Today in racism

[TheCatt]

But Scott Adams is basically saying "stay away from black people," because that's what he actually says, if you are white.

Distributor cuts ties; many papers will stop running Dilbert.



Elon's really leaning hard into this notion that everything is bad + terrible except twitter.

[Leisher]

Elon's really leaning hard into this notion that everything is bad + terrible except twitter.

That's just good salesmanship. Plus, show me how his statement is wrong. (Ignoring how racism thrives on all social media platforms...) The MSM is a business that makes money by getting eyeballs on their product. Racism sells and they push a very strong narrative that racism, specifically white people towards black people, is a huge problem in the U.S. They do so while ignoring the success of other races, particularly Asians, and all crime statistics that prove black people are far more violent towards white people than vice versa. (Last stats I saw had it at a 44 to 1 ratio.)

Purely coincidental, the top 8 headlines on CNN right now are all race related, and again, specifically black oppression by white, particularly the GOP.

Meanwhile, not a single headline there discussing the home invasion where a group of black people tortured a white grandmother and set her on fire that resulted in her death. Reverse the races and it'd be getting wall to wall coverage.

[GORDON]

I read the context of what Scott Adams said. He responded to a poll that 50% of black people said that white people are bad. His answer was that it generally makes black people a hate group, and white people should avoid them. Everyone is focussing on n the second thing, ignoring the first thing. That 4chan invented the verbage that was used in the poll is pointless information, intended to introduce bias.

If it's accurate that 50% of black people are bigoted against whites, based only on their skin color, is Scott wrong? Certainly wrong to say it out loud, but wrong to draw that conclusion? If so, at what percentage of hostility is it valid to have a negative opinion?

I think Scott is a few years too soon trying to have this conversation, but it'll probably happen at some point. Eventually black racism will be too hard to ignore.

[TheCatt]

said. He responded to a poll that 50% of black people said that white people are bad

again, not true as I wrote earlier.

Wait til you find out what white people thought of black people.

[GORDON]

said. He responded to a poll that 50% of black people said that white people are bad

again, not true as I wrote earlier.

Wait til you find out what white people thought of black people.

That's a new conversation, and doesn't affect this one at all.

53% said it was "ok to be white.". Any other breakdown of the other 47% are various degrees of racism. So again, what percentage of racism makes Scotts opinion valid? Your personal threshold is >47%. Noted. Mine probably is too.

[TheCatt]

Meanwhile, not a single headline there discussing the home invasion where a group of black people tortured a white grandmother and set her on fire that resulted in her death. Reverse the races and it'd be getting wall to wall coverage.

link? I find nothing

[TheCatt]

said. He responded to a poll that 50% of black people said that white people are bad

again, not true as I wrote earlier.

Wait til you find out what white people thought of black people.

That's a new conversation, and doesn't affect this one at all.

53% said it was "ok to be white.". Any other breakdown of the other 47% are various degrees of racism. So again, what percentage of racism makes Scotts opinion valid? Your personal threshold is >47%. Noted. Mine probably is too.

pretty sure decades and centuries of oppression would lead black people to have an unfavorable opinion of whites, especially those having experienced racism from whites in their lives.

[GORDON]

I can imagine an actual former slave having a poor opinion. I can imagine anyone who had to experience Jim crow to have a legitimate grudge. But everyone since 1964 has only been getting legal discrimination second and third hand.

Racism is wrong, or it isn't. I think it's binary, some don't. Some people like their shades of gray, but I don't personally hold to that. One flavor doesn't excuse another.

[TheCatt]

But everyone since 1964 has only been getting legal discrimination second and third hand.

I think opinions like this are what make people skeptical of white people.

[GORDON]

It's been illegal nationwide since the civil rights act of 1964. Is that wrong?

[TheCatt]

It's been illegal nationwide since the civil rights act of 1964. Is that wrong?

Why is that the only thing that matters? Also, redlining wasn't eliminated in 1964, among other forms.

[GORDON]

I've been saying "legal racism" this entire time. It matters because all other racism is already illegal.

I don't know what redlining is. Is it legal racism? I'm willing to stand corrected.

[TheCatt]

Is it legal racism? I'm willing to stand corrected.

It was, yes.

[GORDON]

Oh ok. Then I digress , black people in 2023 should definitely hate white people.

Maybe white people should avoid black people then, right?

Say it. Say Scott Adams was right .

[Leisher]

link? I find nothing

Found it, and I got tricked seeing it on Twitter over the weekend. It's from 2016. Perhaps the trials were this weekend or something and that's why it was brought back up? Still, one wonders why it didn't receive nationwide attention at the time.

This remains the most brutal and haunting racially motivated murders in recent memory and not a peep in national news at the time or since. It says so much about our MSM and society that we don't know these kids' names, but we know the names of career criminals Michael Brown and George Floyd. Seriously, don't read the details. I don't know how anyone can read them and then think nice things about humanity.

The MSM plays a huge role in continuing the division among people by constantly stoking the flames of racism. They cannot wait to report any white on black violence (like the father/son in...FL?, George whatshisname in FL, and so on), while ignoring the far more prevalent black on white violence. They (and a certain political party) create a narrative of "white supremacy is why you cannot succeed" aimed directly at our black communities, meanwhile all other ethnicities are thriving. Most Asian ethnicities are doing far better than whitey. When violent attacks on Asians began happening, white supremacy was blamed. Then all the videos started coming out and I think 1 out of a dozen actually had a white person as the offender, the rest were all black people. The MSM's response: "White supremacy made the black people attack the Asians." It's fucking insanity. It also ignores a long, long standing hatred between black people and Asians that did not originate in the U.S.

Also, even if the survey Scott Adams was quoting was as flawed as the rant he went on, well, see the images below. There is a clear cultural issue at play here, and obviously it would have to be linked to economics as well. I'm not saying anything that black leaders, not named Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, aren't saying.

Adams is 100% wrong about "getting away from black people" because they condemns an entire race, which is ridiculous, and yes, racist. However, I would argue that what the MSM and certain segments of society does by playing up violence one way while pretending the other doesn't exist is far worse than the rant of a cartoonist.

[Leisher]

Zimmerman! I just remembered it. However, why in the absolute fuck do I even know that idiots name? Why was that story in the news for years?

Where is the Epstein client list?

[TheCatt]

This remains the most brutal and haunting racially motivated murders in recent memory and not a peep in national news at the time or since. It says so much about our MSM and society that we don't know these kids' names, but we know the names of career criminals Michael Brown and George Floyd.

Davidson and his cohorts are black, the victims white. Racial differences have never been suggested as a motivator for what authorities view as a random carjacking.

(From your article)

The ratio math is horribly flawed. Let's say you have a 1:5 ratio of population (like black:white above), and the black people commit 5x the crimes of white people (just making this up for the math). That means each population commits an equal number of crimes. Let's assume victims are at random. That means that OF COURSE black people will have more white victims than white people have black victims. In this case, 5/6 of black crime victims are white, and 1/6 of white crime victims are black. Doing the additional math is just wrong and non-sensical. If anything, you should divide back so the ratio is more like 2:1. (We KNOW that victims are not at random, and that more blacks are victims of black crime proportionally speaking, so the 2:1 ratio makes more sense). But again, it's nonsensical to begin with.

Black on Black homicide data: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/20 ... able-3.xls

[Leisher]

(From your article)

Two things:
1. Show me all their black victims.
2. If you think race did not play a role in this torture, humiliation, rape, and ultimately murder, you're a brainwashed fool. It may not have been proven to be "why" they were chosen to be victims, but that doesn't mean it wasn't there and didn't rear its head during the incident.

No argument on the ratio thing, mainly because it's irrelevant. The ratio being incorrectly calculated does not take away from the staggering crime numbers committed by 13% of the population.

Black on Black homicide data: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/20 ... able-3.xls

Note that black on white murder was double the number of white on black murder. When is the last time a black person murdering a white person got much MSM coverage? I cannot think of one, but maybe I'm wrong.

[TheCatt]

2. If you think race did not play a role in this torture, humiliation, rape, and ultimately murder, you're a brainwashed fool. It may not have been proven to be "why" they were chosen to be victims, but that doesn't mean it wasn't there and didn't rear its head during the incident.

"Race is always a factor" - Leisher.

Note that black on white murder was double the number of white on black murder. When is the last time a black person murdering a white person got much MSM coverage? I cannot think of one, but maybe I'm wrong.

Well, blacks disproportionately kill blacks. And, whites disproportionately kill whites. The country isn't segregated (officially). By random chance, you'd expect the blacks killing whites to be MUCH higher than whites killing black, assuming equal number of crimes.

[Leisher]

"Race is always a factor" - Leisher.

In crimes like that? 100%. What they did was out of pure hatred.

Well, blacks disproportionately kill blacks. And, whites disproportionately kill whites. The country isn't segregated (officially). By random chance, you'd expect the blacks killing whites to be MUCH higher than whites killing black, assuming equal number of crimes.

Only on sitcoms is every family or friend group super diverse.

Considering most homicide is committed by people you know, I would expect the races to kill one another in equal numbers. Random chance or being murdered by strangers would only make up a small discrepancy.

Speaking of racism, apparently white and Latino are the same thing now.