<p>the fact that we have different skin colors automatically creates a divide. that will overpowers any and every other factor. it is in our genes. no one can physically change their skin color (except for michael jackson though lol)</p>
<p>"the fact that we have different skin colors automatically creates a divide."</p>
<p>Not true. For instance, young children don't judge people based on race. Racism is a learned behavior.</p>
<p>
[quote]
My relatives emigrated from Europe at the beginning of the 20th century. Therefore, my family lineage had nothing to do with slavery.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yeah, because there was never any slavery in Europe :rolleyes:</p>
<p>And for anyone who thinks that only white people have "oppressed" blacks, I would only remind you that there are many documented cases of black slaveholders in pre-civil war US.</p>
<p>People seem to think that the term "racism" only applies to those groups who have been "oppressed" in some way. This is not true. Racism involves any differential treatment based solely on race. Racism is definitely wrong, but any racism is wrong, not just racism against minorities. Hence, affirmative action and other such things are wrong.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The "science" behind race is spotty at best (that Asian has small eyes, therefore he must be a total alien from the rest of us!), and I think the definitions can shift with the times.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Still, there are legitimate general trends in different ethnic groups. Yes, there is more diversity within races than between them, but to deny the fact that ethnic groups tend to have certain traits is also a bit silly too. I mean, it would be denying Tay Sachs in Ashkenazi Jews and sickle cell anemia in some black populations. And that's just bad.</p>
<p>Then again, I believe in a more fluid "ethnicity-based" theory of human groups, and not the firm race-based old-style anthropological definitions.</p>
<p>
[quote]
So there was a "black power" club is our school and some kids made a "white power" club and got into trouble. Do you think that's racist?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>ARE YOU KIDDING ME? If there's a black power club then what's wrong with a white power club? That's ridiculous. Both of them should either be shut down or have a name change. Maybe like Black People of America and European-American club or something.</p>
<p>"Yeah, because there was never any slavery in Europe"</p>
<p>Rich people in Europe had slaves. My family was from Ireland and never would have been able to own slaves. They were just poor farmers. As I said before,
it is unfair to lump all caucasian people together into the stereotype of rich people whose families owned plaintations with slaves 200 years ago. If anything, my family was oppressed, which is why they came to America in the first place. Does "the melting pot" ring a bell?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Sure, but it's still not the same thing. Definitions of race can evolve gradually over time, as you say "with the times." But that does not make oppression of poor people any more like oppression of members of a given race. Smart, industrious, or lucky poor people can, in the right circumstances, lift themselves out of poverty and even become rich over a period of years. But nobody can willfully choose to change their race to escape oppression or for any other reason. The fact that society may have redfined who is "white" over a century or so is of scant help to any given oppressed individual.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>There are also possibilities that a person of a minority race can become wealthy and powerful enough to become an honourary white, proving once again that white has less to do with race/science and more to do with social prestige.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Still, there are legitimate general trends in different ethnic groups. Yes, there is more diversity within races than between them, but to deny the fact that ethnic groups tend to have certain traits is also a bit silly too. I mean, it would be denying Tay Sachs in Ashkenazi Jews and sickle cell anemia in some black populations. And that's just bad.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes, definitely. People have intermingled for only the past few hundred years. Obviously, groups of people living in isolation will develop certain diseases and physical tendencies. But that's not enough to justify splintering the human race into multiple races. The only reason why racism still exists is because it alleviates some of our guilt at not treating certain people like human beings. They're relegated to another race altogether.</p>
<p>BTW, I doubt the story about the black power club is true. Even in the most liberal school, that's an extreme idea.</p>
<p>"whites are already the minority on a world wide scale"</p>
<p>True. Whites only make up about 10% of the world's population today. And every year the number decreases, due to racial mixing (when a black man has a child with a white woman, or vice-versa, the child is considered black) and also white people just not procreating at the rate of other races anymore.</p>
<p>People associate "white power" with the KKK so it seems more threatening? There shouldn't be any "[insert race] power" club. The thread's probably fake anyway.</p>
<p>About whites being the minority--they might technically be in numbers, but you're going to have to give me a whole lot of evidence if you're going to say that they're underrepresented.</p>
<p>those kids who started the second club are my heroes. Getting into trouble or not.</p>
<p>
[quote]
when a black man has a child with a white woman, or vice-versa, the child is considered black
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Only in America. In Brazil, a light-coloured mixed person would be considered white. Therefore, in a nuclear family unit, you could have both black and white kids. </p>
<p>And if the "white race" is dwindling, Caucasians are doing fine so don't worry about your race.</p>
<p>
[quote]
But that's not enough to justify splintering the human race into multiple races.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No, but there are legitimate scientific reasons for ethnic classifications. Like I said, this is a more wishy-washy sort of grouping mechanism, but it allows us to pinpoint important differences in groups, treat people better medically, and understand historical trends better.</p>
<p>
[quote]
No, but there are legitimate scientific reasons for ethnic classifications. Like I said, this is a more wishy-washy sort of grouping mechanism, but it allows us to pinpoint important differences in groups, treat people better medically, and understand historical trends better.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Oh definitely, I'm not trying to argue with you on that point. But differences across ethnicities should be viewed just like differences within ethnicities.</p>
<p>Absolutely. Human grouping trends are fluid, not static.</p>
<p>It's interesting to consider that races actually are a construct, not reality. Indeed, as recently as 100 or so years ago, the U.S. was considering categorizing Italians (and, I believe Eastern Europeans) as being Negroid. Indeed, as recently as the late 1800s some so-called scientists in the U.S. were still trying to figure out whether people of black African descent were human.</p>
<p>"Only in America. In Brazil, a light-coloured mixed person would be considered white. "</p>
<p>Not exactly. The Brazilian system of racial categories is very confusing and also seems to be changing. Here's one description.</p>
<p>"Unlike in the United States, in Brazil there is no "one drop" rulethe custom that defines anyone with any known or suspected African ancestry as "black." The Brazilian system of racial classification is both more complex and more in keeping with biological reality. First, Brazil has never had two discrete racial categoriesblack and whiteand Brazilians recognize and have words for a wide variety of racial types. Moreover, how individuals are classified racially does not depend solely on their physical appearance, their skin color, hair type, and facial features or on those of their relatives. Social class, education, and manner of dress all come into play in assigning someone to a racial category. As Brazilians put it, "money whitens"that is, the higher the social class, the lighter the racial category to which an individual belongs. A well dressed, well educated woman with dark skin and Negroid features might be referred to as a moreno (roughly, brunette), while an illiterate sharecropper with light skin might be assigned to a darker racial category than his physical appearance alone would warrant.</p>
<p>Ironically, some evidence suggests that since the 1960s Brazil has been moving toward a system of racial classification similar to that of the United States. That is, the multitude of racial terms commonly used by Brazilians may be giving way to a bifurcate system of branco and negrowhite and black."
<a href="http://www.everyculture.com/Bo-Co/Brazil.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.everyculture.com/Bo-Co/Brazil.html</a></p>
<p><<virtually all="" history="" that's="" taught="" in="" this="" country="" is="" white="" history.="">> Northstarmom</virtually></p>
<p>I wonder where you got this idea. In our district, beginning eight years ago, ALL ninth graders take a subject called "African and Asian Studies." They now cram all of Western Civilization (what you would call "white" history, I guess) into tenth grade (they used to divide that up into two courses taken freshman and sophomore years).</p>
<p>
[quote]
I wonder where you got this idea. In our district, beginning eight years ago, ALL ninth graders take a subject called "African and Asian Studies." They now cram all of Western Civilization (what you would call "white" history, I guess) into tenth grade (they used to divide that up into two courses taken freshman and sophomore years).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Your district is weird.</p>
<p>It's not that unusual at all, actually.</p>
<p>Where else do they do this?</p>
<p>Anyway, I doubt many people would be opposed to a "History of Western Civ" or "Euro History" club. People would love to talk about Greek myths or the Crusades. But "White history" is just stupid; it has about as much academic merit as "History of ugly people".</p>
<p>
[quote]
>>Racism, classism, sexism, religionism... They're all the same: <<</p>
<p>No, they are not. Poor white people can turn into rich white people and thus can even become the oppressors themselves if they so choose. It's happened many times. Same with religion. But people can't change their race. They're stuck. Not the same situation.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Michael Jackson successfully crossed race lines. It is a well-documented fact.</p>