Originally posted by Omega Vision
Did I refer you to Guns, Germs, and Steel by Jared Diamond?If not, the thesis in that book was that European cultures became dominant over the rest of the world during the Age of Exploration and beyond because of a combination of superior technology (guns), superior resources (steel), and the assistance of microorganisms (germs). The last one is arguably the most important for Diamond--germs explain why Africa didn't become like the Americas--with the native population more or less wiped out and replaced by settlers and mixed race individuals: the very same germs that destroyed the Amerindian populations were mostly endemic to Africa, and it was the white settlers instead who became sick. There's more to it than that, another important reason why Europeans came to dominate the world was their agricultural model, which was made possible by the favorable climate of Europe. He also uses Europe's geography as a way of explaining why countries like China, who had similar advantages to Europeans, didn't become colonial powers: that the lack of Balkanization (which in Europe was fomented by the many natural boundaries and peninsulas that encouraged the development of small, culturally distinct nations) didn't present the Chinese with sufficient push factors to force them to explore outside of their known world. Eventually this lack of exploration and expansion meant that they lagged behind Europe, despite having been in most ways more advanced than Europe for most of history.
I read that book as well some time ago. While I'm not entirely sold on the premise as being absolute(things are rarely as simple as three main causes), overall the work has some good ideas. Implementation of foreign inventions and shipbuilding helped Europe tremendously; in particular, the compass and gunpowder came from Asia by way of Middle East, but it was Europeans who used them in deep blue sea traveling and conquest.
Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
The power of Aryan blood cannot be denied.
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
I read that book as well some time ago. While I'm not entirely sold on the premise as being absolute(things are rarely as simple as three main causes), overall the work has some good ideas. Implementation of foreign inventions and shipbuilding helped Europe tremendously; in particular, the compass and gunpowder came from Asia by way of Middle East, but it was Europeans who used them in deep blue sea traveling and conquest.
Originally posted by Omega Vision
Looking at China, it's always very interesting how in one sense they missed their chance to take over the world by looking inward. After all, Zheng He's ships which traveled from China to Madagascar about a century before Columbus sailed to the Caribbean were much larger, more powerful ships than the Nina, Pinta, and Santa Maria and could have crossed the relatively more gentle Pacific to discover California or Peru, but the Chinese never considered venturing east because they believed there was nothing out there that they needed. As late as the time of the American Revolution the Chinese Emperor told a British trade envoy that the West had nothing to offer China. Then came the Opium Wars...
China missed a huge change to become a colonial power. At least, back then.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
You have no legitimate point, you are only being a troll. STOP NOW! Or I will place you on my ignore list forever.
lol!
Your point is logically consistent. You don't call your moth a b*tch because it would make a you crass-mouthed ass and you think using the excuse that she's your mother to call her a b*tch, makes a person a crass-mouthed ass. The only way for your statement to be taken as hypocritical is if you really did call your mother a b*tch but pretended not to and still maintained your position that it is "crass-mouthed ass" making.
Saying that someone who calls their mother a b*tch, a crass-mouthed ass, in and of itself, does not make one a crass-mouthed ass. Here is an example for why the hypocrisy position is stupid(color-coded to show the direct parallels):
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I can't call my mother that because I'm not a crass mouthed ass.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Sounds like an excuse to be rude. We should treat each other with respect.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
I can you call my mom a b*tch but you can't.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
So much for treating others with respect. 🙄
Example 1:
John says it is a bad idea to spit into the wind.
Bill holds that it is okay to spit into the wind.
Bill spits into the wind and gets spit on his face.
John says, "See, it is a bad idea to spit into the wind."
Bill accuses John of having bad ideas because John said spitting into the wind is a bad idea.
Example 2:
John says one becomes a poor farmer if he uses his hands to till.
Bill holds that it is okay to till with his hands.
Bill tills with his hands and harms himself.
John says, "See, you are a poor farmer if you till with your hands."
Bill accuses John of being a hypocrite because John said farming with your hands makes you a poor farmer.
In both of these examples, it is impossible for John to actually be a hypocrite because the actions John outlined for his negative statement were not fulfilled by John. It is possible to purposefully misinterpret John's negative statement and apply it inappropriately but this is dishonest and illogical.
To make a more simple case out of Adam_Poe's direction:
John: It is a bad idea to call others' ideas bad.
Bill: It is okay to call others' ideas bad.
Bill: John, you are hypocrite because you think it is a bad idea to call others' ideas bad. You created a paradox, b*tch.
John: 😬 😬 😬
Obviously, I do not subscribe to forcing paradoxes when a paradox can be avoided through alternative and in-context interpretations of people's statements. This is why I agree with Shakyamunison's perspective that Adam_Poe's hypocrisy accusation was a "fail" attempt.
The meeting I am in, right now, is extremely boring as it covers the access control theory we are going to employ for our SharePoint shares. I am not even halfway through this meeting. I cannot jazz up this post anymore than I have. I hope you enjoy this break-down of the disagreement between these two posters, KMC-ers.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
You have no legitimate point, you are only being a troll. STOP NOW! Or I will place you on my ignore list forever.
I have a completely legitimate point: you are a hypocrite; you passive-aggressively insult someone in one post and advocate respecting others in the next.
Moreover, you are no one to dictate anything to me and as such, whether you put me on your ignore list for any amount of time is completely inconsequential to me.
Now, do you have anything substantive to say, or shall I call you a whambulance?
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
I have a completely legitimate point: you are a hypocrite; you passive-aggressively insult someone in one post and advocate respecting others in the next.Moreover, you are no one to dictate anything to me and as such, whether you put me on your ignore list for any amount of time is completely inconsequential to me.
Now, do you have anything substantive to say, or shall I call you a whambulance?
Re: Acceptable discrimination?
Originally posted by KharmaDogBlackpeoplemeet.com is no different then an asian social network, empahsis on Asian in the title or a Latin etc etc. You do no there are other races on the website right? It becomes discrimination if only that particular race is allowed to become a member of the site. Take blackplanet.com as an example. Although it says Blackplanet, you can go there an meet all soughts of people that are not black. Everyone is getting along conversing and having a good time. A good form of acceptabble discrimination is, not being able to live in a certain area because of your color. Of course your not going to be told that, your just not going to be accepted, because your application has mysteriously dissappeared....lol. Or not being able to go to a school because it's out of the neighborhood that you live in.
I was watching Football yesterday and I saw an advertisement for Blackpeoplemeet.com.I can't help think that if there had been a internationally televised commercial for a "whites only" dating service that there would have been a stink raised somewhere.
When is discrimination acceptable?