If your family line has been in this country or on this continent for centuries, you are mixed, multiple times over.

“White” American racists: check your DNA. If you are pure “White", you likely are a newby and what you say should not carry much clout. American followers of racist groups are really stupid. You obviously don’t know who you are.

This is why it is stupid for our government to count colors []white []black []white latino []native American. Are there any 100% of any one of these categories in generational-Americans?

Our government is not our friend.

Actually, this is not as true as you would have yourself believe. The media has given us a skewed vision of what is real. I had a history professor talk about this and he used the crown metaphor. Groups in the US when they mesh, are like melting a box of crowns. They fit together, but retain their individual colors. Red and blue dont mix and become purple, they melt together but stay red and blue. As a whole, most crime is done within the race involved, white on white, Asian on Asian, black on black ect. The same goes for marriage, housing, ect. Their tends to be more mixing in large cities, but I think this is more of a function of density and opportunity as much as anything else. This is an attempt at an analytical evaluation, so try not to make it one based on race. It takes eons to get the results you are stating here. The jews were in Germany for ove 450 years, and yet in the 40s they were still able to be singled out, and yet they were both white. Tribe's in Africa are all black, and yet they retain their individual traits and customs after many centuries. It may happen, but it's going to be over centuries, not decade's. To date, it tends not to evolve that way if you look at human development as a whole.

OP, just 'cause your grandma liked fucking niggers doesn't mean the same is true in all families. Trying to denigrate the rest of us because of your half breed mammy isn't going to make you any more valid as a human.

If you have an IQ over 120, you likely have no black blood in the most recent five generations of ancestry.

causeican Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If your family line has been in this country or on
> this continent for centuries, you are mixed,
> multiple times over.

True.

> “White” American racists: check your DNA. If
> you are pure “White", you likely are a newby and
> what you say should not carry much clout.
> American followers of racist groups are really
> stupid. You obviously don’t know who you are.

True.

> This is why it is stupid for our government to
> count colors []white []black []white latino
> []native American. Are there any 100% of any one
> of these categories in generational-Americans?

The race that is tracked has nothing to do with DNA. It's about social groups, and is designed to attempt to address injustices committed against some groups. Just as a person may have a major advantage being born into the Rockefeller family, one may be at a major disadvantage being born into a family that were slaves or systematically oppressed for 400 years. If the proverbial Rockefellers built their fortune they pass onto that great great grandson by oppressing the slaves' great great grandson, it is only just and right that the latter realize some of the wealth they made for the former.

My blood is certainly mixed-- Scot and Irish

idiots abound Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
I had a history professor
> talk about this and he used the crown metaphor.
> Groups in the US when they mesh, are like melting
> a box of crowns.


What the fuck is a crown?

WilliamRobert Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> idiots abound Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> I had a history professor
> > talk about this and he used the crown metaphor.
> > Groups in the US when they mesh, are like
> melting
> > a box of crowns.
>
>
> What the fuck is a crown?


I believe that dullard is trying to say, 'crayon'.

"If the proverbial Rockefellers built their fortune they pass onto that great great grandson by oppressing the slaves' great great grandson, it is only just and right that the latter realize some of the wealth they made for the former.”

This makes no sense in many different ways. You fail.

causeican Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "If the proverbial Rockefellers built their
> fortune they pass onto that great great grandson
> by oppressing the slaves' great great grandson, it
> is only just and right that the latter realize
> some of the wealth they made for the former.”
>
> This makes no sense in many different ways. You
> fail.

Example:
Smiths and their slaves both start with nothing. Smiths enslave slaves, make them work on their whatever. The whatever makes tons of money. Both work hard, but slaves get 0 profits, Smiths get a million. Clearly unjust.

Smiths invest a million, pass on the earnings to their children, their children turn it into more and more and more.

Slaves invest zero, pass zero on to their children, their children turn it into zero and zero and zero. Because the Smiths took it from them.

The Slaves and their children worked hard and earned those profits, but the profits were stolen from them. It is rightfully their property, and the property of their heirs. It is entirely right and just that it be given to them.

When the first generation died. The debt died. When the first white soldiers died on behalf of the black slaves, more debt was paid. Every white soldier that died paid off a little more of that debt. The POTUS paid off some of that debt. A nation changes and grows and a debt does not remain the same. Each individual is responsible for what they do today with what they have. You can not take away from Paul and give it to Dan just because Paul’s ggggg-grandfather made money and Dan’s ggggg-grandparents were his slaves. There are too many variables to discount such a claim if simple commonsense doesn’t work for you.

causeican Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When the first generation died. The debt died.
> When the first white soldiers died on behalf of
> the black slaves, more debt was paid. Every white
> soldier that died paid off a little more of that
> debt. The POTUS paid off some of that debt. A
> nation changes and grows and a debt does not
> remain the same. Each individual is responsible
> for what they do today with what they have. You
> can not take away from Paul and give it to Dan
> just because Paul’s ggggg-grandfather made money
> and Dan’s ggggg-grandparents were his slaves.
> There are too many variables to discount such a
> claim if simple commonsense doesn’t work for
> you.

If one can inherit wealth, how does one not inherit obligations?

The route of money and fortune... Many try to lay claim... Many who’s hands would be better spent making their own. claiming a right to a fortune originating more than a century ago, well, show me an example. Show me the path of the money and how it was earned and by whom from it’s beginning and where it is today. Then show how the claimant is entitled to it. Are there any cases or is this just a broad “give me” from any wealthy “white” man?

So you can't answer the question. Children inherit the positive results of any injustice their parents inflict, but not the obligations of that infliction. OK.

they inherit from the previous generation’s wealth, possibly, if it is given to them.

You cannot provide me a line of wealth linking back to a specific person over 150 years ago?

I'm mixed. My DNA test shows I'm part German Shepherd.

Kardinal Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> causeican Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > "If the proverbial Rockefellers built their
> > fortune they pass onto that great great
> grandson
> > by oppressing the slaves' great great grandson,
> it
> > is only just and right that the latter realize
> > some of the wealth they made for the former.”
> >
> > This makes no sense in many different ways. You
> > fail.
>
> Example:
> Smiths and their slaves both start with nothing.
> Smiths enslave slaves, make them work on their
> whatever. The whatever makes tons of money. Both
> work hard, but slaves get 0 profits, Smiths get a
> million. Clearly unjust.
>
> Smiths invest a million, pass on the earnings to
> their children, their children turn it into more
> and more and more.
>
> Slaves invest zero, pass zero on to their
> children, their children turn it into zero and
> zero and zero. Because the Smiths took it from
> them.
>
> The Slaves and their children worked hard and
> earned those profits, but the profits were stolen
> from them. It is rightfully their property, and
> the property of their heirs. It is entirely right
> and just that it be given to them.

They squandered their 22 trillion already (the amount spend on the war on poverty in the last 50 years).

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/sep/19/rector-the-war-on-poverty-50-years-of-failure/