azazel666 Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 Nobody is trying to deny it. The far-right uses the argument that black and white are so far apart genetically that biologically we have to live separate existences in order to thrive. You may not like it, but black, white (and any other colour you care to choose) share 99.9% of their DNA. Any genetic variation in the species is contained in the 0.1% left. So saying "can we stop it with all the "we're all the same" garbage, when its patently not true to anyone with eye sight." doesn't hold water as you are only looking at that 0.1%. Genetically we are basically "all the same". John X I don't think many people on the far right say we need to live separate existences to thrive? What is this based on John? People might say there is no need for us to live together right here in this country, but that's a far cry from the above? Also, in relation to racial differences, seems to me some people won't accept any thought of differences even though evidence supports differences(as Mr Bojangles says). Why? The differences are tiny, what's the problem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John X Posted October 11, 2011 Author Share Posted October 11, 2011 I don't think many people on the far right say we need to live separate existences to thrive? What is this based on John? Pretty much every white supremacist group puts this forward as a justification for forcible repatriation. 'Nature's way' they say. Until they became respectable the BNP and Nick Griffin were also saying this. The NF, what's left of it, also believe it. This is despite it being discredited from almost the moment we first had a proper understanding of genetics. Of course scientific evidence and research has never got in the far-right's way when it comes to race hate. Look at the Protocols. Discredited nearly 100 years ago (in 1913 I think, I'll need to check) but still being quoted as fact in 2011, to justify anti-Semitism. When Hitler used them as a justification for the Holocaust they had already been discredited a generation before. John X Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azazel666 Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 Pretty much every white supremacist group puts this forward as a justification for forcible repatriation. 'Nature's way' they say. Until they became respectable the BNP and Nick Griffin were also saying this. The NF, what's left of it, also believe it. This is despite it being discredited from almost the moment we first had a proper understanding of genetics. Of course scientific evidence and research has never got in the far-right's way when it comes to race hate. Look at the Protocols. Discredited nearly 100 years ago (in 1913 I think, I'll need to check) but still being quoted as fact in 2011, to justify anti-Semitism. When Hitler used them as a justification for the Holocaust they had already been discredited a generation before. John X I can't see it. I know some groups may have the idea that they don't want black blood in their gene pool to avoid "tainting" it, but these are surely on the most extreme end of "the far right". Would I be correct in my understanding that white supremacism is actually different to having "far right" views? Or is does your definition of the far right equal white supremacism? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John X Posted October 11, 2011 Author Share Posted October 11, 2011 Would I be correct in my understanding that white supremacism is actually different to having "far right" views? Or is does your definition of the far right equal white supremacism? Of course far-right doesn't doesn't equal white supremacism! The far-right covers a spectrum of ideologies from the 'deliberately' confused thinking of the English Defence League to the hardcore extremists like Brevik and some of the american survivalist groups. John X Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azazel666 Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 Of course far-right doesn't doesn't equal white supremacism! The far-right covers a spectrum of ideologies from the 'deliberately' confused thinking of the English Defence League to the hardcore extremists like Brevik and some of the american survivalist groups. John X Ok so when you said "The far-right uses the argument that black and white are so far apart genetically that biologically we have to live separate existences in order to thrive.", you meant all of the groups in that spectrum think that right? You're getting a little confusing John X. Or wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John X Posted October 11, 2011 Author Share Posted October 11, 2011 Ok so when you said "The far-right uses the argument that black and white are so far apart genetically that biologically we have to live separate existences in order to thrive.", you meant all of the groups in that spectrum think that right? I meant to say 'Some on the far right'. My apologies. I can't be right all the time ;-) John X Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanerothyme Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 And an even bigger variation between chihuahuas and dalmatians. Those who advocate racial exclusivity as opposed to ethnic or cultural exclusivity are time and time again caught out by a poor understanding of genetics. The oft-repeated statistic that 80% of white British people can trace 90% of their DNA back 2000 years to the remains of a caucasian found in Cornwall, misses out the important addition that 80% of british black people can as well! John X And that every person in this country shares 35% of their precious DNA with a banana and 70% of it with a stickleback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John X Posted October 12, 2011 Author Share Posted October 12, 2011 Are the far-right in Britain past their sell-by date? Apparently not, having read some of the views expressed on these boards. It's rather suspicious how much of the countries that support Palestine are either islamic or at least anti-western isn't it? Of course, muslims could always settle in countries that do not recognise Palistine and try to take them over by stealth. You know the sort of thing, use a country's own policies against itself to get agents, for want of a better expression, into positions of power to try and influence public opinion to accept islamification of the entire world. John X Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bojangles Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 John X, do you model this internet persona on the misguided comic character Citizen Smith played by Robert Lindsay in the late 70s? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stan Tamudo Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 do you model this internet persona on the misguided comic character Citizen Smith I thought you were Citizen Smith? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.