Resurfacing the Gap between Ethnicity and Race (1.2)

What is Ethnicity?Merriam – Webster Says:              Ethnicity is the noun form of Ethnic. Ethnic in it’s adjective form means:             1A: of or relating to large groups of people classed according to common racial, national, tribal, religious, linguistic, or cultural origin or background.             B: Being a member of a specified ethnic group             C: of, relating to, or characteristic of a minority ethnic group             2: of or relating to the Gentiles or to nations not converted to Christianity: PAGAN             There is a secondary definition that pertains to the U.S. as such, it even says “chiefly US.”             Ethnic in its noun form: a member of an ethnic group, especially: a member of a minority group who retains the customs, language, or social views of the group. (Merriam-Webster 2023)              What connotation to follow?              We will be following the “Chiefly US” version of the definition, seeing as to how it’s a pre-requisite for the upcoming body of the article. To clarify, ethnicity/ethnic within this article means a member of a minority group who retains the customs, language, or social views of the group. It doesn’t say this, but we are assuming that the “customs, language, or social views of the group” is referring to the group of traditional cultural origin. Adding a social/cultural universal into the word ethnic for those in the U.S. that use it. This could help someone, for when one is talking to a postmodernist, who knows what definitions and of what sources they derive their information from. They could just as easily blur the lines of thought for their own benefit without the required use of universals. Of which is one of the most enraging things those of that specific thought-group do – collapse your ideas – since their ideas are so collapsible themselves. It honestly makes talking to them like chewing brick.             When I read that little bit at the end, “retains the customs, language, or social views of the group.” It left a wide-open gap for definition. What group? As I said, we are automatically assuming the traditional group of culture that, also assumingly, doesn’t or didn’t reside or originate in the U.S. It also gives those who claim equitable rights to the group they serve automatic assumptions that they retain the customs, language, or social views. Measuring their thoughts, behaviors, actions, and general level of cultural comprehension can’t be hard since the “customs, language, or social views” are all codified in some semblance of philosophical, political, and usually theological thought and writing. Another question bears on the ethnicity dilemma, “how many ‘customs, words of a language, and truth to social views is considered to be of ethnicity or not?” I suppose a generalization would be in order since one can’t possibly measure such a preposterous question, especially one that calls for empiricism. It’s obvious those of “ethnic origins” will use this analytic reference to further push their agenda, of which they don’t quite know the direction anyway. Total control? Total freedom? For who? You and yours?             Conditions of victory are never clear, by default, conditions of loss are never clear – therefore the one who cannot lose in an argument because nothing matters anyway – the postmodernist. However, this line of logic is only used as a strategic turning point to properly posit one’s position to the optimal level of audience range and donor support. In any “ethnic-specific” philosophy that comes out today is blasphemous to include anybody other than their own race – well, women and LGBTQ community by default – including but not limited to white people. I mean correct me