Modern methodologies of White racism – “Reverse Racism”

reply to post by Robonakka



I get upset when I hear those "facts", but the reason has nothing to do with race.

So will you tell me please: What does an IQ test assess? Do you think Asians are more intelligent than Whites by design? Do you think that Whites are more intelligent than Blacks by design? You don't have to respond with the answers to those questions if you'd rather not, but think about that.

Many people posting here are unable/unwilling to do a thorough analysis of slavery and the effects that are still felt by many minorities TODAY. It's far easier to dismiss it with "ah, get over it, it's 2012, stop being lazy". Yes, many people are lazy, however, there's an equal amount if not more who are not.

The median wealth of white households is 20 times that of black households and 18 times that of Hispanic households, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of newly available government data from 2009.

Why is that? Because Blacks and Hispanics are lazy? Anyone that believes so has a serious issue and may whatever god you believe in have mercy on your soul. Again, back the the whole effects of America pre Civil Rights movement thing.

Why isn't more money going into these "ghettos"? Why is the quality of both materials and staff lower, on average, in schools that are predominately minorities? You want to solve the inequality issue? That's a damned good place to start. A solid education in a positive is the key to a solid foundation. Without a solid foundation, you are at a disadvantage.

reply to post by Robonakka

Help me out here. Can a fact be racist?

It depends on the interpretation. Blacks are on average less intelligent, but this is not racist unless it is because of genetics. If it is thought to be a result of culture, then it is not racist.

reply to post by Maslo


So it is racist if they can't help it? That seems wrong. I think behavior in blacks is genetically programmed. They are very different from white people genetically. So much so that in any other animal they would be declared a different species. But since it is humans we ignore that fact. We tend to label those differences as bad or racist. But they are merely differences. A lack of impulse control, less ability to understand complex conditions and an inability to plan ahead are not good or bad, just different. All races have this to some extent. But blacks have more and it affects them more. Those inherited traits reflect themselves in black culture. If you simply can not control your impulses and can not plan ahead for the future then you will not go to school or save money. You will steal because that is money now and now is all that matters. People blame society. And maybe society is somewhat at fault. The society whites have made require impulse control. They require planning ahead and saving. If you are not capable of those things then the society that values those traits will seem mighty unfair to you. Will it not? If you are incapable of understanding complex patterns or subjects then you will make up something you can understand. So you feel better about yourself.

I see the problems of race as being caused by a frustration at not being able to understand the world and thus simplifying the world to meet your intellectual ability. But such incredibly complex systems are not able to be simplified that much. So the result is such a distorted view of the world that problems will arise.

Why can't we merely codify the differences between races, acknowledge them and then build on each others strengths? If we understand that certain people are lousy at certain things and brilliant at others then we can steer them to a more productive course. It would not be racist to do that. Would it? You can't assume the lack of blacks in chemistry or physics is a product of racism. But if you understand the differences between the races it all becomes clear and you can channel your energies into a more productive way of life.

Things were so much more honest in the 1930's. Today any attempt to understand is met with cries of racism and insensitivity. It should not be like that.

reply to post by Robonakka

So it is racist if they can't help it? That seems wrong.

Nope, it is racist when it is caused by biological race (genetics). Thats what the word means. Altough note that there is no universaly accepted definition of racism. Some people consider only the belief that racial discrimination is justified to be racism, so according to this definition, someone who considers some race genetically inferior but still treats people equally on an individual basis is not a racist.

The exact definition of racism is controversial both because there is little scholarly agreement about the meaning of the concept "race", and because there is also little agreement about what does and doesn't constitute discrimination.[4] Some definitions would have it that any assumption that a person's behavior would be influenced by their racial categorization is racist, regardless of whether the action is intentionally harmful or pejorative. Other definitions only include consciously malignant forms of discrimination.

reply to post by Robonakka


Thank you for being a blatant and proud racist so we can all know to disregard your racist opinions.

reply to post by Robonakka

I think behavior in blacks is genetically programmed. They are very different from white people genetically. So much so that in any other animal they would be declared a different species.

Wow, this might be the second or third most racist post I've seen on ATS, and that is saying something. You do realize that this is the same faulty logic/propaganda that the Europeans used to gather support to go to Africa and kidnap and enslave millions of people? You do realize that behavioral genetics proves you wrong on every point you made? You do realize that according to geneticists, race is genetically non-existent phenomena, that it is merely a social construct established and reinforced by people much like yourself? You do realize there was no "Black" race or "White" race until the 17th century when the supposed imperialist "White" man marched into Africa looking to steal spices and gold and other goodies and found a bunch of supposed "negroids" who were "obviously inferior" and thus deserved to be enslaved and robbed?

No, of course not. You don't realize any of that because you are a racist and that bars you from all forms of intelligence.

reply to post by openlocks


Again, here are some facts that are just facts. "The differences in morphology (cranial and facial features) between human races are typically around ten times the corresponding differences between the sexes within a given race, larger even than the comparable differences taxonomists use to distinguish the two chimpanzee species from each other. To the best of our knowledge, human racial differences exceed those for any other non-domesticated species. One must look to the breeds of dogs to find a comparable degree of within-species differences in morphology."

Fixation index, or FST, is a way to measure genetic distance between populations. The FST between Whites (British) and Blacks (Bantu) is 0.23. The FST between the common chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) and the bonobo (Pan paniscus) is 0.103 which is half the White-Black difference despite the two being classified as separate species. The FST between two gorilla species, Gorilla gorilla and Gorilla beringei is 0.04 or 1/6 the difference between Blacks and Whites. The FST between humans and neanderthals is less than 0.08 or about 1/3 the Black-White difference. The FST between humans and homo erectus is 0.17 which is 3/4 the Black-White distance. Thus Whites and Blacks are more genetically distant than two different chimpanzee species, two different gorilla species, humans vs neanderthals, and humans vs homo erectus. If one is consistent and objective with taxonomic classification systems even in regards to human populations, Blacks and Whites could (and arguably should) be classified into separate species and at the very least into different subspecies.

The average FST between different dog breeds is 0.154 which is nearly identical to the average FST between human populations at 0.155. Although wolves (Canis lupus) and dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) are a different species (lupus) than coyotes (Canis latrans), "there is less mtDNA difference between dogs, wolves, and coyotes than there is between the various ethnic groups of human beings."[12] Dr. Stanley Coren, professor of psychology at the University of British Columbia, argues that "Different breeds [of dog] obviously have different types of instinctive intelligence." So why couldn't different human populations as well, if genetic distances between human races are just as significant as genetic differences between dog breeds?

Argue with me all you want, do not argue facts. That is why I asked if facts were racist.

reply to post by Robonakka

Argue with me all you want, do not argue facts. That is why I asked if facts were racist.

No, facts are not racist, it is your interpretation of facts that is racist. I will not argue with you over anything, enough Geneticists, Biologists, Sociologists and Neurologists have argued against you and Philippe Rushton's kind. In fact, there is so much evidence and so many scientists that have put this kind of thinking to rest, that even acknowledging your trolling ways any further is pointless.

Have a wonderful life.

reply to post by openlocks



Whites didn't march into Africa and steal slaves. The slaves were sold to the Europeans by other blacks and Arabs.

Originally posted by Robonakka
reply to post by Maslo

 

So it is racist if they can't help it? That seems wrong. I think behavior in blacks is genetically programmed. They are very different from white people genetically. So much so that in any other animal they would be declared a different species. But since it is humans we ignore that fact. We tend to label those differences as bad or racist. But they are merely differences. A lack of impulse control, less ability to understand complex conditions and an inability to plan ahead are not good or bad, just different. All races have this to some extent. But blacks have more and it affects them more. Those inherited traits reflect themselves in black culture. If you simply can not control your impulses and can not plan ahead for the future then you will not go to school or save money. You will steal because that is money now and now is all that matters. People blame society. And maybe society is somewhat at fault. The society whites have made require impulse control. They require planning ahead and saving. If you are not capable of those things then the society that values those traits will seem mighty unfair to you. Will it not? If you are incapable of understanding complex patterns or subjects then you will make up something you can understand. So you feel better about yourself.

Wow!! I know that you never studied biology and probably have never heard of the human genome project. you really should google human genetic. The issue of actually genetic differences between human phenotypes is remarkably small.

There are many people who appear phenotypically "white" that have almost 50% black gene. The USA has many of these but also so does Europe. TO assign poor "impulse control" and mental deficiency to BLacks as a Homogenous group ( go back and read your post) is racist and blatantly so. You are an unfortunate mix of blatant racist writing and a woeful lack of scientific knowledge.

reply to post by kimish


This will be my last post to you as well. It is not the facts that I am arguing with, it is your racist interpretation of those facts. Yes, SOME slaves were sold to the Europeans by the Africans. But considering the economic/militaristic pressures the Europeans put on these African societies, it is no different than when the World Bank or IMF force nations into devastating debt levels and/or when NATO nations place sanctions on countries and threaten them with invasion, sooner or later the nation starts complying and begins handing over people and money.

Your Right-wing propaganda is NOT facts, it is the racist interpretations of facts. Put down your high-school history books and go actually read some real historians work. Sheesh...

I don't know what is wrong with you Right-wing propagandists, but you read about Genetics through pseudo-psychologist's eyes and about History through Right-wing politicians eyes.

Originally posted by Tiger5

Originally posted by Robonakka
reply to post by Maslo

 

So it is racist if they can't help it? That seems wrong. I think behavior in blacks is genetically programmed. They are very different from white people genetically. So much so that in any other animal they would be declared a different species. But since it is humans we ignore that fact. We tend to label those differences as bad or racist. But they are merely differences. A lack of impulse control, less ability to understand complex conditions and an inability to plan ahead are not good or bad, just different. All races have this to some extent. But blacks have more and it affects them more. Those inherited traits reflect themselves in black culture. If you simply can not control your impulses and can not plan ahead for the future then you will not go to school or save money. You will steal because that is money now and now is all that matters. People blame society. And maybe society is somewhat at fault. The society whites have made require impulse control. They require planning ahead and saving. If you are not capable of those things then the society that values those traits will seem mighty unfair to you. Will it not? If you are incapable of understanding complex patterns or subjects then you will make up something you can understand. So you feel better about yourself.

Wow!! I know that you never studied biology and probably have never heard of the human genome project. you really should google human genetic. The issue of actually genetic differences between human phenotypes is remarkably small.

There are many people who appear phenotypically "white" that have almost 50% black gene. The USA has many of these but also so does Europe. TO assign poor "impulse control" and mental deficiency to BLacks as a Homogenous group ( go back and read your post) is racist and blatantly so. You are an unfortunate mix of blatant racist writing and a woeful lack of scientific knowledge.

And what about the testosterone levels? What about MAOA? Both of these things are higher in sub-saharan blacks then anyone else on the planet and both correlate to impulsive behavior.

Originally posted by openlocks
reply to post by kimish

 

This will be my last post to you as well. It is not the facts that I am arguing with, it is your racist interpretation of those facts. Yes, SOME slaves were sold to the Europeans by the Africans. But considering the economic/militaristic pressures the Europeans put on these African societies, it is no different than when the World Bank or IMF force nations into devastating debt levels and/or when NATO nations place sanctions on countries and threaten them with invasion, sooner or later the nation starts complying and begins handing over people and money.

Your Right-wing propaganda is NOT facts, it is the racist interpretations of facts. Put down your high-school history books and go actually read some real historians work. Sheesh...

Oh please, I guess your viewpoint, your opinion is what is considered fact?

African civilizations at that time period had their own slave trade....some African nations were worse then others (some slaves were used as sacrifices while others were able to buy their freedom) . Some historians say that up to 90% of the slaves sold to the Europeans were from Africans themselves - and the leaders of these nations knew how those slaves were going to be treated, because they had their children educated in Europe. African civilizations at the time were in many cases equal to their European counterparts.

Yes, slavery to this day still affects the black community in the west, but people tend to ignore Africa's part in all of this.

reply to post by wingsfan


Well if you can quote a few peer reviewed scientific papers then I woul dbe happy to read them. The black that you write of are not to be found in the USA as the "Sub Sahara is not in the USA. It therefore follows that given the black s in the USA have a high level of white blood your intertpretation must be incomplete if not wriong!

reply to post by Tiger5


Several studies have shown that blacks, and arabs have higher testosterone levels then whites, up to 17% more. Sample sizes have been high as 15,000 - so there maybe merit in the case.

Evidence also suggests that these levels drop off after the age of 24....and actually testosterone levels increase in white males after the age of 40.

reply to post by Tiger5


I would love to but since these studies came to public eye the science community hastily backed away from them. Most sites carrying the reports now are of a nature not appropriate for this site.

Google and wiki has some info yet, but the "warrior" gene seems to be defined as damaged now rather then a steadfast inherited one amongst certain groups.

I'm not trying to make a racial comparison per say, just in regards to your reply involving impulse.

reply to post by MidnightTide


I really don't see what you said that contradicts or challenges what I said?

The Africans who facilitated and benefited from the Atlantic slave trade were political or commercial elites–generally members of the ruling apparatus of African states or members of large trading families or institutions.

autocww.colorado.edu...

i.e. Those who would benefit from the economic pressures that the Europeans placed upon these societies where the ones capturing and selling slaves. The Atlantic Slave Trade literally funded these elite families rule for hundreds of years.

How does that contradict what I said?

sorry to be a nit picker and moan but true ... crazy chazzer never actually killed anyone , eileen wournos was the # killing seven men consecutively , the ob's knew bout her but left her to it to kill scum men and peadophilles then pretty much got #ed over by mostly everyone to get money for film rights ( charlize theron ... monster ) dunno if lee was crazy but apparent reptillian ???? and 2019 her prediction of nukes and asteroids. duno what it was bout her ??? i sympathise with a serial killer ??? oh and the iceman prob most body count not mass killing , the fbi deem serial killers kill with cooling off period before next kill and apparently still atleast 22 known killers active in usa atm

Originally posted by openlocks
reply to post by MidnightTide

 

I really don't see what you said that contradicts or challenges what I said?

The Africans who facilitated and benefited from the Atlantic slave trade were political or commercial elites–generally members of the ruling apparatus of African states or members of large trading families or institutions.

autocww.colorado.edu...

i.e. Those who would benefit from the economic pressures that the Europeans placed upon these societies where the ones capturing and selling slaves. The Atlantic Slave Trade literally funded these elite families rule for hundreds of years.

How does that contradict what I said?

Your blaming everything on the Europeans that bought the slaves and ignoring those who sold them. Africa had a slave trade before any European touched Africa, therefore Africa had as much blame as the Europeans who bought them. You can not just blame it on the elites either, because I am sure there was an entire support structure for said slave trade. I haven't researched it, but I wonder how important slavery was to African nations, before and after European interaction.