There are people who make bizarre statements in every group. I personally believe that most, if not all White Nationalists have um… < checks forum description >…wrong… beliefs. But that said, I’m a skeptic and I feel no need to rethink my position on skepticism because some skeptics are also whack-jobs. I’m Jewish and the fact that there’s loony Jews out there doesn’t mean I should “take a lesson from that” and I’m sure that whatever group you’re a member of will have some loonies in it too.
I hope Millen rethinks his position too, but the fact that even for White Nationalists there’s really weird fringe elements probably won’t (and shouldn’t) be a driving factor.
If we ever reach that point, it is likely that no other definable racial group will exist on the planet Earth either. Yet the human race will still exist. (Or else, it won’t, but that’s for another thread.)
You have two ethnicities, (forget biological race since that’s a can of worms around here). If they’re in competition, the boundries of that is useful for defining groups politically.
That is, if you’re going about the task of trying to define these groups for political ends, which you wouldn’t be doing in the first place.
Actually the guy who wrote that would prefer to simply ask people what race they belong to, (but in light of any classification of themselves they’ve currently put themselves in). To him it’s about group loyalty and the dual code above all. Other WN’s wouldn’t accept that, so the whole thing is political.
Ideally, to most racist, would be many small groups. We concede that’s not workable. The compromise for us though isn’t one single group either.
Most do, but there are racists who don’t think it’s a lot more than a social construct. They’re just advancing the interests of their own socially constructed group over the interests of others. Most racists I’ve known like that are already geographical, like British Nationalists for example.
I think race exists biologically. It’s inherited from your parents so I don’t know how genes are not involved, (though I’m not a scientist so I don’t like going here). I suppose race could be nothing but superficial differences as far as there exist proof that was gathered from scientific controlled experiments. It is suspicious to me that, for example, Africans clearly adapted to a warmer client as you can see from the protective pigmentation. Yet all adaptation to life in Africa was strictly limited to the clear aesthetic differences that you coincidentally can’t deny.
I’ll have to look through the thread. Not sure how I could have gotten turned around into saying I don’t think race is biological. I’ve made a distinction between personal definitions and useful political definitions, and stated that I don’t think biology is a useful political definition of race.
I don’t know what to do with a load of assertions that there are no differences in races other than the superficial ones that can’t be denied. I’ve been down this road before. Subjective observations about races are rightly discarded, but then no statistical or historical differences are accepted either. Nobody can really perform controlled scientific experiments conclusive to any amount of critical analysis without breeding little groups of various races and observing several generations of them in a controlled environment.
Black. Was it a trick question?
Well, to be clear I’m not here trying to “win converts”, and I don’t know/care why you personally should care.
Why does it matter if there are no more white people in the future? Why should I care.
If my daughter marries a black man and has a “mixed race” baby, how would that baby be any less my grandchild? It would have exactly the same percentage of my genes as if the father were as white as snow. Why should I care any more if it’s skin is a different color than if its eyes are a different color?
Millen if one of your children had a child with a non-white person would you accept that child as your grandchild?
Makes sense, from your view. We don’t dig this multi-cultural version of America one bit, and I don’t think of it as “my” country. I’d be happy to leave you with the whole place. Things probably won’t work that way, so I hope you’re comfortable with your loyalties
Millen, I don’t care what is or is not ‘white’ by your standards, but I would like to know what type of people you would like to open the new country to; what personal, social and philosophical characteristics would they share.
When did I suggest that all Black people are violent? This was just one incident.
How did I suggest all Non-White immigrants are bigots? I have experienced this just twice.
There is no such thing as a “white” ethnicity. Ethnicity is not defined by physical characteristics. Irish ethnicity is different than Norwegian ethnicity. Are they different races?
Also, I don’t know where you live but the US does not have any “competition” between ethnicities. Whatever competition there is tends to be ideological, political and socio-economic, but it’s not “racial.”
Why should they be defined for political ends? You’re starting with a premise of “race” and then trying to find a definition of. How about if we just dump the premise and work on more important things like peace and prosperity?
Group loyalty? That’s a tautology, my friend. You have to define what a group is before you can use “loyalty” as an identifying characteristic.
I can be loyal to my country, to my chess team or to my family. That doesn’t make those things racial groups. When I was in the Navy I felt loyalty to those who served with me regardless of color. I would view any attempt to disenfranchise them (or any other human) based on skin color as an assault on my people. Does that make me the same race as they are?
Your ideology is a mess. Not only can’t you identify who is in your group and who isn’t, you have no defined goals or rational agenda.
You still haven’t identified what those groups are or what purpose is served by “advancing their intererests.”
Why do you care about “white” people more than “non-white?”
You think wrong. Science does not recognize any such classification. It has absolutely no biological meaning.
“Race” really is nothing but superficial variations. Humans are not speciated. Skin color is no more significant that eye or hair color.
Neither are any of your other definitions.
Race is not something that has to be disproven. You are the one asserting that such a thing exists. You have the burden to prove that variation in skin color amounts to anything more than variation in physical stature. Your experiment with “races” presumes that you have a biological definition of race to begin with which you don’t.
You based that conclusion purely on skin color and nothing else, which means that your sociological rationalizations are just so much smoke. All you really care about is skin color.
Good luck, Millen88. There might not be any essential connection between “White Nationalism” and antisemitism, but there is a definite historical connection, and by now the attitudes are so closely intertwined that it will be very difficult to pick them apart. See the above posts by Sublime5.
Face facts, Sublime5. The Jews are here already, you will never get rid of them, and odds are good that some of them will marry your grandchildren. A thousand years from now (assuming the human race survives that long), there will be people living on this continent with Jewish ancestry, and there will be people with white gentile ancestry, and there will be people of non-white ancestry, and in many if not most cases they will be the same people. Just accept it.
What’s more, we’re not even talking about the future. How do you know you’re not Jewish? At least in part. Ever since the fall of the Roman Empire, Jews have lived in practically every country in Europe at one time or another. Wherever they lived, they came under very strong social pressure (putting it mildly) to convert to Christianity. And it is a matter of historical record that in every generation, some of them did yield to the pressure. And once they converted – within a couple of generations their grandchildren and everybody else forgot they had ever been Jewish, and they assimilated with the gentile population. So how can you be sure of your racial “purity”? Even Hitler might have had a Jewish grandfather, though the question was never settled one way or the other – see Cecil’s column on the subject, at http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a3_325b.html:
And there’s not even a question that Jesus had a Jewish mother!
It sounds as if debaters here are using different definitions of the word “race.”
Here are a few definitions for the word race as it is apparently used in language. Dictionary.com, The American Heritage Dictionary, and even the dictionary found at Yahoo had the same definition for race.
You’re only proving to me that discrimination is rampant in multicultural societies. It is far better for me to seek out a mono-racial society where such discrimination can not take place.
