Rastafarian Spliffie

White Rastafarians, Race-Marijuana- Or Culture?

White Rastafarians, Race-Marijuana- or Culture?

By Joyce

The Rastafarian movement is world wide, yet the White Rasta receives most of the heat and scrutiny from casual observers. I would like to take this opportunity to delve deeper into the issue. Most people are clueless regarding ancient Ethiopia, Haile Selassie, Beta Israel (Lost Tribe of Israel), the African Diaspora, or the Rastafari Movement. However, if you want to kick it with some White Rastas (hereafter referred to as simply Rastas) and converse about the movement, they'll blow you out of the water. Race is socially and culturally constructed and can not be defined biologically. In a world with so many diverse populations it is impossible to use phenotypes to categorize people into racial ‘groups'. Physical features vary within and across races and can not be attributed to one group of individuals. Race as a biological entity is a mythological concept embedded in our racist history and has no empirical evidence to support the theory.

The current definition of race in the dictionary is, "A local geographic or global human population distinguished as a more or less distinct group by genetically transmitted physical characteristics." (The American Heritage College Dictionary '02:1146).

A note at the bottom of the page indicates there is a debate regarding the definition though it has yet to be changed. The definition is still circulating, but outdated; therefore, it is very misleading because it is inaccurate information. Initially race was defined in order to aid the argument of evolution. "Some (scientists) even argued that races represented a series of evolutionary stages, some more ‘advanced' than others" (Rensberger 2004:146). Race became a way to explain differences and to establish a hierarchical system in society based on color. As time progressed, scientists realized there were no genetic markers to indicate race, approximately 1/1, 000 of a gene is different from one person to the next ("Race: The Power of an Illusion"). It is not our genes that determine differences in race but the environment individuals originate from.

The Darwinian notion of natural selection is a strong explanation for the differences among the human race. It accounts for selection based on an already existing variety; therefore, someone with dark skin would have an advantage in hot, sunny climates, whereas individuals with white skin would be better equipped for cooler environments. The individuals with qualities best suitable for the environments they lived in were most likely to survive and produce offspring. This means individuals with different skin colors separated not because they evolved differently but due to survival purposes. Physical differences were responses to different climates, diets, and even patterns of behavior or cultural practices (Brooks, Jackson, and Grinker 2004: 155). Race was not the salient issue but physical characteristics, which varied across races due to environmental differences.

Physical traits vary even within families. Members often have different physical traits in hair color, eye color, or body build. There is no one defining characteristic that sets one group apart from another. Skin color, hair texture, and blood type are all variable qualities distributed independently. The Aborigines of Australia have wavy-straight hair like Europeans and skin color similar to African blacks (Rensberger 2004: 152). A black person and a white person with the same blood type are more genetically similar to each other than two white individuals with different blood types. These examples show how variable physical traits can be and further the argument that race is not biological; physical characteristics are not restricted to one ‘race'.

Anthropologists, who specialize in studying groups of people, agree that it is impossible for a specific trait or gene to identify a group. In Anthropology Explored the authors state that "…no physical feature distinguishes any race" (Rensberger 2004: 148).

Skin color is the most popular way to categorize people racially. Does this mean a dark skinned African person born and raised in Mozambique is of the same race as a dark skinned person born and raised in Iraq? Because the two individuals identify with different groups, the idea of race being a unifying characteristic is faulty. "Race and ethnicity are increasingly seen as arbitrary constructs fulfilling a social need…" (Brooks, Jackson. and Grinker 2004: 156). Race thus becomes nonexistent; it is an idea society has constructed to classify its members. Most anthropologists agree that race as a biological and static concept is inaccurate and propose that race is culturally derived.

If race is not biological then it means that people can transition from one ‘race, ' or set of practices, to another. A white child born and raised in a Jamaican family can grow up with the same language, social practices, and interests as his or her fellow black sisters and brothers. Culture becomes the identifying factor as opposed to the individuals' skin color or hair texture. This fluid notion of race was never acknowledged in the past as people, including scientists, attempted to present race as an unchangeable position a person was born into. Currently, recognizing a person's ethnicity or culture is more appropriate than to classify the individual as black, white, or other. The most revered Rasta of all, Bob Marley, was of white lineage, courtesy of a British naval officer cruising through the islands.

In reflecting upon the various topics and writings discussed above, it can be concluded that race can not be defined biologically. Scientific research shows that the genetic difference between humans is very slight and there is no distinctive gene to indicate race. Race was constructed in order to create an unfair social hierarchy when in actuality it is not a constricting category but a negotiable one.

Joyce

Joyce embraces the "Cannabis Culture" at http://www.cali9.com

Article Source: ArticlesBase.com