1491, or, Was Pre-European "White Man" America Really

[benny]

Huh?

Google it now! Forum rules forbid duplication of the same post.

[jbg]

Google it now! Forum rules forbid duplication of the same post.

You can link back to the old post.

[benny]

You can link back to the old post.

Lockean proviso:

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

http://www.politicalphilosophy.info/lockeanproviso.html

[CANADIEN]

My more significant point, addressed earlier in the thread, is that in no way is 5% of the population (all that remained) entitled to 100% of the land. Also, human migrations are a constant, as is the displacement or even death of the displaced. I don't think anyone rationally wishes that history be frozen at a point 5769 years ago.

Recognition of aboriginal ownership of land was set as a principle (in North America at least) by the Royal Proclamation of 1763, a fact confirmed every time the U.S. Government or British Crown went into the motions of sitting down to sign treaty transferring land. Any land that was not legally transferred still belongs to its original owners.

In fact, Kyoto was badly needed back in the day.

:lol:

[Molly]

My point is not that there weren't white atrocities. There were. But there were plenty going the other way.

My more significant point, addressed earlier in the thread, is that in no way is 5% of the population (all that remained) entitled to 100% of the land. Also, human migrations are a constant, as is the displacement or even death of the displaced. I don't think anyone rationally wishes that history be frozen at a point 5769 years ago.

...... Um. My mind jumped immediately to the Holocaust. That comment suggests that the goods and property of the millions who died were RIGHTLY dispersed among whoever could manage to steal it, and should not be returned to the people or the heirs of the dead if and as they are found....

I don't agree with that.

Edited April 24, 2009 by Molly

[jbg]

...... Um. My mind jumped immediately to the Holocaust. That comment suggests that the goods and property of the millions who died were RIGHTLY dispersed among whoever could manage to steal it, and should not be returned to the people or the heirs of the dead if and as they are found....

I don't agree with that.

You're right. However the practicalities of the seizure of the property of the Jewish victims (and survivors) were one of the prime moving forces behind the establishment of the State of Israel. Since the survivors' homes and businesses had been seized and "distributed" they were quite unwelcome back in their "home villages".

[benny]

I don't agree with that.

Justice is agreeing to follow a social contract in which its clauses have been established by us in some kind of original position to guarantee our impartiality (i.e. a situation in which we all ignore what will be our personal fate in history).

[Wild Bill]

Geez, Tango implies that "White Bread" European culture became so advanced because they were just lucky! Lictor616 makes it out to be a "race" thing.

Then we get a dozen pages or more of posts of various accusations of racism. As I scanned through the mess, only DogonPorch made a post even hinting at the real reason Europeans were more advance...culture!

It seems like nearly everyone confuses race and culture, yet they are so very, very different! Culture, among other things, determines a society's ability to cope with its environment and improve its living standard. At times in Man's history various races have had positive and negative cultures in this regard.

Europeans, especially the British, developed a culture of universal education and a strong work ethic. Some pundits believe that colder climates force cultures to be more progressive, just to survive. They point to the fact that few tropical cultures where you can sleep under the stars and pick food from trees have produced steam engines. That would be another thread but it's obvious there's something to the argument.

European culture lead to the Industrial Revolution and eventually to the very digital media we are all using to have this argument! It wasn't luck and it wasn't race. It was a social attitude where enough people perceived needs and the potential rewards of trying to address them, coupled with a high enough baseline of education where there were large enough numbers of people educated enough to do it!

As opposed to some priest caste being the only ones educated. Those cultures that restricted education to such small castes rarely advanced at all.

The idea of race being the basis for intelligence was seriously blown out of the water during the second World War. Armies often found themselves based in foreign lands and needing to use local populations for their labour. A Polynesian was found able to be as equally skilled as a Westerner, or an Inuit (Eskimo at the time) or a North African. He simply needed some education that his own culture had not yet or perhaps never would provide.

Some things are vital for a culture to progress technologically. Education and attitudes must produce a sufficiently high enough number of individuals that can think logically and use scientific method in their approach to problems.

Before the North American aboriginals could have developed modern medicine, computers, central heating and such they would have had to morph their culture into one more like the Europeans. Otherwise it would have just "stood still" for hundreds if not thousands of years.

No, Europeans were not just "lucky". They just happened to be first at embracing using your head before using your heart. Sometimes things can get out of balance but for tens of thousands of years in our history societies were skewed away from universal hard work and intellectualism. Why do you think that in Britain over a thousand years are referred to as the "Dark Ages"?

Those cultures over the past few centuries that adopted the European cultural attributes tend to have prospered. Those that fiercely resist and cling to fundamentalist religions have not, except in a parasitical sense. Islamist terrorists can use the weapons and technology of the West but could never develop them on their own.

To suggest that the West developed to the point where we are curing many diseases and cancers only because of luck makes no sense. To suggest that it was only because we happened to be born of a "white race" is just as ludicrous. Children adopted from other races and cultures and raised in Western culture families fare just as well or poorly as "domestics".

Race is irrelevant.

[benny]

Race is irrelevant.

Race is very relevant but race as battle or competition. Ships powerful enough to cross the Atlantic were the result of a war escalation. European kingdoms were unlucky enough to have been caught in frenetic cycles of violence. In the 15th century, international commerce was made mainly for military alliances purposes.

[lictor616]

ad hominem... I was wondering where I have seen writen every second posting before... Yep, your postings on that other site a few years back. I must though that you didn't use to be that vulgar. Must be the frustration from having been banned from other forums.

What other website!?!? what are you even talking about... could you be less obvious in diverting the attention from the actual topic at hand? I mean you make it so easy to call you an intellectual coward.,.. unable to address the ISSUES of a debate: you ALWAYS put the onus back unto me personally .. what are you afraid of in debating rationally?

[lictor616]

It would indeed be idiotic to deny the role heredity plays in PHYSICAL characteristics of human beings, and if you had learned to read beyond what your hate-infected brain can process, you would notice that nobody here is making such a claim.

Equally idiotic is the notion that heredity, and therefore race, is a determinent factor of intellectual capacities, or morality. Surely, someone who claims to be the only around here capable of rational thoughts will admit to that.

thank you then: the concept of heredity and cline and extended hereditary group (ie RACE) is indeed a valid and real notion... thank you for agreeing with EVERYTHING I've been saying...

You really think intelligence is not highly influenced by characteristics inherited at birth? I agree that intelligence is also half nurture... as is everything, but to say that we are all born with the same intelligence and capacity for self discipline is just plain old liberal poppycock... its NONSENSE ON STILTS...

We know for instance that many serial killers are BORN not BRED ... so clearly genes undoubtedly play a deciding role in EVERY human faculty.

[lictor616]

Because you are under the delusion that intellectual capacities are determined by race, you are under another illusion... that we all know it but just will like about it. Nope. What we know is that the idea is horse m*nure.

you like the words c*ap and horse m*nure don't you...

obsessed with pooh...

And i'm sorry but the Bell Curve and about 60 other controlled tests for IQ point to about the same gap in type and degree of intelligence and the break is along RACIAL LINES.

There are many reasons to believe race and IQ are intricately linked, judging from the type of societies certain types of people create, judging from the crime stats in any given country or "diverse" area in a country (ie Detroit, South Central, Louisiana). I mean that actually isn't a single exception to the rule..

The most orderly and capable societies are the northern asiatic ones (who surpass our own in this respect)... and they consistently (and I stress consistently- show up an average IQ of 104 to 106 compared to our 100 or 101) Look at every tool of measurement for scientific literacy and mathematical literacy ... look at the very leftist and liberal OECD indexes of measurement (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/edu_sci_lit-education-scientific-literacy)

there isn't a single exception for the rule... so no... THERE IS EVERY REASON TO BELIEVE THAT RACE DOES HAVE A CAUSAL RELATIONSHIP WITH IQ... the TESTING CERTAINLY SUGGESTS it does... history also points towards that direction, as does the record of technology and inventions...

the illusion is that we're all precisely equal in all aspects of intelligence and applications of intelligence...

Edited April 24, 2009 by lictor616

[lictor616]

Genetics can influence intellectual capacities at an individual level.

But at the level of an entire culture, or group of culture sharing a skin pigmentation? To believe that is to believe that Western Europeans in general were geniuses at the time of Christ, had intellectual dsabilities at the time of Charlemagne, were a little below average when the Black Plague struck, and back to be geniuses again by the time of Luther.

Skin pigmentation? That's not all that race or "clines" are... you're quite wrong in saying that what affects the individual cannot afffect the group.. i don't know where you're getting the bundle of your ideas and notions... not only do you self contradict over and over again

( first saying race doesn't exist... then saying it does exist ... but doesn't do anything, then saying genes influence intelligence and physical aptitudes... but are irrelevant... that people are determined by their genetic makeup.. but its only individual).... more proof taht you're going out on a whim and don't know what you're talking about...

[M.Dancer]

Welcome

It the Facsist Comedy Hour

With your favourite buffon

Lictspittle

[lictor616]

Welcome

It the Facsist Comedy Hour

With your favourite buffon

Lictspittle

managed to make 3 spelling mistakes here.... you can't even ignore me correctly...

coward... scared of a little "spittling" fascist like moi...

[M.Dancer]

coward... scared of a little "spittling" fascist like moi...

Why be scared? Haven't we effectively cleansed the world of 100s of thousands of them?

No one cares though, and rightly so....dead fascists and angst ridden teen age idiots savants comme toi

[lictor616]

Why be scared? Haven't we effectively cleansed the world of 100s of thousands of them?

No one cares though, and rightly so....dead fascists and angst ridden teen age idiots savants comme toi

cough cough, then why not slaughter another one ? Cmon it should be easy to gang up on a puny low IQ fascist ogre such as me who actually believes in the nobility of the Western world and its people.

and how many millions of eminently disposable commies like you have been rightly given the "control + alt delete" treatment they so richly deserve?

I'll be awaiting your next ad hominem angst laden post troll...

Edited April 24, 2009 by lictor616

[M.Dancer]

cough cough, then why not slaughter another one ? Cmon it should be easy to gang up on a puny low IQ fascist ogre such as me who actually believes in the nobility of the Western world and its people.

If you truly believed in the nobility of it's people, you wouldn't espouse a detestable abomination and cancererous ideaology like fascism.

You been wrong about just about everything you have posted, your sub high school level history and your misunderstanding of science...calling me a commie hasn't changed your track record of stupidity....

[benny]

Garbage in, garbage out.

[tango]

you like the words c*ap and horse m*nure don't you...

obsessed with pooh...

And i'm sorry but the Bell Curve and about 60 other controlled tests for IQ point to about the same gap in type and degree of intelligence and the break is along RACIAL LINES.

Only on tests designed by and for white/Euro people - ie, most to all of them.

Valid cross-cultural comparisons of 'IQ' have never been done, because we do not have the proper, equated assessments.

On achievement tests, factors like parental education, income, etc account for more than race, and explain any differences.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but your conclusion has no valid foundation.

Edited April 24, 2009 by tango

[lictor616]

If you truly believed in the nobility of it's people, you wouldn't espouse a detestable abomination and cancererous ideaology like fascism.

You been wrong about just about everything you have posted, your sub high school level history and your misunderstanding of science...calling me a commie hasn't changed your track record of stupidity....

I don't espouse fascism... but if you want to call preferring my culture and defending the people who created it "fascism" and if you call people who want to make a viable future for those people to grow "extremists"... then I am a fascist extremist and that is that...

really nothing I said smacked of any established ideology. certainly not National Socialism (which is distinct somewhat from so-called "fascism")...

Either way you completely refuse to enter debate and so its hard for me to discern what you mean by fascist... so far as I can tell you're just using words you know will antagonize people... all you do is fling words and label me... that's not exactly an intelligent tactic.

If you want to debate the ethicacy or viability of Fascism as an ideology... that is an entirely different subject...

If you want to respond to my previous statements of the existence of DIFFERENT and DIVERSE "races" or clines then by all means do so...

otherwise what you say doesn't impose on anybody here with half a brain and used to such liberal mud slinging..

And to use a snippet from the Politically Correct verbiage index: you're comitting the liberal transgression of "STEREOTYPING ME"

definition: "A stereotype is a phrase relating to all the members of class or set. The term is often used with a negative connotation when referring to an oversimplified, exaggerated, or demeaning assumption that a particular individual possesses the characteristics associated with the class due to his or her membership in it. Stereotypes can be used to deny individuals respect or legitimacy based on their membership in that group."

so eat what we eat ...

[lictor616]

Only on tests designed by and for white/Euro people - ie, most to all of them.

Valid cross-cultural comparisons of 'IQ' have never been done, because we do not have the proper, equated assessments.

On achievement tests, factors like parental education, income, etc account for more than race, and explain any differences.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but your conclusion has no valid foundation.

not by and for... Bell curve's chief of procedure was a Jewish man: Richard J. Herrnstein, and 2 blacks were contributors...

And the fact that ASIANS are shown as the highest scorers in controlled tests (which completely puts the lie on the cross-cultural comparisons being somehow "invalid") should tell you something about the "bias" of the tests.

And no single refutation has thus far been able to debunk the Bell Curve (many scoff at it and judgin by the liberal hate crazed response... there is no reason to trust in some of the more categorical refutations).

Education is not only a product of how much money you parents make... most of today's geniuses (Epimethius Society, Helliq Society, Prometheus Society et al.) come form the middle class or ever poorer classes. Money and parent intelligence helps... but offers no guarantee.

all liberals and thoughtless people like you can do .. is SAY: "oh... its not true... no valid "foundation""... as if you've said something profound and meaningful...

pathetic...

Edited April 25, 2009 by lictor616

[tango]

not by and for... Bell curve's chief of procedure was a Jewish man: Richard J. Herrnstein, and 2 blacks were contributors...

And the fact that ASIANS are shown as the highest scorers in controlled tests (which completely puts the lie on the cross-cultural comparisons being somehow "invalid") should tell you something about the "bias" of the tests.

And no single refutation has thus far been able to debunk the Bell Curve (many scoff at it and judgin by the liberal hate crazed response... there is no reason to trust in some of the more categorical refutations).

Education is not only a product of how much money you parents make... most of today's geniuses (Epimethius Society, Helliq Society, Prometheus Society et al.) come form the middle class or ever poorer classes. Money and parent intelligence helps... but offers no guarantee.

all liberals and thoughtless people like you can do .. is SAY: "oh... its not true... no valid "foundation""... as if you've said something profound and meaningful...

pathetic...

The book "the Bell Curve" has been debunked by every professional in the field, because differences are accounted for by factors other than race, and because IQ tests are culturally loaded. Those who believe this bunk are those who know nothing about the development and validation of assessments.

Here's the organization behind it:

Nearly all the research that Murray and Herrnstein relied on for their central claims about race and IQ was funded by the Pioneer Fund, described by the London Sunday Telegraph (3/12/89) as a "neo-Nazi organization closely integrated with the far right in American politics." The fund's mission is to promote eugenics, a philosophy that maintains that "genetically unfit" individuals or races are a threat to society.

The Pioneer Fund was set up in 1937 by Wickliffe Draper, a millionaire who advocated sending blacks back to Africa. The foundation's charter set forth the group's missions as "racial betterment" and aid for people "deemed to be descended primarily from white persons who settled in the original 13 states prior to the adoption of the Constitution of the United States." (In 1985, after Pioneer Fund grant recipients began receiving political heat, the charter was slightly amended to play down the race angle--GQ, 11/94.)

The fund's first president, Harry Laughlin, was an influential advocate of sterilization for those he considered genetically unfit. In successfully advocating laws that would restrict immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe, Laughlin testified before Congress that 83 percent of Jewish immigrants were innately feeble-minded (Rolling Stone, 10/20/94). Another founder, Frederick Osborn, described Nazi Germany's sterilization law as "a most exciting experiment" (Discovery Journal, 7/9/94).

The fund's current president, Harry Weyher, denounces the Supreme Court decision that desegregated schools, saying, "All Brown did was wreck the school system" (GQ, 11/94). The fund's treasurer, John Trevor, formerly served as treasurer for the crypto-fascist Coalition of Patriotic Societies, when it called in 1962 for the release of Nazi war criminals and praised South Africa's "well-reasoned racial policies" (Rolling Stone, 10/20/94).

One of the Pioneer Fund's largest current grantees is Roger Pearson, an activist and publisher who has been associated with international fascist currents. Pearson has written: "If a nation with a more advanced, more specialized or in any way superior set of genes mingles with, instead of exterminating, an inferior tribe, then it commits racial suicide" (Russ Bellant, Old Nazis, the New Right and the Republican Party).

Nice racist fascists you hang with.

It's bunk, lictor, and you look stupid if you fall for it and promote it.

[lictor616]

The book "the Bell Curve" has been debunked by every professional in the field, because differences are accounted for by factors other than race, and because IQ tests are culturally loaded. Those who believe this bunk are those who know nothing about the development and validation of assessments.

Here's the organization behind it:

Nearly all the research that Murray and Herrnstein relied on for their central claims about race and IQ was funded by the Pioneer Fund, described by the London Sunday Telegraph (3/12/89) as a "neo-Nazi organization closely integrated with the far right in American politics." The fund's mission is to promote eugenics, a philosophy that maintains that "genetically unfit" individuals or races are a threat to society.

The Pioneer Fund was set up in 1937 by Wickliffe Draper, a millionaire who advocated sending blacks back to Africa. The foundation's charter set forth the group's missions as "racial betterment" and aid for people "deemed to be descended primarily from white persons who settled in the original 13 states prior to the adoption of the Constitution of the United States." (In 1985, after Pioneer Fund grant recipients began receiving political heat, the charter was slightly amended to play down the race angle--GQ, 11/94.)

The fund's first president, Harry Laughlin, was an influential advocate of sterilization for those he considered genetically unfit. In successfully advocating laws that would restrict immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe, Laughlin testified before Congress that 83 percent of Jewish immigrants were innately feeble-minded (Rolling Stone, 10/20/94). Another founder, Frederick Osborn, described Nazi Germany's sterilization law as "a most exciting experiment" (Discovery Journal, 7/9/94).

The fund's current president, Harry Weyher, denounces the Supreme Court decision that desegregated schools, saying, "All Brown did was wreck the school system" (GQ, 11/94). The fund's treasurer, John Trevor, formerly served as treasurer for the crypto-fascist Coalition of Patriotic Societies, when it called in 1962 for the release of Nazi war criminals and praised South Africa's "well-reasoned racial policies" (Rolling Stone, 10/20/94).

One of the Pioneer Fund's largest current grantees is Roger Pearson, an activist and publisher who has been associated with international fascist currents. Pearson has written: "If a nation with a more advanced, more specialized or in any way superior set of genes mingles with, instead of exterminating, an inferior tribe, then it commits racial suicide" (Russ Bellant, Old Nazis, the New Right and the Republican Party).

Nice racist fascists you hang with.

It's bunk, lictor, and you look stupid if you fall for it and promote it.

pffffffffffffffffffffffff HAHAHAHAHAAH !!!!!!

a neo-nazi?... a talmud Jew.... Neo-Nazi!? a research compendium that denies any theory of White Racial superiority?

that word gets flung around too often for it to have any real meaning... neonazi? a study taht concludes Asians to be the smartest average racial group? I mean cmon....

you're having a laugh aren't you! ... why don't you quote the Anti defamation League and other pseudo "human rights" advocates... you're quoting an unrecognized FAIR.org & Rolling Stones? What's their credibility in scientific literacy?

be serious...

[benny]

Some critics have found significant one incident written about by DeParle on Charles Murray:

"While there is much to admire about the industry and inquisitiveness of Murray's teen-age years, there is at least one adventure that he understandably deletes from the story: the night he helped his friends burn a cross. They had formed a kind of good guys' gang, "the Mallows," whose very name, from marshmallows, was a play on their own softness. In the fall of 1960, during their senior year, they nailed some scrap wood into a cross, adorned it with fireworks and set it ablaze on a hill beside the police station, with marshmallows scattered as a calling card.

Rutledge [a social worker and former juvenile delinquent] who was still hanging around the pool hall [and considers some of Murray's other memories to be idealized] recalls his astonishment the next day when the talk turned to racial persecution in a town with two black families. "There wouldn't have been a racist thought in our simple-minded minds," he says. "That's how unaware we were."

A long pause follows when Murray is reminded of the event. "Incredibly, incredibly dumb," he says. "But it never crossed our minds that this had any larger significance. And I look back on that and say, 'How on earth could we be so oblivious?' I guess it says something about that day and age that it didn't cross our minds". So, racism can hide itself very deep into our psyche.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Murray_(author)

Edited April 25, 2009 by benny