Philosophy Now Forum

...and don't forget, I live here, so I ought to know.

Actually it's the opposite, you live there so don't know, or even can't know, as you are brainwashed and propagandised daily, at the source. Rather those furthest away from the source are in the best position to say what is happening in the US.

bobevenson wrote:What you're talking about doesn't exist in America, and don't forget, I live here, so I ought to know.[/size][/b]

Well apart from when you are born that is. Interestingly enough under the latest rules Obama would have been classified as white at birth upon his birth certificate.

Arising_uk wrote:

bobevenson wrote:What you're talking about doesn't exist in America, and don't forget, I live here, so I ought to know.[/size][/b]

Well apart from when you are born that is. Interestingly enough under the latest rules Obama would have been classified as white at birth upon his birth certificate.

I was talking about that whole fucking list of racial designations that must be a European tradition since it certainly doesn't exist in America.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:.



I asked the original poster what the point of this thread & the associated links.

The original poster replied - The problem is the Genocide of the White Race.

I just don't understand this.


What genocide?

Who is attempting to destroy the white race?

How could anyone even attempt to determine who or who isn't caucasian?

The whole concept, as you defined it, does not even make sense to me in any respect in 2015.







.

OK.

Let us take this slowly step-by-step with intelligence.

I think we can all agree on the meaning of Genocide so we will skip that discussion.

We will focus on the meaning of "White" and who has the authority and power to define what a "White" person is.

Now we notice that the word "caucasian" has interestingly entered the discussion and I think it is safe to assume that Bill Wiltrack was using that word to define "White" people. Could you please confirm that, that is the case, Bill Wiltrack?

In Bill Wiltrack's question he uses the word "anyone". I suspect that this is an issue far to large for "anyone" person and that is why the Government is the sole authority on the subject of Race.

Does that make sense so far?

Pluto wrote:

...and don't forget, I live here, so I ought to know.

Actually it's the opposite, you live there so don't know, or even can't know, as you are brainwashed and propagandised daily, at the source. Rather those furthest away from the source are in the best position to say what is happening in the US.

This comment is a breath of fresh air but I suspect that it is a bit too sophisticated for some people who will struggle to grasp the magnitude of its' significance.

bobevenson wrote:

Arising_uk wrote:

bobevenson wrote:What you're talking about doesn't exist in America, and don't forget, I live here, so I ought to know.[/size][/b]

Well apart from when you are born that is. Interestingly enough under the latest rules Obama would have been classified as white at birth upon his birth certificate.

I was talking about that whole fucking list of racial designations that must be a European tradition since it certainly doesn't exist in America.

It certainly does exist in America but the American classifications are slightly different.

The White House website has a different definition of a "White" person than the British definition.

US White = European, North African or Middle Eastern

British White = European ONLY!

.



...........................................................





No. What you have continued to say continues to not make sense.


Your attempt at distraction, using the terms white/Caucasian, is sophomoric.


Use white OR Caucasian. Makes no difference to me.

If you would like to address the legitimate questions that I presented...consider this a GREAT opportunity to do so.


I assume you are female. Is your man putting you up to this?


I don't think race relations is a philosophical subject that you feel comfortable discussing.

You have skirted this issue before here on the PhilosophyNow Forums.

You never make any sense. You are never definitive in your position or what philosophy you are putting forward.





.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:.



...........................................................





No. What you have continued to say continues to not make sense.


Your attempt at distraction, using the terms white/Caucasian, is sophomoric.


Use white OR Caucasian. Makes no difference to me.

If you would like to address the legitimate questions that I presented...consider this a GREAT opportunity to do so.


I assume you are female. Is your man putting you up to this?


I don't think race relations is a philosophical subject that you feel comfortable discussing.

You have skirted this issue before here on the PhilosophyNow Forums.

You never make any sense. You are never definitive in your position or what philosophy you are putting forward.





.

Excellent! We are making progress and intellects are being challenged.

Note: Bill Wiltrack sees "no difference" in the terms "White" and "Caucasian".

Is there anybody here who would disagree with him before we move on to the next level?

Brit Dems wrote:Bill Wiltrack sees "no difference" in the terms "White" and "Caucasian". Is there anybody here who would disagree with him before we move on to the next level?

Willtrack is 100% right, and, unfortunately, there aren't any levels to the crap you're talking about to move on to.

.



Thank You Bob Evenson.


Finally, another man here who has the brains and the balls to say what he means & to put his name upon his words.

You my friend, though I may not agree with you at times, you are a man!


That is refreshing.

You other women who claim to be male - up your game or up your ass.





.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:.



Thank You Bob Evenson.


Finally, another man here who has the brains and the balls to say what he means & to put his name upon his words.

You my friend, though I may not agree with you at times, you are a man!


That is refreshing.

You other women who claim to be male - up your game or up your ass.





.

OK.

We have complete unity of opinion between Brit Dems, Bill Wiltrack and Bob Evenson. Is there anyone else who would like to agree or disagree with us?

Brit Dems, Bill Wiltrack and Bob Evenson have all agreed that Caucasian and White mean the same thing when describing a person. We all share the same education on this particular matter and that is why we three (3) are in complete harmony so far.

Is there anyone else who would like to join us in this agreement?

This is an exercise in political science.

Get a grip.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasian_race

Brit Dems wrote:We have complete unity of opinion between Brit Dems, Bill Wiltrack and Bob Evenson.

It's rather touching that Bit Dim, Poor Bill and Reverend Bob have found each other.

Brit Dems wrote:Is there anyone else who would like to join us in this agreement?

No thanks.

Arising_uk wrote:Get a grip.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasian_race

OK.

Thank you Arising UK for that link.

In conclusion, now please state your position.

Are you with us three (3) or against us three (3) on White and Caucasoid?

uwot wrote:

Brit Dems wrote:We have complete unity of opinion between Brit Dems, Bill Wiltrack and Bob Evenson.

It's rather touching that Bit Dim, Poor Bill and Reverend Bob have found each other.

Brit Dems wrote:Is there anyone else who would like to join us in this agreement?

No thanks.

OK.

Thank you for your contribution.