I learned that race on the US is declarative (I am French). Why not.

Now, coupled with the fact that it may give you advantages, say at the university, what stops a guy like me (blond, fair haired) to claim that he is Asian, Black or whatever "race" is the most interesting in that case at that moment?

Will someone tell me I am not Latino enough?

The way I like to phrase it is, "if race is genetic, then black isn't a race."

As the article says, human genetic difference is very real, and is clustered. Can we not then call these clusters races?

There is more genetic diversity within the Africa than in the rest of the world combined. If white and Asian are genetic races, then there are hundreds of different African races. If black is a genetic race then a better name for it is Homo Sapiens -- we're all black.

If black is a race and Europeans aren't black, then race isn't genetic, it's cultural.

A third of Americans still dispute evolution so getting them up to date with genetics will be tough.

The article reiterates the facts about the notions of race and essentialism. The context is that the far right are leaning on historically harmful, scientifically inaccurate, and honestly, kind of absurd ideas about "race".

Having said that, is this not what the entire world has been doing recently? Does BLM not fall for exactly the same fallacy? Is "person of colour" not an egregiously bad phrase to define a person? As if we are white, unless somehow tainted? Is this not something that should concern us all whether it is done with good intentions or not?