White Supremacy, are you kidding?

[Goshin]

:inandout::scared:

 

[Mensch]

People who pretend not to be a racist is, more often than not, actually a genuine racist, except that the modern type of racists, while wearing the cloak of non-racist, must practice racism against the whites.

Give me a break! The only racist here is you.

OK, if “First of all, there is no such thing as a white race or a black race,” the government should have no base to enact the law of affirmative action. Are you for removal of the affirmative action? Let everybody earn what he/she deserves by his/her ability and capability! I am not jealous of Michael Jordon being a basketball celebrity; I certainly, however, feel uncomfortable when a black doctor approaches me next to my bed in a hospital with a suspicion that he may have only earned his qualification through the affirmative action. Of course, the same doctor will not impose this insecure feeling on me if affirmative action has not been there.

Did you actually read my response? My first statement clearly implied that I am against Affirmative Action. I'm against any and all laws that favor one class of individuals over another.

Second of all, by saying ‘the "white race" or Caucasian group have consistently maintained a popular majority over the rest of minorities, and have notoriously limited their freedoms through arbitrary and legal means,’ you have admitted the existence of race although you use the word group in place of race. Why contradict yourself?

Race is a social construction, not a biological trait. Therefore, I'm not contradicting myself when I accurately state that "white" people (and I quote white for a reason) or "caucasian" groups have consistently maintained a popular majority over the rest of minorities. This is because the group of people YOU define as "white people" have constructed this narrow view of race and have used it as a social tool to separate themselves from other groups. They have also used it as a political tool to oppress other groups.

Don’t you distinguish one group from another group by certain physical characters?

In what way? We can discuss natural physical traits that arise out of many years of exposure to different geographic landscapes and climates. But there's no humanistic difference between an African-American and myself. We're both human beings, and there's only one race- the human race.

Don’t anthropologist do just that in using the term race?

They use it only in a historical context to illustrate how it has become a social construction. Anthropologists will be the first to tell you that there is no such thing as race, genetically or biologically speaking. Any attempt to prove that humans are biologically different based on "race" is pseudo-science.

And finally, by saying “if you really want the white equivalent of NAACP, you've already got it,” you have again emphasized the existence of races.

No, I haven't. What I'm saying is that there is, in fact, a group called the National Assocation for the Advancement of White People (NAAWP) and it was founded by the former KKK member and former Lousiana legislator, David Duke. It was simply an observation of fact, not a concession of the existence of race.

The entire argument from you is intended to show you being not a racist,

Actually, I did not intend to defend myself in the post, but merely to reflect on how flawed your argument remains to be, as well to point out the racism that underlies your "white rights" concerns.

but you are, except the concept of racism in your mind is that intimidation from black against white is not racism, and only the other way is. Indeed, it has become so natural for the modern type of racists to ask people to take it for grant if a non-black expreiences a bad deed from a black.

This is jibberish. I never said anything regarding black racism. I realize that there are racist African-Americans. But my intention was not to examine their racism, but to reflect on yours.

 

[crebigsol]

My first statement clearly implied that I am against Affirmative Action. I'm against any and all laws that favor one class of individuals over another.

Sorry, your argument clearly obscures your imply. However, if you are against affirmative action, we have no argument against each other on this topic, except that, be careful, if you stand out to ask for removal of affirmative action, you will be labeled by someone as racist.

Race is a social construction, not a biological trait.

That is your definition of race. In this definition, you reverse the logic. In an environment that race is concerned, people group themselves according to biological group to form the social construction, not the other way. With the argument I have presented, I have exposed myself with enough social nature, can you tell me what race I am from? If I personally appear in front of you, you can immediately judge my race without knowing my social status. At least, if you are interested, you may ask what country, if not ethic group, I are from. Can you tell a rich man’s race if you have never seen him but heard of his name? Can you tell a black man his social status by only looking at his skin color without doing any investigation (let’s say even hearsay is part of the investigation)?

…when I accurately state that "white" people (and I quote white for a reason) or "caucasian" groups have consistently maintained a popular majority over the rest of minorities.

So, you think a group of people have blindly grouped themselves according to a certain social status and “maintained a popular majority over the rest of minorities”. If it is the case, this is a genuinely democratic society and all those who complaint racism in our society is actually those who feel uncomfortable about democracy.

This is because the group of people YOU define as "white people" have constructed this narrow view of race and have used it as a social tool to separate themselves from other groups. They have also used it as a political tool to oppress other groups.

Please tell me the following are from the whites people with narrow view of race:

“Our family has 8 siblings, and all are raised by a single parent”
“AIDS is a disease invented by whites to kill the blacks.”
“the Bush government does not car how blacks suffer.”
“If you don’t vote for Barack Obama, you are a racist.”
“A vacancy left by a black should be filled by a black.”
An Asian woman waiting at the bus station is kidnapped by a black from behind, clearely recorded by video.
…

Yes, you can wrist-tabbing the black as you said later: “I realize that there are racist African-Americans.” The difference in our society is that if all of the above are said or done by whites for the whites in a parallel context, the whites will be punished by law, or at least, severely by public opinion. Why do the blacks have advantage over the whites, and why it is not racist practice?

In what way? We can discuss natural physical traits that arise out of many years of exposure to different geographic landscapes and climates. But there's no humanistic difference between an African-American and myself. We're both human beings, and there's only one race- the human race.

What an ostrich view. OK, if you feel uncomfortable to use the term of race, I have no problem to use the term of ‘group of “natural physical traits that arise out of many years of exposure to different geographic landscapes and climates”’ and if you don’t think this term is too long but also vividly reflects the facts. You are a believer of evolution, right? Why “many years of exposure to different geographic landscapes and climates” has not caused natural selection on human beings at different locations? Indeed, interestingly, many fields that requires physical strength have been dominated by black, such as boxing, football, basketball. Whites in these fields have been displaced from majority to minority. Do you think this as being accidental or consequential?

They use it only in a historical context to illustrate how it has become a social construction. Anthropologists will be the first to tell you that there is no such thing as race, genetically or biologically speaking. Any attempt to prove that humans are biologically different based on "race" is pseudo-science.

Evolution as a science has been molded into a hypocritical theory by interest group. I am not going to discuss with you in depth on this subject, otherwise I have to write a book of 300 pages. The obvious thing is that natural selection has bee greatly influenced by political selection.

Any attempt to prove that humans are biologically different based on "race" is pseudo-science

Interestingly, “scientists” keep declaring that there are more DNA varieties found in Africa than in other part of the world (Although this theory is used to prove their funky theory that all humans are originated from Africa”. DNA variety means DNA difference, DNA difference must mean biological difference. Please explain the logic in a claim like “No difference is found in the difference.”

Actually, I … merely to reflect on how flawed your argument remains to be, as well to point out the racism that underlies your "white rights" concerns. But my intention was not to examine their racism, but to reflect on yours

If you must say I am concerned with “white right”, I only insist on reciprocal political right between blacks and whites. If you think this fits your conception of racism, you have proved my previous claim: The concept of racism in your mind is that intimidation from black against white is not racism, and only the other way is. Indeed, it has become so natural for the modern type of racists to ask people to take it for grant if a non-black experiences a bad deed from a black.

 

[samsmart]

I can't really bother myself to read in detail the OP, but I just want to say that in the future generations racial identities will become increasingly irrelevant as there are more and more interracial marriages and interracial couples having children.

 

[spud_meister]

BS always starts from those who have no sense of logic. I really don't know how a calculation of diminshing of a race will result in a conslucion of assuming "population level would remain static". OK, you must be concluding that the population level would not remain static, but then, show a calculation of variation of percentage of race in the varying populatioon level. Learn some math if you do not want to present BS.

The whole point if your argument was that the white race is vanishing, because predictions show that the percentage of white people in the population will decrease, you explicitly stated "Assuming also that the total population of US keeps 300 million all the time." Which is BS because the the population will not remain static, while the percentage of whites among the population as a whole will decline, the number of them in America will keep increasing.

 

[Mensch]

Sorry, your argument clearly obscures your imply. However, if you are against affirmative action, we have no argument against each other on this topic, except that, be careful, if you stand out to ask for removal of affirmative action, you will be labeled by someone as racist.

I realize that. I also realize that I disagreed with your view of race and racism, and you labeled me a racist (or a racist in the shadows).

That is your definition of race. In this definition, you reverse the logic. In an environment that race is concerned, people group themselves according to biological group to form the social construction, not the other way. With the argument I have presented, I have exposed myself with enough social nature, can you tell me what race I am from? If I personally appear in front of you, you can immediately judge my race without knowing my social status. At least, if you are interested, you may ask what country, if not ethic group, I are from. Can you tell a rich man’s race if you have never seen him but heard of his name? Can you tell a black man his social status by only looking at his skin color without doing any investigation (let’s say even hearsay is part of the investigation)?

What is your point? Yes, human beings have differences but that doesn't make us less human. Race IS a social construction. That is not an opinion or a view, but a fact.

So, you think a group of people have blindly grouped themselves according to a certain social status and “maintained a popular majority over the rest of minorities”. If it is the case, this is a genuinely democratic society and all those who complaint racism in our society is actually those who feel uncomfortable about democracy.

<raises hand> I'm one of them. You're damn right I'm uncomfortable about democracy. And your rationale is the primary reason I'm so uncomfortable about democracy. In this country, we hold up democracy on a pedestal like its some godly act of miracle. Democracy is not, in and of itself, an ethical concept or system. Democracy kills itself. Democracy killed Socrates. Democracy was the reason why we enslaved millions of African-Americans and then segregated them. A majority got together, pulled enough muscle, and decided that this minority group wasn't human and therefore did not deserve the freedoms granted by the constitution. The majority then chained them up and exploited them for economic gains. Democracy is mob rule. Democracy is two wolves and one sheep voting on what they should eat for dinner. Democracy is better than despotism, but it also breeds despotism because if the majority wants a despot, they can have him. LIBERTY is better than democracy.

And your argument goes as follows: The majority voted to oppress the minority and that's democracy. Yes, you're right, but that's no excuse for oppressing the minority.

Please tell me the following are from the whites people with narrow view of race:

“Our family has 8 siblings, and all are raised by a single parent”
“AIDS is a disease invented by whites to kill the blacks.”
“the Bush government does not car how blacks suffer.”
“If you don’t vote for Barack Obama, you are a racist.”
“A vacancy left by a black should be filled by a black.”
An Asian woman waiting at the bus station is kidnapped by a black from behind, clearely recorded by video.
…

Yes, you can wrist-tabbing the black as you said later: “I realize that there are racist African-Americans.” The difference in our society is that if all of the above are said or done by whites for the whites in a parallel context, the whites will be punished by law, or at least, severely by public opinion. Why do the blacks have advantage over the whites, and why it is not racist practice?

I agree that society has placated some of the racist attitudes of certain groups, because they genuinely feel guilty about the history of slavery and of segregation. This is wrong, but it doesn't justify your argument. Our government should be colorblind. Blacks shouldn't have advantage over whites, and whites shouldn't have advantage over blacks. Plain and simple.

What an ostrich view. OK, if you feel uncomfortable to use the term of race, I have no problem to use the term of ‘group of “natural physical traits that arise out of many years of exposure to different geographic landscapes and climates”’ and if you don’t think this term is too long but also vividly reflects the facts. You are a believer of evolution, right?

I believe evolution is the best science has to offer, but I doubt you actually support the theory.

Why “many years of exposure to different geographic landscapes and climates” has not caused natural selection on human beings at different locations?

Does that mean that African-Americans have evolved into a completely different species? They're no longer homo sapiens?

Indeed, interestingly, many fields that requires physical strength have been dominated by black, such as boxing, football, basketball. Whites in these fields have been displaced from majority to minority. Do you think this as being accidental or consequential?

It's a matter of geography and historical circumstances, not of evolutionary traits. African-Americans are not inherently dumber or stronger than their peers. There are cultural differences that led to higher performance ratings in certain fields, but culture is another social construction.

Evolution as a science has been molded into a hypocritical theory by interest group. I am not going to discuss with you in depth on this subject, otherwise I have to write a book of 300 pages. The obvious thing is that natural selection has bee greatly influenced by political selection.

No, not really.

Interestingly, “scientists” keep declaring that there are more DNA varieties found in Africa than in other part of the world (Although this theory is used to prove their funky theory that all humans are originated from Africa”.

And where do you believe humans originated, if not in Africa? I'm guessing you're a religious fellow who doesn't really believe in evolution at all. We'll probably never agree on this topic.

DNA variety means DNA difference, DNA difference must mean biological difference. Please explain the logic in a claim like “No difference is found in the difference.”

Variety, or difference, in DNA does not mean races are biological differences. I have a dark brown hair, and my friend has red hair but that doesn't make me a homo sapien and him something else. You do realize that human beings are one of the most homogenous species on the planet, don't you? There's more diversity between different cats than there are between different humans!

If you must say I am concerned with “white right”, I only insist on reciprocal political right between blacks and whites. If you think this fits your conception of racism, you have proved my previous claim: The concept of racism in your mind is that intimidation from black against white is not racism, and only the other way is. Indeed, it has become so natural for the modern type of racists to ask people to take it for grant if a non-black experiences a bad deed from a black.

When did I ever argue that intimidation from black against white is not racism? Rather, I argued that minorities have developed different interest groups (like the NAACP which you've concerned yourself with in the OP) that arose following repeated attempts by the majority to silence the minority. The "whites" continue to remain a majority with the highest level of influence, so there is no real need for an interest group dedicated to protecting the rights of the "whites." Like I said before, there is an organization created by David Duke that proposes to fight for such rights, and you have every right to join the organization. And you have a right to complain about the existence of "black" interest groups, but it won't do you very good to argue against them and for a "white" interest group. You just sound racially biased, or racist.

 

[crebigsol]

I realize that. I also realize that I disagreed with your view of race and racism, and you labeled me a racist (or a racist in the shadows).

True, anyone who does not agree on equally reciprocal political right on the racial base is racially biased. A more formal term is then racist. This can be true in the past and true in the future. If you insist that there is no race among human beings, your declaration of racism has no base to exist. Therefore, accusing white racism in the past is a false accusation. Do you agree? You cannot see no races and found race at the same time. This is a plain logic.

What is your point? Yes, human beings have differences but that doesn't make us less human. Race IS a social construction. That is not an opinion or a view, but a fact.

My point is exactly what you claim: human beings have differences but that doesn't make us less human. However, why did this government allow the black to openly chant “kill the white crackers” on the street without consequence, the same thing is definitely disallowed if the whites are to do the same thing: to chant “kill the niggers” As a matter of fact, calling them Negro is offensive; even the term color people may make someone upset. Isn’t this government already implying white being less human?

<raises hand> I'm one of them. You're damn right I'm uncomfortable about democracy. And your rationale is the primary reason I'm so uncomfortable about democracy. In this country, we hold up democracy on a pedestal like its some godly act of miracle. Democracy is not, in and of itself, an ethical concept or system. Democracy kills itself. Democracy killed Socrates. Democracy was the reason why we enslaved millions of African-Americans and then segregated them. A majority got together, pulled enough muscle, and decided that this minority group wasn't human and therefore did not deserve the freedoms granted by the constitution. The majority then chained them up and exploited them for economic gains. Democracy is mob rule. Democracy is two wolves and one sheep voting on what they should eat for dinner. Democracy is better than despotism, but it also breeds despotism because if the majority wants a despot, they can have him. LIBERTY is better than democracy.

How can the discussion be continued if you already assume the majority must be a wolf but the minority must be a sheep? Has the majority in America “eaten” Obama so that he cannot be a president? It is true that Democracy kills itself. However, it is another big topic. All I can say with simple word is that Democracy kills itself if those who enjoy it abuse it. There are many political actions and events in Today’s America that look like democracy, but it is actually not. For example, fully escorting illegal immigrants is one of such fake democracy. Allowing homosexual persecuting straight people is another example. Allowing prisoners to enjoy full health care benefit while hard working people outside of the prison may not enjoy the same thing…The list can go on.

And your argument goes as follows: The majority voted to oppress the minority and that's democracy. Yes, you're right, but that's no excuse for oppressing the minority

You are half right about my view. When we talk about majority or minority in democracy, we must also talk about the quality of the groups. You are damn right the majority of non drug abusers must oppress the minority of drug abusers. The peaceful majority must oppress the criminal minority for genuine democracy to continue. If any race does not want to be discriminated or oppressed, reduce the incarceration rate from their own race; make themselves more human, but not make others less human and suffer.

Our government should be colorblind. Blacks shouldn't have advantage over whites, and whites shouldn't have advantage over blacks.

It is very true; but it is not how our government practices nowadays. Black obviously has far more advantages than white. The advantage in most cases is not what they earned by their capacity but stipulated by law or by selective application of law by some “non-racist” authority.

I believe evolution is the best science has to offer, but I doubt you actually support the theory.

Again, you are half true. All I can say is that evolution has many convincing points, but should not be placed in an absolute authority place. It is so absolute nowadays that it begins to expel our law that laid by our Christian Founding fathers. Let me ask you: What make the evolutionist eligible to claim that all humans are originated from Africa? You may say that so many fossil evidences have been found in Africa. This has been an overwhelmed belief. However, this is also parallel to saying that a cemetery is a good place to find someone’s birthplace. An opposite question is that what evidence do they have to refute someone’s claim that Africans’ ancestors actually came from non African continent? Another question: why does natural selection must leave us five digits on each of our limb, not four or not six? There is no evidence to prove that 4 or 6 digits will be less fit in nature.

Does that mean that African-Americans have evolved into a completely different species? They're no longer homo sapiens?

Similar to assuming majority being a wolf, you force another hypothesis on me. There are many breeds of dogs, but it does not make one breed being less dog than the other breed. On the other hand, different breeds of dogs have different personality; it is a fact no one can deny. Instead of asking “Does that mean that African-Americans have evolved into a completely different species?” You question becomes more accessible and sound if you use “path” to replace “species”. In your mind, you already have a “no longer homo sapiens” image for them to match and assume me doing the same thing. When an employer hires someone, he must scrutinize this someone’s credential. The credential of more that 10,000 years of history has presented to us that whites/Caucasians converted Europe with European landscape, Negro converted Africa with African landscape. So far, we found no exception. A beautiful Detroit has become a sub-African city; New Orlene is on the way. Another credential is that people risk anything to join the place that has European landscape if they happen to be born in place that is not so. Tell me some example that people risk anything to join the place that is African landscaped.

Why do people have no courage to face these facts?

It's a matter of geography and historical circumstances, not of evolutionary traits. African-Americans are not inherently dumber or stronger than their peers. There are cultural differences that led to higher performance ratings in certain fields, but culture is another social construction.

Culture is a result of brain activity. Animals has no culture. The major factor distinguishing human beings from animals is culture. The culture difference between black and white must tell the consequence of brain activity.

And where do you believe humans originated, if not in Africa? I'm guessing you're a religious fellow who doesn't really believe in evolution at all. We'll probably never agree on this topic.

I partially believe evolution, I am not a religious fellow. However, I feel extremely sorry that whites and Christians are gradually cornered in this country. With the situation so continuing, America will be gone. Too many people already see today’s America as yesterday’s Rome.

Variety, or difference, in DNA does not mean races are biological differences.

Then, the genetic theories should be thrown to the trash can.

I have a dark brown hair, and my friend has red hair but that doesn't make me a homo sapien and him something else. You do realize that human beings are one of the most homogenous species on the planet, don't you? There's more diversity between different cats than there are between different humans!

Here, you force hypothesis again. A small difference and a big difference is not equal difference.

The "whites" continue to remain a majority with the highest level of influence, so there is no real need for an interest group dedicated to protecting the rights of the "whites." Like I said before, there is an organization created by David Duke that proposes to fight for such rights, and you have every right to join the organization. And you have a right to complain about the existence of "black" interest groups, but it won't do you very good to argue against them and for a "white" interest group. You just sound racially biased, or racist.

The danger for the white is that they gradually drift to be minority. With the hatred the minority shown against them today, the white must face disaster tomorrow if they don’t prepare ahead of time.

 

[crebigsol]

The whole point if your argument was that the white race is vanishing, because predictions show that the percentage of white people in the population will decrease, you explicitly stated "Assuming also that the total population of US keeps 300 million all the time." Which is BS because the the population will not remain static, while the percentage of whites among the population as a whole will decline, the number of them in America will keep increasing.

The assumption of "keeps 300 million all the time" is for illustration for comparison. If you feel uncomfortable with it, we can increase it to 3,000 million. Say the white has increased to 210 million from 200 million by the time the figure of 3,000 million is reached, what percentage of the white is found in the entire population? It may be true that the 3,000 million figure may never reach in America, but it is also true that white would have long been extinct before the 3,000 million is reached.

 

[LizardofOz]

The assumption of "keeps 300 million all the time" is for illustration for comparison. If you feel uncomfortable with it, we can increase it to 3,000 million. Say the white has increased to 210 million from 200 million by the time the figure of 3,000 million is reached, what percentage of the white is found in the entire population? It may be true that the 3,000 million figure may never reach in America, but it is also true that white would have long been extinct before the 3,000 million is reached.

How about this crazy white person that probably throws the N word around liberally around your family and thinks that they are going to get beat down by darky: when you actually get beat down by darky, refused service, wake up with a burning cross in your front lawn or anything that could actually be considered a hate crime towards your person then come back here and start whining.

 

[crebigsol]

I can't really bother myself to read in detail the OP, but I just want to say that in the future generations racial identities will become increasingly irrelevant as there are more and more interracial marriages and interracial couples having children.

It is the white who pays the price of extinction for the racial identity vanishing. The problem is that no one can guarantee interracial mariage to be the only way to eliminate the racial identity in the future. When the white becomes powerless in population, those who are impatient to "share" wealth will have other means to eleiminate the racial identity, such as enslaving. Indeed, enslaving the white has been on the way, such as the abused welfare system coupled with the policy of taxing the "rich". Believe or not, even enslaving would have been too gentle when situation "matures". Why should a creative race in history suffer such a humiliate ending? Even if interracial marriage is a major factor to contribute to the racial identity vanishing, with the present decreasing rate of white, there will not be enough white to marry non white to keep the white's gene outstanding among human beings. In other words, the bottom line is still that the white has to be the one to pay the price of extinction for the racial identity vanishing, violently or "peacefully". Human beings have so much conscious that all ancient ethical culture from all minority must be protected from vanishing by all means, but no one pays attention to the vanishing of white. Indeed, some feels so welcome for their vansishing.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

It is the white who pays the price of extinction for the racial identity vanishing. The problem is that no one can guarantee interracial mariage to be the only way to eliminate the racial identity in the future. When the white becomes powerless in population, those who are impatient to "share" wealth will have other means to eleiminate the racial identity, such as enslaving. Indeed, enslaving the white has been on the way, such as the abused welfare system coupled with the policy of taxing the "rich". Believe or not, even enslaving would have been too gentle when situation "matures". Why should a creative race in history suffer such a humiliate ending? Even if interracial marriage is a major factor to contribute to the racial identity vanishing, with the present decreasing rate of white, there will not be enough white to marry non white to keep the white's gene outstanding among human beings. In other words, the bottom line is still that the white has to be the one to pay the price of extinction for the racial identity vanishing, violently or "peacefully". Human beings have so much conscious that all ancient ethical culture from all minority must be protected from vanishing by all means, but no one pays attention to the vanishing of white. Indeed, some feels so welcome for their vansishing.

Posts like this belong in the conspiracy theory section of this site.

 

[crebigsol]

How about this crazy white person that probably throws the N word around liberally around your family and thinks that they are going to get beat down by darky: when you actually get beat down by darky, refused service, wake up with a burning cross in your front lawn or anything that could actually be considered a hate crime towards your person then come back here and start whining.

Does you argument support you to think the following to be justified?

1. The entire white race is a criminal race, guilty of racism.
If you say yes, where would you place Lincoln, where would you place all those white heroes who have sacrificed their lives and families for the liberty of the black?
2. It is time for the black to practice racism against the white.
If you say yes, why should people feel bad about racism against black by white? With the yes, aren't you just advocating to replace racism with another racism? Indeed, worse, with your reversed racism, you encourage vengeance in addition to racism. You think you have been noble, but you do the opposite thing.
3. Encouraging equal reciprocal political right like what I insist is racism.
If you say yes, why don't we just go ahead to claim openly that it is time for the black to be a dominate class in this country for equality to be realized?
4. A handful whites' wrong doing is good enough to politically guilt-trip the entire whites.
If you say yes, are you going to apply the same logic and principle to all races by looking at the prisons to inspect the incarceration rate from each race?
5. If you feel so justify for the black to intimidate the white because of the violent history, should the Asian do the same thing back to the black because the following incident?
a. An Asian woman waiting at the bus station was kidnapped from behind by a black like packing a chicken, caught in the video.
b. An Asian old man was fisted to death in Oakland, practically a lynch.
c. Too many robbery cases happen to Asians and almost all the violence is done from black to them if not from the Asians. So far I have not heard of one incident that an Asian is robbed by a white.
While people complaint white intimidating the black in the past, let us not to forget it is also the white who outcry to liberate them. If that you show justice to black is not to show you being noble, give the white the credit. They deserve the credit far more than the complaint. If it is not for the effort and sacrifice of the white majority, the blacks are still slaves. No matter by population or by economic-political power, the black cannot liberate themselves. There is no need to dispute.

 

[Albert Di Salvo]

"....1. Can anyone guarantee the procedure of browning be peaceful?..."

HOW? You press your lips to hers, as she undoes your pants. The flesh becomes one, the hearts beat as one, she gives birth to your sons and daughters who are the flesh of your flesh and the blood of your blood, and anyone who threatens them must die. Oh, she's brown and so are your flesh and blood. That's how it worked for me.

 

[Mensch]

True, anyone who does not agree on equally reciprocal political right on the racial base is racially biased. A more formal term is then racist. This can be true in the past and true in the future. If you insist that there is no race among human beings, your declaration of racism has no base to exist. Therefore, accusing white racism in the past is a false accusation. Do you agree? You cannot see no races and found race at the same time. This is a plain logic.

Gay men can recognize the beauty of women without being heterosexual. I recognize the issue of race only as a social construction. I wasn’t born yesterday. If I denounce the flat earth theory, does that mean I can no longer recognize the existence of such a theory? Race is a theory. It is a social construction used specifically to self-identify oneself in relation to “others.” By recognizing what you are not, you are using that measurement to identify your own sense of self. If you’ve read anything about the history of race theory and racism, you’ll discover that Anglo-Americans in the late 1800s were calling Irish immigrants “blacks.” Yet today, you as a self-identifying white male would not even think to consider an Irish immigrant “black.”

My point is exactly what you claim: human beings have differences but that doesn't make us less human. However, why did this government allow the black to openly chant “kill the white crackers” on the street without consequence, the same thing is definitely disallowed if the whites are to do the same thing: to chant “kill the niggers” As a matter of fact, calling them Negro is offensive; even the term color people may make someone upset. Isn’t this government already implying white being less human?

Maybe we’re disagreeing right off the bat on the concept of free speech. I believe we shouldn’t do anything to tear away at the fabric of this delicate human right. There should be no repercussions for haters to speak hatred and for good people to speak goodness. It is their First Amendment right to speak freely, without exceptions.

How can the discussion be continued if you already assume the majority must be a wolf but the minority must be a sheep? Has the majority in America “eaten” Obama so that he cannot be a president?

No, but that is only because the majority are currently less racist than they’ve ever been. The viewpoints of the majority change from day-to-day. So long as the majority is happy, friendly, and openly tolerant of the views and the free existence of minorities, it will continue to hear their views and allow them to partake in the political process. If they’re not, then we’re talking about a far more oppressive majority. Democracy, by itself, does not protect the freedom of minorities.

For example, fully escorting illegal immigrants is one of such fake democracy.

That is true only from the perspective of your nationalistic, xenophobic worldview.

Allowing homosexual persecuting straight people is another example.

I’m sorry. I must have missed that one. Fill me in.

Allowing prisoners to enjoy full health care benefit while hard working people outside of the prison may not enjoy the same thing

The government is not responsible for providing healthcare to free individuals. It is responsible for providing such care to prisoners because prisoners are slaves of the state. It’s called cruel and unusual punishment. Read the constitution.

You are half right about my view. When we talk about majority or minority in democracy, we must also talk about the quality of the groups. You are damn right the majority of non drug abusers must oppress the minority of drug abusers.

Wrong. The government does not have jurisdiction over my body, my mind, or my personal decisions that affects only me. Individuals should have the right to consume whatever substance they wish to consume, to purchase sex, to sell their organs, or to gamble and drive cars that are not equipped with seatbelts or airbags. Personal safety and personal risk are decisions to be made by the individual, not by the state.

The peaceful majority must oppress the criminal minority for genuine democracy to continue. If any race does not want to be discriminated or oppressed, reduce the incarceration rate from their own race; make themselves more human, but not make others less human and suffer.

You just said that you don’t believe being of a different group means you’re less. The only individuals who should be oppressed in society are those who violate the specific natural human rights of other citizens.

It is very true; but it is not how our government practices nowadays. Black obviously has far more advantages than white. The advantage in most cases is not what they earned by their capacity but stipulated by law or by selective application of law by some “non-racist” authority.

I’ve already said I’m against ethnic or racial subsidies. I don’t mind if private groups and private organizations attempt to provide scholarships and aid to those in their own group, but I do not believe it the role of government to take from everyone’s pocket to subsidize a certain minority.

Again, you are half true. All I can say is that evolution has many convincing points, but should not be placed in an absolute authority place. It is so absolute nowadays that it begins to expel our law that laid by our Christian Founding fathers.

Which laws? You should really read up on the Deist views of our founders.

Let me ask you: What make the evolutionist eligible to claim that all humans are originated from Africa? You may say that so many fossil evidences have been found in Africa. This has been an overwhelmed belief. However, this is also parallel to saying that a cemetery is a good place to find someone’s birthplace. An opposite question is that what evidence do they have to refute someone’s claim that Africans’ ancestors actually came from non African continent?

Here’s a logical fallacy. You cannot prove a negative! The evidence exists that the ancestors of humans originated in Africa. There is no evidence to indicate that they originated in the Americas or in Asia or in Europe.

[/quote]Another question: why does natural selection must leave us five digits on each of our limb, not four or not six? There is no evidence to prove that 4 or 6 digits will be less fit in nature.[/quote]

Again, you’re trying to prove a negative. However, let me ask you the following: Why does God give us an appendix and wisdom teeth? Is he teaching them a lesson by giving them human appendages with no proven usage except to provide pain and in some cases, death (appendicitis) to humans?

Similar to assuming majority being a wolf, you force another hypothesis on me. There are many breeds of dogs, but it does not make one breed being less dog than the other breed. On the other hand, different breeds of dogs have different personality; it is a fact no one can deny. Instead of asking “Does that mean that African-Americans have evolved into a completely different species?” You question becomes more accessible and sound if you use “path” to replace “species”. In your mind, you already have a “no longer homo sapiens” image for them to match and assume me doing the same thing. When an employer hires someone, he must scrutinize this someone’s credential. The credential of more that 10,000 years of history has presented to us that whites/Caucasians converted Europe with European landscape, Negro converted Africa with African landscape. So far, we found no exception. A beautiful Detroit has become a sub-African city; New Orlene is on the way. Another credential is that people risk anything to join the place that has European landscape if they happen to be born in place that is not so. Tell me some example that people risk anything to join the place that is African landscaped.

If you give a man enough rope, he’ll hang himself.

Culture is a result of brain activity. Animals has no culture. The major factor distinguishing human beings from animals is culture. The culture difference between black and white must tell the consequence of brain activity.

Culture is not a result of a single brain activity. Culture is another social construction that develops from sociological circumstances.

I partially believe evolution, I am not a religious fellow. However, I feel extremely sorry that whites and Christians are gradually cornered in this country. With the situation so continuing, America will be gone. Too many people already see today’s America as yesterday’s Rome.

Then the National Association for the Advancement of White People (NAAWP) is really meant for you.

Then, the genetic theories should be thrown to the trash can.

Why?

The danger for the white is that they gradually drift to be minority. With the hatred the minority shown against them today, the white must face disaster tomorrow if they don’t prepare ahead of time.

I don’t feel like debating a member of the National Aryan Alliance.

 

[tryreading]

I happen to notice a title in the sub-forum: White Supremacy: A growing power? White supremacy? What a joke! Black supremacy has been flooding over the brim in America while the whites as a race is dying, but whites are still accused of exercising supremacy. Brains from all races are so corrupted in this country, no wonder this country has lost so much power to the Socialist China so rapidly. Sure, any dying person can stuff his brain with pride. It is said that Queen Louie XVI of France still felt her being superior while being forced to step on the guillotine platform. I really fail to see how supremacy works for a person who must die at another person's will. Blacks have been defined as a superior race by nature and by law in this country, who has supremacy? let's see some facts:
1. They have expelled all competitors of other races in all athletic competition where physical power is a dominating factor. No affirmative action is allowed or even proposed for any other race in this field.
2. In all competitions where brain power is the major element, affirmative action must be there for them to reap benefit. The affirmative action can be so abusive that vacancy must be reserved for them regardless how many qualified whites must be barred.
3. They can openly spread hatred against white, shout to kill white crackers in church, on streets, on TV, wave base ball bat at the voting station, declaring that this country will be dominated by blacks. So far, no law can touch them. Can the whites do the same thing to the blacks? Try it, white baby. The black supremacy will have law to smash any white doing things even close at no time. Why must Michael Williams be expelled from Tea Party? Because the Balck supremacy makes the whites' knees buckle.
4. The blacks can have NAACP, what do the whites have? Or what can they have?
5. Over all the whites are the major contributors of high tax, but the blacks are the major recipients of welfare checks that are derived on the tax. This phenomenon is forbidden by law to appear as statist quote in government documents. The overall effect of such paying and receiving is that the whites are forced to pay someone to push the whites to extinction.
The list can go on.
Skinheads? Why can't people see it as a resultant product of oppression asserted by black supremacy? Whites as a race have been either cornered or committing suicide. If this country continues to blindly appease one race while purposely oppresses the other race, racial war bound to explode someday. It is dangerous. White supremacy is a term that is either a blabbing by the whites during their dream or a created reason for further persecution pushed forward by the Black supremacy. Remember the famous accusation "AIDS is invented by whites to kill blacks"? Dreadful!

This thread completely fails from the first sentence. Dude, the Supremes were black.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Basic genetics dictates that we'll all be a basic shade of brown in the centuries to come.

I am pretty sure this is not true. IIRC, with a more heterogeneous input I think the output gains more variability, not less.

 

[Hoplite]

Ok I find this very difficult to let slide anymore

If you insist that there is no race among human beings, your declaration of racism has no base to exist. Therefore, accusing white racism in the past is a false accusation. Do you agree? You cannot see no races and found race at the same time. This is a plain logic.

Simply because something exists only within human society doesnt mean you cant recognize it when someone in that society is prejudiced against it. Sexuality is a perfect example.

However, why did this government allow the black to openly chant “kill the white crackers” on the street without consequence, the same thing is definitely disallowed if the whites are to do the same thing: to chant “kill the niggers” As a matter of fact, calling them Negro is offensive; even the term color people may make someone upset. Isn’t this government already implying white being less human?

Considering the KKK can freely hold rallies without being shut down, your point seems to be incorrect.

Allowing homosexual persecuting straight people is another example.

Ok, no one in America is persecuted. Least of all heterosexual people.

Black obviously has far more advantages than white. The advantage in most cases is not what they earned by their capacity but stipulated by law or by selective application of law by some “non-racist” authority.

I never really understood this claim. Where are all these benefits that I supposedly get or are deprived of by being white?

Again, you are half true. All I can say is that evolution has many convincing points, but should not be placed in an absolute authority place. It is so absolute nowadays that it begins to expel our law that laid by our Christian Founding fathers.

Oi, a Creationist? Seriously?

Let me ask you: What make the evolutionist eligible to claim that all humans are originated from Africa? You may say that so many fossil evidences have been found in Africa. This has been an overwhelmed belief. However, this is also parallel to saying that a cemetery is a good place to find someone’s birthplace.

Ok, I know this might be a shock to someone who apparently isnt familiar with science, but we CAN test these things.

Another question: why does natural selection must leave us five digits on each of our limb, not four or not six? There is no evidence to prove that 4 or 6 digits will be less fit in nature.

Actually what's important is our opposable thumbs. We have five fingers because natural selection favored our ancestors who had five digits.

There are many breeds of dogs, but it does not make one breed being less dog than the other breed. On the other hand, different breeds of dogs have different personality; it is a fact no one can deny. Instead of asking “Does that mean that African-Americans have evolved into a completely different species?”

Ok, this doesnt even BEGIN to make sense.

The credential of more that 10,000 years of history has presented to us that whites/Caucasians converted Europe with European landscape, Negro converted Africa with African landscape

Guns, Germs, and Steel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Culture is a result of brain activity.

Guess again, culture is the glue that holds a social group together through shared identity.

I partially believe evolution, I am not a religious fellow.

Wait wait wait, you're not religious yet you discount evolution....

Then, the genetic theories should be thrown to the trash can.

Except they have the benefit of, y'know, proof.

Here, you force hypothesis again. A small difference and a big difference is not equal difference.

This makes absolutely no sense.

The danger for the white is that they gradually drift to be minority. With the hatred the minority shown against them today, the white must face disaster tomorrow if they don’t prepare ahead of time.

Hatred? Where exactly are you looking?

I live in an area that is primarily black with large pockets of Armenian and Latino populations. As a white guy, I feel absolutely zero animosity from any of the aforementioned groups as long as I treat the people in these groups with some degree of respect.

I personally can find far more wisdom from Mani in Brotherhood of the Wolf concerning race than your entire post; "All women have same color when candle is out"

I am pretty sure this is not true. IIRC, with a more heterogeneous input I think the output gains more variability, not less.

I may be incorrect about it, but as the differing pigmentation genes of our skins mix more freely, we assume a more neutral color.

Think of it sort of like paint, mix enough different colors in and you eventually will end up with a neutral color.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

I may be incorrect about it, but as the differing pigmentation genes of our skins mix more freely, we assume a more neutral color.

Think of it sort of like paint, mix enough different colors in and you eventually will end up with a neutral color.

But people don't get an average of their ancestors genes. They get specifics they ones.

If you increase the amount of possible combinations, you increase the number of possible outcomes. It doesn't average out.

If you throw a bunch of crayons into a bag and then select two of them at random, you'll get a combination of two crayons. The more crayons that are in the bag doesn't mean that suddenly every combination will produce the same thing. It means that there will be a greater variety of combinations.

 

[Hoplite]

But people don't get an average of their ancestors genes. They get specifics they ones.

If you increase the amount of possible combinations, you increase the number of possible outcomes. It doesn't average out.

If you throw a bunch of crayons into a bag and then select two of them at random, you'll get a combination of two crayons. The more crayons that are in the bag doesn't mean that suddenly every combination will produce the same thing. It means that there will be a greater variety of combinations.

In microcosm yes, but when this is done across an entire population, the net result over successive generations is a blending of skin tones.

 

[crebigsol]

Gay men can recognize the beauty of women without being heterosexual... I don’t feel like debating a member of the National Aryan Alliance.

Out debate seems extending beyond bound, although I would like to continue. I believe neither of us would have time to endlessly dwell in it. I am making a website that would have a specific topic on what we have discussed. Give me another 3 months. When it is completed, I would like to extend my invitation to you to visit. If you are interested, we can continue then. Of course, you can decide freely whether you want to visit at all.

Before I completely leave the topic here, please allow me to make a brief comment on your most current response.

All your point of views are based on that the freedom or democracy that we can enjoy today would still be there tomorrow because the yesterday's America is there forever with good health. With the acceleration rate of downhill rolling that we can see about the US today, I really don't knnow how long she can still be there. A simple question, why the once richest country in the world all of a sudden has become the biggest debtor of the once almost the poorest country? It has taken only 30 years for this to become reality. Are we sure, with the present condition continuing, we can clear the huge national debt some day?
As to evolution, I said I partially believe it. So, I am not going to refute what you propose in your argument. On the other hand, saying the entire human species coming out of Africa is unacceptable to me. I am not saying this based on prejudice toward or against some race, I am saying this because I have detected too manay assumptions from the evolution theory about human's evolution. One big assumption is that we all were originated from tree tops. To me, this is absolutely wrong. Our ancestors have been living in water ever since there ware primates. You don't believe what I say here, I know. This is another topic I would propose in my website. Hope I can meet you there.

Thanks

 

[crebigsol]

…
Hatred? Where exactly are you looking?
…
I live in an area that is primarily black with large pockets of Armenian and Latino populations. As a white guy, I feel absolutely zero animosity from any of the aforementioned groups as long as I treat the people in these groups with some degree of respect.

“Kill the white crackers”
“AIDS is invented by the white to kill the black”
“God damned America”
“Some whites said ‘do not hold me accountable for what my ancestors did’, but you are the beneficiaries!”
What can I say to a man who has no feeling when a whip is flying over his head. Ronald Reagan once said: “There is a quick way to get peace: surrender.”

 

[LizardofOz]

“Kill the white crackers”
“AIDS is invented by the white to kill the black”
“God damned America”
“Some whites said ‘do not hold me accountable for what my ancestors did’, but you are the beneficiaries!”
What can I say to a man who has no feeling when a whip is flying over his head. Ronald Reagan once said: “There is a quick way to get peace: surrender.”

I'm almost certain now you are just a troll. If not, I am sorry you didn't have better parents.

 

[Hoplite]

“Kill the white crackers”
“AIDS is invented by the white to kill the black”
“God damned America”
“Some whites said ‘do not hold me accountable for what my ancestors did’, but you are the beneficiaries!”
What can I say to a man who has no feeling when a whip is flying over his head. Ronald Reagan once said: “There is a quick way to get peace: surrender.”

I've heard equally stupid and hateful things out of the mouths of all people of all races and all colors, why should I focus more on these things when they are said by someone of a different race than I?

They're equally stupid no matter who is saying it, why give it any weight at all?

 

[crebigsol]

I'm almost certain now you are just a troll. If not, I am sorry you didn't have better parents.

In case you are assuming you have better parents and I don't, I am sorry you have betrayed them, if not the direct one, it should be the grand-ones (if your photo is really your portrait, though.) (OOPs, if it is not, you have betrayed even further.)

 

[crebigsol]

I've heard equally stupid and hateful things out of the mouths of all people of all races and all colors, why should I focus more on these things when they are said by someone of a different race than I?

They're equally stupid no matter who is saying it, why give it any weight at all?

You don't have to, indeed. But you cannot stop someone else from weighing or using it, or them. It is how it works: "This farm belongs to us now, leave." Then, without a gun shot, without even hatred expression from the orderer, a white farm owner had to pack and leave. This has not happened in America, because the condition has not "matured". Before the condition matures, you are still protected by the not yet completely crumbled country.