A Conversation About Race

[Argus]

My recollection is that the Toronto police were asked to keep the records by some cultural communities concerned that they were being unfairly targeted for arrest and detainment, but the cops wisely declined because they did not feel competent in identifying people's race/cultural origin. ("Unhh ... Are you 'Indian' or Indian, sir?")

Your "recollection" is, of course, wrong.

In February of 1989, Inspector Julian Fantino of the Metropolitan Toronto Police Department told the North York Committee on Community, Race and Ethnic Relations that Blacks in the Jane-Finch community accounted for a disproportionately high percentage of certain street crime in that area (Story and Byers 1989). The release of these figures sparked a response from various representatives of government and community groups. Much of the initial criticism was directed towards Inspector Fantino; it was claimed that race-crime statistics are inherently racist and detrimental to relations between police and racial or ethnic communities (James 1989; Story and Byers 1989). Shortly after the release of the information, Fantino apologized for his remarks (Reid 1989) and the Metropolitan Toronto Police Services Board adopted a policy banning the collection or publication of statistics relative to the race, colour or creed of individuals, because they reinforce stereotypes, correlate ethnic groups with crime, and are contrary to fundamental values in society (Smith and Ruryk 1989; Byers ..

In fact, the statistics showed that Blacks, who made up about 5% of the population were responsible for about 95% of the street crime.

Edited September 6, 2009 by Argus

[lictor616]

Vegetarians live longer than meat eaters too. Vegetarians would have us believe it's because of what they eat, but how true is that? Studies show that we need meat, it's good for us in moderation. So what gives, why are vegetarians living longer? In reality, it's because they tend to lead healthier lives overall whereby they tend to exercise more, smoke less, amongst many other things.

Apply the same thing to race - there is no direct correlation between race and crime. Under the right circumstances (ie single parent home, low income bracket, low education levels etc), people of any race tend to be prone to crime.

IOW, there is more than just genetics at work here. There are socioeconomic factors that are tied into the equation.

yes, like so many other human phenomena, it is a combination of nature and nurture. but both are very important.

The problem with liberals and their analysis of crime, is that they completely ignore the "nature" aspect of it... to them crime is purely economical... and as any educated person knows, that simply isn't so.

[Argus]

Apply the same thing to race - there is no direct correlation between race and crime. Under the right circumstances (ie single parent home, low income bracket, low education levels etc), people of any race tend to be prone to crime.

IOW, there is more than just genetics at work here. There are socioeconomic factors that are tied into the equation.

And cultural factors. Those are a huge part of it. Those cultural factors help to explain why poor Blacks from single parent homes are less likely to finish high school than poor Whites from single parent homes, and more likely to become involved in gangs and street crime than poor whites.

[Argus]

How about you start by reading some of the responses to this thread.

What I mean is, just how many Blacks today can't get an apartment or a job because someone hates Black skin and thinks they're racially/genetically inferior?

Even most of those who don't like Blacks, or have some level of discomfort with Blacks aren't operating on the basis of "racism" but on a bias born of their experiences with, or media descriptions of Black culture and Black crime.

If you're extremely suspicious of Blacks because you believe they're genetically inclined towards violence that's racism. If you're extremely suspicious of Blacks because of all the media reports, because of what friends have said, because of statistics on Black crime, that's NOT racism. It might be bigotry, or bias, or prejudice, depending on the degree, but it's not racism. You are operating not out of a sense of racial superiority, but out of what information you have at hand on that particular sub-group.

When was the last time you were arbitrarily stopped driving your car?

Do police pull over more young Black men because they believe that black men are racially inferior and thus destined for crime, or do they pull over more young Black men because so many crimes are being committed by young Black men? There is a vast difference between the two. Perhaps not to the men pulled over without cause, but in the motivation of the cops. Even in the US jurisidctions where half or more than half of the cops are Blacks, young black men still tend to be pulled over far more often than Whites. And they're pulled over by White cops, Black cops, Hispanic cops and Asian cops because of the amount of crime young Black men are involved in.

The problem is you people on the Left don't even understand the definition of the pejorative terms you so freely cast about you.

[BC_chick]

And cultural factors. Those are a huge part of it. Those cultural factors help to explain why poor Blacks from single parent homes are less likely to finish high school than poor Whites from single parent homes, and more likely to become involved in gangs and street crime than poor whites.

You're talking about a culture that was denied access to education and robbed of the ability to form a family-unit for centuries. Of course these 'cultural' differences will take some time to go away.

If you approach the issue from a compassionate POV, you would think, blacks live in xyz situations, xyz situations promote negative behavious, what can we do about alleviating xyz problems facing the black community.

You're no longer speaking from a position of superiority, but rather, a humanitarian one. Just be sure to know what your intentions are when you point out these 'cultural' differences.

Edited September 6, 2009 by BC_chick

[lictor616]

You're talking about a culture that was denied access to education and robbed of the ability to form a family-unit for centuries. Of course these 'cultural' differences will take some time to go away.

If you approach the issue from a compassionate POV, you would think, blacks live in xyz situations, xyz situations promote negative behavious, what can we do about alleviating xyz problems facing the black community.

You're no longer speaking from a position of superiority, but rather, a humanitarian one. Just be sure to know what your intentions are when you point out these 'cultural' differences.

Actually blacks (as the initial human group) is the oldest "race" of mankind. They had at least 64 000 years to develop these things independently with no "whitey" around... but failed... miserably.

"Denied access to education"!? Where the Chinese, with their ancient and supremely respectable literature, scientific knowhow and civilization "denied access to education by whites? no, they EDUCATED THEMSELVES.

Where the liberated haitians in what used to be called Hispaniola or St-Domingue (the crown jewel of France's colonial empire) "denied education"? No they were turned over to themselves and inherited A MADE COUNTRY, with electrical plants, functioning sewage plants, roads, ships, cannons, rifles, and EXCELLENT french law.

and what did the blacks in haiti do with it (after btw genociding all the white men, all the white children... and eventually all the white women after keeping many of them shut up in pens, for uses that you should have no trouble in imagining) ? They inherited a MADE country, the envy of the Caribbean.... and all they could do was run it into the first concrete wall... Today even despite BILLIONS IN AID... Haiti is a ruined country, a howling cesspit of savagery and dearth...

and unfortunately for liberals... no whitey around to blame (although many of them actually disgustingly blame US aid as the sole culprit of Haiti pitiable state).

Edited September 6, 2009 by lictor616

[Argus]

You're talking about a culture that was denied access to education and robbed of the ability to form a family-unit for centuries. Of course these 'cultural' differences will take some time to go away.

No, that won't cut it. The statistics show that Black youths are less likely to finish high school, in both Canada and the US, than they were in the nineteen fifties and sixties. You can't blame that on slavery.

As for family units, Blacks were, like Whites, routinely married. There were very few cases of single parenthood (comparatively speaking to today) in the nineteen fifties and sixties. While it's true that the majority of Blacks, in both Canada and the US now grow up in homes without fathers that too is a recent phenomenon.

If you approach the issue from a compassionate POV, you would think, blacks live in xyz situations, xyz situations promote negative behavious, what can we do about alleviating xyz problems facing the black community.

Yes, but until someone actually acknowledges the problem there isn't going to be a lot of impetus to develop what in all probability will be expensive solutions.

[Argus]

Actually blacks (as the initial human group) is the oldest "race" of mankind. They had at least 64 000 years to develop these things independently with no "whitey" around... but failed... miserably.

I don't know. What percentage of Nigerian or Zambian babies are born to single mothers? Obviously there is a problem, culturally speaking, with Black teenage girls getting pregnant here in North American, and of a certainty, in Jamaica, but I have never heard that holds true for Africa.

[lictor616]

You're talking about a culture that was denied access to education and robbed of the ability to form a family-unit for centuries. Of course these 'cultural' differences will take some time to go away.

If you approach the issue from a compassionate POV, you would think, blacks live in xyz situations, xyz situations promote negative behavious, what can we do about alleviating xyz problems facing the black community.

You're no longer speaking from a position of superiority, but rather, a humanitarian one. Just be sure to know what your intentions are when you point out these 'cultural' differences.

Men are also more violent, more selfish, more aggressive, less nurturing, and more promiscuous than women. This is true in all societies from all corners of the globe at what ever time. Anyone who has worked with kids know that it is folly to pretend that these differences are merely the result of accidental "cultural conditioning"....

Why is it wise to just assume that it is true for racial/ethnic clines?

[lictor616]

I don't know. What percentage of Nigerian or Zambian babies are born to single mothers? Obviously there is a problem, culturally speaking, with Black teenage girls getting pregnant here in North American, and of a certainty, in Jamaica, but I have never heard that holds true for Africa.

Well in some African societies, because there is so much promiscuity and so much uncertainty about parenthood, men tend to look after the children of their sisters more than they look after the children of anyone else, because they are completely certain that they are genetically related to them.

They don't really know whether or not the children of the women that they may have slept with are necessarily their own. So they pay much more attention to the children of their sisters because they know that they and their sisters came from the same woman, and any child of their sisters is genetically related to them. Once again, proof of the importance of genetics, if of course you're uncertain about parenthood.

[BC_chick]

No, that won't cut it. The statistics show that Black youths are less likely to finish high school, in both Canada and the US, than they were in the nineteen fifties and sixties. You can't blame that on slavery.

As for family units, Blacks were, like Whites, routinely married. There were very few cases of single parenthood (comparatively speaking to today) in the nineteen fifties and sixties. While it's true that the majority of Blacks, in both Canada and the US now grow up in homes without fathers that too is a recent phenomenon.

We could go back and forth about the causes of this phenomenon, but I think you agree with the jist of what I was saying about there being a learned attribute to certain negative behaviours rather than racial genetic predisposition, correct?

Yes, but until someone actually acknowledges the problem there isn't going to be a lot of impetus to develop what in all probability will be expensive solutions.

Plenty acknowledge it and try to do something about it and they're not chastised for it. You may think why it's because they themselves are black but that's not necessarily true.

As I said before, it's because they are not forming their opinions from a position of superiority, but genuine concern. They could be black or white, it doesn't matter.

[lictor616]

We could go back and forth about the causes of this phenomenon, but I think you agree with the jist of what I was saying about there being a learned attribute to certain negative behaviours rather than racial genetic predisposition, correct?

why again must it be "either - or", don't you agree that it can be both?

[BC_chick]

why again must it be "either - or", don't you agree that it can be both?

When I see black families succeeding in the right conditions and white families failing miserably in the wrong conditions, no.... I tend to think that learned behaviour is the more determining factor in the outcome of things than racial genetic makeup.

[lictor616]

When I see black families succeeding in the right conditions and white families failing miserably in the wrong conditions, no.... I tend to think that learned behaviour is the more determining factor in the outcome of things than racial genetic makeup.

wow, I don't have time right now to show you the obvious inadequacy of that comment... but go ahead and sample this : http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4628960

The newest phenomenon today is Blacks STILL FAILING despite being raised in the right conditions...

Some of the wealthier black neighbourhoods are still plagued by the same sort of problems present everywhere in ghettos.

No less a liberal public figure then bill cosby spoke out against this...

Now what of genetic factors... do you think they count for ANYTHING AT ALL in determining the behavior of people?

[BC_chick]

Some of the wealthier black neighbourhoods are still plagued by the same sort of problems present everywhere in ghettos.

What, like raping white women?

ETA: not that I believe that, I'm talking about your attitudes toward black 'problems'....

But in all seriousness, care to elaborate on these 'problems' in the wealthy black neighbourhoods?

Edited September 6, 2009 by BC_chick

[lictor616]

What, like raping white women?

ETA: not that I believe that, I'm talking about your attitudes toward black 'problems'....

But in all seriousness, care to elaborate on these 'problems' in the wealthy black neighbourhoods?

top 25 black neighbourhoods:

http://higley1000.com/about-this-site/methodology/top-25-b

1/West Mount Airy - 41.2% (Higley #168) (Philadelphia, Philadelphia)

28,873 residents

http://philly.everyblock.com/crime/locatio...est-mount-airy/

Mt Airy has 2.85 the national crime rate.

much of these neighbourhoods are not places you'd like to live in...

[lictor616]

What, like raping white women?

ETA: not that I believe that, I'm talking about your attitudes toward black 'problems'....

But in all seriousness, care to elaborate on these 'problems' in the wealthy black neighbourhoods?

Look at college statistics...

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editoria...aduation_rates/

"BACK IN the National Collegiate Athletic Association basketball tournament this year after just missing the title last year, Memphis coach John Calipari said, “We don’t feel we have anything to prove because we’re a different team.” One thing is not different. Memphis should not be in the tournament at all, with a 44 percent graduation success rate for its African-American basketball players.

{snip} UConn also should not be in the tournament with a graduation rate of 22 percent for its African-American players and only 33 percent for the whole team.

{snip} Missouri should not be in the tournament either, with a 25 percent graduation rate for black players and only 36 percent overall.

black colleges have graduation rates WELL below the national average. I mean 25% graduation rate? abysmal! Yet as a general rule, people get into college if they have stable parents and access to funds... so what the problem here?

[BC_chick]

{snip} UConn also should not be in the tournament with a graduation rate of 22 percent for its African-American players and only 33 percent for the whole team.

{snip} Missouri should not be in the tournament either, with a 25 percent graduation rate for black players and only 36 percent overall.

black colleges have graduation rates WELL below the national average. I mean 25% graduation rate? abysmal! Yet as a general rule, people get into college if they have stable parents and access to funds... so what the problem here?

lictor, we were talking about crime. I said I believe the statistics are a result of environment and not genetics, you said why can't it be both. I said because in the same environments, other races are prone to act in a similar fashion.

I'm not sure how to address your post. First, I'm not sure I'd say graduation rates of 22% AA vs. 33% overall or 25% AA over 36% overall is *abysmal*, but you're entitled to your opinion.

Second, it still doesn't show that there is a genetic component to black *criminal activity*.

Care to try again? Care to show me where blacks from middle and upper class neighbourhoods are committing crimes just because of their DNA makeup?

[BC_chick]

{snip} UConn also should not be in the tournament with a graduation rate of 22 percent for its African-American players and only 33 percent for the whole team.

{snip} Missouri should not be in the tournament either, with a 25 percent graduation rate for black players and only 36 percent overall.

black colleges have graduation rates WELL below the national average. I mean 25% graduation rate? abysmal! Yet as a general rule, people get into college if they have stable parents and access to funds... so what the problem here?

lictor, we were talking about crime. I said I believe the statistics are a result of environment and not genetics, you said why can't it be both. I said because in the same environments, other races are prone to act in a similar fashion.

I'm not sure how to address your post. First, I'm not sure I'd say graduation rates of 22% AA vs. 33% overall or 25% AA vs. 36% overall is *abysmal*, but you're entitled to your opinion.

Second, it still doesn't show that there is a genetic component to black *criminal activity*.

Care to try again? Care to show me where blacks from middle and upper class neighbourhoods are committing crimes just because of their DNA makeup?

[M.Dancer]

In Longueuil, police officers have a maximum quota of arrests of black males... recently a black cocaine dealer driving a stolen car at high speeds, was pulled over and LET GO.. because the arresting officer knew that the department had reached the maximum quota of blacks... and didn't want to be audited.

how's that for anti-black racism?

I don't think make believe qualifies for evidence.

Now can you can provide a link for such a sensational claim?

Somehow I doubt it.

[M.Dancer]

I don't think make believe qualifies for evidence.

Now can you can provide a link for such a sensational claim?

Somehow I doubt it.

Still waiting....(I won't hold my breath)

[Rue]

yes, like so many other human phenomena, it is a combination of nature and nurture. but both are very important.

The problem with liberals and their analysis of crime, is that they completely ignore the "nature" aspect of it... to them crime is purely economical... and as any educated person knows, that simply isn't so.

The problem is you have no clue what Liberal theory is and if you did you would realize it does not comment on

or provide theories on whether genetics dictates intelligence.

You misappropriate the word to use it in a manner that refers to anyone who does not agree with you that people of colour are of lower intelligence.

Your agenda is to come on this board and coach your neo Nazi white supremacist agenda.

You want to start a debate on why the studies that attempted to show balck people had lower i.q. levels then do it.

Stop couching your racist ideology in veiled terms.

Go on provide one study that proves black people have lower i.q.'s then caucasians.

Can't wait.

[Rue]

The debate as to whether people of certain “races” are more intelligent or less intelligent then people of other races necessarily engages in concepts that deal with psychology, anthropology, biology, economics, history, philosophy, sociology, demographics, genetics, and medicine.

The actual the concept of race as a relevant factor in determining intelligence and being able to classify differences in intelligence levels between races is based on the premises there is such a thing as race, and then that the intelligence tests referred to are accurate and meaningful.

I would contend that a review of biology and genetics has clearly established that the human species has no "races" in the biological sense and that the terms we use to define race are in fact social constructs, i.e., based on our subjective assumptions that flow from our culture values as to what “race” is.

I would also make the same argument for how intelligence tests have been created, i.e., that while they claim to be based on objective methodology in fact contain built in cultural assumptions that then taint the statistics obtained because of those biases which will then predispose certain groups over others to do better on those tests.

I would contend that medicine, psychology, anthropology and socio-biology have all proven that there is no single form or type of intelligence, and that formal education helps individuals to develop a specific variety of cognitive abilities that are most popularly used to measure i.q. but that there are other methods not considered which could also measure i.q. and are not resulting in anomalies between alleged race groups.

I would contend the above sciences has sufficiently proven that BOTH one’s genetic predisposition and learned behaviour in their environment BOTH contribute equally to the level of i.q. an individual obtains, i.e., that one’s intelligence level may be based on a genetic predisposition but also such things as whether the infant is exposed to toxic chemicals wild in the womb or then whether during certain stages of its development outside the womb as an infant, then child, then teen, the subject is able to eat proper food, live in a stress free shelter and has role models that encourage that individual to develop its i.q.

I would contend that the genetic predisposition and the environmental factors can be positive or negative and have nothing to do with race but everything to do with the individual genetic make-up passed on in the dna that has been proven to be found in all alleged races and that the environmental conditions I mention affect people of all the alleged races in the same manner.

The text, Race and Intelligence, Separating Science From Myth, Edited by Jeffrey M. Fish, and catalogued as ISBN: 978-0-8058-3757-5 (hardback) 978-1-4106-0433-0 (electronic) and published by Routledge in the U.S. is the source for my above contentions.

I would also provide the following references to counter the myths of race as a biological concept:

http://www.enotalone.com/article/5043.html

http://www.enotalone.com/article/5044.html

http://blogcritics.org/culture/article/the...ce-and-culture/

I would provide the following references to counter the myth of black people or certain races being less intelligent then others:

http://psychology.jrank.org/pages/526/Race-Intelligence.html

http://www.apa.org/journals/releases/amp60146.pdf

http://www.jewcy.com/cabal/will_saletans_scandalous_source

http://www.wilderdom.com/personality/L4-1I...eVsNurture.html

http://www.spectacle.org/1207/smart.html

http://en.allexperts.com/e/r/ra/race_and_i...ontroversy).htm

http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/custo...;accno=ED074172

http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.o.../XT0UW7SVHY.pdf

http://www.unm.edu/~jar/v55n2.html

http://www.schoolracetalk.org/node/8

http://www.skepdic.com/iqrace.html

[Rue]

I would also contend that understanding how genetic predisposition may make us

vulnerable to certain diseases is crucial.

Trying to decontextualize genetic predisposition to advance theories that promote

race hatred which I contend is the political agenda of the poster I have responded

to should be challenged.

Trying to understand why black men are arrested so disproportionately hirer then

other people in Canada or why there are so many aboriginals in jail is also crucial

not to create a pretext to discriminate against them or resent them but to understand

what factors are leading to their criminal incarceration and we already know what

a lot of it is;

1-clear indication that police officers subjectively are more likely to stop

a young black man in a car or out at night then any other type of people;

2-lack of early male role models;

3-unemployment;

4-lack of recreational facilities;

5-in the case of aboriginal people-a failure to connect such people to

nurturing communities so that the community as a whole can provide

rather then have each of its members fragment and become alienated and

floated in a cultural milieu that emphasizes individuality and materialism over

holistic concepts of identity and non material values.

It is not rocket science.

If people want to use people's failures or short-comings to incite resentment

and hate then for me, the only issue is exposing that hate agenda.

No one complains about positive generalizations or using genetics to engage

in positive outcomes. Most of us however agree when we use generalizations for

negative generalizations and negative agenda-then there is a problem.

There are no statistics, I repeat no statistics that prove blacks who live in the exact same environment

as whites are more likely to commit crime or fail to thrive.

There are no statistics, I repeat again, no statistics that prove when aborginal people are allowed to

live in nurturing communities, they are more likely then whites to fail and commit crime.

There is limited biological information as to how genetic traits csn predispose some of us with common ancestry to certain diseases but that is all.

All theories and postulations about there being less intelligence in certain races has been repudiated.

More to the point you will not find any mainstream geneticist or biologist who would use the social construct of race as it means nothing to them.

The fact that a human may have dark skin or a flaired as opposed to narrow nose is not a genetic concept-it is a subjectively perceived concept. Kinky hair does not make one a different genetic group then another.

All humans of all alleged races are inter-related and not distinct nor do our genetic traits as to hair texture or skin colour relevant factors as to what makes us genetically predisposed to certain diseases.

[lictor616]

http://www.enotalone.com/article/5043.html

http://www.enotalone.com/article/5044.html

I will focus on the initial two quotes who cite such authors as Joseph L. Graves.

Most of these sources approach the subject (which is necessarily SCIENTIFIC) in a very amateur or innapropriate manner... For instance Graves approaches the subject of races as a sociologist... He PRESUMES that racism is some sort of sin... and that race is therefore not real and from that he bases his opinion on many social superstitions (equality and other fictions of the mind). First, noting only the nuttier notions about race 400 years ago, he disengenuously provides a clumsy example involving greater genetic variation between chimpanzees. Graves also says that the typical European and African share 99.61 % of their genes in common. Genetic effects tend to be nonlinear; even minute genetic differences can bear large phenotypic consequences. Chimpanzees and humans, for example, have 98.9 to 99.3 percent of their genes in common.

But one cannot reason a priori that an absolute difference of 0.39 percent is too small to support genetic divergence in IQ.

The American Society for Cell Biology revealed their discovery that the prostate tumour found in black men have more than 20 times the level of a certain cancer-promoting substance as the tumours found in white men.

Then there are BiDil and other race specific medicines ... which graves of course ignores outright (because it would obliterate his point)..

In essence Graves adopts the attitude of a cowardly scientist, being careful to misrepresent the case for racial differences... His book therefore is less then worthless... and anything this man says is suspect...

Most of the "race doesn't exist camp" try to attack the archaic definition of "pure race." As anyone in science understands, races are mere taxonomies that look at the infrequencies or frequencies of differentiating genetic alleles between population groups. As I said most of the speudo intellectuals that claim to attack the concept of race ... argue against old and etiolated notions of purity and other sophisticated pollameré. the arguments of most of your posts Rue are perhaps valid and interesting for 1895.

You can see the bias written all over the fake talk of the reality of races... as soon as you hear words such as "racism" "class warfare" "the underprivileged" "hitler" "nazi" or the like... you know that these are only used to cloud reason and to excite the glands of liberals who have Political Correctness as a religion and use scholarship to go against the purpose of scholarship.

Edited September 11, 2009 by lictor616