ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2019 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Saturday, April 19, 2014

The end of debate

Forget Aristotle's distinction between dialectic and rhetoric. The devolution of formal debate means that it doesn't even rise to the level of rhetoric any longer.
It used to be that if you went to a college-level debate tournament, the students you’d see would be bookish future lawyers from elite universities, most of them white. In matching navy blazers, they’d recite academic arguments for and against various government policies. It was tame, predictable, and, frankly, boring.

No more.

These days, an increasingly diverse group of participants has transformed debate competitions, mounting challenges to traditional form and content by incorporating personal experience, performance, and radical politics. These “alternative-style” debaters have achieved success, too, taking top honors at national collegiate tournaments over the past few years.

But this transformation has also sparked a difficult, often painful controversy for a community that prides itself on handling volatile topics. 

On March 24, 2014 at the Cross Examination Debate Association (CEDA) Championships at Indiana University, two Towson University students, Ameena Ruffin and Korey Johnson, became the first African-American women to win a national college debate tournament, for which the resolution asked whether the U.S. president’s war powers should be restricted. Rather than address the resolution straight on, Ruffin and Johnson, along with other teams of African-Americans, attacked its premise. The more pressing issue, they argued, is how the U.S. government is at war with poor black communities.

In the final round, Ruffin and Johnson squared off against Rashid Campbell and George Lee from the University of Oklahoma, two highly accomplished African-American debaters with distinctive dreadlocks and dashikis. Over four hours, the two teams engaged in a heated discussion of concepts like “nigga authenticity” and performed hip-hop and spoken-word poetry in the traditional timed format. At one point during Lee’s rebuttal, the clock ran out but he refused to yield the floor. “Fuck the time!” he yelled. His partner Campbell, who won the top speaker award at the National Debate Tournament two weeks later, had been unfairly targeted by the police at the debate venue just days before, and cited this personal trauma as evidence for his case against the government’s treatment of poor African-Americans.
Further evidence in support of my time-to-civilization hypothesis. At this point, the debate competitions may as well bring in gorillas from the zoo and distribute the "debate" awards on the basis of which primate was able to throw the most fecal matter. That "alternative-style" of debate is no less dialectically legitimate than hip-hop, spoken-word poetry, and appeals to “nigga authenticity”.

If I were a college student these days, I would show up for a debate wearing a dress and smeared red lipstick, and no matter what the resolution was, start rapping very passionately about how the more pressing issue was how the U.S. government refused to let me marry a silverback gorilla. Then I'd turn it over to my partner, Baraka from the National Zoo, who would take a massive dump on the stage before chucking large handfuls of it at the other competitors, hooting and howling all the while.

If logic is white privilege, so too is civilization. I suppose we can look forward to this alternative style of  debate percolating into the legal system:

"Y'ownah, I object that my client ain't guilty and shit!"

"You can't object to that."

"Shut yo mouth, you ain't no AUTHENTICATED nigga. Uncah Tom!"

"Excuse me?"

"FREE MAH PEOPLE! NO JUSTISS NO PEACE!"

From sign language to the foundation of science fiction to formal debate, it's all inexplicable magic to the half-savages. They can see the forms, they can even mimic them to a certain extent, but they simply do not understand the core functions and rationales underlying the observable actions. And they don't have any chance whatsoever of sustaining a modern technological society. None.

This may be distasteful news to you. But no matter what they say, A is A. A will ALWAYS be A. A is NEVER Not-A. It never will be.

Labels: ,

161 Comments:

Anonymous Dan in Tx (too legit to quit) April 19, 2014 1:07 PM  

Can President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho be any more than just a few years away?

Anonymous Jonathan April 19, 2014 1:09 PM  

If logic is white privilege, so too is civilization

Been saying this exact thing for years.

Anonymous Salt April 19, 2014 1:14 PM  

Unleash the Kraken!

Anonymous Sasquatch April 19, 2014 1:15 PM  

Probably one of your best rants in a coon's age.

Blogger buzzardist April 19, 2014 1:17 PM  

If logic is white privilege, so too is civilization.

Vox, you really only needed to utter this one sentence to take down the entirety of this charade.

College debate has long been a hangout for potheads and iconoclasts, and debaters are typically quite skillful at talking about what they want to talk about, regardless what the resolution may be, but most at least stuck to logic, or at least pretended that logic mattered. I'm left wondering what happened to the judging pool that this utter rejection of logic and even the basic rules of debate has been let to pass. Who taught the Master Word to the Night Hounds and invited them inside?

Anonymous Master Rogers April 19, 2014 1:18 PM  

They won't be satisfied until the US looks like Africa with a big African warlord ruling the ruins.

Anonymous Rolf April 19, 2014 1:19 PM  

I don't see why they can't DQ both teams for failing to address the point, and declare no winner, or let it go to the next-"best" team.

And I like your white privilege quote, Vox.

Anonymous indpndnt April 19, 2014 1:20 PM  

I remember debate in high school, where the whole point was to argue from a given premise (regardless of your feelings on it). It didn't matter if you didn't like the premise, it was a valuable skill to learn how to understand and present arguments for it, and solutions for it. The negative side had the opportunity to either disprove the premise, or to agree with the premise and attack the proposed solution. As you worked out what your opponent was doing, you would tailor your own arguments based on their strengths and weaknesses, and the evidence you had available to you in your bins.

The whole notion of the "affirmative" not being for the premise is ridiculous. If the affirmative doesn't have to affirm the premise of the debate, then all you have are two sides yelling about whatever they want to, with no structure.

Hardy disagrees. “Having minimal rules is not something that reflects a middle-class white bias,”

Yep. It's so ridiculous that someone would think that the requirement that the affirmative team should affirm the resolution (gee, there's a root word running around there somewhere) is somehow racist.

I'm still not sure if the onion has leaked out and this is satire.

Blogger Tom Kratman April 19, 2014 1:20 PM  

It may say more about time to decivilization than about time to civilization.

Anonymous Stilicho April 19, 2014 1:24 PM  

It's analogous to giving a puppy a treat for crapping on the living room floor..in front of guests. Rewarding this behavior only ensures that there will be more of it. Much more.

Anonymous Godfrey April 19, 2014 1:28 PM  

"... At this point, the debate competitions may as well bring in gorillas from the zoo and distribute the "debate" awards on the basis of which primate was able to throw the most fecal matter..."


You really should have a link to a list of your most hilarious one-liners. I literally spit out the piece of sandwich I was chewing when I read that sentence. Thanks for the laugh.

Anonymous MrGreenMan April 19, 2014 1:29 PM  

I remember 15 years ago, talking to a friend in college debate, where he explained how he had a particularly difficult time with a girl standing up and disagreeing, saying that he was correct "if you wanted to use logic", but her feelings were something different. At the same time, I was introduced to feminist historians, who sit and feel the vibrations in those parts they must keep voting "D" to keep, and then write them into "herstory" and publish it as academic history. I said something along the lines - however good the fiction, it is no more history than Ivanhoe or Robin Hood, and I was shouted down in a classroom of honors students for not realizing - objective history did not matter, because, if that wasn't a good story, nobody would read it, so better to have a story people will read than a literal recounting of what actually happened.

Anonymous Jonzen April 19, 2014 1:32 PM  

Too late Vox – about the shit dumping part. I did college debate with my last tournament in 2002 and this personal performance nonsense started main streaming into policy debate around that time. A few years after I left, I was told that one CEDA debate tournament involved human shit in a bag. Also, a lesbian team from another school went topless in order to demystify sex and the female body. What that had to do policy debate still eludes me. I don’t have much in the way of evidence to support this other than what I was told.

At one tournament I lost to a team because I didn’t incorporate “Queer Theory” into my policy affirmative that would have the US Government act as honest broker between North and South Sudan in order to end the civil war.

And the teams that ran the “racist” arguments – well that was a real shit-show of stupidity.

Anonymous Porky April 19, 2014 1:32 PM  

We've gone from Gershwin, Bernstein and Copland to repetetive, mind-numbing hip-hop and techno in less than a hundred years.

Are you part of the problem or part of the solution?


Anonymous MrGreenMan April 19, 2014 1:35 PM  

Still, this is the entirely predictable consequence of the Vietnam-era leftist academic campaign to institutionalize anti-Westernism and proceed to subvert and kill Western thought.

Anonymous Ape Spectator April 19, 2014 1:41 PM  

Further evidence in support of my time-to-civilization hypothesis. At this point, the debate competitions may as well bring in gorillas from the zoo and distribute the "debate" awards on the basis

I'm not sure that is a good idea. They are just waiting to strike.

You have to think about this more carefully. We have opposable thumbs, remember that.

Anonymous Concerned Rabbit Hunter April 19, 2014 1:41 PM  

"This may be distasteful news to you. But no matter what they say, A is A."

What about: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_World_of_Null-A

The map is not the territory!

Anonymous rycamor April 19, 2014 1:52 PM  

This, I could scarce believe, but within 2 clicks on Youtube, there it was.

Meanwhile, 2 days ago my daughter and a set of homeschool students participated in a mock trial at the courthouse. Presided over by a 30-year-veteran judge, with some older attorneys sitting in the jury. The kids were dressed the part, with blue blazers for the boys, professional dresses and skirts for the girls. Everyone did their part with full respect for the rules of order, and exhibited admirable skill with rhetoric and logic. And these were 8th-graders.

Afterward the judge said he wished most of the attorneys in his court could dress and act as professionally as the kids.

These children have been born and raised into a culture that has been sold out from under them. Whence their future? Let us pray. Hard.

Anonymous Don April 19, 2014 1:57 PM  

Tom - Sailer used to quote, "There's a lot of ruin in a nation." I think we are merrily chugging along the path of ruin. From encouraging cheating in sports to destroying education, to destroying the family, to our foul 'entertainment' and media we are moving steadily towards ruin. How much ruin do we have left?

Anonymous Ape Spectator April 19, 2014 2:00 PM  

Meet Koko the gorilla, smarter than most Africans. "During the course of the study, Koko has advanced further with language than any other non-human. Koko has a working vocabulary of over 1000 signs. Koko understands approximately 2,000 words of spoken English. Koko initiates the majority of conversations with her human companions and typically constructs statements averaging three to six words. Koko has a tested IQ of between 70 and 95 on a human scale, where 100 is considered "normal." Michael, the male silverback gorilla who grew up with Koko, had a working vocabulary of over 600 signs."

You can't let those guys out. If that soft opposable thumb touches a gun trigger or a nuclear briefcase...

Oh YOU REALLY fucked now.

Blogger Hector April 19, 2014 2:03 PM  

@rycamor, amazing video. Has it always been normal for debate participants to speed talk? Having trouble understanding anything.

Are the judges for these things students themselves or faculty?

Anonymous Dan in Tx April 19, 2014 2:05 PM  

So I guess this is what will pass for the "education" that college students will be receiving in exchange for indentured servitude if Ted Cruz's bill you mentioned earlier were to pass.

Anonymous Don April 19, 2014 2:05 PM  

I live in a small town and one of the kids we'll call 'John Smith' was known for his prodigious strength and his tiny intellect. One of the kids asked, "Who's smarter John Smith or a gorilla?"

Answer, "A gorilla you can teach a gorilla sign language." That was nearly fifteen years ago and occasionally someone will trot that out. Joys of living in a small town.

Anonymous Seymour Butz April 19, 2014 2:08 PM  

‘Further evidence in support of my time-to-civilization hypothesis.

[…]

And they don't have any chance whatsoever of sustaining a modern technological society.’

If I’m not mistaken, I’ve heard you peg the number at roughly a thousand years. Judging by its current state of development, does (urban, nominally post-tribal) African society seem on track to fulfil that estimate, or do you think they’ll take significantly longer than Western and Northern Europe after exposure to the Roman Empire? If I understand your logic correctly, it should be roughly the same because once civilisation is introduced, it naturally begins a selective process for traits that are suitable to civilisation, right? To me, the level of squalor and disease — the growing pains of Africa’s attempt to adopt a technologically modern society — does seem to be following roughly the same timetable as Europe in the Early Middle Ages, but I’m frankly not educated enough in that field to make a sound judgement.

Anonymous kh123 April 19, 2014 2:13 PM  

"Koko initiates the majority of conversations with her human companions and typically constructs statements averaging three to six words."

She has one over on most habitually textarded Millennials, I'll give her that.

Anonymous fish April 19, 2014 2:19 PM  

HOLY SHIT!!!! The Onion just crashed into Idiocracy under full steam!

Anonymous Jack Amok April 19, 2014 2:23 PM  

Can President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho be any more than just a few years away?

Which direction?


It may say more about time to decivilization than about time to civilization.

Tom, you ever do any rock climbing (probably yes...)? Going up is a lot slower than going down, especially when the "down" part is a surprise...

Anonymous Don April 19, 2014 2:27 PM  

President Camacho: Shit. I know shit's bad right now, with all that starving bullshit, and the dust storms, and we are running out of french fries and burrito coverings. But I got a solution.

South Carolina Representative # 1: That's what you said last time, dipshit!

South Carolina Representative # 2: Yeah, I got a solution, you're a dick! South Carolina, what's up!

Anonymous Concerned Rabbit Hunter April 19, 2014 2:44 PM  

"If I’m not mistaken, I’ve heard you peg the number at roughly a thousand years."

That is about 40-50 generations. R = H^2 * S. I think Greg Cochran or Henry Harpending had something to say about that.

That is, you need something more than 1,000 years. You need selection as well. Natural or artificial, it doesn't seem to matter.

Blogger Longstreet April 19, 2014 2:46 PM  

Wow, that's disappointing, but not really surprising. It's been 25 + years now, but I was a CEDA debater. Did pretty well and had a blast. I hate to see people like this shitting all over something that used to be so rewarding and fun.

"I don't see why they can't DQ both teams for failing to address the point, and declare no winner, or let it go to the next-"best" team. "
Rolf, in my day that's precisely what would have happened.

"@rycamor, amazing video. Has it always been normal for debate participants to speed talk? Having trouble understanding anything."
I'm not rycamor, but yes, it was a fairly common tactic, and one I thoroughly despised. I could do it, but I hated doing so. I preferred to stand, or fall, on a few solid, well-crafted arguments rather than resort to a carnival performance.

"Are the judges for these things students themselves or faculty?"
In my day the judges were faculty , other professors and coaches. Only if absolutely necessary would students or lay judges be utilized.

One of my favorite judges was a coach from another school. She was pretty sharp, and her teams always did well. She hated the speed-talking thing as much as I did, and she would start each round by telling the teams "You can speak at whatever speed you like, but I can take notes only so fast. If I don't get it, you don't get it." It was always fun to watch the trash-talkers struggle to throttle down and actually debate, to have to compete on the merits rather than how many trivial objections/points they could squeeze into their allotted time.

It was a fun time. Don't even want to watch the video. It would just further disgust me.

Blogger Tommy Hass April 19, 2014 2:48 PM  

"We've gone from Gershwin, Bernstein and Copland to repetetive, mind-numbing hip-hop and techno in less than a hundred years."

I may be horrified at this disgrace as much as the next guy, but referring to all hip hop and techno as "mind numbing" just SCREAMS "out of touch".

Anonymous kh123 April 19, 2014 2:51 PM  

"South Carolina Representative # 1: That's what you said last time, dipshit!"

No no, that should be Massachusetts Representative #1. Those animals don't just preserve themselves, you know.

Blogger RobertW April 19, 2014 2:55 PM  

Excellent point vox, which is the first new thought I've heard from anyone for a while. To most blacks (certainly the leftist ones) logic and even civilization appear as magic to them. Since few are capable of either they assume they must be the result of sinister forces.

Although in their defense I would say that most white leftists also view logic as some kind of sinister magic.

Anonymous Dr. Idle Spectator, Stanford Genetics April 19, 2014 2:56 PM  

That is about 40-50 generations. R = H^2 * S. I think Greg Cochran or Henry Harpending had something to say about that.

That is, you need something more than 1,000 years. You need selection as well. Natural or artificial, it doesn't seem to matter.


Yes but you are forgetting the wild card for artificial: genetic engineering. Coming soon to China.

What is natural breeding, but slooow genetic engineering? For example, the caste system in India.

Blogger W.LindsayWheeler April 19, 2014 2:57 PM  

QUOTE: the strategy of the Frankfurt School was to deconstruct universalist, scientific thinking by the use of “critical reason,” postmodernism has opted for complete relativism and the lack of objective standards of any kind in the interests of preventing any general theories of society or universally valid philosophical or moral systems (MacDonald, Ch 5, p. 197 quoting Norris 1993, 287ff).

We can thank the Frankfurt School for this. It is about destroying all rules and standards. You can thank Protestant philosemitism and your First Amendment that let these people run rampant thru your country.

Thanks for the link to an actual debate of the Oklahoma vs Harvard. What a disgusting piece of garbage that is. That is not debating whatsoever. What that is unknowable.

Blogger Laguna Beach Fogey April 19, 2014 3:01 PM  

Effing savages. Exterminate the brutes.

Blogger Tom Kratman April 19, 2014 3:09 PM  

Some, Jack, both outside the Army and in Ranger School. I've done more fun things in my life, frankly.

And, yes. But usually a quick trip down involved militarized outside actors.

Course, we've been building the equivalent of Gothic tribes inside our borders for a while, sooo...

Anonymous Shibes Meadow April 19, 2014 3:12 PM  

Yep, this is it: the end of debate. I was a Championship Cross-Ex debater thirty years ago, when you had to have the facts and the logic on your side to win. The UIL judge listening to you had no mercy: every dropped argument or broken change of logic cost you. The time clock had no mercy, either. It was a tough, brutal form of learning.

No more. I knew the writing was on the wall a few years ago when they started introducing kritik into debate. Kritik is a form of meta-argument by which the debaters argue against the meanings of words ("race is a social construct!"), the validity of rational argument ("there can be no 'debate' until we destroy this society of patriarchy and privilege!") and the nature of reality itself ("Facts? There are no 'facts'!") instead of affirming or negating the resolution.

Kritik renders debate impossible. One cannot argue the facts, the logic, or the merits of the case because all of these are constructs of the cis-sexual, intrinsically racist, intrinsically LGBTIQ2OMGWTFBBQ-phobic Christo-fascist society of privilege we inhabit. Logic is Eurocentric and racist; there are many "logics". Facts are products of the privileged clases imposed on the rest of us by force; there are no true facts. Any claim of benefit that does not promote the destruction of Western civilization is a disguised attempt at genocide toward people of color, the transgendered, and all those groups that have been marginalized, enslaved, and exploited by white, heterosexual, Christian cismales. Until the white man is exterminated, transgender is the norm, Christianity is smashed, and every member of society is equal in terms of wealth, privilege, and status, there can be no argument of the issues. There is nothing left to debate. You are either a shock worker of the Revolution or you are not. If you are not, you are an Enemy of the People, and deserve death -- not debate.

A is not A. "A" is a racist, Eurocentric power construct used by the privileged to exploit and enslave the rest of humanity. In a world of equality and diversity, "A" can be any letter the People want it to be.

I have said it time and time again: there is no more use for debate or argument in our society. We are at war.

Anonymous Dr. Idle Spectator, Stanford Genetics April 19, 2014 3:18 PM  

For the slow unidle people, Population Genetics has the R = h^2 * s equation for a continuous trait on the last page.

"It is biology! I was told there would be NO MATH!"

Anonymous Ah, The Sweet Smell Of Elitism April 19, 2014 3:23 PM  

It is important to note the two organizations involved in debates (CEDA, NDT) are controlled directly by the participants and lack any significant conduct enforcement procedures.

That is, debate procedures are not strictly enforced. Those teams involved are fully aware of the potential lack of decorum and/or adherence to “traditional” means (translation --> free form style) to address the issue in this forum. Debate rounds are now filled with specialized jargon regardless of the background of the team. Moreover, the changing of the topic at the discretion of the debaters is an acceptable tactic. Indeed, kritik is king in these contests.

It is an immutable fact the Ivy League liberals AND conservatives in sponsored events have also repeatedly employed the same methods as, let’s keep it real here, "nigger rhetoric"--interrupting, using vulgarities, emphasizing personal experience rather than factual evidence, “rapping” their positions.

So when Laguna makes the comment "Effing savages. Exterminate the brutes", he is in effect advocating the shooting whites, blacks, hispanics, and asians. How noble his endeavor.

So, contrary to the rant displayed here, it is NOT squarely a “vibrancy” phenomenon, but a result of the breakdown of civil discourse throughout our society, regardless of social standing/status, political party, or religious affiliation.

Blogger Eric Wilson April 19, 2014 3:26 PM  

rycamor,

That first guy was the omega-est guy I've ever seen. Yikes.

Anonymous Don April 19, 2014 3:27 PM  

I may be horrified at this disgrace as much as the next guy, but referring to all hip hop and techno as "mind numbing" just SCREAMS "out of touch".

Say's the fucktard who asks why we don't shoot the victim along with the rapist because the victim 'is partially responsible'. Says the guy who wants the age of consent lowered and wants to fuck girls at 'peak nubility'? Says the pedophile who continually slides the goal posts regarding sex with children.

We should consider anything he says as relevant, true, or meaningful. Keep arguing for pedophilia and shooting the victims of child rape. That's more your speed.

Anonymous VD April 19, 2014 3:30 PM  

Don, don't crosspost. Do not attempt to continue previous arguments on unrelated threads.

Anonymous Jack Amok April 19, 2014 3:36 PM  

Some, Jack, both outside the Army and in Ranger School. I've done more fun things in my life, frankly.

I always liked it. Quite a few skinned knuckles, but great sense of accomplishment at the top. Usually a nice view too. The least fun was always when I'd slipped and had to re-climb the same section again. Or when I got to a dead end and had to descend a bit to try a different route.

I mentioned yesterday, I'm a Scoutmaster with a BSA troop. I don't in general enjoy spending time around 14 year old boys. But I would like to have a few responsible 34 year old men around in twenty years to help keep things running. They haven't given me much hope they'll civilize themselves...

I disagree about the "militarized outside actors" part. Any society strong enough to climb the cliff is strong enough to keep someone else from knocking them off if they don't want to be knocked off. But I think it's too easy to become enamored of the view and sit around getting fat and happy. Then one day, you're not strong enough to hold on any longer. The outside actors, they just limit the time you have to fix things once you get in trouble.

Anonymous Don April 19, 2014 3:37 PM  

Vox (and everyone else) - my apologies. I was angry and wrong to drag my anger into this thread.

Anonymous sawtooth April 19, 2014 3:38 PM  

Have two divisions for debate competition.

The first division would be the "logic" division. It would be subject to strict rules regarding rational, coherent material presented in a formal atmosphere.

The second would be the "unlimited" division. As the name implies; anything goes here. Shouting, rapping, poetry slamming, disrobing, effigy and flag burning, sexual exhibition; anything to get a rise out of the judges. Just like that wretched thing called "performance art".

The logic competition would be held in the morning while the unlimiteds would be in bed, storing up energy for the late night debate chaos fest.

Anonymous Don April 19, 2014 3:42 PM  

If they cannot follow the rules of debate disqualify them. If those are the rules of the debate, quit calling it a debate. Call it 'performance art' or whatever you like but it's not a debate.

Anonymous YIH April 19, 2014 3:51 PM  

Further evidence in support of my time-to-civilization hypothesis.
I disagree, my hypothesis is with rare exceptions, Africans can't be civilized.
There are things an animal can be trained to do, including very unanimal-like behaviors (such as animals performing for entertainment) but they will never fundamentally change.
For 50 years, when it comes to Africans in America we've been trying ''to teach the pig to sing''. My point is ''it's a pig, it's never going to break into song''. Wherever you find Africans in a large enough concentration (sub-Saharan Africa, Haiti, Detroit) you find Africa.
It's been noted that even literally thousands of years after others had developed written languages that Africans on their own never did.
The smarter ones realize that, so they either resort to ''We wuz 'gyptians and shit!'' or ''Oral history is just as good as written history!''.
Vox believes they can 'evolve' to what we consider civilization, I don't.
If I were a college student these days, I would show up for a debate wearing a dress and smeared red lipstick, and no matter what the resolution was, start rapping very passionately about how the more pressing issue was how the U.S. government refused to let me marry a silverback gorilla. Then I'd turn it over to my partner, Baraka from the National Zoo.
I'd suggest a better choice of debate partner would be Koko the Gorilla.
Koko can at least communicate in ASL. I'm not so sure about other African species.

Blogger Tom Kratman April 19, 2014 3:51 PM  

It's a way to look at it, I suppose, Jack, but off the top of my head I can't think of a rapid fall that didn't involve outside actors (where natural disaster sometimes fills in for humans).

Anonymous Anonymous April 19, 2014 3:52 PM  

Dr. King would be proud.

Blogger tz April 19, 2014 3:57 PM  

If logic is male privilege, then so is civilization.

Just sayin'...

Except there is a different thread in Christendom, that of excellence, combined with humility. So the best and brightest would go on and learn more and do science and engineering, but not forget that it was not anything they did but the grace of God that gave them those talents, and the eponymous parable should be remembered. But there was a goal to leave things better, not consume things left by those who came before.

Compare that with current popular culture. And I have no reason to discriminate. The more hubris combined with the less talent, the higher you get. The less melody, harmony, or even rhythm in your music, the more you will get awards. The more your art looks like a technicolor yawn, the same. Women are getting the majority of degrees. (And I remember - I think it was Marcotte's book cover art featuring an Ape - must be a debate on feminism). If you try for excellence or achievement, except in a few areas like sports, you get torn down.

I suspect that there is still a white male majority, or at least a plurality involved in these debates - the organizers if not the participants. Note how none of them can rise to the child who plugged the dyke or said the emperor is naked. What are the white males still with authority rewarding and what are they punishing?

One reason you find more traditional thinking in computers (and engineering in general) is that you have to be able to distinguish A and ~A. You have to think logically and do proper arithmetic according to rules. The computer will grant no self esteem out of pity, it will segfault or delete your files.

And every story I've heard where black or otherwise "deprived" students were treated with respect - and the respect to tell those who failed to learn were defective, but if they wanted to they could be repaired - got results rapidly. Civilization is apparently contagious. That is why public schools cannot allow any excellence or responsibility, starting with the tenured teachers. Even one dysfunctional teacher shows every student in the school that they can get a permanent paycheck even if they at best do nothing or at worst are actually damaging.

The churches have been infiltrated by the enemy. The black churches make excuses for the race, but the feminized white churches are no better. The caption on the pedestal women were placed upon was "Mother". Even today, as the bioclock bell tolls for them, women don't want to be Mothers so much as to acquire a child or two, to add to the vehicles and pets and McMansion. The foundation of civilization is the family, and that is a place where women can be "Mom".

Compare out-of-wedlock birth rates and you get a measure of civilization.

Blogger ajw308 April 19, 2014 4:00 PM  

Just wait till they allow sub-.40 caliber handguns, but only if held greater than 60 degrees off of vertical (to verify nigga authenticity).

Anonymous Jack Amok April 19, 2014 4:46 PM  

Tom,

I figure the outside entities aren't as important as the strength of society itself. Plenty of people wanted to do the Romans in. None of them succeeded until the Romans mostly did themselves in.

Anonymous Anonymous April 19, 2014 4:47 PM  

> Vox believes they can 'evolve' to what we consider civilization, I don't.

Oh, I don't know about that. We've got an interesting little social experiment going on in my family where an unfortunate choice of sister-in-law decided to do the full Angelina Jolie and I acquired an Ethiopian orphan niece and nephew just barely out of infancy. And once that unfortunate choice was remedied, the kidlets got dropped full immersion into my mother's hard core Presbyterian ideas of how to raise exceptional children. And in case any of you don't know hard core Presbyterians, they make tiger moms look like pussy cats. Wimpy pussy cats. Five years on and the kidlets have gone from *actual* Stone Age savages, never mind this "half-savage" stuff, to absolutely running rings around all their peers at anything intellectual. Not nearly up to my own level from a similar upbringing, but they also didn't get it from birth. It's definitely giving me cause to give the nature/nurture debate a sober second look. So come back in another 15 years, and I'll have a definitive answer for you on whether Presbyterian shock culture therapy can turn actual-no-shit savages into functional citizens; but it's looking remarkably promising so far. At least compared to their civilized race peers raised by the public school system. Which is a lower bar all the time, I grant you. But still.

Anonymous Porky April 19, 2014 4:58 PM  

I may be horrified at this disgrace as much as the next guy, but referring to all hip hop and techno as "mind numbing" just SCREAMS "out of touch".

It was just a generalization, Tommy Haas.

Perhaps somewhere exists a techno composition of such depth, such complexity, such soul-stirring passion, such transcendental that it would rival a Rhapsody In Blue or a Fanfare for the Common Man.

But I doubt it.

From what I've heard of techno, dub-step, trance, hip hop, and what passes for R&B these days, it generally appears to be little more than the music of savages who have learned how to use synthesizers and figured out how to trigger the young, easily stimulated amygdalae of todays youth. If it someday ends up in the pantheon of great compositions it will not be a testament to the greatness of the music, but rather the idiocracy of society.

I guess the question is whether the music is symptomatic of the decline, or if the decline is perpetuated by the legitimization of savage art.

Either way, If we are going to call savagery like hip hop and techno "art", then there's no reason that "Jesus in Urine" should not be embraced as such. It certainly stimulated my amygdala.

Anonymous YIH April 19, 2014 5:02 PM  

thecryptile:
I'm thinking /sarc right?
It boils my blood these days when talk radio (I'm looking at YOU Glenn Bunk) gets reverent about MLK. His plagiarism is well-documented, even from 'whacky morning zoo' DJs who think he was some sort of saint of African 'liberation'.

Blogger TontoBubbaGoldstein April 19, 2014 5:02 PM  

Ruffin and Johnson went all Cap'n Kirk on the Kobayashi Maru- like debate format...an sheet.

Blogger tz April 19, 2014 5:07 PM  

I just thought about it and the feminization runs deeper. Note what PUAs and alphas do - come in as if they owned the place, intimidate, and generally are self confident - and are only challenged by another alpha, even when they break rules. Stockholm syndrome without the use of physical weapons.

Going back to the beginning:
Eve: But God said we would die if we ate that fruit.
Serpent: No you won't, see how good it is?
Eve: OK.
---
Adam: God said we would die.
Serpent: No you won't, see how good it is?
Adam: If you aren't gone or under a rock before I find a sufficiently large and heavy one, you will end up under one and won't be able to slither out. Understand?

So the debate team of Bitch n Ho engage in verbal projectile defecation, and ... they win. Or it would have been the other cannibalistic snake.

I'm glad I'm not in college and my short experience was terminated early (several flashbacks of me arising to tell the room "this is stupid" throughout my career).

The only problem with including Baraka is that there would be one intelligent primate in the room. But sometimes gorilla warfare is the proper course - which is graded pass-fail.

Blogger tz April 19, 2014 5:09 PM  

Of course Travis would rip the face off the competition

Do you think we can schedule a match between B&Ho and Travis?

Anonymous CorkyAgain April 19, 2014 5:16 PM  

Although in their defense I would say that most white leftists also view logic as some kind of sinister magic.

Etymologically, "sinister" means "from the left".

So I would say instead that leftists view logic as an oppressive tool used by uptight right-wing misogynistic, homophobic and racist squares.

Logic is unnecessary, you see. You either "get it" or you don't.

Anonymous Barak Obama April 19, 2014 5:21 PM  

The smarter ones realize that, so they either resort to ''We wuz 'gyptians and shit!'' or ''Oral history is just as good as written history!''.

By smart you mean those who inherited a bit of intelligence off their white ancestors like i did

Anonymous YIH April 19, 2014 5:26 PM  

tz:
Believe it or not, I lean toward so-called 'environmentalism' because of what is known as the tragedy of the commons.
Individual 'property rights' allow you to 'foul your nest' and suffer the consequences of it, but that doesn't help me if you are running a 'meth lab' next door to me. It's explosive (as in could damage me or my property) and has a foul chemical odor (that I don't want to put up with or breathe).
Like it or not, that is why ''zoning'' exists. Like it or not Nate, if you want to live in Birmingham, I strongly encourage you to do so. But show your family you care about them and live/work there and have them live in a non-cancerous environment that is much less African.

Blogger Matamoros April 19, 2014 5:39 PM  

YIH: ...my hypothesis is with rare exceptions, Africans can't be civilized.

The bonobo genome compared with the chimpanzee and human genomes :
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v486/n7404/full/nature11128.html?WT.ec_id=NATURE-20120628#f4

May make a good bumper sticker:

White Privilege = Civilization
Black Privilege = Africa

Anonymous Noah B. April 19, 2014 5:43 PM  

No gorillas necessary. Debate club will devolve into a rapid exchange of "Yo Mama" one-liners.

Anonymous Noah B. April 19, 2014 5:48 PM  

And to lump all modern music together as being the same is nonsense. On the one end of the spectrum is rap about bitches and hos that are highly repetitious, and on the other end is music by groups like Underworld, which are modern symphonies.

Anonymous Anonymous April 19, 2014 5:51 PM  

This is why it is imperative for every man to learn a blue-collar, hands-on trade. And to shoot a gun.

As someone who went to school for and currently works in a paper-pushing career where the "correct" answer isn't objective, but based on "what someone else thinks." Combine that with a natural inability to pick up "dirty hands work naturally, and you cna see I'm behind the 8-ball...

BUT...

When "what someone else thinks" is so plum illogical, it really is useless to go through the normal, bureaucratic methods. Robespierre, remember, started out as a lawyer; it was only when he was personally insulted by the king and saw no way to redress via courts and government the wrongs that he saw that he began pushing towards bloody revolution.

On a saner note, think of John Adams; though his cousin, Sam Adams, was always pushing for an overthrow, John sought reconciliation through the normal channels. John won the Boston Massacre trials to prove to England that America was civilized, only to have the King spit on the colonies and still declare them uncivilized. Once John realized that the normal means were useless...he, too, advocated for war.

And blue collar trades and self-defense are the only things that survive, in war or in peace.

Rape!

Blogger hoigao April 19, 2014 5:58 PM  

In a high school american lit honors debate about whether or not Huck Finn should be taught in school, the opposing team brought in the one black kid in our year (not in our class however, he was in remedial english) to 'testify' how the use of the 'n-word' in the book had psychologically tortured his high school career. In my 'rebuttal', I asked a few basic questions about the more humanizing representations of Jim in the book and was rewarded with a blank stare. Out of instinct the next question I asked was "Have you even read the book?" I couldn't even tell you his reaction, the outcry from the opposing team was uproariously vehement in their objections for I was "badgering the witness".

By the end of the whole nonsense, the teacher sanctimoniously instructed the jury to be fair when deciding who won the debate, HOWEVER her own personal opinion was that while my team was better prepared and made the better arguments, her HEART went to the opposing team. We won anyways, but when the teacher pulled me aside after class and told me that I did 'exceptionally well' and asked me to join the debate team, I told her no.

She asked why and I told her I had to follow my heart.

Anonymous YIH April 19, 2014 6:03 PM  

0bama:
That's right. You got your ability to become POTUS the same way Mark Levin (note the ISRAELI last name).
I don't ''hate'' Israelis, I just think they belong in the country that we created for them.
YES! ''I did my roots!'' Mostly English, there are some Dutch and German in my heritage.
Which means I can't move to Italy even if I wanted to.

Anonymous George of the Jungle April 19, 2014 6:17 PM  

To paraphrase the brilliant-if-you're-an-ape Edwin Star: ' Logic! Huh! Yeah! What is it good for? Absolutely nothing, sing it again, you all!' The left already knows that it is violating objective logical principles, but doesn't give a damn. It is more than willing to sacrifice the rest of us on its bloody altar of absolute equality. It will willfully ignore the inevitable resultant destruction, as long as its sanctimonious moral fantasyland is forced down society's throat.

Since this anti-intellectual, anti-meritocratic attitude increasingly permeates all aspects of our current so-called society, I propose the following tactic: Join or form a Christian militant sect (e.g., Church of the Christian Soldiers) that closely mimics Islam in that it has its own legal adjudication system a la Sharia (call it "o díkaios trópos" or "Otropos" for short). Our corrupt relativistic so-called justice system has already set precedent for such extra-judicial bodies, so use the same tactics as Moslems in the regular court system to introduce it and get it recognized. That's the first step.

The next step is to report all your taxable income to the IRS, but withhold it by placing it into a church-controlled escrow account, based on the Otropos church court's stance that it would be immoral to release funds to an arm of immoral degenerate society, until and unless specific policies start to otherwise change.

Talking and talking endlessly on blogs is fun, but it makes no forward progress in what's left of the real world. Somebody actually has to start doing something, and doing it differently. No doubt there are some holes in the above, but also no doubt that with a little investigative work there are loopholes that can be found to close them.

Blogger Baloo April 19, 2014 6:30 PM  

Reprinted and quibcagged :)
White Male Logic

Anonymous Anonymous April 19, 2014 6:35 PM  

@tz Except there is a different thread in Christendom, that of excellence, combined with humility. So the best and brightest would go on and learn more and do science and engineering, but not forget that it was not anything they did but the grace of God that gave them those talents, and the eponymous parable should be remembered. But there was a goal to leave things better, not consume things left by those who came before.

Amen to that.

@theTroll
And in case any of you don't know hard core Presbyterians, they make tiger moms look like pussy cats. Wimpy pussy cats. Five years on and the kidlets have gone from *actual* Stone Age savages, never mind this "half-savage" stuff, to absolutely running rings around all their peers at anything intellectual. Not nearly up to my own level from a similar upbringing, but they also didn't get it from birth. It's definitely giving me cause to give the nature/nurture debate a sober second look. So come back in another 15 years, and I'll have a definitive answer for you on whether Presbyterian shock culture therapy can turn actual-no-shit savages into functional citizens; but it's looking remarkably promising so far. At least compared to their civilized race peers raised by the public school system. Which is a lower bar all the time, I grant you. But still.

Home schooled?



Anonymous Porky April 19, 2014 6:35 PM  

And to lump all modern music together as being the same is nonsense. On the one end of the spectrum is rap about bitches and hos that are highly repetitious, and on the other end is music by groups like Underworld, which are modern symphonies.

Ok. Repetitious, boring, pointless, plotless, unadventurous, insipid symphonies. Good Lord, the name "trance music" itself tells us exactly what level of consciousness is required to appreciate the "art".

So we have one end of the modern spectrum appealing to the base instincts of money and sex, while the other end of the spectrum glues endless looping rhythms together like tinkertoys and invites us to turn our conscious brains off and dance like an ape on extasy.

Sounds less like civilization and more like some savage tribal fertility dance around a bonfire.

Over and over the appeals to "civilization" seem to be nothing more than appeals to "our particular brand of savagery".





Anonymous YIH April 19, 2014 6:35 PM  

indpndnt April 19, 2014 1:20 PM

I remember debate in high school, where the whole point was to argue from a given premise (regardless of your feelings on it). It didn't matter if you didn't like the premise, it was a valuable skill to learn how to understand and present arguments for it, and solutions for it. The negative side had the opportunity to either disprove the premise, or to agree with the premise and attack the proposed solution.
That is where you are wrong. ''Is The Bible accurate or not?'' is a debate.
For example ''What is baptism?'' The Bible says Jesus was baptized by John the baptist, yet Catholics say ''holy water'' (water that might or might not be ''blessed'' by a child molester) is good enough.
Sorry, Ann Barnhart, you can't ''just go Galt (From a HARDCORE Atheist).

Blogger Tommy Hass April 19, 2014 6:36 PM  

"Say's the fucktard who asks why we don't shoot the victim along with the rapist because the victim 'is partially responsible'."

I didn't mean that literally bro. Hyperbole.

Blogger Unknown April 19, 2014 6:38 PM  

This kind of non-logic synch up well with the global warming fraud and all the "science" they tell us about?

Anonymous damntull April 19, 2014 6:42 PM  

YIH - "I disagree, my hypothesis is with rare exceptions, Africans can't be civilized."

I'd like to see some evidence for this hypothesis. Nothing you said in your first post could be considered evidence that they cannot be civilized. What is it about Africans that prevents them from becoming civilized in the same way that the Germanic barbarians became civilized?

Blogger Hanns Strudle extra gooey April 19, 2014 6:45 PM  

This garbage has seeped into the debates between intellectuals, in a small way. Watch the last debate between Krauss and William Lane Craig. Krauss used a buzzer when Craig was retorting.

Blogger Jamie-R April 19, 2014 6:49 PM  

The decline of standards is funny in America. They got the foundations about what they were doing wrong, now it's just which shit can roll down the slippery slope the fastest.

Anonymous ivvenalis April 19, 2014 7:03 PM  

Well, for comparison: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMo7VHeoadQ

(Compare again: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vora1t0rX2E)

These organizations apparently had already discarded any semblance of actual debate for some time in favor of….something else. Armed with this knowledge, incidentally, you can note that the original article plays on the reader’s expectation of what “debate” looks like in order to enhance the perception of colorful Sun People shaking up stody Anglo parliamentary debates rather than a clearly dysfunctional system falling further into dysfunction. Assuming that the author ever actually watched any of these “debates”.

Anonymous YIH April 19, 2014 7:09 PM  

damntull:
Short answer, Detroit. Explain that. You want to say ''it's because the Whites fled!!!'' without saying WHY ''the Whites'' ''fled''.
Here's something you need to know African, the less we Whites can produce, the less we can provide for you.
In Africa, we Whites BUILT railroads, because you couldn't do it. You can't even keep them running, tell me I'm wrong.

Anonymous Ah, The Sweet Smell Of Elitism April 19, 2014 7:13 PM  

YIH--“I disagree, my hypothesis is with rare exceptions, Africans can't be civilized.”

followed by...

thetroll--”We've got an interesting little social experiment going on in my family where an unfortunate choice of sister-in-law decided to do the full Angelina Jolie and I acquired an Ethiopian orphan niece and nephew just barely out of infancy.”



I propose both of these privileged individuals engage in verbal combat on this issue, with the Ilk voting which side’s position is most convincing. As an aside, I would argue that Ethiopians are already civilized since they meet the most basic definition of the concept, and that both gentlemen are savages on the basis of their preconceived notions. But, what do I know. Let the ilk decide!


hoigao--”In a high school american lit honors debate...”

I had the exact same experience at my prep school, except the roles were reversed--there was this white student who got schooled by the black kid. Amazing!


“Either way, If we are going to call savagery like hip hop and techno "art", then there's no reason that "Jesus in Urine" should not be embraced as such. It certainly stimulated my amygdala.”

“Over and over the appeals to "civilization" seem to be nothing more than appeals to "our particular brand of savagery.”

Thread winners.

Blogger Tom Kratman April 19, 2014 7:20 PM  

"None of them succeeded until the Romans mostly did themselves in."

Not really, Jack. They were doing pretty well until the Goths came in as a tribe, and then won the Battle of Adrianople. The Empire had had serious problems in the second century, of course, but overcame them and, while letting in some immigrants, broke them up into manageable and assimilable chunks. It was the cohesive Goths, the loss of about half the deployable infantry, and the loss of tax revenues when the Goths, and others, settled that klilled them.

That is, of course, simplistic as hell. There;s a list - you can find it in Brian Ward-Perkins excellent little refutation of the most disgustingly PC notions of "late antiquity" - that lists, IIRC, something over 200 credible reasons for the empire's fall.

Hmmm..feeling ambitious, I looked it up. 210 reasons, here: http://www.utexas.edu/courses/rome/210reasons.html. But it all really begins with masses of cohesive but unruly foreigners bearing sharp, pointy things.

Anonymous Anonymous April 19, 2014 7:22 PM  

> Home schooled?

Heh. 'Schooled' is not an either/or thing in this world. You're shipped off to the public penal system because Part A is learning how to deal with all the stupid people in the world ... and then you get home for Part B, the school after school where you do the actual learning. It's pretty hardcore.

Anonymous damntull April 19, 2014 7:27 PM  

YIH,
First, I'm white. Second, I am inclined to agree with Vox's time to civilization hypothesis.
You're the idiot who claimed that Africans CAN'T be civilized.
So far, all you've given is examples that some Africans are not civilized, or more precisely, can't maintain an advanced civilization. You've still offered no evidence for your claim that Africans CAN'T be civilized. Care to try again?

Anonymous Anonymous April 19, 2014 7:33 PM  

> I propose both of these privileged individuals engage in verbal combat on this issue, with the Ilk voting which side’s position is most convincing.

Oh, I'm not claiming that the dear sir is necessarily wrong. Just observing that the impact of family culture on our Eithiopian imports so far is more than I would have thought was possible. But they're still preteens, so like I said give it another 15 years and let me see what kind of time preferences they display in adulthood, then I'll have a position I'll defend (however anecdotally) on whether you can stamp long time preferences (and Presbyterian culture is nothing if not long time preferences...) on raw material from cultural areas unacquainted with the concept. So far, all I really have solid proof of is that public schools really, really, suck compared to having someone driving the kids hard. But that really shouldn't surprise anyone here, I trust.

Anonymous YIH April 19, 2014 7:35 PM  

Ah, The Sweet Smell Of Elitism:
decided to do the full Angelina Jolie
Congratulations on your new pet. Do you know how to care for your new pet?
Some say it's a human being, but for Angelina Jolie it's not. She BOUGHT a wild animal 'pet' from Africa.
It's the new 'dog in the purse' for them.

Anonymous Anonymous April 19, 2014 7:45 PM  

> Some say it's a human being, but for Angelina Jolie it's not. She BOUGHT a wild animal 'pet' from Africa. It's the new 'dog in the purse' for them.

Oh, that applies 100% to my unlamented ex-sister-in-law too, I assure you. And at the time I was in perfect agreement with you as how it was likely to turn out. But so far, it's looking like culture may indeed have far more of an impact than I'd previously credited. We shall see.

Anonymous Kwame April 19, 2014 7:50 PM  

"You've still offered no evidence for your claim that Africans CAN'T be civilized."

Detroit.

Blogger Retrenched April 19, 2014 7:56 PM  

"The problem with progress is that you eventually run out of other people's civilization... "

Anonymous YIH April 19, 2014 8:08 PM  

thetroll:
I went through this 25 years ago. I was living with my cousin, he bought a Komodo Dragon as a pet. Guess who had to take care of it? Nasty critter. I got lucky, I told him, you want me to care for it? Sell it to me. I bought it, to give it to Gatorland. Last I heard, it's still alive. I don't want it back.

Anonymous Snowflake April 19, 2014 8:08 PM  

**This may be distasteful news to you. But no matter what they say, A is A. A will ALWAYS be A. A is NEVER Not-A. It never will be.**

Except, of course, when A is something like malingering, in which case it is only malingering when a woman does it, but suddenly becomes not-malingering when a man does it.

Anonymous Don April 19, 2014 8:16 PM  

Shut up Ann.

Anonymous Anonymous April 19, 2014 8:19 PM  

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Anonymous Anonymous April 19, 2014 8:20 PM  

Who are you talking to?

Anonymous YIH April 19, 2014 8:47 PM  

You're the idiot who claimed that Africans CAN'T be civilized.
And again Haiti that half of Hispaniola was a lush tropical paradise. The Dominican Republic still is. How can we eeeevilll Whites be able to see that and you can't?

Anonymous damntull April 19, 2014 8:59 PM  

@ the idiot called YIH

Again, this isn't evidence that they CAN'T be civilized - it is only evidence that they are not fully civilized. This is the third time I've asked. Why can't you answer the question? Is it because you're a wannabe who wants to show his intellectual "chops" by taking Vox's post and saying, "Well, I'll go even further!" as if that qualifies you as intelligent?
Plus, I'm white, retard, and I hardly subscribe to the idea that Whites are evil - you don't seem to have listened the first time.

Anonymous YIH April 19, 2014 9:32 PM  

damntull:
I noticed you have not disputed my assertion that no written language was developed in sub-Saharan Africa even though there is plenty of evidence that written languages were developed north of the Sahara (yes, I consider Egyptian hieroglyphics a written language) it can also be argued that Chinese written language also existed that far ago.
Even if you consider it fiction, the Old Testament was mostly written in Hebrew, a written language that existed long before Christ. The New Testament was written in Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek and Roman, all written languages that existed 1500 years before Whites were exposed to sub-Saharan Africans.
We Whites were developing a printing press to mass produce the written word before Africans had any concept of the written word!!!

Anonymous damntull April 19, 2014 9:57 PM  

@YIH,
I haven't disputed anything you said, because there is no need. NOTHING YOU SAID so far is evidence for your assertion that Africans CAN'T be civilized. Think about it pal, because that's QUITE a claim. You'd have to bring a lot of evidence to the table - but you haven't done so. And I suspect you can't.
Don't get me wrong - it's clear that Africa and Africans are far less civilized than the rest of the world - I just don't see anything that tells us that it will ALWAYS be that way. What is it about Africans that prevents them from ever becoming civilized?

Anonymous Ah, The Sweet Smell Of Elitism April 19, 2014 10:05 PM  

The traits of a civilization are government, language, architecture, organized religion, and trade.

Note how you focus on "written language". As a general rule, serious historians and anthropologists do NOT discount the contributions of civilizations such as sub-Saharan tribal groups or the Incas of South America--groups that spoke a language--that produced significant trading networks without this tool. Sophisticated societies can be attained without writing, and rating the division of early human activities between hunting and gathering and agriculture is more fundamental than the invention of writing.

Damntull, it is clearly apparent we are dealing with thetroll and YIH, who are the worst types of savage--one that are civilized.

Anonymous Godfrey April 19, 2014 10:12 PM  

@ W.LindsayWheeler April 19, 2014 2:57 PM
"...That is not debating whatsoever. What that is unknowable."


I'm sure I'll receive abuse from some here for this WLW, but don't ever disappear. I always enjoy and appreciate your take on things.

Anonymous physphilmusic April 19, 2014 10:21 PM  

When I first read this I thought I was reading straight from the Onion. This is shocking. I participated in formal (English) high school debate for a bit back in Asia a few years ago, and despite the fact that my country is a ridden with corruption and most of the people more accurately termed half-civilized, yet our judges would never have allowed this shit to happen. We had to stick with the topic at hand. Passionate speaking allowed, sure, but no raps or spoken word poetry or swearing or throwing chairs or even yelling. Quite an embarrassment that American judges are not only letting this happen, but instead are encouraging it as a "new way to debate".

Vox seems to imply the problem is with black people not being fully civilized. Perhaps that is true to some extent, but I think the larger problem, which makes this worse than it ever should be, is tolerance and encouragement of trash like critical race theory which results in garbage like this. Whatever intellectual abilities these black debaters have are channeled not into coming up with good arguments, but instead into regurgitating leftist rubbish. And white people are certainly partially to blame for this crap, since they were the ones who came up with critical theory in the first place, and are responsible for its stranglehold in universities.

Anonymous Legatus April 19, 2014 10:23 PM  

I was going to put this in another area, but it is applicable here to:

What one difference has been shown between "leftists" and "rightists"?

Spanking.

How does spanking effect anything?

Spanking teaches you a number of things.

The first is, "actions have consequences". You cannot understand logic without that basic idea. "If A, then B" is simply beyond your grasp, since you cannot understand the word "then", the idea that a thing done now can affect the future. One inner city teacher tried something, he taught his students chess. The idea that a move now would effect the whole game later, and that they should think ahead, was a revelation to them. They had never even considered the idea before in their lives. They also learn this through their home life, specifically, their father, who they never knew, they learned from him "do onto others, then split", IE ignore consequences, avoid them. Also, they will not consider the consequences of turning a debate into such a feces slinging contest because they do not understand the word "consequences".

Second, they cannot control their emotions. If they are spanked, they may want a thing, but have to stop and think, is it worth a spanking to do it? "If i dood it, I get a spanking, I dood it!", perfectly logical. If they are never spanked, they never have to control their emotions, whatever whim of the moment they have, they act on it. Thus the triumph of emotion over logic, they know nothing else. This is aided and abetted by TV, advertisers do not want people to think logical thoughts like "do I really need that?" or "is this really the best product?", it is much easier to simply appeal to emotions. Example, the car ad that showcases British supervillians, suave, sophisticated, powerful, you want to be like them, buy a Jaguar. Nothing about Jaguars being a superior car in any way, simply an appeal with emotional images. And that common TV episode, the choice between logic or "follow your heart", which do you think the advertisers, who actually pay the TV networks bills, want to win? Basically, logic is bullshit detection, and there are a LOT of people out there now feeding a lot of BS who will do anything they can to discourage and disparage logic and encourage you to "follow your heart", this includes a lot of teacher at all levels nowadays.

With no understanding of consequences and no control over their emotions, they will do anything to win, or even to feel like they won, and they will talk about anything that gives them an emotional rush.

This also effects politics and the course of a nation, they will vote themselves money out of the treasury (socialism) because they learned something from dear old Mom and Dad (if any), you can get anything you want if you just scream loud enough, no need to work for it or anything. Demonstrations are just what they look like, mass temper tantrums.

The reason all the former empires fell? They worked to make their children s lives better then their own, they succeeded. Their spoiled children then tore down their country, and that was the end of that. You can keep it going for a while by conquering other countries and taking their stuff and making them slaves, but eventually your spoiled children will run away from combat and then the barbarians will do unto you.

Anonymous Lulabelle April 19, 2014 10:29 PM  

"I'm sure I'll receive abuse from some here for this WLW, but don't ever disappear. I always enjoy and appreciate your take on things."

I agree.

Anonymous CorkyAgain April 19, 2014 11:00 PM  

Excellent comments, Legatus.

I will observe however that they do understand if-then logic in at least one of its applications: "If I throw a big enough tantrum, Mommy and Daddy will let me have what I want."

Anonymous Rolf April 19, 2014 11:50 PM  

Kwame - technically, that's simply argument by anecdote. Yes, a number of examples of failure to develop (or maintain) a civilization as we'd normally define it can be given. That is NOT, however, proof in any formal sense that they cannot. Merely that they often do not.

Anonymous Pt April 20, 2014 12:14 AM  

"Merely that they often do not."

Then what difference does it make? They aren't going to try and neither are the other savage tribes.

Anonymous Pt April 20, 2014 12:28 AM  

"Perhaps that is true to some extent, but I think the larger problem, which makes this worse than it ever should be, is tolerance and encouragement of trash like critical race theory which results in garbage like this. Whatever intellectual abilities these black debaters have are channeled not into coming up with good arguments, but instead into regurgitating leftist rubbish. And white people are certainly partially to blame for this crap, since they were the ones who came up with critical theory in the first place, and are responsible for its stranglehold in universities."

The white race's own worst enemy is leftard white's, until they identified and dealt with as the enemy within the gates that they are civilization will keep retreating. The non-white races are ancillary.

Anonymous Discard April 20, 2014 1:31 AM  

There is no White privilege, there is only White virtue.

Blogger Lud VanB April 20, 2014 1:33 AM  

did I miss the Mein Kampf verse readings...are they over already?

Anonymous Snowflake April 20, 2014 1:45 AM  

Corky: ** "If I throw a big enough tantrum, Mommy and Daddy will let me have what I want.**

Absolutely. And if that doesn't work, just wave around the bible and point at various verses to explain why the straight, white, Christian male should get a pass on malingering, murder, or any other bad behavior that other people should be punished for.

Anonymous Snowflake April 20, 2014 1:48 AM  

Pt wrote: **Then what difference does it make? They aren't going to try and neither are the other savage tribes.**

Can you show documention of your precognitive powers? Otherwise, you can't make that statement.

Anonymous Pt April 20, 2014 2:20 AM  

"Can you show documention of your precognitive powers? Otherwise, you can't make that statement."

The article above is a good start liar.

Anonymous Discard April 20, 2014 2:21 AM  

Regarding the possibility of Africans ever becoming civilized: An average IQ of 75 or 80 may not preclude any sort of civilization, but would it be a civilization that Whites could bear to live in? Would we even call it a civilization?

Anonymous Pt April 20, 2014 2:23 AM  

"Just wave around the bible and point at various verses to explain why the straight, white, Christian male should get a pass on malingering, murder, or any other bad behavior that other people should be punished for."

Where's the verses in the bible that give straight,white,Christian males a pass? Where's YOUR documentation?

Anonymous Discard April 20, 2014 2:24 AM  

Snowflake: Maybe I missed some context here, but just who is waving a Bible around and saying that heterosexual White Christian men are free to be wicked?

Anonymous kh123 April 20, 2014 2:53 AM  

"did I miss the..."

Yes, unfortunately our book burning sessions don't span several unbroken weeks. That is to say, we don't cover dining hours.

Anonymous A Plate of Shrimp April 20, 2014 2:59 AM  

"Again, this isn't evidence that they CAN'T be civilized - it is only evidence that they are not fully civilized"

The real question is not whether Africans can or cannot be civilized. The real question is, Even if they are genuinely attempting to become civilized, why should we have to put up with any of their bullshit during the process. Why should we be endlessly tormented and looted by this uncertain experiment? Let them go off and get civilized on their own, then they can invite us to come over and admire the place. Til then, fuck off, we have problems of our own which don't concern them.

Anonymous Desiderius April 20, 2014 3:17 AM  

phys,

"Vox seems to imply the problem is with black people not being fully civilized. Perhaps that is true to some extent, but I think the larger problem, which makes this worse than it ever should be, is tolerance and encouragement of trash like critical race theory which results in garbage like this. Whatever intellectual abilities these black debaters have are channeled not into coming up with good arguments, but instead into regurgitating leftist rubbish. And white people are certainly partially to blame for this crap, since they were the ones who came up with critical theory in the first place, and are responsible for its stranglehold in universities."

Now we're getting closer to the truth. Who is it that have hired these critical race theoreticians?

To what end?

Cui bono?

Anonymous Michael April 20, 2014 9:09 AM  

Although it's partially the black community's own fault for allowing themselves to be hoodwinked into perpetual victimhood, Vox, your argument leapfrogs the involvement of the state, media and education system in (deliberately) fostering and maintaining their social constraints. There are plenty of intelligent people of all colors and stripes who do not drink the kool-aid nor conform to the status quo. The ape comparisons added nothing to the discussion and are mean-spirited. It's not a sin or a flaw to be born black.

I'd argue that parts of Africa are becoming more civilized than western nations, at least in terms of governance, because they're willing to stand up against homosexuality, whereas our bureaucrats and justices kowtow to the LGBT bullies.

Anonymous You Ganda April 20, 2014 10:22 AM  

Damntull: "First, I'm white."

Please define white in less than 2000 words with supporting links. There are readers of this blog that get very confused every time someone refers to "white people". I know this is an inconvenience but as whites become minorities in their own homelands, you might as well get used to it.

Anonymous Winn Mason April 20, 2014 10:50 AM  

Oh, man. Reading stuff like this article is so depressing and crazy. What kind of insanity is this? All you have to do is rant and rave that a fact you don't like is racist and do a rap and you win a debate? Just how idiotic has this whole white guilt thing gone? All this does is further divide people. Literally, it just stops people wanting to interact with people of different ethnic groups, they just throw up their hands and say why bother? That's how I see it. Yeah, we are doomed, doomed, doomed.

Anonymous The other skeptic April 20, 2014 11:03 AM  

Please define white in less than 2000 words with supporting links.

We are the people who have achieved the most in the world. Look around and you can see that everyone else copies us, including the Chinese.

Oh, yeah, you don't need quantity when you have such quality. Just ask those who were present at Rorke's Drift.

Anonymous Desiderius April 20, 2014 11:32 AM  

"Just how idiotic has this whole white guilt thing gone?"

What's idiotic about it? The people promoting it don't feel guilty - people who feel guilty aren't smug - they're hired by people who want you and me to feel guilty. Why might they want to do that?

Would you label a Mexican drug lord idiotic? Or would another adjective fit better?

Anonymous Desiderius April 20, 2014 11:35 AM  

"Please define white in less than 2000 words with supporting links. There are readers of this blog that get very confused every time someone refers to "white people". I know this is an inconvenience but as whites become minorities in their own homelands, you might as well get used to it."

No dice, pilgrim. We're a land of half-breeds, always have been. We've had our 500 years to get good and civilized, we're not pissing it away for a lousy mess of nihilistic pottage.

Anonymous physphilmusic April 20, 2014 12:04 PM  

We are the people who have achieved the most in the world. Look around and you can see that everyone else copies us, including the Chinese.

I'd be hard-pressed to define all white people as a single "people", just as you can't group Asians as one "people", but several different ones like Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Indian, etc. Similarly, there are Germans, English, French, etc. I would think it odd for a Frenchman to be proud of the achievements of Sir Issac Newton.

Anonymous Discard April 20, 2014 12:13 PM  

Physphilmisic: Can Europeans not recognize their common Euroness? As for White Americans, many of us are mixes of three or four or five distinct European ethnicities. If I'm French-German-Irish-Polish, "White" is the only plausible racial identity.

Anonymous Ah, The Sweet Smell Of Elitism April 20, 2014 2:44 PM  

What about Spanish-Central American? What about English-African? Are they white? Or is there another "plausible" identity? Please do share.


“Regarding the possibility of Africans ever becoming civilized”

“Even if they are genuinely attempting to become civilized, why should we have to put up with any of their bullshit during the process.”

Leave it to the civilized savages here, no doubt before going to Church or after reading their Bible on Easter, to state their unholy opinions. Africans are civilized--the criteria that I outlined previously has been met. They are generally content with their existence, no different than your life here on Earth.

Philippians 2:3--Do nothing from rivalry or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves.


“We are the people who have achieved the most in the world.”

Who is “we”? If you mean the human race that has consistently wavered between enlightenment and barbarianism through creating (and butchering), and developing (and manipulation) and inventing (and stealing and lying). you are on the right track.

Anonymous CorkyAgain April 20, 2014 2:45 PM  

If Obama can claim to be black despite having a white mother, whites can affirm their European heritage even if there are a few non-Euros among their ancestors.

Me, I identify with my ancestors on my father's side. They came from northwest Germany, near the present-day Dutch border, and settled in Pennsylvania in the 1690's. They probably spoke the Limburgisch dialect, something I'd like to learn myself.

I also have some Scottish and Swedish ancestors, but as far as I know, none who weren't northwest Europeans. So that's where I take my bearings, and anyone who wants to deny me that identity or tell me I should somehow be ashamed or embarrassed by it can go suck rocks.

Blogger Brad Andrews April 20, 2014 5:13 PM  

I have still not seen enough evidence that it is skin pigmentation that causes these inanities and not societal acceptance.

People are inherently corrupt and outward structure is required to maintain civilization in all of us.

Anonymous Ah, The Sweet Smell of My Own Ass April 20, 2014 5:36 PM  

And who is my neighbor? Which is why I quote from the Bible so often, since I apparently hate its adherents so damned much.

Anonymous The Skiddler April 20, 2014 5:53 PM  

Nobody has claimed that skin pigmentation causes anything. Don't be so dense. Racial differences are manifest at all levels, from physical abilities, cognitive abilities and the expression of culture. There is this area of science called Genetics that you really ought to look into. I hear they've made some very startling discoveries in the last few years.

And while the left has everyone dizzily distracted debating the reality of race or whether white people exist, they work feverishly to institute policies that result in the genocide of white people in every white nation through unlimited non-white immigration and forced integration and assimilation which they refer to with the code-words diversity and multiculturalism.

Anonymous Discard April 20, 2014 6:14 PM  

Ah, The Sweet Smell of Elitism: If a person from South America is descended entirely from Spaniards, they are White. If a person from Africa is descended entirely from English ancestors, they are White. Of course, they might plausibly identify as Spanish or English instead. What is your problem with this? Please do share.
Where does the Bible tell us to pretend to believe things that are not true? It's not unholy to speak the truth. Blacks are, on average, less cognitively developed than Whites. This has consequences. For example, their inability to even sustain a city that Whites built. They are simply less capable of building and supporting a civilization than Whites are, i.e., they are less civilized. If you wish to change that fact, you need to recognize it first.

Anonymous The other skeptic April 20, 2014 9:47 PM  

Meanwhile, Google wants to get more girls and underrepresented minorities into Computer Science Education.

Anonymous Ah, The Sweet Smell Of Elitism April 20, 2014 10:24 PM  

And what race do you categorize a European who mated with a Native American? with an African? Please, do tell.

Because there but these races--Caucasian, African, Native American, Malaysian, Mongolian, Malaysian.


"Where does the Bible tell us to pretend to believe things that are not true?"

The Bible teaches that God has made "from one blood every nation of men" (Acts 17:26). Paul taught the Athenians that they came from the same source in the creation as everyone else. We are all from one blood. In other words, there are no superior or inferior races. We are all from the same race: the human race. Touting one's cognitive superiority or inferiority, in the face of one metric--IQ scores--directly counter's God's will.

Again, Africans have met the criteria for civilization as outlined. They certainly do not need you, the civilized savage, to tout your anti-Christ notions.


The Skiddler = Titus Didius Tacitus

Blogger IM2L844 April 20, 2014 11:40 PM  

Why do you hate diversity?

Anonymous Discard April 21, 2014 12:34 AM  

Sweet Smell: A European who mates with a native American or an African is a European. If the native American they mate with is an American Indian, then their offspring is a Mestizo if they are in Latin America, and a half-breed in the U.S. and Canada. If the native American they mate with is White, then the offspring will be White. The offspring of a European and a Sub-Saharan African is a Mulatto in the Western hemisphere, and a Colored in South Africa. Is that so hard?

There are only three primary colors, red, blue, and yellow. That fact does not mean that there is no such thing as orange, green, or violet. So it is with mixed races, Eurasian, Mulatto, Mestizo. What's so hard about that?

Since the Creation, the human race has branched into the different races. We are changed. It that not obvious? We may all be of one blood, if you go back far enough, but how does that preclude one race having outpaced another since the two diverged? How does that go counter to God's will?
Every sort of cognitive test shows the same result, it's not a single metric. Blacks are dumb, as a rule. I'd guess that most Whites have never heard about the Black/White IQ gap, but most of them who have any dealings with Blacks know that to be true. If you have a means, other than simple assertion, to demonstrate equality between the races, let's hear about it.

Anonymous Discard April 21, 2014 12:41 AM  

I hate diversity because diversity is a euphemism for the displacement of me and my people. I can go and look at the neighborhood I grew up in and see the bars on the windows and steel fences around the yards. I can look up my old high school online and see that only one out of eight entering ninth graders graduates. I can see how those Whites who tout diversity the most don't choose to live with it themselves, thereby indication that they don't believe their own words. I hate diversity because I'm not so foolish as to take a medicine that the druggist himself wouldn't touch.

Anonymous Ah, The Sweet Smell Of Elitism April 21, 2014 8:46 AM  

"If the native American they mate with is an American Indian, then their offspring is a Mestizo if they are in Latin America, and a half-breed in the U.S. and Canada.The offspring of a European and a Sub-Saharan African is a Mulatto in the Western hemisphere, and a Colored in South Africa. Is that so hard?

I asked you a direct question, and leave it to you to skirt it. What race does a "mestizo" and a "mulatto/colored" belong to out of these five distinct categories--Caucasian, African, Native American, Malaysian, Mongolian, Malaysian.

Answer this direct question.


Because "mestizo" and "mulatto/colored" is a biological or phenotypical distinctions within racial groups (such as those between Scandavians and Spaniards within the white or Caucasian race).


"Every sort of cognitive test shows the same result, it's not a single metric."

Relying squarely on these "tests" to demonstrate alleged inferiority. That is part of the "civilized savages" playbook. Well done, sir, well done.


"I hate diversity."

How anti-Christian of you.

James 2:1-26--"My brothers, show no partiality as you hold the faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory. For if a man wearing a gold ring and fine clothing comes into your assembly, and a poor man in shabby clothing also comes in, and if you pay attention to the one who wears the fine clothing and say, “You sit here in a good place,” while you say to the poor man, “You stand over there,” or, “Sit down at my feet,” have you not then made distinctions among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts? Listen, my beloved brothers, has not God chosen those who are poor in the world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom, which he has promised to those who love him?"


Romans 14:1-23--"As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions. One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables. Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him. Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand. One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind."

Anonymous Shibes Meadow April 21, 2014 9:29 AM  

“ … [M]ore often it has been used to hurt them. Math was behind the development of nuclear weapons. It is used to maintain an economic divide between a handful of wealthy, White people and the billions of poor people of color around the world. It is used as a rationale for depriving people of access to cheap, life-saving drugs. So my question is: what good has the progress of mathematics as an intellectual discipline done for people? Maybe if our mathematics had a background in social justice, we wouldn’t have so many people suffering around the world.” — Jonathan Osler, “The Guide for Integrating Issues of Social and Economic Justice into Mathematics Curriculum”

Math is racist!

Anonymous Rubber Plant April 21, 2014 9:35 AM  

Nice. Using the Bible to justify the genocide of white people. Diversity and multi-culturalism are simply genocidal schemes perpetrated on whites in all white countries and only white countries, thanks to the narcissistic altruism/mental illness of liberals. It would be fine if only they had to deal with the consequences of their delusions and perished for it, however, they are ensuring there is no escape for any white people. Africa for the Africans. Asia for the Asians. White countries for Everyone?

Anonymous Ah, The Sweet Smell Of Elitism April 21, 2014 10:15 AM  

Thank you, Shibes Meadow, for your opinion.


Rubber Plant = Titus Didius Tacitus

Why do you pervertly interpret the Good Book? The James passage I cited focuses on rather than blaming evil on OURSELVES, we are tempted to blame it ON OTHERS: “I was just the victim!” James wants us to avoid these common pitfalls so that we will persevere under trials and receive the crown of life.

So, please demonstrate how this passage serves in support of the genocide of white people or retract your assertion.

Blogger IM2L844 April 21, 2014 12:01 PM  

Diversity and equality are mutually exclusive. Embrace one, cake eaters.

Anonymous Luke April 21, 2014 12:44 PM  

Related: Chicongo (formerly "Chicago") gov't schools mandate Black revisionist "History" in ALL classes in K-10th grades:

http://dailycaller.com/2014/04/21/see-what-theyll-be-teaching-in-the-chicago-public-schools/

"CPS began developing IAAAS after a push last year from groups that wanted to implement a state law passed in 1990 that required public schools to offer one unit on African-American history.

Chicago fifth graders will be exposed to another controversial and widely-criticized theory in Ivan van Sertima’s “They Came Before Columbus.” Van Sertima, who taught at Rutgers University, theorized that Africans populated the Americas well before Columbus.

But critics largely panned the work. In a 1977 New York Times book review, archaeologist Glyn Daniel called van Sertima’s work “ignorant rubbish” and labeled it “myth and folklore.”

But CPS went above and beyond, implementing the curriculum across all core disciplines, which include literacy, mathematics, science, social science, the arts, physical education and health.

“The law said it had to be one unit devoted to the history of African-Americans,” Annette Gurley, CPS chief officer of teaching and learning told the Chicago Tribune in 2013. “What we’ve done is we’ve taken it throughout the year for all subjects, not just one subject.”

The eighth grade literacy section unit, titled “Being an Advocate to Social Justice,” directs students to the website for the American Civil Liberties Union. It also includes a poem titled “Racism is Around Me Everywhere,” cartoons from the website LeftyCartoons.com, and it encourages discussion of Attorney General Eric Holder’s infamous “nation of cowards” quote.

The ninth grade literacy section encompasses a study of the Pan African Movement. Teachers are encouraged to engage their students in debate over voluntary segregation. “Have someone read the following resolution, Resolved: voluntary segregation promotes growth in a diverse community. Teams then participate in a graded formal debate.”

Tenth graders are introduced to “critical race theory,” which holds that institutional racism and white privilege are pervasive throughout society."







Anonymous civilServant April 21, 2014 1:31 PM  

From sign language to the foundation of science fiction to formal debate, it's all inexplicable magic to the half-savages.

Are we half-savages to you?

Anonymous civilServant April 21, 2014 2:01 PM  

But no matter what they say, A is A. A will ALWAYS be A. A is NEVER Not-A. It never will be.

Everyone agrees with this. The conflict is over what A is. Or is to be.

For example:

"It would be interesting to see who would buy the Nevada federal land if it were put up for auction. Who would be willing to pay the most? Somehow, I don't think it would be cattle ranchers and small-town Nevadans. My bet would be on Silicon Valley environmentalist billionaires. I don't think the ranchers would really prefer private ownership to the BLM. A lot of conservatives, when they talk about how the federal government ought to sell off its land, really want the government to give away the land to certain people whom they like."

Anonymous Discard April 21, 2014 5:32 PM  

Sweet Smell: Your direct question was "What race do I categorize a European who mated with a 'native American'. With an African?
That hypothetical European remains a European, even if he screws sheep.
I put "native American" in quotes because I reject the fashionable use of the phrase. I am White, and have always been a native American. I am an American citizen, and I was born here. Americans who were not born here or born overseas to American citizens are called "naturalized Americans". I reject all leftist phraseology intended to undermine my culture.
Anyway, I did answer your intended question, however ill-phrased. If I understand you correctly, you do not accept the concepts of Mulatto or Mestizo, since you insist that I tell you which of five racial categories they belong to. You wrote that they are biological distinctions within a racial group, when they are clearly between racial groups. Did you misspeak? Is English not your first language? You're really not making any sense.

I do not rely on any test to tell me that Blacks aren't very bright as a rule. The value of IQ tests is rhetorical, in that they can be reassuring to some timid thinkers who might otherwise deny the evidence of their own eyes. If the tests told me that Blacks were our equals, I would doubt the tests. As I wrote, most White people have never heard about the IQ difference, but they still know about Black intellectual inferiority from personal experience. There's nothing savage about noticing what's in front of you.

As I wrote, and you apparently have not bothered to read, I hate diversity because it is a euphemism for something else, the displacement of my people and culture. Do you hate "the final solution"? Why? Whats wrong with the final solution?

Anonymous Discard April 21, 2014 5:34 PM  

civilServant: You're right about selling off Federal land. All the best of it would be bought and locked away by multibillionaires.

Anonymous civilServant April 21, 2014 7:35 PM  

civilServant: You're right about selling off Federal land.

It was not meant to be about federal land as such.

That "A is A" is of course absolutely correct as far as anyone knows. The problem is that A is what it is regardless of whether anyone fully understands it or not and that one's understanding of A may be deficient both in fact and in consequence. In fact it is likely to be deficient. But some make no allowance for this. "I am smart. Everyone else is stupid."

Anonymous Discard April 21, 2014 10:08 PM  

civilServant: OK. I see your point, "A is A, but what is A?", but I don't know enough to comment about theories of knowledge.

Anonymous Ah, The Sweet Smell Of Elitism April 22, 2014 7:54 AM  

"If the native American they mate with is an American Indian, then their offspring is a Mestizo if they are in Latin America, and a half-breed in the U.S. and Canada."

followed by...

"That hypothetical European remains a European, even if he screws sheep."


Hello, Mr. Contradicting Yourself, hello! You previously stated that when a European mates with someone from Latin America, they are mestizo. Except mestizo is NOT a race. When pressed further, you said they were white. Which is it?

Again, answer the direct question...What race does a "mestizo" and a "mulatto/colored" belong to out of these five distinct categories--Caucasian, African, Native American, Malaysian, Mongolian, Malaysian.


"I put "native American" in quotes because I reject the fashionable use of the phrase. I am White, and have always been a native American."

No, Native Americans are native to North, Central, and South America. They were indigenous to this land. Your ancestors came from Europe. They originated on that continent. Now, to be fair, recent scholarship has linked DNA with Europeans to Native Americans. That is, Americas' natives have in part European roots. However, this event occurred some 24,000 years ago. Regardless, your ancestry is of direct European heritage, not Native American lineage.


"I hate diversity because it is a euphemism for something else, the displacement of my people and culture."

No, diversity means just that...diversity. This concept is fundamental to America's history. Why do you despite the human race?

Anonymous Ah, The Sweet Smell Of Elitism April 22, 2014 7:54 AM  

Oops, why do you despise the human race, Discard?

Anonymous ogunsiron April 22, 2014 4:43 PM  

YIH April 19, 2014 9:32 PM
...
I noticed you have not disputed my assertion that no written language was developed in sub-Saharan Africa even though there is plenty of evidence that ....before Africans had any concept of the written word!!!
----
And you still haven't said why you think that low african IQ can't be remediated. One would think that eugenics, genetic engineering or good old assortive mating would help.

It's one thing to acknowledge HBD but it's another thing to imagine that Koko the gorilla is smarter than most Africans, half of Black Americans and 1/3rd of White Americans, if her best score of 95 is to be trusted. Common sense tells us that there's something funny going on with those IQ measurements.

Anonymous Discard April 23, 2014 5:19 PM  

Sweet Smell: If a European mates with an Indian (feather), the European remains a European. Their offspring is the Mestizo. That is what was written above. Read it if you wish, April 21, 12:34 AM. What is the contradiction?

I am a native American. I was born here. "Native" refers to birth, as in "nativity". Don't get into semantic arguments with native speakers of what is apparently not your native language. American Indians are also native Americans, as well as aboriginal Americans. (I leave aside any argument over Europeans who arrived 24,000 years ago, not knowing much about it.)

You don't read your own writing very well. I don't worry about typos, but I see the identical error in two of your comments. You write "…five distinct categories…Caucasian, African, 'Native American', Malaysian, Mongolian, Malaysian." Why "Malaysian" twice? And what about Australian Aborigines? Are they not a legitimate racial category? Are you confused?
Be that as it may, why do you insist that a mixed race person must fit into one of the racial groups that you name? Did you not get the memo, Bi-racial is vogue. I ask you a direct question: If you mix equal amounts of blue and yellow paint, is the result blue or yellow? Green is not a valid category, by your thinking.

I hate diversity because it is a euphemism for the destruction of my people and culture. Why do you hate the White race?

Anonymous Discard April 23, 2014 5:31 PM  

ogunsiron: Not speaking for YIH, just my own view here. It would be possible with extreme measures to remediate low African intelligence, given a millennium or two, but why bother? To raise them to the level of average Whites? The same effort put into average Whites would give you a lot more. Why make a race car out of a Yugo, when the same money put into a Ford might win you some races?

Common sense tells me that there's something funny with the IQ testing of Koko the gorilla. If a particular example seems bizarre, doubt the example first, not the general run of things.

Anonymous Ah, The Sweet Smell Of Elitism April 23, 2014 6:01 PM  

"You don't read your own writing very well."

Oops, didn't catch my mistake the first time--Caucasian, African, Malaysian, Mongolian, and Australoid. Five distinct categories. Ok, all good. Thanks for pointing it out. Small potatoes considering your significant errors in logic.

So, what race does a "mestizo" and a "mulatto/colored" belong to? I see you keep dodging this simple question.


"why do you insist that a mixed race person must fit into one of the racial groups that you name?

Don't change the topic because you are getting your ass handed to you. The question is why do you believe that ethnic groups = race?



"If you mix equal amounts of blue and yellow paint, is the result blue or yellow? Green is not a valid category, by your thinking."

We are not discussing paint, we are discussing the difference between race and ethnicity--concepts you cannot even grasp. Great work at deflection, yet again. Note that the primary colors are red, blue....and GREEN! So, your effort to outwit me, I'm afraid, fails miserably. The colors that are derived from primary colors are called secondary colors. Colors are colors. Races are races. Ethnic groups are ethnic groups. Ethnic groups are NOT races. Races are NOT ethnic groups.


"I hate diversity because it is a euphemism for the destruction of my people and culture. Why do you hate the White race?"

I love humanity, which includes all races. Why do you, like other racialists, put your race on a pedestal?


"I am a native American. I was born here. "Native" refers to birth, as in "nativity". Don't get into semantic arguments with native speakers of what is apparently not your native language. American Indians are also native Americans."

On one level, yes, you and I are native to America, i.e. the United States; we were born here. On another level, only indigenous peoples can call themselves Native Americans--they were here first. If anything, we are invaders. Smile!

Anonymous Discard April 23, 2014 7:45 PM  

Sweet Smell: You didn't catch the error the second time either, which is why I mentioned it.

A mestizo is mixed Amerindian and Caucasian. A Mulatto is mixed Sub-Saharan African and Caucasian. Where's the dodge?

Where did I say that ethnic groups equal races? Everything I've said is on this page, so don't invent words for me because you're getting your ass handed to you. So why do you insist that a person must fit into one of your racial boxes?

Green is not a primary color, it is a secondary color, as are orange and violet. The primary colors are red, blue, and yellow. Consult your fourth grade science book.
Colors are a useful analogy to mixes of races. Are you unable to grasp a simple analogy, or is this just a poor job of deflection on your part?

We are discussing the difference between race and ethnicity? What's to discuss? Where do we disagree? Cite me, using the date and time of each comment are at the upper right.

Re diversity: All other races look out for their own interests, exclusively. You hate Whites, already the most tolerant of races, because you would deny us what every other race does. They can prey and predate on us, destroy our institutions, but we can't even object openly. Blacks turn college debate into a circus, and we should applaud? Only Whites are to be held to a standard that not even White multi-cults live up to.

On the level that matters, which is survival, I am a native American. Using the phrase "Native American" exclusively for Indians is part of an attempt to de-legitimize my people and culture. It legitimizes our displacement by immigrants, since we're all invaders, right?

Anonymous Discard April 23, 2014 9:37 PM  

My error: Prey and predate are synonyms. I meant to say that other groups can prey on and leech off Whites, but we are not supposed to even object.

Anonymous Ah, The Sweet Smell Of Elitism April 25, 2014 5:20 PM  

"Blacks turn college debate into a circus, and we should applaud? Only Whites are to be held to a standard that not even White multi-cults live up to."

Had you paid close attention to this debate, white kids also employed the same tactics during those debates.


"They can prey and predate on us, destroy our institutions, but we can't even object openly."

Sure you can. It's called the First Amendment.


"It legitimizes our displacement by immigrants, since we're all invaders, right?"

Technically, yes.


The bigger question is why do you hate humanity?

Anonymous Discard April 25, 2014 11:13 PM  

Sweet Smell: White kids talked too fast. It was the non-Whites who turned it into a circus, by making up their own rules and choosing to address other own topics than those assigned to them. No doubt, since the Blacks were proclaimed winners, some White kids will adopt their path. But it's not college debate anymore. Blacks ruined it.

The First Amendment has been gutted by the civil courts, which make employers responsible for the expressed opinions of their employees, under the guise of protecting the preferred peoples from hostile work environments. Most people post under pseudonyms here because we could lose our jobs.

You admit it. You want us displaced from the country we and our ancestors built. Why do you hate us?

Anonymous Ah, The Sweet Smell Of Elitism April 26, 2014 11:14 AM  

"White kids talked too fast. It was the non-Whites who turned it into a circus, by making up their own rules and choosing to address other own topics than those assigned to them."

You cannot read--It is important to note the two organizations involved in debates (CEDA, NDT) are controlled directly by the participants and lack any significant conduct enforcement procedures.

That is, debate procedures are not strictly enforced. Those teams involved are fully aware of the potential lack of decorum and/or adherence to “traditional” means (translation --> free form style) to address the issue in this forum. Debate rounds are now filled with specialized jargon regardless of the background of the team. Moreover, the changing of the topic at the discretion of the debaters is an acceptable tactic. Indeed, kritik is king in these contests.

It is an immutable fact the Ivy League liberals AND conservatives in sponsored events have also repeatedly employed the same methods as, let’s keep it real here, "nigger rhetoric"--interrupting, using vulgarities, emphasizing personal experience rather than factual evidence, “rapping” their positions.


"The First Amendment has been gutted by the civil courts..."

There but five clear distinctions in which free speech is restricted. Otherwise, Americans are free to speak their minds.


"Most people post under pseudonyms here because we could lose our jobs."

Victim card. Well played.


"You want us displaced from the country we and our ancestors built."

No, your reasonable white friends can stay. You, on the other hand... :)

Blogger CM April 26, 2014 3:01 PM  

I heard about this in passing after coming back from vacation. I was sitting there trying to puzzle out the logic of the rules of debate favoring white culture?

The rules of debate were put in place to LIMIT debaters... it put limits on the "traditionally white" debaters. So does that mean it put the white man down? When rules limit people objectively and consistently, then they are fair and don't give ANYONE an advantage over anyone else - unless you have spent the time to learn to argue effectively within the confines of those rules.

It was such an eye-opening moment... not that I need more of them. But I sat there in my car with my mouth hanging open trying to puzzle out what exactly their issue was.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts