quote:

---

Originally posted by Jeesh:
I won't throw stones at you. Racism is a cruel and harsh thing with NO POINT. I can't beleive people can be so stupid to think skin color makes you different! What if you were the other race? You wouldn't like it. What about the Golden Rule? Do unto others as you would have them do unto you? I just can't beleive it.

---

quote:

---

Basically, for me it is that we are brute animals that have not changed our ways since building our first tribe.

---

I agree completely with this statement.
 

---

Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
 
Techinally by point of view, we could be called a sucess. All animals fight, and all animals strive to outcompete with others so that they canmake sure their species can win.

Our species is so advanced, and has so thouroughly defeated everyother species, that we even try to save other ones, and make sure THEY can win, to a certain degree.
 

---

Posted by Augustine (Member # 9225) on :
 
How could humans be a failure? We have no precedent to live up to, and we are obviously the smartest organism in the world. We may not be the most physically evolved, but our mental evolution has made up for that by creating goods to help us live. We, unlike all other species, do not fight for dominance over other species or to survive. We fight to survive more comfortably than all other humans. We may have racism and other social problems, but who are we to say that other organisms do not.

I also agree with Reticulum’s answer.
 

---

Posted by Reticulum (Member # 8776) on :
 
Thanks Augustine, I also think yours is excellent. I think you hit the nail on the head, so to speak.

Also, welocme to Hatrack!!!
 

---

Posted by Sub-Odeon (Member # 9211) on :
 
I'm in an interracial marriage of 12 years, so I consider myself more sensitive to the race issue than your average blue-eyed devil.

I won't bother with the roots of racism, because they go so deep into our prehistoric past that any attempt to analyze "where racism came from" would be pure speculation.

What concerns me is, where do we go from here? When I was a child, the goal (supposedly) was transparency. Dr. King spoke of a nation where content of character mattered more than color of skin. This is the "dream" I had, and still have.

Alas, modern U.S. culture has gone the opposite direction, striving for racial hyper-awareness. Instead of submerging our racial and ethnic differences, we now highlight them to the extreme. Hyphenation is rampant. Various ethnic and sexual-orientation groups constantly attempt to extract special consideration from our public institutions. Bean-counting is the name of the game, as quotas and "diversity" police attempt to enforce artificial racial structures where none previously existed.

I won't even bother with the Islamist thing, as that is a subject for its own thread and is related, not to race, but to the survival of an outdated and monstrous religious ideology which embraces murderous, theocratic fascism.

I'm starting to conclude, in the oh-so-elderly days of my early 30's, that racism will always be with us. Like cancer. Like the common cold. Like so much of the strife that seems to forever be with us. As an LDS person I have come to see racism as just another byproduct of the Fall of Adam & Eve from Paradise. It is a disease of the mind and the spirit, bred into one generation after another, and spread so insidiously that we'll never be able to toss it overboard, even if certain nations are successful at curbing its more public manifestations.
 

---

Posted by A Rat Named Dog (Member # 699) on :
 
I've heard our host discuss racism, and I think he has an interesting perspective. He suggests that racism may be an expression of a deeply-ingrained instinct in humans to recognize and distrust outsiders from other tribes.

It may have been a vital survival instinct in a more dangerous time, or simply a means of preserving an individual's genetic future in an evolutionary sort of way, by driving out the competition.

Now, though, in a more civilized time, where we expect human beings to be able to live in peace and tolerate one another, this racism thing is really counterproductive.

The ideal, to me, would be to develop a culture that recognizes that there will always be friction between different sorts of humans who are unfamiliar with one another (because of race, religion, culture, status, politics, experience, etc), but that also clearly idealizes the ability to make compromises and get along with one another in spite of such differences.

Racism and other forms of prejudice are a problem that every generation will need to solve anew, if it truly is rooted in inborn psychology. But the purpose of culture is to be able to pass on learned behaviors to future generations, even in spite of instincts to the contrary.

I think we should consider ourselves a massive success, that after years of unabated racism as the norm for all of humanity, we have managed to, within a couple of centuries, create a culture that actually values tolerance and demonizes racism. It doesn't mean that racism doesn't exist (and I don't think that will be the case for a very long time, if ever). But the very fact that a person could come to a forum like this, make a post decrying racism, and assume that everyone here will agree that racism is bad — that, in itself, on an historical scale, is a huge accomplishment.

Humanity: GOLD STAR!
 

---

Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
 
The way I see it, calling humankind a failure right now is like calling a 12 year old a loser because he doesn't have a fast car, big house, nice job, and beautiful wife already. Anyone who can't see that we've made a huge amount of progress over these last several millenia has obviously never heard of things like slavery, feeding people to lions for fun, and burning "witches" alive, just to name a few of the well-known savageries that used to as common as Starbucks. The human race has not been around that long in the grand scheme of things. In terms of our moral and intellectual development, we may still be in the evolutionary equivalent of childhood or adolescence. When was the last time you told a child to write-off his existence as a failure? As long as we exist we can improve. We can't fail until we're totally extinct.
 

---

Posted by Descolada Survivor (Member # 9019) on :
 
Glad I could make this disscussion possible
 

---

Posted by Juxtapose (Member # 8837) on :
 
I think racism will be with us until racial interbreeding renders all people into a sort of dark-tan color. Or at least until so many people are products of mixed ethnic backgrounds that racism becomes a virtual impossibility.

Religious persecution? That's a whole different can o' beans.

But really, by your definition, Descolada Survivor, I don't think it's possible for any organic species to be successful. Any living, reproducing creature will, for the forseeable future anyway, have to compete for survival. That competition is bound to have effects like this, be they manifested in racial hatred, or a simple, animalistic defense of territory.

Sub-Odeon,
You're right, this isn't the place for a full fledged debate on Islam, but I think that if you study the religion some, you'll understand that the violent aspect of Islam is embodied in a tiny minority, and passively supported by a population that has been used and abused for decades over a natural resource.
 

---

Posted by SiriusSky (Member # 9216) on :
 
First off, I think we need to address the fact that racism isn't just about the color of skin, other forms of prejudice are tied into it. (Let alone prejudism's many other forms, in their own right). So whether (for example) you have a muslim backround or not it's going to be judged by flesh tone, and so will you as a person. And if, say you're Muslim and white as can be, you're either going to get the same prejudice the other guy got, or you'll be exempt from it. This of course is dependent upon those who is doing the judging.

But I can't entirely agree. I wouldn't say that the human race is failure, I'd say that we've failed in some veins, but I still don't care for the finality that to say "we've failed" brings across. I have to agree with those who have said you can't judge us so harshly because we are in our "infant" stage. But still we should take some accountability for our actions, and not dismis it as "yeah, look how far we've come already, and we still have a ways to go so don't judge us."

I guess to sum it up:
I agree, but let's not make it sound so final.
 

---

Posted by SC Carver (Member # 8173) on :
 
First things first, If someone is racist based on skin color alone then they are stupid and I think just about everyone would agree with that. So I think SiriusSky is right, there is more to racism than that.

One thing I find interesting is several people on this thread and other places say that if we just understand the other race better then there wouldn't be racism. I am sure a lot of racism is based off of misunderstanding, but even if I can completely understand another race/religion/sex/age group doesn't mean I will agree with it. I think this is where a lot of the racism comes from. So I don’t think understanding is necessarily the answer. I am not sure what is.

As far as humans being a failure, I would think the opposite is true. There are many arguments for us being the most successful species ever.
 

---

Posted by TheGrimace (Member # 9178) on :
 
One other aspect to consider when discussing racism is the vast difference between racism and predjudice. By my definition at least, predjudice are ingrained first impressions given to a specific group of people (be they race, religion, nationality, locality, gender etc...) while racism is more the active embracing of these predjudices.

We all are predjudiced in some way shape or form, sometimes rightfully, sometimes erroneously. The key is to have the moral strength to fight these predjudices and not embrace them.

I'll be honest, if I see an African-American walking down the streets of downtown Chicago I have a semi-concious initial reaction that puts me slightly more on edge (some of this is irrational, some of it is probably related to actual statistics regarding crime etc.) but then I try to make the concious effort not to make significant judgements or actions based on these predjudices.

We can try to fight these predjudices, and slowly work them out of society, but for the time being they will still be there. I honestly think the end of Crash does a good job of pointing this out (I'll avoid spoilers, but if you've seen it, the scene with the good cop in the car).

Even good people who aren't racist can still be affected by predjudice.

Does this mean the race is tragically flawed? yes, but failed? I don't think so.
 

---

Posted by SiriusSky (Member # 9216) on :
 
Tragically flawed, that's a good way of putting it.
 

---

Posted by TrapperKeeper (Member # 7680) on :
 
Human race a failure? What was the objective of the human race? Who gave it to us? And who the heck gave you a game over sign and told you to evaluate the entire species and judge it as a failure while we are still kicking?
 

---

Posted by SiriusSky (Member # 9216) on :
 
D.S might be going a little overboard in his conviction but that's a bit harsh.
 

---

Posted by lisha_rose (Member # 9166) on :
 
trapper keeper its called the right of free speech.
d.s. has every right in the world to judge anything they want freely. I personally believe that yes we have our faults and yes we have failed miserable at a few things but all in all we are still in existense so we cant be a complete failure. just imperfect as you will
 

---

Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
 
Look this is how I see it. If someone made our race, like God or a superior alien race, then we could be judged as failures. Our perception is limited to only what we see and not what our whole race sees. Our almost disinterest in space exploration and the fact that we can't settle petty differences amongst ourselves at home could easily signify that we aren't mature enough to solve our own problems. God help us if something that affects us universally comes along. However, if we actually evolved from monkeys then I think we aren't a failure because we've survived this long and along the way we've made pretty things like pyramids and Empire State Buildings. As I said before we haven't been around long enough in the whole grand scheme of things to be called a failure. It will take something like a killer asteriod or the threat of alien annihalation before we can be judged as failures. In my opinion God made us all individuals so that when the time comes, each individual can be judged as a success or a failure, not our race as a whole.
 

---

Posted by xxsockeh (Member # 9186) on :
 
Lisha_rose, does that mean it would be perfectly fine if one of us were to say that all African Americans are horrible people? No, it wouldn't be. And therefore, lumping EVERY single human on Earth is basically a stereotype, which is basically just as bad as my example of racism above. It's pretty much the same thing. Not every human has failed. Some may have, but only some.
 

---

Posted by I Am The War Chief (Member # 9266) on :
 
Everyone needs to calm down and realize how foolish they are all being. I say this because by talking about "racism" you are being biggoted and stereotypical to the max, let me explain.

RACE was originally used by white anglo saxon to try and determine what kind of species of man were these colored peoples that they were finding? possibly evolved monkeys? they didnt know but they looked like savages so therefore must be a different race lol this may seem strange but was believed back in the day. So white people created the term race

To say someone is of a different race because of thier skin tone is absurd. Skin color is very small on the human genome. People with different eye colour or hair colour are genetically less related to u then if they had a different skin colour.

So to sum up we are all truly one group of humans
their is no such as race
and since white people are the only ones who ever believed in racism we are the only ones who are capable of being racist
black people never assumed to be of a different race from whites so the cant be "racist' hope this shuts down this conversation because u cant talk about something that doesnt exist
 

---

Posted by I Am The War Chief (Member # 9266) on :
 
I just realized some people may not belive my post so i thought why not use some accredited sources- good ol canadians always thinking -

[�]In many different contexts, people have continued to identify the Other by reference to phenotypical features (especially skin colour) which therefore serve as indicative of a significant difference. Moreover, they have continued to use the idea of �race� to label that difference. As a result, certain sorts of social relations are defined as "race relations," as social relations between people of different "races." Indeed, states legislate to regulate "race relations," with the result that the reality of race� is apparently legitimated in law (Guillaumin 1980). Thus the idea of "race" has continued to be used in common-sense discourse to identify the Other in many societies, but largely without the sanction of science (R. Miles, Racism, 1989, 1995).


[�] In a widely noticed racial identity case in Louisiana�the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, remarking that "the very concept of racial classification of individuals is scientifically unsupportable," ruled that Mrs. Susie Phipps, "who had always thought she was white, had lived as white, and had twice married as white," was not in fact white because her parents, who had provided the racial information on her birth certificate, had classified her as "colored." "Individual racial designations are purely social and cultural perceptions," the court said; the relevant question, then, was not whether those "subjective perceptions" correctly registered some biological fact about Phipps but whether they had been "correctly recorded" at the time the birth certificate was issued. Since in the court's judgment they had been, Susie Phipps and her fellow appellants remained "colored"(W. Benn Michaels, Our America: Nativism, Modernism, and Pluralism, 1995).
 

---

Posted by Puppy (Member # 6721) on :
 
I understand the science behind the fact that racial differences are very minor, but I don't see how you get from that to accusing everyone on the board of being bigots. Nor do I see how that should encourage anyone to engage you in conversation, except out of morbid curiosity.
 

---

Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
 
And white people are certainly not the only people capable of racism. Regardless of how the term "race" came to be, that doesn't affect what it means now, and it certainly doesn't mean that the people who founded the concept are the only ones who recognize it today.
 

---

Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by I Am The War Chief:


RACE was originally used by white anglo saxon to try and determine what kind of species of man were these colored peoples that they were finding? possibly evolved monkeys?

---

quote:

---

So to sum up we are all truly one group of humans
their is no such as race
and since white people are the only ones who ever believed in racism we are the only ones who are capable of being racist
black people never assumed to be of a different race from whites so they cant be "racist' hope this shuts down this conversation because u cant talk about something that doesnt exist

---

*sigh*
Looks like I'm going to have to straighten you out a bit, friend.
Here's my credentials to speak on this:
I have a Mexican aunt. I love her and my cousins dearly.
I live in St.Louis. There are A LOT of blacks, whites, and hispanics in St. Louis.
I dated a black girl; she and I are still really close friends.
I have several other black friends.
I myself am Irish, with a few eclectic descendants(African and Native American).

Now, maybe you don't see this where you live, but in St. Louis, there are lots of fights between blacks and whites. The blacks call the whites more names than the whites call the blacks, as a generality. I'm not saying that my white friends aren't racist; many of them are. I'm saying that a good portion of my black friends are too.

As for Whites inventing race, several Native American tribes actually revered the whites, claiming they were Manitou, entirely because of their skin color (I'll try to find sources to back that up).

Racism is not only a 'white thing'. You can be racist against ANY race.

I do agree with you to some extent. Race is a silly distinction. Hair color and eye color were probably used before race, though. The problem isn't black vs. white vs. arab vs. hispanic vs. other, or anything like that. Nay, the problem lays in the intrinsic human need to classify everyone and say, "You're different from me."

What we need to do is stop putting things in boxes. It's hard, especially when your talking to ignorant curs who don't understand your goal, but it can be done.
 

---

Posted by I Am The War Chief (Member # 9266) on :
 
ok ok ok ill drop the white racist thing but its important to understand that blacks can hate hispanics because of their skin cpolour or culture or whatever but that does not mean that they think that they are a different race as we truly are all one RACE their is no scientific eveidence to support the notion that their is more than one. If you dont believe me read the report that the United Nations issued after ww2 they used a team of international scientist to try and see if hitlers claims had any merit turns out he was wrong shrugs
 

---

Posted by I Am The War Chief (Member # 9266) on :
 
"won't even bother with the Islamist thing, as that is a subject for its own thread and is related, not to race, but to the survival of an outdated and monstrous religious ideology which embraces murderous, theocratic fascism."

OH MAN cant belive were talking about biggotry an
prejudices then this guy starts spouting of how all islamists are terrorists.
By this rationale arent all christians white rednecks from the south who gather up on the weekends to hunt down some undesired races? Point dont stereotype religions man it never works
ps but dont get me started on those johovus witness's lol joking joking
 

---

Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
 
An additional comment about your earlier post, War Chief: I think that you're taking the term "race" in a far too strict manner. You almost sound like you think that it is synonymous with the word "species". Using the term "race" or recognizing others as different "races" is not an example of bigotry. Non-white people do identify themselves as being of a different race. You may not find an exact example in scholarly literature, but that's because you're more likely to see the more formal term; "ethnicity". "Race" is just the colloquial term for "ethnicity", and neither term implies that white people are radically different than black people, just that they have slightly different physical characteristics due to being subjected to different evolutionary pressures in the past. We all know that the genetic differences between all humans are minute. In fact, your DNA is 99% identical to that of any other human on Eath.
 

---

Posted by I Am The War Chief (Member # 9266) on :
 
Qoute- Neodragon -"Race" is just the colloquial term for "ethnicity", -

No its not though
RACE implies genetics
Ethnicity is cultural,
 

---

Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
 
Like I said, you're being too strict with your definitions. In regular everyday speech the two are used interchangeably, even if they do have different meanings in the most literal sense. Besides, there is a genetic difference, just as a blue eyed person is genetically different than a brown eyed person. "Race" does not imply a significant genetic variation in the context of human populations.
 

---

Posted by I Am The War Chief (Member # 9266) on :
 
while skin colour may be genetic its not different enaugh for me to classify u as a chimpanzee even though they to share 99 percent the same DNA as humans because society continues to let the word Race exist people still think in those terms.
 

---

Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
 
Again, race does NOT equal species, so me recognizing you as a different race does not equate to me seeing you as something other than humam. Most people realize this, and so the term "race" in and of itself does no harm. It's people's misconceptions about what race entails that causes problems, and not using the word isn't going to make that go away.
 

---

Posted by lisha_rose (Member # 9166) on :
 
i wasnt meaning to single out the human race sock it isnt racism if you consider everyone one race like i do i dont see people as black or white or what not. everyone are people in my book no matter of skin color. so no it wouldnt be like singling african americans. plus imho the in no way would be horrible people. And yes every person on this earth has failed at something. whether it be a test or a job or something. because of that fact that we are not perfect or anywhere near pefect. and if lumpin as you put it every single person into one category ie humans is a stereotype then i am a stereotyper but its better than keeping them apart. My opinion only though dont know how every one else feels about it
 

---

Posted by I Am The War Chief (Member # 9266) on :
 
No matter how much u say something doesnt make it true, look up the definitions if u like
go here if you want to cut down on the research time: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race
it will explain to u all u would ever want to know about race and species as they are the same thing if you want to talk about ethnicity u could say ethnic breed just as their are different breeds of dogs it does not take away from the fact that they are all dogs
 

---

Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
 
For crying out loud... read the very first sentences in the article:

quote:

---

The term race distinguishes a population of humans from other populations. The most widely used human racial categories are based on visible traits (especially skin color and facial features), genes, and self-identification.

---

It says right there that the term "race" is used to describe different groups of humans within the one species. Isn't that what I've been telling you?

There's even a link within the article to a reference explaining how the different races are defined for cenus purposes. (in the US, at least) http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_68178.htm

You know, a word can have more than one meaning depending on the context...
 

---

Posted by I Am The War Chief (Member # 9266) on :
 
First off i dont see the word species in their once and just because something is commonly accepted as being true does not make it so. Race cannot be used to describe skin colour. As it goes on to say that this term is in-accurate

"The term ethnic breed would be more accurate, as Humans are all one species, Homo sapien, like domestic dogs are one species,"

Ethnicity is different from race this whole document outlies how some people take ure postion but in the following arguement shows how its is wrong.

The first to challenge the concept of race on empirical grounds were anthropologists Franz Boas, who demonstrated phenotypic plasticity due to environmental factors (Boas 1912) and [2], and Ashley Montagu (1941, 1942), who relied on evidence from genetics. Zoologists Edward O. Wilson and W. Brown then challenged the concept from the perspective of general systematics, and further rejected the claim that "races" were equivalent to "subspecies" (Wilson and Brown 1953). Claude Lévi-Strauss's Race and History (UNESCO, 1952) enforced this cultural relativist thesis, by the famous metaphor of cultures as trains crossing each other in different directions, thus each one seeing the others as immobile while they themselves are progressing.

These guys have proved six ways from sunday that there are no sub species in the RACE that is human
 

---

Posted by I Am The War Chief (Member # 9266) on :
 
just thought id highlight my favorite line NOTE it does have the word species in it

and further rejected the claim that "races" were equivalent to "subspecies"
 

---

Posted by I Am The War Chief (Member # 9266) on :
 
Im sorry that was bit sarcastic its 1 am and im getting cranky, I really have enjoyed these debates, i really respect you for your ideas and backbone to speak your mind its refreshing to see.
 

---

Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
 
For like the tenth time, race does not equal species or sub-species in the context of ethnicity. The lines I quoted above explain it as clearly as I can imagine, so I'll repeat them:

quote:

---

The term race distinguishes a population of humans from other populations

---

quote:

---

The most widely used human racial categories are based on visible traits (especially skin color and facial features)

---

And I remind you that this is from the source that you referred me to.

Now let me refer you to yet another source defining race" http://www.answers.com/topic/race-1
In particular take note of the first 4 definitions, and also note that they are held separate from the fifth definition; the biological one which is the only one that you acknowledge. As I've been saying, the word has different meanings in different contexts, but they are all valid. We all know that by the 5th definition there is only one human race, but by the others, humans can be divided into different racial groups.
 

---

Posted by I Am The War Chief (Member # 9266) on :
 
but by the others, humans can be divided into different racial groups.

Im sorry but youll never convince me that there is more than one race of humans kicking around no matter how you say the word is being used in context. If you are refering to them as populations thats fine, if it helps you to transfer the word race to mean population ok, but the text goes on to say that while it may help average joe understand the concept it is an in accurate word
 

---

Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
 
Okay, whatever. I know that we both understand that a human is human, regardless of the colour of his/her skin, or the shape of his/her eyes or nose, etc. We're really just quibbling over semantics.


...But I'm still right, by the way, so
 

---

Posted by I Am The War Chief (Member # 9266) on :
 
If its semantics then were both technically right but cant agree on the definition but seeing as my definition is right i respond with a dignified
 

---

Posted by Jimbo the Clown (Member # 9251) on :
 
*laughs*
It seems to me, Ta-Kumsaw, that you've persisted just for the sake of arguing.
 

---

Posted by I Am The War Chief (Member # 9266) on :
 
Im not an Native Tribal Leader, my name hails from the glorius battle fields that was War Craft Frozen Throne, leader of the Orcish Horde!

and im only persisting because I hate the word race ... so sue me.... but just like the bad guys from lethal weapon 2 ive got diplomatic immunity so Jimbo you cant sue! OH oH OH oH Cant Touch This - HAMMERTIME!
 

---

Posted by Alon (Member # 9282) on :
 
my philosophy on racism at the moment is that we are all human. This makes all of us want power. Some gain power by beating others down. This brings out racism. Everyone must be racist towards a point.
 

---