718
719

Iceland: 320k population, 90k registered guns. Almost no Violent Crime (bbc.com)

acupoftwodayoldcoffe が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]returnoftheDjediFascist 17ポイント18ポイント  (25子コメント)

No, racist means that one believes that a particular race is superior to another. That's the very definition of racism.

It doesn't even have to be the belief in one's own particular race. I think the word you're looking for is stereotypical.

[–]teflon_honey_badger 14ポイント15ポイント  (19子コメント)

I think you're both missing the point. It's not the color of their skin that's the problem. It's their shitty culture.

[–]eTr0nicminarchist 5ポイント6ポイント  (18子コメント)

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but how can we immediately dismiss that different races aren't prone to say certain levels of aggression or other factors? How are species of dogs considered different with different average intelligence levels but race is a no-no? What about the fact that black males have higher testosterone levels which can lead to higher aggression levels?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3455741

Edit: Downvotes for asking question?

[–]cuginhamer 17ポイント18ポイント  (12子コメント)

Nobody who is educated about animal models will immediately dismiss the possibility that different races are prone to different levels of aggression, but when there is

  1. very good evidence that there are cultural (learned) explanations for differences in rates of violence between races and

  2. no good evidence that there are biological differences between races that explain the same data (the genetic studies are high quality and genome wide and don't show any angry black guy genes),

the logical conclusion is that race differences in aggression are primarily environmental/cultural/learned, not biological.

Add into that the fact that race as we know it is defined culturally and not biologically, the whole 'race differences in violence is biological' argument as an explanation for what we see in the real world (rather than a hypothetically plausible scenario) has no objective basis.

[–]eTr0nicminarchist 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

Appreciate the reply. Thanks.

[–]goldenvoicerehab 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

'no good evidence that there are biological differences between races that explain the same data (the genetic studies are high quality and genome wide and don't show any angry black guy genes)'

Please don't propagate nonsense. There are a huge numbers of studies on the MOAO gene which show significant differences between the races propensity to aggression. Just wiki it to get started learning. There are also ample studies showing different testosterone levels.

[–]cuginhamer 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

The effect size for MAOA is tiny, more than an order of magnitude lower than the race difference (and that's the biggest known genetic effect). Saying that explains race effects is nonsense. To review statistical vs clinical significance would be important.

[–]Amestrius 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

To be fair any research into physical and mental differences between the races has been pretty taboo outside of medical condition treatment since the 1940's. It's kind of a frowned upon and highly explosive field of research.

[–]cuginhamer 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Tons of people have the data and analyze it. It is far from being ignored. A quick Google scholar search will show you that the work on the subject has been continuous.

[–]acupoftwodayoldcoffe[S] -2ポイント-1ポイント  (6子コメント)

Yes, and some are heavily cultural/learned/environmental than others.

[–]an-ok-dude 3ポイント4ポイント  (5子コメント)

I would add economic opportunity in there too.

[–]acupoftwodayoldcoffe[S] -4ポイント-3ポイント  (4子コメント)

economic opportunity has less of an effect, though.

[–]HVAvengerPeaceful Libertarian 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

What, no it isn't. Its not a coincidence that the vast majority of urban crime is committed in very poor areas.

[–]anarchitektLibertarian Socialist 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

No source required if you can present your sociology degree.

[–]an-ok-dude 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Oh? I don't think so. Check out what Thomas Sowell has to say about things like the minimum wage act.

[–]goldenvoicerehab 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

You are right but society is decades away from being able to accept this. You can give people all the data in the world and it won't be enough to overcome their existing beliefs on the matter. We know for a fact that there are significant biological differences between different ethnic groups which affect everything from athletic ability to propensity towards diseases. It's highly likely that the factors selected for during slavery have resulted in anew ethnic group which is more prone to aggression and has lower iq- this was specifically selected for over many generations. Just like generations of nepalese in the himalayas have a higher red blood cell count now on average.

Evolution exists and our species is no exception to the rule of environmental adaptation. People refuse to accept this of course and prefer to get angry and call names than provide a scientific response.

[–]TheSonOfGod6 0ポイント1ポイント  (3子コメント)

One problem with that argument is how exactly do you divide humanity into races? On what basis? Genetic diversity is way higher in Africa than it is in Europe to the point that members of a single tribe, the Khoisan, are more different genetically from each other than a Russian and a Korean. So if you consider Russians and Koreans to belong to different races based on genetics, you would have to divide "Africans" into tens of thousands of different "races".

[–]Amestrius 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

That answer is pretty simple, people tend affiliate and segregate themselves. As this becomes generational and systematic, they become different races. Also what you said is a bit misleading. Russia borders Korea and has a great deal of East Asian peoples. In addition Whites and East Asians have a great deal of Neanderthal DNA that doesn't exist in Africans.

[–]TheSonOfGod6 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

"That answer is pretty simple, people tend affiliate and segregate themselves. As this becomes generational and systematic, they become different races."

Do you mean ethnic groups?

Yes Russia does indeed have East Asian people, I am talking about white Russians. http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100217/full/463857a.html

Sub-Saharan Africans do also have Neanderthal DNA although to a lesser extent, thanks to a large wave of migration of Eurasians into Africa about 3,000 years ago. http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-34479905

[–]Amestrius 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

A wave of migration that barely made a dent in the gene pool compared to the 4-10% of Europeans.

[–]MMonReddit 7ポイント8ポイント  (3子コメント)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/racism?s=t

The definition of racism is inclusive of what you both said. /u/fissionman1 is right. Further, when you say "racist means that one believes that a particular race is superior to another" you're not actually countering his definition of racism because, all things equal, saying one specific race is inclined to violence is equal to saying that that race is inferior to others (if we make the justified assumption that an inclination to violence is a negative trait). Saying that race is inferior to others is the same as saying one race is superior to others. It's a racist belief.

Edit: it seems /r/libertarian has been infiltrated by reactionaries. That's... Upsetting. Her your shit together, /r/libertarian.

Edit2: I see that returnoftheDjedi is a fascist, LOL. Good job upvoting his racism enabling bullshit, you fuckin idiots.

[–]returnoftheDjediFascist 3ポイント4ポイント  (2子コメント)

all things equal

First of all, they're not.

saying one specific race is inclined to violence is equal to saying that that race is inferior to others

This could be inferred, but still doesn't qualify as racist. The same way you can't be called a nationalist for saying that Belgium is a shit country.

Saying that race is inferior to others is the same as saying one race is superior to others.

No again, if anything saying one race is inferior to others only stands to reason that all other races are superior to that one.

[–]MMonReddit -3ポイント-2ポイント  (1子コメント)

I don't really care to sit here and nitpick, honestly. Common usage as well as dictionary and scholarly definition of the terms make it clear that that is a racist belief. You're right in some of your criticism here, (which I thought of while writing, but left open because I didn't think you'd be so petty as to try to attack those tiny little gaps) but ultimately you're wrong. In any case, it doesn't matter what we call it. The belief that a particular race is inherently inferior is stupid and that's the bottom line.

[–]returnoftheDjediFascist 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

I believe that the specific meanings of words, and their proper usage should be held as vastly important. By continuing improper usage one only works to muddy communication and further erode this civilization. Remember when literally didn't mean figuratively? Furthermore, nitpicky as I may be, I am certainly not delivering an attack. This is an important issue requiring all kinds of logical wrestling and simply throwing around loaded terms to illicit an emotional reaction is utterly wrong. This tactic is typically implored by politicians and cultural marxists to shame and silence anyone with a not-so politically correct thought.

[–]HVAvengerPeaceful Libertarian -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

What? No, that is one aspect of racism, but that isn't the only way to be racist. Saying all purple people are evil is racist, but it doesn't claim anyone is superior to purple people.