ancient civilisations and empires in history

let's list 'em.
off the top of my head, there's ancient greece (philosophy! sculpture! tragedy!), rome (gladiators), the byzantine empire/constantinople (mosaics, awesome architecture), ancient india (uh.. elephants?), ancient egypt (pyramids and papyrus!) .. ancient china (vases, funny hats and robes), feudal japan (ninjas)

am I missing any? add please.

>>118

Proof? Because from my understanding (which is naturally, less limited than yours) geographically those environment were few and far between and they were patches of land that were ALWAYS being warred over.

Secondly, putting "civilizations" in quotation marks everytime we speak on SSA-civilizations is a bit rediculous at this point because you seem to have a proclivity for changing the definition to suit your argument.

Third, Egypt as a superpower was well on it's way out before the enslaved Africans (Oh yeah, and Arabs, Iranians, and oh my what else <=== The point is that the last Egyptian dynasty wasn't all "negroes") rose up. The uprising of these peoples was basically a final symptom.

So, how exactly, when there is great dispute over your points does this prove your statement?

I think we should keep something in context of African civilizations and the constant (ancient and modern) ideological, political, economic and military pressure that's been placed on the region.

All hatred for "negroes" trace back to Noah's Ham, and the directive of semitism- meaning Christians, Jews and Islam to attack Africa. Now- historically speaking, I can only see this as an act of revenge. It has suddenly occured to me that the semites may not have left Africa and all it's empires willingly, but instead were forced out.

>>120
>>121
Give it a est nigras, she/he's right. The descriptions you've given could apply to any neolithic or bronze age village anywhere on the globe. You haven't had a hard time, you're inferior.

>>122
Actually scratch that, you have had a hard time, except so has everyone else. The difference is they organised what meager resources they had and made the most of it instead of sucking on each other's anuses ad until their cousins who left africa nad evolved higher intelligent came back with aid packets or took them over the atlantic to slave the plantations.

>>121
Actually, the hatred for Blacks came when Euros started enslaving them in such scale that they needed a justification for it. That's when they started making up all that bullcrap about blacks being "unintelligent", "dishonest", and all that piss (in style with what Nazis were later to say about Jews to justify Auschwitz & co).

And they triumphed too; >>123 et al still go around believing those lies. With a straight face, at that.


Oh, and don't get me started on why SSA's shittier now than before. That's politics; USA & USSR were pissing their pants worrying that a successful 3rd World nation possibly supporting the others, so they effectively agreed that SSA et al be trampled into the mud.

Case in point: The biggest man-made artificial lake on the planet, is in Africa. Ghana, to be precise, built in 1961-65. It was a part of a national optimism that with the nation now independant, things would be looking up.

...and then the coups began...

>>114
I agree, it is easy for me being white, a man, and from an upper-middle class family. But there is still a dislike of white people from what we've done. There still is racism and discrimination, but many minorities assume it in white people too much. And as I said before, we are still paying Native Americans in the form of casinos, which I don't like. Affirmitive action, too, I feel is overcompensating. If I were black, a woman, or pretty much any race besides white, I could get into Berkeley. But being the ball of majority that I am, I pretty much have no chance.

>>125

So what though? You just prefaced your sentence with "It is easy for me being white, a man, and from an upper-middle class family." whatever you have to afterwards just seems like greed, imo.

Point: YOU ALREADY HAVE IT EASY. So why are you complaining about Native Americans and Affirmitive action for minorities who (and you just ADMITTED THIS) obviously don't have it easy as you with guys like >>122, >>123 around. Complaining about Affrimative Action at this point is complaining about not having white privilage anymore.


>>124
No, hatred for blacks is directly traced to what I said. Google it, please and stop with the baseless refutations. Same goes to >>123. Proof or widely available information or it didn't happen.

>>124
The trouble is the lies I believe in are backed up with fact and the truth has no facts to back it up.

I would have thought lies don't have proof to back them up and the truth has proof to back it up, but I'm white. I must be raist and thus not in a position to question a non-white on the subject of race.

vedic civilization dates back hundreds of millions of years.

>>126
I am not entirely against affirmitive action, though. For social class where it brings out the potential of those who were basically brought up to fail, be it rednecks, blacks from the ghetto, illegals, whatever, is a good idea. What I'm saying is, I am in advanced classes, I get good grades and whatnot, andI have black and other ethnic friends in my same situation. When it is made easier for them to get into selective colleges, that's when I have a problem with it.

The biggest part about it being easy for me to do well academically is social class, not being white or male. When AA is for solely race or gender, I consider it to be racist/sexist. I'm not trying to be greedy, I don't doubt that I'll be successful in life, its the college thing that irks me, ivy league was pretty much shot once my GPA went to 3.9.

The main reason I'm complaining about Native Americans is because I know one, who's family owns a Treasure Island, and they are millionares. The whole family is lazy drug addicts, they get a free ride their whole life and they don't do anything with it. All for stuff that happened a couple hundred years ago. Seems backwards to me.

>>128
you mean hundreds of tens of years, right?

>>129

Let me put this into 4-chan.org speak:

Whites have a 100 cakes.

Blacks have 10 cakes.

Due to a group of whites making sure all other whites have 100 cakes (and Blacks always having 10) legislature was put in place so that some blacks can get 70 cakes.

You're complaining about a 30 cake difference.

And that's terrible.

And here another problem, you're still complaining about a minority of blacks might have over yourself who has multiple and instituationalized advantages. And did it ever occur to you that those blacks got in on their own merits? Probably not, huh?

>>131
The thing is some blacks have 50 cakes and some whites only have 5 cakes. Also not all people who have 50 cakes are thieves and not all people with 5 cakes are victims, some are lazy, some are hard workers and some are just stupid. The race of the individual is an irrelevant demographic, only their merit is important. Eugenics is the answer.

>>132

"Some blacks w/ 50" is more like 5%.
"Some whites w/ 5" is more like 3%.

Race will be irrelevant when white privelege is fully dismantled. It will not be "an irrelevant demographic" until then. --Futhermore- this country, actually, no society has proven itself to be 100% a meritocracy yet, so eugenics will not work until then.

>>133


has NOT proven itself to be 100% meritorcratic.

>>127
"The trouble is the lies I believe in are backed up with fact and the truth has no facts to back it up."

What facts exactly?

"...but I'm white. I must be raist and thus not in a position to question a non-white on the subject of race."

I'm white too, if that's what you mean. With the type of white looks that the SS would have killed for. However, that doesn't stop me from seing how it takes culture, not race, to dumb people down.

Like, say, enforced illiteracy, by way of nuking the education system through budget cuts so as to service phantastically (sometimes also artificially) high foreign debt (or whatever the excuse-of-the-day is). That kind of illiteracy that allows the superstition you usually need to go for those get-rich-quick schemes, like corruption or cargo cult-type churches (that admittedly gets the priest rich quick).

Like encouraging (or at least not discouraging) a culture that clowns on anyone with interests outside the 2-3 permissable ones (e.g. basketball, hiphop, and guns&drugs).

Like encouraging (or at least not discouraging) a culture that clowns on anyone that wants more education than just about what's needed to make widgets all day, every day, until you retire... or you die before retirement... or the factory moves/goes bust, leaving you with no job, ever again... (whichever comes first)

Like feeding people with distractions that divert people's attention away from important stuff (e.g. presidential fellatio over potentionally imminent peace in the Middle East, for those who remember that far back). (Btw, stuff like pr0n fit very nicely in here...)

>>133
Where's the logic? Race is irrelevant, therefore affirmative action is also flawed.

White priviledge: seems to be either the criminal benefits of discrimination (which is already coverred by civil rights) or the state of not being discriminated against (which is not a priviledge but a right); is caused by discrimination. Meritocracy would eliminate the cause of white priviledge.

Enforce civil rights to eliminate discrimination and implement meritocracy so opportunities go to those who will put them to the best use rather than people who possess irrelevant demographical classifications.


No country has achieved 100% anything, however this is no reason to discard all hope of reducing crime, preventing tyranny from arising, reducing poverty etc etc.. The purpose of values is to ensure efforts are used constructively, even if they are not achieved 100% they do a lot of good. Meritocracy is a value that will reduce racism and discrimination.

Protip: Political groups which peddle easy answers are making a mockery of you. You may feel "empowerred", but deep down you will know what you are doing isn't true or right. Only the truth can set you free.

>>135
you forgot to add 'Like posting on 4chan' amright?

>>136

Still, it stands to reason that Meritocracy needs to be 100% for eugenics to work. That's what I'm talking about. I'm all for a meritocracy otherwise, but for now the divide between black and white is so great and so inate in every institution that it'll take quite some time before we implement eugenics based on merit or even meritocracy based on merit.

What good is a meritocracy where just being born white is consider a merit?

>>138
I would redefine your argument. You would need all the factors to work 100% perfectly in order for eugenics to work 100% perfectly. This not what I expect as can be extrapolated from my previous statement.

If we add meritocracy and eugenics to our values...
[*ring ring* shoop]
A small point, I don't believe things should be balanced, they should be logically defined. To simplify my argument I will simply state that they need to be balanced reasonably since I can't be botherred to go into absolute detail how the values would be structured and applied scientifically using statistics.
[shoop]
... and balanced them in a reasonable manner with other important values we would not achieve a 100% success rate due to the nature of reality. What we would do is do more good than not botherring with either of these values at all. Eugenics is dependant on meritocracy as meritocracy is needed to determine the natural abilities of a person.

So even though the science will not be 100% precise it is better than nothing, even a low level of eugenics is beneficial. For example parents will be able to select embryos which do not contain dehabilitating genetic disease thus prevent their child from sufferring their entire life.

>>138
Oh and if you consider irrelevant demographics as merit, then you are incorrect. It's as simple as that.

Again, you're not getting it. You and I may consider race an
"irrelevant demographic" but how do we keep those who consider race (an irrelevant deomgraphic) as a merit from disabling a meritocracy?

Present-day "Scientific statistics" would be numbers based on the cultural disparities and the re-enforced white privalege-based social gap >>135 mentions. Coldly taking that approach while ingoring history is building the framework for a meritocracy doomed for failure.

>>141
"how do we keep those who consider race (an irrelevant deomgraphic) as a merit from disabling a meritocracy? "

That's one of the reasons why values cannot be enacted 100%, people commit crime. This doesn't mean the values are not beneficial. Make the distinction between opposing the entire concept and opposing the methods used to put the concept into practice.

Oh and white priviledge is an ambiguous term as I already mentionned.

>>141
"how do we keep those who consider race (an irrelevant deomgraphic) as a merit from disabling a meritocracy? "

That's one of the reasons why values cannot be enacted 100%, people commit crime. This doesn't mean the values are not beneficial. Make the distinction between opposing the entire concept and opposing a particular method used to put the concept into practice.

Oh and white priviledge is an ambiguous term as I already mentionned.*

fix'd

>>137
"(Btw, stuff like pr0n and 4chan fit very nicely in here...)"

Like this? ;-)

>>124
The Volta Lake is a man-made lake created after the River Volta was dammed at the Akosombo gorge. The lake is dendritic in shape and has a generally north- south orientation with an average length and width of 400 km and 25 km respectively. It has a catchment of 385,185 km2, excluding its own area of 8,730 km2. Nearly 60% of this area lies outside of Ghana.
The lake was created to store up water primarily to generate hydro- electricity. Additionally it was envisaged that it would improve inland water transport, boost fishing, ensure enough water for domestic and industrial use and for irrigation, etc.
The project was implemented by Impregilo (Italian Civil Engineering Firm) under the supervision of the Volta River Authority of Ghana, at the cost of £ 70 million, and was completed in 1966 (5).

>>143

I'm sorry, but that's just not good enough. Of course you're not worried about ramifications such as these, because, well, you're white. Of course things can't be done 100%, but then again that's the point I'm trying to make here. Things apparently can't be done up to even 50%. And that's terrible.

What you are suggesting is total impunity and I'm saying that such an impunity to white priveledge will damage a meritocracy to the point where it would be useless to have one and it would simply be more of the same. Basically, biding time until minorities are reduced further and further into disparity without addressing first, the very real consequences of white privaledge.

If you are saying to me that white privaledge is "ambiguous" then you are a part of what I'm fighting against. Your meritocracy is half-hearted, half-thought out and could only lead to further inequality. 

lol, very nearly every single post in this thread is wrong on some point. I think it's funny when 4chan tries to act like it knows something.

FYI Alexander was greek. His father was greek, and ruled the greek city states, which revolted upon his death. go play Rise of Nations, Empire Earth, or Rise of Legends. Or read a book.

>>146
My race is irrelevant, I have no choice but to assume you are racist now, sorry.

I'm still not sure what exactly you mean by white priviledge. If you mean outright racism which denies merititious people opportunities, then I agree with you absolutely without exception. However if you think that the state of not being discriminated against is a crime, then your argument is absurd.

>>148
The individual's race is irrelevant, it's true.  An asshole is an asshole, a crook is a crook, a scientist is a scientist.  But in large groups, the relevance of race grows.

>>149
If you use eugenics race ceases to be a problem. The assholes are repatriated, the good people are evacuated and the average people... well their children don't have to have their genes.

>>147
he's macedonian. macedonians weren't greek, at least that's what the true greeks before alexander's time think of macedonians. by alexander's time the greek city states weren't what they once was and thus is ruled by macedon.

What's all this shit about white privilidge?  Explain.

It sounds just like something someone makes up to make themselves look like they're being repressed when they're really not.

They say treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity.  Would treason to blackness be the same thing?

>>151
Now that, my dear Watson, is what we call "owned"

Treason to whiteness basically means not caring about race. They are not saying you should go around betraying white people, they are saying you should not think "oh this guy is white and that guy isn't white". While there is nothing wrong with this term it's a pointless word, you could simple prove to people that racism is illogical, but liberals like to make new words up for old definitions and pass it off as their creation.

White priviledge however is an attempt to mix the state of not being discriminated against with the act of discriminating against someone. So according to them everyone who was born white is as guilty of white priviledge as a plantation owner in the 1700s. White priviledge is injust.

Over-all all liberals do is whip up paranoia in the black community and call anyone who disagrees with their stupid ideas a racist, regardless of the merits of their argument. I am black, no really I am, and I've been called a white racist already.

>>154
UH-HUH!

PWNED NIGAZ

White priviledge doesn't exist.  Most of what "White priviledge" is is simple flash judgements our society metes out regardless of race.  A white trash redneck family in dirty clothes is going to get harassed at a store JUST AS MUCH as a black family in the same situation.  I work at wal mart, I've seen it happen.  A black guy came through my line wearing a polo shirt and khaki pants, he obviously had a pretty good job, was of good socio economic status etc...   My manager didn't ask me to stop him at the door, didn't give him a second look (I was training as a greeter).  Later, he told me to check the receopt of a family of white trash coming through.

See, "white priviledge" is just the priviledge of not being poor, not being stupid etc...  Why are black people so poor and stupid?  Because they give the time of day to the stupid ass leaders who tell them that everything is the white man's fault and that they shouldnt' try to improve themselves because that'd be playing the white man's game or something stupid like that.

Usually, it's your own damn fault you have nothing.

Also suspect is the fact that everyone who screams that the white man is keeping them down doesn't usually support the black people doing what they can to improve their lot...  It usually involves the black man demanding more welfare and kickbacks.  More "help".

The best way to get anywhere is not to rely on the help of people who would really rather leave people well enough alone.  The political correctness of always giving in to the things that minorities demand is just a veneer.  If you insist on being parasites, you'll be in trouble in a couple of generations when the culture shifts and suddenly, giving loud obnoxious minorities anything they want isn't so popular.

If that happens, guess what?  You'll be fucked.  The assholes will have to do or die, and suddenly, your minority will become a better group of people, more productive and independent.  All you need to do is stop relying on someone else.

>>159
So, I'm guessing you favor social darwinism?