U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 01-23-2009, 03:32 AM
 
Location: Macao
15,714 posts, read 34,804,493 times
Reputation: 9257

Advertisements

Well....NO....the entire country won't just mix into ONE look.

What'll happen, is you just have a spectrum...black black to white white...with everything imbetween. Generally speaking, there will ALWAYS be white people attracted to white people, and black people attracted to black people and brown people attracted to brown people.

So, you'll basically have ALL kinds...a mosaic. But the mass majority of people from my observation, still generally seem to be attracted to people who look like them...but we certainly need A LOT MORE 'bridge-gappers' in my opinion - mixed. For one, they are gorgeous, attractive, better genes, and with bicultural-ability, have a greater mental capacity than a mono-cultural, mono-lingual, mono-racial person.

 
Old 01-23-2009, 03:41 AM
 
Location: Ohio
1,008 posts, read 642,829 times
Reputation: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heracles View Post
Dang, judging by this post and several down the thread a bit, it sounds like you have an ax to grind or are misunderstanding. No one here is saying that mixed relationships are better or anything. If you have seen such things in the media, share them. All I meant was that I foresee the day waaay in the future when we approach a much more homogeneous look through slow mixing. Man spread over this globe and differentiated to survive. I think this will slowly reverse through our more and more connected world. It's not a call to arms, just a long prediction.

I've found that the people who see differences (in race, class, appearance, ability, lifestyle, values, etc) and who automatically want everything and everybody to be the same, are the most pathological and insane of all the people in the world. The communists first tried to destroy class, but the European workers were only interested in getting a fair deal, they were not interested in rising up and cutting the factory owner's throat and massacring clergy (aside from the Bolsheviks in Russia and the communist/anarchist terrorists in Spain, who fortunately were crushed by Franco and the patriots).

The European workers proved to be less than ideal for recruiting into communism so the communists ultimately packed up and went elsewhere, primarily to third world nations. Relying on the tribal way of life with the often accompanying collectivist attitudes, and the disdain for colonial regimes, the communists found ample recruits in the third world. They helped overthrow colonial regime after colonial regime, while shifting the focus of their rhetoric from class to race. Once the colonial regimes were gone they shifted their rhetoric slightly, no longer attacking colonial masters since there were no colonial masters, to the idea that the entire world is an intricate system of global white oppression against everybody else, and that class is inherently linked to race, with whites being elites and everybody else being oppressed workers (bringing the class angle back into things). They then declared that the focus of their efforts should be on abolishing race (typically whites), and that borders cannot exist, cultures cannot exist, etc... Communists always seek to destroy the predominant culture of a nation when they enter into that nation, so the people lack any cohesion and have no foundation with which to oppose the new communist culture that is intended to be placed above them. Now they're trying to destroy the predominant culture of the world, since they want nothing short of the world this time. This means Western culture, as it is the most influential and powerful culture in the world, with the Islamic culture probably being a close second.

Communists used to want to abolish class, now their main focus is on abolishing race. The message and goal may have changed a bit, but they're as eager as ever to kill another 100-150 million people if they get the chance.

People say, "never again" about Hitler, but most shrug and scratch their head in ignorance when asked about the 20-40 million killed by Stalin, the 30-50 million killed by Mao, the 3-5 million killed by Pol Pot, etc... They seem to believe that Hitler has a monopoly on massacres/purges. How many young Americans (aside from the Marxist revolutionaries or dedicated students of history) have even heard of Pol Pot or can find Cambodia on the map?

People who advance an agenda that will result in the destruction of cultures, I regard as communists or at least agents of communism. If somebody said, "I yearn for the day when all classes become one and there are no appreciable differences in the houses people have, the cars they drive, how much money they make" I would say that they are a communist or at least an agent of communism. When somebody says, "I yearn for the day when all races become one and there are no appreciable differences in how people look" I see that for what it is, more communist rhetoric.


Communists are mentally disturbed people who cannot appreciate the uniqueness of every human life, the differences in appearance, strength, talents, creative abilities, height, weight, they see people as numbers, cold and hard numbers, resources to be used for building and maintaining the communist state. Stalin never blinked an eye at sending men into battle without rifles or lacking ammunition, as far as he was concerned there were more Russians where those came from.

For whatever reason, they hate differences when they see them.

Somebody can sing better than somebody else, somebody can run faster than somebody else, somebody gets more dates than somebody else, somebody has more people tell her she is pretty than somebody else... They actually spend their time wondering how they can correct such "problems."

Communists are at war with every single person who wants to maintain their own uniqueness and individuality. In essence, they are like the Borg collective, they want everything to be one mass entity, under their control. The Great Leader will rant about how special he is, and how unique he is, how only he can run the nation effectively, as his goons place oversized posters of him on the walls of all the buildings, while the masses are expected to lose their uniqueness and become faceless and nameless commodities, being allocated to a certain task based upon the needs of the state as decided by The Party.

When the Communist Manifesto was published it was effectively a declaration of war against everybody who doesn't want to just be a replaceable cog in the machine of the state/party.

I want to be who and what I am, not who or what the state/party believes I should be.
 
Old 01-23-2009, 08:34 AM
 
Location: Cumberland Co., TN
20,088 posts, read 20,582,200 times
Reputation: 20419
Quote:
Quote:
I dont think there is such a thing as pure race. We are all mixed. We have a different way of classifying race. A good example is our president who is half Caucasian and half black. People dont want to acknowledge his mix. They rather say he is African American despite his mother being Caucasian. There are countries that are mixed and are still very diverse in color as well as attractive.
The way I see it there is a definate "race" if you will. One can distinguish caucasion and mongoloid for example. You can point out aboriginal from swedes. Even within "races" one can pick out a particular ethinticity.

As to the OP, I think on a small level it could inspire some people to date interracially. Just like when a new movie comes out 101 dalmations or Marley some sheep run out a buy that breed of dog. As far as mixing thats has been going on for a long time. We are seeing more mixes I think largely due to ease of travel. Proximity.
 
Old 01-23-2009, 08:42 AM
 
516 posts, read 1,710,012 times
Reputation: 576
Quote:
Originally Posted by ESFP View Post
In schools now, most children who are "mixed" are proud of it. It has completely reversed from when I was in school (a while back). I'm surprised that nobody discusses our new President being as Caucasian as he is African-American. Actually, he's an English, Irish, French, Dutch, German, African-American. Mixed is much easier, and most people already are.
I heard a child recently say, "well, he's not that black", referring to President Obama. I certainly don't mean to offend anyone - these are the words of an 8 year old!

However, since there is so much racial mixing perhaps there should be a new census category. At this point, why is it that if someone is 50% african american and 50% caucasian why are they classified african american? Why is it if someone is 50% african american and 50% latino why are they classified as latino? Is this some strange rock/paper/scissors phenomenon? Maybe there should be some kind of category created as there will certainly be more racial mixing in the generations ahead.
 
Old 01-23-2009, 08:48 AM
 
Location: Ohio
1,008 posts, read 642,829 times
Reputation: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shwa View Post
I heard a child recently say, "well, he's not that black", referring to President Obama. I certainly don't mean to offend anyone - these are the words of an 8 year old!

However, since there is so much racial mixing perhaps there should be a new census category. At this point, why is it that if someone is 50% african american and 50% caucasian why are they classified african american? Why is it if someone is 50% african american and 50% latino why are they classified as latino? Is this some strange rock/paper/scissors phenomenon? Maybe there should be some kind of category created as there will certainly be more racial mixing in the generations ahead.

Whether or not you agree with it or like it, in the USA to be able to claim a White racial identity, you typically need to be entirely White. This goes back to the "one drop rule" from the late 19th century and early 20th century. If somebody has any discernable non-white ancestry, they are not regarded as White by the majority of White Americans. That's how it has tended to be in the USA.

As for the case specific to Obama, it seems he decides to identify as Black, ignoring the fact his mother was White, except when referring to her, and her mother (his grandmother) as "typical White women" (whatever that means).
 
Old 01-23-2009, 09:09 AM
 
2,214 posts, read 1,642,751 times
Reputation: 371
I thought that the election of Obama as President was supposed to put an end to all this arguing about race, and prove that race doesn't matter.

Obviously, just the opposite is true.
 
Old 01-23-2009, 09:49 AM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,915 posts, read 7,095,365 times
Reputation: 948
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioUberAlles View Post
Way to put words in my mouth!

I simply said that I am sick of seeing the media elite portraying race-mixing as morally superior to racially homogenous marriages.

They need to leave people the heck alone!
And what do these words OF YOURS mean, "It's not enough that miscegenation is legal, mixed-raced marriages are legal"?
 
Old 01-23-2009, 09:50 AM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,915 posts, read 7,095,365 times
Reputation: 948
Quote:
Originally Posted by mommabear2 View Post
I didn't take Ohio's post that way at all. It's a complex notion in what Ohio is saying, if I'm understanding them correctly. Mixed is not "better." Staying with your own race/ethnicity/etc. is not "bad." A Jew wanting to marry a Jew is not "bad." A black man who only dates black women is not "racist." It is what it is. People have their preferences. There are ethnicities that have been around for thousands of years because they stayed with people who have similar historical/cultural - and by extension - racial background. There's nothing "wrong" with races not being mixed.

btw, I'm mixed raced. My family is a made up of all colors.
It is by definition "racist".
 
Old 01-23-2009, 09:53 AM
 
Location: Ohio
1,008 posts, read 642,829 times
Reputation: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
And what do these words OF YOURS mean, "It's not enough that miscegenation is legal, mixed-raced marriages are legal"?

People who push an agenda are not content simply to be allowed to marry a woman (or man) of another race, or marry a person of the same sex, they don't simply want legal acceptance or society to be unconcerned with their conduct, leaving them to do as they wish. They want to be seen as better than everybody else, they want their neighbors to feel in awe at the sight of their being in a mixed-race or homosexual marriage.

I'm not going to fall down on my knees and kiss your feet for being in a gay marriage or a racially mixed marriage, or any sort of marriage. Do what you want, leave me the heck alone, shut up about it and get on with your life.

What do you want? A cookie? A medal? A parade?
 
Old 01-23-2009, 10:11 AM
 
Location: Harrisonville
1,831 posts, read 2,062,265 times
Reputation: 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioUberAlles View Post
I've found that the people who see differences (in race, class, appearance, ability, lifestyle, values, etc) and who automatically want everything and everybody to be the same, are the most pathological and insane of all the people in the world. The communists first tried to destroy class, but the European workers were only interested in getting a fair deal, they were not interested in rising up and cutting the factory owner's throat and massacring clergy (aside from the Bolsheviks in Russia and the communist/anarchist terrorists in Spain, who fortunately were crushed by Franco and the patriots).

The European workers proved to be less than ideal for recruiting into communism so the communists ultimately packed up and went elsewhere, primarily to third world nations. Relying on the tribal way of life with the often accompanying collectivist attitudes, and the disdain for colonial regimes, the communists found ample recruits in the third world. They helped overthrow colonial regime after colonial regime, while shifting the focus of their rhetoric from class to race. Once the colonial regimes were gone they shifted their rhetoric slightly, no longer attacking colonial masters since there were no colonial masters, to the idea that the entire world is an intricate system of global white oppression against everybody else, and that class is inherently linked to race, with whites being elites and everybody else being oppressed workers (bringing the class angle back into things). They then declared that the focus of their efforts should be on abolishing race (typically whites), and that borders cannot exist, cultures cannot exist, etc... Communists always seek to destroy the predominant culture of a nation when they enter into that nation, so the people lack any cohesion and have no foundation with which to oppose the new communist culture that is intended to be placed above them. Now they're trying to destroy the predominant culture of the world, since they want nothing short of the world this time. This means Western culture, as it is the most influential and powerful culture in the world, with the Islamic culture probably being a close second.

Communists used to want to abolish class, now their main focus is on abolishing race. The message and goal may have changed a bit, but they're as eager as ever to kill another 100-150 million people if they get the chance.

People say, "never again" about Hitler, but most shrug and scratch their head in ignorance when asked about the 20-40 million killed by Stalin, the 30-50 million killed by Mao, the 3-5 million killed by Pol Pot, etc... They seem to believe that Hitler has a monopoly on massacres/purges. How many young Americans (aside from the Marxist revolutionaries or dedicated students of history) have even heard of Pol Pot or can find Cambodia on the map?

People who advance an agenda that will result in the destruction of cultures, I regard as communists or at least agents of communism. If somebody said, "I yearn for the day when all classes become one and there are no appreciable differences in the houses people have, the cars they drive, how much money they make" I would say that they are a communist or at least an agent of communism. When somebody says, "I yearn for the day when all races become one and there are no appreciable differences in how people look" I see that for what it is, more communist rhetoric.


Communists are mentally disturbed people who cannot appreciate the uniqueness of every human life, the differences in appearance, strength, talents, creative abilities, height, weight, they see people as numbers, cold and hard numbers, resources to be used for building and maintaining the communist state. Stalin never blinked an eye at sending men into battle without rifles or lacking ammunition, as far as he was concerned there were more Russians where those came from.

For whatever reason, they hate differences when they see them.

Somebody can sing better than somebody else, somebody can run faster than somebody else, somebody gets more dates than somebody else, somebody has more people tell her she is pretty than somebody else... They actually spend their time wondering how they can correct such "problems."

Communists are at war with every single person who wants to maintain their own uniqueness and individuality. In essence, they are like the Borg collective, they want everything to be one mass entity, under their control. The Great Leader will rant about how special he is, and how unique he is, how only he can run the nation effectively, as his goons place oversized posters of him on the walls of all the buildings, while the masses are expected to lose their uniqueness and become faceless and nameless commodities, being allocated to a certain task based upon the needs of the state as decided by The Party.

When the Communist Manifesto was published it was effectively a declaration of war against everybody who doesn't want to just be a replaceable cog in the machine of the state/party.

I want to be who and what I am, not who or what the state/party believes I should be.

A truly unique take on things.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top