[Potemkin]

That's nice. But my definition of race did not involve religion.

Indeed, which demonstrates just how ahistorical it is.

[FiveofSwords]

Indeed, which demonstrates just how ahistorical it is.

Nobody ever equated race and religion.

[Potemkin]

Nobody ever equated race and religion.

Indeed not, but I simply stated that religion mattered more than race to the British, and by extension the Americans. Which it clearly did. The Catholic Irish were regarded and treated very differently than the Protestant Scots, despite the fact that they both belonged to the same ‘race’. Can you account for this? Were they wrong to treat them differently?

[Rancid]

@FiveofSwords, you have convinced me. Races are real.

[ingliz]

Nobody ever equated race and religion

That's odd because I could have sworn you did.

"You also cannot simply turn jews into gentiles by telling them about jesus...you could only meaningfully attempt such a conversion by altering their blood"

— FiveofSwords

[FiveofSwords]

Indeed not, but I simply stated that religion mattered more than race to the British, and by extension the Americans. Which it clearly did. The Catholic Irish were regarded and treated very differently than the Protestant Scots, despite the fact that they both belonged to the same ‘race’. Can you account for this? Were they wrong to treat them differently?

I know that there was a lot of anti catholic sentiment in the early usa...except Maryland which was explicitly a state for catholics. I already knew that...of course. Because I am educated. You aren't teaching me anything lol...why are you even bringing it up? What is the relevance?

[FiveofSwords]

That's odd because I could have sworn you did.

"You also cannot simply turn jews into gentiles by telling them about jesus...you could only meaningfully attempt such a conversion by altering their blood"

— FiveofSwords

That's funny. You once again fail at reading comprehension. That quote actually clearly implies I do not equate race and religion and yet you quoted it as if you think it implies that I do. You have a disorder dude, setiously.

[ingliz]

@FiveofSwords

You are a card.

I provided a link to your 'culture is in the blood' spiel.

Religion is a cultural artefact, and thus a racial delineator, according to you; it's in the 'blood'.

And it's not the first time you've trotted this argument out.

Previously, you have said a Latino cannot be white, however white his or her skin, because s/he lacks 'white culture'.

To put a bow on it.

You have said there are nation races; German, English, Scots, Welsh, and Irish, blah, more bollocks, blah, based on cultural differences.

[Fasces]

Dude, there were at least 2 Irish people in the US senate when it was decided in 1789 that citizenship would only be open to 'free white men of good character'

The Senate is often full of men of devious and Negroid characters, regardless of best intentions.

[QatzelOk]

That's nice. But my definition of race did not involve religion.

Again, RACE (as a scientific classification) only existed starting in the 18th Century.

The Irish were one of the first victims of this fake science.

Before that, RELIGION had the same role as RACE. So it was actually RACISM that replaced RELIGIONISM ... and both are socially-constructed. They are both fake.

The richest institutions on Earth have constantly invented (ie. pulled out of their asses) ways of classifying human beings that would lead to their own pawns (racial or co-religionist) slaughtering "others" (religious or racial) in order to profit.

Inventing these fake categories is about *making a profit off of the resulting clashes.*
The slaughtering of Palestinians (in order to open up a real estate and oil exploration boom) is the most current example of this Elite-manufactured hatred for other humans.

And because humans are inclined to defend the rich and powerful and follow all the trends that they instigate, ordinary schmoes (like FiveofSwords) frequently regurgitate these ideas in order to kiss ass.

Many middle class and poor KKK members joined the organization for social-climbing reasons, and many of them improved their social status "doing jobs" for this organization.

[FiveofSwords]

@FiveofSwords

You are a card.

I provided a link to your 'culture is in the blood' spiel.

Religion is a cultural artefact, and thus a racial delineator, according to you; it's in the 'blood'.

And it's not the first time you've trotted this argument out.

Previously, you have said a Latino cannot be white, however white his or her skin, because s/he lacks 'white culture'.

To put a bow on it.

You have said there are nation races; German, English, Scots, Welsh, and Irish, blah, more bollocks, blah, based on cultural differences.

Lol I never said anything like that. You just really fail at reading comprehension

[FiveofSwords]

Again, RACE (as a scientific classification) only existed starting in the 18th Century.

The Irish were one of the first victims of this fake science.

Before that, RELIGION had the same role as RACE. So it was actually RACISM that replaced RELIGIONISM ... and both are socially-constructed. They are both fake.

The richest institutions on Earth have constantly invented (ie. pulled out of their asses) ways of classifying human beings that would lead to their own pawns (racial or co-religionist) slaughtering "others" (religious or racial) in order to profit.

Inventing these fake categories is about *making a profit off of the resulting clashes.*
The slaughtering of Palestinians (in order to open up a real estate and oil exploration boom) is the most current example of this Elite-manufactured hatred for other humans.

And because humans are inclined to defend the rich and powerful and follow all the trends that they instigate, ordinary schmoes (like FiveofSwords) frequently regurgitate these ideas in order to kiss ass.

Many middle class and poor KKK members joined the organization for social-climbing reasons, and many of them improved their social status "doing jobs" for this organization.

No, no, no. Humans just didn't really know what exactly a race was and how it arose until after Charles Darwin. And if you read about the scopes monkey trial, the information was not welcomed by Christians.

The irish were always considered white. But when you want to get the common man to not like a people, it is common to make propaganda pretending they aren't white. For example in both the world wars, the usa and uk created propaganda pretending the germans were huns...which of course is false and biologists knew it was false...it was for the masses.

The common man always had more racial concerns than the elite. Historically you could easily avoid diversity if you have more money. But the elite also always had a taste for the exotic and they enjoyed zoos and foreign food. That trend goes all the way back to Rome, and juvenal's satires are full of complaints about it.

The kkk was formed as a resistance movement against the north and reconstruction. And the north had more power than the south. It's success was actually very unlikely...but southern people just seem more politically savvy than Northern people, despite being more poor. Obviously it was shut down after ww2, because the elite became aware of what a threat racial nationalism can be at politically activating the masses.

You have everything backwards lol

[Fasces]

Prove Irish are white @FiveofSwords. I'm just not buying it. They clearly aren't white. Next you'll tell me Arabs are white.

[Tainari88]

Prove Irish are white @FiveofSwords. I'm just not buying it. They clearly aren't white. Next you'll tell me Arabs are white.

And White American Nazi's children pop out of the womb knowing English and Nazi values are not taught, they come in the DNA. Lol.

[FiveofSwords]

Prove Irish are white @FiveofSwords. I'm just not buying it. They clearly aren't white. Next you'll tell me Arabs are white.

Dude, nobody can visually distinguish an Irish person from other people in Northern Europe. This is because they lived in an environment just like other Europeans. The climate and fauna are basically the same, the various cultural revolutions that impacted Europe also impacted them (such as Christianity, feudalism, the enlightenment, the agricultural, medical, and industrial revolution, etc)...the dna of Irish people overlaps massively with scottish, Welsh, and english...and it basically always has since the Celtics invasion at least. Irish always lived among other Europeans and there wasn't any particularly significant genetic isolation in them.

Arabs actually have always been counted as white in the US census. Despite the fact there is a clear physical difference between Arabs and Europeans (although you wouldn't know that from watching the casting in movies from the 1940s). In fact Europeans and Arabs are somewhat close genetically...at least much more close than Europeans and black or Europeans and north asians. If you split global human dna into 5 clusters, Europeans and Arabs would share the same cluster...they are only differentiated in 6 or more clusters. So the intuition of 18th century lawmakers was not entirely wrong. But the difference between European and Arab nature is significant enough to be noticed and important. An Arab civilization will have totally different character to a white civilization.

[Potemkin]

For example in both the world wars, the usa and uk created propaganda pretending the germans were huns...which of course is false and biologists knew it was false...it was for the masses.

Actually, it was Kaiser Wilhelm II who compared the German people to the Huns (and, by implication, himself to Attila), in his speech to the troops being sent to suppress the Boxer Rebellion in China in 1900.

“Should you encounter the enemy, he will be defeated! No quarter will be given! Prisoners will not be taken! Whoever falls into your hands is forfeited. Just as a thousand years ago the Huns under their King Attila made a name for themselves, one that even today makes them seem mighty in history and legend, may the name German be affirmed by you in such a way in China that no Chinese will ever again dare to look cross-eyed at a German.”

Link

After that, the British habitually referred to the Germans as ‘the Hun’.

[FiveofSwords]

Actually, it was Kaiser Wilhelm II who compared the German people to the Huns (and, by implication, himself to Attila), in his speech to the troops being sent to suppress the Boxer Rebellion in China in 1900.

“Should you encounter the enemy, he will be defeated! No quarter will be given! Prisoners will not be taken! Whoever falls into your hands is forfeited. Just as a thousand years ago the Huns under their King Attila made a name for themselves, one that even today makes them seem mighty in history and legend, may the name German be affirmed by you in such a way in China that no Chinese will ever again dare to look cross-eyed at a German.”

Link

After that, the British habitually referred to the Germans as ‘the Hun’.

Funny speech, but I noticed he never actually called the germans huns...that would be quite funny if he did.

And no, obviously this speech is not what inspired anglos to pretend the germans aren't white in the world wars. That was just typical anglo propaganda...to pretend the enemy the government wants people to shun or kill are not white. This mainly works on the lower classes because they tended to have strong racial feelings...it is not, as suggested, a 'luxury attitude'.

[Potemkin]

Funny speech, but I noticed he never actually called the germans huns...that would be quite funny if he did.

And no, obviously this speech is not what inspired anglos to pretend the germans aren't white in the world wars. That was just typical anglo propaganda...to pretend the enemy the government wants people to shun or kill are not white. This mainly works on the lower classes because they tended to have strong racial feelings...it is not, as suggested, a 'luxury attitude'.

The English are a Germanic people who speak a Germanic language. Their ancestors came from Saxony and neighbouring areas back in the 6th century. If the Germans aren’t white, then neither are the English. The British called the Germans “the Hun” not because they thought they were racially of the same origin as Attila and the Huns (which would have been stupid), but because they thought the Germans were culturally like the Huns - barbaric, violent and destructive. And were they wrong about them?

[FiveofSwords]

The English are a Germanic people who speak a Germanic language. Their ancestors came from Saxony and neighbouring areas back in the 6th century. If the Germans aren’t white, then neither are the English. The British called the Germans “the Hun” not because they thought they were racially of the same origin as Attila and the Huns (which would have been stupid), but because they thought the Germans were culturally like the Huns - barbaric, violent and destructive. And were they wrong about them?

Most germans actually have ancestry from the visitors who DEFEATED the huns in battle. That historical fact shows a comical amount of irony to Wilhelm's speech and to dumb anglo propaganda. Wilhelm could have simply stated actual history of Germany and made the Germans look more impressive and it would be more appropriate for the situation...'defeat the Chinese loke you defeated the huns!'

And just no. Culturally Germany was nothing like the huns. Attila and Fredrick the great would never have been 'bros' lol. That is a rather stupid and ignorant idea and believing that would make you about as much of a dupe as the uneducated English peasants.

[Potemkin]

Most germans actually have ancestry from the visitors who DEFEATED the huns in battle. That historical fact shows a comical amount of irony to Wilhelm's speech and to dumb anglo propaganda. Wilhelm could have simply stated actual history of Germany and made the Germans look more impressive and it would be more appropriate for the situation...'defeat the Chinese loke you defeated the huns!'

Wilhelm wasn’t being ironic - he didn’t do irony. This speech was just another of Wilhelm’s cringe-inducing moments when he would hand propaganda gift after propaganda gift to Germany’s enemies. There’s a reason the German government edited that paragraph out of the official version of the speech.

And just no. Culturally Germany was nothing like the huns. Attila and Fredrick the great would never have been 'bros' lol. That is a rather stupid and ignorant idea and believing that would make you about as much of a dupe as the uneducated English peasants.

The “stupid and ignorant idea” was Kaiser Wilhelm’s.