Warbirth #racist

Warbirth #racist forums.worldofwarcraft.com

If all people were equal, why would there be more blacks in prison than in college? And why would blacks, who comprise 12% of the country, make up the majority of the prison population? And why would 90% of NFL and NBA stars be black? People aren't equal. Equality is an idealist liberal pipe dream.

48 comments

old comment by Nibien

/facepalm.

To start things off: Not all people are equal, see some people are tall, some people are short, some people are left handed and some are right, some people even don't have use of their legs. That's not the point, the point is they're supposed to be treated as equals and with the same dignity.

I can give about fifteen factors in which would account for a large chunk of all of that.

Regardless, if he actually presented a half-way rational viewpoint, he might actually make sense, this is obviously just ignorant bigotry.

Besides, I don't even think all the races are equal, I mean heck Africans own the fuck out of me for being in the sun, even minor physical traits and intellectual traits may be bound to crop up, albeit given the evolutionary line and such minor trait changes I don't think there was enough time for significant changes to occur.

However I think any (if any are in fact existent) statistical differences amongst races are so horribly insignificant they don't matter what-so-ever in comparison to more important social and economic factors, to the point of believing that one race were somewhat superior (in all aspects, much less one) enough to make them better than anyone else is absurd.

Besides, China won the most gold medals in the Olympics recently, last time I checked. Weren't they that nasty race that was supposed to be physically inferior? Oh my, what a surprise. Guess we'll have to use some other asinine stereotype to prove the inferiority of everyone but the trailer-trash hicks.

old comment by Pickle

Bigot
"Sure, but does that mean anything on a practical level, or is it another meaningless slogan?"

It sure does mean something on the practical level: most people in the industrialized world aren't in poverty, most "minority" groups in the said industrialized world thrive just as much as the majority groups when they aren't being systematically targeted by their governments and populations at large, most people aren't super geniuses or super rich and it sure as shit doesn't take brains to make a lot of money. (http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/columnist/vergano/2007-08-12-smart-not-rich_N.htm)

For the most part, people come out differently as a result of their ethnic group's minor adaptations to their surroundings. The question: "are all humans equal" is the wrong question to ask. It's vague as hell, equally what? Equally tall? Equally rich? You have to specify, and even then, what is it worth? Does it mean you'll live a better life being smarter or being able to run faster? Otherwise, all humans are equal for the simple fact they are equally as human as their taller next door neighbor, end of discussion.

The thing these racists out here don't realize is that humanity is much more complex than a series of arbitrary traits that do jack shit for you in the long run if you:

* Don't use them correctly
* Don't use them at all
* Use the skill, but it's not economically viable
* Have a shitty attitude coupled with no work ethic.

old comment by Bigot

Lt. Fred: Institutionalied and deliberate rascism. It's right there in the law.

Examples/proof?

Adam: Whites in Europe aren't successful either.

See Eastern Europe/Caucasus.

Oh, I didn't know they had it that bad. We ought to send them BILLIONS OR DOLLARS OF DEVELOPMENT AID don't you think?

Pickle: Way to avoid the other points that were made around here, yer a grreat troll!

They had nothing to do with the subject.

All humans are humans because they can breed with each other, Bigot.

Are you still assuming I think some humans are not human?

What does "we're all human" mean? Does it mean we have similar values or morals? Does it apply to the radical muslim who gang rapes a Western girl because she doesn't wear a hijab? Does it apply to the African who rapes his 3-year old child to cure the dick sickness?

By the way, individual differences mean far more in the long run than insignificant group differences and that's the thing people lose sight of one half the time.

If they matter to people, they're not insignificant. Don't be so arrogant.

old comment by Dan Onymous

@ Bigot. You want the question addressed? OK.

"Are all humans equal?"

Clearly not. As Nibien pointed out, people are different heights, strengths, ages, intelligences, abilities etc.

Is race the main differentiating factor that makes people unequal? Clearly not. Thinking that skin colour is what makes people equal or not is what makes you a racist twat.

You say 'anti-racist' as if it's a bad thing. Obviously you cannot see the point of sayings such as 'we all bleed red' etc. To anyone with sense, the obvious point there is that we are all basically the same - same organs, same body chemistry, same emotions, feelings etc. If all you can see is the amount of melanin in someone's skin then I'm not surprised you can't see things which are obvious to most other people.

old comment by Pickle

"Oh, I didn't know they had it that bad. We ought to send them BILLIONS OR DOLLARS OF DEVELOPMENT AID don't you think?"

Guess who was sending them money during the cold war for development purposes? I'll give you a hint: they weren't American. Even the Western Europeans got welfare money in the form of the Marshall Plan.

"They had nothing to do with the subject."
They sure did! I noted that even though individual human beings have differences, they are all the same because they are human beings. Get it now?

"Are you still assuming I think some humans are not human?

You obviously have a REALLY limited grasp of what humanity is. Let's have Merriam-Webster help you out

Main Entry: 1hu·man
Pronunciation: \'hyü-m?n, 'yü-\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English humain, from Anglo-French, from Latin humanus; akin to Latin homo human being more at homage
Date: 14th century
1: of, relating to, or characteristic of humans
2: consisting of humans
3 a: having human form or attributes b: susceptible to or representative of the sympathies and frailties of human nature <such an inconsistency is very human P. E. More>

That is what all humans are humans means, cut and dry. Morals and values are relative to the society you live in.

"If they matter to people, they're not insignificant. Don't be so arrogant"

Lots of things matter to people that are insignificant, like "race" or iPhones.

old comment by Bigot

Dan Onymous: Clearly not. As Nibien pointed out, people are different heights, strengths, ages, intelligences, abilities etc.

Equality means that every group must perform equally good (or bad) in every field of life, regardless of intelligence, strenght or ability, not whether there are differences in intelligence, strenght or ability ;)

Is race the main differentiating factor that makes people unequal? Clearly not.

It is the main factor in correlation with criminal behaviour though!

Thinking that skin colour is what makes people equal or not is what makes you a racist twat.

We're talking about race, not skin color.

You say 'anti-racist' as if it's a bad thing.

It is.

If all you can see is the amount of melanin in someone's skin then I'm not surprised you can't see things which are obvious to most other people.

The color of peoples' blood is obvious to me. In fact, it's so obvious to me that I would never bother to tell somebody it, let alone use it as an argument.

Pickle: Guess who was sending them money during the cold war for development purposes? I'll give you a hint: they weren't American. Even the Western Europeans got welfare money in the form of the Marshall Plan.

I thought the Marshall Plan was American.

That is what all humans are humans means, cut and dry.

Again, does it, or should it have any practical value? Why do anti-racists use it as an argument for their agenda? Is it supposed to make me less raycis of something?

Morals and values are relative to the society you live in.

Or the society you originate from.

Lots of things matter to people that are insignificant, like "race" or iPhones.

Race may be insignificant to you, but it still matters to most people, especially if they live in multicultural societies. Don't be so arrogant.

PS. I meant to say "millions of dollars".

old comment by Pickle

"Equality means that every group must perform equally good (or bad) in every field of life, regardless of intelligence, strenght or ability, not whether there are differences in intelligence, strenght or ability ;)"

Strawman, we aren't talking about "performance", we are talking about people being equally human regardless of their different attributes.

"It is the main factor in correlation with criminal behaviour though!"

I though socio-economic status was, whoops, appears as if we live in racist bizarro world, where the amount of melanin in one's skin determines if they are more prone to being a criminal.

If you institutionalize policies aimed at keeping groups poor and downtrodden, you will see an increase in crime.

"We're talking about race, not skin color."

Though you racists, for the most part, can't seem to separate the two.

"It is."

It's bad to be against pre-judgment and it's bad to be open to new human beings? That sounds pretty anti-social to me.

"I thought the Marshall Plan was American."

Learn to separate statements: It was a response to your "counter" to the other person's comment on Eastern Europe. The Soviets gave bucket loads of financial and military aid to it's satellite states in Eastern Europe and most of them failed miserably.

The Marshall Plan, started by the Americans, threw government cheese at the Western Europeans.

"Again, does it, or should it have any practical value? Why do anti-racists use it as an argument for their agenda? Is it supposed to make me less raycis of something?"

Yes it does have practical value: judging people based on flawed generalizations is extremely impractical on the professional and personal level. Would you like being judged as a jerk before you even walk into a room because you're of a different ethnicity as the majority of the people in the room? How about being pre-labeled stupid or mean?

Prejudice against people without knowing them on the personal level makes absolutely no sense and lowers the cohesion of societies while making them far less effective and far more tense.

"Or the society you originate from."

Oh yeah, I'm sure that the thousands of children imported for adaptation to the U.S. just come with Russian or Chinese culture and values built into the bones, right? Culture and values are taught, not hardwired. I bet you if you grew up in an Italian household in Italy, you'd have way different views of eating and sports than you do now, say, from the place you live.

"Race may be insignificant to you, but it still matters to most people, especially if they live in multicultural societies. Don't be so arrogant."

What "matters" to people is not relevant, only the truth matters. If looking at things without childish emotions and irrational preferences makes me arrogant, then color me smug.

Individualism - try it sometime.

old comment by Bigot

Pickle: Strawman, we aren't talking about "performance", we are talking about people being equally human regardless of their different attributes.

And I haven't said that people aren't equally human, I was talking about the nature of egalitarism.

I though socio-economic status was, whoops, appears as if we live in racist bizarro world, where the amount of melanin in one's skin determines if they are more prone to being a criminal.

Nope. And again, I haven't said anything about skin color.

Color of Crime
(looks like it was just violent crime though, my mistake)

If you institutionalize policies aimed at keeping groups poor and downtrodden, you will see an increase in crime.

Who's doing this?

Though you racists, for the most part, can't seem to separate the two.

Completely unfounded claim. To me it looks like anti-racists like yourself can't:
"where the amount of melanin in one's skin determines if they are more prone to being a criminal"

It's bad to be against pre-judgment and it's bad to be open to new human beings? That sounds pretty anti-social to me.

It's bad to impose your ideas on others with a total disregard to the democratic process, it's bad to support racially discriminatory policies, and as an extreme example, it's bad to go around in large groups beating young nationalists (ARA etc.).

Would you like being judged as a jerk before you even walk into a room because you're of a different ethnicity as the majority of the people in the room? How about being pre-labeled stupid or mean?

No, of course not, but it would be understandable if the majority or a vocal minority of my ethnicity acted like jerks.

Prejudice against people without knowing them on the personal level makes absolutely no sense and lowers the cohesion of societies while making them far less effective and far more tense.

It does make sense. Blacks are a lot more likely to be criminal than other people, so it's only natural to avoid them, especially the gangsta types.

Sort of like it's a good idea for women to avoid sneaky men at park by midnight.

I completely agree with the last part though. The natural outcome of multiculturalism.

C'mon, you know what I meant.

What "matters" to people is not relevant - only the truth matters.

Of course. What a typical anti-racist you are!

Individualism - try it sometime.

When we've gotten over problems related to groups.

#706149: I know that Bigot is a troll but he's a very dedicated one. Did you see his face when somebody told him that white Caucasians and Eastern European countries are performing as bad and he reacted childlike and stupid?

They are not performing "as bad" as black Africans.

old comment by Pickle

"And I haven't said that people aren't equally human, I was talking about the nature of egalitarism."

Thus it still remains a strawman according to the definition of a strawman, seeing as you never clarified that you were speaking about egalitarianism, nor was that the entire point of that exchange was defining people as "human", meaning they are all equally human.

"Nope. And again, I haven't said anything about skin color."

When you make thinly veiled statements on "race", it's only logical to assume the skin color of the person from a said identity.

"Who's doing this?"

Erm, Jim Crow Laws? Plessy v. Ferguson? The U.S. Government and many other governments had these types of laws up until lately, and the legacy of these laws still lives on.

"Completely unfounded claim. To me it looks like anti-racists like yourself can't:
"where the amount of melanin in one's skin determines if they are more prone to being a criminal""

Refer to my post made earlier. Now combine this picture image
with certain facial and physical traits, and you'll be able to determine what "race" someone is (except in multicultural societies).

"It's bad to impose your ideas on others with a total disregard to the democratic process, it's bad to support racially discriminatory policies,"

Those "racially discriminatory policies" were voted on and approved by representatives that were chosen from their communities to vote for the issues that the people in the community care about. The last time I checked, America has a majority white population, as does Western Europe.

"and as an extreme example, it's bad to go around in large groups beating young nationalists (ARA etc.)."

Crime is bad period. Why do you seem to think all anti-racists condone that sort of behavior?

"No, of course not, but it would be understandable if the majority or a vocal minority of my ethnicity acted like jerks."

Still wouldn't be, that's a weak justification to assume that just because x and y were jerks, that guy z would be one too right off the bat, without knowing him.

"It does make sense. Blacks are a lot more likely to be criminal than other people, so it's only natural to avoid them, especially the gangsta types."

Only POOR "black" people are more likely to be criminal than other people, just like poor "white" people are much more likely to be more criminal than everyone else. Ever hear of chavs? They tend to be white.

"Sort of like it's a good idea for women to avoid sneaky men at park by midnight."
Because minorities are really out to snatch your wallet for cash.

"I completely agree with the last part though. The natural outcome of multiculturalism."
And or the ideas pushed forward by the elite to create such tension in the FIRST place.

"C'mon, you know what I meant."

Oh, that "morals and values" have a genetic component? It's exactly what you said when you stated "or the society they originate from".

"Of course. What a typical anti-racist you are!"
Yeah, logical and based in reality.

"When we've gotten over problems related to groups."
Or rather, perceived problems.

"They are not performing "as bad" as black Africans."
That's a funny joke. It's like saying the KKK isn't "as bad" a terrorist organization as Hezbollah. They are still both terrorist groups, and both Sub-Saharan Africa and Eastern Europe are doing bad (but are getting better, with policy reforms).

Just quit while you're ahead.

old comment by Bigot

M.M.: Don't you think it's a tad arrogant to say "most people"? From what I've seen, very few people know what WN is, let alone nationalism itself. And if they do, the majority will just falsely accuse it of being "supremacy" or "racism".

There is a reason why race is such a touchy subject to most people, and it's by no means related to any kind of nationalism.

Pickle: Thus it still remains a strawman according to the definition of a strawman, seeing as you never clarified that you were speaking about egalitarianism, nor was that the entire point of that exchange was defining people as "human", meaning they are all equally human.

Obviously we aren't talking about inequality in height or weight, but rather social equality which is promoted by egalitarism, correct? I mentioned performance because egalitarists use differences in performance (by groups) to prove the existence social inequality.

When you make thinly veiled statements on "race", it's only logical to assume the skin color of the person from a said identity.

I still haven't implied that skin color is of any importance in determining the accomplishment or lack thereof of a person. It's not my fault some races are darker.

The "Color of Crime" has already been torn to shreds by the southern poverty law center

It looks as if they were too busy trying to get Don Black's wife fired to adress the part in "color of Crime" where poverty is covered.

Erm, Jim Crow Laws? Plessy v. Ferguson? The U.S. Government and many other governments had these types of laws up until lately, and the legacy of these laws still lives on.

The legacy being that blacks STILL blame the whitey on everything!

Refer to my post made earlier. Now combine this picture with certain facial and physical traits, and you'll be able to determine what "race" someone is (except in multicultural societies).

What's this got to do with anything?

Crime is bad period. Why do you seem to think all anti-racists condone that sort of behavior?

They call themselves anti-racists, and I've never heard other anti-racists distance themselves from the violent extremists, so I'll assume they have no problem with it.

I said "extreme example". I'm not assuming anything.

Refer to "Color of Crime".

And or the ideas pushed forward by the elite to create such tension in the FIRST place.

...Like multiculturalism?

Oh, that "morals and values" have a genetic component? It's exactly what you said when you stated "or the society they originate from".

I was talking about immigration...

Yeah, logical and based in reality.

Yeah, that's right image

Or rather, perceived problems.

What do you mean?

That's a funny joke. It's like saying the KKK isn't "as bad" a terrorist organization as Hezbollah. They are still both terrorist groups, and both Sub-Saharan Africa and Eastern Europe are doing bad (but are getting better, with policy reforms).

In my case, KKK isn't "as bad", because they're not out to get ME. I'd much rather have them around, much like I'd rather live in Eastern Europe than in Africa.

#709228: Bigot, if people are not equal, be consequent and don't impose duties on them WITHOUT GIVING THEM ANY RIGHTS(see slavery)

What? I don't support slavery.

old comment by Pickle

"Obviously we aren't talking about inequality in height or weight, but rather social equality which is promoted by egalitarism, correct? I mentioned performance because egalitarists use differences in performance (by groups) to prove the existence social inequality."
We are talking about equality as human beings by merely being HUMAN BEINGS, LIKE THE BEGINNING OF THE THREAD, REMEMBER? You can't seem to answer questions straight on, just like a troll.

"I still haven't implied that skin color is of any importance in determining the accomplishment or lack thereof of a person. It's not my fault some races are darker."

You mentioned, thinly veiled, about skin color and race, it has nothing to do with "accomplishment". Dodging much?

"It looks as if they were too busy trying to get Don Black's wife fired to adress the part in "color of Crime" where poverty is covered."
Hmm, ok, then I'll have the Orange County public defender Carl C. Holmes do it for them then: http://www.pubdef.ocgov.com/poverty.htm

"Color of Crime
(looks like it was just violent crime though, my mistake)"
The "Color of Crime" has already been torn to shreds by the southern poverty law center http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=255
I'm going to play the Bigot game: I never said that they mentioned poverty in the Color Of Crime, I said they demolished the numbers and I gave an example of how poverty causes crime. Don't confuse the name for the purpose of the article, k hun?

"The legacy being that blacks STILL blame the whitey on everything!"
They have a pretty good reason to, don't they? I mean besides the fact that black people in America have only been treated as human beings for the past 30 or so years. It's not blame, it's pin pointing the cause of the problems.

"What's this got to do with anything?"
It has to do with assuming skin color with race. Circular questions to dodge, again, not surprising bigot.

"They call themselves anti-racists, and I've never heard other anti-racists distance themselves from the violent extremists, so I'll assume they have no problem with it."
The vast majority of people in the industrialized world are anti-racist, and they don't condone that sort of behavior. What sort of bizarro world do you live in?

"I said "extreme example". I'm not assuming anything."
The only sort of examples racist use because hyperbolic language is the only way they can dupe anyone into believing their tripe.

"...Like multiculturalism? "
Like RACISM. Racism is mostly an invented phenomenon.

"Refer to "Color of Crime"."
And it's still as meaningless and skewed as ever.

Or the society they originate from, hmm, moot point since we were talking about where people were born.

"Morals and values are relative to the society you live in.

Or the society you originate from. "
Remember that Bigot? How does that have to do with immigration if we are talking about people ALREADY IN THE DAMN COUNTRIES THEY LIVE IN?

"What do you mean?"
Having a problem with another ethnic group is a perceived problem and a personal problem.

"In my case, KKK isn't "as bad", because they're not out to get ME. I'd much rather have them around, much like I'd rather live in Eastern Europe than in Africa."

Ha, not out to get you? Hezbollah and groups allied with it would ice you in a heartbeat just for being American on their turf because they, just like you have a skewed view of most minorities being jerks, have a skewed view that all Americans support Israel.

We are comparing actions and not personal repercussions of the actions, Bigot. Yes or no, did the KKK not perform terrorist actions on African Americans and Jews? Yes or no, has Hezbollah committed terrorist actions on Israelis and Lebanese?

old comment by Bigot

Pickle: We are talking about equality as human beings by merely being HUMAN BEINGS, LIKE THE BEGINNING OF THE THREAD, REMEMBER? You can't seem to answer questions straight on, just like a troll.

I haven't disagreed with you on that, so it doesn't really make sense to debate it, dumbass.

You mentioned, thinly veiled, about skin color and race, it has nothing to do with "accomplishment". Dodging much?

Please rephrase that.

Hmm, ok, then I'll have the Orange County public defender Carl C. Holmes do it for them then: http://www.pubdef.ocgov.com/poverty.htm

Much like SPLC, he seems to mistake correlation for causation. There's obviously a correlation between crime and poverty: if you spend half of your life in jail, chances are that you're going to be poor and unemployed.

I'm going to play the Bigot game: I never said that they mentioned poverty in the Color Of Crime, I said they demolished the numbers and I gave an example of how poverty causes crime. Don't confuse the name for the purpose of the article, k hun?

Where did you give an example how poverty causes crime?

They have a pretty good reason to, don't they? I mean besides the fact that black people in America have only been treated as human beings for the past 30 or so years. It's not blame, it's pin pointing the cause of the problems.

No, it's an excuse to not do anything about the problems yourself.

It has to do with assuming skin color with race. Circular questions to dodge, again, not surprising bigot.

I'm not "assuming skin color with race".

image
NOT WHITE

The vast majority of people in the industrialized world are anti-racist, and they don't condone that sort of behavior. What sort of bizarro world do you live in?

You're mistaking "non-racism" or opposition of "racism" for the ideology of anti-racism. Pretending to tolerate other races doesn't make you anti-racist.

I can assure you, if people were aware of the true nature of anti-racism, rather than mistaking it for opposition of racial discrimination, they wouldn't call themselves "anti-racist".

Like RACISM. Racism is mostly an invented phenomenon.

Invented by Lev "Trotsky" Bronstein (loljew), and anti-racist himself, no less.

Or the society they originate from, hmm, moot point since we were talking about where people were born.

Whatever gave you that idea?

Remember that Bigot? How does that have to do with immigration if we are talking about people ALREADY IN THE DAMN COUNTRIES THEY LIVE IN?

Muslim immigrants are already in the damn UK, yet 60% of them support Sharia courts. It looks like their morals and values are from the society they previously lived in.

Having a problem with another ethnic group is a perceived problem and a personal problem.

It can quickly escalate into a national problem. It's happened before.

I was talking about the KKK.

And what's THIS got to do with anything? I haven't said the KKK hasn't performed terrorist actions, I just said they haven't, and will not perform them on ME.

M.M.: And the reason being...?

Race matters. Duh.

Warbirth #racist forums.worldofwarcraft.com

48 comments

Confused?