not sure what you mean by this but america has and has had plenty of money to help fix alot of the communities that have historically suffered from opression, racism, bad policies by the federal/state governments, and poverty.(fixing them would have even helped the economy long term but many dont want this because it would give more power to minorities) Instead of trying to help fix these communities, america often times just does more to hurt them with the broken criminal justice system, war on drugs,(war on minority communities to imprison and kill them) and money spent everywhere else except for on the people who need it most.
if you're going to start lying we can't have a serious conversation. did you mean to say that minorities have been oppressed, attacked, and impoverished for multiple generations?
this makes alot of sense but what europeans have done in the past 500 years has been a little different than the prior sins of human history.(maybe excluding eastern europeans, i need to see a map) the scale of the thefts, genocides, and enslavement is nothing like any other group of people have ever committed. from a non european point of view they pretty much ruined the world. america is nice and everything but id much rather have the native americans still existing on their home continent and id much rather be in africa.(before the Europeans destroyed it and caused all of the chaos that exists today as a result of colonialism) im just thankful africans didnt end up like the native americans. the native americans are basically extinct. I am part choctaw among other things and they are just gone. i am amazed europeans havent altered history more and allow the people of the world to learn about these events.
Ugh. It was a half joke, with my point being that the oscars aren't racist. I never even implied any black guy is undeserved of an MVP award. And I get hit with this wall of text. Didn't Lupita Nyongo won an oscar just last year? How, if they are racist? How do you even prove an award ceremony is racist? Is it because the judges are predominantly white? It's just awards given by an expert comittee. I'm not saying racism doesn't exist. I'm merely saying there wasn't anything racist about the oscars. The rest is just some bs white guilt trip. How long will colonial Europe be blamed for everything? People living today have nothing to do with colonialism. And what do you think the natives were doing? Being peaceful? They were making war with each other. Making blood sacrifices to their gods. The Aztecs required offers from other, lesser, tribes. Who would then go on to war with each other in an attempt to steal people, so they don't have to send their own for sacrifice. Japan was constantly at war. That country was a bloodbath until the 16th century. Korea, China, Russia were warring too. African tribes were in war with each other constantly. In fact, when the evil whiteys came, they were eager to capture slaves from other tribes themselves and trade them for riches/weapons/food. The middle east was, and still is, a bloodbath. The Ottomans were raiding and massacring europe constantly. My point? The old world was a brutal world. Might is right was the rule. It just so happened the European nations were the most advanced at a point in time, which gave them great power. I am not excusing any of it. I am merely saying they weren't any more evil than any other race. Can you honestly say any other race wouldn't use such power if they had it? This white guilt propaganda is bs. I am not responsible for actions of people from 500 years ago.
blacks only win for slave or gangster movies... the real problem is that minorities arent given the roles that would allow them to win more type of these type of awards. white people make those decisions though. i dont really care about the oscars though, just the real problems the country has.
Spoiler And they've also had many initiatives that are ostensibly supposed to help. Wellfare, gentrification programs, affirmative action, and so on. Some more successful than others. Some actually made the problems worse. Bad policies by the Federal and State governments are most certainly an issue, though this is not limited to minority groups in this regard. From my view, most of those hoarding wealth and power are doing so to ensure their own personal dominance, not to impoverish (or keep impoverished) any specific race of humans. The poor (of any race or creed) are especially targeted because their desperation can be manipulated (and is also a possible threat in the forms of riots and political unrest, provided it is pointed toward a useful goal it can even become a solid movement, like what happened in the 60's). ------------------------------------------------- According to Oxfam, 62 people (all going to Davos, I posted about this earlier in the thread, though there wasn't too much discussion other than I think BP mentioning that some economists disagreed with their figures) own more wealth/property than the 50% of the world (roughly 3.5 Billion) that are the poorest in the world. And also that 1% of the population (roughly 70 Million) own more than the other 99%. While I'm sure some of that 1% are legit, the fact is that the bad policies are funded by these types of people to serve these people. I'm sure some of them are also racist (at least that has been true historically), but it is secondary to securing their own personal (or their own families) power. Stuff that happened 300 years ago is largely moot by now and only really matters so much as people have carried it with them towards the present. Stuff that happened 200 years ago is history. Stuff from 100 years ago has had an impact but is dying out. 50 years ago still matters, but it's fading, and the new generations have the freedoms and opportunities where were stolen from them returned to them. Though whether or not they can capitalize depends on the larger economic picture and of course their own individual efforts. However, the larger economic pictures is currently crap. It's been crap for over a decade. Everyone is feeling it. While this of course has to do with my local demographics (it's mostly white, latino, and asian people in my area, with some North Africans and Blacks as well but less), most of the homeless people I see, and I see quite a bit, usually at least 1-2 on a daily basis (mostly different people) are white. A few are Black, but there are very, very few homeless Latinos even though they are one of the greater demographics in the area. Today I walked by a young man with a sign saying "Starving!" (and gave him what food I could spare at the time, but beside the point). It isn't the White People that put this white guy onto the streets out of racism. It wasn't even the Middle Class people that put him there out of classism. It's the result of the economy being dominated by fraud, bad policies, and so on, fomented by a portion of the 1%. Not even "the rich" but the greater and true elites of the world. That's the real classism. If you want to blame the current bad policies on anyone, it's not "White Men" in general, though I could point you to some White men that I believe are responsible. And again, maybe they are doing some of it out of a racist agenda, but irregardless, they are doing it first and foremost to expand and secure their own power over everyone else. At least that was what I was trying to communicate. To help put something in perspective. When I say what happened 50 years ago is fading, the median age of white males in the US is 41 (though part of this is also declining birth-rates). The Median age of Blacks is 35 (the homicide rate doesn't help here, but I'm sure poverty and such are also issues, I won't argue that there are problems here). In both cases it's less than 50 years, meaning most of the members of both parties weren't even alive when segregation was a thing, and most of them are of the age to have/had children. Many people have, historically been able to build themselves and their family up from less. If there's a reason why Blacks specifically haven't been able to, it's because of a mixture of culture (embracing gang culture/drugs following the War on Drugs*), and the timing (bubble economy followed by a crash). *(The War on Drugs should be done away with and indeed never brought up. However, I don't believe it alone is responsible for the higher incarceration rates for Black people. I think, rather it is that combined with the manipulation of desperation of the poor in general, though I'm sure some had racist motivation at least in the past. In either event, White Men in general shouldn't be blamed for it. Indeed the War on Drugs for many is ostensibly an attempt to clean up those minority neighborhoods "afflicted" with drug abuse and crime. They are mistaken, but their intentions are generally towards the betterment of minorities.) But seriously, for someone who came in to say they don't care about the Oscars (you're not alone in that), this thread about Snow has taken a rather interesting turn. I thought I made a thread specifically to talk about Racism, Government Policies, and how they intersect?
the aztecs were more or less savages too but itd be better for them to continue to exist than all of the natives being basically wiped out from their homeland.(and from existence period) there is also a big difference between regular wars and large scale theft and genocide. japan has a pretty mixed history as well but its not the same scale as what countries like france, england, and spain. the aztecs savagery doesnt compare to that of the spanish and english at all. what the spanish and english did was much much worse. you are right that the world is evil but the key thing is the scale of the atrocities and the scale of the thefts and genocides committed. look at americas racial makeup today, its pretty sad. this should be a country of native americans, they are all dead. seems like most of the worlds people are evil or have gotten where they are today by their ancestors being evil. many but not all european nations just went another step further.(or several steps...)
any or all of them, as long as they got to continue to exist and self govern. the native americans partially have themselves to blame for their own destruction. the natives fighting and weakening each other is why they no longer exist.(with luck, nature, and other forces playing a large role as well) fighting amongst yourselves is almost never the best option but people are stupid and make stupid decisions in part because of how chaotic and evil the world is and because of their short lifespans. if people lived longer and didnt die so easily this would be a much more peaceful and unified world. Our lifespans and the fact that we dont become adults until nearly our 20th year is the biggest reason the world is so insane.
Bubble wrapping the world is impossible. They had their chance. I am more worried about current successes and failures. The storm clouds are at the gates, and all of us will pay the piper one way or the other. Humanity should be fine, but nothing is guaranteed. Time to meditate, then act. Good day.
peoples lifespans are too short, that's why the worlds so messed up. if we lived longer and reproduced less this world would be a utopia. Too much knowledge is lost with each death and birth.
I vote Winnebago the ruling tribe! What? Just because I'm part Winnebago doesn't make me biased or anything! Well, when our life-spans were shorter (such as in the times of colonialism) kids became adults much "sooner" (generally puberty-ish, maybe a couple extra years, mid-teens basically, girls became "women" probably sooner-ish but depends on the culture). Not sure if that makes much of a difference for you but I just thought it was worth mentioning. I'm all for longer life-spans, but we as a species need to stop killing each other long enough to, uh, not die. The thing is, I don't think merely living longer makes us more peaceful in and of itself, though obviously it affords the opportunity to learn more about the world.
I don't think that reducing the birth-rate is necessary to preserve knowledge. All you need to do is ensure they live long enough to be taught about the world and be able to explore it for themselves. As far as over-population issues, I think that can be handled in the short term through improved logistics, and in the long-term via planetary colonizations and the like, though this does potentially add some communications barriers (where-in the knowledge is lost or distorted or forgotten) on an interstellar level (provided further technologies can't be advanced to solve that problem).
I am glad the storm is over! And now ust a little history because it seems to be lacking in this thread. USA is noobs when it comes to extermination and slavery. I suggest even reading into it deeper and of course from multiple sources these are snippets from R Rummels which is a good start. "This is a report of the statistical results from a project on comparative genocide and mass-murder in this century. Most probably near 170,000,000 people have been murdered in cold-blood by governments, well over three-quarters by absolutist regimes. The most such killing was done by the Soviet Union (near 62,000,000 people), the communist government of China is second (near 35,000,000), followed by **** Germany (almost 21,000,000), and Nationalist China (some 10,000,000). Lesser megamurderers include WWII Japan, Khmer Rouge Cambodia, WWI Turkey, communist Vietnam, post-WWII Poland, Pakistan, and communist Yugoslavia. The most intense democide was carried out by the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, where they killed over 30 percent of their subjects in less than four years. The best predictor of this killing is regime power. The more arbitrary power a regime has, the less democratic it is, the more likely it will kill its subjects or foreigners. The conclusion is that power kills, absolute power kills absolutely." "Finally, this is a report and not a research article and I have only cited my past and forthcoming publications from which these results are taken. Be assured, that I covered and cited the literature as fully as I could in these sources, and went beyond the statistics to write an historical analysis on each case of democide that exceeded 1,000,000 dead. So that the reader will have some idea of what the estimates underlying the results look like, I have given in the Appendix some of the estimates for the Cambodian Khmer Rouge democide. Each published table presenting the full estimates for one of the results to be given ran for dozens of pages and in some cases over fifty pages. I had to write separate books for the USSR and **** Germany4 in order to present all the material underlying the final democide figures for them, and another book5 for Nationalist China and the PRC. The complex history of democide in Cambodia required a long chapter in Death by Government,6 and the presentation of the associated material given in the associated statistical volume7 ran to 845 lines of estimates, consolidations, and calculations. Now for the overview. The principle conclusion emerging from previous work on the causes of war and this project is that power kills, absolute power kills absolutely. The more power a government has, the more it can act arbitrarily according to the whims and desires of the elite, the more it will make war on others and murder its foreign and domestic subjects. The more constrained the power of governments, the more it is diffused, checked and balanced, the less it will aggress on others and commit democide.8 At the extremes of power, totalitarian communist governments murder their people by the tens of millions, while many democracies can barely bring themselves to execute even serial murderers. As listed in Table 1 , this century's megamurderers--those states killing in cold blood, aside from warfare, 1,000,000 or more men, women, and children--have murdered over 151,000,000 people, almost four times the almost 38,500,000 battle-dead for all this century's international and civil wars up to 1987. The most absolute Power, that is the communist U.S.S.R., China and preceding Mao guerrillas, Khmer Rouge Cambodia, Vietnam, and Yugoslavia, as well as **** Germany, account for near 128,000,000 of them, or 84 percent. No one of the remaining megamurderers, which include the regimes of Pakistan,9 wartime Japan, Nationalist China, Cambodia, communist Vietnam, post-War II Poland,10 and communist Yugoslavia, were democratic when it committed its democide. Then there are the kilomurderers, or those states that have killed innocents by the tens or hundreds of thousands, the top five of which were the China Warlords (1917-1949), Atatürk's Turkey (1919-1923), the United Kingdom (primarily due to the 1914-1919 food blockade of the Central Powers and Levant in and after World War I, and the 1940-45 indiscriminate bombing of German cities), Portugal (1926-1982), and Indonesia (1965-87). These are shown in Table 1. Some lesser kilomurderers were communist Afghanistan, Angola, Albania, Rumania, and Ethiopia, as well as authoritarian Hungary, Burundi, Croatia (1941-44), Czechoslovakia (1945-46), Indonesia, Iraq, the Czar's Russia, and Uganda. For its indiscriminate bombing of German and Japanese civilians, the United States must also be included on this list. These and other kilomurderers add almost 15,000,000 people killed to the democide for this century. As listed in Table 2, the most lethal regime in this century was that of the communist Khmer Rouge in Cambodia during 1975 through 1978. In less than four years of governing they exterminated over 31 percent of their men, women, and children; the odds of any Cambodian surviving these four long years was only about 2.2 to 1. As mentioned, the Appendix exemplifies some of the estimates of this killing. The major and better known episodes and institutions for which these and other regimes were responsible are listed in Table 3. Far above all is gulag--the Soviet slave-labor system created by Lenin and built up under Stalin. In some 70 years it likely chewed up almost 40,000,000 lives, over twice as many as probably died in some 400 years of the African slave trade, from capture to sale in an Arab, Oriental, or New World market. In total, during the first eighty-eight years of this century, almost 170,000,000 men, women, and children have been shot, beaten, tortured, knifed, burned, starved, frozen, crushed, or worked to death; or buried alive, drowned, hanged, bombed, or killed in any other of the myriad ways governments have inflicted death on unarmed, helpless citizens or foreigners. The dead even could conceivable be near a high of 360,000,000 people. This is as though our species has been devastated by a modern Black Plague. And indeed it has, but a plague of absolute power and not germs. Adding the human cost of war to this democide total, governments have violently killed over 203,000,000 people in this century. Table 4 breaks down this toll by type of regime. Figure 1 graphs the regime comparisons. " Go go big government ?
