Racism
- Thread starter vagner
- Start date
Wars and destruction will not destroy Europeans or any other race. Race mixing on the other hand will...a peoples set of genes will be completely submerged into another gene pool, that is why racial separation is the only solution. Take Japan for example, look at the stability there, and take a look at the Middle East where population movements have taken place for thousands of years leaving their genetic marks that is why there is so much tension. The solution to that would be allow each and every race/ethnicity over there form their own nation and government.
Religious movements can be very political, look at the Pope and his power in Europe for centuries, all because of the Donation of Constantine of course. But in any case, we should blame a lot more then religion for the extremism and goofy behavior of humans. With Europe for example, burning all scientist at the stake for contradicting the bible? That is more of a reflection of European behavior at the time, rather then religion itself.
But not all religion has to be destructive look at all the European religions before our conversion to Christianity Odinism, the Greek gods, the Roman gods etc none of those religions converted others upon pain of death. Look at Buddhism, that religion doesnt convert upon pain of death either.
The Balkans has a lot of political dissention yes, it is a struggle between ethnic groups over there as well. The Greeks are very patriotic, if they are left to themselves then you would see an improvement over in the region.
This is a debatable issue, by ignoring it and saying oh race doesnt exist is just the cowardly way out.
That is nonsense...America was never founded for everyone to settle! In fact, only whites had citizenship. The Native Americans and blacks didnt were denied citizenship. It was only in 1868, after the civil war, when blacks were finally given citizenship. But nonetheless, America immigration laws were meant to keep this country majority white, the 1924 immigration act also known as Johnson-Reed Act is a prime example of that. It was only until the 1965 immigration act when that act was turned on its head and now America is turning into a third world nation.
Thrymfal
Snootchie Bootchies
ahem, the philosophy upon which the country was founded, and it's actual execution are two different things. Are you going to tell me that we shouldn't have the right of free speech because of the Alien and Sedition acts? Are you saying that Habeus Corpus isn't important because Lincoln suspended it? Are you implying that freedom of the press is a non issue because we already passed the Haye's Code? Are women to be denied the right to vote, after all. the country was established without women's suffrage. Just because the government behavead a particular way a century ago does not mean it must behave that way now, nor does it mean that it should.
"We hold these truths to be self evident: that all men are created equal" Not all white men, not all land owning, christian men. Sure, that's how it was enforced, but that doesn't mean it was right.
I personally resent the idea that a government should have the right to tell me where i can live. Who cares, white, black, brown, we're just fucking monkeys. Insane, mutated apes, who decided that since the insane mutated apes who came before them lived in a particular spot on the pale blue speck that it must be theirs forever. It's insane. Race...again, race, it's bullshit. "White" is a culture. "Black" is a culture.
The only reason you are white is because when your insane mutated ape grandparents left africa they went north, and as a result their skin needed to whiten to more easily absorb the less omnipresent sunlight. If you think that makes you more fit to survive in the world, then how about i plop your white ass down in the middle of the Serenghetti. In two hours you'll be sun burned to a crispy purple and being pecked at by vultures. Real superior. It's the same with Black people, drop them on a mountain and they're fucked. It's evolution in action.
But the thing is, we've conquered nature. We don't need to be white, we don't need to be black, and so, sowly, yet surely, we'll stop being them. It doesn't bother me though. I'll always be of Scandinavian descent, no matter what color my skin is. My kids will have a little viking in them no matter what. And if pale skin and blond hair vanishes one day, so what? Sloping brows and body hair vanished too. Why don't you cry about the loss of those ancestral traits...
For fuck's sake, i'm a strong enough person with or without appearances. And besides all that, just you wait, one day, when we are all dark haired and olive skinned, people will still come from scandinavia, and you bet your ass they'll still be proud of it. They'll still be able to say my family were the Vikings, they'll stil be able to say "Fuck you, I'm a stubborn Swede"....which, by the way is more or less my sentiment if you disagree.
I have no idea what you are referring to about Japan (I would like to know though, as Japanese teen culture scares me shitless
)My point though was this; all the arguents proposed about race are inherently flawed from major stadingpoints; one is the "phenomenon" [sic] that can be "observed" [sic] throughout history is not attributed to racial specifications; genetics have been able to set the limelight for knowing and understanding just how much our genes control us (and if you don't know, Nature vs. Nurture is still a hotly debated issue). Two, there is no correlation between actions people take and skin color - all information presented can also be attribued to various political/cultural/religious pressures WITHOUT having to resort to "blaming other peoples for their difference" - which said differences also constitute behavioral attitudes (which is not a part of skin color or specific to any race!).
And I brought up the religion standpoint because I was trying to say that cultural/religious beliefs usually prevail over internal physical drama between peoples. And what the hell are you talking about the Greeks and Romans never converted people by the sword. Only later did they (the Romans) apply the acculturation method; before that it was either worship there gods and do as they do or pay the fucking price (you can see this with ALL the treatment of the jews....and yes I think there is nothing inherently wrong with Judaism - way fucking better than Christianity) beforehand they slaughtered others (of the same skin or different) as did every single other group of people. The only difference is that they may (or may not have) used religion as a justifying means.
Thrymfal
Snootchie Bootchies
I <3 you.
I'm also a man....and scandinavian descent too....hey baby
I'll just take it as love in the roman sense....and without the butt sex.
darcy
Member
It's not just like dogs. The genetic difference between two different breeds of dog is greater than the difference between a human and a gorilla. The genetic differences between two humans are so minute they are scientifically insignificant, as far as catagorization is concerned... also, typically the genetic differences between two members of any one so-called race are far greater than the genetic differences used to discern one race from another.
What Im saying is that America wasnt founded as a place where people from everywhere could come, put aside their differences those are your words, but they arent an accurate reflection of the facts of American history. People from Europe were allowed into this country as detailed in the 1924 immigration act, not everywhere as you say.
You are talking about change in American political system, with Habeus Corpus, womens rights etc let me tell you not all change is good. The American political system today is pretty much ripping this country apart with these endless wars in the Middle East and unrestricted immigration it is making America weaker, not stronger. We need to change it.
Yes, that didnt apply to all races, proof in the pudding comes with the revolutionary heroes and the writers of the American constitution (the reason why you and I have our freedoms today) were racist white supremacist who never believed in racial equality. I dont share that view, but however, America was created by whites for whites African American nationalist have wanted to separate from the white man for decades, there efforts were undone by hypocritical Marxist.
Well, look at Japan, Mexico, China, etc they dont allow unrestricted immigration. To the contrary, they have very strict immigration laws, they dont have a death wish unlike the post war Democracys of the West..
You have a strange theory of evolution. You say we are monkeys and then you say we are apes insane mutated apes to be exact. First of all monkeys arent apes gibbons, orangutans, gorillas, and chimpanzees are apes. Furthermore, White and Black is far more then a culture, our in cultural achievements, cranial capacity, gestation periods, brain cells, life span, crime rates, diseases, etc are all different.
L.L. Cavalli-Sforza and two colleagues, P. Menozzi and A. Piazzia, in their work The History and Geography of Human Genes published in 1994 detailed 2.288 genetic point difference between whites and black Africans. The research found that the English differ from the Danes, Germans and French by 21-25 points of genetic distance, whereas they differ from North American Indians by 947 points, from black Africans by 2,288 points and from Mbuti Pygmies by 2,373 points. That is a death blow to racial equality and that race is a cultural concept rather then a biological one. This is coming from a person (Cavalli-Sforza ) who champions racial equality. The elite of Western society know very well race exist, they just try to deny that reality for your average Joe.
Skin color is only one genetic difference. Color doesnt make a race for example, if an Oriental persons skin color was white, that wouldnt make that person a European. It goes by genetics, people from of European decent are genetically similar to one another, people of African decent are similar to one another, and people from Asia are genetically similar to one another. That is why there are hereditary diseases that only certain races can have sickle cell anemia for blacks, Hereditary Hemochromatosis (HHC) for whites.
Like I said, skin color is just one genetic difference. I dont believe in superiority, I believe in survival. Im against the politically correct establishment trying to end the concept of race. I go by biology, not geography, with my Hereditary Hemochromatosis (HHC) example that is a hereditary disease that effects only Europeans, so we can see race not just for a social concept, put rather a way to discover new cures for genetic diseases etc. The way the mainstream Western society denies racial differences is parallel to how Christians disbelieved the earth was flat, even though all the evidence to the contrary.
If apes can have their groupings then why cant humans? If prosimians can have there groupings, lorises, lemurs, and tarsiers then why cant humans have our groupings, (African, European, Asian)? Scientific intellectual giants such as Charles Darwin (the father of evolution), his cousin Francis Galton, and the famous neurologist Paul Broca all believed in race. The founders of anthropology had exceptional knowledge of human differences, in marked contrast to the founders of racial equality, particularly Franz Boaz who had little knowledge of that field, who completed his doctoral thesis on the colors of water.
I have no idea what you are referring to about Japan (I would like to know though, as Japanese teen culture scares me shitless
Japan is a racially homogenous society, which is the key to their stability, in marked contrast to the Middle East, where practically every race has lived throughout the centuries.
Well, both history and science tell a different story. Skin color, by the way, is just one genetic difference. But I’m sorry…there is absolutely no way ‘political/cultural/religious pressures can explain all the obvious differences within the races. That contradicts anthropology…all the founders of evolution and anthropology believed in race, it was only after Franz Boaz and his hordes of egalitarians who decided to change that concept. The races of humanity are differ in terms of cultural achievements, IQ’s, cranial capacity, crime rates, diseases, brain cells, brain sizes, gestation periods etc. There is little political or cultural explanation for these differences.
The mainstream biology books that are found in high schools and universities detail that heredity is responsible for the pretty little colors of flowers and that animals can be divided into species, but yet, this doesn’t apply to humans? Evolution made everything else different besides humans? That is nonsense and the people who promote that false idea know very well that humans are different, but they insist on breaking down racial thought.
Religious disputes can be settled through assimilation, racial disputes can only be settled by separation. When did the Greeks slaughter all who didn’t believe in Zeus, Athena, etc in the way Christians did throughout Europe during the Dark Ages? Never. As far as the Romans, they were very tolerant of other religions…that is why there were so many different religions within the empire and even Rome itself, Christianity was hated by emperors like Nero, but even after awhile Christianity was excepted, despite the fact they agitated against Roman society, viewing it as pagan. The Romans and all Europeans paid the price for tolerating Christianity…was Constantine converted to that religion it spread throughout the empire and was no longer one of the many tiny cults through the empire.
With the Jews (a race) were agitated by Greek and later Roman rule…that was more racial then religious. With religion, the Jews were forced to except the Greek god Zeus…but that was an attempt to stop uprisings from the Jews and that wasn’t even close to the slaughter of European pagans by Charlemagne and the Teutonic Knights. Jewish nationalism prevented them from become Greek…some of the Jews did, but the majority didn’t. That is the same with Rome as well.
This puzzles me…you don’t believe in race, but you choose Judaism over Christianity? That is odd…the former is a racial religion, whereas the latter is universal and anybody can become a Christian. Judaism has kept the Jewish genotype intact to this very day, if it wasn’t for their Jews racial religion they would have disappeared years ago, just like the Seleucids, the Ptolemy’s, the Roman patricians etc etc etc.
The Kohanim for example, the priest class amongst the Jews (‘Cohen’ means priest in Hebrew). They are still here on the earth in marked contrast to the other peoples I listed above. Dr. Hammer of the University of Arizona discovered that they all descend from a single male ancestor…amazing.
I never said races doesn't exist or anything like that. There's no point in having so much discussion over it. It's the 21st century, people. Let's put aside our differences and work together to meet our common goals.
Knarfi
Yaba-daba-doo!
Im against racism but do agree with the guy (forgot who it was) who said that its not good if we all end up looking the same, that there are no more blond or green-eyed people left because of mixing up with black races.
darcy
Member
Yes, because the variations in humans are fluid, not finite or concrete. "Race" is a flawed concept because it tries to categorize ethnicity, while ethnicity is based on a variety of factors that vary independantly of one another. You can use the concept casually, as a descriptor, but when to try to apply it scientifically it fails.
Well, race and ethnicity should be kept separate. The thing is the human races are different, a serious anthropologist could look at a skull from thousands of years ago and identify the race. Same with genetics, with gene flow in North Africa for example, geneticist can tell when the different population movements in the area from the Neolithic to the expansion of Arabic peoples. If you are curious on your racial origins you can get a DNA test, the thing is many people would love to know their paternal/maternal origins. It is pointless for the politically correct establishment to deny race at this period.
You are correct. It can cause division, but you are right by all means, we need to work together and meet our common goals.
Tyra
Member
Sorry, dude. I am one of those "serious" people that work with ancient human remains, and I can tell you it doesn't work that way. If it did, we'd know who settled this continent first, and who brought Indo-European to Europe for example, but we don't. Only DNA can differentiate, and it doesn't differentiate according to "race", which is why we do not test for "race", but for kin and sex. There are some differences between skeletal remains, but they, too, do not differ by "race"(unless you want to differentiate a neanderthal from a sapien, but there are no neanderthals left today, so we don't need to render them extinct). I am not saying that because of any political stance or whatever, but just as an FYI, since you made a factual error in your post.
darcy
Member
I never set out to be politically correct... I wish to be factually correct, and as far as I can tell the concept of "race" is a flawed one.
Nobody is denying the fact that people vary from place to place, it's a matter of whether or not we fit into convenient little groups or not... or perhaps, convenient big groups. Which we don't. For years people tried to solidify the theory that humans fit into 3 races: caucausian, negroid, and mongoloid. But the guidelines of those races are horribly defined, and leave out a large portion of humanity- native Americans, for example, as well as Polynesians, Australian Aboriginals, etc- people who don't conveniently slot into "white" "black" or "other".
Race is an easy way to describe someone's appearance and maybe their background, but trying to make any sort of serious judgement behind it is unfortunate and misinformed.
And just because the founders of anthropology and other biological sciences were racist does not mean that there is a correlation about those positions being true today; the whole point of science is to advance and gain knowledge; not hang on to archaic knowledge that has been proved false due to cultural bias.
darcy
Member
Exactly, anthropology was at first an attempt to carefully seperate humanity into those different groups, but studies in that field eventually led them in the opposite direction- from a firmly seperated view of variations within humanity, to a very fluid and multi-faceted view.
Similar threads
