How do you classify the races? This is what I do:

How do you classify the races? This is what I do:

>White
Anyone of European decent.

>Black
Anyone of sub-Saharan African decent, or Austro-Indian Aboriginals.

>Hispanic
Anyone from Latin America

>Asian
Anyone from East Asia or Southeast Asia

>Indian
Anyone from the Indian subcontinent

>Semite
Anyone who descends from Semitic speaking people (excluding Ethiopians)

>Persian
Anyone who speaks Persian natively or from a Persian speaking family

>Turk
Anyone who speaks a Turkic language natively or from a family that does

>Native American
Anyone who is a Non-Hispanic American native or Polynesian

>North African
Anyone from North African decent

Think I got it all.

Attached: 3-14-8-3-2-30-44m.jpg (483x720, 71.48K)

Pretty good but how would you classify Afghans? Persian or Indian subcontinent? Asking because that's what I am.

Also, I'd really love to see how modern science would categorize races but we all know how politicized the topic of race is and you just get nonsense ideological drivel even from scientific fields as a result.

modern science says race doesn't exist but it's clear it does it's just a spectrum and not clear cut, kind of like how the color spectrum exists but what we consider as "blue" varies by culture. but yeah it would be interesting if it's possible

>Afghans
They're Persian cuz they speak Dari, which is a Persian dialect, or Pashto, which is an Indo-Aryan language closely related to Persian. Also Pakis are Indian.

Slavs?
they arent that hard to clasisify (pripyat) but iirc they are their own race from the eastern europeans

Slavs are white, they're from Europe.

I thought the same but thought I was coping a bit cuz I didn't want to be Pajeet. The Iranians certainly don't care for us though that's because they see us as barbaric and we're not even the same sect of Islam, but still. Thanks user.

The Europeans had no idea where they were coming from until they found Pripyat, they didnt look like the Europeans either

Africans and Australian Aboriginals are completely different genetic lineages (not to mention facial appearance). That'd be like calling Europeans and East Asians the same race because they both have white skin.

Attached: abbo2.jpg (960x960, 96.14K)

Don't really fall into any of those categories, but identify as white.

It's autistic not to lump semite, persian, turk, and north african into "Arab." (With the exception of Jews).

>Africans and Australian Aboriginals are completely different genetic lineages
Idc this classification is arbitrary and based on colloquial everyday American classification of race.

yet you make TurkIc, Persian, and Arab all different? not very colloquial.

They are all very different from one another so yes it is.

Where are you from?
asdfg

It literally is not colloquial in America. I've never heard anybody make a distinction between an Iranian and Iraqi on a racial basis.
So either you are going by valid differences (in which case Africans and Abbos have more dramatic differences than those named) or you are going by colloquial everyday classification which would preclude four different types of "brown desert guy."
Or your a smoothbrain.

How can I include Persians Turks as Arabs when they don't speak Arabic? Muslim isn't a fucking race. And I can't call them Semites cuz they don't speak a Semitic language. And I can't call Jews Arabs cuz they don't speak Arabic. This is the logical conclusion of American colloquial classification, most Americans just don't think about it as much. You're retarded.

You're trolling. Europeans all speak a whole lot of different languages. Are you going to divide Germanic speakers and Romance speakers?

I use a sort of taxonomic system
Breed
Race
Ethnicity
Supernation
Nation
For example the breeds are caucasoid, mongoloid, veddoid, congoid, capoid, and australoid. Then of course you get into race which in the caucasoid breed would be whites and semites (arabs and jews) or for mongoloids it would be asians and native americans.
Ethnicity would be like broad classifications based on language and culture. for whites it would be germanic, celtic, slavic, ugric, mediterranean, persian, etc.
Supernations would be like germans vs scandinavians or east slavs, west slavs, and south slavs.
Nations are just what they have been for millennia, though it should be noted the united states is not a nation it is a country made up of states which act as their own nations do to different cultures and dialects

No because the only qualification to be white is to be European. All Europeans are white. This is all arbitrary.

>Hispanic
Hispanic is the name of Spanish culture, like Anglo for English culture. I say Latino instead.
>Turk
Turks are people from Turkey. Turkic works good for central asians that speak Turkic.

Might be autistic but it's right

The only qualification to be Arab is to be tan, live in or near the Middle East, and talk fast at each other. This is the American colloquialist approach. Do you even live in America?

Latino and Hispanic are synonymous in my eyes. People from Spain and Portugal are white though cuz it's in Europe.

>The only qualification to be Arab is to be tan, live in or near the Middle East, and talk fast at each other. This is the American colloquialist approach.
No it's not, faggot.
>Do you even live in America?
Yes I do, faggot.

Sure, but then it's really stupid not to make distinctions among Sub-Saharan African races (Sani, Igbo, Bantu) or group Pacific Islanders with Native Americans.

You have a bad system and it's not based in either reality or American attitudes. I'd keep this one to myself, champ.