No one is failing, except those members who want to validate people who say "I don't hate people, I just think I'm naturally superior to them."
It's like my 80 year old, racist grandfather saying that the nurse who took care of him after his bypass surgury smelled funny because she was black, and his equally backwoods new wife saying they all smell funny.
He didn't specifically say he hated them, but how is what he said not ignorant racism?
I'm suprised you consider it semantics Paul.
Originally posted by Ytse
Yes...you did. I asked how you came to the conclusion that his position was spawned of hatred and you said "well, because its an evil remark." It's hatred because it's hatred is begging the question.Wow, I kind of take offense to that. Of course not. Absolutely not. For a few years of my life my only father figure was a black man.
But you're ignoring my question restating your own speculation.
Originally posted by Ytse
I've referenced David Hume a lot on these forums so I'll use him again:"I am apt to suspect the Negroes to be naturally inferior to the Whites. There scarcely ever was a civilised nation of that complexion, nor even any individual, eminent either in action or in speculation. No ingenious manufacture among them, no arts, no sciences"
That's not even factual. A learned, educated man my ass.
Terrible example.
Originally posted by Devil King
He didn't specifically say he hated them, but how is what he said not ignorant racism?
It is ignorant racism. That's my point. Racist ideology doesn't necessary have to come from hatred.
I'm just trying to highlight the distinction here. Hatred can lead to one espousing racism. And being inundated with racist ideology can be the spark which ignites hatred. But they are not the same thing. And I do contend that in earlier times, such as when David Hume was around, that sheer ignorance is a valid explanation for racism view.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
My opinion of you is plummeting. But it's not too late to save face.
It's a bit egotistical of you to think that I judge myself against what your opinion of me is. I don't even know why you'd think I was interested in your assessment.
🙄
Now, you were the one having a fit over being on topic. Are you going to continue with your unsolicited personal opinions? How juvenile that is should be embarassing to you.
Originally posted by Ytse
It is ignorant racism. That's my point. Racist ideology doesn't necessary have to come from hatred.I'm just trying to highlight the distinction here. Hatred can lead to one espousing racism. And being inundated with racist ideology can be the spark which ignites hatred. But they are not the same thing. And I do contend that in earlier times, such as when David Hume was around, that sheer ignorance is a valid explanation for racism view.
So you are suggesting Hume did not know of African civilizations like Egypt?
Originally posted by Ytse
It's a bit egotistical of you to think that I judge myself against what your opinion of me is. I don't even know why you'd think I was interested in your assessment.🙄
Now, you were the one having a fit over being on topic. Are you going to continue with your unsolicited personal opinions? How juvenile that is should be embarassing to you.
Sarcasm is just over your head, isn't it?
Originally posted by chithappens
Why would he not refer to them as "negroes?" You know something I don't know?
Perhaps the most important question to answer is: What race did the Egyptians believe they belonged to? The ancient Egyptians saw themselves as being ethnically distinctive from both the Asiatics to the north and the Negros to the south. The tiles from a palace shown here depict a negro and an Asiatic captive. They look distinctly different from the Egyptian priest shown above. Both in art and in literature, it was clear that they saw themselves as being different from their neighbors. The Egyptians believed that they were of the "Egyptian" race.
Originally posted by Ytse
I've referenced David Hume a lot on these forums so I'll use him again:"I am apt to suspect the Negroes to be naturally inferior to the Whites. There scarcely ever was a civilised nation of that complexion, nor even any individual, eminent either in action or in speculation. No ingenious manufacture among them, no arts, no sciences"
Originally posted by Ytse
Perhaps the most important question to answer is: What race did the Egyptians believe they belonged to? The ancient Egyptians saw themselves as being ethnically distinctive from both the Asiatics to the north and the Negros to the south. The tiles from a palace shown here depict a negro and an Asiatic captive. They look distinctly different from the Egyptian priest shown above. Both in art and in literature, it was clear that they saw themselves as being different from their neighbors. The Egyptians believed that they were of the "Egyptian" race.
Not valid for more reasons that these two:
1) It is not a quote from Hume.
2) "complexion" was the reasoning of Hume. Not what Egyptians think of "negroes."
"There scarcely ever was a civilised nation of that complexion"
Originally posted by Schecter
i consider it semantics because it is. hate is factually a relative word.
same as love. you cant just wrap it up in a neat little one-size-fits-all package.
That's right. And that's what makes them all the more wrong, because that's exactly what they're trying to do. Anyone who says that their race is just factually superior to another is absurd to think he can do so without being hateful, intentionally or not.
Originally posted by chithappens
It is not a quote from Hume.
I know. My point was if the egyptians considered themselves to be an ethnic group unto themselves, and expressed that through their literature and art, then it is reasonable to assume anyone who has studied the egyptians to any degree would understand that. I'm saying this is why Hume probably wasn't referring to the egyptian people as "negroes."
"complexion" was the reasoning of Hume.
Egyptian people look different than black people.
Originally posted by Schecter
because eletist whores try desperately to convince everyone that the ancient egyptians were not really black
Northern Africans do have far different racial traits then Southern Black Africans though, are they still considered "black" as a Kenyan would? Not sure about that.... E.g., Indians and Chinese are both considered "Asians" and their countries share a large border, yet they differ in appearance greatly.
Originally posted by Ytse
I know. My point was if the egyptians considered themselves to be an ethnic group unto themselves, and expressed that through their literature and art, then it is reasonable to assume anyone who has studied the egyptians to any degree would understand that. I'm saying this is why Hume probably wasn't referring to the egyptian people as "negroes."
This isn't certain. You are assuming this is what Hume believed. You are adding context the Hume's quote that is not certain. Possible, but all we have to go on is that quote and I know nothing of Hume being learned of the Egyptian civilization beyond the mumbo jumbo they feed the public.
Originally posted by Ytse
Egyptian people look different than black people.
This changed over the eras. I'm not sure anyone can make certain claims that the current population is the same as two millenniums ago.
Regardless, the topic of Hume is still extremely stupid because there were kingdoms throughout Africa. Africa was the richest conteninent. To this day, nations strip Africa of all their shit.
Egypt included or not, people of the "negro" complexion accomplished plenty.