|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On June 10 2016 00:34 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2016 00:20 Mohdoo wrote:On June 10 2016 00:11 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 09 2016 23:29 Mohdoo wrote:
Black people are more impulsive because they are usually in poor neighborhoods where everyone is black and poor and have been poor forever. There's a huge amount of hopelessness regarding economic mobility. Got nothing to lose, so why not? For this reason, violence and impulsivity are closely tied to socioeconomic status/ poverty levels. On a related note, the black community tends to (as a whole) be in less affluent areas, but an educated, middle class black man wouldn't be expected to be more violent or impulsive than a poor, struggling white man. Right. Sorry if my post didn't imply the last part of your thought. It's not about being black, it's about being hopeless. People who are hopeless take significantly more risks than people who have stability to and success. Agree with you're reasoning for the most part but you can't just exclude the reverse possibility: black people are in worse condition because of their impulsivity(or any genetic reason).
I think it is an issue that compounds on itself. Because they had no hope, they got hopeless and reckless. Being hopeless and reckless made things much worse. Can I blame them? Not really. It's an issue that is going to take a lot of coordination and cooperation. I don't subscribe to the belief that it is reasonable or even feasible for these disasters of areas to just pick themselves up. There's way too much momentum. I strongly believe in the idea of blasting areas like this with a ton of programs and aggressive efforts to just utterly transform the areas. Reaching out to 50 kids while 60 kids are involved in gangs just isn't enough. It is an infection. You can't just put bandages on it. It needs medicine, treatment, follow ups and prevention of relapse. There is just SO much keeping all this going. It's gotten so toxic that there's really no delicate touch that will do anything in some areas.
|
On June 10 2016 00:54 SolaR- wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2016 00:44 Biff The Understudy wrote:On June 10 2016 00:34 biology]major wrote:On June 10 2016 00:20 Mohdoo wrote:On June 10 2016 00:11 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 09 2016 23:29 Mohdoo wrote:
Black people are more impulsive because they are usually in poor neighborhoods where everyone is black and poor and have been poor forever. There's a huge amount of hopelessness regarding economic mobility. Got nothing to lose, so why not? For this reason, violence and impulsivity are closely tied to socioeconomic status/ poverty levels. On a related note, the black community tends to (as a whole) be in less affluent areas, but an educated, middle class black man wouldn't be expected to be more violent or impulsive than a poor, struggling white man. Right. Sorry if my post didn't imply the last part of your thought. It's not about being black, it's about being hopeless. People who are hopeless take significantly more risks than people who have stability to and success. Agree with you're reasoning for the most part but you can't just exclude the reverse possibility: black people are in worse condition because of their impulsivity(or any genetic reason). Except that at different times and different place, the role of the violent (and suppressed) minority has varied wildly. Go to Romania, and you can take any racist post in this thread and replace the word "black" by "gypsy" to get a stereotypical right wing discourse. In France it would include the arab populations. In Russia the Chechen and other Ural people. etc etc.. Always with the same arguments: those people are worst off because their race is inferior, whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean. What is universal is that when people have perspectives, are not subject to racism and have accessed to an equal level of education they are infinitely less likely to turn out criminals. Nuked provides a great example of racism that im willing to fight against. People should be individually defined by their own character and abilities, and those unfair groupings of people not only holds no merit but is completely unnecessary and only exemplifies how much of a shitbag you are.
Whoa this got blown way out of proportion. I am not racist lol. My point was people are different and that races are different. Not worse, different. If that makes me racist than i guess i am.
|
Well we accept that genes matter for physical differences, but the minute it gets internal everyone freezes up. X race is taller on average, X race is faster on average, X race is stronger on average, X race has a smaller dick on average. But the moment you say X race is more impulsive and thus more violent everyone says 'NO'. Which is confusing to a lot of people. Because you're saying, "ok genes say we have skin, eyes, nose, hair, teeth, medical conditions to the point of people needing different medications" but the moment there is a mental difference it's "NO".
It's up to anti-racists to combat that. And they have to do it calmly and succinctly of point, counterpoint. Point, counterpoint. To say there's no reason for racism to exist is kind of silly considering we segregated ourselves naturally thousands of years ago. Possibly due to being sick of violently reacting with one another.
|
United States44283 Posts
On June 10 2016 01:15 SK.Testie wrote:
considering we segregated ourselves naturally thousands of years ago. Possibly due to being sick of violently reacting with one another.
Sorry, just to be clear, you think the white people and the black people and the Asian people were all living together in Africa and then the Asians and the whites moved out to start their own homogeneous states in Europe and Asia?
|
On June 10 2016 01:15 SK.Testie wrote:
Well we accept that genes matter for physical differences, but the minute it gets internal everyone freezes up. X race is taller on average, X race is faster on average, X race is stronger on average, X race has a smaller dick on average. But the moment you say X race is more impulsive and thus more violent everyone says 'NO'. Which is confusing to a lot of people. Because you're saying, "ok genes say we have skin, eyes, nose, hair, teeth, medical conditions to the point of people needing different medications" but the moment there is a mental difference it's "NO".
It's up to anti-racists to combat that. And they have to do it calmly and succinctly of point, counterpoint. Point, counterpoint. To say there's no reason for racism to exist is kind of silly considering we segregated ourselves naturally thousands of years ago. Possibly due to being sick of violently reacting with one another.
Except that This Is factually incorrect. "X race is Y" isn't correct at all. Variation in humans is almost entirely due to historical geographic distribution and isolation, not some magical "race" gene. There is nothing genetic about race and it is quite likely that a random white guy genetically resembles a random black guy more so than he does the next random white guy.
Oh, and we didn't segregate ourselves thousands of years ago based on race. The initial humans were of the same "race" and migrated around the world from Africa. Physical variation arose from the subsequent geographic isolation.
|
The Guardian summarizes the platform of Clinton and Trump.
Criminal justice
Clinton: End the era of mass incarceration, reform mandatory minimum sentences, and end private prisons. Encourage the use of strategies such as police body cameras and end racial profiling to rebuild trust between law enforcement and communities. Help formerly incarcerated individuals successfully re-enter society. Supports the death penalty for “particularly heinous crimes”.
Trump: Has said little during the campaign, but past statements suggest a “tough on crime” approach including longer prison sentences. In the wake of police shootings, he has said: “I have to say that the police are absolutely mistreated and misunderstood.” Supports the death penalty for those who kill police officers.
Economy
Live Bernie Sanders meets with Obama at White House – campaign live
Follow live coverage from the 2016 campaign as Sanders is expected to meet with Obama after his primary battle with Hillary Clinton
Read more
Clinton: Raise the federal minimum wage to $12 an hour, with local governments free to set minimums above that level. Tighten the tax code to make sure “millionaires don’t pay lower rates than their secretaries”. Ask Congress for at least $275bn to invest in infrastructure. Every worker entitled to up to 12 weeks of paid family leave and an additional 12 weeks of paid medical leave.
Trump: Create jobs. Get smart businessmen from Wall Street to run the economy because they have the expertise. Tax relief for middle-class Americans; simplify the tax code to reduce the headaches people face in preparing their taxes. “We’ve spent $4tn trying to topple various people. If we could’ve spent that $4tn in the United States to fix our roads, our bridges and all of the other problems, we would’ve been a lot better off.”
Environment
Clinton: Set national goals to have 500m solar panels installed; generate enough renewable energy to power every home in America; cut energy waste in homes, schools and hospitals by a third; and reduce American oil consumption by a third. Launch a $60bn Clean Energy Challenge to partner with states, cities and rural communities and a $30bn plan to revitalise coal communities.
Trump: “Snowing in Texas and Louisiana, record setting freezing temperatures throughout the country and beyond. Global warming is an expensive hoax!” – tweet from 29 January 2014. Aggressively use coal, fracking and oil. Cut funding for the Environmental Protection Agency.
Foreign policy
Clinton: Thought to be more hawkish and interventionist than Obama. A leading advocate for the military intervention in Libya and argued for military intervention in Syria, which the president ultimately rejected. Strong support for Israel but endorses Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran. Clinton voted in favour of the Iraq war in 2002, which she now says she regrets.
Trump: “America first” and “stay unpredictable” approach. Hold summits with Russia and China soon after election and seek to regain their respect by showing strength. Destroy Isis in Iraq and Syria and tear up Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran. Tell US allies in Nato to pay their fair share or risk losing protection. Trump claims he did not support the Iraq war and says: “We are getting out of the nation-building business.”
Gun control
Clinton: Strengthen background checks and close dangerous loopholes in the current system; hold irresponsible dealers and manufacturers accountable; keep guns out of the hands of terrorists, domestic abusers, other violent criminals and the severely mentally ill.
Trump and Clinton on guns: two visions of race, justice and policing in the US
Read more
Trump: “The second amendment to our constitution is clear. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed upon. Period.” Prosecute more violent criminals in cities such as Baltimore and Chicago and empower law-abiding gun owners to defend themselves. Trump owns a firearm and is endorsed by the National Rifle Association.
Healthcare
Clinton: Retain Obamacare. Crack down on rising prescription drug prices and hold drug companies accountable so they get ahead by investing in research, not jacking up costs. Protect women’s access to reproductive healthcare, including contraception and safe, legal abortion.
Trump: Repeal Obamacare on day one. Oppose cuts to Medicaid and Medicare. Trump says he is now pro-life. However his campaign statements differ from policies laid out on his website, making his approach uncertain. It does not appear to include any major expansion of healthcare coverage.
Immigration
Clinton: Comprehensive reform to create a pathway to citizenship, keep families together and enable millions of workers to come out of the shadows. Defend Obama’s executive actions to provide deportation relief for Dreamers and parents of Americans and lawful residents. End family detention and close private immigrant detention centers.
Trump: Build a wall along the Mexican border that Mexico will pay for. Deport 11 million undocumented migrants, which opponents say is both callous and physically impossible. End birthright citizenship. “Gangs, drug traffickers and cartels have freely exploited our open borders and committed vast numbers of crimes inside the United States ... We have the moral high ground here, and all the leverage.”
Trade
Clinton: After some prevarication, came out against the Trans-Pacific Partnership, despite helping negotiate it during her time as secretary of state. She said at a debate in October: “It was just finally negotiated last week, and in looking at it, it didn’t meet my standards, my standards for more new, good jobs for Americans, for raising wages for Americans.”
Trump: Slams the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Argues that since China joined the World Trade Organisation, Americans have witnessed the closure of more than 50,000 factories and the loss of tens of millions of jobs. Plans to bring China to the bargaining table by declaring it a currency manipulator and revive US manufacturing by putting an end to China’s “illegal export subsidies and lax labour and environmental standards”.
University education
Clinton: Says students should never have to borrow to pay for tuition, books and fees to attend a four-year public college in their state under the New College Compact. Students will do their part by contributing their earnings from working 10 hours a week. Families will do their part by making an affordable and realistic family contribution.
Trump: Little evidence of a coherent policy, but he has said there is no reason the federal government should profit from student loans. Trump has also been forced to defend his own Trump University, the subject of an ongoing court case.
I like Hillary's program, it makes sense even though I wish she went further on many issues, and her foreign policy agenda which is going to be in the continuity of every American president since the 70's (except for Bush junior, whose positions were an exception).
I hope she doesn't slide on the right when time comes to convince undecided voters (it will probably happen, although she will have pressure from the left of the party and the Sanders movement not to drift too much).
In many ways, we are heading for a continuity with Obama's positions, which is excellent, excellent news in my opinion.
source
|
On June 10 2016 01:17 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2016 01:15 SK.Testie wrote:
considering we segregated ourselves naturally thousands of years ago. Possibly due to being sick of violently reacting with one another. Sorry, just to be clear, you think the white people and the black people and the Asian people were all living together in Africa and then the Asians and the whites moved out to start their own homogeneous states in Europe and Asia?
No the general consensus right now is that we all left Africa at X points in history etc.
|
On June 10 2016 01:19 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2016 01:15 SK.Testie wrote:
Well we accept that genes matter for physical differences, but the minute it gets internal everyone freezes up. X race is taller on average, X race is faster on average, X race is stronger on average, X race has a smaller dick on average. But the moment you say X race is more impulsive and thus more violent everyone says 'NO'. Which is confusing to a lot of people. Because you're saying, "ok genes say we have skin, eyes, nose, hair, teeth, medical conditions to the point of people needing different medications" but the moment there is a mental difference it's "NO".
It's up to anti-racists to combat that. And they have to do it calmly and succinctly of point, counterpoint. Point, counterpoint. To say there's no reason for racism to exist is kind of silly considering we segregated ourselves naturally thousands of years ago. Possibly due to being sick of violently reacting with one another. Except that This Is factually incorrect. "X race is Y" isn't correct at all. Variation in humans is almost entirely due to historical geographic distribution and isolation, not some magical "race" gene. There is nothing genetic about race and it is quite likely that a random white guy genetically resembles a random black guy more so than he does the next random white guy. Oh, and we didn't segregate ourselves thousands of years ago based on race. The initial humans were of the same "race" and migrated around the world from Africa. Physical variation arose from the subsequent geographic isolation.
Well Asians are shorter than Netherlanders. That's a correct assumption, right? So it's safe to say that men from the Netherlands are taller than men from SEA as a group. Correct?
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
foreign policy is still all about the middle east to the public it seems but the biggest foreign policy issue is the tpp and that will get passed with modifications under hillary , but not trump.
|
On June 10 2016 01:13 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2016 00:34 biology]major wrote:On June 10 2016 00:20 Mohdoo wrote:On June 10 2016 00:11 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 09 2016 23:29 Mohdoo wrote:
Black people are more impulsive because they are usually in poor neighborhoods where everyone is black and poor and have been poor forever. There's a huge amount of hopelessness regarding economic mobility. Got nothing to lose, so why not? For this reason, violence and impulsivity are closely tied to socioeconomic status/ poverty levels. On a related note, the black community tends to (as a whole) be in less affluent areas, but an educated, middle class black man wouldn't be expected to be more violent or impulsive than a poor, struggling white man. Right. Sorry if my post didn't imply the last part of your thought. It's not about being black, it's about being hopeless. People who are hopeless take significantly more risks than people who have stability to and success. Agree with you're reasoning for the most part but you can't just exclude the reverse possibility: black people are in worse condition because of their impulsivity(or any genetic reason). I think it is an issue that compounds on itself. Because they had no hope, they got hopeless and reckless. Being hopeless and reckless made things much worse. Can I blame them? Not really. It's an issue that is going to take a lot of coordination and cooperation. I don't subscribe to the belief that it is reasonable or even feasible for these disasters of areas to just pick themselves up. There's way too much momentum. I strongly believe in the idea of blasting areas like this with a ton of programs and aggressive efforts to just utterly transform the areas. Reaching out to 50 kids while 60 kids are involved in gangs just isn't enough. It is an infection. You can't just put bandages on it. It needs medicine, treatment, follow ups and prevention of relapse. There is just SO much keeping all this going. It's gotten so toxic that there's really no delicate touch that will do anything in some areas.
Yeah it's a complicated multi factorial issue that requires a massive effort. the genes argument doesn't do anything to help them anyways, ok so if they have genes that lead to impulsive behavior now what? There is no solution for that. The solutions exist culturally. Get rid of gang/hood culture, and have good leadership for black people. Their leadership is horrible, Obama could have guided the discourse better, but other than that he was their best role model. They need more role models, more leaders emphasizing the important things like working hard and education. Unfortunately those topics aren't as sexy as drugs and hoes so hip hop/rap artists have basically taken over. No fathers to guide the kids either, which is pretty essential.
|
United States44283 Posts
On June 10 2016 01:22 SK.Testie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2016 01:17 KwarK wrote:On June 10 2016 01:15 SK.Testie wrote:
considering we segregated ourselves naturally thousands of years ago. Possibly due to being sick of violently reacting with one another. Sorry, just to be clear, you think the white people and the black people and the Asian people were all living together in Africa and then the Asians and the whites moved out to start their own homogeneous states in Europe and Asia? No the general consensus right now is that we all left Africa at X points in history etc.
What colour do you think the people leaving Africa were? Do you think they left because they didn't want to live with the Africans anymore?
I ask because you said that the different races segregated themselves.
|
On June 10 2016 01:15 SK.Testie wrote:
Well we accept that genes matter for physical differences, but the minute it gets internal everyone freezes up. X race is taller on average, X race is faster on average, X race is stronger on average, X race has a smaller dick on average. But the moment you say X race is more impulsive and thus more violent everyone says 'NO'. Which is confusing to a lot of people. Because you're saying, "ok genes say we have skin, eyes, nose, hair, teeth, medical conditions to the point of people needing different medications" but the moment there is a mental difference it's "NO".
It's up to anti-racists to combat that. And they have to do it calmly and succinctly of point, counterpoint. Point, counterpoint. To say there's no reason for racism to exist is kind of silly considering we segregated ourselves naturally thousands of years ago. Possibly due to being sick of violently reacting with one another.
The taller / faster and everything else is heavily linked to the living condition ... Mankind as a specie as the particularity to develop after birth quite a lot, and to be designed to adapt to its surrounding. For exemple, the height of a guy is in part genetic, but that genetic part basically define its potential of growth : the actual height that an individual will effectively have will depend on a lot of things (with insufficient food, the body reserve the energy for the most important feature of our body).
Not to mention that within the group "black" the difference in height are way bigger than between an average "black" and "white". Pygmee anyone ?
You are not arguing about "race" (understand skin color), but about populations.
|
bernie is speaking in the rose garden rn
|
The problem with your theory Testie is you are ignoring the developmental effects of an individuals environment on those "internal" factors like behavior.
You are not your genes only is the consensus and what we are increasingly finding out is that what happened with your parents and grand parents can be passed down as well through epigenetics. Now look at African Americans in the US who have had a really hard time historically. This effect snowballs not just from a socioeconomic standpoint (making it harder for them to move upward and out of poverty because the system is biased against them) but also the tolls on their biology from these shitty conditions that can have impacts through multiple generations. These things can impact their minds and bodies in adverse ways. Couple that with a system that does them no favors and their own developed cultural attitudes in reaction to all this? Its a cluster fuck for the poor. As a side point about violence and poor whites? Well you bring up Appalachia and that is rural area, not really comparable to the much higher densities of urban ones which poor blacks are mostly in.
This is a very complex problem that incorporates a shit ton of factors. That is not to say elements of what you are saying aren't wrong, personal responsibility has a role to play as well as some elements of black culture being counter productive. But place those things into the historical and current place of African Americans in this country and you can easily see why some of those self destructive elements of culture arose and how overall they have a lot of extra barriers and factors working against them that make it harder for the average person to succeed. You have to think on a larger scale here
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
http://www.vox.com/2016/6/9/11867810/bernie-sanders-obama-future-democrats
this guy is basically right but still handling some bernie supporters with kids gloves. biggest obstacle for bernie is obama, who would be able to challenge the tenuous link between bernie's goals and bernie's policies for the youth. this link is tenuously maintained by a combination of lack of experience/knowledge and receptivity to anti-hillary propaganda.
|
On June 10 2016 01:15 SK.Testie wrote:
Well we accept that genes matter for physical differences, but the minute it gets internal everyone freezes up. X race is taller on average, X race is faster on average, X race is stronger on average, X race has a smaller dick on average. But the moment you say X race is more impulsive and thus more violent everyone says 'NO'. Which is confusing to a lot of people. Because you're saying, "ok genes say we have skin, eyes, nose, hair, teeth, medical conditions to the point of people needing different medications" but the moment there is a mental difference it's "NO".
It's up to anti-racists to combat that. And they have to do it calmly and succinctly of point, counterpoint. Point, counterpoint. To say there's no reason for racism to exist is kind of silly considering we segregated ourselves naturally thousands of years ago. Possibly due to being sick of violently reacting with one another.
There are far, far more things that determine your "impulsivity" than there are determining how your body's enzymes metabolizes drugs. I can literally do an experiment where I take enzymes produced by one person and enzymes from another person and see exactly what they do to drug metabolism in a culture. Similarly, I can isolate growth factors from specific genes and see how cells respond to them if I'm interested in them.
If you're going to make a causal claim-which is what you're really saying about race here, that "X race is more violent because they are X race"-you would need to be able to produce a similar experiment for violence and race or control away all associations between violence and race. Have fun with that.
Look at UC Berkeley's sexual discrimination case in the 70s. A higher percentage of men than women got into the department. That's a factual statement. But they didn't get in because they were men, they got in because they applied to easier departments-so the first statement doesn't actually help us get a good understanding of the situation at all.
|
On June 10 2016 01:26 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2016 01:13 Mohdoo wrote:On June 10 2016 00:34 biology]major wrote:On June 10 2016 00:20 Mohdoo wrote:On June 10 2016 00:11 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 09 2016 23:29 Mohdoo wrote:
Black people are more impulsive because they are usually in poor neighborhoods where everyone is black and poor and have been poor forever. There's a huge amount of hopelessness regarding economic mobility. Got nothing to lose, so why not? For this reason, violence and impulsivity are closely tied to socioeconomic status/ poverty levels. On a related note, the black community tends to (as a whole) be in less affluent areas, but an educated, middle class black man wouldn't be expected to be more violent or impulsive than a poor, struggling white man. Right. Sorry if my post didn't imply the last part of your thought. It's not about being black, it's about being hopeless. People who are hopeless take significantly more risks than people who have stability to and success. Agree with you're reasoning for the most part but you can't just exclude the reverse possibility: black people are in worse condition because of their impulsivity(or any genetic reason). I think it is an issue that compounds on itself. Because they had no hope, they got hopeless and reckless. Being hopeless and reckless made things much worse. Can I blame them? Not really. It's an issue that is going to take a lot of coordination and cooperation. I don't subscribe to the belief that it is reasonable or even feasible for these disasters of areas to just pick themselves up. There's way too much momentum. I strongly believe in the idea of blasting areas like this with a ton of programs and aggressive efforts to just utterly transform the areas. Reaching out to 50 kids while 60 kids are involved in gangs just isn't enough. It is an infection. You can't just put bandages on it. It needs medicine, treatment, follow ups and prevention of relapse. There is just SO much keeping all this going. It's gotten so toxic that there's really no delicate touch that will do anything in some areas. Their leadership is horrible, Obama could have guided the discourse better, but other than that he was their best role model.
In his defense, I think making a legitimate effort to help blacks in the US would have defined his legacy. It would have been "The first black president just focused on helping black people the whole time". Instead, he's defined his administration in more...high level ways? But I don't think it was "viable" for him to go hard on it. It would have come across very poorly.
|
On June 10 2016 01:14 NukeD wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2016 00:54 SolaR- wrote:On June 10 2016 00:44 Biff The Understudy wrote:On June 10 2016 00:34 biology]major wrote:On June 10 2016 00:20 Mohdoo wrote:On June 10 2016 00:11 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 09 2016 23:29 Mohdoo wrote:
Black people are more impulsive because they are usually in poor neighborhoods where everyone is black and poor and have been poor forever. There's a huge amount of hopelessness regarding economic mobility. Got nothing to lose, so why not? For this reason, violence and impulsivity are closely tied to socioeconomic status/ poverty levels. On a related note, the black community tends to (as a whole) be in less affluent areas, but an educated, middle class black man wouldn't be expected to be more violent or impulsive than a poor, struggling white man. Right. Sorry if my post didn't imply the last part of your thought. It's not about being black, it's about being hopeless. People who are hopeless take significantly more risks than people who have stability to and success. Agree with you're reasoning for the most part but you can't just exclude the reverse possibility: black people are in worse condition because of their impulsivity(or any genetic reason). Except that at different times and different place, the role of the violent (and suppressed) minority has varied wildly. Go to Romania, and you can take any racist post in this thread and replace the word "black" by "gypsy" to get a stereotypical right wing discourse. In France it would include the arab populations. In Russia the Chechen and other Ural people. etc etc.. Always with the same arguments: those people are worst off because their race is inferior, whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean. What is universal is that when people have perspectives, are not subject to racism and have accessed to an equal level of education they are infinitely less likely to turn out criminals. Nuked provides a great example of racism that im willing to fight against. People should be individually defined by their own character and abilities, and those unfair groupings of people not only holds no merit but is completely unnecessary and only exemplifies how much of a shitbag you are. Whoa this got blown way out of proportion. I am not racist lol. My point was people are different and that races are different. Not worse, different. If that makes me racist than i guess i am.
You are implying that a group is inferior because they are more impulsive. Typically, if you are impulsive you are most likely intellectually inferior. Therefore, you are saying black people are less intelligent than other races.
|
On June 10 2016 01:58 SolaR- wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2016 01:14 NukeD wrote:On June 10 2016 00:54 SolaR- wrote:On June 10 2016 00:44 Biff The Understudy wrote:On June 10 2016 00:34 biology]major wrote:On June 10 2016 00:20 Mohdoo wrote:On June 10 2016 00:11 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 09 2016 23:29 Mohdoo wrote:
Black people are more impulsive because they are usually in poor neighborhoods where everyone is black and poor and have been poor forever. There's a huge amount of hopelessness regarding economic mobility. Got nothing to lose, so why not? For this reason, violence and impulsivity are closely tied to socioeconomic status/ poverty levels. On a related note, the black community tends to (as a whole) be in less affluent areas, but an educated, middle class black man wouldn't be expected to be more violent or impulsive than a poor, struggling white man. Right. Sorry if my post didn't imply the last part of your thought. It's not about being black, it's about being hopeless. People who are hopeless take significantly more risks than people who have stability to and success. Agree with you're reasoning for the most part but you can't just exclude the reverse possibility: black people are in worse condition because of their impulsivity(or any genetic reason). Except that at different times and different place, the role of the violent (and suppressed) minority has varied wildly. Go to Romania, and you can take any racist post in this thread and replace the word "black" by "gypsy" to get a stereotypical right wing discourse. In France it would include the arab populations. In Russia the Chechen and other Ural people. etc etc.. Always with the same arguments: those people are worst off because their race is inferior, whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean. What is universal is that when people have perspectives, are not subject to racism and have accessed to an equal level of education they are infinitely less likely to turn out criminals. Nuked provides a great example of racism that im willing to fight against. People should be individually defined by their own character and abilities, and those unfair groupings of people not only holds no merit but is completely unnecessary and only exemplifies how much of a shitbag you are. Whoa this got blown way out of proportion. I am not racist lol. My point was people are different and that races are different. Not worse, different. If that makes me racist than i guess i am. You are implying that a group is inferior because they are more impulsive. Typically, if you are impulsive you are most likely intellectually inferior. Therefore, you are saying black people are less intelligent than other races.
I think the widely varying definitions of "intelligence" make conversations like this difficult because everyone is meaning something different.
|
On June 10 2016 01:58 SolaR- wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2016 01:14 NukeD wrote:On June 10 2016 00:54 SolaR- wrote:On June 10 2016 00:44 Biff The Understudy wrote:On June 10 2016 00:34 biology]major wrote:On June 10 2016 00:20 Mohdoo wrote:On June 10 2016 00:11 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 09 2016 23:29 Mohdoo wrote:
Black people are more impulsive because they are usually in poor neighborhoods where everyone is black and poor and have been poor forever. There's a huge amount of hopelessness regarding economic mobility. Got nothing to lose, so why not? For this reason, violence and impulsivity are closely tied to socioeconomic status/ poverty levels. On a related note, the black community tends to (as a whole) be in less affluent areas, but an educated, middle class black man wouldn't be expected to be more violent or impulsive than a poor, struggling white man. Right. Sorry if my post didn't imply the last part of your thought. It's not about being black, it's about being hopeless. People who are hopeless take significantly more risks than people who have stability to and success. Agree with you're reasoning for the most part but you can't just exclude the reverse possibility: black people are in worse condition because of their impulsivity(or any genetic reason). Except that at different times and different place, the role of the violent (and suppressed) minority has varied wildly. Go to Romania, and you can take any racist post in this thread and replace the word "black" by "gypsy" to get a stereotypical right wing discourse. In France it would include the arab populations. In Russia the Chechen and other Ural people. etc etc.. Always with the same arguments: those people are worst off because their race is inferior, whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean. What is universal is that when people have perspectives, are not subject to racism and have accessed to an equal level of education they are infinitely less likely to turn out criminals. Nuked provides a great example of racism that im willing to fight against. People should be individually defined by their own character and abilities, and those unfair groupings of people not only holds no merit but is completely unnecessary and only exemplifies how much of a shitbag you are. Whoa this got blown way out of proportion. I am not racist lol. My point was people are different and that races are different. Not worse, different. If that makes me racist than i guess i am. You are implying that a group is inferior because they are more impulsive. Typically, if you are impulsive you are most likely intellectually inferior. Therefore, you are saying black people are less intelligent than other races.
Yes thats exactly my point thank you. If you will excuse me now, I have to go burn some crosses with my Croatian friends but we will catch up later!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
