Board index › General Discussion › News and Current Events

Trump Declaring War on 1.5 Million muslims

Page 7 of 14 [ 219 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ... 14  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,284

15 Dec 2017, 6:49 pm

Daniel89 wrote:
It really depends what you class as a race

You answered your own question...there is no scientific basis for race- designation is subjective
Only racist Europeans ask for this information on census forms or job applications



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,795
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

15 Dec 2017, 10:33 pm

cyberdad wrote:
Daniel89 wrote:
No the caste system was based on race and your race determined what jobs your were allowed to do. People have been aware of the concept of race since they met other member races and seen that they look different.

It's a projection by the European colonists that appearance + caste = race
In India upper caste hindus come from generations of people who due to their social status spent more time indoors compared to lower castes who's occupations mean't they were exposed to the hot Indian sun. It's not rocket science that endogamy (caste marriage barriers) means over time their appearance changes through selection.

However these caste barriers are only 2000 yrs old, India is much older. The highest brahmin to the lowest pariah share most of their genes...they had concepts of tribes then caste/religion but not race...


While I have no doubt that Brahmans stayed out of the sun instead of toiling outside, it must be remembered that they and the various warrior castes are descendants of fair skinned, blue eyed Indo-Europeans. But it can be argued that these original practitioners of Hinduism were themselves white, and definitely were guilty of racism.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,284

15 Dec 2017, 11:03 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Daniel89 wrote:
No the caste system was based on race and your race determined what jobs your were allowed to do. People have been aware of the concept of race since they met other member races and seen that they look different.

It's a projection by the European colonists that appearance + caste = race
In India upper caste hindus come from generations of people who due to their social status spent more time indoors compared to lower castes who's occupations mean't they were exposed to the hot Indian sun. It's not rocket science that endogamy (caste marriage barriers) means over time their appearance changes through selection.

However these caste barriers are only 2000 yrs old, India is much older. The highest brahmin to the lowest pariah share most of their genes...they had concepts of tribes then caste/religion but not race...


While I have no doubt that Brahmans stayed out of the sun instead of toiling outside, it must be remembered that they and the various warrior castes are descendants of fair skinned, blue eyed Indo-Europeans. But it can be argued that these original practitioners of Hinduism were themselves white, and definitely were guilty of racism.

This is an error of language Vs ethnicity
The only population in south Asia who have retained blonde hair and blues eyes are the Kalash of the Chitral valley in modern Pakistan. Interestingly their genetics indicates they are infact less closely related to western Europeans than their dark skinned Indian neighbors which initially doesn't make sense
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/ ... jSZzlWWbIV
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4570283/

Genetics indicates that the Kalash may have been living in India for more than 10,000 years which brings into question how hinduism arose as these people are "pure" Indian but obviously don't follow hinduism and don't follow the narrative of "Aryan invasion"



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,795
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

15 Dec 2017, 11:26 pm

cyberdad wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Daniel89 wrote:
No the caste system was based on race and your race determined what jobs your were allowed to do. People have been aware of the concept of race since they met other member races and seen that they look different.

It's a projection by the European colonists that appearance + caste = race
In India upper caste hindus come from generations of people who due to their social status spent more time indoors compared to lower castes who's occupations mean't they were exposed to the hot Indian sun. It's not rocket science that endogamy (caste marriage barriers) means over time their appearance changes through selection.

However these caste barriers are only 2000 yrs old, India is much older. The highest brahmin to the lowest pariah share most of their genes...they had concepts of tribes then caste/religion but not race...


While I have no doubt that Brahmans stayed out of the sun instead of toiling outside, it must be remembered that they and the various warrior castes are descendants of fair skinned, blue eyed Indo-Europeans. But it can be argued that these original practitioners of Hinduism were themselves white, and definitely were guilty of racism.

This is an error of language Vs ethnicity
The only population in south Asia who have retained blonde hair and blues eyes are the Kalash of the Chitral valley in modern Pakistan. Interestingly their genetics indicates they are infact less closely related to western Europeans than their dark skinned Indian neighbors which initially doesn't make sense
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/ ... jSZzlWWbIV
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4570283/

Genetics indicates that the Kalash may have been living in India for more than 10,000 years which brings into question how hinduism arose as these people are "pure" Indian but obviously don't follow hinduism and don't follow the narrative of "Aryan invasion"


OF course there's been intermixing, but the higher caste people recall how they were once lighter in color, and see how they are still lighter in color to the low caste people.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,284

16 Dec 2017, 2:29 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
OF course there's been intermixing, but the higher caste people recall how they were once lighter in color, and see how they are still lighter in color to the low caste people.


Yes of course but "colorism" doesnt equate to racism. Almost all civilisations had colorism - for example Japan and China fair skin is desirable and people do everything to keep out of the direct sun. This is not to do with race but with simple division of society into laborers/farmers and upper class. Once again dark skin is a sign of working in the sun



Daniel89
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Oct 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,592

16 Dec 2017, 3:01 am

cyberdad wrote:
Daniel89 wrote:
It really depends what you class as a race

You answered your own question...there is no scientific basis for race- designation is subjective
Only racist Europeans ask for this information on census forms or job applications


If there is no such thing as race then there is not such thing as racism. There is a scientific basis for race, just recently scientists use the term Ethnicity exclusively.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,795
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

16 Dec 2017, 4:09 am

Daniel89 wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Daniel89 wrote:
It really depends what you class as a race

You answered your own question...there is no scientific basis for race- designation is subjective
Only racist Europeans ask for this information on census forms or job applications


If there is no such thing as race then there is not such thing as racism. There is a scientific basis for race, just recently scientists use the term Ethnicity exclusively.


As different varieties of humanity can intermix and produce viable offspring, it proves there is only one race - - the human race.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,795
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

16 Dec 2017, 4:10 am

cyberdad wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
OF course there's been intermixing, but the higher caste people recall how they were once lighter in color, and see how they are still lighter in color to the low caste people.


Yes of course but "colorism" doesnt equate to racism. Almost all civilisations had colorism - for example Japan and China fair skin is desirable and people do everything to keep out of the direct sun. This is not to do with race but with simple division of society into laborers/farmers and upper class. Once again dark skin is a sign of working in the sun


But was that colorism introduced by military might?


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Daniel89
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Oct 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,592

16 Dec 2017, 4:29 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
Daniel89 wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Daniel89 wrote:
It really depends what you class as a race

You answered your own question...there is no scientific basis for race- designation is subjective
Only racist Europeans ask for this information on census forms or job applications


If there is no such thing as race then there is not such thing as racism. There is a scientific basis for race, just recently scientists use the term Ethnicity exclusively.


As different varieties of humanity can intermix and produce viable offspring, it proves there is only one race - - the human race.


Well no. There have been many different species of humans yet we have interbred with them, race is essentially phenotypical differences and how a society perceives them when ever two groups came across each other they would notice they looked different.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,795
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

16 Dec 2017, 4:50 am

Daniel89 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Daniel89 wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Daniel89 wrote:
It really depends what you class as a race

You answered your own question...there is no scientific basis for race- designation is subjective
Only racist Europeans ask for this information on census forms or job applications


If there is no such thing as race then there is not such thing as racism. There is a scientific basis for race, just recently scientists use the term Ethnicity exclusively.


As different varieties of humanity can intermix and produce viable offspring, it proves there is only one race - - the human race.


Well no. There have been many different species of humans yet we have interbred with them, race is essentially phenotypical differences and how a society perceives them when ever two groups came across each other they would notice they looked different.


The fact that all humans today can intermix and produce viable offspring, that shows we are in fact one race.
The fact that we were able to intermix with archaic humans shows that they were not so different from modern humans.
A human is a human is a human.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Daniel89
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Oct 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,592

16 Dec 2017, 5:23 am

No Neanderthals and other humans were different species. You can breed many species together an get viable offspring Lions and tigers can produce fertile cubs it would be silly to claim they were the same.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,284

16 Dec 2017, 5:57 am

Daniel89 wrote:
race is essentially phenotypical differences and how a society perceives them when ever two groups came across each other they would notice they looked different.

These differences were exaggerated so that even up to the 1960s many people believed Africans were closer to apes, indeed research in the 1980s by Hernstein & Murray suggested Africans had lower IQs was an attempt to masquerade racist claims as legimitate scientific research, it has been debunked as an attempt to legitimize old beliefs that African brains were primitive



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,284

16 Dec 2017, 5:59 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
OF course there's been intermixing, but the higher caste people recall how they were once lighter in color, and see how they are still lighter in color to the low caste people.


Yes of course but "colorism" doesnt equate to racism. Almost all civilisations had colorism - for example Japan and China fair skin is desirable and people do everything to keep out of the direct sun. This is not to do with race but with simple division of society into laborers/farmers and upper class. Once again dark skin is a sign of working in the sun


But was that colorism introduced by military might?

Might be better to say it was reinforced by military might



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,284

16 Dec 2017, 6:02 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
Daniel89 wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Daniel89 wrote:
It really depends what you class as a race

You answered your own question...there is no scientific basis for race- designation is subjective
Only racist Europeans ask for this information on census forms or job applications


If there is no such thing as race then there is not such thing as racism. There is a scientific basis for race, just recently scientists use the term Ethnicity exclusively.


As different varieties of humanity can intermix and produce viable offspring, it proves there is only one race - - the human race.

It's interesting the alt-right is recycling old ideas of racial purity instilling feat in middle America their daughters will be seduced by hip-hop culture



Daniel89
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Oct 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,592

16 Dec 2017, 6:23 am

cyberdad wrote:
Daniel89 wrote:
race is essentially phenotypical differences and how a society perceives them when ever two groups came across each other they would notice they looked different.

These differences were exaggerated so that even up to the 1960s many people believed Africans were closer to apes, indeed research in the 1980s by Hernstein & Murray suggested Africans had lower IQs was an attempt to masquerade racist claims as legimitate scientific research, it has been debunked as an attempt to legitimize old beliefs that African brains were primitive


Yes racism is real but noticing that other races exist doesn't equate to racism. Most people believed what they were told because they had no interaction with other races.



JohnPowell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2016
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,806
Location: Palestine

16 Dec 2017, 2:06 pm

cyberdad wrote:
Daniel89 wrote:
No the caste system was based on race and your race determined what jobs your were allowed to do. People have been aware of the concept of race since they met other member races and seen that they look different.

It's a projection by the European colonists that appearance + caste = race
In India upper caste hindus come from generations of people who due to their social status spent more time indoors compared to lower castes who's occupations mean't they were exposed to the hot Indian sun. It's not rocket science that endogamy (caste marriage barriers) means over time their appearance changes through selection.

However these caste barriers are only 2000 yrs old, India is much older. The highest brahmin to the lowest pariah share most of their genes...they had concepts of tribes then caste/religion but not race...


When did you stop supporting colonialism?


_________________
"No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?"