Super Nova wrote
I agree with Brian. We are one race therefore equal.
Hi Super Nova, I just missed you on the "Climate Change" topic. You vanished into cyberspace before I could talk some sense into you.
We may be one race in that we are one species. But within all species, including humans, sub species exist. Sub species are created where a species is separated by vast distances and very different climatic and environmental conditions, evolve to have noticeably different physical and behavioural differences. This gives particular sub species an advantage in their particular environments.
The same genetics that work for every other living thing on earth applies to humans as well. Races and ethnicities are human sub species. Mixed race humans are breeds. In the animal world, it is widely appreciated that some sub species and breeds are intelligent, and some are dangerous.
Super Nova wrote
However we are not equal in
- Culture
- Education
- Nurture
- Life head starts
- IQ
- Opportunity
- Wealth
That is a declaration, not an argument.
Super Nova wrote
Do not mistake that these inequalities have anything to with what is called "Race". If you stuck a whole bunch of white duds in Nigeria at birth and coloured them black (to not be discriminated against and be fully immersed), they would be no different to a Nigerian today.
Some of this, particularly life opportunities are far from equal.
Once again, that is more of a declaration than an argument.
I will show you how it is done.
I was once brainwashed into thinking that all races were equal. But it did not take me long to figure out that there was something fundamentally wrong with the anti racist argument. To begin with, the only excuse that the so called "anti racists" could come up with to explain why some ethnicities are chronically dysfunctional, was to always blame the white race. You are even implying that in your above statement.
Now, blaming one race for the dysfunctions of another race is racism. Hitler blamed the Jews for the misfortunes of the Germans, and I think you would agree that he was being racist. So, what I had to choose from was to choose between two racist explanations that explained why some notorious ethnicities were so dysfunctional. I chose the one which made the most sense.
That is, that success in life is primarily a factor of intelligence. And IQ's levels are primarily related to the time that any sub species of humans have existed within a civilised society. In primitive societies, being extremely violent and aggressive may give you an advantage over rivals when it comes to taking and defending a territory that has life prolonging resources. But civilised societies depend more upon having a majority of it's members being of a co operative personality, and very violent and selfish members are usually genetically eradicated.
What this means is that those ethnicities (or human sub species) not long removed from barbarism have a low collective IQ and a genetic predisposition to extreme violence. Such people hardly make good citizens in advanced societies, and their own societies are dangerous places to be in, and economic basket cases.