Then I would contend you're not intelligent enough for me to bother engaging with. Have fun.
Is it ok to be proud to be white?
- Thread starter rubberduck
- Start date
Then I would contend you're not intelligent enough for me to bother engaging with. Have fun.
Thank you for taking part. I appreciate you gave it your best shot
I have already done so. You have already done so. Repeatedly. In many posts in many threads.
The little snippet you're trying to pretend is all of your position is not and claiming that it is your position is nonsense. We both know that. Anyone who reads your posts knows that. All it is is a flimsy facade of a pretence of an excuse for your position. You are a biological group advocate. You make no attempt to hide it. You don't consider it wrong.
h4m0ny summed it up well. Of course, you ignored it. You'll ignore it again now:
The only thing wrong is the singular - your irrational prejudice is not a one-off thing. It's constant. It's who you have chosen to be.
Where would the world be without the Egyptians? Where would it be without the Assyrians, Sumerians, Hittites, Babylonians?
**** you rekt boi.
Sounds like an awful lot of projection, rather than cool analysis, right here.
I've been consistent, you've already agreed I've been consistent, and now you're saying it's all just an act.
If I'm saying people's experience of the world differs because of how the world treats them, that's not me advocating for stratification of biological groups. It's rather me advocating for understanding and empathy of the way the world changes for people based on the way they are perceived. And from that, promoting the move towards equalising that experience.
Your position seems to be to deny that the world acts differently toward different groups. And to be affronted when someone points out that this might not be realistic, turning your canon on the whistleblowers in society rather than the perpetrators. As if the people saying "hold on, x group is being peed on a bit here" are actually the ones unzipping their flies to unload.
This attitude is what people refer to as 'privilege'. You are fortunate to be in a position where you have never felt disadvantaged by your 'biological group' and therefore find it easy to believe that such disadvantages are not significant. Or perhaps you have felt the pang of disadvantage in some form, which you use to minimise that of others. "When you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like persecution" said someone more lyrical than me.
I don't know that we should be taking 'biological group' equality lessons from the publisher of the "pakistani couple..." dog-whistle thread, to be honest.
Yet none of them was responsible for bringing the world into the industrial or modern age.
Mass agriculture, electricity, antibiotics, abolishing slavery...
Agriculture developed in the middle east and china, as well as numerous independents occasions in Asia and South America, but not in central or western Europe.
The first batteries come from Iraq 2000 years ago.
India abolished slavery 2400 years ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Agricultural_Revolution
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Algernon_Parsons
A British born Irish man developed the steam turbine
It's not just being the first to do something, we abolished slavery and brought an end to the Atlantic Slave trade by enforcing the ban with the Royal Navy. Slavery was effectively ended in the developed world following British precedent.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 May 2007
- Posts
- 9,087
- Location
- Surrey
That's the second one, first was moving from forager to agriculture.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricultural_revolution
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2019
- Posts
- 747
The Baghdad battery was theorised to be a way of storing scrolls to prevent deterioration as the components could not be used to create what we class as a battery.
Mass agriculture is generally classed as mechanised farming which started with Richard Trevithicks steam powered threshing machine in the 1800s, despite how well others did with man, water wheel and animal power techniques.
Yeah you're actually right about Agriculture, China was quite ahead in that area to be fair
No, it doesn't.
You are a believer in biological group identity. You constantly write in those terms, expressing your belief that simple biological traits determine a person's identity and that the simple stereotypes you attach to those biological group identities determine everything about their life. This argument started from one of the many examples of you doing that.
I oppose the idea of biological group identity.
Your claim that your belief in biological group identity is a projection of my belief in it is so obviously untrue that it's ridiculous.
Different, but not necessarily worse. My guess is that it wouldn't be very different, but there are too many other factors to tell. What if, for example, China had remained stable or at least fairly stable for longer periods of time in the bronze and iron ages? What if the late bronze age collapse didn't happen? What if the Indus river valley civilisation didn't collapse? What if the Maurya empire didn't collapse? Granted, that last one was somewhat influenced by Europeans but only somewhat. On the European side of history, what if Carthage had won the Punic war? Carthage was quite different to Rome and Rome was a massive influence on Europe. Or what if the Plague of Justinian didn't happen and the Roman Empire was restored in the 6th century AD? That would have changed a lot of things, but in what ways? Would the industrial revolution have started in Europe much earlier than it did in reality? Or would it have started somewhere else? Perhaps, for example, the restored Roman empire would have restored Alexandria as the world's greatest centre of learning and perhaps the industrial revolution would have started there.
Speculation about the effects of things happening differently in the past can be interesting, but it's far from certain even over shorter time periods, let alone millenia. What if someone in eastern Africa started the bronze age 100,000 years ago? It could have happened.
No, it didn't. One foreign visitor to one small part of northwestern India said there weren't any slaves in that part of India at that time and Indian records prove he was wrong anyway. There were slaves in that part of India at that time, but the cultural differences between the visitor's country and that part of India caused him to misunderstand the situation.
There were also slaves later in India, at least in the parts of India for which records exist (and presumably in the rest of India), and Indian records indicate that the conditions of slavery became worse after the end of the Maurya empire. There were a number of rules regarding the treatment of slaves in ancient Indian records (part of the reason for the misunderstanding I mentioned above and one way we know there were slaves there at that time), but those mostly went out the window after the Maurya empire ended.
Or Russia for that matter, the dominant powers would probably be Arabic or Asian.
And without Mesopotamia there wouldn’t be a Europe, stop being vicariously vainglorious. The continued prosperity is not inherent to Europe beyond being a relatively stable arable landmass, indeed the first civilisations collapsed because of environmental damage... and we are repeating it as usual.
One only need to look at the increasingly moronic beliefs in the age of infinite access to information, to say that we are no better than that which collapsed.
One only need to look at the increasingly moronic beliefs in the age of infinite access to information, to say that we are no better than that which collapsed.
Last edited: