|
>So, you actually think Charles Darwin >came up with the idea >that Europeans are part of >a racial group?
Actually Charles Darwin came up with that particular postualte.
I have >no idea how you could >substantiate that. In fact, I >don't think you can.
Look it up
European >interaction with Native Americans and >Africans throughout the colonial period >is filled with writings which >indicate that Europeans considered themselves >superior to both, much of >those writings pre-dating Darwin. The >world's problems with race precede >Darwin, I'm afraid.
Superiority ideologies dont necessarily mean racial ideololgies- race ideologies were fostered as evolutionary science and that would follow the work of charles darwin and charles lyle. Race propogated the Europeans should not only consider themselves better but perpetuate social science that claimed other groups were subhuman- BIG DIFFERENCE.
>>http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0679600701/qid%3D957368729/sr%3D1-20/104-5523944-2795968 >> >>as well as the subsequent writing >>of charles lyle. These books >>provided that race had its >>"scientific" basis in the systems >>of evolution by which professing >>that "white" or "caucasians" were >>more evolved as their features >>were less "simian" > >racial division predates any of this.
PROOVE IT! find one book one race classification that precedes evolutionary theory- that's nonsense- that was the whole point- to explain human variance according to evolutionary theory.
>I don't have to signify anything. >Anyone in America knows the >general racial classifications: black, white, >Asian, Hispanic.
Asia is a geographic origin, Hispanic is hardly accepted by several Latino people, Black is a nationalist term that is not officially observed by this nation and white is something signifies no national origin and no cultural origin. does that sound like a stable system of operation to you?
You've forgotten such racial classifications as Caucasian, Negroid, Mongloid, Oriental, Latino, Indian, and Native American where do all those people fit into your "general racial classifications" they dont... and they dont even want to!
>>>Why aren;t Russians (from the >>>eastern portion of the old >>>USSR )and Isrealis considered "Asians"? >> >>I dont know- whats your point? > >My point is, all racial classifications >are arbitrary, not just the >"white" racial classicification. Someone somewhere >decided that "Asian" as a >racial group did not encompass >every human being who lived >on the Asian continent.
No that derives of culture and geographic origin and the history of events. How far did asians travel their continent to make such delineations. Even a laymen's understanding will demonstrate the difference between the two areas; not only is there an obvious cultural variation filled with different traditions and different customs there is also a natural boundary of colder climate and terser terrain that separates the cultures. Thats not arbitrary its a damned mountain range.
K
|