Racial Superiority

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
RebornTN wrote:

Couldn’t you say that a race developed a certain culture though?

Well, yes, because that is factually true - but their race did not provide some biological determinant that another race would not have had. In other words, you may a common denominator of a particular culture may be its race, but that race didn’t “cause” that civilization to develop one way or another.

[/quote]

I had read some studies that people of a western Asian descent have a higher capacity for memorization and mathematical skills then those of a western Europe descent. While those of Western European descent scored on average higher in terms of art and creativity such as musical talent.

That’s just something I read. But I understand your point.

42

[quote]orion wrote:
jre67t wrote:

Ok why is it that the most powerful nations right now consist of the Asian and European races. Yet the Latin and African Nations are poverty nations. Why is this?

Jared Diamond, “guns, germs and steel”

Guns, Germs, and Steel - Wikipedia [/quote]

Your link didn’t work for me. Can you elaborate on the article?

43

[quote]RebornTN wrote:
orion wrote:
jre67t wrote:

Ok why is it that the most powerful nations right now consist of the Asian and European races. Yet the Latin and African Nations are poverty nations. Why is this?

Jared Diamond, “guns, germs and steel”

Your link didn’t work for me. Can you elaborate on the article?[/quote]

Europe had unique advantages due to its several peninsulas, east-west axis and abundance of domesticable animals and “super-grasses”, meaning plants that delivered a high yield when cultivated.

The Incas had to work with corn and guinea pigs.

44

[quote]orion wrote:
Europe had unique advantages due to its several peninsulas, east-west axis and abundance of domesticable animals and “super-grasses”, meaning plants that delivered a high yield when cultivated.

The Incas had to work with corn and guinea pigs.

[/quote]

I thought you were a person that ascribed the belief of evolution? If humanity originated in Africa and migrated outwards, wouldn’t a race determine it’s own location? Incans also had a large amount of silver if I remember correctly. While not as useful as iron, I believe that you can forge weapons or armor pieces out of it.

Also, those in central America had a lot more vitamins in their diets then others around the world, if you look at some of the possible trade around that region.

If you are making a comparison with European horses, I will bring up war elephants. People can make use of whatever animals are native to their land to bring to bear in warfare. If nothing else, an ancient roman strategy would be using the corpses of dead animals as a form of biological warfare. The Aztecs had dead corpses did they not? It is a matter of how you use the resources you are given. Ingenuity > Luck.

45

It’s actually very simple, repeat after me: LICENCE TO HAVE KIDS.

46

[quote]Majin wrote:
It’s actually very simple, repeat after me: LICENCE TO HAVE KIDS.[/quote]

LICENCE TO HAVE KIDS.

Ok, now what?

47

[quote]RebornTN wrote:
orion wrote:
Europe had unique advantages due to its several peninsulas, east-west axis and abundance of domesticable animals and “super-grasses”, meaning plants that delivered a high yield when cultivated.

The Incas had to work with corn and guinea pigs.

I thought you were a person that ascribed the belief of evolution? If humanity originated in Africa and migrated outwards, wouldn’t a race determine it’s own location? Incans also had a large amount of silver if I remember correctly. While not as useful as iron, I believe that you can forge weapons or armor pieces out of it.

Also, those in central America had a lot more vitamins in their diets then others around the world, if you look at some of the possible trade around that region.

If you are making a comparison with European horses, I will bring up war elephants. People can make use of whatever animals are native to their land to bring to bear in warfare. If nothing else, an ancient roman strategy would be using the corpses of dead animals as a form of biological warfare. The Aztecs had dead corpses did they not? It is a matter of how you use the resources you are given. Ingenuity > Luck.[/quote]

no silver is a crappy metal for weapons. think how many silver guns and swords have you seen in your life that saw battle? the amount a quadriplegic could count i imagine.

having large animals to domesticate for warfare is still dependent on luck of location. sometimes people take other things such as food, weather, trade, and water in consideration to settle before what animals to domesticate for war.

again with biological warfare, dead animals were useful because europe emphasized isolated castles more than other cultures. throwing a few dead animals into a mayan city would not do much. and AGAIN its all luck with diseases that are transmittable from animal to human, such as cowpox. also europe had poorer city wide waste management.

48

[quote]PB-Crawl wrote:
no silver is a crappy metal for weapons. think how many silver guns and swords have you seen in your life that saw battle? the amount a quadriplegic could count i imagine.[/quote]

You can’t make anything lethal out of silver? And there were NO sources of iron on the continents of N.A. and S.A.?

[quote]
having large animals to domesticate for warfare is still dependent on luck of location. sometimes people take other things such as food, weather, trade, and water in consideration to settle before what animals to domesticate for war.[/quote]

Not sure what your trying to prove here. To me, you seem to be validating that other people have selected superior locations.

Isn’t it ironic that the Aztecs were taken out by biological warfare?

49

[quote]RebornTN wrote:
Ok, now what?[/quote]

Utopia.

Maybe.

50

[quote]RebornTN wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
RebornTN wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
Whats race have to do with being strong militarily? If you have superior firepower, you are superior militarily. This is not based upon race.

You have to be able to get the firepower though. Not everyone did that.
[/quote]

Get it from where? The firepower was refined through centuries of continuous warfare as were tactics. Does warfare make one superior?

I thought we were talking about genetics.

51

[quote]Majin wrote:
RebornTN wrote:
Ok, now what?

Utopia.

Maybe.[/quote]

Pretty damn close. Enforce it with RISUG should that ever become viable.

52

[quote]RebornTN wrote:
orion wrote:
Europe had unique advantages due to its several peninsulas, east-west axis and abundance of domesticable animals and “super-grasses”, meaning plants that delivered a high yield when cultivated.

The Incas had to work with corn and guinea pigs.

I thought you were a person that ascribed the belief of evolution? If humanity originated in Africa and migrated outwards, wouldn’t a race determine it’s own location? Incans also had a large amount of silver if I remember correctly. While not as useful as iron, I believe that you can forge weapons or armor pieces out of it.

Also, those in central America had a lot more vitamins in their diets then others around the world, if you look at some of the possible trade around that region.

If you are making a comparison with European horses, I will bring up war elephants. People can make use of whatever animals are native to their land to bring to bear in warfare. If nothing else, an ancient roman strategy would be using the corpses of dead animals as a form of biological warfare. The Aztecs had dead corpses did they not? It is a matter of how you use the resources you are given. Ingenuity > Luck.[/quote]

If the link doesn’t work (works for me) just google Jared Diamond, “guns, germs and steel”. You must know what you want to refute before you try to do it.

53

Another angle on this is: what is superior - a culture that enables you to live in perfect harmony with the environment, taking just what you need from the earth and hence has had no need to change for 40000 years (some estimates claim Australian Aboriginal culture is even older) or a culture where resources are depleted, environment trashed and has to change with every generation?

It all depends on your point of view.

54

[quote]Simba wrote:
Another angle on this is: what is superior - a culture that enables you to live in perfect harmony with the environment, taking just what you need from the earth and hence has had no need to change for 40000 years (some estimates claim Australian Aboriginal culture is even older) or a culture where resources are depleted, environment trashed and has to change with every generation?

It all depends on your point of view. [/quote]

Aaargh, a hippie and a relativist. You Sir, should be banned immediately.

55

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Kind of like the question which dog breed is the best? Breeders can physically select for the traits they desire. It dos not happen naturally because a male dog will mount anything that crosses its path.[/quote]

Bitches do choose their mating partner and that explains why feral and wild dogs are fitter and healthier than man-made breeds. They live longer and are spared from

Specialization has a cost. The more specialized an animal is, the less defenses it has to survive in a new occuring situation and environmment. Pandas and koalas are on the brink of extinction for a reason, black bears and rats are everywhere…
From a survival point a view Crossfit got it right. HA! AH!

56

[quote]kaaleppi wrote:
Simba wrote:
Another angle on this is: what is superior - a culture that enables you to live in perfect harmony with the environment, taking just what you need from the earth and hence has had no need to change for 40000 years (some estimates claim Australian Aboriginal culture is even older) or a culture where resources are depleted, environment trashed and has to change with every generation?

It all depends on your point of view.

Aaargh, a hippie and a relativist. You Sir, should be banned immediately.[/quote]

Didn’t say it was my opinion, just an alternative angle to the ‘superiority’ question.

57

so pretty much the movie GATTACA?

no thanks. That doesnt sound fun.

58

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Gregus wrote:
Yes they were. Europes military has always been very technologically advanced and ahead of it’s time. The tactics and metallurgy were and are very advanced. From the time of the Early Greeks they were unbeatable and are to this day. It’s an art of warfare they’ve been developing for several thousand years. One of the biggest challenges they had was from the east and the recurve? bow. But that would have only gone so far or not. Who knows, it’s all history.

And Europeans are considered Caucasians. Why would you even ask that? It’s like asking, when you say Africans which race are you talking about? Obviously black people, but that’s not to say there’s no white African citizens.

Yeah, technologically advance? How come we lost the Crusades? The Chinese had rockets and used gun power centuries before the Europeans did.

Unbeatable? The Turks overran half of Europe, the Moors took over Spain. European influence was driven from the middle east, Africa and Central Asia by the Muslims.

It was only after the Eastern Civilization declined that the West gained in militarty strength.

Improvements on existing weapons makes one tactically, but not racially superior.
[/quote]

We lost the crusades because of the distance involved in fighting such a war and the kings of Europe got tired of financing that war. It really came down to money. But for the few (relatively) knights that were there, mainly the The Templars, they were very feared and had an unprecedented kill ratio.

The turks overran half of Europe (Southern) due to their vast numbers. They could literally swarm a battlefield. Effectively neturalising most technological advantages. But they were not able to hold it for long. Austria got saved from being overtaken permanently, believe it or not, by Polish Knights.

The Europeans honed and refined their art of war very quickly. You see that with Alexander the great. The first inkling were the Spartans. The Romans held most of the known world in control for thousands of years and brought civility to most corners. In fact, the USA is largely based on Roman systems. From our government to our roads and stadiums.

Perhaps one of the greatest European Contributions to the world is the democratic government where people are considered important and have unalienable rights.

In the end i see each race as having a very distinct contribution, like pieces of a puzzle for a better world. None better or worse then the other, just different and unique.

59

[quote]THE_CLAMP_DOWN wrote:
so pretty much the movie GATTACA?

no thanks. That doesnt sound fun.[/quote]

Unless you happen to be the one banging Uma Thurman.Then it could be lots of fun.

60

Hey you know what’s funny? Between all the debate about White vs Black athletes, you guys forgot about Asians! And guess who won the most gold medals this year in the 2008 Olympics? China.

That’s right, they beat the good old USA. And no, the Chinese didn’t import a bunch of Jamaicans or Nigerians to play for them like we did. They used their own athletes.