[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

ahem:

"No rational man, cognizant of the facts, believes that the average Negro is the equal, still less the superior, of the white man. And if this be true, it is simply incredible that, when all his disabilities are removed, and our prognathus relative has a fair field and no favour, as well as no oppressor, he will be able to compete successfully with his bigger-brained and smaller jawed rival, in a contest which is to be carried out on by thoughts and not by bites ."

Charles Darwin The Descent of Man page 20

and could we forget page 179

"The standard of intelligence of the average Negro is similar to that of the eleven-year-old youth of the species Homo sapiens"

(so black folks are a different species are they darwin?)

So I suppose that is that then?

are you familiar with social darwinism? people have not necessarily taken his theories in the direction you are hoping for, not even Darwin himself, that is the invention of open-minded folks like us from the future.. Darwin was not strong enough to overcome the bigotry of his time, which is a shame, because plenty of white folks were NOT racist at that time, but he continued to believe in bunk pseudo-science..

...

[Alex's Trip]

yay 2 threads.

[Rob Instigator]

by OUR definition of racist every single european back in darwin's time was racist

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

by OUR definition of racist every single european back in darwin's time was racist

exactly. he was a fucking victorian. they had empire in their brains. to condemn individuals because of the morals of their time is sheer ignorance.

darwinist thinkers however claim that the inhabitants of new guinea are smarter than europeans, who are in average a stupider people. the reason for this is that to survive in new guinea you had to be clever and avoid being murdered, whereas to survive in europe you just needed a solid immune system because plagues were #1 killer.

but who the fuck knows and who gives a shit anyway. everyone should fuck everyone and we won't be bitching about this stupid shit any longer.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

by OUR definition of racist every single european back in darwin's time was racist

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

exactly. he was a fucking victorian. they had empire in their brains. to condemn individuals because of the morals of their time is sheer ignorance.

bull shit to both of you..
if all Victorians or all europeans were racist then explain these kind folks..
A

• William Allen (Quaker)

B

• Thomas Babington
• Joseph Beldam
• Thomas Binney
• Samuel Bowly
• Henry Brougham, 1st Baron Brougham and Vaux
• Sir Thomas Buxton, 1st Baronet

C

• John Clarkson (abolitionist)
• Thomas Clarkson
• Josiah Conder (editor and author)

D

• William Dawes (Royal Marines officer)
• Thomas Day

E

• Edward James Eliot

F

• William Forster (philanthropist)
• Charles James Fox

H

• Christopher Newman Hall

H cont.

• Robert Halley
• John Scandrett Harford
• Francis Hargrave
• John Hobbis Harris
• David Hartley (the Younger)
• Elizabeth Heyrick
• Samuel Hoare Jr
• John Hoppus

K

• Joseph Ketley
• William Knibb

M

• Hannah More
• William Morgan (abolitionist)
• Samuel Morley (MP)

N

• John Newton

P

• John Pye-Smith

R

• William Rathbone III
• William Rathbone IV

R cont.

• Richard Rathbone
• Andrew Reed (clergyman)
• Elizabeth Jesser Reid
• William Roscoe

S

• John Scoble
• Granville Sharp
• James Sherman (minister)
• William Smith (abolitionist)
• Walter Spencer Stanhope
• Percival Stockdale

T

• Jeremiah Thompson
• Henry Thornton (abolitionist)

W

• Josiah Wedgwood
• William Wilberforce

Y

• Ann Yearsley

and these

B

• Jacques Pierre Brissot

C

• Étienne Clavière
• Marquis de Condorcet

D

• Edmond Louis Alexis Dubois-Crancé

G

• Henri Grégoire

H

• Victor Hugues

I

• François-André Isambert

P

• Étienne Polverel

R

• Julien Raimond

S

• Victor Schoelcher
• Society of the Friends of the Blacks
• Léger-Félicité Sonthonax

V

• Jean Alexandre Vaillant

Racism may have been the norm of the 18th/19th century, but lets not all be so naive to assume that everybody in Europe was a racist, because that is simply not true, there were many many people who were NOT racist, and supported movements against slavery, bigotry and social racism..

so lets not exonerate Darwin because of the context of his era, because that is simply a cop-out for his misguided personal beliefs. Racism is universal crime, and it remains so across history. There were people who lived and were even martyred for the cause of equality and social justice, and this idea that all Europeans were universally racist is a mockery of their struggle..

[Rob Instigator]

I did not say they WERE racists. I said tha by OUR modern definition of racist, everyone in europe was one, being taught and accepting the standard norms of the day.

Darwin took 20+ years to write On The Origin Of Species and in that time became a DEEP believer in the rights of all men, and the fallacy of the slave trade and the supposedly inherent inferiority of africans.

Darwin's work actually stuck the first nail in the coffin of these racist assholes. 200 years later racist fucks are still upset that Darwin provided a mechanism by which nature created all of us, black white whatever, out of the same cloth, how we are all deeply related.

chill

[Rob Instigator]

No rational man, cognizant of the facts, believes that the average Negro is the equal, still less the superior, of the white man. And if this be true, it is simply incredible that, when all his disabilities are removed, and our prognathus relative has a fair field and no favour, as well as no oppressor, he will be able to compete successfully with his bigger-brained and smaller jawed rival, in a contest which is to be carried out on by thoughts and not by bites

notice he does not say it is TRUE.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

Darwin took 20+ years to write On The Origin Of Species and in that time became a DEEP believer in the rights of all men, and the fallacy of the slave trade and the supposedly inherent inferiority of africans.

Darwin's work actually stuck the first nail in the coffin of these racist assholes. 200 years later racist fucks are still upset that Darwin provided a mechanism by which nature created all of us, black white whatever, out of the same cloth, how we are all deeply related.

umm, that is not correct.

Descent of Man, the book with all those nice racists quotes I provided was written AFTER origin of species, and published in the 1870s..

while it is true that Darwin was against the slave trade, he WAS not in favor of any kind of belief in the equality of Europeans and Africans, he believed them savage and inferior, or did you not read the quotes? There are plenty more, but I am not writing a research paper on Darwin here, you just have to read that book for yourself

further, for the fifty years immediately following Darwin, his theories, far from ending racism, were used to SUPPORT it as Social Darwinism and Eugenics..

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

No rational man, cognizant of the facts, believes that the average Negro is the equal, still less the superior, of the white man. And if this be true, it is simply incredible that, when all his disabilities are removed, and our prognathus relative has a fair field and no favour, as well as no oppressor, he will be able to compete successfully with his bigger-brained and smaller jawed rival, in a contest which is to be carried out on by thoughts and not by bites

notice he does not say it is TRUE.

no, he says is HIS philosophy that they ARE NOT EQUAL is true..
in fact, in that quote Darwin is saying that he is impressed that Africans with smaller brains and bigger jaws who he says "are not equal" could compete. He is impressed that inferior Africans can even compete with white men at all, he is not claiming equality by a long shot.

i'm not trying to discredit the science of darwin here, just point out his bigotry in relation to the Darwin is NOT a racist thread, because that idea is bullshit when he clearly was.. you can be a racist and still have good ideas aside from your racism, but lets be honest about history instead of whitewashing our cultural heroes in the face of idealism.

If i can accept that Haile Selassie was an elitist, than surely y'all can accept that Darwin was a racist.

[Rob Instigator]

but WHAT DOES IT MATTER?

I worry more about current people who seek to keep us divided by constantly using RACE as if it was a meaningful term, and not just a holdover of old european bullshit.

[!@#$%!]

suchfrinds-- many of those abolitionists were paternalistic and thought themselves superior, they just thought their superiority obliged them to be do-gooders instead of slavers. others had an interest in peddling machinery, for which slave labor was competition. others (i read babbington's entry) were sexists. take everyone with an ignorant streak from your list and you end up with nobody.

darwin was a seminal thinker in the field of science. period. looking to him for moral guidance is kinda stupid. his word is not gospel anyway-- it's a theory that gets constantly revised and developed. you keep the parts that make sense and discard the crap. it's how science works.

yes eugenics was in part derived from him, but so what. the spartans killed malformed children. animals do that too. someone discovered the fire and now we have napalm; another discovered the wheel and now we have global warming, etc. etc. we're always going to use knowledge for stupid ends. so fucking what. who the fuck is perfect? we fuck up and we correct our ways. nobody knows the end of the fucking story. prophesies can kiss my skunky ass-- the lies of conmen. nobody knows where we're going and the future will look back at us and laugh a little-- so what? you do what you can, then you die. that's life, o wise one.

[Rob Instigator]

"The future's uncertain and the end is always near." - Mr. Mojo Risin'

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

but WHAT DOES IT MATTER?

.

i told you, I only posted this in context with the Charles Darwin was Not Racist thread...

and it matters quite a bit actually, because people today infer because Darwinian theories have been used by bright souls like us to smash racism, that somehow Darwin also tried to smash racism and he didn't.

I-man only big up the righteous acts of the past for hero worship.. and Darwin does not rank high on my list of heroes, especially when there were plenty of examples of good folks who worked very hard against racism to admire, specifically because of the context of the extreme racism they were fighting against. After all, this is why we celebrate King day right? To admire the heroes of the past who fought the good fight which gave birth to our today? Its easy for us not to be racists today, but in that time it was quite a struggle, and we should big up those people who fought hard and lived their lives to the struggle..

and to !@#$%!, I am well aware of the racism which was also embedded in the abolition movement, however, as I said before this thread is not a research project, you will have to pick and chose your own examples from those lists, that was just posted to make the point that there were people who were NOT racist.

[Rob Instigator]

i honor the man for his ideas.
it's all we have left of him!

Darwin singlehandedly demolished (although many do not want to admit it) the idea that a persoonal god has a hand in the details of day to day existance.

for that I am grateful.

to lump him in with the virulent hate-filled racists is a diservice to the man.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

i honor the man for his ideas.
it's all we have left of him!

Darwin singlehandedly demolished (although many do not want to admit it) the idea that a persoonal god has a hand in the details of day to day existance.

for that I am grateful.

to lump him in with the virulent hate-filled racists is a diservice to the man.

so you will clutch your idealism in the face of hero-worship?

its as I told you, I can accept history warts an all... Haile Selassie was one of the champions of equality and smashing racism, and yet he shit on a solid gold toilet while millions of Ethiopians suffered famine and absolute poverty, and yet I can equally venerate HIM while accepting his flaws openly and honestly..

in regards to Darwin I feel the same way.. and by the way, Darwin himself did not directly smash the concept of theology, people used his ideas for that later..

[!@#$%!]

darwin was very neurotic, suffered all kinds of ailments, had character flaws, and his shit stank for sure.

the theory of evolution fucking rules though.

[Rob Instigator]

ahhh, true, but they were HIS ideas.

and he knew they would do so, which is why he purposefully was coy in his wording in descent of man regarding humans equality with the animals.

"Animals, whom we have made our slaves, we do not like to consider our equal.”

[Rob Instigator]

ideas are all the humam race has

everything else is superfluous.

[flophousefloozie]

Keep going, you guys!

This is entertaining AND educational.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by flophousefloozie

Keep going, you guys!

This is entertaining AND educational.

i think we squeezed the last drop out of this one. sorry!

i can recommend this book though:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guns,_Germs,_and_Steel

it's fun + awesome

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

i think we squeezed the last drop out of this one. sorry!

i can recommend this book though:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guns,_Germs,_and_Steel

it's fun + awesome

Guns, Germs and Steel is a fabulous book, a fundamental idea, and a very entertaining PBS special as well.. it is an equalizing theory, that humans are the same, but geography is what divides us.

I equally recommend that one for further reading..