Races Aren't Superior But Cultures Are

Indeed. There are many different criteria and values. However, humans all have a number of definite needs. To the extent that these are all met for the greatest number the culture that best promotes that can be considered superior.

 

He doesn't hate himself. Technically, he is not even saying he hates that culture. You are saying him and the culture he came from are the same thing. He is saying they are not...he (as a person) is separate and distinct from that culture.

I have Native American ancestry as well. I also have European ancestry. I consider all of those cultures to be inferior to modern America in the ways that matter. I do not consider myself European or Native American...I consider myself American.

"Inferior" does not mean they do not have value. It just means they are inferior. "Inferior" and "worthless" do not mean the same thing.

 

I didn't read past this. If you think I was saying that white culture is better, then you didn't read the title or the content of the OP. If you're not going to spend time to read it, I'm not going to waste time responding to your ignorance. Have a nice day.

 

How are you defining "black culture"? Was Hilter representative of white culture? Or Stalin? Or the Marquis de sade?

The last guy was a white guy, and was the origin of the word "Sadism" in our language.

 

Maybe you should re-read your own OP and the title to your thread. I see you ignored the link to further update your knowledge on the topic, remain in the dark if you wish, that is your choice. I have yet so see any culture without flaws, as a person that comes from a European "culture" I know of more flaws to our "culture" than I have time to list here, to claim or even consider that culture is the defining sign of ones superiority is not logical, factual or correct.

 

It is if you base superiority on that subjective measure.

Obviously a lot of people disagree, given that they are immigrating here four times more than Canada.

This is not even talking about actual immigration statistics (the US wins there too), but just where the immigrants would LIKE to go if they had a choice. Canada is not their choice.

Just sayin.

 

The United States dwarfs both nations, combined, Militarily, Economically, and Technologically. I can't think of anything those nations have ever done that the US has not exceeded. They use our products, they are defended by our military. They need us, we do not need them.

What criteria are you using to define inferiority?

 

You've hit on one of the most difficult dilemmas facing our nation today. Feminism resulted in some changes that were and are beneficial for our society. No longer are women denied opportunities for which they're fully qualified. However, feminism has created a gender division by attempting to destroy what was historically the major female role, that of mother and nurturer of her family. The historical role of the male in our society was provider and protector of his family. That role has been outrageously degraded by society's acceptance of extreme feminist doctrine. In the past unwed mothers with no means of support had to depend on their parents or other family members for her financial support and that of her children. The mother's lack of self-control and her poor judgment resulted in dire circumstances. In today's society, those same mothers are rewarded with the support of daddy taxpayer. There is no longer a need for self-control and good judgment. In those cases in which the father takes responsibility for his actions, the mother can take his support money and in many cases deny him influence with his children. Our government has not only removed the incentive from the woman to marry, but taken away the father's incentive to financially support his children.

One could argue that ALL taxpayer support for such irresponsible behavior should end. Doing so raises another issue, that being the fate of the innocent child/children. It takes a cold heart to place children in such a position. Perhaps the answer is the same as what it was earlier in our history? Take away children from destitute single mothers and place them in orphanages. The child would be cared for at taxpayer expense, but no irresponsible mother and father would benefit from their irresponsibility. There'd be little desire to continue creating children when no financial benefit would result. In cases where one or both parents changed their behavior, began working successfully and capable of supporting the child, the child could be returned.

One thing is certain. Present policies are not working, and are in fact destroying much of our culture!

 

I am assuming from your other posts that you claim to be 'native American'- which type of 'native American' I don't know and don't really care about. But if that is what you believe is the truth about 'native Americans' or Europeans, you really need to read some more history.

First of all- lets talk about Western- or European culture and technology. This did not 'evolve' in a vaccuum. Idea's and technology moved east and west, from China to England. Sometimes these took thousands of years, but inevitably they made their way from the far west to the far east. Very little was an entirely novel technology or idea that was not influenced by some prior concept or technology- and then spread across Eurasia.

Writing is an excellent example of this. Writing was independently invented only a few times in known human history- and never in Europe. The best arguments I have seen is that writing was developed independently in 3 or 4 places- Babylonia or Sumeria(I can't remember which) was probably the first. China probably developed its writing, and Mesoamerica invented a unique writing system. Egypt may have developed its writing system independently- or it may have know of the concept of writing from Babylonia.

But once cultures know of writing- they either adopt the writing system that they heard of- or they invent their own writing system for their language. Look at what the Cherokee did once they were exposed to the written language from the English- who learned writing from the Romans- who learned writing from the Greeks- who learned about writing from the Phoenicians- who knew about writing from the Egyptians.

If you were familiar with the history of Europe, you would know that most parts of Europe were exactly as you described your people until a few hundred years ago. Most of Europe built no walls, no pyramids, no temples, no cities. Most of Europe contributed no literature, art or science until relatively recently.

Now if you were familiar with the history of Native Americans- you would know that MesoAmericans did all of those things. Even the Northern American Indians built large towns/cities- look up the Missippean Culture. We just don't know much about them because they were largely wiped out by disease before European explorers made it to them.


But I can also acknowledge the sad reality that we were never going to evolve beyond primitive tribalism. My culture was inferior and would not advance without help, even if we went on for a thousand more years.

Look at the history of places like Ireland- Ireland's culture was not that dissimilar to some of the plains indian cultures- clans that regularly raided other clans, stealing horses and cattle. They didn't spontaniously change their culture- they were influenced- and eventually conquered- like your own culture- and had other cultures forced upon them.

I am very grateful that I live in the culture I live in.

But none of it came from a vacuum.

One of the reasons I love to read history is because there are so many surprises- so many accomplishments- and so much tragedy. I study history to learn about humankind- not to prove my culture is superior to any other.

 

20% of canada's population are immigrants compared to 12% of the usa...per capita canada takes in more immigrants per year than the usa...

 

No culture came from a vacuum, that I agree with, but the origins of ideas are irrelevant. Chess started out in India, but India didn't make chess a world wide game. Reading and writing began in Mesopotamia (not China like you're claiming) but it was Europe that filled the world with literature. The paramount mark of a superior civilization is the ability to advance and keep advancing. International trade on a global scale was an accomplishment of Europe, which is why the New World was discovered and settled. My people made a canoe that got you from one side of the lake to the other and that's probably how we got to this continent to begin with, contrary to the "ice bridge" theory. Nomads could see Alaska from the furthest reaches of Siberia and simply made boats and came across.

And that's beside the point, I just like to bust myths. But I get a feeling from your post that you're not so much contradicting my argument as you are voicing a different viewpoint and I appreciate that. I'm proud of my heritage because we have accomplishments too. For one, we treated the land far better than the Europeans that came over and clear cut forests and slaughtered buffalo for sport. Nonetheless, whites started to learn from us how to respect the land, take from it only what one needs, and pay homage to the animal that gave its life for us. Many hunters still adhere closely to Indian hunting etiquette. We also have a fierce warrior culture that's inspired this country's military which is why even our weapons are named with Indian war references. All this to say, there were ways that we influenced your culture, which seems to be your argument as well.

 

when will you stop your display of historical ignorance...there were no seas to cross by the first inhabitants of the americas, siberia and alaska were linked by an immense dry land bridge....

you like to bust myths? you're proud of your heritage? oh really....how about your personally invented myth the first americans never developed writing, building cities, pyramids, temples,literature how is that bit of ignorance sitting with your pride?... you insult your own people with your historical ignorance...you don't bust myths you invent new ones...wanna tell us again how the Roman empire was peaceful? or europeans never hardly ever at war with each other, or how slavery was banned in medieval europe

your OP and your entire argument is a fallacy built on myths and historical ignorance..

 

I am a far leftist, but I want to say that I agree with this 10000000000000000000%!!!!!

If you go back 10,000 years and remove Europe from the map of the Earth, you gotta a world full of half naked people living in caves eating tree bark and maybe the Chinese making pasta and shooting off bottle rockets, WHITE MEN FROM EUROPE INVENTED EVERYTHING!!!!!

 

we've been correcting her the entire thread and she's ignored ever challenge, what kind of person goes through 284 posts and never once can be bothered to check their own "facts" when continually challenged and corrected...how difficult is it to do a simple search on native american accomplishments and find they did indeed build cities, pyramids, defensive walls, astronomy, mathematics, literature...

I just did a simple google word search pyramids america I got to the E in america and got over 6 million hits in .20 seconds...but according to our astute historian native americans never built pyramids...

 

2000 yrs ago most white men in europe were in your words still "half naked people living in caves eating tree bark "

 

A land bridge wasn't necessary for nomadic tribes to travel to Alaska and in fact when it disappeared 16,000 years ago, they may have continued to cross the water by boat. There are many theories regarding how the Americas were populated and none of them are "ignorant" and none of them can be proven. So let's stop being insulting or I'll find somebody else to discuss things with.

 

Just goes to show that there is ignorant people on both sides of the political spectrum....

 

I'm not a she. That's one. And the temples built by the Mayans and Incans have only recently been referred to as "pyramids" which glosses over way too many glaring differences. But try explaining that to somebody who thinks Google makes them smart. Moreover, we're talking about civilizations that died out because they warred incessantly and practiced human sacrifice and offered up their children to various gods, which again goes right back to my argument about superior cultures. The ruins remain today as a sober warning to people today of what happens to a culture of death.

And moreover, when you move further north, you don't find sophisticated buildings, or architecture of any kind. My tribe was in the Northwest in parts of Idaho, Montana, and Canada. Our most advanced structures were tipis and long houses (tribes further east) and sometimes larger mound communal structures. But utterly lacking was an advanced knowledge of masonry, architecture, and city building. Much more primitive than even the Mexica. So when I'm talking about "my people" you might want to reconsider the context in which you're reading that.

In any event, I'm sick of your hostility and I have no need for it, so I'm considering you for permanent ignore status.

 

the first north americans were already far into the americas before the land bridge disappeared so there was no crossing from siberia to alaska by boat...

saying you are historically ignorant is not an insult because you clearly are and refuse to acknowledge when you're clearly wrong, not once have you even answered a challenge to your "historical" facts so I don't how you claim you're discussing anything, you ignore anything that proves you wrong, that's not discussing...are you ready to admit north and central americans built pyramids, walls and cities? and literature and astronomy and mathematics all those things you said they couldn't do as well as the eygptians because they had the wrong skin color and were clearly inferior...

 

Just so you don't waste any more time responding to me, I'll let you know as a courtesy that I'm going through with my decision to place you on permanent ignore. Have a nice life.

 

wrong again not surprisingly...they've been referred to as pyramids since day one of their discovery...they didn't die out because of warfare...european civilizations warred incessantly and didn't die out, don't even try to suggest us whities are any more humane then any other civilization that's laughable...sacrifice children yeah white people did that too... check out the atrocities of Srebrencia , gang rape of children, rape camps, infanticide, genocide yeah christian whities on their best behaviour we're just so superior...

you clump all us whities into one big group, were all superior but then you want to separate native americans into individual groups? that rather convenient...'

cultures develop the technology and society according to their needs, agriculture allows civilizations like the aztecs, olmecs, mayans, Inca,pueblo,the mound builders, and many others the time to build permanent structures, societies that are nomadic like the Blood or Dakota can not remain in one location and survive so permanent structures are impossible... that does not mean the Blood and Dakota were inferior cultures to the Aztecs and Incas...each adapted to their unique environment...

nah you're just embarrassed for being continually wrong and having someone call you out on it...putting me on ignore is your loss not mine, I've supplied you with more history knowledge in two days than you've learned in a lifetime previous to this thread...

show some pride in your own culture and quit sucking up to whitie, we're no better than you are...

 

What makes you think that? Primitive nomadic peoples migrated along the shore line by boat. Waterways has always been preferred method of transportation.

 

yes they certainly could have skirted the coast but they were definitely in alaska before the bridge disappeared and well down into the americas...the oldest confirmed site in tip of S america confirms they were there before the land bridge became impassible...his claim was the first american came across the open waters of the Bering...

 

Explain why you believe per capita measurements would be relevant in this context.

 

And there is also evidence in South America that people and technology came from Polynesia as well as South American influences on Polynesia.