Italians With Black Blood

nobledruali · Dec 23, 2006

http://www.white-history.com/refuting_rm/5.html

flaminghetero · Dec 24, 2006

nobledruali said:

http://www.white-history.com/refuting_rm/5.html
Click to expand...

Fuck them

Silvercosma · Dec 26, 2006

Supremacist Pseudoscience

Soulthinker · Dec 26, 2006

There was a book written about relationship of Blacks and Italians. I let you know when I find it.

nobledruali · Dec 27, 2006

Silvercosma said:

Supremacist Pseudoscience
Click to expand...

:shock: So you think it's mostly fiction huh Silver :?:

LaydeezmanCris · Dec 27, 2006

Italians have had African ancestry from as far back as the Roman times. Gaius Julius Caesar Octavianus, the Roman Emperor from January 16, 27 BC - August 19 AD 14, came from a family with long traces to the horn of Africa. During the battle of Actium between Ceasar himself and Mark Antony, his soldiers were supported by his lover, Cleopatra of Ptolemaic Egypt. After the war, many of the soldiers stayed in Greece and the others went on to Egypt to get brides. Others even went back to the Roman Empire which had large numbers of Eurasians and slaves from Africa.

Silvercosma · Dec 29, 2006

nobledruali said:

:shock: So you think it's mostly fiction huh Silver :?:
Click to expand...

Well, whenever I hear/read this kind of nonesense about "black genes", "black blood" and "measuring the level of purity" then this is causing me the same reaction as if I would hear someone scratching with fingernails on a blackboard.

Of course Italians have African ancestors, there is no human in this world who hasn't. And of course they mingled and mixed with Africans just like all humans everywhere on this world did whenever they came into contact with eachother. And of course, humans exposed to a similar climate adapt to the environment by developing similar physical characteristics, but this pseudo-scientific stuff about "purer races" and "amount of xy-race blood" really makes my toe nails curl up.

You can't "prove" the existance of races scientifically because the concept of races is a social construct without any scientific basis. Even the American Anthropological Association finally acknowledged this as a fact in their statement on "Race":

In the United States both scholars and the general public have been conditioned to viewing human races as natural and separate divisions within the human species based on visible physical differences. With the vast expansion of scientific knowledge in this century, however, it has become clear that human populations are not unambiguous, clearly demarcated, biologically distinct groups. Evidence from the analysis of genetics (e.g., DNA) indicates that most physical variation, about 94%, lies within so-called racial groups. Conventional geographic "racial" groupings differ from one another only in about 6% of their genes. This means that there is greater variation within "racial" groups than between them. In neighboring populations there is much overlapping of genes and their phenotypic (physical) expressions. Throughout history whenever different groups have come into contact, they have interbred. The continued sharing of genetic materials has maintained all of humankind as a single species.

Physical variations in any given trait tend to occur gradually rather than abruptly over geographic areas. And because physical traits are inherited independently of one another, knowing the range of one trait does not predict the presence of others. For example, skin color varies largely from light in the temperate areas in the north to dark in the tropical areas in the south; its intensity is not related to nose shape or hair texture. Dark skin may be associated with frizzy or kinky hair or curly or wavy or straight hair, all of which are found among different indigenous peoples in tropical regions. These facts render any attempt to establish lines of division among biological populations both arbitrary and subjective.

Historical research has shown that the idea of "race" has always carried more meanings than mere physical differences; indeed, physical variations in the human species have no meaning except the social ones that humans put on them. Today scholars in many fields argue that "race" as it is understood in the United States of America was a social mechanism invented during the 18th century to refer to those populations brought together in colonial America: the English and other European settlers, the conquered Indian peoples, and those peoples of Africa brought in to provide slave labor.

From its inception, this modern concept of "race" was modeled after an ancient theorem of the Great Chain of Being, which posited natural categories on a hierarchy established by God or nature. Thus "race" was a mode of classification linked specifically to peoples in the colonial situation. It subsumed a growing ideology of inequality devised to rationalize European attitudes and treatment of the conquered and enslaved peoples. Proponents of slavery in particular during the 19th century used "race" to justify the retention of slavery. The ideology magnified the differences among Europeans, Africans, and Indians, established a rigid hierarchy of socially exclusive categories underscored and bolstered unequal rank and status differences, and provided the rationalization that the inequality was natural or God-given. The different physical traits of African-Americans and Indians became markers or symbols of their status differences.

As they were constructing US society, leaders among European-Americans fabricated the cultural/behavioral characteristics associated with each "race," linking superior traits with Europeans and negative and inferior ones to blacks and Indians. Numerous arbitrary and fictitious beliefs about the different peoples were institutionalized and deeply embedded in American thought.

Early in the 19th century the growing fields of science began to reflect the public consciousness about human differences. Differences among the "racial" categories were projected to their greatest extreme when the argument was posed that Africans, Indians, and Europeans were separate species, with Africans the least human and closer taxonomically to apes.

Ultimately "race" as an ideology about human differences was subsequently spread to other areas of the world. It became a strategy for dividing, ranking, and controlling colonized people used by colonial powers everywhere. But it was not limited to the colonial situation. In the latter part of the 19th century it was employed by Europeans to rank one another and to justify social, economic, and political inequalities among their peoples. During World War II, the Nazis under Adolf Hitler enjoined the expanded ideology of "race" and "racial" differences and took them to a logical end: the extermination of 11 million people of "inferior races" (e.g., Jews, Gypsies, Africans, homosexuals, and so forth) and other unspeakable brutalities of the Holocaust.

"Race" thus evolved as a worldview, a body of prejudgments that distorts our ideas about human differences and group behavior. Racial beliefs constitute myths about the diversity in the human species and about the abilities and behavior of people homogenized into "racial" categories. The myths fused behavior and physical features together in the public mind, impeding our comprehension of both biological variations and cultural behavior, implying that both are genetically determined. Racial myths bear no relationship to the reality of human capabilities or behavior. Scientists today find that reliance on such folk beliefs about human differences in research has led to countless errors.

At the end of the 20th century, we now understand that human cultural behavior is learned, conditioned into infants beginning at birth, and always subject to modification. No human is born with a built-in culture or language. Our temperaments, dispositions, and personalities, regardless of genetic propensities, are developed within sets of meanings and values that we call "culture." Studies of infant and early childhood learning and behavior attest to the reality of our cultures in forming who we are.

It is a basic tenet of anthropological knowledge that all normal human beings have the capacity to learn any cultural behavior. The American experience with immigrants from hundreds of different language and cultural backgrounds who have acquired some version of American culture traits and behavior is the clearest evidence of this fact. Moreover, people of all physical variations have learned different cultural behaviors and continue to do so as modern transportation moves millions of immigrants around the world.

How people have been accepted and treated within the context of a given society or culture has a direct impact on how they perform in that society. The "racial" worldview was invented to assign some groups to perpetual low status, while others were permitted access to privilege, power, and wealth. The tragedy in the United States has been that the policies and practices stemming from this worldview succeeded all too well in constructing unequal populations among Europeans, Native Americans, and peoples of African descent. Given what we know about the capacity of normal humans to achieve and function within any culture, we conclude that present-day inequalities between so-called "racial" groups are not consequences of their biological inheritance but products of historical and contemporary social, economic, educational, and political circumstances.
Click to expand...

nobledruali · Dec 29, 2006

:idea: Yep that's true. But the evil :evil: in man will always find a way to hurt his fellow man whether it's "race" or something else.

Sign In

Register

Italians With Black Blood

nobledruali Well-Known Member

flaminghetero Well-Known Member

Silvercosma New Member

Soulthinker Well-Known Member

nobledruali Well-Known Member

LaydeezmanCris New Member

Silvercosma New Member

nobledruali Well-Known Member

Share This Page

White Women Black Men.com