Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Ancestoral blame and moral judgements
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 9>
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Ancestoral blame and moral judgements
    Posted: 16-Jul-2008 at 15:43
Originally posted by Slayertplsko

....
Do you get it? It is not richness that is bad, it's poverty that is bad and the best thing is to make the poor rich, not get rid of the rich and all be poor.
 
Of course, no all rich are bad at all. I wouldn't blame someone that get rich by its own merits, as a sportman, movie actor or inventor. However, people that are rich because the explotation of servs really deserve a bullet in the skull. In places like the jungles of Brazil there is still people living in conditions of semi-slavery, and in the mines of Bolivia certainly people lived that way. In all countries of Latin America there is still problems with the low wages of workers.
 
Racial problems don't exist in Latin America between Indigenous and not-Indigenous people in here, a problem that do exist between Blacks and the rest, though. And I mean racism to the discrimination on facial features, body shapes, etc. It is important that you understand that, because the reaction of Latinos to physical aspects of people is high, and Latinos (in general or in average) don't accept well blacks, australoid or extreme mongoloid people, rejecting them just by looks, something you don't witness much with Indians.
 
What do exist, though is a discrimination to Indigenous cultures and customs. It seem some people in here believes accepting indigenous customs, traditions and language is a sort of "treason to Europe". Sometimes people offend each other calling themselves "indian", which mean in local slang: "savage". There is also indigenism in here, that is people of no direct link to Indian who call themselves Indians. Sometimes they are violent, like the brave fans of a soccer team that call themselves Indians in Chile, who have killed several neonazis.
 
Yes, we have those conflicts in here, but they are a lot more complex and difficult to explain that just calling it racism and ask to follow Martin Luther King... Wink
 


Edited by pinguin - 16-Jul-2008 at 15:46
Back to Top
Leonidas View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 01-Oct-2005
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4613 		  Quote Leonidas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Jul-2008 at 12:42
Originally posted by pinguin

Nope. I said what was going on there wasn't racism but ethnic discrimination.
First, Ladinos is a synonim of Sephardite, which mean Spanish Jew. Perhaps you mean Latino (Latin american citizen) or maybe Mestizo or Castizo (European + 1/2 and 1/4 Native American, respectively).
 
your splitting major hairs with this, if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck its a chicken logic.

International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination

1. In this Convention, the term "racial discrimination" shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life.



Edited by Leonidas - 16-Jul-2008 at 12:43
Back to Top
Slayertplsko View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-May-2008
Location: Slovakia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1061 		  Quote Slayertplsko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Jul-2008 at 08:33
Originally posted by pinguin

We know who our enemies are: the rich. And in here those ideologies of racism, design to divide the working class people don't convince us. 


I wouldn't say all rich, because that would be the classism you hate so much. This reminds me the old joke about Bolsheviks.

(Petersburgh, 1917)Young Russian noble drinks her morning tea and hears some noise from outside. She asks her maid:
- Katja, what's going on outside?
- There's a revolution going on madamme.
- Who leads the revolution?
- Bolsheviks
- My grandfather was a revolutionaire as well. He was a Dekabrist. What the goal of these Bolsheviks
- Their goal is that there were no rich.
- Strange. My grandfather's goal was that there were no poor.

Do you get it? It is not richness that is bad, it's poverty that is bad and the best thing is to make the poor rich, not get rid of the rich and all be poor.
Back to Top
Slayertplsko View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-May-2008
Location: Slovakia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1061 		  Quote Slayertplsko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Jul-2008 at 08:24
Originally posted by pinguin

Fellow, you can't have an idea of what has been going on in here, because you live so far away.


True to some extend. But the same applied to your idea of what has been happening in Europe. You know about Europe just WW1, WW2 just like I know about the surpression in Chile, famine, Pinochet and some things that happened around his time. And after all, my point was change in Europe, and I LIVE in Europe.

Originally posted by pinguin

Let me say just one thing. During most of the 19th century and 3/4 of the twenty, large number of Chileans were treated as servants! We had a strike on the mining industry at the beginning of the century were 3.000 were shot dead. We had many rural violence. Half our population was alcoholic in the 40s, and we had the higher children dead rate in the world at those times. During the 20s people died of hunger here. And during the 70s a military coup killed thousand, tortured a hundred thousand and sent to the exile 1/10 of our population.


Yes we had similar experience in 19th and early 20th century with Magyars. Still, I don't blame today's Magyars for what happened 100 years ago...got it?? And that's the point of the whole thread. Civilisations/nations/societies change with every birth and death and since all those guilty Magyars are dead, there is no one to blame. If your father commited a murder, should you be imprisoned?
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Jul-2008 at 03:43
Originally posted by Slayertplsko

It doesn't matter how much of that blood they have - it's a belief!
 
A belief of fascists and ignorants. It is not the way the average Latino thinks.
 
Originally posted by Slayertplsko


OK so you seem reluctant to accept that a ladino with Indian blood can racisticly discriminate a native American.
 
Nope. I said what was going on there wasn't racism but ethnic discrimination.
First, Ladinos is a synonim of Sephardite, which mean Spanish Jew. Perhaps you mean Latino (Latin american citizen) or maybe Mestizo or Castizo (European + 1/2 and 1/4 Native American, respectively).
 
So, let's start from the beginning. These days, 500 years after Columbus, not all American Indians are pure Indians. Some are blond blue eyed! Besides, not all "Europeans" are pure European, because some look Indigenous. Put it in another way: not all rich look European and not all poor look Indigenous. Mixtures are very uniform. To complicate more things, in countries like Paraguay, no matter you are pure white you speak Guarani.
 
However, in some countries such as Peru, Bolivia and in some ways in Mexico as well, there is a divide between the mainstream Hispanic culture and the Indigenous peoples. That's something that have been going on during centuries, and that still isn't fixed. A shame in Latin America but an actual fact.
 
Originally posted by Slayertplsko

You back it up with the fact that it MUST be two different races. Please be aware that there are no races as has been recently pointed out. Even a greater nonsense is superiority of one or the other race, which by your logics means that racism doesn't exist. But you never questioned this term and seem to pretty well accept it - so is the actual genus or the belief important?? There is racism because people believe there are races and that their race is superior to the rest.
 
The problem is not race but culture. Some people believe here that European culture is superior to Indigenous culture. That's were the problems starts. However, as I said before, not all the people agree with the fascists.

Originally posted by Slayertplsko


You refuse the concept of racism based on exclusively a belief, but you don't have any problem with the concept of racism itself. What does it mean? It means you're a racist.Wink
Therefore I would suggest that you abandon this silly position you hold.

Nonsense. What's going on in here, as I have said to you several times, it is not racism but a mixture between classism and ethnic divide.

In Chile, in particular, although there are still many problems of abusses against Indigenous people, they are each generation more educated and accepted by the mainstream. Even more, people in general are starting to value a culture that is also theirs.

Originally posted by Slayertplsko

Originally posted by pinguin

New generations are  changing those attitudes but still there is lot to be done. In my country, for instance, indigenous people used to be shy about theirs customs but not anymore. Today all the country is more receptive to them.


Glad to hear that. But this really is that 'double standard' - you defend your own people by the fact that they're much more tolerant nowadays. If this is to defend them, then the fact that all European nations are entirely tolerant today should give end to this thread, because there would be no collective guilt possible.Wink
So I would suggest you cease this position as well.
 
Fellow, you can't have an idea of what has been going on in here, because you live so far away. Let me say just one thing. During most of the 19th century and 3/4 of the twenty, large number of Chileans were treated as servants! We had a strike on the mining industry at the beginning of the century were 3.000 were shot dead. We had many rural violence. Half our population was alcoholic in the 40s, and we had the higher children dead rate in the world at those times. During the 20s people died of hunger here. And during the 70s a military coup killed thousand, tortured a hundred thousand and sent to the exile 1/10 of our population!
 
In all these Indians and not Indians had suffered the same, because they were poor. The fascists have always been our rich people.
 
We know who our enemies are: the rich. And in here those ideologies of racism, design to divide the working class people don't convince us.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


Edited by pinguin - 16-Jul-2008 at 03:43
Back to Top
Slayertplsko View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-May-2008
Location: Slovakia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1061 		  Quote Slayertplsko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Jul-2008 at 09:28
Originally posted by pinguin

It is an unaceptable discrimination. I agree on that. Unfortunately, as you may know, the ones that discriminate Indigenous people the most are those that have tons of Indian blood themselves.


It doesn't matter how much of that blood they have - it's a belief!
OK so you seem reluctant to accept that a ladino with Indian blood can racisticly discriminate a native American. You back it up with the fact that it MUST be two different races. Please be aware that there are no races as has been recently pointed out. Even a greater nonsense is superiority of one or the other race, which by your logics means that racism doesn't exist. But you never questioned this term and seem to pretty well accept it - so is the actual genus or the belief important?? There is racism because people believe there are races and that their race is superior to the rest.

You refuse the concept of racism based on exclusively a belief, but you don't have any problem with the concept of racism itself. What does it mean? It means you're a racist.Wink
Therefore I would suggest that you abandon this silly position you hold.


Originally posted by pinguin

New generations are  changing those attitudes but still there is lot to be done. In my country, for instance, indigenous people used to be shy about theirs customs but not anymore. Today all the country is more receptive to them.


Glad to hear that. But this really is that 'double standard' - you defend your own people by the fact that they're much more tolerant nowadays. If this is to defend them, then the fact that all European nations are entirely tolerant today should give end to this thread, because there would be no collective guilt possible.Wink
So I would suggest you cease this position as well.


Edited by Slayertplsko - 15-Jul-2008 at 09:33
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Jul-2008 at 01:58
It is an unaceptable discrimination. I agree on that. Unfortunately, as you may know, the ones that discriminate Indigenous people the most are those that have tons of Indian blood themselves.
 
New generations are  changing those attitudes but still there is lot to be done. In my country, for instance, indigenous people used to be shy about theirs customs but not anymore. Today all the country is more receptive to them.
 
 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Jul-2008 at 23:24
Originally posted by pinguin

In the case of Latin America, in cases as in Bolivia and Guatemala, what exist is ethnic discrimination and ethnic divides. I challenge you to divide those people by race, just looking at theirs phenotype, without resorting to ethnic clothings.
 

Slayertplsko pretty much answered that in his last question, replace Jews by Native Americans and Hitler by mestizos/criollos/ladinos. It doesn't matter if there is an actual genetic/racial difference (which is something nonsensical from a scientific point of view anyway), if the people looking down upon others percieve a racial difference, if they think the other is somehow inherently different/inferior because of his ethnicity or ancestry (which many Guatemalan ladinos and Bolivian whites definately do), it is racism.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Jul-2008 at 21:25
Let me put in this way. There are some rich people that believe there are two kind of homo sapiens: humans and sub-humans. Or as Aldoux Huxley put it: alphas and betas. They believe people that work for others is genetically conditionated to do so and be poor forever.
 
No matter how much I hate that definition, that it isn't racism but classism.
 
In the case of Latin America, in cases as in Bolivia and Guatemala, what exist is ethnic discrimination and ethnic divides. I challenge you to divide those people by race, just looking at theirs phenotype, without resorting to ethnic clothings.
 


Edited by pinguin - 14-Jul-2008 at 21:27
Back to Top
Slayertplsko View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-May-2008
Location: Slovakia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1061 		  Quote Slayertplsko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Jul-2008 at 21:01

1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.

OK so this is a dictionary definition - I think it quite well supports gcle2003.

and another one: 1. a belief that human races have distinctive characteristics that determine their respective cultures, usually involving the idea that one’s race is superior and has the right to control others.

And one more question: was it more important for Jews how Hitler defined the race or dictionary or you?...sure it was HitlerWink


Edited by Slayertplsko - 14-Jul-2008 at 21:05
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Jul-2008 at 20:48
Originally posted by gcle2003

....

I'm not sure it's true there is no way to distinguish (physically) a European Jew from a German. Or indeed a Welshman from a Bavarian.

But anyhow racism is subjective - it depends on whether the racist believes there is such a distinction. Doesn't matter if he is right or wrong.

 
It doesn't matter to me how people define racism. What matters to me is that anyone that wants to lecture about racism in Latin America should first go to the dictionary and find the definition.
 
 
 
 
 
 
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035 		  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Jul-2008 at 20:43
Originally posted by Seko

I'll partially go with Pinguin on the broad definition of racism and stretch it a bit. Discrimination is discrimination. One party classifies another. When based on race you might think the catagory has become more detailed. Yet that is so general that almost anything could be racial these days. Features, skin tone, affilited political groups, IQ, you name it.


Anything heritable is a parameter in distinguishing racial groupings. However racial distinctions are temporary, since, while species, once formed, can't re-merge, races can.

It's like languages - they don't merely grow apart as time goes by, they also assimilate and reassimilate.
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035 		  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Jul-2008 at 20:39
Originally posted by Mixcoatl

Originally posted by pinguin

Originally posted by gcle2003

Why do people think race is indicated by skin colour?
 
Facial features are also included. Racism is based in physical differences.

Physical differences aere not necessarily visible.


 It is amazing that so many people keep confussing terms. It seems "racism" is such a fashionable term that even when other kind of discrimination goes on people insist in using theirs favorite label.

There is no way to distinguish a (European) Jew from a German. So I assume you also believe the Holocaust had nothing to do with racism?


I'm not sure it's true there is no way to distinguish (physically) a European Jew from a German. Or indeed a Welshman from a Bavarian.

But anyhow racism is subjective - it depends on whether the racist believes there is such a distinction. Doesn't matter if he is right or wrong.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Jul-2008 at 20:04
Originally posted by Mixcoatl

...
There is no way to distinguish a (European) Jew from a German. So I assume you also believe the Holocaust had nothing to do with racism?
 
Indeed. No one is more ignorant than a Nazi.
 
They hated the Jews because they succeed more than the average Nazi looser, and had nothing better to do that call Jews "a race".  Then, they had to figure it out ways to distinguish the Jews from the rest. What is more tragical and pathetic is that many Nazis indeed had hebrew ancestry, perhaps including Hitler himself....
 
And nobody noticed it.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Jul-2008 at 18:36
Originally posted by pinguin

Originally posted by gcle2003

Why do people think race is indicated by skin colour?
 
Facial features are also included. Racism is based in physical differences. It is amazing that so many people keep confussing terms. It seems "racism" is such a fashionable term that even when other kind of discrimination goes on people insist in using theirs favorite label.

There is no way to distinguish a (European) Jew from a German. So I assume you also believe the Holocaust had nothing to do with racism?
Back to Top
Seko View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Spammer

Joined: 01-Sep-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8595 		  Quote Seko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Jul-2008 at 17:59
I'll partially go with Pinguin on the broad definition of racism and stretch it a bit. Discrimination is discrimination. One party classifies another. When based on race you might think the catagory has become more detailed. Yet that is so general that almost anything could be racial these days. Features, skin tone, affilited political groups, IQ, you name it.

Edited by Seko - 14-Jul-2008 at 18:02
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Jul-2008 at 17:22
Originally posted by Leonidas

Originally posted by gcle2003

Why do people think race is indicated by skin colour?
good point, which most probably will be ignored.

Race, pinguin, is perceived...


 
Accents and crosses are also perceived.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Jul-2008 at 17:21
Originally posted by gcle2003

Why do people think race is indicated by skin colour?
 
Facial features are also included. Racism is based in physical differences. It is amazing that so many people keep confussing terms. It seems "racism" is such a fashionable term that even when other kind of discrimination goes on people insist in using theirs favorite label.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Jul-2008 at 17:19
Originally posted by Paul

... 
Hypocrite!
 
And a fraction of a percent doesn't really count. Otherwise half the population of Spain can go to Chille tomorrow to evict Chileans from their lands.
 
Paul, it seems you have a free ride to offend me here. Anyways. We are a free country from Spain. We defeat them in battle in the same way the U.S. got rid of Britain.
 
In Chile there wasn't an apparheid policy like in the U.S. that kept people appart. Here, natives mixed with Spaniards since the beginning. So, I have nothing to do with Spain, except many of my ancestors came from there. Some as conquerors, others as colones but most as immigrants during republican times. Other of my ancestors have always live here.
 
Please, Paul, if you don't have idea, don't call me hypocrite and just close gently your mouth.
 
In any case, if I try to enter Spain I would probably be deported Confused
 
 
 
 
 
Back to Top
Leonidas View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 01-Oct-2005
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4613 		  Quote Leonidas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Jul-2008 at 12:14
Originally posted by gcle2003

Why do people think race is indicated by skin colour?
good point, which most probably will be ignored.

Race, pinguin, is perceived...
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 9>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.