So which phenotype genes are it that geographically cluster in these Blacks, please? The ones that have no clinal variation. Is it dark skin? Curly hair? Thick lips? Really, would looove to know.
CP’s reference to cockroaches was not a comparison of black people to cockroaches. He was making a logical point that the lack of knowledge of a specific gene that causes Group A to be more intelligent that Group B does not mean there is “no evidence” of any genetic basis for the difference. Anyone would agree with this if the two groups being compared were cockroaches and humans. Logically, the same should apply if the two groups were two “races”, hence his point.
You seized on the word cockroaches, knowing that racists are apt to compare groups that they dislike to the unsavory aspects of cockroaches, and you attempted to pretend that CP was doing this, hence revealing his true racism. This was dishonest on your part.
And you additionally reveled in the fact that others would likely do the same going forward. My observation was that this technique is successfull here because of the group dynamic, in which dishonest twisting of other people’s words is rendered effective via a dominant majority of ideological teamates backing each other up. You would probably not be as pleased if you thought such techniques could be used against you, but you are smug in the knowledge that this is unlikely to happen given the makeup of this board.
It’s whichever ones are driving a typical enough appearance that promotes individuals self-identifying with “black.”
Are you pretending that doesn’t exist? Are you pretending (like that iiandyiiii idiot) that if a gene can’t be cited then a physiologic difference should not be posited?
If you are interested, (and one doubts you are), a number of studies looking at “self-identification” noted a remarkable correlation with (continent of origin-base) “race” categories. Do I need to help you look those up, or are you able to use a computer by yourself for items beyond posting “chicken fucker” for those with whom you disagree?
Of course, if you’re right and there is no such thing as gene clustering driving appearance differences among races, get it on News 24 now!
I understand that there’s been quite the kerfuffle in RSA over the years about some “apartheid” something or other which based itself on a notion that one should discriminate against an individual based solely on an appearance difference…
Billions upon billions have been invested, along with enormous efforts in social policy, all attempting to ameliorate putative nurturing variables over the past 100 years.
Unfortunately, the efforts have not panned out, as evidenced by the fact that even the creation of a wealthy, educated black middle class does not self-sustain. Children of wealthy and educated blacks continue to substantially underperform their poverty stricken and undereducated white counterparts.
There is no dearth of much sillier putative nurturing variables, and no upper limit to exploring them, but these would have to apply only to blacks and not other races (for example, proposing that blacks–and only blacks–are lousy parents) so the outlook is bleak for closing a stubbornly persistent pattern seen everywhere in the world (see my above post).
Waiting…waiting…have to sign off now but will check in soon to get your list, iiandyiiii.
You are the one who is obsessed about “Self-identified” groups and “African-American” is a clear example of a self-identified group.
I don’t understand a lot of these words. Can you explain it like I’m five?
This does not logically follow. Comparing humans and animals really is (and really should be) different than comparing humans to other humans.
Mockery is not necessarily dishonest. Mockery is often appropriate, as are witticisms that take advantage of misstatements.
Mockery can also be fun for all (or mostly all).
When I make misstatements, I’m fine with being mocked. And if I say something that might be racist, I very much hope people point it out. Most racists have no idea that they’re racist… and if I say something racist, I want to know. I want to make myself better. I point it out to others to, among other things, give them the chance to make themselves better.
People don’t self-identify as Black because of their own appearance. They self-identify because of their ancestry, culture and own ideologies i.e. their environment, not their looks.
What do you mean by “that”?
No, I’m saying there is no readily-visible phenotypic difference you have cite that clusters by geographical “race” or even your beloved SIRE groups. So looking at any cause for phenotypic clustering is pointless, when you haven’t even shown the clustering occurs.
Your continued refusal to name even one such readily-apparent phenotype only reinforces that you are aware of this.
What do I care about yet more flawed studies with a distinct American (i.e. artificially segregated) population bias by Risch and his acolytes, when the Brazilian studies show that SIREs in a true mixed population show you how artificial the American examples are?
Like I said, “scientific” selection of data is all the “scientific” racists have.
Umm, how exactly is citing Apartheid supposed to be helping your racist case? Of course they based their rationale partly on appearance - because they were fucked-up people. Is that where you want to plant your flag? “It’s OK to use appearance to classify people because the Apartheid regime did it” is about as good a character reference for you as the cockroach thing.
Over the past 100 years? That’s a joke. Until just the last few decades, these efforts were pathetic. And even in the last few decades these efforts have been weak.
Some of these efforts have reduced the size of some of the discrepancies. And like I said, most of these efforts have been very poor efforts. Just because the discrepancy still exists does not mean it will always exist. I don’t consider a few decades of weak efforts as anything close to definitive.
Wrong – these variables might apply to any groups. And as weak as the efforts to correct them have been in the US, they’ve been even weaker in most other parts of the world. This is not ‘persistence’ in any useful sense of the word.
Did you miss it? Post #495, and that was just several examples off the top of my head. There are numerous others.
I’m not taking a position on this. You’re certainly entitled to argue that his comparison was flawed. But that’s not the same thing as claiming he intended something other than what he intended.
I’m good with that. But mockery which is based on the premise that someone intended something completely different than what they actually intended, is dishonest.
There is no visible difference between human beings that you can say only belongs to one race and doesn’t, instead, vary from group to group in a continuous fashion, and pop up in multiple locations. Or possibly occurs in isolated groups with no rhyme or reason (or correlation to other racial characteristics), like red and blonde hair.
He inadvertently compared black people to cockroaches. I don’t think he intended to, but he certainly did it – at least with regards to comparisons of relative intelligence. Thus, a ripe opportunity for mockery. And it hit a nerve, as I intended.
I never said it was intended.
Fotheringay-Phillips, you seem to think that every position deserves to be treated respectfully. I disagree. Every position deserves to be confronted on the facts and data, but some positions also deserve mockery and disrespect. When someone comes to the board and suggests the Holocaust didn’t happen, they deserve to have their arguments shredded (factually), and they deserve mockery and disrespect (and worse). Similarly, when someone suggests that black people are inherently genetically inferior in intellect, they deserve to have their arguments shredded (again, factually), and they deserve mockery and disrespect. Especially in the Pit.
That is what I attempt to do with regards to these positions.
We know nothing about the genes for intelligence in humans, much less their prevalence in various groups. Therefore, it’s ridiculous to make claims about some groups of humans being inherently genetically less intelligent than others. In addition, such claims are very, very racist. They deserve to be attacked on both accounts. The pseudo-science thrown around deserves to be shredded and mocked, and the certainty with which one holds that black people are intellectually inferior deserves extreme disrespect.
People should be afraid to say racist things. If someone holds such an opinion, they should be afraid to state it publicly – just like if someone holds the opinion that the Jews should be exterminated. Over and over again, for decades and decades, these opinions have been shown to be based on shit for evidence. It’s no different now.
When someone finds all the genes for high and low intelligence, and they can prove that their presence correlates highly with high (and low) test-score performance in individuals across all groups, and they show that the prevalence of these genes varies significantly among various groups, then it might be time to start this discussion anew.
But that would take a lot of hard work. For the blatherers who proclaim their unsupported ‘race realism’ bullshit, that hard work doesn’t seem to be in the cards.
Maybe it’s because of their genes.
Yes, you are. You are ascribing motivation to one side of an argument while defending the motivation on the other side. Your claim here is dishonest.
Are you in a racial minority . . . and do you think that’s why your attitudes about white people aren’t racist?
No, I don’t think so. I don’t know what might be giving you that impression.
I do think people’s positions should not be misrepresented, though.
I don’t know what this is about.
I was not taking a position on whether CP’s analogy to humans and cockroaches was logically compelling. I was taking a position on what CP himself meant with that analogy.
iiandyii himself now appears to agree with me about this (and says he only meant to mock CP without conveying an incorrect interpretation of his intention). I have no idea what you’re saying now.
I didn’t misrepresent his position. He’s consistently (in this thread and others) misrepresented mine (calling me “egalitarian”, whatever that means, along with insisting that I believe that there is no genetic variation between various groups), but for some reason I don’t see you speaking up about that.
“Now appears” – it was your error, not mine. I never said he intended to compare cockroaches to black people… I was just mocking his inadvertent comparison.
I do believe that such inadvertent comparisons are revealing, though. It’s much easier to “slip up” in this way in this kind of discussion if one believes that black people are indeed inherently less intelligent. Which is also why I think it hit a nerve.
It’s true that slip-ups like this can be revealing. But people do use cockroaches as examples of very primitive creatures. Racists also like comparing ethnic groups that they don’t like to cockroaches (especially when complaining about their proliferation). So CP was very exposed to the sort of attack you did, which is why it hit a nerve, I would guess. (Had he used monkees or apes for the analogy he would have been in the same situation.)