You must be one of those deplorables in Trump's basket, then. Is that your best defense of Trump, to scapegoat some random people with a filthy slur?
I can understand your wishing your opponents would die, because you have no way to deal with them honourably as people, what with your being a subhuman knuckle dragger and all. Maybe you can enlighten me though: Why are people allowed to hunt animals and eat them for dinner, but they're not allowed to do the same with subhuman white supremacists? It's a real mystery, isn't it?
I've got some more articles on Trump coming out soon. I hope you give them a good read.
3.5% of the population spills 55% of the blood nationwide. Subsaharan African males. 14x more likely to commit murder than any other race. This pattern hold globally. Deny evolution and the pisspoor impulse control of North American Pavement Apes all you like.
And your explanation of the greater murder rates attributed to dark-skinned people would be entirely genetic, is that it? So they're an inferior "race" because of their inherent defects? Even if that were true, genetic engineering would make it possible to eliminate those defects, so I take it you've been calling for such research rather than, say, demonizing those dark-skinned people who would be afflicted with uncivil genes. But no, there you went and called them a filthy name, comparing them to apes. That looks to me like an inconsistency in your reasoning, which suggests you're coming at this from emotion, not from science, your appeal to statistics notwithstanding.
All of that's irrelevant, mind you, since we know from biology that human behaviour has genetic and environmental causes. So what have the African governments been like over the last century or so? Has the West had a hand in reinforcing those dictatorships? What colour was the skin of those Europeans who enslaved Africans and brought them over to North America?
Oh, and were dark-skinned people primarily responsible for the millions of deaths that occurred in the two world wars? How about the slaughter caused by the Chinese and Russian communist regimes? Or will you define "murder" to discount such mass killings in your tallies?
In principle, mind you, I don't deny the possibility that there are genetic or ingrained cultural differences around the world. But I hardly see historical reason to praise the behaviour of light-skinned people, on the whole. Granted, German culture produced some amazing Renaissance men. But what we call the technological progress due to the early supremacy of Western science may have the unintended consequence of destroying the ecosystem. So the net supremacy of white people would be dubious because of our short-sightedness.
Or look at the lack of impulse control on the part of many white Americans who went into debt because they couldn't say no to advertisements and had to act like good little consumers even if their jobs didn't pay enough for them to afford all the latest gadgets. Rather than deal with their irrationality, they've resorted to opioids and Trumpian scapegoating. Where's the white superiority again?
"Coming at this from emotion" We fund their entire existence. Without them the US would would have murder / gun crime rate equal to BELGIUM. My cousins were raped by them and my godfather was murdered, trying to stop a pair from robbing a Jiffy Lube. Yes, I hate them.
South Africa's rape and murder rates were vastly, vastly lower under Apartheid. Blacks had the same skin color as the pygmies they enslaved / devoured to near extinction, that didn't stop them. Screw your 'praise'. Whites simply being allowed to live and support each other unmolested, like every other race should apparently be allowed to, is enough. Why should we be required to fund a multi-billion dollar eugenics program to upgrade them? How would you even suggest getting them to accept that their inferior grip on emotions, aggression and reasoning is inherent, peacefully?
The US government may provide some financial support to its poor citizens, but whites also brought dark-skinned Africans to North America by enslaving them. That's starting off at a disadvantage, so it's not so easy to blame African-Americans' bad behaviour solely on alleged bad genes.
It's like the situation of the Native Canadians, many of whom don't assimilate well in Canada and drink themselves to death. They were conquered and double-crossed and nearly exterminated by the Europeans, and their culture's being wiped out, so how should we expect them to react? Those are obvious environmental reasons for bad behaviour.
And it appears I was right about the emotional reason for your racism. Your attitude is only rationalized by your statistics and lame arguments, since it's grounded in your family's terrible personal experiences with some dark-skinned criminals. As understandable as that may be, rationally speaking those are anecdotes that don't prove all dark-skinned people are inferior or are comparable to those criminals who hurt or killed some of your family members.
I'd suggest you try to forgive those African-American criminals your family encountered, on Christian grounds, but Christianity's nonsense. Still, hatred is emotionally taxing and it extends the damage done by those crimes--to you. Hatred is stressful and stress is physically damaging to the body. Just some advice.
I'm not saying dark-skinned people are all saints. Nor am I saying that all dark-skinned cultures are equal in worth to European cultures. Maybe some African cultures are philosophically or ethically inferior. But cultures can change; indeed, all cultures come and go.
Sure, white people may want to control immigration to prevent inferior cultures from ruining current American or European societies. Putting it that way would at least be defensible. But the racism goes too far because white-skinned people often have a hand in meddling with those dark-skinned cultures in the first place. That goes for much of Africa and the Middle East. For example, the US supported dictators in Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia to control the flow of oil or to exacerbate long-standing rivalries and play those countries off against each other (rather than try to modernize the region and heal the tribal wounds). Now white Europeans complain about the wave of migrants from inferior Middle Eastern countries. The point is that any racial judgment there is illegitimate, self-serving and impudently so. It takes real chutzpah to blame someone for being bad if you had a hand in making that person bad.
I wasn't suggesting that you actually campaign for research into the inferiority of certain genes. I was just pointing out that you don't really care about the pseudoscientific arguments, since your racism is based on hatred and a personal grudge, as you admitted. If you really believed that certain genes are primarily responsible for dark-skinned criminality, you would indeed be in favour of genetic re-engineering. If it could be scientifically proven that a handful of genes are to blame, it would be irrational not to take action against those genes. The problem is that genetics isn't so simple. As I said, genes work in tandem with the environment, and it's pretty much impossible to disentangle them, especially when it comes to complex human behaviour.
Rape convictions in Sweden from 2012-2017 reveal a weird and interesting pattern: 84% of rape is by people of non-European descent. 2/3 of all rapes are committed by asylum-seekers or people with a residence permit. 95.6% of all assault rapes are committed by people of non-European descent. 90% of all group rapes are committed by people of non-European descent. 85% of all group rapes against men are committed by Afghans.
The Swedish government calls its natives Nazis simply for daring to notice a bloodstained pattern, staining everything. Tells women to wear "Anti-Rape Bracelets" to make their invading attackers feel 'guilty'. Ignore the hundreds of grenade explosions every year. The Vikings' descendants embraced pacifism, believing all the other 'tribes' of Earth could share in their utopia. They're getting raped and pillaged for it. Reality isn't just some horrifyingly bad cosmic joke, it's Lovecraftian. Hodgsonian. It hates.
My racism is based on the cruel coldness of nature's essence. Subsaharan Blacks would refuse to accept that they're objectively worse humans, violently in many cases. Like they currently do. There is no way out of this hellmouth with bloodshed or sacrifices.
I can link you to literally endless amounts of research proving Subsaharans (African Americans) are genetically predisposed to lower IQs and higher aggression, compared to any other race. They are awful everywhere, not only in places they were enslaved.
I'm not interested in debating whether dark-skinned people from Africa are genetically inferior. What's the point you infer from that assumption, that Trump is a great president because of his racist treatment of dark-skinned immigrants from Mexico and the Middle East?
Or is your point that my worldview isn't dark enough?
You say, I think, that Americans didn't support dictators abroad, because Americans aren't the same as their politicians. Are you assuming, then, that American democracy is dysfunctional? That was Osama bin Ladin's point, that American civilians are fair game, because in a democracy the politicians represent the voters. The majority rules in a democracy; therefore the majority can be military targets in a conflict.
But you're saying American democracy is a joke. The US is really a plutocracy, so the majority who votes for the politicians don't even have indirect control over American foreign policy. Is that what you're saying?
So you wish for a stranger's heart to be crushed. That's an ignoble, low-brow sentiment. By contrast, I wish to see others reach heights of heroism, if only to stir my emotions and inspire me to produce better art.
Whenever we hear about any statistical disparities between racial groups in America, we are only permitted to publicly blame such differences on “racism.”
Conveniently, this standard doesn’t apply to sports because the evidence for athletic inequality between the races is so overwhelming, one looks like a bald-faced liar for blaming those disparities on “skin color.” With blacks comprising only 13% of the population but accounting for 75% of NBA players and two-thirds of NFL players.
As usual, a strictly genetic explanation of that dominance of blacks in sports oversimplifies, as the article linked below points out.
But I agree any genetic component would likely be downplayed to be politically correct. What, though, is the relevance of your point to Trump? Do you think Trump is heroic for how he's clumsily dealt with racial issues?
"But, of course, the reason why hiphop is doing so much damage is because the white owners of major labels extirpated all other voices but the most harmful ones." Why doesn't he name these white owners?
Did those records not sell well in the black community? Claims require evidence.
Anon, if gangsta rappers had to depend on blacks to buy their music, they'd be back on the streets peddling dope. Africans are a minority in America & most of them are dirt poor to boot. I'm sure plenty of blacks do listen to rap, but they aren't the ones fueling the demand.
Concerning racial IQ, you might find this interesting:
"Eventually, the mainstream was dominated by what sold lots of records in the white suburbs" Did those records not sell well in the black community? Claims require evidence. I'm white, I and many other whites were big fans of groups like De La Soul. I was also confused and disappointed gangster rap became popular. As Hollywood has proven many times over, sex and violence sell. If he's serious about changing things, naming/shaming the owners of the hip-hop record labels would be a great start.
I agree that naming names might strengthen the argument in that article, but his analogy between sports and rap hardly requires that specificity.
The record labels are owned by conglomerates which I presume are controlled mainly by white men. Educational institutions are also typically owned by white men. Rap stars were filtered down over the decades from a wide variety to the gangsta rappers who give African-Americans a bad name. Likewise, as the author says, supposedly "black dominance in brawn is naturally balanced by white dominance in brains. But anyone who has taught in a US high-school system knows that this balance is strictly imposed on black males. Intellectuality is not just discouraged but not even recognized. When you reinforce this attitude by underfunding education, the remaining opportunities for black success are not found in the classroom but in the gym."
As for who buys rap albums, see Sybok's response above. I certainly agree, though, that sex and violence sell to all types of people.
Anyway, it's a complex issue, so maybe that analogy is a stretch. I'm certainly no expert on rap or sports. But I doubt the disparity in sports is explainable entirely in genetic terms.
Trump is an idiot, but the Democrats are total rubbish, they want to promote a paternalistic socialism giving more power to the government, and destroy the livelihoods of the middle class.
Americans seem to have a skewed view of "socialism," because they're comparing the left-wing of their politics to Republican policies which have been pushed further and further to the right or have gotten more and more insane or nakedly plutocratic and socially Darwinian. By contrast, the Democrats have moved closer to the center (the Clintons, Obama, the DNC), with only impotent outbreaks of rhetorical "progressivism" or "socialism" (Sanders, Warren).
What destroys the middle class faster, the free market that forms monopolies that buy up their competitors before bursting the bubble and taking the whole economy down, or the government that means to regulate the marketplace to prevent such economic predation? The American middle class wasn't created by a free market, but by the Progressive Era, the New Deal, and by a high rate of taxation which prevented grotesque levels of economic inequality and thus plutocracy (rule by the wealthy few).
Niggers exist and it kills you inside not being able to admit it even to yourself. Good. I hope it's a long and agonizing death.
ReplyDeleteYou must be one of those deplorables in Trump's basket, then. Is that your best defense of Trump, to scapegoat some random people with a filthy slur?
DeleteI can understand your wishing your opponents would die, because you have no way to deal with them honourably as people, what with your being a subhuman knuckle dragger and all. Maybe you can enlighten me though: Why are people allowed to hunt animals and eat them for dinner, but they're not allowed to do the same with subhuman white supremacists? It's a real mystery, isn't it?
I've got some more articles on Trump coming out soon. I hope you give them a good read.
3.5% of the population spills 55% of the blood nationwide. Subsaharan African males. 14x more likely to commit murder than any other race. This pattern hold globally. Deny evolution and the pisspoor impulse control of North American Pavement Apes all you like.
ReplyDeleteAnd your explanation of the greater murder rates attributed to dark-skinned people would be entirely genetic, is that it? So they're an inferior "race" because of their inherent defects? Even if that were true, genetic engineering would make it possible to eliminate those defects, so I take it you've been calling for such research rather than, say, demonizing those dark-skinned people who would be afflicted with uncivil genes. But no, there you went and called them a filthy name, comparing them to apes. That looks to me like an inconsistency in your reasoning, which suggests you're coming at this from emotion, not from science, your appeal to statistics notwithstanding.
DeleteAll of that's irrelevant, mind you, since we know from biology that human behaviour has genetic and environmental causes. So what have the African governments been like over the last century or so? Has the West had a hand in reinforcing those dictatorships? What colour was the skin of those Europeans who enslaved Africans and brought them over to North America?
Oh, and were dark-skinned people primarily responsible for the millions of deaths that occurred in the two world wars? How about the slaughter caused by the Chinese and Russian communist regimes? Or will you define "murder" to discount such mass killings in your tallies?
In principle, mind you, I don't deny the possibility that there are genetic or ingrained cultural differences around the world. But I hardly see historical reason to praise the behaviour of light-skinned people, on the whole. Granted, German culture produced some amazing Renaissance men. But what we call the technological progress due to the early supremacy of Western science may have the unintended consequence of destroying the ecosystem. So the net supremacy of white people would be dubious because of our short-sightedness.
Or look at the lack of impulse control on the part of many white Americans who went into debt because they couldn't say no to advertisements and had to act like good little consumers even if their jobs didn't pay enough for them to afford all the latest gadgets. Rather than deal with their irrationality, they've resorted to opioids and Trumpian scapegoating. Where's the white superiority again?
"Coming at this from emotion"
DeleteWe fund their entire existence. Without them the US would would have murder / gun crime rate equal to BELGIUM. My cousins were raped by them and my godfather was murdered, trying to stop a pair from robbing a Jiffy Lube. Yes, I hate them.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteSouth Africa's rape and murder rates were vastly, vastly lower under Apartheid. Blacks had the same skin color as the pygmies they enslaved / devoured to near extinction, that didn't stop them. Screw your 'praise'. Whites simply being allowed to live and support each other unmolested, like every other race should apparently be allowed to, is enough. Why should we be required to fund a multi-billion dollar eugenics program to upgrade them? How would you even suggest getting them to accept that their inferior grip on emotions, aggression and reasoning is inherent, peacefully?
DeleteThe US government may provide some financial support to its poor citizens, but whites also brought dark-skinned Africans to North America by enslaving them. That's starting off at a disadvantage, so it's not so easy to blame African-Americans' bad behaviour solely on alleged bad genes.
DeleteIt's like the situation of the Native Canadians, many of whom don't assimilate well in Canada and drink themselves to death. They were conquered and double-crossed and nearly exterminated by the Europeans, and their culture's being wiped out, so how should we expect them to react? Those are obvious environmental reasons for bad behaviour.
And it appears I was right about the emotional reason for your racism. Your attitude is only rationalized by your statistics and lame arguments, since it's grounded in your family's terrible personal experiences with some dark-skinned criminals. As understandable as that may be, rationally speaking those are anecdotes that don't prove all dark-skinned people are inferior or are comparable to those criminals who hurt or killed some of your family members.
I'd suggest you try to forgive those African-American criminals your family encountered, on Christian grounds, but Christianity's nonsense. Still, hatred is emotionally taxing and it extends the damage done by those crimes--to you. Hatred is stressful and stress is physically damaging to the body. Just some advice.
I'm not saying dark-skinned people are all saints. Nor am I saying that all dark-skinned cultures are equal in worth to European cultures. Maybe some African cultures are philosophically or ethically inferior. But cultures can change; indeed, all cultures come and go.
DeleteSure, white people may want to control immigration to prevent inferior cultures from ruining current American or European societies. Putting it that way would at least be defensible. But the racism goes too far because white-skinned people often have a hand in meddling with those dark-skinned cultures in the first place. That goes for much of Africa and the Middle East. For example, the US supported dictators in Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia to control the flow of oil or to exacerbate long-standing rivalries and play those countries off against each other (rather than try to modernize the region and heal the tribal wounds). Now white Europeans complain about the wave of migrants from inferior Middle Eastern countries. The point is that any racial judgment there is illegitimate, self-serving and impudently so. It takes real chutzpah to blame someone for being bad if you had a hand in making that person bad.
I wasn't suggesting that you actually campaign for research into the inferiority of certain genes. I was just pointing out that you don't really care about the pseudoscientific arguments, since your racism is based on hatred and a personal grudge, as you admitted. If you really believed that certain genes are primarily responsible for dark-skinned criminality, you would indeed be in favour of genetic re-engineering. If it could be scientifically proven that a handful of genes are to blame, it would be irrational not to take action against those genes. The problem is that genetics isn't so simple. As I said, genes work in tandem with the environment, and it's pretty much impossible to disentangle them, especially when it comes to complex human behaviour.
Rape convictions in Sweden from 2012-2017 reveal a weird and interesting pattern: 84% of rape is by people of non-European descent.
Delete2/3 of all rapes are committed by asylum-seekers or people with a residence permit. 95.6% of all assault rapes are committed by people of non-European descent. 90% of all group rapes are committed by people of non-European descent. 85% of all group rapes against men are committed by Afghans.
The Swedish government calls its natives Nazis simply for daring to notice a bloodstained pattern, staining everything. Tells women to wear "Anti-Rape Bracelets" to make their invading attackers feel 'guilty'. Ignore the hundreds of grenade explosions every year. The Vikings' descendants embraced pacifism, believing all the other 'tribes' of Earth could share in their utopia. They're getting raped and pillaged for it. Reality isn't just some horrifyingly bad cosmic joke, it's Lovecraftian. Hodgsonian. It hates.
"the US supported"
DeleteWe are not out our lying, child-killing, toddler-raping, false flagging politicians you consummate jackass.
My racism is based on the cruel coldness of nature's essence. Subsaharan Blacks would refuse to accept that they're objectively worse humans, violently in many cases. Like they currently do. There is no way out of this hellmouth with bloodshed or sacrifices.
DeleteI can link you to literally endless amounts of research proving Subsaharans (African Americans) are genetically predisposed to lower IQs and higher aggression, compared to any other race. They are awful everywhere, not only in places they were enslaved.
DeleteI'm not interested in debating whether dark-skinned people from Africa are genetically inferior. What's the point you infer from that assumption, that Trump is a great president because of his racist treatment of dark-skinned immigrants from Mexico and the Middle East?
DeleteOr is your point that my worldview isn't dark enough?
You say, I think, that Americans didn't support dictators abroad, because Americans aren't the same as their politicians. Are you assuming, then, that American democracy is dysfunctional? That was Osama bin Ladin's point, that American civilians are fair game, because in a democracy the politicians represent the voters. The majority rules in a democracy; therefore the majority can be military targets in a conflict.
But you're saying American democracy is a joke. The US is really a plutocracy, so the majority who votes for the politicians don't even have indirect control over American foreign policy. Is that what you're saying?
Truly embracing how cruel and uncaring evolution and the cosmos is would crush what's left of your heart. I hope to see that.
ReplyDeleteSo you wish for a stranger's heart to be crushed. That's an ignoble, low-brow sentiment. By contrast, I wish to see others reach heights of heroism, if only to stir my emotions and inspire me to produce better art.
Deletehttps://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/27/opinion/jewish-culture-genius-iq.html
ReplyDeleteWhenever we hear about any statistical disparities between racial groups in America, we are only permitted to publicly blame such differences on “racism.”
ReplyDeleteConveniently, this standard doesn’t apply to sports because the evidence for athletic inequality between the races is so overwhelming, one looks like a bald-faced liar for blaming those disparities on “skin color.” With blacks comprising only 13% of the population but accounting for 75% of NBA players and two-thirds of NFL players.
As usual, a strictly genetic explanation of that dominance of blacks in sports oversimplifies, as the article linked below points out.
DeleteBut I agree any genetic component would likely be downplayed to be politically correct. What, though, is the relevance of your point to Trump? Do you think Trump is heroic for how he's clumsily dealt with racial issues?
https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2017/09/25/25432524/why-the-over-representation-of-black-americans-in-professional-sports-is-not-a-good-thing
"But, of course, the reason why hiphop is doing so much damage is because the white owners of major labels extirpated all other voices but the most harmful ones." Why doesn't he name these white owners?
DeleteTo counter your red herring, here's the point that was being made in that article, which speaks for itself:
Delete'If the reader returns to the early days of hiphop, they will find an amazing variety of characters, modes, and voices. There was the intellectual De La Soul, the quirky Kwamé the Boy Genius, the Islamic Poor Righteous Teachers, the black militancy of Public Enemy, the Afrocentric feminism of Queen Latifah, the hippy and trippy P.M. Dawn, the gangsterism of NWA, and so on and so on. All of these acts achieved some success. There was a market in the black community for this wealth of voices and modes. But things began to change in the mid-1990s with the inflation of rappers like Tupac and Biggie Smalls and Jay-Z. Labels began to focus on black gangster culture. Eventually, the mainstream was dominated by what sold lots of records in the white suburbs: black men threatening or killing other black men. This social process completely eliminated from the mainstream hiphop diversity. And now white commentators have the gall to argue that "hiphop has done more damage to African Americans than racism" (as sampled on Kendrick Lamar's "DNA").But, of course, the reason why hiphop is doing so much damage is because the white owners of major labels extirpated all other voices but the most harmful ones. And we now have a situation where the raps of black men killing black men is a normal thing to dance to.'
Did those records not sell well in the black community? Claims require evidence.
DeleteAnon, if gangsta rappers had to depend on blacks to buy their music, they'd be back on the streets peddling dope. Africans are a minority in America & most of them are dirt poor to boot. I'm sure plenty of blacks do listen to rap, but they aren't the ones fueling the demand.
Concerning racial IQ, you might find this interesting:
https://www.unz.com/freed/iq-do-uq-a-sojourn-among-the-true-believers/
"Eventually, the mainstream was dominated by what sold lots of records in the white suburbs" Did those records not sell well in the black community? Claims require evidence. I'm white, I and many other whites were big fans of groups like De La Soul. I was also confused and disappointed gangster rap became popular. As Hollywood has proven many times over, sex and violence sell. If he's serious about changing things, naming/shaming the owners of the hip-hop record labels would be a great start.
ReplyDeleteI agree that naming names might strengthen the argument in that article, but his analogy between sports and rap hardly requires that specificity.
DeleteThe record labels are owned by conglomerates which I presume are controlled mainly by white men. Educational institutions are also typically owned by white men. Rap stars were filtered down over the decades from a wide variety to the gangsta rappers who give African-Americans a bad name. Likewise, as the author says, supposedly "black dominance in brawn is naturally balanced by white dominance in brains. But anyone who has taught in a US high-school system knows that this balance is strictly imposed on black males. Intellectuality is not just discouraged but not even recognized. When you reinforce this attitude by underfunding education, the remaining opportunities for black success are not found in the classroom but in the gym."
As for who buys rap albums, see Sybok's response above. I certainly agree, though, that sex and violence sell to all types of people.
Anyway, it's a complex issue, so maybe that analogy is a stretch. I'm certainly no expert on rap or sports. But I doubt the disparity in sports is explainable entirely in genetic terms.
Trump is an idiot, but the Democrats are total rubbish, they want to promote a paternalistic socialism giving more power to the government, and destroy the livelihoods of the middle class.
ReplyDeleteAmericans seem to have a skewed view of "socialism," because they're comparing the left-wing of their politics to Republican policies which have been pushed further and further to the right or have gotten more and more insane or nakedly plutocratic and socially Darwinian. By contrast, the Democrats have moved closer to the center (the Clintons, Obama, the DNC), with only impotent outbreaks of rhetorical "progressivism" or "socialism" (Sanders, Warren).
DeleteWhat destroys the middle class faster, the free market that forms monopolies that buy up their competitors before bursting the bubble and taking the whole economy down, or the government that means to regulate the marketplace to prevent such economic predation? The American middle class wasn't created by a free market, but by the Progressive Era, the New Deal, and by a high rate of taxation which prevented grotesque levels of economic inequality and thus plutocracy (rule by the wealthy few).