FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Mon Jan 21, 2019 2:07 pmGiven that you have now explicitly stated other races are inferior, can we now describe you as a White Supremacist against your previous advice?Dachshund wrote: ↑Mon Jan 21, 2019 1:04 pmHere are two facts for you to consider...
Over the past 1000 years of its existence, Western (white European) civilization has been the single most war-ridden, war-dominated and militaristic civilization in history.
Western (white/European) culture is objectively superior in every respect (rational, moral, aesthetic, etc.) to every other world high culture that has ever existed in the entire history of human civilization. No other ethnic/racial group has ever produced a culture/civilization that even comes close to rivalling the power, beauty, nobility and glory of that created by the white Western European race.
Now, tell me, "Aristotle", what inferences do you draw when you add FACT (1) to FACT (2) ?
One inference II draw is that if you think the white man in America will passively succumb to genocide at the hands of inferior racial groups like:the black African-American; the Arab Muslim; or the Mexican Hispanic, etc; if you think that when demographic "push" really comes to "shove" he will offer no resistance, that he will just meekly surrender his identity (and existence) as a proud, white, Western man along with all of his glorious cultural inheritance ( i.e; the legacy unique values; traditions; institutions; moral principles; social manners and mores passed down to him by his forefathers, those men who forged human history's greatest civilization) to a mob of grubby savages (i.e. people like YOU), THINK AGAIN.
From what data do you derive the FACTTTTT(1) about most militaristic civilizations? I can't see any real justification for it given that Sparta was over 1000 years ago, and in the last millennium we've had the Mongols. That's before Veritas Aquafresh rolls out his general complaint list about Islam.
Describe a culture as superior is to make what is called a normative judgment. That is normative as opposed to objective. So by definition FACCCCTTTT(2) is false.
There are only two reasons that I have to believe that anything exists:
(1): I can see it - it's observable, or (2): there is something else I can observe which cannot be explained without the assumption that this other things exists.
So, I believe in elephants because I can see them, and I believe in (invisible) waves of Electro-Magnetic Radiation( EMR), because without them, the fact that my television works would be a miracle, and I do not believe in miracles. So I believe in these invisible waves of EMR that scientists tell me exist.
When someone says racial group A is superior to racial group B; or racial group A has more goodness than racial group B, the terms "superior" and "goodness" fail both of my tests. ( I cannot see "superior" or "goodness").
If a boy scout helps a little old lady across a busy road, for instance, I cannot literally see the "goodness" of his action in the same way I can tell how long it took him by looking at my wristwatch.
We don't have to assume that superiority and goodness exist to explain anything that happens in nature. We do things because we think they're right or wrong, but what is REALLY making us act is not the right and the wrong, but our beliefs and convictions, and these beliefs and convictions can be explained by evolution.
When someone says "A" is superior to "B", 99% of the time they do not say this in a vacuum. Most comparisons we make are made with reference to some antecedently agreed upon standards - some sort of OBSERVABLE property that we are using as our standard of excellence. For example if I say a particular model of an Apple computer is superior to its IMB counterpart, this judgement is typically based on certain commonly accepted standards like "speed" and "user friendliness" for example. The judgement of which computer is superior is not made relative to some cosmic standard or in the eyes of God.
When it comes to comparing races, there are four, main, commonly accepted , agreed upon standard that are used to make judgements of worth. These standards are : INFLUENCE; EMULATION; EFFICIENCY and POWER. When we apply these standards we discover that the White Western European race is indeed superior to all others. Let me briefly demonstrate below...
This refers to how much difference a racial group has made in the world's history. It is a clear and concrete fact that White Western Europeans are more important - more superior - by this standard than Blacks or Asians or Hispanics. Had the Black African races never existed, Africa may have been different, but Asia and the US ( also the UK, Canada, Australia, etc.) would not have been very different. Had the Asian races (Japanese, Korean, Chinese, etc) never existed the world would look quite different but it would still be recognisable. If Western Europeans had never existed the world would be UNIMAGINABLY different. Imagine for your self what the world would be like if we were to subtract: Western science and technology, transport (automobiles, jet airliners), communications (telephone, radio, internet), electronic banking, exploration, medications, weapons/explosives, every child in schools across the world is taught how to plot points on the "X" and "Y" axes in their maths classes, without Rene Descartes (a Western European) this would be the case.
Western man has had the greatest influence on the world by far, the white European race has made far more difference than any other racial/ethnic group.
Some critics might say that the white Western European race has only managed to exercise the tremendous influence that it has across the world due to it long history of violent colonisation, imperialism and armed conquest; in other words that the West FORCED its influence on other peoples of the world. This is not true, because the fact is that every other race and culture desires the control over nature that Western scientific modes of though has made possible. They also want the technology that Western science has made possible. They also want western medicines, low rates of infant mortality, longer life-spans, higher productivity, freedom, liberal democracy, Western-style justice systems, higher standards of living and so on. All of the world's other racial groups living in Africa, China, Brazil, Mexico, Cuba, Islamic states like Saudi Arabia and so on strive to emulate the West. If you were to give a non-white third world nation a magic wand and tell them that if they waved it, they would have a quality of life the same as that enjoyed by a typical middle-class American living in a white - majority city in the US, they would certainly wave the wand. Even when it comes to personal traits everyone seems to agree that the traits in which white Western Europeans excel , like intelligence (g-factor) are valuable and highly desirable.
One thing is better than another - more EFFICIENT - if it is better at achieving some tacit end.
For example rubber is a better (more EFFICIENT) insulator than wool.
Generally speaking the West has found better, more efficient means to myriad important ends/goals, for example: crop rotation in agriculture is more efficient than praying to the Sun God; the use of electricity and the electric light bulb/ fluorescent tube to control ambient lighting are far better than candles of fires (electricity works out being cheaper, it is also safer and it is easier to control); it is more efficient to transport oneself in a motor car travelling at 60 mph, than riding a horse at 10 mph or walking at 3 mph. From the cosmic point of view there is no "right" or "wrong" about any of this. The point is that all sides agree, they agree that if you value food crop rotation is a better means to the end than praying to a Sun God. All side in a debate would agree that achieving the goal of transporting oneself 30 miles from A to B is better accomplished using a motor car than by walking on foot. There is nothing to argue about here, for practical purposes, everyone agrees. Finally Western morality, which places great value on the principle of justice is more efficient than the morality of many coloured races/nations. Some recent research in human behavioural science has found that Westerners tend have an innate sense of equity/fairness which is efficient in the sense that it ultimately leads to greater wealth; the opposite was the case for more egocentric, impulsive, short-term focused personalities.
If I form an army of 1000 White European Westerners and pit then against an army of 1000 Black Africans or any other non-White race, with the stipulation that each army was only allowed to use the weapons that its race had developed, obviously the Western army would crush all others. Western man has a long history of engaging in war; and Western soldiers are highly skilled combatants displaying remarkable: courage; intelligence;discipline/audacity; sense of higher purpose.
In conclusion, there you have four objective, widely (in not universally) accepted and agreed upon standards for evaluating the excellence of different human races. As you can see for yourself, the fact all support the claim that the white Western European race is objectively superior to all others.
Do you agree? If not, please explain why.
(PS: I explain why The West is has been history's most militaristic culture in a separate post).