History /
Casimir the Great (Kazimierz Wielki) started anti-Semitism? [101]
How much more precise can you be than seeing the very existence of the races, and the affinity that races feel towards one's own kinds?
All due respect, these are craps! Plz give the biological evidence as you claimed. Otherwise stop nonesensical sophistry.
And they have been for millena with Plato being just one of the examples. You have heard about Plato's "Republic" haven't you.
Do you mean Plato is arguing "racial intolerance"?!
On the biological scale we are indeed one species, but as individuals we do not think on the scale of the entire human kind.
For your knowledge we all are different indeed from a biological aspect. No one would possess the same body of genes as any one else had ever did. This is what makes us look different in many ways. But we are all human beings and there are humanitarian values which are accepted worldwide. Some may prefer Democritus and some Sokrates, some follow Muhammad, some Jesus, some Moses, and some Buddha.
But there is no universally accepted and admired creed according to which "racial intolerance" would be interpreted alright. I am not talking about the useless political systems of our times, I am talking about "racial intolerance" which you maintain it fanatically.
And you are a linguist?
Not professionally. I am an amateur linguist.
So tell us about that vast difference between rationalization and ethical standards
Read Kant's dissertations on ethics.
Are these standards inherent in nature and completely irrational?
If you mean ethical standards, yes they are innate stuffs as well as philosophically "rational".
How can you call people derogatory name and then pretend to be some kind of defender of cross racial relations?
Thanks for insisting on your fallacy. For your information it is a general term in use which is
sometimes considered to be offensive,
not always nor often. My usage could not be including its "sporadically offensive meaning" becuz I did not mean to, as opposed to your malicious misrepresentation.
Are you in grade 5 reading some 19th century novels?
I am sorry that you still do not know some stuff are ageless.
"Noble savage", huh?
Are you trying to insult primitive people by remarking the term "savage"?!
ALL human groups are perfectly capable of committing acts that are considered unethical by other groups.
lol, it is amusing how you run forward (likely unintentionally). Did I say primitives are infallible?! You asked whether ethics is ingrained with humans nature or not and I exemplified these purely natural men and their obvious point of view abt ethicality.
Still, is it ethical for them to kill baby seals? The whole world protests when they do so.
lol, you are unbelievable. Nature is able to sustain a natural food circle (one eats the other and another its it and so on). Not the early men nor the primitives have ever caused something noticeably wrong within this circle. It is us-the so-called modern men who seriously jeopardize this planet. It was the civilized European hunters taking prideful photographs while standing next to the "Mounds of Buffalo-skulls", not the native Americans. By the way you hinted since some Eskimos hunt some baby seals, then the whole ethicality within the entire primitive creeds on this planet would be nothing?! Thanks again for your faithfulness to fallacy.
If need be we kill them, and they kill us. The "need" can be any need as defined by the perpetrator of the aggression.
Makes sense! (sick!)
The Nazis justified murder and they called it the law. Jews justified murder and they called it the Bible.
Do you really think these rush lines of examples would refute morality and thereby confrim your unsound idea of "racial intolerance"?!
Yes, the American and British war crimes are easily justified and accepted by their respective populations.
Wrong. Many celebrities (Noam Chomsky, S. Kubrick) never ever admitted any craps justifying unfair wars. And I think most Britons as well as Americans are already against war. Obama (true or false) polled becuz of his motto of changing the ongoing belligerency.
The same withing the muslim world within the framework of their own approaches, which certainly are in opposition to those of the US and UK.
It still has nothing to do with approving the "refutal of morality" and subsequently the "confirmation of racial intolerance", in your eyes.
So tell me, who is moral here?
Ok suppose I told you none. So could that mean "morality" is wrong?! Lets make another supposition, one day you get up and find all men on the earth claiming 2+2=3 for their own irrational reasons, so could you believe that 2+2=4 is wrong even though science has already confirmed it?! Utilize your gray cells man! "Rightness" is not up to its pretending followers, even if all men turned into wrong ones, Rightness still would be Rightness.
As someone said, fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity.
As someone [God knows who] said, fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity [therefore there could not be any real "fight for peace" at all] ... after this therefore becuz of this....
the US did not give one bit about Poland and in fact sold Poland out to the USSR in Yalta.
As a fallacious arguer I knew you are going to say that. Werent the bulk of your resistance forces clustered in the UK? Are you denying that US saved the UK and afterwards all of you?! Yes they first rescue you from the Nazi occupation and racisim, then-for presently obscure reasons, entrusted you to Communism. Throughout the Communist rule you had your own country but probably under an unsavory government, nevertheless the Communist party members were indeed Polish natives. Anyways Communists didnt kill you becuz of your nose, or your non-German genes, etc. Your army just lost your home in a few months (or maybe only 30 days I am not sure) but US aids, thru Bolsheviks, saved you forever.
The help the USSR received from the US amounted to about 5% of the Soviet costs.
Who told you that accurate and odd percentage? I dont know the real amount of US aids for Soviets, at the present time, but one thing is obvious for me as an Iranian: our country got no nationwide railway until 1943 when Uncle Sam's financial sources finished it as soon as possible. A great railyway from the hot shores of Persian gulf all the way to the green Caspian coasts. And you know what for they constructed it? To convey the huge amounts of aids to Russia, whilst Nazis were approaching Caucasian mountains and had the main part of the green Europe as an oyster for themselves. It is a fact that without Uncle Sam the eastern frontier would end up a "Slaughterhouse of Communists", where Nazis would be measuring Russian noses to make sure whether they could live in their Utopian society or merit death. Have not you ever heeded this fact that Nazis started off continous retreats on both frontiers as soon as Americans joined the war?! Anyways it is an off-topic stuff and got nothing to do with the fact that no freaks on this planet should be intolerant towards the others.
It could be argued that Poles fighting in Poland during WW2 contributed more to the war effort than Americans ever did.
Are you that much partial?
When you consider then number of Poles fighting on the Western front then those 5% of American cash pales in comparison to Polish input towards the liberation of others.
Ok I will tell them that in accordance with your account it was Poland which liberated the Europe not America!! But I am afraid according to this statement of yours US once, at the same time, sells out Poland. Maybe Polish fighters just freed every where but Poland (such forgetfuls!) and it is why US could librate there and sell you out!
the US ... in fact sold Poland out to the USSR in Yalta.
Just thought you might want to know.
Ok forget abt it at all. The people you feel partial for are undoubtedly the only "Libertador" in the Europe. But would it still give the pretext to hate the others becuz of their race?!
I don't think humans are any more special in the universe than any other creatures.
Then whatever
you think is a fact and could concern every body. Another sincere confession of course! Now I am getting the best impression I could ever conceive of you.
David Hume and Immanuel Kant would be a start.
Immanuel Kant cosiders "racial intolerance" as a moral matter?! For your knowledge the basis of such a bestial idea of racial intolerance is one's essentially better entity in comparison to the others. As I told you before according to Kant's ethicality it is the "good will" which is the only essentially "good" stuff within the cosmos, not a race nor a nation! Why are you making mock of yourself?!
heavens indeed. Look for proof in the old testament. Heck, there is some in the NT too.
But I am afraid you are resorting to your believe in a book, to justify your hatred towards Jews, whilst the book itself is brought about by a Jew-who is a universal pragaon of tenderness! Very rational.
In conclusion, you need to read more, study more and get some facts straight.
What a groundless conclusion based on irrelevant and absurd accounts, narrations, or freaky personal views.
For now you have very little material to form half decent arguments.
Let me guess, and it means "racial intolerance" is rational.
Unless you consider propaganda posters and motivational speeches actual knowledge.
For sure I do not care propagandistic craps. For instance stuffs like these are of course nothing to heed:
It could be argued that Poles fighting in Poland during WW2 contributed more to the war effort than Americans ever did.
If you are literally an intolerant person towards any people becuz of their race or religion or stuffs like that, so I am sorry for you in the heartiest way possible. On one hand you seem to detest the undergoing circumstances in the world and you feel that they are not right and fair, but on the other hand, instead of holding the right idea and trying to amend the world, you just sincerely devote yourself to exacerbate it in the worst way. :(
