SDMB Bigoted Asshole Omnibus Thread

[New_Deal_Democrat]

@An_Gadai

Because it sure fucking stinks of trolling to me. I’d prefer disability fantasists to our board racists. I know this fucking furrow has been plowed a number of times recently but seriously, what the fuck. Can you not ban the usual suspects from talking on the subject of race, or at least corral them into only posting about that bullshit in their own threads? It really brings down the quality of this board to have these fuckers here. I’m sick of it, especially when they infect threads of merit.
Fuck that shit.

You are obviously intolerant of beliefs that anger you, and which you cannot refute. I am no more extreme than Charles Murray. He is a respected political scientist. All you need to do to refute me is to demonstrate that blacks behave and perform as well as whites, or else explain their high rates of crime and illegitimacy and their low average intelligence in ways that somehow absolve them of responsibility.

[Gyrate]

Wait - we’ve got a Dogma AND a Taboo? What page of the *Protocols of the Elders of Hollywood *is that on?

[New_Deal_Democrat]

@olivesmarch4th

I dunno. I said I’d support NDD’s banning and I meant it. There’s something to be said for honest dialog, true, but he’s demonstrated he’s incapable of that. He is the antithesis of fighting ignorance. Some people are racist, and some people are… fucking racist. I’ve never felt this much animosity toward any other poster. My reason for not wanting him around is pretty selfish. I just fucking hate him.

What am I ignorant of? What don’t I know that if I knew would convince me that the Negro race is biologically equivalent to the Caucasian race?

[iiandyiiii]

@New_Deal_Democrat

What am I ignorant of? What don’t I know that if I knew would convince me that the Negro race is biologically equivalent to the Caucasian race?

“Biologically equivalent” can mean pretty much anything you want- but if you mean “has the same average genetic tendency towards intelligence and aggression”, then there is no reason to believe otherwise. A genetic explanation for the achievement gap requires genetic evidence- there is no other kind of evidence that will support it.

[Spice_Weasel]

@New_Deal_Democrat

You are obviously intolerant of beliefs that anger you, and which you cannot refute. I am no more extreme than Charles Murray. .

I doubt Charles Murray would be caught dead with the likes of you. Your ability to reason is so poor that you’re probably also a laughingstock among racists.

(I’ve read Charles Murray, by the way - I doubt you’ve ever had the courage to read anything that didn’t confirm your bigotry.)

[New_Deal_Democrat]

@brazil84

I agree. The definition of “racist” and “racism” (and whether I fall within that definition) is irrelevant to the underlying issue of the extent to which black underachievement is the result of genetics.

If black under achievement is not due to genetics it is due to laziness and viciousness. I have talked to a number of teachers who taught in black schools. They have told me that it is a frustrating and frequently a dangerous experience.

[Evil_Economist]

@brazil84

It doesn’t affect the merits of my argument one way or another, but just to demonstrate that you are wrong (and self-deluded), I’m prepared to bet you $5,000 (five thousand dollars) on this.

You must agree to keep my identity confidential, and you can pick out 3 board-certified psychiatrists in the New York City area. I will pick one of them to visit at your expense. We will each put up five thousand dollars to be held by a neutral party we both agree on. I will also put up an extra $300 so you will be reimbursed for the cost of the psychiatrist if you win the bet.

If the psychiatrist diagnoses me as autistic, the $10,300 will be turned over to you. Otherwise, the money will be turned over to me.

And by the way, it’s telling that you chose to diagnose me with autism since one of the classic traits of autism is an inability to pick up on social cues. Of course the main argument, so to speak, on your side of the debate is that those who speak the truth about racial differences are mercilessly ostracized.

Probably everyone who challenges popular dogma is the subject of similar accusations.

So, what you’re saying is that your mental ilness is not autism? I’m perfectly fine with that, but out of curiosity, what would those psychiatrists diagnose you with?

[iiandyiiii]

@New_Deal_Democrat

If black under achievement is not due to genetics it is due to laziness and viciousness. I have talked to a number of teachers who taught in black schools. They have told me that it is a frustrating and frequently a dangerous experience.

You’re using anecdotal evidence- and it’s not even your anecdote. I have personal experience- my own anecdotes- that disagree.

And neither your second-hand anecdotes nor my own anecdotes say a damn thing about genetics.

[orcenio]

Well, there’s…

@brazil84

Ahh, and finally we come to the quintessential Liberal Excuse for black underachievement. The ultimate unfalsifiable reversal of cause and effect. Blacks underachieve because there are racists out there who believe it’s in their nature.

@brazil84

Not really, since I am justified in being skeptical of liberal excuses. I do still consider them.

I haven’t invented any fictions. Nor I have I invented phrases to conceal question-begging arguments.

Again my questions:

Are you denying that a 50 year old man is more likely to have a heart attack than a 20 year old girl?

Are you denying that this can be seen just from simple observation?

@brazil84

What choice do I have given that you made a fallacious argument which was disguised by a phrase you invented?

Sure why not? I have observed that people on the Left are constantly inventing excuses for black underachievement. When one excuse does not stand up to scrutiny, they move on to the next excuse. I have referred to this as the “Liberal Excuse Machine.”

You might also ask yourself why you just advanced a clearly fallacious argument to support your position but have not retracted it. The reasonable conclusion is that you are so invested in your position that it has warped your thinking.

Here is your position again, in case you forgot:

“‘simple observation’ won’t cut it if sustained application of the scientific method is required.”

This is very clear question-begging.

I do. And the way I keep myself honest is to make predictions. To think about what evidence would change my mind. And to make appropriate concessions when the evidence contradicts my position or predictions.

I prefer facts and logic to Colibri’s bluster or arguments ad populum.

@brazil84

Ok, then in that case, your claim is as follows:

“‘simple observation’ won’t cut it if sustained application of the scientific method is required.”

Well duh.

In that case, your claim is as follows:

“”‘simple observation’ won’t cut it in any field of endeavor which requires the rigorous elimination of possible confounding variables.

Again, duh.

What you are doing is known as “begging the question.”

i.e. you were simply assuming that simple observation is not sufficient to reasonably conclude that whites are smarter than blacks. As opposed to offering any actual evidence or argument to the contrary.

Of course not. You simply invented a phrase to aid you in your special pleading. You made a claim which sounded principled and powerful but was essentially just a tautology.

I’ve considered everything very carefully, including the various excuses offered by the Liberal Excuse Machine. I’m well aware of the “legacy of slavery” excuse; the “history of discrimination” excuse; the “inadequate school funding” excuse, and so on.

@brazil84

Probably almost any country in the world has had violence, invasions, pillaging, bloody revolutions, civil wars, occupations, etc. over the last few hundred years. So there is plenty of fodder for the Liberal Excuse Machine.

@brazil84

Asserting it doesn’t make it so. But feel free to elaborate on your latest Liberal Excuse.

@brazil84

Lol@ your mindless invective. Very persuasive. :rolleyes:

I guess Liberal Excuse Number 56,124 isn’t that credible when you actually scrutinize it.

@brazil84

Ok, so your view is that a foreign trade embargo is sufficient to cause a group of people to underperform for 150 years after that embargo ends?

i.e. people who are not blinded by political correctness are skeptical of the excuses put forth by the Liberal Excuse Machine.

@brazil84

Well the other thing about Haiti is that the blacks there chased out and slaughtered all of the whites more than 200 years ago. Making it difficult to blame their current problems on whites.

Although I’m confident that the Liberal Excuse Machine will come up with something.

There’s also “leftist”

@brazil84

I certainly don’t care about violating the Sacred Leftist Racial Taboo.

No need to . . . you are the one who is (in effect) insisting that the Oxford Online Dictionary is wrong.

You are the one who seized on a triviality, and then when I pointed out that your nitpick was wrong, accused me of seizing on trivialities.

@brazil84

Lol, I’m just trying to figure out what exactly is the excuse you are offering. You are the one who mentioned an emargo – not me.

Lol, you are the one who omitted it – not me.

So what exactly is the excuse now? Embargo + big debt 150 years ago = massive underachievement now? Or is there more to Leftist Excuse number 56,124 for black underachievement?

@brazil84

“Leftist” is a commonly used word with connotations right along the lines I was expressing.

This is from Wikipedia:

My use of the word “Leftist” was completely in line with this explanation.

@brazil84

Fine, then substitute your word for Leftist in the point I first made. Which stands.

Lol, I’m sure it seems that way to you.

@brazil84

I’m not going to waste time arguing semantics with you. I’m using the term “Leftist” in a certain way – to mean a certain group of people on the political Left in the West today. One of the core beliefs of this group is the egalitarian hypothesis. If you want to refer to this group in some other way, feel free.

The overwhelming evidence indicates that the egalitarian hypothesis is wrong. I’ve outlined much of the evidence on a blog post elsewhere.

@brazil84

I’m not sure what you mean by “racists,” “non-racists,” and “Leftists.” For me, one of the basic principles of Leftism is the “egalitarian hypothesis,” i.e. the claim that genetic predisposition for intelligence and other important psychological traits is distributed equally among all racial and ethnic groups.

You are of course free to offer your own definition.

Given that the overwhelming evidence shows the Leftist position to be false, it’s the Leftist position which relies upon faith at this point.

[brazil84]

@Evil_Economist

So, what you’re saying is that your mental ilness is not autism?

Ummm, no. I’m saying that your claim which I am autistic is wrong.

A few posts back you said this:

No, your mental disorder is almost certainly autism

If you are confident in this, you have a chance to make an easy 5 grand.

So will you take the bet? Or are you abandoning your position?

[New_Deal_Democrat]

@Bryan_Ekers

How are you being suppressed? You’re still talking.

Others would have been intimidated by the abuse thrown at me by cowards. And they are cowards. They feel brave as part of a lynch mob, but they are not able to explain persistent racial patterns.

[New_Deal_Democrat]

@Evil_Economist

So, what you’re saying is that your mental ilness is not autism? I’m perfectly fine with that, but out of curiosity, what would those psychiatrists diagnose you with?

This reminds me of Soviet authorities sentencing dissidents to mental institutes.

[Jack_Batty]

< brazil84 > orcenio, please quote where I said, precisely, that I “blame liberals for my own rhetorical impotence.” Failing that, admit I said no such thing and apologize.

No? Good-bye, liar! < brazil84 >
Uncanny, isn’t it? I do a mean James Mason too.

[New_Deal_Democrat]

@olivesmarch4th

I doubt Charles Murray would be caught dead with the likes of you. Your ability to reason is so poor that you’re probably also a laughingstock among racists.

(I’ve read Charles Murray, by the way - I doubt you’ve ever had the courage to read anything that didn’t confirm your bigotry.)

How have I failed to reason?

[New_Deal_Democrat]

@iiandyiiii

“Biologically equivalent” can mean pretty much anything you want- but if you mean “has the same average genetic tendency towards intelligence and aggression”, then there is no reason to believe otherwise. A genetic explanation for the achievement gap requires genetic evidence- there is no other kind of evidence that will support it.

I have posted plenty of evidence that Negroes tend to perform less well than whites intellectually. The burden of proof is on those who maintain innate racial equality. Where is the evidence of that? I mean: Where?

[iiandyiiii]

@New_Deal_Democrat

Others would have been intimidated by the abuse thrown at me by cowards. And they are cowards. They feel brave as part of a lynch mob, but they are not able to explain persistent racial patterns.

These “patterns” are only present in some statistics, and shrinking in many. And they are “persistent” only in the sense of a few decades. And you’ve ignored several studies and groups that show no gap or a reversed gap- you have an excuse for anything that doesn’t match your narrative- whether that excuse is scientific or not. And even if these patterns were actually consistent and persistent, it still would not be any evidence for anything genetic.

Genetic evidence is what you really need- if you’re really interested, go do some science and get it. Science is hard.

[iiandyiiii]

@New_Deal_Democrat

I have posted plenty of evidence that Negroes tend to perform less well than whites intellectually. The burden of proof is on those who maintain innate racial equality. Where is the evidence of that? I mean: Where?

No- you’re not getting it. You’ve posted evidence of the achievement gap, which we don’t deny. You’ve posted zero, nada, nothing, that supports your genetic explanation. We’re not saying anything about “innate racial equality”. We’re saying you have no evidence for your genetic explanation- because you don’t.

You keep talking about “performance”. Performance, whatever it means, has nothing at all to do with your genetic explanation for the achievement gap. You have no evidence for this genetic explanation.

[iiandyiiii]

I’ll put it another way, NDD- if this were an experiment to determine the cause of the “achievement gap”, you would not have gotten past the Hypothesis stage. You’ve made a scientific hypothesis- one that can be tested. But it hasn’t been tested. Maybe it will be some day.

[Great_Antibob]

FOR FUCK’S SAKE, TAKE IT BACK TO THE OTHER THREAD!

There’s no damned reason to split the same tired argument into multiple threads.

[Bridget_Burke]

Is New Deal Democrat really a Democrat?

Is OMG A Black Conservative really black?