Ross-Kemp Posted 6 November 2008 Posted 6 November 2008 India is the most racist country, most racist people are 'Indian' nationals, obviously!!! But who are the "Indian nationals" racist against.
Zingari Posted 6 November 2008 Posted 6 November 2008 India is the most racist country, most racist people are 'Indian' nationals, obviously!!! surely it's still the fault of the british though something they did to cause all the trouble
Dr The Singh Posted 6 November 2008 Posted 6 November 2008 surely it's still the fault of the british though something they did to cause all the trouble They were well racist before the brits existed mate!!!
Ross-Kemp Posted 6 November 2008 Posted 6 November 2008 They were well racist before the brits existed mate!!! WHO AGAINST
Zingari Posted 6 November 2008 Posted 6 November 2008 They were well racist before the brits existed mate!!! i was joking i believe we are all racist and sexist to a greater or lesser degree , it's how we deal with it that is important
Alexikokopops Posted 6 November 2008 Posted 6 November 2008 surely it's still the fault of the british though something they did to cause all the trouble Here's a couple of articles on racism in India http://www.kanglaonline.com/index.php?temp...how&kid=796 http://www.boloji.com/wfs5/wfs677.htm I don't know much about it at all, but I imagine it gives you a bit of a gist.
Head Honcho Posted 6 November 2008 Posted 6 November 2008 WHO AGAINST Many different races make up the sub continent that is India so I'd guess they are racist against other Indians.
Flynny Posted 6 November 2008 Posted 6 November 2008 None of you are making any effort to understand each other. Most of you are thinking pretty much the same from different angles. Implying each other are racist isn't going to help. We all agree it shouldn't be a big thing, but racism has been around for so long that it's generally assumed it will be, despite efforts against it. Now that Obama has been elected it's a big thing precisely because it's not been a big thing. It's a celebration of the fact that in the most globally important nation, race hasn't been a factor, and so, perversely, it's become a factor. Now that Obama has set the trend, it won't happen again. When a race is subjugated, every first will be important. Are people saying newspapers never should have printed stories about Rosa Parks? "Some woman sat on a bus, who cares if she's black or not? If she's anti-racism lets ignore her race, it's not a story". As for the black vote, minorities always have a much stronger sense of communal identity out of necessity, which explains their massive turnout for Obama. It's just a fact of life. The less racist America becomes, the less that'll need to happen, and Obama's presidency is a huge step in that direction.
Ross-Kemp Posted 6 November 2008 Posted 6 November 2008 None of you are making any effort to understand each other. Most of you are thinking pretty much the same from different angles. Implying each other are racist isn't going to help.We all agree it shouldn't be a big thing, but racism has been around for so long that it's generally assumed it will be, despite efforts against it. Now that Obama has been elected it's a big thing precisely because it's not been a big thing. It's a celebration of the fact that in the most globally important nation, race hasn't been a factor, and so, perversely, it's become a factor. Now that Obama has set the trend, it won't happen again. When a race is subjugated, every first will be important. Are people saying newspapers never should have printed stories about Rosa Parks? "Some woman sat on a bus, who cares if she's black or not? If she's anti-racism lets ignore her race, it's not a story". As for the black vote, minorities always have a much stronger sense of communal identity out of necessity, which explains their massive turnout for Obama. It's just a fact of life. The less racist America becomes, the less that'll need to happen, and Obama's presidency is a huge step in that direction. Yes. The majority of people who voted for Obama, voted for him because he is black. Isn't that racist ?
Guest Posted 6 November 2008 Posted 6 November 2008 Yes. The majority of people who voted for Obama, voted for him because he is black. Isn't that racist ? Maybe black people didn't think that their views were represented by previous candidates, so didn't bother to vote.
Ross-Kemp Posted 6 November 2008 Posted 6 November 2008 Maybe black people didn't think that their views were represented by previous candidates, so didn't bother to vote. That, I seriously doubt.
Benji Posted 6 November 2008 Posted 6 November 2008 Yes. The majority of people who voted for Obama, voted for him because he is black. Isn't that racist ? Not really, if it was purely because he was black then yes and we should be wary of any mentality like that coming into play in the UK, but I'd like to think that it was more, "he's black and so will understand our views and way of life better than anyone else". Just like we would do with Brown, Cameron or the insignificant yellow man.
Alexikokopops Posted 6 November 2008 Posted 6 November 2008 Yes. The majority of people who voted for Obama, voted for him because he is black. Isn't that racist ? I'm not sure where you get the "majority" from. You could make the sweeping generalisation that all black people voted for him because he's black, but that's only 12.8% pf the American population. 80% of the population is white.
Phube Posted 6 November 2008 Posted 6 November 2008 India is the most racist country, most racist people are 'Indian' nationals, obviously!!! Too true, well more religion/caste-ist. My mate at work was a 2nd Level caste person, and she is marrying a Sikh which is just tolerable... but if she took a Muslim home.... I think her Granny (and whole family) would have disowned her!! And 'unmentionables' are treated worse than animals... really quite sad...
Ross-Kemp Posted 6 November 2008 Posted 6 November 2008 I'm not sure where you get the "majority" from. You could make the sweeping generalisation that all black people voted for him because he's black, but that's only 12.8% pf the American population. 80% of the population is white. I woould like to see if those figures are actually correct.
Dr The Singh Posted 6 November 2008 Posted 6 November 2008 But who are the "Indian nationals" racist against. I'll enlighten you!! India is made up of over 200 languages, several races and several cultures. India isn't one nation it's several nations clumped together, hence the ruling race\system favours it's own at the expense of others and hence there are many seperatist movements etc. The rulers then subject those groups attacks of genocide, rape etc to entich unity by fear!!!
Ross-Kemp Posted 6 November 2008 Posted 6 November 2008 I'll enlighten you!! India is made up of over 200 languages, several races and several cultures. India isn't one nation it's several nations clumped together, hence the ruling race\system favours it's own at the expense of others and hence there are many seperatist movements etc. The rulers then subject those groups attacks of genocide, rape etc to entich unity by fear!!! Thank you, I was always under the impression it was just one race etc... pardon my ignorance there.
Zingari Posted 6 November 2008 Posted 6 November 2008 Here's a couple of articles on racism in Indiahttp://www.kanglaonline.com/index.php?temp...how&kid=796 http://www.boloji.com/wfs5/wfs677.htm I don't know much about it at all, but I imagine it gives you a bit of a gist. so it does i've never doubted that india was a racist country though , ( most countries in the world are ) What irritates me is when any inter racial troubles occur anywhere in the world, someone tries to blame the british (or other european) colonialism for planting the seeds .
Master Fox Posted 6 November 2008 Posted 6 November 2008 This is everything that is wrong with the world today. Does it matter what colour his skin is really. If he was white, no-one would have made this much if a deal out of it. All due respect to African-Americans, Africans, Indians, Asians, IT DOESN'T FOOKING MATTER WHAT COLOUR YOU ARE. GET OVER IT. Well he isn't actually black. He's mixed race. White 1/2 Black. So America technically still doesn't have it's first 'all black' president. Would be more correct to say americas first racially diverse president. Anyway, our PM is Brown.
Zingari Posted 6 November 2008 Posted 6 November 2008 Well he isn't actually black. He's mixed race. White 1/2 Black. So America technically still doesn't have it's first 'all black' president. he would have to come from new zealand
Bellend Sebastian Posted 6 November 2008 Posted 6 November 2008 Yes. The majority of people who voted for Obama, voted for him because he is black. Isn't that racist ? I think they were just as likely to have voted for him because he was the Democrat candidate and it didn't make sense to vote in another Republican after two terms of an unpopular Republican administration. This is a very important issue though, and I've given it a lot of thought. Here's my contribution to the debate: I love black people but I couldn't eat a whole one
Ross-Kemp Posted 6 November 2008 Posted 6 November 2008 I think they were just as likely to have voted for him because he was the Democrat candidate and it didn't make sense to vote in another Republican after two terms of an unpopular Republican administration.This is a very important issue though, and I've given it a lot of thought. Here's my contribution to the debate: I love black people but I couldn't eat a whole one
Master Fox Posted 6 November 2008 Posted 6 November 2008 he would have to come from new zealand He doesn't like rugby.
Dr The Singh Posted 6 November 2008 Posted 6 November 2008 Too true, well more religion/caste-ist.My mate at work was a 2nd Level caste person, and she is marrying a Sikh which is just tolerable... but if she took a Muslim home.... I think her Granny (and whole family) would have disowned her!! And 'unmentionables' are treated worse than animals... really quite sad... The aryans were a race!! Sikhs come from 3 or 4 particular races, including, Scythians, Huns, Aryans and the sakas!!! The origins of the Indus valley was developed on race and then further divided into the bhramical hierarchy\ caste!!!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.