Writing at Alternet, Salon, and here at We Are Respectable Negroes, I have argued that George Zimmerman is a murderer, one motivated by racism, an over-identification with Whiteness and White Authority, as well as a fetish for playing cop, to kill a person who was guilty of walking while black in the "wrong" neighborhood.
At present, George Zimmerman's attorneys are trying to defame and discredit Trayvon Martin's character by releasing text messages and photos of him acting in a "criminal" manner.
However, there is little discussion of the following issues which would suggest that Zimmerman has many defects of character and behavior.
George Zimmerman was arrested for domestic violence. He was apparently on mood altering drugs while pursuing an unarmed person against police instructions, and then killing said innocent. George Zimmerman was also accused of committing sexual assault and molesting a family member. George Zimmerman also assaulted police officers.
Thus, some questions.
How do these facts enter into the prosecution's case? Why is the public not hearing more about Zimmerman's character defects? By attacking Martin's character--and on issues that have little if anything to do with Zimmerman's motivations for chasing down and murdering an innocent person--are Zimmerman's attorneys now open to an attack on their client's questionable background?
Black youth are made into adults for purposes of incarceration, harassment, and murder by the State, as well as those overly identified with Whiteness and White Authority. Black adults are infantilized by those who want to argue that we are not worthy of citizenship, are stuck on a "plantation," and seek to disenfranchise us at the polls. This paradox typifies black life during Jim and Jane Crow and through to the post civil rights era.
A one sided attack on Trayvon Martin when George Zimmerman's character and motivations have not been equally scrutinized is a function of that same dynamic.
How Trayvon Martin is guilty as opposed to being presumed innocent, and the burden of proof is on his family and attorneys to prove Martin's right to live when confronted by the murderous machinations of a vigilante killer, are more proof that black life remains cheap in the Age of Obama--and how African-American's lives are (quite literally) in some ways less valuable than they were centuries ago.
Black kids walking home are all black beast rapist giant Negroes in the eyes of people like George Zimmerman and those who support him. "Niggerization" is real. Never forget that fact; do not let your kids, who may happen to be black and brown, forget that fact either.
85 comments:
Facts without context, and...your point is?
There is an interesting element there though. Crime is supposedly going down. But, is this an artifact of how the data is being gathered and correlated? Plus, what of the lack of reporting of crime in prisons to the overall stats?
I'm really enjoying the design and layout of your blog. It's a very easy on the eyes which makes it much more
enjoyable for me to come here and visit more
often. Did you hire out a developer to create your theme?
Fantastic work!
my web blog: Louis Vuitton Outlet
When a civilian detains an unarmed female at gunpoint, then kills her, they are charged with kidnapping and murder, usually with attempted rape thrown in for the maximum penalty. Why is the Trayvon Martin case so different. Because he is male. Like the Jodi Arias case, the defense argues that the killer's life was in danger. The Arias defense presented the victim, Travis Alexander as being an abusive monster who was a deadly threat to Jodi Arias. The defense wanted us to believe that Mr. Alexander's magical mangina and the Stockholm Syndrome caused his killer to drive across state lines to throw herself onto his bed every chance she got. The problem with our society with the glorification of war, vigilantism and gangsterism is that young men are seen as expendable shooting targets and cannon fodder. Have you noticed most of the new reality crime programming involves women as murderers, usually of men, ie "Wives with Knives".
Read the New Jim Crow, the book Race, Crime and the Law, the Sentencing Project's reports, etc.
Really? Are you talking about absolute numbers or rates of crime? Are you talking about intra-group violence?
And whites are much more likely to be domestic terrorists, commit mass murder, treason, child molestation, sex crimes, etc. etc. etc. So what is your point?
Back to that mess again. We discussed that many many times already. You really want to rehash arguments about rational racism and negrophobia? Tedious and easily dismissed.
I assume that you are black. Therefore, by your logic then you should be subjected to harassment and profiling. You and your children should be subjected to summary murder then too because someone somewhere looks like is also a member of the same racial group and by implication your kids and you are much more "likely" to be criminals.
As I discussed in great detail, you cannot generalize from aggregate level data down to individual level probabilities of crime.
I know you are a provocateur; but sometimes your inferences sound like something out of Stormfront. Do you really believe that you are immune from the broader social level generalizations about crime and stereotype threat? You are smarter than that.
There's no evidence Zimmerman molested a person; there is evidence that Trayvon Martin participated in organized fights and smoked marihuana (confession by text and pictures). I think GZ wins the battle.
Off with his head then for the crimes of smoking weed!!!!! And I hope you are not talking about that silly fake fighting video.
I will take Zimmerman's own relative talking about his molesting her over Zimmerman, a perjurer and liar, any day.
Trayvon Martin was
stalked
hunted
executed
for the crime of WALKING WHILE BLACK.
Period.
nothing more.
lol, priceless comedy gold...., confronted with simple, unqualified fact, you (and your rhetorical arguments) meltdown with the quickness.
crack kills....,
rotflmbao..., What a pussy...., deleting statements of fact that contradict all your airy blather
No. Your comments are not advancing the conversation. You are provoking and needling just to do so.
I try to take time to offer up substantive comments as I did w. you here.
I give you lots of latitude here because more often than not it results in an interesting conversation.
Here? Not so much. Engage constructively on the issue or choose not to comment on this thread. Name calling. Attacking the host? Not interested.
We went through this when I established the comment policy.
"holy self-hatred batman" advances the conversation, butBased on available data from 1980 to 2008—
Blacks were disproportionately represented as both homicide victims and offenders. The victimization rate for blacks (27.8per 100,000) was 6 times higher than the rate for whites (4.5 per 100,000). The offending rate for blacks (34.4 per 100,000) was almost 8 times higher than the rate for whites (4.5 per 100,000)does not?
Facts are like kryptonite to your flimsy and dishonest "arguments" - deny and attempt to hide them at your own peril.
Again, what does this have to do with trayvon martin. So black people as a group should be subjected to wanton murder on the street because of crime stats? Does that apply to you and your children and family?
I gave you some things to think about re: context and the biases of the criminal justice system. Incarceration rates are a function of systemic biases within the system.
I also gave you some stats on intra-racial violence and white criminality. Again, you are very odd as whenever white folks and crime are brought up you suggest such conversations are out of pocket.
So Zimmerman had FBI stats in his head then make a specious connection--as I have detailed consistently and w. other sources--to how one teenage walking down the street posed an existential threat to him.
Your point is misplaced and stinks of some of the mess we here from white nationalists. I allowed the self-hatred comment to stand as it is mighty fascinating to see a black person channeling this mess and also advocating for Sullivan's race/IQ arguments.
A fair question.
"Facts are like kryptonite to your flimsy and dishonest "arguments" - deny and attempt to hide them at your own peril."
Again, you are heckling and harassing. I have been more than patient. Again.
Your facts lack context. They therefore lack any meaning beyond serving as tedious talking points on the very serious matter of race, crime, and justice. If it sounds like something I would hear at Stormfront, I am not really interested in having such energy here.
We have talked about this at length. I have stated my peace and unless you are willing to bring something new to the conversation it just makes sense for you to move on from this thread.
Hola! I've been following your site for a long time now and finally got the courage to go ahead and give you a shout out from Humble Tx! Just wanted to mention keep up the fantastic job!
Here is my site Rmr Calculator
While being black may had have something to do with it, being male while black was probably the deciding factor. We usually don't hear about this happening to black females. In my place of residence, Gun Happy, Texas, males of all races are shot for the tiniest perceived provocation. Spend some time watching "Snapped" or any of the other true crime shows and you will see many women found not guilty or getting reduced sentences after killing a man. How often can a man claim abuse or self-defense if he kills a female? The media has made this about "Stand your ground" laws, when it is really a kidnapping and murder case--something that would have been obvious had Trayvon Martin been female.
Thanks for your personal marvelous posting! I seriously enjoyed reading it, you happen to be
a great author. I will be sure to bookmark your blog and will come back later in life.
I want to encourage you to continue your great job, have
a nice afternoon!
my blog - metabolic rate calculator
The author complains that George Zimmerman is trying to defame Trayvon Martin even as the author defames George Zimmerman. African Americans are badmouthing George Zimmerman for no good reason. Martin caused this mess by attacking George Zimmerman just because George Zimmerman was watching Martin. Martin escalated the situation to lethal force by using the concrete sidewalk as a weapon to try to kill Zimmerman. Banging a human head into concrete repeatedly can EASILY result in death and all Zimmerman did was watch Martin. As far as Martin was concerned the mere act of Zimmerman watching Martin justified Martin trying to kill Zimmerman. Martin got too violent too easily.
rikyrah, Martin was not executed for walking while black; Martin was killed because he was using lethal force against Zimmerman (banging Zimmerman's head into concrete sidewalk) without justification. Martin was a bad kid who got too violent too easily.
The deciding factor in Tryavon Martin's death was when Trayvon Martin decided to try to kill George Zimmerman by banging Mr. Zimmerman's head into a concrete sidewalk repeatedly.
Joyce M you can not process facts very well. You talk about a civilian "detain" someone but Zimmerman did not "detain" Martin. All Zimmerman did was watch Martin. Stop you're stupid lying and inferior fact-processing. It's people like you that cause the confusion because you can't process facts honestly and correctly.
A one sided attack on Trayvon Martin when George Zimmerman's character and motivations have not been equally scrutinized is a function of that same dynamic.
A one-sided attack on Trayvon Martin is what a criminal defense attorney would be expected to do to influence the views of prospective jurors - "if it doesn't fit, you must acquit" kayfabery at its finest.
How Trayvon Martin is guilty as opposed to being presumed innocent, and the burden of proof is on his family and attorneys to prove Martin's right to live when confronted by the murderous machinations of a vigilante killer, are more proof that black life remains cheap in the Age of Obama--and how African-American's lives are (quite literally) in some ways less valuable than they were centuries ago.
The BJS data bear out this empirical fact, while simultaneously demonstrating that it is blacks who primarily undervalue black life, at an exponentially greater rate than at any time from 1865-1965, and, that the number of whites murdered by blacks since 1970 is in excess of 200,000, dwarfing the number of black men lynched by whites from 1865-1965 and justifying a rational fear of young, pants-sagging, black-trash emulating and identified young black males.
The data show that a George Zimmerman incident is a statistical anomaly or outlier, while getting kilt by pookie'an'em happens at a daily clip of 40 or more occurances a day, every single day, no exceptions.
"The BJS data bear out this empirical fact, while simultaneously
demonstrating that it is blacks who primarily undervalue black life" Cnulan
Not sure I can agree with that point keeping in mind the War on Drugs, which disproportionally wrecks havoc on millions of black lives per year.
"at an exponentially greater rate than at any time from 1865-1965, and, that the number of whites murdered by blacks since 1970 is in excess of 200,000, dwarfing the number of black men lynched by whites from 1865-1965" Cnulan
The exclusive focus on lynching is puzzling for the fact that thousands of blacks were killed by whites who were not lynched. I'm thinking about the Reconstruction era, "slavery by another name", racial mobs, etc in which the 200,000 black on white homicide rate would likely dwarf the number of blacks killed by whites.
Though do I agree with your overall point of this Zimmerman/ Martin case being an outlier.
When I originally commented I appear to have clicked on the -Notify me when
new comments are added- checkbox and now each time a comment is added I receive 4 emails with the exact same comment.
There has to be a way you can remove me from that service?
Appreciate it!
my blog ... Sac Louis Vuitton
I meant the number of blacks killed by whites would dwarf the current 200,000 black on white homicide rate.
Hmm. DeMello. That penninsula hovering above Africa. Skin just a tad olive? Hair curly? Even the pubes?---they looked so different from the Nordics in the locker room. So inadequate. So weak. And your inadequacy: intellectually, spiritually, emotionally. The girls---they couldn't appreciate you. The real white you. And those black guys---fucking the Nordic women you really really wanted. I know, Russell---it's unfair. There's no alternative. Others have to pay. Especially the dark ones. They have to pay. We hear you. The Priviledge---it just wasn't really extended to you. So Martin had to pay.
Not sure I can agree with that point keeping in mind the War on Drugs,
which disproportionally wrecks havoc on millions of black lives per
year.
What exactly does the War on Drugs have to do with the black-on-black homicide rate?
The fact that black drug dealers are small scale marketers to poor and thus low-quantity/low-cost consumers has a lot to do with the high-risk, low-hanging fruit targeting of their business by lazy and incompetent cops, but what does that have to do with their murderousness toward one another, and, their demonstrated inability to organize and manage their affairs on a larger and more disciplined scale like the irish, italians, and jews were able to do during their crimey phases of ghetto systeme illegal business?
Bottomline, violent, vulgar, ignorant and stupid is a great recipe for getting caught, being feared, and overall, not being very successful at the dope game.
Of course, you were there, yeah right. How did Zimmerman get into Trayvon Martin's personal space in order to get into a struggle with him? We all have the right to resist a kidnapping or assault. If someone is following me too closely, I would suspect they are trying to do me harm.
Why was there a struggle, if Zimmerman was only watching at a distance? Your theory does not make any sense.
How long are your arms? If someone is watching at a distance, then there's no confrontation.
The author didn't defame Zimmerman. Zimmerman is a serial fuckup and what the author noted is entirely relevant to his being in the unenviable position in which he currently finds himself.
I remember one morning when someone was watching and following me. As any sensible person, I was frightened and started to run. He eventually pushed me to the ground and stole my purse. He could have kept his distance, but decided to come into my personal space--a sign that he meant to do me harm and he did.
Now I can talk about that. We are much more at risk from each other, which is what is so tragic. I also think that Zimmerman's attorneys are trying to poison the jury pool...which I would too.
But, I don't know the law, thus my questions, about how bringing up character issues of the victim could help Zimmerman if he has actual arrests on his record, the toxicology report, and other issues in his background.
" justifying a rational fear of young, pants-sagging, black-trash emulating and identified young black males."
That is where we disagree. There is nothing "rational" about using aggregate data to generalize about specific probabilities of a given person doing you harm or committing a crime. It is rational to be afraid of folks you know and are related to. Strangers not so much.
I think it is on google books, or I may have quoted from it here, but Reasonable Racism, which was written by a criminologist who is a stats guy, does the math on that one pretty easily.
Now, if we want to talk about stereotype threat and irrational cues and behaviors for why a person would perhaps be afraid of a black youth then yes, that could be something worth bantering about.
But again, be careful. By that logic we should be running for the hills when we see white men as they much more likely to be serial killers. We should profile white men for domestic terrorism and mass shooting. We should keep white men away from kids because of their aggregate propensity to commit sex crimes.
Are you prepared to go both ways on this? Moreover, why is it considered reasonable in the public discourse to talk about criminalizing whole classes of black and brown youth but there are howls of outrage when talk about doing that to white people?
Black people have overwhelmingly been victims of white violence in this country's history. The word "riot" almost exclusively referred to white on black mass violence until it shifted in the 1960s discourse.
So black people as a group should be subjected to wanton murder on the street because of crime stats? Does that apply to you and your children and family?
My peeps deport themselves like the genetic and cultural nobility we are. Peasants get out of pocket with us at their own peril.
Again, you are very odd as whenever white folks and crime are brought up you suggest such conversations are out of pocket.
Nonsense and falsehood.
There is no "whenever white folks and crime" - rather - their is the curious and relatively recent phenomenon of the mass murdering active shooter. I have stated in no uncertain terms my belief - and furnished corroborating evidence in support of this belief - that SSRI withdrawal correlates very closely with and may be deemed causative of such outlier mass murder events.
You and I have never had a discussion of "white folks and crime".
So Zimmerman had FBI stats in his head then made a specious connection--as I have detailed consistently and w. other sources--to how one teenage walking down the street posed an existential threat to him.
I don't know what Zimmerman had in his head, and frankly don't care.
It is a fact that a profoundly and massively disproportionate percentage of violent crime and homicide in the U.S. is attributable to black male youth, murdering at a steady clip of 40/day. Given that fact, it should be commonplace to consider black male youth emulating ghetto thug deportment as a potential threat.
Your point is misplaced and stinks of some of the mess we hear from white nationalists. I allowed the self-hatred comment to stand as it is mighty fascinating to see a black person channeling this mess and also advocating for Sullivan's race/IQ arguments.
Nonsense and lies. My point is fact-based and intensely uncomfortable for folks like yourself who eschew fact-based argumentation.
As for Sullivan's point about dogs as species and dogs as breeds, he hasn't violated any fact of which I'm aware. Though his use of these facts offends your delicate pearl-clutching sensibilities and defies your ability to adequately refute or respond.
"My peeps deport themselves like the genetic and cultural nobility we are. Peasants get out of pocket with us at their own peril."
You want a black exceptional negro card where all these social dynamics apply to other black people but not to you and your kin. Absurd. Defies both reason and experience. There is simply too much evidence, personal, anecdotal, and empirical about racial profiling, stop and frisk, etc. as applied to "proper" negroes like yourself.
Moreover, constitutional rights liberties and freedoms are not something that can or should be decided upon by how someone looks.
As for Sullivan's point about dogs as species and dogs as breeds, he hasn't violated any fact of which I'm aware. Though his use of these facts offends your delicate pearl-clutching sensibilities and defies your ability to adequately refute or respond.
People are not breeds of dogs. I gave you links to other folks whose work is on race and IQ and that fiction. Coates had a great interview w. a leading geneticist on the topic. If you as a black person want to throw your lot in with Race Science IQ folks have at it.
There is no construct validity for the foundations of their claims. Have said it before; will say it again. Choose to believe what you would like.
lol - one of these things is not like the other one, one of these things just doesn't belong.....,
CDV, since the age of twelve I have been in fist/foot fights, bat fights, knife fights, and gun fights with various and sundry - and never lost.
I was twelve years old the very first time I saw someone shot to death. I accept and embrace the specific nature of the culture in which we are embedded - and aspire to something Edo-ifically more intense.
I'm not the one to whom policy issues should be addressed. My interest is on specific personal fitness in a context of culturally pervasive ultra-violence, period.
I brought up the War on Drugs to challenge your claim that " it is blacks who primarily undervalue black life". With millions of black lives wasted behind bars, I think it's fair to say that whites undervalue black lives as much, if not even more so.
You mentioned the Irish and other ethnic whites, but in all fairness, ethnic whites have a different history in America. I'm focusing on the fact, that inner-city police force were generally dominated by their ethnic group, thus allowing them the opportunity to be more "disciplined" (turning a blind eye to many crimes, a luxury hardly enjoyed by blacks who have effectively been policed by outside groups throughout American history).
I don't "want" a goddamned thing. I am what I am and have no desire or compulsion to conceal the fact of what that is and what it entails. I conduct myself like a radically autonomous and objectively free man.
Moreover, constitutional rights liberties and freedoms are not something that can or should be decided upon by how someone looks.
That will be litigated any minute now and decided by a jury of peers.
People are not breeds of dogs. I gave you links to other folks whose work is on race and IQ and that fiction. Coates had a great interview w. a leading geneticist on the topic. If you as a black person want to throw your lot in with Race Science IQ folks have at it.
Coates is less than nothing to me, his presence at the Atlantic is offensive as he represents an unqualified and low common denominator token.
Humans, like dogs, are a highly and obviously differentiated conspecific lot. http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/conspecific
Given the fact that I thoroughly understand this topic from a functional assessment, cytoarchitechtonic, and genetic and epigenetic perspective - I needn't refer to or "throw my lot in" with anyone. Least of all with folk who cannot abide much less engage in fact-based discourse and who depend on increasingly pathetic emotional appeals to pigmentational solidarity.
With millions of black lives wasted behind bars, I think it's fair to
say that whites undervalue black lives as much, if not even more so.
How'n'a'phug these little Guatamalan hobbits make their way up from central america to the cranberry bogs and pocket $3000.00 week picking berries?
I think that it's fair to say that ghetto trash is trifling and unfit.
I'm focusing on the fact, that inner-city police force were generally dominated by their ethnic group, thus allowing them the opportunity to
be more "disciplined" (turning a blind eye to many crimes, a luxury hardly enjoyed by blacks who have effectively been policed by outside groups throughout American history).
rotflmbao..., how many generations 2nd/3rd line civil rights inheritor progeny been running major U.S. municipalities into the ground?
You mean to tell me that not.a.single.one of these clans could put every aspect of that dope game together on a large and disciplined scale and make things happen?!?!?!?!
Then they're just IQ 75 loozers who richly deserve the fate that their incompetent capacities have yielded....,
Okay Stagolee...and I mean that as a complement. That having been said, those are stories of inter-personal violence, life skills, etc. how do we generalize public policy from those experiences? and how would a generalizable policy scale up from those experiences for a functioning society?
Great. Write up an article on the topic and present a symposium. I would love to see how the experts in the field respond to your claims.
Please share what these human dog breed equivalents are. And how would would we be able to identify them visually or phenotypically?
"You mean to tell me that not.a.single.one of these clans could put every aspect of that dope game together on a large and disciplined scale and make things happen?!?!?!?!" Cnulan
Yes I do mean to say that these politicians are incompetent and self-serving, but exactly does that have to do with the devaluation of millions of black lives wasted behind prisons because of the War on Drugs? In context of American history, black life has always been viewed as cheap more so by whites, but also by may blacks.
I was simply puzzled by your statement "... it is blacks who primarily undervalue black life..." and wanted to point it that homicide is not the only nor best measure to gauge one's value of life; other means such as disproportion mass incarceration for petty drug offenses can equally measure one's regard for life. I'm thinking that the millions of black lives forever destroyed due to petty drug offense (men who can live productive lives despite drug use) in contrast to the number of black lives slain on the street (often unproductive men caught up in the drug game who rightfully should be locked away or killed), and reasoning that the War on Drugs is a devaluation of black life.
Of course, I'm assuming that the War on Drugs was not ever supported by majority of black folks, but instead was a policy implicated and largely accepted by whites (and even self-serving black politicians) in the 70s as a way to control (devalue) black life.
We also cannot forget how black folks were not able to use the political machines of ethnic politics for uplift and self-enrichment in mass the way that white immigrants were for a variety of reasons. You had local black machines in big cities, but nothing like Tammany hall for black people.
And where blacks did have some access to municipal jobs they were quickly replaced by white immigrants and/or further and further reduced in numbers.
Nevermind how "chocolate cities" were already in the dumps when black folks took over at the same time they were being systematically defunded in the 1970s and 1980s. What a prize, huh?
The weak and the stupid gotta go, gotta go, gotta go....,
Your deference to Coates' white expert means that you concede every other argument I made. Post up the white boy's link and I'll whoop his narrow as too....,
The well of excuses for black ghetto fitness failure is essentially botomless for those so identified.
Mebbe it's time for you cheerleaders for a winless squad to give up on these sorry muhhukkas...,
Lol, when all else fails, there's always feces flinging to fall back on....,
Goodness. Talk about false inference. No, I just decided there is nothing I can say that will move you from erroneous conclusions and apparent inability to grasp the problem of construct validity in any effort to model something as specious as "race" and vague/convoluted as "intelligence."
Thus, maybe someone who is a leading expert on the subject will penetrate:
http://www.theatlantic.com/ta-nehisi-coates/
Now that is a cogent engagement with the facts now isn't it. What a binary world and model you have of social reality. Why is this?
Those are not "excuses" they are explanations. They also exist within a broader context of other explanations too including under-capitalization, poor planning of many black American entrepreneurs, crappy service, the informal black tax that those communities are subjected to, internalized self-hatred where the Korean and white man's ice is thought to be colder, etc. etc. etc.
But, you cannot separate that from the systemic destruction of black wealth in this country, and the systemic transfer of it, aided and abetted by the White State, to its coffers.
I just decided there is nothing I can say that will move you from erroneous conclusions and apparent inability to grasp
rotflmbao....,
the liberal arts dilettante parroting polysyllabic gibberish because he has nothing substantive to say, fixed his mouth in my general direction with "inability to grasp"
truly.priceless.comedy.gold....,
Coates white boy ain't say isht one way or t'other. SURELY you can do better than that!!!!
Meanwhile, chinamen's ignore all that insecure and handwavy denial by steady grindin at the grail...., http://subrealism.blogspot.com/2013/03/inside-chinas-bio-google.html
Not a single explanation in the bunch, just a lot of pathetic excuses signifying nothing so much as your own endless and irrational identification with the pathologically unfit and incapable.
I would usually delete a comment such as this. But, I will let it stand so that folks get an insight into the grotesque bigotry driving many of Zimmerman's defenders.
Okay Stagolee..lol. i wonder where cnu would be without his extraordinary intellect. given his penchant for guns and violence, probably dead or in prison.
Yup!!! Good thing the Nu's ain't raise no dipshit dummies.
Concentrated parental investment you see is the sine qua non of high intellect. What makes it indisputably heritable...,
"Coates white boy ain't say isht one way or t'other. SURELY you can do better than that!!!!"
Well, he has the bonafides, the books, and the research center. I think I will have to defer to his expertise. You can name call if you like. Now, you have positioned yourself as an expert on the topic of race and IQ.
Please explain what methodological errors he committed? How do you locate his claims in the literature on the topic? What exactly makes them more or less persuasive than those others in the literature? You don't have access to his data set, but based on the article what is your take on it?
Again, I am fair and reasonable and polite.
"the liberal arts dilettante parroting polysyllabic gibberish because he has nothing substantive to say, fixed his mouth in my general direction with "inability to grasp""
Please mind the comment policy. I went through this before and have no interest in returning to a discussion of proper comportment and politeness on this site.
You are generally entertaining and your tendencies to needle and prod ban be useful. At this point, it is just a distraction.
I have substantively and politely gone back and forth on this issue. You make few if any substantive claims except to dismiss any comment, expertise, substantive citation or the like that you dislike. That is not furthering a conversation. It is tedious and tiresome. Do reconsider your approach.
and your tendency to make appeals to "favorable" scientific authority, or just appeals to authority period, are nearly legendary by now...,
Bottomline, Coates "expert" didn't say much of anything other than to say that there's not enough evidence to blah, blah, blah..., meanwhile, the Shenzen genomics lab pours billions into the process of actual scientific discovery to suss out the genetic basis of higher cognitive functioning.
I'll bet on the actively engaged chinese rather than the diffident and politically motivated white boy on this one....,
So you can't answer the questions then? And you make your own appeal to authority about "the Shenzen genomics lab." Got your game on this one now. Your appeals to authority trump everyone else's appeal to authority by your own criteria and rules. Not very interesting or intellectually honest.
As I said, please do answer those questions given your expertise on the subject.
You mind the comment policy.
Clearly from where you sit your lopsidedly enforced "comment policy" means that just about any kind of limp-wristed insult you and the head full of mush crowd supporting your sob stories throw out is permitted, while hitting back at an offending musty yeastsack is not.
I get it that if you don't censor facts and strong arguments, you'll be crushed, pretty much why you got chased out of Cobb's spot by comparative weaklings. But bottomline, if you don't understand "inability to grasp" coming from you and directed toward me as an insult, then the truth simply is not in you.
"I get it that if you don't censor facts and strong arguments, you'll be crushed, pretty much why you got chased out of Cobb's spot by comparative weaklings."
I am not interested in arguing at Cobb's website with herrenvolk knuckleheads with little grasp of the facts about American politics, history, culture, race, etc. etc. etc. I have no interest in wasting time talking to neo-John Birchers.
Cobb kept threatening to ban me because I was not willing to play around with all of his claims that he couldn't substantiate, i.e. being an "expert" on history because he played video games as one example. Thus, what is the point to the conversation then?
You are not offering up any "strong arguments" you are name calling. I don't censor facts. I only ask that you provide context behind them. You claimed to be an expert on this race-IQ stuff and you are not able to answer some basic questions in response to a widely recognized expert's comments on the subject.
You are apparently very upset by what you see as specious appeals to authority but you make your own appeals to authority that you and only you are the arbiter of.
I have been very very patient. I also try to be polite. But, your tone and energy has been extremely disagreeable as of late. Why is that?
As I said a year or so ago, I am not interested in spending energy deflecting folks who want to just critique, harangue, and try to provoke me as opposed to substantively engaging the conversation and moving it forward.
You have your own site, feel free to police it or not as you like.
Please explain what methodological errors he committed? How do you locate his claims in the literature on the topic? What exactly makes them more or less persuasive than those others in the literature? You don't have access to his data set, but based on the article what is your take on it?
http://youtu.be/8ESfN3lUNRM
lol, even with access you can't answer the questions you disingenuously posed here - more importantly, those questions and your author's claims are entirely irrelevant to the subject at hand.
What IS relevant to the subject at hand, is neurocriminological data I've brought to your attention, and the self-sorting process by which real-life crimeys apply themselves to the disorganized, high-violence, low-yield mayhem which has made the contemporary black ghetto a disgraceful, unsustainable, and insufferable killing field. bears repeating:What are we to do, for example, Eagleman
asked, with the fact that "if you are a carrier of one particular set of
genes, the probability that you will commit a violent crime is four
times as high as it would be if you lacked those genes. You're three
times as likely to commit a robbery, five times as likely to commit
aggravated assault, eight times as likely to be arrested for murder and
13 times as likely to be arrested for a sexual offence. The overwhelming
majority of prisoners carry these genes; 98.1% of death row inmates do…
Can we honestly say that the carriers of those genes have exactly the
same range of choices in their behaviour as those who do not possess
them?
Having carefully thought through the implications of these data, I've saved you the unpleasant work of having to articulate a solution to the problem. The solution is fairly self-evident, though it's clear that through the fog of your wannabe race man lens, you're not quite capable of grasping it.
lol, too late for you now, but by the time you grasp the specific and on-topic data and its application that I've casually tossed your way - if you are the least bit honest - you will not only realize but also admit that you didn't even have a stick to bring to this swordfight.
I appreciate those cites. Now others can provide some context or not.
Are these voices considered mainstream? How are they located relative to other experts on the subject?
From the piece you cite, even the findings are controversial. And what do we do the evidence that there may be some biological element to an extreme behavior, i.e. psychopathic violence in our society? How do we generalize from that finding to other people? What does it mean for public policy and the law?
The article also notes the following:
"• This article was amended on Monday 13 May. A paragraph that misrepresented the views of the neuroscientist David Eagleman has been removed. The paragraph implied that Eagleman believed that the possession of particular genes resulted in criminal behaviour.
This is not his belief, in his words, "Genes are part of the story, but they're not the whole story. We are likewise influenced by the environments in which we grow up".
The story would seem to not be so cut and dry.
The sections on the debate about criminology, phrenology, and the like were instructive.
Again, no need to needle and name call the host.
Lord. I offered some thoughts and observations. I also offered up some links to other folks with the bonafides. I have no problem saying what I know and don't know.
I do know that race is a social construction and that any research which uses that as an independent variable has serious construct validity problems. That is not just my more than layperson opinion, but would seem to be a repeated theme that comes up again and again by folks involved in this race-IQ debate and who rebut its findings as specious.
One day, for you, may there be some Prozac. You remind me of a White Supremacist. Quite honestly, you give me the creeps.
"lol, even with access you can't answer the questions you disingenuously posed here - more importantly, those questions and your author's claims are entirely irrelevant to the subject at hand."
Slight of hand on your part Cnu. Answer the questions. Again, there is nothing disingenuous on my part. I am open and patient...perhaps too much so. Is that assumption projection on your part?
"those questions and your author's claims are entirely irrelevant to the subject at hand."
By your own edict. I would suggest they are central to the discussion. Not complicated.
in his words, "Genes are part of the story, but they're not the whole story. We are likewise influenced by the environments in which we grow up".
Checkmate!!!
http://youtu.be/aCbfMkh940Q
Thank you for playing.
http://youtu.be/An1-ntyBcz8
Again. No one said that genes did not matter in terms of human behavior. Why are you constructing a straw man?
What this "conversation" has ultimately been about are specious claims to a link between race and IQ and the broader public policy implications of this research when genetics are only part of a much bigger story.
I am not interested in eugenics or mass screening of children for certain genetic profiles. That is my own position on measuring the net good and bad that history teaches us comes from such misadventures.
Others can choose another path.
I'm not either, nor did I ever suggest that I was. What I did that sent you down the path of pearl-clutching censorship was post up factual data relating to the objectively true assertion that more than 50% of all U.S. violent homicides can be attributed to an environmentally and congenitally circumscribed hood-dwelling subset of the 3% subset of the U.S. african-american male population.
I didn't even try to further qualify this fact, because its implications seem fairly obvious.
Interestingly, that rorschachian datum was all that it took for you and your fanboy chorus to illuminate the rabbit-holes of your own fevered imaginations.
The very simple fact of the matter is that given the specific history of the U.S. during the 20th century, the contemporary hood has served as a eugenic lens focusing and concentrating certain elements for which specific measures now exist.
Facts is facts. Correlation, causation, and resulting devastation. Everything else is, as they say, merely conversation....,
Fevered. Um. No on my part. Concern about a univariate explanation for a complex problem. Yes.
Genes are not destiny. We may choose to agree or disagree on that fact and what the science tells us.
Go enjoy the holiday and eat some good KC ribs.
univariate?
You know better.
I have shown you specific history, environment, parameters of measurement, and you now see exactly what I see.
I'm speaking to you as the father of a deep-voiced, 6' tall, size 14 shoe wearing, 13 year old black boy. Should I be concerned with a remotely possible George Zimmerman outlier threatening my preppily uniformed boy, or, should I be concerned about money marc an'em nukkaz down on the plaza violating curfew and shooting at the mayor of the city? http://www.kctv5.com/story/15263833/3-teens-shot-on-the-plaza.
Sober up and tell me what data I should be considering as relevant and applicable to the situation in which I find the focus of a generation of my personal parental investment?
Trayvon had nothing but Skittles and Iced Tea.
He was minding his own damn business
On that night...in that housing development
TRAYVON WAS A VICTIM PREYED UPON BY A CRIMINAL VIGILANTE THUG WHO DECIDED TO BE JUDGE, JURY AND EXECUTIONER FOR TRAYVON.
JUSTICE FOR TRAYVON!!!
Martin lost Zimmerman and then came back and attacked him. Gangsta-want-to-be tried to grab Zimmerman's gun and ended up getting shot. Zimmerman, busted nose and lacerations on back of head, due to pounding on concrete by Martin. Martin, other than gunshot wound, skinned knuckles, you know, like from hitting someone. Witness saw Martin on top of Zimmerman. Can you say SELF-DEFENSE???
And these people are allowed to work as attorneys in America??! Where I live he would have his license taken away from him.
Well, he was arrested several times for various attacks,is that not enough to consider him dodgy? So what he got into fights and smoked marihuana? He was not doing anything wrong to Zimmerman that night and it was Zimmerman who attacked.
So, goodbye then, CNu...
Not a single intelligent counter argument from you neither but only ridiculous snide comments making fun of black slang. Ain't that a bit ghetto, dear?
Yeah,you like to fall back on self-hatred pretty much all the time someone mentions bad treatment of black people in the society. Is this what those 'noble' genes have done for you. Ouch! That was a tough luck.
lol, the way you hanging on my johnson "marine" - mayhapst you should change your alias to jarhead faggot...,
There isn't enough space in this comment box to respond to the author of the foregoing "We Are Respectable Negroes"...but I will say a few words about the article, and the author. TM may have been Profiled and unjustly pursued for being Black in the wrong neighborhood. But that is not why he was killed. TM realized that he was being followed by GZ and confronted GZ in a violent way. This is what got TM killed. He wasn't being robbed for his iced tea or his bag of Skittles...
You say that "Niggerization is real"...your entire article is spewing hate for white people. You are a racist. If all white people, or even the majority of them were racist, then how did Obama get elected to POTUS, twice? Assuming that every black in this country voted for him, and no whites voted for him (being that we are all racists, i.e "never forget that.." then it would have been impossible for BA to become President. It was the whites that got him elected (along with the black votes. So your Niggerization theory is b.s. How many articles have you written, or how many time have you blogged about the 600 black on black murders that happened in Chicago last year? I'm sure that many of those young black boys had some skittles in their pocket and was drinking an ice tea...or is it a 40? Why are you all of a sudden so worked up when a hispanic man kills a black man (yes man, you can enter the military at 17, get married, and be tried as an "adult" in every state in the union).? Because you are a racist! If a white man was beating your face and head in and had you in a position where you couldn't get free, and Anyway, go ahead and do what you and yours feel like doing after the Not Guilty verdict, and we will just sit back and let you do to us whatever you want. I bet you will skip over the local KFC and Popeyes! If you were smart you'd just go bounce that orange ball around and throw it through that hoop that has that net attached to it. Y'all are pretty good at that little game. But then again, if I decided not to work and live off of food stamps and welfare and make babies that I can't take care of I guess I'd be pretty good at bouncing that orange ball too! I hope to see you around, homey.
ok, the state has to prove there was a crime committed, if they want a conviction. The state has no evidence. Tray is dead, and there is not one bit of evidence to contradict Zimmerman's account, with the two EYE witnesses placing Zimmerman on the bottom of the fight. You can't get a conviction on what you think happened, you get a conviction on what you can PROVE happened.
Zimmerman was walking to his vehicle when Trayvon Martin made the decision to approach him from behind. They were not together previously. Trayvon Martin approached from the back and asked Zimmerman if he had a problem, and after Zimmerman responded "no", Trayvon Martin said, Well you do now" and proceeded to hit Zimmerman, knocking him to the ground and beating his head into concrete. George Zimmerman's head wound was in the back showing that Zimmerman was on his back. His nose was broken.All of these pieces of evidence have been reported.
If you had followed the facts of the case you would know that Zimmerman was never near Martin. He was trying to get a better address and keep Martin in sight, but he turned around and went back to his vehicle. Martin turned around also, and instead of continuing on to the apartment he was going to, he decided to approach Zimmerman from behind. He asked Zimmerman if he had a problem and Zimmerman said :"no" and Martin said, "Well, you do now" and he hit Zimmerman hard enough that Zimmerman fell on the ground and Martin got on top of him and tried to pound his head into concrete while saying "you are going to die". George Zimmerman had a broken nose and a wound on the back of his head and grass stains on his back. This means Martin was on top. All of this was reported. There was no racism.There was no kidnapping, and Zimmerman did not assault him, or even approach him. He just called 911 to report a suspicious person walking in a disoriented way in this gated community, observing that this person was dressed like former suspects in many break-ins in this gated community where George Zimmerman had taken on the responsibility to protect. There was no crime here until Trayvon Martin chose to hit George Zimmerman. The 2nd "crime" was charging George Zimmerman with murder. Zimmerman should not even have to use the stand-your-ground law which is a law providing a person who fears for their life to either chose to flee or stay and fight using deadly force. Zimmerman did not have that choice. He could not get up. He was left with no choice except to defend himself while he lay on the ground-----a definite tragedy for both of them, but clearly caused as the result of Trayvon Martin's anger in being viewed as suspicious and choosing to assault Zimmerman for just doing his job he had signed up for.
Again, just because zman says that is what happened you automatically believe it? His story does not add up. Remember there were no witnesses. It was dark out. How could TM go back to find zman in the dark?! So now we have TM coming after zman after seeing a strange man from a bit of a distance,unable to make out his features. I don't believe zman his story makes no sense. No remorse, lied about SYG law he got an A in. There are many other problems I see. How can you process facts on something if you don't know if they are actually facts. Imcan ask zmzn supporters the same thing, Where you there? No, only zmzn knows what really happened and he is going to say whatever it takes to get himself off.
Moodyblues was TM "running" or more like "skipping" Does zman know syg law or not? Ok so what facts are you talking about, zman story and it's holes are leaking.
Post a Comment