Is America (US) ready for a black president?

[iam]

The president should be a complete and total mutt to not have any favoritism.

I think that will be the future. Since there is so much racemixing. Eventually there will be a president that will be like the roadrunner. He/she will be 1/? french, chinese, japanese, vietnamese, peruvian, cuban, mexican, arabian, african, salami etc

 

[Chatha]

I thought you were intelligent but apparently not. Laziness has nothing to do with gender. There are as much lazy men as women. If you want to blame laziness on women then you are forgetting the role men have in contributing to this socalled laziness. Because women traditionally have stayed home and reared the young, it fosters nonaggressiveness or docility. What the hell do you want, what kind of a looney blames women for not conquering the world when she was taking care of your seed while your out doing the other????? Unless you'd like to trade places. God people are stupid.

Your rants doesn't change the facts does it now? Besides what gives you the idea that its easy to take care of children, do you think its about relaxing at home and watching kids? Even in primitive times children are not your only duty as a woman, you have to wash all the cloths( ten miles at the river), cook all the food, attend to the sick, and even work at farms or grow something in the backyard e.t.c. Its not easy work. All this work shouldn't make women lazy today. In remote parts of rural Africa and SouthWest Asia the women are far more fit than American women, probably more fit than some men. Women today are just too fuckin lazy and whinny, I don't think you've had a close relatonship with any woman for sometime, Mr iam

 

[Chatha]

TimeTraveler:

Which Asian country and to what historical significance?

Which African tribes and to what historical significance?

Which European countries and to what historical significance? At most you can mention Boadicca and/or Joan of Arc, perhaps Queen Elizabeth I, and those were not "matriarchial cultures" (Celts, Franks, and Tudor English were certainly not matriarchies).

Egypt was never matriarchical. There were three female pharohs. Neferetti, some other dame, and Cleopatra.

And the Amazons are generally held to be ahistorical. Even so, they were barbarians that left virtually no impact on history if we are to believe Herodotus at face value.

It doesn't change the fact that it was practised, once a woman is ruler...its a matriachal. Though I have my suspicion about these societies, everybody knows that the real puppeteers in matriachal societies are men. Elizabeth I had those many barons and lords that constantly diliberated behind her, plus she fell in love with that gentleman from Liecester, who people say had "dark" ambitions(my kind of guy). Nefretiti also got there through her husband, and everybody knows prince philip is the backbone of Elizabeth II's house. I don't want to spoil the show for women, but behind every great women is a bunch of low life organisms known as men, waiting and plotting in wings. Magareth Thatcher on the other hand was a very good example of the essence of women. Her female managerial role was very good when Britian was operating a stop and go economy after the fall of the empire, and she was a good foreign representative to amend British tights with its former colonies.

 

[invert_nexus]

Hmm.
Long thread.
I'm not interested in the topic enough to read it all, I'm afraid.
So paint me with the thread-flirter brush and revile me, good posters.

I'll simply answer the opening post and vamoose.

No. The country is not ready. It'll probably never be ready. There'll be a mexican (latino) president before there'll ever be a black president. In fact, there's a good chance that there will never be a black president as they will always be in the minority. Soon to be joined by whites, of course...

And, the question wasn't asked, but the same goes for a woman president.
No. Hillary will not be elected.

And if the democrats are stupid enough to run Hillary and/or Obama then they are simplly handing the election over to the republicans...

Now, what would be interesting is if the dems ran that ticket while the republicans ran a Rice ticket (or maybe Powell).
Then maybe a third party would finally transition into a viable option.
Let's keep our fingers crossed that the two leading political parties have finally become so decrepit and inbred that they would willingly hand over their monopoly on power to a third party. It's far overdue.
Want to talk about political reform? The only way it is going to happen is to ditch this two party monopoly.
And everyone with a brain should see that this is true.

 

[S.A.M.]

TimeTraveler:

Why should I believe you? It goes aganist human nature. Humans like to hate other humans, and if theres a caste system, they prefer to focus their hatred on the defenseless lower castes. It's like this in every society, India as well. You owe me some evidence, so cite your sources.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_caste_system

In the Vedic period, there also seems to no discrimination against the Shudras (which later became an ensemble of the so-called low-castes)[7]. Later scriptures such as Bhagavad Gita and Manusmriti state that the four varnas are created by God. A varna is a division of the society that consists of many sub-castes or Jātis. Manusmriti and some other shastras mention four varnas: The Brahmins (teachers, scholars and priests), the Kshatriyas (kings and warriors), the Vaishyas (traders, landowners and some artisan groups), and Shudras (agriculturists, service providers, and some artisan groups). Another group of untouchables excluded from the main society was called Parjanya or Antyaja.

Passages from these scriptures suggest that the caste system was originally non-hereditary:

As the son of Shudra can attain the rank of a Brahmin, the son of Brahmin can attain rank of a shudra. Even so with him who is born of a Vaishya or a Kshatriya
ManuSmriti X:65​

Caste system has traditionally had several critics in India:

There has been strong criticism[31] of the caste system existing in India, both within and outside India.

Gautama Buddha and Mahavira, the founders of Buddhism and Jainism respectively, were against any kind of caste structure. Many bhakti period saints such as Kabir, Dnyaneshwar, Eknath, Ramananda, Ramanuja and Tukaram rejected all caste-based discrimination and accepted disciples from all the castes. Many Hindu reformers such as Swami Vivekananda and Sathya Sai Baba believe that there is no place for the caste system in Hinduism.

The caste system has also been criticized by many Indian social reformers. Some reformers, such as Mahatma Jyotirao Phule and Iyothee Thass argued that the lower caste people were the original inhabitants of India, and were conquered in the ancient past by Brahman invaders. Mahatma Gandhi coined the term "Harijan", a euphemistic word for untouchable, literally meaning Sons of God. B. R. Ambedkar, born in Hindu Dalit community, was a heavy critic of the caste system. He pioneered the Dalit Buddhist movement in India, and asked his followers to leave Hinduism, and convert to Buddhism. Periyar Ramasami, a Tamil rationalist fought against the caste practice of Brahmins and was a prominent Anti-Hindu.

Chatha:

samcdkey,
Was colonialism also to be blamed for the seperation of Indian muslims which resulted in Pakistan?

The British policy of divide and rule played a major rule in the religious divide between Hindus and Muslims in India.

e.g.

The Government of India Act of 1909 — also known as the Morley-Minto Reforms (John Morley was the secretary of state for India, and Gilbert Elliot, fourth earl of Minto, was viceroy) — gave Indians limited roles in the central and provincial legislatures, known as legislative councils.

The Morley-Minto Reforms were a milestone. Step by step, the elective principle was introduced for membership in Indian legislative councils. The "electorate" was limited, however, to a small group of upper-class Indians. These elected members increasingly became an "opposition" to the "official government". Communal electorates were later extended to other communities and made a political factor of the Indian tendency toward group identification through religion. The practice created certain vital questions for all concerned. The intentions of the British were questioned. How humanitarian was their concern for the minorities? Were separate electorates a manifestation of "divide and rule"?

Most British government policies were aimed at keeping the Indians divided, so as to prevent any opposition to their rule.

In 1905, British viceroy Lord Curzon set the stage for India's modern Hindu-Muslim conflict when he partitioned the province of Bengal. The resulting protest amid Bengal's elite Hindu minority -- which stood to lose rents from Muslim majority renters across the new boundary -- became violent as Hindu nationalists took up the landowners' cause. India's Muslim elite reacted by forming the All-India Muslim League in 1906. This organization, motivated by a concern for Muslim rights, ultimately became the chief proponent for the creation of Muslim Pakistan as a separate homeland for India's Muslims.

European perceptions of India, and those of the British especially, shifted from unequivocal appreciation to sweeping condemnation of India's past achievements and customs. Imbued with an ethnocentric sense of superiority, often known as the White Man's Burden, British intellectuals, including Christian missionaries, spearheaded a movement that sought to bring Western intellectual and technological innovations to Indians, ignoring the fact that the Indian Christian tradition through the Saint Thomas Christians went back to the very beginnings of first century Christian thought.

Because revenue collection became the company's most essential administrative function, Cornwallis made a compact with Bengali zamindars, who were perceived as the Indian counterparts to the British landed gentry. The Permanent Settlement system, also known as the zamindari system, fixed taxes in perpetuity in return for ownership of large estates; but the state was excluded from agricultural expansion, which came under the purview of the zamindars. In Madras and Bombay, however, the ryotwari (peasant) settlement system was set in motion, in which peasant cultivators had to pay annual taxes directly to the government.

Neither the zamindari nor the ryotwari systems proved effective in the long run because India was integrated into an international economic and pricing system over which it had no control, while increasing numbers of people subsisted on agriculture for lack of other employment. Millions of people involved in the heavily taxed Indian textile industry also lost their markets, as they were unable to compete successfully with cheaper textiles produced in Lancashire's mills from Indian raw materials.

They also followed a systematic system of starvation to maintain the class divides:

A 'scorched earth' policy was implemented in the Chittagong region, nearest the Burmese border, whilst excessively large amounts of rice were exported to the Middle East to feed British troops, and to Ceylon, which had been heavily dependent on Burmese rice before the war, and which was the headquarters of South-East Asia Command.

During the British rule in India there were approximately 25 major famines spread through states such as Tamil Nadu in South India, Bihar in the north, and Bengal in the east; altogeher, between 30 and 40 million Indians were the victims of famines in the latter half of the 19th century (Bhatia 1985)....there have been no famines since the end of the British rule in 1947 and the establishment of a democratic government.

 

[iam]

Your rants doesn't change the facts does it now? Besides what gives you the idea that its easy to take care of children, do you think its about relaxing at home and watching kids? Even in primitive times children are not your only duty as a woman, you have to wash all the cloths( ten miles at the river), cook all the food, attend to the sick, and even work at farms or grow something in the backyard e.t.c. Its not easy work. All this work shouldn't make women lazy today. In remote parts of rural Africa and SouthWest Asia the women are far more fit than American women, probably more fit than some men. Women today are just too fuckin lazy and whinny, I don't think you've had a close relatonship with any woman for sometime, Mr iam

You make no frigging sense. Your giving me a course in whats easy and whats not? Of course its easier, you don't even have to cook these days. As a matter of fact, all you need to do is push buttons. But a woman is not any lazier than the man that comes home and plops himself on the couch with his remote control. There are lots of duties women have to do to helping with homework, fixing meals, carpooling, cleaning, paying bills etc etc etc. Just because you have got a lazy wife doesn't mean every woman is lazy. Note, not all women are responsible just like not all men are responsible. There are lazy men and lazy women, there are bad providers and good wives and mothers and bad husbands, fathers, and employees and vice versa. Its not all women are lazy and all men are not. YOUR rant doesn't change the facts, the fact of the truth. THERE ARE LOTS OF LAZY PEOPLE AND THEY ARE LAZY FOR A LOT OF DIFFERENT REASONS.

 

[Chatha]

You make no frigging sense. Your giving me a course in whats easy and whats not? Of course its easier, you don't even have to cook these days. As a matter of fact, all you need to do is push buttons. But a woman is not any lazier than the man that comes home and plops himself on the couch with his remote control. There are lots of duties women have to do to helping with homework, fixing meals, carpooling, cleaning, paying bills etc etc etc. Just because you have got a lazy wife doesn't mean every woman is lazy. Note, not all women are responsible just like not all men are responsible. There are lazy men and lazy women, there are bad providers and good wives and mothers and bad husbands, fathers, and employees and vice versa. Its not all women are lazy and all men are not. YOUR rant doesn't change the facts, the fact of the truth. THERE ARE LOTS OF LAZY PEOPLE AND THEY ARE LAZY FOR A LOT OF DIFFERENT REASONS.

Actually, my mother is probably more hard working than my father. I never said all women are lazy, but you will never convince me that per their population, more women are lazier than men. The difference is more apparent in cities. I guarantee you if you walk outside and pick 10 men and 10 women at random to run 5 miles, you will probably find men giving a better effort. Its not just in physical ability, its mentally too. If you don't think women are lazy, you've never lived with a modern day woman.

 

[iam]

Actually, my mother is probably more hard working than my father. I never said all women are lazy, but you will never convince me that per their population, more women are lazier than men. The difference is more apparent in cities. I guarantee you if you walk outside and pick 10 men and 10 women at random to run 5 miles, you will probably find men giving a better effort. Its not just in physical ability, its mentally too. If you don't think women are lazy, you've never lived with a modern day woman.

And I explained the reason why and you are not picking up on it. Don't blame women for being subdued and having a harder time finding their will when they've cowtowed to you and been in the background to HELP and be of ASSISTANCE to you. YOU historically wanted it that way. Remember the 'woman should be seen but not heard'. This is a role they've been playing for millenia until very recently. Now your all surprised why women are not acclimated in a friggin second. Thats stupid, presumptuous, and unfair. Modern day women aren't lazy, they are adapting. There are more and more in the workforce.

 

[Chatha]

I agree

 

[TimeTraveler]

Gosh, what brainpower. You are doing that genius, america is not multicultural because you are racist. What worst aspects of any culture are you accepting???? Your full of it. What activities are simply unAmerican and unacceptable that are so bad that you don't do yourself???? You have the worst aspects of your own culture hampering you.

I don't value the concept of race. So no I'm not a racist, I'm a humanist, but if I ever were a racist, I'd be racist against all races, what would that mean?

I'm pro humanity, I'm anti race. We have to admit not all cultures are equal, some cultures promote violence, some cultures promote stupidity, in some cultures dropping out is a good thing, in some cultures beating your wife is a good thing, in some cultures it's a good thing to bully people and animals.

It should be obvious that not all cultures are equally good. Most cultures have good elements and bad elements, I promote cultural discrimination, I promote open cultural exchange, this means an individual should have the right to select the good elements from every culture and adopt these elements into their culture, while rejecting the bad elements.

Multi-culturalism is bullshit because it's this seperate but equal attempt. It's not the same thing as true open cultural exchange. What I'm saying is, I don't want a country where everyone speaks their own language, has their own holidays, lives in their own seperate community, has their own isolated way of life which outsiders are not allowed to become a part of. Thats currently multi-culturalism, it's this closed thing, that people refuse to share with outsiders, whats the value in this?

I'm for cultural intergration, if you have a culture, you should be able to promote it, and anyone should be able to adopt it, improve on it, and exchange it, this is open source culture.

Closed sourced culture is multi-culturalism, this is where ethnic groups, or people who look similar to each other, group up and start acting like one another, and refuse to let people in, or don't want to teach people their language, or get mad when people celebrate their holidays, or look up to their heros, or who want to join their tribe. I'm not for closed culture.

There are certain aspects of every culture that are negative, and the only way to improve on our cultures, is to allow for open exchange. Therefore I'm not a racist, perhaps I'm a cultural elitist? Even if you could classify me as a cultural elitist, I'm also very open, I share my culture, and I expect other people to share their culture with me, and I'm only really against the people who refuse to share.

There are some cultures that are just plain bad, and race has nothing to do with it. The culture that promotes violence, in specific the cultures that promote violence against women, are bad, PERIOD. The cultures that promote ignorance, and miseducation, are bad, PERIOD. You might be able to find good aspects inside these cultures, and these cultures can be made good, but only if they are open to all who wish to be a part of it.

This means, druggie culture is bad, MTV culture is bad, I'm saying pop culture, mass culture, it's bad. There are good elements of hiphop culture, of rock n roll culture, of pop culture, and these elements are good. The only way to make the culture evolve is to continue to allow the influx of good elements into it, to bring new blood into the culture, and this can only happen when you have constant exchange.

Culture to me has as much to do with race, as cyber culture has to do with the race of the computer you use to access it. Stop being such a reactionary, you reveal your own misconceptions.

 

[TimeTraveler]

And I explained the reason why and you are not picking up on it. Don't blame women for being subdued and having a harder time finding their will when they've cowtowed to you and been in the background to HELP and be of ASSISTANCE to you. YOU historically wanted it that way. Remember the 'woman should be seen but not heard'. This is a role they've been playing for millenia until very recently. Now your all surprised why women are not acclimated in a friggin second. Thats stupid, presumptuous, and unfair. Modern day women aren't lazy, they are adapting. There are more and more in the workforce.

Don't you see the point I made. If a culture mistreats it's women, it's got a negative element.

Each culture has negative and positive elements, just like each culture has both positive and negative representitives. Some cultures have more negative representitives at a certain period of time than positive, and this makes it a bad culture, but this bad culture can be reformed and restructured into a good culture in a very short period of time.

Culture is currently bad in the USA, because most of the culture is designed by the big media people, like MTV, or other pop networks and magazines.

These entities exist, to promote the worst instincts in human nature. So on MTV for example, women aren't directly called property, or sex objects, it's a lot more subtle than that, instead they trick your subconscious into believing it, but treating women as sex objects, and as property. They don't, directly tell women that women are inferior, they give women inferior roles in movies to promote the inferior nature in women. These movies then go on to help promote the idea that only women are supposed to be secretaries, or that only women are supposed to do certain jobs.

The same thing happens to minorities, if you look at how each group is portrayed on TV, there seems to be patterns. These media patterns are part of our cultural programming. So you see a lot of young black males are rappers, atheletes and entertainers, but you don't really see doctors, scientists, professors or business men on TV. Even Oprah, the richest woman on the planet, is portrayed as an entertainer and not a business woman. This conditions the youth to believe, that there are limited avenues for success.

Multi-culturalism cannot work in it's current form, period, it's so mutilated in this form that it's destructive. This may be because the media has too much control over culture, but who gave the media so much control anyway? Who exactly buys that rap music where women are treated as sex objects, or where people shoot each other? Who exactly buys that rock song that promotes drugs and alcohol?

Kids in the suburbs are buying it, because they want to buy culture as a product, instead of actually exploring the world, and actually meeting people who could share the culture with them in a positive way. When you buy culture as a product, you get exactly what you pay for.

 

[iam]

I don't value the concept of race. So no I'm not a racist, I'm a humanist, but if I ever were a racist, I'd be racist against all races, what would that mean?

I'm pro humanity, I'm anti race. We have to admit not all cultures are equal, some cultures promote violence, some cultures promote stupidity, in some cultures dropping out is a good thing, in some cultures beating your wife is a good thing, in some cultures it's a good thing to bully people and animals.

It should be obvious that not all cultures are equally good. Most cultures have good elements and bad elements, I promote cultural discrimination, I promote open cultural exchange, this means an individual should have the right to select the good elements from every culture and adopt these elements into their culture, while rejecting the bad elements.

Multi-culturalism is bullshit because it's this seperate but equal attempt. It's not the same thing as true open cultural exchange. What I'm saying is, I don't want a country where everyone speaks their own language, has their own holidays, lives in their own seperate community, has their own isolated way of life which outsiders are not allowed to become a part of. Thats currently multi-culturalism, it's this closed thing, that people refuse to share with outsiders, whats the value in this?

I'm for cultural intergration, if you have a culture, you should be able to promote it, and anyone should be able to adopt it, improve on it, and exchange it, this is open source culture.

Closed sourced culture is multi-culturalism, this is where ethnic groups, or people who look similar to each other, group up and start acting like one another, and refuse to let people in, or don't want to teach people their language, or get mad when people celebrate their holidays, or look up to their heros, or who want to join their tribe. I'm not for closed culture.

There are certain aspects of every culture that are negative, and the only way to improve on our cultures, is to allow for open exchange. Therefore I'm not a racist, perhaps I'm a cultural elitist? Even if you could classify me as a cultural elitist, I'm also very open, I share my culture, and I expect other people to share their culture with me, and I'm only really against the people who refuse to share.

There are some cultures that are just plain bad, and race has nothing to do with it. The culture that promotes violence, in specific the cultures that promote violence against women, are bad, PERIOD. The cultures that promote ignorance, and miseducation, are bad, PERIOD. You might be able to find good aspects inside these cultures, and these cultures can be made good, but only if they are open to all who wish to be a part of it.

This means, druggie culture is bad, MTV culture is bad, I'm saying pop culture, mass culture, it's bad. There are good elements of hiphop culture, of rock n roll culture, of pop culture, and these elements are good. The only way to make the culture evolve is to continue to allow the influx of good elements into it, to bring new blood into the culture, and this can only happen when you have constantly exchange.

Culture to me has as much to do with race, as cyber culture has to do with the race of the computer you use to access it. Stop being such a reactionary, you reveal your own misconceptions.

You are defining multicultural in the context of the segregation of groups in america. When people do not accept eachother, they do not have a multicultural society. They have disparate groups. But part of the problem is you have to respect the people as much as you respect their culture. Many aspects of culture are personal to a certain ethnicity and borne from it and bear characteristics of it. Its not just about appropriation, its about respect and understanding as it is a part of them and they are hoping to become members of your society. A person is not an object for you to pick and choose and discard the rest. A chinese person isn't here just for them to cook your americanized version of chinese food and be off with him. Do you care about that person or the interests of that group as well or do you just want to pick and choose what you want? I don't know if your white but you sure think like a white racist. I'm not saying its intentional but your views are slightly prejudicial and exploitive. You seem to think that different ethnic groups are isolated in america because they do not want to share their culture. That is incorrect, they are not accepted and everybody wants to live their way of life just as how a white person may not like or be associated with anything outside their perceived culture or develop human understanding beyond his comfort zone or clique. Mainstream culture is accepted but mainstream culture is not altogether healthy nor is it nonprejudicial, it has its own standards and target demographics. What is most bizarre is you think culture has nothing to do with race and it most definitely does, there is no right or wrong to it. You also confuse moral values with culture. Culture could mean simply a type of food. Is chinese food and jamaican food the same? Its food alright but is one wrong and the other right? No, its about preferences. Have white husbands beat on white wives? Have africans? have asians? Of course. These are not cultural but human. Culture represents the personality and unique creativity of a group.

 

[TimeTraveler]

You are defining multicultural in the context of the segregation of groups in america. When people do not accept eachother, they do not have a multicultural society. They have disparate groups. But part of the problem is you have to respect the people as much as you respect their culture. Many aspects of culture are personal to a certain ethnicity and borne from it and bear characteristics of it.

Multi-culturalism didnt work because the idea was a flawed concept from the start. If people could have predicted that ECONOMICS would have influence and control over mult-culturalism people would have known immediately that it would never work properly. That's the whole point, when culture becomes a product and people don't care to talk to each other or learn about other cultures, then multi-culturalism can't work. It does not work right now because, kids in the suburbs are afraid to actually go into the ghetto and make a friend there and find out what life is like, instead they are lazy and want the ghetto brought to their TV, or to their stereo, or to a magazine. It's this laziness that prevents Americans from having a successfully culturally intergrated society. It seems to work online, so I know it's possible to have cultural intergration, but thats not the same as multi-culturalism, I'm for assimiliation not seperate cultural groups.

Its not just about appropriation, its about respect and understanding. A person is not an object.

Of course a person is not an object, if you are the sort of person who does not see people as objects, but the majority of people in this country DO see people as objects. The majority of people in this country see you as an object, period. The majority of men in this country see women as objects, the majority of whites see minorities as objects, the majority of capitalists see labor and workers as objects or numbers, etc. This is not how we want it to be, but when culture is controlled by television, then peoples minds will be morphed in such a way so that they see everyone as a thing, or an object.

I don't know if your white but you sure think like a white racist. I'm not saying its intentional but your views are slightly prejudicial and exploitive. You seem to think that different ethnic groups are isolated in america because they do not want to share their culture.

I'm not talking about just minority ethnic groups, I'm talking about all of them. When Irish or Italian, or German, or Spanish, celebrate their unique cultures, it should be open to minorities to join in and learn, and celebrate. I don't think it's right when Europeans deliberately exclude minorities from doing stuff, like playing golf, or blocking people from entering the country clubs, or whatever. I think thats wrong. But somehow you assume I was thinking about race, I was not, I'm saying the world would be better, if Europeans welcome minorities who want to share their culture. If a person wants to join your culture, why not allow them to or at least give them a chance?

That is incorrect, they are not accepted and everybody wants to live their way of life just as how a white person may not like or be associated with aything outside their perceived culture.

Thats fine, but what if people want to learn about or exchange with them? How exactly can people access a closed culture? If someone is Jewish for example, but refuses to tell you anything at all about what being Jewish is about, and keeps everything a secret, and only hangs around with Jews and won't even talk to you or explain their culture to you, thats wrong.

Mainstream culture is accepted but mainstream culture is not altogether healthy nor is it nonprejudicial, it has its own standards and target demographics. What is most bizarre is you think culture has nothing to do with race and it most definitely does, there is no right or wrong to it.

To the younger generations, culture has less and less to do with race.This closed culture stuff is of the old generation. Skaters for example, what race are they? What race are video gamers? What race is cyber culture? Everyone on this forum is of a different race, who cares? It's not about race to the younger generations. Race is a concept from an older generations culture, and depending on what your culture is today, you might or might not believe in race.

You also confuse moral values with culture. Culture could mean simply a type of food. Is chinese food and jamaican food the same? Its food alright but is one wrong and the other right?

That's fine, but cultural exchanges allows you to share recipes, so you can learn to cook Chinese food from your Chinese friend and learn to cook Jamaican food from your Jamaican friend, and in the process also teach them to cook Italian food if you are Italian. Do you see? This is how culture is supposed to be shared in an open cultural society.

Instead people write cookbooks and sell them, and the process of selling out, reduces the value of the cultural exchanges which might take place in friendships. So yes the best aspect of cultural exchange is that you'll learn a lot of new things from a lot of new perspectives, you'll learn new better ways to do the things you already do.

No, its about preferences. Have white husbands beat on white wives? Have africans? have asians? Of course. These are not cultural but human. Culture represents the personality and unique creativity of a group.

People have to be taught to hit and beat their wives. It's cultural. I'd never beat on a woman because I've been culturally programmed to be a protector. Other men have been culturally programmed to smack their bitch up, or keep their pimp hand strong etc. It depends on the culture.

Some men are taught that it's a males job, to beat a woman into submission, and be king. In this culture, of course this man is going to beat his wife, or resort to violence, because this is what they are taught culturally.

There is no group personality, there is no group creativity, it's always individuals manipulated by other individuals. Humans, at least the masses, are like robots who get programmed by their TV, by their music, by the media. All of us are programmed, even me. The aware among us know we are programmed, and can at least distinguish between good and bad programming.

 

[iam]

Multi-culturalism didnt work because the idea was a flawed concept from the start. If people could have predicted that ECONOMICS would have influence and control over mult-culturalism people would have known immediately that it would never work properly. That's the whole point, when culture becomes a product and people don't care to talk to each other or learn about other cultures, then multi-culturalism can't work. It does not work right now because, kids in the suburbs are afraid to actually go into the ghetto and make a friend there and find out what life is like, instead they are lazy and want the ghetto brought to their TV, or to their stereo, or to a magazine. It's this laziness that prevents Americans from having a successfully culturally intergrated society. It seems to work online, so I know it's possible to have cultural intergration, but thats not the same as multi-culturalism, I'm for assimiliation not seperate cultural groups.



Of course a person is not an object, if you are the sort of person who does not see people as objects, but the majority of people in this country DO see people as objects. The majority of people in this country see you as an object, period. The majority of men in this country see women as objects, the majority of whites see minorities as objects, the majority of capitalists see labor and workers as objects or numbers, etc. This is not how we want it to be, but when culture is controlled by television, then peoples minds will be morphed in such a way so that they see everyone as a thing, or an object.



I'm not talking about just minority ethnic groups, I'm talking about all of them. When Irish or Italian, or German, or Spanish, celebrate their unique cultures, it should be open to minorities to join in and learn, and celebrate. I don't think it's right when Europeans deliberately exclude minorities from doing stuff, like playing golf, or blocking people from entering the country clubs, or whatever. I think thats wrong. But somehow you assume I was thinking about race, I was not, I'm saying the world would be better, if Europeans welcome minorities who want to share their culture. If a person wants to join your culture, why not allow them to or at least give them a chance?



Thats fine, but what if people want to learn about or exchange with them? How exactly can people access a closed culture? If someone is Jewish for example, but refuses to tell you anything at all about what being Jewish is about, and keeps everything a secret, and only hangs around with Jews and won't even talk to you or explain their culture to you, thats wrong.



To the younger generations, culture has less and less to do with race.This closed culture stuff is of the old generation. Skaters for example, what race are they? What race are video gamers? What race is cyber culture? Everyone on this forum is of a different race, who cares? It's not about race to the younger generations. Race is a concept from an older generations culture, and depending on what your culture is today, you might or might not believe in race.



That's fine, but cultural exchanges allows you to share recipes, so you can learn to cook Chinese food from your Chinese friend and learn to cook Jamaican food from your Jamaican friend, and in the process also teach them to cook Italian food if you are Italian. Do you see? This is how culture is supposed to be shared in an open cultural society.

Instead people write cookbooks and sell them, and the process of selling out, reduces the value of the cultural exchanges which might take place in friendships. So yes the best aspect of cultural exchange is that you'll learn a lot of new things from a lot of new perspectives, you'll learn new better ways to do the things you already do.



People have to be taught to hit and beat their wives. It's cultural. I'd never beat on a woman because I've been culturally programmed to be a protector. Other men have been culturally programmed to smack their bitch up, or keep their pimp hand strong etc. It depends on the culture.

Some men are taught that it's a males job, to beat a woman into submission, and be king. In this culture, of course this man is going to beat his wife, or resort to violence, because this is what they are taught culturally.

There is no group personality, there is no group creativity, it's always individuals manipulated by other individuals. Humans, at least the masses, are like robots who get programmed by their TV, by their music, by the media. All of us are programmed, even me. The aware among us know we are programmed, and can at least distinguish between good and bad programming.

Assimilation as its understood now is not going to work either. Because assimilation is traditionally meant everyone adapting to a caucasian culture which naturally marginalizes and has prejudicial consequences.

But as you stated, no need to worry because in the end its about technology. No matter how much some one group wants to hitch their ego for the ride. Technology itself does not discriminate or play favorites. 1+1=2 no matter who or what you are. Also, the younger generation growing up in a much more global world should do a better job of understanding and diplomacy. It will be a technology culture, not a race, ethnicity based one.

Its funny because all this back and forth really isn't going to affect it. Our little egos mean nothing in the long run.

 

[TimeTraveler]

Assimilation as its understood now is not going to work either. Because assimilation is traditionally meant everyone adapting to a caucasian culture which naturally marginalizes and has prejudicial consequences.

That is a stereotype. Not all Europeans are racist! You act as if all caucasian people have the same racist culture, thats a mistake on your part, and it shows your prejudicial thinking. How old are you? you must be from the old civil rights generation to think like this.

But as you stated, no need to worry because in the end its about technology. No matter how much some one group wants to hitch their ego for the ride. Technology itself does not discriminate or play favorites. 1+1=2 no matter who or what you are. Also, the younger generation growing up in a much more global world should do a better job of understanding and diplomacy. It will be a technology culture, not a race, ethnicity based one.

I don't think it will be a technology culture. I think it will be a culture of awareness levels. There will be ignorance, that Jerry Springer type ignorance that exists in the population will still exist in the future, but if humanity is to survive, humanity will also have a self aware element. This element will know for sure what a human actually is, both scientifically, spiritually, philosophically, on all levels. This new aware group of humans, will likely be humanitarian, it won't be about "race", because race as an idea is self limiting. At some point humans are going to have to go into space, or do different things besides stay on earth if they are to survive, and there are more important things to worry about than our physical appearance.

So it seems, the technology will speed up the process of our species becoming self aware, because right now our species is not even self aware, it's like a computer network with computers that are divided in such a way, that they arent aware that they are calculating the exact same problems. At some point, distributive computing will take over and humans will figure out that some problems we share as a species, and some solutions and benefits we share as a species, and these are what we have to focus on long term.

Its funny because all this back and forth really isn't going to affect it. Our little egos mean nothing in the long run.

Thats just it. Ego has nothing to do with race, or at least it shouldnt. You are your consciousness more than you are your race. You are your personality more than you are your race. Your race is just your physical appearance at best, it's not who you are.

Most people in your life who you don't get along with, are in YOUR race that the government defines you as, once you figure this out, then you know that race is bullshit, a control mechanism at best, with no basis in scientific reality. Why? Because we don't measure race by intelligence, or by how the brain operates, or by personality, or by athletic abiltiy even, we measure race on the most ridiculously superficial traits and genes, like skin, hair, eyes, nose, etc, the type of genes that don't make a single difference.

I think the youth has figured this out, I'm sure I'm not the only one who knows, and the internet is one of the reasons people know the truth about race. If race is real, you won't be able to just glance at a person and know if they are of your race or not, if you thought it would be that simple, you are wrong.

Just like it's not going to be so simple you can smell a person and figure out what their genes are, of course you won't be able to figure it out just by using your eyes, or listening to the sound of their voice. Maybe if we used our brains, we'd know.

 

[radicand]

1) Yes, Condi or Obama are accepted widely.

2) No, not yet.

What do you think?

I thought we already had one with Bill Clinton!!!???

Could not resist that one.

I personally do not think skin color matters. What matters is ideas. If the right ideas are tossed around (especially those higlighting individualism), it does not matter who you are I will vote for you.

I voted for Alan Keyes, twice. Of course, he never got out of the primaries.

 

[iam]

That is a stereotype. Not all Europeans are racist! You act as if all caucasian people have the same racist culture, thats a mistake on your part, and it shows your prejudicial thinking. How old are you? you must be from the old civil rights generation to think like this.



I don't think it will be a technology culture. I think it will be a culture of awareness levels. There will be ignorance, that Jerry Springer type ignorance that exists in the population will still exist in the future, but if humanity is to survive, humanity will also have a self aware element. This element will know for sure what a human actually is, both scientifically, spiritually, philosophically, on all levels. This new aware group of humans, will likely be humanitarian, it won't be about "race", because race as an idea is self limiting. At some point humans are going to have to go into space, or do different things besides stay on earth if they are to survive, and there are more important things to worry about than our physical appearance.

So it seems, the technology will speed up the process of our species becoming self aware, because right now our species is not even self aware, it's like a computer network with computers that are divided in such a way, that they arent aware that they are calculating the exact same problems. At some point, distributive computing will take over and humans will figure out that some problems we share as a species, and some solutions and benefits we share as a species, and these are what we have to focus on long term.




Thats just it. Ego has nothing to do with race, or at least it shouldnt. You are your consciousness more than you are your race. You are your personality more than you are your race. Your race is just your physical appearance at best, it's not who you are.

Most people in your life who you don't get along with, are in YOUR race that the government defines you as, once you figure this out, then you know that race is bullshit, a control mechanism at best, with no basis in scientific reality. Why? Because we don't measure race by intelligence, or by how the brain operates, or by personality, or by athletic abiltiy even, we measure race on the most ridiculously superficial traits and genes, like skin, hair, eyes, nose, etc, the type of genes that don't make a single difference.

I think the youth has figured this out, I'm sure I'm not the only one who knows, and the internet is one of the reasons people know the truth about race. If race is real, you won't be able to just glance at a person and know if they are of your race or not, if you thought it would be that simple, you are wrong.

Just like it's not going to be so simple you can smell a person and figure out what their genes are, of course you won't be able to figure it out just by using your eyes, or listening to the sound of their voice. Maybe if we used our brains, we'd know.

I really don't give a rats sh*t what you think because i think you are an egotistical and deceitful person. You say all the right things but you seem disingenuous.

I said traditionally it is prejudiced to expect foreigners to adapt to a caucasian culture and disembrace who they are. BECAUSE THAT IS HOW IT IS FOR NOW UNLESS YOU STAY WITH YOUR OWN KIND. I fuking walk out my door everyday and that is what I see because it is, businesses, jobs, architecture, media, society etc are all controlled by white people. Even the asian restaurants are geared to the white consumer. That is not prejudicial to cite that observation, that is a fact! YOU are being prejudicial and disgusting by pretending you can pull the wool over foreigners eyes with your fake political correct bullsh*t! As a matter of fact, no one is talking any language but ENGLISH you fuker in western countries. Of course they do as they should. But I was specifically referring to america, the immigrant country. And the more immigrants you accept into your country to work, pay taxes and contribute, the more it is your obligation to represent them and their voice in kind. They are no longer your guest. You want a country where everyone speaks the same language???????????????? Really?????????? Why are you so afraid they might be speaking another language???? Are there japanese coming up to you saying sayonara?? Damn that thought must be scary. You want this and you want that. You should hear yourself.

You also got cottage cheese for brains if you think that technology is not going to be the defining character of the future. You talk about being a humanist and seeming to convey fairness but it will not happen without it. Human maturity has not evolved as fast as technology. Get over it because you can't force it.

And I'm sick and tired of you regurgitating back to me my points and your shpiel of a "future society of different awareness levels" is deadpan retarded because every society is this way not just in the future.

And you are not selffukingaware. For your information, race is not just skin deep as well. Surprised? There are personal characteristics that are defining and to not respect that is prejudiced as well. I disagree that most of the people you don't get along with is in your race, that is really the most stupid argument i've ever heard. You may have disagreements but on a deeper level you are more connected than to others. This is for everyone.
That doesn't mean people can't get along or respect eachother as they are and its just as prejudiced for you to demand they give up or give you something so you are all the "same" so you don't have to deal with any differences.

You are twisted like someone breaking bones to fit straight. lol

 

[Prince_James]

Chatha:

For once, I must agree with you on your rather sensible stand on sexual politics.

 

[iam]

Chatha:

For once, I must agree with you on your rather sensible stand on sexual politics.

hehehe...you remain consistent!

 

[Chatha]

...(coughs). Just a thought. America will never assimilate culturaly if you look at the foundations of the land. In fact America was build by spilled rival blood. Native Americans are the indeginous people of America, and even they had more divisions in tribes than humanly possible. Then came the Spanish, then follwed the Frenchies, then sailed the Brits. Right from genesis to inception, to declaration of independece, its been segregation and cultural diversity. That country is one weird country.

Originally by iam
...I fuking walk out my door everyday and that is what I see because it is, businesses, jobs, architecture, media, society etc are all controlled by white people. Even the asian restaurants are geared to the white consumer...

Because cacausians are more intelligent, timetraveller calls it domination, I say it takes intelligence to dominate. However the gap is bridging everyday with technology and publications. You don't even have to go to school to learn the latest computer programs these days, just buy a PC, log on to sciforums, and the good guys at Computer science and culture will walk you through.