3 ms·

> It’s not racist to try to explain why Europe conquered New Guinea and not the other way around. What is racist is to say it happened for a reason, not blind

• FrustratedMonky 3y ago
  Isn't that opposite. If all humans are equal, and one group wins, then it was either external factors or luck. But if it is not luck or external reasons, then isn't that racist, because now you are saying Europeans are somehow genetically different (better), or have a better culture, and that is what caused their success? I think you are mixing possible reasons. There are non-racist reasons.
• prepend 3y ago
  But it did happen for a reason and it’s luck. There’s lots of random chance involved (New Guineans could have started in England) but because of those chance positions there are reasons things happened. How is that racist?
• teapot7 3y ago
  He's saying that it happened for reasons completely unconnected with race. Whether you believe his claims are correct or not, how do you manage to read them as racist?