There is no such thing as racism
Last edited by Partisan; 12-12-09 at 05:02 AM.
Schadenfreude ist die schönste Freude.
But another anthropoligists, Michel Leiris, argues that if we look at different societies in history we can't just make this easy assumption. "Many societies have displayed themselves with some group pride, but while the group regards itself as superior or priviledged compared with other groups, it makes no "racist" claims and, for instance, is not above entering into temporary alliances with other groups or providing itself with women from them."
If we turn to the Mediterranean world, where there was considerable amount of contact with lighter skinned people in the North and darker people in the south, racism is difficult to find. Black people, especially, were viewed favorably by the anchient Egyptians, Hebrews, Greeks, and Romans. Even Moses married a Nubian woman for which the book of Numbers (somewhere) of the Bible stated that the "anger of the lord was aroused against those who objected."
1) The anchient Greeks called some of their neighbors "barbarians" but that was only because they could not speak Greek.
2) When Alexander the Great conquered Persia and India, ten thousand Greek soldiers married Hindu Indian women.
3) In the Roman Empire, Roman slaves came from captured peoples of Africa, Asia, and Europe. In other words, slavery for the Romans was a matter of equal opportunity for all.
4) In the late Middle Ages, European slaves were taken increasingly from areas north and west of the Caucusus.
The identity of slavery to solely mean black Africans rose and originated in the Muslim world and North Africa. It was made illegal in this region (by the Qu'ran) to enslave a Jew or a Christian. What was left to fill the positions of slaves? As slaves from this region began to be exported to foriegn nations and regions, slavery became increasingly synonymous to the black skin color. After centuries had passed the Atlantic slave trade identified black Africans as the slave. Now it is important to recognize that in the end, slavery was abolished throughout the world where blacks were used, but only in the U.S. was there a predominant society crushing "racist" phenomena developed. This was a result of capitalism and protestant prescription (The Catholic church prescribed that black slaves in the Americas were to be taught Christianity, while the Protestant prescription was to treat them as beneath Christiandom and therefore "evil.") Whites viewed blacks as meaning one thing.... - inferior, ignorant, unable to understand morality, and forever heathen.
Fast forward to the twentieth century. Nazi Germany altered the slave's identity to meaning Jew. They did not seek the poor as in anchient worlds. They did not seek a certain skin color as in the Atlantic Slave Trade. They sought a specific ethnic identity, which is why their brand of slavery has been argued to be "racism," though not because of skin color. Of course, scapegoating Jews had been an historical thing for Europeans, so the leap into slavery and butchery was inevitable.
You are confusing group pride, which may be maintained by a tribe over another, with racism, which is typically about a certain skin color or entire race.
The best way to break through this "everything is racism" barrier is to imagine a scenario where the world is about to explode and you have one life boat into space that can seat 100 people. Shall we choose from among the brightest and the most intellegent (which would mostly all come from the European/American/Asian theatre) or will we refrain from the "racist" stigma and head to Africa?
This is that politicially correct hinderance that has people afraid to talk about others and fearful of any analytical work. It's this fear of "racism" that has people scared to say "blacks"...er..."African Americans"....er.....etc.
Last edited by MSgt; 12-12-09 at 07:42 PM.
And slavery was racism long before then. How do you think the keeping of fellow humans, specifically black Africans as property was justified?
That really depends on how a 'race' is defined, it's quite arbitrary. It could be defined by location and language, and be narrowed down to tribe.You are confusing group pride, which may be maintained by a tribe over another, with racism, which is typically about a certain skin color or entire race.
Skin colour is a very broad criterium.
But for a notion of superiority to be racism, power to subdue and dominate needs to be exerted, regarding a neighbouring tribe/race as inferior is not racism by itself.
I am not scared to say "blacks" or talk about others. But then, I don't have any theories about races to share, I think it's silly to assume inherent characteristics.This is that politicially correct hinderance that has people afraid to talk about others and fearful of any analytical work. It's this fear of "racism" that has people scared to say "blacks"...er..."African Americans"....er.....etc.
Last edited by MSgt; 12-18-09 at 12:41 AM.
I don't know what you meant to show with your listing, but making alliances with groups which are regarded as inferior, or recruiting slaves from different sources, does not imply an absence of racism.
You have not mentioned characteristics of racism and shown that they were not present.
But you are right that it is not easy to assess from our present point of view, the effort to systematically categorise races came later, with colonisation.
No, the Jews were not the only 'inferior' race, slavs, for example, were also regarded as labour material for the Aryans, but they featured above the Jews.
Ah, I misunderstood, I thought you meant philosophising in public, which can easily be taken the wrong way - it's something I rarely do. I don't know which studies are proposed, but I have read before that this subject is politicised.I don't follow your meaning. I shared no "theories." These are matters of university study and they do make perfect sense.
"And slavery was racism long before then. How do you think the keeping of fellow humans, specifically black Africans as property was justified?"
Those 450 words prior to "Nazi" state exactly the answer to your question.
Last edited by MSgt; 12-19-09 at 01:32 AM.