Does National Socialism have any truth or relevance to it?

[Zephyrus]

I'm sure as a Texan he's more proud of the whole Alamo scenario than the Civil War.

 

[seedofvengeance]

Indeed... I don't like Confederate assholes.

 

[~Derek~]

^On a lighter side, me and you both have the same MySpace layouts.

 

[seedofvengeance]

That's awesome... how did you find my myspace? I thought that link didn't work.

 

[~Derek~]

I looked at your profile on UM and copy and pasted your myspace info at the end of the www.myspace.com/ thing. Here's mine.
www.myspace.com/derek1988

 

[seedofvengeance]

Oh, cool. I added you.

 

[~Derek~]

I added you as well, thanks for the add. Now I'm just waiting on your Messenger info.

 

[seedofvengeance]

I never log on to any messenger, really. Occasionally I get on aim, where I'm eljermymagnifico.

 

[Ender Rises]

^On a lighter side, me and you both have the same MySpace layouts.

 

[~Derek~]

Ok, cool I added you and I'm on for now if you want to talk.

 

[Cythraul]

Race is an arbitrary concept

How?

 

[skeptik]

Well there are several ways to answer that question, but I'll start off by clarifying. What I was referring to was the social construction of race, and in the social processes of race issues and relations, a good deal of it is indeed arbitrary. For example, in the US, in order for a newborn to be deemed "white", both parents must be "white". Different countries have different means of determining race, so somebody who is of one social race in one country may be considered a different one elsewhere. There is no universal system of classifying race in this sense, because it has cultural origins with respect to given regions. And of course cultural concepts are arbitrary in their very natures.

As far as biological race goes, I don't know really all that much about it, but I acknowledge that there may be a minute biological basis for distinguishing races, but on the whole I believe that the discrepancies to be found in these instances will be insignificant at best and will have a great deal of bleeding over between different racial classifications.

 

[Cythraul]

Well there are several ways to answer that question, but I'll start off by clarifying. What I was referring to was the social construction of race, and in the social processes of race issues and relations, a good deal of it is indeed arbitrary. For example, in the US, in order for a newborn to be deemed "white", both parents must be "white". Different countries have different means of determining race, so somebody who is of one social race in one country may be considered a different one elsewhere. There is no universal system of classifying race in this sense, because it has cultural origins with respect to given regions. And of course cultural concepts are arbitrary in their very natures.

I think there is the same sort of arbitrariness in a lot of concepts, even concepts that we would be inclined to firmly believe are grounded in natural classes. Race doesn't seem to me to be a special case. I don't know how relevant this point is because I am extremely tired. Bye.

 

[Zephyrus]

Biological race is a function of climate.

Africans have darker skin to reflect the increased amount of sunlight in tropical regions. They also tend to be taller and thinner so their bodies can shed heat for the same climatological reason.

As you go further North and South from the tropical climates, you get lighter skin color because colder climates favor those who can better retain heat. Lighter skin absorbs more sunlight, while being shorter and smaller allows the body to retain more heat by function of its surface area to volume ratio.

Climate is the only reason there are perceptible distinctions in race, and these are the only differences. Factors such as intelligence are completely independent of climate, so assessing a race in an intellectual context is fallacious.

 

[Killbot]

Black peoples can't swims as well as us, hoorah!
They totally own us at most other physical activities though....

@OP - I didn't read it, but the answer is no.

 

[Blind Guardian]

I agree with most of you guys but there´s one thing i think is strange. Look at the world elite in 100m running,only black guys.Why is that really? I mean i can see why there´s only black people in the world elite in 10000m running,because it´s simply a much more usual way of transportation than cars etc in african countries. But how come there´s no white people in the 100m world elite? Is there some kind of minimal but important difference in muscular structure between white and black people? Which also just includes the running mechanism,because if you look at high jumping for example there´s a lot of white guys in the elite.

 

[Zephyrus]

As I explained, Africans have longer limbs so that they have more surface area to shed excess heat in a hot African climate. Consequently, they are also able to cover greater distances with their strides.

 

[cookiecutter]

Yeah but they didn't invent anything!

 

[SentinelSlain]

If you actually go to some tribe out in the jungle you may find they are all either healthy or dead, strong or dead, agile or dead etc etc.

Weak genes die out naturally, mnore so than in a society where the weak are artifically kept alive.

I have another point BUT I'm not 100% on it. Depending on what food is available, the humans in the area will either turn into farmers or stay just gathering bits on the way if there is plenty. This leads on to different skill being developed. That's what I would guess is one of the reasons for the apparent difference in races advances technologically.

 

[Killbot]

I heard black people develop naturally denser muscles or something, or they have an extra muscle in their leg, something like that. Don't quote me on that, but yeah, that's the word on the street.