ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Mar 11^th, 2007 at 2:04am:


Because that is the PC way of dealing with it.

Were the British afraid or ignorant of the various people they have brought under their Imperial yolk back when the British Empire was around e.g India, Africa, China etc? Watch the movies and they'd argue that they were, but seriously, it was all about power and money through exploitation of cheap labour and someone else's natural resources. Saying that the natives of the subjugated lands are savages and are subhuman is merely a convenient way of not only justifying it, but to further prove to themselves how great they are. Nothing to do with fear and ignorant in that regard.

What about fear of loosing the gravy train and position of surperiority? Once people are born into that and come to think of it as normal, the fear of losing it can be strong. When people throw off their oppressors it can get very ugly very quickly. I suspect that the British realised this after learning it the hard way and eventually took an approach of yielding power slowly rather than trying to hold onto it at all costs.

It usually comes with a good ass kicking, at no extra cost.

I think part of the problem stems from visibility issues. The 'problem people' (drunken aborigines, violent muslims) tend to be far more visible than the majority of the people they are taken to represent. This is why the impression many people have is so different from the reality.

Before anyone gets all technical on us, I think it is reasonable to use the term to apply to unfair discrimination based on religion, as I am not aware of any commonly accepted 'ism' for religionism (religious discrimination? - doesn't exactly roll of the tounge like racism).

DT,

Thanks for your reply..I could get a dictionary meaning and I will, but I always understood racism to mean when one race thinks its race/culture is superior to another.

I think the term rascism encompasess both -white pple feel superior to black and black pple feel superior to white..it works both ways..in the way they see theyre own culture and values as functioning and being better . If a man is black he will be judged and cast into a certain mould because he is black,  if he were white he would also be judged accordingly and for the same raesons, so yes, colour and gentics do play a part in what I perceive top be overall defintion if racism.

My question goes more to why it is we cant see out side of our own value system to believe that its possible that just because a culture and or value system is not neccessarily our own that we cannot comprehend that is still a useful functioing tool for that society..and that because IT IS different that it can compare in functioanality to our own..and be as good and in some cases better.

For instance the way pple veiw Ind society and other races that exist in our multicultural society..

It cannot be said on even this forum alone that veiws of Indigenous pple are generally scathing and that little thought goes into commentary about subjects and veiws relating to them.

Quote:


If that's the case, I must be a racist and not even know it. 

For example, I think European (My culture), is superior to that of an Aboriginal, African or someone from the middle east.
Now even though what I said is undoubtedly true, why do people argue otherwise and blame me for stating the obvious?


Quote:


I think it should too... unfortunately it doesn't. To me, our society only sees 'white people' to be the racist ones. I don't think this is fair.


Quote:


Yep. But I think that's the ONLY definition of racism. I've had this discussion on cracker a thousand times with beo. We've been through all the online dictionaries and we've discovered that some dictionaries include the 'culture' argument for racism, but then some don't include it. We eventually found out that the original term 'racism' was coined by communists during the russian revolution to vilify people who discriminated against other 'races' based on their appearance (Yes, the term 'racism' is a rather recent word).
The 'culture' definition was only recently added so that politically correct bigots had the pleasure of labelling more people racists wherever they went.


Quote:


I can argue this point, but I'm not going to bother.

Quote:


DT, I disagree. You have to include culture. And culture is shaped by religion, so that should be included too.

Palestinians and Israelis share the same blood lines. They look the same, and have the same genes. Obviously, they are different races.

Polynesians have the same ancestry, yet have different customs. Stand a Hawaiin and Maori next to each other, and you would be struggling to tell them apart.

There is a huge variation in the caucasian race. You would be struggling to differentiate between a southern Italian and Turk. Once again, the difference is cultural.

These examples show that race is defined by culture, not by genetics.