them, who indeed do not think they are "white" or members of the "white" race. Strangely enough, a few of them are themselves SSA admixed. Human psychology is endlessly fascinating.

If we're talking about further back, the ancestral groups that mixed to produce "Europeans" did not look very much like modern Europeans; indeed, some of them probably looked pretty "Australoid" or "South Indian", but then phenotypes change based on the environment. I doubt environmental factors will have much effect going forward, however, at least not in industrialized countries, as we rather control for the environment.

Under 'agenda' I meant more Lebrok's kind of position not you.

People can think about themselves whatever they like, but in strictly anthropological terms Georgians belong to Europeid metarace.

Whatever ancestors looked like, it is just fine how it is. I appreciate diversity, I don't want everybody to be part of some amorphic grey mass.

And again ancient mixing was due to conquest and rape. Today's mixing in cosmopolitan areas will never happen on large scale. Even in Brasil there is no mixing in higher classes who live in gated communities...
 
Under 'agenda' I meant more Lebrok's kind of position not you.

People can think about themselves whatever they like, but in strictly anthropological terms Georgians belong to Europeid metarace.

Whatever ancestors looked like, it is just fine how it is. I appreciate diversity, I don't want everybody to be part of some amorphic grey mass.

And again ancient mixing was due to conquest and rape. Today's mixing in cosmopolitan areas will never happen on large scale. Even in Brasil there is no mixing in higher classes who live in gated communities...

You're perfectly free to have your preferences; whatever floats your boat. That has nothing to do with the facts about racial admixture in the U.S., for which I've provided statistics. Nor does it have anything to do with attitudes in the U.S. The Pew Poll (a very respected group) has examined the issue in depth:

"Furthermore, the 2008 Pew Survey found more than a third of adults (35%) say they have a family member who is married to someone of a different race. And, most Americans say they approve of racial or ethnic intermarriage – not just in the abstract, but in their own families. More than six-in-ten say it would be fine with them if a family member told them they were going to marry someone from any of three major race/ethnic groups other than their own and over 70% approve of interacial marriage in general.[4] "


The numbers will only increase in the younger generations. It's no doubt true that for people who choose to live in the Caucasus, or in the depths of southern India, or in internal China, the odds are that their children will indeed "inmarry". It will be different in more cosmopolitan parts of the world, whatever the parents think about it.

As to the people of the Caucasus, what anthropologists think is not dispositive for the average man on the street if that man happens to be a racist of the Nordicist persuasion. Of course, there are severe social and even economic consequences to expressing any such view in the U.S. today.

As to those Brazilians living in gated communities, like in other places in Latin America, they have anywhere up to 10% and more Amerindian and SSA; they just don't want to admit it. I've found it extremely interesting that some of the people most obsessed with who is lighter and darker, or who is more "exotic" in terms of Europeans or Near Easterners turn out to be of admixed ancestry themselves, even if they only recently discovered it. That is what comes of having been raised in societies where looking like a slave or an aborigine means you are relegated to a lower socio-economic status. I find it very sad. Of course, if one takes the long, objective view, if China all of a sudden conquered the world, you'd get people having eye surgery, flattening their noses and dying their hair pitch black. That's just human nature, alas.

You might find this John Hersey novel enlightening....great writers so often provide deep insights into human nature.
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1495461.White_Lotus
 
My main point is that tribalism, us vs. them group psychology is human nature (race based gangs in multicultural America anyone?). Even if current state of racial and ethnic situation will be somehow altered due to intensive globalist brainwashing politics, in its place new diverse groups will arise. There will be no one race in the future however remote (unless some global cataclysm reduces human population to minimum).
 
My main point is that tribalism, us vs. them group psychology is human nature (race based gangs in multicultural America anyone?). Even if current state of racial and ethnic situation will be somehow altered due to intensive globalist brainwashing politics, in its place new diverse groups will arise. There will be no one race in the future however remote (unless some global cataclysm reduces human population to minimum).

You keep repeating opinions unsupported and, to be fair, perhaps incapable of being supported by facts, and I keep providing you with facts which contradict those assertions, at least with regard to the U.S. Given that over 70% of Americans approve of inter-racial marriage, I think you could say that tribalism here, at least, is on the decline. Whether in the future this "new" tribe might be intolerant of other "tribes", I don't know. I have no great opinion of humanity, and I suppose it's perfectly possible that they'll do something stupid like that. Look at the Balkans, or, as an even better example, Northern Ireland. They're practically genetic clones of one another, and some of these men seem to positively relish this fratricidal warfare. It's all very depressing.

Oh, interesting that you think preaching tolerance of other groups and respect for one another's humanity is brainwashing. Perhaps it is, but what is racism? It's just brainwashing of another kind. Even if it feeds into the baser instincts of the id, does that mean we as a society should pander to it? What possible good would that do? People would be far better off getting an education, a decent job, marrying and having babies than letting some demagogues distract them from the real issues by deflecting all the blame onto some "other". Now there you have my actual opinion. :)

Perhaps it's best to agree to disagree.
 
What education has to do with it? Unless you mean some liberal agenda education :)
The most racist persons in history were very educated folks.

I don't really believe those 'facts' which mostly stem from biased sources.

Preaching 'tolerance' usually is a subversive way to undermine targeted group's identity and security.

'Humanity' is a social construct.
 

This thread has been viewed 284745 times.

Back
Top