On Sat, 31 May 2008 06:34:42 +0800, RichAsianKid wrote
(in article
<4a39db3c-6858-48de-9955-2f5b7393d87c@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>):
> On May 29, 11:58 am, Jim Walsh <jimNOwalsSPA...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> On Thu, 29 May 2008 14:33:17 +0800,RichAsianKidwrote
>> (in article
>> <775d05a9-284a-482d-b9cc-eba88ce27...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>):
>>
>>> thus I do love your examples. There are many more....Sunnis and
****ites,
>>> Chinese and Malays, Sinhalese and Tamils, etc etc.
>>
>> All refuting your claim: "Perhaps that's why blacks are always seen as
the
>> 'other' in virtually every society."
>>
>> Are you now admitting that claim is false?
>>
>> --
>
> No, once again, a non-sequitur. You will have to show us how a 'non-
> black' outgroup would then translate into blacks not being another
> outgroup in that society.
?? Norwegians consider Swedes the other. They do NOT consider "blacks' the
other. And so on and so forth. My examples are factual disproof of your
claim.
> And besides, I said "virtually" every
> society, and exceptions therefore do not prove the rule.
Name a society in which blacks are the other. They certainly are not THE
other in China, in Japan, in America.
In China, depending on which part you live in, non-Han Chinese are the
other
(i.e., Tibetans).
In Japan, the Koreans and the Ainu are THE others.
In America, illegal immigrants are the primary "other".
--
Love, Jim
(I often delete parts of the previous post and I often remove excessive
crossposts.)
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com
The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
=----
|
