monoxide_child
New Metal Member
- Jul 30, 2008
- 6,210
- 4
- 0
Races
- Thread starter cannibal corpse
- Start date
Any evidence for any of this? I can conceive of it, so it's definitely not inconceivable.
An adopted african or north-korean can feel very well anywhere. For all adopted people getting to know your familie is more of an identity thing. It's seems to be a natural instinct in humans to want to know your family.
Woodoo hysteria as you call it is culture, something that can and will be change when times come.
The scientific metode is not known by everyone. Not even all people from western countries knows how it works.
Inconceivable? If your parents know how it works, the kids will learn.
Caladan
Member
- Sep 9, 2008
- 259
- 0
- 16
Hmm. Yes I did think it through. Apart from ethnic australians, there is no subset of the human race that has been "endogamous for literally thousands of years". None whatsoever. There has been different levels of interaction and mixing between races over the years. And by the way, quoting an article from Wiki doesn't do much for the veracity of your argument.
Caladan
Member
- Sep 9, 2008
- 259
- 0
- 16
Not true. Music tastes have NOTHING to do with DNA. The machete behaviour that you speak of did indeed happen loads of times in european nations (the witch trials, etc) you REALLY need to study your history. One also wonders why this "machete behaviour" never happend in Africa until after colonisation.
An adopted african "might" not feel right in a european culture mainly if he/she is excluded from parts of it. If the african was adopted and wholly accepted in that culture, he would totally be at home within it.
Music??? Surely you jest now. How on earth can a metalhead claim that music is genetic? I have met loads of africans who do enjoy classical music (Beethoven, etc). Do you even know any africans at all?
Actually it is ideology like yours that has created this "globalist commercial culture", ideology that somehow believes that who moved from africa to one part of the world are somehow superior to all other humans.
Einherjar86
Active Member
Quoting Wikipedia shouldn't have any effect on the veracity of my argument whatsoever. That's why I also quoted from Mainstream Science on Intelligence -- which you conveniently ignored...
On the scale of endogamy/exogamy, human ethnic groups have overwhelmingly tended towards the former. They have, without a doubt, interbred far more than they have mixed. This is why we have observable differences between different human populations in the first place. It's also why modern population geneticists, such as L.L. Cavalli-Sforza can infer human population structure and calculate the genetic distance between different racial groups.
Well, that "machete behavior" certainly did exist in Africa before colonisation. When Europeans first arrived on the African continent they found it in a state of almost perpetual warfare, and then exploited the pre-existing African slave trade from which they acquired slaves of their own. If anything colonisation was a good thing for Africa, things have got much worse since they gained independence.
As for Norsemaiden's assertion that taste in music is influenced by our genetics, this should be obvious. Musical taste is moderately correlated between sets of monozygotic twins reared apart, for example. Here's Professor J. Philippe Rushton, commenting on the sometimes eerie similarities between identical twins raised separately, in his work Race, Evolution and Behaviour:
'One of these pairs, the Jim twins, were adopted as infants by two different working-class
families. But they marked their lives with a trail of similar names. Both named their childhood pet Toy.
Both married and divorced women named Linda and then married women named Betty. One twin named
his son James Allen, the other named his son James Alan.'
There are hundreds of such examples, which show exactly to what extent we're influenced by our biological makeup. So, especially in light of the previous example, I find your assertion that musical taste has nothing to do with DNA to be extremely far fetched indeed.
monoxide_child
New Metal Member
- Jul 30, 2008
- 6,210
- 4
- 0
so the blacks that act white and the whites that act black are the result of race-mixing
Sisyphus's Struggle
Ember Days
Caladan
Member
- Sep 9, 2008
- 259
- 0
- 16
Arcording to your argument, then europeans shouldn't like rock music (from which metal evolved). Afterall, it's a black invention. And how about the increasing number of black people on the metal scene? Is their DNA mixed up?
Yes there was tribal warfare in Africa when the europeans "discovered" it. But there was tribal warfare in europe as well, the english vs the french, the french vs everyone else, the different wars between factions on the british isles, the list goes on. Pure machete behaviour. All we need to do is swap armour, lances and swords for machetes. My friend, this machete behaviour is within us all. And the warfare was not perpetual, anymore than the british isles was in perpetual warfare when the romans arrived.
Colonisation was a DISASTER. Independence (at least in most of the british administered colonies) was a farce, a mummer's farce ochestrated by the british to maintain control of their colonies even after granting independence. 60-70% of the crises that presently engulf the continent can be traced to and dumped at the doorstep of meddling european powers.If the european powers who colonised africa had done exactly what they claimed they wanted to do - educated and empowered the natives equally, then by the time these colonials left, there would have been a huge number of qualified, educated and enlightened africans who could have flawlessly taken over power and continued in the same vein. However, what actually happened was that the colonials had raped and pillaged the land, so it was not in their best interest to hand over power to the more intelligent and enlightened people who would quickly have realised the double standards of the so-called just european governments.
And don't even compare the african slave trade to the european slave trade of the post 1500s. The african slave trade was a trade of people by people. The european slave trade was a trade of "lesser people" by "superior people". It was the dehumanisation of an entire race and culture. And your entire argument still goes back to theories used to justify that slave trade.
Caladan
Member
- Sep 9, 2008
- 259
- 0
- 16
Yes, that is just silly. What is black or white behaviour.
Indeed what is black or white. People comes in all colours, shapes and sizes. A discussion about only two colours is to easy.
Europeans have all kinds of immoral behaviour from our past we would rather see not have happend.
Throught history ancient empires has evolved everywhere. It's just that europeans now seem to be a bit in front in the development of sivilization.
In africa for instance, has anyone heard of Great Zimbabwe. Well the reason why we know so little about it is the fact that the colonizers wanted to find white people to have made this empire. This could not have been made by blacks. They couldn't find any, but that didn't stop them from making up a story and distroy the ruins looking for white truth.
Humans are much more complicated than black or white. To judge whether the afrikans has failed or not, and why. You have to compare pre-colonization sosietys to what the colonizers did. Than you can judge the influence of the colonizers behaveur on the africans. History goes in a straight line, the years go by, and things happen. Those things need to be judge by the action done in the past. Nothing stands on its own. Everything has a story. Often a long story.
Caladan
Member
- Sep 9, 2008
- 259
- 0
- 16
PhantoMPhones
owning your ass since '03
- Jul 19, 2008
- 83
- 0
- 6
haha.... You are seriously trying to tell everyone that all of Africa's current conflicts are a result of 'meddling european powers', and that if they actually put in a correct level of effort that Africa would magically turn into a majority of educated and enlightened people? I think you are the one that requires a bit of a history lesson, and biology/physiology while you're at it. And while I'm making a point, lets make another one. Now that there is independance, why can't they for the sake of their own lives pull together coherent countries? Shit happens, countries and continents have been conquered and reconquered, slaughtered and 'cleansed' hundreds of times. And most of them have been able to pull their heads out of their asses for the greater good of their people.
Act black/ Act white? You're damn straight, it what 'makes' us, us. Acting 'human' is really a moot point as everyone is human, everyone has basic human 'behaviour', as is greatly dictated by our physiology (mammalian diving reflex for example). However stripping this commonality away would you seriously tell me there is no difference between race?
On a note about music and such, intermixing is definitely a cause for 'white people acting black' etc (which by the way, if you acknowledge such a distinction to begin with, you have inherently also accepted the differences in race, thusly your argument becomes self-defeating). Of course genetics plays a role but so does environment (which amazingly enough also plays a role in defining what a race is). Just because someone is genetically may be predisposed to generally behaving in/enjoying a specific x (where x is a variable) does not mean that one CAN'T diversify/ or completely defer x. All of this not even taking into consideration gradual manipulation and remoulding of people through social and commercial factors.
Imho, people who deny difference between race, are either deluding themselves or they are seriously mislead, or unaware. Personally I would much rather have a planet absolutely filled with different flavours of people, different cultures, different facets to life, but with the way things are going in a few hundred years much of that will be lost, much of it HAS been lost. Accents are disappearing, physical distinctions are disappearing, language is disappearing, and all the while crime goes up, divorce goes up, violence and depravity are all on the rise while our general standars of ethics and morality plummet all in the wake of 'equality, multiculturalism and enlightenment'.
I say NO THANKS. I think there is a great deal that we have to offer eachother, many things that can be learned, and great enlightenment as a species to be gained by sharing with eachother, but NOT LIKE THIS. People seem to be very shortsighted about this issue. Heres the situation;
-people 'rise up' to 'equality' and multiculturalism, seemingly becoming more tolerant and 'enlightened'. Anyone against such is labelled 'racist, bigot' and is commiting 'hate crime'
-mass immigration occurs flooding the countries with great flares of culture, flavour. All seems well. Mission complete
-clashes between different cultures/race groups occur resulting in gang violence and discrimination.
-minority law is set in place to prevent this. unfortunately many of the majority then begin feel to opressed due to the special incentives and privilages that the minority is granted.
-things sort of even out, though crime rates etc are generally on the rise. Prisons are overflowing.
-a bunch of time passes and due to all the intermixing and interbreeding, we end up with s singular 'race' with much of the distinction and diversity in culture ultimately lost in time.
So whats the point to begin with? Personally I think we can do this better, so that we can continue in our diversity. That, or when this inevitable mediocrity occurs, we will once again see a ruling class. Eventually the strong will get tire of caring for the weak.
Unabated multiculturalism and 'equality' is a mistake. The human race will become stagnant or we will continue to see war between different ideals, inevitably ending in a ruling body of people, and the creation of 'race' once again based around political ideals and moral standards rather than culture. Theres no point to it. We may as well have just let Hitler continue what he was doing, this whole process would have occured much quicker.
:twocents:
Act black/ Act white? You're damn straight, it what 'makes' us, us. Acting 'human' is really a moot point as everyone is human, everyone has basic human 'behaviour', as is greatly dictated by our physiology (mammalian diving reflex for example). However stripping this commonality away would you seriously tell me there is no difference between race?
On a note about music and such, intermixing is definitely a cause for 'white people acting black' etc (which by the way, if you acknowledge such a distinction to begin with, you have inherently also accepted the differences in race, thusly your argument becomes self-defeating). Of course genetics plays a role but so does environment (which amazingly enough also plays a role in defining what a race is). Just because someone is genetically may be predisposed to generally behaving in/enjoying a specific x (where x is a variable) does not mean that one CAN'T diversify/ or completely defer x. All of this not even taking into consideration gradual manipulation and remoulding of people through social and commercial factors.
Imho, people who deny difference between race, are either deluding themselves or they are seriously mislead, or unaware. Personally I would much rather have a planet absolutely filled with different flavours of people, different cultures, different facets to life, but with the way things are going in a few hundred years much of that will be lost, much of it HAS been lost. Accents are disappearing, physical distinctions are disappearing, language is disappearing, and all the while crime goes up, divorce goes up, violence and depravity are all on the rise while our general standars of ethics and morality plummet all in the wake of 'equality, multiculturalism and enlightenment'.
I say NO THANKS. I think there is a great deal that we have to offer eachother, many things that can be learned, and great enlightenment as a species to be gained by sharing with eachother, but NOT LIKE THIS. People seem to be very shortsighted about this issue. Heres the situation;
-people 'rise up' to 'equality' and multiculturalism, seemingly becoming more tolerant and 'enlightened'. Anyone against such is labelled 'racist, bigot' and is commiting 'hate crime'
-mass immigration occurs flooding the countries with great flares of culture, flavour. All seems well. Mission complete
-clashes between different cultures/race groups occur resulting in gang violence and discrimination.
-minority law is set in place to prevent this. unfortunately many of the majority then begin feel to opressed due to the special incentives and privilages that the minority is granted.
-things sort of even out, though crime rates etc are generally on the rise. Prisons are overflowing.
-a bunch of time passes and due to all the intermixing and interbreeding, we end up with s singular 'race' with much of the distinction and diversity in culture ultimately lost in time.
So whats the point to begin with? Personally I think we can do this better, so that we can continue in our diversity. That, or when this inevitable mediocrity occurs, we will once again see a ruling class. Eventually the strong will get tire of caring for the weak.
Unabated multiculturalism and 'equality' is a mistake. The human race will become stagnant or we will continue to see war between different ideals, inevitably ending in a ruling body of people, and the creation of 'race' once again based around political ideals and moral standards rather than culture. Theres no point to it. We may as well have just let Hitler continue what he was doing, this whole process would have occured much quicker.
:twocents:
Caladan
Member
- Sep 9, 2008
- 259
- 0
- 16
Okay. You really need to read my post properly. In no way did I blame all of Africa's problems on colonisation, I merely said 60-70% can be traced to the meddling of colonisation. And what do you mean "correct level of effort"? The whole world goes around with the beleif that colonisation was a great help to africa, and after the benevolent and helpful europeans left, everything fell apart. This is not quite true. If Europe had pumped back 20% of what they took from africa back in, and invested it in africans, things would be better today. The west has to take some responsibility. And by the way, the oldest republic in Africa is all of 50 years old. 50 years after the roman empire left britain, the nation was in a state of anarchy. These things do take some time.
Of course there are differences between ethnic divisions of humanity. But can you explain what you mean "act white/act black"? What is the difference? Tell me how one acts white, and how one acts black (or should I say act European and act African) then we can discuss that at length.
I agree with the third paragraph in part. However, if one can change, then one is not hard-wired to a certain way of behaving, how then is it genetic? Can a goat grow canines and start hunting down deer? Naah. The fact that one can change means that it is NOT genetic. And this is what this whole discussion is about - whether one section of the human race is genetically wired to baser behaviour and underacheivement, or whether experiences and environment affects us all.
I don't deny differences between different ethnic divisions. You need to go back and read the history of this thread. What I deny vehemently is that one ethnic division is superior to another. This is simply not true. Cultures, opportunities and situations can occur to give an ethnicity an advantage over others, but this definitely does not make any superior or inferior.
I won't argue for or against immigration, but if you truly want to preserve these cultures and stuff, then you MUST stop all forms of exploitation in the world. If a certain part of the world harnesses most of the worlds resources, manipulating things in such a way so as to benefit a small geographic area, human beings will naturally flock to this benefiting geographical area. It's a force of nature, the politicians are simply helping nature out. I actually believe there is a way for immigration to work, but it's just a theory, I can't actualise it. One thing is for sure in my opinion - to have a good immigration policy, one must work like the state of israel, and insist that immigrants assimilate and embrace the culture of their intended country.
Of course there are differences between ethnic divisions of humanity. But can you explain what you mean "act white/act black"? What is the difference? Tell me how one acts white, and how one acts black (or should I say act European and act African) then we can discuss that at length.
I agree with the third paragraph in part. However, if one can change, then one is not hard-wired to a certain way of behaving, how then is it genetic? Can a goat grow canines and start hunting down deer? Naah. The fact that one can change means that it is NOT genetic. And this is what this whole discussion is about - whether one section of the human race is genetically wired to baser behaviour and underacheivement, or whether experiences and environment affects us all.
I don't deny differences between different ethnic divisions. You need to go back and read the history of this thread. What I deny vehemently is that one ethnic division is superior to another. This is simply not true. Cultures, opportunities and situations can occur to give an ethnicity an advantage over others, but this definitely does not make any superior or inferior.
I won't argue for or against immigration, but if you truly want to preserve these cultures and stuff, then you MUST stop all forms of exploitation in the world. If a certain part of the world harnesses most of the worlds resources, manipulating things in such a way so as to benefit a small geographic area, human beings will naturally flock to this benefiting geographical area. It's a force of nature, the politicians are simply helping nature out. I actually believe there is a way for immigration to work, but it's just a theory, I can't actualise it. One thing is for sure in my opinion - to have a good immigration policy, one must work like the state of israel, and insist that immigrants assimilate and embrace the culture of their intended country.
Sisyphus's Struggle
Ember Days
You know, this kind of discussions really stress me, to see how people from the so called first world talk about this and that without knowing the Real effects of what they're saying, just because they are sitting there behind a computer in their houses, or they're studying or working, and they move in all that kind of reality that the concepts recreate. I live in a country where you can see everything, people of all kind of "socio economic status", of all kind of "races", of all kind of "religions", of all kind of "concepts" you could imagine. To tell you the truth i have never visited another country, so i don't know what's the situation in other countries (to read "international news" doesn't count, a "paper" can't tell me how it feels to be in any particular situation). It seems that you're all talking about what humanity is, and what strucks me hard its that you all talk from the Concepts not from your own Experience. I've been lucky to be with and get to know homeless people, white people, black people, assian people, people from neighbour countries, indigenous people... a lot of people with different "social status", and the only thing i can tell you it's that they're different, unique, human beings with so many similarities... they've all made different decisions in their lives.
About DNA and stuff like that: Humans weren't meant to fly, yet they tried and did it.
About DNA and stuff like that: Humans weren't meant to fly, yet they tried and did it.
SentinelSlain
Suck my joined date.
- Nov 21, 2007
- 10,015
- 153
- 63
What pisses me off is the hypocrisy in people reaction to the idea of minority rule depending on the colours involved. White anti racist are mainly fashion conscious racists.
When I say that bare in mind you be neither racist nor anti racist. I don't have strong beliefs to do with race.
When I say that bare in mind you be neither racist nor anti racist. I don't have strong beliefs to do with race.
Norsemaiden
barbarian
White men that act black are really showing that they wish they were black, and its no wonder that when a white woman sees a choice between a wanna-be black and a real one, she would prefer the real one (if that's all the choice is). That's what white men should think about when they try to emulate black behavior. It loses them women.
Maybe the reverse happens with black men who act white.
Maybe the reverse happens with black men who act white.
wow you fail too. :O
All this talk about black people acting white and white people acting black...stfu. I thought we were all human and acted human....yes there are the stereotypes for a race but wtf are you talking about woman? "a wanna-be black and a real one"
so if a black man does not fit the stereotype of a typical black man (saggy pants, rap, "gangsta") then they are automatically a wanna-be white? got it.
