>Whew! There's a lot you need to unpack here. There is no place ruled by "minorities." You might want to take some time to reflect on what your word choice says

>Whew! There's a lot you need to unpack here. There is no place ruled by "minorities." You might want to take some time to reflect on what your word choice says about how you view other people in the world. In your haste to virtue signal with the bingo card you brought from Twitter, you either forgot what the word 'minority' actually means, or forgot that there absolutely were/are countries ruled by groups that were ethnic minorities in that country. For example Rwanda up to the mid 20th century was run by the Tutsis who were only 15% of the population. What am I supposed to use to describe them, if not 'minority'? >The premise of this is invalid. Why do you incorrectly think that there exists a kind of arithmetic where bad deed in the past + good deed in the past = net good ? Additionally, why are you taking all of this so personally? Since people like you keep bringing bad deeds from the past, it's only fair that good deeds be brought up too. I personally do not judge anyone by the history of their ancestors. But evidently you do (or you wouldn't be going on about historical racism), so within your worldview, I expect you to be consistent and not a hypocrite. If you bring up the bad, people can bring up the good. Simple as. I can't take it personally, if only because I'm not white and come from the other side of the world. But I have a sense of justice and I dislike seeing people treated worse than others because of the color of their skin. Which is what I think you're doing with your targetted snipes at white people, which I strongly doubt you do at other ethnicities with the same shortcomings. >you say "the world owes all of this to white men" without realizing a couple of key facts. First, due to systematic racicm, blah blah, women, excuses excuses I don't get it, do you agree with that factual statement or not? I see you're giving excuses for why that fact is a fact, but I'd like to see if you still have a foot in reality or not, by seeing you say "yes I agree with that fact, we owe most of our advances to white men" or "I disagree". If you disagree, then please let me know why, so I can flip your argument against you to absolve current white people for whatever original sin you think they're guilty of. Also, what about in non-European countries? Why didn't any of those countries invent the sort of things that save billions of lives? >I fear that you are falling into the trap of believing that there's any genuine, natural validity to the artificial construct that is race. Race does not exist in nature Although I don't treat anyone differently due to their race, there are definitely biological differences between different ethnicities, and anyone who claims there isn't, even if they are so-called distinguished American """scientists""", is simply trying to gaslight me for political correctness' sake. I roundly reject appeal to authority when it comes to anything even slightly infected by American humanities majors, because those professors aren't doing science, they're doing politics and careerism. Otherwise how do you explain that Olympic sprinting is dominated specifically by Jamaicans and West Africans? I certainly don't go around talking about white men's accomplishments normally. It's only when I see white people under attack for ancestral sins that I use this counter-argument. Basically you set the tone of the discussion and I counter-punched. If you had acted like a pleasant normal person, and didn't try the woke religion's favorite activity that is dunking on whitey, we wouldn't be having this conversation.