At 9/23/13 06:32 AM, poxpower wrote: Dafuck you talking about.
The USA is basically a British colony that was built on the back of slavery and genocide, it wasn't based on the idea of ethnic diversity.

Yeah, that's the past.
When I say "is" and "always will be", that should have you thinking about present and future.

Was the past horrible? Yes.
Can we forgive, move on, and make something good out of it? Absolutely.

im sorry i had sex with your gf pox

this isnt called for

At 9/23/13 12:36 PM, Sekhem wrote:

At 9/23/13 12:33 PM, yurgenburgen wrote:

At 9/23/13 12:30 PM, Sekhem wrote: racists struggle to insult an entitled black man

big surprise

get new material

get a better race

.

Luckily no sane minority would want to live there. Maybe it's good to stick the extreme racists in one place, long as they have no jurasdiction outside of it.

At 9/23/13 12:44 PM, Otto wrote: Luckily no sane minority would want to live there. Maybe it's good to stick the extreme racists in one place, long as they have no jurasdiction outside of it.

Maybe the WBC could go there too.
And then we can drop a nuke on them.

At 9/23/13 12:44 PM, Otto wrote: Luckily no sane minority would want to live there. Maybe it's good to stick the extreme racists in one place, long as they have no jurasdiction outside of it.

Only problem is there's already a black guy living there, and he's being threatened and harassed.

At 9/23/13 11:24 AM, Sekhem wrote:

bermuda has one of the highest (for some time THE highest - 2007 for example) gdps in the world

Bermuda is 54% black and 31% whites.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bermuda

By comparison, South Africa is 71-80% blacks and only 9% whites and they're still prosperous.
But take Haiti, where it's 95% blacks and 5% mixed is now a dump where it was once highly profitable ( partly due to slavery ). It has now been stripped of its resources. The Dominican republic, which is literally the other half of the same island, has a much lower black population and is doing quite well.

Here is a list of sub-saharan countries that were never colonized:

http://africanhistory.about.com/od/eracolonialism/tp/AfricaNotColon.htm

Liberia and Ethiopia.
That's about it. Those are two of the shittiest places on the planet. Liberia is so in disarray that Vice even did a documentary on it; there's dollar hookers and military generals that practice cannibalism.

Historically there have been no great sub-saharan African empires either. I am not aware that any of the countries Europeans colonized where at one point powerful / relevant kingdoms. Africa to this day is mostly tribes. If you look at the ethnic background of most of those countries you'll see dozens if not hundreds of distinct genetic groups that date back hundreds of years, because they mostly never organized into large kingdoms or city-states and practiced mostly tribal warfare.

Also worthy of mention is the fact that most black people outside of Africa are partly mulattoes, often around 10-25% white due to having lived for so long among Europeans.

So yah there you go, that's the story of that.

Btw notice I said that they had to be the majority and they also had to be in power.

Historically and even to this day, places that have vast black populations don't produce many black intellectuals or leaders proportionally, so that you could easily have 70% black people but expect to have well over 70% of that country's leading minds be non-black.

I fact I count only a single black Nobel laureate in all of history that didn't get it for peace or literature: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_black_Nobel_Laureates
He shared it with a white man and he himself was not born in an African country but a British colony...

Note that there are close to 1 billion black people in the world, though it's fairly hard to count.

By comparison, Jews have won over 135 not including literature and peace... There's only give or take 13 million of them and you'd be hard-pressed to make a case against for a more persecuted and discriminated against people in history.
Not only that but it's only a small genetic and cultural group of secularized Jews who actually produce this bounty of advancements, not even the whole population.

Not to mention that most of the black people who did win a Nobel prize, even if they're stupid ones ( literature and peace are the stupid ones in case you didn't know ) were actually of mixed ethnicity, like Obama and Ralph Bunche or not really black at all like Anwar Sadat who is middle-eastern as far as I can tell.

So yah I know where I'd go live if I had a choice between the jew-only and the black-only country.

At 9/23/13 03:23 PM, supergandhi64 wrote: that's different because israel is the land of god's chosen people *sigh* all these baka goyim

--supergandhi64

I think you're getting God mixed up with the British...

At 9/23/13 12:36 PM, Sekhem wrote:

At 9/23/13 12:33 PM, yurgenburgen wrote:

At 9/23/13 12:30 PM, Sekhem wrote: racists struggle to insult an entitled black man

big surprise

get new material

get a better race

get a better music

At 9/24/13 11:02 AM, eliteknightofastora wrote: get a better music

Rock and roll was also invented by black people, silly.

At 9/24/13 08:43 AM, poxpower wrote: I fact I count only a single black Nobel laureate in all of history that didn't get it for peace or literature: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_black_Nobel_Laureates
He shared it with a white man and he himself was not born in an African country but a British colony...

You do realize that this price is basically handed out by Western-centric scientifical establishment, right? What you said is like saying that asians do not make good music because they don't win MTV's music awards...

At 9/24/13 04:07 PM, Dr-Worm wrote:

At 9/24/13 11:02 AM, eliteknightofastora wrote: get a better music

Rock and roll was also invented by black people, silly.

yeah and then who did make it popular elvis the beatles iron maiden

At 9/23/13 12:36 PM, Sekhem wrote: get a better race

Anybody paying attention to this shit? Or racism towards white people just doesn't count?

At 9/24/13 04:42 PM, 24901miles wrote: But there are plenty of intellectuals in the African community who have won the Nobel Prize, (Peace, Literature, one for Economics) just none in Science. Do you realize how frequently Asians earn the Nobel Prize for Science? Very often.

I'm not saying that it is a white-supremacist organization. Just saying that they are mostly focused on western cultures and science. And I'm also not surprised that Asians often earn the Nobel Prize. There is a cultural proximity between western counties and asian countries (mostly Japan).

But don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that being more focused on a culture or another is plain wrong, I'm just saying that you can't argue that blacks are stupid or have lesser forms of knowledge because they aren't winning the Nobel Prize, or at least not as often as whites and asians.

That's kind of Odd! Isn't it? A community of people who make it their job to be scientifically unbiased... challenging every single decision on the path to discovering truth in the world around them... would favor Whites and Asians. Why?

The fact that you are talking about science as the be all and end all of knowledge, rejecting all other approches or theories as valid just pretty much proves how biaised science is. It's particularly hilarious when neuroscientists talk about ethics, philosophy and morality like they are the first human beings to even consider that morality isn't relative to the belief of individuals.

You are quite naive if you believe that because they are scientists they can put aside everything that makes them human. Not to mention that scientists have proven quite a few time in history that their dogma isn't preventing them from making quite questionnable acts.

At 9/24/13 04:25 PM, supergandhi64 wrote: i think you're getting mixed up

--supergandhi64

The expiration of the British Mandate in Palestine disagrees...

At 9/24/13 04:31 PM, HeavenDuff wrote:

You do realize that this price is basically handed out by Western-centric scientifical establishment, right? What you said is like saying that asians do not make good music because they don't win MTV's music awards...

Asian countries have won many nobel prizes ( and people of Asian origin who emigrated to other countries ).

Also if you look at the scientific production of countries; http://www.scimagojr.com/countryrank.php
You see Asians ranked quite highly
This chart is more telling: http://www.sciencevisually.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Scientific-Paper-Trail-770x384.jpg

Again you see that Asian countries do quite well ( as they do in recent Nobel nominations btw ) whereas African countries are nowhere to be found, save for South Africa, who's intellectual production comes predominantly from the white population.

This is telling on two fronts:
1. In their native countries, black people don't produce much science
2. In western countries, black people don't produce much science either

Whereas both at home and abroad, Jews and Asians produce lots of scientific advances.
For instance, Asian Americans have earned 10 nobel prizes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_American
That's as much as the entire nation of Japan.

And why is this western bias present in sciences, but not in sports or entertainment? Black people are vastly over-represented in many athletic activities all over the world. There's also droves of successful black entertainers with vast white fanbases. They are much richer and more powerful than any black scientist would ever become.

So.... why this westerner Nobel conspiracy?

At 9/24/13 04:57 PM, HeavenDuff wrote:

But don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that being more focused on a culture or another is plain wrong, I'm just saying that you can't argue that blacks are stupid or have lesser forms of knowledge because they aren't winning the Nobel Prize, or at least not as often as whites and asians.

Well feel free to pick whatever metric for intelligence / advancement you want and see how Africans and their cultures fare when compared to other groups.

At 9/24/13 05:05 PM, 24901miles wrote:

Of course it's hilarious when Neuroscientists talk about Ethics, Philosophy, and Morality. They're the ones who are finally learning the truth about how the brain functions at its core, rather than creating needlessly complex pseudosciences which fail to accurately describe the workings of the brain (see Psychology, Philosophy, and Religion).

I like this guy lol.
Though psychology is not really a pseudoscience.

At 9/24/13 05:15 PM, poxpower wrote: Well feel free to pick whatever metric for intelligence / advancement you want and see how Africans and their cultures fare when compared to other groups.

Well, if you haven't noticed... Africa's situation is kind of bad on various aspects. They are stuck with boundaries established by colonists hundreds of years ago. They have violent dictatorships. And to make it even better, the IMF policies are fucking up their economies and as time goes by, their economy is futher and further more controlled remotely by foreign corporations...

Not to say that there is nothing produced there as far as philosophy and knowledge of all forms goes. It might not be of much interest to our civilization though. Which doesn't mean that it is void of interest altogether.

At 9/24/13 05:05 PM, 24901miles wrote

Of course it's hilarious when Neuroscientists talk about Ethics, Philosophy, and Morality. They're the ones who are finally learning the truth about how the brain functions at its core, rather than creating needlessly complex pseudosciences which fail to accurately describe the workings of the brain (see Psychology, Philosophy, and Religion).

In fact, these guys do not have much understanding of the human being. They reject the importance of socialization, culture, human's subjectivity, symbolisation and the very important fact that humans, beyond what they biologicaly are... is the only specie that is able to give sense and interpret their actions, life, relationships, etc.

I've studied countless of theories in my field of study (and other fields), and these positivist theories are most often then not, completely laughable.

I have a friend who studies psychoanalysis, and he described a case to me recently. His thesis supervisor had to treat a case of vaginismus on a patient. Long story short, that woman had a psychological blocking that was in no way physiological. The psychoanalyst found out through discussions with the woman, that she had a double-blockage, one was conscious and the other was subconscious. To treat this problem, the psychanalyst had to understand the subjective aspect of the human in front of him. That's not something your neuroscience can understand...

There is a common mistake made by these dogmatic scientists. They reject socialization, subjectivity and culture as some kind of "outside influence" on the very "logical closed-system" that is the human. This is an ideological position, and not a scientifical one. They reject the possibility that humans could be in fact, social beings by nature.

This methodical individualism is in no way an evidence, it's an ideological choice made by scientists who believe that it is a scientifical fact.

I'm sorry, but you have obviously no kind of knowledge of sociology, psychology, political science, history and basicaly anything "human-related". These fields of study are far more complex than you think. And your derogatory behavior towards these vast, diversified, complex and intelligent fields of study... fools no one both others who are just as uneducated and close-minded as you are...

At 9/24/13 05:58 PM, HeavenDuff wrote: very "logical closed-system" that is the human.

*the brain.

both others who are

but*

At 9/24/13 05:58 PM, HeavenDuff wrote:

Well, if you haven't noticed... Africa's situation is kind of bad on various aspects.

I did notice, but who's fault is it?
Is it their ineptitude that is causing this in the first place, or is this causing their ineptitude? The evidence massively supports the later hypothesis.

They are stuck with boundaries established by colonists hundreds of years ago.

So?

They have violent dictatorships.

Again who's fault is that?

And to make it even better, the IMF policies are fucking up their economies and as time goes by, their economy is futher and further more controlled remotely by foreign corporations...

I frankly don't buy this argument at all. At no point where they prosperous and then de-possessed. Typically, it's the opposite that happens: They are relatively prosperous under the rule of others and then degenerate when they become independent, despite massive ongoing international charity.

But feel free to explain to me the workings of how we are "fucking up their economies" without their full or partial cooperation.

It seems to me they are fucking their economies themselves quite well enough.

I have a friend who studies psychoanalysis,

psychoanalysis is a pseudoscience.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoanalysis#As_a_field_of_science

History, women's studies, sociology, anthropology, comparative religions and philosophy are vastly non-sciences as well. They don't do experiments or seek to find new knowledge, generally they are content to repeat the same assertions over and over for decades on end.

Psychology, biology and neurosciences on the other hand have vastly progressed our understanding of the human mind in the last 30 years.

At 9/24/13 04:39 PM, yurgenburgen wrote:

At 9/24/13 04:37 PM, eliteknightofastora wrote: yeah and then who did make it popular iron maiden

holy shitting what

holly shit i did a error of thiking the iron maiden is rock that is actualy heavy metal what a shame i not perfect like you yurgenburgen i think i gonna go and kill myself bye

At 9/24/13 06:28 PM, poxpower wrote: I did notice, but who's fault is it?
Is it their ineptitude that is causing this in the first place, or is this causing their ineptitude? The evidence massively supports the later hypothesis.

Have you ever taken a single class of political science or sociology? It's quite the opposite way. The evidence massively supports that they've been suffering colonisation over hundreds of years, and that they are now getting their economy destroyed by powerful capitalist economies.

And once this system of domination is established, how the hell do you think they are supposed to get out? Their economy is held remotely by powerful corporations.

So?

So they have cultural groups who don't get political representation. These boundaries were traced not following cultural development, but following purely economical interests of the colonists. Today you have minorities getting politicaly destroyed by majorities, which doesn't help the local economy and keeps these countries in civil war...

Again who's fault is that?

Colonists...

Take history lessons...

I frankly don't buy this argument at all. At no point where they prosperous and then de-possessed. Typically, it's the opposite that happens: They are relatively prosperous under the rule of others and then degenerate when they become independent, despite massive ongoing international charity.

Well, read stuff. Start with Jean Ziegler. They had local economies, but then industries who can produce more, for cheaper costs are forced upon them by the IMF policies. They can't have any kind of political freedom under the IMF policies which forces them to accept direct investment, make economical cuts in social and structural development (aka schools and hospitals) thus forcing a neo-liberal economy on these countries and preventing all kind of social progress. Forcing these kind of politics on them, pretty much kills any kind of possibility for a democraticaly-oriented system to ever establish itself.

But feel free to explain to me the workings of how we are "fucking up their economies" without their full or partial cooperation.

I've never said "We".

But having unfair competition opposing local fishermans and farmers to food corporations like Monsanto pretty much kills the economy. These economies were not focused on massive production, massive distribution and a capitalist approach to economy. So basically, forcing this system upon them is rejecting their "potential" democratical right to chose what kind of system they would like.

Familiarize yourself with the concept of Dumping or better, read one or two chapters of Jean Ziegler's L'empire de la honte. You'll learn about predatory economical strategies used to kill local economies.

Plus, when you have an industrial type of production opposing a local type of production, the local type cannot match the low prices of the corporations because they don't have the low cost associated with automatized and industrial productions.

Not only were these countries never free to develop these kind of economies. But who the hell are these corporation dicks who think that they can force "THE ONE GOOD WAY TO LIVE".

psychoanalysis is a pseudoscience.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoanalysis#As_a_field_of_science

Like that means anything. Not being a "science" in the modern meaning of the word, is pretty much a good thing when working in human and social fields.

History, women's studies, sociology, anthropology, comparative religions and philosophy are vastly non-sciences as well. They don't do experiments or seek to find new knowledge, generally they are content to repeat the same assertions over and over for decades on end.

No.

Read Habermas, Foucault, Bourdieu Ziegler, Horkheimmer, Saïd, Adorno, Arendt, Yung, Negri or better yet! I see you're a Quebecer! Read André Corten, Dan O'Meara, Christian DeBlock, Yves Couture, Francis Dupui-Déri, Karl-David Mandell, Geneviève Pagé, Frédérick Gagnon, Daniel Holly, Thing-Sheng Lin, etc.

But I suppose you already know all of them, their books, their work, their theories, and they are probably all out-dated and stupid.

You are wrong. All the documentation and informations in the world are against you.

Psychology, biology and neurosciences on the other hand have vastly progressed our understanding of the human mind in the last 30 years.

Lol.

I'm pretty much done here. You've proven to have very limited knowledge on the matter. And basically you do not "seek to find new knowledge" and you are generally "content to repeat the same assertions over and over". If you don't make the simple effort of reading about these people I've mentionned, don't bother replying...

At 9/24/13 07:08 PM, HeavenDuff wrote: But having unfair competition opposing local fishermans and farmers to food corporations like Monsanto pretty much kills the economy. These economies were not focused on massive production, massive distribution and a capitalist approach to economy. So basically, forcing this system upon them is rejecting their "potential" democratical right to chose what kind of system they would like.

I've said "democratical right to chose what kind of system" they would want. But that deals more with sovereignty than it does with democracy.

Thankyou Heavenduff for doing what peolpe usually can't be bothered to do, and that is silencing the hot alkaline semi-chode of poxpowers inability to change handed to him by his own narrow world view

At 9/24/13 07:08 PM, HeavenDuff wrote:

The evidence massively supports that they've been suffering colonisation over hundreds of years, and that they are now getting their economy destroyed by powerful capitalist economies.

Then why is it that most non-black colonies are doing quite alright? Hong Kong for instance? Or India. Almost all of South America were European colonies but they are doing decent today, at least far better than Africa.
You also forget that the Americas were colonies. Why did colonialism make those countries the most prosperous on earth yet somehow crippled black nations to this day?

How did Germany and Japan rebuild so fast after world war 2 despite large sanctions from the rest of the world and massive devastation and loss of life? Unified Germany is now one of the strongest countries on earth a mere 25 years after the fall of the Berlin wall.

And once this system of domination is established, how the hell do you think they are supposed to get out? Their economy is held remotely by powerful corporations.

What corporation is holding Haiti hostage exactly? How are "corporations" keeping THE ENTIRE CONTINENT as well as scattered islands from achieving the prosperity that you claim they would achieve if only they had ruled themselves from the get-go? At what point in their long history were black nations prosperous?

So they have cultural groups who don't get political representation.

But the cultural groups who do get political representation in black countries and who are black don't achieve prosperity either. And the blacks who live under white rule are more prosperous than those who don't, irrespective of how "represented" they are in that country's government.

These boundaries were traced not following cultural development, but following purely economical interests of the colonists. Today you have minorities getting politicaly destroyed by majorities, which doesn't help the local economy and keeps these countries in civil war...

In what way is the tribal nature of the African continent, which emerged millennia before any invaders, the fault of "colonialists"? Furthermore, there are plenty of countries today that are vastly multi-ethnic and yet seem to do quite well; Canada, USA, France, China, India to name a few.

Since you are such an astute student of history, perhaps you would care to tell me also how such wide and multiethnic empires as the Roman and the Greeks managed to dominate for so long despite being nothing but a vast collection of conquered territories. Why did that model work for an aggressive Roman invader ( as it did for the Muslims btw ) but somehow it fails when applied to Africa?

Africa is one of the most ethnically diverse continents on earth, if you separate each group into its own country Africa would be hundreds if not thousands of countries. Explain in what way this would solve any of their current problems.

They had local economies,

Oh ok so before they had local economies that thrived and produced tons of scientific advancement, high GDP and high standards of living?

but then industries who can produce more, for cheaper costs are forced upon them by the IMF policies.

Forces them how?? Who's forcing them? With what? Guns?
??

Forcing these kind of politics on them, pretty much kills any kind of possibility for a democraticaly-oriented system to ever establish itself.

This same process of industrialization was brought to China decades ago. Now they are one of the first world economies. How exactly did they manage to do this and yet no African country is able to escape these evil "corporations" who "force" themselves onto them ( somehow )?

But having unfair competition opposing local fishermans and farmers to food corporations like Monsanto pretty much kills the economy.

Again this same thing is happening all over the world, how is it that it's only keeping Africa in the stone age?
Why was industrialization a bounty for the west but some horrible curse for Africa?

Familiarize yourself with the concept of Dumping or better, read one or two chapters of Jean Ziegler's L'empire de la honte. You'll learn about predatory economical strategies used to kill local economies.

He sounds like a dumbass.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Ziegler
"former professor of sociology"

Well there's your problem.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Ziegler#Criticisms

I am also familiar with dumping and don't know of any evidence that it can ravage an entire country's economy, let alone African countries.
http://www.globalpolitician.com/default.asp?23989-business
As with everything in economics, there is no simple answer.

Like that means anything. Not being a "science" in the modern meaning of the word, is pretty much a good thing when working in human and social fields.

Well that's ignorance on a level that is pretty impossible to counter lol.

In this day and age to think that psychoanalysis of all things is more relevant than neuroscience to the betterment of humankind of flat-out mind-blowing.

At 9/24/13 08:43 AM, poxpower wrote: So yah I know where I'd go live if I had a choice between the jew-only and the black-only country.

poxpower is the argument your trying to make here that this man is in the right?

I think the world is full of double standards.

Down the street from my apartment, there is Jewish only community.

Only people of Jewish heritage may live there. They own a lot of land, and there are absolutely no non-Jewish people owning any property.

What justifies their right to form a racially and religiously pure community?

At 9/24/13 10:00 PM, yurgenburgen wrote:

At 9/24/13 09:38 PM, naronic wrote: poxpower is the argument your trying to make here that this man is in the right?

wait a second I thought that was a given

I guess that's true but as usual Poxpower makes a terrible argument weaved out of low resolution statistics and correlations and expects people to take her seriously

At 9/24/13 10:05 PM, naronic wrote:

At 9/24/13 10:00 PM, yurgenburgen wrote:

At 9/24/13 09:38 PM, naronic wrote: poxpower is the argument your trying to make here that this man is in the right?

wait a second I thought that was a given

I guess that's true but as usual Poxpower makes a terrible argument weaved out of low resolution statistics and correlations and expects people to take her seriously

Big talk from a guy who got smashed to bits by the owner of http://humanvarieties.org/ recently.
I guess it's easier to talk shit than to get demolished a second time on the same subject matter.

You were impossibly rude to this guy who took time out of his busy schedule just to come here and debate with you in a civil manner. It did not take him very long to exhaust his patience and realize you had no idea what you were talking about whereas he spends a large amount of his free time reading and reviewing the relevant literature.