Your opinion on the importance of race and nationality?

[Rogue planet]

Inspired by a recent discussion with someone stating that they believe some races are superior to others.

Is it racist to say some races and nationalities are naturally and/or biologically better than others? Is it racist to say that somebody's race determines their personality? I want to know what other people think.

Please don't be too imposing when posting your opinions.

I included a poll just so people who have quite a strong (and perhaps unpopular) opinion can simply vote, instead of making a post that might attract attacks from others. I'm interested to see the statistical side of things, because some people who carry seemingly racist views may just be apprehensive to voice them publicly.

 

[Nihilego]

Superior at certain things? Perhaps. Aren't some countries just generally better at a particular thing that others, like Brazil with Football or China with Maths? Or am I just stereotyping here? ._.

But superior as a whole? Never, imo. I don't really see how any one nation or race could be all-round superior to another.

Although as for the personality thing you mentioned, Vendak, you may have something there. From what I've seen around school, Americans tend to be louder and express their opinions more often than the English, for example. Although I'm obviously only using a very small sample of people here and it could just be an individual thing. But yes I do think that cultural differences contribute a lot to different personalities between races. Still not superiority, though.

 

[Azureth]

Well, blacks are certainly better at running and jumping on average. Whites do better in colder climates and strength competitions, asians are better at group think, hispanics...salsa dancing? haha

 

[groteske]

A lot of Mexicans have an extremely strong work ethic, blacks have the best range for singing, Germans are fantastic engineers, Chinese excel at math and business, Brazilians are robust and sexual because of a parasite that affects 70% of the population. It's not racist; stereotypes exist because there is some truth to them. Certain traits are more well-honed in one race over the other through centuries of adaptation.

Americans tend to be louder and express their opinions more often than the English, for example

Probably because a lot of us were taught America was the BESTEST, MOST POWERFUL COUNTRY EVAR from a young age. Much of our population never got past that attitude.

 

[twocows]

What a bunch of bollocks. People are people.

 

[Ivysaur]

I think any person can do anything with proper training and education, regardless of "race" or nationality. The differences between people are just because the natural conditions of that zone have caused the people to naturally adapt to them. If a white baby were to be with a lot of black kids and live with them, he'd probably get to be as quick as them. If an American baby lived in a southern European country, he'd too end up naturally kissing girls as a way to say "hello" instead of staying ten feet away from any unknown people.

And two questions:
- The Brazilians are good at football, but they barely have one more World Cup than the Italians, and their style of play and "race" are completely different. So?
- What kind of race is "Hispanic" anyway? "White-not-anglo-saxon people"? And where would an Italian guy fit? XD

 

[groteske]

- What kind of race is "Hispanic" anyway? "White-not-anglo-saxon people"? And where would an Italian guy fit? XD

I took it to mean Latin Americans, in the context Azureth used

 

[poopnoodle]

it's racist to just notice the general characteristics of certain races. there's nothing wrong with that, it's just part of our natural tendency to organize our perception of reality. i'm with Went and twocows, it boils down to nature and nurture. it's not about ethnic origin but the environment a person was raised in and how they adapted to it.

 

[Shining Raichu]

I don't think anyone is qualified to make value judgments on the superiority on races of people as a whole. Sure, I guess it's fine to say "this race has a tendency to be better at this activity due to the biological characteristics X, Y and Z" but I'm not sure if that comes anywhere close to determining superiority.

As twocows said, people are people.

 

[Livewire]

I'm Irish, therefore, I MUST be a drunkard!

As Twocows, Went, and poopnoodle previously stated, It comes down to the individual - the racist stereotypes and generalizations are just that - distasteful stereotypes and generalizations. Hominem ad populem is flawed logic. Not all Americans are loud, arrogant and brash. Not all Irishmen drink copious amounts of Guinness. (Although who wouldn't?) Not all Asians are super intelligent with flawless grades. Not every Indian is a doctor or surgeon. Let's also not forget race is nothing more than a social construct, a way of categorizing different peoples. Our chromosomes and DNA are the same.

 

[Shizz]

Actually I don't find it too racist to say such a thing; so long as it's scientifically. Such as those that evolved to live in the cold mountains, or deserts. They would be genetically superior to me in those given areas. On top of that, since just about every race has been enslaved; there are watered down genetics in all of us. Some of us being profusely inbred, others, more lucky. Does it matter much other than in settings? Not...really. Anyone can be great, and anyone can be..terrible.

 

[Kirbychu]

Superior at certain things? Perhaps. Aren't some countries just generally better at a particular thing that others, like Brazil with Football or China with Maths? Or am I just stereotyping here? ._.

That has to do with their culture, not their races. From what know, football is everywhere in Brazil and is incredibly popular, of course they're going to be good at it. They have access to tons of resources and their encouraged by their peers to play. It has nothing to do with race, just their culture and surroundings. Someone from any other country has equal potential.

I'm not sure I'd call Brazil the best either.

Well, blacks are certainly better at running and jumping on average. Whites do better in colder climates and strength competitions, asians are better at group think, hispanics...salsa dancing? haha

It's not that whites are better in cold climates. Cold climates are actually the reason they're white in the first place.

I think any person can do anything with proper training and education, regardless of "race" or nationality. The differences between people are just because the natural conditions of that zone have caused the people to naturally adapt to them. If a white baby were to be with a lot of black kids and live with them, he'd probably get to be as quick as them. If an American baby lived in a southern European country, he'd too end up naturally kissing girls as a way to say "hello" instead of staying ten feet away from any unknown people.

I agree with this man.

 

[Esper]

From the thread title I thought this was going to be a question about how people perceive their own race/nationality and its relative importance to them.

I don't think there's anything relevant to anyone can say to support one race being 'superior' to another. Any differences between races are so miniscule that individual factors greatly outweigh them and any differences going to be something really obscure and specific. So, for instance, you might be able to say that one race metabolizes milk 3% faster than another race, but that's nothing more than an anecdote in the great scheme of things. Nothing worth bringing up ideas of 'superiority' over.

And of course race isn't a clearly defined boundary anyway, but I don't even need to go into that.

 

[Azureth]

It's not that whites are better in cold climates. Cold climates are actually the reason they're white in the first place.

Well, I think it's safe to say that that does make white people able to do better in colder climates since that's what made them.

Similarly with Asians. Though I haven't done any real research I think that's why whites and asians have done so well compared to other races throughout history. Whites and asians had to work hard to innovate and evolve under very harsh conditions, whereas those from Africa an Latin america never really needed to, food was plentiful and they by and large never faced any real hardships.

From the thread title I thought this was going to be a question about how people perceive their own race/nationality and its relative importance to them.

I don't think there's anything relevant to anyone can say to support one race being 'superior' to another. Any differences between races are so miniscule that individual factors greatly outweigh them and any differences going to be something really obscure and specific. So, for instance, you might be able to say that one race metabolizes milk 3% faster than another race, but that's nothing more than an anecdote in the great scheme of things. Nothing worth bringing up ideas of 'superiority' over.

And of course race isn't a clearly defined boundary anyway, but I don't even need to go into that.

Well, given enough time and dedication I am sure anyone can be great at anything, however I do believe certain traits come easier to certain races such as what I said above.

 

[Livewire]

Well, I think it's safe to say that that does make white people able to do better in colder climates since that's what made them.

Similarly with Asians. Though I haven't done any real research I think that's why whites and asians have done so well compared to other races throughout history. Whites and asians had to work hard to innovate and evolve under very harsh conditions, whereas those from Africa an Latin america never really needed to, food was plentiful and they by and large never faced any real hardships.


Well, given enough time and dedication I am sure anyone can be great at anything, however I do believe certain traits come easier to certain races such as what I said above.

Then why is there no credible scientific evidence backing up anything you just said?

Mankind has physical differences because we adapted to the climates we happened to live in, that's about it. "Whites" have lighter skin to absorb more melanin from the sun's rays, because sunlight is weaker at northern latitudes. People of African-American descent have darker toned skin because it shields them from the sun, and they don't need as much melanin, being ancestrally from Sub-Saharan Africa, one of the hottest areas on the planet. You can put an Indo-European in Africa, and an African in Europe, and they'll both do just fine, they won't just up and die. That's what marvelous about human beings, they adapt to the environmental situation to survive, regardless of any other particulars.

(Speaking in historical terms of course, we have this thing called Air Conditioning and Sunscreen now that nullifies that) Any talk of superiority is utter nonsense. Saying that certain traits are inherent to certain races is a generalization at best.

 

[Azureth]

Then why is there no credible scientific evidence backing up anything you just said?

Mankind has physical differences because we adapted to the climates we happened to live in, that's about it. "Whites" have lighter skin to absorb more melanin from the sun's rays, because sunlight is weaker at northern latitudes. People of African-American descent have darker toned skin because it shields them from the sun, and they don't need as much melanin, being ancestrally from Sub-Saharan Africa, one of the hottest areas on the planet. You can put an Indo-European in Africa, and an African in Europe, and they'll both do just fine, they won't just up and die. That's what marvelous about human beings, they adapt to the environmental situation to survive, regardless of any other particulars.

(Speaking in historical terms of course, we have this thing called Air Conditioning and Sunscreen now that nullifies that) Any talk of superiority is utter nonsense. Saying that certain traits are inherent to certain races is a generalization at best.

Well, maybe there is, I have never looked. However, I know what you mean, but basically I think taken to extremes white people would probably fair better in, say, Antarctica than hispanics/blacks. And vice versa.

 

[Masqueraine]

I think the only differences between 'races' are skin color and some things like height and features. But none of those things determine superiority except in the racist's eye.

 

[Livewire]

Well, maybe there is, I have never looked. However, I know what you mean, but basically I think taken to extremes white people would probably fair better in, say, Antarctica than hispanics/blacks. And vice versa.

Have them bring appropriate attire for the cold climate, that should rectify things.

 

[Emonga]

No I don't think so. Everyone is different.

 

[Alternative]

Just one thing I've found out about superiority of the races, is that some people who are aboriginal or "black" here tend to think they can do so much more than anyone else because they just think too much about themselves. If something bad is about to happen to them they just say that whoever is telling them off or whatever is "racist" when they're doing the wrong thing. It's happened a lot in school, where aboriginals play the racist card to get away with everything. I just don't get it how people can do that and get away with it.

I'm not a racist person, I just don't like people who use their race to get the benefit of the doubt for everything.