lictor616 Posted September 8, 2009 Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 (edited) sample this miniclip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHmHYk_P22w...feature=related I,d like to know your thoughts. Edited September 8, 2009 by lictor616 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted September 8, 2009 Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 sample this miniclip:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHmHYk_P22w...feature=related I,d like to know your thoughts. It is poorly put together...not a lot of intellect in this message - just the usuall parroting of the white power thing - same old same old - Family loyaltiy is important - as is the extended loyality to the family tribe - family first - but if a black man gains my trust - he is family also...If a black man or a jew or a muslim breach my trust - they are out of the loop...I don't care who you are - If you are good - You are in - If you are bad - you can get lost and go to hell - and I don't care how white you are....BUT the blonde pale eyed race will be extinct soon _ I suggest to the white folks not to be gayified - and breed...breed or die as a family - Blonde and pale is very beautiful _ all of my children were such ---some want to interbreed into my family because they are ashamed of not being as white - that's fine - and some - Look at me with my grey blonde hair and beard - and want to kill me _ I look like the king of Caucasia....cos' I am... But I will give you a break if you are good ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted September 8, 2009 Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 There's nothing wrong with white pride. As the video points out, there is much to be proud of. But the video also does make several statements that I disagree with. I for one see no particular benefit to the concept of "racial identity". Yes, any individual human is a member of a given race (or mixture of races), but this does not necessarily have to be a significant part of their identity. In fact, in a society like the US, for example, I think people identifying too much with their race and not enough with other things is more a problem than anything. Identity can come from many things - what one has achieved, one's culture, who one loves, one's political and philosophical views, etc, it does not have to be founded on race. If society thought more in these terms, rather than race-based quotas and affirmative action, we'd be a lot better off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted September 8, 2009 Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 I think there are "pride" movements out there for other races because whites have conquered their lands, enslaved other races, empowered them, and generally made them feel inferior. I don't recall whites ever being subjected to this by other races, hence there's really no need for "white pride" movements since whites have never, to my knowledge, felt, thought, or been made to feel, inferior to other races. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted September 8, 2009 Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 I think there are "pride" movements out there for other races because whites have conquered their lands, enslaved other races, empowered them, and generally made them feel inferior. I don't recall whites ever being subjected to this by other races, hence there's really no need for "white pride" movements since whites have never, to my knowledge, felt, thought, or been made to feel, inferior to other races. Except now, when racial guilt is ascribed to all white people and they are forced to atone for the perceived wrongs of previous generations, even if those generations were not their own ancestors. And of course there are plenty of examples of white populations being conquered or enslaved by non-white forces throughout history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted September 8, 2009 Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 I think there are "pride" movements out there for other races because whites have conquered their lands, enslaved other races, empowered them, and generally made them feel inferior. Umm.. Slavery isn't the sole domain of "white" people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted September 8, 2009 Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 Except now, when racial guilt is ascribed to all white people and they are forced to atone for the perceived wrongs of previous generations, even if those generations were not their own ancestors. And of course there are plenty of examples of white populations being conquered or enslaved by non-white forces throughout history. Could you define "white" here? Who do you mean? Do you mean Europeans? The only real cases I can think of that might be close to what you claim are the Tartar conquests of the Rus and the Muslim conquest of Spain (I don't count the Turkish conquests of Greece and the Caucasus, because while the Turks might ethnically and linguistically be independent of these regions, they were very much a Mediterranean and Near East peoples closely related to those they conquered). Europe was always somewhat insulated from the rest of the Old World because it was essentially a mountain-walled peninsula. Invasions were rather difficult, and required either coming up from the Mediterranean or across the Central Asian Steppe, no small feat. The Chinese civilization was always much more vulnerable because it simply did not have the natural defenses to fend off surrounding groups, so they were overrun by their neighbors a number of times (the final time being the Manchurians, before the ethnic Han finally regained full control of the area after the last Manchu Emperor was deposed). Most of the invading of "whites" seems to me to have happened by other "whites", if you define "whites" as being Europeans. Maybe you have some other definition, I dunno. It sure wasn't Africans or Arabs who toppled poor old Harold and marched in a bunch of Norman French into England. It sure wasn't Africans or Arabs that marched into Rome and deposed Romulus Augustulus. Don't recall any Arabs or Africans invading Belgium to get at France. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Posted September 8, 2009 Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 I don't take a lot of pride just for picking my grandparents. I have much respect for what the CULTURE of my British heritage has brought to the world, from steam engines to British Law and systems of government! However, my ancestors did that, not me. I've always felt that I'm on my own! It's up to me as an individual to do something worthy of pride. Nobody should hand it to me because of my race or the folks I hang around with. I've never felt part of some "tribe". To me, if you have to take pride in your "tribe" accomplishments then you're not doing enough yourself! That's also why I don't feel any "white" guilt. Again, that's a tribal thing. If it wasn't me that did something and I feel no right to take credit then it logically follows that I feel no obligation to take any blame. This is also the way I treat others. I COULD give some of my black friends a hard time, if I wanted. After all, they gave us Jimi Hendrix and rock and roll. Also B B King, who is GOD! Then they followed it up with disco and hiphop! Still, that would be tribal and I just can't see the logic in that. I only discriminate against those black friends that listen to hiphop. They're still my friends, I just feel very, very sorry for them! So when I hear racism I just tune it out, like some fundamentalist Christian trying to tell me the world was created in 4004 B.C. or some such illogical drivel. I WILL debate positives and negatives between various cultures! Culture has little or nothing to do with race, except by happenstance. Raise an Inuit child in Somalia and you'll have just another Somali who looks a bit different from the rest. His culture will be the same, determined by his upbringing. So again, screw the whole racial pride thing, white, black, yellow or green. It's getting to be a Star Trek world very quickly. Nobody cares about your race when we need someone trained and educated enough to fly a starship. If you don't get the job, it's not gonna be because of your race. It will be because we need someone who spent enough time at school learning science and technology. A degree in the Koran or Christian divinity won't cut it. Nor will just being white! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted September 8, 2009 Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 Umm.. Slavery isn't the sole domain of "white" people. I didn't say it was. But what other race enslaved white people? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted September 8, 2009 Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 Could you define "white" here? Who do you mean? Do you mean Europeans? The only real cases I can think of that might be close to what you claim are the Tartar conquests of the Rus and the Muslim conquest of Spain Two examples right there. What's wrong with those? (I don't count the Turkish conquests of Greece and the Caucasus, because while the Turks might ethnically and linguistically be independent of these regions, they were very much a Mediterranean and Near East peoples closely related to those they conquered). Debatable, but hardly relevant, you've already named two examples. The fall of the Byzantines to the Ottomans is another example in the same region. The demise of the crusader kingdoms yet another. I'm sure many more could be dug up with some googling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted September 8, 2009 Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 I didn't say it was. But what other race enslaved white people? The point I'm getting at is that I don't see how it matters. If "white" people are to feel guilty for enslaving others, why then should the others that enslaved still others not be made to feel guilt for doing so? In other words, the blame game is a ridiculous exercise; just about everybody enslaved somebody at some point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 8, 2009 Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 I didn't say it was. But what other race enslaved white people? Technically? Mongols.....so that would be Asians and others if you insist on a race label. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 8, 2009 Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 The point I'm getting at is that I don't see how it matters. If "white" people are to feel guilty for enslaving others, why then should the others that enslaved still others not be made to feel guilt for doing so? In other words, the blame game is a ridiculous exercise; just about everybody enslaved somebody at some point. Almost true....slavery was rampant in the pre-Columbian Americas, Africa, Asia, etc. That's because slavery is largely an economic system having little to do with racial hatred. "Whites" were also "enslaved" as indentured servants in Europe and the Americas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted September 8, 2009 Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 ....I don't feel any "white" guilt. Again, that's a tribal thing. If it wasn't me that did something and I feel no right to take credit then it logically follows that I feel no obligation to take any blame. I don't feel any guilt, either; but I think people can recognize that wrongs have been done without feeling guilt, since they personally had nothing to do with it. Guilt is a waste of energy and emotion that could be channeled towards accomplishing positive things. So my comments in no way meant we should feel guilt. But I do understand why races that have been put down do try to encourage "pride." If they've experienced the opposite, then they should learning to be proud of who they are. I think whites have had that "pride" as a race all along. I don't recall from history whites as a race ever being downtrodden, treated as inferior, or told that they were inferior -- thus made to feel inferior. So I really don't see the need for "white pride" movements. I think generally people who are all about white pride are just having a difficult time dealing with the fact that other races aren't feeling inferior; aren't seeing themselves as inferior. I think they believe that whites should be held as 'superior.' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted September 8, 2009 Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 .... I think generally people who are all about white pride are just having a difficult time dealing with the fact that other races aren't feeling inferior; aren't seeing themselves as inferior. I think they believe that whites should be held as 'superior.' In the harshest formats...yes. But it is a natural human behavior to lament the loss of power or privilege which is actually defined in terms of such "superiority" at many levels. The same thing happens/happened for women's rights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charter.rights Posted September 8, 2009 Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 Lictor666 is confused in the OP. Race is a construct of a false superiority complex. One cannot have pride in their race since it does not exist in the context it as been presented. However, it is possible to have pride in one's culture or nation but since Canadians as a rule do not have a culture distinguishable from others they have inherited ( or adopted) it is difficult to put a finger on any "Caucasian" or Anglo-European culture in Canada. So really this entire thread is nothing but a red herring in an attempt by Lictor666 to get others to accept his persistent bigoted diatribe, which has no basis in fact, truth or in any form of reality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lictor616 Posted September 8, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 (edited) Lictor666 is confused in the OP.Race is a construct of a false superiority complex. One cannot have pride in their race since it does not exist in the context it as been presented. However, it is possible to have pride in one's culture or nation but since Canadians as a rule do not have a culture distinguishable from others they have inherited ( or adopted) it is difficult to put a finger on any "Caucasian" or Anglo-European culture in Canada. So really this entire thread is nothing but a red herring in an attempt by Lictor666 to get others to accept his persistent bigoted diatribe, which has no basis in fact, truth or in any form of reality. "lictor666"... wow. Culture is a construct... (actually race isn't a "social construct" at all, it is independent of any setting, geographical religious, cultural or otherwise.... race is an immutable fact). So is it ok then to be proud of a culture? Since it is "socially constructed"? Also race is no figment of the imagination as you seem to suggest... race is an immediate and real faculty.... no one looks at wesley snipes wondering if he is black or asian... they know instantly... To quote no less a biological evolutionary scientist then Ernst Mayr, "perhaps the greatest evolutionary scientist of the twentieth century", might be called the Linnaeus of the Modern Synthesis {neo-Darwinism}, his Systematics and the Origin of Species set forth the biological species concept still in use today, with large utility for explaining speciation. Mayr was quoted stating the fact of human races {Winter 2002. Vol. 131, pg. 89}, in which he suffers no fools from the "race does not exist" camp: "There are words in our language that seem to lead inevitably to controversy. This is surely true for the words "equality" and "race." And yet among well informed people, there is little disagreement as to what these words should mean, in part because various advances in biological science have produced a better understanding of the human condition. Let me begin with race. There is a widespread feeling that the word "race" indicates something undesirable and that it should be left out of all discussions. This leads to such statements as "there are no human races." Those who subscribe to this opinion are obviously ignorant of modern biology. Races are not something specifically human; races occur in a large percentage of species of animals. You can read in every textbook on evolution that geographic races of animals, when isolated from other races of their species, may in due time become new species. The terms 11 subspecies" and "geographic race" are used interchangeably in this taxonomic literature. This at once raises a question: are there races in the human species? After all, the characteristics of most animal races are strictly genetic, while human races have been marked by nongenetic, cultural attributes that have very much affected their overt characteristics. Performance in human activities is influenced not only by the genotype but also by culturally acquired attitudes. What would be ideal, therefore, would be to partition the phenotype of every human individual into genetic and cultural components. Alas, so far we have not yet found any reliable technique to do this. What we can do is acknowledge that any recorded differences between human races are probably composed of cultural as well as genetic elements. Indeed, the cause of many important group differences may turn out to be entirely cultural, without any genetic component at all. Still, if I introduce you to an Eskimo and a Kalahari Bushman I won't have much trouble convincing you that they belong to different races. In a recent textbook of taxonomy, I defined a "geographic race" or subspecies as "an aggregate of phenotypically similar populations of a species inhabiting a geographic subdivision of the range of that species and differing taxonomically from other populations of that species." A subspecies is a geographic race that is sufficiently different taxonomically to be worthy of a separate name. What is characteristic of a geographic race is, first, that it is restricted to a geographic subdivision of the range of a species, and second, that in spite of certain diagnostic differences, it is part of a larger species. No matter what the cause of the racial difference might be, the fact that species of organisms may have geographic races has been demonstrated so frequently that it can no longer be denied. And the geographic races of the human races established before the voyages of European discovery and subsequent rise of a global economy - agree in most characteristics with the geographic races of animals. Recognizing races is only recognizing a biological fact. Only a person impudent enough to reject Darwinian evolution and biology can deny the fact of race... One cannot simultaneously believe in Darwinian evolution and deny the reality of races and or "sub-races" a by-product of differentiation through human evolution." http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/001951.html Edited September 8, 2009 by lictor616 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lictor616 Posted September 8, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 so far most people have voted to have pride for one's race is not reasonable and not justifiable... some of you (most notably the leftists elements) where actually hostile to such a concept. Now I must pose a follow up question: Given the fact that racial pride is seen as deleterious and baneful, how many of you will resist the forced program of black history month.. in the US as well as in Canada? I know that none of you EVER in these boards have voiced your concern on it.. but now that you recognize that racial pride is a no-no, how many of you will oppose the most influential manifestations of it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted September 8, 2009 Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 Also race is no figment of the imagination as you seem to suggest... race is an immediate and real faculty.... Race is indeed a human concept (and it certainly isn't a faculty - how is one's race an ability?), merely being but one construct of classification out of many. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted September 8, 2009 Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 Race is indeed a human concept All concepts are human concepts. We are the only species with the intelligence to come up with "concepts". That doesn't make them any less existent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter F Posted September 8, 2009 Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 Given the fact that racial pride is seen as deleterious and baneful, how many of you will resist the forced program of black history month.. in the US as well as in Canada? I know that none of you EVER in these boards have voiced your concern on it.. but now that you recognize that racial pride is a no-no, how many of you will oppose the most influential manifestations of it? Not I. Whats wrong with teaching Black History? or any other history for that matter? Since when has the teaching of history become a manifestation of pride? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lictor616 Posted September 8, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 Race is indeed a human concept (and it certainly isn't a faculty - how is one's race an ability?), merely being but one construct of classification out of many. race is a cluster of genes.... or to put it bluntly of genetically encoded building blocks which specific charateristic affecting all range of human faculties... from susceptibility to specific disease, acuity of vision etc... Genes are very much responsible and controlling for many ... actually ALL human faculties. obviously it follows therefore that race (described as a cluster of genes and therefore traits ) are determinant of many human faculties (physical, mental and otherwise). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter F Posted September 8, 2009 Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 sample this miniclip:I,d like to know your thoughts. I think the thing is bunk. Somebody somewhere does a remarkable thing and somehow that persons abilities and acheivements become mine. Michealangelo or Donatello or whatever sculpts a beutiful statue and somehow that reflects upon my abilities and talents - why? Because he was white and so am I! The whole concept of 'racial pride' is bunk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lictor616 Posted September 8, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 Not I. Whats wrong with teaching Black History? or any other history for that matter?Since when has the teaching of history become a manifestation of pride? Well, you see the clip I showed was very much like a celebration of White history... it wasn't hateful towards other races (in fact it said nothing of other races)... and yet no one here found it acceptable... Black history is the same ... it forces us to look at the achievements of a particular race and pardon my cynicism ... but do you expect me to believe that you do not think that Black History is source of pride for blacks? The movement's orginal purpose was to give to blacks a sense of racial pride and group achievement: the official website : http://www.biography.com/blackhistory/blac...story-month.jsp says: "The Black Power Movement of the 1970s emphasized racial pride and the significance of collective cultural values. This prompted the ASNLH, now called the Association for the Study of African American Life and History, to change Negro History Week to Black History Week. In 1976, they extended the week to a month-long observance." but since you say that the teaching of history is not necessarily "a manifestation of pride"... would you agree (for the sake of equality) to grant us a White History Month? highlighting mainly the racial achievements of white people (as a group)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lictor616 Posted September 8, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 8, 2009 Race is indeed a human concept (and it certainly isn't a faculty - how is one's race an ability?), merely being but one construct of classification out of many. i direct you over to this thread: http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....showtopic=14909 It shows you how much of a construction EGALITARIANISM IS... Race a social construct (my eye!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.