| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"News Source" |
| Date: |
30 Apr 2006 09:03:07 PM |
| Object: |
Re: The Origin of Racism |
Ichi wrote:
The Origin of Racism
The Term Racism
The term racist has been around since 1936. The concept has been in the=
English language since 1907. It appears that the conflict between Hitle=
r's
Germany and the Jewish culture was the catalyst for the predominance of=
the
term racist. I say Jewish culture, because there are three racial group=
ings
within the Jewish community: Hebrew, mixed-breed Hebrews, and non-Hebre=
ws.
[...]
http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=3D4523
The Origins of the Word 'Racism'
History; Posted on: 2005-01-29 11:00:32
*The curious beginnings of a useless word.*
by Sam Francis
THE OXFORD English Dictionary is a multivolume reference work that=20
is one of Western scholarship=92s most remarkable achievements=96the=20
standard dictionary of the English language on what are known as=20
=93historical principles.=94 Unlike most dictionaries, the OED also=20
provides information on the first historical appearance and usage of=20
words. The range of the erudition in the OED is often astounding,=20
but for AR readers, one of its most interesting entries is for the=20
word =93racism.=94
According to the second edition (1989) of the OED, the earliest=20
known usage of the word =93racism=94 in English occurred in a 1936 book=20
by the American =93fascist,=94 Lawrence Dennis, The Coming American=20
Fascism. The second usage of the term in English that the OED=20
records is in the title of a book originally written in German in=20
1933 and 1934 but translated into English and first published in=20
1938=96Racism by Magnus Hirschfeld, translated by Eden and Cedar Paul.=20
Since Hirschfeld died in 1935, before the publication of Dennis=92=20
book the following year, and had already used the word extensively=20
in the text and title of his own book, it seems only fair to=20
recognize him rather than Dennis as the originator of the word=20
=93racism.=94 In the case of the word =93racist=94 as an adjective, the O=
ED=20
ascribes the first known usage to Hirschfeld himself (pictured).
Who was Magnus Hirschfeld and what did he have to tell us about=20
=93racism=94?
Magnus Hirschfeld (1868-1935) was a German-Jewish medical scientist=20
whose major work was in the field of what came to be known as=20
=93sexology=94=96the scientific study of sex. Like Havelock Ellis in=20
England and Alfred Kinsey in the United States, Hirschfeld was not=20
only among the first to collect systematic information about=20
sexuality but also was an apostle of sexual =93liberation.=94 His major=20
work was a study of homosexuality, but he also published many other=20
books, monographs, and articles dealing with sex. He wrote a=20
five-volume treatise on =93sexology=94 as well as some 150 other works=20
and helped write and produce five films on the subject.
It is fair to say that his works were intended to send a=20
message=96that traditional Christian and bourgeois sexual morality was=20
repressive, irrational, and hypocritical, and that emancipation=20
would be a major step forward. His admiring translators, Eden and=20
Cedar Paul, in their introduction to Racism, write of his=20
=93unwearying championship of the cause of persons who, because their=20
sexual hormonic functioning is of an unusual type, are persecuted by=20
their more fortunate fellow-mortals.=94 Long before the =93sexual=20
revolution=94 of the 1960s, Magnus Hirschfeld was crusading for the=20
=93normalization=94 of homosexuality and other abnormal sexual behavior.
Hirschfeld was the founder of an Institute for Sexual Science in=20
Berlin and helped organize =93sexology=94 on an international scale. In=20
1922, he was physically attacked and almost killed by anti- Semites=20
in Munich. In May, 1933, the Nazis closed down his =93Institute of=20
Sexual Science=94 and Hirschfeld fled to France, where he lived until=20
his death in 1935.
Racism is largely devoted to a highly polemical =93refutation=94 of some =
of the main racial ideologies and theories of the 19th and 20th=20
centuries. The writers whom Hirschfeld criticized, aside from his=20
favorite target of the National Socialists themselves, were figures=20
like Arthur de Gobineau, Vacher de La-Pouge, Houston Stewart=20
Chamberlain, and others generally denounced today as=20
=93pseudo-scientists.=94 In fact, that is an inappropriate term. Some of =
them were not trying to write as scientists at all but rather as=20
political theorists, while others are better described as=20
pre-scientific writers on race who worked with inadequate=20
information, concepts, methodology, and terminology. While=20
Hirschfeld may have been correct in rejecting their more egregious=20
errors, his sneering at them for these mistakes is rather like=20
ridiculing Copernicus and Kepler because they continued to accept=20
some erroneous ideas from medieval astronomy.
Even when Hirschfeld is right in his critique of the early race=20
theorists, it is often because he has chosen easy targets. His=20
=93refutation=94 of =93racism=94 is largely centered on irrelevant=20
common-places that even extreme exponents of racial differences=20
might readily acknowledge=96that all human beings are part of the same=20
species and can interbreed, that blood transfusions can take place=20
between races, that =93there is no such thing as a pure race,=94 that=20
the races are identical in the vast majority of physical=20
characteristics, that cephalic index is not a meaningful measurement=20
of intelligence or character, etc. Yet his =93scientific=94 evidence is=20
often merely anecdotal or simply his own opinion asserted as=20
unquestioned truth.
In another section, he recounts the names of those he considers the=20
70 most outstanding figures in world history and announces that =93all=20
such lists, when made without bias, will show that persons of genius=20
and persons of outstanding talent are not set apart from the ruck by=20
any colour of their eyes, by a peculiar shape of the skull or the=20
nose, by any =91ethnological=92 characteristics whatever. What is=20
decisive in human beings is not race but individuality.=94 It does not=20
seem to occur to Hirschfeld that all but about 8 or 9 of the 70=20
world-historical figures on his list are white Europeans. There are=20
no Negroes and only two Asians (Confucius and Sun Yat Sen).
It is interesting that for all his contempt for =93racism,=94 Hirschfeld =
never once mentions IQ studies or the considerable psychometric=20
evidence about race and intelligence that was already available even=20
in the 1930s. Most of Hirschfeld=92s polemic is aimed at the=20
proponents of intra-European racial differences (Nordics, Alpines,=20
Mediterraneans, Dinarics, etc.) and not at differences between=20
whites and other major races (though he steadfastly denies such=20
differences as well). Curiously, he never cites the work of Franz=20
Boas and his disciples against =93racism,=94 though that work was=20
available in Europe at the time, nor does he invoke the ideas of the=20
Frankfurt School, though Hirschfeld=92s own claim that =93racism=94 is=20
rooted in fear, loss of self-esteem, and other social and=20
psychological pathologies resembles the ideas the Frankfurt School=20
was formulating.
Nor, despite Hirschfeld=92s own Jewish background and the Nazi threat=20
to Jews, does he seem preoccupied with anti-Semitism; in one or two=20
passages he criticizes Jews themselves for their own ethnocentrism=20
and faults Zionism for having created a new =93race hatred=94 between=20
Jews and Arabs. Moreover, Hirschfeld is a stout defender of=20
eugenics, though not on racial lines, and he even has a brief=20
chapter exploring a distinction he calls =93Gobinism or=20
Galtonism=94=96that is, attacking the ideas of French =93racist=94 Arthur=
de=20
Gobineau and defending those of Francis Galton, who coined the word=20
=93eugenics=94 and pioneered its development. Today most critics of=20
=93racism=94 would lump Galton and Gobineau together rather than=20
distinguish between them.
As a serious critique of the view that socially significant natural=20
differences between the races exist, Hirschfeld=92s book is a failure,=20
and even as a polemic against some of the more politicized and=20
unverified claims about race made a century or more ago, it is weak.=20
The importance of the book is not so much its content, however, as=20
what it tells us about the word =93racism=94 and how the enemies of=20
white racial consciousness have developed and deployed it for their=20
own purposes.
Hirschfeld describes his own political ideals as =93Pan-Humanism,=94 a=20
version of political, cultural, and racial universalism. The Pauls=20
themselves write, =93we think that the readers of Racism will detect a=20
very definite orientation to the Left. . . . [Hirschfeld] was one=20
who fully realized that sexual reform is impossible without a=20
preliminary economic and political revolution.=94
In Racism, Hirschfeld offers what is essentially a definition of=20
=93Pan-Humanism:=94 =93The individual, however close the ties of=20
neighborhood, companionship, family, a common lot, language,=20
education, and the environment of nation and country, can find only=20
one dependable unity within which to seek a permanent spiritual=20
kinship=96that of humanity-at-large, that of the whole human race.=94=20
With one exception, he is unsparing in his denunciations of the=20
ethnocentric loyalties of nations, races, and cultures: =93Always and=20
everywhere, except in Soviet Russia, xenophobia, xenophobia,=20
xenophobia.=94 Later, he informs us, =93It may be too early to speak,=20
but perhaps the problem of nationalities and races has already been=20
solved on one-sixth of the land-surface of the globe [i.e., Stalin=92s=20
Russia].=94
=93Racism,=94 therefore, is a term originating on the left, and has been =
so defined and loaded with meanings the left wants it to have that=20
it cannot now be used by the supporters of white racial=20
consciousness for any constructive purpose. Anyone who uses the term=20
to describe himself or his own views has already allowed himself to=20
be maneuvered onto his opponents=92 ground and has already lost the=20
debate. He may try to define the word differently, but he will need=20
to spend most of his time explaining that he does not mean by it=20
what everyone else means. As a term useful for communicating ideas=20
that the serious supporters of white racial consciousness wish to=20
communicate, the term is useless, and it was intended by those who=20
developed it that it be useless for that purpose.
But understanding the origins of the word =93racism=94 in Hirschfeld=92s =
polemic also makes clear the uselessness of the word for any other=20
purpose. No one seems ever to have used the word to describe his own=20
ideas or ideas with which he agrees; its only application has been=20
by the enemies of the ideas it purports to describe, and hence it=20
has no objective meaning apart from its polemical usage. If no one=20
calls his own ideas =93racism=94 and its only application is to a body=20
of ideas considered to be untrue and evil, then it has no use other=20
than as a kind of fancy curse word, the purpose of which is simply=20
to demonize anyone who expresses the ideas it is supposed to describe.
It is clear that Magnus Hirschfeld himself harbored deep=20
ideological, professional, and personal animosities against those to=20
whom he applied the word, and those animosities may have extended to=20
the entire society that throughout his career he associated with=20
sexual repression and which he wanted replaced by a kind of global=20
communism under the label of =93Pan-Humanism.=94 Whatever the flaws or=20
virtues of his polemic against =93racism,=94 his own opposition to=20
racial consciousness was neither entirely rational nor=20
disinterested. It is time that the enemies of racial, national, and=20
cultural consciousness like Hirschfeld and the Frankfurt School=20
cease to be able to claim a monopoly on rationality and sanity and=20
that the obsessions and motivations that seem to shape their own=20
ideologies and political behavior be subjected to the same scrutiny=20
they apply to the societies and peoples whom their thinking could=20
destroy.
http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=3D4523
.
|
|
| User: "Comm" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Racism |
07 May 2006 10:56:37 PM |
|
|
People - and by that I mean a very BIG and very "square/normal" group of
people, are sick of the word "racism" and sick of people bringing up "race"
whenever something goes wrong. Nobody wants to hear it any more. They
might not overtly say it, but you can tell by how they simply dismiss it and
anyone spewing and yammering about it.
Call it what you want - race, breed, type, style, kin - the CONCEPT is felt,
it's in our limbic brains - it's based on facial recognition first of all,
religion and style of dress lesser so. People feel comfortable with people
pretty much like themselves where everyone blends in comfortably. They feel
comfortable with people on the same intellectual level as themselves, even
if these similarities cross class differences. Also, people note styles of
dress (those are "markers" that our brains recognize - again, it's limbic).
Not being able to speak the same language bars any kind of communication -
or friendship - or anything else.
People have comfort factors inbuilt into them - no matter how "hard" a
leftie tries to quiet these feelings down. The feelings are there. Period.
There is no changing this save to change the human species into something
else. Like insects.
Yes, "racism" didn't exist in Stalin's Soviet Union - BY FORCE. And?
Stalin was not a liberal, by the way. Heh.
Liberals, imo, are sick people.
"News Source" <reporter@v-news.org> wrote in message
news:v%d5g.11278$sq5.1450@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
Ichi wrote:
The Origin of Racism
The Term Racism
The term racist has been around since 1936. The concept has been in the
English language since 1907. It appears that the conflict between Hitler's
Germany and the Jewish culture was the catalyst for the predominance of
the
term racist. I say Jewish culture, because there are three racial
groupings
within the Jewish community: Hebrew, mixed-breed Hebrews, and non-Hebrews.
[...]
http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=4523
The Origins of the Word 'Racism'
History; Posted on: 2005-01-29 11:00:32
*The curious beginnings of a useless word.*
by Sam Francis
THE OXFORD English Dictionary is a multivolume reference work that
is one of Western scholarship’s most remarkable achievements–the
standard dictionary of the English language on what are known as
“historical principles.” Unlike most dictionaries, the OED also
provides information on the first historical appearance and usage of
words. The range of the erudition in the OED is often astounding,
but for AR readers, one of its most interesting entries is for the
word “racism.”
According to the second edition (1989) of the OED, the earliest
known usage of the word “racism” in English occurred in a 1936 book
by the American “fascist,” Lawrence Dennis, The Coming American
Fascism. The second usage of the term in English that the OED
records is in the title of a book originally written in German in
1933 and 1934 but translated into English and first published in
1938–Racism by Magnus Hirschfeld, translated by Eden and Cedar Paul.
Since Hirschfeld died in 1935, before the publication of Dennis’
book the following year, and had already used the word extensively
in the text and title of his own book, it seems only fair to
recognize him rather than Dennis as the originator of the word
“racism.” In the case of the word “racist” as an adjective, the OED
ascribes the first known usage to Hirschfeld himself (pictured).
Who was Magnus Hirschfeld and what did he have to tell us about
“racism”?
Magnus Hirschfeld (1868-1935) was a German-Jewish medical scientist
whose major work was in the field of what came to be known as
“sexology”–the scientific study of sex. Like Havelock Ellis in
England and Alfred Kinsey in the United States, Hirschfeld was not
only among the first to collect systematic information about
sexuality but also was an apostle of sexual “liberation.” His major
work was a study of homosexuality, but he also published many other
books, monographs, and articles dealing with sex. He wrote a
five-volume treatise on “sexology” as well as some 150 other works
and helped write and produce five films on the subject.
It is fair to say that his works were intended to send a
message–that traditional Christian and bourgeois sexual morality was
repressive, irrational, and hypocritical, and that emancipation
would be a major step forward. His admiring translators, Eden and
Cedar Paul, in their introduction to Racism, write of his
“unwearying championship of the cause of persons who, because their
sexual hormonic functioning is of an unusual type, are persecuted by
their more fortunate fellow-mortals.” Long before the “sexual
revolution” of the 1960s, Magnus Hirschfeld was crusading for the
“normalization” of homosexuality and other abnormal sexual behavior.
Hirschfeld was the founder of an Institute for Sexual Science in
Berlin and helped organize “sexology” on an international scale. In
1922, he was physically attacked and almost killed by anti- Semites
in Munich. In May, 1933, the Nazis closed down his “Institute of
Sexual Science” and Hirschfeld fled to France, where he lived until
his death in 1935.
Racism is largely devoted to a highly polemical “refutation” of some
of the main racial ideologies and theories of the 19th and 20th
centuries. The writers whom Hirschfeld criticized, aside from his
favorite target of the National Socialists themselves, were figures
like Arthur de Gobineau, Vacher de La-Pouge, Houston Stewart
Chamberlain, and others generally denounced today as
“pseudo-scientists.” In fact, that is an inappropriate term. Some of
them were not trying to write as scientists at all but rather as
political theorists, while others are better described as
pre-scientific writers on race who worked with inadequate
information, concepts, methodology, and terminology. While
Hirschfeld may have been correct in rejecting their more egregious
errors, his sneering at them for these mistakes is rather like
ridiculing Copernicus and Kepler because they continued to accept
some erroneous ideas from medieval astronomy.
Even when Hirschfeld is right in his critique of the early race
theorists, it is often because he has chosen easy targets. His
“refutation” of “racism” is largely centered on irrelevant
common-places that even extreme exponents of racial differences
might readily acknowledge–that all human beings are part of the same
species and can interbreed, that blood transfusions can take place
between races, that “there is no such thing as a pure race,” that
the races are identical in the vast majority of physical
characteristics, that cephalic index is not a meaningful measurement
of intelligence or character, etc. Yet his “scientific” evidence is
often merely anecdotal or simply his own opinion asserted as
unquestioned truth.
In another section, he recounts the names of those he considers the
70 most outstanding figures in world history and announces that “all
such lists, when made without bias, will show that persons of genius
and persons of outstanding talent are not set apart from the ruck by
any colour of their eyes, by a peculiar shape of the skull or the
nose, by any ‘ethnological’ characteristics whatever. What is
decisive in human beings is not race but individuality.” It does not
seem to occur to Hirschfeld that all but about 8 or 9 of the 70
world-historical figures on his list are white Europeans. There are
no Negroes and only two Asians (Confucius and Sun Yat Sen).
It is interesting that for all his contempt for “racism,” Hirschfeld
never once mentions IQ studies or the considerable psychometric
evidence about race and intelligence that was already available even
in the 1930s. Most of Hirschfeld’s polemic is aimed at the
proponents of intra-European racial differences (Nordics, Alpines,
Mediterraneans, Dinarics, etc.) and not at differences between
whites and other major races (though he steadfastly denies such
differences as well). Curiously, he never cites the work of Franz
Boas and his disciples against “racism,” though that work was
available in Europe at the time, nor does he invoke the ideas of the
Frankfurt School, though Hirschfeld’s own claim that “racism” is
rooted in fear, loss of self-esteem, and other social and
psychological pathologies resembles the ideas the Frankfurt School
was formulating.
Nor, despite Hirschfeld’s own Jewish background and the Nazi threat
to Jews, does he seem preoccupied with anti-Semitism; in one or two
passages he criticizes Jews themselves for their own ethnocentrism
and faults Zionism for having created a new “race hatred” between
Jews and Arabs. Moreover, Hirschfeld is a stout defender of
eugenics, though not on racial lines, and he even has a brief
chapter exploring a distinction he calls “Gobinism or
Galtonism”–that is, attacking the ideas of French “racist” Arthur de
Gobineau and defending those of Francis Galton, who coined the word
“eugenics” and pioneered its development. Today most critics of
“racism” would lump Galton and Gobineau together rather than
distinguish between them.
As a serious critique of the view that socially significant natural
differences between the races exist, Hirschfeld’s book is a failure,
and even as a polemic against some of the more politicized and
unverified claims about race made a century or more ago, it is weak.
The importance of the book is not so much its content, however, as
what it tells us about the word “racism” and how the enemies of
white racial consciousness have developed and deployed it for their
own purposes.
Hirschfeld describes his own political ideals as “Pan-Humanism,” a
version of political, cultural, and racial universalism. The Pauls
themselves write, “we think that the readers of Racism will detect a
very definite orientation to the Left. . . . [Hirschfeld] was one
who fully realized that sexual reform is impossible without a
preliminary economic and political revolution.”
In Racism, Hirschfeld offers what is essentially a definition of
“Pan-Humanism:” “The individual, however close the ties of
neighborhood, companionship, family, a common lot, language,
education, and the environment of nation and country, can find only
one dependable unity within which to seek a permanent spiritual
kinship–that of humanity-at-large, that of the whole human race.”
With one exception, he is unsparing in his denunciations of the
ethnocentric loyalties of nations, races, and cultures: “Always and
everywhere, except in Soviet Russia, xenophobia, xenophobia,
xenophobia.” Later, he informs us, “It may be too early to speak,
but perhaps the problem of nationalities and races has already been
solved on one-sixth of the land-surface of the globe [i.e., Stalin’s
Russia].”
“Racism,” therefore, is a term originating on the left, and has been
so defined and loaded with meanings the left wants it to have that
it cannot now be used by the supporters of white racial
consciousness for any constructive purpose. Anyone who uses the term
to describe himself or his own views has already allowed himself to
be maneuvered onto his opponents’ ground and has already lost the
debate. He may try to define the word differently, but he will need
to spend most of his time explaining that he does not mean by it
what everyone else means. As a term useful for communicating ideas
that the serious supporters of white racial consciousness wish to
communicate, the term is useless, and it was intended by those who
developed it that it be useless for that purpose.
But understanding the origins of the word “racism” in Hirschfeld’s
polemic also makes clear the uselessness of the word for any other
purpose. No one seems ever to have used the word to describe his own
ideas or ideas with which he agrees; its only application has been
by the enemies of the ideas it purports to describe, and hence it
has no objective meaning apart from its polemical usage. If no one
calls his own ideas “racism” and its only application is to a body
of ideas considered to be untrue and evil, then it has no use other
than as a kind of fancy curse word, the purpose of which is simply
to demonize anyone who expresses the ideas it is supposed to describe.
It is clear that Magnus Hirschfeld himself harbored deep
ideological, professional, and personal animosities against those to
whom he applied the word, and those animosities may have extended to
the entire society that throughout his career he associated with
sexual repression and which he wanted replaced by a kind of global
communism under the label of “Pan-Humanism.” Whatever the flaws or
virtues of his polemic against “racism,” his own opposition to
racial consciousness was neither entirely rational nor
disinterested. It is time that the enemies of racial, national, and
cultural consciousness like Hirschfeld and the Frankfurt School
cease to be able to claim a monopoly on rationality and sanity and
that the obsessions and motivations that seem to shape their own
ideologies and political behavior be subjected to the same scrutiny
they apply to the societies and peoples whom their thinking could
destroy.
http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=4523
.
|
|
|
| User: "AmerGovtCriminalsExposer" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Racism |
08 May 2006 01:37:20 AM |
|
|
"Comm" <no@spam.com> wrote in message
news:Vjz7g.469$t32.72@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
People - and by that I mean a very BIG and very "square/normal" group of
people, are sick of the word "racism" and sick of people bringing up
"race" whenever something goes wrong. Nobody wants to hear it any more.
They might not overtly say it, but you can tell by how they simply dismiss
it and anyone spewing and yammering about it.
Call it what you want - race, breed, type, style, kin - the CONCEPT is
felt, it's in our limbic brains - it's based on facial recognition first
of all, religion and style of dress lesser so. People feel comfortable
with people pretty much like themselves where everyone blends in
comfortably. They feel comfortable with people on the same intellectual
level as themselves, even if these similarities cross class differences.
Also, people note styles of dress (those are "markers" that our brains
recognize - again, it's limbic). Not being able to speak the same language
bars any kind of communication - or friendship - or anything else.
People have comfort factors inbuilt into them - no matter how "hard" a
leftie tries to quiet these feelings down. The feelings are there.
Period. There is no changing this save to change the human species into
something else. Like insects.
Yes, "racism" didn't exist in Stalin's Soviet Union - BY FORCE. And?
Stalin was not a liberal, by the way. Heh.
Liberals, imo, are sick people.
Hey RACIST *****,
You are fucking CONFUSED ***** with a mole brain that does NOT understand the
meaning of cultural and language differences and RACISM.
RACISM is when a WHITE COP gives unjustified tickets to COLORED PEOPLE or
BEAT THEM UP because of their skin color.
Have you seen this pictures at www.maafa.org ?
Whites MURDERED, BURNED and LYNCHED BLACKS because of the SKIN COLOR of
BLACKS.
.
|
|
|
| User: "H.R.H. Qwerty" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Racism |
08 May 2006 11:57:31 AM |
|
|
In article <445ee6d4$0$23729$a8266bb1@reader.corenews.com>,
"AmerGovtCriminalsExposer" <AmerGovtCriminalsExposer@americangovt.org>
wrote:
"Comm" <no@spam.com> wrote in message
news:Vjz7g.469$t32.72@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
People - and by that I mean a very BIG and very "square/normal" group of
people, are sick of the word "racism" and sick of people bringing up
"race" whenever something goes wrong. Nobody wants to hear it any more.
They might not overtly say it, but you can tell by how they simply dismiss
it and anyone spewing and yammering about it.
Call it what you want - race, breed, type, style, kin - the CONCEPT is
felt, it's in our limbic brains - it's based on facial recognition first
of all, religion and style of dress lesser so. People feel comfortable
with people pretty much like themselves where everyone blends in
comfortably. They feel comfortable with people on the same intellectual
level as themselves, even if these similarities cross class differences.
Also, people note styles of dress (those are "markers" that our brains
recognize - again, it's limbic). Not being able to speak the same language
bars any kind of communication - or friendship - or anything else.
People have comfort factors inbuilt into them - no matter how "hard" a
leftie tries to quiet these feelings down. The feelings are there.
Period. There is no changing this save to change the human species into
something else. Like insects.
Yes, "racism" didn't exist in Stalin's Soviet Union - BY FORCE. And?
Stalin was not a liberal, by the way. Heh.
Liberals, imo, are sick people.
Hey RACIST *****,
You are fucking CONFUSED ***** with a mole brain that does NOT understand the
meaning of cultural and language differences and RACISM.
RACISM is when a WHITE COP gives unjustified tickets to COLORED PEOPLE or
BEAT THEM UP because of their skin color.
Have you seen this pictures at www.maafa.org ?
Whites MURDERED, BURNED and LYNCHED BLACKS because of the SKIN COLOR of
BLACKS.
Whites were lynched, too, and the lynchings weren't just for sport or
fun. Whites and blacks who "stepped out of bounds" were meted out this
extra-legal "justice".
Qwerty
.
|
|
|
| User: "AmerGovtCriminalsExposer" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Racism |
08 May 2006 05:41:11 PM |
|
|
"H.R.H. Qwerty" <qwerty@nonya.biz> wrote in message
news:qwerty-C57850.12573108052006@news.charter.net...
In article <445ee6d4$0$23729$a8266bb1@reader.corenews.com>,
"AmerGovtCriminalsExposer" <AmerGovtCriminalsExposer@americangovt.org>
wrote:
"Comm" <no@spam.com> wrote in message
news:Vjz7g.469$t32.72@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
People - and by that I mean a very BIG and very "square/normal" group
of
people, are sick of the word "racism" and sick of people bringing up
"race" whenever something goes wrong. Nobody wants to hear it any
more.
They might not overtly say it, but you can tell by how they simply
dismiss
it and anyone spewing and yammering about it.
Call it what you want - race, breed, type, style, kin - the CONCEPT is
felt, it's in our limbic brains - it's based on facial recognition
first
of all, religion and style of dress lesser so. People feel comfortable
with people pretty much like themselves where everyone blends in
comfortably. They feel comfortable with people on the same
intellectual
level as themselves, even if these similarities cross class
differences.
Also, people note styles of dress (those are "markers" that our brains
recognize - again, it's limbic). Not being able to speak the same
language
bars any kind of communication - or friendship - or anything else.
People have comfort factors inbuilt into them - no matter how "hard" a
leftie tries to quiet these feelings down. The feelings are there.
Period. There is no changing this save to change the human species into
something else. Like insects.
Yes, "racism" didn't exist in Stalin's Soviet Union - BY FORCE. And?
Stalin was not a liberal, by the way. Heh.
Liberals, imo, are sick people.
Hey RACIST *****,
You are fucking CONFUSED ***** with a mole brain that does NOT understand
the
meaning of cultural and language differences and RACISM.
RACISM is when a WHITE COP gives unjustified tickets to COLORED PEOPLE or
BEAT THEM UP because of their skin color.
Have you seen this pictures at www.maafa.org ?
Whites MURDERED, BURNED and LYNCHED BLACKS because of the SKIN COLOR of
BLACKS.
Whites were lynched, too, and the lynchings weren't just for sport or
fun.
Whites and blacks who "stepped out of bounds" were meted out this
extra-legal "justice".
Qwerty
Dont lie and argue just for the sake of argument. Racism of whites is
everywhere in history all over this world where ever they attacked,
conquered, looted and murdered the natives.
.
|
|
|
| User: "H.R.H. Qwerty" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Racism |
08 May 2006 05:50:16 PM |
|
|
In article <445fc8b9$0$23780$a8266bb1@reader.corenews.com>,
"AmerGovtCriminalsExposer" <AmerGovtCriminalsExposer@americangovt.org>
wrote:
"H.R.H. Qwerty" <qwerty@nonya.biz> wrote in message
news:qwerty-C57850.12573108052006@news.charter.net...
In article <445ee6d4$0$23729$a8266bb1@reader.corenews.com>,
"AmerGovtCriminalsExposer" <AmerGovtCriminalsExposer@americangovt.org>
wrote:
"Comm" <no@spam.com> wrote in message
news:Vjz7g.469$t32.72@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
People - and by that I mean a very BIG and very "square/normal" group
of
people, are sick of the word "racism" and sick of people bringing up
"race" whenever something goes wrong. Nobody wants to hear it any
more.
They might not overtly say it, but you can tell by how they simply
dismiss
it and anyone spewing and yammering about it.
Call it what you want - race, breed, type, style, kin - the CONCEPT is
felt, it's in our limbic brains - it's based on facial recognition
first
of all, religion and style of dress lesser so. People feel comfortable
with people pretty much like themselves where everyone blends in
comfortably. They feel comfortable with people on the same
intellectual
level as themselves, even if these similarities cross class
differences.
Also, people note styles of dress (those are "markers" that our brains
recognize - again, it's limbic). Not being able to speak the same
language
bars any kind of communication - or friendship - or anything else.
People have comfort factors inbuilt into them - no matter how "hard" a
leftie tries to quiet these feelings down. The feelings are there.
Period. There is no changing this save to change the human species into
something else. Like insects.
Yes, "racism" didn't exist in Stalin's Soviet Union - BY FORCE. And?
Stalin was not a liberal, by the way. Heh.
Liberals, imo, are sick people.
Hey RACIST *****,
You are fucking CONFUSED ***** with a mole brain that does NOT understand
the
meaning of cultural and language differences and RACISM.
RACISM is when a WHITE COP gives unjustified tickets to COLORED PEOPLE or
BEAT THEM UP because of their skin color.
Have you seen this pictures at www.maafa.org ?
Whites MURDERED, BURNED and LYNCHED BLACKS because of the SKIN COLOR of
BLACKS.
Whites were lynched, too, and the lynchings weren't just for sport or
fun.
Whites and blacks who "stepped out of bounds" were meted out this
extra-legal "justice".
Qwerty
Dont lie and argue just for the sake of argument. Racism of whites is
everywhere in history all over this world where ever they attacked,
conquered, looted and murdered the natives.
I've offered no lies. Sure, Whitey's been cruel at times, but what race
of people hasn't?
Qwerty
.
|
|
|
| User: "AmerGovtCriminalsExposer" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Racism |
08 May 2006 09:33:40 PM |
|
|
"H.R.H. Qwerty" <qwerty@nonya.biz> wrote in message
news:qwerty-160706.18501608052006@news.charter.net...
In article <445fc8b9$0$23780$a8266bb1@reader.corenews.com>,
"AmerGovtCriminalsExposer" <AmerGovtCriminalsExposer@americangovt.org>
wrote:
"H.R.H. Qwerty" <qwerty@nonya.biz> wrote in message
news:qwerty-C57850.12573108052006@news.charter.net...
In article <445ee6d4$0$23729$a8266bb1@reader.corenews.com>,
"AmerGovtCriminalsExposer" <AmerGovtCriminalsExposer@americangovt.org>
wrote:
"Comm" <no@spam.com> wrote in message
news:Vjz7g.469$t32.72@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
People - and by that I mean a very BIG and very "square/normal"
group
of
people, are sick of the word "racism" and sick of people bringing up
"race" whenever something goes wrong. Nobody wants to hear it any
more.
They might not overtly say it, but you can tell by how they simply
dismiss
it and anyone spewing and yammering about it.
Call it what you want - race, breed, type, style, kin - the CONCEPT
is
felt, it's in our limbic brains - it's based on facial recognition
first
of all, religion and style of dress lesser so. People feel
comfortable
with people pretty much like themselves where everyone blends in
comfortably. They feel comfortable with people on the same
intellectual
level as themselves, even if these similarities cross class
differences.
Also, people note styles of dress (those are "markers" that our
brains
recognize - again, it's limbic). Not being able to speak the same
language
bars any kind of communication - or friendship - or anything else.
People have comfort factors inbuilt into them - no matter how "hard"
a
leftie tries to quiet these feelings down. The feelings are there.
Period. There is no changing this save to change the human species
into
something else. Like insects.
Yes, "racism" didn't exist in Stalin's Soviet Union - BY FORCE.
And?
Stalin was not a liberal, by the way. Heh.
Liberals, imo, are sick people.
Hey RACIST *****,
You are fucking CONFUSED ***** with a mole brain that does NOT
understand
the
meaning of cultural and language differences and RACISM.
RACISM is when a WHITE COP gives unjustified tickets to COLORED PEOPLE
or
BEAT THEM UP because of their skin color.
Have you seen this pictures at www.maafa.org ?
Whites MURDERED, BURNED and LYNCHED BLACKS because of the SKIN COLOR
of
BLACKS.
Whites were lynched, too, and the lynchings weren't just for sport or
fun.
Whites and blacks who "stepped out of bounds" were meted out this
extra-legal "justice".
Qwerty
Dont lie and argue just for the sake of argument. Racism of whites is
everywhere in history all over this world where ever they attacked,
conquered, looted and murdered the natives.
I've offered no lies. Sure, Whitey's been cruel at times, but what race
of people hasn't?
Qwerty
Ok here is a simple question.
How many non-white countries were attacked, conquered, annihilated, looted,
colonized and enslaved by whiteys and vice versa ?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Comm" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Racism |
09 May 2006 08:31:53 AM |
|
|
"AmerGovtCriminalsExposer" <AmerGovtCriminalsExposer@americangovt.org> wrote
in message news:445fff3b$0$23768$a8266bb1@reader.corenews.com...
"H.R.H. Qwerty" <qwerty@nonya.biz> wrote in message
news:qwerty-160706.18501608052006@news.charter.net...
Ok here is a simple question.
How many non-white countries were attacked, conquered, annihilated,
looted, colonized and enslaved by whiteys and vice versa ?
How far back in time do you want to go? The Egyptians conquered people,
usually WHITE people. The Romans conquered people, the Romans were
mediterranean. They conquered the Germanic people. Whites got in on the
"conquering" act very late in the whole picture. My people conquered the
Islamic Middle Eastern people and many white people.
.
|
|
|
| User: "AmerGovtCriminalsExposer" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Racism |
09 May 2006 06:43:38 PM |
|
|
"Comm" <no@spam.com> wrote in message
news:dR08g.377$x4.11@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
"AmerGovtCriminalsExposer" <AmerGovtCriminalsExposer@americangovt.org>
wrote in message news:445fff3b$0$23768$a8266bb1@reader.corenews.com...
"H.R.H. Qwerty" <qwerty@nonya.biz> wrote in message
news:qwerty-160706.18501608052006@news.charter.net...
Ok here is a simple question.
How many non-white countries were attacked, conquered, annihilated,
looted, colonized and enslaved by whiteys and vice versa ?
How far back in time do you want to go? The Egyptians conquered people,
usually WHITE people. The Romans conquered people, the Romans were
mediterranean. They conquered the Germanic people. Whites got in on the
"conquering" act very late in the whole picture. My people conquered the
Islamic Middle Eastern people and many white people.
Last I know MAJORITY of the Land and properties in african countries South
Africa and Zimbabwe are still OWNED BY WHITES.
Here is what Rev Desmond Tutu said.
When the WHITE MAN came to Africa, we had the land and they had the bible.
Today we have the bible and they have the LAND.
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his
government."
Edward Abbey
http://thirdworldtraveler.com/Authors/QuotationsToMakeUSThink.html
http://thirdworldtraveler.com
Pax anti- american imperialism and terrorism is a philosophy.
Making sure evil, imperialistic american govt does not turn me into a slave
like majority of the americans, is liberty building.
Think of it as somebody beating the ***** out of EVIL AMERICAN GOVT
CRIMINALS, MURDERERS and TERRORISTS for being FASCIST and GENOCIDAL.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "A." |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Racism |
10 May 2006 09:48:29 AM |
|
|
Comm wrote:
"AmerGovtCriminalsExposer" <AmerGovtCriminalsExposer@americangovt.org> wrote
in message news:445fff3b$0$23768$a8266bb1@reader.corenews.com...
"H.R.H. Qwerty" <qwerty@nonya.biz> wrote in message
news:qwerty-160706.18501608052006@news.charter.net...
Ok here is a simple question.
How many non-white countries were attacked, conquered, annihilated,
looted, colonized and enslaved by whiteys and vice versa ?
How far back in time do you want to go? The Egyptians conquered people,
usually WHITE people.
Huh? Since when are the Circum-Mediterranean people "white"? What
the hell does "white" mean in this context? Some Egyptians had fairly
pale skin - certainly within the range of many Germans and French. My
French father is darker than some many living Egyptians.
Which "white" people were conquered by the Egyptians? The Sumerians
and the Babylonians were medium brown people, as were the Egyptians.
If that's what you're meaning by race (again). Skin color. Give us
the
names of battles and how you know the balance of skin colors.
The Romans conquered people, the Romans were
mediterranean. They conquered the Germanic people.
So the Romans weren't white? I'm so confused. And the Germans
were clearly white? When was this? The Viking's bringing of the
blonde/blue eyed stuff is thought to have occurred between 100 AD and
900 AD.
A little early for the Romans to be conquering Lily White Germans,
isn't it?
Romans had dark brown and black hair, brown to light brown skin. Big
deal.
No meaningful differences, other than culture, between the Romans and
their opponents.
Whites got in on the
"conquering" act very late in the whole picture. My people conquered the
Islamic Middle Eastern people and many white people.
I forget, which color are your people? It's so hard to keep straight.
When, in your opinion, did "white" people first show up? And where?
Let's at least define who these people are. What's the source
population
for the Whites? Everything I'm reading in the academic literature
points
to a much later emergence of light-skinned peoples (both European-style
and Asiatic-style and blended between), so of course they got started
later. What's your point? How about you run some algorithm involving
"time at
which race began, number of race in place at point of conquest, and so
forth."
Good luck with that project.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Comm" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Racism |
12 May 2006 12:37:16 AM |
|
|
Since you asked:
"A." <atalanta.brilliante@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1147272509.846895.245780@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Comm wrote:
"AmerGovtCriminalsExposer" <AmerGovtCriminalsExposer@americangovt.org>
wrote
in message news:445fff3b$0$23768$a8266bb1@reader.corenews.com...
"H.R.H. Qwerty" <qwerty@nonya.biz> wrote in message
news:qwerty-160706.18501608052006@news.charter.net...
Ok here is a simple question.
How many non-white countries were attacked, conquered, annihilated,
looted, colonized and enslaved by whiteys and vice versa ?
How far back in time do you want to go? The Egyptians conquered people,
usually WHITE people.
Huh? Since when are the Circum-Mediterranean people "white"? What
the hell does "white" mean in this context?
Using the criteria of Martin Bernal - "what is considered white in modern
day society." That answers that question.
The "crown of imperialism" has been passed around, from one nation to
another. Western Europeans, British, USA are very late comers as far as
that goes.
You are always SO eager to jump into the conversation (defending that
absolute moron that I just posted this ***** to?) Same ol Ms. V.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Comm" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Racism |
09 May 2006 10:45:43 PM |
|
|
I can't resist:
----- Original Message -----
From: "AmerGovtCriminalsExposer" <AmerGovtCriminalsExposer@americangovt.org>
Newsgroups:
rec.org.mensa,sci.anthropology,alt.politics,alt.california,nyc.politics
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 3:06 PM
Subject: Re: Get Out Your Wallets, Evil White People!
If you hate white people go see a plastic surgeon and get yourself a black
or brown skin.
***** whites hating *****.
"AmerGovtCriminalsExposer" <AmerGovtCriminalsExposer@americangovt.org> wrote
in message news:445fff3b$0$23768$a8266bb1@reader.corenews.com...
"H.R.H. Qwerty" <qwerty@nonya.biz> wrote in message
news:qwerty-160706.18501608052006@news.charter.net...
In article <445fc8b9$0$23780$a8266bb1@reader.corenews.com>,
"AmerGovtCriminalsExposer" <AmerGovtCriminalsExposer@americangovt.org>
wrote:
"H.R.H. Qwerty" <qwerty@nonya.biz> wrote in message
news:qwerty-C57850.12573108052006@news.charter.net...
In article <445ee6d4$0$23729$a8266bb1@reader.corenews.com>,
"AmerGovtCriminalsExposer" <AmerGovtCriminalsExposer@americangovt.org>
wrote:
"Comm" <no@spam.com> wrote in message
news:Vjz7g.469$t32.72@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
People - and by that I mean a very BIG and very "square/normal"
group
of
people, are sick of the word "racism" and sick of people bringing
up
"race" whenever something goes wrong. Nobody wants to hear it any
more.
They might not overtly say it, but you can tell by how they simply
dismiss
it and anyone spewing and yammering about it.
Call it what you want - race, breed, type, style, kin - the CONCEPT
is
felt, it's in our limbic brains - it's based on facial recognition
first
of all, religion and style of dress lesser so. People feel
comfortable
with people pretty much like themselves where everyone blends in
comfortably. They feel comfortable with people on the same
intellectual
level as themselves, even if these similarities cross class
differences.
Also, people note styles of dress (those are "markers" that our
brains
recognize - again, it's limbic). Not being able to speak the same
language
bars any kind of communication - or friendship - or anything else.
People have comfort factors inbuilt into them - no matter how
"hard" a
leftie tries to quiet these feelings down. The feelings are there.
Period. There is no changing this save to change the human species
into
something else. Like insects.
Yes, "racism" didn't exist in Stalin's Soviet Union - BY FORCE.
And?
Stalin was not a liberal, by the way. Heh.
Liberals, imo, are sick people.
Hey RACIST *****,
You are fucking CONFUSED ***** with a mole brain that does NOT
understand
the
meaning of cultural and language differences and RACISM.
RACISM is when a WHITE COP gives unjustified tickets to COLORED
PEOPLE or
BEAT THEM UP because of their skin color.
Have you seen this pictures at www.maafa.org ?
Whites MURDERED, BURNED and LYNCHED BLACKS because of the SKIN COLOR
of
BLACKS.
Whites were lynched, too, and the lynchings weren't just for sport or
fun.
Whites and blacks who "stepped out of bounds" were meted out this
extra-legal "justice".
Qwerty
Dont lie and argue just for the sake of argument. Racism of whites is
everywhere in history all over this world where ever they attacked,
conquered, looted and murdered the natives.
I've offered no lies. Sure, Whitey's been cruel at times, but what race
of people hasn't?
Qwerty
Ok here is a simple question.
How many non-white countries were attacked, conquered, annihilated,
looted, colonized and enslaved by whiteys and vice versa ?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Day Brown" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Racism |
28 Sep 2006 07:30:09 PM |
|
|
Well, "Constant Battles" by LeBlanc suggests its been going on since the
stone age. But the Hebrews really gave the idea a kick in the *****.
What Joshua did in the land of Caanan to the Philistines and Caananites,
we now call 'genocide'. And "Jehovah", "Jesus", "Allah" have been used
to justify genocide ever since.
But it mite be useful to look up the primate field studies. They show
that it is the alpha males who commit all the violence, both domestic,
and against other groups. Alpha male chimps have been reported forming a
gang to go into an adjacent territory searching for a foraging couple.
Then, they will murder the male and any progeny of the female, kidnap
her, and gang rape her on the way, and when she is forced to join their
harem.
One mite wonder why the beta males exist. It turns out that the females
have been seen sneaking into the bush to mate with betas. Bloodwork
shows different hormone profiles- the alphas have higher adrenalin,
which speeds reflexes (but also impulsive aggression) and lower
seratonin, which sharpens senses (but also results in restless sleep and
a grouchy mood in the morning).
The betas and females are more intuitive, able to read body language so
as to be able to tell when an alpha is going to strike out. Betas place
themselves between the alphas and the more vulnerable; betas are the
same size as alphas, and can take the abuse.
In like manner, it is the daughters of the betas who are the most
intuitive, and therefore the most competent mothers. The daughters of
alphas abandon and abuse their young, which get adopted by both the beta
males and females.
Thus, groups which dont have enough alphas cant protect the territory,
and starve. But those which have too many see violent struggles for
power and civil war. Those groups which have too few betas dont have
enough young alphas survive to grow up to defend the territory.
DNA shows that the alpha trait is handed down on the Y chromosome.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Racism |
28 Sep 2006 07:36:50 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 19:30:09 -0500, in alt.atheism , Day Brown
<daybrown@wildblue.net> in <0PZSg.98$004.126076@news.sisna.com> wrote:
Well, "Constant Battles" by LeBlanc suggests its been going on since the
stone age. But the Hebrews really gave the idea a kick in the *****.
What Joshua did in the land of Caanan to the Philistines and Caananites,
we now call 'genocide'. And "Jehovah", "Jesus", "Allah" have been used
to justify genocide ever since.
Sure, but so have other ideas. The Maori committed genocide in New
Zealand without any use of such ideas. I can supply plenty of other
examples if you wish.
But it mite be useful to look up the primate field studies. They show
that it is the alpha males who commit all the violence, both domestic,
and against other groups. Alpha male chimps have been reported forming a
gang to go into an adjacent territory searching for a foraging couple.
Then, they will murder the male and any progeny of the female, kidnap
her, and gang rape her on the way, and when she is forced to join their
harem.
Which primates do this? That sounds like a mish-mash of various
actions including lions.
[snip]
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
http://www.beawitness.org
http://www.darfurgenocide.org
http://www.savedarfur.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Aardvark J. Bandersnatch" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Racism |
29 Sep 2006 04:38:20 AM |
|
|
"Matt Silberstein" <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
message news:ehqoh2thb29smfecmedc6pasf49lib8cvs@4ax.com...
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 19:30:09 -0500, in alt.atheism , Day Brown
<daybrown@wildblue.net> in <0PZSg.98$004.126076@news.sisna.com> wrote:
Well, "Constant Battles" by LeBlanc suggests its been going on since the
stone age. But the Hebrews really gave the idea a kick in the *****.
What Joshua did in the land of Caanan to the Philistines and Caananites,
we now call 'genocide'. And "Jehovah", "Jesus", "Allah" have been used
to justify genocide ever since.
Sure, but so have other ideas. The Maori committed genocide in New
Zealand without any use of such ideas. I can supply plenty of other
examples if you wish.
But it mite be useful to look up the primate field studies. They show
that it is the alpha males who commit all the violence, both domestic,
and against other groups. Alpha male chimps have been reported forming a
gang to go into an adjacent territory searching for a foraging couple.
Then, they will murder the male and any progeny of the female, kidnap
her, and gang rape her on the way, and when she is forced to join their
harem.
Which primates do this? That sounds like a mish-mash of various
actions including lions.
Indeed! A couple of references would be helpful, so the rest of us could
review the source material.
Otherwise, we'll just have to reject this one out of hand.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Racism |
29 Sep 2006 07:11:28 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 05:38:20 -0400, in alt.atheism , "Aardvark J.
Bandersnatch" <sumbuddy@micrsfot.com> in
<kvmdnT-TOtQTdIHYnZ2dnUVZ_rednZ2d@insightbb.com> wrote:
"Matt Silberstein" <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
message news:ehqoh2thb29smfecmedc6pasf49lib8cvs@4ax.com...
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 19:30:09 -0500, in alt.atheism , Day Brown
<daybrown@wildblue.net> in <0PZSg.98$004.126076@news.sisna.com> wrote:
Well, "Constant Battles" by LeBlanc suggests its been going on since the
stone age. But the Hebrews really gave the idea a kick in the *****.
What Joshua did in the land of Caanan to the Philistines and Caananites,
we now call 'genocide'. And "Jehovah", "Jesus", "Allah" have been used
to justify genocide ever since.
Sure, but so have other ideas. The Maori committed genocide in New
Zealand without any use of such ideas. I can supply plenty of other
examples if you wish.
But it mite be useful to look up the primate field studies. They show
that it is the alpha males who commit all the violence, both domestic,
and against other groups.
Nope. In some species there is violence down the line as each animal
dominates those beneath it. Or with bonobos they have sex instead of
violence.
Alpha male chimps have been reported forming a
gang to go into an adjacent territory searching for a foraging couple.
Actually, I read this a second time and it is just pure nonsense.
Alpha males don't, but definition, form gangs. Alpha is a singular,
there is only one alpha males at a time for a group. Yes, chimps hunt
in groups. So do wolves, so do sharks, so do other animals.
Then, they will murder the male and any progeny of the female, kidnap
her, and gang rape her on the way, and when she is forced to join their
harem.
Now does gang rape make sense for an alpha?
Which primates do this? That sounds like a mish-mash of various
actions including lions.
Indeed! A couple of references would be helpful, so the rest of us could
review the source material.
Otherwise, we'll just have to reject this one out of hand.
I think the incoherence of the post made it difficult for me to see
the errors at first.
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
http://www.beawitness.org
http://www.darfurgenocide.org
http://www.savedarfur.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Comm" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Racism |
09 May 2006 08:31:53 AM |
|
|
There are many more crimes done by blacks on whites. No one calls it racism,
even when they shout honky.
I know what racism is. I'm SICK of the god damned word. I'm sick of the
god damned whining about "past wrongs," too.
"AmerGovtCriminalsExposer" <AmerGovtCriminalsExposer@americangovt.org> wrote
in message news:445ee6d4$0$23729$a8266bb1@reader.corenews.com...
"Comm" <no@spam.com> wrote in message
news:Vjz7g.469$t32.72@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
People - and by that I mean a very BIG and very "square/normal" group of
people, are sick of the word "racism" and sick of people bringing up
"race" whenever something goes wrong. Nobody wants to hear it any more.
They might not overtly say it, but you can tell by how they simply
dismiss it and anyone spewing and yammering about it.
Call it what you want - race, breed, type, style, kin - the CONCEPT is
felt, it's in our limbic brains - it's based on facial recognition first
of all, religion and style of dress lesser so. People feel comfortable
with people pretty much like themselves where everyone blends in
comfortably. They feel comfortable with people on the same intellectual
level as themselves, even if these similarities cross class differences.
Also, people note styles of dress (those are "markers" that our brains
recognize - again, it's limbic). Not being able to speak the same
language bars any kind of communication - or friendship - or anything
else.
People have comfort factors inbuilt into them - no matter how "hard" a
leftie tries to quiet these feelings down. The feelings are there.
Period. There is no changing this save to change the human species into
something else. Like insects.
Yes, "racism" didn't exist in Stalin's Soviet Union - BY FORCE. And?
Stalin was not a liberal, by the way. Heh.
Liberals, imo, are sick people.
Hey RACIST *****,
You are fucking CONFUSED ***** with a mole brain that does NOT understand
the meaning of cultural and language differences and RACISM.
RACISM is when a WHITE COP gives unjustified tickets to COLORED PEOPLE or
BEAT THEM UP because of their skin color.
Have you seen this pictures at www.maafa.org ?
Whites MURDERED, BURNED and LYNCHED BLACKS because of the SKIN COLOR of
BLACKS.
.
|
|
|
| User: "AmerGovtCriminalsExposer" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Racism |
09 May 2006 06:41:17 PM |
|
|
RACIST SCUM,
You can pretend all you want but RACISM is KICKING and ALIVE in AMERICA
everywhere.
You never experienced RACISM and you dont know what the ***** you are talking
about.
Go to a shrink and get help if you are sick of hearing the word RACISM.
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his
government."
Edward Abbey
http://thirdworldtraveler.com/Authors/QuotationsToMakeUSThink.html
http://thirdworldtraveler.com
Pax anti- american imperialism and terrorism is a philosophy.
Making sure evil, imperialistic american govt does not turn me into a slave
like majority of the americans, is liberty building.
Think of it as somebody beating the ***** out of EVIL AMERICAN GOVT
CRIMINALS, MURDERERS and TERRORISTS for being FASCIST and GENOCIDAL.
"Comm" <no@spam.com> wrote in message
news:dR08g.376$x4.95@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
There are many more crimes done by blacks on whites. No one calls it
racism, even when they shout honky.
I know what racism is. I'm SICK of the god damned word. I'm sick of the
god damned whining about "past wrongs," too.
"AmerGovtCriminalsExposer" <AmerGovtCriminalsExposer@americangovt.org>
wrote in message news:445ee6d4$0$23729$a8266bb1@reader.corenews.com...
"Comm" <no@spam.com> wrote in message
news:Vjz7g.469$t32.72@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
People - and by that I mean a very BIG and very "square/normal" group of
people, are sick of the word "racism" and sick of people bringing up
"race" whenever something goes wrong. Nobody wants to hear it any more.
They might not overtly say it, but you can tell by how they simply
dismiss it and anyone spewing and yammering about it.
Call it what you want - race, breed, type, style, kin - the CONCEPT is
felt, it's in our limbic brains - it's based on facial recognition first
of all, religion and style of dress lesser so. People feel comfortable
with people pretty much like themselves where everyone blends in
comfortably. They feel comfortable with people on the same intellectual
level as themselves, even if these similarities cross class differences.
Also, people note styles of dress (those are "markers" that our brains
recognize - again, it's limbic). Not being able to speak the same
language bars any kind of communication - or friendship - or anything
else.
People have comfort factors inbuilt into them - no matter how "hard" a
leftie tries to quiet these feelings down. The feelings are there.
Period. There is no changing this save to change the human species into
something else. Like insects.
Yes, "racism" didn't exist in Stalin's Soviet Union - BY FORCE. And?
Stalin was not a liberal, by the way. Heh.
Liberals, imo, are sick people.
Hey RACIST *****,
You are fucking CONFUSED ***** with a mole brain that does NOT understand
the meaning of cultural and language differences and RACISM.
RACISM is when a WHITE COP gives unjustified tickets to COLORED PEOPLE or
BEAT THEM UP because of their skin color.
Have you seen this pictures at www.maafa.org ?
Whites MURDERED, BURNED and LYNCHED BLACKS because of the SKIN COLOR of
BLACKS.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Comm" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Racism |
09 May 2006 10:40:47 PM |
|
|
I don't need a shrink. But you need to learn to read if you labeled a guy
that was making a whopping joke a "person who hates white people."
Listen buster. YOU are the one that needs a shrink due to your
waste-of-time, STUPID obsession with things that really NEED NOT concern
you.
I do not hear about "racism" anywhere I happen to CHOOSE to go - and in such
places I CHOOSE to go - there are thousands of people. Obviously, the
wretched non-issue is not a problem at all.
Let the whites (who you hate so much) just wall off their own countries and
keep everyone non-white out - and let the whites stay out of non-white
areas. That would solve EVERYTHING. Period.
End of subject.
"AmerGovtCriminalsExposer" <AmerGovtCriminalsExposer@americangovt.org> wrote
in message news:4461284c$0$23731$a8266bb1@reader.corenews.com...
RACIST SCUM,
You can pretend all you want but RACISM is KICKING and ALIVE in AMERICA
everywhere.
You never experienced RACISM and you dont know what the ***** you are
talking about.
Go to a shrink and get help if you are sick of hearing the word RACISM.
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his
government."
Edward Abbey
http://thirdworldtraveler.com/Authors/QuotationsToMakeUSThink.html
http://thirdworldtraveler.com
Pax anti- american imperialism and terrorism is a philosophy.
Making sure evil, imperialistic american govt does not turn me into a
slave
like majority of the americans, is liberty building.
Think of it as somebody beating the ***** out of EVIL AMERICAN GOVT
CRIMINALS, MURDERERS and TERRORISTS for being FASCIST and GENOCIDAL.
"Comm" <no@spam.com> wrote in message
news:dR08g.376$x4.95@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
There are many more crimes done by blacks on whites. No one calls it
racism, even when they shout honky.
I know what racism is. I'm SICK of the god damned word. I'm sick of the
god damned whining about "past wrongs," too.
"AmerGovtCriminalsExposer" <AmerGovtCriminalsExposer@americangovt.org>
wrote in message news:445ee6d4$0$23729$a8266bb1@reader.corenews.com...
"Comm" <no@spam.com> wrote in message
news:Vjz7g.469$t32.72@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
People - and by that I mean a very BIG and very "square/normal" group
of people, are sick of the word "racism" and sick of people bringing up
"race" whenever something goes wrong. Nobody wants to hear it any
more. They might not overtly say it, but you can tell by how they
simply dismiss it and anyone spewing and yammering about it.
Call it what you want - race, breed, type, style, kin - the CONCEPT is
felt, it's in our limbic brains - it's based on facial recognition
first of all, religion and style of dress lesser so. People feel
comfortable with people pretty much like themselves where everyone
blends in comfortably. They feel comfortable with people on the same
intellectual level as themselves, even if these similarities cross
class differences. Also, people note styles of dress (those are
"markers" that our brains recognize - again, it's limbic). Not being
able to speak the same language bars any kind of communication - or
friendship - or anything else.
People have comfort factors inbuilt into them - no matter how "hard" a
leftie tries to quiet these feelings down. The feelings are there.
Period. There is no changing this save to change the human species into
something else. Like insects.
Yes, "racism" didn't exist in Stalin's Soviet Union - BY FORCE. And?
Stalin was not a liberal, by the way. Heh.
Liberals, imo, are sick people.
Hey RACIST *****,
You are fucking CONFUSED ***** with a mole brain that does NOT understand
the meaning of cultural and language differences and RACISM.
RACISM is when a WHITE COP gives unjustified tickets to COLORED PEOPLE
or BEAT THEM UP because of their skin color.
Have you seen this pictures at www.maafa.org ?
Whites MURDERED, BURNED and LYNCHED BLACKS because of the SKIN COLOR of
BLACKS.
.
|
|
|
| User: "AmerGovtCriminalsExposer" |
|
| Title: Re: The Origin of Racism |
10 May 2006 12:45:15 PM |
|
|
"Comm" <no@spam.com> wrote in message
news:3hd8g.2193$u4.1711@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
I don't need a shrink. But you need to learn to read if you labeled a guy
that was making a whopping joke a "person who hates white people."
Listen buster. YOU are the one that needs a shrink due to your
waste-of-time, STUPID obsession with things that really NEED NOT concern
you.
I do not hear about "racism" anywhere I happen to CHOOSE to go - and in
such places I CHOOSE to go - there are thousands of people. Obviously,
the wretched non-issue is not a problem at all.
Let the whites (who you hate so much) just wall off their own countries
and keep everyone non-white out - and let the whites stay out of non-white
areas. That would solve EVERYTHING. Period.
End of subject.
Sure go ahead and convince all the rest of the whites and DIVIDE AMERICA
PROPORTIONALLY as per the population percentages.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin, 1759
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his
government."
Edward Abbey
http://thirdworldtraveler.com/Authors/QuotationsToMakeUSThink.html
http://thirdworldtraveler.com
Pax anti- american imperialism and terrorism is a philosophy.
Making sure evil, imperialistic american govt does not turn me into a slave
like majority of the americans, is liberty building.
Think of it as somebody beating the ***** out of EVIL AMERICAN GOVT
CRIMINALS, MURDERERS and TERRORISTS for being FASCIST and GENOCIDAL.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
