Post: #651

(01-17-2018 11:23 AM)nomadbrah Wrote:  ^ Yeah, that's where the "christianity is jewry" comes from ECL, you do know that right?

Where did the initial system come from and why? Jews pulled a coup off of the cultural global system established by whites.

I don't deny that and have been saying that for awhile now. However the groundwork was laid down already for what we see as globalism today.

Post: #652

Slavery and colonialism are the two mantras aside from the Holocoust forever repeated for the White guilt.

But the facts are this:

1. Slavery has been part of almost every culture. Islam had slaves until the 1980s and the current system is still doing. Almost every bloody society had slavery as a hallmark.
What people don't tell is that while Whites had joined the slavery bullshit for the gain of 1.7% (only they owned Slaves in the US - in Europe that was even lower), the truth is that European Whites ended actively slavery everywhere on Earth!

At one time from 1850-1900 the British navy employed up to 1/5 of their entire fucking fleet to end slavery! Slavery was also practiced by Africans enslaving other Africans - the British had once a constant military presence before the African coast capturing slave ships.





So - yes White Christianity joined slavery while Christianity initially wiped it out later, but they also FUCKING ABOLISHED IT AND ELIMINATED IT EVEN IN COUNTRIES THEY DID NOT RULE LIKE IN MUSLIM ONES!

Also I might add - the first 500.000 slaves in the US were White - Scots and Irish - sold at times at 10% the value of blacks and there were even laws forbidding the cross-breeding of those white-black slaves because it lowered the worth of the black slaves:





2. Colonialism:

I have also talked with some educated Africans and strangely enough those that have been to a never-colonized country like Liberia know that colonialism actually helped many countries in Africa.

Also I might add that again the entire colonialism bullshit was financially a disaster as only 0,1% of the society made great riches while the taxpayers in each country paid for the crap. That is why they quickly let go of the colonies.

There are scores of educated Africans who can see the positive influence of Whites in Africa - some even say that the Europeans left too early. They sure wished for equality and equal opportunity, but they did not mind the European leadership since that was often less corrupt and more competent than what they got under their own rule.

So I would not say that ALL CONQUESTS WERE EQUALLY BAD! There is a difference between being conquered by a tribe which brings superior tech and knowledge vs being conquered by a horde of rapists and savages who burn your cites, kill the men and rape the women - or later impose their medieval system that is inferior than the one they conquered (Arabs conquering Persia for example, Mongol invasions, sacking of Rome by the then primitive Northern European tribes).

--------------

So in summary - I am not excusing neither slavery done by Christians in the last centuries nor the excesses of colonialism, but I am merely stating that in my opinion Whites had repaid for the errors of slavery by forcing others to end it - otherwise they would not have stopped.

And the colonialism aspect is remedied by having paid for the quick development of conquered nations. Liberia for example was created by the indigenous tribes and by freed slaves and is the least developed African nation there - it is not a coincidence. Liberia still has a GDP concentrated at a rate of 80% in agriculture like a country set in 1800. Even bloody Somalia is better than them!

And again - I am not calling colonialism good, but it was not as bad as some may think it was. There were however conquests in the past by other tribes were indeed just shit and pure slaughter. This was not it. We exalt the Romans and Greeks and their conquests because they actually brought an upgrade in science and technology to the conquered tribes - unfortunately they even managed to lose it themselves later.

Post: #653

(01-17-2018 12:08 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  Slavery and colonialism are the two mantras aside from the Holocoust forever repeated for the White guilt.

You misinterpret my post. I don't give a fuck about white guilt and i'm not using it as some bludgeon. I've said from the start that whites have every right to fight for ethnic survival. I'm just pointing out the causes of the fraying threads and the fact is the root causes are not addressed in an honest way at all. On the left you have the coalition of the brown with jews spoonfeeding white liberal marxists who want to use it as a cudgel to guilt whites into a multiculturalist hell. On the right you have people advocating for white ethnonationalism and "independence" advocating quite underhandedly for a return to the same system of traditional globalist imperialism which eventually fell apart.

To borrow an alt right phrase: Both are shit tier systems with questionable longevity. Rome didn't even advocate for what some of the guiding "intellects" of the alt right are advocating these days.

I also firmly believe that what is replacing the U.S. now (not so covert jewish elites with leftist latin indio/meztiso takeover) is far worse than the white founding anglo system it was based on. I believe if whites don't maintain majority it's completely done in north america. I don't believe for a second that latinos will magically hold hands in solidarity with blacks or at the other social class that chinese, whites, and indians will work together in this new society.

Quote:But the facts are this:

1. Slavery has been part of almost every culture. Islam had slaves until the 1980s and the current system is still doing. Almost every bloody society had slavery as a hallmark.

That's absolutely true and who were the dummies who imported it into their fresh new lands to kick start a new world order?

Once again i'm not making a push for white guilt or a narrative about poor downtrodden dindus but how whites themselves fucked up big time and keep making the same mistakes.

Quote:I have also talked with some educated Africans and strangely enough those that have been to a never-colonized country like Liberia know that colonialism actually helped many countries in Africa.

Surely places in Africa were improved from boiling shit to make a feral animal soup to sip on at night to reading and writing but this wasn't so for a lot of colonial "subjects" at the time. Like it or not civilizations in asia and other parts were isolated in their own way and wanted to be left alone. Why did the dutch want to establish colonies in southeast asia?

Why did Britain for that matter?

it was an acceleration of globalist ambitions to rule the seas and the known world against their own white neighbors.

This was a game that the other half of the world didn't care for really they had their own established order. It's entirely true Japs were invading kingdoms in Korea and even in China even back during the Imjin wars but there was almost a cyclical nature to the conflict.

The globalism introduced abroad led to another type of frenetic competition. It hasn't abated since..

Post: #654

(01-17-2018 12:33 PM)El Chinito loco Wrote:  Surely places in Africa were improved from boiling shit to make a feral animal soup to sip on at night to reading and writing but this wasn't so for a lot of colonial "subjects" at the time. Like it or not civilizations in asia and other parts were isolated in their own way and wanted to be left alone. Why did the dutch want to establish colonies in southeast asia?

Why did Britain for that matter?

it was an acceleration of globalist ambitions to rule the seas and the known world against their own white neighbors.

This was a game that the other half of the world didn't care for really they had their own established order. It's entirely true Japs were invading kingdoms in Korea and even in China even back during the Imjin wars but there was almost a cyclical nature to the conflict.

The globalism introduced abroad led to another type of frenetic competition. It hasn't abated since..

A lot of the European colonialist conquests were based on some kind of fear that the other European nation would get an edge over them either financially or militarily and then conquer them later in some war.

There may have been something else added to it, because the international lodges as well as usury central bankers were operating AS ONE.

So my guess is that a lot of the imperialism was founded on the ideas that all more advanced countries fell towards. It was probably more beneficial to Africans while many Asian countries could have gone without. You will also note that the places with the strongest cultures were able to shake away colonialist rule easily and even embark on their own transformations - China and even Japan being in danger (though somehow no one wanted to sink his teeth in that militarized cookie).

Honestly based on my understanding of the ruling global elite, then I would say that the same boys wanted to conquer various parts of the world and impose a similar system, because they already had plans of global domination. They used their proxy workers (back then mostly Freemason lodges - now globalist think tanks and corporations) to conquer all the countries of the world knowing that it would be financially destructive for the host nations, but it did not matter. Impoverished Europeans were shipped out to slaughter folk at the other side of the Earth so that the globalist rulers got their way. Some people profited from it more (Africa) while others would have been content with an exchange of knowledge - (Asia).

But personally I would say FUCK IT - THE PAST IS PAST. I don't see the heirs of the Aztecs being guilty of mass genocide of their own underclass or the Muslims repeating Mea Culpa for countless slaughters and 1400 year old slavery.

So fuck it - the past is past. White Euro-states are relatively benign and inclusive now despite all claims of racism by the Left. As you correctly put it - if they are gone from their dominated states, then those countries become shit-holes over time and will be far less orderly or benevolent to various races/religions.

Post: #655

Fun fact, the only time China was open to foreigners from the West was when it was ruled by Kublai Khan who staffed his public employees with non-chinese.

That's what is happening in the US now. The jewish occupied USA used foreigners such as Nimrata Lena as their goons.

Post: #656

Female interviewer was pretty biased in the way she was asking questions. But Jordan Peterson was calmed and rational.

Post: #657

(01-17-2018 11:10 AM)El Chinito loco Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 03:15 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 01:08 AM)godzilla Wrote:  If you look at the history of the world. In about every nation. There was always a minority. If there wasn't a visible ethnic minority. There was a religious minority. The majority will find something new to complain about.

Blacks and latinos have hardly been responsible for the large welfare states that exist in Europe and America today. Most of these laws were past when former was probably 99 percent white and the latter was 90 percent.(though they sure took advantage of the programs) Whites loves socialism just as much as anyone else. They just want it on their terms.

What did whites expect though when they starting letting the extreme lower class of Mexico and Central America in 50 years ago? None of these people have the intelligence or cultural understanding to succeed in a modern corporate ecomony. Do you expect them to just come in and take a $7 dollar an hour job for there whole lives and not take the welfare that's available to them and everyone else?

Of course the people coming in were and are not responsible for the changes. The changes were allowed to happen and were created by international globalists. Those guys view the 110IQ Chinese peasant, the 120IQ white gender studies professor or the 70IQ Somali welfare recipient as virtually identical. To them they are just cogs in the machine and part of the large pool of unwashed masses - the useless eaters.

They don't care about any ethnic nation states and in fact want them to go, because lack of uniform nation states will make ruling over the serfs easier. They know that people will unlikely be able to unite in a nation made up of highly different groups.

Diversity is indeed a strength - it's a positive things to them, because it rips apart the bonds of a potentially united serf-class. Diversity of that sort is not positive for anyone among the established people, but the changes are often slow and incremental and the people will only later wake up and see their country having transformed into a shit-hole. It will be too late to change things then.

Two fatal mistakes committed by western civilization in the last 500 years.

#1 Slavery.

What purpose and intent was there to import hundreds of thousands of African slaves to tend the fields of the new world? It was simple greed and avarice. There is no free ride

It set the racial paradigm for centuries to come and poisoned the well early on. This problem would have been easily ameliorated by importing more irishmen or other whites to till the land. Whites created a real moral legacy of grudge and hatred there even if blacks now in contemporary society have unparalleled success and prosperity compared with what they may have had coming from their native lands.

You can blame it on jews or whatever situation at the time but this was a decision by white elites who knew the consequences and didn't give a shit. I don't believe for even an instance they didn't know the possible blowback from all this even centuries down the line. These weren't idiots but learned men.

I've said for awhile that the biggest sellouts were always the wealthy WASP elites. Classism is and will forever be the biggest flag bearer over even an ethnocentric society. This is why in the U.K. it's still everything. Class, status, bloodlines, wealth, etc.. all intrinsic to modern anglo society.

A rich paki merchant who enslaves white girls is still lord over the poor white British intellectual 10 generations deep. This is why both male and female Brits feel no moral or racial distaste for living in places like Dubai and sucking on some oil sheikh's cock literally and figuratively. "It's part of the legacy, mate!" I know some Brits will deny this but i've met many well to do Brits abroad who express these sentiments. It's part and parcel of modern Britain.

I hate anarcho communism and the other fag shit proposed by the left but this is a glaring issue responsible for a lot of strife in the ages.


...

Take away the Blacks and you have a new underclass in the Irish and Italians.

The whole concept of whiteness really gained steam in America because you had caucasian and non-caucasian people side by side. At this point you had different types of white people who had previously despised each other, look at each other and realize they were more alike than different, bite the bullet and join together like Voltron.

I was just in Japan a few months back talking to some Japanese people who showed visible contempt for Chinese people and the culture. And this was a country they owe basically their entire writing system to.

Humans are just tribalistic by nature.

EDIT: And for the record I do think America should stay majority white, I just don't think the legacy of slavery in the country has any real significant bearing on why the country is circling the drain.

Post: #658

Perfect example of reform Judaism. Doing a service during a protest, which is disgraceful to an actual service. Than they get arresting, in tallis and yarmulkes doing it since they are disturbing a public avenue. In a way they are getting non Jews to pray which I guess is a bonus for them.

Post: #659

(01-17-2018 04:52 PM)budoslavic Wrote:  Female interviewer was pretty biased in the way she was asking questions. But Jordan Peterson was calmed and rational.

This interview is going viral, even though it's 30 minutes long, because the interviewer gets so completely owned. The British corporate media obviously dislike this guy. If he ever gets interviewed by CNN or MSNBC, their ad hominem attacks towards the end of the interview will be even more egregious than the ones from this lady. Most evolutionary psychologists keep their heads down to minimize the attacks they get from the academic left, but this professor clearly doesn't give a fuck.

Post: #660

Scaramucci on HardTalk

Post: #661

(01-17-2018 12:00 PM)El Chinito loco Wrote:  

(01-17-2018 11:23 AM)nomadbrah Wrote:  ^ Yeah, that's where the "christianity is jewry" comes from ECL, you do know that right?

Where did the initial system come from and why? Jews pulled a coup off of the cultural global system established by whites.

I don't deny that and have been saying that for awhile now. However the groundwork was laid down already for what we see as globalism today.

It's a good question.

I think the white drive to conquer the world comes from some melancholic yearning for the ideal, which is a deep part of the collective white psyche.

White people, and by that I mean mainly Indo-European, people have always had this idea that the world is decaying. There's the idea that paradise was lost through decadence. You see it in the romantic movement:



This is the painting used to illustrate romanticism on Wikipedia.

What is it if not melancholy.

You find this same idea in the Indo-European Hindu Rig Veda. Here is the idea that we live in a fallen world (Kali Yuga).

Or in Plato the theory of the world of ideas, which are true and beautiful, but which we can't perceive in our untrue world.

Why not ask the great poet of the empire why they did what they did?

Rudyard Kipling

White Man's Burden

Quote:Take up the White Man’s burden—

Send forth the best ye breed—

Go send your sons to exile

To serve your captives' need

To wait in heavy harness

On fluttered folk and wild—

Your new-caught, sullen peoples,

Half devil and half child

Take up the White Man’s burden

In patience to abide

To veil the threat of terror

And check the show of pride;

By open speech and simple

An hundred times made plain

To seek another’s profit

And work another’s gain

Take up the White Man’s burden—

And reap his old reward:

The blame of those ye better

The hate of those ye guard—

The cry of hosts ye humour

(Ah slowly) to the light:

"Why brought ye us from bondage,

“Our loved Egyptian night?”

Take up the White Man’s burden-

Have done with childish days-

The lightly proffered laurel,

The easy, ungrudged praise.

Comes now, to search your manhood

Through all the thankless years,

Cold-edged with dear-bought wisdom,

The judgment of your peers!

Is this white supremacy as it often claimed or a melancholic confirmation of the futility of idealism?

Post: #662

That Jordan Peterson video received over a million views in less than 24-hours, but it doesn't appear on YouTube's "trending" page so I wonder if they manually removed it. It's currently at 1.6 million views, which I think will now make his book a bestseller. No corporate media outlet, however, has mentioned the interview yet that I've seen.

Post: #663

I have some suspicions on why the Norks are so cushy cushy all of a sudden with these olympic games. One flag one Korea? I wonder what they're planning.

Post: #664

Tomorrow night is going to be very interesting because #MyBordersMyChoice goes down across public spaces, colleges and universities all over the world. I'm sure a lot of people will be triggered when they see these meme posters.

Post: #665

(01-18-2018 10:11 AM)C-Note Wrote:  

(01-17-2018 04:52 PM)budoslavic Wrote:  Female interviewer was pretty biased in the way she was asking questions. But Jordan Peterson was calmed and rational.

This interview is going viral, even though it's 30 minutes long, because the interviewer gets so completely owned. The British corporate media obviously dislike this guy. If he ever gets interviewed by CNN or MSNBC, their ad hominem attacks towards the end of the interview will be even more egregious than the ones from this lady. Most evolutionary psychologists keep their heads down to minimize the attacks they get from the academic left, but this professor clearly doesn't give a fuck.

It’s a wonderful interview, especially considering that the interviewer is Cathy Newman. From the interviews I’ve watched with her, she really has a smarmy, superiority complex.
They’re now trying to spin the interview and the fallout from it, to paint Cathy as a victim. Apparently she has been on the receiving end of “death threats” and “vile mysoginistic abuse”, despite no evidence being brought forward to support these claims.

Post: #666

I went to the store this evening wearing my Trump t-shirt. Hadn't done that in a while, but figured it would be a good thing to rub in liberal faces, especially after they shot themselves in the foot with the shutdown nonsense. Anyway I passed by this girl there wearing a shirt that said "Immigrants make America great". Well she saw my shirt but then she instantly looked away and pretended not to notice. I almost laughed out loud.

Post: #667

(01-21-2018 10:40 AM)Poker Wrote:  

(01-18-2018 10:11 AM)C-Note Wrote:  

(01-17-2018 04:52 PM)budoslavic Wrote:  Female interviewer was pretty biased in the way she was asking questions. But Jordan Peterson was calmed and rational.

This interview is going viral, even though it's 30 minutes long, because the interviewer gets so completely owned. The British corporate media obviously dislike this guy. If he ever gets interviewed by CNN or MSNBC, their ad hominem attacks towards the end of the interview will be even more egregious than the ones from this lady. Most evolutionary psychologists keep their heads down to minimize the attacks they get from the academic left, but this professor clearly doesn't give a fuck.

It’s a wonderful interview, especially considering that the interviewer is Cathy Newman. From the interviews I’ve watched with her, she really has a smarmy, superiority complex.
They’re now trying to spin the interview and the fallout from it, to paint Cathy as a victim. Apparently she has been on the receiving end of “death threats” and “vile mysoginistic abuse”, despite no evidence being brought forward to support these claims.

Sargon has an hour-long analysis vid on the debate where he digs into the details and why Cathy Newman thinks and acts the way she does.

It's essentially based on radical feminism of MEN VS WOMEN.

When she is surprised that Peterson is happy that some women earn more money after negotiating better it's as if she cannot believe that the a man can be happy for a sworn enemy - a woman - winning.

Post: #668

Croatia was included in #MyBordersMyChoice! We're relevant!

Post: #669

Whenever I hear that there's this guy who "Challenges the prevailing myths that govern a society" I always imagine a LARPer.

But what I want is a guy who hammers those myths very hard, with original content, excellent reasoning, and really (really!) good rhetoric. This guy should evoke a boss battle in Dark Souls, because the myths are so large and the Challenger so small that the Challenger had better 100% know his shit - or he'll get crushed.

The YouTuber right now who most encapsulates this "Hammer" philosophy is named The Alternative Hypothesis. And in this video below, he hammers the Martin Luther King, Jr. myth. He starts out really slow by asserting that MLK was a plagiarist who was controlled by Powerful Elites and ends by asserting that American Blacks cost the country $300 billion per year - so fuck MLK.

I'm no historian, so I can't say how accurate his research is. But if you like the sound of big, big ideas getting smashed by huge, huge hammers, I recommend this video (and series of videos) extremely highly.

Post: #670

Large sections of the alt-right seem to have turned into an inverse version of the black consciousness community whereas they believe every unfortunate thing that has ever happened to whites can be attributed to blacks; it's like their version of "The Man". If it weren't for blacks they'd have space travel, feminine, chaste women, and an end to email spam.

Like the black consciousness community arguing whether biracial people are actually black, there are even arguments in the alt-right now on what does and does not constitute white.

Post: #671

The high Wrote:Large sections of the alt-right seem to have turned into an inverse version of the black consciousness community whereas they believe every unfortunate thing that has ever happened to whites can be attributed to blacks; it's like their version of "The Man". If it weren't for blacks they'd have space travel, feminine, chaste women, and an end to email spam.

Do you know why I like claims like, "Martin Luther King, Jr. didn't write his I Have A Dream speech!" and "The yearly contribution of American Blacks to the American economy equals negative $300 billion!"?

It's because they're concrete Yes/No claims. There's no nuance, (although maybe the latter claim is nuanced in the sense of having to define "Economic Contribution").

When people like you address non-nuanced claims with "The Alt-Right is totally like the Black consciousness community" - (which totally avoids discussing the degree to which each group's claims can be empirically verified) - I simply cannot take you seriously.

Post: #672

His presentation just seems very specious, he'll cite some claim and then follow it up with his own anecdote. For example around 8:40 he quotes a book from Thaddeus Russell wherein 1.2% of former slaves reported of being raped by a former slavemaster, than tacks on his own personal anecdote of most white guys today not being attracted to black women as a buttress. That may or may not be true but where is the evidence and where is the correlation of the rates of rape amongst slaves and their masters over 150 years ago to the attraction of white men to black women today? That type of sophistry sets off red flags. I could go on and on and point out little inconsistencies that reveal his own strong bias like comparing the legitimacy rate of America to the continent of Africa but it's not worth it. Then he closes the video by saying it's safe to assume the behavior of blacks today is no different than their behavior then when his own data shows the opposite.

And where is the claim that blacks cost the country 300 million a year; I couldn't find it?

Post: #673

the high Wrote:For example around 8:40 he quotes a book from Thaddeus Russell wherein 1.2% of former slaves reported of being raped by a former slavemaster, than tacks on his own personal anecdote of most white guys today not being attracted to black women as a buttress. That may or may not be true but where is the evidence and where is the correlation of the rates of rape amongst slaves and their masters over 150 years ago to the attraction of white men to black women today?

There are two completely different fields of study, which have divergent opinions regarding the correlation between rape and impregnation.

The evolutionary biologists say that the reproductive drive is the primary impetus for our every decision; ergo, rape is about impregnation, and impregnation is about sexual attraction. The sociologists, (especially the feminists), say rape is about power and domination; ergo, rape is completely disconnected from impregnation and sexual attraction. These two sides have been battling it out over this issue for more than forty years, and I'm not impressed by the sociological argument, because I'm not impressed with Feminists.

To me, the video-presenter merely spoke as someone who studies a lot of evolutionary psychology, and accepts its conclusion. (As someone who has also read a lot of Evolutionary Psychology, I happen to agree with his conclusion.) To me, also, you strike me as someone who reads Exactly Zero Evolutionary Biology whatsoever - and so you concluded he was uttering "sophistry" because what he said didn't align with What You Already Know.

Quote:I could go on and on and point out little inconsistencies that reveal his own strong bias like comparing the legitimacy rate of America to the continent of Africa but it's not worth it. Then he closes the video by saying it's safe to assume the behavior of blacks today is no different than their behavior then when his own data shows the opposite.

And where is the claim that blacks cost the country 300 million a year; I couldn't find it?

1. Not "the legitimacy rate", the "literacy rate".

2. You don't explain "how his data shows the opposite".

3. Not "$300 million", "$300 billion".

Post: #674

(01-23-2018 11:28 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

the high Wrote:For example around 8:40 he quotes a book from Thaddeus Russell wherein 1.2% of former slaves reported of being raped by a former slavemaster, than tacks on his own personal anecdote of most white guys today not being attracted to black women as a buttress. That may or may not be true but where is the evidence and where is the correlation of the rates of rape amongst slaves and their masters over 150 years ago to the attraction of white men to black women today?

There are two completely different fields of study, which have divergent opinions regarding the correlation between rape and impregnation.

The evolutionary biologists say that the reproductive drive is the primary impetus for our every decision; ergo, rape is about impregnation, and impregnation is about sexual attraction. The sociologists, (especially the feminists), say rape is about power and domination; ergo, rape is completely disconnected from impregnation and sexual attraction. These two sides have been battling it out over this issue for more than forty years, and I'm not impressed by the sociological argument, because I'm not impressed with Feminists.

To me, the video-presenter merely spoke as someone who studies a lot of evolutionary psychology, and accepts its conclusion. (As someone who has also read a lot of Evolutionary Psychology, I happen to agree with his conclusion.) To me, also, you strike me as someone who reads Exactly Zero Evolutionary Biology whatsoever - and so you concluded he was uttering "sophistry" because what he said didn't align with What You Already Know.

Whether you've read a lot of evolutionary psychology is irrelevant to the discussion. Personally, I make a mean cheese omelet. And you're not impressed with feminists so their claims are automatically invalid? So if feminists think the earth is round, you would think the earth is flat because you're not impressed with feminists? It's not about what you're impressed with it's about what the data shows.

Anyway this isn't about the impetus that drives rape this is about the claim that white men not being attracted to black women in 2018 has any bearing on the rate of rapes among female slaves and their masters during slavery. For one, he just throws it out there to be taken at face value, and two he's assuming the sexual preferences of white men then is the same as it is now. But you know what? He very well could be right, but he's providing no evidence. And the fact he's mixing in his own anecdotes with some citation is why I call it sophism.

Quote:1. Not "the legitimacy rate", the "literacy rate".

2. You don't explain "how his data shows the opposite".

3. Not "$300 million", "$300 billion".

1. He's still comparing a country to a continent.

2. According to the data on his site Black incarceration rates have been increasing since at least 1930. I would think that would imply a change in behavior.

3. How is African Americans costing America 300 billion a year?

Post: #675

@thehigh:

1. Do you think it's fundamentally wrong to compare the rate of AIDS in American Blacks to the rate of AIDS among African Blacks? I ask because doing so "compares a country to a continent" - which you've objected to.

2. "According to the data on his site Black incarceration rates have been increasing since at least 1930. I would think that would imply a change in behavior."

And you would be wrong, because you're not addressing the author's claim. I've an extremely good auditory memory, so I can quote nearly verbatim, (despite playing Civilization Revolution while listening).

The specific behavior he was discussing was Black people complaining that they're "put upon", so that they can extract extra resources from White people.


3. "How is African Americans costing America $300 billion per year?"

It is customary in YouTube videos to "Leave Links in the Description Below". When a YouTube creator says, "Links are in the Description Below", you're supposed to click on the correct link, then use Searches to quick-find what you're looking for.

At the bottom of this particular video, there are twelve links in the description. While it is a challenge to pick the correct link, once you do, you can word search "billion" - and the very first positive result leads to the section outlining his research methods and data.

This search took me less than thirty seconds.

---------

Overall, you're advancing rather incoherent arguments. And you're making extremely careless mistakes - (like confusing "the legitimacy rate" with "the literacy rate"). So you're giving me the impression that you dislike what The Alternative Hypothesis argued, but you're not able to intelligently refute it.