Are all races equal?

[Master Zen]

BTW, I remember Bulworth saying something like

"we all should **** each other until we're the same color".

Now THAT's an idea! Where do I sign?

[foolish_icarus]

I just saw this thread and I admit that i have not read through all of it, but in case this point has not yet been made I would like to present it. It is partly in response to the origional question in the first post and partly in response to what the discussion seems to have developed into:


Firstly, all claims of superiority or inferiority are completely subjective and equally pointless. Whether it is a species or an individual it can only react to the environment it exists in. This includes all the seeming advantages or disadvantages it is presented with. There is no justification for the conditions that exist, no claims of "not fair" or "if only we had been where you were". If something, a group or a single entity, survives the conditions it inhabits, it succeeds. If it dies or ceases to exist, it fails. There is no intermediate measure, because at every single point in time the conditions will be different, and the only way an outlook for a group absolutely cannot change is if they don't exist. That is the fundamental law in operation here. If it can exist, it does. If it cannot, it doesn't. Often the conditions decide a fate that is completely beyond the control of the participant, be it negative or positive. So any seeming advantages at one point of time are not the result of any special merit, merely an indicator that the thing has been able to survive in the conditions it has been presented with. No more. No less.

Secondly, and more in line with the origional question:
There are definitely differences between groups when averaged or some such nonsense. But individually there is no such distinction. It is much like melecular activity, if you have enough of the substance you can somewhat predict what the bulk of it will do, but the actions of the individual parts is unpredictable to us. Just as with people. I certainly feel a connection with people based on their personal attributes, not their racial heritage, because that is meaningless. Its all about circumstances, not what the statistics say will probably happen, because that has no effect on the individual scale. And finally, this is because we are all of the same species, able to breed and continue our species, no matter what the race, and so we certianly share a fairly common fate. Partly because of this reproductive link and partly because of the social conditions that have been created, there can only be an evaluation on the individual scale, and even this is based on how well the person does in each given environment. I hope you follow my reasoning (assuming it hasn't been presented in this thread before, i didn't see anything like this but that doesn't mean much). If something is unclear, or you just think i'm full of crap, i will be happy to attempt to be more accurate and precise, or just verbally stick a poker up your ass, whatever is necessary.

[Luk]

Well, I think that not only in Europe there were horses, and other civs did not create such a great Civilizations like Europe (China, and India were definitly inferior in many aspects, like social sphere, individualism, organization, culture, ideas, etc). Not only in Europe were the cattle. Most of domestic able animals and plants were in Middle, and Far East.

Greeks for example had definitly worser natural enviroment then other civilization, they had to import many things to their country etc, etc. There were many other tribes like Fenicians, and many others which we do not know which had the same, or better resources as Greeks, but only Greeks managed to create such a culture, and such an organizations like Greeks, Platon, Aristoteles, Sofokles, Sokrates and many others created something which is not affected by natural enviroment but mostly because of their spirit, their will o createness Gobineau, the precursor of racial superiority theory was examining the differences between races, and he exclude Natural Enviroment, because as he said, even the best enviroment is not enough to create an advanced culture, and he exclude social enviroment, because even the best institutions and goverments given to societes non-white are not gonna to be realised.

Europeans had disadvantages and advantages, many other civilizations in Euroasia had more advantages, and they did not use that. Even if they create a great empire, when the geopolitical strucutre collapsed they could not reincarnate in other geopolitical strucutre, because their culture, and civilization were not moderniznig, and were not as vital as European culture does. Europeans had a great ability to adpot new things to their culture, they had very good organization, they create all ideas, and all types of social lives, they always tried to change and they were always modernizing. The geopolitical structures were changing, Greek, Roman Empires collapsed, but after this always were coming another geopolitical structure. For example in China, India, in South America there was not such a development, despite that natural recources were the same or even better. Europeans had to import many things, they did not have everything, and after Rome Collapsed they were inferior, and weaker then Islamic Empires.

Incas did not solve that problems, because they did not create the culture in the full meaning of this word. They did not created cuch an organized society like Europeans, they did not tried to expand, Im sure that they could create much more well organized society, and much more expansionist. For example, South America is far more inferior then north america... Why???? Because in South America there are lot of Indians, and lot of Indians crossed with Whites, and in North America the civilization were created by pure European people, who destroyed all natives. South America is now poorer because they did not destroyed, and killed all Indians.

Chinese, and African civs were superior then White???? I first time hear it! Egypt was a pathetic civilization, and Chinese is a symbol of civlization which has no will to expand. Chinese are not able to be never superpower even in our times, because it is not in their nature. Chinese civilization had fisrt invented the gunpowder, and many, many more technologies, but they did not use it effectivly, but Whites, Europeans gained it, and use it more effectivly, because we are geneticcaly different. The civilization is the development of people. The people create civilization, and of course natural enviroment does have matter, but not only this. As I said Chinese, Indians, Middle East had better start locations then Europe, and they did not expand, they did not use even their great scientifical research as mentioned above gunpowder. Why???? Because of genetically differences of race.

Native Americans are Yellow race. They are not White, so they are definitly not in white race group.

Galls, and Germans had no better technologies or even equal then Romans, and they conquer Rome, so you the fall of Rome is not based on support of food. I could give you a lot of reasons why Rome collapsed, and it was not connected at all with natural enviroment.

Moslems were material poor???? Moslems had insufficient materials????? You are stupid, or uneducated. Moslems had in that times better technique, were richer, and more powerful, and Europe in that times, the times of middle ages had not above average population grow. In that times I can say that European population did not grow too much. You trie to fit your theory, but it not fits. Moslems had of course the advantage in that times over Europe, but they did not manage it, because white even in bad times, times when their geopolitical structures were after collapse, and new geopolitical strutures started to create, even in that times they defended from far more rich civilization as Moslems were.

And IQ tests measured at Black students after Universities in America with White students resulted in 20 points disadvantage.... Why???? In the same conditions in America white students are better then blacks... Why????

I can't proof you anything because I do not have abilities to do it, and I do not keep all newspapers! All your texts are not backed with profs. And if you did not hear about this diferences geneticaly in Athlets, you read to less newspapers, and books. I do not want to prove you something which is proven

Generally my theories are backed by science, and history. Your are backed by nothing, but artificial theories which tries to fit the facts for the theory which is set before the facts.

[Luk]

And I have to say that I do not really belive in IQ testes, it is rather a symbol of racial differenes

[Boris Godunov]

Luk, you're an idiot. You claim science and history backs you up, but then you cite Gobineau (who died in the 19th century) as your source. His work has been thoroughly discredited by modern science and anthropology. Hell, it was discredited back in the 19th century by Joseph Fermin in his response, The Equality of Races.

Gobineau's works were also very influential in the founding of Nazism, which I guess you are a big fan of as well.

Try some modern texts, such as Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond. Or any number of modern looks at history and anthropology. You will find your assertions are a load of bull****.

[Luk]

Well, todays science about IQ says that IQ is affected by enviroment and genetics. It is a mix.

Gobineu was the writer quoted here to prove that even in XIX century racism were answering to Enviromental bull****.

As I said, now I do not belive in science after II WW but even this science are proving racial differences, but of course uses political correctness.

I think that my belive in racial superiority is based on facts. Fact is that we, whites created the best civilization. How we did this is a matter of science, and research, and as you all see science are changing rapidly, and science is very affected by politics, and trends. So science, and research are not facts. Facts are obiective. And obiective is that White race is the best. I do not care why, but we are the best. The best from ancient times to modern times. Always the best, and I think that forever, because if something is not ending for 2000 years, it will not end in another 2000 years

Nazism... It is stupid, by nazism Europeans destroyed their chances to be superpower for years...

Racial superiority should be idea of elite, only elite... as it is now. Normal people should think as you all people think. And Im glad that Europeans did this trick with Human rights. Because of human rights, and democracy, we white people rule the world. But as European I want European White people to rule the world, not American White People

[Velociryx]

Using your logic, Luk....could we not say this:

Americans built the biggest economy the planet has ever seen.

Nobody else's economy even comes close to the USA's in size and vibrance.

Therefore, Americans are superior.

See how silly?

-=Vel=-

[DuncanK]

Vel,

That is a silly argument I agree. But it is an argument that unfortunately many have made before.

[Velociryx]

Just because others have made it before, certainly does not make it the truth.

Yes....since Luk seems to enjoy pointing out facts, the US economy IS the biggest, no matter how you slice it. That's an undisputable fact. (the only way Europe has been able to hold a candle, size wise, is to begin to merge their economies....yeah, if you take fourteen, sixteen industrialized countries in Europe, add up the sum-total of their economic output, you begin to come close, that's true, but the EU is not a unified political governing body...it's not a "United States of Europe" so the comparison isn't exactly apples to apples).

So...by his logic, the argument above holds.

::shakes head in wonder::

-=Vel=-

[Sandman]

What's more amazing is that he's Polish.

They pissed away their greatness like so many of his 'inferior' non-Europeans.

[DuncanK]

Originally posted by Luk
I think that my belive in racial superiority is based on facts. Fact is that we, whites created the best civilization. How we did this is a matter of science, and research, and as you all see science are changing rapidly, and science is very affected by politics, and trends. So science, and research are not facts. Facts are obiective. And obiective is that White race is the best. I do not care why, but we are the best. The best from ancient times to modern times. Always the best, and I think that forever, because if something is not ending for 2000 years, it will not end in another 2000 years

I think you don't know that we are talking about social science not science. You can't prove things in social science. It's just that no social scientist believe in your theory, because it's too ridiculous.

[DuncanK]

Originally posted by Luk
But as European I want European White people to rule the world, not American White People

Vel,

I see now why you are pointing out that Americans are the most successfull civilization. You just sunk his battleship

[Velociryx]

Indeed...tho I didn't wanna do the copying and pasting myself, but I'm glad you caught it....

-=Vel=-

[Master Zen]

If the white race is so superior, why have the not been superior throughout ALL of history??? I mean, if they are so great as you say, this world should be thier oyster since the beginning of time.

How can you be sure that the white race will still be superior in another 100 or 200 years? You can't. White superiority is a fluke of history, just as every other major empire and every other religion or race's superiorty has been: flukes. To think, like Fracis Fukuyama that this is the "end of history" and that the status quo of today will be maintained for the rest of time is stupid and arrogant and it's EXACTLY how other empires felt just before they melted away.

Just look at the arabs in the first half of the millenium. They were ahead in every possible aspect of human development than europe in the dark ages. Did they ever believe those primitive medieval squabbling barbarians would ever be superior? I doubt it. The Chinese as far as the 1700's treated europeans like crap because they believed their celestial empire would be forever the greatest. Big surprise.

Just as whites have not been in charge since the beginning of time is sufficient evidence to believe there will come a time which another race will lead this world. Considering white people will amount to less than 15% of the population by the year 2050 (compared to 40% in 1900), it seems to me quite the more impossible.

Rejoice while ye can. You, your sons or at the most, your grandsons may not share your optimism.

[Zero]

Raguil, I guess your statement would be 100% correct if you can ONLY make the assumption that white people are indeed superior today. So I guess either way racial superiority doesnt work out.