NationStates Jolt Archive

I agree with the author. I will either call them Arabs or I will call them Those brown-skinned people from the desert. Which desert? Oh, the one where they wear those towel thingies on their heads. You know who I'm talking about. The ones who keep blowing things up.

They're arabs. Deal with it.

Your great insight into the peoples of North Africa, Western and Central Asia is astounding, thanks for clearing this all up.
It would be of great benefit if you were neutered.
:D

Last edited by Olymyopia : Today at 8:30 AM. Reason: It's late and I cant spell

I think spelling is the least of your problems.

Okay, so while we're on that note let's call Asian "Yellow Skinned Rice Eyes," Polynesians "Those Brown Skinned People Who Serves Drinks and Dances For Us," and East Europeans "Commie Bastards." It'll make classification and isolation so much simpler.

:rolleyes:

bwahaha

I think spelling is the least of your problems.

Seconded.

I agree with the author. I will either call them Arabs or I will call them Those brown-skinned people from the desert. Which desert? Oh, the one where they wear those towel thingies on their heads. You know who I'm talking about. The ones who keep blowing things up.
I'd like to see you use the phrase "Those brown-skinned people from the desert. Which desert? Oh, the one where they wear those towel thingies on their heads. You know who I'm talking about. The ones who keep blowing things up" in every discussion about current events in the middle east, however it would not only be tiresome but many people could be wondering why you were talking about the mafia in Las Vegas all the time.

I suppose that would be a bit dumb, but then I suppose wanting to homogenise the world into one amalgamated identity is a bit dumb even without making contrary assetions to boot. Aside from possibly McDonalds and Starbucks, who the heck are all these 'turn the world clone' people you refer to?
I can understand a disregard for national borders, but why would anyone want to amalgamate identities?:confused:
Many internationalists believe in breaking down traditional cultures and creating one world identity. Corporations also love the idea. It means a more or less homogeneous consumer basis without significant differences in tastes. Therefore, they would boost their profits.


Nationality is one possible aspect of a person's identity. I dont think a uni-sex world is impossible despite considering my sex/gender to be very important aspects of my identity. May I ask if you feel the need to live in a world where only one sex exists, or do you not associate yourself with your own sex/gender, or might you concede that feeling attached to one's own identity doesnt require that one destroy all others whose identity includes aspects (or an aspect) different to one's own?
Feeling attached to one's identity could turn into hostility when one feels that the environment in which their identity is prevalent is under threat. Say, from another culture becoming a majority and expelling their culture. In an ideal world, it would be easy for apples and oranges to coexist. In the real world, it is far more complicated.

And to answer your question, I am a gay male, yet I am vehemently feminist. A world where only women existed would be ideal. So I am a bit of a femi-nazi. Of course, my more intellectual side rejects such notions. :)

I agree with the author. I will either call them Arabs or I will call them Those brown-skinned people from the desert. Which desert? Oh, the one where they wear those towel thingies on their heads. You know who I'm talking about. The ones who keep blowing things up.

They're arabs. Deal with it.

What you think is irrelevant. This isn't a matter of opinion. Not all people from the Middle East are Arabs, and that is a point of fact. Deal with it.

I'd like to see you use the phrase "Those brown-skinned people from the desert. Which desert? Oh, the one where they wear those towel thingies on their heads. You know who I'm talking about. The ones who keep blowing things up" in every discussion about current events in the middle east, however it would not only be tiresome but many people could be wondering why you were talking about the mafia in Las Vegas all the time.

Most of our gangsters are actually Mormon, now.

people actually think the US would use nukes?!

didn't you ever see War Games? :p


seriously though... the thought of nukes being used kinda scares the sh** out of me. i mean, how many decades has it been since one was used, and how many times did the world get within minutes of midnight on the Doomsday Clock??Ike wouldn't use nukes. Kennedy came close. Everyone since then wouldn't consider it. Now, I believe that GW would do anything he decided to do. Facts and future results don't even enter his relm of thought.

I agree with the author. I will either call them Arabs or I will call them Those brown-skinned people from the desert. Which desert? Oh, the one where they wear those towel thingies on their heads. You know who I'm talking about. The ones who keep blowing things up.

They're arabs. Deal with it.

Iranians aren't overly brown. Iran is not a dessert, neither is Turkey. Turks don't wear turbans, and as far as I know they haven't had any suicide bombers. This is an idiotic statement, but worse its idiocy based on incorrect assumptions.

Iranians aren't overly brown. Iran is not a dessert, neither is Turkey. Turks don't wear turbans, and as far as I know they haven't had any suicide bombers. This is an idiotic statement, but worse its idiocy based on incorrect assumptions.

The only idiotic assumption made anywhere in this thread [at least, the only one recorded by me, having read only the original post, my post, and anybody quoting my post] is that I was doing anything more than stirring up shit.

But for the sake of argument (because I'm right and it's not my fault if you're so left-minded your brains fell out), if I tell you "the Arabs fucked up again," you'll have somewhat an idea of which group of fuckups I am talking about. "Arabs", when used this way, is an ambiguous label applied to any person native to that region. It's nothing more than "they". When the author argues that it's more convenient to say "they" than to get into specifics, he's right. I would rather say "Arabs" than "Turks and Saudis and Iraqis and Iranians and Kurds and on and on and on until the end of my days" when I'm just speaking about everybody from the area in general, the same way I would call anybody from Sweden or Norway or Denmark, Scandinavian.

QED, dumbasses.

It should be noted that you're all a bunch of idiots.

-snip-
Tell me, did you get severe meningitis as a kid?

None of those titles (Arab, Persian, Turkish) refer to races, they refer to ethnic groups equivalent to calling someone Germanic or Slavic.

The only real race is the Human race anyway.

Many internationalists believe in breaking down traditional cultures and creating one world identity. Corporations also love the idea. It means a more or less homogeneous consumer basis without significant differences in tastes. Therefore, they would boost their profits.


Internationalism doesn't necessarily equal homogenization; really, it seeks to allow all cultures to compete and influence each other free of predatory laws and restrictions, and places world interests above national or cultural interests. Even multinational corporations engineer their products to individual cultures; if anything, maintaining those separations commercially would ultimately prove more profitable.

If we think about it, "traditional" culture is nonexistent save in places with no contact with the outside world at any time; every culture has been influenced and evolves according to its contact with others, and cultures that are more open are more advanced, freer, and more prosperous than those that forcibly isolate themselves.

None of those titles (Arab, Persian, Turkish) refer to races, they refer to ethnic groups equivalent to calling someone Germanic or Slavic.

The only real race is the Human race anyway.

Please. Ethnicity and race are used interchangably in every forum you will ever find. And either way, that premise supports what I wrote.


Argesia, I got radiation poisoning from my cell phone. I assassinated JFK. I caused the Chernobyl accident. I invented the Olympics. Or not, whatever - I'm still right.

Internationalism doesn't necessarily equal homogenization; really, it seeks to allow all cultures to compete and influence each other free of predatory laws and restrictions, and places world interests above national or cultural interests. Even multinational corporations engineer their products to individual cultures; if anything, maintaining those separations commercially would ultimately prove more profitable.

If we think about it, "traditional" culture is nonexistent save in places with no contact with the outside world at any time; every culture has been influenced and evolves according to its contact with others, and cultures that are more open are more advanced, freer, and more prosperous than those that forcibly isolate themselves.
That would be multiculturalism. I was referring to uniculturalism.

I'm still right.
No. You're not. You're an imbecile.

No. You're not. You're an imbecile.

Dude I totally agree. I'm still right.

Please. Ethnicity and race are used interchangably in every forum you will ever find. And either way, that premise supports what I wrote.


Argesia, I got radiation poisoning from my cell phone. I assassinated JFK. I caused the Chernobyl accident. I invented the Olympics. Or not, whatever - I'm still right.

No, you're not. You're wrong, an idiot, and ignorant. You also clearly did not attend any school of repute, or you would have learned the various ethnicities of the peoples of the Middle East. About the only thing they have in common is Islam, and even Israel throws that awry. Now please, discontinue posting while you only look slightly foolish.

Actually I'm wondering why the Fundie Christians don't check in and explain that each of these groups came from a specific founding father.

No, you're not. You're wrong, an idiot, and ignorant. You also clearly did not attend any school of repute, or you would have learned the various ethnicities of the peoples of the Middle East. About the only thing they have in common is Islam, and even Israel throws that awry. Now please, discontinue posting while you only look slightly foolish.

You must have attended a pretty reputable school to assume that you don't learn the various ethnicities of the people of the Middle East in 10th grade at public school. There's a thought - I didn't go to the Blair Academy for high school and I don't go to Yale for college, but I still know enough to speak right over your fucking head. I didn't think it was even complicated.

They have one thing in common, before anything else: GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION.

You must have attended a pretty reputable school to assume that you don't learn the various ethnicities of the people of the Middle East in 10th grade at public school. There's a thought - I didn't go to the Blair Academy for high school and I don't go to Yale for college, but I still know enough to speak right over your fucking head. I didn't think it was even complicated.

They have one thing in common, before anything else: GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION.

Think of it this way; if I take a globe of the world (in fact I have one right here...) and take a red sharpie and draw a circle encompassing all of these countries, they immediately become a group. We call this group the Middle East. Every of these country's inhabitants are as much the same race (or ethnicity, you shithead), Arabs, as Portugal and Romania are the same race, Europeans. Or, better yet, Americans are all taken to be Americans regardless of where they came from, but as you break it down, you get blacks and whites and latinos and asians and (!) arabs. It's how we classify them and it's widely accepted, and no matter how much you bitch you cant change that.

Alright, boss. You tell a Pole that he's the same as a German. Because all different people can be combined into huge, homogenous groups.

And, by your stupid ass example, all the people in the Middle East would be...Middle Eastern. Not Arabs. People from the region we call Arabia would be Arabs. A valiant attempt at being condescending, but you don't have that crazy thing called reality to back you up. Take your 10th grade ass back to social studies class, and tell your teacher that you need to learn.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v223/maddillphatyo/2004world1600.jpg

There we go. Makes about as much sense as calling Israel "Arab".

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v223/maddillphatyo/2004world1600.jpg

There we go. Makes about as much sense as calling Israel "Arab".
Odd. You forgot to include Greece in Europe.

Odd. You forgot to include Greece in Europe.

Think there might have been a reason I went with ridiculous combinations?

Think there might have been a reason I went with ridiculous combinations?
I guess so. Either way, just wanted to stress it is very much European.

I guess so. Either way, just wanted to stress it is very much European.

And Israel is very much NOT Arab, which is why classifying the whole of the Middle East as Arab is assinine. And there you have...my point.

Alright, boss. You tell a Pole that he's the same as a German. Because all different people can be combined into huge, homogenous groups.

And, by your stupid ass example, all the people in the Middle East would be...Middle Eastern. Not Arabs. People from the region we call Arabia would be Arabs. A valiant attempt at being condescending, but you don't have that crazy thing called reality to back you up. Take your 10th grade ass back to social studies class, and tell your teacher that you need to learn.

If I told a Pole has was European, he couldn't argue with me. If I told a Pakki he was Asian, he couldn't argue with me. Germans are also European, Indians are also Asians (you could make an argument that Indians aren't really asian, but I'll assume youre not going to). And, again, Middle Eastern and Arabic are interchangable. Even if they aren't, you're just applying another ambiguous label to the same group the author was talking about. You're just screaming at the mirror.

And Israel is very much NOT Arab, which is why classifying the whole of the Middle East as Arab is assinine. And there you have...my point.
Indeed it is. Especially when Middle Easterner is the proper term.

Actually I'm wondering why the Fundie Christians don't check in and explain that each of these groups came from a specific founding father.

Do people still tell the story of Noah's molesteration by his son?

And, again, Middle Eastern and Arabic are interchangable.

And again, they are not, for the same reasons Chinese and Japanese and Korean and Mongolian are not interchangeable, though they can all be classified as "East Asian" or whatever generic geographic term you'd like to place them in, and for the same reasons German and Polish and Greek and Portugeese are not interchangeable, though they can all be classified as "European". Persian and Turk and Israeli and Egyptian cannot be interchanged, even though they are all "Middle Eastern".

Damnit, Sdaeriji - you've made me an American with your geopolitical tomfoolery!

Indeed it is. Especially when Middle Easterner is the proper term.

Which is what I don't understand about the original poster. He asks why we can't classify everyone from the Middle East as "Arab". Would it be so difficult to just classify everyone from the Middle East as Middle Eastern? Or is that too many letters? We don't classify everyone from Africa as Ethiopian, nor everyone from Asia as Cambodian, nor everyone from Europe as Andorran. Why the Middle East? And while we're at it, why not just classify everyone from the Middle East as Cambodian, since it's just part of Asia anyway.

Damnit, Sdaeriji - you've made me an American with your geopolitical tomfoolery!

Monkey?

The Iranians are mostly Persians and would take offense at being called an Arab. The Turks certainly aren’t Arab and I could think of a few people in Israel who might take offense as well. And the Kurds, it doesn’t take a lot to set them off these days, surrounded by so many ethnic enemies. You’d probably be best not calling them Arab. And don’t even start about Chechnya, those guys are not people you want mad at you.

It’s like referring to everyone in the US as Europeans. Why not, the primary immigrants to the US were Europeans and really who else lives there anyways. As you can see this isn’t really a good way to blanket label the people living in a region.

Calling the Middle East Muslim doesn’t even work because there are lots of strong Christian enclaves, as well as some people in Israel who again might have something to say about being called Muslim.

The Bruce

Which is what I don't understand about the original poster. He asks why we can't classify everyone from the Middle East as "Arab". Would it be so difficult to just classify everyone from the Middle East as Middle Eastern? Or is that too many letters? We don't classify everyone from Africa as Ethiopian, nor everyone from Asia as Cambodian, nor everyone from Europe as Andorran. Why the Middle East? And while we're at it, why not just classify everyone from the Middle East as Cambodian, since it's just part of Asia anyway.
The OP made his post out of ignorance to be honest. He is rather young and naive. I think he now realises why he was wrong. What amazes me is that others who are less so naive still insist on calling all Middle Easterners Arabs.

The OP made his post out of ignorance to be honest. He is rather young and naive. I think he now realises why he was wrong. What amazes me is that others who are less so naive still insist on calling all Middle Easterners Arabs.

Eh, I give up. I dont even disagree with you guys. Like I said in the first place, I'm just entertaining myself. Fighting is fun.

That's regional, not race.

And the US and Canada are multiracial.

i was just gonna sit here and eat popcorn...but..a glaring error in your logic compells me to respond....



QUOTE=Kievan-Prussia]That's regional, not race

umm..wouldnt people from the "region" of the middle east be no different then people from the "region" of north america?

i hope that answers your question..pretty simple eh?

same region,different race,religion(muslim/jewish)ethnicity...no?

how is that different then a mexican and a norte americano?

ohhhhhh..i see...one is white and one is brown!!

so how do you differentiate between hispanics of all regions and...omg...middle easterners of different cultures and religions?

by the food they eat maybe?they are all brown,so how can you tell?

lucky for you there are not many mexican/hispanic muslims..then you would be in a real tizzy!:headbang:

Eh, I give up. I dont even disagree with you guys. Like I said in the first place, I'm just entertaining myself. Fighting is fun.
Evidently. And yes, it is.

i was just gonna sit here and eat popcorn...but..a glaring error in your logic compells me to respond....



QUOTE=Kievan-Prussia]That's regional, not race

umm..wouldnt people from the "region" of the middle east be no different then people from the "region" of north america?

i hope that answers your question..pretty simple eh?

same region,different race,religion(muslim/jewish)ethnicity...no?

how is that different then a mexican and a norte americano?

ohhhhhh..i see...one is white and one is brown!!

so how do you differentiate between hispanics of all regions and...omg...middle easterners of different cultures and religions?

by the food they eat maybe?they are all brown,so how can you tell?

lucky for you there are not many mexican/hispanic muslims..then you would be in a real tizzy!:headbang:

Is this thread 20 pages of this crap?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v223/maddillphatyo/2004world1600.jpg

There we go. Makes about as much sense as calling Israel "Arab".WHAT!!! Alaska is now the 11th province of Canada?!?! Oh look, Nunavut has just expanded into Greenland.

:sniper:

you people are stupid, its nothing more than how anyone argues someone is classified

is pluto a planet? does that mean theres 9 planets? wait theres a lot of other moons and large entities in our system arent those planets? no? why not? they are smaller? so what size must a large entity be in order to be considered a planet? larger than all the moons apparently? smaller than the sun? what if a system had an entity in it larger than its sun? is the "10th" planet a planet or a large space rock?

my point is, it doesnt matter at all because the classifications this guy is caught up on are all inventions of humans anyways so it does not matter, maybe they would have called white people blacks, what then? would you argue that arabian people should be called purples? it doesnt matter guy

:sniper:

you people are stupid, its nothing more than how anyone argues someone is classified

is pluto a planet? does that mean theres 9 planets? wait theres a lot of other moons and large entities in our system arent those planets? no? why not? they are smaller? so what size must a large entity be in order to be considered a planet? larger than all the moons apparently? smaller than the sun? what if a system had an entity in it larger than its sun? is the "10th" planet a planet or a large space rock?

my point is, it doesnt matter at all because the classifications this guy is caught up on are all inventions of humans anyways so it does not matter, maybe they would have called white people blacks, what then? would you argue that arabian people should be called purples? it doesnt matter guy
Doesn't matter? Ok, from now on I'll call you an Arab.

is pluto a planet? does that mean theres 9 planets? wait theres a lot of other moons and large entities in our system arent those planets? no? why not? they are smaller? so what size must a large entity be in order to be considered a planet? larger than all the moons apparently? smaller than the sun? what if a system had an entity in it larger than its sun? is the "10th" planet a planet or a large space rock?

Moons orbit around planets. That's why they're not planets. And if there was a body bigger than the sun, the sun would be orbiting around it.

Many internationalists believe in breaking down traditional cultures and creating one world identity. Corporations also love the idea.
I've never met any such internationalists, I doubt they are as common as your earlier comments implied.
It means a more or less homogeneous consumer basis without significant differences in tastes. Therefore, they would boost their profits.
I'm well aware of the vested interest a minority have in breaking down diversity, that is why I specifically mentioned McDonalds and Starbucks (figuring that the typology being indicated was obvious).

Feeling attached to one's identity could turn into hostility when one feels that the environment in which their identity is prevalent is under threat.
Yes it could, and a car gas tank could explode. Neither of these things are (as your earlier comments implied) inevitable so far as I can see.

Say, from another culture becoming a majority and expelling their culture. In an ideal world, it would be easy for apples and oranges to coexist. In the real world, it is far more complicated.
Everything in the real world is complicated, so no news there. Human beings deal with complexity incessantly, one might argue that we thrive on it.

And to answer your question, I am a gay male, yet I am vehemently feminist. A world where only women existed would be ideal. So I am a bit of a femi-nazi. Of course, my more intellectual side rejects such notions. :)
We'll have to agree to disagree (or disagree to agree if you prefer;) ). Personally I prefer the world with at least two genders.

Isn't it sorta like calling an englishman a scotishman??? you can't classify all middle-eastern people as arabs, especially because there are many differences between middle eastern countries

Isn't it sorta like calling an englishman a scotishman??? you can't classify all middle-eastern people as arabs, especially because there are many differences between middle eastern countries

No, it's like calling an Englishman a Romanian. That's the similarity.

There is no such thing as race. It is a concept developed to defend things such as slavery, "They're not human, they're 1/5 human, obviously, just look at their skin color! It's black!" There is actually just as much genetic similarity between an African, an Asian, and a Native American as there is between any two people of the same 'race.' So take off the multi-colored glasses society has given you, and realise that in the end, we're all the same! (Not in a conformist way, in the sense that we all came from the same place.)

Moons orbit around planets. That's why they're not planets. And if there was a body bigger than the sun, the sun would be orbiting around it.
They're satellites.