Color-blind racism is an ideology that allows persons of the dominant socially defined race (European Americans) to claim that racism is no longer the central factor determining the life chances of persons of non-European descent (particularly dark-skinned individuals of African descent). They argue that instead of the ongoing institutional and individual racism of American society, nonracial factors such as market dynamics, naturally occurring phenomena, and the cultural attitudes of minorities themselves are the main causal factors of their social subordination. Concurrent with the rise of this ideology has been the scientific determination that the human species does not really contain biological races. Thus, many color-blind racists have co-opted this fact to further argue that racism can no longer exist, since we have no biological races. This article will not only outline the nature of human biological variation, why that variation does not justify the classification of biological races within the species, but also why this fact has absolutely nothing to do with the ongoing racial discrimination faced by persons with dark skins in the United States. Furthermore, it will explain why membership in a socially defined race has real biological consequences including reducing the mental and physical well-being of the socially subordinated.

Race, Social construction, Biomedical research, Evolutionary medicine, Race-specific medicine,

The roots of biological determinism are ancient. Yet despite advances in biological science in the twentieth century, determinist thinking has not been eliminated. This article reviews the history of biological determinism, examining its varieties from its creationist beginnings to present-day biological thinking in the age of genomics. It elucidates the relationship between biological determinism and racialist understandings of human genetic variation. Of particular importance in this regard are the ongoing claims of racial medicine (a modern biological determinist variety) as well as resurgent attempts to classify humans into biological races utilizing genomic data and clustering algorithms (such as STRUCTURE). Finally it presents how the complexity of biological variation generated by genetic, epigenetic, environmental, and chance effects vitiates simplistic biological determinism.

The last decade of the 20th century experienced a resurgence of genetically based theories of racial hierarchy regarding intelligence and morality. Most notably was Herrnstein and Murray's The Bell Curve (1994), that claimed genetic causality for long-standing racial differences in IQ. In addition, it raised the time worn argument that the over-reproduction of genetically deficient individuals within our population would lead to a serious decline in average American intelligence. These authors provided no specific rationale for why these genetic differences should exist between human 'races'. Instead, they relied heavily on the work of Canadian psychologist J. Philipe Rushton (in The Bell Curve, 1994, Appendix 5: 642-3). Rushton has advanced a specific evolutionary genetic rationale for how gene frequencies are differentiated between the 'races' relative to intelligence. He claims that human racial differences result from natural selection for particular reproductive strategies in the various racial groups. Rushton's theory is based entirely on the concept of r-and K-selection, first explicitly outlined by MacArthur and Wilson in 1967. This article examines both the flaws in the general theory, and specifically Rushton's application of that same theory to human data. It concludes that neither Rushton's use of the theory nor the data that he has assembled could possibly test any meaningful hypotheses concerning human evolution and/or the distribution of genetic variation relating to reproductive strategies or 'intelligence', however defined.