What do you think about this idea that has been frequently repeated lately that there is no such thing as race?
I reject the notion of no races as much as i would think anyone who confused a german shepard with a poodle.
There is only one human race. That is a granted given.
There are clearly physical differences that gather at what I like to call "poles." No one is going to confuse Lucy Lu, Loretta Devine (Boston Public) and Pamela Anderson for each other.
Likewise no one will confuse Arnold swartzen..., Weslet Snipes or Bruce Lee with each other.
between these poles you have a whole mess of "mixed" peoples.
The other damning fact that none of these people discuss is the fact that Only Black people can create other black people ( as in skin tone) and these same black people are the only human sub species that can generate most of the human variation that is displayed on the planet. This was observed by Dr. Leaky a long long long time ago.
As for the social angle. the white race was socially created in order to explain the need for subjugation of those classified as non-white. This neccessity to maitain a 'pure" white race lead to all kinds of non-white classifications for those who whites bred with "non-whites." In the United States it resulted in the stupid One Drop rule (which I personally reject). The sole purpose of such a rule was to keep the white race as "pure" as ppossible while stratifying blacks by affording enhanced status to those who were less black. Similar things were attempted in South Africa as well.
what exactly don't you understand? even your "commandment" post clearly states "ethnic.' yet and still you insist on calling the tragedy that was Rwanda a racial issue when it clearly is not.
The ideology which instructed to discriminate against a group of people (here, the Tutsis), to shun them, and to exterminate them, is clearly a racist one.
Quote:
If you got some issue with how serbs aryans and other europeans define themselves, you should take it up with those people. The fact of the matter is you have labeled a clear ethnic clash as a racial one.
No I didn't talk about a ?racial clash?, but about a racist ideology: one of discrimination and extermination, based upon the ravings of nineteenth-century pseudoscience, and whose outcome was genocide.
The ideology which instructed to discriminate against a group of people (here, the Tutsis), to shun them, and to exterminate them, is clearly a racist one.
No I didn't talk about a ?racial clash?, but about a racist ideology: one of discrimination and extermination, based upon the ravings of nineteenth-century pseudoscience, and whose outcome was genocide.
let me talk slow to you:
The Hutu are an ethnic group ( and your documentation says this). teh Tutsi's are an ethnic group.
Both Hutus and Tutsis are Black.
so it is not possible for their ideology to be racist since they are both of the same race.
The Hutu are an ethnic group ( and your documentation says this). teh Tutsi's are an ethnic group.
Both Hutus and Tutsis are Black.
so it is not possible for their ideology to be racist since they are both of the same race.
As stated earlier, ther're all Homo Sapiens Sapiens, and it seems of great importance to you that they share common skin colour, but that was also the case of both victims and perpetrators of many previous racist genocides in the same century.
The genocide which occured in 1994 was motivated by an ideology which saw one group as inherently ?superior? and another inherently ?inferior? and detrimental to the ?superior?'s interest; and so those deemed ?inferiors? were deemed worthy of extermination, which was indeed attempted.
Both the motivations and the actions of that genocide were racist.
The idea that racism is impossible among people of the same ?race? is not in accordance with reality.
As stated earlier, ther're all Homo Sapiens Sapiens, and it seems of great importance to you that they share common skin colour, but that was also the case of both victims and perpetrators of many previous racist genocides in the same century.
The genocide which occured in 1994 was motivated by an ideology which saw one group as inherently ?superior? and another inherently ?inferior? and detrimental to the ?superior?'s interest; and so those deemed ?inferiors? were deemed worthy of extermination, which was indeed attempted.
Both the motivations and the actions of that genocide were racist.
The idea that racism is impossible among people of the same ?race? is not in accordance with reality.
Yassuh massa. I is sowee fo' tryin' to be an uppity negro. Please don' beat me massa. I sho is sowwe fo' a thinkin' i was learned. Issa go bak to my shack now. Don't you worry massa I won' be a tryin' to show off no' mo'
As stated earlier, ther're all Homo Sapiens Sapiens, and it seems of great importance to you that they share common skin colour, but that was also the case of both victims and perpetrators of many previous racist genocides in the same century.
The genocide which occured in 1994 was motivated by an ideology which saw one group as inherently ?superior? and another inherently ?inferior? and detrimental to the ?superior?'s interest; and so those deemed ?inferiors? were deemed worthy of extermination, which was indeed attempted.
Both the motivations and the actions of that genocide were racist.
The idea that racism is impossible among people of the same ?race? is not in accordance with reality.
Yassuh massa. I is sowee fo' tryin' to be an uppity negro. Please don' beat me massa. I sho is sowwe fo' a thinkin' i was learned. Issa go bak to my shack now. Don't you worry massa I won' be a tryin' to show off no' mo'
Are you trying to pass yourself for a victim here, or to imply that I'm racist?
If so that would be a classic case of Argumentum ad Hominem in the lack of an actual argument, and a pathetic one at that.
Today I recieved a private message from one "jonathan"
stating:
"unnecessary
quote:
Yassuh massa. I is sowee fo' tryin' to be an uppity negro. Please don' beat me massa. I sho is sowwe fo' a thinkin' i was learned. Issa go bak to my shack now. Don't you worry massa I won' be a tryin' to show off no' mo'
don't make me talk to you again about this sort of crap.
thank you,
jonathan"
Since I am a black person who is decended from persons who at some point in time had to say something like this I don't see what is unneccesary about it. Furthermore this whole "don't let me have to talk to you about this sort of crap" attitude is unneccessary, I'm a grown 31 year old man. I can write in whatever vernacular I choose.
This implication of the above 'slave talk" was because I believe mr. Goldstein was doing the typical "I know more about the native than you" attitude that is very pervasive in white society, especially white males. To tell me, who is quite familiar with the Hutu-Tutsi, situation that I don't know the difference between an ethnic group and the concept refered to as "race." is an insult not only to my intelligence but also to my person. That "Jonathan" did not see it neccessary to point out to Mr. Goldstein that his own document clearly stated "ethnic" in reference to the Tutsi, is a clear case of discrimination here on AppleInsider.
I suggest that "jonathan" sit down and take time out to ponder his own biases and discriminatory attitudes. And I do hope he takes the time to send me a "private" apology for the unneccessry e-mail harrassment ( since the notification landed in my inbox). besides this converstion was between two willing parties who could at anytime disengage themselves without "jonathan" stepping in.
I believe mr. Goldstein was doing the typical "I know more about the native than you"(?) To tell me,? I don't know the difference between?
Etc.
A straw-man argument in addition to the ad Hominem. And since you prefer talking about me rather than to me Mr. Sondjata, as well as discussing my person rather than my arguments; it's clear that you have no real argument to add.
goldstein: "Hutu Tutsi conflict was racist. my document proves it
sondjata: your document says "ethnic matutsi." clearly an ethnic conflict.
Goldstein: Everyine is a homosapien so the Hutus were racist
sondjata: your document says "ethnic matutsi." Clearly this is an ethnic conflct
Goldstein: homosapiens. aryans.. blah blah blah
sondjata: you're document says "ethnic matutsi" Clearly this is an ethnic conflict."
Goldstein: clearly you have no argument. regeardless as to what my document says, I'm right and all your arguments are not valid. Plus I feel you are insulting me as a person and making straw man arguments.
sondjata: But your document says "Ethnic Matutsi." Clearly this is an ethnic conflict.
Goldstein: *Continues to blabber about race and ethnicity and how he feels personally attacked and the number of straw men he percieves but never comes to realize that he is wrong about the Rwanda situation. goes to bed at night secure in the thought that he has fended off yet another threat to his intellectual security*
Sondjata: Hey whatever man. What say you post the last thought and we call it quits.
African populations are the most genetically diverse, as you would expect seeing as our species comes from Africa and the first 30 to 60 thousand years of our history was spent there. It should be no surprise to discover that people from neighbouring valleys in Central Africa are more genetically distant than a pair of people taken at random from Helsinki and Tokyo.
Then again, human beings are incredibly similar in genetic terms: two gorillas taken from different sides of the same mountain in the Congo will be more genetically distant than a man from Lesotho and a woman from Mexico (as I will even post in a thread about BMW cars if I possibly can.) We're closer than gerbils and cats, so I suppose if you want to be pedantic then even Apartheid South Africa wasn't 'racist'.
Call it what you want; the convention is to call that kind of stuff 'racism'. It works for me and it probably does for almost everyone else too. The gene stuff is simply helpful for understanding quite how stupid and pointless racism is.
To Rwanda we go. The Tutsis tend to be taller and paler than the Hutus. The Hutus are traditionally farmers, too, while the Tutsis were herders.
It looks like they kill each other for similar sorts of reasons to the Serbs and the Bosnian Muslims, yes, but it's a fact that Hutus killed people who looked like Tutsis and Tutsis killed people just because they looked like Hutus.
However it all kicked off, it all looks like racism to me.
goldstein: "Hutu Tutsi conflict was racist. my document proves it
sondjata: your document says "ethnic matutsi." clearly an ethnic conflict.
Goldstein: Everyine is a homosapien so the Hutus were racist
sondjata: your document says "ethnic matutsi." Clearly this is an ethnic conflct
Goldstein: homosapiens. aryans.. blah blah blah
sondjata: you're document says "ethnic matutsi" Clearly this is an ethnic conflict."
[?]
Etc.
There is no need to do a ?reconstitution? to a discussion which all can read above, and quoting is certainly more accurate than paraphrasing.
I did not say anything about a ?racist conflict?.
I have addressed an ideology which sets apart one group as inherently ?superior? and good and the other as inherently ?inferior? and bad; an ideology which set to de-humanise the targetted group and then to exterminate it.
Such ideology is a racist one, analogous to other racist ideologies from last century. It motivated the murder of some one million people less than ten years ago, by a racist regime.
The idea that people of similar skin colour cannot be racist toward each other is self-delusion, at best.
I agree with Immanuel Goldstein, the rwanda genocide has to do with racism, even if it's an ethnic conflict.
Many scientist have proven that there is no basis for the concept of race. If you study all the differences between differents humans, you will be enable to make differents groups by lack of correlation. Thus the concept of race is a human silly creation. As the word ethnophobia do not exist, and as this concept is as stupid, as any other form of racism, i will say it's racism. It's a specific form, like racism against black has some difference with racism against jews aka antisemitism. But all form of racism share some common values, hate of the differences or supposed differences of others, wether the differences are ethnic, skin color, religion, politic, or others.
Comments
Originally posted by BRussell
What do you think about this idea that has been frequently repeated lately that there is no such thing as race?
I reject the notion of no races as much as i would think anyone who confused a german shepard with a poodle.
There is only one human race. That is a granted given.
There are clearly physical differences that gather at what I like to call "poles." No one is going to confuse Lucy Lu, Loretta Devine (Boston Public) and Pamela Anderson for each other.
Likewise no one will confuse Arnold swartzen..., Weslet Snipes or Bruce Lee with each other.
between these poles you have a whole mess of "mixed" peoples.
The other damning fact that none of these people discuss is the fact that Only Black people can create other black people ( as in skin tone) and these same black people are the only human sub species that can generate most of the human variation that is displayed on the planet. This was observed by Dr. Leaky a long long long time ago.
As for the social angle. the white race was socially created in order to explain the need for subjugation of those classified as non-white. This neccessity to maitain a 'pure" white race lead to all kinds of non-white classifications for those who whites bred with "non-whites." In the United States it resulted in the stupid One Drop rule (which I personally reject). The sole purpose of such a rule was to keep the white race as "pure" as ppossible while stratifying blacks by affording enhanced status to those who were less black. Similar things were attempted in South Africa as well.
Originally posted by Sondjata
what exactly don't you understand? even your "commandment" post clearly states "ethnic.' yet and still you insist on calling the tragedy that was Rwanda a racial issue when it clearly is not.
The ideology which instructed to discriminate against a group of people (here, the Tutsis), to shun them, and to exterminate them, is clearly a racist one.
If you got some issue with how serbs aryans and other europeans define themselves, you should take it up with those people. The fact of the matter is you have labeled a clear ethnic clash as a racial one.
No I didn't talk about a ?racial clash?, but about a racist ideology: one of discrimination and extermination, based upon the ravings of nineteenth-century pseudoscience, and whose outcome was genocide.
Originally posted by Immanuel Goldstein
The ideology which instructed to discriminate against a group of people (here, the Tutsis), to shun them, and to exterminate them, is clearly a racist one.
No I didn't talk about a ?racial clash?, but about a racist ideology: one of discrimination and extermination, based upon the ravings of nineteenth-century pseudoscience, and whose outcome was genocide.
let me talk slow to you:
The Hutu are an ethnic group ( and your documentation says this). teh Tutsi's are an ethnic group.
Both Hutus and Tutsis are Black.
so it is not possible for their ideology to be racist since they are both of the same race.
it's really not that hard man.
Originally posted by Sondjata
let me talk slow to you:
The Hutu are an ethnic group ( and your documentation says this). teh Tutsi's are an ethnic group.
Both Hutus and Tutsis are Black.
so it is not possible for their ideology to be racist since they are both of the same race.
As stated earlier, ther're all Homo Sapiens Sapiens, and it seems of great importance to you that they share common skin colour, but that was also the case of both victims and perpetrators of many previous racist genocides in the same century.
The genocide which occured in 1994 was motivated by an ideology which saw one group as inherently ?superior? and another inherently ?inferior? and detrimental to the ?superior?'s interest; and so those deemed ?inferiors? were deemed worthy of extermination, which was indeed attempted.
Both the motivations and the actions of that genocide were racist.
The idea that racism is impossible among people of the same ?race? is not in accordance with reality.
Originally posted by Immanuel Goldstein
As stated earlier, ther're all Homo Sapiens Sapiens, and it seems of great importance to you that they share common skin colour, but that was also the case of both victims and perpetrators of many previous racist genocides in the same century.
The genocide which occured in 1994 was motivated by an ideology which saw one group as inherently ?superior? and another inherently ?inferior? and detrimental to the ?superior?'s interest; and so those deemed ?inferiors? were deemed worthy of extermination, which was indeed attempted.
Both the motivations and the actions of that genocide were racist.
The idea that racism is impossible among people of the same ?race? is not in accordance with reality.
Yassuh massa. I is sowee fo' tryin' to be an uppity negro. Please don' beat me massa. I sho is sowwe fo' a thinkin' i was learned. Issa go bak to my shack now. Don't you worry massa I won' be a tryin' to show off no' mo'
Originally posted by Sondjata
Originally posted by Immanuel Goldstein
As stated earlier, ther're all Homo Sapiens Sapiens, and it seems of great importance to you that they share common skin colour, but that was also the case of both victims and perpetrators of many previous racist genocides in the same century.
The genocide which occured in 1994 was motivated by an ideology which saw one group as inherently ?superior? and another inherently ?inferior? and detrimental to the ?superior?'s interest; and so those deemed ?inferiors? were deemed worthy of extermination, which was indeed attempted.
Both the motivations and the actions of that genocide were racist.
The idea that racism is impossible among people of the same ?race? is not in accordance with reality.
Yassuh massa. I is sowee fo' tryin' to be an uppity negro. Please don' beat me massa. I sho is sowwe fo' a thinkin' i was learned. Issa go bak to my shack now. Don't you worry massa I won' be a tryin' to show off no' mo'
Are you trying to pass yourself for a victim here, or to imply that I'm racist?
If so that would be a classic case of Argumentum ad Hominem in the lack of an actual argument, and a pathetic one at that.
stating:
"unnecessary
quote:
Yassuh massa. I is sowee fo' tryin' to be an uppity negro. Please don' beat me massa. I sho is sowwe fo' a thinkin' i was learned. Issa go bak to my shack now. Don't you worry massa I won' be a tryin' to show off no' mo'
don't make me talk to you again about this sort of crap.
thank you,
jonathan"
Since I am a black person who is decended from persons who at some point in time had to say something like this I don't see what is unneccesary about it. Furthermore this whole "don't let me have to talk to you about this sort of crap" attitude is unneccessary, I'm a grown 31 year old man. I can write in whatever vernacular I choose.
This implication of the above 'slave talk" was because I believe mr. Goldstein was doing the typical "I know more about the native than you" attitude that is very pervasive in white society, especially white males. To tell me, who is quite familiar with the Hutu-Tutsi, situation that I don't know the difference between an ethnic group and the concept refered to as "race." is an insult not only to my intelligence but also to my person. That "Jonathan" did not see it neccessary to point out to Mr. Goldstein that his own document clearly stated "ethnic" in reference to the Tutsi, is a clear case of discrimination here on AppleInsider.
I suggest that "jonathan" sit down and take time out to ponder his own biases and discriminatory attitudes. And I do hope he takes the time to send me a "private" apology for the unneccessry e-mail harrassment ( since the notification landed in my inbox). besides this converstion was between two willing parties who could at anytime disengage themselves without "jonathan" stepping in.
thank you.
Originally posted by Sondjata
I believe mr. Goldstein was doing the typical "I know more about the native than you"(?) To tell me,? I don't know the difference between?
Etc.
A straw-man argument in addition to the ad Hominem. And since you prefer talking about me rather than to me Mr. Sondjata, as well as discussing my person rather than my arguments; it's clear that you have no real argument to add.
sondjata: your document says "ethnic matutsi." clearly an ethnic conflict.
Goldstein: Everyine is a homosapien so the Hutus were racist
sondjata: your document says "ethnic matutsi." Clearly this is an ethnic conflct
Goldstein: homosapiens. aryans.. blah blah blah
sondjata: you're document says "ethnic matutsi" Clearly this is an ethnic conflict."
Goldstein: clearly you have no argument. regeardless as to what my document says, I'm right and all your arguments are not valid. Plus I feel you are insulting me as a person and making straw man arguments.
sondjata: But your document says "Ethnic Matutsi." Clearly this is an ethnic conflict.
Goldstein: *Continues to blabber about race and ethnicity and how he feels personally attacked and the number of straw men he percieves but never comes to realize that he is wrong about the Rwanda situation. goes to bed at night secure in the thought that he has fended off yet another threat to his intellectual security*
Sondjata: Hey whatever man. What say you post the last thought and we call it quits.
African populations are the most genetically diverse, as you would expect seeing as our species comes from Africa and the first 30 to 60 thousand years of our history was spent there. It should be no surprise to discover that people from neighbouring valleys in Central Africa are more genetically distant than a pair of people taken at random from Helsinki and Tokyo.
Then again, human beings are incredibly similar in genetic terms: two gorillas taken from different sides of the same mountain in the Congo will be more genetically distant than a man from Lesotho and a woman from Mexico (as I will even post in a thread about BMW cars if I possibly can.) We're closer than gerbils and cats, so I suppose if you want to be pedantic then even Apartheid South Africa wasn't 'racist'.
Call it what you want; the convention is to call that kind of stuff 'racism'. It works for me and it probably does for almost everyone else too. The gene stuff is simply helpful for understanding quite how stupid and pointless racism is.
To Rwanda we go. The Tutsis tend to be taller and paler than the Hutus. The Hutus are traditionally farmers, too, while the Tutsis were herders.
It looks like they kill each other for similar sorts of reasons to the Serbs and the Bosnian Muslims, yes, but it's a fact that Hutus killed people who looked like Tutsis and Tutsis killed people just because they looked like Hutus.
However it all kicked off, it all looks like racism to me.
Originally posted by Sondjata
goldstein: "Hutu Tutsi conflict was racist. my document proves it
sondjata: your document says "ethnic matutsi." clearly an ethnic conflict.
Goldstein: Everyine is a homosapien so the Hutus were racist
sondjata: your document says "ethnic matutsi." Clearly this is an ethnic conflct
Goldstein: homosapiens. aryans.. blah blah blah
sondjata: you're document says "ethnic matutsi" Clearly this is an ethnic conflict."
[?]
Etc.
There is no need to do a ?reconstitution? to a discussion which all can read above, and quoting is certainly more accurate than paraphrasing.
I did not say anything about a ?racist conflict?.
I have addressed an ideology which sets apart one group as inherently ?superior? and good and the other as inherently ?inferior? and bad; an ideology which set to de-humanise the targetted group and then to exterminate it.
Such ideology is a racist one, analogous to other racist ideologies from last century. It motivated the murder of some one million people less than ten years ago, by a racist regime.
The idea that people of similar skin colour cannot be racist toward each other is self-delusion, at best.
Many scientist have proven that there is no basis for the concept of race. If you study all the differences between differents humans, you will be enable to make differents groups by lack of correlation. Thus the concept of race is a human silly creation. As the word ethnophobia do not exist, and as this concept is as stupid, as any other form of racism, i will say it's racism. It's a specific form, like racism against black has some difference with racism against jews aka antisemitism. But all form of racism share some common values, hate of the differences or supposed differences of others, wether the differences are ethnic, skin color, religion, politic, or others.