Philosophy Now Forum

Jared Taylor, president of American Renaissance, the gentleman’s think tank on white race relations in America, made some interesting observations about manipulated statistics in race crime reports. In “Race, Crime, and Violence” (July, 1999), Taylor classified American racial statistics by the categories of White, Black, Asian, and American Indian, so that, when he says “A black is 103 times more likely to rob a white than vice versa,” his white-based statistic is based on Caucasian people—white American people, not including Asians, Hispanics, Pacific Islanders, or American Indians. The crimes of Negroes against actual “white” Americans are then even much higher. While in 1997 some 49% of murder victims were black, 90% of the 15,289 murders in that year were ‘same race’ murders. There were 1,100 whites killed by blacks, and 480 blacks killed by whites, which means a black was 15 times more likely to kill a white than vice versa.

In 1994, American Renaissance (Samuel Taylor) reported:


In 1992, police reported 23,760 murders and non-negligent homicides. Although they are only 12 percent of the population, blacks committed about 55 percent of the murders. This means that murder rates, by race, were dramatically different. “Whites” (including Hispanics) killed at a rate of 5.1 per 100,000 while the rate for blacks was 43.3 per 100,000. Blacks are therefore 8.5 times more likely to commit murder than whites and, all by themselves, account for the fact that the United States has a higher murder rate than England or Italy.

These kinds of statistics, in which the figures for at least two other races, Asian and American Indian, are kept separate from the black and white statistics, have not been publicized to any helpful extent. Indeed, what we are seeing now, in the cases of George Zimmerman and Jake England, is the indication of intentional distortion of statistics by categorizing all people as either black or white. This is a clear attempt at reducing the black crime statistics in the United States. Whatever statistics are generation by a ratio of 10 blacks to 100 whites, those statistics will be greatly reduced if the ratio is 10 to 200, or to 500. The larger the “white” group, the smaller the black crime statistics—and also the more ‘intense’ the minority status of the black group. (from Color Me White Even If I'm Indian

chaz wyman wrote: That is why racial discrimination is bad idea, and the simple fact of gathering the stats is discriminatory.

artisticsolution wrote:

chaz wyman wrote: That is why racial discrimination is bad idea, and the simple fact of gathering the stats is discriminatory.

I am not talking about stats...stats can be interpreted with bias.

Yes you are. You are either talking about urban beliefs (which are worse), or actually gathered stats which objectify arbitrary racial characteristics.

I am talking about scientific facts.

Pass me a fucking bucket!!! There are no statistical facts. A race is arbitrary. You might as well gather stats from people with small noses, and fat toes - THEY WILL SHOW differential characteristics.
People with innie belly buttons or outies will have different intelligence. Think about it!

I am talking about knowing about all parts of the brain functions and all genetic facts. All the evidence is not in....you and I are only speculating at this point. (contradiction; there are no facts, but they would show race is true if there were)

There is very little difference genetically between humans and apes, let alone different humans. There is no link between colour and intelligence - though you might find a statistical correlation- there is no CAUSAL link.
So whilst it might be true that people with small big-toes are less intelligent than those with big ones- why do you think gathering such stats is useful in any way?



So what if, science unveiled something in the brain that only certain people have that cause them to be more violent and they also found a "cure" for such violence? Would you say that there should be a mandate to cure all violent behavior?

They already have and it has nothing to do with race. There is a genetic propensity towards psychotic behaviour. Many CEOs have this gene as do serial killers. Now tell me what are you going to do with this information?


Conversely, if science found that something in the brain or dna that caused cancer and they also found a cure for all cancer, would you say that there should be a mandate to cure all cancer?

They already have. Now tell me what you are going to do with this information.

Also, if science found something in the brain that only certain people have that made them more inclined to have a faith in God, would you say that there should be a mandate to cure superstitious type religious belief ?

Ditto - see above. None of these are related to race though it might be true that some people of colour have it more or less than others - So how do you think you are going to use this information?

Why is it so crazy to believe that everyone might not have the identical brain or dna or genetics.

Despite the fact that we share 98% of our genes with Benobos, and 40% with bananas. We all mange to have unique genes - everyone of us. You are confusing two completely different issues. Race just makes a mockery of genetic differentiation, by categorising those differences into arbitrary categories of skin colour. Then finds correlation in factors used to discriminate for those skin colours. To what end?


What I mean to say is...we know there are people born without arms and legs...is it so weird to think they could be born with missing parts of the brain...or lacking other such things that may cause them to be violent? Is it possible that since science has not fully understood what makes us tick yet that we can't say all violence stems from the acts of elitists...yet?

What has this got to do with race?

artisticsolution wrote:"When's the last time you saw a Swede hijack an airplane?"

SpheresOfBalance wrote:

artisticsolution wrote:"When's the last time you saw a Swede hijack an airplane?"

There's no reasoning with you, because you're a dumb racist ****! I hope you never had any kids, because if you have, you fucked them up, having a portion of your backward ass, inbred gene pool. There should be a law against people with your lack of intellect breeding.

SpheresOfBalance wrote:The threads author states that he's a retired lawyer, that's a fucking joke!

artisticsolution wrote:Nothing here even remotely comes close to what I mean.

That's only because you don't get it.

You are all beating a strawman in your attempt to stay relevant. You are deliberately lying by taking my words and believing they mean what they meant in the 70's. I am making a completely different argument than you are rebutting.

In denial.

You are stuck in a 70's mentality and will not break free. But society can't continue in this manner. Eventually trends change...and when they do...it is all too clear what was the problem.

Yep the future is fascist - we all know that.

You are perpetuating a victim mentality that sets up the world that you hate. Your mentality divides people and is the reason why you have made the elitists wield even more power than they had with slavery.

You are the one creating the victims. Creating them statistically. Positing arbirary physical differences against biometric data. Sorry but you are the one that is out of date. Why not Google Francis Galton. He was debunked 80 years ago, and is still bullshit.

You shield the masses in this game of good vs. evil...telling them it was the elitists that made them this way...but then in the same breath you turn around and give the elitists much authority when you say it is better to ape them so that we are all the same.

This bears no resemblance to reality. What drugs are you on?

The truth...You're still not bored with this conversation you've been having since the 70's? Oh...and how's it working for you? Do the elitists still keep you down? Are they less powerful or more?

I'll keep listening to Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela. Good ideas never go out of fashion.

chaz wyman wrote:
I'll keep listening to Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela. Good ideas never go out of fashion.

artisticsolution wrote:AS:I never said they should not be required to learn a reasonable level of English, I said that they should. But I don't think their "special" language as you call it, is bad. How about we all learn it as well? It's the conformity thing where all black should conform to a white ideal that I don't like. Sooo I have all these questions in my head.

Here is what I don't understand. I think I am hearing you, chaz and SOB saying that it is good to learn a reasonable level of English. (I agree) and that it is bad to have this "special" language (which I don't agree) You see to me...what you are condoning is everyone learning what the elitists insist they learn...or rather learn how to play in an elitist world which to me is condoning that world as "better" but then at the same time dissing that same elitist world as acting as if they are better! I am just flabbergasted! Why not make it a law that says elitist have to learn the special language that you say is not reasonable? Why not make it so elitists need to learn something from blacks in America instead of the other way around? Why not dare to think something different?

AS: Well at least you admitted the truth that it is "opinion." Chaz and SOB state it as fact. I am just saying that the fact is...that all the facts are not in so all we can have is opinion. When science learns more about the human mind and genetics...then maybe we can learn the truth.

AS: I don't know anything about sports but I am pretty much guessing that an aboriginal could not take the championship away from them? Now when I say that....does it mean I think an aboriginal should be kept from doing so? No. Does it mean I think they never could. No. Does it mean I think they are less than? No. It simply means that I am asking what makes people different if we all come from the same origin? How did we get different?

Arising_uk wrote:

artisticsolution wrote:AS:I never said they should not be required to learn a reasonable level of English, I said that they should. But I don't think their "special" language as you call it, is bad. How about we all learn it as well? It's the conformity thing where all black should conform to a white ideal that I don't like. Sooo I have all these questions in my head.

artisticsolution wrote:

chaz wyman wrote:
I'll keep listening to Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela. Good ideas never go out of fashion.

You think you are listening to mlk or nm? That is laughable. Did they promote violence? No. Did they see a discrimination because of their skin color? Yes Meaning...they noticed how white people used the color of skin against them...hence racism. It is not racism to notice that people have different colored skin! It is only racist if you want to discriminate.

You are behaving like a Christian...there is no discussion there is only accusations. Onward Christian soldier!