|
Post by MC anunnaki on Aug 24, 2005 1:22:24 GMT -5
You guys are nuts. If you re-read my initial post, you'll see that I'm for marrying whoever you want. (I'm no racial isolationist. In fact, I chided Crimson Guard for saying that he was skeptical about racial-mixing.) So please pay better attention. While I agree that racial mixing makes for a hardier genetic stock (and less imbreeding), I tried to be balanced and admit that there were collateral consequences of those policies . . . which are the eventual disappearance of smaller groups. That's not hatred or fear. That's respect for the variety of the human race. Excatly the opposite of racist rhetoric--which holds that all other races are inferior and that only one's own group should exist. I understand what you're getting and what you're describing is called ethnopluralism I think. Many racists use that as a more PC alternative to preaching racial isolation. I too appreciate the variety of humans on this planet, but if many members of a certain small group want to breed with members outside of their group, then we can't really do much about it. I think groups will disappear or merge and become something new no matter what anyone thinks. Besides, it doesn't necessarily mean less variation.
|
|
|
Post by Mike the Jedi on Aug 24, 2005 1:40:58 GMT -5
Even if all the races mixed, human variation would never be eliminated. New races would emerge and the process would start all over.
|
|
|
Post by henerte on Aug 24, 2005 2:08:53 GMT -5
Even if all the races mixed, human variation would never be eliminated. New races would emerge and the process would start all over. Human variation will never be eliminated because people simply look different from each other (except for twins). In this sense, human variation will always exist, but it doesn't mean that human races will exist. The process of race creation will not re-emerge because probably one of the main reasons why races appeared is the fact that different groups of people lived in a relative isolation from each other. Today, when you can travel anywhere and whenever you want to, it's impossible to keep people in that isolation.
|
|
|
Post by Mike the Jedi on Aug 24, 2005 2:25:14 GMT -5
Exactly, it's a new frontier of racial possibilities. I doubt just because we are on the cutting edge of technology and globalism that we will defeat natural selection completely. The more things change, the more they stay the same, they say.
|
|
|
Post by wasterzhi on Aug 24, 2005 8:38:27 GMT -5
I don't like racial or subracial mixing. I am always disturbed when I see two people who look completely different, especially if a beautiful young woman is paired with an Asian or an African man. I think it is such a waste of genes, because she could have really beautiful children if she mated with a nice man of her own race. What evolution has taken thousands of years to create can be destroyed in an instant, just for gratification, without thinking about the mixed-race children and their problems.
|
|
|
Post by MC anunnaki on Aug 24, 2005 10:28:13 GMT -5
because she could have really beautiful children if she mated with a nice man of her own race. Why can't she have beautiful children with a man not of her race? What evolution has taken thousands of years to create can be destroyed in an instant, just for gratification, without thinking about the mixed-race children and their problems. I hear this a lot from racists, the whole "evolution"-talk. Why is something holy simply because it has taken many thousands of years to develop? No one has ever been able to give me a satisfying answer to that.
|
|
|
Post by nockwasright on Aug 24, 2005 10:45:31 GMT -5
[quote author=wasterzhi board=racesoc Why is something holy simply because it has taken many thousands of years to develop? No one has ever been able to give me a satisfying answer to that. Well it's easy. Just look the product of all this evolution: And it took much longer evolution time to achieve such superior beauty: Actually the word "evolution" seems to have a lot of impact on easily impressed people
|
|
|
Post by nordicyouth on Aug 24, 2005 11:00:09 GMT -5
The solution is to instill each ethnicity with a sense of pride (aesthetically, and otherwise), thereby eliminating stereotypical miscegenation by certain groups due to general insecurities.
Mixing would still occur, but rather on the basis of love, etc., rather than ulterior motives.
Not that I'm prejudiced, but race, class, and gender issues (i.e. insecurities, superiority/inferiority complexes, etc) are factors in relationships, probably all at a roughly equal level. Race, it seems, is merely more visible to the outsider than the others, although we've all heard the story of the boy from the wrong side of the tracks who marries the rich girl and resents himself and her because of it no matter how successful he is. That would be class.
And these three are just generally prevalent insecurities - I haven't even touched on the personal. Most people operate based on fear, and relationships are duly affected.
|
|
|
Post by Drooperdoo on Aug 24, 2005 11:33:37 GMT -5
Please, oh, please don't make us pull out examples of the horrors of racial-mixing--like the American black with a giant orange afro. You keep making it like racial mixing typically leads to beautiful women like Halle Berry or men like musician Lenny Kravitz. They're the exception. The rule is the awkward black kid with freckles and a giant orange afro. Bwa-ha-ha-ha
P.S.--Just being serious here for a moment: It's usually not the choice Caucasians who breed in with negroes or Asians. I've always been annoyed--not at an attractive white marrying a black, but by the contrary: A muscular, handsome black man marrying a fat, sloppy trailer trash white girl. (You see it all the time.) He could do so much better. But I guess he can't get past the love of that "pretty white skin". He'll ignore the fact that her face is that of a pug, or her body shape that of a blimp. Always depresses me. The slave's suicidal psychology--thinking it's imperative to "breed himself out".
|
|
|
Post by Melnorme on Aug 24, 2005 12:39:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by MC anunnaki on Aug 24, 2005 12:40:45 GMT -5
Well it's easy. Just look the product of all this evolution: And it took much longer evolution time to achieve such superior beauty: This can only be answered in one way: ;D Thanks for the link, Melnorme!
|
|
|
Post by wasterzhi on Aug 25, 2005 2:18:54 GMT -5
Why can't she have beautiful children with a man not of her race? Sometimes mixed race people are beautiful but it is a fleeting beauty that cannot be reproduced, because only pure races can produce their own likenesses. Two beautiful Nordids produce beautiful Nordids, two beautiful Sinids produce beautiful Sinids, but a beautiful Nordid and a beautiful Sinid produce a beautiful person if their genes combine in a harmonious and esthetic way and don't clash with each other. I hear this a lot from racists, the whole "evolution"-talk. Why is something holy simply because it has taken many thousands of years to develop? No one has ever been able to give me a satisfying answer to that. Existing human races have been shaped and refined by thousands of years of evolution, and have proven their value and their ability to survive. They are like old trees that have withstood the test of time. Why destroy them and create new untested mixed races? Only selfish people experiment with their children that way.
|
|
|
Post by Mike the Jedi on Aug 25, 2005 2:56:28 GMT -5
Racial mixing completely compromises human survival and participating in it signifies the fall of man. I mean, history as taught us that when races mix, bad things are bound to happen! I mean, just look what racial mixing did to the Ainu! What ugliness! And don't get me started on the Tuareg! This poor guy is too ashamed to even show his hybrid face: And alas, the Khmers! Just another tragic example of what happens when Mongoloids mix with Australoids... Angkor Wat, Schmangkor Wat, I say! And somewhere, the great Aryan gods weep... for their Indid descendants have mixed with Veddoids to create such horrible abominations as this successful Microsoft executive: The horror! The horror!
|
|
|
Post by MC anunnaki on Aug 25, 2005 5:52:05 GMT -5
Existing human races have been shaped and refined by thousands of years of evolution, and have proven their value and their ability to survive. They are like old trees that have withstood the test of time. Why destroy them and create new untested mixed races? Only selfish people experiment with their children that way. You're not answering the question. Just because "old trees have withstood the test of time" doesn't make them holy. Same goes for humans. WHY NOT create new races? Has evolution/Nature/whatever forbidden it? What makes it wrong, from an objective point of view? So far, racists have only been able to give me their subjective reasons for being against race-mixing which basically boils down to one thing - they like their own ethnic group. Nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't explain why race-mixing is wrong. From a biological point of view, there is nothing wrong or right with two mammals reproducing.
|
|
|
Post by eufrenio on Aug 25, 2005 6:49:46 GMT -5
Existing human races have been shaped and refined by thousands of years of evolution, and have proven their value and their ability to survive. They are like old trees that have withstood the test of time. Why destroy them and create new untested mixed races? Only selfish people experiment with their children that way. You're not answering the question. Just because "old trees have withstood the test of time" doesn't make them holy. Same goes for humans. WHY NOT create new races? Has evolution/Nature/whatever forbidden it? What makes it wrong, from an objective point of view? So far, racists have only been able to give me their subjective reasons for being against race-mixing which basically boils down to one thing - they like their own ethnic group. Nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't explain why race-mixing is wrong. From a biological point of view, there is nothing wrong or right with two mammals reproducing. Here are some objective reasons from a scientist you would probably qualify as "racist": The health consequences of race mixing majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/the_health_consequences_of_race_mixing/And here´s the reply to David B´s blog entry at GNXP.com that Melnorme linked to: majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/1312/
|
|