• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is it Racist for White Countries to Remain White?

Is it Racist for White Countries to Remain White?

  • Yes

    Votes: 23 38.3%
  • No

    Votes: 37 61.7%

  • Total voters
    60

phattonez

Catholic
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
30,870
Reaction score
4,246
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
We are a single species.

Try to make a big deal out of minor differences like pigmentation has no basis in science.

There is something real obvious going on outside science.

Of course we are the same species. Different dog breeds are all dogs, but they also certainly have different characteristics. They're not immutable like with dogs, we do have free will, but it would be ignorant to deny those differences.
 

phattonez

Catholic
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
30,870
Reaction score
4,246
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Irrelevant to what I said.

Completely relevant. You may not see any different human races, but those races certainly see themselves.
 

Puigb

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2013
Messages
12,329
Reaction score
6,046
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Completely relevant. You may not see any different human races, but those races certainly see themselves.

Mexican is not a race.
 

<alt>doxygen

"I want MY WALL!"
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2016
Messages
8,932
Reaction score
4,191
Location
Floriduh
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
California.

Okay. There's one in FL and we have a poster on DP who lives there, thus my question. It's a pretty red necky place.

Personal attacks are not an argument.

Why is that a personal attack? You don't agree with the idea of a white ethnostate? Your posts certainly indicate that you do. Can't you own your views?
 

late

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
4,583
Reaction score
1,261
Location
Southern Maine
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Of course we are the same species. Different dog breeds are all dogs, but they also certainly have different characteristics. They're not immutable like with dogs, we do have free will, but it would be ignorant to deny those differences.

We don't breed people like dogs.

The differences are cultural, racism is an illusion.

There's no magic here, you treat people badly, and surprise, surprise, surprise...
 

phattonez

Catholic
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
30,870
Reaction score
4,246
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Okay. There's one in FL and we have a poster on DP who lives there, thus my question. It's a pretty red necky place.

Arcadia, CA has been described as the Asian Beverly Hills. Before recently, it was just another mostly white suburb.

Why is that a personal attack? You don't agree with the idea of a white ethnostate? Your posts certainly indicate that you do. Can't you own your views?

My own views are no forced expulsions of citizens, deportations of all illegals, no immigration at least until wages start rising, employment rates rise, and home prices are closer to 2x annual incomes.

My views are closer to ethnonationalism than liberal democracy, to be sure, but that doesn't mean that I necessarily would favor a white ethnostate. For instance, an atheistic ethnostate would certainly be against my interests. I'd rather have a cohesive, religious culture, and yes, that can include different races as long as the culture is maintained. Religion>race.
 

phattonez

Catholic
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
30,870
Reaction score
4,246
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
We don't breed people like dogs.

The differences are cultural, racism is an illusion.

There's no magic here, you treat people badly, and surprise, surprise, surprise...

And you think I make nothing of cultural differences? That's essentially all that I talk about on this forum.
 

<alt>doxygen

"I want MY WALL!"
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2016
Messages
8,932
Reaction score
4,191
Location
Floriduh
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Arcadia, CA has been described as the Asian Beverly Hills. Before recently, it was just another mostly white suburb.



My own views are no forced expulsions of citizens, deportations of all illegals, no immigration at least until wages start rising, employment rates rise, and home prices are closer to 2x annual incomes.

My views are closer to ethnonationalism than liberal democracy, to be sure, but that doesn't mean that I necessarily would favor a white ethnostate. For instance, an atheistic ethnostate would certainly be against my interests. I'd rather have a cohesive, religious culture, and yes, that can include different races as long as the culture is maintained. Religion>race.

Okay, thanks for making the distinction. Noted...
 

truthatallcost

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
26,719
Reaction score
6,278
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Ask all the Mexicans who cheered on their World Cup victory over Germany yesterday whether they have a common identity.

Hey, I just saw this map showing the favorite soccer teams by state.

34096452_2039741809620928_6174883329091829760_n.jpg


Judging by this, our name should be the United States of Amexico.
 

Jredbaron96

Gen 4:10
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
25,534
Reaction score
17,221
Location
US of A
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Rome survived for hundreds of years as a republic before it became a grand empire.

And reached it's zenith as an Empire. You shouldn't be knocking Rome's multiculturalism, you should be arguing that we should emulate it. Rome succeeded because of how effectively it incorporate the cultures and peoples of those it conquered. The grandsons of the Gauls that fought Julius at Alesia served as Centurions, Senators, and Legates. Rome survived, and indeed thrived, for centuries despite being composed of Latins, Italians, Greeks, Thracians, Dacians, Illyrians, Gauls, Iberians, Africans, Egyptians, Syrians, and Anatolians.

Now of course, it must be understood that the Roman views on culture, race, and ethnicity were far different from our own, and must be considered when comparing Rome to any other modern state.

Of course governmental instability contributed, but being a large empire spanning diverse cultures contributes to that governmental instability.

The rise of Christianity and the Crisis of the Third Century, an economic disaster, contributed far more to the collapse of the Roman Empire than having too many different cultures.
 

Jredbaron96

Gen 4:10
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
25,534
Reaction score
17,221
Location
US of A
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Weird, because that Eastern Roman Empire did quite well for itself despite also having adopted Christianity as the official state religion.

Yes, they did quite well after centuries of civil wars that tore their Empire apart and all they were left with was the richest parts.
 

maxparrish

Conservatarian
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
11,864
Reaction score
7,252
Location
SF Bay Area
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Research can fine tune people's ancestries even further than just a general region. Like I said before, in some instances they can even trace which particular neighborhood of London your ancestors may may have been from. The science is that good. But that doesn't make people from that neighborhood a different race or subspecies.

LOL. It's funny to read how confident you sound on this. The research is not at all clear on this. The fact that you are so eager to believe this just betrays your will to believe.

So yes, there is no question "race" exists. But only because we create it.

Sorry, you're projecting - I was never eager reject the liberal "appropriate thinking" orthodoxy taught to me as a young student, but I was eager to observe society and desired to logically understand biological, as well as cultural, reality. Thankfully my affection for the scientific method and reasoning overwhelmed the fearful taboos and shibboleths hammered into our young minds.

Alas, some of us never break free from their childhood imprinting, and even as adults they are driven to pretend what ought to true actually is true.

All of which, by the way, explains why your objections are so insubstantial. In sum:

First, the concept "race" is a social construction for a class of real objects, but it is not an arbitrary one. Be it a chair, a race, or an airplane each of these terms are symbols for something which is a material object(s), but "grouped" by their common attributes (as are, by the way, concepts for abstract social objects, like money or marriage).

Second, "sub-species" and "race" are terms for a grouping of a subset of a species. In biological classification, "the term subspecies refers to a unity of populations of a species living in a subdivision of the species global range and varies from other populations of the same species by morphological characteristics.[2]" and "In biological taxonomy, race is an informal rank in the taxonomic hierarchy, below the level of subspecies. ... Various definitions exist. Races may be genetically distinct populations of individuals within the same species,[3] or they may be defined in other ways, e.g. geographically, or physiologically.[4]"

Accordingly, the taxonomic grouping of biological human objects by racial classification are defined by those populations with common historical genetic relationships and origins with similar morphology. So roughly speaking "Blacks (Africans, Negroids) are those who have most of their ancestors from sub-Saharan Africa; Whites (Europeans, Caucasoids) have most of their ancestors from Europe; and East Asians (Orientals, Mongoloids) have most of their ancestors from Pacific Rim countries (Cavalli-Sforza, 2000; Cavalli-Sforza, Menozzi, & Piazza, 1994; Nei & Roychoudhury, 1993; Risch, Burchard, Ziv, & Tang, 2002)."

And if all of a person's ancient ancestors suggest they were from London or Denmark, I assure you they would not be identically the same as Orientals or Negroids - genetically or morphologically.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(biology)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subspecies#Doubtful_cases
https://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf
 

maxparrish

Conservatarian
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
11,864
Reaction score
7,252
Location
SF Bay Area
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
And reached it's zenith as an Empire. You shouldn't be knocking Rome's multiculturalism, you should be arguing that we should emulate it. Rome succeeded because of how effectively it incorporate the cultures and peoples of those it conquered. The grandsons of the Gauls that fought Julius at Alesia served as Centurions, Senators, and Legates. Rome survived, and indeed thrived, for centuries despite being composed of Latins, Italians, Greeks, Thracians, Dacians, Illyrians, Gauls, Iberians, Africans, Egyptians, Syrians, and Anatolians.

Now of course, it must be understood that the Roman views on culture, race, and ethnicity were far different from our own, and must be considered when comparing Rome to any other modern state.

The rise of Christianity and the Crisis of the Third Century, an economic disaster, contributed far more to the collapse of the Roman Empire than having too many different cultures.

You should have said don't knock Rome's style of acculturation. Once territory was conquered and decades of rebellions crushed, the process of acculturation (Romanization) began. Temples, housing, gladiatorial bouts, housing, bathing, Latin, togas, etc. transformed the provenances (so much so, all romance languages are rooted in Latin). Tribal elites children received a Roman education, and acculturation held, until involuntary "multiculturalism" (migrations and invasions) gained ascendancy.
 

Infinite Chaos

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
19,547
Reaction score
9,377
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
~ involuntary "multiculturalism" (migrations and invasions) gained ascendancy.

LOL, the stupidest comment on the interwebz today. Multiculturalism defined partially as an invasion is not multiculturalism. Ghenghis Khan could not be described as a multiculturalist except in the most warped of imaginations.

~ being a large empire spanning diverse cultures contributes to that governmental instability.

Rome's huge empire survived from at least 27B.C to around 470A.D. - longer than many other empires and that was because of it's integration of a range of cultures.
 

Jredbaron96

Gen 4:10
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
25,534
Reaction score
17,221
Location
US of A
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
You should have said don't knock Rome's style of acculturation. Once territory was conquered and decades of rebellions crushed, the process of acculturation (Romanization) began. Temples, housing, gladiatorial bouts, housing, bathing, Latin, togas, etc. transformed the provenances (so much so, all romance languages are rooted in Latin). Tribal elites children received a Roman education, and acculturation held, until involuntary "multiculturalism" (migrations and invasions) gained ascendancy.

The mass migrations were a result of the Empire already weakening, not a cause of it.
 

maxparrish

Conservatarian
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
11,864
Reaction score
7,252
Location
SF Bay Area
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
LOL, the stupidest comment on the interwebz today. Multiculturalism defined partially as an invasion is not multiculturalism. Ghenghis Khan could not be described as a multiculturalist except in the most warped of imaginations.

Rome's huge empire survived from at least 27B.C to around 470A.D. - longer than many other empires and that was because of it's integration of a range of cultures.

Resist being obtuse. "Multiculturalism" in quotes mean so-called. And so-called Multiculturalism, the belief that the support of the folkways of foreign cultures were the engine of Roman stability is as misleading as it is wrong. The uncontrollable mass migrations and invasions initiated a "multiculturalism" that Roman acculturation could not prevail (and yes, some of those folkways were violence against competing groups and Romans). It was, by any measure, a defacto involuntary multiculturalism, regardless of the intentions of the historical forces. And by the way, were you familiar with Chinese history the Mongols invasion did not result in major multi-culturalism because the Mongols adopted mostly Chinese folkways (e.g. political rulership)… this was a case of acculturation.

Finally, if an empire is going to conquer foreign peoples, crush their rebellions, ship the booty to Rome, and then tax them into as tributary provinces, then Rome had to have a measure of tolerance for foreign folkways (while Roman culture took root) or face bloody rebellions - (e.g. Jewish, Celtic, and Macedonian insurrections). This isn't a source of strength, its an avoidance of ruin by over-reach.

So if anyone is touting a solution for empire building and subjecting foreign peoples and rule by emperorships, then by all means tout the benefits of their rulers multi-cultural tolerance. After all, it also worked for the Hapsburg and German empires until subjected peoples found unexpected opportunities to fight their way to independence (e.g. Poland and eastern Europe), right?

Yep, multiculturalism, isn't it great or what?
 

maxparrish

Conservatarian
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
11,864
Reaction score
7,252
Location
SF Bay Area
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The mass migrations were a result of the Empire already weakening, not a cause of it.

I'm sure that you had a point, just not one relevant to my comments about Roman acculturation.
 

American

Trump Grump Whisperer
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
94,229
Reaction score
32,162
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
So instead of dealing with the issue, you're just going to go the nihilistic route and pretend that we don't both know exactly what white is. Your dodging of the issue speaks volumes.

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

Answer the goddamn question. Are you talking about Sweden and Norway or what?
 

Travelsonic

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 14, 2006
Messages
1,390
Reaction score
328
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
So instead of dealing with the issue, you're just going to go the nihilistic route and pretend that we don't both know exactly what white is.

No, rather than just accept a term we've never heard before, "White country," we're gonna ask for clarification. Not knowing what "white country" means =/= not knowing what "white" in a more general racial sense means.
 

phattonez

Catholic
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
30,870
Reaction score
4,246
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
And reached it's zenith as an Empire. You shouldn't be knocking Rome's multiculturalism, you should be arguing that we should emulate it. Rome succeeded because of how effectively it incorporate the cultures and peoples of those it conquered. The grandsons of the Gauls that fought Julius at Alesia served as Centurions, Senators, and Legates. Rome survived, and indeed thrived, for centuries despite being composed of Latins, Italians, Greeks, Thracians, Dacians, Illyrians, Gauls, Iberians, Africans, Egyptians, Syrians, and Anatolians.

At which point was it not continually putting down rebellions in this multicultural empire?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Roman_civil_wars_and_revolts

This looks like a government barely able to hold onto power.

The rise of Christianity and the Crisis of the Third Century, an economic disaster, contributed far more to the collapse of the Roman Empire than having too many different cultures.

Again, the Byzantine empire survived for centuries with Christianity, so this argument about it doesn't really make sense. The economic argument, for sure, does make sense, and it certainly contributed to the fall. But what were the origins of that crisis? I imagine putting down multiple revolts every century contributes to economic weakness.
 

phattonez

Catholic
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
30,870
Reaction score
4,246
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative

Infinite Chaos

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
19,547
Reaction score
9,377
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed

phattonez

Catholic
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
30,870
Reaction score
4,246
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
In what way does that list invalidate how long the Roman Empire lasted or that it successfully utilised a vast range of different tribes and peoples into becoming citizens, leaders or even emperors of Rome?

South Africa has also existed as a continuous government even through the end of apartheid. Are you going to claim that this was a successful state during the transition?
 
Top Bottom