Do minorities need to have their own exclusive spaces?

Quote from godkingteshub

Actually if white people never left Europe the world would have been a much better place. So there is something about isolationism that has positive outcomes

i agree with that so much

Quote from godkingteshub

Actually if white people never left Europe the world would have been a much better place. So there is something about isolationism that has positive outcomes

That's a bit unfair. White people leaving Europe wasn't the problem. The problem was colonialism. You could say "if white people didn't somehow think they were entitled to rape and pillage the world, it would be a better place", then I would agree. But the movement of people's has bought the world much good.

History isn't so straightfoward either. Countries like Brazil have white skinned natives, which lived there long before Europe discovered the content, as did some parts of North America. Even originally, in the early days of humans moving around, Greek Empire for example, they had no word for white, and never saw skin tone as a way to classify people, same for Ancient Egyptians. Humans managed to move around the World for hundreds of years, mixing as racial groups, without classifying these groups based on race. They fought conflicts, sure, and there were definitely issues with humanity before race became a huge factor (such as early slavery in Africa, the Middle East), but these were rarely based on race, but location and class.

It wasn't until the World became concerned with profits, that there was suddenly a need for mass exploitation.

Imperialism/Colonialism is inherent to capitalism, not humanity.

People moving around is not a bad thing. People exploring and exploiting to generate profit, is a bad thing.

On the same note, and to answer the question, no. I do not think minority groups should be segregated. Even if you could argue that segregation/isolationism is somehow ever "justifiable", that only applies to the start of segregation. As soon as that group is segregated, and there is no more integration, no more mixed education, no more promotion of understanding through co-existing, it becomes less about "protecting minorities safe spaces", to, "that minority should be isolated from people because they are not like us".

Assuming what your OP is describing is a real issue, not just a Twitter spat with sock puppets, lesbians today feeling the need to be separated from trans lesbians, is no different than straight people feeling the need to be separated from gay people, because they are homophobic. Education and acceptance come through integration.

Quote from godkingteshub

You are seeing history through the rose tinted colored lenses of a modern day person. The only reason people wanted to move around in the pre-modern era was exactly to rape and pillage. Even in the earliest human writings there’s accounts of racial stereotypes and capturing of slaves from far away lands. People getting their house in order rather than burning down the houses of others would have set the world in a much better path

But that isn't the case. In Ancient Egypt and Ancient Greece, this separation based on race definitely did not exist, both languages didn't even have words to describe "skin tone". The Chinese also travelled long and far for trade on the silk road, with no clear intent to cause such harm, and native groups that were separate in many countries also co-existed. Even Neanderthals and homo-sapiens co-existed for years.

I do not say it didn't happen, but to suggest that was always the only reason to ever travel, or that people left their native lands, is just plain wrong. We spend so much (warranted) time focusing on colonialism and imperialism in history learning, which again is warranted, that we forget there is and always has been an alternative.

Quote from godkingteshub

Actually Ancient Egyptians were pretty skin color racist. I’m not sure if they had specific racial words but in their art they made those with black or yellow skin as either being defeated or attacked, while those with brown skin as victorious

Also not true. They focused on accuracy with their depictions, and did include skin colour, but royalty was often shown as dark skinned, even when they were not as dark as the drawings depict.

Quote from JaedaKim

Hmm not surprised at this response at all

I don't feel attacked, I honestly don't care what some random stranger on the internet says or thinks

Oh and if you can't bother to spell out full words, don't talk to me

its called code baby girl, clearly u do feel attacked, you just told me not to ¨AttAcK HoW U FEEl¨ enough to reply and tell me how u feel. Ur racist and thats the end of it your dismissed, tootles.

Quote from destinie-1132

its called code baby girl, clearly u do feel attacked, you just told me not to ¨AttAcK HoW U FEEl¨ enough to reply and tell me how u feel. Ur racist and thats the end of it your dismissed, tootles.

Whatever you say, irrelevant online stanger

Quote from JaedaKim

Whatever you say, irrelevant online stanger

you too babe tootles.

huh interesting

Quote from Yan20

But that isn't the case. In Ancient Egypt and Ancient Greece, this separation based on race definitely did not exist, both languages didn't even have words to describe "skin tone". The Chinese also travelled long and far for trade on the silk road, with no clear intent to cause such harm, and native groups that were separate in many countries also co-existed. Even Neanderthals and homo-sapiens co-existed for years.

I do not say it didn't happen, but to suggest that was always the only reason to ever travel, or that people left their native lands, is just plain wrong. We spend so much (warranted) time focusing on colonialism and imperialism in history learning, which again is warranted, that we forget there is and always has been an alternative.

The silk road was a place of lots of ethnic conflict there's some pretty interesting stuff on it of states competing militaristically for ownership of trade hubs.

Quote from godkingteshub

Actually if white people never left Europe the world would have been a much better place. So there is something about isolationism that has positive outcomes

I don't know why I always get a feeling that people envy the ability of white European's to conquer the world so well from comments like these.

I'd doubt the efficacy of exclusive zones. There would inevitably be "post-code envy" where one group would claim that another's unfairly got better land, resources, etc. and inevitably rile up nationalism, etc.

Basically its the world wars again...

Quote from godkingteshub

Actually Europeans just conquered lands that were already conquered and destroyed many times over for thousands of years, so it was like pinning a guy down who got his ass beat for 12 rounds and expect him to defend himself against a well rested fighter. Or they conquered areas where their civilization didn't advanced to the Bronze Age level yet, they didn't even have chariots. And often they just drew lines on a map that nobody explored but they claimed because nobody else would dispute with them.

How is that different from any civilization in history, the technologically weak get crushed what's new.

Exclusive spaces can include private social organizations.

Quote from godkingteshub

I'm just saying that conquering wasn't a unique Europe feat. It happened all the time, it just became more noticeable as the world population grew

The reason I pointed at possible jealously is that the Europeans were probably the best at conquest in recent history I never said it was a specific European feat I apologize if it led to any confusion.

They don't NEED to be seperated but it would be a fun experiment to see what happens if you left different people groups, who sometimes have a whole set of ideas and beliefs to themselves, and finally test all the theories people have of how the government could be better

Maybe you should make the political parties seperated though, because then we could test which one is actually most capable of running the country.