Ancient Race Debates

It would mean whites and blacks have difference ancestors.

As a history buff, my understanding is there were no "White" or "Black" people then, since these races hadn't been invented yet. Black British actors would have been fine as well, since neither race existed. Creation of these distinct races in such a cosmopolitan society as existed in many eras of the Roman Empire, where ethnic groups frequently move shockingly long distances, would require a system of racial segregation that has no historical evidence. That's not t

All the original Europeans were black

They may not be your ancestors (if you are solely of sub-saharan decent), but they are most definitely the ancestors of most people on the planet including mine.Racism only enters the picture if we assume one Homo species is “superior” to any of the others, something for which we have no evidence. Different !== worse.

Yes, black vs white is a very old concept. Why do you think europeans started referring to people from africa as black and themselves as white, when they are really more like pink and brown?

Why would it be a crackpot theory to suggest that for Western Europeans, whose civilization as we know it starts in the late 1400s, who convinced themselves of African inferiority for the purpose of justifying their theft, rape, and murder of those people, upon seeing Black looking people in Egypt from thousands of years before their civilization started, would want to erase signs of it? Sounds just about right to me.

It is funny, because just last week there was an article about them not all being blonde. Popular sentiment on HN was "that is strawman actually no one says they were all blonde and it would be dumb to expect them all to be blonde".The argument was that given all the rape and slavery they engaged in, some gene mixing is to be expected.

> Fascinating that you singled out white people. The original poster could have any ethnic heritage, but you went with white.I wasn't commenting about the original poster but about the broad community that have been making this exact argument about this exact issue since it entered the public debate, and a wide number of other issues for, well, almost the entire time that population studies that would support this kind of discussion of the past have existed.(And, yes, you can see i

History is more nuanced than people want it to be. If you think that white skinned people specifically are or were all racists in a unique way that sets them apart from other nations, creeds, tribes, then yes that is both stupid (demonstrably ahistorical) and itself racist. If you want to compare the relative intellectual achievements of different races, it sounds like you do, that to me is inherently racist. Grouping people of a different historical epoch based on the color of the

wikipedia has a pretty deep explanation of the black egyptian hypothesis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Egyptian_hypothesisAnd in case it's even needed to say so, I don't believe in egyptians or the historical jesus being white - I don't think anyone does outside of American media.As for my personal bias, I have no dog in this fight. I'm in