[Sherman Logan]

It should be noted that “Races” in Darwin’s title referred to what we would today more commonly refer to as “subspecies” or “breeds.” It did not specifically refer to human races.

The term is still used in that way in botany and perhaps in other branches of biology.

The connotations we assign to the concept “race” were absent in his day. It had a much broader use. For instance, Kipling, Rhodes and other often referred to “the Anglo-Saxon race.”

Given the general POV of the time, Darwin’s book is surprisingly free of white racism and triumphalism.

[D_Idaho]

Darwin’s views on race are more than clear in his follow-up book “The Ascent of Man.” His disciples include Francis Galton and Margaret Sanger. In “Ascent” he compares the human race to a barnyard where defective animals are destroyed for the good of “the race” and predicts a future where the more advanced races (such as the Anglo-Saxons) would wage war on the inferior ones,

[Agamemnon]

It should be noted that “Races” in Darwin’s title referred to what we would today more commonly refer to as “subspecies” or “breeds.” It did not specifically refer to human races. The term is still used in that way in botany and perhaps in other branches of biology.

Could you please supply an example where the term "Races" is used this way in a scholarly article or presentation in the field of "botany and perhaps in other branches of biology"?

FReegards!