When did bayoneting babies go from "pragmatic steppe/feudal politics/realism" to needing scientific racism to justify it?
>>18431522around in the early modern era in the XVII-XVIII centuries, when the newly intelectual movements such as Humanism, the Scientific Revolution and the Enlightment spread around Europe making people more aware of their own humanity, but still wanting to play empire
>>18431522Normal people don't enjoy killing babies. Only those who have had a shitty/traumatic life will do so with no qualms. Steppenigs lived the worst life you could imagine from the time they were born, probably watched their moms get abducted and raped and their family members killed in raids, and then accompanied their tribes to go abduct and rape the enemy in retaliation. So obviously, growing up with this sort of lifestyle, they would see such things as more normal and acceptable than we would. Much like a regular nig in a ghetto raised by a crackmammy with an imprisoned/absentee father, whose only experience of life is watching other nigs deal on street corners and occasionally do drive-bys.
>>18431680le civilised changs had whole families put to the sword because one of them fucked up, steppenigs were hardly an exception
>>18431683I'm just using them as an example. The soldiers of any despot are trained to do things like this as well. Anyone who doesn't follow orders will be pruned and punished, until all they have are loyal dogs who will do anything upon request. It's a similar psychological conditioning process to the natural one steppenigs are all forced to endure by existing.
>>18431685uh oh, what flavor of mentally ill diasporoid whose distant ancestors were raped by steppenigs are we dealing with here
>>18431686>you're mentally ill if you notice realityOkay man.
>>18431660>everyone was evil and stupid before the civil rights movement
>>18431522During the medieval period, the divide was less about biology and more about faith.>ReconquistaBlood Purity: In 15th-century Spain, the concept of limpieza de sangre (purity of blood) emerged. Even if Jews or Muslims converted to Christianity, they were still viewed with suspicion because of their "ancestral blood." This was a crucial bridge toward modern racial thinking.Why did it appear? Because the Reconquista .By the mid-1400s, many people in Spain had converted to Christianity, often under extreme duress. However, these Conversos didn’t disappear into the lower classes. Because they were no longer barred by religious laws, they rose to high positions in government, the Church, and finance. Many Conversos worked as tax collectors for the Crown. This made them the face of state authority and economic pressure.Old Christians (those who claimed "pure" Christian ancestry) grew jealous. They felt that even though Conversos shared their faith, they were "winning" at society in a way that felt unfair.
>>18431692>Atlantic Slave TradeThe modern concept of race was born from the need to justify the Atlantic Slave Trade and the colonization of the Americas.European powers needed massive amounts of labor for sugar and cotton plantations. It was difficult to justify the brutal enslavement of other human beings while simultaneously preaching Christian values of "brotherly love."Initially, the legal and moral justification for enslavement was that the individuals were "infidels" or "heathens." Black african kingdoms captured and sold captives from rival kingdoms and tribes to the Europeans. However, there was still a demand for an ideological, moral, religious justification for slavery. Since they weren't Christian, they weren't part of the "universal community of man" and could be "saved" through the discipline of labor and exposure to the Gospel.However, enslaved people began converting to Christianity in massive numbers. Under traditional Canon Law, one Christian could not hold another Christian in perpetual bondage. This created a massive economic "glitch" for plantation owners.When baptism threatened the labor supply, the justification shifted from what a person believed to who they were. They turned to the Bible (specifically Genesis) to find a permanent, inherited mark of inferiority.Proponents of slavery pointed to the story of Noah, who cursed his son Ham's descendants (Canaan) to be "servants of servants." There is absolutely no mention of race or skin color in the original biblical text of this story. However, pro-slavery theologians "re-interpreted" the curse to mean that Ham was the ancestor of all Africans and that dark skin was the "mark" of the curse. This made slavery hereditary and inescapable. Unlike a religious belief, you couldn't "convert" out of a curse.As the Enlightenment de-emphasized religious authority, the "Curse of Ham" started to feel like an old-fashioned superstition to the educated elite.
>>18431693Some "scientists" (like Samuel Morton) argued that different races were actually different species entirely, created separately by God or nature. They began measuring skulls to "prove" that Europeans had larger brains and were thus naturally meant to lead, while others were naturally meant to follow.It’s a classic case of rationalization. The economic desire for free labor came first; the "reasons" were manufactured afterward to keep the conscience clear and the bank accounts full.
The "invention of whiteness" is one of the most successful social engineering projects in history. Before the late 1600s, "White" didn't exist as a legal or social identity. People identified as English, Christian, Irish, Dutch, or Virginian, but not "White." The shift happened primarily in the Colonial Chesapeake (Virginia and Maryland) as a response to a massive threat to the ruling class: class unity.In the early 1600s, the tobacco fields were worked by a mix of people:>Poor Europeans: Indentured servants who sold 7–10 years of their lives for passage to the New World.>Enslaved Africans: Some were enslaved for life, but others were "term" servants who eventually gained freedom.These two groups lived together, worked together, intermarried, and (most importantly) shared a mutual hatred for the wealthy "Planter" elite who exploited them both. The nightmare of the ruling elite came true in 1676. A man named Nathaniel Bacon led a rebellion against the colonial governor. His army was a "rabble" of black and white laborers fighting side-by-side.They burned Jamestown to the ground. The wealthy planters realized that if the poor stayed united, the elite would eventually lose everything.To prevent another rebellion, the colonial assembly began passing laws to drive a wedge between poor Europeans and Africans. This was the moment "Whiteness" was manufactured:The elite couldn't give poor Europeans more land or money, so they gave them status. They created laws that gave even the poorest European a sense of superiority over any African. By inventing "Whiteness," the elite created a permanent buffer class. Poor Europeans became the "police" of the system (slave patrols), protecting the very elites who were actually keeping them in poverty.It was a brilliant political move: it traded economic power for racial status, a trade-off that has shaped American politics and social structures for centuries.
>>18431698I love how everyone always forgets the part where Bacon's chimpout only got the energy it did because people thought the colonial government wasn't slaughtering injuns fast enough lol
>>18431698I'm pretty sure it was as simple as looking at a white person's skin and a black person's skin and going "hey I'm more white and he's more black", but you know, leftist faggots need to smell their own farts while overanalyzing everything.
>>18431683>le civilised changs had whole families put to the sword because one of them fucked upGenerational Extermination usually only happened in treason cases as it is the maximum worst punishment anyone can receive in these cases. It's very different to Steppeniggs who empty towns for not paying them protection money.
>>18431701After the rebellion was crushed and Bacon died of dysentery, the government shifted. They became much more aggressive in their policies against Indigenous tribes.
>>18431522End of WW1. Even during that time, the German Empire soldiers were crucifying women and children.
>>18431701True. This part is often sanatized. By formalizing "Whiteness," the elites effectively said: "We will give you the 'right' to claim Indigenous land and the 'right' to feel superior to the enslaved Africans, as long as you stop pointing your muskets at us."
>>18431703Partially. Racism worked a bit different back then and was more bizarre. Physical appearance could be treated symbolically rather than biologically. Medieval people didn’t have “race” like we do but they still had hierarchies.They didn’t think in modern biological race categories. Instead, they used a mix of:religion (Christian vs. “heathen”)geography (East, Africa, etc.)culture and languageAnd, yes, they put themselves at the top. In medieval romances, physical appearance was seen as a direct reflection of the soul's state. Since "darkness" was associated with sin/paganism and "whiteness" with purity/Christianity, the literature of the time used physical transformation as a literary device for conversion.In Wolfram von Eschenbach’s Parzival (c. 1210), there is a character named Feirefiz. He is the half-brother of Parzival, born to a European father and an African queen. Because he is "mixed," the text describes him as being spotted black and white like a magpie.When he finally converts to Christianity to marry a Grail-bearer, the "spots" are often described as resolving or his "darkness" fading. They believed that the "heathen" state physically darkened the skin, and the "light" of Christ would literally brighten it.Then there's Washing the Ethiopian White. The phrase comes from Book of Jeremiah (13:23). Not all medieval thinkers believed skin color physically changed with belief. Many understood skin color as tied to climate or lineage (influenced by ancient Greek ideas).The Medieval View: You are Black because you are a "heathen," but we can "fix" you through baptism. You can become one of us. It mixes metaphor, theology, and physical description in ways we no longer do. But it also laid groundwork that later hardened into racial ideologies.Over time, especially into the Renaissance and early modern period, this idea hardened into more explicitly racial thinking.
>>18431711Cry about it third-worldist worm
>>18431698>racism is a psyop by da rich!!!!No you retard, it's about aesthetics. Nobody is being taught to hate jeets, they do so because they're brown. Btw Bacon's wagies were racist against Natives and were mad at the govt for not ethnically cleansing them
>>18431522>When did bayoneting babiesIs there any proof this actually happened?
>>18431701But even this was based on class interests rather than racially based. They didn't want more injun killin' because they didn't like the red man for the color of his skin, they wanted him gone because Indian land was the only way the lower classes could hope to gain a home/land/independence of their own, as the Plantation elite had monopolized land ownership in the colonies proper.
>>18431720The reason why they went after the Indians and not the planters is because of skin color though (and other factors like cultural markers)
>>18431698Yeah I've heard the idea that "racism" didn't exist until around this time. Bullshit of course. As if people from around the world wouldn't think each other different had they encountered each other 1000s of years ago. It's cute and probably convinces some idealistic college students.
>>18431745>Yeah I've heard the idea that "racism" didn't exist until around this time.Did you even read his post. Whiteness became an institution and suddenly anyone and everyone can suddenly become experts in it if they have enough money and clout to push narrarives.
>>18431698>Before the late 1600s, "White" didn't exist as a legal or social identityYes it did? There's frankish/french poetry and literature mentioning how 'white' european christians are and how 'black' muslims and/or moors are>People identified as English, Christian, Irish, Dutch, or Virginian, but not "White."You can identify as multiple things
>>18431718>No you retard, it's about aestheticsDeranged post.>Nobody is being taught to hate jeetsHe didn't bring them up you illiterate fuck.
>>18431703God forbid people are educated or bother to read.
>>18431757I bring up Indians because they're the most obvious example that it's about aesthetics. Like just at popular racist rhetoric, nobody even pretends to care about "IQ" or "they're taking our jobs" anymore, it's just "they're ugly"
>>18431764>Like just atjust look* at
>>18431764
Funny when leftists get so easily unhinged and start flailing around with ad hominems.
>>18431764Deep set eyes aren't exclusive to Indians at all nor is it "universal" among them at all. The aesthetic argument has so many holes in it that basically sinks in a kiddie pool. It's just the final refuge for the terminally shallow.
>>18431718>Nobody is being taught to hate jeetsyou were tho, lonely neets who spend most of the time online because they try to fit in into spaces are the ideal prey for this kind of us vs them brainwahsing ofc this only applies to terminally online twitter neonazis, normal healthy people will not hate someone else because they don't look like a supermodel
>>18431680>>18431680Trying to explain why someone does a "leeee baaaadd" with "they are heckin hurt" is gay and retarded.Its a projection, some people just enjoy different things without having to be molested by their dad(faggots).Most people who enjoy hurting others are just more connected to their hind mind.
>>18431522idk
>>18431784You have to realize that the whole hate pipeline has been running for centuries. It's basically super modularized and extremely easy to custom change it in anyway you like but everyone just uses stock pre-set lines and rhetoric with some minor changes here and there. Social media has already been hooked into it (FB and Twitter are totally submerged) so it's only get more deranged and pervasive since people. Ow see it as a quick and cheap pathway to some money and power.
>>18431522settle down, yoshimoto, it was only ever acceptable among a few inherently barbarous "cultures"
>>18431792Targetting and killing kids was done by western powers for ages during the colonial era.
>>18431796then why are there 2 billion south asians
>>18431784"Normal, healthy" are social constructs. Also normies constantly shit on people based on their looks
>>18431778I have no idea what you're trying to say or how this relates to my point. It's clear as day these people are getting hate based on their looks
>>18431814if you one day stop being terminally online and taking all your knowladge of the world from /pol/ and twitter and step outside of your parents house, you will see that a lot of people are not super pretty
>>18431835>you will see that a lot of people are not super prettyAnd they were all bullied by other kids and still have self-esteem issues over it
>>18431839nobody is getting bullied over having avarge or below avarage looks (since that's 90% of the humans) if you were bullied in your childhood it was because something about your character made you an easy target, like inablity to make friends
>>18431842Kids bully each other over looks all the time>haha you're fat>haha you're brown>haha you wear glassesetc.Racism is an adult version of this lookism
>>18431852wrong again, bullying is choosing a single target that can't defend themselves, good looking kids will get bullied if they are autistic and can't find friends who would help them out. Racism is literally oposite of lookism since even good looking members of the wrong race are supposed to be harrased, opressed or killed Have you even gone to a normal school yourself? you sound like you are taking your knowledge from american high school setting sticoms/dramas
>>18431858>Racism is literally oposite of lookism since even good looking members of the wrong race are supposed to be harrased, opressed or killedIt's not the opposite of lookism as it's rooted in it. When Ukrainians started flooding Europe in 2022 nobody really cared about it even though every anti-black racist statement can easily be used against Ukrainians:>Ukrainians come from a dysfunctional country full of crime>Ukrainians never had a civilization >Ukrainians never invented anythingetc.It's just about looks.>Racism is literally oposite of lookism since even good looking members of the wrong race are supposed to be harrased, opressed or killedThey're collateral victims. If you're Hitler and want to kill all Jews, you're not going to spare Paul Newman and Jennifer Connelly because that would prove it's about aesthetics and make you look shallow, so the minority of good-looking Jews gotta go too in order for your ideology to save face.Even then, the Nazis classified Poles as inferior but kept the "Aryan-looking" Polish children in breeding programs. So even for them it was about aesthetics
>>18431697>>18431693>the root is economicsNo the root is biology.>there was a demandBy who? From who?
>>18431852When i was a kid i would select as a target the more popular, bigger, smarter, ... Than me kid and beat them.I once got to manipulate a huge downie to beat 5 of my classmates Beat up a lot of females and what people called bullies at the time too.Even took a sturdy piece of plastic and beat up my bigger cousin with it.
>>18431721Had way more to do with the Indians being extremely easy to steamroll (oftentimes outright going and doing it themselves without Colonial Government approval) whereas the Planters had a whole social system including military power (and ultimately the might of the British Military) protecting them. People will follow the path of least resistance and when the choice is between "Raise a rebellion against the government and it's professional military that has lots of guns and a large population" and "That tiny disorganized group over there wheezing with smallpox who often have nothing to fight back with beyond a stone hatchet" people are going to choose to take from the latter.
Colonial Virginia history is so weird and alien reading about as a New Englander. Ours is so much more straightforward of "first generation tolerated natives well, second generation started having prickly relations, third generation asserted absolute dominance over the natives". No third racial element because puritans didn't work the slaves as hard, and those that were ended up in ports like Newport who were later sold south. There was definitely hatred and dissent (nearly all Rhode Island's doing) but all that happened was turning one's brow up and decreeing that they'd be judged by the Almighty in the next life, no infighting
>>18431868Ukraine is European and European people live within its borders. They can relatively seamlessly integrate into other European societies in ways that someone from Syria or North Africa might struggle to. Hilariously enough some countries like Sweden told them to fuck off, probably in no small part because they were Europeans. Certain attitudes have a degree of basis in aesthetics, but there are cultural attitudes and ethics and like a million other things that also inform them and which are all usually much more important than what someone looks like.
>>18432088>he thinks racism is about whether or not a group "integrates" into societyOh no no no no
Even steppe tribes would prefer not to kill babies, they would just kill all males over a certain height.
>>18432166>blackpilled frogposter is also terminally retardedmany such cases
>>18432253Talk about "integration" is just a cover that anti-immigration types use to appear reasonable
>>18431721>>18432041Settler violence against festher Indians in colonial America had both class-based and aesthetic motivations while hatred against dot Indians in the 2020s is purely aesthetic
