Race..Culture..Non pc Question

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
21

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Hey look, a stupid bigot asked a stupid bigot question, but predicated it with “non pc question”. Clearly if I point out how much of a dipshit racist this guy is, he’ll just say he’s not “being pc”.

Good job losing any credibility you might have had, ever.[/quote]

Careful, you are moving dangerously close to “bigoted against stupid bigots” territory here.

Probably a more effective strategy would be to explain why you disagree with his premise.[/quote]

“bigoted agaisnt bigots” is another fun one. Its impossible. Being against bigotry means being against those who practice bigotry. It’s an attempt to hijack the definition of the word to say “Anything can be considered bigotry, therefore nothing can be considered bigotry.”

Question: If you see a man hitting a woman and you knock him the fuck out, should we say you “assaulted” the man? If you see someone steal an old womans purse, and you take the purse back from him, are you a theif, because you “stole” the purse from the man? Are you “bigoted” against murderers, rapists, theives, terrorists, etc?
[/quote]

While I do not necessarily disagree with what you are saying here, your original statement suggested a complete severing of all dialog because of a judgment call you made that was clearly (as we can see by the various responses to the OP), subjective. Now see the definition of bigot:

I am honestly not looking to get into a nit-picky semantic bitch-fight, I just wanted to point out that there is actually a probably pretty good discussion lurking in the OP, despite the fact that it is sensitive subject matter and he probably could have worded his query more carefully. It’s tip-toeing through a minefield just to pose this question in any form, clearly.

22

Jarad Diamond wrote a book entitled, “Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies” that delves into this very topic. The book won a Pulitzer. It basically ANSWERS Mr. Valor’s “Non-PC question” in a scientific way and with an historical perspective, rather than judgment or bigotry.

I think the knee jerk responses exhibited here are a symptom of the pendulum swinging too far in the other direction FROM bigotry. There ARE gaps in power and technology that have favored countries and societies of Eurasian descent. To say otherwise is to stick one’s head in the sand and ignore history. Valor was simply asking “why?”. Asking a question certainly doesn’t make one a bigot (although I think the phrasing of his question was poorly conceived, but that reflects his level of education, not any malicious intent on his part, IMHO).

Diamond argues that Eurasian civilization is not so much a product of ingenuity, but of opportunity and necessity. That is, civilization is not created out of sheer will or intelligence, but is the result of a chain of developments, each made possible by certain preconditions.

He reduced the primary factors down to the three items in the title: guns, germs and steel. Eurasian societies developed them first… And it wasn’t “military prowess” that defeated 90% of the native inhabitants of the new territory that was colonized, it was disease. Europeans had such filthy hygiene that they spread disease where ever they went. LOL

Intolerance in either the form of bigotry or “ultra political correctness” is still intolerance. How about we engage in a little intellectual honesty? Valor wasn’t shouting racial epithets from his window, he asked a question on the correct forum on a website known for strong and diverse opinions… As much as we may be ashamed by it, racism and discrimination and all kinds of FUCKED UP behavior is a part of our history. While we can’t change history, we can certainly learn from it. And we’ve all seen where intolerance (no matter what form it takes) leads to: the pendulum swinging back to the OTHER end of the spectrum!

1 Like
23

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Jarad Diamond wrote a book entitled, “Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies” that delves into this very topic. The book won a Pulitzer. It basically ANSWERS Mr. Valor’s “Non-PC question” in a scientific way and with an historical perspective, rather than judgment or bigotry.

I think the knee jerk responses exhibited here are a symptom of the pendulum swinging too far in the other direction FROM bigotry. There ARE gaps in power and technology that have favored countries and societies of Eurasian descent. To say otherwise is to stick one’s head in the sand and ignore history. Valor was simply asking “why?”. Asking a question certainly doesn’t make one a bigot (although I think the phrasing of his question was poorly conceived, but that reflects his level of education, not any malicious intent on his part, IMHO).

Diamond argues that Eurasian civilization is not so much a product of ingenuity, but of opportunity and necessity. That is, civilization is not created out of sheer will or intelligence, but is the result of a chain of developments, each made possible by certain preconditions.

He reduced the primary factors down to the three items in the title: guns, germs and steel. Eurasian societies developed them first… And it wasn’t “military prowess” that defeated 90% of the native inhabitants of the new territory that was colonized, it was disease. Europeans had such filthy hygiene that they spread disease where ever they went. LOL

Intolerance in either the form of bigotry or “ultra political correctness” is still intolerance. How about we engage in a little intellectual honesty? Valor wasn’t shouting racial epithets from his window, he asked a question on the correct forum on a website known for strong and diverse opinions… As much as we may be ashamed by it, racism and discrimination and all kinds of FUCKED UP behavior is a part of our history. While we can’t change history, we can certainly learn from it. And we’ve all seen where intolerance (no matter what form it takes) leads to: the pendulum swinging back to the OTHER end of the spectrum! [/quote]

I actually liked Diamond’s book, as well as a lot of Marvin Harris’ books, which are in the exact same vein and attempt to answer the same questions, and are just really fun to read, even if his conclusions are occasionally questionable (or outrageous). I’d like to know, though, where that leaves modern societies. These theories are excellent at explaining the scope and trajectory of early societies, but how come certain societies today, after having been exposed to more than their fair share of opportunity to take advantage of the factors they’d been lacking for so many eons, still show absolutely no signs of pulling themselves from the primordial sludge that gave birth to them?

In short, how come so many countries, with every example and opportunity to succeed they could ever in their wildest dreams hope for, continue to precipitate headlong toward inexcusable, colossal failure?

24

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Jarad Diamond wrote a book entitled, “Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies” that delves into this very topic. The book won a Pulitzer. It basically ANSWERS Mr. Valor’s “Non-PC question” in a scientific way and with an historical perspective, rather than judgment or bigotry.

I think the knee jerk responses exhibited here are a symptom of the pendulum swinging too far in the other direction FROM bigotry. There ARE gaps in power and technology that have favored countries and societies of Eurasian descent. To say otherwise is to stick one’s head in the sand and ignore history. Valor was simply asking “why?”. Asking a question certainly doesn’t make one a bigot (although I think the phrasing of his question was poorly conceived, but that reflects his level of education, not any malicious intent on his part, IMHO).

Diamond argues that Eurasian civilization is not so much a product of ingenuity, but of opportunity and necessity. That is, civilization is not created out of sheer will or intelligence, but is the result of a chain of developments, each made possible by certain preconditions.

He reduced the primary factors down to the three items in the title: guns, germs and steel. Eurasian societies developed them first… And it wasn’t “military prowess” that defeated 90% of the native inhabitants of the new territory that was colonized, it was disease. Europeans had such filthy hygiene that they spread disease where ever they went. LOL

Intolerance in either the form of bigotry or “ultra political correctness” is still intolerance. How about we engage in a little intellectual honesty? Valor wasn’t shouting racial epithets from his window, he asked a question on the correct forum on a website known for strong and diverse opinions… As much as we may be ashamed by it, racism and discrimination and all kinds of FUCKED UP behavior is a part of our history. While we can’t change history, we can certainly learn from it. And we’ve all seen where intolerance (no matter what form it takes) leads to: the pendulum swinging back to the OTHER end of the spectrum! [/quote]

I agree with everything you said. My problem with the OP was where he said that white Christian
males are responsible for the ideals he stated. The simple fact is that the first people to develop those ideals were lacking at least one of those three attributes.

25

Your original post exudes ignorance. I find it amusing that the white people screaming about how “White Christians are so smart and important” are usually the stupidest and least important people around.

A lot has already been touched on. Many of the greatest philosophers in human history predated Christ, so there goes the Christian part of your theory. Edward Gibbon argued that the Pax Romana (1st-2nd Centuries CE) was the single greatest and most peaceful time to live on Earth. At least in the Mediterranean world, it was certainly a more humane period than both the Early and High Middle Ages–during which Christianity was, for the first time, at the center of European life.

Why was it Europe and not Africa that produced Hamlet and the Mona Lisa and the Notre Dame? Geography. Europeans live in a temperate climate. Summers are warm and winters are cold but water is abundant and the temperature rarely kills. The animals scattered across Europe are generally harmless and remarkably domesticable. Africa is the opposite. Could Shakespeare have penned (quilled?) Othello if he had to spend every day walking ten miles to the river (you can’t live near it because predators congregate there every day), running from lions, hunting gazelles, all the while sweating like a whore in church? No.

Throughout most of the history of civilization, China was the most sophisticated place on Earth.

The torch of civilization was carried in large part by Islamic Arabs during the Dark Ages. Europeans laughed at the ridiculous Arabs because they “bathed every day”…many Brits bathed only once or twice a year. They even introduced the concept of zero to the stupid white Christians in 12th Century (it probably originated in India in the 9th Century).

Why did Europe (and later, North America) emerge as the powerhouse of the Modern Era? Diamond argues Guns, Germs, and Steel. Add to that large natural reserves of coal very close to the surface. Also, the willingness to colonize and mercilessly exploit foreign peoples.

Don’t get me wrong, I love me my whiteness. Vampire Weekend crooning on the radio as I roll to the hip downtown coffee shop in my Prius. The gentle breeze threatening to undo my skinny scarf and blow my pastel fedora out into the suburban Springtime. But fucktards like you need to understand that we arrived here today as a result of a huge collective effort on the part of literally millions of people of different religious, ethnic, and racial backgrounds. We sit on the shoulders of Giants–and many of them were black, Latino, Chinese, Arabian…even Eastern European I guess (I joke, I joke). What the fuck have you contributed to human civilization?

26


Now wait just a DANG minute!

IT IS A FACT that White Christians, in Medieval Scotland, gave the world Curling!

(Haters!)

Mufasa

27

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Now wait just a DANG minute!

IT IS A FACT that White Christians, in Medieval Scotland, gave the world Curling!

(Haters!)

Mufasa[/quote]

AND iceskating AND skiing.

We iz the superior race, hands down.

Also, black people cant swim.

Its science.

28

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Hey look, a stupid bigot asked a stupid bigot question, but predicated it with “non pc question”. Clearly if I point out how much of a dipshit racist this guy is, he’ll just say he’s not “being pc”.

Good job losing any credibility you might have had, ever.[/quote]

We cheer for a UFC HW champ with “Brown Power” forever etched into his skin, we cheer for a President elected in no small part because of his skin color (by blacks who dont have a clue what his politics actually are, I add…), by support “The Race” and Cair…

But HOW DARE…HOW DARE a WHITE MAN even SUGGEST that White Culture is anything other than complete and total shit? HOW DARE YOU!!

You can keep your head buried firmly in your ass, doesn’t change the double standards that currently exist… Imagine if Brock Lesnar had “White Power” tatted on his chest…

29

[quote]Spartacus32 wrote:

[quote]Valor wrote:
As the world changes I think a good argument can be made that White Christian (males…) have been the driving force that created the ideals of Liberty, Rule of Law, Equality, and personal responsability.

When you review World History. I think the above is fairly clear. Without question others have helped and Whites have made errors. But overall I think the point holds.

If…If I’m correct…where does that leave us as we abandon those values and as the plague Multiculturlism spreads?[/quote]

If I were you, I would open those World History textbooks and look up the Persian Empire, Mesopotamia, ancient Egypt, Phoenicia, ancient Greece, the Roman Empire, and Alexander the Great. Every single one of those ideals came about before the idea of Christianity and a lot of these ideals have their origins in the fertile crescent. Also, after the fall of Alexander and his Library plunged Europe into the Dark Ages, it was contact with the Persians and the pagans in Ireland that began reintroducing these ideals to the Europeans.
[/quote]

Fair point. Though as I post from “birth place of civlization” let me assure you…

They’ve forgotten most of those lessons.

30

[quote]jre67t wrote:
As an Hispanic I often argue with my fellow mojo friends and black brothers about this. Not necessarily as whites being supreme, but why are most powerful countries excluding Asians, ran by the Anglos. There are examples of bad Anglo countries i.e. former Soviet Union States.

Look at South America yeah its doing well and good but in my opinion it could be a whole lot better, they are full of natural resources. Same as Mexico very rich in resources as well. Look at the majority of Africa and the Middle East and some of Indonesia and India. Why are the majority so downtrodden and in poverty?

Australia and New Zealand are doing well and are populated with Anglos as well. There must be something to this in my opinion. Are they smarter, better, stronger, No. But in my opinion I believe they have way of thinking of the greater of the herd than for the one. Mind you I do not include the Hitler types.

Also before you guys bash on me Im an Anchor baby from two wetbacks. The problem with America is not the Mexicans its the real Southern countries, i.e. Nicaragua, Salvador…so on and so on. Where real poverty is 90 percent of the population. [/quote]

A great post and I hope it does not get lost in whatever crime of ignorance many here think I am guilty of.

I did not imply that any race is better than any other.
What I am stating is that some cultures ARE in fact better than others. I dont not think something as stupid as skin color determines anything.

I have friends who are Puerto Ricans from New York, that cannot STAND Puerto Ricans from Puerto Rico…does that make them self-racist?

31

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Jarad Diamond wrote a book entitled, “Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies” that delves into this very topic. The book won a Pulitzer. It basically ANSWERS Mr. Valor’s “Non-PC question” in a scientific way and with an historical perspective, rather than judgment or bigotry.

I think the knee jerk responses exhibited here are a symptom of the pendulum swinging too far in the other direction FROM bigotry. There ARE gaps in power and technology that have favored countries and societies of Eurasian descent. To say otherwise is to stick one’s head in the sand and ignore history. Valor was simply asking “why?”. Asking a question certainly doesn’t make one a bigot (although I think the phrasing of his question was poorly conceived, but that reflects his level of education, not any malicious intent on his part, IMHO).

Diamond argues that Eurasian civilization is not so much a product of ingenuity, but of opportunity and necessity. That is, civilization is not created out of sheer will or intelligence, but is the result of a chain of developments, each made possible by certain preconditions.

He reduced the primary factors down to the three items in the title: guns, germs and steel. Eurasian societies developed them first… And it wasn’t “military prowess” that defeated 90% of the native inhabitants of the new territory that was colonized, it was disease. Europeans had such filthy hygiene that they spread disease where ever they went. LOL

Intolerance in either the form of bigotry or “ultra political correctness” is still intolerance. How about we engage in a little intellectual honesty? Valor wasn’t shouting racial epithets from his window, he asked a question on the correct forum on a website known for strong and diverse opinions… As much as we may be ashamed by it, racism and discrimination and all kinds of FUCKED UP behavior is a part of our history. While we can’t change history, we can certainly learn from it. And we’ve all seen where intolerance (no matter what form it takes) leads to: the pendulum swinging back to the OTHER end of the spectrum! [/quote]

Thanks for defending me… I think…

32

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Now wait just a DANG minute!

IT IS A FACT that White Christians, in Medieval Scotland, gave the world Curling!

(Haters!)

Mufasa[/quote]

I feel like I’m coming out of some obscure closet when I say that curling is the shit.

Seriously.

33

[quote]smh23 wrote:
Your original post exudes ignorance. I find it amusing that the white people screaming about how “White Christians are so smart and important” are usually the stupidest and least important people around.

A lot has already been touched on. Many of the greatest philosophers in human history predated Christ, so there goes the Christian part of your theory. Edward Gibbon argued that the Pax Romana (1st-2nd Centuries CE) was the single greatest and most peaceful time to live on Earth. At least in the Mediterranean world, it was certainly a more humane period than both the Early and High Middle Ages–during which Christianity was, for the first time, at the center of European life.

Why was it Europe and not Africa that produced Hamlet and the Mona Lisa and the Notre Dame? Geography. Europeans live in a temperate climate. Summers are warm and winters are cold but water is abundant and the temperature rarely kills. The animals scattered across Europe are generally harmless and remarkably domesticable. Africa is the opposite. Could Shakespeare have penned (quilled?) Othello if he had to spend every day walking ten miles to the river (you can’t live near it because predators congregate there every day), running from lions, hunting gazelles, all the while sweating like a whore in church? No.

Throughout most of the history of civilization, China was the most sophisticated place on Earth.

The torch of civilization was carried in large part by Islamic Arabs during the Dark Ages. Europeans laughed at the ridiculous Arabs because they “bathed every day”…many Brits bathed only once or twice a year. They even introduced the concept of zero to the stupid white Christians in 12th Century (it probably originated in India in the 9th Century).

Why did Europe (and later, North America) emerge as the powerhouse of the Modern Era? Diamond argues Guns, Germs, and Steel. Add to that large natural reserves of coal very close to the surface. Also, the willingness to colonize and mercilessly exploit foreign peoples.

Don’t get me wrong, I love me my whiteness. Vampire Weekend crooning on the radio as I roll to the hip downtown coffee shop in my Prius. The gentle breeze threatening to undo my skinny scarf and blow my pastel fedora out into the suburban Springtime. But fucktards like you need to understand that we arrived here today as a result of a huge collective effort on the part of literally millions of people of different religious, ethnic, and racial backgrounds. We sit on the shoulders of Giants–and many of them were black, Latino, Chinese, Arabian…even Eastern European I guess (I joke, I joke). What the fuck have you contributed to human civilization?[/quote]

Man, I hate asking this question because of even the appearance of being racist but I’m curious about your African comments. So, it’s your position that African culture has not advanced (socially and economically) because it’s hot and predators live near the rivers? What about building canals, aqueducts and such? Fences? Why is a country with such natural resources STILL fucked up? I hope those questions can be raised without the specter of racism. And I will point out that Africans that emigrate here are usually very racist toward American blacks. So, since Africans feel free to draw the distinction, I’ll happily accept that distinction when discussing Africa.

34

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Jarad Diamond wrote a book entitled, “Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies” that delves into this very topic. The book won a Pulitzer. It basically ANSWERS Mr. Valor’s “Non-PC question” in a scientific way and with an historical perspective, rather than judgment or bigotry.

I think the knee jerk responses exhibited here are a symptom of the pendulum swinging too far in the other direction FROM bigotry. There ARE gaps in power and technology that have favored countries and societies of Eurasian descent. To say otherwise is to stick one’s head in the sand and ignore history. Valor was simply asking “why?”. Asking a question certainly doesn’t make one a bigot (although I think the phrasing of his question was poorly conceived, but that reflects his level of education, not any malicious intent on his part, IMHO).

Diamond argues that Eurasian civilization is not so much a product of ingenuity, but of opportunity and necessity. That is, civilization is not created out of sheer will or intelligence, but is the result of a chain of developments, each made possible by certain preconditions.

He reduced the primary factors down to the three items in the title: guns, germs and steel. Eurasian societies developed them first… And it wasn’t “military prowess” that defeated 90% of the native inhabitants of the new territory that was colonized, it was disease. Europeans had such filthy hygiene that they spread disease where ever they went. LOL

Intolerance in either the form of bigotry or “ultra political correctness” is still intolerance. How about we engage in a little intellectual honesty? Valor wasn’t shouting racial epithets from his window, he asked a question on the correct forum on a website known for strong and diverse opinions… As much as we may be ashamed by it, racism and discrimination and all kinds of FUCKED UP behavior is a part of our history. While we can’t change history, we can certainly learn from it. And we’ve all seen where intolerance (no matter what form it takes) leads to: the pendulum swinging back to the OTHER end of the spectrum! [/quote]
That’s what all the liberal types say in their response as their last resort. “Go read that book”. The same book also claims whites to be less intelligent than dark, non-white savages.

Africa is the most resourceful continent on the planet, yet only whites and asians are able to make anything out of them. Countries like Iceland and Finland are barren and very hard to survive in, yet they are routinely ranked as the best to live. So much for nice conditions.

Some people try to kind of confuse by talking about ancient arab achievements as well as amerindian achievements (even if they amount to beautiful piles of rocks) which is all fine and dandy. Sure, they have achieved things in the past and keep having importance in world trade, reflecting their biological capacities. They’re just somewhat lesser achievements, and today is what matters most. That’s why they want to come (t)here and not the other way around.

The yellow man has some good achievements going for him as well, though ingenuity is largely historical. White nations generously allow asian students to come and study for free, copy and steal ideas and then go back home, remembering what the round eyed man taught them.

The guy who made a point about non-christian civilizations doing this and that has a semi-point but…he was talking, at least almost entirely, about WHITE civilizations.

It’s been proven a hundred years ago that races are basically different species and differ wildly in their anatomy, including their brains; races differ significantly in average brain volume and complexity.

All in all, whites are a combination of smarts, morals and beauty lusted after by the remaining dark haired, dark eyed races. If whites were to lose all their standing due to soft hearted compassion for invading hordes, they would lose it because of their uniquely human altruism and faith in a supposed fellow man. If whites were to lose their beauty, they would still stand as the inventors and creators of advanced government, philosophy, art and science. If whites were to lose their smarts, they would still be ogled by different races for their beauty, until multicularism, diversity and miscegenation turned the world into a uniform, brownish mass.

35

[quote]Valor wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Hey look, a stupid bigot asked a stupid bigot question, but predicated it with “non pc question”. Clearly if I point out how much of a dipshit racist this guy is, he’ll just say he’s not “being pc”.

Good job losing any credibility you might have had, ever.[/quote]

We cheer for a UFC HW champ with “Brown Power” forever etched into his skin, we cheer for a President elected in no small part because of his skin color (by blacks who dont have a clue what his politics actually are, I add…), by support “The Race” and Cair…

But HOW DARE…HOW DARE a WHITE MAN even SUGGEST that White Culture is anything other than complete and total shit? HOW DARE YOU!!

You can keep your head buried firmly in your ass, doesn’t change the double standards that currently exist… Imagine if Brock Lesnar had “White Power” tatted on his chest…[/quote]

For every skin-color vote in Obama’s favor, there were three hicks willing to vote for ANYONE with white skin regardless of their politics.

Even if my one-to-three ratio is skewed, here is a statistic for you: 12% of America is black. A poll conducted in 2006 by Opinion Research Corp found that 11% of the country reported itself as being racially biased in favor of whites. See what I’m getting at?

Obama won because he came across as youthful, energetic, and intelligent while McCain chose a running mate who did not understand that Africa was a continent and not a country.

36

[quote]smh23 wrote:

Obama won because he came across as youthful, energetic, and intelligent…[/quote]

I agree with this but the press did help him. Would he have won anyway? Yes most likely.

37

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

Obama won because he came across as youthful, energetic, and intelligent…[/quote]

I agree with this but the press did help him. Would he have won anyway? Yes most likely.

[/quote]

Wait…now that’s WAY too “positive”? for you, Zeb, when speaking of the President.

Give it up…where’s the “but” or “and” to this reply?

Mufasa

38

[quote]Valor wrote:

What I am stating is that some cultures ARE in fact better than others. I dont not think something as stupid as skin color determines anything.

[/quote]

I would disagree with this. Through out history they seem to rise and fall. There is like an ascension- apex- decadence cycle that each one goes through.

We wouldn’t be here now with nuclear power, high speed communication, or interplanetary travel without the foundations laid out by other cultures.

We actually aren’t any better, we’re just taking the ball and running with it for a couple of centuries.

In fact, unless something changes soon, we will begin a descent into cultural decadenceif we already haven’t.

39

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]Valor wrote:

What I am stating is that some cultures ARE in fact better than others. I dont not think something as stupid as skin color determines anything.

[/quote]

I would disagree with this. Through out history they seem to rise and fall. There is like an ascension- apex- decadence cycle that each one goes through.

We wouldn’t be here now with nuclear power, high speed communication, or interplanetary travel without the foundations laid out by other cultures.

We actually aren’t any better, we’re just taking the ball and running with it for a couple of centuries.

In fact, unless something changes soon, we will begin a descent into cultural decadenceif we already haven’t.

[/quote]

Great post, sky!

Mufasa

40

[quote]Mufasa wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

Obama won because he came across as youthful, energetic, and intelligent…[/quote]

I agree with this but the press did help him. Would he have won anyway? Yes most likely.

[/quote]

Wait…now that’s WAY too “positive”? for you, Zeb, when speaking of the President.

Give it up…where’s the “but” or “and” to this reply?

Mufasa[/quote]

My Aunt Biddy always told me “facts is facts.”

:slight_smile: