Chattel Slavery: Was there any worse atrocity in human history????

[p-tavern]

SL mods troll their own section now?

 

[janklow]

Most likely when you think of indians, you think of people that look like the following, so yeah, i do think that you, like most westerners, have a very slanted view of indians.

...or i think of Indians (or people of Indian descent) that i actually know,as opposed to the rich, upper-class Indians the MEDIA keeps cramming down my throat. it could be that.

 

[tikingjcoleprince]

...or i think of Indians (or people of Indian descent) that i actually know,as opposed to the rich, upper-class Indians the MEDIA keeps cramming down my throat. it could be that.

Unless you've traveled internationally, which you very well could have, and assuming you live in America, there is probably a 99% likely hood the indians you know ARE upper-caste, since very few non-upper-caste indians have the resources, or are legally permitted, to come here.

 

[janklow]

Unless you've traveled internationally, which you very well could have-

correct

-and assuming you live in America-

USA USA USA

-there is probably a 99% likely hood the indians you know ARE upper-caste, since very few non-upper-caste indians have the resources, or are legally permitted, to come here.

well, one, it's perhaps a mix of economic strata. two... i think a point being glossed over is the "portrayed in the media" part.

 

[tikingjcoleprince]

What do you think of the reality that this Fed GOVT allows indians to rake in billions of $$$$$ via their casino revenues...while Blacks still peril in America's ghettos, with nothing, no imperatives no Aid no reparations no arrangements like reservaton-casinos?

I don't think I know enough to comment. But I do believe at this point in time, to compare the plight of one non-white race to the plight of another is useless and benefits no one. Anyone can make a case that his race is suffering the most at the hand of the white man, but arguing that does nothing to alleviate the suffering.

We've been talking about indians from India.

 

[tikingjcoleprince]

correct

USA USA USA

well, one, it's perhaps a mix of economic strata. two... i think a point being glossed over is the "portrayed in the media" part.

Frankly, i don't even know what we're going back and forth about anymore.

I personally believe it breaks down to this:

We indians are our own ethnic and cultural group, but if you must fit us into the three major races, negroid, caucasoid, and mongoloid, we fit in either negroid or caucasoid. To say all indians are white, or all indians are black is unfair, and a blatant lie. Generally, the more southern, and more low caste indians have more negroid ancestry, and would therefor be negroids, while the northern, more high caste indians, which are the ones that usually come to America, and which are portrayed in the media FAR more, do have more white blood, because their ancestry is more among the waves of whites that consistently conquered and subjugated the black natives of india, and they would be considered white.

But to group any indians as part of either group i think is wrong, since at least 95% of indians probably have both white blood and black blood in them, and culturally are so different, that i believe we are our own group essentially.

Sorry if this post was incomprehensible, I'm tired and sick

 

[tikingjcoleprince]

I dont think i was arguing, as I was being rather cordial towards the opinions here...plus I don't think there's anything wrong with it, since it's always correct, to identify a clear right vs. A clear Wrong or "worse-victim" in these scenarios

When i said "arguing" i meant it more like in the sense "debating", rather than being argumentative, so no shots at you or anything. And yes, it may be possible to identify a worse victim, but what good does that really do? A lot of blacks in America are still suffering, indians in india are still in a shithole, africans in africa are still making very little progress, a lot of hispanics are still illiterate and poor. In the end we can only do what we can for our own people, and the people in similar plights as our own.

yes indeed you were, my friend, and so I hoped it would be laudable to bring a unique perspective on the centuries-old, global-code to prop india's indians as well as all other indians, up over Black people...

1st, india's indians are absolutely 100% unrelated to native american indians except for sharing a common label by the white man. The european explorers were trying to reach India when they stumbled upon the Americas, and thinking they had indeed reached india, they called the natives "indians." Apart from that the two groups are completely unrelated, and neither group calls themselves "indians" as far as i know. That was a label put on both groups by the white man. (Yes, today, some indians do call themselves indians, but thats due to assimilation into white culture and other factors unrelated to this topic)

and 2nd, being a indian of African descent and appearance, i think i would know of any global propping up of india's indians over black people, and i have never seen, experienced, or heard of it. There may be certain groups of people that treat india's indians better, but Ive also met plenty of people that have treated me worse when they found out i am indian, and not black as they first imagined based on my appearance.

Native american indians, again, i will not comment on because i don't know enough about them.

 

[janklow]

What do you think of the reality that this Fed GOVT allows indians to rake in billions of $$$$$ via their casino revenues...while Blacks still peril in America's ghettos, with nothing, no imperatives no Aid no reparations no arrangements like reservaton-casinos?

...

We've been talking about indians from India.

...this ...keeps happening

okay, anyway:

We indians are our own ethnic and cultural group, but if you must fit us into the three major races, negroid, caucasoid, and mongoloid, we fit in either negroid or caucasoid.

okay, here's the deal:

01. no one is saying you cannot define Indians as their own ethnic/cultural group. in fact, one of the things i have repeatedly said is "Indians are still a distinct cultural/national concept WITHIN one of the larger racial groups"

02. everyone's negroid, caucasoid or mongoloid; you don't get to be none of the above. Indians happen to qualify as caucasoid (aka "white folks")

03. people in Indian, as it is a nation, may be mixed race and background, but this not unique to India

04. no one is exempt from the racial categorization. just wanted to repeat that one

05. this is why i make rulings on this: we're SUPPOSED to be saving time here

 

[tikingjcoleprince]

...

...this ...keeps happening

okay, anyway:

okay, here's the deal:

01. no one is saying you cannot define Indians as their own ethnic/cultural group. in fact, one of the things i have repeatedly said is "Indians are still a distinct cultural/national concept WITHIN one of the larger racial groups"

02. everyone's negroid, caucasoid or mongoloid; you don't get to be none of the above. Indians happen to qualify as caucasoid (aka "white folks")

03. people in Indian, as it is a nation, may be mixed race and background, but this not unique to India

04. no one is exempt from the racial categorization. just wanted to repeat that one

05. this is why i make rulings on this: we're SUPPOSED to be saving time here

Did you not read anything else i wrote? Ya, SOME indians are caucasoid, but again, to classify all indians as caucasoid is a blatant lie. Many are very clearly negroid, and hell, some in the north east are even mongoloid.

 

[janklow]

Did you not read anything else i wrote? Ya, SOME indians are caucasoid, but again, to classify all indians as caucasoid is a blatant lie. Many are very clearly negroid, and hell, some in the north east are even mongoloid.

yes, i read everything you wrote. and then i posted post #164 after them. did you need me to post it again? because i am pretty sure i can accuse you of not reading my posts just as quickly.

 

[tikingjcoleprince]

yes, i read everything you wrote. and then i posted post #164 after them. did you need me to post it again? because i am pretty sure i can accuse you of not reading my posts just as quickly.

Well i was just wondering, because generally when two people are discussing a topic, and person A makes a claim, if person B refutes that claim, it is expected that person B offers some sort of explanation as to why.

 

[janklow]

Well i was just wondering, because generally when two people are discussing a topic, and person A makes a claim, if person B refutes that claim, it is expected that person B offers some sort of explanation as to why.

now, see, this happened as well, but i can restate:

01. nationality != race
02. no one is exempt from being categorized into one of the three racial categories
03. logically, there is no reason to pretend being placed in a racial category negates one's cultural/ethnic/national background or history or whatever you like; despite this notion being advanced, it's unsupported

 

[tikingjcoleprince]

now, see, this happened as well, but i can restate:

01. nationality != race

02. no one is exempt from being categorized into one of the three racial categories

03. logically, there is no reason to pretend being placed in a racial category negates one's cultural/ethnic/national background or history or whatever you like; despite this notion being advanced, it's unsupported

And thats all true. But that still doesn't back up your claim that all indian are white. It just states reasons why i should be ok with that claim. But that claim is fundamentally wrong.

There are parts of india where many inhabitants are very clearly mongoloid:

And all over india, especially in the lower castes, some people are very clearly negroid:

 

[janklow]

And thats all true. But that still doesn't back up your claim that all indian are white. It just states reasons why i should be ok with that claim. But that claim is fundamentally wrong.

"03. people in India, as it is a nation, may be mixed race and background, but this not unique to India

 

[tikingjcoleprince]

"03. people in India, as it is a nation, may be mixed race and background, but this not unique to India

OHHH it all makes sense now, being mixed in race and background = white. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[janklow]

OHHH it all makes sense now, being mixed in race and background = white. Thanks for the clarification.

the clarification that you seem to be overlooking is that India is not just a general description of an ethnicity, but ALSO a nationality. hope that helps!

 

[tikingjcoleprince]

the clarification that you seem to be overlooking is that India is not just a general description of an ethnicity, but ALSO a nationality. hope that helps!

And race obviously != ethnicity OR nationality.

And since some indians are white, its only logical that ALL indians, even the black, brown and yellow ones, are white. Makes perfect sense.

 

[janklow]

And race obviously != ethnicity OR nationality.

you know, you say this like you're starting to get it, but then it all falls apart

And since some indians are white, its only logical that ALL indians, even the black, brown and yellow ones, are white. Makes perfect sense.

or they're only Indian in terms of nationality

fundamentally, what this STILL comes down to is you being upset about being white. it's been on display the entire time. to which i say, it's not your fault you're white, man

 

[waterproof]

you know, you say this like you're starting to get it, but then it all falls apart

or they're only Indian in terms of nationality

fundamentally, what this STILL comes down to is you being upset about being white. it's been on display the entire time. to which i say, it's not your fault you're white, man

lol, Janklow what your nationality bruh...

 

[tikingjcoleprince]

you know, you say this like you're starting to get it, but then it all falls apart

or they're only Indian in terms of nationality

fundamentally, what this STILL comes down to is you being upset about being white. it's been on display the entire time. to which i say, it's not your fault you're white, man

Lmao, noooo sir you are very mistaken. I'm very clearly not white, and i have no doubt about that fact, nor can any statement you make convince me otherwise. You see me on the street you would probably, like almost everyone else i meet, think i'm black until i tell you otherwise, so being white is not an issue for me. What is an issue is you calling the rest of my people white. Many of them are >50% Caucasian, and i know and accept that. But many also are not, so i'm still having a hard time understanding how they are white.

So, please, even if you dont read any of the rest of my post, please answer this question: How can someone who is much more than 50% negroid or mongoloid be considered white?

I feel like you've been avoiding answering that one key question this whole time.