Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Racism on live chess


  • 20 months ago · #381

    netzach

    The Ginger-tomcat does not do battle with the Black-tomcat becuase they are different in appearance astronomer.

    They do so because of territorial defensiveness.

    A Clydesdale and a Quarterhorse are indeed the same-thing, as is an inhabitant, of Tenant-creek or Sydney despite outward appearances. 

  • 20 months ago · #382

    delete92

    Gilded_Candlelight wrote:
    astronomer999 wrote:
    Gilded_Candlelight wrote:
    at. 

    A) Race is not a taxonomic term applying to humans.

    B) Racism is discrimination based on race.

    C) Since race does not apply to humans, racism is unmerited discrimination

    Since racism is unmerited discrimination then racist doing the world a measurable disservice. 

    So now we've moved on to speciesism. If you refuse to apply the concept of race to humans, you are saying that humans are in some essential way different from other organisms. That's unscientific.

    Or do you think that a Clydesdale and a quarterhorse are the same thing.

    you are an idiot. None the less I will explain, because I enjoy letting other people laugh at you. 

    A) Race, species, sub-species etc are taxonomic classifications

    B) Taxonomic classifications exist to distinguish different organisms

    C) All organisms have a classification, but some organisms, having a broader variation taxonomically (By scientific standards), are given more (numerically higher in number) classifications. 

    D) If a organism can be sufficiently classified without further taxonomical classification it is, as adding classification would be redundant (a word you still dont comprehend.

    E) Humans do not have race, since it is sufficient to explain their classification with Homo sapiens sapiens (the latter sapiens being the sub-species). 

     

    If you insist on being an idiot, please feel free to hate our sub-species brothers Homo sapiens idaltu, though it seems someone already did. You are so stupid I am amazed you can live independently and by yourself. Notice how you are not arguing with me, but with ALL OF ACCEPTED BIOLOGY. Even so, I am glad  you are back, there was just too much intelligent discussion going on. 


    I would love there to be a world without racism

    I've experienced first hand racism that has gone a lot further than just name calling or other verbal abuse - and some of my friends have come off even worse than I have

    However - while we are perhaps not scientifically different - society, culture, religion, geography and history all play a huge role in both seperating and defining us all

    Personally I think this difference is a good thing that add variety to the world and makes the human race a much richer thing for these differences

    Unfortunately my view isn't shared by all - and that is where racism becomes an issue

  • 20 months ago · #383

    astronomer999

    Gilded_Candlelight wrote:
    astronomer999 wrote:
    Gilded_Candlelight wrote:
    at. 

    A) Race is not a taxonomic term applying to humans.

    B) Racism is discrimination based on race.

    C) Since race does not apply to humans, racism is unmerited discrimination

    Since racism is unmerited discrimination then racist doing the world a measurable disservice. 

    So now we've moved on to speciesism. If you refuse to apply the concept of race to humans, you are saying that humans are in some essential way different from other organisms. That's unscientific.

    Or do you think that a Clydesdale and a quarterhorse are the same thing.

    you are an idiot. None the less I will explain, because I enjoy letting other people laugh at you. 

    A) Race, species, sub-species etc are taxonomic classifications

    B) Taxonomic classifications exist to distinguish different organisms

    C) All organisms have a classification, but some organisms, having a broader variation taxonomically (By scientific standards), are given more (numerically higher in number) classifications. 

    D) If a organism can be sufficiently classified without further taxonomical classification it is, as adding classification would be redundant (a word you still dont comprehend.

    E) Humans do not have race, since it is sufficient to explain their classification with Homo sapiens sapiens (the latter sapiens being the sub-species). 

     

    If you insist on being an idiot, please feel free to hate our sub-species brothers Homo sapiens idaltu, though it seems someone already did. You are so stupid I am amazed you can live independently and by yourself. Notice how you are not arguing with me, but with ALL OF ACCEPTED BIOLOGY. Even so, I am glad  you are back, there was just too much intelligent discussion going on. 

    All you have said is that you will stop classification at an arbitrary point.

    Sadly, biological science goes further, thus we have campaigns to preserve particular populations of species with the aim of ensuring genetic diversity within that species. That's positive discrimination.

    And in human biology, medicine is progressing to the point of using race as an indicator of probability of disease. It's called epidemiology.

    PS I'm glad to see that you're achieving consistent orthographic outcomes today

  • 20 months ago · #384

    delete92

    regardless of whether science classes us as different - rightly or wrongly some people class humans they perceive as different in a negative way and (whether or not its scientifically correct) people use the word "race" and the word "racism" to explain these "differences" - and the way some people react when confronted with people they dont see as the same as themselves - be this verbal or physical abuse

    i doubt calling them idiots is likely to change their view

  • 20 months ago · #385

    astronomer999

    Gilded_Candlelight wrote:

     I know you will learn to read one day. High five man :) come on, give me a high five!

    HI V? .....I haven't got it, but I'm sure you will.

    My God, give a boy a hammer and he'll bang it all day

  • 20 months ago · #386

    GenghisCant

  • 20 months ago · #387

    GenghisCant

    'How come every time an igloo's made, it's always white huh, Eskimos racist!

  • 20 months ago · #388

    GenghisCant

    'Why are you last in the queue of your Doctor's patients, chronological or is your surgery racist?'

  • 20 months ago · #389

    astronomer999

    Careful with that hammer. You don't want to know what it feels like to hit your thumb.

    Then again, you have to be doing something constructive to have a reason to hold a nail, which might get mishit

  • 20 months ago · #390

    GenghisCant

    We call whiteout 'Tippex' here. We're a bit more politically correct here in the UK :P

  • 20 months ago · #391

    GenghisCant

    Ha! I like it. That guy is quite funny. He does some other videos worth checking out as well.

    This one is 'Rap 101'

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ympI2mdABUM

    He calls it a 'Cultural icebreaker' lol.

  • 20 months ago · #392

    GenghisCant

    :D, yeah he is quite funny, if I'm thinking of the right person. He does a sketch about people making fun of the Indian accent?

  • 20 months ago · #393

    netzach

  • 20 months ago · #394

    GenghisCant

    Yeah, I just searched for him. He is the guy I was thinking of.

    At the risk of being accused of being racist, you don't see many good........Canadian (ooh, see what I did lol) comedians.

  • 20 months ago · #395

    Timothy_P

    Moses2792796 wrote:

    @Irontiger, being a racist is not a crime as far as I am aware...

    ...anyway, this Joe character has inadvertently stumbled across an interesting point, which is that people often assume that race is an issue when it is not, funnily enough it is the people who claim to be the strongest opponents of racism who are the most guilty of this.  They tend to make race a central issue where it should not be taken into account, affirmative action is a classic example.

    In the US, racist speech is called hate speech and is illegal.

  • 20 months ago · #396

    Greenmtnboy

    Rich LIttle...

  • 20 months ago · #397

    chebf123

    block'em

  • 20 months ago · #398

    Greenmtnboy

    As a human animal of non-color, every time I walk down the crackers aisle at the supermarket I am deeply offended by the racial stereotype inferred by that name.  Fortunately, our english brethren (sisteren?) on the other side of the atlantic long since evolved out of sensitive names like "crackers" preferring biscuits as the neutral term.   

  • 20 months ago · #399

    Ubik42

    joeschmo123 wrote:

    It can be justified, is all Im saying.You not understanding this just shows how prejudice you are against racists.Which is another form of intollerence.

    Well, I suppose being a human I have a certain amount of intolerance in me, so I carefully spend all of my intolerance on racist jerks so I won't be tempted to be intolerant towards people who have a shred of human decency.


Back to Top
This forum topic has been locked.