Are Black people inferior to White people? Revisited

Discussion of science, technology, politics, and other topics that aren't strictly philosophical.
Post Reply
Tesla_HATED_Jews
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2014 1:40 am

The 1 Truth you cannot handle

Post by Tesla_HATED_Jews » Sat Nov 15, 2014 4:30 am

The forum doesn't allow new users to make, big posts.

Instead, I have uploaded it to: PasteBin

On a sidenote - Would an admin be opposed to replacing this text with the message from pastebin?
Since I wrote it for this site, and cannot load it here? There is little or no cursing, and idk why it doesn't post.
Thank you!


Please, continue there, and comment here.

- If pain is weakness leaving the Body,
I hope you are all in great emotional pain, by the end my message.
Translated:
If weakness is false belief or deceit,
I hope you choose to extract it, no matter how much pain it causes.

Tesla_HATED_Jews
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2014 1:40 am

Are Black people inferior to White people? Revisited

Post by Tesla_HATED_Jews » Sat Nov 15, 2014 6:05 am

I saw a message here earlier, and thought that this forum would be a place for intelligent discussion...

Its a topic most are too weak to discuss. & so it is my intention to use facts to show this is true.
& We will see just how smart everyone is... Can you smash your false beliefs? LOL, we will see.


First there is the Fact. First the Effect.
Then there is the Theory. Then the Cause.


I will begin with a few questions:
Why has no civilization, or great thinker, ever referred to the black race as superior, mentally?
Why are the other races NOT flocking to live in Black people's civilizations in Africa?
Why do black people in Africa still live in Mud hut villages and dirty sheet metal shacks?
(even after 1,000 billion in aid from foreign countries??)
Why are African countries economically sluggish (why do we call it the third world)?
(despite having more natural resources than the rest of the world...)
Why do poor black communities sell crack and heroin to their own people, when poor white one's do not?
Why do black people make up aprox 75% of America's (roughly) 800,000 violent crimes (per year)?
(I'm trying to be conservative - do your own research about these stats)
Why is Germany's economy thriving, the strongest in all of Europe, even though they were bombed off the map 70 years ago?
Why is Africa still a "third world" hellhole?

Why do white civilization's have skyscrapes, electronics, microchips, and airplanes,
When black civilizations have none of these things?


I have news for you - Those older civilizations were right.
The crazy beliefs that blacks are even close to the intelligence of whites...
Well that is something relegated to this fine generation of Americans,
As they preside over the collapse of the world's most successful economy.


OHHH, but the list goes on!
The African Continent, I believe excluding North Africa, has an average iq of 70.
But don't worry those IQ tests are total bullshit anyways. So lets move on.

No African, before the 1900s, ever built a single two story building.
& you might say, 'Non-sense, I've seen a few old mud spires with wooden logs sticking out!'
To which I would reply, and African king paid and recuited a man from the Middle East, near the 1500s.
He built the structures in question. & he only built a few of them.
The next group of people to build a two story building, happened in the mid 1800s. They were white missionaries.
& If you go to Africa today, they still live in mud huts and shacks.

In the US, there is a massive correlation between the corruption of a town / city, and the percentage of black people.
Please, take a trip to wikipedia and see the cities with the highest black percentage.
But, Mr tesla, where is the proof behind this?? Simple. Look at the cities in the US with the Highest black population.
Would you be surprised to know that Detroit has the highest black population by percent? over 80%...

But Mr. Tesla, Why has the world changed its views concerning black inferiority? No one shares your perspective!
- I'll give you a hint, it has to do with media... False reality is often mistaken for the real one.




I'm sure, if you've made it this far, you are wondering, why are blacks less intelligent?
The issue rests with our ancestors, and the region in which they evolved.


White people come from the far north. They are mostly nordic.
Note that, we favor Scotland over England, for their 'spirit', 'pride' and honor.
Note that, the most northern countries have the strongest economies (the southern ones have only trade and resources).

In the far north, the winter kills the weak. The winter defined weak as, those who did not prepare for the winter, and those who were not intelligent enough to build a cabin.

One must have sturdy tools, like axes, in order to cut the trees needed for a shelter. The farther north, the better the cabin needs to be.
One must have knowledge of living heavy weights, and planning the construction of a building.
WE ARE DECENDED FROM THE EARLIEST ENGINEERS AND ARCHITECTS. THIS IS WHY WE ARE SUPERIOR.



I would go further, but I'm sure the hammer now sits firmly in the bloated sack of fat you call equality.
Remember, emotional pain is weakness leaving your body.

-MT

Bobo
Posts: 517
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 1:35 pm

Re: Are Black people inferior to White people? Revisited

Post by Bobo » Sat Nov 15, 2014 8:28 am

I see racism coming as a reaction to views that put higher importance on values like liberty and equality, racist theories were developed to justify practices contrary to those values. They were and are mainstream values incompatible with some economical interests.
Liberalism is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty (which is especially stressed in classical liberalism) and equality (which is more evident in social liberalism).[1] Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas such as free and fair elections, civil rights, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free trade, and private property.[2][3][4][5][6]
-
Liberalism first became a distinct political movement during the Age of Enlightenment, when it became popular among philosophers and economists in the Western world. Liberalism rejected the notions, common at the time, of hereditary privilege, state religion, absolute monarchy, and the Divine Right of Kings. The 17th-century philosopher John Locke is often credited with founding liberalism as a distinct philosophical tradition. Locke argued that each man has a natural right to life, liberty and property[7] and according to the social contract, governments must not violate these rights. Liberals opposed traditional conservatism and sought to replace absolutism in government with representative democracy and the rule of law.
---
A controversial aspect of imperialism is the defence and justification of empire-building. Most controversial of all is the justification of imperialism done on rational grounds. J. A. Hobson identifies this justification on general grounds as: "It is desirable that the earth should be peopled, governed, and developed, as far as possible, by the races which can do this work best, i.e. by the races of highest 'social efficiency'".[10]
-
Colonialism was always portrayed in the colonizing country (in public) as bringing benefits for the colony. They included: increased standard of living, benefits of Christianity, improved health and education, establishing law and order, etc.
-
In the book, Osterhammel asks, "How can 'colonialism' be defined independently from 'colony?'"[5] He settles on a three-sentence definition:
Colonialism is a relationship between an indigenous (or forcibly imported) majority and a minority of foreign invaders. The fundamental decisions affecting the lives of the colonized people are made and implemented by the colonial rulers in pursuit of interests that are often defined in a distant metropolis. Rejecting cultural compromises with the colonized population, the colonizers are convinced of their own superiority and their ordained mandate to rule.[6]
-
In his critique of colonialism in Africa, the Guyanese historian and political activist Walter Rodney states:
"The decisiveness of the short period of colonialism and its negative consequences for Africa spring mainly from the fact that Africa lost power. Power is the ultimate determinant in human society, being basic to the relations within any group and between groups. It implies the ability to defend one's interests and if necessary to impose one's will by any means available. In relations between peoples, the question of power determines manoeuvrability in bargaining, the extent to which one people respect the interests of another, and eventually the extent to which a people survive as a physical and cultural entity. When one society finds itself forced to relinquish power entirely to another society that in itself is a form of underdevelopment ... During the centuries of pre-colonial trade, some control over social political and economic life was retained in Africa, in spite of the disadvantageous commerce with Europeans. That little control over internal matters disappeared under colonialism. Colonialism went much further than trade. It meant a tendency towards direct appropriation by Europeans of the social institutions within Africa. Africans ceased to set indigenous cultural goals and standards, and lost full command of training young members of the society. Those were undoubtedly major steps backwards ... Colonialism was not merely a system of exploitation, but one whose essential purpose was to repatriate the profits to the so-called 'mother country'. From an African view-point, that amounted to consistent expatriation of surplus produced by African labour out of African resources. It meant the development of Europe as part of the same dialectical process in which Africa was underdeveloped."
-
The act of colonizing spread and synthesized social and political western ideas of a gender and racial hierarchy to colonized areas, as well as elicited the further development of ideas about the gender dichotomy and racial divisions in European society during the colonial era.[20][21][22] Popular political practices of the time were to support colonialism rule by legitimizing European male authority and female and non European inferiority through studies of Craniology, Comparative Anatomy, and Phrenology.[21][22][23]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperialism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonialism

User avatar
Kunga
Posts: 2333
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:04 am
Contact:

Re: Are Black people inferior to White people? Revisited

Post by Kunga » Sat Nov 15, 2014 2:26 pm

This is what should be done
By one who is skilled in goodness,
And who knows the path of peace:
Let them be able and upright,
Straightforward and gentle in speech,
Humble and not conceited,
Contented and easily satisfied,
Unburdened with duties and frugal in their ways.
Peaceful and calm and wise and skillful,
Not proud or demanding in nature.
Let them not do the slightest thing
That the wise would later reprove.
Wishing: In gladness and in safety,
May all beings be at ease.
Whatever living beings there may be;
Whether they are weak or strong, omitting none,
The great or the mighty, medium, short or small,
The seen and the unseen,
Those living near and far away,
Those born and to-be-born —
May all beings be at ease!

Let none deceive another,
Or despise any being in any state.
Let none through anger or ill-will
Wish harm upon another.
Even as a mother protects with her life
Her child, her only child,
So with a boundless heart
Should one cherish all living beings;
Radiating kindness over the entire world:
Spreading upwards to the skies,
And downwards to the depths;
Outwards and unbounded,
Freed from hatred and ill-will.
Whether standing or walking, seated or lying down
Free from drowsiness,
One should sustain this recollection.
This is said to be the sublime abiding.
By not holding to fixed views,
The pure-hearted one, having clarity of vision,
Being freed from all sense desires,
Is not born again into this world.


[Buddha]

User avatar
Cahoot
Posts: 1573
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:02 am

Re: Are Black people inferior to White people? Revisited

Post by Cahoot » Tue Nov 18, 2014 7:04 am

Are turtles inferior to rabbits?

User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6045
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Are Black people inferior to White people? Revisited

Post by Diebert van Rhijn » Wed Nov 19, 2014 6:27 am

Depends on the stew being prepared...

In any case, the eater is superior to what he's eating and yet being defined by it too.

User avatar
Cahoot
Posts: 1573
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:02 am

Re: Are Black people inferior to White people? Revisited

Post by Cahoot » Wed Nov 19, 2014 7:19 am

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:Depends on the stew being prepared...

In any case, the eater is superior to what he's eating and yet being defined by it too.
Then we can say that people eat just about anything, and the capacity to do so is the basis of superiority both among all species and within the definition of man. By this measure, the man who can order quail eggs and caviar is superior to one relegated to a diet of home cooked roots and roadkill.

By this dietary standard rabbits, and I suspect turtles, are more particular.

McStew
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYWzFBw1pcc

Bobo
Posts: 517
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 1:35 pm

Re: Are Black people inferior to White people? Revisited

Post by Bobo » Thu Nov 20, 2014 1:11 pm

'Eating' is a highly compounded activity, to the extent that in complex organisms it is not performed by the organism alone. And there's the whole food chain going on that it's hard to find the superior side in a cycle. Also qualitatively, as the buddha shits like everyone else, when the eater is eating another eater there's no ground to ascertain superiority, or to put it in another matter, eating and shitting are a main activity of humans, animals, bacteria; to the extent that it is an activity that is denied of divinity and an activity which the proper acess to is denied to part of the population that is poor.

User avatar
Cahoot
Posts: 1573
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:02 am

Re: Are Black people inferior to White people? Revisited

Post by Cahoot » Thu Nov 20, 2014 11:28 pm

Hunger makes food divine, which results in all components squealing yes in unison. And, this is the contemplation point where Sunshine may want to place attention in order to relate the topic to the stated aims of the Genius Forum: since the divine is found in the material, other than in imagination can any particular form be excluded from the divine, and other than in imagination can a form be simultaneously inferior and divine.

Science has made it possible to produce food enough for everyone. The United States, which is the most generous society in the world, produced record crops this year.

Science has made possible distribution systems that can feed everyone on the planet.

Why are the poor denied access?

“When shit becomes valuable, the poor will be born without assholes.”
- Henry Miller

Bobo
Posts: 517
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 1:35 pm

Re: Are Black people inferior to White people? Revisited

Post by Bobo » Fri Nov 21, 2014 1:00 am

Eating and shitting can be regarded as necessary human activities. It is also made into a luxury leisure activity in modern society, to the point of the denial of the necessity as if it were only a luxury activity, partially because the problems of shortage of hunger and shelter is supposed to be non-existent in materially developed societies, where there's no shortage of material resources in regard to needs. Needs that are not met are then explained with denial towards the need. The inferiorization of people that use no luxury is used to justify the degrading effects of the neglect of basic needs, as if it came from personal fault or divine wrath.

User avatar
Cahoot
Posts: 1573
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:02 am

Re: Are Black people inferior to White people? Revisited

Post by Cahoot » Mon Nov 24, 2014 9:33 pm

Deprivation amidst plenty is obviously a result of greed encountering wealth.

In underdeveloped individuals, underdeveloped families, underdeveloped societies and underdeveloped countries, food, water, and medical supplies are wealth.

One consequence of greed encountering wealth is the perpetuation of the status quo. The status quo of underdeveloped country attracts the wealth of food and medical supplies, attracts the perks surrounding military bases, attracts lessors of mining rights, attracts developers of the status quo.

Another consequence of greed encountering wealth is starvation and deprivation of the citizens via the political power of giving and withholding food, a tactic of so-called strong men who have temporarily acquired political power.

Add a dollop of genuine human stupidity, such as the centrist planning of the Communist brain trust that starved the Ukraine in the early 20th century, and one begins to glimpse the universal of wrong, which like the universal of right needs to be defined with at least one foot anchored in life, which is the standard that defines.

Bobo
Posts: 517
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 1:35 pm

Re: Are Black people inferior to White people? Revisited

Post by Bobo » Thu Dec 04, 2014 11:25 am

There's the possibility that the same thing happened in the US at the same time due to the Great Depression though.
“According to the US statistics, the US lost not less than 8 million 553 thousand people from 1931 to 1940. Afterwards, population growth indices change twice instantly exactly between 1930-1931: the indices drop and stay on the same level for ten years. There can no explanation to this phenomenon found in the extensive text of the report by the US Department of Commerce Statistical Abstract of the United States"

Analyzing the period of the Great Depression in the USA, the author notes a remarkable similarity with events taking place in the USSR during the 1930s. He even introduced a new term for the USA – defarming – an analogue to dispossession of wealthy farmers in the Soviet Union. “Few people know about five million American farmers (about a million families) whom banks ousted from them lands because of debts. The US government did not provide them with land, work, social aid, pension – nothing,”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... icans.html

http://english.pravda.ru/world/americas ... -famine-0/

User avatar
Cahoot
Posts: 1573
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:02 am

Re: Are Black people inferior to White people? Revisited

Post by Cahoot » Thu Dec 04, 2014 9:32 pm

Bobo wrote:There's the possibility that the same thing happened in the US at the same time due to the Great Depression though.
“According to the US statistics, the US lost not less than 8 million 553 thousand people from 1931 to 1940. Afterwards, population growth indices change twice instantly exactly between 1930-1931: the indices drop and stay on the same level for ten years. There can no explanation to this phenomenon found in the extensive text of the report by the US Department of Commerce Statistical Abstract of the United States"

Analyzing the period of the Great Depression in the USA, the author notes a remarkable similarity with events taking place in the USSR during the 1930s. He even introduced a new term for the USA – defarming – an analogue to dispossession of wealthy farmers in the Soviet Union. “Few people know about five million American farmers (about a million families) whom banks ousted from them lands because of debts. The US government did not provide them with land, work, social aid, pension – nothing,”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... icans.html

http://english.pravda.ru/world/americas ... -famine-0/
That’s the reason some compare Roosevelt to Stalin. However, there is a distinction of intention between Roosevelt’s attempts to help people with social engineering that had unintended consequences, and the intended consequences of Stalin’s Ukrainian genocidal program which was designed to subjugate and crush political resistance. Unfortunately for work-a-day folks, starvation due to incompetence in governing, and starvation as a malicious tactic, have the same result.

Blaming banks for what they do is like blaming tigers for what they do. Society can certainly turn banking into a social service agency, and many would argue that for security and safety of society this is the way to go. However, that’s no longer banking. It’s something else. (Banking proponents argue the principle that stagnation results when the balance necessary for constructive growth tips too far towards safety and security.)

When the balance tipped too far and the mortgage industry in the United States was forced by government to provide housing loans to all, the mortgage industry changed into something else. There were consequences.

When insurance companies are forced to provide insurance to all for pre-existing conditions, then it is no longer insurance, in principle. It is something else.

Aside from semantics, a proper question for the social engineers to consider is, how much government control over the individual is necessary for the healthiest society.

Here’s a genocidal social engineering program that has an impact on society and that philosophically appears to be in compliance with the the thread's author.
http://www.blackgenocide.org/sanger.html

User avatar
Tomas
Posts: 4328
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 2:15 am
Location: North Dakota

Re: Are Black people inferior to White people? Revisited

Post by Tomas » Fri Apr 03, 2015 1:53 pm

Bobo wrote:There's the possibility that the same thing happened in the US at the same time due to the Great Depression though.
“According to the US statistics, the US lost not less than 8 million 553 thousand people from 1931 to 1940. Afterwards, population growth indices change twice instantly exactly between 1930-1931: the indices drop and stay on the same level for ten years. There can no explanation to this phenomenon found in the extensive text of the report by the US Department of Commerce Statistical Abstract of the United States"

Analyzing the period of the Great Depression in the USA, the author notes a remarkable similarity with events taking place in the USSR during the 1930s. He even introduced a new term for the USA – defarming – an analogue to dispossession of wealthy farmers in the Soviet Union. “Few people know about five million American farmers (about a million families) whom banks ousted from them lands because of debts. The US government did not provide them with land, work, social aid, pension – nothing,”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... icans.html

http://english.pravda.ru/world/americas ... -famine-0/
Dispossess the land and it's open season on human squatters.

Old news about the lost peoples of the depression.

Death is cool.

When you lie down one comes full circle with the dust.
Don't run to your death

User avatar
chikoka
Posts: 439
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 7:16 pm
Location: Zimbabwe

Re: Are Black people inferior to White people? Revisited

Post by chikoka » Fri May 22, 2015 4:58 pm

Being a 100% black african (say like navy black :) ) i would like to try and not answer from a emotional perspective. But alas ..you are right, i do live in the third world so...as i'm known for ..i will ask you not to expect timely consistent dialogue.

Firstly are you aware that no civilisation has ever been invented in drought free europe. That civilisation was a gift offered by the middle easterners after the same gave you agriculture. Before we move to the obvious point you will raise (that they are also caucasians [rightly so]) i would like to point out that present day reality is a snapshot of eternalness. That if we lived in the days of the sumerians in mesopotamia..all that you have said about blacks would be equally applicable to all of europe.

Then we stand back and revisit the caucasianness of the sumerians. This forum is infested with logic so i ask you t follow me.
You say blacks never made a civilisation because they couldnt. So we might say that when blacks and whites split there was no civilation yet so this common ancestor couldnt and that since the caucasians subsequently built one there must have been genetic changes they went through that allowed this.

Examine this reasonings douppelleganger .The sumerians obviously have some genes they do not share with the europeans. I point to the difference in complexion, any way the two have lived in different climates for at least 10 000 years judging by the fossil record (cro magnon man ..etc etc).
So why now do you rush , after the previous reasoning, to say that even thought the common ancestors of both the dark skinned caucasians and the white caucasians was able to form a civilisation when he didnt . By symmetry the sumerians also went through genetic changes that facilitated this developement that they do not share with the white caucasians.

Not even pointing out that when you have a group of people ,the caucasians ,stretching from scandavia all the way to southern india, that form a population more than 10 times the population of blacks..what a strange thing it must be to ask why they progress more than 10 times as fast? You guys did develope bayesian probability.

Then on the flip side we ask; how come the sumerians did it but the blacks (and the europeans) couldnt. Again we look to the "Grand Excuse" that europeans use but how what a mystery that it doesnt apply to blacks.

All civilisations that were original (not founded on colonialism) can be listed. Egypt, sumeria, india, china , the north americans and the south americans. Well the excuse is based on a study of their simmilarities. first i will address the old world. All of them were invented in simmilar conditions; a river running through a desert.
Why a river and why a desert? A river to guarantee crops, plenty crops that left populations with lots of free time after the harvest to engange in other things. A desert to guarantee protection from outside raiders seeking to reep where they did not sow and force the river dwellers to retsart.
The Excuse points out that there is no river running through a desert anywhere in europe. But of course though this be true aalso in black africa , we cant be justifying black "ignorance' and "stupidity" like that.

The new world had different conditions that served the same purpose. The olmecs lived in tjhe waist of the americas with only one front to defend , with a river again and lots of dependable rain. The Incas lived on the peruvian shore with a virtually imprenetable mountain range to the east , and an ocean to the west. Also..lots of rain.

Enough about excuses..didnt the blacks evolve in "laid back africa" while the whites lived in an environment that forced them to think more? Well we examine earlier efforts by "sincere" archeologists.
It seemed as though early man was definately african. but when he became erectus he moved over the world. Cold environment proponents convinced of their own rcorrectness then postulated that mankind evolved every where at once from erectus populations in different lands. When it seemed that the first fully human skull (swanscombe man , and others) was from europe 200 000 years ago they were faced with a dillema. Should they say all humans are descendat of this man o r only them ..relagating the other races to developing after. they chose the latter...europeans developed first into humans before everyone else.

Then there was a troubling phenomena..as they found more skulls later (the descendants of swanscombe) they noticed that while the first had modern features..the later had more and more primitive features. These humans became more and more primitive with time , almost as if they wree trying to get back to the homo erectus stage. All the while enduring the coldest environments..yea ..two ice ages.These people became known as the neanderthals.
Then on top of this paradox came another ...populations more advanced were found contemporary and earlier than swanscombe with more advanced feature ...(?) in a tropical environment (?).
Nothing to fear though..these scientist would explain this riddle.
They were again face d with a dillema..Should they say all humans are descendant of these african men or only the africans evolved into humans first relagating the other races to developing afetr. We what do you know...they chose the former ."WHAT HYPOCRITES".

Then the scientist sighed and said to themselves ..we might as well do a proper job. A new moderntheory that explained everything discoverd. That tropical climate man was a social creature. That intellingence is shown in the very human act of sharing.That it was crucial for the african to know what would happen if he offended the alpha male, two days afer he had last eaten, while the hunters had been frustrated with a kill and the day was almost through.
Can you see it? A social being was forced to think in terms of *many* variables in order to exist as a group. That only a full blown politician could survive and earn many mates to breed with and so pass on his genes.
In Africa populations had always been greater than elsewhere so these conditions were more cut throat. All this while the other nations were forced to let all breed in order to maintain numbers for the hunts.

Then i would also like to throw a cheap shot at you. dont you know that all human populations except africans have a "descent" amount of neanderthal and homo erectus genes in them? This from the contact the proto diaspora made with the "people" they met.

How we are answered to the question of why the two most intelligent creatures after humans are from africa.

Post Reply