Genetics isn't culture; we've got plenty of evidence to back that up. And that still doesn't negate the dictum that states "equal under the law".
I don't get to go and harm somebody for criminal reasons, unprovoked because I'm from a different culture than they are.
Similarly, while I believe I come from a more advanced culture than say a Kalahari bushman (and with some evidence to back that up), nonetheless their culture has likely better enabled them to survive in the Kalahari desert (and that's ok; I've not got any real desire to go survive in the Kalahari desert; they may have no real desire to engage in my cultural milieu either....they might have a point with the drag queen story hour, to be honest). I can't help but notice that the Kalahari bushmen are not the ones who created Cardi B, and America/Americans have.
Although I do agree to some extent that cultures can and do have friction points when they come into contact with one another -- sometimes greater, sometimes lesser (although we'd probably disagree on cultures -- I'm firmly of the opinion that the "cultures" the Western world is having a problem with right now are pretty much as a result of the Western world -- we're not having a Kalahari bushman culture problem, for example).
Never said it was, so your point is... well pointless.
I don't get to go and harm somebody for criminal reasons, unprovoked because I'm from a different culture than they are.
A strawman. An individual, or a few, merge with the culture through the means of adaptation, they lose theirs, or force the bits that are incompatible out so they can be succesfully merge their mother, and host cultures.
When cultures clash into violence, it's because there's enough dissenting mass to enable phyical hostilities, through peer pressure, constant brain siege by listening to people hate on the opposed culture, and belief that theirs is superior. This is obvious because we don't remove superiority from our lives, it's stupid.
Similarly, while I believe I come from a more advanced culture than say a Kalahari bushman (and with some evidence to back that up), nonetheless their culture has likely better enabled them to survive in the Kalahari desert (and that's ok; I've not got any real desire to go survive in the Kalahari desert; they may have no real desire to engage in my cultural milieu either....they might have a point with the drag queen story hour, to be honest). I can't help but notice that the Kalahari bushmen are not the ones who created Cardi B, and America/Americans have.
As i previously said, if you benchmark the cultures and compare them to the micrometer, can you honestly say that a western/mediterranean/asian man will lose against a kalahari man? If you drop them in the middle of the desert they'll die, obviously, JUST as the kalahari man would, but put into a life of desert they'd survive, just like your model. In modern society? those races i mentioned have a ridiculously higher chance to not only survive, but thrive.
Play this game so that you don't admit outright that races do play a part; If you were to form a colony on a different planet, would you bring your kalahari man, or a random modernized man? The logical part of your brain will take the controversial answer, why? Because it subconsciously wants to live.
Although I do agree to some extent that cultures can and do have friction points when they come into contact with one another -- sometimes greater, sometimes lesser (although we'd probably disagree on cultures -- I'm firmly of the opinion that the "cultures" the Western world is having a problem with right now are pretty much as a result of the Western world -- we're not having a Kalahari bushman culture problem, for example).
The answer to this is in the second sentence "Sometimes greater, sometimes lesser" And the answer to that? It's because there's not many friction points. A western American man would work really well with a western French man. Different cultures, but almost 0 to none friction points. As per your kalahari bushmen culture problem, they may not have many, but they sure are warring amongst eachother, more so thatn western, mediterranean and asian countries.
No, I brought up the argument of the Kalahari bushman because I wanted to point out a very good example of differing cultures (with a racial component) to make two points (that would back up MY argument):
people are superior only within the context of their millieu; aka. what they're good at (and my original post was stressing individual superiority of merit, but no matter, down this rabbit hole I willingly travelled); I could bring it back to individual merit as well -- people tend to be good at what they have a talent for and especially at skills they have worked hard to develop; they are superior to others who have not.
However:
superiority does not confer higher privileges under the law (or it shouldn't -- that it does is one of the reasons we're having problems) -- we don't get to walk up to Mr. Bushman nor Mr. American not of my whatever and murder him for shits and giggles...they have rights too (or should have in a just, lawful, free society -- that this has taken a huge slide is one of the reasons we're having a problem).
And I don't know about working really well between a western American man (aren't they all?) and a western French man...the French soldiers used to drive my husband and his unit (some of whom had the same R1b as the French dudes, some of whom did not) fucking nuts when they did a train up together...something, something cultural differences in attitudes towards lunch breaks vs. mission goals...
PS. as for the "mission to Mars" -- that's all conjecture at this point; for all we both know both the Bushman and the European might have skill sets that could prove quite useful...hasn't been tried yet; we might find out in the future
Genetics isn't culture; we've got plenty of evidence to back that up. And that still doesn't negate the dictum that states "equal under the law".
I don't get to go and harm somebody for criminal reasons, unprovoked because I'm from a different culture than they are.
Similarly, while I believe I come from a more advanced culture than say a Kalahari bushman (and with some evidence to back that up), nonetheless their culture has likely better enabled them to survive in the Kalahari desert (and that's ok; I've not got any real desire to go survive in the Kalahari desert; they may have no real desire to engage in my cultural milieu either....they might have a point with the drag queen story hour, to be honest). I can't help but notice that the Kalahari bushmen are not the ones who created Cardi B, and America/Americans have.
Although I do agree to some extent that cultures can and do have friction points when they come into contact with one another -- sometimes greater, sometimes lesser (although we'd probably disagree on cultures -- I'm firmly of the opinion that the "cultures" the Western world is having a problem with right now are pretty much as a result of the Western world -- we're not having a Kalahari bushman culture problem, for example).
Never said it was, so your point is... well pointless.
A strawman. An individual, or a few, merge with the culture through the means of adaptation, they lose theirs, or force the bits that are incompatible out so they can be succesfully merge their mother, and host cultures. When cultures clash into violence, it's because there's enough dissenting mass to enable phyical hostilities, through peer pressure, constant brain siege by listening to people hate on the opposed culture, and belief that theirs is superior. This is obvious because we don't remove superiority from our lives, it's stupid.
As i previously said, if you benchmark the cultures and compare them to the micrometer, can you honestly say that a western/mediterranean/asian man will lose against a kalahari man? If you drop them in the middle of the desert they'll die, obviously, JUST as the kalahari man would, but put into a life of desert they'd survive, just like your model. In modern society? those races i mentioned have a ridiculously higher chance to not only survive, but thrive.
Play this game so that you don't admit outright that races do play a part; If you were to form a colony on a different planet, would you bring your kalahari man, or a random modernized man? The logical part of your brain will take the controversial answer, why? Because it subconsciously wants to live.
The answer to this is in the second sentence "Sometimes greater, sometimes lesser" And the answer to that? It's because there's not many friction points. A western American man would work really well with a western French man. Different cultures, but almost 0 to none friction points. As per your kalahari bushmen culture problem, they may not have many, but they sure are warring amongst eachother, more so thatn western, mediterranean and asian countries.
No, I brought up the argument of the Kalahari bushman because I wanted to point out a very good example of differing cultures (with a racial component) to make two points (that would back up MY argument):
However:
And I don't know about working really well between a western American man (aren't they all?) and a western French man...the French soldiers used to drive my husband and his unit (some of whom had the same R1b as the French dudes, some of whom did not) fucking nuts when they did a train up together...something, something cultural differences in attitudes towards lunch breaks vs. mission goals...
PS. as for the "mission to Mars" -- that's all conjecture at this point; for all we both know both the Bushman and the European might have skill sets that could prove quite useful...hasn't been tried yet; we might find out in the future