• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: tryptakid | Foreigner

The Ferguson thread / additional race discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes after every death we should just introduce new laws and legislation, is that right? Or not every death but just the ones that Sharpton and Jesse Jackson deem as important?

we should do better than we do @ seeing systemic inefficiencies in general

and if a case makes national news - those are the type of questions we should be addressing, -not what color were the people, or what political party our thoughts should align with
 
So whites should just ignore that statistically, a white woman will be killed at a rate that is 12 times (not that it is a lot in the first place) higher, if she couples with a black than if white?

I just read about a white girl in a Mississippi town who was filled with lighter fluid. Knocked out and lighter fluid up her nose in her mouth.. In her body. Lit on fire. Burned from the inside out. Paramedics arrived to find her conscious, burning alive, walking down the road. No suspect named yet apparently, but rumor is they are black. She is known to date blacks. Has pictures up with blacks. Friends claim black. Town is 50% black. Heck... Maybe this was some jealous white or something, I don't know.

Another story I captured, a 40 year old black guy murdered his 23 year old white girlfriend. His mother is being charged for HELPING cover it up.

I can link to these stories, and more. Not to say it is at all common, BUT, I'll tell ya, folks, I can find MANY stories of Black guys killing White women or simply blacks killing whites... I highly doubt I'm going to find many stories of white guys killing black women. Or raping them.

I know that these are anecdotes. They don't really prove anything. And some might blame culture, class, poverty, expectation... But still.
 
Last edited:
So whites should just ignore that statistically, a white woman will be killed at a rate that is 12 times (not that it is a lot in the first place) higher, if she couples with a black than if white?

I just read about a white girl in a Mississippi town who was filled with lighter fluid. Knocked out and lighter fluid up her node in her mouth.. In her body. Lit on fire. Burned from the inside out. Paramedics arrived to find her conscious, burning alive, walking down the road. No suspect named yet apparently, but rumor is they are black. She is known to date blacks. Has pictures up with blacks. Friends claim black. Town is 50% black.

Another story I captured, a 40 year old black guy murdered his 23 year old white girlfriend. His mother is being charged for HELPING cover it up.

I can link to these stories, and more. Not to say it is at all common, BUT, I'll tell ya, folks, I can find MANY stories of Black guys killing White women or simply blacks killing whites... I highly doubt I'm going to find many stories of white guys killing black women. Or raping them.

I know that these are anecdotes. They don't really prove anything. And some might blame culture, class, poverty, expectation... But still.

Umm not victim shaming but more like how the fuck can you get into that kinda trouble that often in your case without basically being a fucking shit disturber.

They must have been "fucking shit disturbers" according to Paranoid Android. At least that's what he presumed I was when I said I'd been jumped and robbed in the inner-city before.

I suppose we can say at the end of this girls brief life, at least she got to experience a vibrant life in Mississippi full of diversity.

Let me guess: it was the killer's socio-economic background that caused this? Let me guess it was the missing father figure? Or was it the fault of the lighter fluid and matches, we need a ban on lighter fluid and matches?
 
This is the classic liberal nanny state reaction. IE the entire gun debate

Legislation can affect social behaviors substantially. Look at the Surgeon General warning on cigarettes. Did it stop smoking? No. Did a significant drop in smoking occur shortly afterwards? Yes. Same with seat belts, littering, drunk driving etc. We can debate about which laws would or wouldn't work but let's not pretend that laws are entirely useless.

As for this larger issue, it's enormous. It's not smoking or littering. There's no single law I could think of to make any sort of dent in American race relations today. I used to be a proponent of the officer vest cam option. After the Garner video though, I feel this would be a simple waste of money. We had the entire incident on video (and audio) and this changed nothing. Camera footage could literally have an officer robbing someone at gun point and the vest footage would remain fucking useless.

Police structure need serious overhaul. I just have no idea what to do about it. Unless police lose all authority/legitimacy and people just start shooting back at them like they were civilians trying to stop and harass people, I think it's going to be a very minimal and slow evolution in the structuring of police departments if there is any at all.


Let me guess: it was the killer's socio-economic background that caused this? Let me guess it was the missing father figure? Or was it the fault of the lighter fluid and matches, we need a ban on lighter fluid and matches?

That's not how statistics work imo.
 
pa cites the Irish and Italians immigrating in the states as being analogous with people like Pakistanis and etc. immigrating into Western Europe. It is not the same. Irish and Italians are both Western Europe. They are both products of the Roman Empire. They have that vibration- that influence. All of Western Europe has experienced similar enough evolution. A lot more similar than an Arab or Pakistani, or Black African. And even then, if it is only culture because I know not many of you believe in racial divides, I for one am not sure. I just can't imagine Black Africans every going to the moon had they not been integrated into 'Europe'. I believe we have been on different paths. I believe that what we see as 'races' are the start of what would have been entirely unique, species. At some point we wouldn't be able to breed. And this is enough for me to question... These questions. But, maybe that's not fairz because honestly, I sort of like Central and South American people. I mean, I'm attracted to their women, and don't feel exactly like I'm doing the wrong thing when I imagine mating with them, unlike with Blacks. Jesus, I really don't know, honestly. I'm going to take a break.

Ireland was not a part or product of the Roman Empire. Unless you are talking about the Laudabiliter a papal bull issued to bring the Irish church under Roman rule and granted Henry 11 the right to rule Ireland which led to the Norman invasion of Ireland and eventually English occupation. That document is rather controversial as it's authenticity has been doubted but either way the Normans did invade Ireland and this led to English rule. And look how well that turned out 8)

But wtf dude? Seriously what did black people ever do to you? My cousin is one of those uncivilized blacks (well half Jamaican and half Newfoundlander) you keep talking about (he is pretty educated for someone that's supposed to be little more then a savage according to you) and i lived with him and his mom for about a year on the mainland and they treated me as one of their own even though they barely knew me at the time and their family and friends didn't know i even existed. And guess what despite the cultural differences that means we are not supposed to mix according to you we got along very well. What a shocker 8o . I may have been the only white person at alot of parties i went to but i was certainly never made fun of or hated by any of them because i was white. I was treated better by them then i was by many white people up there and indeed they basically saved my ass from being homeless on one occasion. Either that or i would have had to hitch half way across the country to get back to my own home which would have sucked to say the least. But nope they took me in when my own cunt of a uncle kicked me out after a argument i had with the fat prick. They didn't have to do that and i was treated better by them then many people i knew from home or had grown up with.

Seriously man we are all humans regardless of what color we are, what ethnic background we come from or what accent we speak with. We all have the same motivations behind our actions at the end of the day. How you can think of other people as basically being alien to you simply because of the color of their skin is abit beyond me.
 
Thanks for your reply, What 23. So it looks like your experience differed a bit from mine. As I said, take from it what you will ...

Sociology, geography, and history (and the semi-"hard" sciences that accompany these humanities) are pet interests of mine, and something I like to follow in the popular press. I read an interesting study published in the Washington Post within the past year or two, which looked at ethnic homogeneity around the world, and what other indicators it correlated with. I'll post the link later when I have more time to find it again. The folks who ran the study were trying to be as scientific as possible, and an early problem they ran into was objectively defining the boundaries of ethnic groups. They concluded fairly quickly, from the background research they did for the study, that two people belong the same ethnic group if they choose to see themselves, and each other, that way. In other words, ethnicity is a social construct; people choose to be of the same ethnic group.

A good example: Mexico is country that, by most measures, appears to be rapidly homogenizing. In past censuses, on the blank for "ethnicity", people tended to write in "White", "Mestizo (mixed)", or "Native American". At first more and more people were writing in "Mestizo", including individuals who had written "White" or "Native American" on past censuses. Then a funny thing started happening: more and more people just started writing "Mexican", a trend which continues today, and now makes up the majority of responses. Clearly the inhabitants of Mexico are more and more coming to see themselves as a single homogenous people. A similar process happened in England 1000 years ago after the battle of Hastings. Though it isn't as well documented, I'm sure you'd find a similar process took place over generations in all large peoples who now see themselves as homogeneous. It's like the flow of colored goo in a lava lamp -- a dynamic process that is, and always has been, a part of the human condition.

Granted there is probably a whole science, waiting to be discovered, about what behavioral and environmental disparities give two people, or two groups of people, high odds of looking at each other and saying, "You're not 'my people'!" And now we're into the realm of social psychology and objectively measurable data. This kind of science might have some promising applications in the way of encouraging individual and society-wide behaviors that correlate strongly with greater inclusivity.
 
This post originally in response to pa

Interesting on the history, and I do admit a lot of ignorance of the details of it, though I don't think I thought Ireland was directly part of it, to my credit.

Honestly none of your story surprises me. I'm not saying directly that they are uncivilized. I'm mainly saying that that are different enough to matter- I'm arguing that. Maybe it doesn't to some. Maybe some are ignorant (I am). I admit that you seem like much less of an asshole than me. But you don't understand me. Fuck. I'm trying to figure it out right now.

As I've said, I believe that there are differences. Not that whites are all clones of one another or blacks for this matter. But Egypt wasn't a black civilization. It may have had Blacks, but it wasn't Black. It may have even, ancient Egypt, had a lot of European influence. There are genes associated with those with a Celtic Y Haplogroup... The same as mine. Many mummies have red hair and blond hair. It is wavy, and of the type of hair. These are in families of Pharoahs. There is also a certain pyramid form in Bosnia, I think. Overgrown with land, and plant life. It was a multicultural place, for sure, Egypt. Probably a lot of admixture.

Red haired and blond haired mummies were found in China.

The upper caste in India is closer related to Europeans, and the the lower, more Asian (and Asia and Europe are huge, just to say I'm aware).
http://m.indiatoday.in/story/contro...-descent-lower-castes-of-asians/1/230848.html

Getting back to it, I don't know of any Black native places that developed written language. Or civilization like that of whites and a lot of others. I don't believe that 100,000 years of separation does absolutely nothing... even if genes remain largely the same, there is still a different make up with other conditions... Different frequencies of variations and things. I'm not saying I hate them, or that because 'whites' (broadly, Indo-Europeans, I think) were somehow able to inject themselves into cultures and people everywhere that they are really, objectively 'better', as far as I know. I do know that with them, things are possible. I have not seen it demonstrated to the same degree, with others. Whites harnessed electricity. They built ships and roamed oceans successfully. Flew. Set the world on fire. Created systems that effectively enslaved much of the world. But that's nature. I get nature. I don't like a lot of what goes on (I'd say sometimes). Of humans. Of myself.

I know its hard to fathom but I'm really not talking about individuals. I'm talking about groups. As a group, whites would beat any group that I can think of, in a lot of things I can think of, including warfare, which, exists always (even if in your own mind balancing and stuff-the world/you). Though we are a bit higher than other animals, most animals have territories. And immigration of individuals into preexisting groups, or into others' territories, to my knowledge, is rocky, and often with competition or and/or blood. I'm pretty sure. This what humans do is understandably complex. We are complex. But you must understand its perfectly healthy to have reservations. Though we are largely animals that learn and depend on our environment to learn, it is complex, and our bodies developed uniquely all over and 'learned' in various ways our environment, and 'us'. Basically I'm saying, it would be a sort of genocide to consciously outbreed the indigenous population(s) of Europe- to encourage it with populations from way far away, en masse (who breed faster, as well, and have different culture or...). As I've said a lot of times, I am reserved about claiming America (or Australia, or South Africa) should 'stay white'. I can't say I believe that. Or not. Realistically, I can't. But I don't see why the demography of Northwest Europe or elsewhere needs to change so rapidly and drastically. Or why people are shamed for having such an idea as loyalty to a group in this way. Having any order as such.

I want to say that I like diversity. But I also like diversity(! requires some degree of separation!).
 
Last edited:
LosBlancos said:
I'm not sure where you get the idea that their is a human right to free migration, you couple this with the "right" to health care, food, and shelter

Your examples are not analogous to mine: on what grounds can which groups validly impede free human movement (which has occurred throughout our history as a species)? I was just noting that the framework of nation states fails to present ethically valid justification for placing human migration under coercive control. . .though I'd be happy to hear a justification for it.

Undeniably there would be a drastic lowering of the standard of living for almost all in the country

This has not been the case with patterns of migration to the US (where rates of South of the border immigration appear to vary closely with economic growth, restrictions on immigration just determining the rate of undocumented migration), and I don't think it would necessarily be a bad thing: this lowered standard of living you note is more than offset by increasing standards of living for immigrants.

MDAO said:
They concluded fairly quickly, from the background research they did for the study, that two people belong the same ethnic group if they choose to see themselves, and each other, that way. In other words, ethnicity is a social construct; people choose to be of the same ethnic group.

I think this, to some degree, conflates social construction with personal choice. Eg, I would have a great deal of trouble creating a new ethnicity ex-nihilo and compelling anyone to identify with it. Similarly, I can't declare myself a part of some ethnicity with which I have no hereditary ties and expect people to respect my membership. Eg, I couldn't declare myself a Spaniard no matter how appropriate my cultural performance of it.

For an ethnicity to persist and grow (from a psychological perspective, "replicate"), it needs to hold some relevance in terms of relatively closed social networks of culturally similar individuals, who are cast in structural relations of differentiation with other groups. Yes, a good bit of the production of ethnicity depends on voluntary political mobilization of ethnicity, but this always emerges in some socio-structural context, where some possible ethnic projects are viable and some aren't. And it is primarily due to political coercion imposed from without that ethnicities turn into races.

Granted there is probably a whole science, waiting to be discovered, about what behavioral and environmental disparities give two people, or two groups of people, high odds of looking at each other and saying, "You're not 'my people'!"

I call it "sociology", but it's not very good yet. ;)

ebola
 
Your examples are not analogous to mine: on what grounds can which groups validly impede free human movement (which has occurred throughout our history as a species)? I was just noting that the framework of nation states fails to present ethically valid justification for placing human migration under coercive control. . .though I'd be happy to hear a justification for it.

On the exact grounds I mentioned, because they simply cannot sustain more residents in their country. There are others, like security risk. Ethics are relative, I wouldn't let any random person into my house, is that impeding "human migration" as well?

t think it would necessarily be a bad thing: this lowered standard of living you note is more than offset by increasing standards of living for immigrants.

This is rich. I'm sure the Native Americans took comfort knowing that as their standard of living, the standard of living for Europeans was drastically raising. I don't want our country to befall a similar fate as Native Americans or Aboriginal Australians that's why I'm against immigration. It's not bigotry, not racism. If you look at the groups most affected by immigration and low-wage labour it will likely be African-Americans or the Hispanics presently here being priced out of the job market with a huge influx of cheap labour. Why would I rationally vote for a measure that would decrease my own and my fellow Americans standard of living? That should be considered treason, the crime of "betraying one's country".

LosBlancos
 
u.s. voters vote against their own interests all the time. it's hardly groundbreaking news.

alasdair

So you'll concede widespread immigration would lower the standard of living of Americans but hear hear the saving grace of the plan it would be offset by increase in standard of living of living for the immigrants. Isn't that great?

Just remember when the immigrants you say should be let in without any control go on to murder, rape, and be paedophiles remember the blood will be on your hands. When they bring HIV here and spread it across Americans, or Ebola, the blood will be on your hands. When some immigrants commandeers a plane and flies it into a building, the blood will be on your hands.

I'm not against immigration. Just control of the quality and quantity.
 
Just remember when the immigrants you say should be let in without any control go on to murder, rape, and be paedophiles remember the blood will be on your hands. When they bring HIV here and spread it across Americans, or Ebola, the blood will be on your hands. When some immigrants commandeers a plane and flies it into a building, the blood will be on your hands.

Still haven't answered a single question about the Italiophobia of the late 1800s I've brought up repeatedly. It was identical to what you're describing now. The crime, the disease, the violence. These were all used to describe Italian immigrants. Are you not familiar with the nativist movement?

Or is that different somehow?
 
So you'll concede widespread immigration would lower the standard of living of Americans but hear hear the saving grace of the plan it would be offset by increase in standard of living of living for the immigrants.
i did not say that.
Just remember when the immigrants you say should be let in without any control...
i did not say that.

when people accuse you of trolling, this is the kind of thing they have in mind, i expect.

alasdair
 
i did not say that.
i did not say that.

when people accuse you of trolling, this is the kind of thing they have in mind, i expect.

alasdair

Alas tbf you do have a tendency to say things that have little substance and that leave no conclusions to be dawn. I think it is wisely tactful but counter productive to the progress of an earnest debate/exchange. Missing you in TL bro
 
Why would I rationally vote for a measure that would decrease my own and my fellow Americans standard of living? That should be considered treason, the crime of "betraying one's country".

I could word this in a different way like say why should i as a member of the working class go against not only my own class interests but also the interests of every other working class person out there regardless of nationality by furthering the interests of the elite by falling for the very same divisive strategies that you and other Conservatives endorse? Why should i support those who basically make their living off exploiting my class?

Why do i get the feeling that you would have been a part of the Nativist movement back in the old days throwing shit on the Irish and Italians as they got off the boats. Or do you only count immigrants as anyone that ain't pale?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top