White History Month.

[Mushet]

Is "The people who enslaved black people in America were almost entirely white, and those who benefit to this day from the system set into place by chattel slavery so long ago tend, by and large, to be white" better?

At least to Hungaristans particular case though, it is a possibility some of his ancestors were enslaved at one point or another (if any of them were unlucky enough to be serving in the hungarian military durring the ottoman invasions), and those who enslaved blacks in the South were just one version of whites.
Automatically merging all white sinto the same category is stupid for many reasons, and there are plenty of examples of white vs white ethnic conflict (ie almost every single dam war in Europe that didnt have to do with religion)

This seems to be about American whiteness, that little social club that has become more accepting to assimilate other European peoples they considered non-white about the same time darker complexioned minority groups were rising.

[Norjagen]

I do not think that there should be a "White History Month." That said, I voted "Yes" in the poll, because that is not what the poll asked: "Should White People get a equal footing as black people?" And the answer to that, in my mind, is a resounding "yes." It is a sad commentary on our society that -any- group; be it white, black, gay, straight, Yankees fans, Sox fans, or whatever, feels that it "deserves" its own special month, upon which to remind all of the others of its accomplishments.

In an ideal world, I would rather see all social groups represented equally, at all times. Like many affirmative action laws, setting aside special recognition for any one racial group serves only to reinforce the racial boundaries between those groups; perpetuating the very racism (on both sides) that they seek to alleviate.

[Priory Academy USSR]

Given that most history in the predominantly white West is about white people, there's really no need whatsoever.

[Zottistan]

Isn't white history, in the West, anyway, just called... history?

[Jogentagana]

I don't get it why white people who are proud of their race are viewed as racist if they are not doing any harm. Only 1/5 of the people in the world are white.

[Zottistan]

I don't get it why white people who are proud of their race are viewed as racist if they are not doing any harm.

All racial pride does harm on some level. It clouds people's judgement, contributes to strife, and doesn't make any sense.

Only 1/5 of the people in the world are white.

So?

[Jogentagana]

I don't get it why white people who are proud of their race are viewed as racist if they are not doing any harm.

All racial pride does harm on some level. It clouds people's judgement, contributes to strife, and doesn't make any sense.

Only 1/5 of the people in the world are white.

So?

Because then it is even more important for white people to preserve their culture and traditions - not by violence and racism.

[Zottistan]

All racial pride does harm on some level. It clouds people's judgement, contributes to strife, and doesn't make any sense.

So?

Because then it is even more important for white people to preserve their culture and traditions - not by violence and racism.

That's not pride, that's an appreciation of white cultures. I'm all for this, white cultures have some pretty magnificent traits. Just bear in mind that one of the world's best cellists is ethnically Chinese. White culture hasn't belonged to white people for a long time, and there's no reason a white person should feel proud of them.

[Aurora Novus]

The fact that European culture spread through largely underhanded means does nothing to refute my claim. I don't give a toss how sad or unfortunate it may be, it's still reality.

Not really, African cultures, Asian cultures, Native American cultures, etc. really left their mark comparable to Europe's mark, "Western Covilization" absorbs and to this day still greatly absorbs their influences and a lot of what you think as "European" are really products of other cultures.

Please provide example. Until them, hogwash. African and Native American culture have not contributed globally to the modern cultural and political happenings of the globe anywhere near to the extent that European culture has. Asain culture has done a bit more, but still not on the same level as Europe.

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

well....

i areas where whites are not the predominate culture, like [...] south america, it might make some sense.

[Angleter]

All racial pride does harm on some level. It clouds people's judgement, contributes to strife, and doesn't make any sense.

So?

Because then it is even more important for white people to preserve their culture and traditions - not by violence and racism.

There's no such thing as 'white culture' or 'white traditions'. I, a white Briton, have far more in common with a black Briton than a white, say, Bulgarian. Individual nations have their own culture and traditions, but (in the vast majority of cases at least) there's nothing innately racial about them.

[Imperial Nilfgaard]

There shouldn't be a black history month, nor a white history month. History is collective, and the moment you catagorize it into "white" or "black" you are perpetuating artificial divisions.

The color of your skin doesn't give you ownership over a particular historical event.

[Souseiseki]

Not really, African cultures, Asian cultures, Native American cultures, etc. really left their mark comparable to Europe's mark, "Western Covilization" absorbs and to this day still greatly absorbs their influences and a lot of what you think as "European" are really products of other cultures.

Please provide example. Until them, hogwash. African and Native American culture have not contributed globally to the modern cultural and political happenings of the globe anywhere near to the extent that European culture has. Asain culture has done a bit more, but still not on the same level as Europe.

i've always been kinda conscious of how silly it is, but it never really hit me until this post. how can you lump 10s if not 100s of separate counties and cultures, with huge differences, most of which hate each other or used to really hate each other, into big labels like that, based on "well i do say the urals make us totes our own continent"?

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

Seems you have not been to Argentina or Uruguay.

Most Uruguayans are descended from colonial-era settlers and immigrants from Europe with almost 88% of the population being of European descent,

Argentina' numbers is also that high. Then Costa Rica in Central America and Puerto Rico in the Caribbean. Both in the high 70's percentage. However, the culture of those places are not 100% copies of Europe but a mixture of European, Native and African. White Europeans do not eat Plantain. They probably do not know what it is. White Caribbean and Central Americans (all in the tropics) do eat plenty of Plantains.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Lati ... #Argentina

And then you have Brazil, where plantains (pacobas) were domesticated independently from the Eurafrasian lines, that is the least male chauvinist and Roman Catholic and one of the most socially liberal in the region... Where African-derived culture is extremely prevalent, where we don't have white/black segregation but solely rich/poor one...

And where 65-80% of the DNA is European (>98% of male lines).

[Zottistan]

Because then it is even more important for white people to preserve their culture and traditions - not by violence and racism.

There's no such thing as 'white culture' or 'white traditions'. I, a white Briton, have far more in common with a black Briton than a white, say, Bulgarian. Individual nations have their own culture and traditions, but (in the vast majority of cases at least) there's nothing innately racial about them.

There are "white cutlures", which encompass Western cultures and some Eastern European cultures. There is no "white culture" in itself. It's a categorization of somewhat similar cultures.

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA US EUROPEANS JUDGING OTHER PEOPLES FOR VIOLENCE HAHAHAHAHAHAH

Oh well. Educate yourselves, Pale Faces.

Please don't ever participate in a thread like this when you can't even understand the post you're responding too.

Amerindian civilizations weren't any more particularly violent was my point.

Apocalipto depicting Aztecs as barbaric fetishists and perpetuating ethnocentric views anyone?

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

There's no such thing as 'white culture' or 'white traditions'. I, a white Briton, have far more in common with a black Briton than a white, say, Bulgarian. Individual nations have their own culture and traditions, but (in the vast majority of cases at least) there's nothing innately racial about them.

There are "white cutlures", which encompass Western cultures and some Eastern European cultures. There is no "white culture" in itself. It's a categorization of somewhat similar cultures.

But then there are Western countries where much or most of the bloodlines aren't traditionally associated with Western ethnicities, such as all of the Americas south of the USA, South Africa, Israel (the Ashkenazi and mixed-Ashkenazi are a plurality AFAIK), or those other Westernized parts of Asia such as Hong Kong and Macau (NOT Japan ffs).

[Angleter]

There's no such thing as 'white culture' or 'white traditions'. I, a white Briton, have far more in common with a black Briton than a white, say, Bulgarian. Individual nations have their own culture and traditions, but (in the vast majority of cases at least) there's nothing innately racial about them.

There are "white cutlures", which encompass Western cultures and some Eastern European cultures. There is no "white culture" in itself. It's a categorization of somewhat similar cultures.

What is innately 'white' about, say, Irishness, or Swedishness?

[Zottistan]

There are "white cutlures", which encompass Western cultures and some Eastern European cultures. There is no "white culture" in itself. It's a categorization of somewhat similar cultures.

But then there are Western countries where much or most of the bloodlines aren't traditionally associated with Western ethnicities, such as all of the Americas south of the USA, South Africa, Israel (the Ashkenazi and mixed-Ashkenazi are a plurality AFAIK), or those other Westernized parts of Asia such as Hong Kong and Macau (NOT Japan ffs).

Bloodlines don't make much of a difference with culture. Yo-Yo Ma is Chinese by blood, but one of the world's finest Western cellists.

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

Only 1/5 of the people in the world are white.

Source?

It is impossible to know. In Latin America the boundary between white and non-white is very fluid and no census ever tried to accurately portrait this.

I know because I was very undecided in the 2010 one. I would answer both branco and pardo if I could (though I'm not really brown, and my whiteness is far enough fitting into our definition, but for the lack of a mestiço category... whatever). Just like Americans who look white but have 25% Japanese blood answer they are both white and Asian.

Furthermore, my estimate would be 7-13% for 2010 and probably 2/3 or less of it in 2020 anyway.

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

Bloodlines don't make much of a difference with culture. Yo-Yo Ma is Chinese by blood, but one of the world's finest Western cellists.

But wouldn't calling e.g. Haitian or South African culture "white" be a misnomer?

[Zottistan]

There are "white cutlures", which encompass Western cultures and some Eastern European cultures. There is no "white culture" in itself. It's a categorization of somewhat similar cultures.

What is innately 'white' about, say, Irishness, or Swedishness?

I wouldn't categorize them as white cultures, since they're too varied and localized.

Just for the record, I don't usually use the term "white cultures", I'm just saying it's a valid synonym for European/American culture (which would include most elements of Irish culture, even though Ireland is a European country geographically. I don't know enough about Swedish culture to make that judgement about Sweden).

Bloodlines don't make much of a difference with culture. Yo-Yo Ma is Chinese by blood, but one of the world's finest Western cellists.

But wouldn't calling e.g. Haitian or South African culture "white" be a misnomer?

That wasn't the point. Of course it would.

The point was that white cultures can be practiced by non-white people and still be white culture. The dominant culture in an area populated by non-white people can still be a "white" culture.

[Yorkopolis]

Asian cultures were pretty dang advanced when Europeans conquered America. The Mayans had astronomy, math and an early form of plumbing when they disappeared. The Arabs contributed ideas to modern medicine and gave us our numeral system

No, they were not because they never set to explore nor did they had advanced technology like the Europeans did. In fact because they were backward they were colonised at the end (Arabs and Asians)

Math + Algebra, both eastern ideas originating out of Asia. Gunpowder, cannons, whatnot? All from Asia. Fireworks? From Asia.

Factually, and I hate to make your brain explode here, but the Muslims colonised Spain and Portugal while the rest of Europe was backwards, isolationist, and criticized everyone as heretics. The society of Al-Andalus, as the Muslim-colonised Iberian peninsula would later be called, became one of the most flourishing and multicultural places in the world. Yes, the Europeans sure have contributed to technology, too, but who invented the means that the Europeans used to commence said contributions? Asians, Arabs, Mayans, all over the world. Your shitty Eurocentric worldview is as disgusting as the Americocentric worldview that holds everything in the world to the standard of the US, and what's worse is that, unlike those Americocentric bastards, you don't even acknowledge that all these peoples actually did a lot more than you would ever like to admit in 1000 years time.

[Miyager]

Please don't ever participate in a thread like this when you can't even understand the post you're responding too.

Amerindian civilizations weren't any more particularly violent was my point.

Apocalipto depicting Aztecs as barbaric fetishists and perpetuating ethnocentric views anyone?

That's not what he said though. He simply pointed out the Aztecs weren't peaceful in any way.

[Conscentia]

No, they were not because they never set to explore nor did they had advanced technology like the Europeans did. In fact because they were backward they were colonised at the end (Arabs and Asians)

Math + Algebra, both eastern ideas originating out of Asia. [...]

Maths and algebra aren't both Asian ideas.
Algebra gets it's name from an Arabic word and was greatly developed in Asia and the Islamic world.
Many innovations in mathematics were made in Asia.
This does not mean that maths and algebra are Asian inventions.