Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
Mr. X - I was curious to see if I could find a point of agreement with NSWLP, who is, as you have correctly pointed out, a racist. And I did - we both think that black people should have access to schools that work to inculcate high standards and a strong sense of discipline. For what it's worth, I think -everybody- should have access to schools like that; I bet NWLSP would agree with me there. But it's particularly important for people who are less likely to be taught those values at home. I can agree with him about that without agreeing with his conclusions about inherent biological differences between blacks and whites.
Ther reason I'm giving him the time of day in the first place is that NWLSP is responding to a problem which exists: the statistics that he cites are a reflection of the fact that there is a huge, ongoing problem with urban black culture. He doesn't see this as being the product of centuries of systematic oppression and denial of resources; he'd rather blame it on inherent differences, based on his incomplete understanding of a few isolated studies. What's important, though, is that he is willing to talk about the problem, and how it might be addressed, which surprisingly few white people are. And some of the solutions he proposes are not completely bizarre. (The birth control thing seems like pretty straight-ahead "final solution" territory, I'll grant you, but I wanted to see what else he had to say before I called him on it.)
NWLSP - As I said, I agree with you that education is one possible solution to this problem. I don't think birth control is an effective solution (how is this enforced, anyway?), partially because it's politically impossible (icky associations with, among other people, good ol' Hitler) and partially because no poor person in their right mind would line up to let the government inject them with something. Plus, chemical birth control isn't perfect, it screws up people's hormones (you're interested in testosterone, I know), and the whole thing just smacks of another way to remind black people that they're second-class citizens. This probably sounds way too liberal to you, but I do think people generally behave as they are expected to behave, and treating people like animals results in people who behave like animals.
Also, minor historical quibble: North Africans were all up in Europe's business at many points in history - from Hannibal to the Crusades. (Remeber the Moors?) European technology only really took off relative to Africa after the enlightenment.
I'm very sympathetic to the argument that racism plays a role in the disparity of incarceration rates, as do sentencing practices, inadequate legal representation, drug-enforcement policies, criminal-enforcement procedures, history, institutional racism, and class-based advantages unavailable to many African Americans. Those things are unarguable. I also think the Judge's conclusion that incarceration rates reflect a propensity of African Americans to break the laws is patently absurd.
What I don't see, though, is any recommendation for solutions. The answer that extends logically from your argument, if I understand it correctly, is that law enforcement should start pursuing white people for crimes as aggressively as they pursue black people. (Or better yet, they should start pursuing rich people for crimes as aggressively as they pursue poor people.) But given finite police resources, the logical extension of that argument has the same problem as the mindset we have today: someone makes a decision to pursue the crimes of a certain group of citizens, while deciding that the crimes of a second group of citizens go unchecked. Who that someone is makes a big difference in who gets targeted for "law enforcement."
If we truly meant to pursue all crimes regardless of perpetrator's race, class, religion, national origin, et cetera, we should either pony up with the higher taxes needed to fund the necessary police resources, or we should reduce the number of things for which people can be arrested.
The first option makes me uncomfortable because I don't like the idea of living in a police state. In Seattle, in particular, the police have already earned a reputation for unnecessarily harsh enforcement practices. The second option makes me equally uncomfortable, because although there are a lot of crimes on the books that I think absurd, I don't know that we can eliminate enough crimes to free up the police resources we'd need to go after even the most important ones -- and the idea of living in an anarchy is also unappealing.
The right answer is probably somewhere in between, but I don't see much hope of that happening--or even having the desired effect. Bigger police forces, after all, would merely enforce laws. It wouldn't change the poverty, education, or historical biases that put people in front of judges.
Any ideas?
One minor quibble though. "North Africans were all up in Europe's business at many points in history"
North Africans are not and were not black sub-Saharan Africans, for the most part. They are mostly Arabs and other non-black races like Berbers.
Great job on totally making up shit.
1 Do blacks have much higher testosterone levels than whites? According to Yahoo, Yes, they do--but only by 10 % or 20 %. Here's a link. Scroll all the way down to Chapter 3 (called Sex, Hormones, and AIDS scroll down until you see page 18) because it's a book. The Charles Darwin Research Foundation has it on it's website. http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/se…
2 Have people with higher testosterone levels been proven conclusively to be more aggressive, violent, impulsive, and stupid? Actually, this is FALSE. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/200…. In fact, according to studies in the 1990s, the opposite is true. Testosterone is a source of calmness, happiness and friendliness. http://www.nytimes.com/1995/06/20/us/doe… So logically, it's low testosterone causes men to be violent and aggressive. Which I suppose explains guys like NWLSP .
3. Do Blacks have a significantly higher frequency of "the warrior gene" than whites do? Whoa there big guy. Genetic science generally is very new, and the warrior gene research was just published a year ago. (http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2…) That means a heck of a lot of study is needed before any of us should draw conclusions from it. If we must, however, let's look at the data. A third of people in Western populations have the warrior gene, so if your absurd argument had any basis at all, we'd still expect to see a third of white men incarcerated; instead, we see 1.2% (http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0881455.h….) And, by your absurd logic, we'd see 2 thirds of African American men incarcerated; instead, we see 10.4%. So either you are incredibly stupid, incredibly low on testosterone, or so completely racist that you think we should see MORE African American men in prison.
OK sure. It is all racist whitey's fault.
Black males (< 3% of Seattle) still commit over half of all homicides in Seattle every year.
Personally, I believe Western culture needs an overhaul, & I'm afraid we'll need several generations (still!) to die off before we can make real progress.
No big deal, just another black-on-black murder for naive white Seattle libtards to ignore or explain away and excuse.
If Judge Sanders was SO WRONG, then where are all the white murderers in Seattle? Are a lot of white people committing murders in Seattle that don't ever even get reported in the news or police reports at all???
My numbers come from a list of TOTAL HOMICIDES in Seattle and not from convictions. There are not a whole lot of unsolved homicides in Seattle, and most of the unsolved homicides, such as that of DeChe Morrision, were obviously committed by blacks.
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/weird/Sc…
Scientists Find 'Liberal Gene'
Study conducted by researchers at UCSD, Harvard
By ERIC S. PAGE
First Published: Oct 27, 2010 5:04 PM PDT
Updated 5:16 PM PDT, Wed, Oct 27, 2010
Source: Scientists Find 'Liberal Gene' | NBC San Diego
Researchers have determined that genetics could matter when it comes to some adults' political leanings.
According to scientists at UC San Diego and Harvard University, "ideology is affected not just by social factors, but also by a dopamine receptor gene called DRD4." That and how many friends you had during high school.
The study was led by UCSD's James Fowler and focused on 2,000 subjects from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. Scientists matched the subjects' genetic information with "maps" of their social networks. According to researchers, they determined that people "with a specific variant of the DRD4 gene were more likely to be liberal as adults." However, the, subjects were only more likely to have leanings to the left if they were also socially active during adolescence.
"It is the crucial interaction of two factors -- the genetic predisposition and the environmental condition of having many friends in adolescence -- that is associated with being more liberal,” according to the study.
"These findings suggest that political affiliation is not based solely on the kind of social environment people experience,” said Fowler, who is a professor of political science and medical genetics.
The researchers also said their findings held true no matter what the ethnicity, culture, sex or age of the subjects were.
Race of Suspect - 2008:
White - 9 = 6%
Black - 72 = 47%
Hispanic - 24 = 16%
Unknown - 49 = 32%
You can be absolutely sure that at least 90% of the "unknowns" were committed by blacks or mexicans/latinos. At the very least, without the "unknowns", blacks and mexicans/latinos commit at least 63% of murders in Dallas. Whites commit only 6%.
To really put it in the proper perspective:
http://www.city-data.com/city/Dallas-Tex…
Dallas Population Racial Data:
Hispanic - 547,781 (44.6%)
White - 355,922 (29.0%)
Black - 274,087 (22.3%)
Therefore, even if the every single one of the 49 "unknown" murderers were whites, the black murderers would still outnumber them!!!!!
Black males also often have weed in their possession when they get busted for other crimes, usually violent or property crimes.
White weed dealers usually are a bit more discreet than black weed dealers. White weed smokers are usually a bit more discreet than black weed dealers.
Dr. Caprice Hollins, former "Director of Equity and Race Relations" for the Seattle Public Schools, said that "having a future time orientation" (AKA PLANNING AHEAD FOR THE FUTURE) was a white racist thing, so all this stuff about blacks getting busted for weed more than whites only makes perfect sense. Get a grip.
"White weed smokers are usually a bit more discreet than black weed smokers."
Of course I am a racist. Why shouldn't I be one?
They sure seem stupid enough to be black to me, but since the article doesn't provide a photo there isn't really any way to know. Want to bet on it?
If they turn out to be white, I will mail a $10 bill to The Stranger for them give to you.
You could make an easy ten bucks! Do a little research and find out!
You don't have to pay me anything whether you win or lose the bet so you really have nothing to lose!
Really? West Virginia is the 48th poorest state in the country, ahead of only Arkansas and Mississippi. West Virginia ranks 47th for total crime, per capita, West Virginia is 96.01% white.
If high poverty equals high crime, W. Virginia should be a basket case, yet it has a remarkably low crime rate.
The color of murder and gun violence in New York
By Jonathan Capehart
Nov. 10, 2010
"In short, 95.1 percent of all murder victims and 95.9 percent of all shooting victims in New York City are black or Hispanic. And 90.2 percent of those arrested for murder and 96.7 percent of those arrested for shooting someone are black and Hispanic. I don't even know where to begin to describe the horror I still feel looking at those numbers. "
Dunno... How would the African city of Carthage have fared if it hadn't been utterly destroyed by the barbarian hordes of Rome? (Carthage was Phoenician, a 2000-year old civilization by then; Rome had barely left the era of Roman sacrifices.)