Why did we segregate people??? (legal, death, Missouri, border)

[texdav]

The animal world even cats have a definite pecking order. They soon learn thier place in that roder from the time they are evry young. This even extends to bredding. Rarely will you see a number of malkes and female cats in a group that the males don't ahve problems. In feeding where they take naps even the females will establish a pecking order. same with derr and most animals. Once established they usually get along until they either have a new born or they are in the rut;tne veryhting is off.Very poor example except in Disney films.

[Thomas R.]

Originally Posted by 2mares

Interesting. When I was a little city girl, I visited my aunt who raised black angus cattle. We were driving thru the pasture and there was one white calf among the black calves. the black calves were chasing and fighting with the white one. I asked why they were picking on that one and my aunt told me it was because the white one was different and that was common behavior.

It sounds like this breed of cow is black and this individual speciment was white. That could be more like how people pick on albinos or something.

Also in nature white animals sometimes "stick out", outside of the Polar regions, and therefore become easy prey. Possibly the harrassment is some kind of inherited way to "teach it" to be better at defending/running than normal or has the intent of... well killing it so it doesn't draw predator attention. (I know this is a cow living on a farm, but it's likely going to inherit some instincts from the wild ancestors)

I don't think you can necessarily make an analogy from that to humans. Especially as racial segregation really doesn't occur in many of the "white" nations of the world that had black minorities. Also Africans were willing to ally with Europeans against other Africans and Christian Europeans were hoping to ally with Christian Ethiopia against much "lighter" Muslim nations.

[2mares]

Originally Posted by MrSykes

I see black cats, white cats, speckled cats, and tabbies hanging around where I live like Heathcliff and the gang - they seem to get along just fine. We humans could probably learn a little from them.

True. Im not saying what my aunt said was true or that it is based solely on color, more likely just difference. I do know from observation, that animals will single out sick, old and defective individuals, kill or banish them. They will also fight and reject members of a different pack. pride or herd and intentionally seek out and kill their offspring. It seems that humans have carried this instinct to segregate throughout history as well. Most tribes seemed to be always at war and conquering one another instead of moving about peacefully, mating and trading freely among one another.

Perhaps this was initially a survival instinct (preservation of genetic integrity) gone terribly terribly wrong.

[bluebeard]

Originally Posted by Memphis1979

I
We have physical differences, caused by muscle specilization, skin specilization, and things of that nature. They were adapting to the plains of Africa, we were adapting to colder climates in Europe. Inuits have physical characteristics that make them naturally suited to live in Alaska.

Yet, the genetic differences are very small, but when you look at them, they are very different.

Dogs are the same way. A Min Pin and a Great Dane are almost genetically identical, but the look like two completely different species.
.

But all of Africa isn't plains. Black populations in Africa live in a variety of climates and geography. White populations also live in a variety of climates (Compare Scandinavia to the Mediterranean to the Middle east to... ummm South Asia (when is a population no longer white or Caucasian or whatever word you want to use).
Dogs were actively breed to look different and have very extremely different functions. They are not comparable. I don't know any human races whose sole purpose was to be a toy for royalty of the Victorian middle classes. I don't know of any species that has a constant team of specialists maintaining that they have appropriate physical form to minute details. In addition, races at different places in the globe have quite different ancestral and ethnic backgrounds (blacks in San Francisco have different backgrounds than blacks in Birmingham, AL which have a different background than blacks in Birmingham, England, Ghana, Ethiopia, Zimbabwe, Jamaica, etc...).
Race was constructed well before there was any idea of genetics. It is pure probability that any genetic differences are found. Like I said, you could divide people by continent or hair color or language group and find genetic and physiological differences. Race can be useful for a cheap and easy category, in medical, social, or other contexts. But we should never confuse the fact that it is an extremely rough categorization of ancestry that is incredibly imprecise at determining population differences.
Humans look different because we are humans. To an alien species, humans might not look so different. It would be more like comparing the differences of a calico cat to a orange tabby cat to a tuxedo cat.

[Memphis1979]

Originally Posted by bluebeard

But all of Africa isn't plains. Black populations in Africa live in a variety of climates and geography. White populations also live in a variety of climates (Compare Scandinavia to the Mediterranean to the Middle east to... ummm South Asia (when is a population no longer white or Caucasian or whatever word you want to use).
Dogs were actively breed to look different and have very extremely different functions. They are not comparable. I don't know any human races whose sole purpose was to be a toy for royalty of the Victorian middle classes. I don't know of any species that has a constant team of specialists maintaining that they have appropriate physical form to minute details. In addition, races at different places in the globe have quite different ancestral and ethnic backgrounds (blacks in San Francisco have different backgrounds than blacks in Birmingham, AL which have a different background than blacks in Birmingham, England, Ghana, Ethiopia, Zimbabwe, Jamaica, etc...).
Race was constructed well before there was any idea of genetics. It is pure probability that any genetic differences are found. Like I said, you could divide people by continent or hair color or language group and find genetic and physiological differences. Race can be useful for a cheap and easy category, in medical, social, or other contexts. But we should never confuse the fact that it is an extremely rough categorization of ancestry that is incredibly imprecise at determining population differences.
Humans look different because we are humans. To an alien species, humans might not look so different. It would be more like comparing the differences of a calico cat to a orange tabby cat to a tuxedo cat.

I agree with you somewhat,

I was answering the question of another poster who said that humans weren't different species. We aren't, but the small genetic differences we have make us look, sound, and perform very differently than each other.

I made the observation that men, before we knew about genetics, might very seriously have thought that black people were a completely different species. And that justified, in their mind, segregation and the treatment of other races.

[iColt1]

well if the declaration covers this and so does the emancipation...we just should never have had this happen...i ask a simple q and you people act like "my generation" is dumb and supposedly needs a better education...well "your generation" thinks they know it all but yet they have caused this planet much destruction...so if you were smart and take my advice...which i doubt you will; you will probably complain or give an excuse...START RECYCLING AND SAVE PLANET EARTH! so what is your argument???

[bluebeard]

Originally Posted by iColt1

well if the declaration covers this and so does the emancipation...we just should never have had this happen...i ask a simple q and you people act like "my generation" is dumb and supposedly needs a better education...well "your generation" thinks they know it all but yet they have caused this planet much destruction...so if you were smart and take my advice...which i doubt you will; you will probably complain or give an excuse...START RECYCLING AND SAVE PLANET EARTH! so what is your argument???

I agree, posters were condescending. Although some were blaming not you, or your generation, but the educational system. This is actually more of an idictment on their own generation.
But a natural reaction to this condescending attitude is the lash back, and not listen. I don't blame you. You are just honestly trying to understand your country's history, and people start complaining.
Also, read all the threads. I could post "My favorite color is red, and it would likely turn into the usual rant-fest, with people talking about Obama, Bush, race/ethnicity, illegal immigrants, and all sorts of personal pet issues that everyone has.
I would just say that the Constitution (what our country goes by, not the Declaration of Independence) is interpreted in different ways at different times. Those who claim to be Constitutional originalists choose to intepret it in certain ways, and those who don't may actually be also following it, but just with a different interpretation. The truth is, the Constitution was made by a group of people all with different ideas of what it should contain. Thus, it was somewhat intentionally vague. It was also made in a totally different time period with different issues and understandings of the world. No one could have predicted what it should have best contained to be best applicable for today's realities. Except to make it largely vague, to allow flexibility.
People will argue against this, but they can't deny that the Constitution was made by people with varying vieewpoints. There is no single "original intent" to follow.

[Sundance]

I think it's natural for people to want to be with their own kind. That's just the way people are. There's Chinatown, Italian neighborhoods, and so on. Black people stay together.

The only time it's perceived as "wrong" is when it's white people doing it. It's okay for everyone else, we're just not supposed to want to do it.

I really don't care what other people think, I'd rather be with my own kind, which means white people....

I'll save you the trouble:

"You're racist!"

I don't care what anyone else thinks, if it's ok for blacks to do, it's ok for whites to do. Now what....

[bluebeard]

Originally Posted by Sundance

I think it's natural for people to want to be with their own kind. That's just the way people are. There's Chinatown, Italian neighborhoods, and so on. Black people stay together.

The only time it's perceived as "wrong" is when it's white people doing it. It's okay for everyone else, we're just not supposed to want to do it.

I really don't care what other people think, I'd rather be with my own kind, which means white people....

I'll save you the trouble:

"You're racist!"

I don't care what anyone else thinks, if it's ok for blacks to do, it's ok for whites to do. Now what....

For American blacks: its a legacy from when the white population forced them into seperate communities. There are numerous social and economic reasons why its continued today. If you look at more newly developed areas, there usually aren't so many black communities.
As for white communities: there are Irish and Italian neighborhoods. Those are white.
Chinatowns are largely also legacies of white-imposed segregation... and largely becomin\g irrelavent. Most Chinese immigrants move into the suburbs, wherever is perceived as safe with good school. Whether there are Chinese or not. And their kids definitely don't stick to Chinatowns.
As for many other ethnic neighborhoods, they are based not on race, but on language, food, etc... And as most others, by a generation or two the kids integrate. Just like all immigrant communities do.
The host community matters just as much, and usually much more than segregated ethnic and racial subcommunities. THey can be culturally accepted, just tolerated, or rejected. If they are accepted and encourage, or even tolerated, they usually integrate after a few generations.

[Sundance]

Originally Posted by bluebeard

For American blacks: its a legacy from when the white population forced them into seperate communities. There are numerous social and economic reasons why its continued today. If you look at more newly developed areas, there usually aren't so many black communities.
As for white communities: there are Irish and Italian neighborhoods. Those are white.
Chinatowns are largely also legacies of white-imposed segregation... and largely becomin\g irrelavent. Most Chinese immigrants move into the suburbs, wherever is perceived as safe with good school. Whether there are Chinese or not. And their kids definitely don't stick to Chinatowns.
As for many other ethnic neighborhoods, they are based not on race, but on language, food, etc... And as most others, by a generation or two the kids integrate. Just like all immigrant communities do.
The host community matters just as much, and usually much more than segregated ethnic and racial subcommunities. THey can be culturally accepted, just tolerated, or rejected. If they are accepted and encourage, or even tolerated, they usually integrate after a few generations.

Stop blaming everything on white people. Asians, blacks, aside from any economic factors, would group together anyway.

The "melting pot" theory was obviously just that; a theory. Forced integration was tried, and it was unsuccessful.