Republican: Yes, We're Racist

So you're defending Nazi theories that "superior character" is inborn? And you have a problem with De-Nazification? Would you prefer promoting it? Well...can't say we didn't see this coming. BTW...Superior Character is a value judgment. I would like you demonstrate how your values are true for us? Can you do that?

 

Interesting thing about this thread. The title is; "Republican: Yes, We're Racist" And we seem to be having an ongoing debate with a couple of people that are decidedly anti-Semitic. I don't know that they're Republican, but I suspect they don't vote for Democrats.

 

http://www.truth-out.org/archive/it...y-more-in-taxes-than-they-receive-in-benefits

Remember that in 2007 President Bush was in office and this report is from a Republican adminstration and not a liberal adminstration. It has been estimated that the "undocumented" (illegal) immigrant actually pays up to $80,000 more in taxes than they receive in government benefits because the "undocumented" (illegal) immigrant is prohibited by law from receiving federal welfare benefits such as Social Security and Medicare that they pay the taxes for.

Additionally you might want to read non-partisian report from the American Enterprise Institute..

http://www.renewoureconomy.org/sites/all/themes/pnae/img/NAE_Im-AmerJobs.pdf

 

Nice racist propaganda that ignores some facts.

Genetic scientists state that the genetic differences within a group (e.g. Northern Europeans) are far greater that the differences between groups (West Africans and Northern Europeans) that that the differences significantly overlap between the groups. In short the differences mentioned are insignificant.

Next is that when we address "race" in the United States there are virtually no "West Africans" in the United States. Virtually all "African-Americans" are mixed race where it is not all that uncommon that their female ancestors were slaves and were raped by their "White" masters. President Obama is not a "black man" but instead is a "black-white man" with what biologists considered to be a superior genetic code (i.e. "mutts" are better than "purebreeds" from a genetic code standpoint).

From a genetic standpoint a mixed West Africans and Northern Europeans genetic code is superior to either the West African or the Northern European genetic code as it reduces the number of regressive genes. Now I'm sure that fact will put a twist in the "racist's" undies. LOL

"

 

The above is complete garbage.

 

Why? Demonstrate why it's garbage.

 

You don't know? You think 'more genetic differences within groups' invalidates a taxonomy?

 

Why would I think that what you're offering is a taxonomy that is valid? Miscategorization can be a logical fallacy in which diverse and dissimilar objects, concepts, entities, etc. are grouped together based upon illogical common denominators, or common denominators that virtually any concept, object or entity have in common. A common way miscategorization occurs is through an over-categorization of concepts, objects or entities, and then miscategorization based upon over-similar variables that virtually all things have in common. For example; you make a point of singling out "Jewish frauds", when fraud has no inherent genetic predisposition. Why is it important to you, to single out Jews as fraud in the field of anthropology? What doe being Jewish have to do with this?

I asked you to demonstrate why what was said is garbage. You haven't done that. What you've done is answer a question with a question. That's garbage. Demonstrate why what was said was "garbage".

 

Nisbett didn't give me a source. I asked him for one just recently and it seems I am remembering the information incorrectly.

Email from Nisbett:

a student of mine and I found that a variety of motives improve blacks' speed on complex reaction time tasks. that was never published. i never worked on digit span.
Richard E. Nisbett
Theodore M. Newcomb Distinguished University Professor
Department of Psychology
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor MI 48109

So he was referencing unpublished research on reaction time tasks not backward digit span. My reasoning however still applies. Many aspects of mental functioning can be affected by differences in environment.

 

Is there a reason why you didn't provide the actual study and instead posted a review of the study that I had already seen?

Do you require a step-by-step explanation for what I asked?

Benefits obviously does not include services, which you would have known if you had tried reading my post.

 

So ignoring facts means addressing intelligence, behavioral and athletic differences between ethno-racial groups in your analogy that only looked at skin pigmentation?

I guess you already forgot you were previously trying to claim the only difference between Whites and Blacks was a coat of paint (ie., skin color).

Looks like you can't stay honest.

- - - Updated - - -

So was there a secular increase for all groups, or just Blacks?

If so, that doesn't prove much.

 

He only mentioned Blacks being studied. What it does prove is that differences in reaction times are not immutable.

 

Certainly some differences exist other than skin color, hair texture to name one easily observable trait.

Fast twitch muscle Fiber? Bone Density? Limb length? Perhaps. I'd like to see reliable studies on those.

MAOA levels, Testosterone and Brain Volume? I don't think so. I've already seen articles debunking the latter two.

Gestation is questionable but could be mediated by environmental factors and spine length I've never even heard of nor can I find anything on that.

Skull structure or craniofacial morphology does differ due to climate.

So biological differences between geographic populations may be more than skin deep but I do not believe that there are intelligence and behavioral differences between groups. Such an idea is derived from racist ideology rather than empirical fact.

What you're promoting here is the idea of hybrid vigor or heterosis, the idea that cross-breeding improves the biological quality of an offspring. I know of no evidence that this is the case for mixed race individuals among humans. What genetic advantages do you know of that are a product of West African and Northern European groups producing mixed people?

 

In fact my argument using "paint" was probably quite accurate because the molecular differences between different colors of paint are probably more than the genetic differences between people.

What tires me are those that use racist propaganda as if it represents a jusitification for racism. I've read far too many of the Stormfront racist propaganda on Policial Forum and that's just what it is, propaganda. As with all successful propaganda its' based upon both half-truths mixed with lies and it is spread by ignorant people that are too ignorant to actually know what they hell they're talking about. The seek nothing more than a "rational foundation" for being racists and they are more than willing to accept a half-truth and a false conclusion (i.e. lie) based upon it.

There really is no hope for the "racist" and only time will someday eliminate most of them. They literally have to become extinct because they live at the bottom of the gene pool. Hitler, were he alive today, would love the propaganda machine created by American racists.

 

In fact Hitler himself was influenced by American eugenicists to advance his racial theories of Aryan Supremacy. All of this Scientific Racism nonsense has its roots in racist propaganda. Rayznack and Mikemikev get their information from White Supremacist websites and blogs run by people with nothing better to do than pass off propaganda as scientific research in order to support their racist ideology. Scientific Racism is pseudoscience and these racialist arguments have been refuted for decades but they persist because ideologues with a racist agenda continue to promote them. Scientific Racism is like a religion. Racialists are fanatical in their support of the idea of racial differences in intelligence and personality because it is emotionally appealing not because it has scientific validity.

 

This should be going in the History section, but IMO if Hitler were alive today, he'd be an entirely different person. Now for the purpose of the exercise, Nazism hasn't happened(as obviously he wasn't around on this fictional earth). Considering that the Soviets treated Jews just as badly, you can feel free to substitute them in. Now, remember that Hitler was a political prodigy. Dude loved reading wartime books, etc. I can only assume science as well.

By this time in 2014, only a racialist even believes in race. DNA evidence has clearly shown we are 99.9% alike. Presume then that Hitler grasps this knowledge.

Bam, an entirely different Hitler. Back in the 1930's, racial theory was advanced as a form of 'identification', or to be more accurate of cultural heritage. It was what humanity had to go on. Other than persecution/murder, Hitler's no guilty of anything that other peers of his era weren't. They were intellectually handicapped.(All of us).

You can easily perform this same exercise on U.S Slavery. It likely never happens if we know about DNA.

 

No, it's not. Oppose it on economic grounds or that the immigrants will not be a benefit to society if you have to, but opposing it on racial grounds is ignorant. It's no different now with Hispanics than it used to be with the Irish, Italians and Jews.

Btw, your leaders (Reagan, the Bushes, McCain, the US Chamber of Commerce, etc.) all thought a flood of illegal immigration would be of great economic benefit. Of course, they wanted to bust up the service unions and keep downward pressure on incomes for the rest of us but to those morons, millions of illegals were going to be a great boon to capital everywhere.

Lordy, I'm gettin' tired of trying to clean up Republican messes.

 

We can only speculate on what someone like Hitler would have been like if we lived in an alternate reality where he was born in a different time period. Hell maybe if he was let in to that art school he wouldn't have turned in to a genocidal maniac. In any case I believe that racists will be racists no matter what scientific research comes out refuting their ideas. For instance it is a well established scientific fact that all humans have a common origin in Africa which refuted the Polygenist beliefs of the 19th century that human races had different origins. The Out of Africa theory has long been celebrated as evidence of our common humanity yet Rushton used the Out of Africa theory of human migration to construct his own narrative of how races evolved to have differences in intelligence and personality (with his r/K reproductive strategy/cold winter theory). So advances in DNA research may convince the average scientist that racialist beliefs are not valid but racism will persist because of ignorance and hatred which have nothing to do with genetics.

 

Fast twitch muscle fiber:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2008/08/jamaican_me_speedy.html

Testosterone differences between Blacks and non-Blacks:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1621259

Bone density differences between Blacks and non-Blacks:

http://depts.washington.edu/bonebio/bonAbout/race.html

Brain volume differences between Whites and Blacks:

http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0013642#pone-0013642-t001

Limb length differences:

http://www.livescience.com/10716-scientists-theorize-black-athletes-run-fastest.html

MAOA repeat more common amongst Blacks:

http://theunsilencedscience.blogspot.com/2011/03/racial-controversy-of-violent-gene.html

 

Racial grounds is correlated with economic reasons to oppose amnesty; Hispanics have lower IQ than White Americans.

 

So apparently you forgot what an analogy is after using one.

Paint coat/skin color was the analogy you made.

Too bad Whites and West African Blacks differ in gestation period, testosterone levels, muscle fiber type, disease susceptibility, brain volume, maturation and limb length.

In other words, Blacks and Whites are as different from each other as sports and luxury editions, if not more so.

 

Please stop using a word you do not understand. You are disrespecting Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks, and Frederick Douglass.

 

This study was cited by Rushton and refuted by Joseph Graves:

This is a racist blog. Variants of the MAOA gene occur at different frequencies in different populations but MAOA is not more common in any given population.

 

Anyone with half a brain knows that an argument isn't refuted if it is 'racist'.

Then again, there was nothing racist about the article.

If you had bothered to have read it, you would have known a specific variant of MAOA - the MAOA repeat - is correlated with aggression, and that Blacks have it in higher frequencies than Whites.

 

I'm laughing so much at this. On no it's a 'racist' blog. That makes it untrue.

Do you not even understand simple arithmetic? It seems like you don't understand numbers. If something occurs at different rates in different groups, then it's more or less common. I can't believe anyone could be this stupid so I can only presume total dishonesty.