ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • Social Issues

How White People Became White!

Updated on October 1, 2016
vveasey profile image

Hi I'm vveasey! Glad to meet U! I don't write to persuade or to gain agreement, only evoking greater insight and awareness in readers minds!

Source
Source

Sounds a Lil Crazy

The title of this hub may sound strange or crazy to you especially if you're white because you've always been white...you're white by birth...you didn't become white by some process or course you took...why that's crazy!

That may be so, but everything and everyone has an origin including the idea or concept of whiteness or being white. As we study the history of how the concept of being white originated we will at the same time discover how the concept of being black came to be.

Caucasian

Another word used to identify white people is "Caucasian." Caucasian didn't come into existence until 1795, coined by the German philosopher Christoph Meiners in his book The Outline of History of Mankind. German anthropologist, Johann Friedrich Blumenbach (living around the same time) thought that white people originated in the Caucasus mountain region. Overtime the intelligentsia of Europe applied this term to all people identified as white. Caucasian means you live in the Caucasus mountain region or are from the Caucasus mountain region. How many "white people" can say that?

Caucasian is a made up word and didn't exist in ancient times, neither did the concept of race. It was recognized that there were different types of people but they weren't seen as being of different races/species. If there were different races/species of humans we wouldn't be able to produce offspring together which as we all know, we can. There is only one race the human race.

The Concept of Race

The concept of race was created around the 1500s in tandem with the North Atlantic African Slave Trade.

The slave trade was a capitalist endeavor.

It was big business and big money.

Most of the countries participating in the slave markets were Christian. Enslaving one's fellow man went against Christian values. So the capitalists and intellectual elite of those countries had to come up with a strategy to offset this problem.

They used the concept of superior and inferior races to justify enslaving and making money off of those they enslaved.

They reasoned that the earliest races, like the black Africans, were the most primitive and the later races, like the white Europeans, were the most advanced and therefore the most human ( the assumption being that the earliest races were closer to apes than to humans).

That black Africans weren't really human, they were subhuman. They weren't really enslaving and selling humans, but subhumans. So there was no reason for Christians to feel guilt or disgust that they were selling and buying humans because they weren't.

Adam and Eve were believed to be the mother and father of all people. At some point they were considered to be white. To account for how black people got in the picture, the curse on the descendants of Ham was created. Ham was supposedly cursed with blackness by God and was made to be the ancestor of all the peoples of Africa and they were tainted because of this supposed curse.

If you read my hub "Are Blacks The Cursed Descendants Of Ham?" You can draw your own conclusion about whether this story is true or not. There a link to it at the end of this hub.

The only people who were considered white in the United States, until the height of the slave trade were, WASPs, White Anglo-Saxon Protestants.

Italians, the Irish, and Jews etc. weren't considered white (probably because they were Catholics and the Jews were Jesus' killers), but as the slave population increased and became greater than the white population, a re-evaluation of who was white was undertaken in an effort to increase the white population, because the fear of slave revolts was a constant threat and danger.

So the Irish and Italians were allowed to become white.

Many southern Europeans weren't considered to be pure white because of their intermingling with Africans in ancient and later times, but eventually all of these peoples' racial status was updated to Caucasian or white.

Racial Purity and Tainted Blood

The idea of racial purity picked up steam during the 1800s because of a widespread fear, especially among the upper classes and royalty, about being born with tainted blood that made you less intelligent, mentally retarded or morally inferior in some way that could be passed on to your kids and their kids and so on and so on.

There was a phobia about being tainted and an obsession with being pure and untainted.

Blacks were considered inferior to Caucasians (or as Hitler called them Aryans) because they were considered to be more "primitive" and tainted because of the Ham curse. So you could see how these ideas and fears could make them a "little bit" obsessed with maintaining the purity of the white race by coming up with standards and methods to determine who was pure/white/superior in intelligence and moral character or who was black/impure/inferior in intelligence and moral character.

It wasn't legal to enslave whites, so the "one drop rule"was created to help keep a clear and legal dividing line between blacks and whites. If you had any black ancestor no matter how far back in time they lived. You were considered tainted with black "blood" and you were considered black, no matter how white you looked.

If you were half black, you were a mulatto. If you were one fourth black you were a quadroon. If you were one eighth black, you were a octoroon. If it could be proven or suspected that you had any "black blood" even "one drop". You were black.

This was great for the slave owners because if they fathered children with black slave women (which many did), those offspring would automatically be their slaves. Buying slaves was expensive and this saved them the expense of buying new slaves. They had a built in renewable slave farm.

White western culture claims the ancient Romans and Greeks as their cultural ancestors and claims to be the inheritors of their cultural legacy. Ironically, the ancient Romans and Greeks never refer to themselves as white people or as Europeans. The Romans considered themselves Romans and the Greeks considered themselves Greeks. They didn't have color prejudice.

The Holy Roman Empire took most of their slaves from the Slavs who lived in what is now known as Eastern Europe. The Slavs became so identified with bondage that the word "slave" is derived from Slav.

This racial sh*t originated in the so-called modern era starting around the 1500's with the creation of North Atlantic Slave Trade and spread to the what would become the United States of America with the "founding" of the so-called "New World".

In a very condensed way, this is how white people became white.


Origin of The Word "Slave"

From Middle English sclave, from Anglo-French or Medieval Latin; Anglo-French esclave, from Medieval Latin sclavus, from Sclavus Slavic; from the frequent enslavement of Slavs in central Europe during the early Middle Ages.

First Known Use: 14th century, Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary,



And Now a Word About Skin Color

"Melanin: a dark brown or black substance that is a natural part of people's skin, hair, and eyes". (Merriam-Webster's Leaner's Dictionary).

"Melanin: any of a group of black or dark brown pigments present in the hair, skin, and eyes of man and animals: produced in excess in certain skin diseases and in melanomas"

(Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition)

Without melanin you wouldn't have eye color, hair color, skin color or any color at all.

Melanin is a natural sunblock, nature's way of protecting the skin from sunburn and sun radiation poisoning. That's why people who don't have sufficient levels of melanin in their skin burn with prolonged exposure to sunlight, but those with sufficient levels get darker or tan

The darker the skin, the more melanin it contains. The lighter the skin the less melanin it contains. The melanin content of the skin accounts for the difference in skin color between blacks, whites, and those in between.

Those people and their descendants who survived in hot areas where the sun was the most intense, had more melanin in their skin and this was passed on to their descendants. Those with the most melanin survived, those without enough eventually died out because if their skin was too light, it absorbed too much sun to stay healthy (Those who survived are the black or darker-skin people).

The reverse of this is true for the people who survived in cold areas where the sun was least intense. They had less melanin in their skins and this was passed on to their descendants. Those with the least melanin survived those with most eventually died out because if their skin was too dark it couldn't absorb enough sun to stay healthy (those who survived are the white or lighter-skin people).

Skin color was noticed in ancient times, but wasn't associated with race or intelligence. It was just an observation like noting the difference in color of various flowers or plants.



DNA Studies Show That All Modern Humans Originated in Africa.

"If you get to the stage where you can persuade people on the evidence, that it's solid, that we are all African, that color is superficial, that stages of development of culture are all interactive, then I think we have a chance of a world that will respond better to global challenges." Richard Leaky, Paleoanthropologist. For a more detailed, historical, fact-based look at the subject, that backs up what Mr Leaky is stating. Click this link http://www.realhistoryww.com/world_history/ancient

Also see the video below that explains "Why Europeans Are White" and why Eskimos who live in an area were there is little exposure to sun are brown!

If you enjoyed the hub, vote it up, share with friends, family, and on social media

Thanks



The Invention of the White Race

Why are Europeans White and Eskimos Brown?

© 2012 vveasey

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • profile image

      Alexandra watts 3 months ago

      Not all dark races after African. African Americans are not African at all but decendants of the ancient isrealites, they come from Shem. Africans come from ham and red people(Caucasians)come from Esau.

    • profile image

      Julio Tan 4 months ago

      Informative. Enjoyed reading the subject on caucasian origins and some races, slavery. Origins of economic and political hierarchy. Am humbled. Thank you.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      vveasey 16 months ago from Detroit,MI

      Thanks For You Input Ninja!

      You said: "Because at the end of the day, we all have same origin and we are the human race"

      I couldn't agree more!

    • profile image

      Ninja 16 months ago

      Hi there! I know it's a old hub but wanted to say this was a great article and I enjoyed so much including all the comments you received.

      I especially loved one of comments from Ron Hawkster too!

      I'm not from the US but living in the US now and it really does give me a headache to see so damn many ppl talk about racial problems even when they're not currently experiencing it. And it goes on and on carrying on to next generation to generation.

      I'm not a white or black, I'm an Asian with thick accent lol

      And like I said I'm not from here so I might have a different perspective and might not be fully understand this whole racial problems in the US but I sometimes feel like when ppl talk about racial problems, they just want to victimize theirselves or want to prove that the other race owe something.

      Hopefully someday we all be somewhat colorblind and like Ron Hawkster mentioned about Northern Africa, skin color differences would be as same as eye color differences.

      Because at the end of the day, we all have same origin and we are the human race :)

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      vveasey 18 months ago from Detroit,MI

      That's right Jonny! You're right on point!

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 18 months ago from Tasmania

      Pardon me for interrupting. It is pretty obvious that differences of culture, upbringing, environment, etc., have a far greater influence upon us human individuals.

      In Britain, which has had an enormous influx of people from all across the world since the end of WWII, people with a wide variety of skin tone and colour, who were born there, have the "British" ways of speaking, accents, lifestyle. Listening to them on radio you will not know their skin colour. You will not know their family back ground. You accept them as equal citizens.

      Suddenly they are seen on TV and reveal their skin colour and people feel let down because "they are black!"

      Pure ignorant prejudice!

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      vveasey 18 months ago from Detroit,MI

      MizBejabbers. I'm not preaching at all!

      I'm just addressing your insinuation, that I don't know what etymology is, and also showing you, that as I said, "Caucasian", as applied to "white" people, is a made up word, coined by German anthropologist, Johann Friedrich Blumenbach, at the turn of the 19th century.

    • MizBejabbers profile image

      MizBejabbers 18 months ago

      Perhaps you are preaching to the wrong person. It is the black African-Americans who insist on calling us Caucasians out of respect. They do not like to use the terms "black" and "white" here in the South. They say Caucasian and African-American. And I stick to my point about "white" African-Americans.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      vveasey 18 months ago from Detroit,MI

      MizBejabbers thanks for your comments.

      I know what etymology is.

      And I know the etymology of the word Caucasian. You may be the one who needs to delve a little deeper into etymology.

      So before you try to "school" me on the etymology of Caucasian.

      Do your homework. Look up the info I provide for you about the origin of the word Caucasian and who coined it below.

      Then tell me who knows what they're talking and writing about concerning, the word, Caucasian.

      (Caucasian, was coined by German anthropologist Johann Friedrich Blumenbach at the turn of the 19th century, the racial classification Caucasian has sparked plenty of debate in its short time in the English language. First there’s the issue of Blumenbach’s mistaken etymology: he erroneously placed the origins of the “White” race in the Caucasus mountain region. He also, not at all humbly, knocked his predecessor, Carl Linnaeus, for his singular method of studying teeth to determine race, calling it “artificial” and asserting that it “came every day to be encumbered with more troublesome anomalies.” Blumenbach, on the other hand, emphasized the importance of studying the entire skull to understand the quandary that is race.

      When anthropologists first started studying race, white supremacy was popularly accepted. Blumenbach was, at least, a bit more progressive than his contemporaries, in that he believed that all men belonged to the same species, even if he considered the Caucasian race—his own race—to be the original type and the “most handsome and becoming” of all five races ( Caucasian, Mongolian, Ethiopian, Malayan, and American) in his now outdated classification.

      The language of race is undeniably a sensitive issue. Words that were once perfectly acceptable become dated and offensive. In his book The Rise and Fall of the Caucasian Race, Bruce David Baum notes: “[T]he notion of a Caucasian race has gone in and out of vogue…in popular usage since it was invented in the late eighteenth century.”

      In a 2008 speech Hillary Clinton used the term “Caucasian”; however, the writers of the 2010 U.S. Census form opted to use the term “White” over “Caucasian” in the question about race. For most Americans, the terms are interchangeable.)

      Dictionary.com online dictionary

    • MizBejabbers profile image

      MizBejabbers 18 months ago

      You write very good hubs on the subject of race except that you need to delve a little deeper into etymology. You say that Caucasian is a made-up word but if that is so, then African-American is even more made up. I know Caucasian (white) people from Africa who are now American citizens. They probably would bristle at being called “African-American”. Would they be “African-American Caucasians?” Get the picture?

      By the way, etymology is the study of words.

      Yes, today genealogists have proved that life originated in Africa. If the Leakeys are correct in their theories, we all came from the same tribe of apes anyway, so that could explain why we continue to make simians out of ourselves when it comes to the racial issue.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      vveasey 21 months ago from Detroit,MI

      MaestroECMcCloud

      Thanks Eddie! I appreciate your comments!

    • MaestroECMcCloud profile image

      MaestroECMcCloud 21 months ago from Lexington, South Carolina

      Very interesting hub Veasey. You seem to have initiated here a much needed dialogue about race, a very sensitive topic at this juncture of America's history.

      We need more of such instead of pretending that we are living in a "post-racial" America. With recent events like the Tamir Rice case and others, it is clear that whoever coined that phrase is either totally out of touch with reality or just plain ignorant.

      Very good hub and excellent responses. Kudos to you my brother.

    • profile image

      Me 24 months ago

      Hi, this stuff I just read is very superficial. And all of it was true. All people originated in the Middle Eastern/ African areas. You can't be Christian if you don't know this. Jesus ancestors all began in Egypt, Cannon and other places.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      vveasey 2 years ago from Detroit,MI

      pip31453

      Thanks again!

      I kind of like that sentiment " a voice 'crying in the wilderness', but not unheard." I appreciate that you and some others "hear me".

    • profile image

      pip31453 2 years ago

      You certainly did that, vveasey! I've been reading your other posts and am enjoying your point of view and learning a lot. Thanks should go to you for stirring folks from their apathy. You are a voice 'crying in the wilderness', but not unheard.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      vveasey 2 years ago from Detroit,MI

      pip31453

      You're welcome!

      And thanks for your righteous input!

      Whether you or others agree with me or not, is not really my concern.

      It's about, getting people thinking and discussing, issues, they may have taken for granted, and never really took the time, to take an unbiased "look" at what they believe, or why they believe it!

    • profile image

      pip31453 2 years ago

      Wow. Can't believe all the hate spewed about 'race'. Apparently adults aren't as capable of intellectual disagreement as I'd hoped.

      Let me ask all of you this--WHO are YOU personally? And, WHAT have YOU done lately to make things better in this world? Life is too short to hate. I am a Christian and of European descent...whatever that means. I never owned slaves but read where one of my ancestors did. Can't change that, but I can change myself and my attitude toward others. From 1st Samuel 16:7: 'For the LORD sees not as man sees: man looks on the outward appearance, but the LORD looks on the heart.' Skin color, facial features, height, weight, deformities, handicaps, etc. should mean nothing if a person can know or be known for what's in the heart. You may dislike someone, perhaps deeply, but it will be because of that person's actions and attitudes. Slavery, bigotry, judgment, repression need to be things of the past, and then left there. I have struggles with others, but I start each day with prayer and an attitude of anticipation of the day's worth and the folks I'll meet. And what a blessing it has been! My friends and I look like something out of a politically-correct ad. We haven't paid attention to race (so-called) since we met. And yes, it occurred to us that we were different early on because it is ingrained in us to notice. Funny how quickly those differences fade when you know a person.

      By the way, my husband and I had genetic DNA done and he has ancestors from Sub-Sahara Africa. He was told that he had Native American about 4 generations back. He has NO native blood according to his results. My husband was surprised, of course, but felt this was a blessing. He is embracing being the child of so many different types of people--a beautiful child of God. I am predominantly European (Irish, Welsh, Norman), but have some Caucasus ancestry. Look that up. It does not equate Caucasian. It is a variety of folks in the area between the Black and Caspian Seas. They were of a mixture of skin colors but known for aquiline features. Describes my dad to a tee. I didn't inherit his nose, but my twin sister and brother did and a nephew has, too.

      Truth be known, the majority of us are an incredible mixture of peoples, but each person is just a member of human kind. Yeah, yeah, I'm a dreamer. What can I say?

      Thanks, vveasey for your blog. I need to do more research to see how much I agree with it, but for now it has been fascinating to see how many people show their 'true colors' by their comments. Looking forward to reading more of your work!!

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 2 years ago from Tasmania

      Just that we were all in-continent.....I suppose....lol

    • profile image

      Chris 2 years ago

      There is a theory that all te continents use to be one super continent so when they divided, we divided. The results, different environments, adaptations, language began to change though some still are similar, ect. So to me we all had a common ancestor by now so race is a dumb excuse for hate.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      vveasey 2 years ago from Detroit,MI

      The meaning of swarthy from Merriam-Webster online dictionary

      adjective swar·thy \ˈswȯr-thē, -thē\

      : having dark skin

      swar·thi·erswar·thi·est

      Full Definition of SWARTHY

      : of a dark color, complexion, or cast

      — swar·thi·ness noun

      See swarthy defined for English-language learners

      See swarthy defined for kids

      Examples of SWARTHY

      a dark-eyed, swarthy young man with killer looks

      Origin of SWARTHY

      alteration of obsolete swarty, from swart

      First Known Use: 1587

      Related to SWARTHY

      Synonyms

      black, brunet (or brunette), swart, dark

      Antonyms

      light

    • profile image

      THE TRUTH 2 years ago

      by GARY LEUPP

      Last month the Guardian reported that a team of scientists studying early homo sapiens in Europe had extracted DNA from the tooth of a male hunter-gatherer who lived in what is now the Asturias region of northern Spain around 7000 years ago. They drew some surprising conclusions from the analysis. The man was dark-skinned but blue-eyed. His nearest DNA matches with contemporary ethnicities are with Swedes and Finns, among the palest of peoples.

      Scholars had earlier argued that blue eyes had appeared as the result of a genetic mutation somewhere between 10,000 and 6000 years ago. (Before that all humans had brown eyes.) But until a few years ago most supposed that the appearance of white skin had occurred much earlier. The European gene pool with its light complexion was supposed to have decisively “split off” from the (also light-skinned) East Asian gene pool by around 50,000 years ago, after which homo sapiens first appeared in Europe, then in China.

      But this timeline may need to be adjusted. It now looks like European whiteness may have appeared much more recently. Maybe there were no “white people” in Europe as recently as 7000 years ago, during the lifetime of the blue-eyed hunter-gatherer, whom the Guardian article calls “swarthy.”

      The new research supports the theory that the spread of agriculture in Europe beginning (only) around 6,000 years ago favored the survival of people with a genetic mutation producing fair skin. The new grain-based diet lacked Vitamin D, vital to teeth, bone health, and to the immune system. Meanwhile humans inhabiting northern climates received less sun exposure than people in most parts of Africa. Light skin absorbs Vitamin D from the sun much more rapidly than dark skin and so becomes a real advantage from certain latitude, according to the theory.With this being said, I really don't think white people have done anything besides conquer. You should do your research and be honest!!!

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 2 years ago from Tasmania

      @truth hurts

      You wrote: "....an yet the bible is there for u to red an whites wrote it but didn't understand what they wrote." I'm glad you understand that, because if whites wrote it, god could not have done so.

      As we have been saying all along, it's humans that wrote it, so stop believing like it was god who done it!

    • profile image

      Sanxuary 2 years ago

      Slavery has been around a long time and the term indentured servant was used throughout the middle ages and beyond after the fall of Rome. Race played less of a part in the majority of history. They did not care about race they just wanted slaves. Free labor is slavery and now its cheap labor. Its always the rich and the strong controlling others to maintain their life style. Like then more is never enough.

    • profile image

      truth hurts 2 years ago

      Its amazed one question was asked an i was told about slavery etc . it was also wild to learn whites come from the cacus mountains an yet they claim to be superior pure ect. When they kill there childrens mothers they have no compasion an blacks r a curse blacks not the ignorant ones they just not takin no sh** an tired all them lies an it does not say in no bible that adam an eve was white point provin always claimin stuff not theres don't even belong to them they don't no nothin about thereselfes an rhey r jealous of black because they were first and everything proves that that's y they have spent some many years trying to prove otherwise white can not stand the sun they will burn so i don't know how they figure blck can't stand to much of the sun an yet they get tans an to say blck was sub humans was bannas they kill each other as well but they always in the blck people life i wonderin sometime if whites would of stayed in them moyntains who would be tryin to put them on the map once again were the hell they come from read what curses r befoee u say blck tainted LOL because it all will be revealed and they can't stopped that incent blood is upon all yall hands an yet the bible is there for u to red an whites wrote it but didn't understand what they wrote

    • profile image

      2_cute 2 years ago

      why white people can't stay in the sun to long

      do they really belong here ?

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 3 years ago from Tasmania

      How will we ever know for certain the origins of darker and lighter skinned peoples around the world? Presumably there will be some science that gives us pretty definite answers. There will always be argument with biased individuals wanting their particular take on it accepted over others.

      Lighter skinned peoples are the minority. There are far more darker skinned people in the world.

    • profile image

      Sharon 3 years ago

      Your post was so full of white supremacy racist shit mixes with lies and half truths. The caucauzoid is a mutant and lived in the mountains, a backwoods uncivilized caveman. Everyone knows that the melaninated man and woman the black race from Africa came all the other races. So go back to reading your books that was stolen from Ancient Egypt even the Pope prays to a Black Madonna and child! Go read history and stop desecrating graves digging up tombs cause you won't find any white folks buried there!

    • profile image

      DaveyBoy 3 years ago

      @jonnycomelately

      This is more than just much ado about nothing. First of all lets not get away from the purpose of this hub page in case some of you forgot.

      "How White People Became White!"

      Perhaps wanting to ignore it, within the page for the topic itself, is an attempt to censor its discussion? Plenty of people have emotional baggage tied up in such issues as this therefore it warrants getting to the bottom of. I have seen much baloney on here from the Zecharia Sitchin based pseudo Afrocentrics that are waiting for the "mother ship connection" to the Hurray! We got Neanderthal DNA, has been, on last leg white supremacist.

      I think you are wasting your time if you think that we should all just sit down and talk together. First of all there just aren't enough Blacks to go around and they live in certain areas. Most of us (whites) don't have a good "white" friend, much less a Black one. Not enough access, besides who has time for friends in our high consumption, disposable, distracted live styles?

      Better to attack bigotry with looking at the "real human story" of how we became. It is the story of one large family tree. Addressing misconceptions and outright lies in our culture/religion/folklore etc..., I think is the way to go. Alas, I know this could be folly as well. God speed the day when beings from other worlds openly arrive and are so different we are forced to see all earthlings a family.

      Then again, my dad always said, "you should watch what you ask for".

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 3 years ago from Tasmania

      Personally, I can't see the purpose of arguing White/Black/Brown/Pink ad infinitum. If we all put as much energy into meeting with and communicating with those who look, speak and think from different cultural backgrounds, we would find so much common ground for agreement, there would be no time or energy for feeding nonsensical phobia.

    • profile image

      DaveyBoy 3 years ago

      @ EuropeanAmericans

      1) When did I push this "albino theory"? I only post proof that "whites" are not cold adapted and are not aboriginal of Europe.

      I don't know how this happened (whiteness), who really does. But it was not because of lack of sun light or access to fish.

      ******** special note ********

      I'm really a fun loving friendly guy. I have reviewed my post and the statement - "Most modern "whites" in Europe are Germanics and Slavs. They have nothing to do with ancient anybody in Europe."

      Was not intended to attack to take away from anyone. I apologize for sounding harsh. It was reactionary because of what I know of shenanigans that go into reporting history. When I say ancient, my reference is to the early cave drawings and everything before 2,500BC.

      ********************************

      2) Of course there are some skeletal differences between regional variants of man, that's how we know for sure that the first Euros looked much like the modern San people of southern Africa. I never claimed there were no "regional variants" of mankind.

      Posting those differences don't support or refute any point me and "guest" were making. (oppps, I think you are one and the same, right?)

      Then again perhaps it shows how suggestive much of this is. You want to think you are special because of a little Neanderthal ancestry (to think we have come to this in 2014, come on, this is some funny $#@!)

      Neanderthals have more bone density than modern man, yet according to your post, Blacks have 0 Neanderthal blood and more bone density than "whites" who just so happen to have some Neanderthal DNA. Soooooooo, what gives?

      Yes, it is very amusing that you find being mostly Homo Sapien so distasteful because of ties to Africa you would rather identify with a more primitive species you perhaps have only 1% DNA from. Please make a Youtube video of this showing your Neanderthal pride, please.

      3) I'm not calling you Slavic. I'm just saying that if you consider yourself a person who is white of European descent, you are either of Germanic or Slavic descent. We know when these folk arrived in Europe. That's all, not a big deal to make.

      So you are Germanic. Well Check out the following quote from the Roman historian Cornelius Tacitus (56-118 A.D.)

      "For my own part, I agree with those who think that the tribes of Germany are free from all taint of intermarriages with foreign nations, and that they appear as a distinct, unmixed race, like none but themselves. Hence, too, the same physical peculiarities throughout so vast a population. All have fierce blue eyes, red hair, huge frames, ...."

      Today red hair is very rare in Germanic settled lands, or anywhere else, why?

      Oh yeah, brush up on your DNA migration facts. Higher learning accepts that our Euro ancestors took a route into Europe from Central Asia. Please only look at respected institutes or university sites. Leave that wacko stuff alone. Or you just don't trust "The Man"?

      Also please tell me why "The Man" is supporting the "Afrocentrics"?

      4) When have I ever used the word "Negroid" in a previous post other than this one. Stop putting words in my mouth. My post are above for all to see.

      For the record, if you had looked at the Bradshawfoundation website you would have seen that central Asians like east Asians migrated from Southern Asia. That is what academia teaches. Not your Nearanderthal/CroMagnon centric foolishness. I never suggested "whites" are "Negroid" albinos. "Whites" are indeed from the dark folk of south Asia, Dravidians (still classified as Caucasian). Many of whom can be near black in color. That is what the genetic record shows. These Dravidians once had a much wider domain going west perhaps as far as the Mediterranean. How these folk became "white" and moved into central Asia and why? I don't know. We just know that once our ancestors had arrived in central Asia a point came when they started getting their @$$ kicked by the Huns so they ran west into the Roman Empire. Thereupon being viewed as a nation of all blue eyed red heads. That is what the historical record states. European whites come from South Asians, who come from the San just like African Blacks. The San are the most ancient of Homo Sapien Sapien.

      5) In regards to phenotypical change in population in a few generations. Have you ever heard of a place called America?

      Folk there don't look like they did just 400 years ago.

      Anyway....

      A family can change "race" (you made me use this ugly word) in just 3 generations. If a "mulatto" mates "white", and then that child mates "white", for all intents and purposes it will "pass" for white in today's America. The reverse is same for Black. So how is it soooooo amazing to you that there are no hordes of "quadroons" in Sweden?

      6) Why didn't nobody "get busy" with the Neanderthals in Africa? $#@! if I know, perhaps it was just to hot for that nastiness. ;o)

      7) BTW, you are still a ding bat

    • profile image

      Black Man Talking 3 years ago

      Leretseh

      as I said you seem like an intelligent person

      But statement lumping all white people together as if they all were in agreement about the slave trade is racially prejudice.

      you say

      "I did not claim "white people found slavery too distasteful". I said they found slave-beeding too distasteful."

      Many, many white people found slavery and slave-breeding, which went hand in hand very distasteful.

      Slaves were expensive, especially for the big wealthy plantation owners.

      Slave breeding was a very important element of the profitable slave trade. The same way breeding cattle or other animals, is a major part of replenishing one's stock. The black slaves were property just like furniture or stock animals and were breed in a similar fashion. So much so, that many of the white slave owners, gleefully added their "personal" contribution" to the gene pool, to help increase and replenish their stock (slaves). The plantations were the first factories in the United States and the product was cotton.

      You say "Just because the US gov't wrote some words on a piece of paper and called it a law - the civil rights act 1964)-- and made white males integrate...doesn't make it right."

      See this is what I'm talking about. You're doing it again.

      There were many white males fighting for this very thing that you're now complaining about. You can't see that?

      Wasn't U.S. government that passed these laws, composed of white males? Doesn't this contradict your statement, that all white males were made to integrate? You didn't specify which white males or how may white males, so your statement means all white males. If you can't see that

      Then this confirms for me, that your comments, are uniformed and/or obscured, by your tendency, to see this whole situation, through racially tinted lenses and therefore, there is nothing left for us to talk about, because it's a waste of my time.

      I'm not attacking you, but your mind appears to be too obscured by racial bias. You can call it "racially dispassionate" but I think that's just your way, maybe not intentionally, of obscuring your own view of the racial bias present in your viewpoint on this subject

    • S Leretseh profile image

      S Leretseh 3 years ago

      I believe my comments are racially dispassionate --not biased.

      I did not claim "white people found slavery too distasteful". I said they found slave-beeding too distasteful.

      White Christian males in America prior to 1964 were ONE group. They certainly had many different political views, and different geographic cultures did emerge. Nevertheless, they were part of ONE male group. Societies are created by male groups (racially, linguistically and religiously similar). Females , historically, procreate for the group and raise the children. All this changed in 1964.

      All of human history, up until 1964 (the civil rights act)... shows us that societies are created by males ... and the primary purpose is to establish a social hierarchy - a social stratification system -- for the male group.

      Just because the US gov't wrote some words on a piece of paper and called it a law - the civil rights act 1964)-- and made white males integrate...doesn't make it right. Written laws should not be used to attempt to defeat, deny and/or defy what is clearly human nature at work - i.e.creating a society.

    • profile image

      Black Man Talking 3 years ago

      Leretseh

      You say " males and females had different roles to fulfill in the male-created society." that's correct! That's my point. And women couldn't step outside the roles, they were assigned to fulfill, in a White Male dominated society, therefore they were socially oppressed.

      White people found slavery too distasteful?

      I already pointed out to you the "white" people who found slavery distasteful enough to do something about it...white abolitionists and those who supported them.

      You seem like a bright person, but you lump all white people together as if they're all the same, and all share the same beliefs as you do, because they're white, when many of them don't.

      You do the same thing with your comments about "Negroes".

      You're making racial assumptions and prejudgements about all white men and black men of all classes, education, political view, etc, etc based on race.

      So your whole viewpoint is racially biased

    • S Leretseh profile image

      S Leretseh 3 years ago

      Women oppressed? Foolish nonsense. Prior to 1964, males and females had different roles to fulfill in the male-created society.

      Umm the slave trade in the US was ended - by white Christian males - in 1807 --a mere 17 years after white Christian males created the American gov't.

      Between 1807 and 1860, blacks became the slave breeders in America (white people found it way too distasteful). The extraordinarily large number of black slaveholders, the brutality in which blacks treated their salves, the willingness of blacks to breed slaves, the full and gleeful way in which blacks in Africa rounded up fellow blacks for slave-traders, is now all coming to light. I continue to be more educated on these topics almost every day

    • profile image

      Black Man Talking 3 years ago

      Leretseh

      All white males didn't agree with your assertions. That's why it was mainly white male abolitionists along with black male abolitionists, who fought for the rights of all so called Negroes, which is just Spanish for the word black, to br free and equal citizens under the law.

      White women's right were oppressed as well.

      The United States is not just a white male group home. It's for all Americans. And let's not forget the so-called Civil war. Which was fought over the issue of, how could "good" white Christians justify enslaving their follow men and women.

      The uniformed say the Civil war was fought over states rights and not slavery. But it was the states right to do what? Maintain the very profitable slave trade.

      So the United States Of America fought a war against the Confederate States of America, because the United States of America wanted to end the selling and trading of humans, like they were animals or furniture, and the Confederate States wanted to continue, to have the "right" to keep the very profitable slave trade going. After all, the whole economy the Confederates States, was built and maintained on the backs of the slaves and the the slave trade.

    • S Leretseh profile image

      S Leretseh 3 years ago

      How Asians became Asians...How Pygmies became Pygmies ... How Negroid people became black... Geeez, WhO CARES! Time to deal with the here and now.

      What needs to be discussed is...

      1) Why did ONE distinct people (American Negroes) march down America's streets in the early 60s and demand integration rights into another people's --another male group's- - established society?

      2) All of human history tells us Black males, who were claiming they were a brutally oppressed people, were supposed to demand autonomy and self-determination. They did the COMPLETE opposite! That is, they pleaded for, then demanded, integration rights INTO the very male group they were claiming were their brutal oppressor. And that this integration - into their brutal oppressor's political/economic systems -- was the source of their freedom, dignity and manhood. WOW! Naturally, no people in human history EVER did this in human history. In fact, black males never established a social stratification system in their entire history in N. America! WOW indeed.

      3) Why would ONE male group (white Christian males) surrender their status environments (political/economic arenas) to another people (black males) ...and with NO QUID PRO QUO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!? WOW INDEED!!!!!

    • profile image

      EuropeanAmericans 3 years ago

      @DaveyBoy Yeah you didn't read it whatsoever. Kind of figured you wouldn't. I laughed when you said I was Slavic considering my family isn't Slavic nor does my DNA trace back to Eastern Europe. You're a brain dead moron. Soon you're going to be saying that the modern Chinese were Slavs that mixed in with the black Chinese population and that's how they became pale.

      You claimed that the white population mixed in with the Negroid population. So why exactly are these people not dark skinned or at least brown today? Why doesn't it look like India, Turkey, or Brazil? Let me guess! More white people came and mixed in with the mulatto population and annihilated them right? Even if they did this Sweden, Norway, Finland, Ireland, and Scotland would be much more darker than they are today. Even white Americans today are darker than the Irish, Scots, Swedes, Norwegians, and Finns.

      You said:

      ........................................................................................................

      "All Modern Europeans are from Asia, they are not descent from the first European so-called Grimaldi man (who arrived directly from Africa)."

      ........................................................................................................

      The Grimaldi man doesn't descend from the Neanderthal so I don't see how he's the first European. The Neanderthals were in Europe for over 350,000 years and went extinct 50,000 years ago. Everybody out of Africa has at least 1-4% of Neanderthal DNA in them. So where did these Neanderthals come from? They claim that the Neanderthals came from Africa however nobody in Africa (minus the Turkish invaders) have Neanderthal DNA in them.

      So where did these Central Asians come from?

    • profile image

      EuropeanAmericans 3 years ago

      Race is much more than skin color. Which is why your little "albino theory" doesn't add up.

      Skull differences:

      Shape of the eye orbits, viewed from the front. Africans tend to have a more rectangular shape, East Asians more circular, Europeans tend to have an ``aviator glasses'' shape.

      Nasal sill: Europeans tend to have a pronounced angulation dividing the nasal floor from the anterior surface of the maxilla; Africans tend to lack a sharp angulation, Asians tend to be intermediate.

      Nasal bridge: Africans tend to have an arching, ``Quonset hut'' shape, Europeans tend to have high nasal bones with a peaked angle, Asians tend to have low nasal bones with a slight angulation.

      Nasal aperture: Africans tend to have wide nasal apertures, Europeans narrow.

      Subnasal prognathism: Africans tend to have maxillae that project more anteriorly (prognathic) below the nose, Europeans tend to be less projecting.

      Zygomatic form: Asians tend to have anteriorly projecting cheekbones. The border of the frontal process (lateral to the orbit) faces forward. In Europeans and Africans, these face more laterally and the zygomatic recedes more posteriorly.

      Differences in racial skulls and craniums:

      https://scontent-a-iad.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xaf1/v...

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TJH70aDctE

      Even the bone density of each race is different. Negroids have a higher bone density than both the Caucasoid and Mongoloid races. Caucasians however have a higher bone density than Mongoloids.

      Bone density by race:

      http://depts.washington.edu/bonebio/bonAbout/race....

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC186358...

    • profile image

      DaveyBoy 3 years ago

      @Guest

      Just let me state a few things for clarity.

      When I say "ancient" I'm not referring to so called "classical" Europe.

      Yes indeed the Latin and Hellenes were the product of invading "whites" from the north having arrived earlier from the Asian steppes, that mixed with the native Pelasgians and Etruscans (not white).

      If you don't take me for being "white", irrelevant. All the researchers I post are white or Asian.

      I post links made my white/Asian researchers only. Not trying to be Afrocentric, the facts are just the facts. The following link shows how it is known that the current population of Europe is unrelated to its population 4,500 years ago.

      http://www.livescience.com/28954-ancient-europeans...

      btw, yes the Kennedys are from Ireland, but I have failed to find any evidence that their family tree was there 4,500 years ago. I really don't get what your "rub" is. Have you not been taught in High School that your Teuton and Slavic ancestors were chased off the steppes by the Huns? That's conventional history.

      All Modern Europeans are from Asia, they are not descent from the first European so-called Grimaldi man (who arrived directly from Africa).

      Don't take my word for it. Check out the Bradshaw Foundation website:

      http://www.bradshawfoundation.com/journey/

      these guys work in collaboration with UNESCO, the Royal Geographic Society and the National Geographic Society, it is a privately funded, non-profit organisation based in Geneva.

      My original argument was that "whites" are simply not "cold adapted". You have not posted any scientific post to refute the post I made (from "whites" and Asians, I might add)

      I read the blog you posted. It admits that its views are not accepted by academia. It also suggest that the "out of Africa" theory is a global conspiracy by the rich and powerful, and the United Nations.

      You are a ding bat.

    • profile image

      Guest 3 years ago

      @DaveyBoy Another Negroid repeating the same old bullshit "albino theory" as if it's fact. That so called "albino theory" has been debunked over a million times. DNA and historical descriptions of the indigenous people's of Europe destroy your little "albino theory". It was nothing but an attempt so you Afrocentrist cunts could steal European history and dehumanize whites just like the majority of the Negroids on here commenting. You just said whites have nothing to do with ancient anybody in Europe yet John F Kennedy's ancestry traces all the way back to ancient Ireland and Scotland to the O' Kennedy's.

      My DNA and ancestors trace all the way back to England, Scotland, Ireland, Germany, etc. If whites came from Central Asia their DNA would trace back to Central Asia.

      Caucasoids and Negroids are not the same people and never have been. Race is real and DNA and skeletons prove this.

      Everybody out of Africa has at least 1-4% Neanderthal DNA. Why is that? I thought we were all the same? Why do Africans have no Neanderthal DNA in them yet everybody supposedly came from Africa?

      Most whites don't even have African ancestry in them whatsoever.

      The "Out of Africa" theory was debunked by a Russian scientist http://atlanteangardens.blogspot.com/2014/05/russi...

    • profile image

      John 3 years ago

      Most of this info is accurate. Except you left out somethings. But for the most part is accurate

    • profile image

      DaveyBoy 3 years ago

      Oopps, I forgot to provide link to Dr. Thadhani's work posted in the New England Journal of Medicine.

      http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1306357

    • profile image

      Rintin 3 years ago

      I disagree with this article. Race is more thank skin deep.

    • profile image

      DaveyBoy 3 years ago

      This ideal that the original "swarthy" settlers of Europe TURNED "white" because they became farmers, who ate only farm produce devoid of Vitamin D. And, the lessened solar duration and intensity in the Northern regions required a paling of the skin for faster absorption of UV radiation and production of Vitamin D is outdated and refuted.

      1) Most modern "whites" in Europe are Germanics and Slavs. They have nothing to do with ancient anybody in Europe. (illregardless, yes I used that word, of the US census usage of "original whites of Europe") They are migrants from Central Asia in the current era. Any encyclopedia will document their entry into Europe.

      2) These "whites" in Central Asia were Nomads - NOT FARMERS! Their diet was rich in Meats and FISH! Plus they had plenty of Sunshine - in Kazakhstan-south, for eight months of the year, the average UV intensity is level 8 out of a maximum 11. Thus there was no reason to turn White there!

      3) The whitest of the "whites" in Europe - the Germans, inhabited Costal WESTERN Europe and Scotland - regions rich in fish and game animals - ancient Germany and modern Germany are different areas.

      4) Nenet Reindeer herders of north siberia (native brown folk) live almost entirely off of the Reindeer (Note: Reindeer Meat does NOT contain Vitamin "D").

      5) This whole "turning white" theory was fully discredited by Ashley H. Robins study of 2009

      study can be read here:

      http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.21...

      6) In Nov. 2013, Dr. Ravi Thadhani, a professor at Massachusetts General Hospital, et al. did a study "Vitamin D–Binding Protein and Vitamin D Status of Black Americans and White Americans" also disproves the Blacks needing to get Vitamin D turning "white" theory.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      vveasey 3 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Thanks Che!

      Glad to hear from a fellow traveler on the road of truth!

    • Che Rogers profile image

      Che Rogers 3 years ago from Los Angeles, CA

      Great hub! It sounds like you have done your research. There is so much science to back up what you are saying. I've found there is a large portion of truth being hidden from the average person. It keeps us fighting over religion, race, creed, politics etc. Divide and conquer. When we realize we all come from the same parents and that we are here to work with nature and preserve creation we will step into out true destiny as caretakers of creation. Keep posting truth. I really love your hubs!

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 3 years ago from Tasmania

      Ok...if truth prevails, then you agree we are all equally human, with the same needs and feelings. And we all aught to be able to get along much better ... IF we drop the prejudice?

    • profile image

      Truth Prevails Ova ALL 3 years ago

      Gracious Goodness. I'll just read/inform myself w/o making coments. Pretty much - all has been said!!!

    • profile image

      that just what jews wrote 3 years ago

      wrong, white people and black people were the first slaves were the first slaves, and t

      and the jews were the slave owners

      then white people left and went up into the mountains

    • profile image

      Common Sense 3 years ago

      *Smacks forehead* [sigh]

      RA what are you talking about? Yes woman and man come out of a woman's womb, but did you forget who made man? God the almighty! He can do all things. Or did you not know ~_~

    • profile image

      RA 3 years ago

      You sit here and tell us that blacks were sub human yet you failed to mention the greatest civilization of those times KMT/Egypt(land of the blacks) . Then you start stating the bible and story of HAM which is all completely false to justify your claim. How deep have you research this stuff? if you started at the bible you didn't go back far enough Adam and Eve where not the first people because a man could never produce a woman from a rib. woman and man come "out a woman's womb" that's where life starts !!!

    • profile image

      black human 3 years ago

      black to white, did he go grey?

    • profile image

      TRUTH 3 years ago

      and to this guy by the name johnnycomelately you are kidding yourself and nobody else if you have a problem with any of the stuff I wrote which is false pls enlighten me with your view on what I stated which is incorrect because I have done my research for years. I see the shoe doesn't fit the other foot so you write some sheer utter garbage. all the years and dates are facts of when your race caused atrocities across the globe and it is simply irrefutable for you to argue that.

    • profile image

      TRUTH 3 years ago

      Canada is not a melting pot and that is not a logic towards stealing other races cultures as india and their swastika belongs to no white devil the (svastika) origin is found in IndiA older than 12000 years all you pathetic pink alien cave apes came and stole that symbol from us and renamed it hakenkreutz and other irrelevant bs! you all NEED TO DiE' i tell you the Hakenkreutz i9s NOT older than indias swastika because whites weren't even around when east Indians were living with aboriginals in IndiA there were adavasi and dalits and over 500 other tribes.you whites are too stupid to not know that or you are totally ignorant which I know for a fact you are ignorant but dumb as well how come you peasants stole china's gunpowder and like rewriting history with LIES! you have lost credibility and are only furthering condemnation on yourselves.and by the way learn history before you go painting the same brush stating EVERY RACE HAS DONE BAD THINGS because the truth is no! not every race has done bad things I don't recollect india ever pestering or invading anyone from Europe period now shut the f up!

    • profile image

      TRUTH 3 years ago

      whites are known for fabricating theorys of les about race and culture religion etc. whites tainted Christianity with LIES also making the lord look white when lord yeshua messiach is not named jesus Christ nor was he white. whites are not Egyptians whites are not Aryans as that is north hindu peoples culture and has nothing to do with white people in Europe as the rig veda Sanskrit mentions nothing regarding Europe as well max Mueller and Nixon got debunked on their bs Aryan invasion theory Aryan culture flourished in india since ancient times even Hinduism is older than Christianity ,Judaism,and Islamic religion.all whites did was taint Christianity with bits and pices of other cultures and claim i9t like its some official teachings when its far from the truth so anything a white devil states are all lies another word for whiteman's theorys are 'LIES'

    • profile image

      TRUTH 3 years ago

      you whites are filthy and carry cancer cells and your dna is polluted as well you get melanoma and hemophilia. whites lack vitamin d and carbon you are melanin deficient and a recessive downgrade race. telling people of color to not be racist F YOU! whites invented racism,colonialism,classism,sexism,fascism, imperialism and also jim crows law and then have the audacity to talk diplomatic when the damagae has been done . mark my words you will all DiE'.whites are the only race which has the highest divorce rates and infidelity as well the least monogamous race of dysfunctional trash who are alimony golddiggers.

    • profile image

      TRUTH 3 years ago

      fact whites are not civilized you people are hereditary to cancer and full of abnormalities and that is FACT! autism, muscular sclerosis, cystic fibrosis,turrets syndrome,cervical cancer,breast cancer,ovarian cancer.and you whites need to leave other races alone before they team up and wipe you out of existence . white race are thieves, liars, and bottomfeeding leeches who steal indoctrinate lies and misappropriate other races cultures and have no respect and show sheer mockery towards marketing other races religions such as yoga and avril lavigne doing that stupid hello kitty video mocking japs and Koreans just like white trash culturally misappropriate native Indians in calling the tem redskins and place the oppressor race as the team players how fn sad when you ever going to learn! well it wont be long until RussiA middle east ChinA IndiA North KoreA Iran Afghanistan ,Iraq blow up some white $%#@&! it will happen. just like when whites made a video mocking islam and then the next day islamist killed four white men in the middle east American embassy.non whites make 2 thirds of the worlds population which means whites are only 25% of the global population we want we can end your existence in misery ,we should I seriously would push the button to exterminate you genetic rejects as you are just a fake copy of what a real human being is . why doesn't whites have any history going back further than 500 years in America. whites are illegal since 1492 and should be deported then jailed for life back in Europe for crimes against all humanity governing north American indian land placing the near genocided race of Indians in reserves and have their women killed like over 1200 of them yet harper does nothing we know you Nazi white imperialist don't want to let go of someone elses land and I tell you the worst is yet to come and we will fight and die to take your life!we know Canada and America with illegal constitutions and charter of rights have a system designed to protect whites and preserve their self entitlements and soon it will be time when America economy crumbles and reaches hyperinflation and causes civil unrest to martial law and then a complete takeover by another invader.either way it doesn't matter to me as whites are the target and target to DiE'.Europe is weak and aint going to save you NATO will be destroyed with those 16 weak countries and you have no idea what can of worms you white filthy pigs have opened.

    • profile image

      TRUTH 3 years ago

      we seriously need a decolonization referendum so whites can be deported back to Europe and have their citizenship revoked.

    • profile image

      TRUTH 3 years ago

      personally you whites are full of bs we are not all the same race and there were not whites when colored people roamed the earth.don't even bother with your bs about everyone is responsible for themselves and shouldn't be blamed because the truth is whites came in colonys and that aint 1 or 2 people so that just proves your ignorance and secondly who is governing Canada and America it sure aint the indigenous people INDIANS so YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for your being in north America and also illegally on north American continent as you white Europeans didn't get a citizenship from natives .

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      vveasey 3 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Dac

      See the video "Why are Europeans white?" up above this comments section for the answer to your question

    • profile image

      Dac 3 years ago

      If some people evolved light skin pigmenation to help them in cold weather, why are native Alaskans not white?It's the same with the natives of Greenland or northern Canada, they have dark skin color.

    • profile image

      tink 3 years ago

      that reverse thing is incorrect.

    • profile image

      The King 3 years ago

      I would like to mention that in every ancient record, it is very well documented that the original color of human and Annuanki skin was a deep blood-brown red, similar to blood almost.

    • S Leretseh profile image

      S Leretseh 3 years ago

      All of this highly specious arguments. The human DNA is about 98.8% indistinguishable. I have never heard of DNA being used exclusively to determine race.

      Finally, WHO THE HECK CARES where a racial group came from?! It's totally irrelevant to modern civilization. In human history, all the way up to 1964, where a human “group” was distinct within a human society based on skin color, that group of people became separate from the other human group(s). This is human nature at work. Nothing nefarious. Skin color, for better or worse, has always mattered in human history. Writing words on a piece of paper, calling it a law, and trying to compel race-nullification in the human mind (civil rights laws)…is not only impossible but ridiculous. (Founding Fathers DID NOT create the legislative system for this purpose).

      Modern civilization, or industrialization & urbanization, began circa 1900. Modern civilization is based on occupational ranking of a male group (male group = racially, linguistically and religiously similar). A male group that stratifies itself by Occupational ranking ... creates marketable material items, or "wealth", which then spawns businesses and industries, which then creates a tax base suitable for gov't services. This was the process by which white Christians made America into an industrial super power. In this process, white people's standard of living also - and not surprisingly - greatly increased. Left in their wake ws the separate male group in America, the Negro people.

      Since the 14th & 15th Amendments were added to the US Constitution (by white males), Negroes in America were supposed to live separately. They were, being a distinct people, suppose to develop their own distinct culture, and provide for their people within the structure and confines of their own male group. The expectation (from white Christians) was that Negroes would become a self-reliant people over time. We know the Negro race failed here - and quite miserably. But WHY? ANSWER:: Black males are non-occupational ranking males ie. they cannot stratify their male group by occupational titles.

      Since blacks could not create occupational ranking groups, they could not generate wealth. Therefore, the plea, then the demand, for integration rights into the occupational groups of the white Christian males. (white Christian males granted the black man his integration plea in 1964). It's become crystal clear since 1964, which male groups are and are not occupational ranking. e.g. Detroit - when white people fled (from black racism), so went a sizable chunk of the tax base. No suitable tax base =Bankrupt.

      BTW, Occupational ranking is simply a social stratification system -- a basis by which male groups create status environments.

    • profile image

      giselhert 3 years ago

      Allot of the article is complete bs with some facts and truths throw in.you use imperial national euro works to attack euro imperil powers.like the true crusades compared to the nationalistic racial creations of the 1700s-1900s that are considered factional today but are anything but.good example would be the so called white slave trade of blacks by far more negro slaves where from muslims not Christians even in the Americas most slave traders where setup by moors and jews.You also claim southern euros to be mixed witch in many cases for example italy u find higher percentage of asian slav and negro in central and northern cities then you do most towns of southern italy.white is not a race neither is black.but if u want to make white a race most of the lightest of skinned peoples don't count picts celts eurasian or Huns are not they are the slaves of europe.my family is italian norman and partly Iranian we owned many slaves in america not 1 was a black african.I consider people akin by features not color my people run the world in all colors.many peseant types ask me what I am consider me not white and my family founded america and owned their ancestors.

    • profile image

      Alex 3 years ago

      I am from Europe so maybe for that reason i did not understand this article.I thing the autor need to drope his prejudices you are thinking has a "Afro-American" who have grew in a specific environment and culture with certain mentalitys wich have been fueled by ignorance from the established power in diferent periods in American History.

      It looks to me you are trying to deny ethnic diversity of the world we live in.Blacks are the people from the Sub-Saharan Africa and withes are the people you can find in some parts of the Middle East,North Africa and of course Europe.The Romans and Greeks where and still are from Europe.Nothing has change in that aspect.

      If the Homo Sapiens comes from Africa if and only from Africa is still debated also because DNA studies did not give a answer for that has you claim.But even if true that does not make us all Africans.To say we all Africans because we Humans may come from the continente Europeans have call Africa its the same to say we are all Monkeys since before we being humans we where monkeys.I can go back on my chronological tree and find my Homo Sapiens relatives living in Africa at the beginning of humanity and if i keep goping back to find i Monkey relatives also in Africa eating Bananas and claiming trees.That does not change the fact everysing evolve and today i am a Human and a European totally different ethnically from the Sub-Saharan Africans.You can see the diference between a white European and a black African by their looks and by their culture.Its call evolution and we are all still evolving.

    • profile image

      Heavyweight champ 3 years ago

      Time to revisit the Annuanuki earlier post. 200,000 year old city found in southern Africa. Sound frequency can be used to levitate objects. Chinese from Fudan university Shanghai china. Proves the first 3 Chinese dynastys were black. Scientific evidence shows the first Europeans were sub Sahara blacks, as someone posted earlier. The sumerians san gig ga the black headed ones. Were black. Black's were prominent in the middle Ages. Moors, napoleon sacked a black french general before his disastrous Russian campaign. Scientific evidence shows whites evolved in the Mediterranean baltic regions, and migrated into europe. Grimaldi the black Europeans who mixed with whites. The berbers were a mixture of blacks and whites, section 4 of the British colony of south Carolina. Clearly describes blacks as berbers, moors, blackamoors and mulattos. African in Africa were exempt. Also asiatic negros, and lascars. Rome and ancient Greece were multi racial. Herodotus and homer, and Diodorus siculus wrote. Eithiopia stretched from Egypt to Mesopotamia far south as south sudan and Somalia, india and China. Confirming books by John G Jackson. 1939 Eithiopia the world's first civilization. The german anthropologist Herbert wendt.

      1964. White irish women were breed with blacks male slaves, for the purpose of creating a stronger race for slave labor. British trading company, James town Virginia. Black moors and berbers and north africans considered other blacks as primitive. They were called negro. And yes prior to the transatlantic slave trade. Arabs enslaved White's, turks and blacks. 1000yrs before Europeans who had the help of black moors. No race is without fault. Annuanuki are depicted as brown. I can't find in sumerian text where it described them as blonde hair blue eyes. And I am looking.

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 3 years ago from Tasmania

      All I want to say, in response to your obvious anger, is that indivdual humans have been the perpetrators of every crime you have mentioned. Regardless of skin colour or ethnic background it is the individual who must take any blame and the responsibility for any deed or attitude.

      Admittedly an institution or administration can be instrumental in supporting individuals but it does no good shifting the blame onto nebulous groups.

      I take responsibility for my own actions, even when I feel part of a bigger group response.

      You, Sir, must accept full responsibility for Your actions and attitudes. Open your mind to new things. Become aware of what, in your own life, has shaped your way of seeing things. Then try meeting with someone you deeply disagree with and try to learn where he or she is coming from.

      Without you applying your energy in this way there can never be resolution for all the matters which are causing you to hate. No one else can do this for you.

      It's resting firmly on your shoulders.

    • profile image

      TRUTH 3 years ago

      nevermind the spelling errors because here the words which my fingers accidentally typed were materials,not,mutate,theory,Eurasian,indo typo to be very honest the caucas mountain region had non whites there first if you want to do a thorough research.whites have no place of origin that is officially theirs as there were others who are non white who can claim it.also whites lost in war to Vietnam,atomic bombed Nagasaki and Hiroshima leaving japs to near genocide like whites betrayed and left natives to near genocide and raped pillaged the Mexicans when whites came from the mayflower boat.china got their gunpowder stolen and yes I agree muslims had no right to do what they did but not every race is middle eastern .yet other races got invaded by whites ,all I got to say is what goes around comes around and im sure if whites were a bigger global population there wouldn't be any diplomacy in talks such as what I am reading on this forum we all know the truth about it.kkk,ira,jim crows law,segragation apartheid in south Africa,concentration camps,sexism,fascism,colonialism,imperialism,classism was all created by whites as well America was stolen by whites in 1492 and only 200 years in KA-NA-DA we don't want peace we want you out or get a war which is inevitable after all whos freedom would non whites be fighting for certainly not the white invader who is losing power after a short 500 year ruling.

    • profile image

      TRUTH 3 years ago

      first off that picture of the black kid turning white is completely fake and I don't understand why whites are trying to be diplomatic after all the global atrocities your people have caused if you really think about it you stole africas gold from their mines you stole from india their Kohinoor diamonds,huma bird artifacts ,crystal throne,golden crown and india kicked whites out in 1947 and gained their independence back when they were invaded in 1849 . nobody likes you whites and I will be honest.you expect forgiveness yet there is a white ruling class in north America? there wont be peace and every race you people pissed off are going to wipe you out. I can name a few korea forgotten war in1960 the qings dynasty in china forcing china to sign a unequal treaty,portuguese and brits invading india and the funny thing is you people had nothing no raw maetrials no natural resources no artifacts and treasury and stole from 90% of the globe and colonized it when these countries you call 3rd or 2nd world sh holes were in fact rich monarchys before whites came and im glad we do have race classifications because we all know it didn't take a few whites to colonize the world it took armies and now the world populous is 2 thirds of non whites and we know you are being depopulated by disasters so keep your fighting thoughts because we don't want to expect nothing less,you start this war WE FINISH IT AND YOU ONCE AND FOR ALL! you have no idea what can of worms and pandoras box your people opened if you were apologetic you would have left.and by the way non whites did notmutate that's all speculation just like the Aryan invasion theopry which max Mueller led in 1899 when Aryan is a hindu culture and the rig veda is the oldest history known in Sanskrit which mentions nothing of Europe and the eurasiaindo European speculation is all bs as there is no proof as well no such thing linguistic wise at all. whites are Eurocentric and ethnocentric liars. why you call yourselves Caucasian and not European yet you call Chinese Asians when asia is a continent which has more different people than Chinese . and Europe only has whites yet before whites there were non whites in Europe but you people fail to mention that.

    • profile image

      TRUTH 3 years ago

      wrong! Caucasian meant bonestructure and then in the year 1785 Christopher meiner a german philosopher changed the definition to meaning white European and excluded the south Asians as south Asians were the first Caucasians but were not white nor European.the word Caucasian should not mean racial identity .as for the lord which is Christian his name is not jesus Christ his real name is yeshua messiach and Pontius pilates and the roman soldiers killed him.the climate theory got debunked as inuit eskimos have been in cold climate for many many centuries and they still look brown to me.hue means color hu-man means person of color whites are not human.

    • profile image

      Roland Gordon 3 years ago

      Beautiful to see the TRUTH expounded. There is only one race, the human race. We need to learn to honor each other with love and mutual respect.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      vveasey 3 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Thanks Jonny

      and Happy New Year To You And All Those

      You Hold Dear!

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 3 years ago from Tasmania

      Thanks for that, I do enjoy hearing other points of view especially when they enhance my current knowledge.

      However, like yourself I suspect, it becomes burdensome when people argue from an ignorant or stubborn standpoint. I am not saying they should keep quiet; just that I will not stick around for a boring waste of time.

      Currently I am in the Mediterranian, dealing with family matters, but will travel to UK this week for further attention to my favourite subject: Azolla and Grey Water. Some would find this boring!

      Best wishes to all good chums in Hubpages and Management--- may all your decisions find favour with those who argue the toss.

      Happy New Year to all.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      vveasey 3 years ago from Detroit,MI

      jonnycomelately

      when I said this is not a debate hub. I really meant that I'm not going to debate certain people. You and others are free to debate as much as you wish. Just wanted to clarify what I meant.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      vveasey 3 years ago from Detroit,MI

      janaslavixc

      Origin Of The Word Slave

      Word History: The derivation of the word slave encapsulates a bit of European history and explains why the two words slaves and Slavs are so similar; they are, in fact, historically identical. The word slave first appears in English around 1290, spelled sclave. The spelling is based on Old French esclave from Medieval Latin sclavus, "Slav, slave," first recorded around 800. Sclavus comes from Byzantine Greek sklabos (pronounced sklävs) "Slav," which appears around 580"(The Free Dictionary.com)

    • profile image

      janaslavixc 3 years ago

      I know this is a year old but wanted to correct a common misconception about the world origin and meaning of 'Slavs' the word 'slave' is not even near the same, though I can understand why English speakers thing this. The word does not mean what you say it means, but is from the name Sclaveni (Greek: Σκλάβήνοι - Sklábēnoi, Σκλαύηνοι - Sklaúenoi, or Σκλάβίνοι - Sklabinoi, Latin: Sclaueni, Sclavi, Sclauini, or Sthlaueni - Sklaveni) was used to describe all Slavic peoples that the Byzantine Empire came into contact with. The Byzantines broadly grouped the numerous Slav tribes living in proximity with the Eastern Roman Empire into two groups: the Sklavenoi and the Antes. The derived Greek term Sklavinia(i) (Greek: Σκλαβινίαι, Latin: SCLAVINIAE) was used for the Slav settlements (area, territory) which were initially out of Byzantine control and independent.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      vveasey 3 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Yeah jonny some people just want to vent their anger

      and that's one of the reasons the discussion become useless

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 3 years ago from Tasmania

      Ok,VVeasey, I will not respond to that comment again, out of respect to your Hub. You know my attitudes and opinions from the past.... no need for argument when it gets us nowhere useful in the discussion.

      Thanks again for your Hub, it has opened up some areas of strong opinion obviously.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      vveasey 3 years ago from Detroit,MI

      I Agree CR

    • CR Rookwood profile image

      Pamela Hutson 3 years ago from Moonlight Maine

      I used to talk about race in a women's studies class I taught in the 90s and most of the the white students took it personally and got angry and defensive. It's hard to get people to look objectively at structural racism when they are benefiting from it in some tangible way. Making it personal deflects attention from the core issues and blocks change. I don't think most people who react this way are consciously trying to change the subject and block change, but that's the effect.

      Sometimes it really frustrates me. Its one of two issues in my own life that make me feel like I live on Mars and sporadically gets a roomful of perfectly nice people screaming at me and each other.

      All the best to you. This is hard stuff.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      vveasey 3 years ago from Detroit,MI

      electronician you're all of the place. I have family who are white. So what you're saying is way off the mark.

      Were you a slave owner? are you a racist? If not what are you so angry about?

      This hub is not a debate forum. I'm just sharing my views. Not trying to upset anyone. So I agree that you shouldn't keep commenting if this hub upsets you that much.

      Nice talking to you

    • electronician profile image

      Dean Walsh 3 years ago from Birmingham, England

      If you really must know jonny, three of my little brothers are half Jamaican and my girlfriend is Ugandan. But I really don't see why you have to make this about me and my personal life - or rather I do see and suspect its because you can't engage with the points I've made and so want to try to undermine my character instead. Anyway, this really is my last comment this time.

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 3 years ago from Tasmania

      Would you like to tell us about YOUR relations with people with less than white skin? Do you have any close friends in that category? Do you have a problem with racial prejudice within yourself? I certainly sounds like it to me ---- but of course I could be mistaken. You be the judge of that.

      Your anger comes from something deeper than just reading into my words what I had certainly not intended.

      You are a technical man so let's get some accurate communication.

    • electronician profile image

      Dean Walsh 3 years ago from Birmingham, England

      I think I have every right to be a little bit angry, although I will admit that this is not helpful and I have now put this aside. I am no longer angry, but you and this hub are still racist. I think that you are trying to focus on my emotional state to avoid engaging with the intellectual points which I made. You mention faults in my comments but don't name them.

      I'm not going to keep coming back and giving you more traffic and visibility for this hub, but I would like to repeat my point:

      Title of hub: How White people became white

      Main content of hub: White Europeans trading in African slaves, Hitler's genocide, the origins of the English word for slave (given as if that was the origin of slavery itself), etc.

      Inescapable conclusion: You think that being white is all about doing evil things, and this hub has nothing to do with how white people became white and everything to do with you wanting to promote your unpleasant racial prejudices.

      Goodbye.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      vveasey 3 years ago from Detroit,MI

      electronician

      I wouldn't be angry. Just as I'm not angry about

      the comments you've made, that I find fault with.

    • electronician profile image

      Dean Walsh 3 years ago from Birmingham, England

      Yes of course that is true jonnycomelately, everyone knows that and I am certainly not doubting it. But what you said was:

      "We white people still regard ourselves as superior, yet we continue to make an absolute mess of the world.

      We claim to be the more intelligent of the "races." Yes we cannot hold our social lives together."

      Speak for yourself. I'm not like that and I think it is very insulting indeed to suggest that all white people today are like the worst white people in history. I also don't think that you can blame white people specifically for making 'an absolute mess of the world'. Your comment shows a very negative, warped and highly offensive view of what white people are like which is absolutely dripping with some strange form of 'white guilt' which sees white people as being the blame for all the world's ills.

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 3 years ago from Tasmania

      electronicion, black slaves were, as I understand it, used extensively to do the more unpleasant jobs. Like in the sugar and cotton plantations. The white-skinned bosses got rich as a result.

      Ok, I concede some of your points, but I don't accept the term racist as applied to myself. I just want to feel us all uniting as humans in order to improve concord and work together in harmony.

    • electronician profile image

      Dean Walsh 3 years ago from Birmingham, England

      Yes vveasey, I do feel rather angry - how would you feel if I wrote a hub about how black people became what they are which set out to list all of the worst things black people have ever done, whilst using historical inaccuracies to exaggerate the point even further?

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      vveasey 3 years ago from Detroit,MI

      electronician

      You seem to be angry and defensive.

      I don't think, white people, who don't share the racial views or attitudes, of those who were or are racist, should feel guilty, just because they happen to be white. If they don't have racist views they shouldn't feel guilty.

      You say "This entire hub is disgusting racism." but you defend those, who were actually racist, and actually enslaved and sold people like cattle or furniture, by pointing out that slavery, existed before they engaged in it, as if that somehow makes it unfair, to see them as racist. How do you reconcile that?

    • electronician profile image

      Dean Walsh 3 years ago from Birmingham, England

      jonnycomelately - the vast majority of white people do not consider themselves to be racially superior and do not claim to be more intelligent than other races. I find your racist stereotyping and generalized insults deeply offensive.

      I also feel the need to say even more strongly what I felt when I was writing my previous comments but was not yet able to put into words. The main thrust of this hub seems to be that what makes white people white is racism, sin and the genocidal acts of Hitler. What have these things got to do with the origins of white people becoming white? This entire hub is disgusting racism.

    • electronician profile image

      Dean Walsh 3 years ago from Birmingham, England

      Yes, the point you make is valid, but I felt the need to comment because often it seems like white Europeans are blamed (and blame themselves) for the whole slave trade when in actual fact they were just joining in an already well established trade. To begin with the reason why the slaves were all black Africans was because that was who the Arabs were mostly selling, but you're right that European Christians, to whom this trade was unnatural and in contradiction with their values, did try to rationalize what was happening by making it racial rather than religious. I thought it was important to make this point because you have written a hub about the origins of the white race which seems to focus largely on the role of white people in slavery, which seems really unfair and unnecessarily derogatory to me and serves to reinforce the common notion of white guilt which is largely unjustified.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      vveasey 3 years ago from Detroit,MI

      electronician

      No problem. You're correct, most conquering countries, enslaved those they conquered, but this wasn't "racial" slavery. It was cultural slavery. We're in agreement on that.

      But I'm not talking about that form of slavery.

      I'm talking about the European slave trade, that lead to the American slave trade, and those countries were mostly Christians, and they did, try to justify, enslaving Black Africans, by "proving" they were subhuman, to help assuage the contradiction, of Christians enslaving their fellow man, instead of loving them, as Jesus whom they claim to be followers of, taught .

    • electronician profile image

      Dean Walsh 3 years ago from Birmingham, England

      Interesting hub, but I have to disagree with you that "Most of the countries participating in the slave markets were Christian". In actual fact through most of this period, especially in the early days which you were referring to, most of the participants in the slave trade were Arabic and North African Muslims. It wasn't until the founding of large plantations in the Americas and the mass transports over to there that the European run slave trade grew to be larger than the older and already well established Arabic / North African trade - in which many whites were enslaved as well as black Africans.

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 3 years ago from Tasmania

      Someone will come on here and call me a traitor...just watch. My pink skin will not pale. Ready to hug a dark one and share the truth. We are all very closely related.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      vveasey 3 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Amen Brother !mirror-gazing is ultimately is about a individuals!

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 3 years ago from Tasmania

      Slaves have been used for doing the dirtiest, hardest, most unpleasant and dangerous jobs, haven't they? Jobs which the bosses just didn't want to do themselves.

      We white people still regard ourselves as superior, yet we continue to make an absolute mess of the world.

      We claim to be the more intelligent of the "races." Yes we cannot hold our social lives together.

      Seems like a little bit of mirror-gazing might do us all some good.

    • vveasey profile image
      Author

      vveasey 3 years ago from Detroit,MI

      Mariusz thanks for your comments

      Charlemagne was crowned "Holy Roman Emperor, in 800 AD, this is the middle ages. Slav, slave, was first recorded around 800

      Origin Of The Word Slave

      Word History: The derivation of the word slave encapsulates a bit of European history and explains why the two words slaves and Slavs are so similar; they are, in fact, historically identical. The word slave first appears in English around 1290, spelled sclave. The spelling is based on Old French esclave from Medieval Latin sclavus, "Slav, slave," first recorded around 800. Sclavus comes from Byzantine Greek sklabos (pronounced sklävs) "Slav," which appears around 580"(The Free Dictionary.com)

    • profile image

      Mariusz 3 years ago

      Great article although few clarifications have to be added:

      1. Holy Roman Empire was an empire born in middle ages and finished off by Napoleon Bonaparte in XIX century. They couldn't have Slav slaves for obvious reasons.

      2. One look at Ancient Rome map of any period shows clearly that the Rome never reached Central Europe and thus ancient Romans couldn't have slaves originating from there.

      3. The most funny thing about genetic origins of nations is that western Europeans are closely related to Chadic people in Sub-Saharan Africa, and Central European Slavic nations are related to people in Northern India and Southern Asia. So much of racial theory.

    • profile image

      Gary 3 years ago

      If there were different races/species of humans we wouldn't be able to produce offspring together which as we all know, we can.

      As in dachshunds and St. Bernards.? They may not be of different species , but no one can dispute their characteristic differences.