Mathew wrote on Dec 19^th, 2013 at 8:30pm:


It's interesting how often racists resort to the creation of strawman arguments to justify their racism.  No one here has argued that, "there is "no such thing" as anglo-celtic Australian majority, who shaped this post colonial nation."  This is purely a figment of your justification.

Nor has there been any forced policies of assimilation (except by that "anglo-celtic Australian majority" who tried it before the creation of Multiculturalism).

The reality is and here we get down to brass tacks, you resent the idea that some who doesn't look the same as you is now your equal.  You feel that the colour of someone's skin or the shape of their eyes or any of the other minor, physical differences between human beings determines the relative value of people and groups.


Quote:


Nope, it puts it on a rational, scientific basis rather than one of prejudice and intolerance.   

|dev|null wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 10:49am:

Most science is new. That's why the concept of race came about in that time span. Race is just a categorization for the 3 distinct groups of humans. These are caucasian, negro and asian. It don't know why you are having a conniption fit about it. All humans can breed together so the differences aren't great. I never said it was. But their are genetic differences that dictate physicality and brain function caused by geographic , climate, diet etc.

Genocides?
being obtuse and selective now eh Jnr...

Pol Pot being your poster boy and all, I'd have been a bit more careful with what I say if I was you...  not to mention Mao and all those dead Chinee eh 
Go bwiantwust another FAIL!

Datalife wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 3:32pm:



Sounds like you've been hanging around Misty too long.

Or, are you another one of his socks?

Sparky wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 11:02am:


So, in otherwords, race as a concept is purely a social construct designed to ease categorisation of people according to their superficial, visible, physical aspects which can be observed by the external observer?

Isn't that essentially supporting the view that "race is a social construct"?  In otherwords, it has no scientific basis? 

|dev|null wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 3:37pm:


Course you can, after all, you follow your idiotic brothers rule it is the only culture you can criticise, a philosophy of his you have, as usual adopted completely and slavishly.

So criticise away.      Why stop now? 

|dev|null wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 10:59am:


What makes you think that I think that?

I thought skin colour is determined by the concentration of compounds which increase or decrease depending on the intensity of sunlight.

I'm talking about social and cultural values of the vast majority of what we would consider white skinned people. People from western, Christian backgrounds; living modern secular lives based on individual freedom. If you can't comprehend the difference between memes and genes, then you are always likely to get confused in these conversations.

You also need to understand that some of the most accurate or forgiving generalisations can be made along 'racial' lines, because of how memes and genes interact. To deny that this is mostly the case and has functioned as such, would be denying reality.

Can you actually calmly and rationally point out any flaws in my position?

|dev|null wrote on Dec 20^th, 2013 at 3:40pm:

Well there's differences in brain function and that can't be seen. That is of course if you have  x ray vision. There's differences in bones, skull shape, organs, eye shape. Hence the concept of race. da dah!!! I'll make it simple for you- think about dogs, some are Poodles and some German Shepherds. All dogs but some guard houses and some snuggle at your feet.