Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Jan van Eck said:

You worded it just fine!

See, a warning to all, if you block me you make an ass out of yourself like this guy because he couldn't read my post.¬†ūüėČ

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

2 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

Who were hurt the most by slavery weren't the slaves, but the poor whites who weren't needed for anything that slaves could do.

What you are overlooking is that the "poor whites" were also slaves, albeit not formally classified that way.  Specifically, some 90% of New England were white slaves, known as "indentured servants."  In large measure, they were kidnapped off the streets of Bristol, held in chains on a boat in the harbor  (until enough were kidnapped), being sold to the shipowner, then trasported to ports in New England where the contracts of Indenture wer sold at a mark-up to local land-owners and merchants.  The contracts were typically for 11 years.  After that, they were (sometimes) cut loose, in theory with a mule and some seed to go start their own farm, but in practice usually left destitute.  Unsurprisingly, the death rate was high enough. 

Another big source of white slaves was the British court system.  Persons arrested for quite petty offenses would be sentenced to "transportation."  The Judge got a payment from the ship-captain for the new slave, who was sentenced to go to America for her crimes.  Lots and lots of younger girls ended up victims of this judicial abuse. 

Judicial abuse is a hallmark of the British class system.  Judicial abuse remains as a salient point in the American judicial system.  What surprises me is that there has not been an overthrow of the judges and courts inside the USA. The Americans seem remarkably complacent about being abused by various branches of government.  

Edited by Jan van Eck
typing error
  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, BradleyPNW said:

jfc, how can you be so wrong about so much so often? 

Says the one who has been proven wrong on a minute by minute basis? You've got no standing, at all

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

8 hours ago, Marcin2 said:

Parties mean something if they win seats in Parliament: House and Senate. I can create party but it has No impact on creation of law in US

Electoral system:first past the post creates 2 party system. And 2 party is worse than multiparty, less democracy , for example African Americans do not have own party and they should.

If you claim that there is referendum Please tell me:When was the last national referendum: all American   voting same day about any Notion ?

 

They don't have much impact because US people didn't choose them.

Ballots access depends on meeting states' requirement

  1. Libertarian Party: 50 states
  2. Green Party: 44 states (write-in status in an additional three states)
  3. Constitution Party: 24 states (write-in status in an additional 22 states)

https://ballotpedia.org/List_of_political_parties_in_the_United_States

US do have third parties senators and house representatives

https://www.senate.gov/senators/SenatorsRepresentingThirdorMinorParties.htm

https://ballotpedia.org/Current_independent_and_third-party_federal_and_state_officeholders#State_representatives

IMHO,

It is not fair to compare individual EU member political system to US electoral system because of the federal . For comparison you should compare US electoral system with EU system and each US state is equivalent to one EU member. The main differences are from majority of US people in all of the states have a united language, embrace more individualism values while EU have many languages, historical background and cultures value.

If you compares with Germany political system, I don't want to go to the details but to simplify, US president has very weak control on policies because his party may not be backed by majority in house and congress while Germany Chancellor is backed by majority in the parliament and have more power in policies.

NZ has Maori party, around 800k people out of population of 5 mil,  but cannot hold much seats in parliament as people seeing that ethnic should not be politicized and should not divide people by race. A black party would not give Obama any chance to be US president and he won't join that party (and his way to presidency would be much much harder if black people votes  black party).

Another factor is scalability of the system in number of states and populations. To manage 1 state of 5  millions in NZ,Singapore with 16 states of 80 millions in Germany or 50 states of 320 millions in US or 1.4 billions in China or India are completely differences level.  In IT terms a physical machine is less scalable as multi network physical machines, which is less scalable as cloud. 

The electoral system which who got 270 will win the elections make US people see little need to have more than 2 parties and it is entirely depended on people choices in each state if the party can have ballot access. What if no party gets to 270 and none of them want to negotiate to each others because it will make them lose future support? A kind of Mexican standoff (The Good, the bad and the ugly). Then a break mechanism will have to implements while such a system is not needed with 2 majors parties. And the more negotiation which all the good sides, the drawn back is it is really hard to have political reform with too much negotiation and prevent the competitiveness of the country.

About the spending money for elections advertising, which seems to waste money, it is kind of creating jobs and a test for budget managements. Bloomberg can spend as much as he can but he still lost the primary. 

With corporate or political lobbying, we can see all of the downside in they try to gain or to up their stocks, but the upside is the lobbying in public, it can be supervised by opponents and the people, much better than under-table bribes and Corporations can have their says in political policies, like any other social components. And the corporations are competing among each others, for example Amazon cloud competes with Microsoft Azure or Google cloud, and majority of stocks are on share market. The rich CEOs or stockholders  will have to pay massive amount of taxes for their bonus and salaries and in turn, when disasters occurs, the governments will use tax payer money to help them to keep the employments, to keep public mutual funds and ETF and therefor keep the stocks up. If they not run efficiently, they will be swallow by their competitors, or people will dumb their stocks. They can be a failed attempt with their lobby like Covid19 med and vaccines . Check and balance right there. 

More over US culture encourage individualism, not parties, not religion, not states, not ethnics. So even when you see the ANFA members, or KKK members, voters for Dem or Rep embraces any common value,  they are not for their races or parties or ideologies but for themselves, for their own perception that it will benefit them. They can do political shopping with smaller parties but it is their free will to shop with big brands.

So each political system have cons and pros and people in each country hold different values. 

Edited by SUZNV
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

What you are overlooking is that the "poor whites" were also slaves, albeit not formally classified that way.  Specifically, some 90% of New England were white slaves, known as "indentured servants."  In large measure, they were kidnapped off the streets of Bristol, held in chains on a boat in the harbor  (until enough were kidnapped), being sold to the shipowner, then trasported to ports in New England where the contracts of Indenture wer sold at a mark-up to local land-owners and merchants.  The contracts were typically for 11 years.  After that, they were (sometimes) cut loose, in theory with a mule and some seed to go start their own farm, but in practice usually left destitute.  Unsurprisingly, the death rate was high enough. 

Another big source of white slaves was the British court system.  Persons arrested for quite petty offenses would be sentenced to "transportation."  The Judge got a payment from the ship-captain for the new slave, who was sentenced to go to America for her crimes.  Lots and lots of younger girls ended up victims of this judicial abuse. 

Judicial abuse is a hallmark of the British class system.  Judicial abuse remains as a salient point in the American judicial system.  What surprises me is that there has not been an overthrow of the judges and courts inside the USA. The Americans seem remarkably complacent about being abused by various branches of government.  

Jan, Jan, Jan. Your narrative has been "fact checked" by facebook, and because you speak of the truth, but your ideals don't fit our narrow minded views and actually disturb our severe TDS, you will be put in jail for a period not to exceed....well whatever we decide in a month....LOL

Oh, and what part of the First Amendment did that squirrel brained idiot in the SCOTUS not understand. Actually four of them seem incapable of understanding what the First clearly spells out, in English, without reservation or exception? The churches just need to organize, have armed guards in the foyer, and hold any police until the services are over. Makes sense to me, just as much as the SCOTUS ruling....

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

Says the one who has been proven wrong on a minute by minute basis? You've got no standing, at all

"who WErE Hurt tHE mOst bY SlAVeRY weREn't THe SlAveS, BUt The poOR wHites Who WeReN't neeDEd FOR ANYTHInG thAT SlAvEs coulD Do." 

Ward. When you say things like that you lose your credibility pretty much across the board. I keep hoping to see you express accurate knowledge in at least one domain to redeem yourself. Because I'm an optimist. 
 

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, BradleyPNW said:

"who WErE Hurt tHE mOst bY SlAVeRY weREn't THe SlAveS, BUt The poOR wHites Who WeReN't neeDEd FOR ANYTHInG thAT SlAvEs coulD Do." 

Ward. When you say things like that you lose your credibility pretty much across the board. I keep hoping to see you express accurate knowledge in at least one domain to redeem yourself. Because I'm an optimist. 
 

Your inability to hold a coherent thought in your head leads you to believe others can't. What I said was entirely correct from an economics perspective. In ancient Rome you were better off being a slave than free with no prospects for employment that any slave could do. Your low intellect isn't my problem. Your lack of critical thinking skills, likewise on you. 

Those Mandingo novels you masturbate to are not an accurate reflection of anything but the author's fantasies (and yours no doubt). I visited a plantation in the deep south still owned by the same family who once had slaves there. The interesting thing were the black employees there who proudly pointed back to their own ancestors who were in fact slaves there. They weren't abused, they were treated like a team owner treats his NBA stars. Five generations later and why were they still hanging around? Because they were family. 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 6/2/2020 at 4:20 PM, Hotone said:

I am not planning to donate any money.  I just want to draw your attention to their grievances. You can't get away with just telling African Americans to work harder.

You are absolutely correct. How dare anyone suggest that an African American actually DO something to improve their lives. WE would be expected to get off our asses, quit dressing like an idiot, learn to speak an intelligible form of English, and LEARN something besides laying on our backs and making babies for the welfare system to support. How DARE anyone make a suggestion like this to African Americans. Funny thing is though, seems to work for the rest of us..... I have some grievance as well, but you don't see ME running around with free stuff from looted stores. I'm not selling whatever your fix is on the corner. Fact of the matter is, a LOT of us seem to be fine growing up, following the rules, getting an education(or skills employers want), NOT leaving a trail of fatherless babies and broken families behind us, and funny enough, NOT getting arrested for doing STUPID things. HOW DARE ANYONE SUGGEST THIS TO THEM!!! Free everything for them!!! NOT!!! They have the same opportunities that most have, they just want to be lazy and NOT utilize them. Then later when all they can find is a crappy minimum wage job that a teenager used to do we have to listen to them whine. About sick of listening to it.... In every society there will be people on top and people on bottom. Law of averages says there will be a LOT more on bottom than on top. Where you want to fall is up to you.... 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

Your inability to hold a coherent thought in your head leads you to believe others can't. What I said was entirely correct from an economics perspective. In ancient Rome you were better off being a slave than free with no prospects for employment that any slave could do. Your low intellect isn't my problem. Your lack of critical thinking skills, likewise on you. 

Those Mandingo novels you masturbate to are not an accurate reflection of anything but the author's fantasies (and yours no doubt). I visited a plantation in the deep south still owned by the same family who once had slaves there. The interesting thing were the black employees there who proudly pointed back to their own ancestors who were in fact slaves there. They weren't abused, they were treated like a team owner treats his NBA stars. Five generations later and why were they still hanging around? Because they were family. 

Ha, no Ward. Slaving on Roman latifundia was not superior to freedom. Again, how can you be so wrong, about so much, so often? A witch must have put a befuddlement hex on you when you were sitting in school or something. 

  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

btw, I'd hope people understand employment was not hard to come by in the ancient Roman empire. The overwhelming majority of the population was "employed" in subsistence farming. LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

Sure he can.  

The fact that you are a victim of US education system the same as @Douglas Buckland @Ward Smithor @Dan Warnick and you have absolutely No idea about other ( other than US) political systems should not be the reason of your pride. Or derogatory comments directed to people that have more knowledge and share it at this forum.

The fact that you do not understand the upsides and downsides of political system of your country is a shame.

If you do not understand my arguments it does not mean that I am stupid or that you are stupid.

  • Downvote 1
  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

What you are describing generally is known as "corruption by blood."  [Sometimes: "corruption of blood."]   This is expressed in USA law as a Bill of Attainder, which is expressly forbidden in the US Constitution.  You will find the clause forbidding the practice in Article One, Section nine, paragraph three:    "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law will be passed."

The Bill of Attainder prohibition clause ws inserted as a response to and reaction to our good friend King George [III] and his practice of invoking it against his political adverseraries in the Colonies.  He would declare anyone who disagreed with him an "Enemy of the State" and place a Bill against him.  Then the Estate, all the relatives, and the assets of the relatives and descendants would  be confiscated to the CVrown.  And whatever any descendant earned would also be confiscated to the Crown.  In effect, the bloodline was condemned to perpetual poverty - forever.   So, the colonists responded to all that (and a lot more) by taking up a call to arms.  

And for good measure, they abolished the titles of Lord, and King, and Sir, and all the rest. Article I, Section Nine, Clause 8:

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

This is known as the "Emoluments Clause," and is what various attempts to go hang Donald Trump and the Russians are all about.   Herewith endeth the Lesson. 

I seem to remember a lot of entertainers receiving titles. from the Queen. What about that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Marcin2 said:

By ballot access I mean access of other parties to ballot box: bery very difficult in US. Practically impossible for a party that does not have multimilion donors.

Parties mean something if they win seats in Parliament: House and Senate. I can create party but it has No impact on creation of law in US

Electoral system:first past the post creates 2 party system. And 2 party is worse than multiparty, less democracy , for example African Americans do not have own party and they should.

If you claim that there is referendum Please tell me:When was the last national referendum: all American   voting same day about any Notion ?

 

Every Party has been on the ballot in the last few presidential elections.

To get on any ballot you just have to have enough signatures on a petition in every state, every elected position, from councilman to the President. with less signatures required for the council position to the most required by the Presidential position.

Like I said the last time, it is done by representation. To get a Constitutional Amendment, you have to have 2/3 majority in congress, 3/4 majority in each state ratifying it, plus conventions at the federal and state level. Last one Completed in1992.

The electoral college is set up so the small states have a little more clout to keep the larger states from taking too much control in things. And to keep the chicanery influence to a minimum, as each state has it's own set of voting laws

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 6/3/2020 at 9:50 AM, Marcin2 said:

1. I usually know the topic I am talking about, and as you noticed I am capable of backing my statements by arguments. Sometimes I refrain from explaining the obvious, like Level 1 cause of riots. This is just political science (and common sense), also backed by first hand experience. Some data I present and rational opinions based on them could be very controversial for you but they exist whether you like it or not (like high probability of black male being criminal : 1/4 and the resulting racial profiling by policemen).

2. What is implied is often only in the head of the individual reader. I think your society is doing a lot to better yourselves, US is constantly changing. I just commented about the riots and refrained from general comments about US or anything.

3. I usually tolerate your ad hominem, derogatory and unnecessary remarks, that is why I answer. This is because I have children and you are old. Having children makes persons more tolerant for controversial behaviour or outbursts.  And I know that old people have more tendency to rant, but I respect them a lot. You also had and have very interesting life and contribute a lot from your experience so age is a great upside here.

About lack of political representation.

The fact that black people consitute 10% of Representatives and 3% of Senators is great and is a proof of positive changes.

But direct representation of a social or racial group through their own party present in Parliament, solely focused on their needs is something totally different. It brings the things to the whole new level. This is the upside of multi-party system. It is difficult to comperehend for Americans cause you know only bi-party political set up. The fact that bi-party system would be very difficult to change in US is another story.

I think lack of direct parliamentarian representation of African-Americans through their own party is a very important observation, and contributes to this discussion. But it does not give any hope for change, and thus is useless from practical point of view.

First of all, you are missing the point. The main point of the protests is overbearing authority. It is the media and the "activists" that make it a black and white racial issue. It is apparently organized by AntiFa into violent riots around the protests, they are similar to what Baader Meinhof and the Red Brigades were before they started killing people, perhaps you are familiar with their history. Protesters have wised up and started handing them over to the police. Some were chased away by protesters.

There has been an increase in police powers and a reduction in accountability and external oversight, extremely bad HR practices and training. Far too much political interference and far too much secrecy. That has made police as much as a problem as crime in particular areas. That is an outgrowth of the expansion of the State.

In the US the coalitions are formed within the parties and the results are on the platforms. Not in the disgusting horse trading AFTER an election. The big issues require a broad consensus, they are not achieved by thin majorities derived from momentary coalitions. 

Black urban neighborhoods used to contain a black middle class, but were dispersed over time into the suburbs and mixed middle class neighborhoods as they became open to integration. They used to make an effort to pick political candidates that had some program that might work to help with economic development and school, bank finance, or healthcare access, - all things that are now gone, and now even access to groceries. As the black middle class moved out, that has changed into a violent culture of drug gangs operating openly, Politics of looting the public purse in favor of friends and family, and the politics of entitlement where "activists" claim to represent minority communities and cut deals with commercial operators to do development, in return for "donations". One of my favorites is a Chicago program with State and Federal funding support to enhance STEM education in public schools by hiring teachers at better terms than the school districts could afford to pay (the bulk of the expense of large school districts is administration and the physical plant, not teachers). They hired relatives and political associates and friends of the program's political sponsors and they didn't even show up for work.   .

Compared to my childhood, things are both much different and much the same but more intensely worse. While race relations at work and shopping are just about as genial as could be, with little difference between behaviors and dress of white and black people in suburbia, the inner city black neighborhoods have entirely gone to rot, with barely any visible businesses catering to those outside the neighborhoods. Bars, pawn shops, liquor stores.

Is there a white oppression of the black community in urban centers? There definitely was in history, but what remains is not particularly white people in politics directing the oppression. The large urban centers are not majority white. The politics are mixed race, the police force usually has more white people because it is hard to recruit from the black community because of high rates of convictions among its young adults. There is also a cultural problem due to the police force's history of enforcing old racial segregation laws.

There is no denying the laundry list of problems in black-white relationships in the US. But it is not at all related to what you appear to think, which is MSM inspired racial relations viewpoint that has been out of date since the 1990s and is still looking for 1960s motifs that are only found in small social pockets (like skin heads) and among the elderly.

  • Great Response! 2
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BradleyPNW said:

Ha, no Ward. Slaving on Roman latifundia was not superior to freedom. Again, how can you be so wrong, about so much, so often? A witch must have put a befuddlement hex on you when you were sitting in school or something. 

Wrong 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, BradleyPNW said:

Yes. I am an ass. I never said otherwise. Also, I'm right. Which makes me an arrogant ass. 

I think the reason you're freaking out about the DOJ and claiming I want to see America burn is that you're wrapped up in a warped world view and it's falling apart. But you chose to buy into that world view so it's all on you, not me, not anyone else.

Wrong 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BradleyPNW said:

btw, I'd hope people understand employment was not hard to come by in the ancient Roman empire. The overwhelming majority of the population was "employed" in subsistence farming. LOL

Wrong 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

1 hour ago, 0R0 said:

First of all, you are missing the point. The main point of the protests is overbearing authority. It is the media and the "activists" that make it a black and white racial issue. It is apparently organized by AntiFa into violent riots around the protests, they are similar to what Baader Meinhof and the Red Brigades were before they started killing people, perhaps you are familiar with their history. Protesters have wised up and started handing them over to the police. Some were chased away by protesters.

There has been an increase in police powers and a reduction in accountability and external oversight, extremely bad HR practices and training. Far too much political interference and far too much secrecy. That has made police as much as a problem as crime in particular areas. That is an outgrowth of the expansion of the State.

In the US the coalitions are formed within the parties and the results are on the platforms. Not in the disgusting horse trading AFTER an election. The big issues require a broad consensus, they are not achieved by thin majorities derived from momentary coalitions. 

Black urban neighborhoods used to contain a black middle class, but were dispersed over time into the suburbs and mixed middle class neighborhoods as they became open to integration. They used to make an effort to pick political candidates that had some program that might work to help with economic development and school, bank finance, or healthcare access, - all things that are now gone, and now even access to groceries. As the black middle class moved out, that has changed into a violent culture of drug gangs operating openly, Politics of looting the public purse in favor of friends and family, and the politics of entitlement where "activists" claim to represent minority communities and cut deals with commercial operators to do development, in return for "donations". One of my favorites is a Chicago program with State and Federal funding support to enhance STEM education in public schools by hiring teachers at better terms than the school districts could afford to pay (the bulk of the expense of large school districts is administration and the physical plant, not teachers). They hired relatives and political associates and friends of the program's political sponsors and they didn't even show up for work.   .

Compared to my childhood, things are both much different and much the same but more intensely worse. While race relations at work and shopping are just about as genial as could be, with little difference between behaviors and dress of white and black people in suburbia, the inner city black neighborhoods have entirely gone to rot, with barely any visible businesses catering to those outside the neighborhoods. Bars, pawn shops, liquor stores.

Is there a white oppression of the black community in urban centers? There definitely was in history, but what remains is not particularly white people in politics directing the oppression. The large urban centers are not majority white. The politics are mixed race, the police force usually has more white people because it is hard to recruit from the black community because of high rates of convictions among its young adults. There is also a cultural problem due to the police force's history of enforcing old racial segregation laws.

There is no denying the laundry list of problems in black-white relationships in the US. But it is not at all related to what you appear to think, which is MSM inspired racial relations viewpoint that has been out of date since the 1990s and is still looking for 1960s motifs that are only found in small social pockets (like skin heads) and among the elderly.

The sad thing is (and yes I'll get attacked for saying it) is there is a disparity between races and IQ. I don't want it to be so but it's still true.

That has to have an effect in a competative environment especially when immigration continues to put pressure on jobs. Was there not a time in Michigan where black people had jobs, church and families before the democracts got power and trashed everything encouraging single mothers to be dependent on the state?

No idea what the answer is but all I know is I don't want to live in a diverse area becasue I am sure my family would end up as a target for people who want to take their problems out on someone else...you know like actual racism.

Edited by El Nikko
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Marcin2 said:

The fact that you are a victim of US education system the same as @Douglas Buckland @Ward Smithor @Dan Warnick and you have absolutely No idea about other ( other than US) political systems should not be the reason of your pride. Or derogatory comments directed to people that have more knowledge and share it at this forum.

The fact that you do not understand the upsides and downsides of political system of your country is a shame.

If you do not understand my arguments it does not mean that I am stupid or that you are stupid.

You do realize that @Jan van Eck is a native of Holland, no? Therefore not a victim of the US educational system. In fact, you should feel like an ignorant fool right about now. He not only knows our system, plus his native Dutch politics, plus the Canadian system, I'd bet he knows more about Poland politics than you do, given that you're another CCP toady in disguise. 

I myself was educated in private schools for k-12 at some of the best schools in the country including a college prep school that routinely whipped the school Kavanaugh went to in academic excellence among other metrics. Therefore you can't blame the US educational system for me. Blame the Jesuits. As for @Douglas Buckland given the quality of his writing versus yours, I'm going with he's better edumacated than you are.

I understand under CCP operative guidelines you're supposed to pretend you're from some other country than the US since your simple grammatical errors are easily spotted by native English speakers. But Jan isn't a native English speaker, yet his exposition is vastly superior to yours. You've worked very hard for your wumao paycheck but you're not the sharpest tool in the shed. 

  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, El Nikko said:

The sad thing is (and yes I'll get attacked for saying it) is there is a disparity between races and IQ. I don't want it to be so but it's still true.

The fundamental reason for this isn't genetic, it's environmental. As our friend @SUZNVfrom Vietnam said, in New Zealand where he went to school the Maori were in the same boat as African Americans are here. It most likely has to do with lack of emphasis and respect for edumacation by the family in both cases. 

I have a friend who is black who was adopted into a large white family. Years after the adoption he got to meet his genetic siblings. Not One of them had his achievements. The family unit is critically important. 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

The fundamental reason for this isn't genetic, it's environmental. As our friend @SUZNVfrom Vietnam said, in New Zealand where he went to school the Maori were in the same boat as African Americans are here. It most likely has to do with lack of emphasis and respect for edumacation by the family in both cases. 

I have a friend who is black who was adopted into a large white family. Years after the adoption he got to meet his genetic siblings. Not One of them had his achievements. The family unit is critically important. 

I would love that to be true but genetics must surely play a part in this

Sub Saharan IQ is around 65-70 IQ and blacks in the US is around 80-85% which is well below average.

I hope they figure it out but I'm not going to have my family murdered because of a social experiment gone wrong...lets face it we just don't know.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

You do realize that @Jan van Eck is a native of Holland, no? Therefore not a victim of the US educational system. In fact, you should feel like an ignorant fool right about now. He not only knows our system, plus his native Dutch politics, plus the Canadian system, I'd bet he knows more about Poland politics than you do, given that you're another CCP toady in disguise. 

I myself was educated in private schools for k-12 at some of the best schools in the country including a college prep school that routinely whipped the school Kavanaugh went to in academic excellence among other metrics. Therefore you can't blame the US educational system for me. Blame the Jesuits. As for @Douglas Buckland given the quality of his writing versus yours, I'm going with he's better edumacated than you are.

I understand under CCP operative guidelines you're supposed to pretend you're from some other country than the US since your simple grammatical errors are easily spotted by native English speakers. But Jan isn't a native English speaker, yet his exposition is vastly superior to yours. You've worked very hard for your wumao paycheck but you're not the sharpest tool in the shed. 

I think Jan went to a US ivy league school.  Of course that doesn't make him a "victim" unless you think those collages indoctrinate and corrupt haha.  I agree Jan is plenty smart, certainly knows a lot about history and law.

I went to a private school for 7-9, was not a fan. Dress code was super annoying, what teen wants to wear dress pants and shirt nearly everyday? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, El Nikko said:

I would love that to be true but genetics must surely play a part in this

Sub Saharan IQ is around 65-70 IQ and blacks in the US is around 80-85% which is well below average.

I hope they figure it out but I'm not going to have my family murdered because of a social experiment gone wrong...lets face it we just don't know.

 

Socioeconomic factors dwarf most everything else (genetics, etc.)

Some of the disparity is also due to the testing format employed.  The tests are more often designed and administered by whites in English or a poor English to native language translation. 

The tests also often contain questions that are culturally biased  "What did Johnny find under the Christmas tree?"  is a silly question for a little kid who never had Christmas at home.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.