Race being a Social Construct has a fair amount of truth in it.

Not Comms Officer · April 27, 2015, 08:07:54 PM

Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:06:01 PM

Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:04:57 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:02:56 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:56:42 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:53:39 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:50:15 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:47:51 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:44:47 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:41:25 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:40:22 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:36:59 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:34:55 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:28:25 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:20:00 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:16:59 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:13:22 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:12:03 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:07:16 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:04:16 PM
Nah, I'm more inclined to believe that hoodlum shenanigans are in ones DNA.
Which can clearly explain how blacks in the US are significantly more rowdy than blacks in Europe, Africa, or Latin America.

#logic
Because in Europe the Muslims are keeping them in order.
In America, we don't have the Islamic population for that.
What you said right there was a social condition. So you pretty much explained in your own post that the behavior of black people here is due to social conditions rather than racial whateverism.
It's in their genes to go wild when machete wielding nutjobs screaming Allahu Ackbar aren't around.
Even if that were the case, which it isn't, you haven't said anything about Latin America and Africa. Which aside from northern Africa (which is already Arab-majority), there aren't any Arabs around to "hold" the blacks back.

And again, what you said made no sense. "It's in their genes to go wild when machete wielding nutjobs screaming Allahu Ackbar aren't around." is so arbitrary and stupid and is just an uneducated assumption at best.
Because they were bred with the Spaniards and natives. Domestic bovine are tempered nothing like their wild European ancestors.
Not really. The conditions faced by blacks in Latin America are nearly the same faced by blacks in the US. As in being transported in slave ships. And look at how different outcomes the two groups had. And no, blacks weren't really bred with Spaniards and natives on any significant scale. A full 33% percent of Brazil's population is completely black, and yet they don't really have problems there like how the blacks here have problems.
Because the brazilians were smart. They took out the troublesome ones. They controlled the gene pool. They wouldn't have let Malcom X live.
lolwut? There's so much stupid in that statement that it's nearly off the charts.

Please tell me how a country of 150 million could possibly effectively root out "the troublesome ones" from a population of 50 million. And not to mention the logistical problems with doing such a thing. Anyways, that statement is made out of pure, refined stupid.
The evidence is there. If you chose to believe otherwise, then I respect your decision.
Oh, please show me this "evidence".
I've already show you.

Here is a supplemental flyer though.
The wild claims that Arabs keep black in check and that Brazil led a campaign to root out all "problematic" black people without posting any sources proving that those claims are true?

That's not evidence, that's crap that conspiracy sites like to post. LOL
Observe social standings and social engineering and you'll note.

"I am apt to suspect the Negroes to be naturally inferior to the Whites. There scarcely ever was a civilized nation of that complexion, nor even any individual, eminent either in action or speculation. No ingenious manufactures amongst them, no arts, no sciences. On the other hand, the most rude and barbarous of the Whites, such as the ancient Germans, the present Tartars, have still something eminent about them, in their valour, form of government, or some other particular. Such a uniform and constant difference could not happen, in so many countries and ages, if nature had not made an original distinction between these breeds of men. - Hume - of National Character, 1748
"In the hot countries the human being matures in all aspects earlier, but does not, however, reach the perfection of those in the temperate zones. Humanity is at its greatest perfection in the race of the whites. The yellow Indians do have a meager talent. The Negroes are far below them and at the lowest point are a part of the American peoples." - Kant - Physical Geography, 1756

What has changed since those times other than the now Americanized spelling of valor?
>citing books about black-white comparisons from the 18th Century as if they were legitimate

Here's an example of another massive crock of BS that was taken seriously by racial theorists at the time, and this was from the 19th and 20th Centuries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man
Except the philosophies of Kant, Hume, Schopenhauer, and the like have stood the test of time while the Pittdown man was quite scientifically debunked.
And there's not a single chance that all of those claims that anyone other than whites aren't human were made solely to justify colonial domination and enslavement? There's no empirical evidence whatsoever suggesting that blacks, Arabs, or whatever aren't human aside from crap made by fringe sources.
Who ever said that they're not human? They are. They're simply lesser humans.

"Lesser humans"

That doesn't even mean anything. You're either human or you aren't. There's no such thing as a "lesser" human. Proposing that such a thing exists are just toxic words that leads to violence.

DAS B00T x2 · April 27, 2015, 08:09:42 PM

Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:07:54 PM

Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:06:01 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:04:57 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:02:56 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:56:42 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:53:39 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:50:15 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:47:51 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:44:47 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:41:25 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:40:22 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:36:59 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:34:55 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:28:25 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:20:00 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:16:59 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:13:22 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:12:03 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:07:16 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:04:16 PM
Nah, I'm more inclined to believe that hoodlum shenanigans are in ones DNA.
Which can clearly explain how blacks in the US are significantly more rowdy than blacks in Europe, Africa, or Latin America.

#logic
Because in Europe the Muslims are keeping them in order.
In America, we don't have the Islamic population for that.
What you said right there was a social condition. So you pretty much explained in your own post that the behavior of black people here is due to social conditions rather than racial whateverism.
It's in their genes to go wild when machete wielding nutjobs screaming Allahu Ackbar aren't around.
Even if that were the case, which it isn't, you haven't said anything about Latin America and Africa. Which aside from northern Africa (which is already Arab-majority), there aren't any Arabs around to "hold" the blacks back.

And again, what you said made no sense. "It's in their genes to go wild when machete wielding nutjobs screaming Allahu Ackbar aren't around." is so arbitrary and stupid and is just an uneducated assumption at best.
Because they were bred with the Spaniards and natives. Domestic bovine are tempered nothing like their wild European ancestors.
Not really. The conditions faced by blacks in Latin America are nearly the same faced by blacks in the US. As in being transported in slave ships. And look at how different outcomes the two groups had. And no, blacks weren't really bred with Spaniards and natives on any significant scale. A full 33% percent of Brazil's population is completely black, and yet they don't really have problems there like how the blacks here have problems.
Because the brazilians were smart. They took out the troublesome ones. They controlled the gene pool. They wouldn't have let Malcom X live.
lolwut? There's so much stupid in that statement that it's nearly off the charts.

Please tell me how a country of 150 million could possibly effectively root out "the troublesome ones" from a population of 50 million. And not to mention the logistical problems with doing such a thing. Anyways, that statement is made out of pure, refined stupid.
The evidence is there. If you chose to believe otherwise, then I respect your decision.
Oh, please show me this "evidence".
I've already show you.

Here is a supplemental flyer though.
The wild claims that Arabs keep black in check and that Brazil led a campaign to root out all "problematic" black people without posting any sources proving that those claims are true?

That's not evidence, that's crap that conspiracy sites like to post. LOL
Observe social standings and social engineering and you'll note.

"I am apt to suspect the Negroes to be naturally inferior to the Whites. There scarcely ever was a civilized nation of that complexion, nor even any individual, eminent either in action or speculation. No ingenious manufactures amongst them, no arts, no sciences. On the other hand, the most rude and barbarous of the Whites, such as the ancient Germans, the present Tartars, have still something eminent about them, in their valour, form of government, or some other particular. Such a uniform and constant difference could not happen, in so many countries and ages, if nature had not made an original distinction between these breeds of men. - Hume - of National Character, 1748
"In the hot countries the human being matures in all aspects earlier, but does not, however, reach the perfection of those in the temperate zones. Humanity is at its greatest perfection in the race of the whites. The yellow Indians do have a meager talent. The Negroes are far below them and at the lowest point are a part of the American peoples." - Kant - Physical Geography, 1756

What has changed since those times other than the now Americanized spelling of valor?
>citing books about black-white comparisons from the 18th Century as if they were legitimate

Here's an example of another massive crock of BS that was taken seriously by racial theorists at the time, and this was from the 19th and 20th Centuries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man
Except the philosophies of Kant, Hume, Schopenhauer, and the like have stood the test of time while the Pittdown man was quite scientifically debunked.
And there's not a single chance that all of those claims that anyone other than whites aren't human were made solely to justify colonial domination and enslavement? There's no empirical evidence whatsoever suggesting that blacks, Arabs, or whatever aren't human aside from crap made by fringe sources.
Who ever said that they're not human? They are. They're simply lesser humans.
"Lesser humans"

That doesn't even mean anything. You're either human or you aren't. There's no such thing as a "lesser" human. Proposing that such a thing exists are just toxic words that leads to violence.

All beings have a default value of worth
Not all beings are equal
How is this a hard concept to grasp?

Not Comms Officer · April 27, 2015, 08:12:23 PM

Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:09:42 PM

Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:07:54 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:06:01 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:04:57 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:02:56 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:56:42 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:53:39 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:50:15 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:47:51 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:44:47 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:41:25 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:40:22 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:36:59 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:34:55 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:28:25 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:20:00 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:16:59 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:13:22 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:12:03 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:07:16 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:04:16 PM
Nah, I'm more inclined to believe that hoodlum shenanigans are in ones DNA.
Which can clearly explain how blacks in the US are significantly more rowdy than blacks in Europe, Africa, or Latin America.

#logic
Because in Europe the Muslims are keeping them in order.
In America, we don't have the Islamic population for that.
What you said right there was a social condition. So you pretty much explained in your own post that the behavior of black people here is due to social conditions rather than racial whateverism.
It's in their genes to go wild when machete wielding nutjobs screaming Allahu Ackbar aren't around.
Even if that were the case, which it isn't, you haven't said anything about Latin America and Africa. Which aside from northern Africa (which is already Arab-majority), there aren't any Arabs around to "hold" the blacks back.

And again, what you said made no sense. "It's in their genes to go wild when machete wielding nutjobs screaming Allahu Ackbar aren't around." is so arbitrary and stupid and is just an uneducated assumption at best.
Because they were bred with the Spaniards and natives. Domestic bovine are tempered nothing like their wild European ancestors.
Not really. The conditions faced by blacks in Latin America are nearly the same faced by blacks in the US. As in being transported in slave ships. And look at how different outcomes the two groups had. And no, blacks weren't really bred with Spaniards and natives on any significant scale. A full 33% percent of Brazil's population is completely black, and yet they don't really have problems there like how the blacks here have problems.
Because the brazilians were smart. They took out the troublesome ones. They controlled the gene pool. They wouldn't have let Malcom X live.
lolwut? There's so much stupid in that statement that it's nearly off the charts.

Please tell me how a country of 150 million could possibly effectively root out "the troublesome ones" from a population of 50 million. And not to mention the logistical problems with doing such a thing. Anyways, that statement is made out of pure, refined stupid.
The evidence is there. If you chose to believe otherwise, then I respect your decision.
Oh, please show me this "evidence".
I've already show you.

Here is a supplemental flyer though.
The wild claims that Arabs keep black in check and that Brazil led a campaign to root out all "problematic" black people without posting any sources proving that those claims are true?

That's not evidence, that's crap that conspiracy sites like to post. LOL
Observe social standings and social engineering and you'll note.

"I am apt to suspect the Negroes to be naturally inferior to the Whites. There scarcely ever was a civilized nation of that complexion, nor even any individual, eminent either in action or speculation. No ingenious manufactures amongst them, no arts, no sciences. On the other hand, the most rude and barbarous of the Whites, such as the ancient Germans, the present Tartars, have still something eminent about them, in their valour, form of government, or some other particular. Such a uniform and constant difference could not happen, in so many countries and ages, if nature had not made an original distinction between these breeds of men. - Hume - of National Character, 1748
"In the hot countries the human being matures in all aspects earlier, but does not, however, reach the perfection of those in the temperate zones. Humanity is at its greatest perfection in the race of the whites. The yellow Indians do have a meager talent. The Negroes are far below them and at the lowest point are a part of the American peoples." - Kant - Physical Geography, 1756

What has changed since those times other than the now Americanized spelling of valor?
>citing books about black-white comparisons from the 18th Century as if they were legitimate

Here's an example of another massive crock of BS that was taken seriously by racial theorists at the time, and this was from the 19th and 20th Centuries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man
Except the philosophies of Kant, Hume, Schopenhauer, and the like have stood the test of time while the Pittdown man was quite scientifically debunked.
And there's not a single chance that all of those claims that anyone other than whites aren't human were made solely to justify colonial domination and enslavement? There's no empirical evidence whatsoever suggesting that blacks, Arabs, or whatever aren't human aside from crap made by fringe sources.
Who ever said that they're not human? They are. They're simply lesser humans.
"Lesser humans"

That doesn't even mean anything. You're either human or you aren't. There's no such thing as a "lesser" human. Proposing that such a thing exists are just toxic words that leads to violence.
All beings have a default value of worth
Not all beings are equal
How is this a hard concept to grasp?

Not all beings are equal, but that says nothing about their "worth". Implying that some groups people are somehow worth less than others are yet more wild claims which promote hatred and violence against others.

DAS B00T x2 · April 27, 2015, 08:13:56 PM

Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:12:23 PM

Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:09:42 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:07:54 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:06:01 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:04:57 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:02:56 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:56:42 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:53:39 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:50:15 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:47:51 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:44:47 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:41:25 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:40:22 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:36:59 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:34:55 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:28:25 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:20:00 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:16:59 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:13:22 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:12:03 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:07:16 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:04:16 PM
Nah, I'm more inclined to believe that hoodlum shenanigans are in ones DNA.
Which can clearly explain how blacks in the US are significantly more rowdy than blacks in Europe, Africa, or Latin America.

#logic
Because in Europe the Muslims are keeping them in order.
In America, we don't have the Islamic population for that.
What you said right there was a social condition. So you pretty much explained in your own post that the behavior of black people here is due to social conditions rather than racial whateverism.
It's in their genes to go wild when machete wielding nutjobs screaming Allahu Ackbar aren't around.
Even if that were the case, which it isn't, you haven't said anything about Latin America and Africa. Which aside from northern Africa (which is already Arab-majority), there aren't any Arabs around to "hold" the blacks back.

And again, what you said made no sense. "It's in their genes to go wild when machete wielding nutjobs screaming Allahu Ackbar aren't around." is so arbitrary and stupid and is just an uneducated assumption at best.
Because they were bred with the Spaniards and natives. Domestic bovine are tempered nothing like their wild European ancestors.
Not really. The conditions faced by blacks in Latin America are nearly the same faced by blacks in the US. As in being transported in slave ships. And look at how different outcomes the two groups had. And no, blacks weren't really bred with Spaniards and natives on any significant scale. A full 33% percent of Brazil's population is completely black, and yet they don't really have problems there like how the blacks here have problems.
Because the brazilians were smart. They took out the troublesome ones. They controlled the gene pool. They wouldn't have let Malcom X live.
lolwut? There's so much stupid in that statement that it's nearly off the charts.

Please tell me how a country of 150 million could possibly effectively root out "the troublesome ones" from a population of 50 million. And not to mention the logistical problems with doing such a thing. Anyways, that statement is made out of pure, refined stupid.
The evidence is there. If you chose to believe otherwise, then I respect your decision.
Oh, please show me this "evidence".
I've already show you.

Here is a supplemental flyer though.
The wild claims that Arabs keep black in check and that Brazil led a campaign to root out all "problematic" black people without posting any sources proving that those claims are true?

That's not evidence, that's crap that conspiracy sites like to post. LOL
Observe social standings and social engineering and you'll note.

"I am apt to suspect the Negroes to be naturally inferior to the Whites. There scarcely ever was a civilized nation of that complexion, nor even any individual, eminent either in action or speculation. No ingenious manufactures amongst them, no arts, no sciences. On the other hand, the most rude and barbarous of the Whites, such as the ancient Germans, the present Tartars, have still something eminent about them, in their valour, form of government, or some other particular. Such a uniform and constant difference could not happen, in so many countries and ages, if nature had not made an original distinction between these breeds of men. - Hume - of National Character, 1748
"In the hot countries the human being matures in all aspects earlier, but does not, however, reach the perfection of those in the temperate zones. Humanity is at its greatest perfection in the race of the whites. The yellow Indians do have a meager talent. The Negroes are far below them and at the lowest point are a part of the American peoples." - Kant - Physical Geography, 1756

What has changed since those times other than the now Americanized spelling of valor?
>citing books about black-white comparisons from the 18th Century as if they were legitimate

Here's an example of another massive crock of BS that was taken seriously by racial theorists at the time, and this was from the 19th and 20th Centuries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man
Except the philosophies of Kant, Hume, Schopenhauer, and the like have stood the test of time while the Pittdown man was quite scientifically debunked.
And there's not a single chance that all of those claims that anyone other than whites aren't human were made solely to justify colonial domination and enslavement? There's no empirical evidence whatsoever suggesting that blacks, Arabs, or whatever aren't human aside from crap made by fringe sources.
Who ever said that they're not human? They are. They're simply lesser humans.
"Lesser humans"

That doesn't even mean anything. You're either human or you aren't. There's no such thing as a "lesser" human. Proposing that such a thing exists are just toxic words that leads to violence.
All beings have a default value of worth
Not all beings are equal
How is this a hard concept to grasp?
Not all beings are equal, but that says nothing about their "worth". Implying that some groups people are somehow worth less than others are yet more wild claims which promote hatred and violence against others.

No. These ideas do not promote violence. That is the work of those who would corrupt the word of scientific truth for their own pleasure or social/political/monetary gains.

Not Comms Officer · April 27, 2015, 08:15:03 PM

Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:13:56 PM

Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:12:23 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:09:42 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:07:54 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:06:01 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:04:57 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:02:56 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:56:42 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:53:39 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:50:15 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:47:51 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:44:47 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:41:25 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:40:22 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:36:59 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:34:55 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:28:25 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:20:00 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:16:59 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:13:22 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:12:03 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:07:16 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:04:16 PM
Nah, I'm more inclined to believe that hoodlum shenanigans are in ones DNA.
Which can clearly explain how blacks in the US are significantly more rowdy than blacks in Europe, Africa, or Latin America.

#logic
Because in Europe the Muslims are keeping them in order.
In America, we don't have the Islamic population for that.
What you said right there was a social condition. So you pretty much explained in your own post that the behavior of black people here is due to social conditions rather than racial whateverism.
It's in their genes to go wild when machete wielding nutjobs screaming Allahu Ackbar aren't around.
Even if that were the case, which it isn't, you haven't said anything about Latin America and Africa. Which aside from northern Africa (which is already Arab-majority), there aren't any Arabs around to "hold" the blacks back.

And again, what you said made no sense. "It's in their genes to go wild when machete wielding nutjobs screaming Allahu Ackbar aren't around." is so arbitrary and stupid and is just an uneducated assumption at best.
Because they were bred with the Spaniards and natives. Domestic bovine are tempered nothing like their wild European ancestors.
Not really. The conditions faced by blacks in Latin America are nearly the same faced by blacks in the US. As in being transported in slave ships. And look at how different outcomes the two groups had. And no, blacks weren't really bred with Spaniards and natives on any significant scale. A full 33% percent of Brazil's population is completely black, and yet they don't really have problems there like how the blacks here have problems.
Because the brazilians were smart. They took out the troublesome ones. They controlled the gene pool. They wouldn't have let Malcom X live.
lolwut? There's so much stupid in that statement that it's nearly off the charts.

Please tell me how a country of 150 million could possibly effectively root out "the troublesome ones" from a population of 50 million. And not to mention the logistical problems with doing such a thing. Anyways, that statement is made out of pure, refined stupid.
The evidence is there. If you chose to believe otherwise, then I respect your decision.
Oh, please show me this "evidence".
I've already show you.

Here is a supplemental flyer though.
The wild claims that Arabs keep black in check and that Brazil led a campaign to root out all "problematic" black people without posting any sources proving that those claims are true?

That's not evidence, that's crap that conspiracy sites like to post. LOL
Observe social standings and social engineering and you'll note.

"I am apt to suspect the Negroes to be naturally inferior to the Whites. There scarcely ever was a civilized nation of that complexion, nor even any individual, eminent either in action or speculation. No ingenious manufactures amongst them, no arts, no sciences. On the other hand, the most rude and barbarous of the Whites, such as the ancient Germans, the present Tartars, have still something eminent about them, in their valour, form of government, or some other particular. Such a uniform and constant difference could not happen, in so many countries and ages, if nature had not made an original distinction between these breeds of men. - Hume - of National Character, 1748
"In the hot countries the human being matures in all aspects earlier, but does not, however, reach the perfection of those in the temperate zones. Humanity is at its greatest perfection in the race of the whites. The yellow Indians do have a meager talent. The Negroes are far below them and at the lowest point are a part of the American peoples." - Kant - Physical Geography, 1756

What has changed since those times other than the now Americanized spelling of valor?
>citing books about black-white comparisons from the 18th Century as if they were legitimate

Here's an example of another massive crock of BS that was taken seriously by racial theorists at the time, and this was from the 19th and 20th Centuries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man
Except the philosophies of Kant, Hume, Schopenhauer, and the like have stood the test of time while the Pittdown man was quite scientifically debunked.
And there's not a single chance that all of those claims that anyone other than whites aren't human were made solely to justify colonial domination and enslavement? There's no empirical evidence whatsoever suggesting that blacks, Arabs, or whatever aren't human aside from crap made by fringe sources.
Who ever said that they're not human? They are. They're simply lesser humans.
"Lesser humans"

That doesn't even mean anything. You're either human or you aren't. There's no such thing as a "lesser" human. Proposing that such a thing exists are just toxic words that leads to violence.
All beings have a default value of worth
Not all beings are equal
How is this a hard concept to grasp?
Not all beings are equal, but that says nothing about their "worth". Implying that some groups people are somehow worth less than others are yet more wild claims which promote hatred and violence against others.
No. These ideas do not promote violence. That is the work of those who would corrupt the word of scientific truth for their own pleasure or social/political/monetary gains.

Cause nobody in history has ever used the fact that some races are "lesser" as a basis for genocide, no. That would be unreasonable. And it's not like that "scientific evidence" proving that other races are "lesser" came from those people who promoted genocide...

DAS B00T x2 · April 27, 2015, 08:16:04 PM

Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:15:03 PM

Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:13:56 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:12:23 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:09:42 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:07:54 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:06:01 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:04:57 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:02:56 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:56:42 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:53:39 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:50:15 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:47:51 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:44:47 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:41:25 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:40:22 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:36:59 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:34:55 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:28:25 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:20:00 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:16:59 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:13:22 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:12:03 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:07:16 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:04:16 PM
Nah, I'm more inclined to believe that hoodlum shenanigans are in ones DNA.
Which can clearly explain how blacks in the US are significantly more rowdy than blacks in Europe, Africa, or Latin America.

#logic
Because in Europe the Muslims are keeping them in order.
In America, we don't have the Islamic population for that.
What you said right there was a social condition. So you pretty much explained in your own post that the behavior of black people here is due to social conditions rather than racial whateverism.
It's in their genes to go wild when machete wielding nutjobs screaming Allahu Ackbar aren't around.
Even if that were the case, which it isn't, you haven't said anything about Latin America and Africa. Which aside from northern Africa (which is already Arab-majority), there aren't any Arabs around to "hold" the blacks back.

And again, what you said made no sense. "It's in their genes to go wild when machete wielding nutjobs screaming Allahu Ackbar aren't around." is so arbitrary and stupid and is just an uneducated assumption at best.
Because they were bred with the Spaniards and natives. Domestic bovine are tempered nothing like their wild European ancestors.
Not really. The conditions faced by blacks in Latin America are nearly the same faced by blacks in the US. As in being transported in slave ships. And look at how different outcomes the two groups had. And no, blacks weren't really bred with Spaniards and natives on any significant scale. A full 33% percent of Brazil's population is completely black, and yet they don't really have problems there like how the blacks here have problems.
Because the brazilians were smart. They took out the troublesome ones. They controlled the gene pool. They wouldn't have let Malcom X live.
lolwut? There's so much stupid in that statement that it's nearly off the charts.

Please tell me how a country of 150 million could possibly effectively root out "the troublesome ones" from a population of 50 million. And not to mention the logistical problems with doing such a thing. Anyways, that statement is made out of pure, refined stupid.
The evidence is there. If you chose to believe otherwise, then I respect your decision.
Oh, please show me this "evidence".
I've already show you.

Here is a supplemental flyer though.
The wild claims that Arabs keep black in check and that Brazil led a campaign to root out all "problematic" black people without posting any sources proving that those claims are true?

That's not evidence, that's crap that conspiracy sites like to post. LOL
Observe social standings and social engineering and you'll note.

"I am apt to suspect the Negroes to be naturally inferior to the Whites. There scarcely ever was a civilized nation of that complexion, nor even any individual, eminent either in action or speculation. No ingenious manufactures amongst them, no arts, no sciences. On the other hand, the most rude and barbarous of the Whites, such as the ancient Germans, the present Tartars, have still something eminent about them, in their valour, form of government, or some other particular. Such a uniform and constant difference could not happen, in so many countries and ages, if nature had not made an original distinction between these breeds of men. - Hume - of National Character, 1748
"In the hot countries the human being matures in all aspects earlier, but does not, however, reach the perfection of those in the temperate zones. Humanity is at its greatest perfection in the race of the whites. The yellow Indians do have a meager talent. The Negroes are far below them and at the lowest point are a part of the American peoples." - Kant - Physical Geography, 1756

What has changed since those times other than the now Americanized spelling of valor?
>citing books about black-white comparisons from the 18th Century as if they were legitimate

Here's an example of another massive crock of BS that was taken seriously by racial theorists at the time, and this was from the 19th and 20th Centuries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man
Except the philosophies of Kant, Hume, Schopenhauer, and the like have stood the test of time while the Pittdown man was quite scientifically debunked.
And there's not a single chance that all of those claims that anyone other than whites aren't human were made solely to justify colonial domination and enslavement? There's no empirical evidence whatsoever suggesting that blacks, Arabs, or whatever aren't human aside from crap made by fringe sources.
Who ever said that they're not human? They are. They're simply lesser humans.
"Lesser humans"

That doesn't even mean anything. You're either human or you aren't. There's no such thing as a "lesser" human. Proposing that such a thing exists are just toxic words that leads to violence.
All beings have a default value of worth
Not all beings are equal
How is this a hard concept to grasp?
Not all beings are equal, but that says nothing about their "worth". Implying that some groups people are somehow worth less than others are yet more wild claims which promote hatred and violence against others.
No. These ideas do not promote violence. That is the work of those who would corrupt the word of scientific truth for their own pleasure or social/political/monetary gains.
Cause nobody in history has ever used the fact that some races are "lesser" as a basis for genocide, no. That would be unreasonable.

That is their own failure, just as with those who would use Islam to spread war and destruction.

Not Comms Officer · April 27, 2015, 08:16:41 PM

Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:16:04 PM

Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:15:03 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:13:56 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:12:23 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:09:42 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:07:54 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:06:01 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:04:57 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:02:56 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:56:42 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:53:39 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:50:15 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:47:51 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:44:47 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:41:25 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:40:22 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:36:59 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:34:55 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:28:25 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:20:00 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:16:59 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:13:22 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:12:03 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:07:16 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:04:16 PM
Nah, I'm more inclined to believe that hoodlum shenanigans are in ones DNA.
Which can clearly explain how blacks in the US are significantly more rowdy than blacks in Europe, Africa, or Latin America.

#logic
Because in Europe the Muslims are keeping them in order.
In America, we don't have the Islamic population for that.
What you said right there was a social condition. So you pretty much explained in your own post that the behavior of black people here is due to social conditions rather than racial whateverism.
It's in their genes to go wild when machete wielding nutjobs screaming Allahu Ackbar aren't around.
Even if that were the case, which it isn't, you haven't said anything about Latin America and Africa. Which aside from northern Africa (which is already Arab-majority), there aren't any Arabs around to "hold" the blacks back.

And again, what you said made no sense. "It's in their genes to go wild when machete wielding nutjobs screaming Allahu Ackbar aren't around." is so arbitrary and stupid and is just an uneducated assumption at best.
Because they were bred with the Spaniards and natives. Domestic bovine are tempered nothing like their wild European ancestors.
Not really. The conditions faced by blacks in Latin America are nearly the same faced by blacks in the US. As in being transported in slave ships. And look at how different outcomes the two groups had. And no, blacks weren't really bred with Spaniards and natives on any significant scale. A full 33% percent of Brazil's population is completely black, and yet they don't really have problems there like how the blacks here have problems.
Because the brazilians were smart. They took out the troublesome ones. They controlled the gene pool. They wouldn't have let Malcom X live.
lolwut? There's so much stupid in that statement that it's nearly off the charts.

Please tell me how a country of 150 million could possibly effectively root out "the troublesome ones" from a population of 50 million. And not to mention the logistical problems with doing such a thing. Anyways, that statement is made out of pure, refined stupid.
The evidence is there. If you chose to believe otherwise, then I respect your decision.
Oh, please show me this "evidence".
I've already show you.

Here is a supplemental flyer though.
The wild claims that Arabs keep black in check and that Brazil led a campaign to root out all "problematic" black people without posting any sources proving that those claims are true?

That's not evidence, that's crap that conspiracy sites like to post. LOL
Observe social standings and social engineering and you'll note.

"I am apt to suspect the Negroes to be naturally inferior to the Whites. There scarcely ever was a civilized nation of that complexion, nor even any individual, eminent either in action or speculation. No ingenious manufactures amongst them, no arts, no sciences. On the other hand, the most rude and barbarous of the Whites, such as the ancient Germans, the present Tartars, have still something eminent about them, in their valour, form of government, or some other particular. Such a uniform and constant difference could not happen, in so many countries and ages, if nature had not made an original distinction between these breeds of men. - Hume - of National Character, 1748
"In the hot countries the human being matures in all aspects earlier, but does not, however, reach the perfection of those in the temperate zones. Humanity is at its greatest perfection in the race of the whites. The yellow Indians do have a meager talent. The Negroes are far below them and at the lowest point are a part of the American peoples." - Kant - Physical Geography, 1756

What has changed since those times other than the now Americanized spelling of valor?
>citing books about black-white comparisons from the 18th Century as if they were legitimate

Here's an example of another massive crock of BS that was taken seriously by racial theorists at the time, and this was from the 19th and 20th Centuries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man
Except the philosophies of Kant, Hume, Schopenhauer, and the like have stood the test of time while the Pittdown man was quite scientifically debunked.
And there's not a single chance that all of those claims that anyone other than whites aren't human were made solely to justify colonial domination and enslavement? There's no empirical evidence whatsoever suggesting that blacks, Arabs, or whatever aren't human aside from crap made by fringe sources.
Who ever said that they're not human? They are. They're simply lesser humans.
"Lesser humans"

That doesn't even mean anything. You're either human or you aren't. There's no such thing as a "lesser" human. Proposing that such a thing exists are just toxic words that leads to violence.
All beings have a default value of worth
Not all beings are equal
How is this a hard concept to grasp?
Not all beings are equal, but that says nothing about their "worth". Implying that some groups people are somehow worth less than others are yet more wild claims which promote hatred and violence against others.
No. These ideas do not promote violence. That is the work of those who would corrupt the word of scientific truth for their own pleasure or social/political/monetary gains.
Cause nobody in history has ever used the fact that some races are "lesser" as a basis for genocide, no. That would be unreasonable.
That is their own failure, just as with those who would use Islam to spread war and destruction.

And it's not like that "scientific evidence" proving that other races are "lesser" came from those people who promoted genocide, slavery, and domination...

Verbatim · April 27, 2015, 08:16:45 PM

Quote from: Madman Mordo on April 27, 2015, 07:46:54 PM

New evidence is emerging to suggest there is in fact a biological basis for race though. We've only just started mapping the human genome which takes an astronomical amount of computational power to process, so to affirm the notion that race is purely a social construct when we've barely even begun to understand genetics is simply fallacious and unscientific.

It goes without saying that racism and discrimination are wrong as a matter of principle of course, but that doesn't mean we should disregard empirical evidence for the sake of political correctness.

It should also go without saying that there's not going to be anything within our genome that could possibly justify the centuries of attrition levied towards racial minorities, let alone social segregation or other minor forms of racial discrimination. Which is essentially what the "social construct" theory is predicated upon.

If it takes us this long to find anything within our DNA to suggest anything about race, it's likely negligible, and we've made the tallest mountain out of the smallest molehill with it.

Verbatim · April 27, 2015, 08:18:19 PM

Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:16:41 PM

And it's not like that "scientific evidence" proving that other races are "lesser" came from those people who promoted genocide, slavery, and domination...

you are being trolled the fuck out of right now, jsyk

DAS B00T x2 · April 27, 2015, 08:18:25 PM

Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:16:41 PM

Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:16:04 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:15:03 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:13:56 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:12:23 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:09:42 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:07:54 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:06:01 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:04:57 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:02:56 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:56:42 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:53:39 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:50:15 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:47:51 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:44:47 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:41:25 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:40:22 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:36:59 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:34:55 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:28:25 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:20:00 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:16:59 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:13:22 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:12:03 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:07:16 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:04:16 PM
Nah, I'm more inclined to believe that hoodlum shenanigans are in ones DNA.
Which can clearly explain how blacks in the US are significantly more rowdy than blacks in Europe, Africa, or Latin America.

#logic
Because in Europe the Muslims are keeping them in order.
In America, we don't have the Islamic population for that.
What you said right there was a social condition. So you pretty much explained in your own post that the behavior of black people here is due to social conditions rather than racial whateverism.
It's in their genes to go wild when machete wielding nutjobs screaming Allahu Ackbar aren't around.
Even if that were the case, which it isn't, you haven't said anything about Latin America and Africa. Which aside from northern Africa (which is already Arab-majority), there aren't any Arabs around to "hold" the blacks back.

And again, what you said made no sense. "It's in their genes to go wild when machete wielding nutjobs screaming Allahu Ackbar aren't around." is so arbitrary and stupid and is just an uneducated assumption at best.
Because they were bred with the Spaniards and natives. Domestic bovine are tempered nothing like their wild European ancestors.
Not really. The conditions faced by blacks in Latin America are nearly the same faced by blacks in the US. As in being transported in slave ships. And look at how different outcomes the two groups had. And no, blacks weren't really bred with Spaniards and natives on any significant scale. A full 33% percent of Brazil's population is completely black, and yet they don't really have problems there like how the blacks here have problems.
Because the brazilians were smart. They took out the troublesome ones. They controlled the gene pool. They wouldn't have let Malcom X live.
lolwut? There's so much stupid in that statement that it's nearly off the charts.

Please tell me how a country of 150 million could possibly effectively root out "the troublesome ones" from a population of 50 million. And not to mention the logistical problems with doing such a thing. Anyways, that statement is made out of pure, refined stupid.
The evidence is there. If you chose to believe otherwise, then I respect your decision.
Oh, please show me this "evidence".
I've already show you.

Here is a supplemental flyer though.
The wild claims that Arabs keep black in check and that Brazil led a campaign to root out all "problematic" black people without posting any sources proving that those claims are true?

That's not evidence, that's crap that conspiracy sites like to post. LOL
Observe social standings and social engineering and you'll note.

"I am apt to suspect the Negroes to be naturally inferior to the Whites. There scarcely ever was a civilized nation of that complexion, nor even any individual, eminent either in action or speculation. No ingenious manufactures amongst them, no arts, no sciences. On the other hand, the most rude and barbarous of the Whites, such as the ancient Germans, the present Tartars, have still something eminent about them, in their valour, form of government, or some other particular. Such a uniform and constant difference could not happen, in so many countries and ages, if nature had not made an original distinction between these breeds of men. - Hume - of National Character, 1748
"In the hot countries the human being matures in all aspects earlier, but does not, however, reach the perfection of those in the temperate zones. Humanity is at its greatest perfection in the race of the whites. The yellow Indians do have a meager talent. The Negroes are far below them and at the lowest point are a part of the American peoples." - Kant - Physical Geography, 1756

What has changed since those times other than the now Americanized spelling of valor?
>citing books about black-white comparisons from the 18th Century as if they were legitimate

Here's an example of another massive crock of BS that was taken seriously by racial theorists at the time, and this was from the 19th and 20th Centuries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man
Except the philosophies of Kant, Hume, Schopenhauer, and the like have stood the test of time while the Pittdown man was quite scientifically debunked.
And there's not a single chance that all of those claims that anyone other than whites aren't human were made solely to justify colonial domination and enslavement? There's no empirical evidence whatsoever suggesting that blacks, Arabs, or whatever aren't human aside from crap made by fringe sources.
Who ever said that they're not human? They are. They're simply lesser humans.
"Lesser humans"

That doesn't even mean anything. You're either human or you aren't. There's no such thing as a "lesser" human. Proposing that such a thing exists are just toxic words that leads to violence.
All beings have a default value of worth
Not all beings are equal
How is this a hard concept to grasp?
Not all beings are equal, but that says nothing about their "worth". Implying that some groups people are somehow worth less than others are yet more wild claims which promote hatred and violence against others.
No. These ideas do not promote violence. That is the work of those who would corrupt the word of scientific truth for their own pleasure or social/political/monetary gains.
Cause nobody in history has ever used the fact that some races are "lesser" as a basis for genocide, no. That would be unreasonable.
That is their own failure, just as with those who would use Islam to spread war and destruction.
And it's not like that "scientific evidence" proving that other races are "lesser" came from those people who promoted genocide, slavery, and domination...

I know what you're referencing. Let's leave the wickedly corrupt "teachings" of the Nazi party out of this.

Not Comms Officer · April 27, 2015, 08:20:00 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on April 27, 2015, 08:18:19 PM

Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:16:41 PM
And it's not like that "scientific evidence" proving that other races are "lesser" came from those people who promoted genocide, slavery, and domination...
you are being trolled the fuck out of right now, jsyk

I'm very aware of that.

Not Comms Officer · April 27, 2015, 08:20:18 PM

Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:18:25 PM

Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:16:41 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:16:04 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:15:03 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:13:56 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:12:23 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:09:42 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:07:54 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:06:01 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:04:57 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 08:02:56 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:56:42 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:53:39 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:50:15 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:47:51 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:44:47 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:41:25 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:40:22 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:36:59 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:34:55 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:28:25 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:20:00 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:16:59 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:13:22 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:12:03 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 07:07:16 PM
Quote from: DAS B00T DAS B00T on April 27, 2015, 07:04:16 PM
Nah, I'm more inclined to believe that hoodlum shenanigans are in ones DNA.
Which can clearly explain how blacks in the US are significantly more rowdy than blacks in Europe, Africa, or Latin America.

#logic
Because in Europe the Muslims are keeping them in order.
In America, we don't have the Islamic population for that.
What you said right there was a social condition. So you pretty much explained in your own post that the behavior of black people here is due to social conditions rather than racial whateverism.
It's in their genes to go wild when machete wielding nutjobs screaming Allahu Ackbar aren't around.
Even if that were the case, which it isn't, you haven't said anything about Latin America and Africa. Which aside from northern Africa (which is already Arab-majority), there aren't any Arabs around to "hold" the blacks back.

And again, what you said made no sense. "It's in their genes to go wild when machete wielding nutjobs screaming Allahu Ackbar aren't around." is so arbitrary and stupid and is just an uneducated assumption at best.
Because they were bred with the Spaniards and natives. Domestic bovine are tempered nothing like their wild European ancestors.
Not really. The conditions faced by blacks in Latin America are nearly the same faced by blacks in the US. As in being transported in slave ships. And look at how different outcomes the two groups had. And no, blacks weren't really bred with Spaniards and natives on any significant scale. A full 33% percent of Brazil's population is completely black, and yet they don't really have problems there like how the blacks here have problems.
Because the brazilians were smart. They took out the troublesome ones. They controlled the gene pool. They wouldn't have let Malcom X live.
lolwut? There's so much stupid in that statement that it's nearly off the charts.

Please tell me how a country of 150 million could possibly effectively root out "the troublesome ones" from a population of 50 million. And not to mention the logistical problems with doing such a thing. Anyways, that statement is made out of pure, refined stupid.
The evidence is there. If you chose to believe otherwise, then I respect your decision.
Oh, please show me this "evidence".
I've already show you.

Here is a supplemental flyer though.
The wild claims that Arabs keep black in check and that Brazil led a campaign to root out all "problematic" black people without posting any sources proving that those claims are true?

That's not evidence, that's crap that conspiracy sites like to post. LOL
Observe social standings and social engineering and you'll note.

"I am apt to suspect the Negroes to be naturally inferior to the Whites. There scarcely ever was a civilized nation of that complexion, nor even any individual, eminent either in action or speculation. No ingenious manufactures amongst them, no arts, no sciences. On the other hand, the most rude and barbarous of the Whites, such as the ancient Germans, the present Tartars, have still something eminent about them, in their valour, form of government, or some other particular. Such a uniform and constant difference could not happen, in so many countries and ages, if nature had not made an original distinction between these breeds of men. - Hume - of National Character, 1748
"In the hot countries the human being matures in all aspects earlier, but does not, however, reach the perfection of those in the temperate zones. Humanity is at its greatest perfection in the race of the whites. The yellow Indians do have a meager talent. The Negroes are far below them and at the lowest point are a part of the American peoples." - Kant - Physical Geography, 1756

What has changed since those times other than the now Americanized spelling of valor?
>citing books about black-white comparisons from the 18th Century as if they were legitimate

Here's an example of another massive crock of BS that was taken seriously by racial theorists at the time, and this was from the 19th and 20th Centuries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man
Except the philosophies of Kant, Hume, Schopenhauer, and the like have stood the test of time while the Pittdown man was quite scientifically debunked.
And there's not a single chance that all of those claims that anyone other than whites aren't human were made solely to justify colonial domination and enslavement? There's no empirical evidence whatsoever suggesting that blacks, Arabs, or whatever aren't human aside from crap made by fringe sources.
Who ever said that they're not human? They are. They're simply lesser humans.
"Lesser humans"

That doesn't even mean anything. You're either human or you aren't. There's no such thing as a "lesser" human. Proposing that such a thing exists are just toxic words that leads to violence.
All beings have a default value of worth
Not all beings are equal
How is this a hard concept to grasp?
Not all beings are equal, but that says nothing about their "worth". Implying that some groups people are somehow worth less than others are yet more wild claims which promote hatred and violence against others.
No. These ideas do not promote violence. That is the work of those who would corrupt the word of scientific truth for their own pleasure or social/political/monetary gains.
Cause nobody in history has ever used the fact that some races are "lesser" as a basis for genocide, no. That would be unreasonable.
That is their own failure, just as with those who would use Islam to spread war and destruction.
And it's not like that "scientific evidence" proving that other races are "lesser" came from those people who promoted genocide, slavery, and domination...
I know what you're referencing. Let's leave the wickedly corrupt "teachings" of the Nazi party out of this.

>implying that I was actually referencing the Nazi party

Mordo · April 27, 2015, 08:33:28 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on April 27, 2015, 08:16:45 PM

It should also go without saying that there's not going to be anything within our genome that could possibly justify the centuries of attrition levied towards racial minorities let alone social segregation or other minor forms of racial discrimination

Of course, but that doesn't mean we should perform mental gymnastics to try and convince ourselves that there isn't a biological basis for race if we do end up discovering damning evidence in the future that confirms the notion.

I'm not even saying there absolutely positively is a biological grounding for race, I'm just saying we shouldn't rule out the possibility, especially seeing as how scientists are discovering the different variations of alleles in the races.

Quote

Which is essentially what the "social construct" theory is predicated upon.

I'd sure like to examine this aforementioned "theory."

Quote

If it takes us this long to find anything within our DNA to suggest anything about race, it's likely negligible, and we've made the tallest mountain out of the smallest anthill with it.

I'm not sure what argument you seem to think I'm positing here, but whatever it is, it isn't the case.

Should we treat all ethnicities the same if we do end up discovering different genetic variations in race? Yes, of course. But is it "racist" to scientifically inquire the human genome? No, and that's a laughable notion at best.

🍁 Aria 🔮 · April 27, 2015, 08:42:25 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on April 27, 2015, 07:23:01 PM

Quote from: Prime Meridia on April 27, 2015, 07:07:34 PM
Race is an indicator of certain physical, heredity traits, no?
it actually isn't
like, at all

(i actually just learned about this in my sociology class)

That's why I refrained from saying genetics. Skin pigmentation (not strictly, but you know what I mean) is usually hereditary, as is your hair, eye color, etc.

Verbatim · April 27, 2015, 08:43:20 PM

Quote from: Madman Mordo on April 27, 2015, 08:33:28 PM

I'm not sure what argument you seem to think I'm positing here, but whatever it is, it isn't the case.

Should we treat all ethnicities the same if we do end up discovering different genetic variations in race? Yes, of course. But is it "racist" to scientifically inquire the human genome? No, and that's a laughable notion at best.

That's not my argument either. The idea is that, historically, we've made a mountain out of this race thing, and even today, we're still struggling with the notion that race doesn't really matter. If there's anything in our DNA to suggest anything about race, we can certainly embrace it, but the point is that if it takes us this long to find an inkling of a difference, it's probably not that significant. And it certainly doesn't change the fact that race is a social construct, because like I said, you're not gonna be able to find anything in our DNA that says "black people can't swim" or something stupid like that--but it won't stop people from making jokes about black people not being able to swim. Because it's a social construct. That's the idea. That's the theory.

King pesto · April 27, 2015, 08:43:59 PM

As long as we can acknowledge that ethnicity is not.

Verbatim · April 27, 2015, 08:45:06 PM

Quote from: Prime Meridia on April 27, 2015, 08:42:25 PM

That's why I refrained from saying genetics. Skin pigmentation (not strictly, but you know what I mean) is usually hereditary, as is your hair, eye color, etc.

oh, well yeah

you threw me off when you said "physical"--i thought you might have been referring to something athletic

Verbatim · April 27, 2015, 08:45:51 PM

Quote from: Sargon of Akkad on April 27, 2015, 08:43:59 PM

As long as we can acknowledge that ethnicity is not.

i don't even know the difference, to be honest

isn't "ethnicity" notorious for being one of the most ill-defined concepts ever

🍁 Aria 🔮 · April 27, 2015, 08:47:53 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on April 27, 2015, 08:45:06 PM

Quote from: Prime Meridia on April 27, 2015, 08:42:25 PM
That's why I refrained from saying genetics. Skin pigmentation (not strictly, but you know what I mean) is usually hereditary, as is your hair, eye color, etc.
oh, well yeah

you threw me off when you said "physical"--i thought you might have been referring to something athletic

I mostly meant aesthetic, but I just remembered that being of certain races increases your likeliness to contract various health issues. For example, black persons are more likely to contract Sickle Cell than someone who is Asian.

🍁 Aria 🔮 · April 27, 2015, 08:48:50 PM

Quote from: Sargon of Akkad on April 27, 2015, 08:43:59 PM

As long as we can acknowledge that ethnicity is not.

Ethnicity includes nationality and regional culture as descriptors, so no, ethnicity is a social concept to some degree.

Turkey · April 27, 2015, 08:49:22 PM

Race is important for medical officials because different races have varying propensities for disorders and diseases. Race is certainly not just a social construct.

Not Comms Officer · April 27, 2015, 08:50:21 PM

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on April 27, 2015, 08:49:22 PM

Race is important for medical officials because different races have varying propensities for disorders and diseases. Race is certainly not just a social construct.

I'm not implying that it is just a social construct. I'm implying that the social "traits" to races is a social construct.

Turkey · April 27, 2015, 08:52:51 PM

Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:50:21 PM

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on April 27, 2015, 08:49:22 PM
Race is important for medical officials because different races have varying propensities for disorders and diseases. Race is certainly not just a social construct.
I'm not implying that it is just a social construct. I'm implying that the social "traits" to races is a social construct.

Like, "black people are more violent on average than white people"?

Not Comms Officer · April 27, 2015, 08:55:41 PM

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on April 27, 2015, 08:52:51 PM

Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:50:21 PM
Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on April 27, 2015, 08:49:22 PM
Race is important for medical officials because different races have varying propensities for disorders and diseases. Race is certainly not just a social construct.
I'm not implying that it is just a social construct. I'm implying that the social "traits" to races is a social construct.

Like, "black people are more violent on average than white people"?

Yeah.

Verbatim · April 27, 2015, 08:57:38 PM

Quote from: Prime Meridia on April 27, 2015, 08:47:53 PM

I mostly meant aesthetic, but I just remembered that being of certain races increases your likeliness to contract various health issues. For example, black persons are more likely to contract Sickle Cell than someone who is Asian.

that has more to do with region than race though

it's not that black people are inherently more prone to it--it's that africa itself happens to be infested with plasmodium
and sickle cell was naturally selected to counteract malaria (i'm pretty sure anyway)

so to say that being black raises your likeliness of contracting sickle cell is only partially true

Turkey · April 27, 2015, 08:58:05 PM

Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:55:41 PM

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on April 27, 2015, 08:52:51 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:50:21 PM
Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on April 27, 2015, 08:49:22 PM
Race is important for medical officials because different races have varying propensities for disorders and diseases. Race is certainly not just a social construct.
I'm not implying that it is just a social construct. I'm implying that the social "traits" to races is a social construct.

Like, "black people are more violent on average than white people"?
Yeah.

Yeah, I think that definitely has more to do with economic classes than anything else.

Not Comms Officer · April 27, 2015, 08:58:39 PM

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on April 27, 2015, 08:58:05 PM

Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:55:41 PM
Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on April 27, 2015, 08:52:51 PM
Quote from: Not Comms Officer on April 27, 2015, 08:50:21 PM
Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on April 27, 2015, 08:49:22 PM
Race is important for medical officials because different races have varying propensities for disorders and diseases. Race is certainly not just a social construct.
I'm not implying that it is just a social construct. I'm implying that the social "traits" to races is a social construct.

Like, "black people are more violent on average than white people"?
Yeah.

Yeah, I think that definitely has more to do with economic classes than anything else.

Exactly. As well as social attitudes.

Cindy · April 27, 2015, 09:09:54 PM

In this thread:

>Correlation = Causation

>No presence of historical awareness

>Extremely Eurocentric/Americentric viewpoints

In essence, you niggas are stupid

🍁 Aria 🔮 · April 27, 2015, 09:10:27 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on April 27, 2015, 08:57:38 PM

Quote from: Prime Meridia on April 27, 2015, 08:47:53 PM
I mostly meant aesthetic, but I just remembered that being of certain races increases your likeliness to contract various health issues. For example, black persons are more likely to contract Sickle Cell than someone who is Asian.
that has more to do with region than race though

it's not that black people are inherently more prone to it--it's that africa itself happens to be infested with plasmodium
and sickle cell was naturally selected to counteract malaria (i'm pretty sure anyway)

Within North America (not Africa) African Americans experience a much more prone to contracting Sickle Cell than a Hispanic or Caucasian person.

If you're arguing that it stems from their ancestors... you aren't really refuting anything here. All I said is that races aren't a social construct because it's defined by hereditary commonality. Probability of contracting something like Sickle Cell is just an example of something hereditary that isn't aesthetic.

🍁 Aria 🔮 · April 27, 2015, 09:14:14 PM

Quote from: Saerveyn on April 27, 2015, 09:09:54 PM

In this thread:

>Correlation = Causation

>No presence of historical awareness

>Extremely Eurocentric/Americentric viewpoints

In essence, you niggas are stupid

Expand upon you meme arrows my Germanic compatriot.