Western society in a nutshell
(twitter.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (87)
sorted by:
You’re an idiot if you think that the rates are even comparable. There are dumb white people, that’s why iq averages exist instead of iq absolutes. Thomas Sowell didn’t have a father either.
So do you accept that you're now making excuses and walking back SicilianOmega's comment because it's fucking wrong?
Are you prepared to accept that in a half-century of dedicated effort to destroy families, the political Left has successfully damaged white families enough to recognize that this kind of behavior is physically capable by white people?
Fascinating, so you’re now claiming that white people didn’t have similar rates of homicide and violent crime before the political left showed up with the “great new society”? You know what used to happen? We killed, institutionalized or ostracized the problematic parts of society. That was deemed racist 50 years ago along with saying anyone at a 85 iq or lower was mentally disabled.
You're changing the subject. Do you accept that you are walking back Sicilian's statement?
You denying the point of the comment. Sicilian wasn’t speaking in absolutes.
Bro come on, everyone knows he didn't mean "every single last white child"
"I invented this improbable and stupid reading of your argument. Will you defend it, or will you admit I'm right?"
Which of these words did I invent?
No, he did, that's literally why he said it. Turns out you do see white kids doing this.
He's so retarded of a racist that he can't accept that sometimes white families are missing fathers because it would bring disrepute to the image of a white family he has in his head.
Meanwhile, white families actually have a lot of broken homes, and that isn't going to be addressed because he's a racist that hates blacks more than he loves whites. Just like any other socialist.
The fact that you think anyone buys this is a low IQ moment from you
Whites, Latinos and Asians are statistically speaking, too smart to fall for the liberal bait and switch on a widespread basis. Doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen, but just less so. Black culture, meanwhile, has been consumed by it. You don’t leave your children fatherless as a cultural norm if you have the IQ to recognize how destructive this pattern behavior is/will be.
Eh, whites appear to be disproportionately overrepresented as serial killers. I mean, blacks just straight up kill you out of IQrage, but whites seem to disproportionately produce serial killers, more than any other race and it appears to be mostly an American thing.
The emphasis here is disproportionate, just like how blacks disproportionately are overrepresented for violent crime like burglary, robbery, murder, assault, etc
Blacks would be serial killers too if they were smart enough to not get caught, ahem, disproportionately.
Much like the school shooter stat, this has been skewed
That's so retarded I hardly know where to begin. Leftism and Liberalism begin in Europe. Most of Latin America is Socialist by one variant or another, and Asia is ravaged by Communism, and the largest Communist country in history specifically.
The bait and switch tactic comes from George (not Jamal) Orwell pointing out the bait and switch tactic with "We were always at war with East Asia".
I've been reading his economics book and I have a lower opinion of his intelligence than I went in with.
I'm sure he's actually very smart, but he absolutely cannot get his ideas across efficiently.
"Clear and concise" (as claimed by the endorsements) my ass.
A group of retards are claiming to be unimpressed by an actual economist. I'm fucking pissing myself with laughter!
I'm not surprised you are incontinent.
Sorry, it's my fault for interjecting in an ongoing thread, but I wasn't trying to make a broader argument. I just saw his name and wanted to comment on his book, since I've been reading it.
Less impressed than I expected to be. He's taught me one or two things and helped clarify some others, but mostly he's told me a lot of what I already know, and in the most retardedly ineloquent, wall-of-text way possible.
I haven't read the whole thing yet but at the very least it should be half the length that it is. He needs an editor even more badly than Ayn Rand did.
I take issue with the notion that he's impressive just by virtue of being an economist. There are lots of retarded economists. I don't think he's one of them - his retardation lies in his method of communication.
I was mocking your criticism because it's so ridiculously flawed that I don't believe you read the book, which one was it again? He's literally a prolific writer, so there are a litany of economic texts that he's written. More-over, some of his books include sections of other books he's previously written to save time, because he explained the issue well enough in those. "Black Rednecks And White Liberals" is comprised of 3 separate books, and some additional original work to simplify the text.
This also goes to the writing style on his books. Different books are meant for different audiences at different reading levels. I would never call him ineloquent, but in the simpler books he will go into detail about how simple concepts work. And in more complicated books he will make multiple examples or case studies to explain larger concepts.
Another overrated mediocrity. Like Neil Tyson, people are just impressed with any black who can do more than tie his own shoes.
At least we still have Clarence Thomas.
I don't know the rates but I will say that the lionazation of single motherhood has become the prevalent social structure for the mass media. Even divorced moms are referred to as single moms even if they share custody 50/50.