>>9
Where
shall we begin. In your post you juxtapose geographic, cultural, and genetic influences without any logical framework to support a subjective (
desirable genes?)conclusion. Then you equivocate, state that you are not a racist, and assert support of social Darwinism, an idea whose time came and went long ago because though it may be natural, it's not humane.
It's rarely easy to engage in logical debate here, because so few of the people here know how to read critically, much less employ logic. If you're not a racist, for whatever reason, we have no quarrel. For those who are, I can only say that your position is logically unsupportable, and I have little interest in educating you. That's your job. I can tell you that if you travel, and interact with other "races" extensively, and are a perceptive sort, you will discover that people, despite race, creed, color, culture, and whatever else, are more alike than they are different. Sad thing is, I can't really say that's entirely a good thing. Thus my original response:
monkeys
I will admit to this potentially inappropriate, and unsupportable supposition: I responded to OP as if he was a racist, though there is little to indicate that that is the case. Perhaps he was simply amazed by the foulness and ignorance of the song, and wanted to share. That's understandable, but not the kind of thing most of us need to see. Anyone who spends more than ten seconds on VIP can tell that there are some seriously sick racist fucks here, and more out in the "real world". Fortunately they are a small, if loud, group that gets smaller every generation.
pax