IFlick is a straight up retard, if you think weed should be punishable by death then you need to get hit by a bus. It was created by god for a reason, it's natural and nobody in the history of earth has ever overdosed on it. Why? BECAUSE IT IS IMPOSSIBLE!!!! Newt Gingrich is a terrible man and should be JFK'd. If he becomes president (which he obviously won't because he sucks) then I will leave this country
This is all racist!! Why the hell get arrested for smoking less pot? Or come to think of it... Why the hell get arrested when not smoking pot at all!!
I have an idea. Why the hell not make pot exclusive to blacks. I may be white, but pot is the last thing I would be into.
@milotickz maybe if you grow up and try it, on a day when you are free and have taken care of all responsibilities... you would see why people smoke weed. ultimate stress relief and a great way to spend a few hours relaxing
@milotickz This is why former Speaker Of The House Newt Gingrich's election is crucial! Possession of the smallest amount of marijuana should be made punishable by death . If you could spare the lives of ten million African Americans from the ravages of marijuana, wouldn't you execute 10,000? A mere ten thousand would set an example. If they new without question we'll kill every single Black man woman and child we catch with marijuana, they'll stop it. Vote Newt Gingrich in 2012!
@hejjagedu well its always easy to call someone a racist cause his point has actual statistics what a liberal thing to do shout racist when you cant win a argument lol haha
Well why are there more cops in black areas? A) Cops like to arrest black people or B) There is more crime in black neighborhoods than white ones?
Of course this isn't the PC thing to say or even think, but its true. Cops aren't in black neighborhoods to arrest pot smokers they're there because of gun, knife and serious drug issues etc which don't happen as frequently in white neighborhoods.
Cops don't give a shit about pot where I live. Having it isn't a criminal offense, and bothering people who posses it or smoke it is a waste of their time, no matter what race they are.
some idiot just messaged me that whites were violent first and that's why blacks are so screwed up now. actually blacks have been butchering each other for centuries without any white involvement at all...get over yourselves and this victim mentality you lazy people.
@RGDCanada some idiot used the terms "blacks" and "whites" and attempted to be taken seriously.
Mitochondrial DNA contained in us all traces back to one woman 75-100 thousand years ago in central africa, from where we all came. A blink of an eye in universal time scales, in the history of of life. All that's different now is genes and memes, melanin and the cultures with which we identify.
"blscks have been butchering", nigger please, we're literally all blacks, and that statement is disgustin
the ‘intelligent’ stupid liberals got it wrong...AGAIN. In most crimes, violent or otherwise it is difficult for police to have enough evidence to keep someone in jail while they investigate the crime. Pot possession is a great tool they can use to detain someone. It just so happens blacks commit far more violent crime thus demanding police to use any method possible to detain them.
@RGDCanada right but kkk just sale roses all the black people hung but we are the violent ones whites started dont get mad cause we still pissed and crasy look wtf we been through as a people
@MrDustock where is that info from? closer to Arabs but look full white! Jerry Seinfeld and bin laden closer not seeing it. Spanish and Arabs look closer.
As someone who went to public schools in Califronia this doesnt surprise me. Whites and every other ethnic group sell and use drugs all the time both in school and out. My bathroom smelled of marjuana booze and urine. My school was mainly latino and white and many of the students openly told teachers and other students that they sell and use drugs especially marjuana. Blacks always had their lockers search and were under constant survellance by the school cops only 2% of the pop.
i dont think they smoke at a lesser rate, I think blacks are more weary of "the man" and when doing this survey they probly got nervous, thought it was some secret raid n said "i dont smoke no weed".....where is my bong?
What is my model again? What are we even arguing? I don't remember.
I don't understand why egalitarian propaganda increases the youths' experience with blacks. It just increases their experience with egalitarian propaganda. The only way to experience blacks is to live in proximity with them.
I remember when I lived in the Chicagoland area, and especially when I was growing up. I would get stopped or pulled over and frisked on almost a daily basis. Coming home from the arcade room after school, going to the store, hanging out with friends, riding my bike, you name it I chances are I would get stopped. And every single time I would get searched.
I didn't do drugs and didn't carry weapons. So it was little more then a waste of time. But come-on!
I'm not going to have this argument again: you think that higher intelligence has effect on SES; now you think that promiscuity has no effect on illegitimacy.
@twk373 - Evidence that people today have more premarital sex and that premarital sex has a causal relationship with increase rates of fathers leaving. A causal relationship where you prove that it's premarital sex causing it, not other factors.
Yes, that's what I'm asking. What evidence would you accept that more premarital sex is the cause of higher illegitimacy rates? We've already established that 'cause' means something different to you than it does to me.
People are ignoring what this story is really saying. The war on drugs is directly started to harm black people and this clearly shows it. If it were 2 or 3 times more than blacks I can understand. But 13 times is just to much to just miss. The war on drugs was started to harm black people and conservatives refuse to end it for that specific reason. I lived and went to school with whites and latinos and they sell and consume drugs all the time.
I'm a conservative, and I want to end the 'war on drugs.'
I do think it is cute, though, how 'progressives' only notice when misguided *conservative* policies harm blacks. But they stop paying attention when it comes to the war on poverty, the minimum wage, teachers' unions, mexican immigration, or the war on family/sexuality/traditional morality.
@twk373 So you ARE conservative when it comes to sexuality. Let me ask you a question: how is it that you believe intelligence and criminal behavior is related on genes, but when it comes to homosexuality, conservatives say, "no there's no gay gene"?
If there is no segregation, that means 100% random mixing. If there was 100% random mixing, there would be no groups or group differences. Differences exist, thus there was some degree of segregation. As you agree.
@twk373 - I didn't say there was 100% random mixing either. Genetic quirks to be closest to gene types from populations nearby. Even though most of their quirks are closest to the quirks of gene types from nearby the overall genome of any given human is overall more similar to the gene types of people from other continents than their own. Their is much more genetic variety within continental populations rather than between them.
I went to a Mercedes dealership a few years ago and there were 2 white teens smoking a fat one on the steps, a white suburb of course. White customers walked by as well as the staff acted as though they didnt see anything. No cops were called.
As a filthy rich honkey who abuses the law and does bad shit. I told my friends if I had a choice to stay as myself or be a rich black celebrity, I'd rather be me. I would never want to be black because of the racism and injustice.
@twk373 Why is it racist to suggest that there is discrimination in the US judicial system? Discrimination is a basic human trait. The judicial system is a system constructed by humans to measure right and wrong, and who is right and who is wrong. Discrimination still exists everywhere else (unless you're ready to say discrimination has been destroyed altogether, if so, we're done talking). Now you are going to suggest that the judicial system is perfect enough to not be tainted by human nature?
Obviously it's not racist out of necessity, it's just that all of the people who claim the US judicial system discriminates unfairly against blacks do so for racist reasons.
The fact is that all the so-called examples of discrimination are intentional consequences of racial profiling, and racial profiling is our best answer to higher black crime rates.
If blacks didn't commit so much crime, there would be no problem.
@twk373 So, you admit that the judicial system uses racial profiling to get the job done. But for some reason do not consider racial profiling to be racist. Even though almost verbatum it fits the definition like a glove. But since that will be a "no it's not/yes it is" conversation I'll leave it. Next: Since you believe you have the "facts" (what's your source, Murray/Herrnstein's Bell Curve?), why do you believe it's this way? Why do blacks commit so much crime and have low test scores?
I *admit*? That's what I've been saying from the start. And of course it's not racist! Racism is evil. Profiling is not. Therefore profiling cannot be racist, because it's not evil.
What are these "facts" that I have? I'll stick with facts, no quotes, thanks.
@twk373 That's it? You didn't tell me why profiling is not racism other than one is evil and the other is not. What makes it evil? Such reasoning will not stand up in court.
And "I'll stick with the facts, no quotes." I'm not sure what that means. That you don't use any sources, you just know the facts. Or you were offended that I put the word "facts" in quotation marks to mock you, so you don't want to answer the question. If so, wow, you're sensitive.
Why do I have to tell you why profiling isn't racist? Prove that it is. You're the one making the accusations, silly. In court, you're innocent until proven guilty.
Anyway, profiling isn't racist because we profile men over women and the young over the old. Why? Because of differences in crime rate. We profile blacks for exactly the same reason.
Find me a source which says that intelligence is 0% heritable.
@twk373 You like wikipedia so: Racism: belief that the genetic factors which constitute race are a primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race. Racial profiling: use of an individual’s race as a key factor in deciding whether to engage in enforcement. You are making judgements based on color of skin. Now once you can get past the FACT that it's racism, you may be able to argue that such racism is righteous.
How exactly did you show that profiling is racism? Is it racist to profile men over women?
These 'definitions' of racism are really all very silly, because they ultimately suggest that facts are racist. It's not the fault of the police that blacks have higher crime rates. What are they supposed to do about it? Ignore them?
@twk373 "Is it racist to profile men over women?" That would be gender profiling and also debatable on right or wrong. So not a good defense. "These 'definitions' of racism are really all very silly," From wikipedia, which you seem to approve of. "What are they supposed to do about it? Ignore them?" As you pointed out: innocent until proven guilty. Racial profiling sort of flirts with that. "Innocent until proven guilty, but if you're black you're a person of interest."
Debate it if you like; the question remains academic. I have never heard anyone complain about criminal gender profiling.
I reserve the right to disagree with Wikipedia, naturally. If we discovered a racially-oriented genetic basis for faster running, only a fool would try to frame the discussion in terms other than 'superiority.' Until there is no stigma attached to 'racism,' I cannot accept any definition of racism that stigmatizes facts.
@twk373 Please, you've never heard anyone criticize the treatment of women as opposed to the treatment of men by the judicial system. Yes, you reserve the right to cherry pick, naturally. But I am glad you've raised the point about the problem of definitions. The subject of what is racism is an ongoing debate. So too is the debate of race itself. I think true racism happens when one comes to a conclusion on this ongoing debate. Too many factors are involved to pin the problems on ethnicity.
While the debate about what racism 'is' is a waste of time, it's self-evident that drawing a conclusion about what racism is doesn't automatically make you a racist. You are just being silly if you think that.
So you want to ignore it, despite the fact that focusing resources where the crime rates are the highest will maximize the number of criminals who are caught. But what if black criminal rates were a thousand times greater than that of whites? Would you still advocate ignoring it? What about a million times? Is there any threshold where your principles break down?
@twk373 When did I say I choose to ignore it? Obviously if there's an area where crime is high, up resources. But if you look at a black person and say, "There's a good chance he's got weed" yeah, that's racial profiling and it's racist. This reasoning: "There's a lot of black people with weed. Okay let's round 'em up." That's racist. And it goes back to this video. I'm not sure if you've responded to it or not but... (continued)
... the whole point of the video is that these resources you hold so valuable are being misplaced. You say it's okay that cops pay more attention to blacks when investigating weed possession. Fine. But then the video says that more whites actually smoke weed, but more blacks are getting in trouble for it. Do YOU choose to ignore this? Or are you cherry picking the facts or at least questioning the TYT sources?
Yes, fine, and the video is one example. I don't disagree that resources are being misplaced. The problem is when progressives use this as a jumping off point to attack the PRINCIPLE of profiling. I'm not defending this particular error, I'm defending the idea of racial profiling in general.
Blacks commit more crime because of social problems: primarily the disintegration of the black family (clearly evidenced by illegitimacy rates of ~70%) and also the 'black subculture' which creates a cycle of crime. Higher poverty rates play a role, too.
Why are black test scores lower? Part of the reason is that black subculture of failure. Part of the reason is lower intelligence. Part of the reason is poverty, and other SES factors.
@twk373 Okay, now keep going, why is it like that? Why is there a disintigration of the black family? Why are there higher poverty rates? Why is the black subculture the way it is? Why is there lower intelligence?
The disintegration of the black family is, in my view, wholly a product of the progressive 'sexual revolution.' The white family has disintegrated in the same way, you know, just not to the same magnitude.
I don't know why you are so obsessed with my motives. My motives are pretty benign: 1) I don't like social problems, and I observe that such problems are disproportionately associated with black people. 2) I don't like being held responsible for black problems.
@twk373 - "I don't like being held responsible for black problems"
Who's holding you responsible? Unless you're a cop no one is saying it's the white public's fault for racial discrimination and racism among law enforcement.
I was responding to a broad question with a broad answer. Mainstream politically correct sensibility blames 'white racism' for all black problems, and then goes on to assert that all white people are either openly racist (paleoconservatives), secretly racist (non-liberals) or--despite their best intentions--suffer from uncurious racial bias (liberals). The "Tea Party" movement illustrates this pretty clearly.
@twk373 - It's not a strawman at all. The scientific definition of "race" is a subspecies or clade. The only other definition would be sociological ones or folk taxonomies, which are not scientific.
"Mainstream politically correct sensibility blames 'white racism' for all black problems"
When have all black problems been blamed on white racism?
@twk373 - Asking someone to prove a negative is silly. That's like asking me "Prove tooth fairies don't exist". The one who makes a positive assertion must prove.
Asking someone to prove the negative of a universal is not silly. Surely you can find one example of a black problem that hasn't been blamed on white racism.
@twk373 - Saying "you're wrong" is not a rebuttal. You're making an argument from ignorance which is stupid.
Your question is like asking "Prove to me Cenk Uygur is not a child molester". The person accusing someone of being a child molester shoulders the burden of proof.
No, my question is like saying, "All women are blondes." Your response is to say, "Prove it." But in fact it should be very easy for you to prove that all women are not blondes.
@twk373 - That's a positive claim. You didn't make a positive claim in your question. Two very different hings.
A better comparison would be like you asking "What men aren't bisexual?" If you're implying all men are bisexual you would need to prove that. It's not on me to disprove an unproven assertion.
I don't know why YT flagged as spam. Inexplicable.
The original claim, "All black problems are blamed on white racism" is positive. It's also a universal claim, so even one counter example would disprove it. That I would even think to make such a claim of course illustrates just how silly people behave when it comes to racial issues.
@twk373 - I was responding to your question "What problems aren't blamed on white racism?" That's asking someone to prove a negative which is a logical fallacy. If I asked "What black problems aren't the fault of white racism?" that would be a logical fallacy for me to ask you that.
The left fought a war against traditional moral views on sexuality/family/divorce/etc. They won. I believe the illegitimacy rates for both blacks and whites have increased by roughly the same multiple, although I'd have to double check.
@twk373 - What is your evidence people actually followed through on the morality on sexuality before the present? What evidence do you have people had less premarital and extramarital sex in past generations? What does it have to do with the divorce rate? Prove premarital sex causes more fatherlessness.
@twk373 You seem not to be bright enough to ever answer a direct question and STUPID enough to assume that people can' read what you wrote before. You may want to wipe your mouth and your shoulder.. there is RUNNY BULLSHIT dripping profusely from one down to the other.
The question was asked, and YOU FAILED to answer it, "WHEN have ALL black problems been blamed on" Racism ( White Supremacy)???????
When refers to a period in TIME, since you seem to lack comprehension.
Lol, did you really go back pages and pages to find that comment? I'm flattered that you care that much, dude. <3 ya 2.
I did answer it, you just can't handle the answer. Not my problem.
Have I sufficiently explained crime statistics too you? Or do you need another refresher? I suspect you do get it, because you totally dodged the topic. Lol.
@twk373 Paranoid? Just having a conversation with you about racism. My flawed human nature wants to jump right in and call you a racist. But I'd like to think of myself as being at least a tiny bit rational and won't jump to conclusions so early. I see your motives you've listed there. Can I translate? 1) black people are responsible for problems affecting you 2) not the other way around. At the least, you have a lack of accountability, at the most you are a white supremacist. Am I wrong here?
I'm surprised you'd think I care whether you call me a racist. Believe it or not, I've never been able to figure out why I should care what progressives think of me.
I have never really understood what 'white supremacism' is even supposed to mean, other than a dirtier version of the label 'racist.'
And no, black people don't really affect me directly. I live in a majority-white suburb, of course. The reason I care about black problems is because I'm a human being. Shocking, I know.
What does it mean, to say that whites are 'superior' to other races? All 'white supremacists' will tell you that east asians are more intelligent than whites. On the other hand, it's also a fact that whites have built the greatest civilization(s) in the world, and have made by far the most contributions to humanity (pick any field). So what is a rational person supposed to make of that?
@twk373 And also, I still find it quite odd that you consider me progressive simply on the basis that I consider racial profiling to be racist, when even most right wing Republicans admit that much.
What is the benefit to me (or anyone, for that matter) of having friends of a different race? I don't see how that answers the question. People would still have friends in a mono-racial society. I haven't been able to detect any lack of assimilation, but what do I know.
@twk373 Just makes no sense. Having friends from different cultures means allowing a different way of viewing the world than yours. You obviously value this otherwise you wouldn't have any friends whatsoever. "Multiracial society is unnecessary because of unnecessary tension" seems an unnecessary statement altogether. Color of skin aside, even in a mono-racial society, as you've called it, you're going to have differences, even different cultures forming. This is an unstoppable outcome.
But I can learn about other cultures and other people without them being my personal friends. Some people will place a value on that, but I think that most wouldn't. People tend to restrict their circle of friends to people who are relatively similar to them. My experience is that interaction with people who are significantly different from me tends to lead to friction unless things are kept at a pretty superficial level, so there's some question as to whether I'm really learning.
Of course there are tensions in any society, but if you look for where the conflicts are greatest, you will typically see racial/cultural divisions. The problem is that people tend to want to preserve their own way of life, and they do not get excited when some other group is competing with them. I think that many (but not all) cultural differences are perfectly benign and should be preserved. And the best way to do that is to have demarcation.
It's difficult to quantify what I mean by 'black culture,' as it is a fuzzy subject. I think that there are elements of black culture that are more accepting of promiscuity, crime, illegitimacy as 'normal', while at the same time rejecting things like education/study/learning as somehow not the ideal. I also think there is a strong undercurrent of anti-white sentiment that has been kept alive over the last 50 years, when it ought to have been suppressed.
I'm not saying there's nothing positive in black culture; that's not the issue. The issue is to discuss the significant problems and how we can go about helping the black community to fix them.
I don't think the fact that there are limits to my ambition and the effort I am willing to expend--in pursuit of a casual interest--makes me insincere, or somehow casts a pall on my (moderately informed) views. A field study is far beyond my level of concern. Look, I don't have a problem with other people or cultures, as long as they're not trying to interfere with or demonize mine. I don't think there's anything morally objectionable about my views.
@twk373 For the record I have not questioned your sincerity. If anything I'm in admiration on bold stance on your beliefs. But here's the beauty of opinion. You believe you're right, I believe you're wrong. But I think I see your views more on a personal level rather than some sort of outreach. You have not tried to convince others to my observation, to "stick to their own kind" as it were. At most, all I can offer you is the suggestion I've already given you.
You believe that I'm wrong? I'm not buying it. Maybe you think I'm wrong on some things, but I don't think you disagree with everything I've said. I think there is a lot of agreement.
At the really practical level, all I want is to have open dialogue on racial problems, and to revisit whether universal adherence to leftist race policies is really going to do what everything thinks it will. Also, an immigration moratorium.
@twk373 Ah, yes, there it is now. I read that about white nationalists they they believe a lot of white people are really white nationalists, but just don't know it yet, and then try to convince them, "Hey, I'm pretty sure you agree with me on more then what you really think." Oh, I'm sure if sit down and knock out a few six packs we'll find that we agree on other issues. I was simply talking about the issue at hand here: racial profiling. I believe it's racist, you don't.
@twk373 Before we get any further though, I think I better let you know right now. I'll never be a white nationalist. I believe white nationalists have a favorite word for what I am: mongrel. I'm Puerto Rican, Nicaraguan, and Scottish, engaged to a Native American, Black, Scottish woman. So, sorry, but I plan to contribute to miscegeny and have mongrel babies with my mongrel wife.
So no, it would not 'work,' because two wrongs do not make a right. Also, you will always find people to disagree with you, so you'd have to kill everyone but yourself.
@twk373 Let me get back to racial profiling. You believe it's not racism, for basically no other reason that I've seen except that you believe it works. In that case, if blacks have such a high crime probability, why don't we solve the problem quicker and eradicate them. I know you would never suggest such a method (and I'm not being sarcastic there, you don't seem to me to be an inhumane person). But it would work wouldn't it?
If I was going to kill off people who ruin the world, I would start with white lefties/liberals/progressives (so pretty much the entire population of Europe) before I even thought about any black people. Lol. Seriously, the issue with black crime rates is very low in the grand scheme of problems with the Western world. Of course, I don't believing in killing people, as you've figured out, so I guess that means I'll just have to rely on boring, ethical methods like 'talking.'
1) Look, who are the people hurt most by black criminals? By far, it's innocent blacks. If you police black criminals less, you are hurting exactly the people who you are trying to help. And you're not dealing with the problem of racist whites, either! You're just going to make them more embittered and racist. The solution to that problem is to get these issues out in the open and discuss them honestly, not to brow-beat whites.
@twk373 Jesus, I'm not even sure we're talking about racial profiling anymore. I simply don't believe that it should be okay for someone to be more likely approached by the authorities based on race or ethnicity. To me that's racism.
Look, if you police an ethnic group more because you just don't like the cut of their jib, then that's racist, because you have no rational justification--it's just your prejudice. However, if you police an ethnic group more BECAUSE they commit crime at a much higher rate than other groups, it's NOT racist. You have an obvious rational, logical justification! The whole reason racism is BAD is because it is based on non-facts. Profiling IS based on facts.
2) Backfire? I think that's nonsense. Whatever the crime rates are, it's a fact that most blacks are NOT criminals, and most blacks do not LIKE criminals, let alone black criminals. You really think normal blacks are going to stand up to defend the thugs who destroy their communities? If these issues were discussed OPENLY, then people (especially blacks) would be more aware and understand the policing measures. You are not giving blacks any credit whatsoever.
@twk373 The thing is I don't believe in racial profiling because 1.) it's an enabler. Not necessarily making racial profiling wrong, but racism is still alive and kicking in our nation. You argue that the judiciary system is not racist, but problem is PEOPLE are there to enforce it and many people are still racist. 2.) it backfires. Okay, let's actively promote racial profiling. Minorities already know about racial profiling though cops try not to openly admit it... (continued)
3) Anyway, answer me this: how would you feel if your community was plagued by extraordinarily high crime rates, people getting sucked into gang violence, dealing drugs, robbing stores, jacking cars, and so on, but the police spent exactly the same amount of time in your community as they did in a neighboring community that had negligible crime? Criminals would be roaming free in your neighborhood. And why? Because your community is black and the other one is white.
@twk373 (2. continued)... But now imagine if we openly advocate it, like say pass a bill that openly gives cops the right to racially profile. Target ethnic groups will simply view this as a declaration of war on their group (they already do). Do you really think the violence will go down? Well, maybe that's their fault right? They should just smile, and say, "I know you're doing your job, and I'm happy to contribute. What's that? A full cavity search? Well alright officer. Keep fighting crime."
Wrong, I don't think it's racism because 1) racism means believing that a particular group is somehow 'inherently inferior,' and racial profiling has absolutely nothing to do with any nonsense like that, 2) if in fact blacks commit more crime, it cannot be 'racist' to police them more, because the POINT of a police system is to POLICE CRIME. You are arguing that the system should ignore crime and arbitrarily police all groups equally, which is in fact the truly 'racist' position.
@twk373 This statement: If this person is this ethnicity, then there's a higher chance that they behave a certain way than a person of this other ethnicity. I simply think such a statement is full of holes.
I don't understand how you can think it's full of holes, given that this is exactly what racial differences in crime rates mean…
But again you are getting too focused on ethnicity. It's not JUST ethnicity. When people say 'racial profiling,' it doesn't mean you ONLY profile on race. It means you INCLUDE race in the existing profile. If a cop sees a well-dressed black guy with his wife and two kids walking down the street, that does NOT fit the profile. See?
@twk373 But I don't think any progressive has a problem with what you said either. It's when racial profiling is used by itself. If there's a description that includes black male, gotique, has a limp, scar on upper lip, there's nothing wrong with that. And show me a "leftie" that thinks that's wrong. On the other hand, if no investigation even calls for such a description and you go after him because he's a "suspicious looking individual" why did you go after him? What's suspicious looking?
See, I told you that we agree. And let's go with example A, shall we? Also, what if the perp you're looking for is a black guy with saggy pants and chains?
Anyway, the question is whether it's A or B that's being advocated when people talk about "racial profiling." I think it's A. Maybe B sometimes gets put into practice, but who would support that?
@twk373 But there aren't any progressives (none that I know anyway) that have a problem with that. Hell, mainstream cop shows like CSI and Law and Order do it that way. And yeah, the question is whether B is being used. And I think it's being used a lot more than you think. Unless you've got a stat for that. No one has a problem with racial profiling as long as it's not the only thing being used.
I don't have an relevant information about how law enforcement agencies interpret or apply racial profiling, but I don't doubt it is abused. Given that many other abuses occur in our police system, it seems likely that they occur in this area, too. However, I have seen anecdotal evidence in the form of collected/reposted news articles (as on AmRen) which demonstrate that certain media/police organizations systematically avoid reporting a perp's race.
I didn't say you're "really a white nationalist," I said that I don't think you actually disagree with me as much as you claim to. What that really means is you have no legitimate reasons for disagreeing with me, and so I think that exposure to rational arguments is not unlikely to bring you around to 'my' side. Because the point of the matter is that 'racial profiling' cannot be meaningfully put in the same category as, say, businesses denying service to blacks.
@twk373 3.) Really at its core, it's simply racist to me. I just don't think you quite understand it from a minority's perspective. Imagine that because of your ethnicity, you will forever be a "person of interest". How would that make you feel? How do you think minorities are supposed to feel about that? I mean what do you say to that?
Actually, I think that intelligence is a good analogy to homosexuality. Intelligence has a significant genetic component and a significant environmental component. So does homosexuality. So, just like it's false to say that being black consigns you to academic failure (intelligence is significantly learned), it's false to say that the 'gay gene' (oversimplification) consigns you to screwing men, because 'being gay' is also significantly learned.
@twk373 Okay, so a pooint we agree on. I'm not so "progressive" as you think. I think both sides of the sexual orientation issue is oversimplified. "it's a gene" vs. "it's a choice" both seem more like oversimplified extremes to inflame the other side of the debate. Anyways nevermind this, I saw this comment of yours and thought I'd comment.
The general criminal profile, which includes (among other things) location. There is a difference between profiling blacks who live in a predominately black high-income, low-crime community and profiling blacks who live in a predominately black, low-income, high-crime community.
@twk373 Okay, give me an example of acceptable racial profiling. Is it, A.) "That guy fits the profile of the perp we're looking for, because he looks this way, including ethnicity, but includes other features." Or is it, B.) "That guy is black, he's wearing Fubu, sagging pants, and chains. Doesn't really fit any description of any suspect in particular. He just looks hoodlumish, so let's bring him in." C.) All of the above.
I'm not sure what you're getting at regarding interracial dating. The point is that blacks commit rape at a much higher rate than whites. It's got nothing to do with whether those rapes are interracial.
@twk373 WTF? The comment I was responding to was yours in which you were clearly talking about interracial rape by comparing white-on-black rapes to black-on-white rapes. Do you even remember what you type?
If I made a comment about interracial rape here, it was awhile ago. But I certainly wasn't suggesting that that blacks have a any sort of predisposition to commit interracial rape.
@twk373 No, I believe the sentence clearly stated that in cases of interracial rape black-on-white rape is higher than white-on-black rape. Pretty sure that's almost verbatum.
@twk373 My argument was that it may realistically be related to interracial dating. For better or worse, it's sort of an unwritten cultural rule. Sadly it's mostly black culture. Whites are becoming more liberal with this issue. But I've talked with black men who actually boldly say, "I think it's okay for black men to date white women, but not okay the other way around." And that feeling has been talked about in media too. White men and black women dating is rising a bit, but it's still rare.
I am sure there is a causal connection between interracial dating rates and interracial rape rates. But I think the point of the oft-quoted rape statistic is to dispel certain notions about who are the primary victims of interracial crimes. (Particularly in reference to hate crimes.) But to be fair I have never really understood why it's somehow better for a woman to be raped by someone of her own race. (Sarcasm there.)
2) I mean dramatically restricting the flow of *legal* immigrants to the US. Forget about illegals. I am pretty sure Obama is not in favor of that. And my experience with 'lefties' is that they favor unrestricted immigration.
@twk373 2.) I'm for that as well, though maybe not for the same reason.
Also, you said earlier that you represent pretty much what most white nationalists believe. But you have no problem with miscegenation. Has something changed in the white nationalist community recently? Separatism, I thought, was the biggest indicator of white nationalism. Most youtube videos posted by white nationalists still express this feeling.
I think you're confusing two different issues. White nationalists have no interest in stopping anyone from marrying who they want to marry. That's what I mean in saying I have no problem with miscegenation. This is independent of the view that miscegenation is, for a variety of reasons, regularly not a good idea--a view that I share.
But just because something generally isn't a good idea doesn't mean there should be a law against it or any nonsense like that. We want to live in a free society, where people are able to live life as they want and pursue whatever they think will make them happy. White nationalists tend to be paleo-conservatives, too.
IFlick is a straight up retard, if you think weed should be punishable by death then you need to get hit by a bus. It was created by god for a reason, it's natural and nobody in the history of earth has ever overdosed on it. Why? BECAUSE IT IS IMPOSSIBLE!!!! Newt Gingrich is a terrible man and should be JFK'd. If he becomes president (which he obviously won't because he sucks) then I will leave this country
MrMar1juana 1 month ago
COLOR OF LAW! It's a war to take the Hebrew (black) father out of the home.
JudahUncuffed 2 months ago
Nigga holdup, Things are not as they seem. You get washed, even if your way too clean!!
muthafuckindevilsson 3 months ago
This is all racist!! Why the hell get arrested for smoking less pot? Or come to think of it... Why the hell get arrested when not smoking pot at all!!
I have an idea. Why the hell not make pot exclusive to blacks. I may be white, but pot is the last thing I would be into.
milotickz 7 months ago
@milotickz maybe if you grow up and try it, on a day when you are free and have taken care of all responsibilities... you would see why people smoke weed. ultimate stress relief and a great way to spend a few hours relaxing
Stefan2SERB 2 months ago
@milotickz So.....you'd do heroin, crack, coke, and meth before pot?
That's.....smart of you.
WalelaComics 2 months ago
@milotickz Don't knock it until you try it lol :). I'd rather my kids puff than drink, any day.
CallASpadeASpade2U 2 months ago
@milotickz This is why former Speaker Of The House Newt Gingrich's election is crucial! Possession of the smallest amount of marijuana should be made punishable by death . If you could spare the lives of ten million African Americans from the ravages of marijuana, wouldn't you execute 10,000? A mere ten thousand would set an example. If they new without question we'll kill every single Black man woman and child we catch with marijuana, they'll stop it. Vote Newt Gingrich in 2012!
IFlick 2 months ago
So goto Beverly hills to smoke your weed.
upupsteru 7 months ago
There's good white people and good black people, it's the ignorant ones I can't stand. On both sides of the spectrum.
PsychoticButcher 8 months ago
@PsychoticButcher BUT THERE ARE WAY MORE IGNORANT BLACKS PRISON POPULATIONS PROVE THAT
Southernjuggalo63 8 months ago
@Southernjuggalo63 what a cute little racist you are
hejjagedu 8 months ago
@hejjagedu well its always easy to call someone a racist cause his point has actual statistics what a liberal thing to do shout racist when you cant win a argument lol haha
Southernjuggalo63 8 months ago
"No, you're absolutely right." Wut?
LiquidShizzles 10 months ago
Well why are there more cops in black areas? A) Cops like to arrest black people or B) There is more crime in black neighborhoods than white ones?
Of course this isn't the PC thing to say or even think, but its true. Cops aren't in black neighborhoods to arrest pot smokers they're there because of gun, knife and serious drug issues etc which don't happen as frequently in white neighborhoods.
oodlesofosz 10 months ago
Cops don't give a shit about pot where I live. Having it isn't a criminal offense, and bothering people who posses it or smoke it is a waste of their time, no matter what race they are.
urantivirus 10 months ago
@urantivirus WHERE IS THIS?
GunsNDio 10 months ago
@GunsNDio Canada
urantivirus 10 months ago
some idiot just messaged me that whites were violent first and that's why blacks are so screwed up now. actually blacks have been butchering each other for centuries without any white involvement at all...get over yourselves and this victim mentality you lazy people.
RGDCanada 11 months ago
@RGDCanada some idiot used the terms "blacks" and "whites" and attempted to be taken seriously.
Mitochondrial DNA contained in us all traces back to one woman 75-100 thousand years ago in central africa, from where we all came. A blink of an eye in universal time scales, in the history of of life. All that's different now is genes and memes, melanin and the cultures with which we identify.
"blscks have been butchering", nigger please, we're literally all blacks, and that statement is disgustin
GraeHall 10 months ago 4
@GraeHall OMG ARE YOU SERIOUS?!?
Of course you are. I'm just shocked to see someone on youtube that knows what they are talking about.
People are being controlled by outdated beliefs
If you want to know what GraeHall is talking about with "genes and MEMES" then check out this video about "mind control" watch?v=EHJIA-GE9b4
rattytheraccoon 7 months ago
@RGDCanada lazy 75th ranger regiment Ft benning Ga Sgt James Buchanan purple heart 3 confirmed enemy KIA who the fuck you calling lazy
jambuc828ify 2 months ago
the ‘intelligent’ stupid liberals got it wrong...AGAIN. In most crimes, violent or otherwise it is difficult for police to have enough evidence to keep someone in jail while they investigate the crime. Pot possession is a great tool they can use to detain someone. It just so happens blacks commit far more violent crime thus demanding police to use any method possible to detain them.
RGDCanada 11 months ago
@RGDCanada right but kkk just sale roses all the black people hung but we are the violent ones whites started dont get mad cause we still pissed and crasy look wtf we been through as a people
jambuc828 11 months ago
Also whites beat up on there wifes more than African Americans as well.
germanyinthehouse 1 year ago 14
Comment removed
SmokeyCough 11 months ago
It's about time people started exposing caucasians.
ShemiticOne 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrDustock Do you know were i can see the DNA studies?
xboondocksx 1 year ago
@MrDustock where is that info from? closer to Arabs but look full white! Jerry Seinfeld and bin laden closer not seeing it. Spanish and Arabs look closer.
xboondocksx 1 year ago
Was Jayar joking at 3:02?
PlannedObsolescence 1 year ago
this isnt because blacks smoke less weed its because they are black.
AcquitJaredLee1911 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER
MUAHAHAHA
zhn0k 1 year ago
@RottenRroses oh i gave it to u in that comment, i apologize
Stillpimpn06 1 year ago
"If you go to low income neighbourhoods, that's where cops are patrolling".
And that's why you have a chance of making it back from that neighbourhood to tell the tale.
That's where shit happens more than anywhere else.
No mayor wants to see statistics of 10 year old kids gunned down rise through the roof.
Keep the cops patrolling. More use from the bastards that way than having them setting up speed traps all over the place!
kirkey99 1 year ago
Arresting people for smoking marijuana is wrong, period.
AmericaDevil 1 year ago
As someone who went to public schools in Califronia this doesnt surprise me. Whites and every other ethnic group sell and use drugs all the time both in school and out. My bathroom smelled of marjuana booze and urine. My school was mainly latino and white and many of the students openly told teachers and other students that they sell and use drugs especially marjuana. Blacks always had their lockers search and were under constant survellance by the school cops only 2% of the pop.
TheCaliCapitalist 1 year ago
JR NEVER SMOKED WEED?!?!?!?!?!!!?!?
maroutyII 1 year ago
i dont think they smoke at a lesser rate, I think blacks are more weary of "the man" and when doing this survey they probly got nervous, thought it was some secret raid n said "i dont smoke no weed".....where is my bong?
EnemyAgent25 1 year ago
What is my model again? What are we even arguing? I don't remember.
I don't understand why egalitarian propaganda increases the youths' experience with blacks. It just increases their experience with egalitarian propaganda. The only way to experience blacks is to live in proximity with them.
twk373 1 year ago
Ana is such a lickup...
Szekler11 1 year ago
LOL there goes that black guy with pot again!
RebornLegacy 1 year ago
I remember when I lived in the Chicagoland area, and especially when I was growing up. I would get stopped or pulled over and frisked on almost a daily basis. Coming home from the arcade room after school, going to the store, hanging out with friends, riding my bike, you name it I chances are I would get stopped. And every single time I would get searched.
I didn't do drugs and didn't carry weapons. So it was little more then a waste of time. But come-on!
andreo 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Being black sucks. Thank goodness I'm not black
woodyfly 1 year ago
What evidence would you accept? Seriously.
I'm not going to have this argument again: you think that higher intelligence has effect on SES; now you think that promiscuity has no effect on illegitimacy.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 - Evidence that people today have more premarital sex and that premarital sex has a causal relationship with increase rates of fathers leaving. A causal relationship where you prove that it's premarital sex causing it, not other factors.
A86 1 year ago
@A86
Yes, that's what I'm asking. What evidence would you accept that more premarital sex is the cause of higher illegitimacy rates? We've already established that 'cause' means something different to you than it does to me.
twk373 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@twk373 - That was my answer. That wasn't a question.
"'cause' means something different to you"
I'm using the scientific definition of the word. Whatever definition you're using it's incorrect.
A86 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@A86
Don't waste my time.
twk373 1 year ago
People are ignoring what this story is really saying. The war on drugs is directly started to harm black people and this clearly shows it. If it were 2 or 3 times more than blacks I can understand. But 13 times is just to much to just miss. The war on drugs was started to harm black people and conservatives refuse to end it for that specific reason. I lived and went to school with whites and latinos and they sell and consume drugs all the time.
TheCaliCapitalist 1 year ago 3
@TheCaliCapitalist
I'm a conservative, and I want to end the 'war on drugs.'
I do think it is cute, though, how 'progressives' only notice when misguided *conservative* policies harm blacks. But they stop paying attention when it comes to the war on poverty, the minimum wage, teachers' unions, mexican immigration, or the war on family/sexuality/traditional morality.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 So you ARE conservative when it comes to sexuality. Let me ask you a question: how is it that you believe intelligence and criminal behavior is related on genes, but when it comes to homosexuality, conservatives say, "no there's no gay gene"?
arthereld 1 year ago
fuck cops
BrightEyedBieber 1 year ago
If there is no segregation, that means 100% random mixing. If there was 100% random mixing, there would be no groups or group differences. Differences exist, thus there was some degree of segregation. As you agree.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 - I didn't say there was 100% random mixing either. Genetic quirks to be closest to gene types from populations nearby. Even though most of their quirks are closest to the quirks of gene types from nearby the overall genome of any given human is overall more similar to the gene types of people from other continents than their own. Their is much more genetic variety within continental populations rather than between them.
A86 1 year ago
@A86
Fine, we'll go with your definitions. I don't see a material disagreement here.
twk373 1 year ago
I went to a Mercedes dealership a few years ago and there were 2 white teens smoking a fat one on the steps, a white suburb of course. White customers walked by as well as the staff acted as though they didnt see anything. No cops were called.
redbonegal 1 year ago 3
As a filthy rich honkey who abuses the law and does bad shit. I told my friends if I had a choice to stay as myself or be a rich black celebrity, I'd rather be me. I would never want to be black because of the racism and injustice.
Fucking sucks...
Pull0utBoy 1 year ago
@twk373 Why is it racist to suggest that there is discrimination in the US judicial system? Discrimination is a basic human trait. The judicial system is a system constructed by humans to measure right and wrong, and who is right and who is wrong. Discrimination still exists everywhere else (unless you're ready to say discrimination has been destroyed altogether, if so, we're done talking). Now you are going to suggest that the judicial system is perfect enough to not be tainted by human nature?
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
Obviously it's not racist out of necessity, it's just that all of the people who claim the US judicial system discriminates unfairly against blacks do so for racist reasons.
The fact is that all the so-called examples of discrimination are intentional consequences of racial profiling, and racial profiling is our best answer to higher black crime rates.
If blacks didn't commit so much crime, there would be no problem.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 So, you admit that the judicial system uses racial profiling to get the job done. But for some reason do not consider racial profiling to be racist. Even though almost verbatum it fits the definition like a glove. But since that will be a "no it's not/yes it is" conversation I'll leave it. Next: Since you believe you have the "facts" (what's your source, Murray/Herrnstein's Bell Curve?), why do you believe it's this way? Why do blacks commit so much crime and have low test scores?
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
I *admit*? That's what I've been saying from the start. And of course it's not racist! Racism is evil. Profiling is not. Therefore profiling cannot be racist, because it's not evil.
What are these "facts" that I have? I'll stick with facts, no quotes, thanks.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 That's it? You didn't tell me why profiling is not racism other than one is evil and the other is not. What makes it evil? Such reasoning will not stand up in court.
And "I'll stick with the facts, no quotes." I'm not sure what that means. That you don't use any sources, you just know the facts. Or you were offended that I put the word "facts" in quotation marks to mock you, so you don't want to answer the question. If so, wow, you're sensitive.
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
Why do I have to tell you why profiling isn't racist? Prove that it is. You're the one making the accusations, silly. In court, you're innocent until proven guilty.
Anyway, profiling isn't racist because we profile men over women and the young over the old. Why? Because of differences in crime rate. We profile blacks for exactly the same reason.
Find me a source which says that intelligence is 0% heritable.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 You like wikipedia so: Racism: belief that the genetic factors which constitute race are a primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race. Racial profiling: use of an individual’s race as a key factor in deciding whether to engage in enforcement. You are making judgements based on color of skin. Now once you can get past the FACT that it's racism, you may be able to argue that such racism is righteous.
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
How exactly did you show that profiling is racism? Is it racist to profile men over women?
These 'definitions' of racism are really all very silly, because they ultimately suggest that facts are racist. It's not the fault of the police that blacks have higher crime rates. What are they supposed to do about it? Ignore them?
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 "Is it racist to profile men over women?" That would be gender profiling and also debatable on right or wrong. So not a good defense. "These 'definitions' of racism are really all very silly," From wikipedia, which you seem to approve of. "What are they supposed to do about it? Ignore them?" As you pointed out: innocent until proven guilty. Racial profiling sort of flirts with that. "Innocent until proven guilty, but if you're black you're a person of interest."
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
Debate it if you like; the question remains academic. I have never heard anyone complain about criminal gender profiling.
I reserve the right to disagree with Wikipedia, naturally. If we discovered a racially-oriented genetic basis for faster running, only a fool would try to frame the discussion in terms other than 'superiority.' Until there is no stigma attached to 'racism,' I cannot accept any definition of racism that stigmatizes facts.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 Please, you've never heard anyone criticize the treatment of women as opposed to the treatment of men by the judicial system. Yes, you reserve the right to cherry pick, naturally. But I am glad you've raised the point about the problem of definitions. The subject of what is racism is an ongoing debate. So too is the debate of race itself. I think true racism happens when one comes to a conclusion on this ongoing debate. Too many factors are involved to pin the problems on ethnicity.
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
While the debate about what racism 'is' is a waste of time, it's self-evident that drawing a conclusion about what racism is doesn't automatically make you a racist. You are just being silly if you think that.
twk373 1 year ago
@arthereld
So you want to ignore it, despite the fact that focusing resources where the crime rates are the highest will maximize the number of criminals who are caught. But what if black criminal rates were a thousand times greater than that of whites? Would you still advocate ignoring it? What about a million times? Is there any threshold where your principles break down?
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 When did I say I choose to ignore it? Obviously if there's an area where crime is high, up resources. But if you look at a black person and say, "There's a good chance he's got weed" yeah, that's racial profiling and it's racist. This reasoning: "There's a lot of black people with weed. Okay let's round 'em up." That's racist. And it goes back to this video. I'm not sure if you've responded to it or not but... (continued)
arthereld 1 year ago
... the whole point of the video is that these resources you hold so valuable are being misplaced. You say it's okay that cops pay more attention to blacks when investigating weed possession. Fine. But then the video says that more whites actually smoke weed, but more blacks are getting in trouble for it. Do YOU choose to ignore this? Or are you cherry picking the facts or at least questioning the TYT sources?
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
Yes, fine, and the video is one example. I don't disagree that resources are being misplaced. The problem is when progressives use this as a jumping off point to attack the PRINCIPLE of profiling. I'm not defending this particular error, I'm defending the idea of racial profiling in general.
twk373 1 year ago
@arthereld
Clearly you're not thinking this through: if high-crime areas deserve more policing, then high-crime ethnicities also deserve more policing.
Anyway, if it's 'racist' to profile blacks, what you're really saying is that the blacks are racist for having higher crime rates.
twk373 1 year ago
@arthereld
Blacks commit more crime because of social problems: primarily the disintegration of the black family (clearly evidenced by illegitimacy rates of ~70%) and also the 'black subculture' which creates a cycle of crime. Higher poverty rates play a role, too.
Why are black test scores lower? Part of the reason is that black subculture of failure. Part of the reason is lower intelligence. Part of the reason is poverty, and other SES factors.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 Okay, now keep going, why is it like that? Why is there a disintigration of the black family? Why are there higher poverty rates? Why is the black subculture the way it is? Why is there lower intelligence?
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
The disintegration of the black family is, in my view, wholly a product of the progressive 'sexual revolution.' The white family has disintegrated in the same way, you know, just not to the same magnitude.
I don't know why you are so obsessed with my motives. My motives are pretty benign: 1) I don't like social problems, and I observe that such problems are disproportionately associated with black people. 2) I don't like being held responsible for black problems.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 - "I don't like being held responsible for black problems"
Who's holding you responsible? Unless you're a cop no one is saying it's the white public's fault for racial discrimination and racism among law enforcement.
A86 1 year ago
@A86
I was responding to a broad question with a broad answer. Mainstream politically correct sensibility blames 'white racism' for all black problems, and then goes on to assert that all white people are either openly racist (paleoconservatives), secretly racist (non-liberals) or--despite their best intentions--suffer from uncurious racial bias (liberals). The "Tea Party" movement illustrates this pretty clearly.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373
Uncurious = unconscious.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 - It's not a strawman at all. The scientific definition of "race" is a subspecies or clade. The only other definition would be sociological ones or folk taxonomies, which are not scientific.
"Mainstream politically correct sensibility blames 'white racism' for all black problems"
When have all black problems been blamed on white racism?
A86 1 year ago
@A86
When have all black problems not been blamed on white racism?
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 - Asking someone to prove a negative is silly. That's like asking me "Prove tooth fairies don't exist". The one who makes a positive assertion must prove.
A86 1 year ago
@A86
Asking someone to prove the negative of a universal is not silly. Surely you can find one example of a black problem that hasn't been blamed on white racism.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 - Asking someone to prove a negative is a logical fallacy. It's a logical fallacy called Argument From Ignorance.
A86 1 year ago
@A86
Well, you're just wrong. Some negatives are easy to prove, like the negative of a universal.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 - Saying "you're wrong" is not a rebuttal. You're making an argument from ignorance which is stupid.
Your question is like asking "Prove to me Cenk Uygur is not a child molester". The person accusing someone of being a child molester shoulders the burden of proof.
A86 1 year ago
@A86
No, my question is like saying, "All women are blondes." Your response is to say, "Prove it." But in fact it should be very easy for you to prove that all women are not blondes.
twk373 1 year ago
Comment removed
A86 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@twk373 - That's a positive claim. You didn't make a positive claim in your question. Two very different hings.
A better comparison would be like you asking "What men aren't bisexual?" If you're implying all men are bisexual you would need to prove that. It's not on me to disprove an unproven assertion.
A86 1 year ago
@A86
I don't know why YT flagged as spam. Inexplicable.
The original claim, "All black problems are blamed on white racism" is positive. It's also a universal claim, so even one counter example would disprove it. That I would even think to make such a claim of course illustrates just how silly people behave when it comes to racial issues.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 - I was responding to your question "What problems aren't blamed on white racism?" That's asking someone to prove a negative which is a logical fallacy. If I asked "What black problems aren't the fault of white racism?" that would be a logical fallacy for me to ask you that.
A86 1 year ago
@A86
And that question was a response to *your* response to my *original* assertion, namely, that "all black problems are blamed on white racism."
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 - I know. I disagreed and you answered *my* response with a request to prove a negative. That's not a proper response.
A86 1 year ago
@A86
The proper response to a universal claim is to find just one counter example.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 - If it's a universal negative claim the person making the negative claim has to prove their claim.
A86 1 year ago
@A86
That's okay, because I'm making a universal positive claim.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 - Not when you asked me to prove a universal negative.
Ex: Me: All Asian problems are the fault of white people.
You: Really?
Me: Which Asian problems are NOT the fault of white people?\
The above is what you just did.
A86 1 year ago
@A86
A good example of an Asian problem that's not the fault of white people is communism.
See? Easy.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 - A good example of a black problem that isn't blamed on whites is the rate of black fatherlessness.
A86 1 year ago
@A86
I blame white liberals for the rate of black fatherlessness.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 - How?
A86 1 year ago
@A86
The left fought a war against traditional moral views on sexuality/family/divorce/etc. They won. I believe the illegitimacy rates for both blacks and whites have increased by roughly the same multiple, although I'd have to double check.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 - How the hell has interracial marriage, gay marriage and the ability to divorce caused more black fatherlessness?
A86 1 year ago
@A86
Traditional moral views:
on sexuality: sex is to be preserved in marriage. Promiscuity and adultery are stigmatized everywhere.
on the family: a family consists of a father, mother, and their children. It is to be preserved and respected as the ideal of society.
on divorce: divorce is a last resort in cases of abuse. Divorce is stigmatized. No-fault divorce is not permitted.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 - What is your evidence people actually followed through on the morality on sexuality before the present? What evidence do you have people had less premarital and extramarital sex in past generations? What does it have to do with the divorce rate? Prove premarital sex causes more fatherlessness.
A86 1 year ago
@A86
The goal of the left has been to reduce sex to an industry of pleasuring one's self, and to dismantle the family unit.
One natural consequence of this is dramatically higher illegitimacy rates.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 You seem not to be bright enough to ever answer a direct question and STUPID enough to assume that people can' read what you wrote before. You may want to wipe your mouth and your shoulder.. there is RUNNY BULLSHIT dripping profusely from one down to the other.
The question was asked, and YOU FAILED to answer it, "WHEN have ALL black problems been blamed on" Racism ( White Supremacy)???????
When refers to a period in TIME, since you seem to lack comprehension.
EbonyNewsChannel1 1 year ago
@EbonyNewsChannel1
Lol, did you really go back pages and pages to find that comment? I'm flattered that you care that much, dude. <3 ya 2.
I did answer it, you just can't handle the answer. Not my problem.
Have I sufficiently explained crime statistics too you? Or do you need another refresher? I suspect you do get it, because you totally dodged the topic. Lol.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 Paranoid? Just having a conversation with you about racism. My flawed human nature wants to jump right in and call you a racist. But I'd like to think of myself as being at least a tiny bit rational and won't jump to conclusions so early. I see your motives you've listed there. Can I translate? 1) black people are responsible for problems affecting you 2) not the other way around. At the least, you have a lack of accountability, at the most you are a white supremacist. Am I wrong here?
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
I'm surprised you'd think I care whether you call me a racist. Believe it or not, I've never been able to figure out why I should care what progressives think of me.
I have never really understood what 'white supremacism' is even supposed to mean, other than a dirtier version of the label 'racist.'
And no, black people don't really affect me directly. I live in a majority-white suburb, of course. The reason I care about black problems is because I'm a human being. Shocking, I know.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 You asked that's why thought you cared. I don't recall giving out my title as a progressive.
You don't know what white supremacy means? Simple, do you believe whites are superior to other races?
And how do you know what shocks me?
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
It's obvious that you're a progressive.
What does it mean, to say that whites are 'superior' to other races? All 'white supremacists' will tell you that east asians are more intelligent than whites. On the other hand, it's also a fact that whites have built the greatest civilization(s) in the world, and have made by far the most contributions to humanity (pick any field). So what is a rational person supposed to make of that?
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 And also, I still find it quite odd that you consider me progressive simply on the basis that I consider racial profiling to be racist, when even most right wing Republicans admit that much.
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
What is the benefit to me (or anyone, for that matter) of having friends of a different race? I don't see how that answers the question. People would still have friends in a mono-racial society. I haven't been able to detect any lack of assimilation, but what do I know.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 Just makes no sense. Having friends from different cultures means allowing a different way of viewing the world than yours. You obviously value this otherwise you wouldn't have any friends whatsoever. "Multiracial society is unnecessary because of unnecessary tension" seems an unnecessary statement altogether. Color of skin aside, even in a mono-racial society, as you've called it, you're going to have differences, even different cultures forming. This is an unstoppable outcome.
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
But I can learn about other cultures and other people without them being my personal friends. Some people will place a value on that, but I think that most wouldn't. People tend to restrict their circle of friends to people who are relatively similar to them. My experience is that interaction with people who are significantly different from me tends to lead to friction unless things are kept at a pretty superficial level, so there's some question as to whether I'm really learning.
twk373 1 year ago
@arthereld
Of course there are tensions in any society, but if you look for where the conflicts are greatest, you will typically see racial/cultural divisions. The problem is that people tend to want to preserve their own way of life, and they do not get excited when some other group is competing with them. I think that many (but not all) cultural differences are perfectly benign and should be preserved. And the best way to do that is to have demarcation.
twk373 1 year ago
@arthereld
It's difficult to quantify what I mean by 'black culture,' as it is a fuzzy subject. I think that there are elements of black culture that are more accepting of promiscuity, crime, illegitimacy as 'normal', while at the same time rejecting things like education/study/learning as somehow not the ideal. I also think there is a strong undercurrent of anti-white sentiment that has been kept alive over the last 50 years, when it ought to have been suppressed.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 So basically nothing positive about the 'black culture'. Such an observation is unrealistic.
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
I'm not saying there's nothing positive in black culture; that's not the issue. The issue is to discuss the significant problems and how we can go about helping the black community to fix them.
twk373 1 year ago
@arthereld
I don't think the fact that there are limits to my ambition and the effort I am willing to expend--in pursuit of a casual interest--makes me insincere, or somehow casts a pall on my (moderately informed) views. A field study is far beyond my level of concern. Look, I don't have a problem with other people or cultures, as long as they're not trying to interfere with or demonize mine. I don't think there's anything morally objectionable about my views.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 For the record I have not questioned your sincerity. If anything I'm in admiration on bold stance on your beliefs. But here's the beauty of opinion. You believe you're right, I believe you're wrong. But I think I see your views more on a personal level rather than some sort of outreach. You have not tried to convince others to my observation, to "stick to their own kind" as it were. At most, all I can offer you is the suggestion I've already given you.
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
You believe that I'm wrong? I'm not buying it. Maybe you think I'm wrong on some things, but I don't think you disagree with everything I've said. I think there is a lot of agreement.
At the really practical level, all I want is to have open dialogue on racial problems, and to revisit whether universal adherence to leftist race policies is really going to do what everything thinks it will. Also, an immigration moratorium.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 Ah, yes, there it is now. I read that about white nationalists they they believe a lot of white people are really white nationalists, but just don't know it yet, and then try to convince them, "Hey, I'm pretty sure you agree with me on more then what you really think." Oh, I'm sure if sit down and knock out a few six packs we'll find that we agree on other issues. I was simply talking about the issue at hand here: racial profiling. I believe it's racist, you don't.
arthereld 1 year ago
@twk373 Before we get any further though, I think I better let you know right now. I'll never be a white nationalist. I believe white nationalists have a favorite word for what I am: mongrel. I'm Puerto Rican, Nicaraguan, and Scottish, engaged to a Native American, Black, Scottish woman. So, sorry, but I plan to contribute to miscegeny and have mongrel babies with my mongrel wife.
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
So no, it would not 'work,' because two wrongs do not make a right. Also, you will always find people to disagree with you, so you'd have to kill everyone but yourself.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 Let me get back to racial profiling. You believe it's not racism, for basically no other reason that I've seen except that you believe it works. In that case, if blacks have such a high crime probability, why don't we solve the problem quicker and eradicate them. I know you would never suggest such a method (and I'm not being sarcastic there, you don't seem to me to be an inhumane person). But it would work wouldn't it?
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
If I was going to kill off people who ruin the world, I would start with white lefties/liberals/progressives (so pretty much the entire population of Europe) before I even thought about any black people. Lol. Seriously, the issue with black crime rates is very low in the grand scheme of problems with the Western world. Of course, I don't believing in killing people, as you've figured out, so I guess that means I'll just have to rely on boring, ethical methods like 'talking.'
twk373 1 year ago
@arthereld
twk373 1 year ago
@arthereld
1) Look, who are the people hurt most by black criminals? By far, it's innocent blacks. If you police black criminals less, you are hurting exactly the people who you are trying to help. And you're not dealing with the problem of racist whites, either! You're just going to make them more embittered and racist. The solution to that problem is to get these issues out in the open and discuss them honestly, not to brow-beat whites.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 Jesus, I'm not even sure we're talking about racial profiling anymore. I simply don't believe that it should be okay for someone to be more likely approached by the authorities based on race or ethnicity. To me that's racism.
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
Look, if you police an ethnic group more because you just don't like the cut of their jib, then that's racist, because you have no rational justification--it's just your prejudice. However, if you police an ethnic group more BECAUSE they commit crime at a much higher rate than other groups, it's NOT racist. You have an obvious rational, logical justification! The whole reason racism is BAD is because it is based on non-facts. Profiling IS based on facts.
twk373 1 year ago
@arthereld
2) Backfire? I think that's nonsense. Whatever the crime rates are, it's a fact that most blacks are NOT criminals, and most blacks do not LIKE criminals, let alone black criminals. You really think normal blacks are going to stand up to defend the thugs who destroy their communities? If these issues were discussed OPENLY, then people (especially blacks) would be more aware and understand the policing measures. You are not giving blacks any credit whatsoever.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 The thing is I don't believe in racial profiling because 1.) it's an enabler. Not necessarily making racial profiling wrong, but racism is still alive and kicking in our nation. You argue that the judiciary system is not racist, but problem is PEOPLE are there to enforce it and many people are still racist. 2.) it backfires. Okay, let's actively promote racial profiling. Minorities already know about racial profiling though cops try not to openly admit it... (continued)
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
3) Ugh! Not all blacks are "persons of interest." Geeze. "Being black" is only one PART of the profile, not the whole thing!
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 What's "the whole thing"?
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
3) Anyway, answer me this: how would you feel if your community was plagued by extraordinarily high crime rates, people getting sucked into gang violence, dealing drugs, robbing stores, jacking cars, and so on, but the police spent exactly the same amount of time in your community as they did in a neighboring community that had negligible crime? Criminals would be roaming free in your neighborhood. And why? Because your community is black and the other one is white.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 (2. continued)... But now imagine if we openly advocate it, like say pass a bill that openly gives cops the right to racially profile. Target ethnic groups will simply view this as a declaration of war on their group (they already do). Do you really think the violence will go down? Well, maybe that's their fault right? They should just smile, and say, "I know you're doing your job, and I'm happy to contribute. What's that? A full cavity search? Well alright officer. Keep fighting crime."
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
Wrong, I don't think it's racism because 1) racism means believing that a particular group is somehow 'inherently inferior,' and racial profiling has absolutely nothing to do with any nonsense like that, 2) if in fact blacks commit more crime, it cannot be 'racist' to police them more, because the POINT of a police system is to POLICE CRIME. You are arguing that the system should ignore crime and arbitrarily police all groups equally, which is in fact the truly 'racist' position.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 This statement: If this person is this ethnicity, then there's a higher chance that they behave a certain way than a person of this other ethnicity. I simply think such a statement is full of holes.
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
I don't understand how you can think it's full of holes, given that this is exactly what racial differences in crime rates mean…
But again you are getting too focused on ethnicity. It's not JUST ethnicity. When people say 'racial profiling,' it doesn't mean you ONLY profile on race. It means you INCLUDE race in the existing profile. If a cop sees a well-dressed black guy with his wife and two kids walking down the street, that does NOT fit the profile. See?
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 But I don't think any progressive has a problem with what you said either. It's when racial profiling is used by itself. If there's a description that includes black male, gotique, has a limp, scar on upper lip, there's nothing wrong with that. And show me a "leftie" that thinks that's wrong. On the other hand, if no investigation even calls for such a description and you go after him because he's a "suspicious looking individual" why did you go after him? What's suspicious looking?
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
See, I told you that we agree. And let's go with example A, shall we? Also, what if the perp you're looking for is a black guy with saggy pants and chains?
Anyway, the question is whether it's A or B that's being advocated when people talk about "racial profiling." I think it's A. Maybe B sometimes gets put into practice, but who would support that?
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 But there aren't any progressives (none that I know anyway) that have a problem with that. Hell, mainstream cop shows like CSI and Law and Order do it that way. And yeah, the question is whether B is being used. And I think it's being used a lot more than you think. Unless you've got a stat for that. No one has a problem with racial profiling as long as it's not the only thing being used.
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
I don't have an relevant information about how law enforcement agencies interpret or apply racial profiling, but I don't doubt it is abused. Given that many other abuses occur in our police system, it seems likely that they occur in this area, too. However, I have seen anecdotal evidence in the form of collected/reposted news articles (as on AmRen) which demonstrate that certain media/police organizations systematically avoid reporting a perp's race.
twk373 1 year ago
@arthereld
I didn't say you're "really a white nationalist," I said that I don't think you actually disagree with me as much as you claim to. What that really means is you have no legitimate reasons for disagreeing with me, and so I think that exposure to rational arguments is not unlikely to bring you around to 'my' side. Because the point of the matter is that 'racial profiling' cannot be meaningfully put in the same category as, say, businesses denying service to blacks.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 3.) Really at its core, it's simply racist to me. I just don't think you quite understand it from a minority's perspective. Imagine that because of your ethnicity, you will forever be a "person of interest". How would that make you feel? How do you think minorities are supposed to feel about that? I mean what do you say to that?
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
Actually, I think that intelligence is a good analogy to homosexuality. Intelligence has a significant genetic component and a significant environmental component. So does homosexuality. So, just like it's false to say that being black consigns you to academic failure (intelligence is significantly learned), it's false to say that the 'gay gene' (oversimplification) consigns you to screwing men, because 'being gay' is also significantly learned.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 Okay, so a pooint we agree on. I'm not so "progressive" as you think. I think both sides of the sexual orientation issue is oversimplified. "it's a gene" vs. "it's a choice" both seem more like oversimplified extremes to inflame the other side of the debate. Anyways nevermind this, I saw this comment of yours and thought I'd comment.
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
The general criminal profile, which includes (among other things) location. There is a difference between profiling blacks who live in a predominately black high-income, low-crime community and profiling blacks who live in a predominately black, low-income, high-crime community.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 Okay, give me an example of acceptable racial profiling. Is it, A.) "That guy fits the profile of the perp we're looking for, because he looks this way, including ethnicity, but includes other features." Or is it, B.) "That guy is black, he's wearing Fubu, sagging pants, and chains. Doesn't really fit any description of any suspect in particular. He just looks hoodlumish, so let's bring him in." C.) All of the above.
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
I'm not sure what you're getting at regarding interracial dating. The point is that blacks commit rape at a much higher rate than whites. It's got nothing to do with whether those rapes are interracial.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 WTF? The comment I was responding to was yours in which you were clearly talking about interracial rape by comparing white-on-black rapes to black-on-white rapes. Do you even remember what you type?
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
If I made a comment about interracial rape here, it was awhile ago. But I certainly wasn't suggesting that that blacks have a any sort of predisposition to commit interracial rape.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 No, I believe the sentence clearly stated that in cases of interracial rape black-on-white rape is higher than white-on-black rape. Pretty sure that's almost verbatum.
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
Yes, there is vastly more black-on-white rape than white-on-black. So?
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 My argument was that it may realistically be related to interracial dating. For better or worse, it's sort of an unwritten cultural rule. Sadly it's mostly black culture. Whites are becoming more liberal with this issue. But I've talked with black men who actually boldly say, "I think it's okay for black men to date white women, but not okay the other way around." And that feeling has been talked about in media too. White men and black women dating is rising a bit, but it's still rare.
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
I am sure there is a causal connection between interracial dating rates and interracial rape rates. But I think the point of the oft-quoted rape statistic is to dispel certain notions about who are the primary victims of interracial crimes. (Particularly in reference to hate crimes.) But to be fair I have never really understood why it's somehow better for a woman to be raped by someone of her own race. (Sarcasm there.)
twk373 1 year ago
@arthereld
1) I agree completely with that.
2) I mean dramatically restricting the flow of *legal* immigrants to the US. Forget about illegals. I am pretty sure Obama is not in favor of that. And my experience with 'lefties' is that they favor unrestricted immigration.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 2.) I'm for that as well, though maybe not for the same reason.
Also, you said earlier that you represent pretty much what most white nationalists believe. But you have no problem with miscegenation. Has something changed in the white nationalist community recently? Separatism, I thought, was the biggest indicator of white nationalism. Most youtube videos posted by white nationalists still express this feeling.
arthereld 1 year ago
@arthereld
I think you're confusing two different issues. White nationalists have no interest in stopping anyone from marrying who they want to marry. That's what I mean in saying I have no problem with miscegenation. This is independent of the view that miscegenation is, for a variety of reasons, regularly not a good idea--a view that I share.
twk373 1 year ago
@arthereld
But just because something generally isn't a good idea doesn't mean there should be a law against it or any nonsense like that. We want to live in a free society, where people are able to live life as they want and pursue whatever they think will make them happy. White nationalists tend to be paleo-conservatives, too.