Jump to content

Should non-whites be given equal rights to whites


Kemal Ergenekon
 Share

Recommended Posts

Would you say so? 


 


A non-white can think and feel up to a high level, quite like a child, but yet if somebody kills an Iraqi. It is seen as ok, when a French or American is killed, it's pure evil.


 


Should human rights be expanded and bombing third-world countries banned? If the right want to claim that it's wrong to kill Americans and the French, why don't they feel the same on the browns being murdered? 


 

  • Upvote 4
77oKn5K.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you bomb their people, kill their families, their pets, everyone they ever knew, and then they come for you with a bomb-laden truck.... don't you dare call them a terrorist. 

Edited by Moreau III
  • Upvote 1

Signed by Sultan Moreau

UqIjjeQ.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think all the victims of 9/11, the London bombings and the Paris shootings were white, so I don't think skin colour has as much to do with it as a feeling of territorial clannishness, where people feel a closer empathetic connection to those most like them in their lifestyle and surroundings, and by extension are made most afraid when those people like them are subject to sudden and inexplicable bouts of violence.

 

I also think that considering the amount of anti-war protesters around the Iraq war, it's not fair to say that people "don't care". 

  • Upvote 1

☾☆


Priest of Dio

just because the Nazis did something doesn't mean it's automatically wrong

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a phenomena called victor's justice...

It's basicly an extention on the saying History is written by the victors.

The west beats the rest of the world in almost everything, and is the most advanced and militarised, so everything done against them is unethical and immoral. A western man could kill an entire village in syria and it will probably be ignored, because international law enforcement and the international court(The Hague) is western and biased towards them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you bomb their people, kill their families, their pets, everyone they ever knew, and then they come for you with a bomb-laden truck.... don't you dare call them a terrorist. 

Except that's a ridiculous argument, since the victims of terrorism didn't kill anyone (for the most part), and terrorism is a description of methodology and is non-negotiable in definition, whatever the stupid adage says. A terrorist is someone who deliberately targets a civilian population or target with the goal of creating political and social instability through terror, for political goals.

  • Upvote 2

☾☆


Priest of Dio

just because the Nazis did something doesn't mean it's automatically wrong

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think all the victims of 9/11, the London bombings and the Paris shootings were white, so I don't think skin colour has as much to do with it as a feeling of territorial clannishness, where people feel a closer empathetic connection to those most like them in their lifestyle and surroundings, and by extension are made most afraid when those people like them are subject to sudden and inexplicable bouts of violence.

 

I also think that considering the amount of anti-war protesters around the Iraq war, it's not fair to say that people "don't care". 

 

My post is a slight alteration of this one. I thought of white and brown, and first-worlder and third-worlder, but this one seemed more to the point.

 

It isn't supposed to be a real comprehensive post. The purpose is just to highlight that "Universal Human Rights" is nothing but a hoax. Rights and democracy are only possible between equals. Among the citizens of first world countries, those rights might be protected. If you are a third-worlder vs a first-worlder, you have no rights, because you are not equal. The same with animals. They might be living creatures that feel pain, but they are not equal. The only rights they will ever get is charity rights bestowed on them by compassionate first-worlders.

Edited by Kemal Ergenekon
  • Upvote 1
77oKn5K.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except that's a ridiculous argument, since the victims of terrorism didn't kill anyone (for the most part), and terrorism is a description of methodology and is non-negotiable in definition, whatever the stupid adage says. A terrorist is someone who deliberately targets a civilian population or target with the goal of creating political and social instability through terror, for political goals.

I think he is referring to insurgencey. Also, is this about Americas foreign policies? Many nations of the west aren't going to war, it's basically America and Russia who are aggressive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except that's a ridiculous argument, since the victims of terrorism didn't kill anyone (for the most part), and terrorism is a description of methodology and is non-negotiable in definition, whatever the stupid adage says. A terrorist is someone who deliberately targets a civilian population or target with the goal of creating political and social instability through terror, for political goals.

 

Humans are emotional creatures. If you are constantly bombing people and they see no way out of the death & murder all around them.... they will do anything to put a stop to it. 

 

It's more or less the same reason why America nuked Japan twice (aiming for population centres to kill the maximum amount of people).

 

Once the US VS THEM mentality set's in: People don't distinguish civilian from military. They just want the shit to stop. 

Edited by Moreau III

Signed by Sultan Moreau

UqIjjeQ.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he is referring to insurgencey. Also, is this about Americas foreign policies? Many nations of the west aren't going to war, it's basically America and Russia who are aggressive.

 

Well, due to nato and many pacts when the US goes to war some EU nations also go to war along the US.

And when a nation like germany joins a war, the rest of the union will likely follow soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except that's a ridiculous argument, since the victims of terrorism didn't kill anyone (for the most part), and terrorism is a description of methodology and is non-negotiable in definition, whatever the stupid adage says. A terrorist is someone who deliberately targets a civilian population or target with the goal of creating political and social instability through terror, for political goals.

Although I do agree that personal terrorism is a pointless activity and doesn't accomplish anything, the idea that the citizens of an imperialist state are innocent when their governments use military force to bomb foreign countries, is at best naive. In post-WWII Germany for example the government embraced the concept of national responsibility, and that the people themselves were partially responsible for WWII and the Holocaust because they either supported the Nazi's or they were apathetic and didn't do anything when people in their own villages were arrested by the SS. Putting the entire blame on "the politicians" is ridiculous.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although I do agree that personal terrorism is a pointless activity and doesn't accomplish anything, the idea that the citizens of an imperialist state are innocent when their governments use military force to bomb foreign countries, is at best naive. In post-WWII Germany for example the government embraced the concept of national responsibility, and that the people themselves were partially responsible for WWII and the Holocaust because they either supported the Nazi's or they were apathetic and didn't do anything when people in their own villages were arrested by the SS. Putting the entire blame on "the politicians" is ridiculous.

 

This is especially true if those imperialist countries are democracies (USA, UK, France, etc) and their populations continuously votes in huge numbers for a government that continues the same imperialist policies as the one it replaced.  

Edited by Moreau III
  • Upvote 1

Signed by Sultan Moreau

UqIjjeQ.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well first of all the title is completely wrong, it should along the lines of the west and then everyone else or 1st world and 3rd world. 

And its not an issue about non-white people at all, in fact the west has no problem at all with brown/black people killing others.

 

The reason people care more is exactly for same reason Muslims care about Muslim countries at war, its apart of their group. So an American cares more about an American than they care about a European. 

Can't just stop bombing crappy countries, need to deal with them first or stop them from being a problem for you.

IpHGyGc.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't just stop bombing crappy countries, need to deal with them first or stop them from being a problem for you.

 

"Can't stop bombing imperialist countries, need to deal with them first or stop them from being a problem for you." - Osama bin Laden

  • Upvote 1
77oKn5K.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well first of all the title is completely wrong, it should along the lines of the west and then everyone else or 1st world and 3rd world. 

And its not an issue about non-white people at all, in fact the west has no problem at all with brown/black people killing others.

 

The reason people care more is exactly for same reason Muslims care about Muslim countries at war, its apart of their group. So an American cares more about an American than they care about a European. 

Can't just stop bombing crappy countries, need to deal with them first or stop them from being a problem for you.

 

You complain bitterly about non-white people flooding your "purely white" western world. Yet you advocate for the bombing of predominately non-white countries, which only displaces millions of none-white people, and forces them to seek refuge in your "purely white" western world and who can't be turned back because the west signed the UN Charter of Human Rights.

 

Do you see the problem with your logic? 

Edited by Moreau III

Signed by Sultan Moreau

UqIjjeQ.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is especially true if those imperialist countries are democracies (USA, UK, France, etc) and their populations continuously votes in huge numbers for a government that continues the same imperialist policies as the one it replaced.  

The United States is not a democracy in any real way, members of Congress and the US President require tens of millions of dollars to afford campaigns required to be elected. That said, the people do have some power and the apathy and silence of the American people when they invaded Iraq or continued to use drones to bomb foreign countries is very telling. I mean when where are all the people who protested in their hundreds of thousands during the Vietnam War? (Of course I'm answering my own question, the answer is that they were protesting because they didn't want to be sent to Vietnam to be killed! Now that the US has transformed from a conscript army to a highly-paid volunteer force (ie, mercenary) "the people" couldn't care less what countries they bomb.

 

Americans can hardly complain about terrorism when they continue to interfere in the affairs of foreign countries or launch military incursions.

Edited by Andrezj Kolarov
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You complain bitterly about non-white people flooding your "purely white" western world.Yet you advocate for the bombing of predominately non-white countries which only displaces millions of those people and force them to seek refuge in your "purely white" western world and who can't be turned back because they signed the UN Charter On Human Rights.

 

Do you see the problem with your logic? 

No, I want to sink their boats as well. 

  • Upvote 1

IpHGyGc.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Middle eastern white, I guess. Though my genetic composition is closer to Greek than Eastern. Pretty !@#$ white in terms of pigmentation. Why?

It gives me a better idea why you hold these views.

IpHGyGc.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

My post is a slight alteration of this one. I thought of white and brown, and first-worlder and third-worlder, but this one seemed more to the point.

 

It isn't supposed to be a real comprehensive post. The purpose is just to highlight that "Universal Human Rights" is nothing but a hoax. Rights and democracy are only possible between equals. Among the citizens of first world countries, those rights might be protected. If you are a third-worlder vs a first-worlder, you have no rights, because you are not equal. The same with animals. They might be living creatures that feel pain, but they are not equal. The only rights they will ever get is charity rights bestowed on them by compassionate first-worlders.

 

I see, I didn't really read that post originally. I would agree that rights are bestowed not inherited, and that what provides those rights is something man made (a legal framework). One of the many arguments for a just war is to extend human rights to people who don't currently have them, by for example bombing their country and replacing their government.

 

Humans are emotional creatures. If you are constantly bombing people and they see no way out of the death & murder all around them.... they will do anything to put a stop to it. 

 

It's more or less the same reason why America nuked Japan twice (aiming for population centres to kill the maximum amount of people).

 

Once the US VS THEM mentality set's in: People don't distinguish civilian from military. They just want the shit to stop. 

 

The bombings in Japan weren't terrorism because they were done by a state- another criteria for terrorism is that it's done by a non-state actor. Terrorism by states is a war crime and a whole different barrel of cats. Also I refuse to believe that ISIS terrorists believe that "they want the shit to stop" or that they're the victims of imperialism. A fairly big chunk of them aren't even from the war zones they're fighting in. Some of them lived in the West.

 

Although I do agree that personal terrorism is a pointless activity and doesn't accomplish anything, the idea that the citizens of an imperialist state are innocent when their governments use military force to bomb foreign countries, is at best naive. In post-WWII Germany for example the government embraced the concept of national responsibility, and that the people themselves were partially responsible for WWII and the Holocaust because they either supported the Nazi's or they were apathetic and didn't do anything when people in their own villages were arrested by the SS. Putting the entire blame on "the politicians" is ridiculous.

 

People don't vote for a war, at least they don't in the UK. They vote for representatives who make that decision. 

 

In addition, targeting civilians is recognised as a war crime both inside and outside of conventional warfare. Plenty of insurgents target military facilities (the IRA for example did for the most part target british police/military). 

 

In a situation of total war it is common to target civilians to hurt the enemy war effort, it doesn't stop it being absolutely immoral- something recognised by almost all countries.

 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/60/ICC_member_states.svg

☾☆


Priest of Dio

just because the Nazis did something doesn't mean it's automatically wrong

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see, I didn't really read that post originally. I would agree that rights are bestowed not inherited, and that what provides those rights is something man made (a legal framework). One of the many arguments for a just war is to extend human rights to people who don't currently have them, by for example bombing their country and replacing their government.

 

Those arguments, while good on paper, would hold more water if (1) bombing the country and replacing a government actually extended human rights to people who don't currently have them (they didn't in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, etc. and I know of no example where you could claim otherwise), and (2) if extending the human rights was not achieved by violating the human rights, especially the right to live, of millions of people (non-whites, so pseudo-people.)

 

 

The bombings in Japan weren't terrorism because they were done by a state- another criteria for terrorism is that it's done by a non-state actor. Terrorism by states is a war crime and a whole different barrel of cats. Also I refuse to believe that ISIS terrorists believe that "they want the shit to stop" or that they're the victims of imperialism. A fairly big chunk of them aren't even from the war zones they're fighting in. Some of them lived in the West.

 

----

 

People don't vote for a war, at least they don't in the UK. They vote for representatives who make that decision. 

 

In addition, targeting civilians is recognised as a war crime both inside and outside of conventional warfare. Plenty of insurgents target military facilities (the IRA for example did for the most part target british police/military). 

 

In a situation of total war it is common to target civilians to hurt the enemy war effort, it doesn't stop it being absolutely immoral- something recognised by almost all countries.

 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/60/ICC_member_states.svg

 

No one is claiming terrorism is OK. The question is how the people who bear the culpability for causing the deaths of millions are not punished or even condemned in any meaningful way. I don't see the perpetrators of the invasion of Iraq being punished for violating the human rights of millions. Do you?

77oKn5K.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.