White supremacy

[Vietnam]

I prefer Asian women over Whites.

Asians age like a... a fine wine, I'd say.

o.o

[Vietnam]

i'm not an internet tough guy those are my beliefs and if you don't believe it, then its your own fault.

Well white people in the US are now the minority 49%

No, 72.4%, actually.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Americans

[New haven america]

Well white people in the US are now the minority 49%

No, 72.4%, actually.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Americans

But once you count the mixed races(Me) and the other US races the number drops quite a bit.

[Vietnam]

No, 72.4%, actually.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Americans

But once you count the mixed races(Me) and the other US races the number drops quite a bit.

How mixed do you have to be to be considered "mixed race?"

[New haven america]

But once you count the mixed races(Me) and the other US races the number drops quite a bit.

How mixed do you have to be to be considered "mixed race?"

IDK, something like one parent or grandparent is one race, the other is a different race. IDK ask the government.

[Avenio]

Well white people in the US are now the minority 49%

Actually, humans in the US are outnumbered 6-to-1 by beetles.

Wut?

Humans evolving from a common ancestor in Africa doesn't support or refute any form of racial supremacist thought. I have no idea why that fact is recited so often in these race threads. Having a common ancestor at one point in our history does not make it impossible for meaningful divisions to evolve later. If -- hypothetically for the sake of argument -- there was a meaningful difference between the races, knowing where the human species originated would not tell us anything about the relationship between races.

I would argue otherwise. A recent African origin for modern homo sapiens means that there is very, very little evolutionary time available for the differences between the 'races' to emerge. What's moreso, the distribution patterns associated with a recent African origin and subsequent colonization means that humankind was one contiguous and interbreeding population until the Late Glacial Maximum, meaning that said available time is reduced almost down to the last 10 000 years.

[Mkuki]

Well white people in the US are now the minority 49%

Actually, humans in the US are outnumbered 6-to-1 by beetles.

Wut?

Humans evolving from a common ancestor in Africa doesn't support or refute any form of racial supremacist thought. I have no idea why that fact is recited so often in these race threads. Having a common ancestor at one point in our history does not make it impossible for meaningful divisions to evolve later. If -- hypothetically for the sake of argument -- there was a meaningful difference between the races, knowing where the human species originated would not tell us anything about the relationship between races.

I would argue otherwise. A recent African origin for modern homo sapiens means that there is very, very little evolutionary time available for the differences between the 'races' to emerge. What's moreso, the distribution patterns associated with a recent African origin and subsequent colonization means that humankind was one contiguous and interbreeding population until the Late Glacial Maximum, meaning that said available time is reduced almost down to the last 10 000 years.

It may mean nothing, but after 8,000 BC farming and the formation of settlements began to occur in Mesopotamia, South Asia, East Asia and Egypt.

[Farnhamia]

Actually, humans in the US are outnumbered 6-to-1 by beetles.



I would argue otherwise. A recent African origin for modern homo sapiens means that there is very, very little evolutionary time available for the differences between the 'races' to emerge. What's moreso, the distribution patterns associated with a recent African origin and subsequent colonization means that humankind was one contiguous and interbreeding population until the Late Glacial Maximum, meaning that said available time is reduced almost down to the last 10 000 years.

It may mean nothing, but after 8,000 BC farming and the formation of settlements began to occur in Mesopotamia, South Asia, East Asia and Egypt.

Meaning what?

[Mkuki]

It may mean nothing, but after 8,000 BC farming and the formation of settlements began to occur in Mesopotamia, South Asia, East Asia and Egypt.

Meaning what?

*shrug*

[Vietnam]

Meaning what?

*shrug*

You just randomly included it without knowing what this even has to do with what we're talking about?..

[Desperate Measures]

Just because someone has a right to say something doesn't mean I shouldn't do my best to shut them up about it.

I don't support freedom of speech, but if freedom of speech is applied in general, then it is hypocritical to attempt to suppress groups that one does not believe in.

No, it isn't. My freedom of speech allows me to yell louder and better if I'm able. Drown 'em out.

[Wikkiwallana]

White supremacy is wrong, I'm sure most can agree with this, however White Pride isn't. I'm proud to be white, but I don't think white people are superior to any other race.

Pride is never wrong. Asian Pride, Black Pride, White Pride, etc. are all wonderful things.

Supremacy is the problem. Supremacy is what oppresses people and hurts others.

Still, skin color pride is rather silly, since none of them are unified groups…

[Wikkiwallana]

You understand that the only valid human origin theory is the theory of evolution, right?

That's like the only scientifically-accepted theory, and thus the only theory you can use when debating politics and social issues since it's the only one with empirical proof.

Yes but billions support religion. Who do we listen to: a select few or the masses? Oh, I thought you were a leftist. Don't you like the masses?

Hooray strawmen and ad hominems! I thought this thread was never going to get anywhere!

[Slovenya]

Still, skin color pride is rather silly, since none of them are unified groups…

you can call it silly, and I can also call it silly to see people proud of their sports team or proud to be cat owners or something along those lines. It's just something people feel proud about; not silly in my opinion

[Wikkiwallana]

Still, skin color pride is rather silly, since none of them are unified groups…

you can call it silly, and I can also call it silly to see people proud of their sports team or proud to be cat owners or something along those lines. It's just something people feel proud about; not silly in my opinion

I agree about the sport team, on the other hand, being a cat owner is something you actually have a choice in and that says something about you as a person.

[Baltenstein]

Pride is never wrong. Asian Pride, Black Pride, White Pride, etc. are all wonderful things.

Supremacy is the problem. Supremacy is what oppresses people and hurts others.

Dunno, in my opinion skin color pride doesn't make any more sense than eye color pride, hair color pride, height pride or nose shape pride.

[The Marxist State]

Well white people in the US are now the minority 49%

Whites are no longer the majority, but they still have plurality and this will continue to be the case for a while yet. Although I think the diversification of our country is a very good thing.

[Vietnam]

Well white people in the US are now the minority 49%

Whites are no longer the majority, but they still have plurality and this will continue to be the case for a while yet. Although I think the diversification of our country is a very good thing.

No, they're still the majority actually, with 72.4%.

[Ktanval]

Whites are no longer the majority, but they still have plurality and this will continue to be the case for a while yet. Although I think the diversification of our country is a very good thing.

No, they're still the majority actually, with 72.4%.

I doubt about those statistics seem some states consider Mexicans as whites and most of them aren't whites.

[Vietnam]

No, they're still the majority actually, with 72.4%.

I doubt about those statistics seem some states consider Mexicans as whites and most of them aren't whites.

Really? I consider them white, although many probably aren't light-skinned enough for you.

Non-Hispanic White is still 63.7%, a large majority.

[Ktanval]

I doubt about those statistics seem some states consider Mexicans as whites and most of them aren't whites.

Really? I consider them white, although many probably aren't light-skinned enough for you.

Non-Hispanic White is still 63.7%, a large majority.

Being light doesn't mean you are white .

Albinos are the example .

[The Steel Magnolia]

IIRC white BIRTHS are at 49%. White folks number ~72%.

[Vietnam]

Really? I consider them white, although many probably aren't light-skinned enough for you.

Non-Hispanic White is still 63.7%, a large majority.

Being light doesn't mean you are white .

Albinos are the example .

Yeah, I was saying how Hispanics are also white, even though a lot don't have "white skin." :v

[Ktanval]

Being light doesn't mean you are white .

Albinos are the example .

Yeah, I was saying how Hispanics are also white, even though a lot don't have "white skin." :v

If they have European ancestry from both parents they are white if his only one he/she isn't white.

[Anachronous Rex]

Yeah, I was saying how Hispanics are also white, even though a lot don't have "white skin." :v

If they have European ancestry from both parents they are white if his only one he/she isn't white.

What about my Asian brethren:

White, or no?