Diversity = Strife ? Watch

pinkfloyd
Badges: 0
#21
Report 13 years ago
#21
(Original post by Jacques Derrida)
Don't leech off ArthurOliver. You're lucky this forum has him.
If you look through the forum you will see the BNP posting lots of links to evidence, backing up claims. The reply to the majority of these posts is , 'so what we're all British so shut up Nazi.'
0
quote
reply
Scheherazade
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#22
Report 13 years ago
#22
Well, most of the rest of your links are crap.

This is from someone who reads them.
0
quote
reply
Batazer
Badges: 0
#23
Report 13 years ago
#23
(Original post by ayaan)
Well, most of the rest of your links are crap.

This is from someone who reads them.
Most of OUR links, link to news articles that are true.
0
quote
reply
Talya
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#24
Report 13 years ago
#24
(Original post by ayaan)
I can easily believe that no-one respects your views on anything though.
Especially when he has to resort to swearing to try and get his point across.
0
quote
reply
pinkfloyd
Badges: 0
#25
Report 13 years ago
#25
(Original post by Kavanne)
Especially when he has to resort to swearing to try and get his point across.
Crock of **** is how I would describe any holy book, as it's the best term for it.

We present argument after arguemnt backed up with facts and figures, when the only reply you ever get is 'racist' from people like yourself who have been brainwashed by the BBC it does get a tad frustrating.


---EDIT---

There is no word quite as effective as a swear word for enforcing your feeling of repulsion for something as sickeningly false as a holy book.
0
quote
reply
technik
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#26
Report 13 years ago
#26
(Original post by pinkfloyd)
Why who is a fascist?
me. but im not in the BNP.

kavanne is struggling in this arena i feel. omg lets call people a name! type thing regularly seen around these parts. of course if she wants to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of fascism and modern interpretations of it she's more than welcome to start a thread or such like. i think, however, this will be the final word she'll say on the subject...
0
quote
reply
Talya
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#27
Report 13 years ago
#27
(Original post by pinkfloyd)

There is no word quite as effective as a swear word for enforcing your feeling of repulsion for something as sickeningly false as a holy book.
But you should not try and enforce your feeling on anyone else! :mad:
0
quote
reply
ArthurOliver
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#28
Report Thread starter 13 years ago
#28
(Original post by Kavanne)
But you should not try and enforce your feeling on anyone else! :mad:
Who shouldn't? The multicultis? Agreed! Kill'em!
0
quote
reply
Nysh
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#29
Report 13 years ago
#29
(Original post by ArthurOliver)
http://foster.20megsfree.com/444.htm

I posted this link to a review-article in another thread last night and was surprised that the books finding -- that the more diverse a population in terms of race, religion, ethnic background etc, the more likely it is that a state would suffer conflict -- was at all controversial.

I would have thought it obvious, and in fact, if I didn't believe it I probably wouldn't have allowed myself to hold the political viewpoint I now do.

What do you guys say?

Of course, it's Yggdrasil who brought me down this road, he collected these snips from the Wall Street Journal over a twenty year period, but truly it never ends, there's new stories every day, and every few years the lid comes off another boiling tension which has simmered for years. (everybody OK with cooking metaphors?)

Anyways, I think the question is pretty well a non-issue. "Diversity", supposedly a strength is obviously a bad bad idea and likely a fatal flaw. Read the link -or don't, the daily news tells the same story- just don't get bogged down in the fact that the reviewer uses the strange word "race". It's a puzzle for some, but he simply means race, or maybe race.
I wanted to ask if you actually know of anytime in history (with or without diversity) there has been any time WITHOUT strife?

Even if you put in your seperationist ideals, it wouldn't make any difference because in order to survive, we need cultural interactions. How do you think farming spread? It didn't just appear in the UK- it was brought in from the Near East.

Strife exists as long as people exist, whether you have 'racial' seperation or not, that's HUMAN nature- not black nature, not white nature, not brown nature, not 'yellow' nature- HUMAN nature.

"Race" is a word created for Imperialism by Social Darwinists, and therefore is absolute rubbish. We are the human 'race'.
0
quote
reply
ArthurOliver
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#30
Report Thread starter 13 years ago
#30
(Original post by Nysh)
I wanted to ask if you actually know of anytime in history (with or without diversity) there has been any time WITHOUT strife?

Even if you put in your seperationist ideals, it wouldn't make any difference because in order to survive, we need cultural interactions. How do you think farming spread? It didn't just appear in the UK- it was brought in from the Near East.

Strife exists as long as people exist, whether you have 'racial' seperation or not, that's HUMAN nature- not black nature, not white nature, not brown nature, not 'yellow' nature- HUMAN nature.

"Race" is a word created for Imperialism by Social Darwinists, and therefore is absolute rubbish. We are the human 'race'.
I wanted to ask whether diversity makes strife more likely.

I have little interest in "race" as you believe it has been dishonestly defined. But, you're wrong on that issue anyway.

"The art of the ancient civilizations of Egypt, Greece, Rome, India, and China, and the Islamic civilization from AD 700 to 1400 shows that these societies classified the various peoples they encountered into broad racial groups. They sorted them based upon the same set of characteristics -- skin color, hair form, and head shape -- allegedly constructed by Europeans when they invented 'race' to justify colonialism and white supremacy."

Race:The Reality of Human Differences
by Vincent Sarich and Frank Miele
0
quote
reply
Nysh
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#31
Report 13 years ago
#31
(Original post by ArthurOliver)
I wanted to ask whether diversity makes strife more likely.

I have little interest in "race" as you believe it has been dishonestly defined. But, you're wrong on that issue anyway.

"The art of the ancient civilizations of Egypt, Greece, Rome, India, and China, and the Islamic civilization from AD 700 to 1400 shows that these societies classified the various peoples they encountered into broad racial groups. They sorted them based upon the same set of characteristics -- skin color, hair form, and head shape -- allegedly constructed by Europeans when they invented 'race' to justify colonialism and white supremacy."

Race:The Reality of Human Differences
by Vincent Sarich and Frank Miele
Ok, firstly, head shape has nothing to do with skin colour- there are a variety of head shapes in every "race"- as you define it. Skin colour is an adaption to UV levels, and a natural reaction to protect the skin from it.

As for strife- it's likely just as much within family/same race units. I mean the French and the English derive from the same "race" and they had MORE fights than we have now.

Art is a human expression, defined through different experiences (perhaps defined by different environments, beliefs, etc). I think, instead of looking at the differences, it would be nice if you could explain the similarities- why did the Maya in South America construct pyramidal buildings like the ones in Egypt, and the Ziggurats in the Near East?

And don't quote some BNP article, or anything of the like. I'm not quoting anything here, I'm asking you to THINK for YOURSELF! I know it's hard when you are subjected to propaganda, but I'm sure you can...
0
quote
reply
ArthurOliver
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#32
Report Thread starter 13 years ago
#32
(Original post by Nysh)
As for strife- it's likely just as much within family/same race units. I mean the French and the English derive from the same "race" and they had MORE fights than we have now.
This portion of your post is relevant. But still, the French and English don't share a territory. Would millions of French moving to England and creating French ghettoes in numerous inner-cities make strife more likely? For example.

The French and English are relatively similar racially, culturally, and religiously, comared to the English and the Pakistanis, say. But still, it's a simple question -- is it more likely that a mix of French and English people will find cause for conflict and division than the French or English alone?

What do you think "race" means. Quote me on "race" and say what you disagree with. Or don't, it really doesn't matter, and gets tiresome...
0
quote
reply
Nysh
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#33
Report 13 years ago
#33
(Original post by ArthurOliver)
This portion of your post is relevant. But still, the French and English don't share a territory. Would millions of French moving to England and creating French ghettoes in numerous inner-cities make strife more likely? For example.

The French and English are relatively similar racially, culturally, and religiously, comared to the English and the Pakistanis, say. But still, it's a simple question -- is it more likely that a mix of French and English people will find cause for conflict and division than the French or English alone?

What do you think "race" means. Quote me on "race" and say what you disagree with. Or don't, it really doesn't matter, and gets tiresome...
Oh, and the English stealing their colonies resources wasn't wrong? The only reason the UK has its little "ghettos" is because it though itself culturally and evolutionarilly superior, and therefore decided it needed to "civilise" (or exploit the resources of) every other nation. That is why, after liberation, so many people fled to the UK- because they had become reliant on Britain.

The French and the English are from the same "race" (as you define it). England has had so many French Kings, it's not even funny. But even then, the English hate the French more than they hate Pakistanis. Why? Because they are culturally similar.

Our human race is defined scientifically as homo sapiens sapiens, not divided into skin colour or other such things. We are the same race- Indians are not from a different race to the British, nor are Africans, South Americans, etc.
0
quote
reply
Howard
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#34
Report 13 years ago
#34
(Original post by Nysh)
The French and the English are from the same "race" (as you define it). England has had so many French Kings, it's not even funny. But even then, the English hate the French more than they hate Pakistanis.
I beg to differ.
0
quote
reply
Nysh
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#35
Report 13 years ago
#35
(Original post by Howard)
I beg to differ.
Is that why I am a "Fukin Moron", as you kindly put it?
0
quote
reply
ArthurOliver
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#36
Report Thread starter 13 years ago
#36
And the answer is....

Is it more likely that there will be confict between an immigrant population that bears an historical greivance toward the majority than conflist will arise among the majority alone? I think you answer the question.

How do I define it ("race")? I don't think you have a clue.
In my little internal dialogies, and personal definitions I think the French and the English are different races. But I think also that Blacks and Whites are different races as far as politics and society and usual and important definitions go. Is it relevant? Am I wrong? Go to bed.
0
quote
reply
Nysh
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#37
Report 13 years ago
#37
(Original post by ArthurOliver)
And the answer is....

Is it more likely that there will be confict between an immigrant population that bears an historical greivance toward the majority than conflist will arise among the majority alone? I think you answer the question.

How do I define it ("race")? I don't think you have a clue.
In my little internal dialogies, and personal definitions I think the French and the English are different races. But I think also that Blacks and Whites are different races as far as politics and society and usual and important definitions go. Is it relevant? Am I wrong? Go to bed.
And suddenly you're playing the patronising white Man, aren't you?

You are wrong. Race is not defined as that, not scientifically, at least. PLus if you try and define the French and English as different then that's like saying the people from York are a different race from those in London. There's so much inter-breeding that you can't classify them as different 'races'.

Oh and thanks for the Neg Rep, I quite like having the capability to annoy someone so much.
0
quote
reply
ArthurOliver
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#38
Report Thread starter 13 years ago
#38
(Original post by Nysh)
And suddenly you're playing the patronising white Man, aren't you?
Don't talk to me like that Sambo--I'll thrash you!
You are wrong. Race is not defined as that, not scientifically, at least. PLus if you try and define the French and English as different then that's like saying the people from York are a different race from those in London. There's so much inter-breeding that you can't classify them as different 'races'.
Go on then, what is "race" and how have I defined it? There are different genetic patterns between the regions of England, does that matter to you? It doesn't matter to me.
0
quote
reply
Nysh
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#39
Report 13 years ago
#39
(Original post by ArthurOliver)
Don't talk to me like that Sambo--I'll thrash you!Go on then, what is "race" and how have I defined it? There are different genetic patterns between the regions of England, does that matter to you? It doesn't matter to me.
Sambo? Like little Black Sambo- the most awfully racist children's fiction ever? Your order "Go to Bed" is playing the role of the patronising white Man. Plus, your violent reaction doesn't really quite scare me.

By defining the Africans and British from a different race shows evidence of your lack of scientific analysis in the meaning of the word "race".
0
quote
reply
ArthurOliver
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#40
Report Thread starter 13 years ago
#40
(Original post by Nysh)
Sambo? Like little Black Sambo- the most awfully racist children's fiction ever? Your order "Go to Bed" is playing the role of the patronising white Man. Plus, your violent reaction doesn't really quite scare me.

By defining the Africans and British from a different race shows evidence of your lack of scientific analysis in the meaning of the word "race".


What does "race" mean, nysh, enlighten me. You appear to know what it truly means and also what I mean by using it. Give me both definitions please, the correct one, and the incorrect one I subscribe to. Come on...Golliwog!
0
quote
reply
X

Reply to thread

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Do you like exams?

Yes (137)
18.51%
No (449)
60.68%
Not really bothered about them (154)
20.81%

Watched Threads

View All