It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Racist Freedom Of Speech Should Racists Be Rounded Up And Jailed? War On Racism?

page: 8
6
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 11:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: theabsolutetruth

Wait, according to that data, the issue is declining birth rates.

If Europe's growth is so low, then logically, immigration of foreign nationals is required in order to keep the country afloat.

Secondly, the Caucasian flavor of humans has been in decline for decades now. We always knew that eventually we would all be some kind of light brown due to a variety of factors.

That's only scary to somebody if you care that much about the color of your skin. If it's about your culture, then that culture will live on, regardless of people's skin color in those people's descendants.

~Tenth

Ok, can you please clarify something for me?
And I believe by know you pretty well know where I stand on this issue, so please don't bother asking if I am trying to be white-centric or purely argumentative.
Why is it that you put so much emphasis on the ethnically caucasian European's decline being just fine, since skin color doesn't matter as much as culture, when I'm fairly positive that you'd agree that 'Black Lives Matter'?




posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 11:16 AM
link   
a reply to: theabsolutetruth


It is about ethnicity as the research says.


Which is just CULTURE.

There is no such thing as 'race'.

We are all human, the color of your skin and your CULTURE are only related to area in which you live and where your ancestors came from and settled.


In Europe where ethnic Europeans are facing potential extinction as mentioned in the previous research, there is a lot of immigration from around the world, most of which adheres to strong ethnic identity, heritage and culture, from food and clothes to education, family, tradition and religion.


Again that's just CULTURE. Keeping people from immigrating to your country isn't going to resolve the low birth rate of so called 'White European's is it?

Your CULTURE lives or dies with you and your kin.


Or are you in favour of ethnicities being protected?


I'm in favor of CULTURE being preserved, which no government or policy can do. Only YOU and those who subscribe to your CULTURE can do that.

I don't see 'British' culture going away anytime soon. Neither do I see the culture of other European nations disappearing, beyond the fact that they aren't breeding as much as other nations are.

~Tenth

edit on 6/23/2015 by tothetenthpower because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 11:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: hadriana
a reply to: rupertg

I have one NA friend and she states that the US flag offends her and is seen as a symbol of racism and oppression of her people.

I found this on Amazon. I can't quite wrap my head around it.
ASIN B00B13KG90 They are native American confederate flags.
Well, that flag is mainly about standing for your nation's rights against a government you see as oppressive.
It symbolizes, being modeled off the Confederate Battle Flag, the call to stand against the loss of your freedoms and rights.
The CSA was fighting against what saw as oppression and a loss of its liberties. Regardless of how reprehensible those freedoms mat have been. So I'd imagine that this flag means the same thing to nations like the Lakota, or Crow, or Blackfoot, or Pawnee, or any of the others.



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 11:35 AM
link   
a reply to: pfishy


Why is it that you put so much emphasis on the ethnically caucasian European's decline being just fine, since skin color doesn't matter as much as culture, when I'm fairly positive that you'd agree that 'Black Lives Matter'?


Firstly, I don't know where you stand, but that's irrelevant to the question at hand.

I don't think it's 'just fine', I'm saying this was BOUND to happen when birth rates in white countries started to decline, while birth rates in other countries increased or remained the same.

Everybody's lives matter. I don't see what that has to do with anything. You should have perhaps used Native American culture as your example.

Either way, culture IS important, but it's not the job of EVERYBODY to promote it. It's the job of those within those communities to promote it. And leave it to their children to do the same.



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 11:36 AM
link   
a reply to: tothetenthpower

All those ethnicities I posted care about their ETHNICITY, of which culture is only a part.

''White European'' is an ethnicity.

Any non ''white European'' ethnicity immigrants such as ethnic Arab / Bangladeshi / Bantu / Korean etc. are not going to become ethnically white European as you suggested.

Do you think all those ''21 African American organisations'' should cease to exist then as they are about ethnicity rather than culture?


dictionary.reference.com...


ethnicity
[eth-nis-i-tee]
Spell Syllables
Examples Word Origin
noun, plural ethnicities.
1.
an ethnic group; a social group that shares a common and distinctive culture, religion, language, or the like:
Representatives of several ethnicities were present.
2.
ethnic traits, background, allegiance, or association:
The graph shows class enrollment by gender and ethnicity.



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 11:44 AM
link   
a reply to: theabsolutetruth


All those ethnicities I posted care about their ETHNICITY, of which culture is only a part.


So they care about race, which is something that doesn't exist.


''White European'' is an ethnicity.


It's a culture.


Any non ''white European'' ethnicity immigrants such as ethnic Arab / Bangladeshi / Bantu / Korean etc. are not going to become ethnically white European as you suggested.


That's not at all what I suggested. I suggested that if White Europeans want to continue being around, they are going to have to start having more babies.

You talk about sustainability, well a 0 birth rate is unsustainable for any country without wide spread immigration.

You're splitting hairs at this point. There is absolutely no reason, beyond lack of breeding that 'White Europeans' are on the decline.

Period.

~Tenth



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 11:58 AM
link   
A gentle reminder...

These topics often become places of strong opinions....members are asked to remember that You are responsible for your own posts.

*** ALL MEMBERS *** Ending Rudeness, Hate, Bigotry: Getting Back to Basics

The END of Hate Speech, subtle or otherwise, on ATS

Community Announcement re: Decorum


Thanks.....

and, as always:

Do NOT reply to this post!!



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 12:05 PM
link   
a reply to: tothetenthpower

Admitting that race exists is part of the way in moving forward. It doesn't mean hating each other it means accepting reality in order to accept the right to ethnicity, heritage and ancestry, and that includes accepting the ethnicity of ''white Europeans''.

Race does exist, there are genetic variances, muscular skeletal variances, predisposition to disease variances etc. so it exists biologically, physiologically and as a concept, this is something many scientists agree upon, such as the anthropologist research quoted.

The concept of race is something most agree exists, there are organisations specifically for blacks or Asians that are based on racial identity.

According to all those ethnicities I quoted, many define their race as part of their ethnicity, such as those ''21 African American Organisations''.

If you are okay about black and asians identifying their ethnic origins then you should think it is okay for all ethnicities identifying with their ethnic origins, otherwise it is hypocrisy, and racism.

As I have said before I think all ethnicities identifying with their ethnic origins is okay, it appears you might not seeing as you challenged the fact I quoted ''white European'' ethnicity.

www.pbs.org...


Those who believe that the concept of race is valid do not discredit the notion of clines, however. Yet those with the clinal perspective who believe that races are not real do try to discredit the evidence of skeletal biology. Why this bias from the "race denial" faction? This bias seems to stem largely from socio-political motivation and not science at all. For the time being at least, the people in "race denial" are in "reality denial" as well. Their motivation (a positive one) is that they have come to believe that the race concept is socially dangerous. In other words, they have convinced themselves that race promotes racism. Therefore, they have pushed the politically correct agenda that human races are not biologically real, no matter what the evidence.

"How can we combat racism if no one is willing to talk about race?"

Consequently, at the beginning of the 21st century, even as a majority of biological anthropologists favor the reality of the race perspective, not one introductory textbook of physical anthropology even presents that perspective as a possibility. In a case as flagrant as this, we are not dealing with science but rather with blatant, politically motivated censorship. But, you may ask, are the politically correct actually correct? Is there a relationship between thinking about race and racism?

Race and racism

Does discussing human variation in a framework of racial biology promote or reduce racism? This is an important question, but one that does not have a simple answer. Most social scientists over the past decade have convinced themselves that it runs the risk of promoting racism in certain quarters. Anthropologists of the 1950s, 1960s, and early 1970s, on the other hand, believed that they were combating racism by openly discussing race and by teaching courses on human races and racism


www.southallblacksisters.org.uk...


Southall Black Sisters is a not-for-profit organisation set up in 1979 to meet the needs of black (Asian and African-Caribbean) and minority ethnic women.

edit on 23-6-2015 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)

edit on Tue Jun 23 2015 by DontTreadOnMe because: trimmed overly long quote IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 12:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: theabsolutetruth


All those ethnicities I posted care about their ETHNICITY, of which culture is only a part.


So they care about race, which is something that doesn't exist.


''White European'' is an ethnicity.


It's a culture.


Any non ''white European'' ethnicity immigrants such as ethnic Arab / Bangladeshi / Bantu / Korean etc. are not going to become ethnically white European as you suggested.


That's not at all what I suggested. I suggested that if White Europeans want to continue being around, they are going to have to start having more babies.

You talk about sustainability, well a 0 birth rate is unsustainable for any country without wide spread immigration.

You're splitting hairs at this point. There is absolutely no reason, beyond lack of breeding that 'White Europeans' are on the decline.

Period.

~Tenth

I only asked my previous question to discern whether there was any hypocrisy in your viewpoint. Not accusing you of it, mind you. Just establishing whether or not it existed. And I'm glad to see it doesn't. Otherwise, there'd be no point in continuing the conversation.
Unfortunately, a great many people identify themselves by their race. Especially in more crowded urban areas. Or institutions like prisons. And that only serves to further divide populations.
But, if there is no race, how can we be discussing racism? I suppose it could be because ethnicism is much more difficult to yell clearly when one has no further valid argument to make.
You are a product of the past, but not a part of it. Maybe your ancestors were slaves, or maybe they owned them. Maybe they settled in the American west, or were Mongolian nomads. But what happened 150 years ago doesn't make you who you are. You do. And anyone who feels the need to strongly connect more with those of common ancestry than those without are prejudiced.
But how uncomfortable would the world become if we were to all just abandon our pasts and ethnicities? Choosing your ethnicity as your main identity is shallow, but completely ignoring it is equally harmful. Because we all need to have a sense of belonging, right? We need to know that we aren't just one lonely voice in an ocean of them, correct?
So, why can't biology also be a part of your personal identity? Why can't someone care if they have similar features to another person? It shows a shared thread in their past.



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 12:12 PM
link   
And no, I'm not saying that genetics is cause for discrimination any more than gender or religion or sexual it are. I'm not trying to advocate discrimination, just ask why it's wrong to be concerned about your genetic lineage.


+7 more 
posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 12:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth


''White European'' is an ethnicity.



You know I DON'T define my european ethnicity by the colour white, none of us do , we go by nationalistic/religious/clan cultural identifiers.

I'm no whiter than a arab.
Nor are my Greek neighbors, my Italian neighbors and so on.

We call ourselves, Greeks, Italians, Croats etc. National identifiers, and within those nationalistic identifiers we have subset of ethnicity by clan regions and religion. It has ZERO to do with white.

Stop calling me white, and everyone else in the same group.

Culture is one thing.
Genetic groups are another, but the genetic group doesn't define the culture. Ask my black cousin who is fluent in Croatian.

I lost family, buried my uncle and had family suffer ethnic cleansing atrocities, so excuse me if I find the made up ethnicities and cultural qualifiers you are listing a bit tedious. It is all made up. You are not born with those ethnic traits but tribalism is taught, a learned behavior and forces the friction.

Nothing you are saying is remotely clued into what European ethnicity is about.
We don't identify ourselves as a WHITE culture. We know we are Caucasian, but there is no generic "oh lets save our white ethnicity" going on in Europe. Except with the neo nazis granted. The rest of us identify as a national culture/religious culture/sub clan culture.

There is NO blanket White culture.

It is offensive to say there is.
edit on 23-6-2015 by zazzafrazz because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 12:26 PM
link   
a reply to: zazzafrazz

Go read the Yale research I posted quoting ''white European'' ethnicity. Go tell Yale your issues.



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 12:30 PM
link   
a reply to: theabsolutetruth


Race does exist, there are genetic variances, muscular skeletal variances, predisposition to disease variances etc. so it exists physiologically and as a concept.




RACE is not a thing. There are no different RACES of humans. There are flavors, based on where those people come from.

SKIN COLOR is not based on genetics, is based on how close to the equator your ancestors came from.


The concept of race is something most agree exists, there are organisations specifically for blacks or Asians that are based on racial identity.


And they should be cultural organizations, not racial ones.


Admitting that race exists is part of the way in moving forward. It doesn't mean hating each other it means accepting reality in order to accept the right to ethnicity, heritage and ancestry, and that includes the ethnicity of ''white Europeans''.


You're confusing admitting that race exists, with racism, which certainly does, not the former.

And again, all of your data points and sources don't mean a thing when we boil your argument down.

You're upset that 'White Europeans" are going extinct.

I pointed out that yes, that's true, only because of a decline in birth rates and nothing to do with immigration.

So what does immigration have to do with your declining birth rates, or the maintaining of your 'white European' heritage?

~Tenth



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 12:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: zazzafrazz

Go read the Yale research I posted quoting ''white European'' ethnicity. Go tell Yale your issues.


Why would I tell Yale?
Trevor Wagener was a freshman in Pierson College who wrote the article you linked. Hardly a peer reviewed scientific conclusive thesis.

You know I can find the words to all Vanilla Ices songs in the New and Old testament by using the Bible Code algorithm . True story. We can find any argument with any spin to support our own misguided agendas.

BTW, that FRESHMAN was talking about birth rates of "native" population. You linked a poor example to promote your White Culture fallacy.



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 06:47 PM
link   
a reply to: tothetenthpower

Obviously you know nothing of the science of genetics.

Race exists and ethnicity is used often in science. For example watching something on evolution tonight, all the hominid fossils in a vast room with storage for each was labelled with their ''ethnic origin'' code.

''White'' ethnicity is also used extensively here in the UK and Europe on every ethnic monitoring form, for example ''white British'', ''white European''

Knowing the truth that race is a biological fact and that ethnicity is a valid term and both are used in official capacities is acceptance of reality, and the fact that these exist isn't racism.

Are you offended at ''white European'' being used as a term of ethnicity on forms or just research or just when I quote it?

Are you offended at the term ''ethnicity'' being used by official forms, or just when I say it?

Are you offended at ''black'' being used as a term of ethnicity on forms?

All those organisations based on their race and ethnicity like the ''blacksisters'' organisation, you want them to stop it and to put something cultural instead?

I have said it before I do not mind that people feel connected to their heritage but you seem to mind, so who is being intolerant?

You should read this article, it explains that race denial is counterproductive.

time.com...


The New York Times' former science editor on research showing that evolution didn't stop when human history began.

A longstanding orthodoxy among social scientists holds that human races are a social construct and have no biological basis. A related assumption is that human evolution halted in the distant past, so long ago that evolutionary explanations need never be considered by historians or economists.

New analyses of the human genome have established that human evolution has been recent, copious, and regional.In the decade since the decoding of the human genome, a growing wealth of data has made clear that these two positions, never at all likely to begin with, are simply incorrect. There is indeed a biological basis for race. And it is now beyond doubt that human evolution is a continuous process that has proceeded vigorously within the last 30,000 years and almost certainly — though very recent evolution is hard to measure — throughout the historical period and up until the present day.

New analyses of the human genome have established that human evolution has been recent, copious, and regional. Biologists scanning the genome for evidence of natural selection have detected signals of many genes that have been favored by natural selection in the recent evolutionary past. No less than 14% of the human genome, according to one estimate, has changed under this recent evolutionary pressure.

Analysis of genomes from around the world establishes that there is a biological basis for race, despite the official statements to the contrary of leading social science organizations. An illustration of the point is the fact that with mixed race populations, such as African Americans, geneticists can now track along an individual’s genome, and assign each segment to an African or European ancestor, an exercise that would be impossible if race did not have some basis in biological reality.

Racism and discrimination are wrong as a matter of principle, not of science. That said, it is hard to see anything in the new understanding of race that gives ammunition to racists. The reverse is the case. Exploration of the genome has shown that all humans, whatever their race, share the same set of genes. Each gene exists in a variety of alternative forms known as alleles, so one might suppose that races have distinguishing alleles, but even this is not the case. A few alleles have highly skewed distributions but these do not suffice to explain the difference between races. The difference between races seems to rest on the subtle matter of relative allele frequencies. The overwhelming verdict of the genome is to declare the basic unity of humankind.

Genetics and Social Behavior

Human evolution has not only been recent and extensive, it has also been regional. The period of 30,000 to 5,000 years ago, from which signals of recent natural selection can be detected, occurred after the splitting of the three major races, so represents selection that has occurred largely independently within each race. The three principal races are Africans (those who live south of the Sahara), East Asians (Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans), and Caucasians (Europeans and the peoples of the Near East and the Indian subcontinent). In each of these races, a different set of genes has been changed by natural selection. This is just what would be expected for populations that had to adapt to different challenges on each continent. The genes specially affected by natural selection control not only expected traits like skin color and nutritional metabolism, but also some aspects of brain function. Though the role of these selected brain genes is not yet understood, the obvious truth is that genes affecting the brain are just as much subject to natural selection as any other category of gene.



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 07:25 PM
link   
a reply to: zazzafrazz

The terms ''white British'' and ''white European'' are used often here in the UK and Europe, on ethnic monitoring forms, on stats, in reports.

The term ''white'' also doesn't mean literally white like chalk, obviously, just as ''black'' literally doesn't mean black like coal.

It is being discussed due to the term being disputed as valid and a moderator suggested it as ''odd'' meaning ''racist''.

I am saying it isn't racist.

Unless you agree, you are a hypocrite or you would want ''black'' and other terms of ethnicity removed from use?

The point here is that if you don't like the term ''white European'' then unless hypocritical you also don't like the term ''black African'' or other ethnic origins and want all references to ethnic origin removed from speech and thought. In which case you want to deny all those groups whose basis is ethnic origin.


edit on 23-6-2015 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 07:41 PM
link   
a reply to: theabsolutetruth

White European? In the article below, from Harvard, this is the opening paragraph:


“I am an African American,” says Duana Fullwiley, “but in parts of Africa, I am white.” To do fieldwork as a medical anthropologist in Senegal, she says, “I take a plane to France, a seven- to eight-hour ride. My race changes as I cross the Atlantic. There, I say, ‘Je suis noire,’ and they say, ‘Oh, okay—métisse—you are mixed.’ Then I fly another six to seven hours to Senegal, and I am white. In the space of a day, I can change from African American, to métisse, to tubaab [Wolof for “white/European”]. This is not a joke, or something to laugh at, or to take lightly. It is the kind of social recognition that even two-year-olds who can barely speak understand. ‘Tubaab,’ they say when they greet me.”


What is and is not "white european" is very interpretive, depending on where you are from. Above we have an "african American" become "white European" just by changing continents.

To go on:


In fact, “There is no genetic basis for race,” says Fullwiley, who has studied the ethical, legal, and social implications of the human genome project with sociologist Troy Duster at UC, Berkeley. She sometimes quotes Richard Lewontin, now professor of biology and Agassiz professor of zoology emeritus, who said much the same thing in 1972, when he discovered that of all human genetic variation (which we now know to be just 0.1 percent of all genetic material), 85 percent occurs within geographically distinct groups, while 15 percent or less occurs between them. The issue today, Fullwiley says, is that many scientists are mining that 15 percent in search of human differences by continent.



Nor can genetic tests verify a person’s race or ethnicity. Genes that affect skin pigmentation or blood proteins involved in malarial resistance, the authors note, may not measure direct and unique ancestry (for example, a founder effect), but reflect instead an evolutionary response to “shared environmental exposures.”


harvardmagazine.com...

There is no genetic basis for "Race". Its made up. For any characteristic of any "race", you will find the same characteristic in every other race as well.



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 08:09 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

As I said before race exists, it is used often in science. Read the research about alleles and do not ask me to defend things I didn't say. I won't even respond to that sort of goading.

Racial determination is essential in many facets of science, including medicine, it is a fact and the truth, and again the realisation of that truth isn't racism.

Ethnic and racial identity is part of human nature, a sense of belonging is inbuilt in humanity, it is part of evolution. Part of the issues of the world today are that people are dissociated from their sense of identity and history. Eroding the things that make people feel included and part of something is not a good idea, people react against such things because it is contrary to their sense of well being and belonging.

www.kenanmalik.com...


The message was clear: Biology permits no racial divisions. The Human Genome Project has settled once and for all the age-old question of whether races really exist.

Except that it hasn’t. Neil Risch, as distinguished a geneticist as Collins and Venter, argues to the contrary that ‘A decade or more of population genetics research have documented biological differences between the races.’ He is, he says, a ‘race realist’.

That race has once more become important as a scientific category seems incontestable. The last few years have seen, for instance, the development of a number of so-called race specific drugs, medicines targeted at particular race. The first to be licensed by the US government was BiDiL, a heart drug to be used only on African Americans.

In the HapMap project, the biggest and most important international follow-up to the Human Genome Project, geneticists have been ‘analyzing DNA from populations with African, Asian, and European ancestry’ to help provide data for treating diseases. HapMap is simply the very big tip of a very big iceberg. Virtually every issue of every genetics journal contains studies of disease or disorder in which sample populations are defined as racial categories.

Anthropologists have created a number of software programmes to determine an individual’s race from the shape of his skull. These programmes are now routinely used both by police forces and by international NGOs working in places like Bosnia and Iraq to identify bodies, say in mass graves.




In an age in which ‘Who am I?’ has become a defining question, and in which people increasingly mine the past to find meaning in the present, genetics-as-genealogy is beginning to change not simply the meaning of race but also the concept of identity. For if race realists talk increasingly in terms of identity and genealogy, anti-racists and minority activists increasingly look to biology for answers to questions of identity. Political and cultural notions of identity are increasingly underpinned by DNA.

Over the past decade geneticists have traced the histories of countless populations. Dozens of commercial companies have sprung up to help individuals trace their family history. Many see this not as an entertaining bit of genealogy, but a fundamental act of recovering their authentic identity.

edit on 23-6-2015 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 08:24 PM
link   
What's confusing for some people is the experts say "only one race".

Then the other experts start listing the differences.




posted on Jun, 23 2015 @ 08:27 PM
link   
a reply to: theabsolutetruth

I think you are misunderstanding that link.

"Race", as you are discussing it here, isn't what is being looked for.

An example: the propensity of "black people" to have sickle cell anemia. This is due to natural selection for people resistant to malaria in tropical regions. Thus, it isn't just "black people" that have developed this selection. It is something that arose in tropical climates.

there are also misguided studies trying to find out why one race is more prone to diabetes, or heart disease. What is ignored is diet, and how the body is attuned to the food of a region. This isn't race, though. THis, once again, is natural selection. Incidence of lactose intolerance in northern India (where the cow is sacred), for example, is far lower than among Native Americans (where there were no cows until recently).

milk.procon.org...

Because of natural selection.

None of this is tied intrinsically to race. Because even among "white europeans", lactose intolerance varies from nation to nation.

There is nothing that allows you to identify one race from another. If you were to sit down and try to write out a taxonomy, you wouldn't be able to. There is no genetic basis, and actually no cosmetic basis for it. Sure, there are generalizations. But you can find examples from each and every "race" that matches every single other race. The "Olmec heads" are a good example of this. The faces have every appearance of african people, until you think about how the pacific islanders look as well.

Just because our governments choose to put slots on a form...that doesn't make it a reality. My goverment wants hispanic people to check the box for "white/caucasian'. Its just some arbitrary classification that means nothing beyond the perceptions of the person checking that box. What they identify themselves as.




top topics



 
6
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join