Caucasians

[jefferiah]

I don't feel the preservation of a skin colour should be a conscionable effort or concern because I don't see physical characteristics as having any significance in the quality of a persons character.

Some of the people in this thread who are concerned about the demise of white skin are the same people making derogatory comments and generalizations towards other cultures. This ethnocentrism may not be outright racist but it certainly is not far off. If these people are worried of discrimination I think they should be addressing the ignorance from which discrimination stems rather than focusing on insulating themselves with greater numbers of people that share their physical characteristics.

At a time when the collective ingenuity and co-operation of the human race is of the utmost importance, the myopic concerns of appearance can only serve to negate our progress.

Hmmm I can see a big difference between wanting to preserve something and hating something else. It is not outright racist, and the certainly not far off comment the wrong way of looking at it. Where one person might wish to protect whites because he hates others and would never marry them, I think Scott is saying he would like to protect them cuz he wants them to exist not because he wants other races to disappear.

Look at it this way.....I am white....If a black guy said "you know I wanna marry a black woman and have black kids" I am not gonna fly off the handle. It may be a decision he has in common with a Supremacist Rastafarian, but he may not necessarily be doing out of the same motive or from any hatred. As long as he aint planning to do anything to me whats the biggie.

[ScottSA]

Well, enlighten me. Explain how? On the backs of the Romans?

No, I'm not going to explain it to you. This thread is not about the rise of Europe, it's about something else entirely. You have made known your opinion, such as it is, numerous times in one line spam posts, and you've demonstrated that you just ain't got enough upstairs to even understand this conversation, much less engage in it. Go away.

[jefferiah]

What puzzles me is the very notion that there is some valuable underlying characteristic worth preserving in the "Caucasian" race. Sure, perhaps you may be attracted to another Caucasian person for aesthetic reasons (or to any other "race", and fine, so be it, whatever floats your boat, for there is nothing wrong in choice).

But to actively worry about the demise of said group? Sure, we have many brilliant thinkers, great athletes, aesthetically pleasing folk which all belong to this category, but we also have many nut jobs, dope heads, thieves, wife abusers in other words, not the type of people whom you would want to glorify.

Is there anything intrinsically better about one group over another? Fools are fools, geniuses are geniuses, regardless of shade.

While I hate to bring up anecdotal evidence, I feel I must, for it is definitely not for reasons of Political Correctness that I think this is of no genuine concern. I happen to live in a neighborhood populated with many of the latter ("white trash" for lack of a better word), so maybe my views are a little biased. Granted, I was raised in similar economic conditions, but I prefer to think myself as being separate from those of my surroundings, and I am sure most of you would too. A simple walk through my neighborhood and you would also be wondering what exactly all the worrying is about.

Have you ever walked through a third world slum? If material conditions, and the intellectual stunting that results, is the measure by which we are to determine the worthiness of races, I daresay we'd best break out the zyclon B and the crop dusters and start flying toward Asia and Africa.

I don't think there is anything intrinsically better about one over the other, but I don't think that's the question. The question is not the relative worth of races, because I don't think there is much difference, if any, in the inherent worthiness of races. I think there are many reasons why caucasians bolted ahead in every field of endeavor in the last 500 years, but I sincerely doubt that whiteness was one of them. But that doesn't mean I think it makes no difference if caucasians fade away or are done away with either. It makes a great deal of difference to me.

Yeah just because I dont think a daisy has any more intrinsic worth than a tulip, doesnt mean I want daises to disappear thinking well there will still be tulips.

[ScottSA]

Some of the people in this thread who are concerned about the demise of white skin are the same people making derogatory comments and generalizations towards other cultures. This ethnocentrism may not be outright racist but it certainly is not far off. If these people are worried of discrimination I think they should be addressing the ignorance from which discrimination stems rather than focusing on insulating themselves with greater numbers of people that share their physical characteristics.

Here is the mushy thinking of the left on display. As one of those making derogatory comments about thirdworld hellholes and slimepits, and 6th century madmen leading 21st century fools to an early grave, and any number of regressive African skewerings of each other with Assegai and whatever weapon lies at hand, I'd like to point out that culture and race are two different things. KListen closely now:

I think European culture is eons ahead of any other culture. I am ethnocentric, and proudly so, if what you mean by that is that I think my culture is superior to other cultures. This thread has nothing to do with culture.

I don't think white people are intrinsically better than any other people.

Edited July 13, 2007 by ScottSA

[betsy]

What puzzles me is the very notion that there is some valuable underlying characteristic worth preserving in the "Caucasian" race. Sure, perhaps you may be attracted to another Caucasian person for aesthetic reasons (or to any other "race", and fine, so be it, whatever floats your boat, for there is nothing wrong in choice).

But to actively worry about the demise of said group? Sure, we have many brilliant thinkers, great athletes, aesthetically pleasing folk which all belong to this category, but we also have many nut jobs, dope heads, thieves, wife abusers in other words, not the type of people whom you would want to glorify.

Is there anything intrinsically better about one group over another? Fools are fools, geniuses are geniuses, regardless of shade.

While I hate to bring up anecdotal evidence, I feel I must, for it is definitely not for reasons of Political Correctness that I think this is of no genuine concern. I happen to live in a neighborhood populated with many of the latter ("white trash" for lack of a better word), so maybe my views are a little biased. Granted, I was raised in similar economic conditions, but I prefer to think myself as being separate from those of my surroundings, and I am sure most of you would too. A simple walk through my neighborhood and you would also be wondering what exactly all the worrying is about.

Walk through a First Nations reserve lately?

Not much reasons for hope, is it?

Why would we want to preserve the Cree language or race?

[betsy]

I just read Scott A's reply above. Need say no more.

I think this thread will inevitably head in the wrong direction. People who envy whites will do nothing but hate whites. People who envy Crees will do nothing but hate Crees.

The ones you need to fear are the whites themselves...the self-deprecating liberals who imagine that the shall we say fairly significant accomplishments of the white race should be criticized in every possible and irrational way.

I think this thread can go nowhere. Sorry ScottA.

Edited July 13, 2007 by betsy

[Drea]

Here's an interesting view...

I'm even inclined to believe some of what he says.

The real America is found in her people: open, generous, overly fair and too trusting. America is in her broad plains and great mountains, her crystal-clear lakes and superb ocean shoreline. America is a thought, a concept, a way of thinking. America's greatness lay in the fundamental nature of her founding culture, which is European - not Negroid, not Mexican, not Jewish - European and White to the bone.

Dead Country Walking

I'm even inclined to believe some of what he says.

[bush_cheney2004]

I'm even inclined to believe some of what he says.

Actually, "America" was all of those things long before the Europeans ever arrived.

[betsy]

I think there are many reasons why caucasians bolted ahead in every field of endeavor in the last 500 years, but I sincerely doubt that whiteness was one of them.

Do you mean Europeans? What about contributions made by Jewish/Chinese thinkers? Prosperity is a likely reason for advancement. When one is hungry, it is difficult to think of much else.

Boy, shall we dig up and keep scores?

What have been the contributions of the white race to the world compared to the non-whites? I'm willing to bet, history will show the whites had indeed contributed a lot.

[Hollus]

Hmmm I can see a big difference between wanting to preserve something and hating something else. It is not outright racist, and the certainly not far off comment the wrong way of looking at it. Where one person might wish to protect whites because he hates others and would never marry them, I think Scott is saying he would like to protect them cuz he wants them to exist not because he wants other races to disappear.

Well I would invite you to take a read through Scott's posts and take note of the negative connotations and judgements he uses when referring to people of other cultures.

Look at it this way.....I am white....If a black guy said "you know I wanna marry a black woman and have black kids" I am not gonna fly off the handle. It may be a decision he has in common with a Supremacist Rastafarian, but he may not necessarily be doing out of the same motive or from any hatred. As long as he aint planning to do anything to me whats the biggie.

I would question your Black friends motives. Maybe they would have absolutely no root in hatred or contempt, but if he was choosing his mate as if he was shopping for certain coloured car I would say he's a very shallow person.

[Hollus]

Some of the people in this thread who are concerned about the demise of white skin are the same people making derogatory comments and generalizations towards other cultures. This ethnocentrism may not be outright racist but it certainly is not far off. If these people are worried of discrimination I think they should be addressing the ignorance from which discrimination stems rather than focusing on insulating themselves with greater numbers of people that share their physical characteristics.

Here is the mushy thinking of the left on display. As one of those making derogatory comments about thirdworld hellholes and slimepits, and 6th century madmen leading 21st century fools to an early grave, and any number of regressive African skewerings of each other with Assegai and whatever weapon lies at hand, I'd like to point out that culture and race are two different things. KListen closely now:

I think European culture is eons ahead of any other culture. I am ethnocentric, and proudly so, if what you mean by that is that I think my culture is superior to other cultures. This thread has nothing to do with culture.

I don't think white people are intrinsically better than any other people.

So are you saying this thread is strictly directed at the idea of maintaining the physical attributes of caucasians? If this thread has nothing to do with culture why are you suggesting the need of a 'caucasian homeland'?

[ScottSA]

[Well I would invite you to take a read through Scott's posts and take note of the negative connotations and judgements he uses when referring to people of other cultures.

And I would invite you go go back to highschool long enough to distinguish between culture and race. Why must you persist in pretending they are the same thing?

[Hollus]

[Well I would invite you to take a read through Scott's posts and take note of the negative connotations and judgements he uses when referring to people of other cultures.

And I would invite you go go back to highschool long enough to distinguish between culture and race. Why must you persist in pretending they are the same thing?

I don't think race and culture are the same thing. I just don't buy your claim that your desire to preserve the the caucasian race is not based out of your ethnocentrism.

[marcinmoka]

Walk through a First Nations reserve lately?

Yes, Ipperwash, just a few days ago. Almost as distrubing as the sight of Johnny "White, Ex - Suburbanite" Meth Head walking down Sherbourne St.

I think European culture is eons ahead of any other culture.

If by European you mean the democratic, tolerant, progressive culture we have established for ourselves, yes, I agree. But this is also were you begin lose me.

If this "Caucasian" culture we have carved out for ourselves is our gold standard, than one would suppose that non Caucasian persons can subscribe to this culture, many do (i.e friends).....though many also do not (i.e foes).

In other words, "Caucasian" implies a race, or general ethnicity, whereas Caucasian culture implies an ideological mindstate, one which is irrespective of race/ethnicity (with the obvious exceptions of the parent/peer to child transmission of information, which as we know, have profound effects on development).

Therefore, I can understand being very passionate and edgy about the potential for medium or long term erosion of your culture and way of life (I am too), but this has nothing to do being "Caucasian" or not. We developed the culture, but that does not mean other willing parties (of different ethnicities) cannot accept it, or even ameliorate it.

The greatest battles will not be ethnic, but ideological. It would be best if we made as many allies as we could, and not make a shrinking club as exclusive as possible.

Et alors?

Vos pensées?

[jefferiah]

Hmmm I can see a big difference between wanting to preserve something and hating something else. It is not outright racist, and the certainly not far off comment the wrong way of looking at it. Where one person might wish to protect whites because he hates others and would never marry them, I think Scott is saying he would like to protect them cuz he wants them to exist not because he wants other races to disappear.

Well I would invite you to take a read through Scott's posts and take note of the negative connotations and judgements he uses when referring to people of other cultures.

Look at it this way.....I am white....If a black guy said "you know I wanna marry a black woman and have black kids" I am not gonna fly off the handle. It may be a decision he has in common with a Supremacist Rastafarian, but he may not necessarily be doing out of the same motive or from any hatred. As long as he aint planning to do anything to me whats the biggie.

I would question your Black friends motives. Maybe they would have absolutely no root in hatred or contempt, but if he was choosing his mate as if he was shopping for certain coloured car I would say he's a very shallow person.

Why is that so bad? Its up to you to choose who you want for whatever reasons. Maybe you are a very shallow person. If a girl says to me I like tall guys....I am not gonna get pissed off about it. Something like in the movie "Losing Isaiah" where the black bio parents claim that black babies belong with black mothers...that would piss me off. But dating who you want to, who cares. You dont have to make a federal case about everything. Some people wanna date people of the same religion, people who dont smoke, etc. You dont have to get into the dating realm and start making human rights cases.

Scott seems to be responding to everybody's cutting down of Europeans as the only bad guys on the planet with posts that show that other people do the same. Like "ok if you wanna start diggin up history, no one is a saint." The "neutral" Acadians paid Natives off to raid English settlements (ie the Dartmouth Massacre) and scalp innocent women and children, and I dont usually feel the need to bring that up unless somebody starts telling me how terrible the English were and are.

If you were to quote a statistic and say it was European whites who were responsible for so many deaths in this perioid in history, no one is going to get overly upset with you, and you probably will have a job to go to tomorrow. In New Jersey a police officer was fired for giving an honest answer to a question he was asked in an interview. No one asked him if he believed whites were better or if there was some genetic hokum

that made blacks prone to crime. But they did ask him if he knew of any statistics about a certain kind of crime (drugs I believe) as it pertained to race. And he answered by quoting an actual FBI statistic....you get the picture. He was fired. Even a black guy on the force defended him. But thats the way it is. People are allergic to race issues.

[Argus]

Well then, presumably, we'll all blend together into one homogeneous race again, as we were in the beginning.

It stands to reason. We know that if any life form in-breeds and doesn't vary its genetic pool, it dies out.

However the dying out is gradual and in the interim I have to put up with people burning crosses on my lawn.

I have to say, Rue, that your participation in this thread so far has been uniformly well below what you are capable of, and this is probably the dumbest of a series of really inane posts.

The people who hate Jews are Muslims. And it is they who are on the rise. So no, the nasty white folks wouldn't be burning crosses on your lawn, the lovely brown Muslims would be burning you on a stake.

[jefferiah]

Walk through a First Nations reserve lately?

Yes, Ipperwash, just a few days ago. Almost as distrubing as the sight of Johnny "White, Ex - Suburbanite" Meth Head walking down Sherbourne St.

I think European culture is eons ahead of any other culture.

If by European you mean the democratic, tolerant, progressive culture we have established for ourselves, yes, I agree. But this is also were you begin lose me.

If this "Caucasian" culture we have carved out for ourselves is our gold standard, than one would suppose that non Caucasian persons can subscribe to this culture, many do (i.e friends).....though many also do not (i.e foes).

In other words, "Caucasian" implies a race, or general ethnicity, whereas Caucasian culture implies an ideological mindstate, one which is irrespective of race/ethnicity (with the obvious exceptions of the parent/peer to child transmission of information, which as we know, have profound effects on development).

Therefore, I can understand being very passionate and edgy about the potential for medium or long term erosion of your culture and way of life (I am too), but this has nothing to do being "Caucasian" or not. We developed the culture, but that does not mean other willing parties (of different ethnicities) cannot accept it, or even ameliorate it.

The greatest battles will not be ethnic, but ideological. It would be best if we made as many allies as we could, and not make a shrinking club as exclusive as possible.

Et alors?

Vos pensées?

he already said that. he said that he doesnt believe there is any genetic predisposition in "Europeans?" to act "European?". Read carefully. He is saying that this protection of Caucasian race is seperate from his cultural preference, and not because he prefers Caucasians.

Look you have Tulips and Daisies lets say. And lets say Daisies are getting scarce. Well Mike is saying you know nothing against Tulips, but I would like to keep Daisies around. I mean you can say "yeah but there will be lots of tulips, whats it matter". It doesnt have to matter to you or me. If it matters to someone, why is that so bad? If you try to preserve bald eagles does that mean you hate great blue herons.

[Argus]

It should be a concern for racists like yourselves, but caucasians are not an ethnocultural group. Hence, the rest of us are not worried.

Good. You distilled your opinion. Now stop jamming the thread and let "the rest of us"," many of whom don't share your opinion, speak. Ok?

Ohh, ScottSA wants to dominate this thread like he wants to dominate this country. Can you say 'fascist'

Can you say shut up and go away?

I know I can.

[Argus]

What can I say? You're an idiot. ScottSA doesn't "assume" that "other races have some inherant genetic quality that makes them want to destroy the other races," ScottSA has just read a little history and knows that races are not known for getting along real well; to wit: killing each other off every chance they get, everywhere and always without exception.

The evidence from the recent past tends to show that Europeans largely slaughtered other Europeans.

Usually, religion is blamed for various wars. Now, you're blaming race.

Religion was blamed for wars for a reason, and race certainly plays its part. I find it difficult to understand why this concept seems beyond the grasp of so many people. The same people who are on this thread arguing against the idea that there would be any likelihood of violence due to different racial groups being jammed together blame the West for the violence in Africa and the middle east because we set the borders which - jammed different ethnic groups together. There is a large school of thought, in fact, which says Africa's cultural and economic melt down over the past fifty years is almost entirely due to the borders having been drawn improperly, jamming all sorts of different tribes together within the political framework of a single nation. They can't get along. They won't get along. And so Africa is consistently unstable and filled with a wild variety of civil wars of various seriousness. There's hardly a single African nation which does not contain ethnic groups which hate each other.

Why shouldn't there be a fear that in a Canada which is not overwhelmingly dominated by one group there might be violence?

[ScottSA]

[Well I would invite you to take a read through Scott's posts and take note of the negative connotations and judgements he uses when referring to people of other cultures.

And I would invite you go go back to highschool long enough to distinguish between culture and race. Why must you persist in pretending they are the same thing?

I don't think race and culture are the same thing. I just don't buy your claim that your desire to preserve the the caucasian race is not based out of your ethnocentrism.

You're playing with terms that I don't think you understand. Of course my desire to preserve the the caucasian race is based on my ethnocentrism. Duh. When did this particular penny drop? When did I ever claim it wasn't based on my ethnocentrism?

[Argus]

[Okay, so you fear the other races. Not because of any cultural difference, but because (place racial designation here) inherently wish to kill all caucasians. I see no basis for the assumption. Nevertheless, what has this got to do with your claim that Caucasians are committing racial suicide? and why is racial suicide a bad thing?

I can only assume this cartoon version of a discussion is meant tongue in cheek?

you assume wrongly. No tongue in my cheek at all.

Your original question was is anyone concerned or not concerned about the impending racial suicide of Caucasians. I said no I am not concerned about the demise of Caucasians. Whats the problem? You asked a question and I provided an answer.

But you provided no context or explanation. I'm willing to bet if someone asked you if you were concerned about the demise of a particular type of animal you'd express at least sadness at the thought. For that matter, if there were fewer and fewer natives in Canada I bet you'd be damned concerned about them disappearing.

But you evidence a reflexive disdain for the very notion that anyone should be concerned about the welfare of whites - as if this is a particular group which no one should be concerned about. Why? Projecting your liberal white guilt? Tons of concern for the welfare of every minority under the sun, but if Whites were to become a minority and even face extinction - well who cares?

[Argus]

I do think you have an excessive pride in appearance. I think the sentiments you present in this post are at best superficial. I did not enjoy Kimmy today and I probably will not enjoy her tomorrow. Not unless she develops a deeper set of values and losses the narcissism.

I have a highly developed sense of values. I am with Argus and August in preserving those values is a much more important legacy than preserving any particular skin-tone.

However, I'm not too big to admit that I am influenced by appearance. My suspicion is that only the visually impaired can truthfully say otherwise.

-k

Well I would have thought you would have replied in such a manner rather than stating how you see it as your duty to pass on your radiant skin and straw coloured hair.

This is called "humour". I understand it is a term with which you and the rest of the PC crowd are entirely unfamiliar. But the rest of us understand.

And ofcourse everyone is influenced by appearance. However, my suspicion is that if you don't recognize beauty in the opposite sex of people with darker skin than yourself you are either visually impaired or have some kind of prejudice towards them.

I have seen some very attractive women of other races, but consistently, generally, I find White women more attractive. I suspect I'm not alone there. And I suspect if you ask an Asian man he'll tell you he finds Asian women more attractive.

Edited July 14, 2007 by Argus

[Argus]

Folks, let's boycot this thread, also. Why give them a platform?

Four one-line posts in a row, and nothing of value in any of them.

[Argus]

So far, I am free to express my opinion, and so far, you are free to express yours. Since we are free to express ourselves, then it would be a violation of my autonomy for you to insist that I post elsewhere. I, on the other hand, encourage your participation in this thread. I choose to not be annoyed. You choose to be annoyed. See? Autonomy.

You are not participating in this thread. You are posting a series of self-righteous, whiny complaints about the existence of this thread.

[August1991]

I decided to go back to Scott's OP because I must admit that I am still confused by this thread. Some posts make sense to me, and others don't.

But survival of a race is very much a valid question. I don't mean the euphemisms of culture and all the other sidesteps we tend to use, nor do I mean culture. For the purpose of this exercize, and to head off Momo et. al. who tend to obfuscate the genetic question, let's define race as follows:

...observable characteristics as skin color, hair type, body proportions, and skull measurements, essentially codifying the perceived differences among broad geographic populations of humans. The traditional terms for these populations—Caucasoid (or Caucasian), Mongoloid, Negroid, and in some systems Australoid...

--------------------

Anyway, the question is this:

Is anyone concerned that Caucasians are intentionally destroying themselves as a homogenous race? It's a fair question, I think, because that is the course embarked upon many years ago when the traditionally Caucasian nations embarked upon policies, almost as one, to institute mass immigration of so-called "visible minorities."

Again, I'd ask that folks focus on the question and not get side tracked by what you might think my sinister motives are for asking it, and I'd ask that the accusations of "racism" be held to a minimum...every other racially homogenous region in the world asks these kinds of questions as a matter of course. And it is a fair question. Given the below replacement birthrates of caucasians across the board, if the west continues on this path, caucasians will become a minority in their own traditional lands, and eventually be absorbed into the other genetic pools.

I'm sure I forgot some caveats, but the question stands...is anyone concerned? Is anyone not concerned?

When I first travelled outside of Canada, young and alone, I was surprised at how much of the world was fundamentally racist. As two examples, most East Europeans viewed gypsies as vermin and I recall that Asian prostitutes refused to accept Black clients.

I am disturbed that Scott (and others) feel that since the rest of the world is racist, then Caucasians have the right to be racist too. I disagree. Racism is not a step forward. It's not scientific.

We should judge people on criteria other than the colour of their skin, or the shape of their nose or eyes. Why? Because such criteria are generally not helpful in making good decisions.

----

Would it matter if the Caucasian race disappeared? No. It's inevitable. In the grand sweep of history, in 100,000 years say, I would imagine that there will be many superficial changes to our gene code. In the past two hundred years alone, the average height of American men has increased by about 6 or 7 inches.

The features that Scott describes as "Caucasian" probably didn't exist as recently as 20,000 years ago (prior to the most recent ice age when Canada was covered under a kilometer or two of ice).

IOW, I can live with a future world sans Caucasians (I'll be dead anyway so "live with" is a figure of speech). My one sincere hope for the future is not only that intelligent life continue on this planet, but that it continue in such a manner that people continue to live civilized lives, exploring and adding to our knowledge. At the moment for example, we are on the edge of remarkable discoveries in genetics. The discoveries of the 22nd or 23rd centuries are still before us.

IMV, the Cold War in its time and environmental destruction now offer greater threats because they have the potential to annihilate intelligent life, leaving only cockroaches to prove their superior status in the Darwinian race.

This backward Islamist threat is not new. Irritating as it is, we've dealt with such before.

Here is the mushy thinking of the left on display.

Argus has used a similar argument. I almost feel as if Scott started this thread as a way to provoke Leftists.

The modern Left has adopted an ideology based on oppressors and victims. White males are oppressors; everyone else is oppressed. To the modern Left, black females, as victims, have the right to defend themselves but white males can never unite or defend themselves since they are oppressors. This is a caricacature but Scott's OP is designed in part to oppose this caricature.

Scott, don't confuse Leftist political correctness with the Enlightenment's non-racial view of existence.

Genetically, human beings have not changed at all for the past 100,000 years.

Can you provide a reference for that assertion?

I read that somewhere and I have been looking on the Internet for a good cite. I have some good comments but no knockout. Admittedly, I overstated the case. Our genes have changed in 100,000 years if only to cope with various infectious attacks. But these have been minor or superficial changes.

I'll stand by my basic argument that a child born 100,000 years ago and brought to the present would have no problem, given the right adoptive family, in graduating from university.

Now, let me finish with this comment in reference to Scott's OP:

Is anyone concerned that Caucasians are intentionally destroying themselves as a homogenous race? It's a fair question, I think, because that is the course embarked upon many years ago when the traditionally Caucasian nations embarked upon policies, almost as one, to institute mass immigration of so-called "visible minorities."

Scott, it seems rather odd that you would refer to "mass immigration".

The "mass immigration" of which you refer was the capture and enslavement of Africans by Europeans and their forced transfer to America. Black Africans didn't choose to immigrate to Caucasian society. Caucasians forced them to immigrate. You'll note too that Caucasians didn't force this immigration to Europe (their homeland), they forced it to America.

So, once again I'm kind of at a loss to understand you, Scott. Are you suggesting that 21st century Caucasians are suffering because of choices made by 18th century Caucasians?

When you say that Caucasians are "intentionally destroying themselves", do you really mean that Caucasians alive today should correct for mistakes made a century or two ago by other Caucasians?

Edited July 13, 2007 by August1991