Talk:Master race
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article holds that the Mater Race is something that already exists, whereas normally I have heard it used in the context of something that will be achieved through eugenics. User:H7asan
I've removed this sentence, since it seems very obscure, and ios also rather distracting and confusing ['[it] was first used by the British colonial power to denote the original inhabitants of the areas (colonies) that they had conquered and ruled.]. Why would the people being ruled over be the 'master race'? Clearly this usage is wholly different from the standard one, and appears to be no more than a coincidence of phrasing. It should not be main definition of the term. Paul B
- Paul, yes, it is somewhat unusual but correct, I think. I copied it from the German version, which I did not write. I am quite sure that Hitler openly admitted that the British colonial policy inspired him to do the same for his colonization of eastern europe. Andries 19:28, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
The Concept of Master Race is not something that purely applies to the German usage of the concept. It is a common recurring theme throughout many mythologies and stories of a people of unblemished spiritual descent, similar to the concept of demigods. The word "Aryan" in the Central Asian cultures implies people who are "great ones", or "heavenly/divine ones" in translation, and the concept of Aryan and Master Race were used in some ways by Nietzsche in his supraman ideology before the Fascists adopted the idea into their own twisted version of it.
- People of "unblemished spiritual descent" do no belong in this article, which is about theories of racial difference. Nietzsche was not concerned with race. Paul B 10:01, 31 July, 2005 (UTC)
May I just say that Nietzsche's own ideas were almost (but not quite) fascist, so although they modified his ideas they did not 'twist' them. I know it i sfashionable to talk as if Nietzsche was a decent man and a good man...etc...however it doesn't cut any ice when you look at his works. You can see by reading them, who the Nazi's modified them (easily) to fit with thheir own agenda.
P.S. And why would Hitler take British Colonial Policy (which has many differences to Nazi Colonial Policy), becase the British used the term 'Master Race' in reference to the indigenious inhabitants of a regions. It shows whoever wrote that in the (German) article's lack of knowledge if A) He thinks the two 'nations' had the same or similar colonial policies or that the idea of 'Master Race' stems for that (completely unreleated) term. - Lucius Anonimus
Contents |
[edit] Blond/Blue Italians
"Italians, under the rule of Benito Mussolini, are not known for having blond hair and blue eyes, yet they fought alongside the Germans as Aryans."
First, there is a disconnect between perception and reality here; being "known for" a characteristic really has nothing to do with anything Italians themselves can do or control. (e.g. the world was once known for being flat, yet the explorers never fell off)
Also, though the experience is anecdotal, Italy seems to be chock-full of blond haired, blue-eyed citizens. Perhaps this isn't the case on The Sopranos and other television and movie portrayals, but in reality... <((Insert Anti-Human propaganda here))>
[edit] Colonial US
In the US a similar concept exsisted. Benjamin Franklin clearly proposed a division between Anglo-Saxons & Saxons and the rest of Europeans whom he considered to be "Swathy Whites." This ideology which was somewhat popular in the US during the late 18th and early 19th century created a defacto, Anglo-Saxon/Saxon master race. The concept is initially the same; thus I beleive the exsistance of a master race concept in the colonial United States ought to be mentioned here. Regards, SignaturebrendelNow under review! 21:21, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
- Well Franklin's views are not really very clearly thought-through, as expressed in his article, which you can see here.[1] He is rather vague about why these Anglo-Saxons are more "lovely", and which races should be included in loveliness (he refers to the white and also the "red" - presumably meaning natives) and he also says that maybe this is just his own preference. There's no clearly articulated theory behind it at this stage. Paul B 08:52, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] NPOV.
There isn't one single indication or comment about the fact that the theories about matser races (whether nazi or japanese or anything else) have been widely discredited. That's not very NPOV. ;) --Regebro 18:40, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
- I quote from the article: "Most modern geneticists no longer give credence to the hierarchical model of race on which the policies of eugenics and racial hygiene are built. The concepts involved in this theory of Germanic superiority is also strongly contested. Most modern scholars see no connection between Indo-European population movements and alleged "Nordic" racial characteristics." Paul B 20:14, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- Uhm, that's under Aryanism. Are we to conclude that Nordicism IS given credence? :-) But fine, there is some text I can use, I'll move it. --Regebro 21:53, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
- It was in that category because it comes after the Nordic category, and the statement links the two. Paul B 22:24, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- Yes, it was in the category after the Nordic category, ie, the Arian category. Anyway, I have fixed it now. :) --Regebro 22:38, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- It was put there to link the two sections on both Nordic and Aryan concepts - at the end of the discussion of the factual aspects of the issue as a summing up. Paul B 00:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- I don't know why it was put there, just how it ended up, and it ended up looking like it was ONLY referencing Aryanism, and it looked hidden away as a small aside. I moved it to the top of the page where it clearly is about both, and where it is NOT hidden away, thereby making the article less POV. I honestly have no idea why you are even discussing this. --Regebro 11:33, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- How can it "only" reference Aryanism when it in fact explicitly refers to the Nordic concept??? If people read the article - which is quite short - it isn't "hidden" at all. I don't mind the section being at the top, but I was explaining that there was also a sensible reason why it was where it was. Paul B 12:07, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
- I attempted to correct this but Paul Barlow keeps on reverting my corrections --- Skapur 23:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Unique to Europe?
Is the master race concept really unique to Europe? What about Japan in the early 20th century? I have the impression that this was an ideoalogy of racial superioroty as well? Is that a misunderstanding? --Regebro 11:37, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- It's difficult to say. What's distinct about Europe is the way it claimed to be based on scientific taxonomies of race and had acres academic-sounding literature to back it up. I don't think there was anything comparable in Japan, but it would be interesting to know. Numerous cultures throughout history have believed that their people were superior to others for various reasons, which often mixed cultural, environmentalist and other arguments. These certainly often included the vaguely "racialist" concept of "superior breeding" and "purity". They also sometimes articulated features such as skin colour (as in the ancient Egyptian racial/ethnic taxonomy). But the specific concept of a "master race" as such - defined by anthropometrics - is very distinctive to European theories of racial taxonomy which didn't really exist before the 19th century. If someone knows more about Japanese thinking at this time it would be useful to discuss. We could also explore the history of the idea of ethnic superiority. Paul B 12:03, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Removal
I removed the section on Tolkien as the central premise (along with most of the details) was inaccurate. The idea that Tolkien portrayed the Numenoreans as 'morally superior' runs into trouble when considering that they slipped into 'devil worship' and human sacrifice... he also specifically wrote that intermarrying with other men was NOT the cause of their decay... indeed, that was the claim advanced by the evil Castamir the Usurper against the rightful (mixed blood) king Eldacar of Gondor. Et cetera. The presentation of Tolkien's work in the article just was not accurate. --CBD 23:33, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
