What are your thoughts on "Race"?

[Whyte.Devyl]

What are your thoughts on "Race"?
Which label do you most strongly identify with?

(You may vote for more than one)

NULL
You deny that there is even such a thing as 'race'. Perhaps you believe that the biological characteristics used to define 'race' are not biological, rather "social constructs".
(Perhaps you are in this subforum by mistake?)

RACIALIST
You maintain that even though 'races' are indeed different, such differences do not include any inherent superiority/inferiority. You may acknowledge that genetically inheritable biological characteristics are indeed real.

RACIST
You believe that certain 'races' are inherently superior or inferior to others. You believe that a particular 'race' has the right to exploit another based on culture, history, or simple biology.

GENOCIDAL SUPREMACIST
You believe that the world should or will be "the same race someday". You support whatever measures neccesary to ensure that a particular 'race' or 'races' cease to exist, even if it is your own 'race'.

*Note that these labels do not neccesarily coincide with contemporary definitions.

 

[Kalam]

The second one, I guess.

 

[Whyte.Devyl]

Forgot to include my own vote.

The second one, I guess.

Kalam,
Any caveats to your vote?

 

[xsited1]

...

RACIALIST
You maintain that even though 'races' are indeed different, such differences do not include any inherent superiority/inferiority. You may acknowledge that genetically inheritable biological characteristics are indeed real.

RACIST
You believe that certain 'races' are inherently superior or inferior to others. You believe that a particular 'race' has the right to exploit another based on culture, history, or simple biology.

...

You could also believe that certain races are superior/inferior to others in some way (e.g., certain sports, thicker skull (Australians), higher IQ, etc.), but do not believe that a particular race has the right to exploit another.

 

[Whyte.Devyl]

xsited1,
Interesting point of view. What you have described is a contemporary definition of "racialist", that is one who subscribes to the notion that not only are 'races' different, but that there are inherent superior/inferior qualities within each given 'race'.

The differentiation I made was that, just because one beleives that certain traits are 'racial', it does not mean that any individual of a particular 'race' is guaranteed to be superior/inferior to another individual of another 'race' solely on the basis of 'racial' characteristics. When I refer to 'racial' characteristics I am including taxonomical traits such as skin color, hair color, eye color, prognathism, skull shape, inheritable diseases, etc.

IMHO - Within any given population, possessing any given set of 'racial' traits, there always remains the potential for "high/low IQ", or "fast/slow runners" depending upon the individual. So by contemporary definition, I guess I am only ½ a "racialist".

Hope that makes sense.

Oh one other thing, Why no vote?

 

[Kalam]

Forgot to include my own vote.

The second one, I guess.

Kalam,
Any caveats to your vote?

Perceived differences between races seem to have far more to do with cultural factors than biological factors.

 

[Yukon]

I believe the whiteman is superior as God demands.

 

[publicprotector]

The source ofracism has always been constant and always will unless certain factors change. That constant is progress, highly developed civilisations always have seen themselves as superior to any that are not as developed. That has been the case throughout history, it not a white thing or a black thing.

It is that which sets all others part, thrown into the mix is religion. But the answer is simple, remove religion, bring everyone up to the same level of development, give people what they need and the majority of problems that humans have with each other will vanish.

It is for that reason that the perps keep things the way they are. Ignorance, war and want make lots of money.

 

[Ravi]

Your definition for racist is incorrect.

from Websters:

1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

 

[Whyte.Devyl]

Your definition for racist is incorrect.

ravi,
No kidding, that may be why I posted this:

*Note that these labels do not neccesarily coincide with contemporary definitions.

That said, the definition provided of "racist" still fits within the boundaries of Websters definition does it not?

One other thing, why no vote?

 

[Ravi]

Still thinking.

"Racist" doesn't require that you have any feelings on exploitation either way.

 

[xsited1]

xsited1,
Interesting point of view. What you have described is a contemporary definition of "racialist", that is one who subscribes to the notion that not only are 'races' different, but that there are inherent superior/inferior qualities within each given 'race'.

The differentiation I made was that, just because one beleives that certain traits are 'racial', it does not mean that any individual of a particular 'race' is guaranteed to be superior/inferior to another individual of another 'race' solely on the basis of 'racial' characteristics. When I refer to 'racial' characteristics I am including taxonomical traits such as skin color, hair color, eye color, prognathism, skull shape, inheritable diseases, etc.

IMHO - Within any given population, possessing any given set of 'racial' traits, there always remains the potential for "high/low IQ", or "fast/slow runners" depending upon the individual. So by contemporary definition, I guess I am only ½ a "racialist".

Hope that makes sense.

Oh one other thing, Why no vote?

If what I've described is the contemporary definition of 'racialist', that is how I will vote. Just remember that my race has the highest IQ.

 

[Yukon]

Is it wrong to know that the white-man has, is, and always will be superior? For goodness sake we took the Negro out of trees, we civilized the Indian, we rule the entire planet. I can't help what is and I'm not at all ashamed to state what is factual.

In today's world of political correctness, affirmative action, equality, etc. etc. it is still undeniable that we of the Aryan Race are masters.

 

[Whyte.Devyl]

Ravi,
Thank you.
After reflecting a bit, I think you may have made an excellant point.
Your point, as I acknowledge it, is that this poll is flawed because of it's non-strict use of labels.
I hope we can chalk it up as a rookie mistake?


My apologies to any who felt they wasted their time reading this.

I'll be back with a much improved version soon.

 

[Ravi]

Ravi,
Thank you.
After reflecting a bit, I think you may have made an excellant point.
Your point, as I acknowledge it, is that this poll is flawed because of it's non-strict use of labels.
I hope we can chalk it up as a rookie mistake?


My apologies to any who felt they wasted their time reading this.

I'll be back with a much improved version soon.

You're welcome. How's the vacation going?

 

[Whyte.Devyl]

How's the vacation going?

While I generally do not like to get off subject...
It is clear that you have me confused with someone else.

 

[Ravi]

My bad.

I look forward to your reworked definitions.

 

[Againsheila]

Except for the special olympics...I'm against it...someone always gets hurt.

 

[ErikViking]

I'll be back with a much improved version soon.

Need I vote again or does the NULL defintion hold?

 

[ARF_Leader]

No one is superior or inferior, everyone is equal.