Post by omegaspan on Aug 24, 2005 17:26:50 GMT -5
It is often noted, mostly by those supporting the superiority of a racial group, that certain characteristics found extensively in that group 'prove' a superior position against other racial groups.
But with what criteria shall we judge those characteristics?
By physical criteria? for example: Blonde hair look more beatifull, more sexy or more 'exotic' than black hair?
By criteria of contribution to society? for example: intelligence contributes to the benefit of a social structure
By criteria of global contribution? for example: intelligence in combination with a good will and a peacefull character of a racial group can be said to benefit humanity as a whole
By criteria of "majestic" physical appearance? for example: tallness as a racial characteristic, or (claimed) great physical strength or courage gives a certain amount of 'glamour' to a racial group
How true can such statements be?
And how much quality is there in them?
For example, tallness has been a classic characteristic that ultra nordic racialists take pride in. The same for warlike behaviour. But such a characteristic is actually negative if we consider that we live in a globalised planet where co existence seems to be the way for our future to actually "happen".
On the other hand, being able to fit in to foreign lands, exercising intelligence, such as Asians do for example, and being relatively peacefull people, is something very positive and contributing to a global society where science knows no boudaries between countries.
Our fantasies about our own racial group may focus on certain physical characteristics that appear to us to be "superior", but in the big picture there should be new criteria judging the worthiness of each racial group's character, in order for us to cope with the ever changing reality we live in.
But with what criteria shall we judge those characteristics?
By physical criteria? for example: Blonde hair look more beatifull, more sexy or more 'exotic' than black hair?
By criteria of contribution to society? for example: intelligence contributes to the benefit of a social structure
By criteria of global contribution? for example: intelligence in combination with a good will and a peacefull character of a racial group can be said to benefit humanity as a whole
By criteria of "majestic" physical appearance? for example: tallness as a racial characteristic, or (claimed) great physical strength or courage gives a certain amount of 'glamour' to a racial group
How true can such statements be?
And how much quality is there in them?
For example, tallness has been a classic characteristic that ultra nordic racialists take pride in. The same for warlike behaviour. But such a characteristic is actually negative if we consider that we live in a globalised planet where co existence seems to be the way for our future to actually "happen".
On the other hand, being able to fit in to foreign lands, exercising intelligence, such as Asians do for example, and being relatively peacefull people, is something very positive and contributing to a global society where science knows no boudaries between countries.
Our fantasies about our own racial group may focus on certain physical characteristics that appear to us to be "superior", but in the big picture there should be new criteria judging the worthiness of each racial group's character, in order for us to cope with the ever changing reality we live in.