[Hencredible Casanova]

(07-27-2013 11:22 AM)Easy E Wrote:  

^I think Bill O'Reilly has some valid points. Sure, his delivery is a bit over the top, but his facts are dead accurate.

Also, why are blacks in so many countries prone to committing crime (Brazil, USA, Canada, UK, France, etc.)? It is comical to pretend that the high black crime rates only happen in the USA. They seem to happen anywhere there is a large black community. How long can the "legacy of slavery" be used as an excuse to gloss over the facts regarding crime?

Where are your sources for these claims? The majority of Brazilians have some measure of African ancestry (the majority), and that is another country with a shameful history of slavery and inequality.

With France, the majority of the incarcerated are Arab Muslim men mostly from Algeria, a country that has suffered brutal colonial oppression by France. The war for independence there came at a huge loss of both French and Algerian lives and there is well-documented evidence of the disproportionate prejudice and injustice Algerians face as immigrants in France.

The UK and Canada do not have higher incidents of crime from their respective black populations. That is simply untrue. Over 70% of the incarcerated in the UK are white.

[Samseau]

Quote:

No other race of human beings has killed more people, raped more women, destroyed more cultures, or has stolen as much land as people of European descent.

You forget one thing: European's didn't only pillage other cultures, but they also were doing it to each other.

Speaking of historical circumstances, Europe has over a 10,000 year history of European tribes attacking each other and looting the spoils (land, wealth, and women).

Thus the racist card is nonsense. Europeans have been equal opportunity opportunists for as long as anyone can remember. It's not like they singled out the blacks for anything, the Europeans have always been exploiters of the weak.

Quote:

I think it's more than fair to say there are deep problems in Black America today, but a helpful discussion would look into the deeper (historical) reasons for that. No serious person can divorce the two.

You can't say that to people that are the product of a culture shaped by slavery (where people literally were owned by others in direct contradiction to America's ideals) and Jim Crow. Keep in mind there are still people alive today that experienced the latter.

Actually, we can. The Jews received far worse treatment than the Blacks did in the 20th century, and yet they are one of the most successful and richest minority groups in the world.

In fact, I'd say the Jews have had much more historical oppression than the blacks, going back thousands of years. Black slavery only lasted a few hundred years, while Jew oppression has been around since the Egyptian days. During the middle ages, it was against the law to even employ a Jew. Jim Crow was never that bad. Blacks were also never exterminated on a mass scale. There are almost zero Jews left in Germany.

[Samseau]

(07-27-2013 12:56 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 12:51 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(07-26-2013 06:19 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

This video merits attention. As I've always said, the end of Jim Crow ironically precipitated the end of the black community as it historically had been. Back in the day black doctors, dentists, lawyers, etc lived in black communities. After the end of Jim Crow, many of these folks left to live in integrated communities. In the inner cities, you had white flight AND the departure of upwardly mobile blacks. Then those communities were hit with the crack epidemic which led to a dramatic increase in violence.

Back in 1964, two-thirds of all people locked up for crime were whites, while blacks and latinos made up the remainder. Today, it's the opposite.

Tim Wise is a bullshit artist. Dude preaches about white racism all day long yet he lives in a 99.9% white community (might even be gated). Typical hypocritical full of shit liberal.

That is a classic ad hominem. What on earth does his residence have to do with his arguments? Do you live in a black neighborhood? If not, does that invalidate your arguments on that basis alone? Wise has educated corporations, law enforcement agencies, and other institutions on the the topic of race in this country.

Ad-hominem applies when a person is making a moral argument. Ad-hominem is a fallacy for any other type of argument, such as scientific, mathematical, historical, musical, epistemology, etc.

For example, if a mass-murderer starts talking about how killing is wrong, would you listen to him? If Goldman Sach's CEO starts preaching about how greed is bad would you listen to him? If a prostitute starts talking about how sexual abstinence is the only way, would you listen to her?

Likewise, when full-of-shit Tim starts preaching about how white people are bad blah blah blah and he himself only lives with white people, you know you're listening to a charlatan. Why doesn't Mr. Wise go and live in South Chicago, or North Cambridge, and then get back to us on why Blacks aren't employed in the same numbers as whites are?

Tim Wise is a phony, hypocritical, full of shit faggot. Just as bad as Al Sharpton, but less comical so I can't even stomach Tim Wise.

And the fact that blacks like you respect Tim Wise is just another example of Blacks who get suckered by Liberals. The Liberals are doing the most to destroy Black America and yet Black Americans cannot stop eating their shit.

And for the record, my neighbors are black.

[Easy E]

(07-27-2013 01:02 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 11:22 AM)Easy E Wrote:  

^I think Bill O'Reilly has some valid points. Sure, his delivery is a bit over the top, but his facts are dead accurate.

Also, why are blacks in so many countries prone to committing crime (Brazil, USA, Canada, UK, France, etc.)? It is comical to pretend that the high black crime rates only happen in the USA. They seem to happen anywhere there is a large black community. How long can the "legacy of slavery" be used as an excuse to gloss over the facts regarding crime?

Where are your sources for these claims? The majority of Brazilians have some measure of African ancestry (the majority), and that is another country with a shameful history of slavery and inequality.

Here you go:

http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime

Also, I am discussing crime RATES. Obviously in countries where blacks make up a tiny minority of the people, the majority of crime with be non-black. However, blacks still have a much higher crime RATE than the non-black population worldwide.

[assman]

(07-27-2013 01:35 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

And the fact that blacks like you respect Tim Wise is just another example of Blacks who get suckered by Liberals. The Liberals are doing the most to destroy Black America and yet Black Americans cannot stop eating their shit.

Amazing, isn't it?

There are black conservatives, but the media does their best to ignore them and ensure that clowns like Sharpton and Jackson get all the airtime.

[Samseau]

(07-27-2013 02:07 PM)assman Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 01:35 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

And the fact that blacks like you respect Tim Wise is just another example of Blacks who get suckered by Liberals. The Liberals are doing the most to destroy Black America and yet Black Americans cannot stop eating their shit.

Amazing, isn't it?

There are black conservatives, but the media does their best to ignore them and ensure that clowns like Sharpton and Jackson get all the airtime.

Black conservatives are marginalized and ignored by white liberals. Yet white liberals never stop talking about white conservatives. Yet another example of their bigoted hypocrisy.

[RaulValdez739]

(07-27-2013 09:38 AM)Fisto Wrote:  

(07-26-2013 08:48 PM)RaulValdez739 Wrote:  

(07-26-2013 01:24 PM)Fisto Wrote:  

Pitt and Valdez

I can't believe you two still are so ignorant of the facts surrounding the case.

Everything Valdez just wrote surrounding his knowledge of the case is wrong.

This is why some black people will make it hard for black people as a whole to be taken seriously.

Pitt, you just posted a video outlining what's wrong in the black community, a major point is to stop playing the role of victims, then you say you completely agree with Valdez who is either too stupid to look up the actual circumstances or is being willfully ignorant.

How you don't see the conflict between these two things is just bewildering.

Please enlighten myself and the good folks on rooshv forum. I am open to debate. Tell me where I went wrong?

And please stay on topic and try not side step with saying, "violence in Chicago".

This has been discussed over and over. You're late to the party. Your understanding of the events is skewed by having heard liberal media news coverage. You obviously didn't care enough to go find the facts for yourself and rely on US magazine.

There's nothing to debate here. You're simply ignorant.

You can't call a man ignorant when he is trying to learn "correct" information. I basically won. Now shut the hell up .

[Hencredible Casanova]

(07-27-2013 12:17 PM)Beyond Borders Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 11:14 AM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 10:37 AM)Beyond Borders Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 10:24 AM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

This notion that people of African descent are "genetically" more predisposed to violence is hilarious and suggests historical amnesia or ignorance - if not worse - on the part of the person making the argument.

Who are you talking to? I was not aware that someone made that statement.

In fact, I think it's been made clear that this isn't what's being argued at all.

Ah. My fault then. I thought I saw it brought up somewhere.

Well, what's being argued then?

I think where you got confused may have been in the post where I pointed out to Giovonny that Fisto was NOT saying blacks were genetically predisposed to violence and crime. You can find the post here: http://www.rooshvforum.network/thread-26239-...#pid498622

At least that's where the term "genetically predisposed" was first used, so I assumed it's where you got that. You can also see my version of what was being argued there.

Sorry about that. Thanks for the correction.

[Hencredible Casanova]

(07-27-2013 01:23 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Quote:

No other race of human beings has killed more people, raped more women, destroyed more cultures, or has stolen as much land as people of European descent.

You forget one thing: European's didn't only pillage other cultures, but they also were doing it to each other.

Speaking of historical circumstances, Europe has over a 10,000 year history of European tribes attacking each other and looting the spoils (land, wealth, and women).

Thus the racist card is nonsense. Europeans have been equal opportunity opportunists for as long as anyone can remember. It's not like they singled out the blacks for anything, the Europeans have always been exploiters of the weak.

Quote:

I think it's more than fair to say there are deep problems in Black America today, but a helpful discussion would look into the deeper (historical) reasons for that. No serious person can divorce the two.

You can't say that to people that are the product of a culture shaped by slavery (where people literally were owned by others in direct contradiction to America's ideals) and Jim Crow. Keep in mind there are still people alive today that experienced the latter.

Actually, we can. The Jews received far worse treatment than the Blacks did in the 20th century, and yet they are one of the most successful and richest minority groups in the world.

In fact, I'd say the Jews have had much more historical oppression than the blacks, going back thousands of years. Black slavery only lasted a few hundred years, while Jew oppression has been around since the Egyptian days. During the middle ages, it was against the law to even employ a Jew. Jim Crow was never that bad. Blacks were also never exterminated on a mass scale. There are almost zero Jews left in Germany.

I didn't forget anything. What you're saying about Europeans pillaging cultures within in Europe doesn't detract from my point, which had nothing to do with who the victims of that violence were.

The rest of your post tells me you have a lot to learn about black history in the US. There are countless examples of blacks not being allowed to work in certain jobs, apply for loans, buy homes in certain neighborhoods, or attend certain schools.

Also, there's really nothing akin to American slavery in history. Being forced to adopt anglo-saxon names, separating children from parents and auctioning them off to slave owners, and eradicating all knowledge of where they came from. Jews have always known they originated in the Levant and they also chose to immigrate to the places they did.

It's rather silly of you to seriously try to compare the histories of entirely different peoples and draw such ignorant observations.

[Norset]

Hencredible:

Did you check all the facts Tim Wise lists? I have never heard of him until that vid. Does he have a reputation of bending truth?

Let us decouple any "morality" he may attempt to preach with the statistics he quotes. Most times in life it is good to only take advice and opinions from people who walk the walk (Mark Minter, ahem), but not for purely logical arguments and the citation of measurable quantities.

Do you know his sources?

If all his numbers are correct, I do not see how he is a hypocrite based on the video you linked. You can live in a 100% white community and realize "wait a minute, group XX which is not white is being treated unfairly by the system". Your zip code does not change the validity of the statistics you cite. Maybe the conclusions you draw from them, but not so much as for you arguments to be completely discredited.

Now the next level is to understand WHY these people are being profiled the way they are. And then you open the can of worms.

[Hencredible Casanova]

(07-27-2013 01:35 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 12:56 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 12:51 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(07-26-2013 06:19 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

This video merits attention. As I've always said, the end of Jim Crow ironically precipitated the end of the black community as it historically had been. Back in the day black doctors, dentists, lawyers, etc lived in black communities. After the end of Jim Crow, many of these folks left to live in integrated communities. In the inner cities, you had white flight AND the departure of upwardly mobile blacks. Then those communities were hit with the crack epidemic which led to a dramatic increase in violence.

Back in 1964, two-thirds of all people locked up for crime were whites, while blacks and latinos made up the remainder. Today, it's the opposite.

Tim Wise is a bullshit artist. Dude preaches about white racism all day long yet he lives in a 99.9% white community (might even be gated). Typical hypocritical full of shit liberal.

That is a classic ad hominem. What on earth does his residence have to do with his arguments? Do you live in a black neighborhood? If not, does that invalidate your arguments on that basis alone? Wise has educated corporations, law enforcement agencies, and other institutions on the the topic of race in this country.

Ad-hominem applies when a person is making a moral argument. Ad-hominem is a fallacy for any other type of argument, such as scientific, mathematical, historical, musical, epistemology, etc.

For example, if a mass-murderer starts talking about how killing is wrong, would you listen to him? If Goldman Sach's CEO starts preaching about how greed is bad would you listen to him? If a prostitute starts talking about how sexual abstinence is the only way, would you listen to her?

Likewise, when full-of-shit Tim starts preaching about how white people are bad blah blah blah and he himself only lives with white people, you know you're listening to a charlatan. Why doesn't Mr. Wise go and live in South Chicago, or North Cambridge, and then get back to us on why Blacks aren't employed in the same numbers as whites are?

Tim Wise is a phony, hypocritical, full of shit faggot. Just as bad as Al Sharpton, but less comical so I can't even stomach Tim Wise.

And the fact that blacks like you respect Tim Wise is just another example of Blacks who get suckered by Liberals. The Liberals are doing the most to destroy Black America and yet Black Americans cannot stop eating their shit.

And for the record, my neighbors are black.

Again, you're attacking the messenger and not the message, a classic ad hominem.

Just because your neighbors are black does not mean you live in a black neighborhood. They could be one of the few if only blacks in YOUR white neighborhood.

But that's a red herring to begin with because where Tim Wise lives is irrelevant to his arguments.

Your diatribe of insults to his character are not enlightening anyone on this thread to the crux of of the matter.

[Duke Castile]

(07-27-2013 02:13 PM)RaulValdez739 Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 09:38 AM)Fisto Wrote:  

(07-26-2013 08:48 PM)RaulValdez739 Wrote:  

(07-26-2013 01:24 PM)Fisto Wrote:  

Pitt and Valdez

I can't believe you two still are so ignorant of the facts surrounding the case.

Everything Valdez just wrote surrounding his knowledge of the case is wrong.

This is why some black people will make it hard for black people as a whole to be taken seriously.

Pitt, you just posted a video outlining what's wrong in the black community, a major point is to stop playing the role of victims, then you say you completely agree with Valdez who is either too stupid to look up the actual circumstances or is being willfully ignorant.

How you don't see the conflict between these two things is just bewildering.

Please enlighten myself and the good folks on rooshv forum. I am open to debate. Tell me where I went wrong?

And please stay on topic and try not side step with saying, "violence in Chicago".

This has been discussed over and over. You're late to the party. Your understanding of the events is skewed by having heard liberal media news coverage. You obviously didn't care enough to go find the facts for yourself and rely on US magazine.

There's nothing to debate here. You're simply ignorant.

You can't call a man ignorant when he is trying to learn "correct" information. I basically won. Now shut the hell up .

You are ignorant of the meaning of the word ignorant.

What did you win? And how did you "basically" win?

If you want to learn correct information, I suggest you go over to the thread that details it ad nauseum.

[Hencredible Casanova]

(07-27-2013 01:46 PM)Easy E Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 01:02 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 11:22 AM)Easy E Wrote:  

^I think Bill O'Reilly has some valid points. Sure, his delivery is a bit over the top, but his facts are dead accurate.

Also, why are blacks in so many countries prone to committing crime (Brazil, USA, Canada, UK, France, etc.)? It is comical to pretend that the high black crime rates only happen in the USA. They seem to happen anywhere there is a large black community. How long can the "legacy of slavery" be used as an excuse to gloss over the facts regarding crime?

Where are your sources for these claims? The majority of Brazilians have some measure of African ancestry (the majority), and that is another country with a shameful history of slavery and inequality.

Here you go:

http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime

Also, I am discussing crime RATES. Obviously in countries where blacks make up a tiny minority of the people, the majority of crime with be non-black. However, blacks still have a much higher crime RATE than the non-black population worldwide.

There's several things wrong with your source in relation to the argument you are making, which is that black people - on the basis of just being black - are more prone to commit crime.

First of all, crime enforcement and criminal activity are not the same thing. Drug use in the US is a prime example. Whites by and large abuse drugs far more than blacks but the enforcement of those crimes are disproportionately directed towards blacks.

Second, you are not looking at other factors such as social and economic conditions that help explain where crime occurs and who does it. Are you looking at disparities between blacks in high-income and low-income areas while also looking at the same for whites? There's a lot more analysis you need to do before making the outrageous claim that blacks are more prone to commit crime just for being black.

Also, you can't divorce the present from the past. If Europeans were known for pillaging and killing for most of the continent's recorded history, does the relative state of calm as of now suggest they are not naturally violent people? How do you explain what Nazis did to Jews during WWII? Are they not white?

There's a lot of problems with the argument you are making.

[Hencredible Casanova]

(07-27-2013 02:57 PM)Norset Wrote:  

Hencredible:

Did you check all the facts Tim Wise lists? I have never heard of him until that vid. Does he have a reputation of bending truth?

Let us decouple any "morality" he may attempt to preach with the statistics he quotes. Most times in life it is good to only take advice and opinions from people who walk the walk (Mark Minter, ahem), but not for purely logical arguments and the citation of measurable quantities.

Do you know his sources?

If all his numbers are correct, I do not see how he is a hypocrite based on the video you linked. You can live in a 100% white community and realize "wait a minute, group XX which is not white is being treated unfairly by the system". Your zip code does not change the validity of the statistics you cite. Maybe the conclusions you draw from them, but not so much as for you arguments to be completely discredited.

Now the next level is to understand WHY these people are being profiled the way they are. And then you open the can of worms.

Great point. Tim Wise is a scholar and highly respected in academia, corporations, and law enforcement agencies. He's not even rich. Most of his career was spent in grassroots activism to effect social change, not in the pursuit of the almighty dollar.Yet guys here are talking about Bill O'Reilly, an uber rich cable news host who spews incendiary content to entertain viewers and solicit ratings to double his dollars. Talk about absurdity.

[Duke Castile]

Hencredible - You are one of the few guys that don't make my eyes roll when talking about these things. You bring historical perspective to the way the black culture's landscape was shaped.

All that said, isn't that more passing the buck? Even if you don't like O'Reilly, don't some of the things he says ring true? I don't know how the idea got started that I think blacks are genetically predisposed to crime, I agree with O'Reilly, I think it's about the disintegration of the black family.

The president is "uber" rich, arguably the most privileged black man in the country, and he "spewed" incendiary and divisive content. That whole "that could have been me" BS was disgraceful.

[Samseau]

(07-27-2013 03:00 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 01:35 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 12:56 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 12:51 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(07-26-2013 06:19 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

This video merits attention. As I've always said, the end of Jim Crow ironically precipitated the end of the black community as it historically had been. Back in the day black doctors, dentists, lawyers, etc lived in black communities. After the end of Jim Crow, many of these folks left to live in integrated communities. In the inner cities, you had white flight AND the departure of upwardly mobile blacks. Then those communities were hit with the crack epidemic which led to a dramatic increase in violence.

Back in 1964, two-thirds of all people locked up for crime were whites, while blacks and latinos made up the remainder. Today, it's the opposite.

Tim Wise is a bullshit artist. Dude preaches about white racism all day long yet he lives in a 99.9% white community (might even be gated). Typical hypocritical full of shit liberal.

That is a classic ad hominem. What on earth does his residence have to do with his arguments? Do you live in a black neighborhood? If not, does that invalidate your arguments on that basis alone? Wise has educated corporations, law enforcement agencies, and other institutions on the the topic of race in this country.

Ad-hominem applies when a person is making a moral argument. Ad-hominem is a fallacy for any other type of argument, such as scientific, mathematical, historical, musical, epistemology, etc.

For example, if a mass-murderer starts talking about how killing is wrong, would you listen to him? If Goldman Sach's CEO starts preaching about how greed is bad would you listen to him? If a prostitute starts talking about how sexual abstinence is the only way, would you listen to her?

Likewise, when full-of-shit Tim starts preaching about how white people are bad blah blah blah and he himself only lives with white people, you know you're listening to a charlatan. Why doesn't Mr. Wise go and live in South Chicago, or North Cambridge, and then get back to us on why Blacks aren't employed in the same numbers as whites are?

Tim Wise is a phony, hypocritical, full of shit faggot. Just as bad as Al Sharpton, but less comical so I can't even stomach Tim Wise.

And the fact that blacks like you respect Tim Wise is just another example of Blacks who get suckered by Liberals. The Liberals are doing the most to destroy Black America and yet Black Americans cannot stop eating their shit.

And for the record, my neighbors are black.

Again, you're attacking the messenger and not the message, a classic ad hominem.

Just because your neighbors are black does not mean you live in a black neighborhood. They could be one of the few if only blacks in YOUR white neighborhood.

But that's a red herring to begin with because where Tim Wise lives is irrelevant to his arguments.

Your diatribe of insults to his character are not enlightening anyone on this thread to the crux of of the matter.

So now it's, "Do as I say and not as I do" Tim Wise?

By the way, Tim Wise's neighborhood:
http://projects.nytimes.com/census/2010/...6.841&l=14

Census tract 134, 97% white neighborhood, Deep south Nashville, TN.

[Hencredible Casanova]

(07-27-2013 03:23 PM)Fisto Wrote:  

Hencredible - You are one of the few guys that don't make my eyes roll when talking about these things. You bring historical perspective to the way the black culture's landscape was shaped.

All that said, isn't that more passing the buck? Even if you don't like O'Reilly, don't some of the things he says ring true? I don't know how the idea got started that I think blacks are genetically predisposed to crime, I agree with O'Reilly, I think it's about the disintegration of the black family.

The president is "uber" rich, arguably the most privileged black man in the country, and he "spewed" incendiary and divisive content. That whole "that could have been me" BS was disgraceful.

I agree with O'Reilly that the disintegration of the black family is a huge problem. I also think many of the issues in the black community would be lessened if there were more black fathers. I even agree with his suggestion to launch public ads encouraging black teenage girls to wait to have sex.

That being said, I think when you look at the totality of history in the black community of this country, you have to acknowledge that meaningful progress is going to take time, and that "personal responsibility" is going to be a hard sell.

For one, black Americans were for most of their history in America considered property. Their fate was linked to the actions of the US government. In the US Constitution itself - a black person (slave) is considered three-fifths of a person. It took a civil war and a presidential act (emancipation proclamation) to free black slaves, and it took many Supreme Court decisions and Congressional legislation to bring basic rights to black Americans.

Since the condition of black America is largely a government creation, the question is whether fixing it is a government responsibility or an individual one. Has the US government done enough to repair the cultural/economic/social damage it inflicted on its black citizens? That is the debate in my view. I think most Americans think that blacks are owed nothing in the economic sense.

Even legislation like the Homestead Act following WWII (which created the American middle class) did not extend black Americans. That was a crucial piece of legislation for building wealth in the form of home ownership (the largest form of wealth for most Americans today).

But contrast that with the reparations Germany has paid to Jews who suffered during the Holocaust, or that the US government paid the Japanese for relocating them to camps and confiscating their property during WWII. That's food for thought.

We just got a black president in 2008, a hugely symbolic event. It may take a generation to see what the effect of that might be.

I think Obama is in a tight place as the most prominent and powerful black politician. He really does have to walk a fine line. On the one hand, he is a black man in America and faces enormous pressure to speak out on important issues in the black community. For the most part he actually has not addressed those concerns to the degree many blacks would hope. But with a case like that of Trayvon Martin where there is round the clock media coverage, he had little choice but to speak out. It's hard to tell when he's being sincere or when he's just being another politician but I didn't expect him to go as far as to say he could have been Trayvon. I'm sure that relieved a lot of his black supporters.

On the other hand, he's also the POTUS, a country that is majority Caucasian so he can't be seen as a Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton type of figure. He has to be the President of the whole country and all the people that are part of it.

After all, Obama is half white. I don't think white America would be quite ready to vote in a brotha as dark as Wesley Snipes. That will take time.

[Samseau]

(07-27-2013 02:57 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 01:23 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Quote:

No other race of human beings has killed more people, raped more women, destroyed more cultures, or has stolen as much land as people of European descent.

You forget one thing: European's didn't only pillage other cultures, but they also were doing it to each other.

Speaking of historical circumstances, Europe has over a 10,000 year history of European tribes attacking each other and looting the spoils (land, wealth, and women).

Thus the racist card is nonsense. Europeans have been equal opportunity opportunists for as long as anyone can remember. It's not like they singled out the blacks for anything, the Europeans have always been exploiters of the weak.

Quote:

I think it's more than fair to say there are deep problems in Black America today, but a helpful discussion would look into the deeper (historical) reasons for that. No serious person can divorce the two.

You can't say that to people that are the product of a culture shaped by slavery (where people literally were owned by others in direct contradiction to America's ideals) and Jim Crow. Keep in mind there are still people alive today that experienced the latter.

Actually, we can. The Jews received far worse treatment than the Blacks did in the 20th century, and yet they are one of the most successful and richest minority groups in the world.

In fact, I'd say the Jews have had much more historical oppression than the blacks, going back thousands of years. Black slavery only lasted a few hundred years, while Jew oppression has been around since the Egyptian days. During the middle ages, it was against the law to even employ a Jew. Jim Crow was never that bad. Blacks were also never exterminated on a mass scale. There are almost zero Jews left in Germany.

I didn't forget anything. What you're saying about Europeans pillaging cultures within in Europe doesn't detract from my point, which had nothing to do with who the victims of that violence were.

I'm merely trying to show you that the color of the victims were irrelevant.

Quote:

The rest of your post tells me you have a lot to learn about black history in the US. There are countless examples of blacks not being allowed to work in certain jobs, apply for loans, buy homes in certain neighborhoods, or attend certain schools.

This was never mandated by federal law. It was always a product of either state, town, or individual preference. In Europe, there was a CONTINENT wide prohibition against employing Jews ordered by the Catholic church. This was several magnitudes of discrimination over anything the blacks ever faced in the Jim Crow days.

Quote:

Also, there's really nothing akin to American slavery in history. Being forced to adopt anglo-saxon names, separating children from parents and auctioning them off to slave owners, and eradicating all knowledge of where they came from. Jews have always known they originated in the Levant and they also chose to immigrate to the places they did.

Sorry man, but this is totally false. Slaves have been treated like garbage for thousands and thousands of years before anyone discovered America. Slaves weren't even given names most of the time, and most of them weren't allowed to have children and if they did then the children would be sold off as slaves as well.

If you ever read this book called "The Bible" you'll learn that the Jews started off as slaves to the Egyptians and were forced to endure incredible hardships and injustices.

Slavery is one of the oldest institutions in the world, and has been practiced by every single culture known to man. You can learn about this just from wikipedia. Not sure why you willfully make yourself ignorant with self-placating lies liberals feed you in order to assuage the black ego.

Quote:

It's rather silly of you to seriously try to compare the histories of entirely different peoples and draw such ignorant observations.

It's completely ridiculous to believe that blacks are unique in their slave history. In fact, their history is as common as day.

"What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun."

[Easy E]

(07-27-2013 03:08 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 01:46 PM)Easy E Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 01:02 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 11:22 AM)Easy E Wrote:  

^I think Bill O'Reilly has some valid points. Sure, his delivery is a bit over the top, but his facts are dead accurate.

Also, why are blacks in so many countries prone to committing crime (Brazil, USA, Canada, UK, France, etc.)? It is comical to pretend that the high black crime rates only happen in the USA. They seem to happen anywhere there is a large black community. How long can the "legacy of slavery" be used as an excuse to gloss over the facts regarding crime?

Where are your sources for these claims? The majority of Brazilians have some measure of African ancestry (the majority), and that is another country with a shameful history of slavery and inequality.

Here you go:

http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime

Also, I am discussing crime RATES. Obviously in countries where blacks make up a tiny minority of the people, the majority of crime with be non-black. However, blacks still have a much higher crime RATE than the non-black population worldwide.

There's several things wrong with your source in relation to the argument you are making, which is that black people - on the basis of just being black - are more prone to commit crime.

First of all, crime enforcement and criminal activity are not the same thing. Drug use in the US is a prime example. Whites by and large abuse drugs far more than blacks but the enforcement of those crimes are disproportionately directed towards blacks.

Second, you are not looking at other factors such as social and economic conditions that help explain where crime occurs and who does it. Are you looking at disparities between blacks in high-income and low-income areas while also looking at the same for whites? There's a lot more analysis you need to do before making the outrageous claim that blacks are more prone to commit crime just for being black.

Also, you can't divorce the present from the past. If Europeans were known for pillaging and killing for most of the continent's recorded history, does the relative state of calm as of now suggest they are not naturally violent people? How do you explain what Nazis did to Jews during WWII? Are they not white?

There's a lot of problems with the argument you are making.

???

Who cares why blacks commit more crime? The fact is that they have higher crime rates than non-blacks. You don't agree with the data so you bring up a bunch of points that don't even matter. I don't have the time to get into a historical debate with you. I presented the data that blacks do IN FACT HAVE HIGHER CRIME RATES THAN NON-BLACKS WORLDWIDE and that is what I set out to prove.

End of discussion.

[Hencredible Casanova]

Samseau - When I say there's nothing like American slavery in the history of the world, I mean that there was nothing as dehumanizing and designed as pure profit exploitation. There is simply no parallel in history to the transatlantic slave trade. Blacks in the Americas who descended from that experience are the largest group of stateless people in the world. They have no idea where they came from.

It's insane to compare that experience to Jews - who no doubt suffered throughout history - but who know their history very well.

As for slavery, sure it exists in many places, even in Africa. In fact, many Africans were complicit in the selling and trading of people to Europeans during the transatlantic slave trade. However, they never imagined it would take on the form that it did in the New World. Slaves within Africa would be people captured in battles and wars between rivaling tribes, not the pure profit plantation system that existed in the US. The cotton and tobacco industries that spawned American wealth was a direct result of the slavery system.

You have a lot to learn man.

[Samseau]

(07-27-2013 03:53 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

Samseau - When I say there's nothing like American slavery in the history of the world, I mean that there was nothing as dehumanizing and designed as pure profit exploitation. There is simply no parallel in history to the transatlantic slave trade. Blacks in the Americas who descended from that experience are the largest group of stateless people in the world. They have no idea where they came from.

It's insane to compare that experience to Jews - who no doubt suffered throughout history - but who know their history very well.

As for slavery, sure it exists in many places, even in Africa. In fact, many Africans were complicit in the selling and trading of people to Europeans during the transatlantic slave trade. However, they never imagined it would take on the form that it did in the New World. Slaves within Africa would be people captured in battles and wars between rivaling tribes, not the pure profit plantation system that existed in the US. The cotton and tobacco industries that spawned American wealth was a direct result of the slavery system.

You have a lot to learn man.

Do you honestly think that was the first time an economy was built on the backs of slaves? I can think of at least three other prominent examples of slave empires off the top of my head. I'm sure there are dozens of others, the Egyptians and Jews just being one of many.

Quote:

There is simply no parallel in history to the transatlantic slave trade.

You've got to be kidding me. This isn't even a little true.

[Norset]

(07-27-2013 03:13 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 02:57 PM)Norset Wrote:  

Hencredible:

Did you check all the facts Tim Wise lists? I have never heard of him until that vid. Does he have a reputation of bending truth?

Let us decouple any "morality" he may attempt to preach with the statistics he quotes. Most times in life it is good to only take advice and opinions from people who walk the walk (Mark Minter, ahem), but not for purely logical arguments and the citation of measurable quantities.

Do you know his sources?

If all his numbers are correct, I do not see how he is a hypocrite based on the video you linked. You can live in a 100% white community and realize "wait a minute, group XX which is not white is being treated unfairly by the system". Your zip code does not change the validity of the statistics you cite. Maybe the conclusions you draw from them, but not so much as for you arguments to be completely discredited.

Now the next level is to understand WHY these people are being profiled the way they are. And then you open the can of worms.

Great point. Tim Wise is a scholar and highly respected in academia, corporations, and law enforcement agencies. He's not even rich. Yet guys here are talking about Bill O'Reilly, a uber rich cable news host who spews incendiary content to entertain viewers and solicit ratings. Talk about absurdity.

I was asking specifically where he got his stats for the % of for example white vs black drug users, and the % of each group locked up. I was rather surprised that these numbers were not proportional for each group. Or maybe a higher % of blacks sell drugs or have more frequent use once they actually use it. Details can hide in statistics.

Not trying to get brownie points but I agree Bill O'Reilly falls into the category of moralizing types who do not deserve my respect and time. I did not watch the initial video. I am sure other people have made the same arguments as him.

I do not claim I have any answers to what is going on with blacks in the US. But within any group of people there is a huge variety of genetic traits, and the current evolutionary pressure will favor some over others. Just like fish tend to decrease in size in a few generations if only the big ones are caught (evolutionary pressure to remain small).

For humans that means we can see distinct differences in as short time as 50 years, or two generations. Imagine that there are two types of humans in equal proportions, type A never breaks the law and type B will break the law if he/she sees benefit. If type A only has 1 kid on average, and type B has 4 on average, in 1 generation there will be half as many type A, and twice as many type B. In 2 generations, 1/4 as many type A, and 4 times as many type B. Which means now the ratio is 1:16 between type A and B! In just two generations.

So it might very well be that certain sub groups of blacks within the US are currently genetically predisposed to certain types of crimes - if that type of behavior increased the mating fitness of either of their parents. And with the huge increase in welfare for the ghetto blacks.. Athlone´s essays cover this.

No this is not racist, in the strict definition. But it is prejudice. I will judge you (before I know you) based on the sub group of people you come from, and the collective behavior of that sub group, but not skin color itself. It is just that skin color makes it so easy to pick out people of such a sub-group.

But I do realize that what I wrote is basically a justification for eugenics. Top-down government sponsored eugenics is utterly deplorable. But so is the "reverse eugenics" that is essentially taking place via (beyond the bare minimum) welfare. So here two wrongs make a right. Sort of. But the better option would be to do neither.

[MikeCF]

^ Bro, the Spartans hunted and killed their slaves as part of a coming of age ceremony for men.

The Romans enslaved practically everyone.

Jews were enslaved but also practiced slavery. The Bible tells Jews how to "justly" treat their slaves:

http://www.evilbible.com/Slavery.htm

Black slavery built the South, no doubt, but it's ahistorical to claim that black enslavement was something special or unique.

Hell, although the numbers are exaggerated, white slavery is occurring. Women are kidnaped, tied to beds, and raped. Many of those women kill themselves or become drug addicts (the slow suicide).

Dubai only exists because of slavery:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comm...64368.html

Slavery is fucked up, to be sure, but blacks are not special. People have been enslaved. People are enslaved.

I predict slavery will increase as the world becomes less civilized.

[Hencredible Casanova]

(07-27-2013 03:48 PM)Easy E Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 03:08 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 01:46 PM)Easy E Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 01:02 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 11:22 AM)Easy E Wrote:  

^I think Bill O'Reilly has some valid points. Sure, his delivery is a bit over the top, but his facts are dead accurate.

Also, why are blacks in so many countries prone to committing crime (Brazil, USA, Canada, UK, France, etc.)? It is comical to pretend that the high black crime rates only happen in the USA. They seem to happen anywhere there is a large black community. How long can the "legacy of slavery" be used as an excuse to gloss over the facts regarding crime?

Where are your sources for these claims? The majority of Brazilians have some measure of African ancestry (the majority), and that is another country with a shameful history of slavery and inequality.

Here you go:

http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime

Also, I am discussing crime RATES. Obviously in countries where blacks make up a tiny minority of the people, the majority of crime with be non-black. However, blacks still have a much higher crime RATE than the non-black population worldwide.

There's several things wrong with your source in relation to the argument you are making, which is that black people - on the basis of just being black - are more prone to commit crime.

First of all, crime enforcement and criminal activity are not the same thing. Drug use in the US is a prime example. Whites by and large abuse drugs far more than blacks but the enforcement of those crimes are disproportionately directed towards blacks.

Second, you are not looking at other factors such as social and economic conditions that help explain where crime occurs and who does it. Are you looking at disparities between blacks in high-income and low-income areas while also looking at the same for whites? There's a lot more analysis you need to do before making the outrageous claim that blacks are more prone to commit crime just for being black.

Also, you can't divorce the present from the past. If Europeans were known for pillaging and killing for most of the continent's recorded history, does the relative state of calm as of now suggest they are not naturally violent people? How do you explain what Nazis did to Jews during WWII? Are they not white?

There's a lot of problems with the argument you are making.

???

Who cares why blacks commit more crime? The fact is that they have higher crime rates than non-blacks. You don't agree with the data so you bring up a bunch of points that don't even matter. I don't have the time to get into a historical debate with you. I presented the data that blacks do IN FACT HAVE HIGHER CRIME RATES THAN NON-BLACKS WORLDWIDE and that is what I set out to prove.

End of discussion.

With all due respect, your initial post that I responded to asked "Also, why are blacks in so many countries prone to committing crime (Brazil, USA, Canada, UK, France, etc.)?"

So, I thought you were trying to have a discussion.

Instead, you gave me a wikipedia link to a book that was published by a white supremacist group.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Century_Foundation

Not going to cut it man.

I understand not everyone grew up with positive experiences with people of different races. It is what it is.

I think there's a hint of truth to all of the arguments but to really come up with answers a lot of information and points of views need to be taken into account.

[TMC]

"Bill O' Reilly talks about Black America"


Yes when it comes to Black America, I look for Bill O' Reilly to let me know what's going on.