Is this message reasonable? Why not?

[Peter F]

no one claims to co-opt these "inventions"

No, we get to claim membership of the extended family of all those brilliant minds.

I don't know how you misconstrue that as anything else...

And all that is fine with me. I have no complaint or criticism about that. There's nothin wrong with any of that.

Personally I get a jolly of telling my kids that thier great-great-grandparents were very probably taking potshots at each other

at Montmorency Falls in 1759.

But that doesnt explain why you think its important for others to know that everything they have or ever will have (or more acurately wont have) is because White Culture.

Its good for you to have an afinity with past generations - but no black guy or native should know that warm-fuzzy and if they do get that warm-fuzzy they better be told how false and feeble it is.

EDIT to add:

For example:

Lictor:

For instance, one of the special charms that Aesop's Fables holds for me is the knowledge that Alexander the Great, for example, had read exactly these same compiled fables when he was a child, more than 2,400 years ago.

When we are told about the boy who cried, wolf, The Mischievous Dog, and think about the lessons these stories teach, it should thrill us to think that nearly every great man in Western history, for thousands of years, had read these same stories as children and had learned the same lessons.

Thats good. Unfortunatly I cant claim the same. My forebears probably never heard a single Aesop fable until maybe a generation or two ago. These forebears living in the Scottish Highlands or perhaps the fjiords of Norway long before any tales of Aesop made thier way to them, let alone them knowing how to read or knowing someone who could read greek/latin and not reading the bible to them instead of Aesops fables.

So, that being so, and me being as white as you, then what shared values and affinity would we have regarding Alexander the Great and other noble white guys?

The fact is that for me to buy into that is to pull the wool over mine own eyes and beleive in a myth.

But I can deal with that. I have no problem coming from a long line of savages who certainly never invented a goddamned thing as far as I know. What they did or didn't do has no bearing on what I am or am not.

Edited September 9, 2009 by Peter F

[Peter F]

Yes, I can agree that racism exists, and I know that it does indeed have life in Japan. But the question is not whether racism exists at all; rather, it's: is what's called racism always actually racism?

I am pondering that same question.

[g_bambino]

yes mulattos most certainly is a racial classification. as is métis...

How can "mixed-race" be a race?

[Bonam]

I am pondering that same question.

The answer should be obvious. People cry racism all the time. At least some of the time the cry must be false. Or do you think every person that ever accuses another of racism has perfect powers of perception and discernment, and not once has ever anyone erred when making such an allegation?

I would go further and say that by far the overwhelming majority of accusations of racism are not, in fact, racism, but that's just my opinion.

[Bonam]

How can "mixed-race" be a race?

Which part of the concept escapes you?

[Guest TrueMetis]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solutrean_hypothesis

Alright so we've got a group that makes up 3% of Native Americans. How does the prove that Europeans settled North America Lictor? What about the blondes in peru?

[kimmy]

I don't see a problem with Black History Month in the United States. Given the history of the nation and the historical role race has played in the divisions that persist to this day in the United States, I think an understanding of the history of black people in the United States is probably an important thing for all Americans to have.

Now, we don't have the same history in Canada, but we have the same divisions, and I don't actually know of the historical reasons why, so maybe that's an argument in favor of having a Black History Month in Canada too. I dunno. Is there enough black history in Canada to merit a whole month of study? I honestly couldn't answer that question.

Should there be a white history month? I personally don't see much point. While it was never explicitly called white history, there's a tacit understanding that most historic events and achievements relevant to the history of our society are indeed the result of white people.

I recall reading once where some academic was advocating that *all* courses should have a non-European history compoment. Science courses would spend a lecture going over scientific achievements of non-European societies, like ancient African kilns that could bake ore hotter enough to extract iron at a time when Europeans were still living in caves and trying to figure out if rocks were edible. And I thought "you know, that's a load of crap." If I'm signed up for a physics course, I'm there to learn about physics, not African kilns.

I don't really need a "white pride" movement to pump up my feelings over my ancestry; I've never not felt pride. I've never had the experience of having someone suggest that I'm a lesser human being because of my European ancestry. (well, except for charter-rights, but she barely counts for anything.)

I have, however, experienced on many occasions where people tried to make me feel inferior because of my hair color. Therefore, I've organized my own little "power" group; we're prowling the streets and mercilessly taunting brunettes. Be warned.

-k

[lictor616]

How can "mixed-race" be a race?

Are you serious?

Hybrids are races!

The same way that two dog breeds interbreeding produce a DIFFERENT dog breed

the same way combining yellow and blue produces green...

the same way combining a 4 door saloon and an SUV makes a crossover...

[lictor616]

I have, however, experienced on many occasions where people tried to make me feel inferior because of my hair color. Therefore, I've organized my own little "power" group; we're prowling the streets and mercilessly taunting brunettes. Be warned.

-k

I personally find blonde jokes very obnoxious and sad. In some more extreme cases they are simply surreptitious hatred... and I'm almost certain that many minorities use them to air their hatred of the minority of ill-starred people who have hair that resembles spun gold... They like to put down and spit at what they can't produce.

My ex girlfriend used to nervously laugh at blonde jokes (she had very bright almost metallic blonde hair) it used to sadden me that her rare and beautiful hair wasn't a source of confidence and self-esteem.

And of course you're utterly right... put the shoe on the other foot... imagine if we say that kinky haired people were stupid... then the sky would be falling and all sorts of hate crimes would be investigated... and charter rights, and american woman, peterF and the like would all come howling in this forum to moan about "raaaay-cism"..

another double standard... .they're really starting to pile up

[lictor616]

Alright so we've got a group that makes up 3% of Native Americans. How does the prove that Europeans settled North America Lictor? What about the blondes in peru?

well they were there, first....

I could use the same argument you use against solutreans being the legitimate heirs to north america against OUR natives...

They constitute what 2% of our country and before Europeans, they weren't even really SETTLERS.... they were nomads, with a stone age culture and without the knowhow to "settle" the land...

ah but if I said that I suppose that would make me some sort of ogre...

[lictor616]

And all that is fine with me. I have no complaint or criticism about that. There's nothin wrong with any of that.

Personally I get a jolly of telling my kids that thier great-great-grandparents were very probably taking potshots at each other

at Montmorency Falls in 1759.

But that doesnt explain why you think its important for others to know that everything they have or ever will have (or more acurately wont have) is because White Culture.

Its good for you to have an afinity with past generations - but no black guy or native should know that warm-fuzzy and if they do get that warm-fuzzy they better be told how false and feeble it is.

EDIT to add:

For example:

Lictor:

Thats good. Unfortunatly I cant claim the same. My forebears probably never heard a single Aesop fable until maybe a generation or two ago. These forebears living in the Scottish Highlands or perhaps the fjiords of Norway long before any tales of Aesop made thier way to them, let alone them knowing how to read or knowing someone who could read greek/latin and not reading the bible to them instead of Aesops fables.

So, that being so, and me being as white as you, then what shared values and affinity would we have regarding Alexander the Great and other noble white guys?

The fact is that for me to buy into that is to pull the wool over mine own eyes and beleive in a myth.

But I can deal with that. I have no problem coming from a long line of savages who certainly never invented a goddamned thing as far as I know. What they did or didn't do has no bearing on what I am or am not.

Whether "black guys" can relate to Aesop's fables or Western Civilization is not really my concern. I do not presume to know what's best for blacks... I don't want to be involved with educating them, feeding them or telling them how to run their own lives (either here in canada) or in the regions of sub saharan africa. I think that past contact and history has shown us that we're not very mutually beneficial for each other... quite the contrary actually....

My problem is when the black presence combined with our policy of multiculturalism results in a situation where I'M NOT ALLOWED THE SAME RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES AS OTHER RACES. That results in an education system that is more concerned with therapy then actual EDUCATION:

Multiculturalists tell us that education can build the self-esteem of minority students by presenting non-White cultures in a favorable light in order to compensate for historical and curricular injustices thereby restoring cultural equality between racial groups. This is simply therapy packaged as education. Our multicult program aims to enhance self-esteem by teaching the students of so called aggrieved or "oppressed" cultures to be proud of their particular ancestry or race.

When education is turned into therapy, the automatic result is to teach history not to ascertain truth, or acquire useful knowledge but to empower (i.e., enhance the self-esteem) of various racial minority enclaves. The result is the introduction of distortions, half-truths, fabrications, and myths into the curriculum in order to make students from certain groups feel good.

For instance, at my cousin's school during Black history month, children had to thank the black students because black employment in canada during WW2 was deemed "crucial" to ammunition production in canada... and of course presumably we'd all be speaking german if it weren't for the handful of semi illiterate church ladies that pressed ammo... And so they had to write letters thanking one or another black person for whatever half baked drivel the "Educators" proposed (blacks were excused from the exercise).

If blacks have a history month to learn about the wonderful invention of peanut butter and are allowed to teach their children (THEIRS AND... OURS (!) in schools programs which strengthen their African identity and raise them as africans... then why is it unreasonable to ask the same for whites?

Not only is this deleterious to white children's self esteem, but it also undermines education

Academic standards of excellence are of no importance to the multiculturalists since they are seen as mere means of non-white oppression. We've all heard the tommyrot about how "IQ tests are racist"... Not only are objective testing denounced as culturally biased or even racist, but some more extreme multiculturalists demand that students be graded only within their cultural or racial group and/or that tests be redesigned so that minority students perform on the average as well as those in the dominant cultural group.

So far as i'm concerned, if black Canadians want to wear bubu's and learn swahili, let them. But it would behoove us to give the same deference to white children, and provide them with programs free of the log rolling clutter of multiculturalism... they shouldn't have to suffer: be looked as inferiors (their heritage and history scoffed at or ridiculed, their ancestors forgotten) and at the same time deny them a decent education...

Edited September 9, 2009 by lictor616

[charter.rights]

Alright so we've got a group that makes up 3% of Native Americans. How does the prove that Europeans settled North America Lictor? What about the blondes in peru?

The population of the Americas occurred 10,000 to 20,000 years before the population of Europe. While it is possible that ~some~ Europeans migrated here (just as ~some~ Asians did) long after it was originally occupied, it is more likely that Americans migrated to Europe.

Europeans actually are late-comers to the out of Africa migrations. On the evolutionary scale that would put them about 10,000 years behind Native Americans and 30,000 years behind Asians.

[charter.rights]

My point exactly. Would you want to carry the baggage of my ancestors? They're making us...

Volga Germans have no connection to the German beer festival. Volga Germans are from the German colony in Southern Russia which was granted by Katherine the Great back in the 1700s.

German is Caucasian. So by Lictor666's reasoning, Octoberfest IS another "White History Month".

We could probably take a number of such special days and say they cater to special white interests....now couldn't we....

[g_bambino]

Which part of the concept escapes you?

Which of the multitude of definitions of the word "race" we're all using, aparently. It would seem that the term can be applied to pretty much anything from physical characteristics on down to ethnic dress.

I do note, though, for lictor's sake, that that source defines race as a social construct.

_[+]

Edited September 9, 2009 by g_bambino

[g_bambino]

Now, we don't have the same history in Canada, but we have the same divisions, and I don't actually know of the historical reasons why, so maybe that's an argument in favor of having a Black History Month in Canada too.

That's an important but often overlooked fact to consider, and I sometimes suspect that the gradual Americanisation of Canada is bringing with it some historical revisionism; I've noted quotes in newspapers and online comments about the "Afri-centric" school in Toronto that reveal the orator's or author's belief that we're "re"-introducing segregated schools in Canada. Er... no. (Coincidentally, I recently came across a journal piece chronicling the 1860 tour of Canada by the Prince of Wales; in it is described a show of school children singing [things really do never change], and noting that "There was a large number of negro children, and with the exception of some attempt at classification at one end, white and black were generally mixed together."¹)

[M.Dancer]

The population of the Americas occurred 10,000 to 20,000 years before the population of Europe.

Maybe in fiction land...but humans have been in Europe for at least 50,000 years...that 20,000 years more than even the most generous credible evidence for north america.

[M.Dancer]

I,d like to know your thoughts.

My thought is this post violates the often not enforced no trolling rule.

NO TROLLING/FLAMING

Do not post inflammatory remarks just to annoy people. If you are not bringing anything new to the argument, then do not say anything at all.

Some messages are not so much offensive as simply nuisance value. An example would be a person who persistently creates conflict without contributing anything useful. In newsgroup circles, such a person is known as a "troll". We define "trolling" as a message that serves no constructive purpose and is likely to cause offence or arguments. We define "annoying" as any message that results in a complaint from a registered user -- we will then decide whether to take action.

The source of the video is from the white supremist site

http://www.natvan.com/

[GostHacked]

The same way that two dog breeds interbreeding produce a DIFFERENT dog breed

the same way combining yellow and blue produces green...

the same way combining a 4 door saloon and an SUV makes a crossover...

Many dogs cannot breed with each other. To much variation in the species. Humans don't seem to have that problem. We are all one race, one species.

This is one thing that bugs me when people talk about the Human Race. We are all part of the same human race/species. We do have different cultures and ethnicities. But we are all one of the same.

[M.Dancer]

Many dogs cannot breed with each other. To much variation in the species. Humans don't seem to have that problem. We are all one race, one species.

This is one thing that bugs me when people talk about the Human Race. We are all part of the same human race/species. We do have different cultures and ethnicities. But we are all one of the same.

Even two dogs from different breeds still produce the same species.

[DogOnPorch]

German is Caucasian. So by Lictor666's reasoning, Octoberfest IS another "White History Month".

We could probably take a number of such special days and say they cater to special white interests....now couldn't we....

1. Drinking beer is a 'white interest'? Interesting. What's eating a watermelon?

2. Oktoberfest is also a Bavarian event...not pan-Germanic by any means. Everyone else is merely copying.

3. There are plenty of 'black' Germans these days...guess what they do in February?

http://atlanticreview.org/archives/592-Bla...in-Germany.html

[ToadBrother]

The advancements of a civilization are credited to members of the civilization, and that includes all people from all races, cultures and continental families. Inventions and innovations - even in North America - cannot be solely credited to "white" North Americans, nor are Anglo Europeans all white Caucasians. Western advancement in the world is interdependent on almost every culture and thinking system, including the various religious ones.

Anyone who attempts to take credit for such advancements is living in la la land.

I really recommend Guns, Germs and Steel by Jered Diamond. While I think he overstates his points to some degree, the conclusion he ultimately comes to that 1. the fundamental technologies and constructs of civilization were developed outside Europe and 2. that Europe pulled ahead of the rest (but really only beginning in the 14th to 15th century) mainly because of a combination of climate and geography.

No one is trying to say that Europeans didn't contribute a great deal to civilization. But the fact is that for the vast history of large-scale society on this planet, it's Old World centres have been outside of Europe; Egypt, Mesopotomia, the Indus River Valley and the Yellow River. The key inventions of civilization; the main grain crops, the domestication of sheep, goats, cows and chickens, writing, urban planning, advanced mathematics, were all the inventions of Middle and Far East cultures, and Europeans were the beneficiaries of that, and with the great invasions from the Asian Steppe that begin in the 4th century, Europe for the most part was shielded from this, while the other major centres of civilization; Mesopotomia, Anatolia, India and China, all suffered substantial setbacks.

As to Africa, Diamond points out that the geographically, the continent by and large is not well suited to the major grain crops developed in Iran and Mesopotomia, and thus Africa was not able to "bootstrap" advanced urban civilization until much later than Europe. Europe's climate was much more conducive to these crops, and the very core of civilization down to this very day are those crops. When ways of growing staple crops in Africa were ultimately discovered, suddenly you start seeing urbanization happening, even before the Europeans came along.

So Europe's dominance has nothing to do with racial superiority, and everything to do with being in the right place.

[M.Dancer]

So Europe's dominance has nothing to do with racial superiority, and everything to do with being in the right place.

Luck often plays a role in success. In any event, since we are the descendants of africans, africans are indeed very successful.

[ToadBrother]

Are you serious?

Hybrids are races!

The same way that two dog breeds interbreeding produce a DIFFERENT dog breed

the same way combining yellow and blue produces green...

the same way combining a 4 door saloon and an SUV makes a crossover...

So now an almost meaningless word in the light of modern genetics because even more meaningless.

First of all, two dogs of different breeds mating and producing offspring does not produce hybrids. All domesticated dogs are just varieties of C. lupus. They're wolves that have been physiologically and behaviorally modified by heavy breeding.

The fact is that every single extant human population on this planet is far more closely related than even chimpanzee populations in Africa. What counts is gene flow, and no human population has been out of the gene pool for more than a few thousand years. Probably the longest period of isolation were the Tazmanian Aborigines, who were cut off from Australia at the end of the last glacial period, and spent some 10,000 years that way. Even in the Americas, and even if you discount some evidence that some Asiatics may have reached South America, the Inuit arrived 6,000 years ago.

[GostHacked]

Even two dogs from different breeds still produce the same species.

They could produce, but not anything that would be considered a viable option. Dog A and Dog B, cannot produce with each other but A and B can reproduce with Dog C. When it is incompatible, you get a botched pregnancy, still births, mother dying during birth, or severe birth defects. This is why you don't breed some dogs together, incompatible and a genetic dead end. You will encounter problems.

Humans are all compatible with each other. Black, white, red, yellow ect. I know this is a little off topic, and I;'ll get back to the topic in my next post

[ToadBrother]

Luck often plays a role in success. In any event, since we are the descendants of africans, africans are indeed very successful.

Oh absolutely. Modern humans first appeared in Africa.

But Lictor seems to aping the pseudo-archaeology of the Nazis, that somehow the Germans were this advanced northern civilization. It was a load of garbage that is still foisted by a few racists out there. But the evidence is pretty clear, the Iron Age came later to Europe than it did to the Mediterranean world. In fact, some of the earliest areas to enter the Iron Age were in West Africa, at least four hundred years before Europe.