Those of you saying there's no such thing as racism against white people, defend this.

[Synobun]

IQ can literally be improved by training yourself on the tests presented. It's learned behaviour (or at least heavily influenced by learned behaviour), and is grossly overestimated by STEM-focused in-groups purely because it correlates positively for those in-groups.

I understand your point in nothing IQ tests are best-used to evaluate individuals (and certainly, they're better than using it to support trends or generalising about racial groups), but even that they're not that good at. You also have to question that, even if it was a salient metric at some point in time, has the cultural baggage that surrounds it (and organisations like MENSA that pride themselves on it) affected its (arguable) uses?

Certainly, the correlation with people obsessed with it and its overlap with negative racial stereotypes (considering the thread we're in) is more than enough to put it in the bin, for me. Nevermind MENSA, or my exposure to such tests over the years.

I'm surprised that standardized intellect is still so thoroughly pushed by certain characters in the discourse when it's already been proven for a long while that there are different kinds of intelligence and that a lack in one is not a lack in another.

 

[Lexicus]

I'm surprised that standardized intellect is still so thoroughly pushed by certain characters in the discourse when it's already been proven for a long while that there are different kinds of intelligence and that a lack in one is not a lack in another.

*Hurriedly puts away caliper and phrenology chart* why, whatever do you mean?

 

[Dekker]

Allow me to get this thread back on track.

So to earlier poster who said there is no systematic racism, is this because blacks and Hispanics are just inherently more likely to default, and not because of some genetics but.. poverty... Which may be tied to some inherent quality?

Modder you haven't answered your ideas on this. Since you say there is no systematic racism, this was directed towards your comments.

w t f do you think you are talking about?

http://theconversation.com/white-pe...the-lions-share-of-all-forms-of-capital-75510

At the time of apartheid in 1994, more than 80% of the land was in the hands of white minority. Data from the Institute of Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies suggest that just under 60,000 white-owned farms accounted for about 70% of the total area of the country in early 1990s. Land reforms programme has been slow. Some suggest that less than 10 % of the total land has been redistributed from white to black ownership since 1994.


Yes all people are capable of being racist. No all racism is not equal. White South Africans still have very very strong systemic advantages based on a legacy of horrible racism and colonialism.

Ya sorry Est this is not the first time my sarcasm was missed, my bad. Thanks Mary for clarifying! My sarcastic comment about about South Africa was parodying how it was brought up and in anticipation of how it would be again;

You need to travel more. I recommend China.

..even when the full post by cloud made clear to specify African-Americans...

Post-Apartheid South Africa and post-Lancaster Accords Rhodesia-cum-Zimbabwe are good counter-arguments to this bold statement.

First example of SA being brought up...

Notice no one will go near your stated fact because they know they will have to concede that yes in fact institutional racism against white people does indeed exist, and we are talking about genocide here.

And here it was done again by Modder, bringing SA back up after clearly not reading all the responses that first did address what Patine said, as well as the ones that specify that America is the focus solely because the OPs post is about what 'may' be said when discussing racism in America. And of course, they won't talk about aparthied SA creating the backlash against whites and Lex's point about how whites are still benefiting from that history of conquest and racism over SA blacks.

Also actually use your mind and read the stuff challenging your positions. These studies account for economic disposition. Not only are these minorities in positions to buy homes, but they are in better positions often than the white people the homes are eventually sold to.

The bolded part is how systemic racism persists to this day in 2019 America. You should feel bad.

My question was to modder since he was indicating that there's no racism but still disparities, meaning there is, something else. We all know this something else is inherent qualities of the races, usually IQ but modder doesn't believe that one, so I'd love to hear from him just what that something else is. And modder, saying there's those inherent qualities is the dictionary definition of racism you know. Feel free to just say you believe in, uh what's the fancy term for it, race realism.

I am rehashing a bit here from another thread, but culture can play a big part in the disparity. Professor James Flynn who is an IQ scientist made the observation that after WW2 when US troops occupied Germany and both white and black American soldiers had children, that those children that grew up in Germany showed no IQ differences at all, the black and white kids had the same IQ, he concluded that the reason was that the offspring of black soldiers in Germany grew up with no black subculture. The same principle stands for the offspring of the white rednecks subculture in southern states. What could cause black people to be higher in crime statistics and incarceration rates? Because there's a direct correlation between socioeconomics and crime. Once you take class out of the picture you can see how class drives these incarceration rates in the first place. Are some black people worse off than some white people? Of course they are. Can previous policies on different generations cause a socioeconomic impact on someone? Of course, but you and others are not claiming this, you are claiming that there are current policies and systems in place that are racist in nature which is causing the disparity, this is what I don't agree with you all on.

Wow ok how to unpack this one. You clear my agree previous policies on different generations can cause a socioeconomic impact. Good. Well you are clearly wrong trying to say no one is claiming that, that is exactly what those disputing you are claiming. What they are ALSO claiming is that the legacy of those policies that were built into the system linger on, whether fully intentionally through written law or not. Duh there's no Jim Crow, and stop and frisk doesn't spell out to target blacks, but are you even reading the stuff Est and others are posting to show the effects or even direct examples of race playing a role in current systems?

For a bite size attempt to explain this stuff I recommend this video:

 

[Berzerker]

I'm surprised that standardized intellect is still so thoroughly pushed by certain characters in the discourse when it's already been proven for a long while that there are different kinds of intelligence and that a lack in one is not a lack in another.

figuring out how many triangles appear in a bigger triangle wont tell me where to find tubers and water

 

[Synobun]

figuring out how many triangles appear in a bigger triangle wont tell me where to find tubers and water

The Very Smart White Urban Academics™ have diagnosed you with terminal stupidity, then. Sad.

But also, I don't mean what I said in the context of needing specialized knowledge in a rural/survival scenario. Even in the environments lived in by these Very Smart White Urban Academics™ there exists a spectrum of intelligence that is compartmentalized into different manifestations. Not doing well at an IQ test truly has no measure of what a person is actually capable of except on the extremes -- and even then, there's a relatively decent chance that those individuals are intelligent/unintelligent in something the IQ test does not cover. IQ tests imply there is a singular method of thought that dictates intelligence which is just untrue even in their most idyllic environment.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

IQ can literally be improved by training yourself on the tests presented. It's learned behaviour (or at least heavily influenced by learned behaviour), and is grossly overestimated by STEM-focused in-groups purely because it correlates positively for those in-groups.

I didn't say it was 100% or even 50% genetic. I have no idea to what degree it is. Less than 100%, more than 0 is a pretty safe bet. It does have predictive value though.

You also have to question that, even if it was a salient metric at some point in time, has the cultural baggage that surrounds it (and organisations like MENSA that pride themselves on it) affected its (arguable) uses?

Depends on who is using it and why. Just because some people put a hole in their foott using a pressure washer and wind up in the ER doesn't mean a pressure washer is a bad tool. That's still true even if you probably don't want to use it as a garden hose or a water pick to clean your teeth.

 

[Patine]

That's, uh, Turkey and the surrounding regions. There is a small difference, something about a separate continent or thereabouts.

Actually, the parts of the Ottoman Empire where slavery of kidnapped Europeans was most rampant was the then-Ottoman controlled Algeria, Tunisia, and Morocco - which are geographically part of the African Continent. The Ottoman Empire, at it's height, was a LOT bigger than just "Turkey and the surrounding regions." Time for some history refreshers.

 

[MaryKB]

I always thought that kind of slavery was more ransom based ... like you get captured, and they want your homeland to pay for your release? And if they don't pay, then you're put to work or whatever, unless I'm mistaken? It's not based around thinking Europeans are subhuman and going and collecting them for chattel slavery as an underclass, and like now there's a whole generational thing going on?

 

[H4run]

I always thought that kind of slavery was more ransom based ... like you get captured, and they want your homeland to pay for your release? And if they don't pay, then you're put to work or whatever, unless I'm mistaken? It's not based around thinking Europeans are subhuman and going and collecting them for chattel slavery as an underclass, and like now there's a whole generational thing going on?

True, it's not based on race, but the pools coming from the POW that can be converted into slave, it's not racial based.

 

[Patine]

I always thought that kind of slavery was more ransom based ... like you get captured, and they want your homeland to pay for your release? And if they don't pay, then you're put to work or whatever, unless I'm mistaken? It's not based around thinking Europeans are subhuman and going and collecting them for chattel slavery as an underclass, and like now there's a whole generational thing going on?

Non-Moslems in general were the "underclass," so Ethiopians, pagan Black Africans, and religious minorities in the Middle East were also fair game, in that regard. There WERE also Moslem slaves, but they were generally treated a bit better in the Ottoman Empire. Also, Europeans who couldn't be ransomed were often "sold" to Europeans after being made to work for a bit - the Dominican Friars considered it a great charity to "buy" White European Christian slaves' freedoms, and often frequented slave markets in the Barbary States.

 

[H4run]

Non-Moslems in general were the "underclass," so Ethiopians, pagan Black Africans, and religious minorities in the Middle East were also fair game, in that regard. There WERE also Moslem slaves, but they were generally treated a bit better in the Ottoman Empire. Also, Europeans who couldn't be ransomed were often "sold" to Europeans after being made to work for a bit - the Dominican Friars considered it a great charity to "buy" White European Christian slaves' freedoms, and often frequented slave markets in the Barbary States.

Having to pay jizyah that the amount is equal with the amount of dzakat that the Muslim have to pay doesn't vis a vis made them under class. Different religion have their own law system to govern their own community using their own judges and ruling. It's hard to spot the discrimination between Muslim and non Muslim within the system, perhaps except the non Muslim's (still arguably) absent within the government system.

 

[Traitorfish]

Of course, I never assume an argument is parochial in scope if it's not initially labelled as such, and I always find limiting it later in the conversation to a parochial parameter with such things as "well it should have been," or "we're both from <blank>," or what have you, to be disingenuous, arrogant, and clumsy all at the same time, and makes the one who opens the thread look like a fool.

I'm sure that's admirably rigorous, but it's out of joint with how most people talk or think.

 

[Patine]

I'm sure that's admirably rigorous, but it's out of joint with how most people talk or think.

You don't want to hear the obvious response to that - my personal opinion on how most people talk and think nowadays - so I'll spare you and everyone else on this thread...

 

[Traitorfish]

You don't want to hear the obvious response to that - my personal opinion on how most people talk and think nowadays - so I'll spare you and everyone else on this thread...

Well, grand, but your opinion about how people talk and think won't stop them talking and thinking that way. You've got to meet people in the middle, at least. When somebody asserts that racism against white people occurs, suggests that this widely-denied, and as evidence of its occurrence cites an incidence occurring in New York, it's not because we've all forgotten about the Khmer Rouge. It's because that's not what we're talking about, and the OP, quite reasonably, assumed people understand that context.

 

[Patine]

Well, grand, but your opinion about how people talk and think won't stop them talking and thinking that way. You've got to meet people in the middle, at least. When somebody asserts that racism against white people occurs, suggests that this widely-denied, and as evidence of its occurrence cites an incidence occurring in New York, it's not because we've all forgotten about the Khmer Rouge. It's because that's not what we're talking about, and the OP, quite reasonably, assumed people understand that context.

The Khmer Rouge wasn't the point I was making (that, I admit, was in response to @Farm Boy's "urban agrarian revival," and may have been a bit, in retrospect, over the top at the time), but my points were in regard to post-Apartheid South Africa and post-Lancaster Accord Rhodesia-cum-Zimbabwe, which is VERY relevant to the point, but was largely shut out because of a retroactive declaration of parochial limits of discussion that was not EXPLICITLY detailed in the OP.

 

[Gorbles]

I didn't say it was 100% or even 50% genetic. I have no idea to what degree it is. Less than 100%, more than 0 is a pretty safe bet. It does have predictive value though.

Depends on who is using it and why. Just because some people put a hole in their foott using a pressure washer and wind up in the ER doesn't mean a pressure washer is a bad tool. That's still true even if you probably don't want to use it as a garden hose or a water pick to clean your teeth.

I didn't say you did. I didn't argue any amount of accuracy (other than a low / discardable amount), just that it's overstated and over-relied upon.

As for your second point, you're comparing mechanical tools which have a prescribed use, to an often-argued static indicator of what various groups of people have considered to be representative of intelligence. One is not the other.

Actually, the parts of the Ottoman Empire where slavery of kidnapped Europeans was most rampant was the then-Ottoman controlled Algeria, Tunisia, and Morocco - which are geographically part of the African Continent. The Ottoman Empire, at it's height, was a LOT bigger than just "Turkey and the surrounding regions." Time for some history refreshers.

The original post was talking about Africans enslaving Europeans. Considering cultural identity and the imperialism of a literal empire, I do not consider the Ottomans African. The Ottomans ruled the African peoples in the countries they occupied, and while collaboration is a very obvious and historical fact, this doesn't mean that Europeans were enslaved by African countries as regularly as the reverse - hence the original post.

It's very nice to try and score technical points like they matter, but as usual, the context is often lost doing so.

 

[Patine]

The original post was talking about Africans enslaving Europeans. Considering cultural identity and the imperialism of a literal empire, I do not consider the Ottomans African. The Ottomans ruled the African peoples in the countries they occupied, and while collaboration is a very obvious and historical fact, this doesn't mean that Europeans were enslaved by African countries as regularly as the reverse - hence the original post.

It's very nice to try and score technical points like they matter, but as usual, the context is often lost doing so.

Well, that demands on how you view it. Not everyone permanently resident on the Continent of Africa is racially African, nor is everyone on the Continent of Europe racially European, nor are all racial Europeans permanent residents of Europe, or all racial Africans permanent residents of Africa. You cannot hold ME responsible when you don't like my response, and your statement is open-ended and loosely-defined. That immature and petty tactic may work on some, but you'll find it doesn't work on me. Being concise and erudite is a burden and onus on the one asking the question or seeking the opinion - not anyone else.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

As for your second point, you're comparing mechanical tools which have a prescribed use, to an often-argued static indicator of what various groups of people have considered to be representative of intelligence. One is not the other.

It's a measure of a particular type of intelligence of a select individual. It's in that context where the tool has the value. Using it in other contexts is ill advised, even if it's more like putting a pressure washer in someone else's foot rather than one's own given how it's sometimes used.

 

[innonimatu]

The original post was talking about Africans enslaving Europeans. Considering cultural identity and the imperialism of a literal empire, I do not consider the Ottomans African. The Ottomans ruled the African peoples in the countries they occupied, and while collaboration is a very obvious and historical fact, this doesn't mean that Europeans were enslaved by African countries as regularly as the reverse - hence the original post.

Minor nitpick, the ottomans pretended they ruled north Africa, but didn't really. And major one, it's racist to call, say, the berbers "not africans", assuming that being black is a requisite to being African. Their ancestors have been there continuously from the dawn of humanity.
The Barbary Coast raiders were a mixture of europeans, turks, arabs and africans, "white" and "black". Rather cosmopolitan, too bad they were so vicious...

It's equally racist to consider the white descendants of white settlers in Africa "not africans", just as it is racist to call the blacks in America "not americans". And on that issue the post-colonial settlement of conflicts in Africa is very thorny. Some situations have gotten so ugly that you have no nice way to solve them.

 

[Gorbles]

Well, that demands on how you view it. Not everyone permanently resident on the Continent of Africa is racially African, nor is everyone on the Continent of Europe racially European, nor are all racial Europeans permanent residents of Europe, or all racial Africans permanent residents of Africa. You cannot hold ME responsible when you don't like my response, and your statement is open-ended and loosely-defined. That immature and petty tactic may work on some, but you'll find it doesn't work on me. Being concise and erudite is a burden and onus on the one asking the question or seeking the opinion - not anyone else.

I appreciate you trying incredibly hard to be some kind of right here, but saying not all African folk are "racially African" (whatever that means) in reference to the historical Ottoman Empire is not the strictly-defined and well-focused statement you think it is.

This all came out of you attempting a pedantic gotcha to me saying the Ottoman Empire (commonly known as the Turkish Empire, at least in Western historical terms) didn't count as an argument that a magical theoretical African slaving empire (ignoring the fact that Africa is, in fact, a continent and denying its individual members agency and history) existed (and specifically enslaved primarily Europeans). No amount of attempts to degrade my "tactics" will change this massive, hilarious attempt at what you consider as educating the fools you deign with your presence

It's a measure of a particular type of intelligence of a select individual. It's in that context where the tool has the value. Using it in other contexts is ill advised, even if it's more like putting a pressure washer in someone else's foot rather than one's own given how it's sometimes used.

Fair correction, but I still disagree that it's a measure of much at all. I'd understand more if it managed to benchmark something that couldn't be trained, but because it is, all it is is a box-checking exercise depending on the time someone has to refine the skills required.

The time component in the evaluation of answers (which is a common thing, in the higher-end tests) might flummox folk, but again that alone isn't a good indicator of many kinds of intelligence or general performance. Hence why I said it correlates with specific STEM-adjacent in-groups in terms of reception, but I also don't think it's a good example of intelligence there either. Logical processes can be taught, after all, even to someone who more naturally goes with something like a gut feeling over repetition-based learning. We all learn in (incredibly) different ways, and these kinds of tests don't reflect that with any amount of accuracy to be valid at any useful scale.

If the select individuals of a particular intelligence are such a specific and minor in-group for this to be a proveable assertion, then naturally the use of IQ in general is fatally flawed by basis of being any kind of standard.

Minor nitpick, the ottomans pretended they ruled north Africa, but didn't really. And major one, it's racist to call, say, the berbers "not africans", assuming that being black is a requisite to being African. Their ancestors have been there continuously from the dawn of humanity.

It's equally racist to consider the white descendants of white settlers in Africa "not africans", just as it is racist to call the blacks in America "not americans". And on that issue the post-colonial settlement of conflicts in Africa is very thorny. Some situations have gotten so ugly that you have no nice way to solve them.

I wasn't the one who raised the Ottomans doing anything; I simply took someone's claims at their word (it seems to be less effort that way). Also, uh, I don't really want to comment on the throwing around of "racist", but yes, by definition, white descendents of white settlers in African countries are most definitily not "African" precisely because of that complex identity you refer to. The issue is very thorny, but considering that colonisation of the African continent only began in earnest in the late 1800s, I feel comfortable saying that unless the theoretical white folk you're theoretically referring to have taken the past 140 years or so to completely reverse historical direction and work against imperialist powers in whichever country they reside, they are definitely not "African".

It's not the same as referring to US citizens, because the US is a singular country. Africa is a continent. The racist thing is to conflate the two, as much of a tangent as this is.

It's also an incredibly trippy to witness comparisons of white folk in Africa (with the power structure they enforced through brutal occupation) to black folk in the US (with, uh, not any of that).