UCLA student rants about Asians

[L.A.P.]

xIXlBat62eU

[Omsk]

Just look at that girl...:( No need to argue about this,this 'good American girl' can talk as much as she wants.
These 'AZN PPL' are better than the lot of them.

[Decolonize The Left]

I stopped listening when she said "I don't mean this offensively."

- August

[bailey_187]

I stopped listening when she said "I don't mean this offensively."

- August

lol, always a sign that someone is about to say somthing racist. Other favourites are "im not racist but..." or "i have black/asian friends but..."

[brigadista]

how did she get in, shes so ignorant?? seems like UCLA really do take anyone judging from her stupidity

[Ocean Seal]

Honestly stupid racists like her don't even deserve the attention. I can't watch the whole thing. I don't even understand why TYT would report on this, it just encourages other eCelebrities of the same kind. This crap just needs to be ignored so that people realize that if they want attention they just can't make a crappy video like this and instantly get it. Next thing you know there are going to be several copycat videos getting the same amount of attention.

[The Red Next Door]

I see crackers like her do it all the time in the library.

[Le Socialiste]

If you're going to come to UCLA, use American manners...


...And what might those be? Who let this girl into UCLA? :blink:

[psgchisolm]

I see crackers like her do it all the time in the library.wtf?

[The Red Next Door]

wtf?

Get over it. it name of a type of food for god sake.

[9]

xIXlBat62eU

behold, the prototypical american poli sci major.

[psgchisolm]

Get over it. it name of a type of food for god sake.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cracker_(pejorative)

I see crackers like her do it all the time in the library.

There white people and then their is white devils and crackers, this politician is a cracker that need to be put in a barrel and throw in to a volcano. hence the word melting cracker barrel.
Hmm


racist.


sign the anti racism against muslim at answers la .net
Congratulations you are the most inconsistent troll on revleft.

[The Red Next Door]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cracker_(pejorative)


Hmm




Congratulations you are the most inconsistent troll on revleft.


Okay I say Honky instead.

[9]

Congratulations you are the most inconsistent troll on revleft.

If you know he's a troll - which he obviously is - why do you feed him?

[southernmissfan]

If you know he's a troll - which he obviously is - why do you feed him?

I have already learned the hard way. I suspect the rest of the forum will soon enough...

[The Red Next Door]

I am not trolling, is it okay i used honky.

[Nolan]

behold, the prototypical american poli sci major.

They must be a lot like business majors.

[Nolan]

I am not trolling, is it okay i used honky.

You think it should be permissible to flippantly use racist terms?

[The Red Next Door]

You think it should be permissible to flippantly use racist terms?

honky is not racist

[Amphictyonis]

The hair, the shirt, the chair and the tan..... I'm not even pressing play :)

[9]

They must be a lot like business majors.

Yeah, I missed that the first time around. :closedeyes:

the point still stands, tho.

[Catmatic Leftist]

The most sick thing is that the people on Stormfront are apologizing for her. Not that it isn't to be expected, though.

[L.A.P.]

behold, the prototypical american poli sci major.

That really sucks on my part, I plan on getting my master's degree in political science.

[psgchisolm]

If you know he's a troll - which he obviously is - why do you feed him?
You know, I was thinking of whether or not I should have said Don't feed the troll instead of my original post. Maybe I'm the troll. I'm trolling you by not trolling the troll so you feed me instead.

[MarxSchmarx]

I changed the title of this thread from "UCLA students" to "UCLA student". This is one person's diatrabe.

I also should add that this woman has apologized profusely for her carelessness. She very likely didn't realize how her statements would be taken. What she said is offensive and hurtful. Still, the power of the internet is something that many people, especially young people, don't entirely grasp. When they aren't celebrities or public figures, frankly my approach to these things in general is "let he who has not sinned...". She is going to have to deal with the fallout of this for a very long time, and that is a mighty heavy burden to put on somebody who said something which, frankly, I hear variants of in many daily interactions.

I don't defend what she said. It is disgusting.

But at the same time, I think it is easy to ridicule her and denounce her. But I think we need to really hate the sin and not the sinner. I am sorry for her because her name is going to have a red flag (you know, not in the good sense...) when she goes on to the next stage in her life. So many people wil be unwilling to forgive her for a stupid mistake she made as a young person. This is a sad situation all around.

[Amphictyonis]

Without watching the video I'm willing to bet she says "like" over 500 times.

[Princess Luna]

I changed the title of this thread from "UCLA students" to "UCLA student". This is one person's diatrabe.

I also should add that this woman has apologized profusely for her carelessness. She very likely didn't realize how her statements would be taken. What she said is offensive and hurtful. Still, the power of the internet is something that many people, especially young people, don't entirely grasp. When they aren't celebrities or public figures, frankly my approach to these things in general is "let he who has not sinned...". She is going to have to deal with the fallout of this for a very long time, and that is a mighty heavy burden to put on somebody who said something which, frankly, I hear variants of in many daily interactions.

I don't defend what she said. It is disgusting.

But at the same time, I think it is easy to ridicule her and denounce her. But I think we need to really hate the sin and not the sinner. I am sorry for her because her name is going to have a red flag (you know, not in the good sense...) when she goes on to the next stage in her life. So many people wil be unwilling to forgive her for a stupid mistake she made as a young person. This is a sad situation all around.
No a stupid mistake is when you are in a restaurant with your friend and you say something racist to him/her and someone accidently catches it on a cell phone camera and it ends up all over the internet, putting a racist rant on Youtube knowing full well that millions of people will be able to see it is not a "mistake" , she dug her own hole so let her sit in it.

[L.A.P.]

I changed the title of this thread from "UCLA students" to "UCLA student". This is one person's diatrabe.


Thank you for fixing the misspelling.

[The Red Next Door]

You think it should be permissible to flippantly use racist terms?

You got the less racist sounding name majority shouldn't be PC.

crackers- republicans, nazi, liberals, silly white social chauvs etc.

There white people and there crackers like this honky.

[Rêve Rouge]

Hah! I remember watching this video. Ignorance can be quite entertaining. But seriously, what was she thinking? According to some statistics, Asians make up about 32% of the student population in UCLA. She must be living a hard life now over there around campus.

[Invader Zim]

Hah! I remember watching this video. Ignorance can be quite entertaining. But seriously, what was she thinking? According to some statistics, Asians make up about 32% of the student population in UCLA. She must be living a hard life now over there around campus.

She has withdrawn from the university.

I find myself in the very odd position of actually feeling a little sorry for her, she has likely irreperably damaged herself and her future through these crass, callous racist comments. Don't get me wrong, I don't defend her comments which were dispicable. However, regarless of whether she eventually changes her repugnant views she will always be that racist girl on youtube. She has branded herself for life. I find that a little sad.

[Robocommie]

The most sick thing is that the people on Stormfront are apologizing for her. Not that it isn't to be expected, though.

Stormfronters are probably literally masterbating over their white nationalist goddess as we speak.

It's hilarious; she even said HORDES of Asian people. HORDES. It's like she's a Waffen SS commander trying to hold back the Eastern devils from the sacred borders of the Reich. :laugh:

Edit: Or the sacred borders of Orange County, I guess.

[Agent Ducky]

Sacred borders of Orange county.... Oh gawd. Why must I live here?

This chick is gonna contribute to everyone's stereotype of Californians. FFFUUUU-.

Also, she singlehandedly just crushed all my aspirations of maybe doing political science in college.

[Robocommie]

Sacred borders of Orange county.... Oh gawd. Why must I live here?

This chick is gonna contribute to everyone's stereotype of Californians. FFFUUUU-.

Also, she singlehandedly just crushed all my aspirations of maybe doing political science in college.

Political science isn't bad to major in if you're really interested in it, just don't be surprised if you run into these folks now and then.

[gorillafuck]

"All of a sudden when I'm about to reach an epiphany..."

oh I bet.

[Invader Zim]

Did anybody see Jimmy Wong's musical responce?

[Catmatic Leftist]

Did anybody see Jimmy Wong's musical responce?

Yes, I LOL'ed out loud. I'm contemplating downloading it onto my iPod.

[jbaez]

This whole thing got a lot of attention for being what it is, I mean there are tons of racist videos on YouTube and the UC's have gotten their fair share of backlash for race-related incidents as of late. Anyone hear about one UCI cafeteria official's idea of dinner for Martin Luther King Jr. day? (fried chicken and waffles) or the noose that someone decided to hang in UCSD's library last year?

That being said, I did watch the video and what the girl says is really ignorant, to the point where I kind of felt stupid myself after a few minutes and stopped watching the video altogether. The Jimmy Wong music video response is funny though, and quite catchy.

[PhoenixAsh]

yeah...this is getting silly.

Everybody is falling over each other to denounce this girl.,...while in the meantime politicians get elected who villify women, who want to shoot immigrants as pigs and who say much worse and much more dangerous things than this girl...who is guilty of a biggotted and racist....but mostly ignorant rant. And I suspect this is foremost caused by the fact that she is brought up in a society which actually actively supports politicians and social constructs which endorse these kind of ideas.

So...we had our fun, we did what had to be done.....now move on and let her have a chance to alter her ideas.

[gorillafuck]

I am not trolling, is it okay i used honky.pRNke1atrpQ

[Pretty Flaco]

how did she get in, shes so ignorant?? seems like UCLA really do take anyone judging from her stupidity

money money money

[Metacomet]

I prefer the parody.

PkuwYX2hpZs

[Agent Ducky]

People are making a big deal about this.. She's not malicious, she's just stupid. Stupid people gonna be stupid.

[PhoenixAsh]

People are making a big deal about this.. She's not malicious, she's just stupid. Stupid people gonna be stupid.

hmm...no not malicious. But offensive and hurtful.

But I completeley agree..the amount of attention this is gaining makes it look like we are dealing with the reincarnation of Hitler....its completely over the top...way off the charts.

Though I think its incredibly important to speak out against racism....I wonder where the mass movement is against the Teaparty officials for example. THis stupid and ignorant girl got two million views in one or two weeks.....while remarks by elected government officials to shoot immigrants, protesters or what ever.....do NOT generate such a large, direct and massive attack against the persons involved.

It makes me wonder if people have lost their ability to distinguish between meaningless racism uttered by a stupid ignorant individual who really does not matter at all.....and dangerous racism, uttered by someone with real power and influence and comming from a direct political agenda.

[Queercommie Girl]

I think while this case is obviously very important, this kind of thing is certainly not the worst kind of racism Asians/East Asians can face in the US or in the West in general. Vincent Chin would be a much more vicious racist case. I know it happened a while ago, but I'm pretty sure it could happen again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vincent_Chin

Vincent Jen Chin[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vincent_Chin#cite_note-chin83-0) (simplified Chinese (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simplified_Chinese_characters): 陈 (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E9%99%88)果 (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E6%9E%9C)仁 (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E4%BB%81); traditional Chinese (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_Chinese_characters): 陳 (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E9%99%B3)果 (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E6%9E%9C)仁 (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E4%BB%81); 1955 – June 23, 1982) was a Chinese American (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_American) beaten to death in June 1982 in the United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States), in the Detroit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detroit), Michigan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michigan) enclave of Highland Park (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highland_Park,_Michigan) by Chrysler (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler) plant superintendent Ronald Ebens (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Ebens), with the help of his stepson, Michael Nitz. The murder generated public outrage over the lenient sentencing the two men originally received in a plea bargain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plea_bargain), as the attack, which included blows to the head from a baseball bat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baseball_bat), possessed many attributes consistent with hate crimes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_crime). Many of the layoffs in Detroit's auto industry, including Nitz's in 1979, had been due to the increasing market share of Japanese automakers, leading to allegations that Chinese American Vincent Chin received racially charged comments before his death.[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vincent_Chin#cite_note-wei-1) The case became a rallying point for the Asian American (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_American) community, and Ebens and Nitz were put on trial for violating Chin's civil rights (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_crime_laws_in_the_United_States#Federal_law). Because the subsequent Federal prosecution was a result of public pressure from a coalition of many Asian ethnic organizations, Vincent Chin's murder is often considered the beginning of a pan-ethnic Asian American movement.[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vincent_Chin#cite_note-yip-2)

Again, class analysis is useful here. Most Asians in a privileged university like UCLA don't come from poor working class backgrounds, but relatively comfortable "middle class" ones. I don't have anything against "middle class students", since personally I came from such a background myself. But middle class students are simply not going to be the section of any race or ethnic group that would face the most amount of racism.

The Asians who face the most racism are not middle class students, but modern-day coolies - cheap immigrant labourers from poorer Asian countries like China or Vietnam. In the UK, such immigrant workers from China generally don't speak very good English, are relatively uneducated, and work very long hours in poor conditions without any trade union representation. And these are the sections of Asians who would face the greatest amount of problems as the UK becomes more and more anti-immigrant.

[Jose Gracchus]

http://whiskeys-place.blogspot.com/2011/03/demographics-in-action-alexandra.html

I found this blog trying to find some of the news about this obnoxious, over-privileged, racist girl. I really can't believe its serious. Somehow "guys who don't get laid often enough" or "white beta males" are being attacked by a conspiracy of white women who prefer Charlie Sheens, the Stimulus Package from Obama, NOW, diversity, all non-white races, and "alpha males". Seriously, just take a gander at some of the posts for unintentional hilarity. I really thought this was a joke at first.

[Agent Ducky]

Yeah, she's being offensive, hurtful. But she shouldn't get attention for this. All I'm saying.

[psgchisolm]

http://whiskeys-place.blogspot.com/2011/03/demographics-in-action-alexandra.html

I found this blog trying to find some of the news about this obnoxious, over-privileged, racist girl. I really can't believe its serious.
Why bring attention to this POS? All you're doing is giving him more views and more attention.


Somehow "guys who don't get laid often enough" or "white beta males" are being attacked by a conspiracy of white women who prefer Charlie Sheens, the Stimulus Package from Obama, NOW, diversity, all non-white races, and "alpha males".
This has fuck all to do with the topic. All you did was make me waste bandwidth and lower my IQ by just looking at it. He has the same shit all other guys say(nice guys ect).


Seriously, just take a gander at some of the posts for unintentional hilarity. I really thought this was a joke at first.
Seriously DON'T take a gander at this Pile of Shit. It is a joke, so why would you post this? What point does this make? Bringing it here won't change his mind. All that does is give him more views and spreads his message more. You could have just as easily closed it and kept your outrage to yourself. Now he gets a little more famous.

[dernier combat]

There white people and there crackers like this honky.
You're at about the same level of asshole as people who try hopelessly to defend their racism by making a distinction between "black people" and "n****rs".

Just as "n****r" is intended to be applied to all black people, "cracker" is intended to be applied to all white people.

[psgchisolm]

You're at about the same level of asshole as people who try hopelessly to defend their racism by making a distinction between "black people" and "n****rs".

Just as "n****r" is intended to be applied to all black people, "cracker" is intended to be applied to all white people.
calm down mate he's already suspended.:thumbup1:

[dernier combat]

calm down mate he's already suspended.:thumbup1:
I just wanted to leave him a friendly message for when the duration of said suspension is over.

[Tim Finnegan]

Beat poet Beau Sia cuts past the bullshit:

F84NWh8Uzok

[Libertatis et Rationis]

I can't believe people like this even exist....

[Amphictyonis]

"even if you're not Asian you shouldnt be on your cell phone in the library"

May this video ruin future employment opportunities for her. That's harsh of me to say but....I can't believe this is the state of mind so many people have- it would be funnier if she was a sort of anomaly but this was the norm back in my college years in California (early 2000's). Not sure if things have changed?

"Asian hordes". Pfft. Can someone find her facebook or myspace? I think we should leave a few thousand messages on her page- that would be fun. What's her youtube account name?

[Nolan]

Alexandra Wallace. That's her name.

[Jimmie Higgins]

hmm...no not malicious. But offensive and hurtful.

But I completeley agree..the amount of attention this is gaining makes it look like we are dealing with the reincarnation of Hitler....its completely over the top...way off the charts.

Though I think its incredibly important to speak out against racism....I wonder where the mass movement is against the Teaparty officials for example. THis stupid and ignorant girl got two million views in one or two weeks.....while remarks by elected government officials to shoot immigrants, protesters or what ever.....do NOT generate such a large, direct and massive attack against the persons involved.

It makes me wonder if people have lost their ability to distinguish between meaningless racism uttered by a stupid ignorant individual who really does not matter at all.....and dangerous racism, uttered by someone with real power and influence and comming from a direct political agenda.

I think part of the attention probably comes because it was specifically anti-Asian racism. There is very little high-profile activism around anti-east Asian bigotry in the US even though it is pretty common and almost acceptable in the mainstream. There is a fairly big working-class Korean community in Los Angeles and a lot of racism along the lines of what this student was saying... "they're loud, can't drive, Asian immigrants won't integrate, etc".

I think this video was public vindication of a form of racism in the US that is generally ignored or taken lightly. I think for people who've experienced that racism, this video is an opportunity to say, "see I'm not crazy there is racism out there" and that's the reason for all the attention.

[Tim Finnegan]

Can someone find her facebook or myspace? I think we should leave a few thousand messages on her page- that would be fun.
It would mostly be pointless.

[Nolan]

It would mostly be pointless.

Why are you talking to a banned person?

And it would be funny.

[Tim Finnegan]

Why are you talking to a banned person?
Was he banned when I posted that? :confused: I must not be paying attention.


And it would be funny.Why? There's plenty of casual racists in the world. No need to torment one in particular just because she stupidly outed herself.

[Queercommie Girl]

I think part of the attention probably comes because it was specifically anti-Asian racism. There is very little high-profile activism around anti-east Asian bigotry in the US even though it is pretty common and almost acceptable in the mainstream. There is a fairly big working-class Korean community in Los Angeles and a lot of racism along the lines of what this student was saying... "they're loud, can't drive, Asian immigrants won't integrate, etc".

I think this video was public vindication of a form of racism in the US that is generally ignored or taken lightly. I think for people who've experienced that racism, this video is an opportunity to say, "see I'm not crazy there is racism out there" and that's the reason for all the attention.

Of course prejudices against all non-white races are still quite common in the West and especially in English-speaking countries like the US, but what evidence do you have that anti-East Asian racism is "more acceptable" in mainstream American culture than racism against other minorities?

[L.A.P.]

Of course prejudices against all non-white races are still quite common in the West and especially in English-speaking countries like the US, but what evidence do you have that anti-East Asian racism is "more acceptable" in mainstream American culture than racism against other minorities?

It may not be hard evidence, but I do kind of feel like squinting your eyes and playing a gong sarcastically gets less moral outrage than your average demonstration of stereotypes and insult of racial face structure.

[Queercommie Girl]

It may not be hard evidence, but I do kind of feel like squinting your eyes and playing a gong sarcastically gets less moral outrage than your average demonstration of stereotypes and insult of racial face structure.

But does it really though? Can you prove this?

Also, apart from "slant-eyed" etc which are related to East Asians, what other "racial face structure" gets picked on in the West?

[L.A.P.]

Also, apart from "slant-eyed" etc which are related to East Asians, what other "racial face structure" gets picked on in the West?

None.

[Tim Finnegan]

Also, apart from "slant-eyed" etc which are related to East Asians, what other "racial face structure" gets picked on in the West?
It's not so much that there's no other facial characteristics that are associated with non-white people- aquiline noses and South and West Asians, for example- but rather that there no other facial characteristics associated exclusively with a particular racial category. (Which is in itself a betrayal of biological ignorance, given that the epicanthic fold can occur in people of all racial backgrounds, and is the norm in some Indigenous American, Pacific Islander and Sub-Saharan African ethnic groups.)

[Jimmie Higgins]

Of course prejudices against all non-white races are still quite common in the West and especially in English-speaking countries like the US, but what evidence do you have that anti-East Asian racism is "more acceptable" in mainstream American culture than racism against other minorities?I guess anti-arab followed by anti-latino racism are the most acceptable in the mainstream because there are active rascist movements trying to make targeting these groups not only acceptable in the mainstream -- but US policy!

So I don't know if "acceptable" was the right way to put it - maybe more ignored or invisible. It's common, people don't seem to get called on it as often and there isn't much of attention drawn to it - probably because there aren't really many grassroots organizations that challenge it since the 1970s.

There is also the common idea that asian-americans don't suffer from "bad stereotypes" like other groups in the US: in pop-culture there is the ideas that east-Asians are only stereotyped as being studious and math-experts. That stereotype exists, but so do many others (often depending on class and varying depending on what region in the US) essentially just as toxic as those against Arabs or Latinos in the US.

This just an opinion based on observation; I don't have any hard evidence, just anecdotal ones from living in California.

[Queercommie Girl]

It's not so much that there's no other facial characteristics that are associated with non-white people- aquiline noses and South and West Asians, for example- but rather that there no other facial characteristics associated exclusively with a particular racial category. (Which is in itself a betrayal of biological ignorance, given that the epicanthic fold can occur in people of all racial backgrounds, and is the norm in some Indigenous American, Pacific Islander and Sub-Saharan African ethnic groups.)

It's also present in some degrees in some Russians and East Europeans given their Mongol admixture to some extent.

[El Chuncho]

''Hordes of Asian people...''

Also Asian people? Japanese? Indian? Middle-Eastern? Russian? Chinese? Thai? :rolleyes:

[El Chuncho]

It's also present in some degrees in some Russians and East Europeans given their Mongol admixture to some extent.

Actually it is not even admixture half the time. It is present in Scandinavians too. :)

[Queercommie Girl]

Actually it is not even admixture half the time. It is present in Scandinavians too. :)

It's present in Uralic-speaking peoples like the Finns, who are related to the Asiatic Altaic-speaking peoples like Mongols and Manchus.

[El Chuncho]

It's present in Uralic-speaking peoples like the Finns, who are related to the Asiatic Altaic-speaking peoples like Mongols and Manchus.

Ah, someone else who knows that. Yes, you are right, and people related to Uralic people probably make up the substratum of ''Nordic'' Scandinavians. :) Both Uralic and Altaic people developed in more or less the same area (the Altaic and Uralic mountains).

A hypocrisy is that many Uralic people are considered ''white'' due to often being blond, whereas most Altaic people are considered ''yellow''. It shows the inadequacies of racial categories.

[Queercommie Girl]

Ah, someone else who knows that. Yes, you are right, and people related to Uralic people probably make up the substratum of ''Nordic'' Scandinavians. :) Both Uralic and Altaic people developed in more or less the same area (the Altaic and Uralic mountains).

A hypocrisy is that many Uralic people are considered ''white'' due to often being blond, whereas most Altaic people are considered ''yellow''. It shows the inadequacies of racial categories.

The Altai and the Ural mountains are not in the same place. (See image)

8157

[El Chuncho]

The Altai and the Ural mountains are not in the same place. (See image)

8157

Not quite, but their region is small enough for close development. Their development occurred in the regions between the two mountain ranges rather in the mountain ranges themselves. ;)

[Dr Mindbender]

Also, apart from "slant-eyed" etc which are related to East Asians, what other "racial face structure" gets picked on in the West?

To me the obvious one that springs to mind is how 'big' or 'hooked' noses became synonomous with anti-semitism.

A nazi illustration. The caption reads “The Jewish nose is bent. It looks like the number six...”
http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/images/giftpilz/scan3.jpg

[El Chuncho]

To me the obvious one that springs to mind is how big noses became synonomous with anti-semitism.

A nazi illustration
http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/images/giftpilz/scan3.jpg

Many Americans portrayed Italians with sloped heads (no basis in fact).

[Queercommie Girl]

Not quite, but their region is small enough for close development. Their development occurred in the regions between the two mountain ranges rather in the mountain ranges themselves. ;)

Actually it is generally believed that the early Altaic peoples originated from the lands to the east of the Altai mountains (i.e. modern-day Mongolia) and not from the lands to the west of the Altai mountains.

Altaic and Uralic peoples are definitely related, but not as closely as you seem to be suggesting, which is why they are not in the same language family.

[GallowsBird]

Incidently, most groups are depicted with sloped heads by racists! They aren't very bright and thus not very imaginative.

[GallowsBird]

Actually it is generally believed that the early Altaic peoples originated from the lands to the east of the Altai mountains (i.e. modern-day Mongolia) and not from the lands to the west of the Altai mountains.

To be fair we don't know where the urheimat of the Altaic languages is from but many do think it was around Eastern Siberia and Manchuria with them entering Mongolia around 300BC. However they are notoriously hard to find an urheimat for and some have suggested different sides of the range... albeit almost always in or near the West Siberian Glacial Lake.


Altaic and Uralic peoples are definitely related, but not as closely as you seem to be suggesting, which is why they are not in the same language family.Unless you prescribe to the view they are part of a Ural-Altaic family as some have... however Greenberg and others class them as Eurasiatic (along with Indo-European).

I do find many similarities between Scandinavians, Altaic, Uralic and Slavic groups myself I must say.

[Queercommie Girl]

Unless you prescribe to the view they are part of a Ural-Altaic family as some have... however Greenberg and others class them as Eurasiatic (along with Indo-European).

I do find many similarities between Scandinavians, Altaic, Uralic and Slavic groups myself I must say.


From a strict scientific perspective, any hypothetical linguistic grouping beyond the level of the "language family" is really completely speculative. There is no real conclusive evidence for the "Eurasiatic" language supra-family at all. This hypothesis is somewhat problematic since all Indo-European groups have always been completely Caucasoid, while Altaic peoples are largely Northern Mongolid like the Sino-Tibetans. Genetically one would assume a closer relationship between the Altaic and Sino-Tibetan peoples, and it's irrational to think that linguistic lineages have no correlation with ethnic ancestry.

[Queercommie Girl]

To be fair we don't know where the urheimat of the Altaic languages is from but many do think it was around Eastern Siberia and Manchuria with them entering Mongolia around 300BC. However they are notoriously hard to find an urheimat for and some have suggested different sides of the range... albeit almost always in or near the West Siberian Glacial Lake.


To some extent these theories are all speculative. But generally speaking Altaic peoples are believed to have originated from the east of the Altai mountains, Sino-Tibetan peoples originated from the Kunlun mountains region (to the north of modern-day Tibet), Uralic peoples originated from the Ural mountains, and Indo-Europeans from the Caspian Sea region.

[El Chuncho]

This hypothesis is somewhat problematic since all Indo-European groups have always been completely Caucasoid, while Altaic peoples are largely Northern Mongolid like the Sino-Tibetans. Genetically one would assume a closer relationship between the Altaic and Sino-Tibetan peoples, and it's irrational to think that linguistic lineages have no correlation with ethnic ancestry.

It depends on how you view ethnic groups, because Ethiopians are Afro-Asiatic but look black. Some have suggested that traditional ''colours'' or ''skull types'' are fluid, believing more in clines than absolutes, like in genetics as a whole.

[GallowsBird]

From a strict scientific perspective, any hypothetical linguistic grouping beyond the level of the "language family" is really completely speculative. There is no real conclusive evidence for the "Eurasiatic" language supra-family at all.

No not at this time.



This hypothesis is somewhat problematic since all Indo-European groups have always been completely Caucasoid, while Altaic peoples are largely Northern Mongolid like the Sino-Tibetans.
Genetically one would assume a closer relationship between the Altaic and Sino-Tibetan peoples, and it's irrational to think that linguistic lineages have no correlation with ethnic ancestry.But that is due more to enviromental factors than gentic relatedness. As much as I hate genetics in general the evidence in this regard is that there is more genetic relationships between Altaic groups and Western Eurasian groups (Semites, Indo-Europeans, Dravids). I should look for the paper I read a few months back... that is there was found to be a bigger gap (albeit not that big) between Northern Mongoloid groups and Southern Mogoloid groups.
Even so I think Tibetans and Chinese look a lot different to Altaic peoples (other than obvious features like the prevalence epicanthal folds) in the same way that "caucasoid" groups have a variety of looks. Phenotype and genotype don't always corrospond. Look at Afro-Asiatic speakers and how diverse they look as well.

[Queercommie Girl]

Locations of origin for the various linguistic groups of Eurasia:

8161

[GallowsBird]

To some extent these theories are all speculative. But generally speaking Altaic peoples are believed to have originated from the east of the Altai mountains, Sino-Tibetan peoples originated from the Kunlun mountains region (to the north of modern-day Tibet), Uralic peoples originated from the Ural mountains, and Indo-Europeans from the Caspian Sea region.


Yes exactly. Some are less speculative though such as the Indo-European Urheimat (though there are some proposals for it being further east than the more accepted one and the vaguely ridiculous idea of it being from India). The Uralic one is very awkward and even less certain than the Altaic Urheimat due to difference in opinion on the proto-stages of the language. Some have even claimed its urheimat was the Baltic and some have claimed it represents a joining of languages spoken from Central Europe to the Urals (I don't believe that one either...)

[GallowsBird]

8161

I've seen this map before... not sure where though. Thanks for posting it anyway.

[Queercommie Girl]

But that is due more to enviromental factors than gentic relatedness.


But physical differences due to "environmental factors" are determined biochemically by genes, and physical changes due to environment can't happen very fast at all, nor are the Earth's various environments really so different from each other to cause such rapid changes.



As much as I hate genetics in general the evidence in this regard is that there is more genetic relationships between Altaic groups and Western Eurasian groups (Semites, Indo-Europeans, Dravids). I should look for the paper I read a few months back... that is there was found to be a bigger gap (albeit not that big) between Northern Mongoloid groups and Southern Mogoloid groups.
Genetically I don't think that's what it shows, but it depends on how you divide "East Eurasian" and "West Eurasian".

Generally speaking East Eurasians are Mongolid while West Eurasians are Caucasoid. The environment of East Eurasia and West Eurasia aren't so different from each other, so the physical differences must be due to differences in ancestry rather than direct environmental adaptations in the "short-term".



Even so I think Tibetans and Chinese look a lot different to Altaic peoples (other than obvious features like the prevalence epicanthal folds) in the same way that "caucasoid" groups have a variety of looks.
Actually Mongolians and Han people from Northern China generally don't look so different at all.



Phenotype and genotype don't always corrospond. Look at Afro-Asiatic speakers and how diverse they look as well.I think you have confused linguistic affinity with genotype. What you should have said is "lingustic affinity and genotype don't always correspond". Sometimes people speak certain languages due to socio-economic reasons, not really because the said language is really their ancestral tongue. For instance, most people in Hong Kong and Singapore speak very fluent English due to the legacy of the British Empire, even though ethnic Chinese people in these areas are not related ancestrally to Germanic peoples.

Many Black groups speak Afro-Asiatic languages due to the fact that they were originally conquered by the Afro-Asiatic-speaking Ancient Egyptians, just like how the original Austro-Asiatic Southern Mongolid speakers in South China (the Yue tribes) became Sino-Tibetan speakers due to Han Chinese conquest and settlement of the region from the Zhou and Han Dynasties onwards.

[GallowsBird]

But physical differences due to "environmental factors" are determined biochemically by genes, and physical changes due to environment can't happen very fast at all, nor are the Earth's various environments really so different from each other to cause such rapid changes.

Genetically I don't think that's what it shows, but it depends on how you divide "East Eurasian" and "West Eurasian".

Generally speaking East Eurasians are Mongolid while West Eurasians are Caucasoid. The environment of East Eurasia and West Eurasia aren't so different from each other, so the physical differences must be due to differences in ancestry rather than direct environmental adaptations in the "short-term".

Yes but most West Eurasian groups developed in different climates to East Eurasians... for instance Caucasians where around the middle east probably and further south and in flatter, warmer and less arid terrain than most East Eurasian groups. Also we aren't talking short term really in this case we are talking many thousands of years.


Actually Mongolians and Han people from Northern China generally don't look so different at all.[QUOTE]

Maybe not (though the few that I saw did look somewhat different) but most Turkic and Tungusic speakers look very different (and despite what some try to claim it there is little evidence for greater mixing with "Caucasoid" groups than various other Central and East groups). Mongolians and far Northern Han have mixed with each other quite a lot as the Chinese having complex educational systems Sinicised a lot of nearby ethnic groups.
Saying that Chinese and Tibetans generally look different as well and they are linguistically related.

[QUOTE]I think you have confused linguistic affinity with genotype. What you should have said is "lingustic affinity and genotype don't always correspond". Sometimes people speak certain languages due to socio-economic reasons, not really because the said language is really their ancestral tongue.

That is true but generally that leaves a substratum from their original language. Hence Germanic, Slavic, Gaelic, Baltic languages (which are almost universally thought to feature non-Indo-European substrata) have features apparently borrowed from the older language of the inhabitants of the region.

When a group of language speakers have a better system for educating, not being an illiterate population helps, then their is a better chance of converting a group to the language of that group without much influence from the original groups language. The Romans for instance where more successful than Germanic peoples for instance as they were literate and could teach their language (however French and other Gallo-Romance languages do still have substratal features from Gallic languages).


For instance, most people in Hong Kong and Singapore speak very fluent English due to the legacy of the British Empire, even though ethnic Chinese people in these areas are not related ancestrally to Germanic peoples.

Yes as they were taught to speak English in schools.


Many Black groups speak Afro-Asiatic languages due to the fact that they were originally conquered by the Afro-Asiatic-speaking Ancient Egyptians,

Here is where I disagree as most don't speak Coptic languages or languages descended from Egyptian but speak other Afro-Asiatic languages. Though there are "black" groups that have been taught to speak Afro-Asiatic languages this isn't the case with for instance Ethiopians (though many did mix with tribes from Kenya in the south) who dwell in the region that may even be the Afro-Asiatic Urheimat.


just like how the original Austro-Asiatic Southern Mongolid speakers in South China (the Yue tribes) became Sino-Tibetan speakers due to Han Chinese conquest and settlement of the region from the Zhou and Han Dynasties onwards.

Exactly and many of the "barbarians" in far Northern China as well. But they are literate whereas many other groups originally weren't or had limited literacy.

Even if I am sometimes disagreeing with you (especially since I am a Nostraicist) it is a good debate nonetheless.

[Queercommie Girl]

Yes but most West Eurasian groups developed in different climates to East Eurasians... for instance Caucasians where around the middle east probably and further south and in flatter, warmer and less arid terrain than most East Eurasian groups. Also we aren't talking short term really in this case we are talking many thousands of years.


But that's exactly what I'm saying. The Nostratic hypothesis can't be right because it claims that Mongolid-looking Altaic groups have a closer ancestry to Caucasoid-looking Indo-Europeans than they do to Mongolid-looking Sino-Tibetans. This could only be possible if the environment caused relatively rapid physical changes over the short term, but obviously that can't be the case here.

Hence I'm skeptical of the claim that Altaic is more related to Indo-European than it is to Sino-Tibetan.



Maybe not (though the few that I saw did look somewhat different)
There are some differences but not a lot at all. Han Chinese people from different regions of China tend to look somewhat different too.



but most Turkic and Tungusic speakers look very different (and despite what some try to claim it there is little evidence for greater mixing with "Caucasoid" groups than various other Central and East groups).
Actually Tungusic peoples are closer to Mongolic speakers than they are to Turkic groups. Mongols and Manchus for instance always had a close relationship in antiquity. Mongols, Manchus and Northern Han don't look so different at all, but Turkic peoples, even those in East Asia, tend to have more Caucasoid admixture. (E.g. Uyghurs)



Saying that Chinese and Tibetans generally look different as well and they are linguistically related.
Both Chinese and Tibetans are generally Northern Mongolid, just that Tibetans tend to have darker skin colour than the Han.



Here is where I disagree as most don't speak Coptic languages or languages descended from Egyptian but speak other Afro-Asiatic languages. Though there are "black" groups that have been taught to speak Afro-Asiatic languages this isn't the case with for instance Ethiopians (though many did mix with tribes from Kenya in the south) who dwell in the region that may even be the Afro-Asiatic Urheimat.
Ethiopians aren't pure Negroids, but a mixture of Negroids and Caucasoids. Maybe they were the result of the mixing between an early ancestral group of Afro-Asiatic or proto-Afro-Asiatic speakers and the local Black populations. Since it has been so long ago the pre-Afro-Asiatic substratum is no longer very evident today.



Even if I am sometimes disagreeing with you (especially since I am a Nostraicist) it is a good debate nonetheless.There is little evidence for the existence of the "Eurasiatic" supra-family beyond pure speculation, never mind the "Nostratic" hyper-family. There is just no evidence. Even the existence of the Altaic language family is disputed by some people.

[GallowsBird]

But that's exactly what I'm saying. The Nostratic hypothesis can't be right because it claims that Mongolid-looking Altaic groups have a closer ancestry to Caucasoid-looking Indo-Europeans than they are to Mongolid-looking Sino-Tibetans. This could only be possible if the environment caused relatively rapid physical changes over the short term, but obviously that can't be the case here.

Hence I'm skeptical of the claim that Altaic is more related to Indo-European than it is to Sino-Tibetan.



There are some differences but not a lot at all. Han Chinese people from different regions of China tend to look somewhat different too.

Yes I agree there. China is a big place after all with widely different regions.




Actually Tungusic peoples are closer to Mongolic speakers than they are to Turkic groups.

I didn'y say which were closer I was talking about appearence sorry if that didn't come across.

However linguistically Mongolian and Turkic languages are considered closer by many (it is highly debateable with Mongolic, Turkic and Tunguisc though).


Mongols and Manchus for instance always had a close relationship in antiquity. Mongols, Manchus and Northern Han don't look so different at all, but Turkic peoples, even those in East Asia, tend to have more Caucasoid admixture. (E.g. Uyghurs)

The admixture of the Uyghurs is up for debate as some sources show they are no more mixed with the surrounding groups as the peoples of many Chinese regions and other regions along the Silk Road. They are purely the most famous because they have the highest percentages of blond hair.

Also I would point out that many Turco-Mongol peoples and dynasties existed.



Both Chinese and Tibetans are generally Northern Mongolid, just that Tibetans tend to have darker skin colour than the Han.

And slightly less of an epicanthus. A few other minor features as well.



Ethiopians aren't pure Negroids, but a mixture of Negroids and Caucasoids. Maybe they were the result of the mixing between an early ancestral group of Afro-Asiatic or proto-Afro-Asiatic speakers and the local Black populations. Since it has been so long ago the pre-Afro-Asiatic substratum is no longer very evident today.

It is possible but substrata are hard to get rid of unless you know the features of them.

As stated in Ethiopia it depends on the region as to whether they are mixed with the more southern people much and I'd point out that there is a fair bit of Sub-Saharan admixture in other North African countries (and some in Europe for that matter technically).



There is little evidence for the existence of the "Eurasiatic" supra-family beyond pure speculation, never mind the "Nostratic" hyper-family. There is just no evidence. Even the existence of the Altaic language family is disputed by some people.

While I agree to an extent, the majority of scholars do agree with an Altaic family (though some only include Turkic, Mongolic and Tungusic (this is not common anymore with Altaicists). There is one proposal that only includes Tunguis, Korean and Japanese, but I find that one not convincing at all) although there are many that don't. Though many consider Turkic and Mongolic

I disagree with the idea that there is "no" evidence fro Eurasiatic or their wouldn't be a valid (albeit not yet accepted) scientific case for its existence and many scholars that refuse to dismiss it (or Eurasiatic) completely (as there aren't too many vocal critics... there are some like Lyle Campbell et cetera though).

Joseph Greenberg, who came up with the theory, was considered one of the best in his field even if Eurasiatic and Amerind haven't been accepted. It is ironic in that regard that his theory of African languages is almost universally accepted despite using the SAME METHOD as he did for the Amerind and Eurasiatic hypothesis.

http://www.nostratic.ru/index.php?lang=en This site has many articles and some good defences of the methods used. Though I am not saying you, or anyone should agree with it, I do think people should have an open mind about it and not just dismiss all of it.

Here are some articles on Greenburg (nothing to indepth):

http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~anthro/articles/archaeo-language.html

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Az7rfk6-A2QJ:www.unm.edu/~wcroft/Papers/JHGobit.pdf

And something written by Greenberg:

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:EfnoliOKlpoJ:www.nostratic.ru/books/%28198%29greenberg-nostratic1.pdf+defence+of+eurasiatic+joseph+greenb erg&hl=en&gl=uk&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgKax77zkIPOcvxngcXDv_mESppWb1hBHUItupt kU0zasbWPsl0_1W8nYl0J60rTAUQomacN87lYUbNvZNAdas-e1ZCje85C3-rWYCDjBoaZQfhI8uzgOdF9j8MIcMuA3bLyp-U&sig=AHIEtbTcQsKgDCsS5KkP_b0wHZPxuu01Lg

[Queercommie Girl]

I didn't say which were closer I was talking about appearence sorry if that didn't come across.


Yeah "appearance" is what I'm talking about precisely. Mongolic and Tungusic peoples look closer to each other than they do to Turkic peoples.



However linguistically Mongolian and Turkic languages are considered closer by many (it is highly debateable with Mongolic, Turkic and Tunguisc though).
As I said, there is no direct simple correlation between linguistic affinity and genetic/ancestral affinity.



The admixture of the Uyghurs is up for debate as some sources show they are no more mixed with the surrounding groups as the peoples of many Chinese regions and other regions along the Silk Road. They are purely the most famous because they have the highest percentages of blond hair.
Regardless, it is a simple empirical fact that Mongols, Manchus and Northern Han look similar to each other and are more or less "pure Mongolids", while Turkic peoples have some Caucasoid admixture. Where they got this admixture from is debatable.



Also I would point out that many Turco-Mongol peoples and dynasties existed.
I don't see the relevance of that here.



And slightly less of an epicanthus. A few other minor features as well.
Yes. All minor features. Han and Tibetans are no more different than French and Italians.



While I agree to an extent, the majority of scholars do agree with an Altaic family (though some only include Turkic, Mongolic and Tungusic (this is not common anymore with Altaicists). There is one proposal that only includes Tunguis, Korean and Japanese, but I find that one not convincing at all) although there are many that don't. Though many consider Turkic and Mongolic

I disagree with the idea that there is "no" evidence fro Eurasiatic or their wouldn't be a valid (albeit not yet accepted) scientific case for its existence and many scholars that refuse to dismiss it (or Eurasiatic) completely (as there aren't too many vocal critics... there are some like Lyle Campbell et cetera though).

Joseph Greenberg, who came up with the theory, was considered one of the best in his field even if Eurasiatic and Amerind haven't been accepted. It is ironic in that regard that his theory of African languages is almost universally accepted despite using the SAME METHOD as he did for the Amerind and Eurasiatic hypothesis.

http://www.nostratic.ru/index.php?lang=en This site has many articles and some good defences of the methods used. Though I am not saying you, or anyone should agree with it, I do think people should have an open mind about it and not just dismiss all of it.

Here are some articles on Greenburg (nothing to indepth):

http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~anthro/articles/archaeo-language.html (http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/%7Eanthro/articles/archaeo-language.html)

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Az7rfk6-A2QJ:www.unm.edu/~wcroft/Papers/JHGobit.pdf (http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Az7rfk6-A2QJ:www.unm.edu/%7Ewcroft/Papers/JHGobit.pdf)

And something written by Greenberg:

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:EfnoliOKlpoJ:www.nostratic.ru/books/%28198%29greenberg-nostratic1.pdf+defence+of+eurasiatic+joseph+greenb erg&hl=en&gl=uk&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgKax77zkIPOcvxngcXDv_mESppWb1hBHUItupt kU0zasbWPsl0_1W8nYl0J60rTAUQomacN87lYUbNvZNAdas-e1ZCje85C3-rWYCDjBoaZQfhI8uzgOdF9j8MIcMuA3bLyp-U&sig=AHIEtbTcQsKgDCsS5KkP_b0wHZPxuu01Lg
I also think the Altaic language group actually exists. But higher-level groups are a completely different matter. There may be some speculative evidence for "Eurasiatic", but there is even less evidence for the even higher-level grouping of "Nostratic".

There is also a hypothesis that Sino-Tibetan is linked to Vasconic languages of prehistoric Europe like Basque, (the so-called Dene-Caucasian languages) but that is also extremely controversial.

Hypotheses regarding higher-level groups of languages certainly cannot be taken at face value at all. One must maintain a highly skeptical attitude. Also, frankly linguistic research has never been purely objective and scientific, there has always been political factors involved too. For instance, some neo-fascist groups like to use certain elements from anthropology and linguistics in order to justify their racist theories. All the more reason to take hypotheses in linguistics with a pinch of salt.

The problem with "Eurasiatic" is that you have to explain how is it that Mongolid Altaic peoples can be more closely related to Caucasoid Indo-Europeans ancestrally speaking than they are to Mongolid Sino-Tibetans.