[Macros]

ah, well then your scheme needs to change

[Obdigore]

Macros;318490 said:

ah, well then your scheme needs to change

Thank you for that, O stater of truths, O knower of all knowable, O polite proclaimer of pundit propoganda.

In essence, I already said that the school system needs to be changed. Fixed if you will.

[Macros]

I was just confirming the point as a higher authority should

[amphibian]

Macros;318450 said:

I was rendered speachless by this statement, and I don't want to sound like I'm piling abuse on you as most people have already commented on this statement. But thats ridiculously racist.

Lets look at what happened once the white man started selling guns to the african nations wholesale and gave them the ability to wreck havoc on a large scale. Rwanda, Congo, Somalia, Sudan, Nigeria, Uganda. These purges have led to mass migratoins which exacerbate the prolems of famine and poverty, leading to even more deaths.

Nothing more dangerous than a large group of white people? Statments like that are what contribute to the continuation of racism, and other biggotry, that wasnt a joke, it was a flat out statement of your opinion, its narrow minded and I don't care what your experiences are, totally unfounded.

Large groups of white people came over to North and South America and personally slaughtered maybe 100,000 people in 40 years. The diseases they brought and spread by contact and via pigs killed something like 60 million people and left both places as ghostlands.

South America was teeming with people twenty years before Pizarro landed. His conquest of the Inca was largely possible due to smallpox epidemics and a civil war over succession (because of the smallpox). The Spaniards then proceeded to screw over the Indian groups for a few hundred years and the other European nations joined in.

White colonialism is still shaping the world today and many of the African nations tearing themselves apart are doing so because of the short term cons pulled on them by their colonial rulers. They never organically developed the societal and governmental institutions required to govern a diverse array of tribes with different interests and to effectively keep the peace.

Affirmative action is basically a little reverse racism used to counteract the racism of the system as a whole in a few cases. It's not nearly as prevalent or powerful as Macros is describing it.

[Obdigore]

amphibian;318557 said:

Affirmative action is basically a little reverse racism used to counteract the racism of the system as a whole in a few cases. It's not nearly as prevalent or powerful as Macros is describing it.

Prove this or it is a 'I think' statement, not a fact.

Reverse racism is still racism, but that is not what I would like to hear from you next.

[Macros]

I'm not argueing that white people aren't responsible for death on a massive scale, they are, the crusades, the colonization of the new world, the world wars.
but to state a large group of white people is the most dangerous thing on earth is blatantly racist statement, as if people of other race have never undertaken any moral reprensible actions.
whether its "a little reverse racism" or outright racism, its still government sanctioned racism, that cannot be argued coherently in any fashion

[Thelomen Toblerone]

amphibian;318557 said:

Large groups of white people came over to North and South America and personally slaughtered maybe 100,000 people in 40 years. The diseases they brought and spread by contact and via pigs killed something like 60 million people and left both places as ghostlands.

South America was teeming with people twenty years before Pizarro landed. His conquest of the Inca was largely possible due to smallpox epidemics and a civil war over succession (because of the smallpox).

Disease is entirely relevant to this. I'm well aware of some cases in the US where smallpox infested blankets were purposely traded with natives, but in the vast majority of cases it was a complete accident.

The conquistadors had no idea if anyone lived in S. America at all, let alone that they didnt have immune systems capable of dealing with western diseases. To include diease as a deliberate act of racism is completely bizarre.
By the same token, you must think the black death was a deliberate attempt by rats and fleas to wipe out enough humans to make conquest feasible.


Do you also honestly think Amerindians and the like did not commit atrocities either? White people may have done something awful in killing scores of mesoamericans, but there arent exactly a shortage of instances of subjugation, brutality, human sacrifice and wholesale butchery in the region before the spaniards arrived.

Humans kill other humans. The French and English have knocked the absolute shit out of eachother for centuries, race has nothing to do with conquest and murder, if the mesoamericans had been white I guarantee you wouldnt have mentioned it. The inequalities that exist today are enough to deal with and fix without examining irrelevant cases from centuries back.

[Cause]

Sorry thelomen it seems despite not been active for months I need to spread the reputation before I can rep you again.

[Astra]

Cause;318679 said:

Sorry thelomen it seems despite not been active for months I need to spread the reputation before I can rep you again.

I was luckier

[Macros]

Indeed, put me in astras camp

[amphibian]

Thelomen Toblerone;318624 said:

Disease is entirely relevant to this. I'm well aware of some cases in the US where smallpox infested blankets were purposely traded with natives, but in the vast majority of cases it was a complete accident.

The conquistadors had no idea if anyone lived in S. America at all, let alone that they didnt have immune systems capable of dealing with western diseases. To include diease as a deliberate act of racism is completely bizarre.
By the same token, you must think the black death was a deliberate attempt by rats and fleas to wipe out enough humans to make conquest feasible.

I think RLY's statement was sufficiently broad enough to include intentional and unintentional harm. For the 60 million plus natives, large groups of white people were incredibly dangerous.

I don't necessarily agree with the full scope of his statement, but there is a lot of truth and history behind it.

Obdigore;318565 said:

Prove this or it is a 'I think' statement, not a fact.

Just went online to find a couple good books on the subject. It'll be a week or so before I get back to you having read them or something similar from the library. (For those curious: The Affirmative Action Debate, Steven Cahn, and Affirmative Action Around the World, Thomas Sowell, were the ones I picked out.)

[Silencer]

If you're going to include unintentional harm as a racially motivated thing.....that's just ludicrous! So, every time a white guy hit a black guy, even if it wasn't because the guy was black, that was a racist thing to do?
Unintentional harm should be left out.
And books have biased opinions anyway. You ever read a book that praises Stalin? I know they exist but they're pretty rare.....


And I too agree with Shinrei.....

[Nequam]

Obdigore;318421 said:

Technically Nequam,

If there is no racism however a large percentage of a certain race is poor and unable to get higher education, then they cannot make enough money to move out of their poor area. Their children are raised in the poor area, and the cycle repeats, except for a select few that make it out.

That is why I support taking all the money going into and spent enforcing the hiring laws to be changed to help pay for higher education, both in public schools, and 'uni' tuitions for those who are intelligent enough to make use of them but cannot afford them.

Yes, but that's not racism, it's the disadvantage of the poor. Education and FAIR CHANCES are what's important. So yeah, I agree with you basically.

Fair chances is the key here. Giving jobs to someone under-qualified because they are a women, black, etc. is not fair and wrong. That is treating the sypmtoms but not the problem. Anyone with an STD will know that treating the symptoms in the end will not help much. The disease will still spread.
So to fix the problem that affirmitive action is trying to adress, in my mind at least, you need to increase education quality and give everyone an equal chance. That's all that will help. Giving jobs to people who didn't deserve them, or were unable to obtain those qualification from no fault of their own will help only that person. Not the whole.


@amphibian
Yes all that bad stuff happened and what not, but it wasn't because they were white. A group of balck people would have been just as dangerous. But it just so happnes that the spanish are white. A group of any race is not more dangerous than anothr group. That cannot be proven, because every human is capable of the same things. What you can say is that white people have caused more harm than other races. (I don't really know if it true) but that doesn't actually make them more dangerous. It was just the way things played out.

[Mezla PigDog]

stone monkey;318313 said:

Although, as I learned from bitter experience at an early age and the history of at least the past century or so teaches; the most dangerous thing in the world is a large group of white people.

Can I just point out to all the people that are jumping on SM for this. Having met him and seen him around the forums over the years, he's one of the most liberal people here and absolutely not racist in the least. His statement (I think, not wishing to put words into his mouth) is more of an historical one (particularly over the last 100 years). Similar to me (as a white woman) saying "the most dangerous thing in the world is a large group of men". I doubt people would be able to take an equal amount of umbrage at that statement (although I fear I may be proved wrong as I am with most confident statements I express in this darned Discussion forum).

[Cougar]

You've also got to remember that Monkey is bloody ancient, he's pre-Windrush I would think.

Joking aside though, Stone Monkey is an excellent chap and it's lucky he doesn't follow his own advice or I'd have never met him, The Picadilly is full of the worst kind of white people on a Saturday afternoon.

I think this thread proves that there are very few people capable of rational debate on race without becoming emotionally invovled to the extent where their judgement is compromised by fear of seeming a bigot, because it is so thoroughly taboo.

[Urb]

Yeah I also took it more as a reference to large groups of white people usually being far more resourceful than other ethnic groups, and therefore potentially far more dangerous. I've heard statements that were far more racist than that (personally I don't find it racist, but I guess you can twist it that way).

[Cause]

I dont believe Stone monkey to be racist, not klu klux klan rabid racist anyway. I would say he is as racist as everyone else is, you ,me,him. With that statement I think he made a mistake, a mistake caused by racial tension we all experience. What he said was just stupid. Black people kill black people all the time. Ironically because they are racist. Perhaps not ironically since its only people outside of their cultures who would think Xhosa and Zulu are remotely similiar. In the same way that calling a chinese man who can remeber WW II japanese would likely get you into trouble even though very few white people I would think can tell the difference. I remeber the original bottle said japanese had a tainted cultural soul. Stone Monkey has obviously suffered/suffers some kind of racism, It I would say is the cause of his statement. I wont put words in his mind but Im sure when he comes back hell have something to say about what he said, what he meant and why he said it. And hopefull he wont feel I have said too much

As for you mezla since you brought it up. Do you think its unfair for companies to ask women if they plan on having kids? It obviously will affect their work. The pregnancy, the maternity leave, becoming the mother. These are not negligible factors.

[Cougar]

It's totally illegal in the UK and I think the EU to enquire if a woman plans on kids/marriage etc as part of a job interview, since clearly you wouldn't hire someone if they said 'I will be going on maternity in 4 months' when you have an equally qualified man and you need them to be at work.

[Mezla PigDog]

Cause;319477 said:

As for you mezla since you brought it up. Do you think its unfair for companies to ask women if they plan on having kids? It obviously will affect their work. The pregnancy, the maternity leave, becoming the mother. These are not negligible factors.

Jeez Cause, that makes me so livid, I can't form a coherent reply!!!

In terms of equality, asking that question is equal to asking a black man if the fact his skin is black will affect his work!!

I freely admit that biologically, women have career break issues that men do not. If paternity leave was made to be equal and flexible with maternity leave (at least speaking for my country), families, working environments and long term productivity would beneft. At least in a society that strived to be equal anyway (and in my country, companies are reimbursed for all maternity leave wages). Even asking the question invokes the sentiment that women are inferior in terms of productivity. What about a man with a load of kids whose childcare he has to contribute too? They should damn well be asked the question as well and it should affect their advancement prospects.

[Cougar]

Trouble with the paternity leave though is that ambitious men would just opt out of it, or companies would put pressure on men not to take it.

You do have to accept there are differences between the sexes which give both subtly differing attributes. Modern feminists don't seek equality in terms of true equality, but to have an equality of opportunity I'm sure there are differences between races, you can't tell me there are no white people in the 100m final because white people are too lazy, who is to say what other differences there are, the most we can hope for is equality of opportunity but so long as you can't trust single sex/race groups which run business and government not to behave in nepotistic ways, affirmative action is here to stay.