|
Post by topdog on Jul 5, 2005 14:56:08 GMT -5
If that being the case, why does he focus attention on E3b, Ethiopian DNA and Egypt? He´s entitled to his own opinions, just as you are to yours. Sciences advances by the clash of ideas and paradigms. (By the way, I cannot access the archived post you linked to) He's been wrong in almost every instance about Africa, espcially East Africa. It doesn't take a genius to know why he's interested in this area so much. Here's the link to that archived post www.network54.com/Forum/message?forumid=233031&messageid=1046062990
|
|
|
Post by eufrenio on Jul 5, 2005 14:56:30 GMT -5
Based on that archived post of his he's certainly far from being a Southern European enthusiast, what do Babylon, Egypt and Syria have to do with Southern Europe? Citing Sergi certainly does more harm than good for him. Well, I guess he was identifying 'Southern European'-like racial elements in Babylon, Egypt and Syria. Here's how I think of it, with 'Southern European' replaced with 'white' : A 'white racial enthusiast' would say : "Whites invented most of the world's important inventions. They even had influence in exotic places like Central Asia! ( Tocharians )" A 'white racialist' might say that, and add : "Whites should look only after their own kind." A 'white racist' would say all of that, and add : "And expell all of the ugly muds!" Mel, I fail to see how this applies to Dienekes. Anyway, I don´t agree with your characterization of the degrees of "racialism". You can agree with point 3, for instance, but not with points 1 or 2. In logical terms, it does not follow from 2 that 1, or from 3 that 2 and 1. It´s probably only true of second and third rate minds, stormfront types.
|
|
|
Post by mike2 on Jul 5, 2005 15:01:11 GMT -5
True, but remember that racialism and nationalism are usually related, but are still two different things.
racialism - the belief in or the practices of racism.
racism - a doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior; hated or intolerance of another race.
So you see, racism is not always about hatred or intolerance. In fact it's more about perceived differences that exist only in the racialist's mind.
|
|
|
Post by eufrenio on Jul 5, 2005 15:02:37 GMT -5
It's really just his unwillingness to come to grips with the fact that some of his ideas about race are outdated and are in desperate need of revision. He believes in the True Negro, for example. You´ve got to admit that he´s at least trying to come up with a synthesis of physical anthropology and genetics. That´s pretty rare these days and he deserves credit for this. As to the "true negro" hypothesis, it´s a working hypothesis which I´m sure he´d discard if he found evidence to the contrary. To be frank, neither the "true Negro" or the "elongated African" theories are truly satisfying, IMHO.
|
|
|
Post by Melnorme on Jul 5, 2005 15:03:32 GMT -5
Mel, I fail to see how this applies to Dienekes. Well, I'm thinking more of Dienekes' older posts on the old Racial Myths board ( you can still see some of that attitude in his early blog posts back on dienekes.com ). Yes, I agree, and I wasn't implying that. For example there are 'depressive' MajorityRights-style racialists who aren't every 'enthusiastic' or 'proud' of their race at all, indeed they consider it weak and easily corrupted, which is why they're depressed.
|
|
|
Post by mike2 on Jul 5, 2005 15:03:54 GMT -5
I agree. I'm not saying Dienekes is an overt racialist with a discernible agenda, but sometimes I do have to wonder about the motives behind his cold, condescending words. He seems to take himself and his hobby too seriously, in other words.
|
|
|
Post by mike2 on Jul 5, 2005 15:07:19 GMT -5
Charlie, I got your forward. This part stood out to me:
"I would not characterize the situation you outline as always "dangerous" and "misleading" although the potential for misinterpretation by naive people or by people with an ideological agenda is certainly possible. Clearly attempts to intergrate independent types of evidence must be done with considerable caution and healthy scientific reasoning."
|
|
|
Post by eufrenio on Jul 5, 2005 15:13:20 GMT -5
Well, I'm thinking more of Dienekes' older posts on the old Racial Myths board ( you can still see some of that attitude in his early blog posts back on dienekes.com ). I see.. Well, I´ve only been aware of the RM board for a short time. Dieneks´blog I´ve been reading for a couple of years, and perhaps you´re right that at one point he was nearly a "Medicist" But I´m sure he´s only a Hellenic Patriot nowadays. I´ve never seem him take pride in Iberian accomplishments, for instance. In short, he doesn´t strike me as a "pan-medicist", Galvez style. White nationalism is a dead-end, that´s why they are depressed. The only viable nationalism is the traditional one, which follows from it´s very name, that is, a nationalism limited to your own nation.
|
|
|
Post by mike2 on Jul 5, 2005 15:17:11 GMT -5
True, I guess Dienekes would best be described as a Hellenophile.
|
|
|
Post by Dodona Underground on Jul 5, 2005 16:16:32 GMT -5
Thought criminals will be apprehended and detained at the central facility pending further processing. Thank you for your time. You may now return to your closely supervised activities.
|
|
|
Post by nockwasright on Jul 6, 2005 2:57:01 GMT -5
Who doesn´t take pride in his own people? I don't actually. Now the usual "I take pride only in the things I do myself ..." bit should follow, but actually I do not so often do this wonderful things to be proud of, unless not committing major crimes is a proud accomplishment. Proud: "Feeling pleasurable satisfaction over an act, possession, quality, or relationship by which one measures one's stature or self-worth" Obviously stature and self worth are meaningful only if compared with other statures and self worth. If one was the only man who had ever been in the world he couldn't be "proud" for lack of terms of comparison. Thus, feeling proud over some population we misthically think we are related to entails that we deem such population better than the others, or most of the others. The phrase "everybody can/should be proud of his nationality/ethnicity/race/whatever sounds sensless to me, then, as they can't be all best, can they? E.g. Charlie Bass (Charlie, forgive me to use you as example, could be anyone else) is proud of being a SSA, and of being an AfroAmerican and of being a citizen of the USA. The differences between the three groups of people that he identifies with are such that the only thing that they have in common is ... Charlie Bass himself. Came it out that he has also Chinese ancestry, he will be proud of Chinese ancestry. I mean that you can not detect any values he uses as a matter of judgement for such different subjects, the only value is Charlie Bass himself. This told, being proud of your nation amounts to believe that you nation is better than the other. As this hardly comes out a comparative analysis of the history of nations, it amounts to say you, and any group that comprehends you is better than the others. Or not?
|
|
|
Post by topdog on Jul 6, 2005 3:06:10 GMT -5
I'm of African-American and Native-American ancestry, but I have never really identified with being Native American because I'm black. I'm more proudly African-American than anything else.
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on Jul 6, 2005 3:27:51 GMT -5
<<African-American than anything else. >>
Your not African,your a Black American,your a mix ...that and African does not =Black(SSA). Its a BS dubious term ,thats why African-American has no meaning.
|
|
|
Post by topdog on Jul 6, 2005 4:03:51 GMT -5
<<African-American than anything else. >> Your not African,your a Black American,your a mix ...that and African does not =Black(SSA). Its a BS dubious term ,thats why African-American has no meaning. I am African-American because 75% of my ancestry is of African descent and my people didn't just magically appear in America, we had to come from someplace. I don't need some European to tell me what African is or how I should identify myself.
|
|
|
Post by Dienekes on Jul 6, 2005 4:31:31 GMT -5
If anyone doubts that genes are correlated with race, then perhaps they can explain how scientists can look at genes of unlabeled individuals and predict their race nearly 100% of the time. dienekes.blogspot.com/2004/12/racial-clusters.htmlAlso, human beings are what they are because of their genes and their environments, so it is quite probable that ethnic groups may differ from each other because of their different gene frequencies and different environmental influences. It is the opposite suggestion, that genes play no role in human aptitudes that must be proven by those who subscribe to it. I am not willing to exclude a priori any factors, either cultural or genetic.
|
|