Are we really all the same?
 

I have no intentions of anything being racist or harmful to any culture in this thread so don't come in here with some whining race card bullshit or unthoughtful responses.

This is assuming all races and cultures have existed on Earth for essentially the same amount of time.

Why is it that the Caucasian race was the first to really advance technologically with the creation of better weapons, boats, wagons, etc.?

Why wasn't it the African race? Or the Native American race?

Was it due to location and material possibility? See, I assume that North America would have had the best resources for everything, but the Native American's were slaughtered once the Brit's came across the pond.

So I was thinking..

Is each race born with a different drive/desire in life?

Im the best mayne i did it!!

Good call, Eli is the answer to life.

like rosie oddonel at a bi sexual bridal shower.

i watched a thing on the history channel about it, in the beggining they said it was because location..whoever had the better crops and bigger food supplie could advance more quickly.(in the very beggining) i cant elaborate cuz i dont really remember but i remember them saying that..

OH MY GOD YOU RACIST FUCK

how dare you make out..............oh who the fuck am i kidding


this is a pretty heavy debate, theres an insane amount of aspects and contributing factors playing a hand here.

at first glance you do have a point. and to an extent the argument of whether were all the same is easily rejected due to the fact that all our civilisations and ansestory paths have been different.

but the real argument or analogy would become, if other races were put in the situations that our white race had been put through, wouldnt they then have developed the same characteristics that we did to become what we are?

if the english race developed on a small island in the pacific near the equator, over thousands of years would the end result mean the english race would be black? or atleast far darker?

are you a supporter of the evolution theory? because this also plays a massive part in determining the conclusion to this thread.

i would equate things more like...


who gets in more wars and forces their civilisations to develop new technology to stay ahead of their enemies..

^^^^i agree, i was just saying in the very beginning..they said the lands that had the advantages were europe the middle east and the top half of africa..

That's a good call. It's just always confused the shit out of me that for some reason the Caucasian race turned out to be so much more powerful than every other race and never understood why. I guess that it's a good question to think about if the Native American's were situated where Europe was and the Brits started in North America if the same shit would have happened. Shit is fucked up..

As for evolution, I'm open to everything except the beliefs of fundamental Christians.

you can call me stupid and wrong for giving my opinion on this thread, because other people always misunderstand what I have to say anyway, but did it ever cross your mind that tribes of black people/tribes of asian people/tribes of white people set themselves up differently to handle life and because of their ways of setting up their ways of life, that determined how much they could get from their land and people, which helped determine where they actually stood on the grounds of power in comparison to other races?

Afterall for many years Africa was ruled by Kings. Asia was ruled by Emperors, and most of the white nations were full of Dukes, & Kings, with an occasional democracy here and there.

see, what you're failing to realize is how tainted your point of view is. it hasn't ALWAYS been the way it is today. take the world back 200 years and Africa is a flourishing land with a society just as advanced as European society. it wasn't until European colonization of Africa that shit started getting fucked up, do your research...

what i'm saying is, you're asking this question from the point of view of someone living in 2008, but you aren't applying modern events or circumstances in order to come to your conclusions. you're assuming that the way it is now is the way it has always been due to some kind of natural process that occurred way back. but the truth is, the world only became like how it is now recently.

*smacks the fuck out of you*

retard. We based our current democracy on a system thousands of years ago. THAT'S THE OLD WORLD.

Africa SOLD US PEOPLE before 200 years ago, OF COURSE THEY GOT RICH.

Do you not THINK I could EVER say ANYTHING that applies so you just ASSUME everything I FUCKING SAY is wrong?

USE YOUR MOTHER FUCKING BRAIN YOU FUCKING ILLITERATE, CRUDELY TAUGHT ASSHOLE.

who the fuck are you talking to? first of all, i wasn't even addressing you or else i would have quoted you, i was addressing the creator of this thread, so the whole "do you just assume everything i say is wrong" thing is irrelevant.

actually, your whole post is irrelevant. wtf does the fact that we BASED our democratic government on the past have anything to do with the fact that the slave trade is what fucked up Africa, not the fact that they are black? lol, i don't know what issues you're discussing, but i'm addressing the ones that the creator of this thread brought up.

i wasn't arguing that history should be ignored or that we should assume that we invented democracy. i just really don't see your point at all. :huh:

"wtf does the fact that we BASED our democratic government on the past have anything to do with the fact that the slave trade is what fucked up Africa, not the fact that they are black?"

First of all, we're based on a democratic government which was originated by white people long ago. We bought the slaves because they were black, no other reason, and considered them without souls anyway, the slave trade is what HELPED Africa because their Kings were poor before our money bought their people.

second:
They harvested their own people to sell, we, as white men, bought them. That's what it has to do with each other.

The actual answer I gave was that our societies of skin colors were built completely differently. Thus that had a lot to do with how they built over time.

the slave trade is what helped africa? are you kidding.
as if they were poor or something, you know they have the most gold,ruby,diamond,silver,ect....than any other country... every surrounding nation has always kept them in a state of poverty amungst different tribes and geurilla groups to extract all that stuff from the country..thats where aids comes in and the weapons contracts, the blood diamond trade ect...
HELPED africa...wow, way to much bill oreilly...

im sorry..


it wasnt untill european colonization of africa that shit started getting fucked up?


isnt that a sure fire proven result that european society was more dominant and advanced than africans. what point are you trying to prove?

You're fucking babbling about some bullshit you don't even understand in the first place and trying to look intelligent with it.

My point of view isn't tainted in any way at all. Africa never had a flourishing land with a society as advanced as the European society before colonization. What the fuck are you talking about? Do you think they would have actually sold slaves and did whatever the fuck Europe told them if they did? Fuck living in a 2008 point of view, you're living in a fucking race point of view, which actually makes YOU the racist.

My question was about different races have different drives/desires and if that would have been the determining factor to where and why we are what we are today. "The world only became like how it is now recently." No, no it fucking didn't. You're thinking from an American point of view and you're thinking wrong.

maybe the white guys didnt "advance technology" maybe we just took all the credit...but yet again bill gates couldnt be anything but white

first of all, as talksic has stated your completely out of whack with your beleif that africa was poor until the europeans brought "their money". as it is well known all money is based on solid wealth, such as gold and diamonds which africa was and still is flooded with. africans just didnt have as strong a value on it until europeans showed up. and that was only because of the trade value it held with europeans. second when africans first used slaves among themselves they weren't slaves for life. then and even the slaves initially sold to europeans were prisoners of war and convicted criminals. yes after the initial monetary gain, lesser citizens were sold off by the king.this lasted until europeans started stealing as many citizens as they can, including royalty. so yes africa was slightly fucked up, but it was multiplied to the tenth degree after european integration. but as red bull said, this thread wasnt really meant to be an argument of races, so ill add to the initial discussion in the next post

the idea of technological advancment has and always will be based on need and want. most races such africans, asians, and native americans didnt have as much of a greed factor as europeans. not saying all europeans, normally royals, nobals, and merchant. this in turn created a system based on monetary gain (which truly is the backbone of technological advancment). the constant arms race of the world, which started in Europe, is a sprint to have superior weapons. superior weaponry, easier chance to conquer others and take their land. other advancments such candles, clothes, other things were based on needs. and needs are all in the minds of the people needing them. such as the lengths different races went to in terms of their clothing. from straw shirts to wool pants. most races didnt feel the need to go to the same lengths in technology as europeans.


^^^^^just my personal theory but a lot of it is based on fact.



all of these advances gave europeans the want and ability to take over the world. so all of the advances given to the world by these advances initially meant nothing to other cultures. so yes europeans fucked up the world. but by fucking it up they made it better in the long run. (i probably just feel this ways because the integration into your culture brainwashed me to think just as you do :thumbup: ) and even in that since, every culture brought somethin better to the table or else why was their an initial want by the europeans to trade with them? asians had silk, which was almost as sought after by europeans as gold. Africans had a far more superior system of learning. and native americans were extremly better agriculture and understanding of the land.

But why did the European's have this drive? This is the initial question, was the white race born with a different desire than the other races?

^^^yea that same question went through my head when i was writing this. thats the unexplained. i guess it was just some random shit. who knows. one little seemingly insignificant thing couldve sparked it off. it all comes down to one simple question to me. what race discovered the wheel. it seems whoever did mightve had the upper hand on technology. and judging by the outcome im guessing it was european ancestors

"first of all, as talksic has stated your completely out of whack with your beleif that africa was poor until the europeans brought "their money"."

does that not change the fact that they got rich from us buying their slaves? Uhhh... It was worth money so they rounded up their people from the forests and dragged them to the fucking shore, themselves, and sold them to merchants.

But as I figured, people would ignore my point.

"But why did the European's have this drive? This is the initial question, was the white race born with a different desire than the other races?"

My presented explanation was that they built their societies differently BASED ON RACE, (Even Kings and Emperors had different rules. For example, Kings with divine right vs. Appointed kings under an Emperor which is the "will of heaven") and because of their race and decisions to build a society structure a certain way, they grew differently.

okay now i agree with your answers to reds question. but as far as the rich thing all i was stating was that they were already rich and didnt realize the value of what they possesed. by the european standards of money, im sure there were a many kings and maybe even a few normal people who were richer than the europeans who they sold the slaves to. but after this new system of buying and selling was installed, they of course wanted more money. you also forget that a lot of rich africans were robbed of all valuable possesions as well.

wow, i'm seriously gonna give up trying to convince anybody on this board to think. everybody has their set attitudes and personalities that they're gonna stick with 100% in order to preserve their self-confidence.

I'M racist for saying that the reason Africa is the way it is is because of European colonization??? how the fuck do you gather that? read a fucking history book, i just took AFRI 101 Intro to African Civilization, and ANY scholar will tell you thats what caused it... like, its not even a debatable topic.
its history.

oh, and Nos - define "better" and "more advanced".

from what point of view? see, even that is ethnocentric to a European way of thinking. who says being "advanced" isn't living happily in tribes that are totally self-sufficient and make the best use out of every part of the Earth we live on? see, even what you think of as being "successful" is tainted by our society.

What's mostly funny is that it's you vs. an entire board of people who are always arguing with you.

I think it's just time for you to admit you're wrong, that's a little easier than trying to convince people to think like a moron. :thumbup:

Teevy has a point but hes just as stubborn as the rest of us when getting his point across. you might not see it man but from our point of view your doing the same thing. even i am. im trying not to but i cant help it. unless somone completly makes u a believer you're always gonna perceive the points you make as right. you might respect someone elses decision, but if you dont jump to that side youll never acept the entire thing as truth. a good example of this would be 2v. man why u always think the entire site dont wanna see your point. no ones picking you out everyone is doing it to everyone.

Well damn if niggas would just grasp the shit from the damn start I wouldn't have to mother fucking split headaches over it.. I find it stressful having to reenact my fucking point with words constantly to get people to understand it. Stop pointing me out for your examples whore

if you look at the people on this website, the fact that the majority of the site disagrees with me on political and social issues actually makes my side of the argument more valid.

i guess this site can't handle an educated, liberal-thinking individual... which is funny considering its a rap site and most people on here claim to be both liberal and educated.

It's mister crazy flow jumpin like bungee no rope

precisely .

Oh I forgot you were always right and the majority is usually incorrect.

Sorry dude.

YO

we got so many cool things because of our race..

you cant sit here and tell me that now youve experienced 2000A.D.+ in a western society that you could go and live in a fucking stone age nomadic dumbass superstitious tribe..

thats a joke

hahahaha @ Teevy always getting owned in threads because he always takes it personal whenever someone has a point that disagrees with him.


RED BULL FOR '08

i pointed u out cause i knew youd make my point for me. thank you

^^^and that wasnt being a smartass, you did prove my point.

"hahahaha" @ people being so damn stupid and controlled by the internet that they think i am getting "owned" on this message board for expressing the views of any intellectual OUTSIDE of RV.

and you would agree with Red Bull's ways of thinking about shit... damn black/Harold & Kumar Republican. you should make a remix of Jay and Nas' "Black Republican"... except change it to "Black/Harold & Kumar Republican" and claim that its really "featuring Jay-Z and Nas" to get more plays on soundclick!!!!!!!!! yayyyy, great idea!!!

this statement just makes me laugh tho, cuz think of how many coutnries would fight each other. The Brits and French and they would just always end up in a stalemate? Then they'd just go away for a while, and then fight each other again. Technology, most of the time, is a devlopment for the country in some OTHER way than war. Than some general see's how it can be put to use in war and snatches it up.....

haahahaha

Controlled by the internet?

Coming from the person who was just controlled by the internet to react to a post aimed at him by bringing in racial references and OBVIOUSLY getting angered by a post so much that he made a diss so bad that even pales in comparison to Poetic's disses.

For someone who talks about being sooo intellectual "OUTSIDE" of RV, you sure let a lot of posts on a "internet message board" get under your skin ;)

haaha I LOVE IT

this whole thread is pretty much asking a pretty common socilization type question. But check this, go to Africa...people dont give a shit what time in the day it is, they have completlely different priorities than white people do. If a white person, cept lazy ones, gotta be some where--than they better fuckign be their on time. As for why this is the way it is. The answer is just a bunch of different opinions that no one can really prove. But most people think that its just a direct cause and effect of the enviroment the culture was raised in.

This thread is just breeding view points with no facts.....