Racism (from a moral standpoint)

[MangaD]

@LutiChris

The problem is that you are assuming things based on researches that do not represent the absolute truth.

one does not need to know every little factor before making a decision (...) is an example when pressed for time and limited information

You are right. But the question is whether the lower IQ is biological derived or not. And if it is biological derived, how much is it influenced by biology in comparison to culture, wealth, etc.

he says at the beginning that it is possible to dumb down a person with potential by not educating them. How do you know that this is not the case for black people?

Because we've been propping them up like no other race for well over a century now in almost everything including job opportunities because of diversity agenda and the general isnt interested

But this is not entirely true. Blacks have been enslaved, and during this time they were forced to do physical labor as opposed to intellectual labor. And when they were emancipated they were not given guidance in terms of mentality and culture, which led them to be adrift, not knowing what to do with their new found liberties. On the other hand, whites were running society and inherited their education and wealth from their parents. A poor black person with dumb / problematic parents who doesn't know what to do with their life is of no competition to the average white person. And this is somewhat of a vicious cycle, but eventually blacks should improve. I don't know if there is any study made on the evolution of blacks' IQ and academic success, it would be interesting to see it.

it seems that 40% of whites are picking hispanics as my dad has with my mom.

Check out the end of my comment to Uri (limi), 2 of my comments above.

I'm sure a higher standard can be applied for those who work hard and benefit the country and want to provide for their kids but just giving them welfare and allowing them to have kids when the majority of single black mothers can not or in some cases WILL not adequately take care of the child is precisely the reason for them not to be breeding until they have their lives in order.

But you're applying this to black people only, why not apply it to white people? Are black people intrinsically inferior to white people? Nevermind I read your answer to this afterwards and I reply below.

Why take away their ability to reproduce? Why not abort in case of accident? And what the heck does "adequately" take care of the child mean? Any black child born in America today will have more conditions than any child born 500, 1000, 10000, 100000 years ago. If conditions were a factor to decide whether a child can exist or not, then none of us would exist.

Men have no rights to life, liberty or happiness. These circumstances may be purchased by oneself, by ones family, by ones tribe or by ones ancestors, but they are nonetheless purchases and are not rights.

This idea does not remotely represent the foundation of any civilized world. Sure many people survived through fight and conquest, but they did this when they had no other choice. And our civilization is not one that is known for eradicating everyone else from this world, rather it integrates them (eg. Roman Empire, colonies), even if it means conquering. The idea that no one has intrinsic value is very harmful to everyone, it will throw society into chaos. By that logic, you can very well kill off the weak just because you can, without any moral rules to consider. I don't think this is the kind of society that you want to live in, where your life means nothing unless you provide services to others. When you stop being able to provide services (illness, age, disability, or simply machine replacement...), you can be disposed.

Sure, if we were not intelligent beings then we would abide by the law of the jungle and what you say would be the norm. This is not the case though.

also neat little fact: Israel does forced sterilization on black jews and there is no criticism of them preserving their ethnostate. clicke

Thanks. This is very interesting indeed.

I do not like the idea of the gov forcing them to work if they don't want to work they shouldn't be given the benefits that they currently have. Would it be better for a man to lose his freedom and keep his sperm or be given the choice to opt out of societal/parental responsibility by taking his seed? I would say giving them more responsibility increases the chances of them increasing meaning in their life which is much more gratifying and lasts longer than our animal instincts to indulge ourselves for momentary happiness. I don't know about forcing them to do it you'd have to convince me of the factors involved as i'm open to the idea but hesitant about the consequences that may follow.

The problem I have with your solution is that finding jobs may not be so easy or possible given the person's and society's conditions. It's not fair to take people out of welfare and offer them nothing in return. One thing is taking them out of welfare because they refused any jobs that the government proposed to them, another thing is simply taking them out of welfare and leave them with nothing.

You are just assuming that they don't want to work, but if this is true you should offer them jobs first and only if they refuse you take them out of welfare. Another problem I see is cheap labor, where you'd demand a lot of work from them and pay them a misery, which would justify their unwillingness to work.

I don't understand what you mean with giving them more responsibility being more gratifying. Isn't that a good thing?

Because we are in competition with minority groups who produce more children and will out breed us. Why should they control the nation and turn the united states into another 3rd world country?

Ok, I get it now. So basically you want to make their life hellish so that they stop reproducing and eventually the US becomes a white-only country. I am against this as I find it immoral. But let me ask you a few questions, from a logical perspective.

1. What makes you think that an oppressed people won't fight back? History has shown us that slavery usually ends with oppressed slaves fighting for their freedom, and usually succeeding. This results in life losses for both sides. Still, considering that whites are greater in number and hold the resources, in the event of a mutiny they could easily get it under control, and would have to execute the rebels. So why not just kill all the black people if that's what you're aiming for? Do you think an oppressed people will lick your boots if you aim for their destruction?
   
2. What makes you think that such tyrannical government would be accepted by the rest of the world and its own population? You may be that cruel of a person, but surely most people in the country would find this unacceptable regardless of the reasons. And the world would not stay silent. The US is powerful but not that powerful.
   
3. Wouldn't it be better to negotiate with African countries some way to deport those people?
   

even if i was a different race i'd still advocate for america to continue to be white.

If you were black would you advocate for your own destruction?

Keeping America white is one thing, oppressing black people is another thing. And trust me, if you oppress them it will be the end for whites in America. Why? Because people would eventually revolt and the multicultural agenda would be much more powerful and would seek to miscegenate people as quick as possible with the intent to make America a brown race. This kind of backfire happens all the time with the left. The more they oppress the right the more hate they seed, which is why we're seeing a rise of the "far-right".

Going back to your other justifications to go to war:

Is this the kind of world you wish to live in?

As for jobs there are plenty of stores/industries that would hire low educated people to do simple tasks such as food/retail. They can also specialize in practical work as i have mentioned like plumbing, mechanical engineering or electric work which only requires 1 or 2 years of exp of training. Another thing I should mention is as we are accelerating exponentially with technology the promise of stability comes more and more unglued. When we increase the wage some demographics will not be picked due to their lack of ability even with all the training and knowledge they'll receive by comparison they won't be able to compete so something akin to apartheid. Look up The Gini coefficient and how that relates to crime.

And does no one want those jobs? Are the employers running out of business because no one will work? Are those jobs paying enough to make a living and not kill the worker to death?

Another thing with the acceleration of technology is that physical jobs become scarce.

What do you want to do about Gini coefficient and crime, and how does race correlate?

I used to think more libertarian lines and get rid of such a wage altogether

If you remove the minimum wage you'll end up having slaves basically.

You think its because it was a lack of education and the contention i put forward is mostly one of biological significance.

I think it has to do with several factors. Race could be one of them. But you haven't presented any proof of that, only theories and assumptions.

The thing is the more acceptable the culture is with certain words the dictionary will change it due time. So far it is ambiguitous i would say the purpose of the words is probably more important than the word itself such as feminism wanting equality for everyone but really the proponents of the ideology want men to step down from their positions not really for equality but because they want to control the policies. Anyone who isn't a feminist they deem a misogynist even those who are proponents of egalitarianism advocate for gender equality but because the won't opt for the feminism label they are also cast in a similar light

Well, the definition of the words doesn't change, but due to their misuse new definitions can be added. Feminism is still about wanting equality, but there are many forms of feminism, and you got the 1st, 2nd and 3rd waves. Just as there are many forms of racism. I can defend that all races have a right to exist or that only my race has a right to exist. What makes a person racist is if they believe in racial superiority.

---

@Uri

1. Source?

2. "2.This phenomenon is bad and should be fought be Recieving national departments as well as non-Go's."

???

3. I disagree with why the US is doing it, but let's drop this topic.

4. You didn't answer my question.

5. Good point! I wonder what @LutiChris has to say about this.