• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Anti Free Speech = EVIL!!!

Flark any consequences. Truth has no negative consequences. What if I told you the truth. What if I told you that tens of thousands of White children have been murdered and will continue to be murdered here in the U.S. by negroes. What if I told you that though blacks make up about 14% of the population, they are responsible for over 50% of the crimes committed. What if I told you that to make things better here in the U.S., we should impale or deport all of the human subspecies Homo negrosis. (negroes) Making things better isn't a negative consequence.
Oh my God. What did you just say?
 
Flark any consequences. Truth has no negative consequences. What if I told you the truth. What if I told you that tens of thousands of White children have been murdered and will continue to be murdered here in the U.S. by negroes. What if I told you that though blacks make up about 14% of the population, they are responsible for over 50% of the crimes committed. What if I told you that to make things better here in the U.S., we should impale or deport all of the human subspecies Homo negrosis. (negroes) Making things better isn't a negative consequence.

Theres the racism
 
In his Democracy in America Alexis de Tocqueville said that in the United States free discussion is not inhibited by the government, but by intolerance by the people for unpopular opinions.

From the beginning of the Cold war to the Tet Offensive of 1968 it was dangerous in the United States to criticize capitalism, advocate socialism, or say anything good about any Communist government. The Tet Offensive ended that because it led to a popular inquiry of the ideas that got the United States into the mess of the War in Vietnam.

Since the Tet Offensive it has been dangerous in the United States to assert a strong relationship between genes, intelligence, crime and race. It is particularly dangerous to criticize blacks, unless you blame what you criticize on white racism.

I am a heriditarian. As such I believe that genes are considerably more important than anything else in determining ability levels and behavior. I am a race realist. As such I believe the following:

Race is an important classification of humans, similar to sub species among the other animal species, and breeds among domesticated animals. A person's race can usually be determined by appearance, and always by DNA analysis.

The different races differ significantly in average characteristics necessary for the creation and maintenance of successful societies and civilizations. These are intelligence, obedience to the law, and monogamy.

These differences are the result of evolving in response to different population pressures for thousands of years.

Consequently, I am flamed on Debate Politics by posters would would probably like for me to be banned. This has been disappointing. Initially I thought that Debate Politics was a forum where controversial topics could be discussed with learning and civility. Sometimes they can be, like in this thread for example. Often they cannot be.

I enjoy investigating different points of view. I do not claim to possess The Absolute Truth. I can always learn from those I disagree with, and I have. I respect the opinions of those I disagree with. I expect respect from them.
 
Some truths are better left unsaid.

Like what? go into some detail.

Charles Murray wrote an excellent response to that when he wrote in his essay, "The Inequality Taboo," "specific policies based on premises that conflict with scientific truths about human beings tend not to work. Often they do harm."
http://www.iapsych.com/wj3ewok/LinkedDocuments/Murray2005.pdf

The belief that social reform and social welfare spending can solve social problems caused by genetic deficiencies has led to the waste of trillions of dollars on welfare programs and enhanced education, and on government programs that have obviously failed. This in turn has led to the unfortunate belief that the government cannot do anything right. Before the civil rights legislation was passed and the War on Poverty declared polls indicated that the vast majority of Americans believed that the government did the right thing all or most of the time.
 
Like what? go into some detail.

Charles Murray wrote an excellent response to that when he wrote in his essay, "The Inequality Taboo," "specific policies based on premises that conflict with scientific truths about human beings tend not to work. Often they do harm."
http://www.iapsych.com/wj3ewok/LinkedDocuments/Murray2005.pdf

The belief that social reform and social welfare spending can solve social problems caused by genetic deficiencies has led to the waste of trillions of dollars on welfare programs and enhanced education, and on government programs that have obviously failed. This in turn has led to the unfortunate belief that the government cannot do anything right. Before the civil rights legislation was passed and the War on Poverty declared polls indicated that the vast majority of Americans believed that the government did the right thing all or most of the time.

Welfare was given a lot longer than the 60s and welfare exists all around the world. Its called living in a society.
A2BBE9C7-2E93-4AF8-9C01-EAED2092B577.jpg
 
As for the op, the only appropriate response is this 48655811-62A9-49A4-8055-2D07C522A297.jpg
 
Like what? go into some detail.

Charles Murray wrote an excellent response to that when he wrote in his essay, "The Inequality Taboo," "specific policies based on premises that conflict with scientific truths about human beings tend not to work. Often they do harm."
http://www.iapsych.com/wj3ewok/LinkedDocuments/Murray2005.pdf

The belief that social reform and social welfare spending can solve social problems caused by genetic deficiencies has led to the waste of trillions of dollars on welfare programs and enhanced education, and on government programs that have obviously failed. This in turn has led to the unfortunate belief that the government cannot do anything right. Before the civil rights legislation was passed and the War on Poverty declared polls indicated that the vast majority of Americans believed that the government did the right thing all or most of the time.

Murray is too controversial for my taste...most of his ideas seem to hinge on white superiority...not truth.

Charles Murray | Southern Poverty Law Center


What are some truths that are better left unsaid? Anything you can't take back or wish you hadn't said.
 
Murray is too controversial for my taste...most of his ideas seem to hinge on white superiority...not truth.

Charles Murray | Southern Poverty Law Center


What are some truths that are better left unsaid? Anything you can't take back or wish you hadn't said.

The Southern Poverty Law Center is an organization that exists to suppress free speech. Charles Murray is a great man. I hope he lives long enough to be fully vindicated.
 
The Southern Poverty Law Center is an organization that exists to suppress free speech. Charles Murray is a great man. I hope he lives long enough to be fully vindicated.

Murray thinks black people are stupid...is that what you think, too?
 
The Southern Poverty Law Center is an organization that exists to suppress free speech. Charles Murray is a great man. I hope he lives long enough to be fully vindicated.

He wont. The SPLC doesnt really suppress speech, it identifies where race hatred exists. Your fallacy is the appeal to martyrdom.
Argumentum ad martyrdom - RationalWiki

“The ivory tower intellectuals dont like me therefore i am correct”
 
Murray is too controversial for my taste...most of his ideas seem to hinge on white superiority...not truth.

Charles Murray | Southern Poverty Law Center


What are some truths that are better left unsaid? Anything you can't take back or wish you hadn't said.

We dont even need to go that route which smart cat will just use as you admitting he is correct which is wrong.

Smart cat will also go to Murray saying jewish people are superior to attack that angle.
 
Murray thinks black people are stupid...is that what you think, too?

Charles Murray does not think all blacks are stupid. He thinks they tend to be less intelligent than whites and Orientals for genetic reasons. So do I.

racialbellcurve.jpg
 
We dont even need to go that route which smart cat will just use as you admitting he is correct which is wrong.

Smart cat will also go to Murray saying jewish people are superior to attack that angle.

"Jewish Genius," by Charles Murray, Commentary, April 2, 2007

Since its first issue in 1945, COMMENTARY has published hundreds of articles about Jews and Judaism. As one would expect, they cover just about every important aspect of the topic. But there is a lacuna, and not one involving some obscure bit of Judaica. COMMENTARY has never published a systematic discussion of one of the most obvious topics of all: the extravagant overrepresentation of Jews, relative to their numbers, in the top ranks of the arts, sciences, law, medicine, finance, entrepreneurship, and the media...

Jewish accomplishment constitutes a fascinating and important story. Recent scholarship is expanding our understanding of its origins.

And so this Scots-Irish Gentile from Iowa hereby undertakes to tell the story...

As soon as Jewish children born under legal emancipation had time to grow to adulthood, they started appearing in the first ranks of the arts and sciences. During the four decades from 1830 to 1870, when the first Jews to live under emancipation reached their forties, 16 significant Jewish figures appear. In the next four decades, from 1870 to 1910, the number jumps to 40. During the next four decades, 1910–1950, despite the contemporaneous devastation of European Jewry, the number of significant figures almost triples, to 114...

From 1870 to 1950, Jewish representation in literature was four times the number one would expect. In music, five times. In the visual arts, five times. In biology, eight times. In chemistry, six times. In physics, nine times. In mathematics, twelve times. In philosophy, fourteen times.

Disproportionate Jewish accomplishment in the arts and sciences continues to this day. My inventories end with 1950, but many other measures are available, of which the best known is the Nobel Prize. In the first half of the 20th century, despite pervasive and continuing social discrimination against Jews throughout the Western world, despite the retraction of legal rights, and despite the Holocaust, Jews won 14 percent of Nobel Prizes in literature, chemistry, physics, and medicine/physiology. In the second half of the 20th century, when Nobel Prizes began to be awarded to people from all over the world, that figure rose to 29 percent. So far, in the 21st century, it has been 32 percent. Jews constitute about two-tenths of one percent of the world’s population. You do the math.

Jewish Genius | American Enterprise Institute - AEI
 
Charles Murray does not think all blacks are stupid. He thinks they tend to be less intelligent than whites and Orientals for genetic reasons. So do I.

View attachment 67292597

This distribution has been countered by multiple testing which show mean IQ in early childhood and adult testing have risen over the years to be more on par with their white counterparts.

Despite him being a conservative, ive learned quite a lot from Felis Leo and there are quite a few conservatives i have not labeled as a fascist because they have gone to fight fascist disinformation trolls in ways i have not been able to which i was pleasantly surprised so being a conservative is not why i have a problem with Murray, nor is it because he disagrees with me. The problem with Murray is he will glom onto literally anything, even nazi eugenicists, to give credence to his preferred policy goals.

Race - The history of the idea of race | Britannica

https://www.debatepolitics.com/redi...du/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/20060619_iq.pdf

This also shows Rushton to be incorrect when he claims the black/white gap remaining unchanged through the years. Thats not true. This is what made you squeal about persecution which is another fallacy.

Before you bring up the appeal to authority, most of the links you provided either pull the typical “out of context” meme while avoiding the fact that if Murray’s book didnt include race/iq, there wouldn't be a lot of controversy on those grounds.
 
Last edited:
Murray is too controversial for my taste...most of his ideas seem to hinge on white superiority...not truth.

Charles Murray | Southern Poverty Law Center


What are some truths that are better left unsaid? Anything you can't take back or wish you hadn't said.

Murray tends to forget that the times he pines for resulted in a lot of people actually being silenced. Dissent was not even tolerated at the dinner table and unhappy wives were not allowed by the family structure to express even cries for help when a man would sexually assault her. He uses a time where white people were a larger majority that could silence dissenting opinions as somehow proof that government policies are faulty now. Yeah they were so swell if you were white because they were set to exclusively benefit white people. See how confirmation bias and circular reasoning goes? Basically smartcat is crying because he cant exclude other people from the government welfare bennies that white people benefitted massively for, including policies that built the middle class, that redlined black people out of government backed loans, etc. The only problem that Murray has with welfare is the “genetically undesirables” are not excluded from it. Murray will never be vindicated and will just be shown for the vindictive coward he is.

Murray’s argument in the inequality taboo is very circular. More people approved of government policy in the past, the majority were white people, the majority of white people were the primary beneficiaries, therefore we should conclude government policy was better?

Murray is the typical white winger pining for the days of actual persecution and discrimination which is why he makes so many excuses for it.
 
Last edited:
This distribution has been countered by multiple testing which show mean IQ in early childhood and adult testing have risen over the years to be more on par with their white counterparts.

Despite him being a conservative, ive learned quite a lot from Felis Leo and there are quite a few conservatives i have not labeled as a fascist because they have gone to fight fascist disinformation trolls in ways i have not been able to which i was pleasantly surprised so being a conservative is not why i have a problem with Murray, nor is it because he disagrees with me. The problem with Murray is he will glom onto literally anything, even nazi eugenicists, to give credence to his preferred policy goals.

Race - The history of the idea of race | Britannica

https://www.debatepolitics.com/redi...du/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/20060619_iq.pdf

This also shows Rushton to be incorrect when he claims the black/white gap remaining unchanged through the years. Thats not true. This is what made you squeal about persecution which is another fallacy.

"The Inequality Taboo," by Charles Murray, Commentary, September 2005

The Bell Curve concluded that some narrowing had occurred since the early 197O's. With the advantage of an additional decade of data, we are now able to be more precise: (1) The black-white difference in scores on educational achievement tests has narrowed significandy. (2) The black-white convergence in scores on the most highly "g-loaded" tests—the tests that are the best measures of cognitive ability—has been smaller, and may be unchanged, since the first tests were administered 90 years ago...

So black and white academic achievement converged significantly in the 197O's and 198O's, typically by more than a third of a standard deviation, and since then has stayed about the same.
http://www.iapsych.com/wj3ewok/LinkedDocuments/Murray2005.pdf

----------

I doubt we can expect much more convergence between the races without eugenic improvement. Convergence would require further evolution among the Negro race, while the white race does not evolve. Further evolution among blacks would require those W.E.B. Du Bois called "the talented tenth" to have large numbers of legitimate children, while the remaining ninety percent of the Negro race had no children at all. This would need to continue every generation for centuries, perhaps a thousand years.
 
Last edited:
Murray thinks black people are stupid...is that what you think, too?

They dont really care about the best and brightest rising to the top which is apparent when they call the usual functions of professional institutions persecution. Ive seen this same shtick from holocaust deniers.
 
The issue with wanting to excise people from the gene pool is not that they were excising the wrong race, its that they were mass murdering people. This reduces our population big time, this making us less evolutionary successful if you want to go with the unemotional truth. We survive and livd longer precisely because we have become best able to adapt to our environment. Not because of some immutable characteristic that is written in stone over all of time. We survive because we care for the infirm, we help each other, and we dont just kill off people that the higher ups deem unfit for life. This is why eugenics is a bastardization of modern evolutionary theory.
 
Charles Murray does not think all blacks are stupid. He thinks they tend to be less intelligent than whites and Orientals for genetic reasons. So do I.

View attachment 67292597

I think Murray is stupid and a racist. His "Bell Curve" was debunked ages ago.

Speaking of ages ago...you're dating yourself, SmartCat....no one calls Asians, "orientals" anymore.


Environment is big factor in cognitive development.

"Bad air can hurt young brains

“Exposure to air pollutants can negatively affect neurodevelopment, resulting in lower cognitive test outcomes and the development of behavioural disorders such as autism spectrum and attention deficit hyperactivity disorders,” the WHO researchers write. “Research suggests that both prenatal and postnatal exposure to air pollution represent threats to neurodevelopment.”

Plenty of studies have found that children who live or attend school in places with high traffic-related air pollution perform worse on cognitive tests, for example. A recent study of 783 children in the Netherlands found that exposure to the small particulate air pollution, known as PM2.5, was “found to cause structural alterations to the cerebral cortex” by the time the children were between 6 and 10 years of age. The cerebral cortex is associated with impulse control; a worse ability to control impulses at this age “may affect educational achievement and increase the risk of mental disorders,” according to the study authors...."

Air pollution is impeding our children’s brain development — Quartz
 
I think Murray is stupid and a racist. His "Bell Curve" was debunked ages ago.

Speaking of ages ago...you're dating yourself, SmartCat....no one calls Asians, "orientals" anymore.


Environment is big factor in cognitive development.

"Bad air can hurt young brains

“Exposure to air pollutants can negatively affect neurodevelopment, resulting in lower cognitive test outcomes and the development of behavioural disorders such as autism spectrum and attention deficit hyperactivity disorders,” the WHO researchers write. “Research suggests that both prenatal and postnatal exposure to air pollution represent threats to neurodevelopment.”

Plenty of studies have found that children who live or attend school in places with high traffic-related air pollution perform worse on cognitive tests, for example. A recent study of 783 children in the Netherlands found that exposure to the small particulate air pollution, known as PM2.5, was “found to cause structural alterations to the cerebral cortex” by the time the children were between 6 and 10 years of age. The cerebral cortex is associated with impulse control; a worse ability to control impulses at this age “may affect educational achievement and increase the risk of mental disorders,” according to the study authors...."

Air pollution is impeding our children’s brain development — Quartz

Remember when he was claiming to be a civil rights advocate thats become disillusioned? One would think he would be happy to see Rushton debunked but yet all i got in response to the brookings article was “buh buh Rushton was persecuted!” and continued playing the victim. He relies on the appeal to martyrdom because he delights in assuming everyone is just repressing the acknowledgement that he is right. Ive dealt with the types When i debated presuppositional apologists. “You know in your heart god exists, you are just repressing the truth in unrighteousness” he delights in assuming everyone knows he is right because he cant handle ever being proven wrong. Its a typical game alt-righters like to play, the Andrew Anglin angle.
 
Speaking of ages ago...you're dating yourself, SmartCat....no one calls Asians, "orientals" anymore.

When I told my Vietnamese girlfriend, "I prefer Oriental women," she did not get angry at me.

She smiled and said, "You think we are much more wonderful."

When I asked on Quora if the word "Oriental" is derogatory, none of the Orientals who responded thought it was. One Oriental who answered was surprised by the question. I certainly do not mean "Oriental" to be derogatory. I prefer Orientals to whites. I first learned Oriental girls existed when I was six or seven. I was watching a television documentary about Japanese school children. I remember thinking, "Some white girls are pretty. Some are not. All Oriental girls are pretty."

My two best friends in high school were Chinese Americans. They never thought "Oriental" was derogatory.

Who makes up these stupid rules anyway? I have been told not to use the word "Negro" any more. Martin Luther King used that word 15 times in his "I have a dream" speech. If he used it, I can use it. What is more, I will keep on using it, thank you very much.
 
I think Murray is stupid and a racist. His "Bell Curve" was debunked ages ago.

"Pretending that Intelligence Doesn’t Matter," Published: July 1, 2000, Author: Linda S. Gottfredson, Ph.D., The Dana Foundation


A 1988 survey of IQ experts, journalists, and science editors2 revealed that the journalists and editors hold views in nearly diametric opposition to those of the IQ experts. The survey’s analysis of the major newspapers and magazines revealed, not surprisingly, that their coverage of intelli*gence is “quite inaccurate.” News stories, for instance, usually leave the false impression that mental tests are culturally biased and that only fringe scientists think that genes have an important influence on intelligence...

Dismayed by the media disinformation attending The Bell Curve controversy, 52 prominent researchers from 34 universities and research centers published a Wall Street Journal editorial page statement in 1994 called “Mainstream Science on Intelligence.” These scientists, the antithesis of ideologues, have published thousands of scientific articles and hundreds of books defining the frontiers of intelligence research. They include many recipients of coveted awards and many past presidents of major scientific associations. Appearing several months into the firestorm over The Bell Curve, the joint statement simply recited the most settled facts in the field, facts that had been depicted over and over again in news and commen*tary as “controversial” or “discredited.” A second consensus statement appeared two years later in the form of an official task force report from the most pertinent scientific organization, the American Psychological Association. “Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns” offered essentially the same portrait of mainstream scientific opinion on the nature, origins, and predictive value of intelligence. Both statements suggested that The Bell Curve’s portrayal of intelligence was basically accurate.4 Neither statement had any discernible impact on media reporting.

Pretending that Intelligence Doesn’t Matter | Dana Foundation
 
"Pretending that Intelligence Doesn’t Matter," Published: July 1, 2000, Author: Linda S. Gottfredson, Ph.D., The Dana Foundation


A 1988 survey of IQ experts, journalists, and science editors2 revealed that the journalists and editors hold views in nearly diametric opposition to those of the IQ experts. The survey’s analysis of the major newspapers and magazines revealed, not surprisingly, that their coverage of intelli*gence is “quite inaccurate.” News stories, for instance, usually leave the false impression that mental tests are culturally biased and that only fringe scientists think that genes have an important influence on intelligence...

Dismayed by the media disinformation attending The Bell Curve controversy, 52 prominent researchers from 34 universities and research centers published a Wall Street Journal editorial page statement in 1994 called “Mainstream Science on Intelligence.” These scientists, the antithesis of ideologues, have published thousands of scientific articles and hundreds of books defining the frontiers of intelligence research. They include many recipients of coveted awards and many past presidents of major scientific associations. Appearing several months into the firestorm over The Bell Curve, the joint statement simply recited the most settled facts in the field, facts that had been depicted over and over again in news and commen*tary as “controversial” or “discredited.” A second consensus statement appeared two years later in the form of an official task force report from the most pertinent scientific organization, the American Psychological Association. “Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns” offered essentially the same portrait of mainstream scientific opinion on the nature, origins, and predictive value of intelligence. Both statements suggested that The Bell Curve’s portrayal of intelligence was basically accurate.4 Neither statement had any discernible impact on media reporting.

Pretending that Intelligence Doesn’t Matter | Dana Foundation

Think tanks dont surprise me

This is what Charles Murray has to say about your studies:

"Elites throughout the West are living a lie, basing the futures of their societies on the assumption that all groups of people are equal in all respects. Lie is a strong word, but justified. It is a lie because so many elite politicians who profess to believe it in public do not believe it in private. It is a lie because so many elite scholars choose to ignore what is already known and choose not to inquire into what they suspect. We enable ourselves to continue to live the lie by establishing a taboo against discussion of group differences.”

No counter argument, no nothing. This is an admission that you cannot accept you are wrong. That is why you pretend that everyone knows you are right. That is dishonet, a logical fallacy, and i just wont let you get away with it. This is pretty much the same as saying nuh uh you’re racist!

https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/20060619_iq.pdf

Lying your way through this with anecdotes hasnt helped you/
 
Last edited:
Btw these “frontiers of intelligence research“ are all paid pioneer fund lackeys and part of self published pseudo journals like mankind quarterly which is a white nationalist blog.
 
I think Murray is stupid and a racist. His "Bell Curve" was debunked ages ago.

Speaking of ages ago...you're dating yourself, SmartCat....no one calls Asians, "orientals" anymore.


Environment is big factor in cognitive development.

"Bad air can hurt young brains

“Exposure to air pollutants can negatively affect neurodevelopment, resulting in lower cognitive test outcomes and the development of behavioural disorders such as autism spectrum and attention deficit hyperactivity disorders,” the WHO researchers write. “Research suggests that both prenatal and postnatal exposure to air pollution represent threats to neurodevelopment.”

Plenty of studies have found that children who live or attend school in places with high traffic-related air pollution perform worse on cognitive tests, for example. A recent study of 783 children in the Netherlands found that exposure to the small particulate air pollution, known as PM2.5, was “found to cause structural alterations to the cerebral cortex” by the time the children were between 6 and 10 years of age. The cerebral cortex is associated with impulse control; a worse ability to control impulses at this age “may affect educational achievement and increase the risk of mental disorders,” according to the study authors...."

Air pollution is impeding our children’s brain development — Quartz

He will just ignore you and call you an ivory tower intellectual. Can you imagine what bitter old puss filled troglodyte argues like that? Oh i know! People that run the organization that helped the nazis set up their eugenics program. Notice he didnt bother addressing your actual arguments and instead appealed to authority again?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom