I keep seeing the word "nigger" posted everywhere and it appears a lot of people here hate black people. Why?
Name:
Anonymous2010-07-25 4:38
I think a lot of those who hate or insult the entire people are trolls. Just saying group think things that either fall into the outrageous attention seeking / probing OR they genuinely believe all black people deserve hatred and their surrounding peers are influenced by a shown hatred.
Blacks are more proportionately hated for being different, higher crime rates, misunderstanding between cultures and language (even though they speak English), forced multiculturalism, one drop loss of European genetics. Etc.
To hate them all is unwarranted, but stereotypes are some what logical as a precautionary and 'not set in stone' first view point.
Name:
Anonymous2010-07-25 7:17
>>1
Same reason you see the word Jew and faggot... has a lot to do with shock value.."Oh my God! He said Nigger! You're not allowed to say nigger!" Tell me I can't say it and I will...
People finding it abhorrent that it is more likely for certain races to do certain thing is also relevant.
To ignore either side is close-minded. To be predisposed to dislike anyone without knowing them at all is illogical. To think that Compton is high crime because it is solely a poor area is not being realistic either.
There is great reason to be 'culturalist' and dislike the habits of miscreant cultures (lack of culture), families that teach violence and guile etc.
There is also reason to be marginally racist. Some may disagree but I base it on experience, history and modern sciences findings. This does not mean you have to be hateful or patronizing and many will force you to wear when you think this way.
There is little reason to be hateful or vengeful. For someone elses lack of understanding.
I find it abhorrent that dogs like to eat their own shit. That doesn't mean that they don't do it. Reality never takes a poll, it simply is.
And there is evidence for differences between races. In most cases the differences are maybe 5% of IQ or thereabouts, and on the other side a much stronger athletic ability. Facts don't require me to hate (PS, it's called trolling, newb.). I think recognizing differences is totally logical. Or do you think Women should be lumberjacks? It wouldn't work based on sex differences.
Name:
Anonymous2010-07-26 18:33
>>8 And there is evidence for differences between races.
Cite your sources.
Name:
Anonymous2010-07-27 20:01
>>9
Get out of Mommy's basement and walk down the street.
Name:
Anonymous2010-07-27 22:23
>>10
That's not a source. Even a simple observation of a group of blacks on a sidewalk of a busy intersection and writing down such an observation can even laughably be considered a source. A proper, scientific, peer-reviewed, journal that there are, without a doubt, inherent differences between the races. Anything less is plainly disingenuous.
So again, cite your sources, being that the burden of proof is on you.
Name:
Anonymous2010-07-28 0:05
WHY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT BLACK RACES?! WHY THE FUCK IS MY WOMEN OUT OF THE DAM KITCHEN!>?
Name:
Anonymous2010-07-28 0:12
you dont have blacks, you hate niggers, like how our troops help arabs, but kill terrorists, get my drift?
Tonnes of sources backing racial difference, there is reason for dissent, but merely the differing Haplogroups, prominence of sickle cell anemia, (and various immunity issues) sun absorption, roller jaw, extended shin bones, DIFFERENCE IN SKIN COLOR, show that there are genetic differences between the race and that we are at different levels in our evolutionary chain. Which races are further ahead is subjective really, blacks out breed whites so are theoretically and practically more 'successful' regardless of nearly all modern marvels and inventions coming from white / aryan / AS Dna, if they give it all away and don't use it for success, they don't necessarily deserve success.
Name:
Anonymous2010-07-29 18:16
>>15
He won't debate honestly with you. Mandatory egalitarianism-at-gunpoint is the new holy of holies. Any suggestion that it is, perhaps, insane, based on lies, etc., is met with the unthinking bray DAT'S RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACIST.
Five hundred years ago the Church damn near burned Galileo at the stake for daring to suggest that the Earth went around the Sun rather than the reverse. Witchcraft! WITCHCRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAFT!
The people who look through the glass of the Seven-Eleven to count the nigger-to-human ratio before they'll step inside, the ones whose parents sent them to the whitest private schools they could find to keep their little white throats from getting cut, are the ones who scream the loudest. It's called cognitive dissonance.
Man, there are a lot of factors brought up, the prevailing misunderstandings seem to be.
Why Germany and Japan after being decimated in Dresden / Hiroshima and Nagasaki came back to world leaders in technology in short years and African nations free from colonial rule for over a hundred years have made no progress and some have even gotten worse!
A point on Eastern Asians scoring the highest on IQ tests, how is the IQ test a "bigoted" western tool of proving themselves supreme if they are behind on there own "bigoted" test?! (IQ tests show intelligence differences from 3 years old prior to socialized education)
Really good points on the Marxist left ignoring racial differences even that there are races, yet allowing affirmative action that is race specific and minimum quotas in some institutions. So which one is it? race or no race? or when it suits discriminating against Indian-Asian-White Anglo Saxon? For disable the race horse to let the plow horse catch up tactics?
It has been shown (even recently) that various external factors contribute to the brain development of humans. Not only are there the sociological factors, but even things like diet and disease play a part. It has recently been shown that places where people don't have decent health care don't show as high an intelligent mark as people who do, since the body is focusing more on developing the immune system than brain development.
It has been shown (even recently) that various external factors contribute to the brain development of humans. Not only are there the sociological factors, but even things like diet and disease play a part. It has recently been shown that places where people don't have decent health care don't show as high an intelligent mark as people who do, since the body is focusing more on developing the immune system than brain development
It has been shown (even recently) that various external factors contribute to the brain development of humans. Not only are there the sociological factors, but even things like diet and disease play a part. It has recently been shown that places where people don't have decent health care don't show as high an intelligent mark as people who do, since the body is focusing more on developing the immune system than brain development
>>27
It's also been shown that brain development and intelligence contribute to the ability to build a society where decent health care is available.
This is why niggers never created the wheel or a written language, or built a city with stone walls, or practiced agriculture, wove cloth, or domesticated animals before the Arabs taught them only a few hundred years ago.
Are they even human? The ability to interbreed means nothing. Dogs and wolves, housecats and bobcats, tigers and lions, horses and donkeys, can interbreed, yet are clearly different species.
>>31 This is why niggers never created the wheel or a written language, or built a city with stone walls, or practiced agriculture, wove cloth, or domesticated animals before the Arabs taught them only a few hundred years ago.
Proof?
African History. Until Arabs and whites, they were living the stoneage life and didn't even make rock paintings. But whatever -- TV says otherwise and you're too stupid to read.
Name:
Anonymous2010-08-05 22:34
>>33 African History. Until Arabs and whites, they were living the stoneage life and didn't even make rock paintings.
Proof? But whatever -- TV says otherwise and you're too stupid to read.
I don't watch television, and you don't even know who I am. Nevertheless, that doesn't absolve you of your obligation to provide relevant sources as the burden of proof is on you.
Name:
Anonymous2010-08-06 5:12
Not 33
Proof of What Africans did and did not accomplish is a looooong post to make.
As far as the validity goes, there is two completely contradictory stories massively publicized. One that african universities sprung up in africa and spread their knowledge to greece / Mediterranean. (even rapped in Nas's lyrics)
And the other is of the copts, who slowly developed culture and technology built on older eastern traditions, the civilization eventually became over run by nubians and for the next few dynasties shrunk and decayed.
From what I have read, second is far more true, to say though that Africans did not even make rock paintings may be going far, invention and civilization for Africans don't stack up in evidence and It is very difficult to supply a lack of evidence, rather evidence that someone elses "burden of proof" is flawed.
>>35
I see, and agree. As far as the validity goes, there is two completely contradictory stories massively publicized.
Indeed. Nobody absolutely knows for sure. Until enough historical and archeological evidence is uncovered, studied, carbon-dated, and data collected into peer-reviewed, scientifically analyzed papers and journals by multiple parties, there will never be a reasonable, beyond the shadow of a doubt, conclusion on the subject.
All the reason why >>31,33 should know better than to spout such crap. Just because there's no evidence that Africans hadn't built civilization on their own without external support, does not offer proof in and of itself that such never happened, to think otherwise is just plain academic dishonesty.
HOw long are we supposed to wait for science to dig up a single niggertopia? We can't find any writing systems outside of North Africa. We haven't found ruins of major cities, we haven't found evidence of nigger philosophy. After 100 years of finding nothing, I think it's pretty safe to say we won't find anything.
>>37 Argumentum ad ignorantiam (argument to ignorance), a logical fallacy assuming that because no evidence has been found for civilization in Africa beyond the northern section of the continent, proves that there was never a type of civilization there at all. A most fallacious argument indeed.
Archeological discoveries happen from time to time, and who knows? There may even been found a long lost underwater city off the coast of Namibia or Mozambique.
Name:
Anonymous2010-08-07 9:39
>>38 Argumentum ad ignorantiam (argument to ignorance), a logical fallacy assuming that because no lack of evidence has been found for civilization in sub-saharan Africa, this proves that there was a civilization there. A most fallacious argument indeed.
Name:
Anonymous2010-08-07 13:27
>>38
"But you can't PROVE there isn't a teacup orbiting Mars! PROVE IT PROVE IT PROVE IT PROVE IT YOU FAGGOT"
Those who claim the Negro in Africa independently invented the wheel, systems of writing, created cities with stone walls, and exhibited other traits linking them with humanity must prove their assertions. The burden of proof is upon them, not us.
Name:
Anonymous2010-08-07 13:51
>>39
But I'm not claiming that there was civilization in Sub-Saharan Africa independent of external support. I'm critiquing >>31 's post that states there never was a civilization there[1], and not providing relevant references to research that support his claim. It is a fallacious argument to make such a statement without referring to substantial evidence to back up said statement[2].
Also, rather cute you tried to turn that around on me[3]. Nice try, slick.
_____________________ Footnotes: [1] Under what evidence exactly? [2] Just as if I said in this thread that there was civilization in Sub-Saharan Africa independent of external support, I have the obligation to provide relevant sources that support my claim, since to make such a claim, the burden of proof is on me. Since I had not made such a claim, I am not obligated to do so. [3] I commend you on making the attempt, but let's not allow cutesy little things like that take the discussion off-topic.
>>40 Those who claim the Negro in Africa independently invented the wheel, systems of writing, created cities with stone walls, and exhibited other traits linking them with humanity must prove their assertions.
I have not made such claims. You (assuming that you're the same guy who authored posts >>31>>33 and >>37 in this thread) have made claims stating the opposite. Since you have stated such a claim, the burden of proof is on you in this case. I make this clear in the footnotes of my previous post, speaking of which, damn that extra [m] tag made them smaller than I had expected!
Name:
Anonymous2010-08-08 11:12
>>41
Fair enough, but this doesn't escape the fact evidence of lack of evidence was found by those searching for evidence of civilization. You see just as there are known knowns, unknown knowns and unknown unknowns, there are also known unknowns, this is the definition of the enigma that is the black man.
There has been legitimate and extensive research done on African civilizations, and there were African civilizations, primarily cattle cultures which organized during the 15th century into the Ashanti, Mali and Songhai, as well as ancient Ethiopia and eastern afro-arab trading posts. The civilizations however are distinctly lacking in many respects, especially recently with new light shone on the issue by Jared Diamond's work "guns, germs and steel" which illustrates that despite negro exposure to old world crops, cattle and technology they failed to adapt these practices and the species themselves to their environment and construct civilizations to a similar level of sophistication until late into the medieval era. Meanwhile the mesoamericans achieved superior levels of intensive farming, trade and urbanization without important innovations that the arabians brought to the dark continent 1000s of years before such as iron and wheeled carts.
I assume like many or most do, that African capability to create civilization is limited.
It is like the roman's view of the solar system in its early days, it was wrong, but worked on the best logic, and although I am probably not wholly correct, until further knowledge is shown I correlate current evidence to = truth as far as we can see it.
That truth is that, African's personally created cultures are more primitive than Roman empires were over 2000 and even cultures from over 5000 years ago further east Mesopotamia, Babylon, the caucus regions pre-china etc. Also that culture given to them as in roads, wells, electricity, besides it being from an era where the technology was more cumbersome than it is for us now in the modern world, it has been misused and they have reverted from their technological gifts down nearer to base level pre-civilization.
>>44
I do not argue that Africa (particularly the Sub-Saharan region) hasn't been researched extensively, however what has been researched already may just be scratching the surface. Already we're seeing theories that ancient civilization may in face date older than we truly realize, including the areas in Sub-Saharan Africa. Dr. Robert M. Schoch has put forth a theory that the Great Sphinx could in fact be much older than previously thought[1].
_____________________ References: [1] http://www.robertschoch.com/sphinxcontent.html
As I've said in >>38 Archeological discoveries happen from time to time, and who knows? There may even been found a long lost underwater city off the coast of Namibia or Mozambique.
>>45 It is like the roman's view of the solar system in its early days, it was wrong, but worked on the best logic, and although I am probably not wholly correct, until further knowledge is shown I correlate current evidence to = truth as far as we can see it.
I agree, however, such should not be deemed "truth" until factual and reliable evidence is procured. Until then, it is a theory, not right nor wrong until substantial evidence deems it valid or false. is We've moved past the days of heavy theocratic governance and people being burned alive for theorizing that the Earth was not the center of the universe.
True we should demand proof, but I think after 100 years including finding pre-human hominid skulls in africa, the chances that we'll find a "lost civilization" in Africa is pretty small. We've found no writings, no substantial ruins, not much of anything. At some point the most logical answer is that said civilizations are not likely to exist.
>>49
This possibility is rapidly declining to the same levels as common superstitions and myths however, in fact it may even be lower at this point since even myths like Atlantis can be construed as elaborations of real world events like the eruption of Santorini and the demise of the Minoans.
>>52
Still a theory that isn't proven right nor wrong.
Name:
Anonymous2010-08-12 8:03
Did you hear the theory that the wheel and language was invented by my cock!... the evidence hasn't been found for it though I jizzed it into a deep crevice in Africa a veeeeery long time ago... so Until you find it you have to assume it could be true.
"I agree, however, such should not be deemed "truth" until factual and reliable evidence is procured. Until then, it is a theory, not right nor wrong until substantial evidence deems it valid or false."
Of course I wholly agree, even gravity is misunderstood in its science so it should be questionable as to how it maintains its pull, we could realize it is a push or that it makes the atmosphere sticky or any number of future understandings we may come to, the evidence for its effect is consistent, but it should not be in our minds that it will always be until we understand that it has to be consistent for some certain scientific reason.
But will you assume that there will be gravity tomorrow?
>>63
AFAIK, how gravity is generally understood has basically become law. Newton's law of universal gravitation, for example. Though, the law itself draws criticism from people who do mathematical calculations, and other such later problems with that were mooted with Einstein's general relativity, which at this point is not really just a theory anymore. Though to think that every single thing about gravity in our universe is understood is just folly.
I see where you're going with this, people are not going to deny the existence of gravity since evidence of it has been procured, studied, and examined. So there is truth that proves it exists.
However, we're talking about possible civilization in Sub-Saharan Africa independent of external support, and to my knowledge, the existence of such a civilization hasn't been proven false, so based just on that, to state that there never was such a civilization to be true, is committing a logical fallacy. Argumentum ad ignorantiam (argument to ignorance) specifically, as I mentioned earlier in this thread in >>38.
Name:
Anonymous2010-08-14 4:17
>>64
There is no reason to assume there was a civilization in Africa.
Name:
Anonymous2010-08-14 11:56
>>65
indeed. Therefore those who make such fantastical claims must bear the burden of proof.
If civilizations existed in Sub-Saharan Africa, show us the evidence. Prove it.
Anyone can make unsupported claims. If you want to be taken seriously, PROVE IT. Saying "but but but but you can't disprove it with 100% certainty" is the sort of faggotry that flying saucer kooks, theologians, and conspiracy theorists engage in, and the reason why no one takes them seriously.
Prove it. PROVE IT. PROVE YOUR CLAIMS OR SHUT THE FUCK UP AND CONCEDE THAT YOU'RE WRONG.
>>65-66 Therefore those who make such fantastical claims must bear the burden of proof.
That's all fine and dandy, however I have not claimed there was civilization in Sub-Saharan Africa independent of external support at all in this thread. Had I done so, then I would be obligated to show the burden of proof on my behalf.
>>31 Claimed there never was, and in >>32 I simply ask him for substantial proof to back up his claim. Since he (and others) had not done so, this is not "proof" that there never was civilization, doing so is committing a logical fallacy which I've stated so earlier in >>64 and >>38 in this thread.
>>65 >>66
There were various civilizations in Sudan/Ethiopia. The most impressive surviving proof of these civilizations today are hundreds of pyramids, designed & built by niggers, for nigger kings and queens.
who are creatively lazy.
who exploit a free giveaway.
who watch TV for >4 hours a day
who play video games > 4 hours a day.
who sleep > 10 hours a day.
who eat junk food for >60% diet.
who accumulate their junk food trash everwhere except in the trash.
who combine trips to reduce labor rather than save time.
who are alergic to sweat, labor, muscle stress.
who creatively discover, share, and celebrate, blind benefits such as welfare, foodstamps, unemployment, medical insurance, prescriptions, etc.
who rant and rave to create more freebies.
who riot and cry when sources dry up.
who hold up their religion as an shield against responsibility.
who claim entitlement without investment.
who snicker at the truly disabled who are not <italics>smart</italics> enough to suck the system dry.
Remind you of anyone?
They come in all colors! and they live in all walks!
They suck the system for peanuts and for pounds!
They have held senatorial seats, they have slept on park benches. They have conned their way into the hearts of the sympathetic, and kicked out other defenseless residents.
We are really talking about whether or not there was one, not whether we could possibly find one.
They have two different answers (1. Unlikely 2. complete uncertainty) and Argumentum ad ignorantiam is not applicable to the first argument.
"to state that there never was such a civilization to be true, is committing a logical fallacy"
I said the evidence for it being there is not there, but it cannot be possibly ruled out ever, like the existence of god in god's mystical god world where we can never inspect.
>>73 We are really talking about whether or not there was one, not whether we could possibly find one.
Oh. Well, I'm not sure when the topic took a turn towards that route. I was just arguing the fallacy of >>31 's claim, nothing more, nothing less. I said the evidence for it being there is not there, but it cannot be possibly ruled out ever, like the existence of god in god's mystical god world where we can never inspect.
Fair enough, I can agree with that. True, even discovered areas are still debated, like the reference I cited in >>47
>>77
No. You're being a wiseass[1]. Animals that were described with similar features to the mythical unicorn have been postulated, discovered, and examined, however the image of what a unicorn is, is of man's imagination.
But, we're not talking about unicorns, I'm talking about the fallacious claim >>31 made in this thread that there never was a civilization without proof to back his claim.[2] He made a claim about it, I never did, and that's the only thing I've been arguing about from the start.[3]
>>73 stated We are really talking about whether or not there was one, not whether we could possibly find one.
To which I would suggest the creation of a new thread to argue on that point, as it seems this argument and its objective has shifted inadvertently somewhere in this thread.[4]
And that's all I'm going to say on that.[5]
_____________________ Footnotes: [1] I apologize for the snide comment, but you're really being absurd. [2] Sorry, "indirect proof", or lack of, is not the burden of proof. [3] Had I also made a claim in this thread, I too, would be obligated to provide burden of proof. [4] Though if it's to be continued in this thread, that's fine. A new thread would be a bit more orderly and actually have a topic. I'd be more than happy to debate it as well, even though this wasn't the objective of my original argument. This thread has spun into something completely different it seems. [5] I'd hate to be rude, but it is become a bit tiring to explain what my argument is for the past seven times and having only one person in this thread that understood it, and probably IHBT. In that case hats off to you, good sirs.
Since it's impossible to prove a negative, how about you put your money where your mouth is and show us a sub-saharan civilization. We've been looking for over 100 years, yet nothing. I mean I suppose you could say that there is one that left no physical evidence, or is buried 60 miles under the earth, but at some point, the odds of finding a lost civilization anywhere we haven't found one yet get so tiny that it's not worth basing an argument on. There might be a teapot on Jupiter too, but I don't think we can use that speculation to conclude that the aliens on Mars drink Earl Grey rather than Green Tea. You speculate that there must be a civilization in SSA, and are using that to speculate on the equality of blacks and white. Yet we have no such civilization outside of N Africa -- most of which were egyptian or phonetian or perhaps Islamic later on. That isn't how this game is played.
Put up or shut up.
PS 80GET
Name:
Anonymous2010-08-18 13:45
So we have concluded wogs are subhuman savages but we will keep them on as beasts of burden for the cotton fields.
_____________________ Footnotes:
[1] Always keep your sambos freshly beaten and punished to maintain maximum productive output.
[2] Remember, they're always guilty of something and they're too stupid to figure out you don't know what they did, field nigros especially, there is always reason for good thrashing.
Name:
Anonymous2010-08-18 18:29
>>81
They're less efficient and more costly to maintain than machinery. Round up the useless eaters and ship them back to Africa.
>>80 You speculate that there must be a civilization in SSA, and are using that to speculate on the equality of blacks and white.
I never once brought race into it, nor was it implied. how about you put your money where your mouth is and show us a sub-saharan civilization.
Okay. How about the ancient Nok Civilization in what is now Nigeria? Which was established around 1000 B.C., way before "just a few hundred years ago".[1][2]
_____________________ References: [1] http://www.geography.ccsu.edu/kyem/GEOG466_Africa/PreColonial_Africa_3.htm [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nok_culture
>>1 I keep seeing the word "nigger" posted everywhere and it appears a lot of people here hate black people. Why?
YOU hate blacks...
All these terms: Nigger, Neeggarow Negrow Black n Ameri-coon mean the SAME.
Are you trying to imply that every name given to these guys have to be uopdated every 10 years cause they suck as a race and they always end up becoming racial slurs?
That's why I call "the race-ism of low expectations"
Well it seems everyone hates niggers, everywhere i seem to go and anyone i seem to meet they always talk shit about niggers. Even niggers hate niggers. WTF!
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-31 15:08
>>99
You should expand your social circle beyond the trailer park.
>>100
I won't humor you, I am live in a gated community not a trailer park.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-31 16:48
>>100
I am live? Why did I say "i am live". Weird.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-31 16:49
>>100
You get the idea, I am a millionaire married to a model.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-31 16:50
Seriously though, I do live in a gated community and having experienced niggers before I have little intention of exposing myself to them even more.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-31 16:51
>>100
post 105 was meant to be a reply to you, sorry >>105
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-31 16:52
>>100
Also I'm not a millionaire married to a model, you probably knew that was a joke, I thought I would just spell that out to avoid confusion.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-31 17:52
>>102
>You should expand your social circle beyond the gated commmunity then because clearly you live a very sheltered life if everyone you know is a racist.
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-02 8:31
>>108
I live in what used to be a english street, I can tell you that the coconuts are amongst the most savage "people" (can't really call them that) that I have ever seen. All they do is work 14 hours a day for the minumum wage at a nowhere job, then come home and scream for hours whilst spending all there money drinking. They never have any savings at the end of the week. There children live in poverty, they live in poverty. All they want is instant gratification, they only care about themselfs, they are as thick as a brick and they squel like pigs.
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-02 10:39
>>109
>All they do is work 14 hours a day for the minumum wage at a nowhere job, then come home and scream for hours whilst spending all there money drinking. They never have any savings at the end of the week. There children live in poverty, they live in poverty. All they want is instant gratification, they only care about themselfs, they are as thick as a brick and they squel like pigs.
Sorry, who're we talking about? Chavs, right?
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-04 1:30
>>109
their*
learn to speak english if you're going to claim to fight for the native english
Hate flows to where you think the bad or harmful things are. Hating without an apparent reason, is because of ignorance or first looks. Hating a social stereotype, wether because of racism, sexuality, gender, age or living style, makes you ignorant to the point that you never realized that we are all the same.
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-20 10:29
Why do people hate blacks?
Cos Haters Gonna Hate.
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-20 11:17
Wow, this thread had itself a really enlightened little conversation now that I finally bothered to actually browse through it…
A: I see no evidence (for an SSA historic civilisation), therefore no such thing existed! B: Ahem, that's not how the burden of proof works. While there is no evidence one way or another, there is still the possibility. A: OK, you prove your claim that there was one! B: What claim? I said «possibility», that's not a claim. A: You said there was. Where's your proof? B: I said no such thing. Learn to read. A: You did! You did! You did! B: Did not. Look, are you that dumb for real? A: Did too! Did too! Did too! B: Troll! (leaves in disgust)
I just love it when white kids go «I hate nigs, they're dumb», and then go and prove the pinnacle of white intelligence to be Person A above. Wow.
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-20 12:21
I don't hate blacks but i dislike the fact they think they "own" a word.
Just like anti gay people think they "own" the word marriage.
So i use nigger intentionally to troll the blacks. Just for the lulz.
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-20 17:35
Well it shouldnt be an offense if they use it themselves.
I mean if you dislike what a person says to you depending on his skin color, it's you who is being a racist actually.
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-20 17:57
>>116
They don't "own" the word. They never did. That's just white people projecting their white guilt. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CJkiwXcvaA If you had any black friends and weren't such a beta, you could call them niggers if you wanted. And wiggers say it all the time too. inb4 'nigga' is different than 'nigger'. It's not.
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-20 22:19
Well lets see. Why are blacks responsible for most crime in cities? Why do blacks reproduce knowing they can't affor to raise a child? Why do blacks expect government handouts? Why do blacks use up soapy tax dollars in welfare? Why do blacks have no manners/class?
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-20 22:45
>>119
Because they used to be slaves. And when they stopped being slaves they were still treated like subhumans for a long time.
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-21 10:16
>>119
>Why are blacks responsible for most crime in cities?
[citation needed]
>Why do whites reproduce knowing they can't affor to raise a child? Why do whites expect government handouts? Why do whites use up soapy tax dollars in welfare? Why do whites have no manners/class?
Oh hey, I can make vast generalisations too.
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-21 12:32
>>120
Well, maybe if they'd stop behaving like subhumans... OH WAIT
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-21 12:33
>>121 [citation needed]
Here you go. Enjoy. ttp://www.colorofcrime.com/colorofcrime2005.pdf
You can substitute "white" for "black" but the results aren't generalizations, they're just you being a silly bugger and trolling.
>keep slaves
>treat them like shit after you free them
>stop treating them like shit for less than one generation
>continue to call them subhuman all the while
>demand that they completely reintegrate before you stop calling them subhuman
Cool attitude bro!
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-21 13:44
>>123
So what you're saying is that white people do not do those things but all black people do? Go on. Give your grave a little deeper.
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-21 19:02
>>125
Read the report and rebut it. You asked for a citation, you got one. Now what, niggerlover?
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-21 19:50
>>119
- Abject poverty; who can afford an education? Oh wait:
- Phuxx0red education system
- Unsafe neighbourhood; Wanna stay alive in the first place? Get a gun and join a gang.
- Us-vs-them mentality enforced by peer pressure; education is for "them", go for it still and you're some kind of traitor or something
- Having just about every news segment about a violent crime suspect described as [basically looking like you]; really boosts you confidence, doesn't it?
- Hearing something like fuck-all about people ever actually escaping the ghetto; another great confidence booster
Things like those tend to keep people down more often than not. Just saying.
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-22 15:09
>>127
Compare niggers to Vietnamese "boat people" who came to the US in the early 1980s. Compare niggers to the descendants of Chinese railway workers brought to the US 150 years ago. What do you notice?
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-22 19:38
>>128
That one group was kidnapped and forced into slavery while the other came on their own free will in an attempt to improve their lives? Are you fucking retarded? There is no comparison.
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-22 19:59
>>128
You mean those with a history and culture of education _not_ being exclusively for some other group than specifically "yours", lest you somehow betray your own, but a good thing to go for if you can get it? The ones that are also immigrants in a time where those tend to get at least some actual help to establish themselves? Let's see...
In those infamous Asians of yours, I notice people able to move into a neighbourhood in more than token numbers (in the order of one single individual per metric square mile) without all the whites suddenly being in such a hurry to move out that housing prices plummet and the area suddenly becomes a ghetto. I also see people not getting stuck in such ghettos with little-to-no realistic chance of ever really escaping.
I notice people not so systematically pissed on over the centuries. I notice a people with a less-than-trampled homeland to look to. A homeland where outsiders that came to trade, didn't first and foremost come looking for people to enslave and land to use for proxy wars. Oh and yeah, a homeland where they still have family and friends to stay in touch with and stuff.
At least in the Chinese, I notice a people whose homeland had natural resources that could be used by people in the stone age, rather than demand people already be in the space age to even get to it. One whose efforts to make a civilisation on its own, wasn't repeatedly disrupted by foreign conquests and natural disasters at all the wrong moments.
(Natural disasters there would cause mass famine and death, but not on a scale and type that caused the society itself to collapse or drive people into smaller groups that would never again unite. Foreign invaders never sought to annihilate Chinese civilisation, only to reap benefits from it. By, for example, being admitted into it.)
Notice that in >>127 I mentioned bad neighbourhoods. Just for the record, I'm not one of those unrealistic morons that think Blacks are somehow incapable of being dumb. Blacks are not free from their own equivalent of white trash and useful idiots. Those join in on a powerful choir telling their own people to not even try to get up and out. Bet you never noticed that, since you're clearly not listening.
Tl;dr: In the Asians, I notice people whose peer pressure is to move up, not down.
Personally, the first blacks (or Asians, for that matter) that I ever met, were in a vocational school. Admittedly those tend to filter out (most of) the dumbfucks, which could be why I never went to school with Americans. (Or, it could be because I'm in Europe. Or both.) But there was nonetheless one year where I was one of only two whites in the whole class...
I also noticed that the Blacks over in the US are, well, American. This never seems to help any.
That's a myth. When whites arrived in Africa, those blacks were already slaves to other blacks. We merely bought them.
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-23 3:06
cause they niggers that why, u tard'd or somewhat?
Name:
Anonymous2012-01-23 9:14
>>131
So as long as Whitey didn't do that particular part himself, it's somehow not a crime after all?
Supply Demand 101:
– When demand is small, few are (in this case) enslaved. One largely just fills one's own needs.
– When demand gets big, more slaves are …appropriated.
– When demand gets huge, an industry is born.