African-Americans comprise 9% of the population of Los Angeles County, but are victims in 59% of all race-hate crimes

[Caladan 19]

But that's only kinda sorta true if you start at the height of Europe's empires. Which really is cherrypicking the evidence. If you start 500 years earlier, all the scientific advances and mathematical advances, as well as preserving all of the philosophy of the West is done by Arab empires.

Well... let's say we have a timeline of 10,000 years. Then you will get a result that civilization has been advanced by Whites and Arabs (almost) alone until around the 1950's. My point wasn't that Whites as such would be somehow superior. It's a color in the end. If you wanna find some absolute physical superiority it would probably be a grey bear and grey hair. The point was that the Western culture has proven itself to be superior and that culture starts comfortably with the Greeks (it doesn't mean that human culture itself would start with the Greeks, but the Greek contributed so much that the contributions before the Greeks can be said to be negligible).

Still, what comes to Arabs, I'm not sure how much they contributed themselves. In my view they more or less preserved the Greek tradition (which was of course extremely important). The only Arab philosopher who I can name without cheating is Abd ar-Rahman Ibn Muhammad Ibn Khaldun (I can name more Turks but they are more or less Whites I suppose if we want to stick to a few aggregates).

I see it as not quite that simple, especially because we're *in* the West, so the philosophers and scientists (say) that we know best are Western. It wasn't just preserving the Greek idea, either... mathematical advances, architectural advances... lots of things are Arab. Thomas Aquinas quotes and responds to Averroes.

And it's a good story to tell about the Greeks.... but they learned a lot from conquering Persia and India... Trade and conquest spread most of the world's information and technology, so it's hard to say. Gunpowder? Pretty sure that's Chinese.

[Heracles 417]

But that's only kinda sorta true if you start at the height of Europe's empires. Which really is cherrypicking the evidence. If you start 500 years earlier, all the scientific advances and mathematical advances, as well as preserving all of the philosophy of the West is done by Arab empires.

Well... let's say we have a timeline of 10,000 years. Then you will get a result that civilization has been advanced by Whites and Arabs (almost) alone until around the 1950's. My point wasn't that Whites as such would be somehow superior. It's a color in the end. If you wanna find some absolute physical superiority it would probably be a grey bear and grey hair. The point was that the Western culture has proven itself to be superior and that culture starts comfortably with the Greeks (it doesn't mean that human culture itself would start with the Greeks, but the Greek contributed so much that the contributions before the Greeks can be said to be negligible).

Still, what comes to Arabs, I'm not sure how much they contributed themselves. In my view they more or less preserved the Greek tradition (which was of course extremely important). The only Arab philosopher who I can name without cheating is Abd ar-Rahman Ibn Muhammad Ibn Khaldun (I can name more Turks but they are more or less Whites I suppose if we want to stick to a few aggregates).

Arabs are Caucasians anyway. So I don't know why they are going on and on about it. I think your original point is about equality and fairness. Which means the same rules applying to all. Irrespective of one's race or culture.

Eg What is viewed as being racist from one should also apply to someone else's comments.

Edited September 2, 2007 by Boo-Yah!

[mawilson 2,133]

Not the Dark Ages, mawilson. Through at least 16th century. How far do you think the Renaissance and Enlightenment gets without having Aristotle as a starting base? How do the medieval Europeans get their hands on Aristotle if not through Africa and the Mid-East? Bear in mind, too, there's a whole hell of a lot going on in China and Japan at the same time.... Japan was a world power before America was.

History just isn't teleological. It's just one damn thing after another. It would be like me saying that Americans are the only ones that contributed to world history because we're on top now. Well, okay, but America didn't create civilization then. If China flips the dollar, do we suddenly get narratives where the Chinese are the only true civilization?

The Arabs reintroduced Aristotle's work to Europe in the 12th century.

Anyhow - we have advanced intellectually more in the last 200 years than in the

previous 2,000, which is why I'm saying only the last couple of centuries matter.

[Caladan 19]

Not the Dark Ages, mawilson. Through at least 16th century. How far do you think the Renaissance and Enlightenment gets without having Aristotle as a starting base? How do the medieval Europeans get their hands on Aristotle if not through Africa and the Mid-East? Bear in mind, too, there's a whole hell of a lot going on in China and Japan at the same time.... Japan was a world power before America was.

History just isn't teleological. It's just one damn thing after another. It would be like me saying that Americans are the only ones that contributed to world history because we're on top now. Well, okay, but America didn't create civilization then. If China flips the dollar, do we suddenly get narratives where the Chinese are the only true civilization?

The Arabs reintroduced Aristotle's work to Europe in the 12th century.

Anyhow - we have advanced intellectually more in the last 200 years than in the

previous 2,000, which is why I'm saying only the last couple of centuries matter.

Right, but they kept doing things that were intellectually interesting well beyond that. Europe wasn't *talking* to them much, but that's not the same thing.

I think it's just plainly false to draw a line at the Industrial Revolution and then count that as civilization given that none of that happens without what came before it. Most of our civilization's trappings is through the last three hundred years but what has that to do with the alleged superiority of white people?

[Heracles 417]

Right, but they kept doing things that were intellectually interesting well beyond that. Europe wasn't *talking* to them much, but that's not the same thing.

I think it's just plainly false to draw a line at the Industrial Revolution and then count that as civilization given that none of that happens without what came before it. Most of our civilization's trappings is through the last three hundred years but what has that to do with the alleged superiority of white people?

Why are you trying to take what Stabu said out of context. The only reason stabu mentioned white civilization was in terms of whether it is okay for someone Caucasian to discuss their ancestor's achievements to the same degree as black Americans do? Once again, nothing else more to it..

Edited September 2, 2007 by Boo-Yah!

[mawilson 2,133]

I think it's just plainly false to draw a line at the Industrial Revolution and then count that as civilization given that none of that happens without what came before it. Most of our civilization's trappings is through the last three hundred years but what has that to do with the alleged superiority of white people?

Only the fact that white people have achieved more in 200 years than ALL the other civilizations over untold thousands of years before them?

[Stabu 0]

Most of our civilization's trappings is through the last three hundred years but what has that to do with the alleged superiority of white people?

I do wonder who has claimed that White people would be superior? I've been the only one who have been talking among those lines and I've been greatly misunderstood. My original point was that 1) White should have an equal right to feel proud of being White than any other people have the right to be proud of something that they've done. Whites shouldn't feel ashamed about themselves in the way they are currently shamed especially by the academia. 2) The second point was that the academia implicitly assumes that Blacks and Hispanics are inferior to Whites and can only compete with them via extra privileges. I think that these privileges are unfair since they reduce the value of education from those Blacks and Hispanics who are very talented and can compete against Whites and Asians without Affirmative action or equal programs.

This discussion has gotten badly out of track...

[Caladan 19]

Right, but they kept doing things that were intellectually interesting well beyond that. Europe wasn't *talking* to them much, but that's not the same thing.

I think it's just plainly false to draw a line at the Industrial Revolution and then count that as civilization given that none of that happens without what came before it. Most of our civilization's trappings is through the last three hundred years but what has that to do with the alleged superiority of white people?

Why are you trying to take what Stabu said out of context. The only reason stabu mentioned white civilization was in terms of whether it is okay for someone Caucasian to mention their people's achievements to the same degree as black Americans do? Once again, nothing else more to it..

The one who brought it up was peejay (check the thread, you quoted it approvingly), who was saying that no one else contributed to civilization besides the White Man and that's a reason for something or other about the genetics of the rest of the planet.

That's not just celebrating the steam engine, you know?

[Caladan 19]

Most of our civilization's trappings is through the last three hundred years but what has that to do with the alleged superiority of white people?

I do wonder who has claimed that White people would be superior? I've been the only one who have been talking among those lines and I've been greatly misunderstood. My original point was that 1) White should have an equal right to feel proud of being White than any other people have the right to be proud of something that they've done. Whites shouldn't feel ashamed about themselves in the way they are currently shamed especially by the academia. 2) The second point was that the academia implicitly assumes that Blacks and Hispanics are inferior to Whites and can only compete with them via extra privileges. I think that these privileges are unfair since they reduce the value of education from those Blacks and Hispanics who are very talented and can compete against Whites and Asians without Affirmative action or equal programs.

This discussion has gotten badly out of track...

Nothing wrong with being proud of your history. I was responding mostly to peejay -- I think it's wrong to see civilization as the product of only White people. You want to be proud of your heritage, that's great. As to affirmative action, if you look at how it's actually practiced at the top universities, it's often less to do with race and much much more to do with socioeconomic status. Meaning the poor white boy from Tennessee who goes to a rural public school and aces the SATs is going to be courted by Harvard just as heavily as a black kid from the inner city.

It's also much less of a bump than people think -- about equivalent to being a candidate track team member for a division III team. If schools actually did straight merit, they'd be 30% Asian. (Is there white affirmative action going on?) But the top schools don't admit students based on a straightforward calculation of GPA and SAT; they look at all sorts of factors. One is race, but imx, it's outweighed by other factors like wanting so many from thus and such private school, or only so many from the Northeast, or trying to recruit more in the Southwest.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

The left wing White liberals always love to talk about White racism.

That's because White liberals (and university people in general) are engaged in an intellectual war against the Western greko-roman culture. They have a deep hatred towards man and are willing to go to almost any length in order to destroy him, his freedom and his creativity. The irony is that the universities where originally built in order to become the enlightenment centers of the world. Currently their task seems to be to bring destruction. In general I hold the view that the more formal education you have the more stupid you become (this thus the fact that I'm likely among the most formally educated on these boards).

We are currently almost living in an Orwellian world, where concepts have been twisted to mean the complete opposite of what they meant originally. The word racism used to mean "discrimination based on race" currently a racist is anyone who "believes that there are genetic differences between groups of men". This means that around 80% of all biology processors are categorized as racist, as are those of us who still think that genes partially determine the intelligence, speed, endurance etc. of individuals. Furthermore the concept or racism has been extended to include anyone who is against groups such as Jews, Muslims, Women or homosexuals (earlier you used to call such individuals anti-Semites, islamophobes, sexists or homophobes). As it seems obvious that also so called minorities hold racist views the term racism has been further defined as something only the majority can do to a minority group. Thus it becomes an impossibility to be a racist against white (Christian) heterosexual males. The irony again is that as the White have already become a minority in the states of Texas and California the concept has been redefined again to mean that racism can only emerge when it's conducted by a "dominant group" (i.e. Whites) against a "subordinate group" (i.e. everyone else), but not the other way around. Another comic thing is that Blacks are in general more against homosexuals' rights and abortion than Whites are. In the same manner Hispanics have a history of being more against Blacks than Whites are. These things are (of course) forgotten.

This double standard is infuriating in so many ways. First of all a Black individual can get away with publicly saying and endorsing that "White people should be exterminated" (as pointed above by Boo-Yah!) where as White individuals can't even use the word ni**er (I actually can't say the word in here either since it's apparently censored) without being labelled as racist. The whole academic world is famous of its affirmative action programs. These programs are unfair and they hurt blacks the most, since these programs mean that the academic achievements of good black students are jeopardized on the labour market because employers think that their achievements are based on extra privilidges even if they wouldn't. These programs also label Blacks and Hispanics as children, since the program assumes that Blacks and Hispanics are somehow inferior in comparison to Whites and Asians and can only compete with them if they are given privilidges. Of course the intellectuals who planned these programs won't admit this, but this is precisely the thinking behind these programs. Even Blacks themselves aren't allowed to criticize affirmative action. Blacks such as Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell are said not to be really Black at all because they have done this. Also the "pride" term is corrupted. It's okay to be proud about being a homosexual, Black, Asian or Arab, but it's not okay to be proud of being White. White pride is associated with silly neo-Nazi extremism whereas other forms of prides are associated with equality. It seems to be totally wrong to be proud of being White, even if the civilization as we know it has always been a White man's project alone, at least till the end of the 20th century (of course this has nothing to do with any kind of racial or genetic superiority but it is simply doe to a series of fortunate events). Without it, most of us would be dead and those lucky enouhg to be alive, would be living in caves.

Ouh and btw. I happen to be and Atheist and thus among the most widely hated minority group in the whole US (luckily Atheism isn't something that would show unless you open your mouth).

Great post. I hope to see more of you in OT. Don't forget to visit a global warming thread on your way out.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Must have forgotten the Mesopotamians (creators of the first written language). They weren't exactly 'white'.

As far as I know ancient history the Mesopotamians influenced the Greeks rather little. The Greeks where more influenced by the Egyptians (who also influenced the Mesopotamians). I didn't say that there wouldn't be high cultures (or civilizations is the more proper English word I assume) outside the Western world. There have been the Chinese, the Indians, the Mesopotamians, the Egyptians, the Carthagese, the Mayans, the Incas and the Aztecs at least. I also pointed out that this has nothing to do with genes or equal, but mostly it's a question of a series of happy events that led the West where it is today. You should realize this at least after you make a list of explorers, scientist and philosophers who you can name. It will consist of mostly Whites (and Jews if you consider them to be non-White) and there's a good reason for this. After say mid 20th century you will find people from other races as well and currently (listing the fames of the early 21st century) it will probably consist of mostly Japanese, Chinese and Indians, which proves how the project of reason has become international and how it can be driven by anyone regardless of race (this will become more and more important especially now when Europe is slowly falling back into darkness).

The point is obvious - you can't lay the advances of civilisation squarely at the door of the "white man". The ancient Greeks and Romans et al bear little resemblance to European or American civilization (such as we'd term 'white civilization') to be in any way analogous.

Reminds me a little of that quote from Monty Python's Life of Brian - about "what did the Romans do for us, except for engineering, sanitation, education etc". Increasingly archaeologists are finding that much of this was already there when the romans came on the scene. As far as that goes the Romans 'invented' relatively little - though they were organised enough to make the most of technologies developed by the preceding civilisation.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Most of our civilization's trappings is through the last three hundred years but what has that to do with the alleged superiority of white people?

I do wonder who has claimed that White people would be superior? I've been the only one who have been talking among those lines and I've been greatly misunderstood. My original point was that 1) White should have an equal right to feel proud of being White than any other people have the right to be proud of something that they've done. Whites shouldn't feel ashamed about themselves in the way they are currently shamed especially by the academia. 2) The second point was that the academia implicitly assumes that Blacks and Hispanics are inferior to Whites and can only compete with them via extra privileges. I think that these privileges are unfair since they reduce the value of education from those Blacks and Hispanics who are very talented and can compete against Whites and Asians without Affirmative action or equal programs.

This discussion has gotten badly out of track...

As I said - I see this very much as a cultural rather than purely 'racial' issue. The 'Black Experience' as it pertains to the US was essentially created out of the slave trade. There are few cultural similarities between 2nd, 3rd and 4th generation blacks living in the US and the African or Caribbeann countries they originated from. As such the 'black identity' as it were, is very much still being determined.

What does it mean to be white in America? Is there a single unified cultural identity you can identify with - or are we all products of our respect countries and points of origin? As I see it the majority is far from homogenous. A specific minority... less so.

[Raspect 0]

What exactly is the point here?

That Latinos and Blacks living in the mainly inner-city parts of Los Angeles don't get along?

That overt racism results from ignorance and a lack of general education (which is also rather typical of inner city life)?

Some point... Stating the obvious...

good point, the same at one time could be said of any 2 minorities..as an example; the irish and italians, when they first came to america...

So why should this get just a ho-hum, nothing-to-see-here response, while the exact same behaviour from whites is an outrage?

Who said that (any) racism was acceptable?

Well you basically have before. Whenever I post proof of racism against someone white, in America, you always respond with a they're just an idiot or extremist style comment. Never ever condemning it.

Same goes with people beating the 'well they are a minority' drum. Yet when someone white is a minority in XYZ county, so many here are like big ######.. Point being does being a minority matter? If so, does it apply and matter as much depending on whether someone is white or not??

If someone white had said these comments they would be all over the media and the usual crowd in VJ would be talking ###### about whoever said it and calling him a range of names..

man, I left for a few days, and was happy, swimming, loving the sun, listening to music, hanging out with friends and his young brothers and sisters, this post had more or less died by then, then I come back to see Boo-Yah has to open their mouth in this fashion again. WAHHHH WAHHHHHHH make me cry, that I put myself through the scrutiny of reading his/her comments. And this Charles, ayyyy, better if I don't even start with that. WOOW is all I will say

[Raspect 0]

The left wing White liberals always love to talk about White racism.

In general I hold the view that the more formal education you have the more stupid you become (this thus the fact that I'm likely among the most formally educated on these boards).

I general, I hold the view that I stop reading posts after I read something like this. So I guess I will just wonder what the rest of your post says

I am sure it was quite entertaining though!!

Good luck!

[Raspect 0]

Oh shut up - I second this!!!!!

I have never said racism is acceptable. That's incredibly disingenuous. That said someone who makes a comment about how "group x should be exterminated" is clearly a nutjob. Hence they quote a 'former professor' and the leader of an organisation which is considered by many people to be extremist. What else do you want me to say? I'm not sure why idiotic comments deserve well... any attention to be honest. I second this also, and I am not sure either why you give Boo-Yah with his/her disingenous comments and quite frankly idiotic comments any attention. You are smarter that that