|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Aug 28, 2020 0:16:39 GMT
Nobel prize laureate James Watson in 2007 made the claim about the race of African people whose intellect is bit lower, than thr intellect of white races.
Some magazines and pulp fictions guessed him as a racist.
Can't say I was surprised he had been tagged with those rusty cliché.
I guess there is a difference. And it doesn't concern only African, it touches many Caucasian, Slavic regions, and even major area of Far East. It clearly explain why only white Europeans could make anything to get more advanced technology and supply, and culture, and art, and logic, etc.
Unfortunately there are plenty conspiracy against whites. Surely, it can't be, but... as soon as there are disagreeded people, there is the one. The conspiracy is nothing, but an envy and greedy wishes to become more like Western Europeans (and, of course, including Americans).
What can be objected if all that is done as a huge progress in our lives was made by Western Europeans. Even the problem of how to get equality had been started by the Europeans. Doesn't it ring any bell?
Anger and rage are what driving most naturally dumb people into bunch of queer questions.
And here's another problem, or I should say a few of them:
- Isn't an intensive diminishing of ambitions of Western Europeans a sign of racism? Trying to take it off is like killing the main identification of the White race. The Western Europeans are those who have started the progress itself. Ironically, but the rights (owning) of erasing of such a identification, and stopping the progress belong to the White Europeans.
- Such an attempt as to decline the White Westerns (or its philosophy, its essence principles, etc) is the pure manifestation of there are dumb and mindless loosers who don't want to be named as they should be. So, theae tricks are same to destroying the science and all the clever things.
- Are racists smarter? - It depends on who's that racist which thoughts are about it. Indeed, the smarter and wiser racist would bring more fruits, than his lower iq collegue.
The marxists usually like to repeat that all our abilities is the result of such appearance in almost infinite times of such activities. Following their logic we could say that there was a vast amount of times for us to see clearly that thw White Western Europeans were the best skilled species on the Earth.
Thus, to answer this question one needs to find to what race the racist belong.
|
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Aug 28, 2020 3:40:44 GMT
Racist to me are people who stereotype. And people who stereotype don't use logic in their conclusions but use their own likes or dislikes. And using likes and dislikes will never be proof of facts but the denial of facts. It's like choosing to go by opinion instead of facts and with that thought process people will not exceed in life in all aspects.
|
|
Clovis Merovingian
Prestige/VIP 
Elder
Posts: 2,694 
Likes: 1,757
Meta-Ethnicity: Anglo-American
Ethnicity: Deep Southerner
Country: My State and my Region are my country
Region: The Deep South
Location: South Carolina
Ancestry: Gaelic (patrilineal), English, Ulster Scots/Scots Irish, Scottish, German, Swiss German, Swedish, Manx, Finnish, Norman French/Quebecois (distantly), Dutch (distantly)
Taxonomy: Borreby/Alpine/ Nordid mix
Y-DNA: R-S660/R-DF109
mtDNA: T1a1
Politics: Conservative
Religion: Christian
Hero: Andrew Jackson, Thomas Jefferson, James K. Polk
Age: 30
Philosophy: I try to find out what is true as best I can.
|
Post by Clovis Merovingian on Aug 28, 2020 5:10:17 GMT
Nobel prize laureate James Watson in 2007 made the claim about the race of African people whose intellect is bit lower, than thr intellect of white races. Some magazines and pulp fictions guessed him as a racist. Can't say I was surprised he had been tagged with those rusty cliché. I guess there is a difference. And it doesn't concern only African, it touches many Caucasian, Slavic regions, and even major area of Far East. It clearly explain why only white Europeans could make anything to get more advanced technology and supply, and culture, and art, and logic, etc. Unfortunately there are plenty conspiracy against whites. Surely, it can't be, but... as soon as there are disagreeded people, there is the one. The conspiracy is nothing, but an envy and greedy wishes to become more like Western Europeans (and, of course, including Americans). What can be objected if all that is done as a huge progress in our lives was made by Western Europeans. Even the problem of how to get equality had been started by the Europeans. Doesn't it ring any bell? Anger and rage are what driving most naturally dumb people into bunch of queer questions. And here's another problem, or I should say a few of them: - Isn't an intensive diminishing of ambitions of Western Europeans a sign of racism? Trying to take it off is like killing the main identification of the White race. The Western Europeans are those who have started the progress itself. Ironically, but the rights (owning) of erasing of such a identification, and stopping the progress belong to the White Europeans. - Such an attempt as to decline the White Westerns (or its philosophy, its essence principles, etc) is the pure manifestation of there are dumb and mindless loosers who don't want to be named as they should be. So, theae tricks are same to destroying the science and all the clever things. - Are racists smarter? - It depends on who's that racist which thoughts are about it. Indeed, the smarter and wiser racist would bring more fruits, than his lower iq collegue. The marxists usually like to repeat that all our abilities is the result of such appearance in almost infinite times of such activities. Following their logic we could say that there was a vast amount of times for us to see clearly that thw White Western Europeans were the best skilled species on the Earth. Thus, to answer this question one needs to find to what race the racist belong. Yes, there have been many studies, the most famous of which was the Bell Curve, which show that the different populations of humans seem to have different average IQs and that this is most likely a result of biology. Still it is really besides the point as differences in IQ vary more between individuals than between races. There are smarter black men than the average white man and dumber Asians than the average white man and dumb whites as well. Furthermore someone's intelligence doesn't define their worth as a person (there are many dumb people far more noble and valuable than many disgusting, repugnant, amoral intellectuals), God endows them with the status of being made in his image and their actions determine if they are a good or evil person. There are of course other personality traits to take into account and here's my opinion on these. I think very much that someone's base personality is determined by their genetics, that humans come with programming and that ethnic groups do to usually interbreeding with each other for thousands of years start to exhibit common personality characteristics. This is why stereotypes have a grain of truth to them as these personality traits fit the population as an average. But again the differences between individuals are probably greater here as well. However humans also have free will to fight against their programming as free will manifestly exists. So, someone can be born with a predisposition for the desire to steal (I knew someone like this), or for violent tendencies, or promiscuity, or any other negative behavior but they can successfully bear this cross and fight against this desire. So I do think that personality traits, behavior, and IQ are largely genetic but there is no excuse not to regard humans as equals and to apply the same standard equally to all of them, and there is great reason to treat them as individuals. What I am saying here might be looked upon as controversial because the common modern ideological consensus is to treat all kinds of humans as identical as well as equal and there's the fear that if we acknowledge these things it will lead to all kinds of horrors. But the idea that our genetics affect everything about us but do not affect our brain and our personality is as absurd to me as claiming that the earth is flat. To illustrate what i'm talking about I always write about regional differences in culture in the United States using the map below.  Well funny enough research was done on the genetics of the people of the United States of America to separate them into genetic clusters, clusters of people who are genetically related to one another by ancestry, and below is what the results were.  To put an finer point on it here is the American Nation's borders affixed to the genetic clusters map.  By the way i'm from the Deep South (marked lower south on the genetic map) and my group is predisposed on average to a lot of negative behaviors and has a lower average IQ than the northern nations so this isn't about me claiming some sort of superiority on the part of my group. I do not think that any group is really superior to any other except maybe regarding cultural values which are things that can easily be changed with a little effort and willpower on the part of any group. Regarding Western Europeans, they do have an amazing set of cultural values (the best in the world in fact) combining the values of logic and empiricism coming from the Greeks and of the perfect morality of Christianity arising from Jerusalem that allow them and their kin in the colonies to create the greatest societies in the world. I hope the West continues to stay on top of the world in the future. |
|
|
|
Post by nobeernolife on Aug 28, 2020 6:15:11 GMT
The third rail of communication today. Given that we are animals and IQ large genetic, OF COURSE there are differences in average IQ between ethnic groups. There also differences in average IQ between families.
But this is the Voldemort of topics, no matter how anti-religious we are, we must insist that genetics play no role among humans, unlike all other species. So don´t even try.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Sept 9, 2020 11:33:38 GMT
Nobel prize laureate James Watson in 2007 made the claim about the race of African people whose intellect is bit lower, than thr intellect of white races. Some magazines and pulp fictions guessed him as a racist. Can't say I was surprised he had been tagged with those rusty cliché. I guess there is a difference. And it doesn't concern only African, it touches many Caucasian, Slavic regions, and even major area of Far East. It clearly explain why only white Europeans could make anything to get more advanced technology and supply, and culture, and art, and logic, etc. Unfortunately there are plenty conspiracy against whites. Surely, it can't be, but... as soon as there are disagreeded people, there is the one. The conspiracy is nothing, but an envy and greedy wishes to become more like Western Europeans (and, of course, including Americans). What can be objected if all that is done as a huge progress in our lives was made by Western Europeans. Even the problem of how to get equality had been started by the Europeans. Doesn't it ring any bell? Anger and rage are what driving most naturally dumb people into bunch of queer questions. And here's another problem, or I should say a few of them: - Isn't an intensive diminishing of ambitions of Western Europeans a sign of racism? Trying to take it off is like killing the main identification of the White race. The Western Europeans are those who have started the progress itself. Ironically, but the rights (owning) of erasing of such a identification, and stopping the progress belong to the White Europeans. - Such an attempt as to decline the White Westerns (or its philosophy, its essence principles, etc) is the pure manifestation of there are dumb and mindless loosers who don't want to be named as they should be. So, theae tricks are same to destroying the science and all the clever things. - Are racists smarter? - It depends on who's that racist which thoughts are about it. Indeed, the smarter and wiser racist would bring more fruits, than his lower iq collegue. The marxists usually like to repeat that all our abilities is the result of such appearance in almost infinite times of such activities. Following their logic we could say that there was a vast amount of times for us to see clearly that thw White Western Europeans were the best skilled species on the Earth. Thus, to answer this question one needs to find to what race the racist belong. Yes, there have been many studies, the most famous of which was the Bell Curve, which show that the different populations of humans seem to have different average IQs and that this is most likely a result of biology. Still it is really besides the point as differences in IQ vary more between individuals than between races. There are smarter black men than the average white man and dumber Asians than the average white man and dumb whites as well. Furthermore someone's intelligence doesn't define their worth as a person (there are many dumb people far more noble and valuable than many disgusting, repugnant, amoral intellectuals), God endows them with the status of being made in his image and their actions determine if they are a good or evil person. There are of course other personality traits to take into account and here's my opinion on these. I think very much that someone's base personality is determined by their genetics, that humans come with programming and that ethnic groups do to usually interbreeding with each other for thousands of years start to exhibit common personality characteristics. This is why stereotypes have a grain of truth to them as these personality traits fit the population as an average. But again the differences between individuals are probably greater here as well. However humans also have free will to fight against their programming as free will manifestly exists. So, someone can be born with a predisposition for the desire to steal (I knew someone like this), or for violent tendencies, or promiscuity, or any other negative behavior but they can successfully bear this cross and fight against this desire. So I do think that personality traits, behavior, and IQ are largely genetic but there is no excuse not to regard humans as equals and to apply the same standard equally to all of them, and there is great reason to treat them as individuals. What I am saying here might be looked upon as controversial because the common modern ideological consensus is to treat all kinds of humans as identical as well as equal and there's the fear that if we acknowledge these things it will lead to all kinds of horrors. But the idea that our genetics affect everything about us but do not affect our brain and our personality is as absurd to me as claiming that the earth is flat. To illustrate what i'm talking about I always write about regional differences in culture in the United States using the map below. Well funny enough research was done on the genetics of the people of the United States of America to separate them into genetic clusters, clusters of people who are genetically related to one another by ancestry, and below is what the results were. To put an finer point on it here is the American Nation's borders affixed to the genetic clusters map. By the way i'm from the Deep South (marked lower south on the genetic map) and my group is predisposed on average to a lot of negative behaviors and has a lower average IQ than the northern nations so this isn't about me claiming some sort of superiority on the part of my group. I do not think that any group is really superior to any other except maybe regarding cultural values which are things that can easily be changed with a little effort and willpower on the part of any group. Regarding Western Europeans, they do have an amazing set of cultural values (the best in the world in fact) combining the values of logic and empiricism coming from the Greeks and of the perfect morality of Christianity arising from Jerusalem that allow them and their kin in the colonies to create the greatest societies in the world. I hope the West continues to stay on top of the world in the future. I'd even gonna say many non-Westerns (and not Western cultured) are just copying everything from the West. No originality, no rationality, no nothing. Although they have enormous gluttony and appetite to swallow up not their products, and to claim here and there that all that was invented and discovered was theirs. IQ is not the one and the only criteria, and it shouldn't be an exclusive ad hoc norm; there're more and the most useful and practica, and more, and more tool is language, and in particularly it is as advancing and mastering the language's qualities so vary its language games. |
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Sept 9, 2020 11:41:47 GMT
The third rail of communication today. Given that we are animals and IQ large genetic, OF COURSE there are differences in average IQ between ethnic groups. There also differences in average IQ between families. But this is the Voldemort of topics, no matter how anti-religious we are, we must insist that genetics play no role among humans, unlike all other species. So don´t even try. There could be different contexts, for this problema, and I'm not disagree that the one (IQ<>=...) isn't good as the rest ones questions, and certainly is not necessary for cosy and peaceful living on this sinner Earth. 'D rather this question is addressed to those who is poorly blinded and misguided by anti-Europeans, and, as a current example - Western Culture. |
|
|
|
Post by nobeernolife on Sept 9, 2020 12:47:54 GMT
The third rail of communication today. Given that we are animals and IQ large genetic, OF COURSE there are differences in average IQ between ethnic groups. There also differences in average IQ between families. But this is the Voldemort of topics, no matter how anti-religious we are, we must insist that genetics play no role among humans, unlike all other species. So don´t even try. There could be different contexts, for this problema, and I'm not disagree that the one (IQ<>=...) isn't good as the rest ones questions, and certainly is not necessary for cosy and peaceful living on this sinner Earth. 'D rather this question is addressed to those who is poorly blinded and misguided by anti-Europeans, and, as a current example - Western Culture. Oh come on, you know very well that you can not touch the subject without immediately being dismissed as racist. I am Caucasian (average 100) and have no problem with my wife being Japanese comes from a group that is higher (average of 105). I can live with that, I just tell her yes that is why she is always right anyway. And actually I have not heard much brouhaha about the Asian superiority in general. It seems the whole carfuffle stems from the fact that Africans have always the lowest figure. For some reason this whole race IQ debate seems awfully tunnel visioned. Anyway, as I said, this topic has been so poisoned by fanatics it is impossible discuss it in real life in public. |
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Sept 9, 2020 13:14:22 GMT
There could be different contexts, for this problema, and I'm not disagree that the one (IQ<>=...) isn't good as the rest ones questions, and certainly is not necessary for cosy and peaceful living on this sinner Earth. 'D rather this question is addressed to those who is poorly blinded and misguided by anti-Europeans, and, as a current example - Western Culture. Oh come on, you know very well that you can not touch the subject without immediately being dismissed as racist. I am Caucasian (average 100) and have no problem with my wife being Japanese comes from a group that is higher (average of 105). I can live with that, I just tell her yes that is why she is always right anyway. And actually I have not heard much brouhaha about the Asian superiority in general. It seems the whole carfuffle stems from the fact that Africans have always the lowest figure. For some reason this whole race IQ debate seems awfully tunnel visioned. Anyway, as I said, this topic has been so poisoned by fanatics it is impossible discuss it in real life in public. Using ad hominen arguments automatically make you to be alike those who overtouched the subject - the rasicm. Appealing to what do we do when we're saying something like that: "that theme is racist...", "that theme is philosophical..."? If this is done just on words (comparing bunch of phrases with typical ones) this doesn't prove that the theme is the one. I'm a Caucasian too, so what? Talking about the superiority of the Western culture doesn't mean I am overrate the race. It's kinda race (racing), and I take historical facts, not biological or physiological stuff. Actually the last is possible to be changed with modern science. Of course there might be such conditions that allowed the genes of Westerns to appeared as they become. It could be that the other genes made the path similarly. If I had appealed to bio superiority that would be claiming "choseness", "exclusivety" or like that. Briefly, the Western genes are like A-plus-grades: they passed the almost all tests. |
|
|
|
Post by nobeernolife on Sept 9, 2020 14:01:01 GMT
Oh come on, you know very well that you can not touch the subject without immediately being dismissed as racist. I am Caucasian (average 100) and have no problem with my wife being Japanese comes from a group that is higher (average of 105). I can live with that, I just tell her yes that is why she is always right anyway. And actually I have not heard much brouhaha about the Asian superiority in general. It seems the whole carfuffle stems from the fact that Africans have always the lowest figure. For some reason this whole race IQ debate seems awfully tunnel visioned. Anyway, as I said, this topic has been so poisoned by fanatics it is impossible discuss it in real life in public. Using ad hominen arguments automatically make you to be alike those who overtouched the subject - the rasicm. Appealing to what do we do when we're saying something like that: "that theme is racist...", "that theme is philosophical..."? If this is done just on words (comparing bunch of phrases with typical ones) this doesn't prove that the theme is the one. I'm a Caucasian too, so what? Talking about the superiority of the Western culture doesn't mean I am overrate the race. It's kinda race (racing), and I take historical facts, not biological or physiological stuff. Actually the last is possible to be changed with modern science. Of course there might be such conditions that allowed the genes of Westerns to appeared as they become. It could be that the other genes made the path similarly. If I had appealed to bio superiority that would be claiming "choseness", "exclusivety" or like that. Briefly, the Western genes are like A-plus-grades: they passed the almost all tests. What? Who is using ad hominem arguments? Not me. And I pointed out that East Asian are on top of the Bell Curve heap (IQ 105) and not Caucasians (IQ 100). As I said, I don´t think that is a big deal. It just is what it is. What exactly is your point? |
|
|
|
Post by joustos on Sept 9, 2020 15:55:22 GMT
Fellows, IQ can be used to compare individuals with respect to "general" intelligence and learnings. Once upon a time, when I came to America, in school I was given an oral IQ test. One question was, "What is the difference between a paper and the radio?" I understood these words literally and was stunned. I remained silent and the testing man explained to me that both give the news, etc. I had learned what paper is, but not that a newspaper was also called "paper". On the contrary, the IQ test which I had to take in the U.S. Army had a lot of "linguistic" questions and, as a clerk mentioned to me later on, my score was "way up there" -- whatever that is.
Well, general intelligence is not genius (inventiveness, creativity, insightfuless) and cannot be measured simply because it does not become operative on demand (as when a tester may ask you to formulate a law of gravitation, or write a love poem, or compose a song, or write an essay on property/ownership). However, we can compare the intelligence of populations (peoples) by investigating the culture or cultures they produced in the course of time -- their languages, religions, artifacts (tools, dwellings, clothing, farms), fine arts, political societies and laws, philosophies, or in a word, the ethnologies of peoples. (Don't tell me that some peoples are suppressed by others and, therefore, cannot manifest their genius. The struggle for freedom, says philosopher Croce, is of the essence of human history or, I would respectfully qualify, of humans who have genial impulses. This struggle is part of one's culture. When successful, it gives rise to republics, not communist regimes.)
__________________________________________________________
"From each accoding to his abilities; to each according to his needs" (in The Communist Manifesto) is not the work of a genius, but of a man who did not work to make a living and was provided by a rich friend.
A guaranteed income for eveyone is part of the Black-American Communist ideology,whether one works or not. Self-reliance (autonomy, freedom) is not their virtue.// The 2020 election is an election of either republicanism or communism (often called socialism).
|
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Sept 9, 2020 16:32:46 GMT
Opening a subject about racism doest make the person racist. It's only racist to those who see everything as racist. And such people shouldn't even be in discussions and stay home in mommy's arms. They're not ready to enter the world on their own two feet.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Sept 9, 2020 18:00:41 GMT
Using ad hominen arguments automatically make you to be alike those who overtouched the subject - the rasicm. Appealing to what do we do when we're saying something like that: "that theme is racist...", "that theme is philosophical..."? If this is done just on words (comparing bunch of phrases with typical ones) this doesn't prove that the theme is the one. I'm a Caucasian too, so what? Talking about the superiority of the Western culture doesn't mean I am overrate the race. It's kinda race (racing), and I take historical facts, not biological or physiological stuff. Actually the last is possible to be changed with modern science. Of course there might be such conditions that allowed the genes of Westerns to appeared as they become. It could be that the other genes made the path similarly. If I had appealed to bio superiority that would be claiming "choseness", "exclusivety" or like that. Briefly, the Western genes are like A-plus-grades: they passed the almost all tests. What? Who is using ad hominem arguments? Not me. And I pointed out that East Asian are on top of the Bell Curve heap (IQ 105) and not Caucasians (IQ 100). As I said, I don´t think that is a big deal. It just is what it is. What exactly is your point? "Oh, come on. You know..." - ad hominem. What do I need to know? Anyway, it's not about that. There's nothing to argue about. I was saying almost the same you did. Asians, Afrikans, Latins, Caucasians... as long as it concerns bio it doesn't really matter. As you said "it's not a big deal" - and there's the point. Another one question is what about those who does with race policy? If there were a situation that required us to do something, and we had to throw away those who had lower IQ's, so should we sacrifice those who had it or not? As a reflection to this question is the question about intrusion to genes, gene modification, etc. Instead of putting the question in this form I could type something like this: "Is Gene Modification Politics Our The Last Resort?" |
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Sept 9, 2020 18:13:26 GMT
Opening a subject about racism doest make the person racist. It's only racist to those who see everything as racist. And such people shouldn't even be in discussions and stay home in mommy's arms. They're not ready to enter the world on their own two feet. Your highness =) I can't disagree on it. Although there are some positive stuff about that too. It's kinda the thing we should try to get along with it. I mean it. There are lots of things that we learned how not to pay attention to it: showing teeth, handshaking, loud talks, noisy laughing, etc. The race is what we should live. I don't think that it is so bad. Sooner or later we get use to it. It's like a child who decided to go working. His parents warn him: "You're not too experienced for such a brave deed, young man". And the child answers: "I'm grow enough to walk, so I can make some steps to make my career". "No, young man, - his parents are convicting him, - don't go out there. It's not safety to go for a walk just like that". And the child, getting angry, responses: "I did my choice!"... Surely, this is a joke, however, we're stuck in some way in our bodies, our space, our imagination. We can't do everything imaginable; we can't fly just wishing it, we can bring back some days, we can't forward some days to know what closer days will bring us? and so on. And being limited enough, I think, we need to overcome the problem of race too. Peacefully. Biologists told about that, about that there were races, some came from those locations, some came from that and so on. |
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Sept 9, 2020 18:27:50 GMT
Fellows, IQ can be used to compare individuals with respect to "general" intelligence and learnings. Once upon a time, when I came to America, in school I was given an oral IQ test. One question was, "What is the difference between a paper and the radio?" I understood these words literally and was stunned. I remained silent and the testing man explained to me that both give the news, etc. I had learned what paper is, but not that a newspaper was also called "paper". On the contrary, the IQ test which I had to take in the U.S. Army had a lot of "linguistic" questions and, as a clerk mentioned to me later on, my score was "way up there" -- whatever that is. Well, general intelligence is not genius (inventiveness, creativity, insightfuless) and cannot be measured simply because it does not become operative on demand (as when a tester may ask you to formulate a law of gravitation, or write a love poem, or compose a song, or write an essay on property/ownership). However, we can compare the intelligence of populations (peoples) by investigating the culture or cultures they produced in the course of time -- their languages, religions, artifacts (tools, dwellings, clothing, farms), fine arts, political societies and laws, philosophies, or in a word, the ethnologies of peoples. (Don't tell me that some peoples are suppressed by others and, therefore, cannot manifest their genius. The struggle for freedom, says philosopher Croce, is of the essence of human history or, I would respectfully qualify, of humans who have genial impulses. This struggle is part of one's culture. When successful, it gives rise to republics, not communist regimes.) __________________________________________________________ "From each accoding to his abilities; to each according to his needs" (in The Communist Manifesto) is not the work of a genius, but of a man who did not work to make a living and was provided by a rich friend. A guaranteed income for eveyone is part of the Black-American Communist ideology,whether one works or not. Self-reliance (autonomy, freedom) is not their virtue.// The 2020 election is an election of either republicanism or communism (often called socialism). Unfortunately almost in every typical to this theme posts are mean racist stuff is seen. Anyway, how to deal with them who intentionally support some cultures to destroy certain others? Karl-Otto Apel, a Deutsche philosopher said a trivial thing that the sport is one of the tools to get along cultures. In some way it were. I remember good old 90's-00's when there were Olympic Games, NBA, and Soccer tournaments, and exactly the sport was a battlefield. 10's seem to get street-fighter arenas, and it's not really good; we can imagine what things have happened in "Do The Right Thing", and also is happening now. I do agree about the brilliant quote you brought about that struggle is the open way out for a culture (seems Croce took too much Hegel's to his philosophy), but what tools could bring that? The tools is the key. |
|
