Is racial segregation an English cultural feature?

[Nork]

When you look at the British Empire and then see the countries that stemmed from it, there is one feature shared between most of them (especially the ones with higher amount of white immigrants): racial segregation. The United States, South Africa, Australia, Canada...

Many people could say that racial segregation is something from the past and it's not longer an issue, but unfortunately it's kind of obvious that racial discrimination is still a thing in those countries (even within the United Kingdom).

If you're from one of those countries, why do you think this is happening? Is English culture intoxicated with racism? Is it due to a narrow-minded imperialistic mentality? Do you believe white native English speakers see themselves as superior?

[minteK917]

When you look at the British Empire and then see the countries that stemmed from it, there is one feature shared between most of them (especially the ones with higher amount of white immigrants): racial segregation. The United States, South Africa, Australia, Canada...

Many people could say that racial segregation is something from the past and it's not longer an issue, but unfortunately it's kind of obvious that racial discrimination is still a thing in those countries (even within the United Kingdom).

If you're from one of those countries, why do you think this is happening? Is English culture intoxicated with racism? Is it due to a narrow-minded imperialistic mentality? Do you believe white native English speakers see themselves as superior?

This is true of literally every other imperial powers. Go tell people in Asia that this is a feature of english lol. Or even easier in Europe. Segregation is a human thing, it has no language what so ever.

[Shadowferal]

Yo...op; your fixation on racism doesn't bode well for your longevity posting here.

Fair warning.

[Saltysquidoon]

It's an artefact of colonialism which isn't an English thing, the English were just the world champions at it (discounting the Romans and Mongols).
You also have to remember the push to be not terrible to people who aren't white land-owning males only started quite recently in the grand scheme of things.

In Australia, for example, women weren't considered 'people' for the purpose of practising law until 1928 and it was not only legal but actual government policy to discriminate against people on the basis of race until the mid-60s.
There are still people alive who were born before either of those dates.

[Nork]

Yo...op; your fixation on racism doesn't bode well for your longevity posting here.

Fair warning.

Anything to say about the topic?

- - - Updated - - -

This is true of literally every other imperial powers. Go tell people in Asia that this is a feature of english lol. Or even easier in Europe. Segregation is a human thing, it has no language what so ever.

Well, not all the empires tried to segregate their population, so it's not an imperialistic feature but a cultural one.

[Spectral]

No, it's a human cultural feature. Not a good one, but an unsurprising consequence of belonging to a species that evolved for small tribes. One might even say that rather than a feature, it's a bug in the code that we're continually trying to find workarounds for.

[Nork]

No, it's a human cultural feature. Not a good one, but an unsurprising consequence of belonging to a species that evolved for small tribes. One might even say that rather than a feature, it's a bug in the code that we're continually trying to find workarounds for.

How would you explain the fact that the most racist countries in the world share a past within the British Empire? There were other empires in the world and the countries stemmed from them didn't have things such as rough racial segregation. Therefore, we cannot just justify it using the "human being" card. There are countries more racist than other, and there were countries where white supremacy was so much strong, even forbidding mixed marriages. Other colonial powers never developed such things.

[Bakis]

Im sorry but when over-simplifying such a topic into this I would just label it baiting or trolling or both.

[Nork]

Im sorry but when over-simplifying such a topic into this I would just label it baiting or trolling or both.

How is this topic baiting or trolling? Try to discuss about the topic, and if you don't want to, just don't type anything. Just because you don't like the topic doesn't mean is trolling.

[Bakis]

How is this topic baiting or trolling? Try to discuss about the topic, and if you don't want to, just don't type anything. Just because you don't like the topic doesn't mean is trolling.

See now I'm convinced.

"over-simplifying"

[Nork]

See now I'm convinced.

"over-simplifying"

Nice argument. Thank you for sharing your point of view with us.

[Ursus]

Im sorry but when over-simplifying such a topic into this I would just label it baiting or trolling or both.

The OP already had one thread closed earlier today for baiting, looks like he's trying to make it a double.

[Bakis]

The OP already had one thread closed earlier today for baiting, looks like he's trying to make it a double.

Not surprised, hes heading for more.

[Nork]

The OP already had one thread closed earlier today for baiting, looks like he's trying to make it a double.

Calling a post as "baiting" without saying why is a poor argument, I'm afraid.

I find your comment more baiting and trolling than my post. You didn't contribute at all to the topic, you just came here to attack me. Quite ironic, isn't it?

[Saltysquidoon]

How would you explain the fact that the most racist countries in the world share a past within the British Empire? There were other empires in the world and the countries stemmed from them didn't have things such as rough racial segregation. Therefore, we cannot just justify it using the "human being" card. There are countries more racist than other, and there were countries where white supremacy was so much strong, even forbidding mixed marriages. Other colonial powers never developed such things.

Because most of the colonies of the other powers were either subject to violent revolution or collapsed and no longer exist. Further, the bolded section of your post is just wrong, so wrong it doesn't merit serious rebuttal.

Also, try looking up the congo which was personally owned by King Leopold II of Belgium, it's basically one of the most horrifically racist places that ever existed in modern history.

[Santti]

I think it's more about being white, than being English.

Or whoever happens to be dominant at the time, really.

[Bakis]

Because most of the colonies of the other powers were either subject to violent revolution or collapsed and no longer exist. Further, the bolded section of your post is just wrong, so wrong it doesn't merit serious rebuttal.

Also, try looking up the congo which was personally owned by King Leopold II of Belgium, it's basically one of the most horrifically racist places that ever existed in modern history.

Or OP could check up France in Northern Africa, Holland in Southern Asia etc etc but its clear OP never opened a history book or cared to watch a documentary and wanted to follow up his prevuious bait thread that got closed.

[Nork]

Because most of the colonies of the other powers were either subject to violent revolution or collapsed and no longer exist. Further, the bolded section of your post is just wrong, so wrong it doesn't merit serious rebuttal.

Also, try looking up the congo which was personally owned by King Leopold II of Belgium, it's basically one of the most horrifically racist places that ever existed in modern history.

What are you talking about? Other empires didn't segregate their population during their life existence, so it doesn't matter if they collapsed or not. What you're saying is: "they didn't endured enough to develop racial segregation". What kind of silly argument is that? Some societies were more racist than others.

"It doesn't merit serious rebuttal", says the guy with the poorest argument I've ever seen. Go and read a book about empires and types of imperialism/colonialism, you ignorant.

[Saltysquidoon]

What are you talking about? Other empires didn't segregate their population during their life existence, so it doesn't matter if they collapsed or not. What you're saying is: "they didn't endured enough to develop racial segregation". What kind of silly argument is that? Some societies were more racist than others.

"It doesn't merit serious rebuttal", says the guy with the poorest argument I've ever seen. Go and read a book about empires and types of imperialism/colonialism, you ignorant.

Why don't you ask the Jewish population of 15th-century Spain how not segregated they felt you absolute numpty. This is why your argument doesn't merit serious rebuttal.
The other colonial powers had racial segregation before they even had colonies.

[Nork]

Or OP could check up France in Northern Africa, Holland in Southern Asia etc etc but its clear OP never opened a history book or cared to watch a documentary and wanted to follow up his prevuious bait thread that got closed.

Oh, here we go. I was talking about English speaking countries, I've never said that other empires or colonial powers weren't racist. But anyway, you are telling me I've never read a history book or watched a documentary, so tell me what kind of racial segregation existed in New France, please. I'm eager to read your answer.

Why don't you ask the Jewish population of 15th-century Spain how not segregated they felt you absolute numpty. This is why your argument doesn't merit serious rebuttal.
The other colonial powers had racial segregation before they even had colonies.

What???? Hahahah Jews were EXPELLED in 'Spain' and Portugal, not segregated, you ignorant. Do me a favour, read a bloody history book about the history of Spain.

Anyway, we are talking about colonialism, remember that when you bring up your arguments. Jews were not a colonised population within the Iberian Peninsula, you ignorant.