If Negros Had Been Left To Their Own Devices...

[Coyote]

And that has nothing to do with race.

What stopped Ethiopia from becoming the next Germany, or Japan?

Ethiopia has a pretty big population size, and could use that to become a powerhouse.

Since Ethiopia wasn't colonized, then why is it poor, and illiterate by African standards?

Sure, Ethiopia had some wars, and invasions, but so did Germany, and Japan.

So, why isn't Ethiopia the next Germany, or Japan?

Why isn't Switzerland? Poland? Brazil? The Balkins?

It takes more then population size.

Switzerland's a pretty advanced nation, and Poland's catching up.

Poland had a per capita income GDP about half of Mexico, or Turkey in 1990 near the fall of the Berlin Wall, now Poland's close to a 1/3rd higher in per capita income GDP than Mexico, or Tiurkey.

Of course there's the major difference, that Poland experienced their capital city destroyed, and ethnic cleansed by Nazi Germany in WW2.
Then experienced economically stagnating Communism.

Ethiopia has had its own set of conflicts as well.

When did Ethiopia's capital city look like this?

Did Ethiopia benefit from the Marshall plan?

 

[Asclepias]

I've seen articles before describing Jews as Black in Europe.
Here's one.

Now between the 1600's did the Jews change colors?
or
did the Europeans exaggerate swarthiness?

The latter is far more likely.

How were the Jews regarded in 16th-century England?

’ The blackness of the Jews also caught the attention of a number of writers; when William Brereton jotted down his impressions of the Jews in the synagogue in Amsterdam in 1635 he noted that the Jewish ‘men are black ..

As a native speaker of Greek, the term "melanchrinos" is used to denote a person of dark skin. Even Greeks use the term to describe each other, as they like most people come in various degree of skin tone. Of course the peoples of Egypt were of darker skin, but in Asclip's world it is used to label those same people as jungle bunnies.

It's an exceedingly silly argument so you have to be slavishly devoted to Afrocentrism to buy it. It's s bit like the Zimmerman-raping-Martin crowd.

Its amusing to see the mental gymnastics whites go through trying to change what was said.

So if youre a native speaker what would be brown skinned and what would be white skinned? After you tell us that then you should explain why two other things. Why would he us the term for Black instead of brown or white skinned and for heavens sake why would he say they had wooly hair? And again.....whats with those pesky drawings of Black people? I am interested in seeing your reply.

 

[Flopper]

They would still be living out their existence much in the manner observed in the quote that follows. Its past time that blacks started expressing their appreciation, for all that the civilized world has done for them. Because petty gripes, and century old grievances aside... The outside world has done far more for Negros; than Negros ever have, or ever will for the non-Negro.

"Since the dawn of history the negro has owned the continent of Africa - rich beyond the dream of a poet's fancy, crunching acres of diamonds beneath his bare black feet. Yet he never picked one up from the dust until a white man showed to him its glittering light. His land swarmed with powerful and docile animals, yet he never dreamed a harness, cart, or sled. A hunter by necessity, he never made an axe, spear, or arrowhead worth preserving beyond the moment of its use. He lived as an ox, content to graze for an hour. In a land of stone and timber he never sawed a foot of lumber, carved a block, or built a house save of broken sticks and mud. With league on league of ocean strand and miles of inland seas, for four thousand years he watched their surface ripple under the wind, heard the thunder of the surf on his beach, the howl of the storm over his head, gazed on the dim blue horizon calling him to worlds that lie beyond, and yet he never dreamed a sail." - Thomas Dixon

This OP is an opinion that blacks had to be shown by whites how to live. It is not about the origins of human species. And It's time we stopped pretending this was the objective of the OP and most of these posters.

You call kidnapping and hundreds of years of enslavement a petty gripe?

Clear gross exaggeration.

If African Americans had it so bad, why did their population grow so fast?

500,000 African American slaves bought since the 1600's became 40 million by the 2000's.

Dare to compare with some other European countries?

Ireland had over 1 million in the 1600''s, now Ireland has over 4.6 million in the 2000's.

Poland had over 4.5 million Poles in the 1600's, now there's 38 million in Poland by the 2000's.

England, and Wales had over 4.4 million in the 1600's, now there's over 53 million in England, and Wales by the 2000's.

.
That's not an equivalent comparison.

A real comparison would be to compare the number of slaves in the population at a given point in time, say 1860 which is estimated to be 3,950,000 compared to the number of blacks in population today, 38.9 million.

In 2010 the black population was 38.9 million which happens to be 13% of the total population. The percent of blacks in the population in 2010 is no greater than the percent of slaves in the population in 1860 which was also 13%. In other words, blacks are the same percent of the population today as the slaves were in 1860.

In 1750, blacks made 20% of the population compared to 13% today.

Blacks have not grown any faster than the general population.
https://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-06.pdf
American Civil War Census Data
Statistics on Slavery

Yes it is, because 500,000 - 600,000 Black slaves were bought to the U.S.A, and that population in 200 - 300 years ballooned up to nearly 4 million.

That's a faster growing population than anywhere in Europe at the same time.

If African Americans were so severely abused, wouldn't they have trouble growing?

It's not 200 to 300 years. It's 400 years between 1600 and 2000. You are also ignoring low immigration rates in Europe compared to New World immigration and the lower birthrates in 19th and 20th century in Europe. A far better comparison of black population growth in American is a comparison between total population growth and black population growth. The black percentage of the total population has been stable for at least 150 years in the US.

 

[Flopper]

I've seen articles before describing Jews as Black in Europe.
Here's one.

Now between the 1600's did the Jews change colors?
or
did the Europeans exaggerate swarthiness?

The latter is far more likely.

How were the Jews regarded in 16th-century England?

’ The blackness of the Jews also caught the attention of a number of writers; when William Brereton jotted down his impressions of the Jews in the synagogue in Amsterdam in 1635 he noted that the Jewish ‘men are black ..

As a native speaker of Greek, the term "melanchrinos" is used to denote a person of dark skin. Even Greeks use the term to describe each other, as they like most people come in various degree of skin tone. Of course the peoples of Egypt were of darker skin, but in Asclip's world it is used to label those same people as jungle bunnies.

It's an exceedingly silly argument so you have to be slavishly devoted to Afrocentrism to buy it. It's s bit like the Zimmerman-raping-Martin crowd.

Its amusing to see the mental gymnastics whites go through trying to change what was said.

So if youre a native speaker what would be brown skinned and what would be white skinned? After you tell us that then you should explain why two other things. Why would he us the term for Black instead of brown or white skinned and for heavens sake why would he say they had wooly hair? And again.....whats with those pesky drawings of Black people? I am interested in seeing your reply.

The first humans to exit Africa were black or brown skinned. Pigmentation varies due to a number factors, genetics, Vitamin D, sun exposure, and mating preference.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

What stopped Ethiopia from becoming the next Germany, or Japan?

Ethiopia has a pretty big population size, and could use that to become a powerhouse.

Since Ethiopia wasn't colonized, then why is it poor, and illiterate by African standards?

Sure, Ethiopia had some wars, and invasions, but so did Germany, and Japan.

So, why isn't Ethiopia the next Germany, or Japan?

Why isn't Switzerland? Poland? Brazil? The Balkins?

It takes more then population size.

Switzerland's a pretty advanced nation, and Poland's catching up.

Poland had a per capita income GDP about half of Mexico, or Turkey in 1990 near the fall of the Berlin Wall, now Poland's close to a 1/3rd higher in per capita income GDP than Mexico, or Tiurkey.

Of course there's the major difference, that Poland experienced their capital city destroyed, and ethnic cleansed by Nazi Germany in WW2.
Then experienced economically stagnating Communism.

Ethiopia has had its own set of conflicts as well.

When did Ethiopia's capital city look like this?

Did Ethiopia benefit from the Marshall plan?

Did Poland benefit from the Marshall plan?

 

[Vandalshandle]

They would still be living out their existence much in the manner observed in the quote that follows. Its past time that blacks started expressing their appreciation, for all that the civilized world has done for them. Because petty gripes, and century old grievances aside... The outside world has done far more for Negros; than Negros ever have, or ever will for the non-Negro.

"Since the dawn of history the negro has owned the continent of Africa - rich beyond the dream of a poet's fancy, crunching acres of diamonds beneath his bare black feet. Yet he never picked one up from the dust until a white man showed to him its glittering light. His land swarmed with powerful and docile animals, yet he never dreamed a harness, cart, or sled. A hunter by necessity, he never made an axe, spear, or arrowhead worth preserving beyond the moment of its use. He lived as an ox, content to graze for an hour. In a land of stone and timber he never sawed a foot of lumber, carved a block, or built a house save of broken sticks and mud. With league on league of ocean strand and miles of inland seas, for four thousand years he watched their surface ripple under the wind, heard the thunder of the surf on his beach, the howl of the storm over his head, gazed on the dim blue horizon calling him to worlds that lie beyond, and yet he never dreamed a sail." - Thomas Dixon

So many racists to put on "ignore". So little time....

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

They would still be living out their existence much in the manner observed in the quote that follows. Its past time that blacks started expressing their appreciation, for all that the civilized world has done for them. Because petty gripes, and century old grievances aside... The outside world has done far more for Negros; than Negros ever have, or ever will for the non-Negro.

"Since the dawn of history the negro has owned the continent of Africa - rich beyond the dream of a poet's fancy, crunching acres of diamonds beneath his bare black feet. Yet he never picked one up from the dust until a white man showed to him its glittering light. His land swarmed with powerful and docile animals, yet he never dreamed a harness, cart, or sled. A hunter by necessity, he never made an axe, spear, or arrowhead worth preserving beyond the moment of its use. He lived as an ox, content to graze for an hour. In a land of stone and timber he never sawed a foot of lumber, carved a block, or built a house save of broken sticks and mud. With league on league of ocean strand and miles of inland seas, for four thousand years he watched their surface ripple under the wind, heard the thunder of the surf on his beach, the howl of the storm over his head, gazed on the dim blue horizon calling him to worlds that lie beyond, and yet he never dreamed a sail." - Thomas Dixon

This OP is an opinion that blacks had to be shown by whites how to live. It is not about the origins of human species. And It's time we stopped pretending this was the objective of the OP and most of these posters.

You call kidnapping and hundreds of years of enslavement a petty gripe?

Clear gross exaggeration.

If African Americans had it so bad, why did their population grow so fast?

500,000 African American slaves bought since the 1600's became 40 million by the 2000's.

Dare to compare with some other European countries?

Ireland had over 1 million in the 1600''s, now Ireland has over 4.6 million in the 2000's.

Poland had over 4.5 million Poles in the 1600's, now there's 38 million in Poland by the 2000's.

England, and Wales had over 4.4 million in the 1600's, now there's over 53 million in England, and Wales by the 2000's.

.
That's not an equivalent comparison.

A real comparison would be to compare the number of slaves in the population at a given point in time, say 1860 which is estimated to be 3,950,000 compared to the number of blacks in population today, 38.9 million.

In 2010 the black population was 38.9 million which happens to be 13% of the total population. The percent of blacks in the population in 2010 is no greater than the percent of slaves in the population in 1860 which was also 13%. In other words, blacks are the same percent of the population today as the slaves were in 1860.

In 1750, blacks made 20% of the population compared to 13% today.

Blacks have not grown any faster than the general population.
https://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-06.pdf
American Civil War Census Data
Statistics on Slavery

Yes it is, because 500,000 - 600,000 Black slaves were bought to the U.S.A, and that population in 200 - 300 years ballooned up to nearly 4 million.

That's a faster growing population than anywhere in Europe at the same time.

If African Americans were so severely abused, wouldn't they have trouble growing?

It's not 200 to 300 years. It's 400 years between 1600 and 2000. You are also ignoring low immigration rates in Europe compared to New World immigration and the lower birthrates in 19th and 20th century in Europe. A far better comparison of black population growth in American is a comparison between total population growth and black population growth. The black percentage of the total population has been stable for at least 150 years in the US.

Uh, because of immigration of Whites to the U.S, there's not a fair comparison to compare Blacks to Whites in the U.S.A.

 

[Coyote]

Why isn't Switzerland? Poland? Brazil? The Balkins?

It takes more then population size.

Switzerland's a pretty advanced nation, and Poland's catching up.

Poland had a per capita income GDP about half of Mexico, or Turkey in 1990 near the fall of the Berlin Wall, now Poland's close to a 1/3rd higher in per capita income GDP than Mexico, or Tiurkey.

Of course there's the major difference, that Poland experienced their capital city destroyed, and ethnic cleansed by Nazi Germany in WW2.
Then experienced economically stagnating Communism.

Ethiopia has had its own set of conflicts as well.

When did Ethiopia's capital city look like this?

Did Ethiopia benefit from the Marshall plan?

Did Poland benefit from the Marshall plan?

You were making comparisons to Germany and Japan. Not Poland.

 

[MikeK]

They're refugees from Syria who want to go home duh...

What is stopping them?

More than 85% of them are military-age males. Where are their wives and children, their sisters and mothers? Why did they abandon them and run rather than stand and fight? These are not asylum-seeking refugees. They are economic opportunists and/or ISIS-coached radicals who are the terrorists of tomorrow.

So unless you're on their side -- wake up! These are not "refugees." They represent a serious threat.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

I'll allow you the privilege of doing your own research, but... I'll leave you with this. The US isn't the only white founded nation that millions from around the world desire entry into...

And that has nothing to do with race.

What stopped Ethiopia from becoming the next Germany, or Japan?

Ethiopia has a pretty big population size, and could use that to become a powerhouse.

Since Ethiopia wasn't colonized, then why is it poor, and illiterate by African standards?

Sure, Ethiopia had some wars, and invasions, but so did Germany, and Japan.

So, why isn't Ethiopia the next Germany, or Japan?

Why isn't Switzerland? Poland? Brazil? The Balkins?

It takes more then population size.

Switzerland's a pretty advanced nation, and Poland's catching up.

Poland had a per capita income GDP about half of Mexico, or Turkey in 1990 near the fall of the Berlin Wall, now Poland's close to a 1/3rd higher in per capita income GDP than Mexico, or Tiurkey.

Of course there's the major difference, that Poland experienced their capital city destroyed, and ethnic cleansed by Nazi Germany in WW2.
Then experienced economically stagnating Communism.

Ethiopia has had its own set of conflicts as well.

Poland's much richer than Ethiopia.....

Poland's per capita income GDP here is listed as roughly $ 21,000, as opposed to Ethiopia as just over $1,000.

GDP - per capita (PPP) - Country Comparison

Poland's nearly 20X more productive in generating GDP per person than Ethiopia.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Switzerland's a pretty advanced nation, and Poland's catching up.

Poland had a per capita income GDP about half of Mexico, or Turkey in 1990 near the fall of the Berlin Wall, now Poland's close to a 1/3rd higher in per capita income GDP than Mexico, or Tiurkey.

Of course there's the major difference, that Poland experienced their capital city destroyed, and ethnic cleansed by Nazi Germany in WW2.
Then experienced economically stagnating Communism.

Ethiopia has had its own set of conflicts as well.

When did Ethiopia's capital city look like this?

Did Ethiopia benefit from the Marshall plan?

Did Poland benefit from the Marshall plan?

You were making comparisons to Germany and Japan. Not Poland.

Well, you bought up Poland, and Poland's far closer to Germany, and Japan than Ethiopia is.

 

[BlackSand]

If you think Africans are inferior you are a racist, got it? Africa it's very hot. how were the Se Asians doing before air conditioning? Jungle is tough believe it... Idiot racists LOL

The sad part is that is two of the benefits the slave traders used as a selling point.
They often commented on how sturdy the black slave was ... And how tolerant they were to standing in the blistering heat of the cotton and cane fields.
It certainly wasn't their inferiority in that aspect that made them attractive to plantation owners ... It was their ability to produce under grueling conditions.

.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

If you think Africans are inferior you are a racist, got it?

Everyone KNOWS blacks are inferior.

1. Black-americans come in last in all standardized tests. Asian-americans do fine on all the tests so it's not due to cultural bias in the tests.

2. Africa is by far the poorest and most backward continent on the planet. All of black africa is now controlled by blacks and has been for decades so it's not due to racism.

3. No black has ever won a Science Nobel Prize unless you count one in 1979 for the semi-science of economics. They have won many nobels in non-brain fields like Peace and also in Literature so it is not due to racism.

4. Out of 1552 chess grandmasters in the world, only THREE are black.

 

[francoHFW]

If you think Africans are inferior you are a racist, got it?

Everyone KNOWS blacks are inferior.

1. Black-americans come in last in all standardized tests. Asian-americans do fine on all the tests so it's not due to cultural bias in the tests.

2. Africa is by far the poorest and most backward continent on the planet. All of black africa is now controlled by blacks and has been for decades so it's not due to racism.

3. No black has ever won a Science Nobel Prize unless you count one in 1979 for the semi-science of economics. They have won many nobels in non-brain fields like Peace and also in Literature so it is not due to racism.

4. Out of 1552 chess grandmasters in the world, only THREE are black.

Environment, jungle living, they don't play chess... zzzzzzz. They are discriminated against more than any other minority by far get real.

 

[Flopper]

If you think Africans are inferior you are a racist, got it?

Everyone KNOWS blacks are inferior.

1. Black-americans come in last in all standardized tests. Asian-americans do fine on all the tests so it's not due to cultural bias in the tests.

2. Africa is by far the poorest and most backward continent on the planet. All of black africa is now controlled by blacks and has been for decades so it's not due to racism.

3. No black has ever won a Science Nobel Prize unless you count one in 1979 for the semi-science of economics. They have won many nobels in non-brain fields like Peace and also in Literature so it is not due to racism.

4. Out of 1552 chess grandmasters in the world, only THREE are black.

I assume you're speaking of intellectual inferiority. A 2005 study of IQ scores of blacks and whites revealed a 15 to 18 point difference which would tend to support your point. However, it is not that simple. Socioeconomic demographics such as education, has a significant impact on both IQ scores and intellectual accomplishments. A study of young black children who were in head start had a 17% improvement in IQ scores vs those that didn't. A number of studies lead to the conclusion that all other things being equal except the color of the skin, measured intelligence would not significantly differ between races.

Race and intelligence - Wikipedia

 

[bgrouse]

I understand just fine that you're trying to whitewash negroes by posting statistics of countries with barely any negroes. El Salvador's black population is a fraction of a percentage of the country's total population. You may as well post a country with no blacks and point out that 0 blacks were responsible for crime there. WTF would that prove? You post countries in the Americas but leave out the most glaring one: USA (over 10%). It's obvious you have an agenda.

I posted the top five countries for homicide in the world. I didn't whitewash anything at all. I simply went and took the top five countries.

Wonderful. So what's your point? That Latinos are violent, too?

Seems you're the one trying to whitewash things by being incapable of understand simple statistics.

Yes, as I pointed out El Salvador has a black population which is 0.01% of the country, almost nothing, as I also pointed out, it has the worst murder rate per capita in the world. Do you disagree with either of these two statistics?

But seriously dude, if you can't grasp the point I'm making, can I suggest enrolling in school again? It's FUCKING SIMPLE.

1, 2, and 3 show that Mestizos are violent, too. 4 and 5 show blacks are violent when a majority, too. And even that's a bit of a guess since you're only posting intentional homicide. There's far more to violent crime (intentional homicide is generally a minority of the crime).

Analyzing the USA would let you control for the environment (same country) and compare blacks to whites to let you determine if blacks can become as nonviolent and smart as whites if placed in the same country.

You said that black people lead the violent crime statistics. I was proving you wrong.

You're missing the point of this discussion.

How am I supposed to not post international homicides? Should I post interstellar homicide rates?

You're supposed to realize that other violent crimes, like robbery and assault, happen far more often and are thus a better indicator, though that isn't the biggest problem with your post.

Look, if you want to post other violent crime, go ahead. The issue here is that a murder is a murder in almost any country. Violent crime changes, statistics are almost impossible to understand in every country you're looking at, and to see how a comparative would be made.

For example the UK and the US probably have similar violent crime rates, yet the US's crime stats make it look LOWER.

Yes, analyzing the US would give you certain information. But you'd be cherry picking information to make a case.

No, I'm picking a country so that the statistics have:

1. Controls for the environment.
2. Actually has the races in substantial quantity.
3. Controls for variation in violent crime definition you were complaining about.

Picking El Salvador doesn't control for the environment, doesn't have the races, and you didn't even post meaningful violent crime statistics.

If your argument is that black people are more violent, and you ONLY stick with the US, you'll never prove that black people are more violent.

In fact there are plenty of black African countries with lower murder rates than the US.

Yes, I am probably missing the point of your discussion. Seeing as you like to just throw in random maps of things for not reason.

Been explained to you in another thread.

As I've told you, violent crime statistics are massively unreliable, murder statistics are the most reliable.

You said they were difficult to compare from country to country, so one obvious solution would be to pick one relevant and appropriate country and look within it, comparing the whites and negroes. Can you get that through your head?

No, you're picking the statistics you think will prove you right if you manage to stop all other statistics from being taken into account.

I'm sorry, I don't play your bullshit games.

I'm picking statistics that are actually usable, moron, instead of picking a country with barely any blacks or looking at homicides only, which is a relatively rare occurrence.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I posted the top five countries for homicide in the world. I didn't whitewash anything at all. I simply went and took the top five countries.

Wonderful. So what's your point? That Latinos are violent, too?

Seems you're the one trying to whitewash things by being incapable of understand simple statistics.

Yes, as I pointed out El Salvador has a black population which is 0.01% of the country, almost nothing, as I also pointed out, it has the worst murder rate per capita in the world. Do you disagree with either of these two statistics?

But seriously dude, if you can't grasp the point I'm making, can I suggest enrolling in school again? It's FUCKING SIMPLE.

1, 2, and 3 show that Mestizos are violent, too. 4 and 5 show blacks are violent when a majority, too. And even that's a bit of a guess since you're only posting intentional homicide. There's far more to violent crime (intentional homicide is generally a minority of the crime).

Analyzing the USA would let you control for the environment (same country) and compare blacks to whites to let you determine if blacks can become as nonviolent and smart as whites if placed in the same country.

You said that black people lead the violent crime statistics. I was proving you wrong.

You're missing the point of this discussion.

How am I supposed to not post international homicides? Should I post interstellar homicide rates?

You're supposed to realize that other violent crimes, like robbery and assault, happen far more often and are thus a better indicator, though that isn't the biggest problem with your post.

Look, if you want to post other violent crime, go ahead. The issue here is that a murder is a murder in almost any country. Violent crime changes, statistics are almost impossible to understand in every country you're looking at, and to see how a comparative would be made.

For example the UK and the US probably have similar violent crime rates, yet the US's crime stats make it look LOWER.

Yes, analyzing the US would give you certain information. But you'd be cherry picking information to make a case.

No, I'm picking a country so that the statistics have:

1. Controls for the environment.
2. Actually has the races in substantial quantity.
3. Controls for variation in violent crime definition you were complaining about.

Picking El Salvador doesn't control for the environment, doesn't have the races, and you didn't even post meaningful violent crime statistics.

If your argument is that black people are more violent, and you ONLY stick with the US, you'll never prove that black people are more violent.

In fact there are plenty of black African countries with lower murder rates than the US.

Yes, I am probably missing the point of your discussion. Seeing as you like to just throw in random maps of things for not reason.

Been explained to you in another thread.

As I've told you, violent crime statistics are massively unreliable, murder statistics are the most reliable.

You said they were difficult to compare from country to country, so one obvious solution would be to pick one relevant and appropriate country and look within it, comparing the whites and negroes. Can you get that through your head?

No, you're picking the statistics you think will prove you right if you manage to stop all other statistics from being taken into account.

I'm sorry, I don't play your bullshit games.

I'm picking statistics that are actually usable, moron, instead of picking a country with barely any blacks or looking at homicides only, which is a relatively rare occurrence.

Oh, insults.

Whatever dude. Try coming back to me when A) you have something to say that is worth something and B) when you get through a whole post with insulting.

 

[frigidweirdo]

If you think Africans are inferior you are a racist, got it?

Everyone KNOWS blacks are inferior.

1. Black-americans come in last in all standardized tests. Asian-americans do fine on all the tests so it's not due to cultural bias in the tests.

2. Africa is by far the poorest and most backward continent on the planet. All of black africa is now controlled by blacks and has been for decades so it's not due to racism.

3. No black has ever won a Science Nobel Prize unless you count one in 1979 for the semi-science of economics. They have won many nobels in non-brain fields like Peace and also in Literature so it is not due to racism.

4. Out of 1552 chess grandmasters in the world, only THREE are black.

The problem here is that there are whites who are "inferior" and they try and make themselves more "superior" by saying "hey, look, blacks are inferior", it's the main point of racism, most racists are fucking idiots who are trying to make themselves look better by trying to make black people look worse.

1) Black Americans aren't all blacks.

2) Africa is the poorest and most backwards continent, it's true. The difference between you and me is that I've been there. I went with two smallish bags and I spent ages going from place to place, country to country. I've got off a combi in Lesotho and every single person got off that bus and walked into a HIV/AIDS hospital but me. I've seen it.

But I've also spent time using my BRAIN to understand it.

Africa is a harsh environment. The people have developed over time to adapt to that environment. The colonial era was brutal for Africa, which had adapted for their environment and their resources, which are far more limited than Western Europe's resources.

But like I said in the first paragraph, you don't care about the reality.

3) So, no black person has won a prize given out by white people. Wow. Has anyone in your family ever won a Nobel prize? If not, then you're clearly inferior.

List of African-American inventors and scientists - Wikipedia

A list of black people much more intelligent than you.

4) So, black people don't play chess much. Wow. Proves what?

 

[bgrouse]

Racist whites will hope against all hope that if Blacks were left to their own devices we would fail. The question I ask is if we are succeeding despite your very best efforts to stop us why would you think we would fail if you vanished from the planet?

Lets be serious for a moment.

1. Blacks existed before whites ever appeared on the planet.
2. They built civilizations that to this day whites cant figure out.
3. While europe was falling back into an illiterate quagmire, Blacks built more civilizations.
4. After whites declared "never again" and went on a homicidal and felonious crime spree across the planet, Blacks still survived and even helped whites build their civilizations.
5. After assisting in their own released from slavery here in the states, Blacks became politicians and successful businessmen.
6. Even when Jim Crow was established Blacks still became successful and built their own thriving towns and cities which whites promptly destroyed out of rage.

If we could do all that when we had no contact with whites and did all that when violently oppressed by whites how is there even a question?

The question is, why are blacks drowning to get to the countries of the racist, raging whites when they could just stay in their apefreaka coontries.

And as a white man, I must say I can't for the life of me figure out how that super-advanced negro vessel works. All us dumb whites have is this crappy driftwood:

If only those negroes would make it to our white countries to teach us their ancient arts...

Ignorance of western foreign policy is apparent here by this stupid ass white man. Again you might want not to make ship accidents racial. The US has 2 naval ship accidents here recently.

And the negro misses the point yet again (hint: it's not about ship accidents, but about who is trying to get where and at what cost).

Yep so if there are 1000 crimes, which is a thing and 700 whites commit rimes, then whites commit 70 percent of the crimes.

And if those 700 whites are from a group of 100,000,000 whites, while the other 300 crimes are committed by 300 blacks from the same country, which happens to only contain 300 blacks, which person would you cross the street to avoid: A random white dude who has a 0.0007% chance of being a criminal or a random black dude who has a 100% chance of being a criminal?

Of course it's not about ship accidents to the white boy because he has just got to keep feeling like he's superior.

We can talk about ship accidents all you want, as long as you don't keep trudging through the discussion like a knuckle-dragging ape. For instance, you'd have to understand that a ship sunk during a battle is not the same as a ship that sinks on its own in ideal conditions. But I doubt you'd ever get that, so I fail to see the point in carrying on.

But it is abut tat and it's really not wise to make such thing racial.

The biggest part you're missing is what those negroes were doing when they drowned, not that they drowned.

Well if you want to make up numbers to support a lie then we can make the number 100 million whites and 300 blacks. But we hot a situation here were there were 10 million arrests for crimes and 7 million were on whites and 2.4 million on blacks. That means that since arrests are a thing, whites are 7 out of 10 who get arrested. Backs 2.4. The number of arrests for .blacks if it was a separate population group, is less than 1 percent of the overall population. The number of whites is more than 2 percent of the population. So then by any standard whites are arrested for crimes in higher numbers and you can try all you want to find some way to use funny math in order to make some claim of racial superiority but it's just not there.

I have no idea what you said there in your broken, hardly intelligible "English." I gave you the example using simple numbers to see if you understand why per capita statistics are important. You didn't answers, so obviously you will never understand and there's no point in using up my keyboard trying to explain it to you.

 

[Asclepias]

If you think Africans are inferior you are a racist, got it?

Everyone KNOWS blacks are inferior.

1. Black-americans come in last in all standardized tests. Asian-americans do fine on all the tests so it's not due to cultural bias in the tests.

2. Africa is by far the poorest and most backward continent on the planet. All of black africa is now controlled by blacks and has been for decades so it's not due to racism.

3. No black has ever won a Science Nobel Prize unless you count one in 1979 for the semi-science of economics. They have won many nobels in non-brain fields like Peace and also in Literature so it is not due to racism.

4. Out of 1552 chess grandmasters in the world, only THREE are black.

The problem here is that there are whites who are "inferior" and they try and make themselves more "superior" by saying "hey, look, blacks are inferior", it's the main point of racism, most racists are fucking idiots who are trying to make themselves look better by trying to make black people look worse.

1) Black Americans aren't all blacks.

2) Africa is the poorest and most backwards continent, it's true. The difference between you and me is that I've been there. I went with two smallish bags and I spent ages going from place to place, country to country. I've got off a combi in Lesotho and every single person got off that bus and walked into a HIV/AIDS hospital but me. I've seen it.

But I've also spent time using my BRAIN to understand it.

Africa is a harsh environment. The people have developed over time to adapt to that environment. The colonial era was brutal for Africa, which had adapted for their environment and their resources, which are far more limited than Western Europe's resources.

But like I said in the first paragraph, you don't care about the reality.

3) So, no black person has won a prize given out by white people. Wow. Has anyone in your family ever won a Nobel prize? If not, then you're clearly inferior.

List of African-American inventors and scientists - Wikipedia

A list of black people much more intelligent than you.

4) So, black people don't play chess much. Wow. Proves what?

"4) So, black people don't play chess much. Wow. Proves what?"
Proves he is an idiot but everyone already knew that. Every Black person I know plays chess. Every time I go to any Black persons family reunion or home someone always whips out the chess board. Makes sense because Moors are the ones that brought the game to europe.