Is Whiteness Inseparable From Western Civilization?

[JimBowie1958]

I think that 'whiteness' and race in general, are artificial social/cultural concepts that are mostly the product of historical accidents.

But I think that Western Civilization is a vital concept that emerged from Western Europe being the latest carrier of the Torch of Civilized Liberty, and not necessarily related to race at all.

Today I think the nations of Singapore, Thailand and Taiwan are closer to the 950 concept of a just moral government than any Western state.

But the root question is this; Is Whiteness inseparable from the concept of Western civilization or not?

 

[The Irish Ram]

White is not a concept, like gender isn't a concept. The proof of that is in a box of crayons, and in your pants.
And, if you think Asian nations are civilized, google their treatment of prisoners during WW2. They are just calm at present..
Pearl Harbor was unprovoked and uncivilized.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

Yes. Different cultures/races (take your pick) develop vastly different forms of government. Some never develop at all beyond the Warlord citystate.

Our special brand of replacing the king with the people is a British/American thing that has its roots in Ancient Israel who never had a king for the first 400 years.

America today is not what it was. Today we are ruled by kings and we pay the price. Our shared morality, which comes from Christianity, is slipping away and internal strife is the result. This is how our Forefathers warned we could be destroyed from within.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

To answer the question, yes, to dissipating degrees up until the Civil Rights movement. Since then, whiteness is mainly a political contrivance used by lefties to manipulate the culture and undermine the social structure.

 

[Picaro]

Singapore some 60 years ago was in about the same place as Mexico. They decided to start a major anti-corruption campaign and the wealthy families went along with it; it was they key to their success, and still is, while Mexico just got even more corrupt and nasty, nothing but a narco state anarchy now, not a real state. It's night and day; if the U.S. doesn't do what Singapore did, it's only going to go downhill. The right wing sociopaths are just as clueless and mindless as the left wing is; they agree on a lot more these days re the 'great unwashed' out here, so don't think either wing has any real interest in keeping the U.S. a viable state; they don't.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Singapore some 60 years ago was in about the same place as Mexico. They decided to start a major anti-corruption campaign and the wealthy families went along with it; it was they key to their success, and still is, while Mexico just got even more corrupt and nasty, nothing but a narco state anarchy now, not a real state. It's night and day; if the U.S. doesn't do what Singapore did, it's only going to go downhill. The right wing sociopaths are just as clueless and mindless as the left wing is; they agree on a lot more these days re the 'great unwashed' out here, so don't think either wing has any real interest in keeping the U.S. a viable state; they don't.

Singapore is an autocratic police state.

I'll pass on following their lead.

 

[Unkotare]

White is not a concept, like gender isn't a concept. The proof of that is in a box of crayons, and in your pants.....

Wow, dumb.

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

Whiteness is greatness!

 

[JimBowie1958]

Singapore is an autocratic police state.
I'll pass on following their lead.

You are engaging in hyperbole.

Singapore - Wikipedia

Singapore is a unitary multiparty parliamentary republic, with a Westminster system of unicameral parliamentary government. The People's Action Party has won every election since self-government in 1959. The dominance of the PAP, coupled with a low level of press freedom and restrictions on civil liberties and political rights, has led to Singapore being classified by some as a semi-authoritarian regime. ...​

Government of Singapore - Wikipedia

The Constitution defines the Government of Singapore as the President and the Cabinet of Singapore. The executive authority of Singapore is vested in the President and is exercisable by him or by the Cabinet of Singapore or any Minister authorized by the Cabinet.[33] However, the President normally plays a nominal and largely ceremonial role in the executive branch of government. Although the President acts in his personal discretion in the exercise of certain functions as a check on the Cabinet and Parliament of Singapore,[34] he is otherwise required to act in accordance with the advice of the Cabinet or of a Minister acting under the general authority of the Cabinet.[35] It is the Cabinet that has the general direction and control of the Government.[36] As Singapore follows the Westminster system of government, the legislative agenda of Parliament is determined by the Cabinet. At the start of each new Parliamentary session, the President gives an address prepared by the Cabinet that outlines what the Cabinet intends to achieve in the session.[37]

Each parliament lasts for a maximum of five years from the date of its first sitting,[38] and once a parliament has been dissolved a general election must be held within three months.[39] Following a general election, the President appoints as Prime Minister an MP who, in his judgment, is likely to command the confidence of the majority of the MPs.[40] In practice, the Prime Minister is usually the leader of the political party holding the majority of the seats in Parliament.[41] The President also appoints other Ministers from among the MPs, acting in accordance with the Prime Minister's advice.​

All in all it sounds very similar to what the Brits have today; a unicameral government with symbolic offices that ceremonially augment the primary legislature. What is autocratic about it? And they have civil rights, so where is the police state?

By any chance, do you think that Zimbabwe is an autocratic police state?

 

[JimBowie1958]

White is not a concept, like gender isn't a concept. The proof of that is in a box of crayons, and in your pants.

So which of the following are white?

The Turks, the Iranians, The Hindi, the Berbers, and the Huns?

They are all Caucasian, but some question the whiteness of each. The racist classification since WW2 excludes most of them, depending on who you ask, but Hitler, the arch-racist of our time, considered all of them to be white, in fact he wanted to conquer Iran and India so he could populate Germany with more superior Aryan blood. But now these are all considered to be 'mud people' by most racial thinking people.

Why is that, do you think?

And, if you think Asian nations are civilized, google their treatment of prisoners during WW2. They are just calm at present..
Pearl Harbor was unprovoked and uncivilized.

Yes, and have you read of the atrocities committed by so-called white nations, like Cromwell's purge of Ireland, the devastation of the 30 years war, or the genocide of Belgium in the Congo?

All races have their shameful deeds. Are all ethnicities and people guilty by race if some of their number commit crimes against another group?

 

[JimBowie1958]

To answer the question, yes, to dissipating degrees up until the Civil Rights movement. Since then, whiteness is mainly a political contrivance used by lefties to manipulate the culture and undermine the social structure.

I agree and I think it is the driving force behind reclassifying so many ethnic groups as nonwhite that used to be considered white. The left wants to turn whhite people into an electoral minority by redefining what white means.

The vast majority of Mexicans are white, Iran is white, India is almost all white, as is North Africa, but the leftist professoriate says they are no longer, and so white peoples are now a minority across the globe, but only be revised definition.

I think we should stop thinking in terms of broad racial categories and look at specific ethnicities to find useful groupings of people.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Whites created humanism and "western" civilization. Loserterianism and extreme conservatism is like the Vicci goths storming Rome or the tribal europeans in northern Europe during the times of Rome so it is the opposite of what created western civilization.

College, innovation and government funded exploration is the superiority of western civilization.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Yes. Different cultures/races (take your pick) develop vastly different forms of government. Some never develop at all beyond the Warlord citystate.

Our special brand of replacing the king with the people is a British/American thing that has its roots in Ancient Israel who never had a king for the first 400 years.

America today is not what it was. Today we are ruled by kings and we pay the price. Our shared morality, which comes from Christianity, is slipping away and internal strife is the result. This is how our Forefathers warned we could be destroyed from within.

So which do you think is the driving force defining a people, their race or their culture? I say it is almost 100% their culture.

I think that there is a commonality between Israel and England, but not what you think. The idea of personal responsibility to obey God is the root of English and Israeli culture, enshrined by Moses for Israel and Alfred the Great in England and this moves a nation toward the idea that a king is no more superior than anyone else, while most cultures form the idea that personal morality is pointless and power is the sole justifier as it bring shame or pride to ones family.

Which of our officers in the USA is a king?.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Whites created humanism and "western" civilization. Loserterianism and extreme conservatism is like the Vicci goths storming Rome or the tribal europeans in northern Europe during the times of Rome so it is the opposite of what created western civilization.

College, innovation and government funded exploration is the superiority of western civilization.

To my knowledge, the earliest humanists were Jews; do you consider them to be white? I do, but not everyone, so I thought I might ask you.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Whites created humanism and "western" civilization. Loserterianism and extreme conservatism is like the Vicci goths storming Rome or the tribal europeans in northern Europe during the times of Rome so it is the opposite of what created western civilization.

College, innovation and government funded exploration is the superiority of western civilization.

To my knowledge, the earliest humanists were Jews; do you consider them to be white? I do, but not everyone, so I thought I might ask you.

Sure,,,,Europeans just developed it and used it to become global leaders.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Singapore is an autocratic police state.
I'll pass on following their lead.

You are engaging in hyperbole.

Singapore - Wikipedia

Singapore is a unitary multiparty parliamentary republic, with a Westminster system of unicameral parliamentary government. The People's Action Party has won every election since self-government in 1959. The dominance of the PAP, coupled with a low level of press freedom and restrictions on civil liberties and political rights, has led to Singapore being classified by some as a semi-authoritarian regime. ...​

Government of Singapore - Wikipedia

The Constitution defines the Government of Singapore as the President and the Cabinet of Singapore. The executive authority of Singapore is vested in the President and is exercisable by him or by the Cabinet of Singapore or any Minister authorized by the Cabinet.[33] However, the President normally plays a nominal and largely ceremonial role in the executive branch of government. Although the President acts in his personal discretion in the exercise of certain functions as a check on the Cabinet and Parliament of Singapore,[34] he is otherwise required to act in accordance with the advice of the Cabinet or of a Minister acting under the general authority of the Cabinet.[35] It is the Cabinet that has the general direction and control of the Government.[36] As Singapore follows the Westminster system of government, the legislative agenda of Parliament is determined by the Cabinet. At the start of each new Parliamentary session, the President gives an address prepared by the Cabinet that outlines what the Cabinet intends to achieve in the session.[37]

Each parliament lasts for a maximum of five years from the date of its first sitting,[38] and once a parliament has been dissolved a general election must be held within three months.[39] Following a general election, the President appoints as Prime Minister an MP who, in his judgment, is likely to command the confidence of the majority of the MPs.[40] In practice, the Prime Minister is usually the leader of the political party holding the majority of the seats in Parliament.[41] The President also appoints other Ministers from among the MPs, acting in accordance with the Prime Minister's advice.​

All in all it sounds very similar to what the Brits have today; a unicameral government with symbolic offices that ceremonially augment the primary legislature. What is autocratic about it? And they have civil rights, so where is the police state?

There is no right to free speech, or a free press. Political opposition is censored, if not outright punished by law. Journalists and citizens are fined and jailed consistently for not toeing the party line.

By any chance, do you think that Zimbabwe is an autocratic police state?

Sure.

 

[ScienceRocks]

There is no right to free speech, or a free press. Political opposition is censored, if not outright punished by law. Journalists and citizens are fined and jailed consistently for not toeing the party line.

By any chance, do you think that Zimbabwe is an autocratic police state?

======================================Matthews point-----
Well, most of the men that theorized such like John locke were europeans. America just pulled all this together and successful created a system based on the theory.

Many european nation after America become democratic and use many of our ideas today.


I really don't understand why the goddamn

keep masking my post.

 

[JimBowie1958]

There is no right to free speech, or a free press. Political opposition is censored, if not outright punished by law. Journalists and citizens are fined and jailed consistently for not toeing the party line.

They say that they have free speech, why do you disagree with that?

The solid phalanx of pro-Democrat coverage by our major media would seem to be effective censorship by our political establishment of both parties that own all the press. Journalists and citizens lose their careers, reputations and are harassed and given death threats if they do things the Establishment deems outrageous.

So the USA is an autocratic police state as well?

 

[Picaro]

Singapore some 60 years ago was in about the same place as Mexico. They decided to start a major anti-corruption campaign and the wealthy families went along with it; it was they key to their success, and still is, while Mexico just got even more corrupt and nasty, nothing but a narco state anarchy now, not a real state. It's night and day; if the U.S. doesn't do what Singapore did, it's only going to go downhill. The right wing sociopaths are just as clueless and mindless as the left wing is; they agree on a lot more these days re the 'great unwashed' out here, so don't think either wing has any real interest in keeping the U.S. a viable state; they don't.

Singapore is an autocratic police state.

I'll pass on following their lead.

Compared to the norm in SE Asia, they're hippies. Not every country on the planet can be like the U.S., developing in a relative isolation and spared being regularly swept over by foreign armies.

 

[Picaro]

White is not a concept, like gender isn't a concept. The proof of that is in a box of crayons, and in your pants.

So which of the following are white?

The Turks, the Iranians, The Hindi, the Berbers, and the Huns?

They are all Caucasian, but some question the whiteness of each. The racist classification since WW2 excludes most of them, depending on who you ask, but Hitler, the arch-racist of our time, considered all of them to be white, in fact he wanted to conquer Iran and India so he could populate Germany with more superior Aryan blood. But now these are all considered to be 'mud people' by most racial thinking people.

Why is that, do you think?

And, if you think Asian nations are civilized, google their treatment of prisoners during WW2. They are just calm at present..
Pearl Harbor was unprovoked and uncivilized.

Yes, and have you read of the atrocities committed by so-called white nations, like Cromwell's purge of Ireland, the devastation of the 30 years war, or the genocide of Belgium in the Congo?

All races have their shameful deeds. Are all ethnicities and people guilty by race if some of their number commit crimes against another group?

Nazis also even distinguished between tribes of Gypsies re 'Aryaness', exterminating what they considered 'non-Aryan' Gypsies and leaving 'Aryan descended' Gypsies originated from parts of India alone. They were bizarre on many points in that cult. Don't know how they made the distinctions re Gypsies, as they look similar.