[quote]rainjack wrote:
After reading through 4 pages of this mind-numbing circle jerk, I have come to the conclusion that I share the same outlook as my special friend Bastard Guy: I hate everyone. Equally. Almost.
Californians and Yankees are naurally at the top of the shit list. But they can’t help it. They were made that way. [/quote]
Go Patriots!!!
So, I have to imagine this is how New Orleans was let down by its local politicians; a lot of pissing and dissing, but no results. What would you do to fix the problem? and if you don’t think there is a problem, stfu.
[quote]JJJJ wrote:
Finally, you love tossing the term “racist” around. A racist is one who believes in the superiority of his race . . . which you assume, in my case is white.
Not only do I not believe that “whites are superior” . . . I’m not even “white.”
I think that you, like others on this thread, are fighting for a certain principle and I respect that. But you need to be very careful not to let your zeal overwhelm your common sense. You need to open your mind to what’s really going on in this country if you ever hope to have a positive effect on it.[/quote]
“Open my mind?” Coming from you, that’s a joke.
Clarification: A racist is someone who makes subjective judgements based on race. That’s it. My example of “asians are better at math” is a subjective and racist statement. Someone who believes themselves superior because of their race is a special kind of bigot, one who is bigoted against every race except for their own.
You claim to be 50 years old, claim to have all these experiences which make you so wise, and yet you seem to have very little understanding of what it means to walk in someone else’s shoes.
Your reasoning is shallow and your arguments are weak. I was not surprised to see you shift your stances so often in this thread as your illusionary worldview crumbled under its own untenable foundation. And as expected, you have not apologized for your short-sighted and bigoted comments which have brought out such vocal criticism.
But like I said before, I am done with you. This post is for the people who are reading this thread, and still think that you have some kind of point which has any validity at all:
SHAME ON YOU.
Don’t you realize when you become lazy in your mind and draw conclusions like this “black people are criminals because there’s more of them in jail?”, that you are lowering yourself? The problems of poverty and crime cannot be explained away by race, and don’t you ever think like that again. Shame on you for entertaining it for even a second.
This assmonkey JJJJ says that there are problems in the ghetto… well no shit. Did you come up with that all by yourself? But it is not because the ghetto residents are black, dammit! What would assmonkey have us do? Herd them all up into camps? “Yeah, we better get these black folks out of the ghetto, the only people that can properly handle living in the ghetto are poverty-stricken white people.”
I know that you think you’re a regular guy/gal, and that you do your best to see the good in people, but I ask you to stop for a second and think about this, because it’s important. Are you actually a racist? Do you make subjective judgements, out loud or not, based on somebody’s race, and nothing else? Be honest… at least with yourself.
There is never a good reason to say “blacks are X” or “jews are Y”. Why would you ever have some reason to say something like that? I’m not trying to be PC here (shudder), I’m just being real. Why be an assmonkey if you don’t have to be? There are enough jerks in this world already.
Thank you if you read this whole post and reflected for even a split second.
MAKKUN . . . I wanted to thank you for an excellent post. I read it once but have not finished with it. One “read” does not do it justice. Looks like enough material there for a week’s worth of work and I look forward to gigging into the material you presented and thinking through your conclusions.
Not that my opinion matters one way or another, but I agree with your conclusions . . . the black community is more violent and the reason why is still unknown. (Hopefully, I’ve understood your conclusion.)
I suspect genetics may play a larger role than what you identify and alienation a smaller role. If this had been 1965, then I would agree that the social alienation of the black community is a large contributing factor. But in 2005? . . . I’m just not sure.
I also disagree that “a lot of research” is being done. Some is, sure, but we still do not have a climate in academia where researchers can study this issue free of fear. In fact, one of the significant problems in colleges today is Political Correctness and how it stiffles legitimate research.
Issues like race, homosexuality, the equality of women and more and more . . . religion . . . are taboo.
Thanks again.
LOTHARIO
I don’t believe I’ve done this:
"I was not surprised to see you shift your stances so often in this thread as your illusionary worldview crumbled under its own untenable foundation. "
I would appreciae an example.
TARTARUS . . . in reference to your point: “If the criminals don’t represent all black people, then they can’t be used as an example of what black people are like. Criminals, particularly if they’ve just been set free in a disaster, are violent, for the most part. You don’t project that behavior onto humanity in general.”
What I’ve tried to say and maybe it just isn’t coming across because of all the static, is that the black community has a problem and it manifests itself in the statistical data we see . . . and in what we see in NO.
I would use the analogy of a cancer. The cancer cells don’t attack the entire body. The cancer itself may not even be very large but it can still be lethal if left unchecked.
This cancer in the black community is the culture that I described in the opening post of this thread.
Now, whether that culture is shaped by genetics or environment, we don’t know . . . and the causes may not even be important. What is important is attacking the culture that creates the kind of scumbags that shoot at helicopters.
LOTHARIO . . . YOU SAID: Clarification: A racist is someone who makes subjective judgements based on race. That’s it. My example of “asians are better at math” is a subjective and racist statement. Someone who believes themselves superior because of their race is a special kind of bigot, one who is bigoted against every race except for their own.
Feel free to define racism as you wish. As long as it feels good . . . hey, who cares about being accurate, right?
Outside of the la-la land you occupy, here, in the real world, “racism” has a different meaning. You might want to look into it so you don’t come across like an imbecile (just a suggestion). It detracts from your argument when you stubbornly adhere to wrong definitions.
By your definition, “blacks are better at football, basketball and sprinting” is a subjective and racist statement . . . regardless of how much data one can pile up to support the conclusion.
By the way . . . this is a fucking classic:
“Someone who believes themselves superior because of their race is a special kind of bigot, one who is bigoted against every race except for their own.”
So, in Lothario world we have “bigots” and “special kinds of bigots.”
Cool.
[quote]randman wrote:
doogie wrote:
Randman,
STOP.
This thread will not ever convince anyone you are right. 99% of people already know you are.
All this thread does is give people who want to think like jjjj arguements to use to justify their beliefs. The people you hope to sway won’t even read your posts. They’ll just read the other tripe and end up being even more convinced that their ignorant beliefs are correct.
Point taken. I’ll think about it. Let’s just say I’m going to be monitoring everything JJJJ tries to say on these forums with regards to blacks and violence. If he gets out of hand or starts to recruit some minions, I may have to figuratively slap him down every so often.[/quote]
Guess I’m in the 1%. You think that picking apart this guy’s post paragraph by paragraph and flaunting your inability to grasp the simple points he makes constitutes “slapping him down”? You’ve got to be kidding me. First of all, nobody appreciates your smug, self-righteous bullshit. You don’t fucking speak for me so shut your fucking trap.
All this thread does is AGAIN prove my point that we’ve become so fucking backwards from politically correct BULLSHIT being shoveled down our fucking throats all the god damn time that it’s actually gotten to the point that it’s become “racist” to state a motherfucking FACT.
Here, I’ll sum it up for you. You can pretend not to understand it like you did every other decent point made on this thread that offends your politically correct sensibilities:
FACT: Blacks made up 12% of the U.S. population in 2000 (Source: U.S. Census)
FACT: Blacks constitute 50% of murder arrestees in 2002 (Source: FBI Crime Statistics).
FACT: Blacks constitute 36% of violent crime arrestees in the U.S. in 2002 (Source: FBI Crime Statistics).
This means THERE IS A PROBLEM IN THE BLACK COMMUNITY IN THE UNITED STATES.
This means that BLACKS COMMITED THE MOST VIOLENT CRIMES IN THE UNITED STATES BY FAR in 2002.
Now if you want to say, in light of the above, that blacks in America do not appear to be “more violent” than whites, you can go right ahead. But please explain to us WHY you think that is the case, because it’s pretty damn clear to me that you would be wrong. For God’s sake, you’re describing behavior, not indicting blacks as somehow being genetically inferior.
SOMEONE PLEASE EXPLAIN TO ME HOW IT IS RACIST TO REPEAT THE ABOVE FACTS?
For Christ’s sake, if you want to fix a problem, you have to first be willing to ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE PROBLEM IS THERE!
Rant over.
This is for anybody that feels like they have the need to reply. First of all, when i beleive philosophically that when im an old man i dont want all of this strife in my heart that looking at things in a racial context produces. I mean it makes you bloomin cynical. Currently, however i beleive that such things constitute a somewhat practical way of looking at things until you have more information.
Its a negative stereotype about caucasians ( which prof x pointed out ) that we have a higher incidence of being serial killers. The stats show it, most are white. Even criminal justice profilers put a white guy in the slots when they see another apparant serial killer taking people out. Does that constitute racism? As a white person i would like to think so but its true nontheless. We can argue about semantics all day whether this is racist or not but i am personally ready and trying to look at my own group objectively, i wish that the african americans ( and other groups ) would be willing to do the same. End of rant
I have some family in NYC and a lot of people up there are racist and dont mind admitting it. They talk about the Jews, Italians , Blacks , Whites , whatever but no-body up there is prejudiced b/c they are cynical and dislike everybody. Equal oppurtunity hatas
[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
ChrisPowers wrote:
But just asking the question, “why are blacks responsible for so much of this country’s violent crime when they make up such a small amount of the population?” is not, in itself, racist in any way. Has political correctness gotten that out of control that you can’t even ask WHY that situation exists? Isn’t that the first step toward SOLVING the problem? The most bleeding heart of liberals should want to know the answer to that question as much as any grand wizard of the KKK. Don’t you agree?
This is once again the basic problem here. You have no idea what racism is. What you did was take a stereotype and apply it. Why in the world would you say something like “most violent crime is committed by blacks” without ever doing just a tiny bit of fact-checking? You ASSUMED that the stereotype was right, didn’t you? This is not political correctness, this is the damn truth.[/quote]
What is the basic problem? Don’t tell me I don’t know what racism is. Who the fuck are you to define the term?
I’ve seen that point debated by authorities on the subject and I’ve never seen anyone try to dispute it, except to say that, “it’s because blacks are poor.” Whether or not that’s true (as I’m sure it probably is), it does nothing to change the above FACT.
Now, since the truth has come to light, and we’ve since learned that blacks do indeed commit such a disproportionately large amount of violent crime, are you going to admit that you were wrong?
I think it’s funny that you accused me of being racist for “assuming” that the above was true, when in reality, it was your kumbaya, lets-all-hold-hands-under-the-rainbow assumption that it was false that has exposed you as someone sho swallows the politically correct bullshit that he’s spoon-fed on a daily basis.
I also find it curious that you chose to put quotation marks around a phrase that I did not write, and then disprove THAT point. Is that not the very textbook definition of a straw man fallacy?
What I wrote was: “why are blacks responsible for so much of this country’s violent crime when they make up such a small amount of the population?”
What you quoted and disproved was: “most violent crime is committed by blacks.”
Very curious indeed.
POVERTY IN THE UNITED STATES
Got a phone call from a guy tonight who said Bill O’reilly responded to some letter by saying that 75% of those living in poverty were white.
???
To the best of my knowledge that’s incorrect. The numbers look like this:
293,000,000 people in this country of which 12.7% live in poverty . . . 37 million.
1,000,000 Asians
9,000,000 Hispanics
9,000,000 Blacks
21,000,000 Whites, non-Hispanics
(The numbers don’t add because I rounded up.)
So if he had said 78% of poor people in this country ARE NOT BLACK . . . then that would be accurate.
By the way . . . the numbers above are why I doubt the POVERTY reason as the cause for black violence.
If you believe that poverty-stricken blacks are responsible for all the problems of the black community, then you have to explain why the other 78% of poor people in this country don’t seem to have the same violence issues. What’s their secret?
And note that there are just as many poor Hispanics (I say more because of the issue with undocumented aliens) and they don’t have the violence issue.
Final note . . . there is one disturbing fact about black poverty that has been around for years. 24.7% of all blacks are poor.
That compares to only 10% Asians and 9% whites. 22% of Hispanics are poor but like I said, I think that’s a low estimate.
So yes, if your black extended family has 20 people in it, 5 are living in poverty.
If you’re white only 2 of the 20 are poor.
Significant?
Before you decide, don’t forget that Hispanics have close to the same rate as blacks and don’t have the same violence issues.)
[quote]JJJJ wrote:
I would appreciae an example.[/quote]
Are you still here? I toyed with the idea of ignoring you, but work is slow tonight, so…
“I recently started a thread stating my conclusion that blacks were more violent than whites and that this helped explain the violence in New Orleans.”
“Look . . . this doesn’t mean that I think YOU are violent (I’m assuming you’re black) any more than the black family across the street from me is.
…
But if you are black (and especially a black male) government stats show that you do belong to a SOCIAL GROUP that is very violent.”
“The issue I was trying to draw attention to was the violence in the black community. I think THERE’S SOMETHNG WRONG.
…
I don’t pretend to know if it’s genetics, economics, geography, culture, history, or some other factor.”
Now evidently you can’t make up your mind. You started out so sure about black people, and now it could be all kinds of things.
Number three is especially telling. Give me one example of how your race is determined by anything other than genetics.
[quote]JJJJ wrote:
Kuz wrote:
I really cannot see anyone who is black painting their entire race as being more prone to violence. Just a wild guess.
KUZ . . . not more PRONE to violence. The race IS more violent. The government census and criminal stats prove it. (Whether you like it or not.)
The question is why? And more importantly, what can be done about it?
[/quote]
Apparently you failed statistics in college. Statistics “prove” nothing. They can be used to indicate things, but they provide nothing like proof. Statistics are also easy to manipulate to support any point you want to make. Researchers do it all the time. It’s called cherry-picking. Please take a look here to help you understand the various ways in which statistics can be misleading:
h2g2 - How To Understand Statistics - Edited Entry.
WMD
LOTHARIO
Look man, I don’t want you to think I’m picking on you because I keep responding to your previous post, but I think you actually make a few good points in amongst all your bullshit. Just takes my brain a little longer to process.
YOU SAID: What would assmonkey have us do? Herd them all up into camps? “Yeah, we better get these black folks out of the ghetto, the only people that can properly handle living in the ghetto are poverty-stricken white people.”
No, what Mr. Assmonkey is saying is that . . . well fuck, why repeat myself. Please go back to my first post on this thread. Basically, in one sentence . . . we have to help the black community by developing good, old-fashioned capitalistic entrepreneurship . . . while at the same time getting rid of the white liberal pussies and black pirates who now make money and careers off black misery.
YOU SAID: 2) I know that you think you’re a regular guy/gal, and that you do your best to see the good in people, but I ask you to stop for a second and think about this, because it’s important. Are you actually a racist? Do you make subjective judgements, out loud or not, based on somebody’s race, and nothing else? Be honest… at least with yourself.
Like I’ve tried to explain to you and others . . . you need to be careful with the term “racist.” There is real racism out there and you need to reserve the term for the ones that deserve it.
When I was growing up, for example, I thought spic was my middle name. I was the only Cuban kid in an all-white school system (Mount Pleasant, Wilmington, Delaware). Those were some racists. The KKK was/is racist . . . the NAZIs were racist . . . the Japanese were extremmely racist (still are) . . . I’m seeing real racism by the Korean population in this town towards the blacks coming from NO.
So there’s real racism out there.
Commenting on race, however, does not make you a racist. Making generalizations about racial statistics doesn’t make you a racist. Saying that Chinese are good in math only means you’re stereotyping them. Being a racist means that you’re killing them, or denying them opportunity or nurturing a belief that they are inferior simply because they are Chinese . . . and you’re whatever-the-fuck race you are.
So no, I am not a racist. Thank you for asking. I think people are all equally fucked up.
[quote]makkun wrote:
Let’s look at some scientific research on race, violence and crime. Unlike stated earlier, there is quite a lot of research being done. Even Wikipedia offers quite a good starting point for the discussion - so much for the “PC argument” that no one would dare to touch the subject…[/quote]
Makkun,
I really wanted to give you kudos for this post. It was very well put together – I loved the way you started on one side of the fence and then slowly took it apart.
There’s a huge amount of interesting material you presented to discuss – unfortunately it might be lost in all the noise… maybe another time, another place?
[quote]ChrisPowers wrote:
I also find it curious that you chose to put quotation marks around a phrase that I did not write, and then disprove THAT point. Is that not the very textbook definition of a straw man fallacy?
What I wrote was: “why are blacks responsible for so much of this country’s violent crime when they make up such a small amount of the population?”
What you quoted and disproved was: “most violent crime is committed by blacks.”
Very curious indeed.[/quote]
Calm down pooky, I paraphrased you. What you wrote was:
“To be honest, I didn’t even think it was disputed that blacks commit the majority of violent crimes in the U.S. Is it?”
And THEN, you later narrowed it down to the disproportionality of race vs. violent criminal offenders. Which I will not dispute, because the facts are right there. What makes you different from assmonkey is the fact that you do not immediately jump to the conclusion that it is because the offenders are BLACK.
My contention is that poor and troubled people are criminals. When more black people are disproportionately poor, then they will disproportionately be criminals.
[quote]WMD wrote:
Apparently you failed statistics in college. Statistics “prove” nothing. They can be used to indicate things, but they provide nothing like proof. Statistics are also easy to manipulate to support any point you want to make. Researchers do it all the time. It’s called cherry-picking. Please take a look here to help you understand the various ways in which statistics can be misleading:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A1091350.
WMD [/quote]
Here’s what’s wrong with trying to apply that web site to what’s been presented here: NO CONCLUSIONS HAVE BEEN DRAWN HERE AT ALL.
Who’s manipulating anything? To support WHAT POINT?
It’s people on this site misinterpreting the phrase, “blacks are more violent” to mean, “all black people are inherently violent due to some genetic inferiority” that’s causing the confusion. I have seen no one state any such thing.
You can see the statistics. Explain how YOU think they are misleading.
Do you believe that all of those statistics that were collected by the FBI and the Census Bureau are absolutely useless and mean nothing? Do you actually think that is not of any significance that violent crimes are committed by one race at a rate hundreds of times that of another? You don’t think that’s indicative of a problem?
With all due respect, you have to have your head up your ass if that’s what you think.
[quote]hspder wrote:
makkun wrote:
Let’s look at some scientific research on race, violence and crime. Unlike stated earlier, there is quite a lot of research being done. Even Wikipedia offers quite a good starting point for the discussion - so much for the “PC argument” that no one would dare to touch the subject…
Makkun,
I really wanted to give you kudos for this post. It was very well put together – I loved the way you started on one side of the fence and then slowly took it apart.
There’s a huge amount of interesting material you presented to discuss – unfortunately it might be lost in all the noise… maybe another time, another place?[/quote]
I second this. Makkun has always been one of my favorite T-Nationers. Even if he is a damn foreigner. 
[quote]WMD wrote:
Apparently you failed statistics in college. Statistics “prove” nothing. They can be used to indicate things, but they provide nothing like proof. Statistics are also easy to manipulate to support any point you want to make. Researchers do it all the time. It’s called cherry-picking. [/quote]
WMD . . . what are you going to do next, pull fuzzballs out of your ass?
Let me write you a logical syllogism that shows how statistics can be used to provide TRUTH and VALIDITY in a logical argument:
MAJOR PREMISE: Any minority population that accounts for a disproportionately large number of murders in our society is VIOLENT
MINOR PREMISE: The black social group comprises 13% of the population but commits 49% of the murders.
CONCLUSION: Therefore the black social group is violent.
The above conclusion is both TRUE and VALID. The deduction in the syllogism would be impossible without the stats included in the Minor Premise.
God help us . . . I honestly believe that some of the moral relativism fucking up our society is starting to leak into rational thought.
Stats don’t lie . . . people lie. But hopefully YOU are intelligent enough to know when someone is trying to bullshit you using fancy statistics. Liberals do it all the time. One example . . . the guys on this thread who pull out the list of lynchings to prove how horrible white people are . . . liberal statistics are usually highly inflamatory . . . and empty.
Thank you for the link. I will review it tomorrow when the market slows down.