Added: 2 years ago
From: AfricansArise
Views: 3,435
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (84)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • LOL! Have you READ "Origins"? The phrase "survival of the fittest" refers to GROUPS, not individuals. Darwin never used this phrase, but "fit" doesn't refer to the strongest male beating up rival members and taking whatever he wants, for this would lead to chaos and the community would go extinct = NOT fit. Fit groups contain members within a community that cooperate, care for one another, and look out for the best interests of everyone, so that EVERYONE can be a healthy, contributing member.

  • Yes blacks are powerful a race of murderers rapists arsonists who have The average IQ of 85 and are more likely to die than to reach another continent or reach The age of 45...

  • Comment removed

  • Who says that Darwinist/Anti-Theist dont do anything bad.

  • but darwin was a racist it you research him people would know that

  • unfortunately in this world of political correctness we are not allowed to talk about this. the media worships blacks and always denies eugenics. europe will be screwed if this continues. in 200 years time the world will be ruled by japanese and chinese.

  • black iq is lower. any study confirms this. even Minnesota adoption study.

  • No, people are jealous of black people. Don't worry, the haters will die like anyone else with theirs pride in 9feet deep. Remember that.

  • ... in other words, ignore everything white people have to say about race and eugenics. they are always biased and looking for an excuse to opress and murder.

  • @Southerly93 Indeed but many don't get that.

  • The difference in intelligence doesn't exist, and even if it does, environment is too much of a factor. The genetic variants are small REALLY SMALL

  • darwin was against slavery, when he went to the galopogas islands he was horrified at the way the spanish treated the slaves, and he believed that not enough time had passed for the races to have any major differences in intelligence, and was against it

  • This video lies about Charles Darwin's beliefs, quote-mines his comments out of context in attempts to lie about his comments, and smears him with the racism of others. For the truth, look into Charles Darwin.

  • "Race" is a biological and genetic myth, look up "a scientific test of race" for more info.

    The human genome project found no evidence of biological "races" in humans, only continuous human genetic variation with 7 billion individuals, not "races".

  • @TheDisproof

    That's dumb as hell. besides the fact that a child can look at a black guy and a white guy and tell you one of those things is not like the other, there's other factors. If you found a skeleton in your back yard while digging to install a pool or something. And if you called the police, their forensic anthropologist would be able to tell you the age, sex, cause of death, type of life the person lived, and even race believe it or not just from the effing bones.

  • @ellomirza 1) The human genome project found no evidence of biological "races" in humans, only continuous human genetic variation with 7 billion individuals, not "races". 2) Forensic anthropologists cannot tell you someones "race" as a result of 1).

    Define the biological edge of your own race objectively, go on, try it.

  • @TheDisproof Your claim that racial differences don't exist is false. J. Philipe Rushton and Charles Murray published clinical research exposing the noticable differences that exist in post-natal development, fertility rates, and intelligence quotients. This inconvient truth leads to the conclusion that biological egalitarianism is politically motivated lie designed to suit democratic politicians instead of the objective reality of science.

  • @DELTAFORCE851 it was you crackers that took darwin and put words into his mouth! he did not apply his theory of evolution to the human being! Next, Rushton and Murray have been proven unscientific due to their biases. Richard nesbitt and others like james flynn destroy thier "work". Next, if you were so concerned about superiority you would step down from all high tech posts and appoint asians since they score higher on IQ tests than whites. Cut the bull shit. Your time is up!!!

  • @DELTAFORCE851 You are aware of Rushton and Murray's racism?

    Rushton has been head of the Pioneer Fund since 2002. I suggest you look them up. Neither Rushton or Murray have been able to define distinct biological or genetically distinct "races" in Modern Humans. I suggest you look up sandra scarr's paper on IQ in Bermuda, it disproves Rushton and Murray outright.

  • Why do people keep saying "misunderstood?"

    When you actually read darwin, as the presenter here mentioned with a short quote, it's nothing BUT racism. Holy hell the name of his book is ....and the survival of favored races in the struggle for life! His sole purpose is to scientifically justify racism. It's not a perversion of his theory to apply it to the human race it's the purpose of it.

  • @ellomirza racism exists right?

  • @ellomirza

    1) You do realize Darwin opposed slavery correct? "I was told before leaving England that after living in slave countries all my opinions would be altered; the only alteration I am aware of is forming a much higher estimate of the negro character"

    2) Race as used in that book refers to varieties in animals not human races i.e. that some varieties survive better/have larger populations. He made an observation of a natural phenomena NOT to put forward ideology on race.

  • @FSEffect  you do realize that he was surprised to find that "negro character" that he was taken back by how similar his .....eh.....can't say slaves......help perhaps. He was surprised by how similar his help was to his master race.

    2)you're dumb for saying that. How the effing hell is race now an animal trait? Don't worry he clears it up by practicing what he preached. The darwin family never married into the "negro" race. Not even into any white family outside of just one. I wonder why?

  • @ellomirza

    1) You took exactly zero minutes to look up what I said didn't you? Quote now in full "I have watched how steadily the general feeling, as shown at elections, has been rising against Slavery. What a proud thing for England if she is the first European nation which utterly abolishes it! I was told before leaving England that after living in slave countries all my opinions would be altered; the only alteration I am aware of is forming a much higher estimate of the negro character."

  • @FSEffect

    I can't debate with college girls over youtube at 500 characters or less. You are so full of white guilt you can't see the forest for the trees. We both know you're wrong so agree to disagree.

  • @ellomirza

    "You are so full of white guilt you can't see the forest for the trees." Except I'm not white, but hey, it's not the first time you're so very wrong. And why is it that I have white guilt? I'm quoting Darwin irt you saying he's racist, or are you really this stupid? "We both know you're wrong " No I'm not wrong, it's quite obvious you are though, slinking away when you KNOW you have absolutely no facts to back up your claims, and then throwing ad hominem as if it means anything.

  • @FSEffect great I'm glad you liked it. Here's another one while I go tender my profiler resignation to the local bureau field office: Actions speak louder than words. So while you keep clinging on to one meaningless line about "negro spirit" I'll keep pointing out that his family for generations dedicated itself to maintaining racial purity in a sick experiment of his natural selection theories. Peace!

  • @ellomirza

    One meaningless line?

    "My wife has just finished reading aloud your 'Life with a Black Regiment,' and you must allow me to thank you heartily for the very great pleasure which it has in many ways given us. I always thought well of the negroes, from the little which I have seen of them; and I have been delighted to have my vague impressions confirmed, and their character and mental powers so ably discussed."

    Letter to Thomas Higginson (27 February 1873)

  • @ellomirza

    "that his family for generations dedicated itself to maintaining racial purity in a sick experiment of his natural selection theories" I ask you for evidence and you continue to answer with baseless rhetoric. You also have absolutely zero understanding of evolution or natural selection. So please continue to trot out your uneducated tripe, I enjoy dismantling your so called arguments. Dumbass.

  • @ellomirza

    "I thank God, I shall never again visit a slave-country. To this day, if I hear a distant scream, it recalls with painful vividness my feelings, when passing a house near Pernambuco, I heard the most pitiable moans, and could not but suspect that some poor slave was being tortured, yet knew that I was as powerless as a child even to remonstrate."

    The Voyage of the Beagle (1839), Ch. XXI : Mauritius To England,

    Charles Darwin

  • @ellomirza

    2)"you're dumb for saying that" For saying he was using race as meaning varieties and not as reference to human races? Have you read the book or any passages to it? Do you only understand one definition of race?

    "The darwin family never married into the "negro" race. Not even into any white family outside of just one. I wonder why?" So if I don't marry the next black or white chick I see, I'm... racist? What kind of dumbass logic is that?

  • Who owned all of the slaves? Creationists. And what was the book they used to justify owning slaves? "On the Origin of Species"? No you fuckhead mutant creationists! You justified owning slaves from the Bible.

    And BTW, within years of Darwin's book being published slavery was abolished.

    So for all of recorded human history we had slavery. And within a few years of the theory of evolution being published it was abolished.

    So basically, fuck all of you creationist slave owning bastards.

  • @TerrencePhillip66 Actually creationist were the ones you started the abolitionist movement 1772 all most a 100 years before Darwin. They believe everyone was created by God therefore equal. It was the rationalist that combated their movement. Slavery was ended because of the civil war. Darwin had absolutely no impact on ending slavery, because slavery had been ended a near 200 years in his country before he was born. Actually Charles Darwin's took the guilt out of being racist.

  • This is ironic since evolutionary theory is what has scientifically confirmed that we are all equal in every way and there's no scientific basis for race.

    On the other hand, read the Bible which is highly based upon differenty races, "holy" races, and those of Cain, all of this is sickening racist.

    Bloody hypocrites.

  • @karlkarlkarl1234 Of course modern views of evolution combat racism/ racial superiority. Just as modern views on the bible also combat racism/ racial superiority. Hitler used evolution to justify what he did just as the KKK used the bible to justify what they did. It has nothing to do with evolution or creation, but the pure psychology of people from 1600-1970.

  • @ProphetGuardian I beleive it's not the race, its the culture and land. Living in Europe is considerably easier than living in the Brazilian Jungles. The Europeans, with this easy life and had a better oportunity of building empires and thinking.

    Many Black people today are doctors, philopsophers and successful politicans.

  • If Europeans are so smart, why create such an uneven playing field? Its cause they are not.

  • @modogray

    Dude no-one these days think that.

    Religious nut jobs just want to make it seem that way to further their own ends. Science tells us that we are all equal.

    "Race" is a soial construct, that was further embellished by the Biblical story.

  • What I don't understand is why do people want to talk about "Darwinists" when Darwin was very clearly against racism. We need to stress the fact that Darwin had nothing to do with racism because that will show racists don't have a leg to stand on

  • You think the people making this are racists? No they are simply showing that Darwinian theory does in fact imply inferiority in what Darwin himself called the "savage races" Only complicity could deny such an obvious fact.

  • What this video talks about is eugenics, not evolutionary theory. Eugenics has more in common with intelligent design than with natural selection.

    The fact that same people twist evolutionary theory is neither the fault of Darwin or of the science of evolution; neither does it mean that evolution is untrue.

  • Eugenics is nothing but selective breeding, sterilization, etc. It has nothing to do with intelligent design.

  • Right on!

  • This is barbaric! I want to the next great war to come quick maybe this time Europe and the US suffer massive casualties. In the millions because when war comes it won't be limited to the developing world like in the past, with only brown, black people and Asians suffering.

    Like in the past so bring it on I suggest you all check out Germany, Russia and Holland after WW2. No clean water, mass starvation, disease this is the fate of the planet in my book.

  • Excellent upload.

    Thanks, AfricansArise.

  • Thanks a lot for uploading! It's great to see some serious scientific information on this topic. Unfortunately there's so much pseudo-scientific Nazi propaganda out there, and some people are so stupid that they believe everything they see and hear. Keep up the good work!

  • From what I understand Darwin was actually opposed to the emerging 'Superior Race' believers. It's a bit unfair to equate Darwin with such racist lunatics who were having orgasms over these theories.

  • interesting vid !! thx for posting and i rated !!! ;-))

  • interesting vid,thx for sharing.

  • It is such a stupid misconception that people believe Darwin's theory of evolution was "survival of the fittest".

    He never said that. It was in fact Herbert Spencer who coined that phrase.

    Darwin's theory of evolution suggests "natural selection".

    Strength does not necessarily equate the transfer of genes to the next generation, rather the organism best suited to its environment will do this.

    "Social Darwinism" has nothing to do with the theory of evolution, save that they call it Darwinism

  • Exactly, and also the term 'survival of the fittest' has been misinterpreted by the Fascists. It's expressly the fittest, not the strongest, not the most violent. E.g. rabbits are a very successful species and they're not strong nor violent, but they're able to adapt themselves into various environments.

  • Survival of the fittest is the way of the animal kingdom.

    So should mankind be subject to the rule of the animal kingdom?

    Horemaket (aka the Great Sphynx) answers that question.

    Human head on top of the Lion body, means let your divine nature rule over your animal nature.

    It seems Europeans have yet to learn this lesson.

  • Anyone who is a true supporter of evolution and understand the Human History knows we came out of Africa. So those who use Racist remarks towards blacks thinking whites are more superior have other agendas.

    So those who are lets say Atheist and since most support Evolution, Racist is a not found much within Atheist groups.

    Now those who support evolution but are still religious, can use that to justify their racist agenda.

  • xx djse - yes but u know , the racist cowards , even when u tell them that, they deny it !!! they're so fucking retarded anyway !!! :-)))

  • Good one Inevergiverup1402. I have friends traveling to South America to study the native. First they are screened for illness incase they are sick and pass it on to the natives even a flu can be a disaster because their immun system has never encountered certain illness. We should leave the natives alone there are not bothering us. They have survived with there intelligences and witts for many years with out us messing it up. peace

  • To say that xenophobia and racism are unique to Europeans is, well.........racist.

    Ironic, huh.

  • What I find so disturbing about this is it makes it seems like black people are separated from the rest of humanity. Darwin is supposedly against black people Arabs are supposed to be enemies of black people its such a negative way to look at the world

    I mean more time is focused on imaginary racism than people who really are racist. We need to stop seeing the world as strict barriers between people

  • But these clips don't focus on Darwin as an individual. He's barely mentioned in them. It's s about Darwin-ISM and white supremacy. The focus is on the people who have used Darwin's theories to promote their racist ideologies.

  • @AfricansArise The term "Darwinism" is total BS. Evolution by natural selection has nothing to do with social or political ideologies other than the fact that racists will use just about any obscure excuse to justify their hatred. Religious doctrines about "separate creation" have been employed to the same ends. The notion of "Darwinism" is just an attempt to manufacture pseudoscientific social theories which have nothing to do with Darwin's theory in biology.

  • @markellion: I agree completely. However it's Darwin's theory and all the science that it has inspired this that has absolutely proved this one fact: That we're all Africans at heart. It's bullshit xenophobia and blatent racisim that has tried to co-opt his science for their own twisted ends.

  • markellion - i do totally agree with what u say

  • 5 stars

  • I have a video response but its not showing up

    "The Mis-portrayal of Darwin as a Racist"

  • hadi bi siktirin gidin yaaa ag mason şeytan icadı milleti aptal sanıyonuz ag sie

  • The irony of the situation is that the ONLY savage race on the earth is the EUROPEAN race! No other race of people have commited such acts of savagery upon other human beings!

    So what Darwin meant to say was "At some future period, the SAVAGE races of man will almost certainly exterminate the civilised races" Because only a SAVAGE destroys civilisation in the name of "civilisation"

  • He was talking about tribes coming together and forming civilizations

  • So the British accomplished something that the Nazis were trying to do, only to a different group of people. As usual most people don't know about this and should.

  • Crazy 2 think a mutation is what makes them "smater" than everyone else...

  • or maybe just crazier, a few genes short of a chromosome.

  • gr8 vid

  • I think euros feel very insecure about there selves they feel inferior are something so they have to invent lies.. just like bell curve iq test.. to discrmanate against africans

  • The Bell Curve was highly flawed; it wasn't a lie. The basic hypothesis was that the primary predictor of one's success was based on intelligence. As a high school teacher, I can assure you this theory is, in general, accurate. When you throw in race, though, you've entered a whole new group of variables (education, nutrition, social geography, etc) that muddy the waters. A scientific test needs reasonable controls and should test people with similar backgrounds only against each other.

  • i think it was more then flawed

  • Read it more closely. What the authors of The Bell Curve didn't address well was WHY certain groups didn't score well on IQ tests. Their basic premise, though, held true not just across but also WITHIN demographics. IE: Suburban whites with high IQs are more likely to succeed than those with low IQs. Likewise for inner city blacks. The flaw is in the cross sampling; this was read to suggest blacks are genetically predisposed to have lower IQs, which wasn't the intent of Herrnstein and Murray.

  • then what was there intent?

  • I'm beginning to think you've never read The Bell Curve. The intent was to show that one's intelligence was a (THE) key factor in determining one's lot in life. By exploring this hypothesis and documenting their findings they meant to gather precise data for the forming of effective public policy. Their most useful research had nothing whatever to do with racial divides, but focused on things like drop-out and teen pregnancy rates WITHIN a single demographic (such as non-Hispanic whites).

  • no i just read things about that book an came to a conclusion if it was about race determines intelligence then it wasant a good read

  • You've been mislead. The Bell Curve was, as I said, highly flawed. The authors mistakenly assumed a single IQ test would be equally accurate across demographics. Because of this flaw some specific chapters, taken out of context, are unfortunately open to the reading that they're suggesting certain races to be naturally more intelligent than others. But the authors simply didn't think this way. They believed IQ was a product of environment as well as genetics, and to immeasurable degrees.

  • Nice post my friend.. Knowledge is POWER!!

  • But it is dangerous to think that Darwin had anything to do with racism

  • Religion and science and everything else is used by colonialists against black people

    i.e. curse of ham and social "Darwinism". Darwin himself has nothing to do with racism

  • Exactly. And religion has nothing to do with racism either. Fear and hatred are basic aspects of the human condition. How people choose to justify their fear and hatred is somewhat of a moot point. Such justifications need to be thoughtfully and forcefully challenged, as opposed to the common tactic of declaring we should do away with Darwinism or Religion as inherently racist world views.

  • It must be understood white supremacists want to make everyone and everything to be racist especially against "black Africans" who are considered the lowest of mankind

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more