That’s just plain BS. Northern Aryans have forever subjugated other races because most other races led simpler lives due to more benign climatic conditions.
In Europe the notion of white racial superiority emerged in the 1850s, propagated most assiduously by the comte de Gobineau and later by his disciple Houston Stewart Chamberlain, who first used the term “Aryan” to mean the “white race.” Members of that so-called race spoke Indo-European languages, were credited with all the progress that benefited humanity, and were purported to be superior to “Semites,” “yellows,” and “blacks.”
Believers in Aryanism came to regard the Nordic and Germanic peoples as the purest members of the “race.” That notion, which had been repudiated by anthropologists by the second quarter of the 20th century, was seized upon by Adolf Hitler and the Nazis and was made the basis of the German government policy of exterminating Jews, Roma (Gypsies), and other “non-Aryans.”
Modern civilized whites merely recognize that all races have produced extraordinary intelligent and skilful people, adapted to their own unique environments.
This has nothing to do with “putting all black or brown people on a pedestal” , unless that honor is deserved for an extraordinary accomplishment, just as we put extraordinary white people on a pedestal when they deserve that recognition.
I love jazz and admire many black musicians, not because they are black but because they are great jazz musicians.
Listen to this musical elegy written by a black musician in memory of Django Reinhardt, a white musical master.
I admire these black musical giants. They belong on a pedestal.
Incidentally, not everyone was for colonisation and some people were conscious of the merits of other civilizations.
In 1885, Georges Clémenceau spoke against it in front of la Chambre des députés. The words are those of the time, but nevertheless, he speaks against it.
Google translated:
“M. Clemenceau: The superior races have a right over the inferior races which they exercise, this right, by a particular transformation, is at the same time a duty of civilization. Here, in proper terms, is M. Ferry’s thesis, and we see the French government exercising its right over the inferior races by going to war against them and forcibly converting them to the benefits of civilization. Superior races? inferior races, it is soon said! For my part, I am singularly reduced since I saw German scholars demonstrate scientifically that France had to be defeated in the Franco-German war because the Frenchman is of an inferior race to the German. Since that time, I confess, I look twice before turning to a man and a civilization, and pronouncing: inferior man or civilization. Inferior race, the Hindus! With this great refined civilization that is lost in the mists of time! with this great Buddhist religion which left India for China, with this great efflorescence of art whose magnificent vestiges we still see today! Inferior race, the Chinese! with this civilization whose origins are unknown and which seems to have been pushed at first to its extreme limits. Inferior Confucius! Indeed, even today, let me say that when Chinese diplomats are at odds with some European diplomats… (laughter and applause from various benches) they put on a good show and, if one wants consult the diplomatic annals of certain peoples, one can see there documents which undoubtedly prove that the yellow race, from the point of view of understanding business, of the good conduct of infinitely delicate operations, is in no way inferior to those who are too hasty to proclaim their supremacy.”
I know. He makes it sound like a white woman giving birth to a Black man’s child is giving reverence for non-white. It almost puts it up there with a religion, said like that, but truth is, his words are racism, pure and simple, yet those were his words as quoted, from above in the below quote:
I’m trying not to take offence at the racism. Come to think of it, this could put me in a higher ranking, where I’d be worshipped and adored with “reverence”. lol As Captain Picard once told Number One, “Sometimes you just have to bow to the absurd.” This is one of them.
It’s the only lens some people have. If they can’t come to terms with how their ancestors treated people based on skin color, then they can’t see how movement toward greater equality is the right thing to do. And that’s it’s equality, not a flip to a different kind of inequality.
If you’re talking about slavery that might apply to a small number of today’s Whites. The fact is racism is a type of tribalism – which is natural to everyone except White liberals.
The origin of racism is essentialism, when you classify human beings doting some of different qualities positively or negatively.
To say that " by nature, **** ( any group of people you choose) shows some innate characteristic", is essentialism.
I would not say that White liberals essentialize the Blacks?
I would say that some of them, not all of them, make two mistakes:
the first mistake is to think that, because such people have been or are victims, they must be respected in everything they do and they can’t do anything wrong, individually.
the second mistake is to think that the White people are collectively the absolute evil and that the other people cannot act badly, collectively.
It is allowed to talk about Western slavery but Arab slavery is unthinkable for them. and so …
And excision is an ancient custom, not a good thing, but one must not judge it from our own criteria.
An exemple : We were in groups and we were exchanging about the status of the woman in different civilizations. An ultra-left woman became angry saying " How do we dare to judge the way other people treat women when, in France, a woman dies every three days, killed by her companion ? "
another woman answered : " Because in France it is not an admitted fact, either by laws or by people. the man is arrested and condemned. We don’t admit that women can be discriminated, forbidden to go out, or killed to restaure the honor of the family. things are not perfect in France for women but we try and make progresses. "
Good point. It’s easy to confuse tribalism with racism. I can justify some tradition when it comes to maintaining groups with similar traits, claiming superiority based on birth is not a value.
The framing I like, and didn’t think this up on my own, is that liberals focus too much on the ills of society and forgiving individual victims, while conservatives focus too much on personal responsibility, claiming it can overcome any disadvantage.
Right. It seems most of the world believes lighter [skin] is better, but I fail to see how light skin is better. For one, it is burns easily and is more susceptible to skin cancer. One top of it all, as far as diabetes and heart disease, we all have about the same chance of getting it. I guess I miss the tribalism, because two leggeds aren’t much different when you get down to it and racism is racism and it is learned, no matter how you slice it. Tribalism is just incidental in the course of learning racism.
I’ll accept that some sort of fear of others is built in, and even that it served a purpose for a long time. But let’s look at what doesn’t serve us. Locking people up and depriving them of normal human functions is neither natural or functional. Claiming that there are races at all is bad science, not natural. Justifying institutional slavery based on skin color or “tribe”, not natural. Creating a market based economy, based on merit, then claiming genetic traits are linked to intelligence, not natural.
So, exactly what part of racism are you saying is part of our “evolutionary history”? The type of slavery and incarceration that developed in the last 500 years has no historical precedent. If you say that the industrialized versions of them are “evolutionary”, then you can’t also call them “progress”. You’re saying we are just as much brutes as we were thousands of years ago and what we call “civilization” is built on that, so it’s not civilized at all
I disagree with much of this, but to be clear I mean natural in the sense that it’s part of human nature. The ingredients of racism, so to speak, are baked into us by evolution.
Light skin preference isn’t necessarily a racist thing. All races have some variation in skin tone and there is something known as colorism.
It’s really common in the Middle East and India, but they aren’t really trying to be White. The light skinned individuals from those regions who move to America or Europe can pass as White though, which complicates things.
Racism is learned/taught. It is not at all natural.
No, racism is not. It has nothing to do with evolution. It has nothing to do with a group of humans surviving. In fact, it would be more advantageous to open the gene pool by not teaching racism. Racism narrows the gene pool, potentially leading to inbreeding, but racists can’t see this because they’ve been brainwashed.
Those considered Black, due to having even one ancestor (One Drop Rule) who was Black, can “Pass”. This just proves my point that the made up human idea of “race”, even though there is one race, the human race, is meaningless. The fictitious idea of races within the human species is a myth. There is no such thing as race and you just proved my point by bring up people who “pass for white”. Skin colour is meaningless. The idea of race is meaningless. We are all human.
