[FiveofSwords]

Social construction occurs when people's opinions replace reality.

People form opinions by associating with others, discussing with others, and then forming friendship heirarchies with others. Sometimes a powerful voice in a group of tall people will say "short people are evil and must be killed" and the rest of the group "goes along" in order to reinforce group solidarity.

I have been in many organization where a quarter of the membership "goes along" with the loudest and most self-assured voices, even when they are obviously incorrect or when their "facts" change every week. Bullies can create a culture in this way, even if they are stupid.

And you also have things like "audience capture" where those primary voices that manipulate everyone are also themselves manipulated by their addiction to public reaction.

All of these social dynamics lead to incorrect socially-created information that is treated as a fact.

Add in the bonus jackpot ($$$) of winning the right to kill and steal from people who belong to inferior "races," and you have incentivized what was previously the result of socially-created ignorance.

For example, people could be bullied into believing that short people don't exist. But short people do exist.

Height is not a social construct. It is the product mainly of genetics, although extreme environmental circumstances can have an impact...such as disease or malnutrition.

[Pants-of-dog]

That seems like a flimsy semantic argument. Define the word "defined".

Of course it can be "defined". You know it, I know it. You're probably just going to claim it can't be defined because there might be small groups of people somewhere in the world who seem to be somewhere in between.

But that's as disingenuous as saying that the colours red and yellow don't really exist, because there's orange.

Okay.

Define whiteness.

[FiveofSwords]

Okay.

Define whiteness.

White people are people whose ancestry came from europe.. the people who are adapted to the way of life Europeans historically adopted

[Tainari88]

@QatzelOk wrote:

Social construction occurs when people's opinions replace reality.

Yes this is correct. And it becomes so truthful to those who accept it as truth that they fail to separate facts from fiction.

For me the National Socialists of the USA are reductionist and everything boils down to the white race is being attacked by a genocide done by the elites of the society. My family lost to the rainbow coalition.

Again, if you listen to Derek Black he discusses why the White Nationalist cause had to adopt that line of reasoning. It plays into the latent fears and racist thoughts that most people who are not extreme in their thoughts and it can work over time to make it innocuous. If you listen to Derek Black's NPR interview of 41 minutes and 44 seconds that I posted previously? He explains why they went for that tactic.

It is precisely what I quoted from you. If you can have a group agree on a falsehood...that is seen as they are a victim and most people of all backgrounds are at some point a victim of a capitalist system regardless of being 'white' or 'black' or 'brown', you get some grievance. You then deflect from the real cause of the issues they talk about and you can scapegoat.

Use them to eventually strike at the head of the snake. For them, the USA was founded as a White Supremacist Nation, and it was founded by their ancestors, white British and Scottish Protestant Christians. They believe firmly that they founded the present USA and as such the rest of the races are just opportunistic parasites living off of their greatness. Narcissistic and not true, but that is what they believe.

They are also accurate that the US was founded as a White Supremacist nation. However, it has a radical constitution founded and patterned after the French Revolution. Where the egalité thing was the main deal. Where Gracchus made an appearance countering the idea of the French nobility and the bourgeoisie. The US was founded on a document that was inherently socialistic and almost communist. In many respects. It hit some contradictions with white men with property only could vote. But after that? The rights kept expanding more and more over time. Mostly the Leftists expanded it to encompass making illegal child labor, and other aspects that had to be fought.

Now, it is hitting the final hurdle. Are corporations going to win over democratic forms of governance in te battle for who gets to dictate who is going to have more power in the US society?

The White nationalists and national socialists want the best of socialism for them only and to dictate to everyone who is not part of their genetic group. It is ridiculous and impossible shit at this point. But with violence and enough ignorant people willing to go along with the bully tactics? It could happen.

Eventually, though the National Socialists are going to have their asses handed to them like what happened in WWII. Why? It is too narrow. Too many people have grown beyond the white-only stances in general. It is not profitable for the capitalists. It does not interest the immigrants. It does not interest at least more than a third of the nation that has never been white or identified with it. And too many white liberals and lefties who do not agree as well. Plus you have very powerful white people who think the philosophy is not enough to keep the US afloat internationally.

The amount of internal and external opposition to the Nazi in the USA agenda is not going to do very well over time. It might be lucky and seize power for a bit. But over time it is doomed to fail because it failed to adapt to what the worldwide paradigm has been trending forward with for a long time Q.

[Pants-of-dog]

White people are people whose ancestry came from europe.. the people who are adapted to the way of life Europeans historically adopted

Are Latinos white, then?

[FiveofSwords]

Are Latinos white, then?

Latino is a language category, not biological. If you are asking whether amerindians or mestizos are white then the answer is no. North and South America are not in Europe and did not share European's particular way of life.

[FiveofSwords]

So what if @FiveofSwords is slightly biased in his opinions, what if his categorisations are slightly inaccurate sometimes? Why are you so concerned about his views? What power does he have? Why aren't you going after the Ute with their 5/8ths blood quantum. These people are worse than the Nazis in their blood quantum demands.

But I have said nothing that is inaccurate

[FiveofSwords]

@FiveofSwords

So at last you admit that any definition of 'race' is arbitrary and subjective.

That wasn't difficult, was it?

Dude...the definition of any word is arbitrary. Language itself is intrinsically arbitrary.

[Pants-of-dog]

Latino is a language category, not biological. If you are asking whether amerindians or mestizos are white then the answer is no. North and South America are not in Europe and did not share European's particular way of life.

Latinos are descended from Europeans and are therefore white, according to you. They speak a European language, follow European religions, et cetera.

Mind you, you provided a geographical answer instead of a biological one.

So, according to you, whiteness is a geographical construct that includes Latinos.

If that is not correct, then you may have to change your definition.

[FiveofSwords]

Latinos are descended from Europeans and are therefore white, according to you. They speak a European language, follow European religions, et cetera.

Mind you, you provided a geographical answer instead of a biological one.

So, according to you, whiteness is a geographical construct that includes Latinos.

If that is not correct, then you may have to change your definition.

I said adapted to the way of life peculiar to Europeans. That is necessarily genetic. Just because someone speaks a European language or wears European clothes does not mean it is in their blood. 'Adapted to' implies biology, not geography or linguistics or religion.

[Pants-of-dog]

I said adapted to the way of life peculiar to Europeans.

So if a Black African couple were to go to Europe, have kids, and those kids lived their whole lives in Europe and adapted to the way of life peculiar to Europeans, they would be white?

That is necessarily genetic. Just because someone speaks a European language or wears European clothes does not mean it is in their blood. 'Adapted to' implies biology, not geography or linguistics or religion.

No. Adaptation can mean many things. For example, the tale of the Monkey King has been adapted for the screen, inspiring many cool movies.

[FiveofSwords]

So if a Black African couple were to go to Europe, have kids, and those kids lived their whole lives in Europe and adapted to the way of life peculiar to Europeans, they would be white?



No. Adaptation can mean many things. For example, the tale of the Monkey King has been adapted for the screen, inspiring many cool movies.

Living in europe or not has no relation to whether you are genetically adapted to the particular waybof life and civilization that originated in Europe. Indeed there are more white people currently living outside of Europe than in Europe, and europe will soon be minority white.

You keep insisting I am not giving a biological definition and I just keep insisting that I am.

It should also be clear that I am using the word 'adaptation' in the sense of evolutionary biology. Just like fish are adapted to living underwater (whether or not a fish happens to currently BE underwater)...Europeans are specifically adapted to European civilization.

[Pants-of-dog]

Living in europe or not has no relation to whether you are genetically adapted to the particular waybof life and civilization that originated in Europe. Indeed there are more white people currently living outside of Europe than in Europe, and europe will soon be minority white.

Then clarify what whiteness is.

At this point, it seems like you do not know.

You keep insisting I am not giving a biological definition and I just keep insisting that I am.

That may be because you do not know enough about biology.

For example, you mention Europe, which is a geographical area.

It should also be clear that I am using the word 'adaptation' in the sense of evolutionary biology. Just like fish are adapted to living underwater (whether or not a fish happens to currently BE underwater)...Europeans are specifically adapted to European civilization.

Civilization is a cultural construct. This is not biological either, but is cultural instead.

[FiveofSwords]

Then clarify what whiteness is.

At this point, it seems like you do not know.



That may be because you do not know enough about biology.

For example, you mention Europe, which is a geographical area.



Civilization is a cultural construct. This is not biological either, but is cultural instead.

I did clarify what white people are. You can just keep denying that I did, but that is just your own delusion.

I have said nothing that is not part of accepted biological science. Life forms do in fact adapt to their environment.

Europe is the region where white civilization originated. That location irself is irrelevant...especially because Europeans basically conquered the earth and spread their civilization everywhere...although there are idiosyncrasies in European people that are a product of rather unique conditions of europe...cold winters, scarcity of farmland, etc. But technology quickly made such issues relax their selective pressures on our population. I deed that is what you could say we are primarily adapted to: overcoming nature (and rival people) with technology.

[Pants-of-dog]

I did clarify what white people are. You can just keep denying that I did, but that is just your own delusion.

I have said nothing that is not part of accepted biological science. Life forms do in fact adapt to their environment.

Europe is the region where white civilization originated. That location irself is irrelevant...especially because Europeans basically conquered the earth and spread their civilization everywhere...although there are idiosyncrasies in European people that are a product of rather unique conditions of europe...cold winters, scarcity of farmland, etc. But technology quickly made such issues relax their selective pressures on our population. I deed that is what you could say we are primarily adapted to: overcoming nature (and rival people) with technology.

And again, by this definition, Latinos are white, since they are descended form people who adapted to the environment of Europe.

[wat0n]

Most latinos are regarded as white, even if they are mestizos, in Latin America

[Potemkin]

I did clarify what white people are. You can just keep denying that I did, but that is just your own delusion.

I have said nothing that is not part of accepted biological science. Life forms do in fact adapt to their environment.

Europe is the region where white civilization originated. That location irself is irrelevant...especially because Europeans basically conquered the earth and spread their civilization everywhere...although there are idiosyncrasies in European people that are a product of rather unique conditions of europe...cold winters, scarcity of farmland, etc. But technology quickly made such issues relax their selective pressures on our population. I deed that is what you could say we are primarily adapted to: overcoming nature (and rival people) with technology.

This is not a biological adaptation, it’s a cultural adaptation. You know, that thing which separates humans from animals. We don’t have to evolve thick fur to survive cold winters, we just put on an extra pullover. Lol. What makes Europeans unique is European culture. Asians, Africans, and any number of other humans can quite happily adapt to living in Europe, because they only have to adapt culturally and not biologically. If any humans were ever biologically adapted to living in Europe, then it was surely the Neanderthals. And they were specifically adapted to Ice Age Europe.

[ingliz]

@FiveofSwords

Hindu nationalism ...

Indigenous Aryans Theory (IAT as opposed to AIT) posits that as language has always been a tool of cultural assimilation, and all Indo-European languages can be traced back to Northern India, white civilisation originated in India.





* Edited to be more geographically exact.

[FiveofSwords]

And again, by this definition, Latinos are white, since they are descended form people who adapted to the environment of Europe.

Uh...that is just not true. I don't understand why you are even trying that. Azteca did not revolve in Europe, for example. They evolved in Central america

[FiveofSwords]

This is not a biological adaptation, it’s a cultural adaptation. You know, that thing which separates humans from animals. We don’t have to evolve thick fur to survive cold winters, we just put on an extra pullover. Lol. What makes Europeans unique is European culture. Asians, Africans, and any number of other humans can quite happily adapt to living in Europe, because they only have to adapt culturally and not biologically. If any humans were ever biologically adapted to living in Europe, then it was surely the Neanderthals. And they were specifically adapted to Ice Age Europe.

Well...I just don't think that is true. I think there absolutely can be a biological propensity for technological discovery. It has remained constant in europe,, in fact, despite drastic changes in culture. And other people who attempt to adopt our culture fail to acquire that talent.