"Whiteness" an existential threat to US--the language of genocide in US academia

[IM2]

Not exactly. What you were shown is that whites still benefit from apartheid. Oh but there's more.

I never said whites don't still benefit from Apartheid. Wtf are you smoking?

Apparently you are the one on drugs.. If whites are still benefitting from apartheid then maybe you should shut the hell up and understand that is what's causing the violence.

So in other words, you think it is okay and justified.

Please don't ask why white people are afraid of changing demographics anymore. You are the reason.

.I think you lied.

South Africa's Ramaphosa warns against land invasions

South African President Cyril Ramaphosa warned on Sunday that land invasions would not be tolerated as the ruling African National Congress (ANC) moves to change the constitution to expropriate property without compensation.

Land remains an emotive issue in South Africa and most of it remains in white hands over two decades after apartheid’s demise, despite government programmes aimed at redistribution to narrow glaring racial disparities in ownership.

Speaking to the media in televised remarks near Pretoria after spending the day on a voter registration drive, Ramaphosa was asked about invasions this week of vacant land in a suburb between Johannesburg and Pretoria which have provoked clashes with police.

“We should not tolerate disorder and lawlessness of that type. Nobody has any right to invade land, to violate other people’s rights,” Ramaphosa said.

“All those who want to invade land they will get to know that we will not allow that.”

South Africa's Ramaphosa warns against land invasions

And let me address your last sentence. You whites have ben killing us for the last 400 years and I'm supposed t be concerned that you who are racist whites are scared of a demographic shift? Have you lost your m-f'ng mind white boy? Fuck you!

Talk is cheap.

End of the day, you're a racist who believes people should be treated differently based on the color of their skin. You've pretty much come out and said it yourself. You've dismantled yourself, mate. And I've enjoyed watching you do it! Nothing you have to say from this point forward has any merit, really. Any further response from me or anyone else is more than you really deserve, and should be taken not as a validation of your horrible opinions, but as a desire to watch you further destroy yourself.

At the end pf the day you are sorry white racist liar who thinks whites get to ignore what they have done ad condemn others of color. That's treating people differently on he bass of skin color son. So continue lying to yourself. Because you cannot show one comment from me that supports the lies you have just posted. You need o show me where I specifically sated I support such things instead of lying about me pointing out white wrongdoing that created the problem as basis for the troubles.

 

[IM2]

Why Land Seizure Is Back in News in South Africa

By
Arabile Gumede and Amogelang Mbatha
‎March‎ ‎1‎, ‎2018‎ ‎5‎:‎26‎ ‎AM

"More than two decades after white-minority rule ended in South Africa, most of its profitable farms and estates are still owned by white people, and about 95 percent of the country’s wealth is in the hands of 10 percent of the population. The ruling African National Congress has vowed to step up wealth distribution and promised “radical economic transformation,” including constitutional changes to allow the government to expropriate land without paying for it.

1. Why is land ownership an issue?

Under the rule of European colonists, South Africa’s Natives Land Act of 1913 stripped most black people of their right to own property, a policy reinforced decades later by the National Party and its system of apartheid, or apartness. A government land audit released in February showed that farms and agricultural holdings comprise 97 percent of the 121.9 million hectares of the nation’s area, and that whites own 72 percent of the 37 million hectares held by individuals. This tallies with the results of a separate audit released Nov. 1 by Agri Development Solutions and farm lobby group AGRI SA, which found non-whites own 27 percent of the nation’s farmland compared with 14 percent in 1994.

2. What’s been done until now?

Since 1994, when the ANC became the nation’s dominant post-apartheid party, the state has bought 4.9 million hectares -- about 4 percent of the country’s total territory -- for land redistribution, with about 3.4 million hectares assigned to new owners, according to former Land Reform Minister Gugile Nkwinti. Those who didn’t want the land allocated to them opted for money instead, with 11.6 billion rand ($910 million) paid out from 1994 until January 2017. A separate initiative known as the 50-50 program, meant to encourage joint black-white land management, uses government funds to buy half a farmer’s land and give it to laborers working there. It started in 2016.

3. What changes are on the table?

Parliament had proposed legislation that would allow the government to pay “just and equitable” compensation -- meaning, less than market prices -- for land it expropriates. Former President Jacob Zuma sent the bill back to lawmakers, saying it wouldn’t pass constitutional muster. Another bill, offered for public comment in March 2017 by the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform, would ban foreigners from buying agricultural land and require them instead to enter into long-term leases. It also calls for creating a commission that will set up a register of land ownership that will include race and the size of the holding. On Dec. 20, the ANC, under newly elected party president Cyril Ramaphosa, said expropriating land without compensation should be among mechanisms to effect land reform, as long as it doesn’t undermine the economy, agricultural production and food security.

4. What is the party’s plan?

On Feb. 27, lawmakers agreed to the principle of land expropriation without compensation, and parliament’s Constitutional Review Committee will report back to lawmakers on changes to section 25 of the Constitution by Aug. 30. The opposition Economic Freedom Fighters party proposed a motion to allow land seizures to the legislature, while the ANC proposed amendments. Zuma has also called for a precolonial audit of land ownership, use and occupation patterns.

5. Is taking land without compensation legal?

Not at the moment. AGRI SA, the biggest organization representing the country’s farmers, says the constitution doesn’t provide for expropriation without “just and equitable” compensation. Deprivation of property without compensation “constitutes a very serious breach of an individual’s rights," it said.

6. Why is the ANC doing this now?

The party was initially reticent to allow expropriation without paying. Under Zuma, it came under pressure as economic growth stagnated, and there were calls for his resignation from the opposition, civic leaders and senior officials in his own party, following a series of scandals and an unpopular cabinet reshuffle. He left as the nation’s president in February and was replaced by Ramaphosa. The ANC lost voters in 2016 local elections to parties including the EFF, and Zuma’s reputation eroded the party’s standing to such an extent that it was at risk of losing its majority in 2019 elections. The party needs policies that will gain traction among the nation’s poor, who make up the majority of the electorate.

7. What’s the outlook in parliament?

Two-thirds of lawmakers would have to assent to change the constitution. The ANC holds 62 percent of the seats. The EFF, South Africa’s third-biggest political party, has 6.4 percent .

The Reference Shelf
•ANC statement on adopting expropriation without compensation
•How Zuma and his deputy differ on "radical economic transformation."
•A possible wealth tax is also being considered as a way to improve the standard of living of black South Africans.
•AGRI SA’s take on the constitutionality of expropriation without compensation.
•The Department of Rural Development and Land Reform’s 2017 land audit, released in February 2018, and its 2013 land audit.
•The University of the Western Cape’s Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies overview of the distribution of land."

Why Land Seizure Is Back in News in South Africa

I'm suggesting that you stop running your mouth off about South Africa. It is very apparent you know nothing about the issue.

.

What does this have to do with the torture and murder of white farmers, that is largely ignored by the government?

If that was the case everything. Whites still controlling land they stole in the ancestral lands of hos blacks, controlling the economy they refused to allow blacks to participate in within the own homeland by the very means you are whining about. I don't know what kind of crazy, fucked up, twisted selfish ass world whites like you live in, but in the real world you don't get to mistreat people now for at least 105 years and not expect retaliation.

You condone murder, torture, and rape on the basis of skin color. You've confirmed it. Think that's all anyone needs to know about you, mate.

I've dine nothing of the sort. But you have shown that you support the idea that whites should get to continue benefiting from murder, torture, and rape on the basis of skin color. You've confirmed it. Think that's all anyone needs to know about you, mate.

Lol. Nice try, but I don't support anything of the sort. You do, clearly, but you're also an abhorrent person. And that has nothing to do with your skin color.

Apparently you do because you ignore whites doing it for 80 years which is what has caused this situation. So if the truth is abhorrent to you, that's your problem.

 

[John Shaw]

I never said whites don't still benefit from Apartheid. Wtf are you smoking?

Apparently you are the one on drugs.. If whites are still benefitting from apartheid then maybe you should shut the hell up and understand that is what's causing the violence.

So in other words, you think it is okay and justified.

Please don't ask why white people are afraid of changing demographics anymore. You are the reason.

.I think you lied.

South Africa's Ramaphosa warns against land invasions

South African President Cyril Ramaphosa warned on Sunday that land invasions would not be tolerated as the ruling African National Congress (ANC) moves to change the constitution to expropriate property without compensation.

Land remains an emotive issue in South Africa and most of it remains in white hands over two decades after apartheid’s demise, despite government programmes aimed at redistribution to narrow glaring racial disparities in ownership.

Speaking to the media in televised remarks near Pretoria after spending the day on a voter registration drive, Ramaphosa was asked about invasions this week of vacant land in a suburb between Johannesburg and Pretoria which have provoked clashes with police.

“We should not tolerate disorder and lawlessness of that type. Nobody has any right to invade land, to violate other people’s rights,” Ramaphosa said.

“All those who want to invade land they will get to know that we will not allow that.”

South Africa's Ramaphosa warns against land invasions

And let me address your last sentence. You whites have ben killing us for the last 400 years and I'm supposed t be concerned that you who are racist whites are scared of a demographic shift? Have you lost your m-f'ng mind white boy? Fuck you!

Talk is cheap.

End of the day, you're a racist who believes people should be treated differently based on the color of their skin. You've pretty much come out and said it yourself. You've dismantled yourself, mate. And I've enjoyed watching you do it! Nothing you have to say from this point forward has any merit, really. Any further response from me or anyone else is more than you really deserve, and should be taken not as a validation of your horrible opinions, but as a desire to watch you further destroy yourself.

At the end pf the day you are sorry white racist liar who thinks whites get to ignore what they have done ad condemn others of color. That's treating people differently on he bass of skin color son. So continue lying to yourself. Because you cannot show one comment from me that supports the lies you have just posted. You need o show me where I specifically sated I support such things instead of lying about me pointing out white wrongdoing that created the problem as basis for the troubles.

You blame the victims and make the case that it's okay if some white people are murdered because they are benefiting from injustice. That's what you've spent this entire time doing. Anyone can go back and read for themselves if they want to.

The farm invasions aren't just on white-owned farms; black farmers also get robbed. It's only the whites who are brutalized and murdered, for the most part. Coincidence? Unlikely.

Personally, I hope all the whites leave S.Africa. They can take their talents elsewhere and leave S.Africa to become the next Zimbabwe.

 

[JQPublic1]

Apparently you are the one on drugs.. If whites are still benefitting from apartheid then maybe you should shut the hell up and understand that is what's causing the violence.

So in other words, you think it is okay and justified.

Please don't ask why white people are afraid of changing demographics anymore. You are the reason.

.I think you lied.

South Africa's Ramaphosa warns against land invasions

South African President Cyril Ramaphosa warned on Sunday that land invasions would not be tolerated as the ruling African National Congress (ANC) moves to change the constitution to expropriate property without compensation.

Land remains an emotive issue in South Africa and most of it remains in white hands over two decades after apartheid’s demise, despite government programmes aimed at redistribution to narrow glaring racial disparities in ownership.

Speaking to the media in televised remarks near Pretoria after spending the day on a voter registration drive, Ramaphosa was asked about invasions this week of vacant land in a suburb between Johannesburg and Pretoria which have provoked clashes with police.

“We should not tolerate disorder and lawlessness of that type. Nobody has any right to invade land, to violate other people’s rights,” Ramaphosa said.

“All those who want to invade land they will get to know that we will not allow that.”

South Africa's Ramaphosa warns against land invasions

And let me address your last sentence. You whites have ben killing us for the last 400 years and I'm supposed t be concerned that you who are racist whites are scared of a demographic shift? Have you lost your m-f'ng mind white boy? Fuck you!

Talk is cheap.

End of the day, you're a racist who believes people should be treated differently based on the color of their skin. You've pretty much come out and said it yourself. You've dismantled yourself, mate. And I've enjoyed watching you do it! Nothing you have to say from this point forward has any merit, really. Any further response from me or anyone else is more than you really deserve, and should be taken not as a validation of your horrible opinions, but as a desire to watch you further destroy yourself.

At the end pf the day you are sorry white racist liar who thinks whites get to ignore what they have done ad condemn others of color. That's treating people differently on he bass of skin color son. So continue lying to yourself. Because you cannot show one comment from me that supports the lies you have just posted. You need o show me where I specifically sated I support such things instead of lying about me pointing out white wrongdoing that created the problem as basis for the troubles.

You blame the victims and make the case that it's okay if some white people are murdered because they are benefiting from injustice. That's what you've spent this entire time doing. Anyone can go back and read for themselves if they want to.

The farm invasions aren't just on white-owned farms; black farmers also get robbed. It's only the whites who are brutalized and murdered, for the most part. Coincidence? Unlikely.

Personally, I hope all the whites leave S.Africa. They can take their talents elsewhere and leave S.Africa to become the next Zimbabwe.

Frankly, I wish whites and asians would leave the entire continent alone. None of them are there for the benefit of Africans.

In that vein, should whites leave south africa en masse, i suspect the economic status of blacks living there would not change very much. The GDP of black South Africa is separate from the GDP of white south Africa.

 

[cnelsen]

Before the title of the op is lost to deflections and unrelated banter, I must address it. The fear mongering engendered here is far too dangerous to ignore. By positing the notion that eliminating whitness equates to eliminating Euro- Americans, the thread maker is either sincerely ignorant or conscienciously stupid. Let me enlighten you. Whiteness is a state of mind created by wealthy Euro-American landowners in the 17th century to set themselves apart from indentured servants and slaves. I see no risk to Caucasians in exorcising that foul social apparition known as whiteness.

So when Julius Malema says the time for reconciliation is over and now is the time for "justice" and then urges his followers to "cut the throats of whiteness" he is talking about exorcising a social apparition? You, I, and everyone reading this knows he is advocating racial murder, pure and simple. For you to pretend otherwise despicable.

 

[cnelsen]

In that vein, should whites leave south africa en masse, i suspect the economic status of blacks living there would not change very much.

The Guptas and their ilk would assume control far more harshly than they already have.

 

[bgrouse]

It is absolutely not false. Now who's trying to cover up history?

I'm fully aware of what apartheid was. It's not an excuse to persecute a "race" of people. Or to sit by and do nothing while a vengeful segment of the population plays out their hateful fantasies.

Apartheid did persecute a race of people idiot. .For almost 100 years. And whites still benefit from it now. So like I said:

You know, you just posted up a bunch of false bullshit. Now if you don't know anything about South Africa, the history thereof or the policies that have created the conditions there now, it is better that you STFU.

You really look bad in that picture johnnie.

I'm not the one who lies about white farmers being targeted for robbery, torture, rape, and murder. Which is 100% true.

Black farmers are mostly just targeted for the robbery part.

I'm not going to argue with your stupid white disingenuous ass about this.

South Africa's white minority warned they face 'uprising' and Zimbabwe-style land grab

"The country is on a knife edge with 13 politicians murdered in the last month and the national broadcaster refusing to show images of violence fearing it will incite more attacks.

One radical party has called for a Zimbabwe-style land grab of the estimated 80 per cent white-owned land.

There are also fears among the 1.6million British community who have emigrated to South Africa for cheap living that they could be forced home.

Following heavy defeats in this week’s municipal elections politicians from the ruling African National Congress have spoken out against what they call “economic apartheid.”

More.

"They are threatening to nationalise the mines and other radical reforms to win back the black vote.

Kebby Maphatsoe, the veterans’ minister, said: “We are very, very worried if we don’t do anything to change our economy from being in the hands of the minority we will have our people uprising.”

He also suggested the radical step of nationalising the mine industry.

He said: “We should blame ourselves for not being brave enough for radical change in South Africa’s economy. We need black economic empowerment. We need to take over the running of companies. They cannot be in white hands forever.”

The ANC, which under Nelson Mandela was responsible for winning black people the vote and ending apartheid, have dominated elections since 1994. "

More.

"But in municipal elections this week they lost the iconic Nelson Mandela Bay area although the ANC has 54 per cent of the vote nationally.

South Africa’s 55million population is 77 per cent black and nine per cent white but blacks are becoming increasingly frustrated at inequalities.

They get half the pay of whites, only three per cent of the Johannesburg Stock Exchange is black-owned and the four major banks are white-dominated.

Lindiwe Zulu, the ANC’s business minister, said: “The whites made their money during apartheid and they are benefiting more now. If you don’t deal with the marginalisation of blacks in the economy you are going to be in trouble.”

South Africa's white minority warned they face 'uprising' and Zimbabwe-style land grab

I'm surprised shitskins get as much as half the pay of whites given how stupid they are.

 

[JQPublic1]

Before the title of the op is lost to deflections and unrelated banter, I must address it. The fear mongering engendered here is far too dangerous to ignore. By positing the notion that eliminating whitness equates to eliminating Euro- Americans, the thread maker is either sincerely ignorant or conscienciously stupid. Let me enlighten you. Whiteness is a state of mind created by wealthy Euro-American landowners in the 17th century to set themselves apart from indentured servants and slaves. I see no risk to Caucasians in exorcising that foul social apparition known as whiteness.

So when Julius Malema says the time for reconciliation is over and now is the time for "justice" and then urges his followers to "cut the throats of whiteness" he is talking about exorcising a social apparition? You, I, and everyone reading this knows he is advocating racial murder, pure and simple. For you to pretend otherwise despicable.

I heve not heard Malena calling for the genocide of whites. On the contrary, he has addressed his throngs with peaceful political strategies to retake their ancestral lands. Do you have something more recent than this video? If do post it. Your word alone isn't enough to counter graphic evidence that debunks your premise entirely.

Before the title of the op is lost to deflections and unrelated banter, I must address it. The fear mongering engendered here is far too dangerous to ignore. By positing the notion that eliminating whitness equates to eliminating Euro- Americans, the thread maker is either sincerely ignorant or conscienciously stupid. Let me enlighten you. Whiteness is a state of mind created by wealthy Euro-American landowners in the 17th century to set themselves apart from indentured servants and slaves. I see no risk to Caucasians in exorcising that foul social apparition known as whiteness.

So when Julius Malema says the time for reconciliation is over and now is the time for "justice" and then urges his followers to "cut the throats of whiteness" he is talking about exorcising a social apparition? You, I, and everyone reading this knows he is advocating racial murder, pure and simple. For you to pretend otherwise despicable.

Why are you concerned about what is happening in South Africa? Isn't this op about addressing the pernicious nature of whiteness in this country? What Malena and his throngs do in Africa has no connection to
What we do here. But I do recognize the concept of whiteness as a global concern.
And I sense your fear that people of color might join together to combat it by any means necessary. But that is not something I see taking place in the foreseeable future.
Eliminating whiteness simply gives people of color a better chance at social parity. And, as Malena says in this video, whites should be happy that the black majority in SA IS NOT calling for genocide.

 

[JQPublic1]

In that vein, should whites leave south africa en masse, i suspect the economic status of blacks living there would not change very much.

The Guptas and their ilk would assume control far more harshly than they already have.

I don't care. Were you as concerned when the harshness of apartheid was in place? If not stop whining.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

The idea of race and gender being social constructs was invented by communists to help dismantle western capitalist society. If you believe that women are exactly the same as men, and you can't tell the difference between a Frenchman and a Australian aborigine then I am not going to waste any more time talking to you.

Race is a social construct. Gender is not.
That you would even bring gender into a discussion on race is wierd. Wierder still is the notion you inherited from pseudoscience positing that the human race is divided into myriad sub-races with the "white" race on top as the master race. Your silliness continued when you referenced differences between a frenchman and the autocthonous peoples of Australia as being racial . Yet, your pseudoscience conveniently usurps the rich history of India, whose citizens don't look French EITHER, and arbitrarily deems them to be of the same race you claim to be. But if you are discovered to be an Ashkenazi Jew , such as Kirk Douglas, you lose your white race card. So go on...slink yo ignorant arse on up outta here...go lick your wounds 'cause you been served sucka.

If race is just a social construct, explain how by examining genetic material can tell race, as can a skeletal remains including the skull can tell race too?

Because Africans are all different from each other too. Africa is in fact the most genetically diverse continent on earth.

The idea of race and gender being social constructs was invented by communists to help dismantle western capitalist society. If you believe that women are exactly the same as men, and you can't tell the difference between a Frenchman and a Australian aborigine then I am not going to waste any more time talking to you.

Race is a social construct. Gender is not.
That you would even bring gender into a discussion on race is wierd. Wierder still is the notion you inherited from pseudoscience positing that the human race is divided into myriad sub-races with the "white" race on top as the master race. Your silliness continued when you referenced differences between a frenchman and the autocthonous peoples of Australia as being racial . Yet, your pseudoscience conveniently usurps the rich history of India, whose citizens don't look French EITHER, and arbitrarily deems them to be of the same race you claim to be. But if you are discovered to be an Ashkenazi Jew , such as Kirk Douglas, you lose your white race card. So go on...slink yo ignorant arse on up outta here...go lick your wounds 'cause you been served sucka.

If race is just a social construct, explain how by examining genetic material can tell race, as can a skeletal remains including the skull can tell race too?

I'm not sure forensic exanlminations of skeletal remains to determine race are always accurate for a number of reasons.
1. Millions of people are mixed race

2. Africans are not genetically monolithic. The African continent is the most genetically diverse place on earth. There are no single skeletal characteristics that defines all the black peoples of Africa by one physiological paradigm. Some Africans, such as the Somalis, share skeletal traits consistent with nordic European types, others ..such as the Khoi San resemble nappy headed Chinese.
And neither of those two groups share skeletal frames/skulls with central and western Africans.

The concept of race fails in Africa. But for those who study physical anthropology...you know that Europe is nearly as genetically diverse as Africa.

There are multiple African races, indeed.

Says who? I'd like to see the study. And if sych s study exists i want to see what it says about multiple White races. Or does " whiteness" go beyond race?

Pygmies, Bushman, Sandawe , Horners, Berber, and Negroid could be 6 different races in Africa.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

The idea of race and gender being social constructs was invented by communists to help dismantle western capitalist society. If you believe that women are exactly the same as men, and you can't tell the difference between a Frenchman and a Australian aborigine then I am not going to waste any more time talking to you.

Race is a social construct. Gender is not.
That you would even bring gender into a discussion on race is wierd. Wierder still is the notion you inherited from pseudoscience positing that the human race is divided into myriad sub-races with the "white" race on top as the master race. Your silliness continued when you referenced differences between a frenchman and the autocthonous peoples of Australia as being racial . Yet, your pseudoscience conveniently usurps the rich history of India, whose citizens don't look French EITHER, and arbitrarily deems them to be of the same race you claim to be. But if you are discovered to be an Ashkenazi Jew , such as Kirk Douglas, you lose your white race card. So go on...slink yo ignorant arse on up outta here...go lick your wounds 'cause you been served sucka.

If race is just a social construct, explain how by examining genetic material can tell race, as can a skeletal remains including the skull can tell race too?

Do you think the skeletons of Ashkenazi Jews, including the skulls, are any different from yours?

Another factor often overlooked in evaluating racial differences is interbreeding. Skeletal physiology in mixed individuals could show affinity with either parent...or something in between.


But let's take this debate to the place where modern humans are said to have originated: Africa. The diverse physiologies found among autocthonous peoples of continental Africa seem to reflect any and all human characteristics in the world. That being said, I am puzzled by anthropologists who attempt to assign one set of physiological values to blacks. Pygmies are as different from Watusi
as they are from German dwarfs and other Africans. The skeletal remains of a Somali warrior would be indistinguishable from those of a northern European. Are you beginning to see how silly this race thing is?

Just because there's some overlap doesn't mean there's no race.

There's also some overlap in some bird sub-species, but yet they still are just that.

Since blacks were the first modern humans i guess that makes YOU a subspecies then. But that is your kind if logic...not mine.

Look, if your argument is centered on the notion that genetic diversity somehow plays a part in the pseudo concept of race; you're wrong. There is more genetic diversity among purported " homogenous" groups than between that group and other "racial" groups.

No, Negroid's aren't necessarily the first Humans, in fact they are a younger race than Cro-Magnons.

Cro-Magnons were genetically European on the whole on arrival to Europe, specimens like Konstenki man prove it, the 38,000 year old remains from Russia of Kostenki man is not far removed from modern Russians.

 

[JQPublic1]

Race is a social construct. Gender is not.
That you would even bring gender into a discussion on race is wierd. Wierder still is the notion you inherited from pseudoscience positing that the human race is divided into myriad sub-races with the "white" race on top as the master race. Your silliness continued when you referenced differences between a frenchman and the autocthonous peoples of Australia as being racial . Yet, your pseudoscience conveniently usurps the rich history of India, whose citizens don't look French EITHER, and arbitrarily deems them to be of the same race you claim to be. But if you are discovered to be an Ashkenazi Jew , such as Kirk Douglas, you lose your white race card. So go on...slink yo ignorant arse on up outta here...go lick your wounds 'cause you been served sucka.

If race is just a social construct, explain how by examining genetic material can tell race, as can a skeletal remains including the skull can tell race too?

Because Africans are all different from each other too. Africa is in fact the most genetically diverse continent on earth.

Race is a social construct. Gender is not.
That you would even bring gender into a discussion on race is wierd. Wierder still is the notion you inherited from pseudoscience positing that the human race is divided into myriad sub-races with the "white" race on top as the master race. Your silliness continued when you referenced differences between a frenchman and the autocthonous peoples of Australia as being racial . Yet, your pseudoscience conveniently usurps the rich history of India, whose citizens don't look French EITHER, and arbitrarily deems them to be of the same race you claim to be. But if you are discovered to be an Ashkenazi Jew , such as Kirk Douglas, you lose your white race card. So go on...slink yo ignorant arse on up outta here...go lick your wounds 'cause you been served sucka.

If race is just a social construct, explain how by examining genetic material can tell race, as can a skeletal remains including the skull can tell race too?

I'm not sure forensic exanlminations of skeletal remains to determine race are always accurate for a number of reasons.
1. Millions of people are mixed race

2. Africans are not genetically monolithic. The African continent is the most genetically diverse place on earth. There are no single skeletal characteristics that defines all the black peoples of Africa by one physiological paradigm. Some Africans, such as the Somalis, share skeletal traits consistent with nordic European types, others ..such as the Khoi San resemble nappy headed Chinese.
And neither of those two groups share skeletal frames/skulls with central and western Africans.

The concept of race fails in Africa. But for those who study physical anthropology...you know that Europe is nearly as genetically diverse as Africa.

There are multiple African races, indeed.

Says who? I'd like to see the study. And if sych s study exists i want to see what it says about multiple White races. Or does " whiteness" go beyond race?

Pygmies, Bushman, Sandawe , Horners, Berber, and Negroid could be 6 different races in Africa.

Only if you believe in the false concept of race. The same could be said of Italians, Greeks,Spaniards, Poles, Turks, and Scandinavians.

 

[impuretrash]

Why is it only whiteness being "deconstructed"? Why not Japaneseness? They did some pretty bad things in the past dontcha know.

 

[JQPublic1]

Race is a social construct. Gender is not.
That you would even bring gender into a discussion on race is wierd. Wierder still is the notion you inherited from pseudoscience positing that the human race is divided into myriad sub-races with the "white" race on top as the master race. Your silliness continued when you referenced differences between a frenchman and the autocthonous peoples of Australia as being racial . Yet, your pseudoscience conveniently usurps the rich history of India, whose citizens don't look French EITHER, and arbitrarily deems them to be of the same race you claim to be. But if you are discovered to be an Ashkenazi Jew , such as Kirk Douglas, you lose your white race card. So go on...slink yo ignorant arse on up outta here...go lick your wounds 'cause you been served sucka.

If race is just a social construct, explain how by examining genetic material can tell race, as can a skeletal remains including the skull can tell race too?

Do you think the skeletons of Ashkenazi Jews, including the skulls, are any different from yours?

Another factor often overlooked in evaluating racial differences is interbreeding. Skeletal physiology in mixed individuals could show affinity with either parent...or something in between.


But let's take this debate to the place where modern humans are said to have originated: Africa. The diverse physiologies found among autocthonous peoples of continental Africa seem to reflect any and all human characteristics in the world. That being said, I am puzzled by anthropologists who attempt to assign one set of physiological values to blacks. Pygmies are as different from Watusi
as they are from German dwarfs and other Africans. The skeletal remains of a Somali warrior would be indistinguishable from those of a northern European. Are you beginning to see how silly this race thing is?

Just because there's some overlap doesn't mean there's no race.

There's also some overlap in some bird sub-species, but yet they still are just that.

Since blacks were the first modern humans i guess that makes YOU a subspecies then. But that is your kind if logic...not mine.

Look, if your argument is centered on the notion that genetic diversity somehow plays a part in the pseudo concept of race; you're wrong. There is more genetic diversity among purported " homogenous" groups than between that group and other "racial" groups.

No, Negroid's aren't necessarily the first Humans, in fact they are a younger race than Cro-Magnons.

Cro-Magnons were genetically European on the whole on arrival to Europe, specimens like Konstenki man prove it, the 38,000 year old remains from Russia of Kostenki man is not far removed from modern Russians.

I don't recognize the term Negroid as a descriptor of black Africans. That's a term white racist love to use for effect. It has about as much value as the imaginary Caucasoid moniker..

Cro Magnon
But to keep this exchange in concert with the op title, what race were the CroMagnon? Would they be white by modern standards?

Why is it only whiteness being "deconstructed"? Why not Japaneseness? They did some pretty bad things in the past dontcha know.

Because whiteness has no competition as a destructive tool for demogogues and racists.
Across the globe, European images of Jesus
give whiteness a divine aura. People of Color
are inculcated with the notion that even being an honorary white is better than being what they actually are.

 

[impuretrash]

Because whiteness has no competition as a destructive tool for demogogues and racists.
Across the globe, European images of Jesus
give whiteness a divine aura. People of Color
are inculcated with the notion that even being an honorary white is better than being what they actually are.

Sounds like jealousy to me. I mean, I totally get it. If I had brown skin, brown hair and brown eyes I'd be jealous of good looking white people too

 

[Slimdugger99]

Another anti-white racist professor providing the language for the coming genocide against whites has surfaced. Lisa Anderson-Levy, a professor at Beloit University, argues that "whiteness poses an existential threat to social, political, and economic life in the U.S."

Sounds serious, huh?

View attachment 182457

Her work explores the "ubiquity and violence of whiteness" and she advocates whiteness be "dismantled".

Let's get one thing clear: whiteness is the same thing as white. When that guy in South Africa advocates "cutting the throat of whiteness", he is advocating racial murder. When Ms Anderson-Levy advocates dismantling whiteness, she is advocating "dismantling"--or disappearing--whites.

Anderson-Levy teaches American young people that whites, the founders of the country, threaten the US with annihilation by our very existence; we are an existential threat. Our existence as whites means everyone everywhere is necessarily a victim of the violence our existence perpetrates against them.

Clearly, this Jamaican immigrant, hates whites and wants to exterminate the native people of her adopted land. And I'm guessing the "Levy" means she is married to a Jew (she did do a discussion panel with the notorious, foaming-at-the-mouth Jewish white-hater, Tim Wise).


UMN hosting prof to lecture on ‘the violence of whiteness’

Another racist attempt to vilify the victims of the racial genocide inflicted upon our world by white peoples. The professor is advocating against whiteness as a philosophy of superiority, not of merely being white. You neglect to accurately express her valid observations and conclusions, and instead promote the lie bound to inflame those in the white community most fearful of black rage and retribution. For her to espouse what you have suggested would make her an exact reflection of the racist policies that presaged our past genocides. No scholar could or would be so stupid.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[impuretrash]

Another anti-white racist professor providing the language for the coming genocide against whites has surfaced. Lisa Anderson-Levy, a professor at Beloit University, argues that "whiteness poses an existential threat to social, political, and economic life in the U.S."

Sounds serious, huh?

View attachment 182457

Her work explores the "ubiquity and violence of whiteness" and she advocates whiteness be "dismantled".

Let's get one thing clear: whiteness is the same thing as white. When that guy in South Africa advocates "cutting the throat of whiteness", he is advocating racial murder. When Ms Anderson-Levy advocates dismantling whiteness, she is advocating "dismantling"--or disappearing--whites.

Anderson-Levy teaches American young people that whites, the founders of the country, threaten the US with annihilation by our very existence; we are an existential threat. Our existence as whites means everyone everywhere is necessarily a victim of the violence our existence perpetrates against them.

Clearly, this Jamaican immigrant, hates whites and wants to exterminate the native people of her adopted land. And I'm guessing the "Levy" means she is married to a Jew (she did do a discussion panel with the notorious, foaming-at-the-mouth Jewish white-hater, Tim Wise).


UMN hosting prof to lecture on ‘the violence of whiteness’

Another racist attempt to vilify the victims of the racial genocide inflicted upon our world by white peoples. The professor is advocating against whiteness as a philosophy of superiority, not of merely being white. You neglect to accurately express her valid observations and conclusions, and instead promote the lie bound to inflame those in the white community most fearful of black rage and retribution. For her to espouse what you have suggested would make her an exact reflection of the racist policies that presaged our past genocides. No scholar could or would be so stupid.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

She's a fraud and a racist who couches her hate speech in verbal gymnastics. I posted a video of her earlier in this thread, if you watch it you'll see the bitch is barely coherent. Calling her a scholar is a hilarious misuse of the term. She's got degrees in feminist anthropology and women's studies which are just dumbed down strains of marxist communism for low IQ retards.

 

[JQPublic1]

Because whiteness has no competition as a destructive tool for demogogues and racists.
Across the globe, European images of Jesus
give whiteness a divine aura. People of Color
are inculcated with the notion that even being an honorary white is better than being what they actually are.

Sounds like jealousy to me. I mean, I totally get it. If I had brown skin, brown hair and brown eyes I'd be jealous of good looking white people too

Most people of any group are not good looking. But all so called races have a few beautiful or good looking individuals.. Trump, for instance, has all the physical traits you think are good looking but UGHHHHH!

 

[bgrouse]

Another anti-white racist professor providing the language for the coming genocide against whites has surfaced. Lisa Anderson-Levy, a professor at Beloit University, argues that "whiteness poses an existential threat to social, political, and economic life in the U.S."

Sounds serious, huh?

View attachment 182457

Her work explores the "ubiquity and violence of whiteness" and she advocates whiteness be "dismantled".

Let's get one thing clear: whiteness is the same thing as white. When that guy in South Africa advocates "cutting the throat of whiteness", he is advocating racial murder. When Ms Anderson-Levy advocates dismantling whiteness, she is advocating "dismantling"--or disappearing--whites.

Anderson-Levy teaches American young people that whites, the founders of the country, threaten the US with annihilation by our very existence; we are an existential threat. Our existence as whites means everyone everywhere is necessarily a victim of the violence our existence perpetrates against them.

Clearly, this Jamaican immigrant, hates whites and wants to exterminate the native people of her adopted land. And I'm guessing the "Levy" means she is married to a Jew (she did do a discussion panel with the notorious, foaming-at-the-mouth Jewish white-hater, Tim Wise).


UMN hosting prof to lecture on ‘the violence of whiteness’

Another racist attempt to vilify the victims of the racial genocide inflicted upon our world by white peoples. The professor is advocating against whiteness as a philosophy of superiority, not of merely being white. You neglect to accurately express her valid observations and conclusions, and instead promote the lie bound to inflame those in the white community most fearful of black rage and retribution. For her to espouse what you have suggested would make her an exact reflection of the racist policies that presaged our past genocides. No scholar could or would be so stupid.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

She's a fraud and a racist who couches her hate speech in verbal gymnastics. I posted a video of her earlier in this thread, if you watch it you'll see the bitch is barely coherent. Calling her a scholar is a hilarious misuse of the term. She's got degrees in feminist anthropology and women's studies which are just dumbed down strains of marxist communism for low IQ retards.

She's black, so, what more do you expect?

 

[impuretrash]

Because whiteness has no competition as a destructive tool for demogogues and racists.
Across the globe, European images of Jesus
give whiteness a divine aura. People of Color
are inculcated with the notion that even being an honorary white is better than being what they actually are.

Sounds like jealousy to me. I mean, I totally get it. If I had brown skin, brown hair and brown eyes I'd be jealous of good looking white people too

Most people of any group are not good looking. But all so called races have a few beautiful or good looking individuals.. Trump, for instance, has all the physical traits you think are good looking but UGHHHHH!

Well, he's old. He was a handsome fella back in his prime. Hillary wasnt half bad looking when she was young either. It's not like he's freakishly ugly like George Soros, corpselike like bill Clinton or comical like Bernie Sanders.