The end of Empire-USA third world country

[9sublime]

Besides their disastrous subculture, as has been mentioned by someone else, there's the problem of their lower average IQs.

Ditto to my last answer.

 

[USMC the Almighty]

That might be because of the appauling conditon they were left in after their enslavement by the white race?

Sublime, the fact that blacks were virtually caught up (much to their credit) in terms of family and SAT scores by the 1950s destroys the argument that slavery is the reason blacks lag behind whites today in these categories.

Time for a little Charles Murray.

 

[Andy]

If white and black economics were the same...well, I suppose the argument wouldn't even exist then. Culture almost universally follows conditions. The Hudson River School painted some of the most breathtaking visual landscapes in the history of art because people in the industrialized cities wanted to be reminded of the beauty of nature. The culture came from the conditions, not the other way around.

Culture can contribute to social or economic change, but most often because the culture itself is a reflection of present social or economic problems which are highlighted and addressed.

Cause and effect? When I was in school I worked at a car dealership. A black woman asked me if I could get her a Cadillac emblem from the dealership for her. She wanted to give it to her son. After jokingly saying I'd have to swipe one from a car, I was shocked when she said "oh can you?"... That was unbelievable to me. My own mother would beat me senseless, or have my father beat me senseless for even joking about such a thing. Such horrible Christian values as 'thou shalt not steal' were drilled into me at a young age. It was months later I over heard this woman complaining that her son had been caught stealing.

I suggest that a moral-less culture leads to social and/or economic problems, not the other way around. Being broke does not cause someone to steal, but stealing sure can cause you to be broke.

 

[Andy]

Besides their disastrous subculture, as has been mentioned by someone else, there's the problem of their lower average IQs.

I reject this idea. The subculture, yes. Many black-americans have openly embraced a horrible corrupt subculture within America.

But lower than average IQs... Sorry I don't buy it. When they make education a priority, they are no worse than anyone else. It's simply a matter or having morals and priorities. I also have my doubts to the trustworthiness of IQ test to begin with. The IQ tests say I have a much higher IQ than my sister, yet she is vastly more intelligent than myself. Perhaps it's priorities again. Oh well.

 

[vyo476]

Cause and effect? When I was in school I worked at a car dealership. A black woman asked me if I could get her a Cadillac emblem from the dealership for her. She wanted to give it to her son. After jokingly saying I'd have to swipe one from a car, I was shocked when she said "oh can you?"... That was unbelievable to me. My own mother would beat me senseless, or have my father beat me senseless for even joking about such a thing. Such horrible Christian values as 'thou shalt not steal' were drilled into me at a young age. It was months later I over heard this woman complaining that her son had been caught stealing.

This doesn't prove that any form of culture drove her actions, only your own. Consequently, ask yourself what your socio-economic situation was at the time and compare it with hers.

I suggest that a moral-less culture leads to social and/or economic problems, not the other way around.

I've studied both art history and sociology in some depth. Trust me, culture derives from society a lot more often than society derives from culture.

Being broke does not cause someone to steal, but stealing sure can cause you to be broke.

Being broke sure as hell causes people to steal. Lack of money + desperation = Desperate acts to get money, or at least to fulfill basic human needs (food, water, shelter, etc). This isn't to say that all broke people steal, just that being broke can be a motivator for stealing.

 

[Libsmasher]

I reject this idea. The subculture, yes. Many black-americans have openly embraced a horrible corrupt subculture within America.

But lower than average IQs... Sorry I don't buy it. When they make education a priority, they are no worse than anyone else. It's simply a matter or having morals and priorities. I also have my doubts to the trustworthiness of IQ test to begin with. The IQ tests say I have a much higher IQ than my sister, yet she is vastly more intelligent than myself. Perhaps it's priorities again. Oh well.

Any proof for your claims? I'm guessing not.

 

[Libsmasher]

The whole idea is pure, unadulterated racist crap.

Can't debate? Then get the hell out and quit cluttering the thread with your drools.

 

[9sublime]

Sublime, the fact that blacks were virtually caught up (much to their credit) in terms of family and SAT scores by the 1950s destroys the argument that slavery is the reason blacks lag behind whites today in these categories.

Time for a little Charles Murray.

Can I see thoe figures please because I do not believe them one bit.

I thinhk there is no way blacks recieved better education in the 50's when poverty in black communities was even more rife and segregation was so extreme. But please prove me wrong.

 

[9sublime]

Any proof for your claims? I'm guessing not.

I don't quite know how someone is supposed to go about proving that morality cannot be measured on a nice easy scale like IQ because its pretty obvious .

 

[Bunz]

Leaving aside that the american indians had no concept of property, using your idea, every country in the world should give up their country, since every one suffered invasion in the distant past. The north american continent was originally settled by successive waves of peoples from asia across the Bering Strait approximately 12,000 years ago, each undoubtedly supplanting previous groups by conquest or trying to. The indians in the americas at the time of the american discovery were waring tribes who wouldn't miss a chance to conquer another tribe. So the people who were here when the europeans arrived were all sitting on stolen land. The euro settlers had no thought except to settle and become farmers, but were met everywhere by indian-initiated violence. The US owes people who aren't american citizens exactly nothing.

Nice try, but this has more than a few inaccuracies and half truths. Firstly, the concept that the Europeans wanted to show up here and be peaceful farmers is totally false. The Spanish originally wanted a trade route to the East Indies and when America was found the entire concept was about collecting wealth, specifically gold. Ask the Incas and Aztecs about the peaceful farming that the Europeans did. More like mining at the end of a sword and the barrel of a gun.
Also your notion that there was no concept of property is incorrect. There certainly were informal borders between the tribes. The fact that the Natives had no concept of individual land ownership is moot. Tribes were forcefully removed from lands that historically belonged to them and were taken by imperialists who had zero historic claim to it.

Directly, the Spanish, Portugese, French, British, and American governments all participated in this. As did indirectly, most other European governments and other modern American national states. Mexico, Canada, Brazil for example but more or less every government currently in the western hemisphere.

 

[PLC1]

Can't debate? Then get the hell out and quit cluttering the thread with your drools.

We're supposed to debate a map showing how the non white population has increased in the United States, and saying that we are becoming a third world country due to that change in demographics, and a statement calling it pure unadulterated racist crap is not a part of the debate? Well, OK, then, how about this:

The US may be becoming a third world country, but the change from Aryan to non Aryan is not the cause. The loss of industrial capacity is the cause.

Note my use of the unbiased and neutral word "Aryan". I think that is appropriate to a discussion like this one, don't you?

 

[bokile]

we can see areas in the usa where they are dominant now think that all country is like that

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Sublime, the fact that blacks were virtually caught up (much to their credit) in terms of family and SAT scores by the 1950s destroys the argument that slavery is the reason blacks lag behind whites today in these categories.

Time for a little Charles Murray.

Is he Arthur Murray's brother?

 

[Libsmasher]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Libsmasher
Leaving aside that the american indians had no concept of property, using your idea, every country in the world should give up their country, since every one suffered invasion in the distant past. The north american continent was originally settled by successive waves of peoples from asia across the Bering Strait approximately 12,000 years ago, each undoubtedly supplanting previous groups by conquest or trying to. The indians in the americas at the time of the american discovery were waring tribes who wouldn't miss a chance to conquer another tribe. So the people who were here when the europeans arrived were all sitting on stolen land. The euro settlers had no thought except to settle and become farmers, but were met everywhere by indian-initiated violence. The US owes people who aren't american citizens exactly nothing.

Nice try, but this has more than a few inaccuracies and half truths. Firstly, the concept that the Europeans wanted to show up here and be peaceful farmers is totally false. The Spanish originally wanted a trade route to the East Indies and when America was found the entire concept was about collecting wealth, specifically gold. Ask the Incas and Aztecs about the peaceful farming that the Europeans did. More like mining at the end of a sword and the barrel of a gun.

I thought you we were talking about northern america, where the purpose was only settlement. As for the aztecs, they were one of the most murderous peoples in history - the nazis of meso-america - they got bumped off - who cares?

Also your notion that there was no concept of property is incorrect. There certainly were informal borders between the tribes.

No, you don't know what you are talking about. There was absolutely no concept of "property" as understood by europeans, and tribal boundaries were limited to what a tribe could hold by force, in an envronment of constant tribal warfare. And the land any tribe sat on probably had in all cases been stolen many times during thousands of years - euros just enciuntered the last thieves.

The fact that the Natives had no concept of individual land ownership is moot. Tribes were forcefully removed from lands that historically belonged to them and were taken by imperialists who had zero historic claim to it.

The north american indian tribes all opposed the europeans from the beginning with violence - at Plymouth, at Jamestown, and at Columbus' first attempted settlement in Hispaniola. The segregation of tribes was a consequence of their uniform response to european settlers - violence. The indians have almost only themselves to blame for the consequences of their reaction to the arrival of members of what was clearly a superior civilization.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

The north american indian tribes all opposed the europeans from the beginning with violence - at Plymouth, at Jamestown, and at Columbus' first attempted settlement in Hispaniola. The segregation of tribes was a consequence of their uniform response to european settlers - violence. The indians have almost only themselves to blame for the consequences of their reaction to the arrival of members of what was clearly a superior civilization.

That's just about the slickest way I've ever seen to blame the victims of an invasion. If you invade a country you might reasonably expect the current residents to resist--even if they don't share YOUR particular definition of property rights. You need to read A PEOPLE'S HISTORY OF THE US, much of what you were taught in school was nonsense--revisionist history written the winners.