5 ms·

> It's one thing to say something about a country(France & Prussia), it's another thing to talk about a race(Africans). Africa is a continent. There are white

> It's one thing to say something about a country(France & Prussia), it's another thing to talk about a race(Africans). Africa is a continent. There are white Africans. If I had said, black people, that would be different, however I did not. I did not because the OP mentioned Africans and I was only pointing out that his statement about a generalization of an entire continent (he implied most Africans cannot be different from most other humans, which is already untrue even if you consider just skin color). However, had the OP stated what he stated and used "black people" instead of "Africans," I would have still asked the same question. Because he still would have made a generalization that he could not possibly know. > How far down this endless rabbit-hole are we going to go? I can't prove to you the nature of any group of people, anymore than you can prove to me that you're not just another racist/troll that always shows up during conversations about Africa or African-Americans on Google+ Exactly. You can't prove that it's not a trait. That's all I'm questioning. Btw, I can't prove I'm not a racist to you, but I can prove that I have not yet made a racist remark. By YouTube's definition, I have not made an insulting remark based on a generalization of a race. Just because I don't agree with the author's assertions, does not necessarily mean I agree with the opposite assertion (that Africans are more corrupt and warlike). I have not made the claim or generalization that Africans, or black people, are more corrupt or warlike. Just because you are insulted, does not mean what I have said is actually insulting. That being said, I'm sorry if it offended you, but I stand by my point. All I wanted to say was that the OP himself made a generalization. And I tried pointing it out with a question that might have made me look like I was making a racist remark... but I was just pointing out the fallacy in his claim by implying the opposite could be true..

smtddr 13y ago
I won't be in this thread after this. I already see the rabbit-hole falling has begun. Since we can actually measure & look at people in a very non-debatable way, you can get unquestionable & unbias data on how tall people are and the color of their skin. You cannot debate 6-foot tall versus 7-foot tall. We've(first-world at least) all agreed on what is a ruler. 12 inches is 12 inches. You also cannot debate the color red versus green as it has been defined. The OP's generalization of people being equal is a fair generation to make considering the context of the world we live in today. You should understand and be sensitive to the fact that racism is a real problem in the world today. As such, statements/questions implying directly, or indirectly, a characteristic of a group of people that support ideas aligning with racism should be done with care and not without quality evidence that suggests the negative characteristic; otherwise it just appears malicious. Especially for a group of people who have already experienced very similar abuse for many years and are still dealing with it today.
- chrischen 13y ago
  Again, I did not imply anything racist. I did not make any generalizations, about a race, a country, or EVEN a continent! Please listen to what I'm saying! Just because you constantly assert I'm a racist without actually listening to the substance and nuance of anything I have said does not make me a racist. Please, specifically point out what statement I said was a generalization about a race? Just because I do not agree with the OP, does not mean I agree with the opposite. Just like how if you're not with the US on Iraq does not mean you are with the terrorists. My question "how do you know?" is simply a thought experiment showing the fallacy in the OP's assertion that in fact Africans are not more corrupt or warlike than anyone else. It is totally possible they are. He does not know, nor do I. The point is that he doesn't know anymore than I do. I am not, and have never, stated Africans are more corrupt or warlike either! If I did in fact, state this, please point this out otherwise I will be inadvertently spreading racist beliefs (which I do not. I am totally on your side with this. Let's work together okay?). The OP is the one who made a generalization (Africans are not more corrupt or warlike than other people). All I did was question his generalization. He could have also said "Africans are not any more black than other people." That one is easier to verify that he is wrong, so if I pointed that out by saying "how do you know?" I would have gotten many more up votes. By ignoring the possibility that Africans might have genetic, cultural, societal, or other factors causing the corruption and "warlike" is doing a disservice to the issue, reason, and scientific method.
  - Joe-Z 13y ago
    I really shouldn't be getting into this, but whatever: Let's assume that you believe that "all men are born equal" and you know for yourself that you are not a war-mongering, savaging monster and that this are also not typical traits for other people around you. Then, from your believe that "alle men are born equal" it's just far more likely that people in africa would default to a similar, peaceful, state like you and the thing that drives people in african war-torn countries must be outside factors. (Also, let's be realistic and just admit that it's mostly just racism if you state something negative about a particular group, and not when it's something positive)

smtddr 13y ago

I won't be in this thread after this. I already see the rabbit-hole falling has begun. Since we can actually measure & look at people in a very non-debatable way, you can get unquestionable & unbias data on how tall people are and the color of their skin. You cannot debate 6-foot tall versus 7-foot tall. We've(first-world at least) all agreed on what is a ruler. 12 inches is 12 inches. You also cannot debate the color red versus green as it has been defined. The OP's generalization of people being equal is a fair generation to make considering the context of the world we live in today. You should understand and be sensitive to the fact that racism is a real problem in the world today. As such, statements/questions implying directly, or indirectly, a characteristic of a group of people that support ideas aligning with racism should be done with care and not without quality evidence that suggests the negative characteristic; otherwise it just appears malicious. Especially for a group of people who have already experienced very similar abuse for many years and are still dealing with it today.

chrischen 13y ago
Again, I did not imply anything racist. I did not make any generalizations, about a race, a country, or EVEN a continent! Please listen to what I'm saying! Just because you constantly assert I'm a racist without actually listening to the substance and nuance of anything I have said does not make me a racist. Please, specifically point out what statement I said was a generalization about a race? Just because I do not agree with the OP, does not mean I agree with the opposite. Just like how if you're not with the US on Iraq does not mean you are with the terrorists. My question "how do you know?" is simply a thought experiment showing the fallacy in the OP's assertion that in fact Africans are not more corrupt or warlike than anyone else. It is totally possible they are. He does not know, nor do I. The point is that he doesn't know anymore than I do. I am not, and have never, stated Africans are more corrupt or warlike either! If I did in fact, state this, please point this out otherwise I will be inadvertently spreading racist beliefs (which I do not. I am totally on your side with this. Let's work together okay?). The OP is the one who made a generalization (Africans are not more corrupt or warlike than other people). All I did was question his generalization. He could have also said "Africans are not any more black than other people." That one is easier to verify that he is wrong, so if I pointed that out by saying "how do you know?" I would have gotten many more up votes. By ignoring the possibility that Africans might have genetic, cultural, societal, or other factors causing the corruption and "warlike" is doing a disservice to the issue, reason, and scientific method.
- Joe-Z 13y ago
  I really shouldn't be getting into this, but whatever: Let's assume that you believe that "all men are born equal" and you know for yourself that you are not a war-mongering, savaging monster and that this are also not typical traits for other people around you. Then, from your believe that "alle men are born equal" it's just far more likely that people in africa would default to a similar, peaceful, state like you and the thing that drives people in african war-torn countries must be outside factors. (Also, let's be realistic and just admit that it's mostly just racism if you state something negative about a particular group, and not when it's something positive)