BLM destroyed
- Thread starter 3rd Raikage
- Start date
3rd Raikage
Member
Okay so now it's because of the history and socio economic factors? So not racism? Or is it both? Which is it?
Is the bad socio economic status of blacks the fault of whites? How long are you going to blame whites for something the previus generations did 100-300 years ago? in what time frame do you see it as as a valid argument to blame all the problems of black people on history? Would you also do it hundred years from now if their socio economic status would still be as bad?
Also where's your proof that the situation of the blacka today has a causal link to the times they were enslaved? These young black men didn't get treated badly. They chose to make bad choices. In fact for the last 30-40 years blacks have been given the same equal chances as whites. There has been a vast improvement in terms of treatment of minorities. Yet you still play the victim card? How much more longer are you going to treat them as victims? Do you think that that will help them in their life? If they always think that there's some racist out there ready to ruin their lives they're never going to take responsibility of their own lives.
My point also stands with BLM: instead of victimizing blacks they should be empowering them!
HashiraMadara
Active member
Blame something that happened? Equal chances? Kid, let's pause logic: have you ever been poor before living in a dog eat dog world?
Back to logic: Human brain formulates ideals/beliefs in regards to trends or what is supposedly a norm in the residing environment. As long as it environment doesn't change same as responses to it. What am I saying?
Behavioral sink:
You must be registered for see links
It doesn't matter if it is 10000000000000000 years from now: the projects will always be a dysfunctional influence to a growing human's mind. From slavery times until now none has changed to improved the residing places of many black Americans. Meaning a "ghetto" doctrine sits well in the hippocampus whether given "equal" chances or not. Meaning if he grows up in the same environment he is most likely going to be a junky/convict than not(whether he attends same schools etc. or not)
Above is enough to refute this nonsense. I am not for "victim card" but I am against "holier than though" who formulates fallacy arguments to disprove PTMD caused by slavery.
You mistaken me for someone who supports a BLM? Or any movement for that matter...
Can't see shit I am in my office...
Last edited:
3rd Raikage
Member
Yeah I get it; you put much weight on the enviroment and the socioeconomic factors when it comes to the high crimes rates of blacks. And you know what, you are partly right. In general socio economic factors do play a large part in crime numbers . But you cannot keep using it as a default to for your approach on this matter. By that logic segregated japanese people who are also a minority in U.S would not have been able to rise out of the "jail of segregation". But they did. And are japanese ovepresented in the crime statistics in the same way blacks are? No they aren't.
Between the 16th and 18th century white europeans were enslaved by arabs and muslims in the so called '
You must be registered for see links
'. It has been estimated that 1 million to 1.25 million white Christian Europeans were enslaved in North Africa. For 200 years. And what happened to white generations in Europe after that? Did they start regressive behaviour and began sulking in their own misery stopping all progress in general all because of this terrible injustice ithat had occured to the previous generations? No. In fact what soon followed in the european culture was the Age of Enlightenment that created the basis for secular democrasies and scientific progress.Meanwhile in America it has been almost 150 years since the Civil War ended slavery. Much has happened after that and by much I mean much progress. Maybe not in terms of the segregation issue but still. A tremendous progress has happened and blacks have had equal chances with whites for decades now. Despite of that blacks keep being overpresented in crime statistics. They keep dropping out of high school. They keep being overpresented in jail population.
Single motherhood rate in black community increased from 20% to 70% in the same course of time the Civil Rights Movement had made such tremendous improvements.
If you look at the those statistics now and statistics 30-40 years ago you'll realize that not much has changed in black communities, in fact some phenomenons/situations have gotten even worse. So do you think that U.S is more racist now than it was 30-40 years ago? If not then you can't blame it on racism like many people here on NB do. And if you can't blame it on racism then the only thing you have left is the ghetto culture. And that was my point from the start. There is no institutional racism. There is no racism phenomenom in the U.S police force (although I do agree police brutality in general is a problem in U.S, a big problem). The problem isn't racism, it's the culture.
And while you keep bringing up the cycle of crime in this doomed ghetto culture (as you implied that blacks are doomed to commit crimes because of their surroundings) you have to keep in mind that while you may have some valid points you are mostly victimizing these people. That cannot be happening forever, because in the end it's a matter of choices. Now that they have the choice to go to public elementary schools, the choice to go to high school, the choice to go to college and when after all those options they keep chosing the wrong path you can't keep using the victimizing rhetoric you are using. Whites cannot do everything for black people. They just can't. They change has to come from within now that blacks have the chances to succes as much as whites have.
Blacks need people like Eric Thomas to empower them, to call out their self-victimizing mentality. Something that BLM is not doing, instead it's doing the opposite and that's why I made this thread.
Last edited:
HashiraMadara
Active member
Okay one little fun fact to differentiate "African" and "African American" in America: African migrants(not inborn African Americans) to anywhere in the world are the most successful in academic universities
You must be registered for see links
You must be registered for see links
You must be registered for see links
You must be registered for see links
The same thing happens in South Africa, black migrants who come here become more educated and qualified than any race because?:
Slavery doesn't affect community solely. It creates mental barriers and doctrines don't wont "simply end"...
And they keep on asking themselves why do inborn African Americans always fail...
3rd Raikage
Member
I opened the first article and the actual reason behind what you are arguing is given in the middle of the article:
So it's based on selective immigration. You are basically comparing a selected group of educated black people to all the other black people in U.S. You can't compare a stabile group to an un-stabile group and then make a conclusion based on that. It's not a valid conclusion.
In fact Nigeria which is the country the first article focused on has the
You must be registered for see links
, which is near to the
You must be registered for see links
. That's almost 20 points lower than most of the average IQ's in European countries and in U.S. So it just seems that U.S selected the best of them. So the succes of these most educated Nigerians really tells us nothing about the reasons behind the bad socio economic state of blacks in the U.S.
Last edited:
HashiraMadara
Active member
Lightbringer
Active member
Yes, you are. Poverty is directly related to crime. When you hear the term "ghetto", do you imagine a predominately white population?
African Americas were starting to be considered middle class around the 80s up until Reagan outsourced many jobs to China and companies in those neighborhoods started to pull out, causing the people that live there to lose their jobs and not have many opportunities nearby. This caused the rise in poverty and mostly the minorities being affected by it. As an example, just look up the Philadelphia Badlands.
But even before that you had mortgage discrimination which only let black people take out mortgages for households in certain communities which contributed to racial segregation even after the Jim Crow laws.
And then you have the war on drugs, which again, primarily targeted minorities and the police brutality which target not only minorities, but low income households overall, which caused the mentally of "them vs us".
The U.S. has deep deep roots racism against Blacks since its foundation. Hell, Jim Crow laws was only 50 years ago, which means African Americans weren't really considered free up until that point. The War on Drugs is even called the New Jim Crow laws. So as you can see, we still have a long way to go.
If you're trying to make the argument that this is all genetic, that black people are genetically predisposed to crime and laziness more so than any other race, then that is just racist thinking through and through. It is scientifically absurd to even presume that.
People have been ignoring issues that plague the black community for decades and continue to do so, which is why movements such as "Black Lives Matter" have formed because in the U.S. we really just dismiss any notion of Black suffering and continue to pretend like everything is either their fault or there is nothing wrong with current situation.
Growing up in a certain environment has an affect on your mentality and character, and if that environment is fashioned by hatred and little financial opportunity, then yeah crime and gang violence will occur.
Last edited:
Tantalus Thief
Active member
3rd Raikage
Member
Just in case you are trying to make an argument that race in humans doesn't exist and that genes have got nothing to do with the bad socio economic status of blacks then you are wrong.
Richard Dawkins, the Oxford professor of biology:
You must be registered for see links
You must be registered for see links
You must be registered for see links
This study proves that when a black child is adopted into a white family, the iq of the black child is near his biological parents even when he grows up. Ruling out the impact of enviroment as the reason for the iq differences with white and blacks.
You must be registered for see links
So yes there are clear genetic differences between black.and whites in U.S and there's nothing racist about saying it.
Last edited:
HashiraMadara
Active member
Interestingly enough your answer with this whole situation is in your post. "You can't compare a stabile group to an un-stabile group and then make a conclusion based on that. It's not a valid conclusion."
Meaning there is a "stimuli" that cause the instability on the American blacks... Care to elaborate what it is to me...
That is nothing to surprise me. My country has it lower around 72. However biology should tell you of "genetic variance" a 2 million years can give compared to the less than 100 000 years the more genetically homogeneous Europeans and Asians had hence "out of africa hypothesis" :sdo:
Going back to what you mentioned: Africans do not form something called an "average curve" because a single village has more genetic differences that a white and Chinese guy... #learn science before applying it.
From the given, you can conclude: The best of Africans are the best in the world while the worst of them are the worst in the world HENCE genetic variation
Do you know a place called Grimsby?
Lightbringer
Active member
I absolutely love how you single out my one comment and completely ignore the important points of what I said.
Ok and he has stated nothing that benefits your argument. There is no such thing as a race that is superior genetically.
Does one race have some superpower I don't know about? Each race has its intelligent, dumb, strong, and weak individuals. That is not exclusive to one race.
That study doesn't prove anything. You obviously can't comprehend that every individual is genetically different, that means every person's brain functions differently than one another. THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT ONE RACE HAS A PREDOMINATELY MORE DEVELOPED BRAIN THAN THE OTHER SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY ARE THAT RACE!
By your logic, there can't be no such thing as a black person with a higher IQ than a white person. Do you realize how stupid that is? Further more, IQ is not even a reliable method of determining one's intelligence.
Again, I will reiterate, genetic differences does not mean one race having a substantial genetic advantage over another.
Oh and as for Richard Dawkins:
"Social construct"? Forget it. Race is biologically real. But it's irrelevant to anything that matters. We're all HUMAN.
So yeah, there goes your argument by your validated source.
I'm done with you. I'm not wasting my time trying to debate reality and logic with a racist.
Last edited:
3rd Raikage
Member
No but statistically speaking it does mean that one race differentiates from another. For example what I posted in the op:
"3) Overall, 18% of Asians have an IQ over 120, 10% of whites do and only 1% of blacks. Nearly 84% of blacks have an IQ below 100, which is slightly below the average IQ for whites. The ratio of white Americans to black Americans who have an IQ over 125 is 30:1.PNG
>The IQ gap between blacks and whites in the United States—15-17 points—has not changed since it was first measured nearly a century ago. Both races’ test scores rose during the century, but the gap remained as large at the end of the century as at the beginning despite considerable social change."
You completely missed the point. I just proved you that the average iq of blacks is lower than the average iq of whites. I also proved that majority of genetic researchers think that genes is a valid argument to explain someone's socio economic succes. And here you are talking about individuals? What are you even on about.
No, I never said that. This is your own strawman. You clearly don,t get the consept of average. I advise you to read my post again and focus on comprehending what I said instead of making your own strawman.
I just proved you race as a biological consept is real. That means each race differs from oneanother. For exampöe the some races have higher iq than others. If you don't think thats something to be called as "superior" then whatever. You can think whatever you want, but higher average iq is clearly an advantage and it correlates with socio economic succes as whites/japanese are the most succesful people in the world.
Same with dogs. Border collies are the smartest race in dogs. And there are other dog races that are not so intelligent on average.
No you didn't get it. If you look at the longer quote from Dawkins which posted in the start of my earlier post he says: ".We can happily agree that human racial classification is of no social value and is positively destructive of social and human relations. "
What Dawkins means that we shoud not differentiate races and their differencies in our day-to-day life. That just divides us. He is talking about humans sticking together in general. But he agrees that race is a biological consept and that for example "black" and "white" are used as variables in many scientific studies which study the iq differences.
You not being able to comprehend what I said doesn't mean I am a racist. Although you like to flash the racist card when you dont't want to face the facts.
It's important that we understand the genetic differences between races because that helps us to solve the problems and more efficiently and to understand the bigger picture.
HashiraMadara
Active member
You seem to be the only person here lacking biology and mathematics knowledge.
* Average(measure of central tendency):
"In colloquial language, an average is the sum of a list of numbers divided by the number of numbers in the list. In mathematics and statistics, this would be called the arithmetic mean. In statistics, mean, median, and mode are all known as measures of central tendency."
Average measures closely mean, or will work more accurately through a homogeneous ethinic group e.g European Whites, Chinese, etc.
Why? :
Less than 5 MYA the closest thing(call it gene X, most likely Homo erectus) to a human being formed in Africa. First wave of "X" leaves Africa... fast forward to around 2 MYA, Homo sapiens are fully formed roaming around Africa breeding. It took 1.8 MY before the first Homo sapiens to left Africa in exceedingly small reclusive groups.
Those small genetic fractions of what left Africa formed the rest of the world's humans(had less than 200 000 years to change genetically hence phenotypically with no major punctuated equilibrium assistance).
Meaning, wherever you are outside Africa, those groups are < 1% of the variation left in Africa.
Mathematically what this tells you: A single village in Africa, contains more difference within it than "a white guy and a Indian American). How do you draw an "average IQ" conclusion from such?
You must be registered for see links
I repeat: learn science before linking easily refutable "Gaussian articles" inspired by multi regional theory
Last edited:
3rd Raikage
Member
You seem to be going off the rails here. When comparing 10 000 african americans and 10 000 white americans the IQ gap between them is about 15 points (85 vs 100). This is the reality. The genetic history of our species has little to do with my argument. I'm only stating a statistical fact which is that 84% of african americans have an iq below 100. And only 1% has an IQ over 120. The ratio of white and black americans who have IQ over 125 is 30:1. I'm not bashing anyone just stating facts so that the bigger picture is clearer, so you can leave out the tone you are using and focus on what I'm saying. No need to take offence.
Care to elaborate how you think the genetical variability in Africa of has anything to do with the average iq of blacks in america? And it's not my conclusion. It's a statistical fact.
Last edited:
HashiraMadara
Active member
Well we started the argument with "blacks" ONLY NOW are you specifically mentioning African Americans
A slave trader has no interest in a wittingly begifted individual, he is looking for a strong, resilient not so thinking Juggernaut that will struggle to escape his leash. Hence the athletic Olympics being filled with more Eastern hemisphere slave descendants than Africans from Africa themselves...
Average depth of the ocean is 3,688 meters: This is far from reality as in the Ocean abyss is 4500 m to 6000 m and exits trenches which go to > 11 km depth(Mariana Trench). Meanwhile you absolutely nothing about ocean depth(looking at the 3,688m figure) yet the same cannot be said about a more homogeneous pool depth...
I will never take offense from a man who challenges my shame with logic. Offense only comes when an individual bashes fanatically with no intellectual reasoning disclosed e.g Sasukes World, Sleam Reaper(posts bunch of non sequitur)
Last edited:
I wasn't asking for the reasons behind said crime rate.
My point was, It's all well a good bringing up the argument of population size but if that 13% of the population commits 50% of the nations homicides, violate traffic laws at a higher rates than white (the majority) and such, Then they're going to have problems with the police. What else do you expect to happen?
Quote from Thomas sowell
Well in 1960, which would be almost 100 years after the end of slavery 22% of black kids grew up in homes with only 1 parent.
30 years later after the liberal welfare state that number had more than tripled, we can speculate on how much that 22% was due to the legacy of slavery.
but we know that, that tripling was not due to legacy of slavery, it was due to a legacy of a whole different set of policies and then you can look at so many other ways, Education, Stevenson High School (i think this was the high school he mentioned) in new york, You get in by passing a very tough exam, in 2012 the percentage of black students who had gotten into Stevenson High School was less than 1/10th of the percentage of black students who had gotten in Stevenson High School 33 years earlier.
Dunbar high school in Washington was an elite black high school for a very long time, in 1993 the number of kids out of Dunbar high school who went on to college was less than it was 60 years earlier, which would of been in the depths of the great depression.
look at the housing projects, the housing projects in the first half of the 20th century, within that first 100 years after slavery, Did not have the high crime rates, The murder rates, the graffiti and all the rest, None of that was there. In fact the new York times, pointed out that on Saturday mornings it was common in the housing project of this earlier era for parents to leave their doors unlocked because some of the parents could afford televisions and some couldn't, So the ones who had televisions would leave their doors unlocked and the kids from the other family's could come down and watch.
Well now the latest figures show that most people below the poverty line have two televisions and cable but they wouldn't dare leave their doors unlocked in a public housing project.
30 years later after the liberal welfare state that number had more than tripled, we can speculate on how much that 22% was due to the legacy of slavery.
but we know that, that tripling was not due to legacy of slavery, it was due to a legacy of a whole different set of policies and then you can look at so many other ways, Education, Stevenson High School (i think this was the high school he mentioned) in new york, You get in by passing a very tough exam, in 2012 the percentage of black students who had gotten into Stevenson High School was less than 1/10th of the percentage of black students who had gotten in Stevenson High School 33 years earlier.
Dunbar high school in Washington was an elite black high school for a very long time, in 1993 the number of kids out of Dunbar high school who went on to college was less than it was 60 years earlier, which would of been in the depths of the great depression.
look at the housing projects, the housing projects in the first half of the 20th century, within that first 100 years after slavery, Did not have the high crime rates, The murder rates, the graffiti and all the rest, None of that was there. In fact the new York times, pointed out that on Saturday mornings it was common in the housing project of this earlier era for parents to leave their doors unlocked because some of the parents could afford televisions and some couldn't, So the ones who had televisions would leave their doors unlocked and the kids from the other family's could come down and watch.
Well now the latest figures show that most people below the poverty line have two televisions and cable but they wouldn't dare leave their doors unlocked in a public housing project.
Video for said quote (skip to 3mins into the video) he also goes on to talk about other things.
And what exactly are BLM doing to help black people?.
Are they fighting to lower the High single mother rates among blacks?, The high Black on Black crime?, The Thug/Gang culture?
3rd Raikage
Member
Well that's my bad if I I made you think that I was referring to all the blacks in the world. My point from the start has been African Americans. That's why I have been referring to my op's statistics which are titled: ">Facts from the FBI and Department of Justice on blacks in America:". But maybe I used the term "black" too loosely. But in the context of the op it's more easier to say just blacks.
Blacks all over the world is a too vague consept and like you pointed out it contains many variabilities of genes so that you can't say "blacks are..." and expect it to apply to all the blacks in the world, because one could argue that there are different races among blacks themselves. However if we focus on African Americans, then there's little variability.
Yes, this is a good point and it would be a noteworthy one to discuss if we'd be discussin blacks generally.
This is also true, but I'd like to get back on your earlier point conserning this analogy. The post I didn't get the time to respond while I was at work, the post in where you said:
Do you have any proof for this? Why would the variability in genes of africans translate to variance in IQ of africans? I've never come across this argument before.
Do you mean that if we take this "best race of Africans" that has the most similar genes and take their best 5% and compare it to let's say Japanese best 5%, that the African "elite group" has higher average iq than the Japanese iq?
Or are you just referring to the links you posted earlier about school succes? Because that alone doesn't tell us if those african immigrants are "the best of all". Because like I said you took the elite group from africa and you compare their study results to all the japanese, white and black people in America that consist of really smart, smart, average and below average people. When you should be comparing the best of each group. I used earlier the word "stabile" and "unstabile'" but maybe they are wrong. I can't figure out the word I'm looking for (my native tongue isn't english), but I mean that either you should compare each race generally or you should compare them within their own categories. Not a certain category of a certain race and the general population of another race. Do you get what I'm saying?
That's good to hear. Although my op might be a little provocative as many people seem to think I'm only bashing blacks (racism). I should've probably phrased it differently. But all I'm saying is that:
-BLM in it's current form doesn't help the situation with african americans. They cannot be reasoned with and they do not tackle the real issues in black communities thus they deserve to get "destroyed". They victimise blacks when they should be empowering them
-Most of the problems within black communities are not due racism, but rather due to the ghetto culture, genes and bad choises.This is concluded from the fact that while U.S society has gotten more and more tolerant over the years the black community in some aspects has gotten even worse in terms of socio economic problems and the crime rates are still high or even higher than they were let's say 40-50 years ago.
I think that you agree with me on this? We are never going to solve the problem with blacks in america when we are not looking at the facts, but rather everyone screams racism. I also know that I cannot identify myself with the situation of a person that is born in the midst of a gang culture, but we should still be able to approach this issue pragmatically and leave all the BLM nonsense out of it.
Last edited:
Most of these "counter arguments" consist of two things;
I was hoping to see some try to rebut any of the points made by Ben Shapiro, but I got my hopes too high.
- Stating that they didn't watch the video
- Then proceeding to give their feelings
I was hoping to see some try to rebut any of the points made by Ben Shapiro, but I got my hopes too high.
HashiraMadara
Active member
It is a theoretical concept, very difficult to prove because of the almost bottomless genetic variety Africans has.
* Cognition is regarded as genetic factor... This is easily seen among the more homogeneous non Africans e.g "My God, Japanese are so smart", "ever been in a class with an Asian" etc.
Since Humans(homo sapiens) were regarded as the most cognitive(African origin) of all to emerge from the Homonidae great family, meaning the highly cognitive gene emerged exclusively from them(Since they out bred, outsmarted and outlived any another great hominid out there)...
Then that means it is highly unlikely to have a out of Africa gene of cognition gene caught through the migration that will > what made them successful in the first place: Why were those genes not making whatever species they were caught on make that species > humans...
e.g
There is a African in every category in the world, regardless of what the activity is:
- Chess Grandmaster
- Swimming
- Athletics
- Top 10 world IQ
Where as you may find an Indian indian/white/Jap/etc. in few of those categories but not all... Interestingly blacks follow what you call a viral growth in whatever activity they find interest in:
* Once they're thoroughly exposed to that particular sport, leisure, field etc. they over populate it etc
It is all linked to the wide genetic variety...
It seems you never spent time with many intelligent Africans on Physics/Maths classes. They leave many Japanese butthurt here. The problem is that they are few in numbers where as you always expect a Japanese to do well academically
Last edited: