Which race started racism? Where did it come from?

[TNHarley]

You find that "funny"?

See, this is why we kicked your asses out of Carolina and made you be your own state. West of the mountains is where we stored all the wackos.

yes, because that post is ignorant of thousands of years of history. Also, In the 16th century, the barbury pirates were trafficking slaves from water to new continents and from continents to continents.

See, once again this is why we made a penal colony out of our western hinterlands. Y'all are so much work to edumacate.

Read it again --- the thread is not about slavery --- it's about racism.

YOUR post was about slavery, ya big dummy

Yes ----------- as the answer to the question in the thread title, with a description of how and why.

Perhaps you should start over.
Must be the time zone. I gotta remember y'all need an extra hour to read.

Maybe you should start reading

 

[Pogo]

You find that "funny"?

See, this is why we kicked your asses out of Carolina and made you be your own state. West of the mountains is where we stored all the wackos.

yes, because that post is ignorant of thousands of years of history. Also, In the 16th century, the barbury pirates were trafficking slaves from water to new continents and from continents to continents.

See, once again this is why we made a penal colony out of our western hinterlands. Y'all are so much work to edumacate.

Read it again --- the thread is not about slavery --- it's about racism.

YOUR post was about slavery, ya big dummy

Yes ----------- as the answer to the question in the thread title, with a description of how and why.

Perhaps you should start over.
Must be the time zone. I gotta remember y'all need an extra hour to read.

Maybe you should start reading

What? And lose all this devastating writing?

Let's face it. It's all about time zones. Unless you can force the earth to spin backward I'll always be ahead of you.

 

[jillian]

I think using "Mitochrondrinal DNA research", we could come to a conclusion that the first humans were " Mid Brown" in color. Some religious may say " Adam and Eve" then were Black, and the research backs that up because from two mid brown people, we can get the whole array of color that we have on earth. Not from two Whites or two Dark skinned Blacks. Yet that may not be an exact science . But somewhere along the lines, as humans grew and evolved into our races , somebody got racist! I doubt that racism was in our genetic make up. Or was it?

Think about it, racism on a cellular level; lying dormant like a great Trojan horse. We must then assume that all other emotional content , straight or twisted, also lays deep within us. And each individual manifest it however they do. If this be the case, then emotional content in humans derived from Blacks first.

If racism has a molecular probe , like a fingerprint, we than can trace it. We could then ask Is emotion hereditary?

Was racism a DNA virus?

no...an economic one.

 

[Paul Essien]

I think using "Mitochrondrinal DNA research", we could come to a conclusion that the first humans were " Mid Brown" in color. Some religious may say " Adam and Eve" then were Black, and the research backs that up because from two mid brown people, we can get the whole array of color that we have on earth. Not from two Whites or two Dark skinned Blacks. Yet that may not be an exact science . But somewhere along the lines, as humans grew and evolved into our races , somebody got racist! I doubt that racism was in our genetic make up. Or was it?

But what you don’t know is that Mitochondria DNA is not a part of the nuclear DNA which determines how your body is made. mDNA does not determine a single physical characteristic of your body. All human mtDNA point to a single female person who lived about 200 000 years ago in East Africa.

Every single human has mtdDNA which directly descended from hers. In other words, this person was everybody’s ancestor. mtDNA has nothing to do with our main DNA, and doesn’t affect how we look. In fact, it doesn’t affect any of our genes.

So what are you talking about when you say "I think using "Mitochrondrinal DNA research", we could come to a conclusion that the first humans were " Mid Brown" in color."

Also it’s ultimately a human being (Most likely white) who decides if THIS set of mDNA is different enough from THAT set to warrant classification as a new lineage.

So when you see this

I have my doubts as to whether or not the mapping listed above doesn’t have some very euro-centered presumptions built into its data. Note that Europe has the largest selection of mitochondrial groupings. There is no good biological reason for that to occur, but I can think of SEVERAL scientifically-prejudiced reasons.

Also remember that in all probability, we have far more DNA data for Europe than for Africa.

Think about it, racism on a cellular level; lying dormant like a great Trojan horse. We must then assume that all other emotional content , straight or twisted, also lays deep within us. And each individual manifest it however they do. If this be the case, then emotional content in humans derived from Blacks first.

If racism has a molecular probe , like a fingerprint, we than can trace it. We could then ask Is emotion hereditary?

Was racism a DNA virus?

The white race or dividing people only started in the late 1600s. Before that whites were Europeans who spent there time killing one another. The English didn't consider themselves to be of the same group as the Irish, Germans, Italians, or French.

Races started off because whites needed a way to secure their power. The wealthy landowners feared rebellions and that the poor Europeans might join with African slaves to overthrow them

Heard of Bacon’s Rebellion in the 1600's ? After that rights and privileges were given to poor Europeans to divide them from those slaves with whom they had much in common economically.

They allowed European slaves to be above Africans, and they served on slave patrols, the right to own land, and in some cases allowing them to vote. that was when It was the term “white” came to describe Europeans

And it worked. No slave rebellions from poor whites and they saw themselves as on the same level as rich whites or part of that team.

 

[TNHarley]

yes, because that post is ignorant of thousands of years of history. Also, In the 16th century, the barbury pirates were trafficking slaves from water to new continents and from continents to continents.

See, once again this is why we made a penal colony out of our western hinterlands. Y'all are so much work to edumacate.

Read it again --- the thread is not about slavery --- it's about racism.

YOUR post was about slavery, ya big dummy

Yes ----------- as the answer to the question in the thread title, with a description of how and why.

Perhaps you should start over.
Must be the time zone. I gotta remember y'all need an extra hour to read.

Maybe you should start reading

What? And lose all this devastating writing?

Let's face it. It's all about time zones. Unless you can force the earth to spin backward I'll always be ahead of you.

You obviously arent as far as history goes

 

[TNHarley]

I think using "Mitochrondrinal DNA research", we could come to a conclusion that the first humans were " Mid Brown" in color. Some religious may say " Adam and Eve" then were Black, and the research backs that up because from two mid brown people, we can get the whole array of color that we have on earth. Not from two Whites or two Dark skinned Blacks. Yet that may not be an exact science . But somewhere along the lines, as humans grew and evolved into our races , somebody got racist! I doubt that racism was in our genetic make up. Or was it?

But what you don’t know is that Mitochondria DNA is not a part of the nuclear DNA which determines how your body is made. mDNA does not determine a single physical characteristic of your body. All human mtDNA point to a single female person who lived about 200 000 years ago in East Africa.

Every single human has mtdDNA which directly descended from hers. In other words, this person was everybody’s ancestor. mtDNA has nothing to do with our main DNA, and doesn’t affect how we look. In fact, it doesn’t affect any of our genes.

So what are you talking about when you say "I think using "Mitochrondrinal DNA research", we could come to a conclusion that the first humans were " Mid Brown" in color."

Also it’s ultimately a human being (Most likely white) who decides if THIS set of mDNA is different enough from THAT set to warrant classification as a new lineage.

So when you see this

I have my doubts as to whether or not the mapping listed above doesn’t have some very euro-centered presumptions built into its data. Note that Europe has the largest selection of mitochondrial groupings. There is no good biological reason for that to occur, but I can think of SEVERAL scientifically-prejudiced reasons.

Also remember that in all probability, we have far more DNA data for Europe than for Africa.

Think about it, racism on a cellular level; lying dormant like a great Trojan horse. We must then assume that all other emotional content , straight or twisted, also lays deep within us. And each individual manifest it however they do. If this be the case, then emotional content in humans derived from Blacks first.

If racism has a molecular probe , like a fingerprint, we than can trace it. We could then ask Is emotion hereditary?

Was racism a DNA virus?

The white race or dividing people only started in the late 1600s. Before that whites were Europeans who spent there time killing one another. The English didn't consider themselves to be of the same group as the Irish, Germans, Italians, or French.

Races started off because whites needed a way to secure their power. The wealthy landowners feared rebellions and poor Europeans might join with African slaves to overthrow them

Heard of Bacon’s Rebellion in the 1600's ? After that rights and privileges were given to poor Europeans to divide them from those slaves with whom they had much in common economically.

They allowed European slaves to be above Africans, and they served on slave patrols, the right to own land, and in some cases allowing them to vote. that was when It was the term “white” came to describe Europeans

And it worked. No slave rebellions from poor whites and they saw themselves as on the same level as rich whites or part of that team.

Another that idiot that ignores thousands of years of history.

 

[Pogo]

See, once again this is why we made a penal colony out of our western hinterlands. Y'all are so much work to edumacate.

Read it again --- the thread is not about slavery --- it's about racism.

YOUR post was about slavery, ya big dummy

Yes ----------- as the answer to the question in the thread title, with a description of how and why.

Perhaps you should start over.
Must be the time zone. I gotta remember y'all need an extra hour to read.

Maybe you should start reading

What? And lose all this devastating writing?

Let's face it. It's all about time zones. Unless you can force the earth to spin backward I'll always be ahead of you.

You obviously arent as far as history goes

Again, it's not a point about "slavery" and it's not really a point about "intercontinental slavery". It's a point about racism and how race got set up as an excuse to justify --- not slavery but racial slavery. Prior to the Atlantic slave trade there was certainly slavery practiced worldwide, but it wasn't race-based. Slaves were enslaved because they were captured, not because they were a specific race. And in time they were set free.

Race-based slavery differs in that it uses race itself as a basis and continues that rationale for the slaves' life, and their descendants' lives as well. In the former model the slave was looked on as subservient but not intrinsically "inferior" whereas in the transAtlantic model the slave was considered a slave because of his own birth -- something that could never change.

And that theory --- that one race is inferior to another --- is HOW that transAtlantic trade justified itself to the inevitable resistance from moral forces. Hence, racism is created, and that's my answer to the OP title.

I can't really break it down any simpler than that unless Google Translate comes up with an option for "Tennesseean".

 

[TNHarley]

YOUR post was about slavery, ya big dummy

Yes ----------- as the answer to the question in the thread title, with a description of how and why.

Perhaps you should start over.
Must be the time zone. I gotta remember y'all need an extra hour to read.

Maybe you should start reading

What? And lose all this devastating writing?

Let's face it. It's all about time zones. Unless you can force the earth to spin backward I'll always be ahead of you.

You obviously arent as far as history goes

Again, it's not a point about "slavery" and it's not really a point about "intercontinental slavery". It's a point about racism and how race got set up as an excuse to justify --- not slavery but racial slavery. Prior to the Atlantic slave trade there was certainly slavery practiced worldwide, but it wasn't race-based. Slaves were enslaved because they were captured, not because they were a specific race. And in time they were set free.

Race-based slavery differs in that it uses race itself as a basis and continues that rationale for the slaves' life, and their descendants' lives as well. In the former model the slave was looked on as subservient but not intrinsically "inferior" whereas in the transAtlantic model the slave was considered a slave because of his own birth -- something that could never change.

And that theory --- that one race is inferior to another --- is HOW that transAtlantic trade justified itself to the inevitable resistance from moral forces. Hence, racism is created, and that's my answer to the OP title.

I can't really break it down any simpler than that unless Google Translate comes up with an option for "Tennesseean".

What makes you think the atlantic slave trade was race based and no others were? How many Nations sold their inhabitants for fruit, pogo?
Racism is older than the 16th century.
Maybe you would make more sense if your "history" didnt read like a 9th grade dropout

 

[JQPublic1]

I think what causes racism, is when one person THINKS they are much better than another person.

Take it a step further. Racism is when one or more people of one so- called race think they are superior to everyone in some other specific race. That assessment is more accurate.

the insidious Democrats(I call them new liberals) started subjugating those indentured servants who originally came here knowing that they served for 5 -7 years then were set free

What democrats existed in the 17th century?

one disgusting individual said his property was his and should never be free. This is what History doesn't tell US and why racism still happens

Heh heh heh...FAKE history...

 

[BuckToothMoron]

I think using "Mitochrondrinal DNA research", we could come to a conclusion that the first humans were " Mid Brown" in color. Some religious may say " Adam and Eve" then were Black, and the research backs that up because from two mid brown people, we can get the whole array of color that we have on earth. Not from two Whites or two Dark skinned Blacks. Yet that may not be an exact science . But somewhere along the lines, as humans grew and evolved into our races , somebody got racist! I doubt that racism was in our genetic make up. Or was it?

Think about it, racism on a cellular level; lying dormant like a great Trojan horse. We must then assume that all other emotional content , straight or twisted, also lays deep within us. And each individual manifest it however they do. If this be the case, then emotional content in humans derived from Blacks first.

If racism has a molecular probe , like a fingerprint, we than can trace it. We could then ask Is emotion hereditary?

Was racism a DNA virus?

I think it is natural for people of one group to discriminate against people from another group. You see it in the animal kingdom all the time. Lion prides will fight over territory, so do wolf packs. It’s a natural occurrence.

 

[Paul Essien]

I think it is natural for people of one group to discriminate against people from another group. You see it in the animal kingdom all the time. Lion prides will fight over territory, so do wolf packs. It’s a natural occurrence.

Do you ? Do you see black cats fighting with white cats ? This would not make sense to you. Right ?

You haven't thought this through, have you ?

 

[BuckToothMoron]

I think using "Mitochrondrinal DNA research", we could come to a conclusion that the first humans were " Mid Brown" in color. Some religious may say " Adam and Eve" then were Black, and the research backs that up because from two mid brown people, we can get the whole array of color that we have on earth. Not from two Whites or two Dark skinned Blacks. Yet that may not be an exact science . But somewhere along the lines, as humans grew and evolved into our races , somebody got racist! I doubt that racism was in our genetic make up. Or was it?

Think about it, racism on a cellular level; lying dormant like a great Trojan horse. We must then assume that all other emotional content , straight or twisted, also lays deep within us. And each individual manifest it however they do. If this be the case, then emotional content in humans derived from Blacks first.

If racism has a molecular probe , like a fingerprint, we than can trace it. We could then ask Is emotion hereditary?

Was racism a DNA virus?

Racism was invented to sell the Atlantic slave trade basically.

Slavery itself was thousands of years old but usually involved spoils of war between neighboring tribes. In the sixteenth century when European traders started human trafficking from one continent to another that was something that had never been done, and from the start met with resistance on moral grounds, right back to Bartholomé de las Casas' criticism of Columbus. So they had to invent the idea that these were subhuman "savages" and that by putting them in chains they were actually "helping civilize" them. It was the height of arrogance and unfortunately worked too well.

Those black slaves were sold into slavery very often from other blacks on the African continent. European traders made many African rulers wealthy by buying slaves the rulers had captured.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

I think it is natural for people of one group to discriminate against people from another group. You see it in the animal kingdom all the time. Lion prides will fight over territory, so do wolf packs. It’s a natural occurrence.

Do you ? Do you see black cats fighting with white cats ? This would not make sense to you. Right ?

You haven't thought this through, have you ?

That’s funny! You are taking a very simplistic, like kindergarten simplistic, view of this. It’s not always about the color of skin. It’s about one group quarreling with another. The color of ones skin is just one difference. Language, customs and culture are differences that cause bigotry as well. Does your mother know you’re online?

 

[ptbw forever]

I think it is natural for people of one group to discriminate against people from another group. You see it in the animal kingdom all the time. Lion prides will fight over territory, so do wolf packs. It’s a natural occurrence.

Do you ? Do you see black cats fighting with white cats ? This would not make sense to you. Right ?

You haven't thought this through, have you ?

Fur color is not even close to the same as skin color, different skeletal structures and various other differences.

Your idiotic analogy is more akin to a blonde Irishman fighting a redhead Irishman simply because of hair color, and that has never happened.

 

[ptbw forever]

I think it is natural for people of one group to discriminate against people from another group. You see it in the animal kingdom all the time. Lion prides will fight over territory, so do wolf packs. It’s a natural occurrence.

Do you ? Do you see black cats fighting with white cats ? This would not make sense to you. Right ?

You haven't thought this through, have you ?

That’s funny! You are taking a very simplistic, like kindergarten simplistic, view of this. It’s not always about the color of skin. It’s about one group quarreling with another. The color of ones skin is just one difference. Language, customs and culture are differences that cause bigotry as well. Does your mother know you’re online?

Skin color isn’t even remotely like fur color anyway.

He is dumber than a kindergartener.

 

[TNHarley]

I think it is natural for people of one group to discriminate against people from another group. You see it in the animal kingdom all the time. Lion prides will fight over territory, so do wolf packs. It’s a natural occurrence.

Do you ? Do you see black cats fighting with white cats ? This would not make sense to you. Right ?

You haven't thought this through, have you ?

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

I think using "Mitochrondrinal DNA research", we could come to a conclusion that the first humans were " Mid Brown" in color. Some religious may say " Adam and Eve" then were Black, and the research backs that up because from two mid brown people, we can get the whole array of color that we have on earth. Not from two Whites or two Dark skinned Blacks. Yet that may not be an exact science . But somewhere along the lines, as humans grew and evolved into our races , somebody got racist! I doubt that racism was in our genetic make up. Or was it?

Think about it, racism on a cellular level; lying dormant like a great Trojan horse. We must then assume that all other emotional content , straight or twisted, also lays deep within us. And each individual manifest it however they do. If this be the case, then emotional content in humans derived from Blacks first.

If racism has a molecular probe , like a fingerprint, we than can trace it. We could then ask Is emotion hereditary?

Was racism a DNA virus?

Losers Who Want to Feel Like Winners Play the Race Card

Racism is a healthy and wise survival instinct. Feralphilia is a Death Wish. But the Whiteys Hating Whitey won't die out unless we help the process along.

 

[IM2]

I think using "Mitochrondrinal DNA research", we could come to a conclusion that the first humans were " Mid Brown" in color. Some religious may say " Adam and Eve" then were Black, and the research backs that up because from two mid brown people, we can get the whole array of color that we have on earth. Not from two Whites or two Dark skinned Blacks. Yet that may not be an exact science . But somewhere along the lines, as humans grew and evolved into our races , somebody got racist! I doubt that racism was in our genetic make up. Or was it?

Think about it, racism on a cellular level; lying dormant like a great Trojan horse. We must then assume that all other emotional content , straight or twisted, also lays deep within us. And each individual manifest it however they do. If this be the case, then emotional content in humans derived from Blacks first.

If racism has a molecular probe , like a fingerprint, we than can trace it. We could then ask Is emotion hereditary?

Was racism a DNA virus?

Racism was invented to sell the Atlantic slave trade basically.

Slavery itself was thousands of years old but usually involved spoils of war between neighboring tribes. In the sixteenth century when European traders started human trafficking from one continent to another that was something that had never been done, and from the start met with resistance on moral grounds, right back to Bartholomé de las Casas' criticism of Columbus. So they had to invent the idea that these were subhuman "savages" and that by putting them in chains they were actually "helping civilize" them. It was the height of arrogance and unfortunately worked too well.

Those black slaves were sold into slavery very often from other blacks on the African continent. European traders made many African rulers wealthy by buying slaves the rulers had captured.

Uh, it was more complex than that. Plus whites still bought them. Since it was so wrong, they should not have. .But still slavery ended in the 1860's and blacks faced more than 100 more years of basically the same treatment without being enslaved. Africans did not do that.

 

[harmonica]

the whites [ Brits, Belgians, Spanish, French, etc ] were superior in:
technology
weapons
farming
transport [ ships/etc ]
etc etc
some Africans didn't even have a written language
Cortes conquered a whole kingdom with a ''small'' number of men
--so they would naturally ''feel'' superior
if the shoe was on the other foot--it would be the same

the Japanese thought they were superior--including to US troops in early WW2

 

[IM2]

the whites [ Brits, Belgians, Spanish, French, etc ] were superior in:
technology
weapons
farming
transport [ ships/etc ]
etc etc
some Africans didn't even have a written language
Cortes conquered a whole kingdom with a ''small'' number of men
--so they would naturally ''feel'' superior
if the shoe was on the other foot--it would be the same

the Japanese thought they were superior--including to US troops in early WW2

Wrong. Things occurred in Africa because if agreements between kings and European rulers. You are totally ignorant bout the history of this continent and you only know what whites have taught as that history. You're way behind.