NationStates Jolt Archive

I know this will sound racist, but has anyone noticed that black people are usually blamed for crimes, but its the white people screwing the world. And when a black persondoes commit a crime, and are caught, they claim racism. I'm wondering what everyone thinks about this.

Evidence from how black folks run African countries shows that they'd screw up the world as well if they had the power to do so. Evidence from trailer parks and poor white communities suggests that white folks will commit just as much street crime. It's just that black folks are more likely to grow up without options and in a violent setting.

I agree that the race card is played a bit too often though.

Some white people are racist.

Some black people are racist, but don't realise, and use claims of racism against them to justify the racism that they exhibit themselves.

As for claiming it when arrested, it's just another defense. People don't like going to prison, so they take advantage of any opportunity to avoid it.

I know this will sound racist, but has anyone noticed that black people are usually blamed for crimes, but its the white people screwing the world. And when a black persondoes commit a crime, and are caught, they claim racism. I'm wondering what everyone thinks about this.

I agree with the second statement and partially with the first. The blacks are doing just as much to screw up the world as the reds, whites, and blues. Or whatever other color you wish. Morality isn't skin color exclusive.

Evidence from how black folks run African countries shows that they'd screw up the world as well if they had the power to do so.

Nah, evidence from African countries suggests that once the white folks have got bored of screwing them over, they're too fucked for the black folks to have a chance of doing anything about it.

Vellia said it quite perfectly, Morality isn't skin color exclusive. No race is more moral or could run a country better then another. If someone was to think <insert race here> could run the country better then <insert other race here>, then that is racism.

Nah, evidence from African countries suggests that once the white folks have got bored of screwing them over, they're too fucked for the black folks to have a chance of doing anything about it.
Yeah, black Africans are helpless and will never be able to take care of themselves because the white man took all of their wealth. Nevermind the fact that there are still productive mines in Africa that churn out minerals and gems that are in huge demand worldwide.

I agree with the second statement and partially with the first. The blacks are doing just as much to screw up the world as the reds, whites, and blues. Or whatever other color you wish. Morality isn't skin color exclusive.

Pretty much hit the nail on the head; crime and morality have nothing to do with race.

Yeah, black Africans are helpless and will never be able to take care of themselves because the white man took all of their wealth. Nevermind the fact that there are still productive mines in Africa that churn out minerals and gems that are in huge demand worldwide.
Nothing to do with 'the white man taking their wealth'.

More to do with the very poor social and political state that Africa was left in by the European powers. And it's exasperated by the unfortunate number of black African leaders that are despots.

life is all about perception... in this case, where one decides to place the burden of responsibility.

with that, i bid this thread adieu.

People are being stupid. I didn't say white people or black people or spanish people were being stupid, I said PEOPLE are being stupid.

People are people. People are being stupid.


At least, people in power are being stupid. But I'm sure you know at least one or fifteen dumbass white/black/spanish/asian people from your school/workplace/neighborhood.

Nothing to do with 'the white man taking their wealth'.

More to do with the very poor social and political state that Africa was left in by the European powers. And it's exasperated by the unfortunate number of black African leaders that are despots.
And it's those despotic leaders that I based my original statement on.

Yeah, black Africans are helpless and will never be able to take care of themselves because the white man took all of their wealth. Nevermind the fact that there are still productive mines in Africa that churn out minerals and gems that are in huge demand worldwide.
Indeed, you are absolutely right. I would recommend to all to read "The State of Africa" if they want greater insight into how African states have, on the whole, regressed. They must get out of this victim mentality, rid of their current economic policies and begin reforming their nations.

I've also wondered where all the asians fall in this.

And it's those despotic leaders that I based my original statement on.

I would say that what African states faced upon independence, the legacy of the colonial era, was what led to many nations having despotic leaders.

I would say that what African states faced upon independence, the legacy of the colonial era, was what led to many nations having despotic leaders.
And I would say it is time they changed. European states were at a point in time also despotic. Revolutions occured, and change was brought about. So let's not act as if Africans are totally incapable of aiding themselves. South Africa was doing well until recently, now its government is adopting arcane economic policies that will eventually destroy the country.

I would say that what African states faced upon independence, the legacy of the colonial era, was what led to many nations having despotic leaders.
One would think that with all the revolutions and crap being fought there that stable, democratic, non-corrupt regimes would overthrow the tyrants and take power.

Evidence from how black folks run African countries shows that they'd screw up the world as well if they had the power to do so.

There are two reasons that Africa is in such a mess.

1) The UN is a totally useless intsitution that cannot keep peace at all: it exists only to destroy the sovereignty of its members.

2) The Africans have less experience in government and are less able to control and less able to understand how to control their leaders. The leaders come in, sieze power, and do whatever they want. The same would happen in the US, UK EU or wherever if those peoples weren't so aware of how government works and kept such a close eye on those governing. One can even argue that the same situation exists in the West as in Africa, just on a smaller scale.

So the answer is not that Blacks are any less competent than any other race. They just have fewer police and political vigilantes (sp?).

One would think that with all the revolutions and crap being fought there that stable, democratic, non-corrupt regimes would overthrow the tyrants and take power.
Well...it took many European nations about 1,000 years to get to the stable, democratic position they're in now. You'd think you would give Africa more than 50 years.

I would say that what African states faced upon independence, the legacy of the colonial era, was what led to many nations having despotic leaders.
Liberia has never been a colony, Ethiopia was conquered by Italy for several years in the 1940s. Neither is much better off (actually, it can be argued that either is a little bit worse) than some average ex-colony.

There are two reasons that Africa is in such a mess.

1) The UN is a totally useless intsitution that cannot keep peace at all: it exists only to destroy the sovereignty of its members.

2) The Africans have less experience in government and are less able to control and less able to understand how to control their leaders. The leaders come in, sieze power, and do whatever they want. The same would happen in the US, UK EU or wherever if those peoples weren't so aware of how government works and kept such a close eye on those governing. One can even argue that the same situation exists in the West as in Africa, just on a smaller scale.

So the answer is not that Blacks are any less competent than any other race. They just have less police and political vigilantes (sp?).
I never said that they were less competent. I was just responding to the OP who said that whites were wrecking the world. I was pointing out that African leaders would wreck the world as well if African nations had global power.

Well...it took many European nations about 1,000 years to get to the stable, democratic position they're in now. You'd think you would give Africa more than 50 years.
Let's say 300 if you say the end of absolute Monarchy, and even 50 if we consider Nazism/Stalinism/Fascism.

Let's say 300 if you say the end of absolute Monarchy, and even 50 if we consider Nazism/Stalinism.
300 for the end of absolute Monarchy? Surely that's just a stage in the governmental and political development course that the western European nations went through? Why discount it just because it doesn't sound too good?

But ok, let's take it as 300 years. That's still about 250 more than most African states have had.

For the Nazism/Stalinism...well, for Nazism anyway, there were strong-ish democratic powers surrounding/able to put a check on it. There aren't in Africa.

Let's say 300 if you say the end of absolute Monarchy, and even 50 if we consider Nazism/Stalinism/Fascism.

Less than that, if you consider the Soviet Union, and non-free Eastern Europe.

300 for the end of absolute Monarchy? Surely that's just a stage in the governmental and political development course that the western European nations went through? Why discount it just because it doesn't sound too good?
I am an avowed Monarchist (and devoutly against absolute Monarchy), though if we are talking in terms of political change, 300 years ago was when Monarchy began faltering. It took less than that for it to end.

But ok, let's take it as 300 years. That's still about 250 more than most African states have had.
Perhaps so, but it was a continual process of progress, not regression.

For the Nazism/Stalinism...well, for Nazism anyway, there were strong-ish democratic powers surrounding/able to put a check on it. There aren't in Africa.
South Africa (post-apartheid) was one of the strongest African economies. Egypt is relatively liberal too. Neither have done anything to help, and South Africa is, lamentably, worsening fast.

Less than that, if you consider the Soviet Union, and non-free Eastern Europe.
Their advantage was that they had the strong democracies in Western Europe to help them along, and the EU to aspire to membership of.

Their advantage was that they had the strong democracies in Western Europe to help them along, and the EU to aspire to membership of.
As if Africa doesn't have richer nations?

I never said that they were less competent. I was just responding to the OP who said that whites were wrecking the world. I was pointing out that African leaders would wreck the world as well if African nations had global power.

My apologies.

I wasn't responding for your sake so much as for those who would see what you posted and go away with some warped philosophy or with justification for their racist prejudices.

And when a black persondoes commit a crime, and are caught, they claim racism. I'm wondering what everyone thinks about this.

Does this happen often where you are? And when they claim racism do they mean the people who arrested them are racist? While there is definitely racism where I am and it does affect who gets blamed for what, generally the criminals around here stick to tried and true excuses such as:

I didn't do it!
It was like that when I got there.
I was drunk.
He had it coming.
The other guy did it, not me.

I can't recall reading in the paper about anyone blaming their race for committing a crime.

I know this will sound racist, but has anyone noticed that black people are usually blamed for crimes, but its the white people screwing the world. And when a black persondoes commit a crime, and are caught, they claim racism. I'm wondering what everyone thinks about this.
Commenting that "its the white people screwing the world" is just as racist as blaming "by default" a black person for a crime.

As for Africa, I wouldn't say colonialism was such a bad phenomenon. Please compare Cameroon in 1880 with Cameroon in 1960. I don't see any negative developements, but many positive. The worst part about colonialism is that it ended too fast, before the colonies were able to stand on their own. You can't take an Iron Age land and expect to turn it into a pillar of democracy in only 80 years.

I am an avowed Monarchist (and devoutly against absolute Monarchy, though if we are talking in terms of political change), 300 years ago was when Monarchy began faltering. It took less than that for it to end.
But you can't ignore the 700 years or so when some of them were absolute monarchies, and most others were very strong monarchies.

Perhaps so, but it was a continual process of progress, not regression.
And it was 300 years...it's a bit odd to expect Africa to do it in 50 when they have far less experience in governance.


South Africa (post-apartheid) was one of the strongest African economies. Egypt is relatively liberal too. Neither have done anything to help, and South Africa is, lamentably, worsening fast.
And South Africa was an economy based on the political landscape of the Apartheid era that had just ended. It held out for a while, but the need to help those who were desperately poor has dragged it down.

Commenting that "its the white people screwing the world" is just as racist as blaming "by default" a black person for a crime.

As for Africa, I wouldn't say colonialism was such a bad phenomenon. Please compare Cameroon in 1880 with Cameroon in 1960. I don't see any negative developpements, but many positive. The worst part about colonialism is that it ended too fast, before the colonies were able to stand on their own. You can't take an Iron Age land and expect to turn it into a pillar of democracy in only 80 years.
I'll agree with this. It should have been done more gradually and carefully.

As if Africa doesn't have richer nations?
It does, some, but not in the same way as Europe had in the 1990s.

I know this will sound racist, but has anyone noticed that black people are usually blamed for crimes, but its the white people screwing the world. And when a black persondoes commit a crime, and are caught, they claim racism. I'm wondering what everyone thinks about this.

Quick question - is someone who mugs a person on the street and steals their wallet better/worse/the same as someone who commits fraud for thousands/millions? After all, it's exactly the same attitude and the same sort of crime, the only difference is the scale.

But you can't ignore the 700 years or so when some of them were absolute monarchies, and most others were very strong monarchies.
Though much of Europe flourished during this period. It wasn't exactly the same as Africa.

And it was 300 years...it's a bit odd to expect Africa to do it in 50 when they have far less experience in governance.

I am not expecting Africa to do it in 50. I am saying that Africa, right now, is regressing.

And South Africa was an economy based on the political landscape of the Apartheid era that had just ended. It held out for a while, but the need to help those who were desperately poor has dragged it down.
As well as bad economic policy. Let's not discount that.

Does this happen often where you are? And when they claim racism do they mean the people who arrested them are racist? While there is definitely racism where I am and it does affect who gets blamed for what, generally the criminals around here stick to tried and true excuses such as:

I didn't do it!
It was like that when I got there.
I was drunk.
He had it coming.
The other guy did it, not me.

I can't recall reading in the paper about anyone blaming their race for committing a crime.

My entire life, I've had to be careful around Blacks because bo matter what my inentions may be, I'm racist: "You need to hit the ball over the net. You can't kick it or toss it." "I'll do what I want! You can't pick on me. I'm black and I do what I want. You hate Blacks! That's why you can't let me figure it out on my own! You think I'm stupid because I'm black!"

That is in no way representative of the entire population, but a sizeable portion. It's even worse in an actual crime. Notice how, even in white circles, it's not the Black man's fault he raped the woman. It's the white society that is at fault for tearing Blacks down for all those years. :rolleyes:

Even if Blacks didn't play the race card, many Whites would play it for them. Especially on US news stations.

Though much of Europe flourished during this period. It wasn't exactly the same as Africa.
The last 300 years or the 700 preceeding them?


I am not expecting Africa to do it in 50. I am saying that Africa, right now, is regressing.
Possibly they're going through a stage they have to go through to go forwards. Europe went through stages like it.


As well as bad economic policy. Let's not discount that.
Of course not.

The last 300 years or the 700 preceeding them?
After the Dark Ages (around c.1300- the High Middle Ages) to the age of absolute Monarchy (around c.1700 - the Renaissance and Enlightenment). The period was one of escalating progress. After 1700, Europe grew immensely, notwithstanding the advent of fascism and communism, and WW II.

Possibly they're going through a stage they have to go through to go forwards. Europe went through stages like it.
One can hope. I just hope they do not continually regress.

I know this will sound racist, but has anyone noticed that black people are usually blamed for crimes, but its the white people screwing the world. And when a black persondoes commit a crime, and are caught, they claim racism. I'm wondering what everyone thinks about this.

I think you managed to demonstrate racism against both blacks and whites.

Nicely done.

My entire life, I've had to be careful around Blacks because bo matter what my inentions may be, I'm racist: "You need to hit the ball over the net. You can't kick it or toss it." "I'll do what I want! You can't pick on me. I'm black and I do what I want. You hate Blacks! That's why you can't let me figure it out on my own! You think I'm stupid because I'm black!"

That is in no way representative of the entire population, but a sizeable portion. It's even worse in an actual crime. Notice how, even in white circles, it's not the Black man's fault he raped the woman. It's the white society that is at fault for tearing Blacks down for all those years. :rolleyes:

Even if Blacks didn't play the race card, many Whites would play it for them. Especially on US news stations.

1. Perhaps you wouldn't have to walk on eggshells if you didn't think in terms of stereotypes to begin with.

2. I'd love to see you point to evidence of rape being excused on the grounds that "the white society is at fault for tearing Blacks down all those years." That is simply a canard.

3. Racism against blacks has played a prominent role in our history and still plays a significant role in our society. Sometimes innocent blacks are accused of crimes for racist reasons. Sometimes blacks do receive disproportionate punishment compared to whites. That "the race card" is sometimes misused does not mean it isn't sometimes perfectly appropriate.

After the Dark Ages (around c.1300- the High Middle Ages) to the age of absolute Monarchy (around c.1700 - the Renaissance and Enlightenment). The period was one of escalating progress. After 1700, Europe grew immensely, notwithstanding the advent of fascism and communism, and WW II.

Well, consider the state of near-perpetual war (perfect example: Hundred Years War) that Europe was in during that period; especially the religious wars after the reformation.

As for scientific advancement, there's not much I would expect Africa to do in that regard, it was too far behind scientifically to expect any real innovations; the best you could hope for is them catching up as much as possible.

One can hope. I just hope they do not continually regress.
Hopefully.

Well, consider the state of near-perpetual war (perfect example: Hundred Years War) that Europe was in during that period; especially the religious wars after the reformation.

There was indeed quite a lot of war going on then, but Europe still managed to bloom in spite of it. Sadly, wars in Africa are within states rather than between them, and tend to be total ones, thus completely ravaging what progress they do achieve. I am hoping tribal and partisan differences will eventually die down and some compromise will be achieved in most of them. Africa has to repair itself, possibly with the West's political help. Maybe it will experience China's economic boom one day.

1. Perhaps you wouldn't have to walk on eggshells if you didn't think in terms of stereotypes to begin with.

2. I'd love to see you point to evidence of rape being excused on the grounds that "the white society is at fault for tearing Blacks down all those years." That is simply a canard.

3. Racism against blacks has played a prominent role in our history and still plays a significant role in our society. Sometimes innocent blacks are accused of crimes for racist reasons. Sometimes blacks do receive disproportionate punishment compared to whites. That "the race card" is sometimes misused does not mean it isn't sometimes perfectly appropriate.

Who's thinking in stereotypes. I have a Black friend, whom I pretty sure I could call a n***** if I wanted and she wouldn't care (Not that I would; using that word is very immoral and very unkind.). But I have to be careful, because who wants to be labled a racist? Do you? Would yo rather walk on eggshells or have a horrible reputation even among those Blacks who are not throwing the race card around.

I never said the rape was excused: I said some believe it is society's fault. It's a contradiction, yes, but many hold it. Ask my English teacher: sin itself is a result of racism. Figure that contradiction out!

And the race card is always inappropriate. If you have it up your sleeve and pull it out to get what you want like a fifth ace, then it's inappropriate. If there is a legitimate concern that racism is playing a part in something, then it's no longer the race card. It's protecting your rights if there is a true concern.

Who's thinking in stereotypes. I have a Black friend, whom I pretty sure I could call a n***** if I wanted and she wouldn't care (Not that I would; using that word is very immoral and very unkind.). But I have to be careful, because who wants to be labled a racist? Do you? Would yo rather walk on eggshells or have a horrible reputation even among those Blacks who are not throwing the race card around.

I never said the rape was excused: I said some believe it is society's fault. It's a contradiction, yes, but many hold it. Ask my English teacher: sin itself is a result of racism. Figure that contradiction out!

And the race card is always inappropriate. If you have it up your sleeve and pull it out to get what you want like a fifth ace, then it's inappropriate. If there is a legitimate concern that racism is playing a part in something, then it's no longer the race card. It's protecting your rights if there is a true concern.

I'm not reassured when someone tells me they can't possibly have said or thought something racist because they have a black friend.

you play semantics. It's playing the race card when you don't agree with it and a legitimate concern when you do.

Do societal factors contribute to crime? Of course they do. Racism does cause crime by causing poverty, hopelessness, desperation, etc. That does not mean that an individual that commits a crime is not responsible. No contradiction, just simple truth.

I'm not reassured when someone tells me they can't possibly have said or thought something racist because they have a black friend.

you play semantics. It's playing the race card when you don't agree with it and a legitimate concern when you do.

Do societal factors contribute to crime? Of course they do. Racism does cause crime by causing poverty, hopelessness, desperation, etc. That does not mean that an individual that commits a crime is not responsible. No contradiction, just simple truth.

I didn't say I've never had a racist thought, though I've never said anything racist to my recollection. I'm just saying that it is not stereotyping to say that I ought to be more careful about what I say and the way I say it in front of certain minorities. Just as I would make sure my car doors were locked if I was driving through the bad part of town.

I do not think I'm playing semantics. Most persons use the term "the race card" in a bad way: me too.

I didn't say I've never had a racist thought, though I've never said anything racist to my recollection. I'm just saying that it is not stereotyping to say that I ought to be more careful about what I say and the way I say it in front of certain minorities. Just as I would make sure my car doors were locked if I was driving through the bad part of town.

I do not think I'm playing semantics. Most persons use the term "the race card" in a bad way: me too.

You backpedal at a most impressive speed.

Why would you analogize talking in front of minorities to driving through the bad part of town? :p

http://i3.tinypic.com/wl21cj.jpg

http://i3.tinypic.com/wl21cj.jpg
That was fuuny.:p :D

You backpedal at a most impressive speed.

Why would you analogize talking in front of minorities to driving through the bad part of town? :p

I'm making a point of taking precautions. One wouldn't want to make an issue out of racism if it weren't there. Neither would one want to have one's car hijacked. To prevent these things from happening, one takes precautions?

My point of mentioning my friend, was to point out that I do not believe all Blacks to be pulling the racism card all the time.

I know this will sound racist, but has anyone noticed that black people are usually blamed for crimes, but its the white people screwing the world. And when a black persondoes commit a crime, and are caught, they claim racism. I'm wondering what everyone thinks about this.

Yeah right!

Scientists have found DNK gene that is different with every colour of humans. So black people have genetic inborn love towards the crime, arabs toward suicide, hispanos toward being commie guerillas...

GEEZ. MAYBE THEY ARE CRIMINALS CUZ THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY OTHER CHOISE? MAYBE, JUST MAYBE, THEY HAVE TO STEAL TO SURVIVE? THINK ABOUT THIS!

I know this will sound racist, but has anyone noticed that black people are usually blamed for crimes, but its the white people screwing the world. And when a black persondoes commit a crime, and are caught, they claim racism. I'm wondering what everyone thinks about this.
we all have our role to play in fucking up the world. some people work locally; some people work globally. in the end, its one big fucked up world.

GEEZ. MAYBE THEY ARE CRIMINALS CUZ THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY OTHER CHOISE? MAYBE, JUST MAYBE, THEY HAVE TO STEAL TO SURVIVE? THINK ABOUT THIS!

Very few persons truly need to steal to survive in the West. Many who claim to need to resort to stealing are really simply to proud to go to charity. And many (I'd be willing to guess most) persons who steal, of any race, steal because they want the thing they are stealing, to keep or to sell. Most of the time it has no relationship with need. Except maybe the need for drugs.

Ok, maybe its just me, or does it make sense just to kill criminals? Think of all the benefits;
1. Taxes will go down, because we wont have to pay for prisoner's food, clothing, etc.
2. Crime rates will plummet, because who wants to die because they stole $100 from a convience store
3. Overpopulation wont rise (as rapidly) as it is now

Of course, they're people who say criminals can reform, blah blah blah. BUT, if they have an extensive criminal record, then it shows that they obviously CANT reform.

Essentially, if you can show me 1 criminal that reformed, I can show you 10 that havent. If your a criminal, you deserve to be :mp5:

Ok, maybe its just me, or does it make sense just to kill criminals? Think of all the benefits;
1. Taxes will go down, because we wont have to pay for prisoner's food, clothing, etc.
2. Crime rates will plummet, because who wants to die because they stole $100 from a convience store
3. Overpopulation wont rise (as rapidly) as it is now

Of course, they're people who say criminals can reform, blah blah blah. BUT, if they have an extensive criminal record, then it shows that they obviously CANT reform.

Essentially, if you can show me 1 criminal that reformed, I can show you 10 that havent. If your a criminal, you deserve to be :mp5:

I think this is something for another thread. Unless you can tie it in some way that doesn't require too much stretching.

Very few persons truly need to steal to survive in the West. Many who claim to need to resort to stealing are really simply to proud to go to charity. And many (I'd be willing to guess most) persons who steal, of any race, steal because they want the thing they are stealing, to keep or to sell. Most of the time it has no relationship with need. Except maybe the need for drugs*.

Homeless and beggars have need for house, hot shower and dinner...
and largest number of these can be found in USA...

*this is what i'm talkin' about!

Homeless and beggars have need for house, hot shower and dinner...
and largest number of these can be found in USA...

*this is what i'm talkin' about!

But they don't need the drugs to survive. They think they do, but they don't.

Ok, maybe its just me, or does it make sense just to kill criminals? Think of all the benefits;
1. Taxes will go down, because we wont have to pay for prisoner's food, clothing, etc.
2. Crime rates will plummet, because who wants to die because they stole $100 from a convience store
3. Overpopulation wont rise (as rapidly) as it is now

Of course, they're people who say criminals can reform, blah blah blah. BUT, if they have an extensive criminal record, then it shows that they obviously CANT reform.

Essentially, if you can show me 1 criminal that reformed, I can show you 10 that havent. If your a criminal, you deserve to be :mp5:
so you think that "criminals" are some kind of race of bad people or something? that only a discrete group commit crimes and so earn the title of criminals?

if you take a good hard look, just about everyone breaks the law now and then. some very minor some very serious. they (we) are all criminals.

so which criminals get executed and who decides (given that the decider will certainly be a criminal himself)

whoops, my bad, i didnt realize that this wasnt the right place to be

ok, this is my first posting ever on this place, give me a f****** break, the first post i read was about crime, so boo hoo to you

It's okay. I didn't know what I was doing when I began. I still don't know. I was just pointing out that you weren't where you wanted to be. That's all. Sorry if I offended you.

so you think that "criminals" are some kind of race of bad people or something? that only a discrete group commit crimes and so earn the title of criminals?

if you take a good hard look, just about everyone breaks the law now and then. some very minor some very serious. they (we) are all criminals.

so which criminals get executed and who decides (given that the decider will certainly be a criminal himself)

Ok, Im not going to pretend like im a lawyer who knows everything there is to know about the law. But, since I was a little vauge, let me clarify.

Obviously, Im not suggesting that you get shot for speeding, or something as minor as that. But, if you break a serious law (such as rape, murder, extortion, etc.) you should get the death penatly.

The more criminals that die doing such crimes will, by dying, deter other would-be criminals from committing a crime in the first place.

Also, "criminals" are a psudeo-race of people. This race isn't determined by skin color, or other such physical features. Instead, "criminals" are people that feel that they are more important than the law, and feel that the law doesnt apply to them

Blackredwithyellowsuna [That's a mouthful], just don't say another word about "The Man" keeping the minorities down. No one seriously believes that socialist dogma anymore. No one worth anything, at least.

Human beings have autonomy of action, ESPECIALLY in the U.S. You and the rest of your little happy-happy Democratic Socialist* buddies might not like it, but they PUT themselves in a position of being homeless, starving, etcettera etcettera. They had equality of OPPURTUNITY, and they DENIED it.

So, all of your arguments about "They Have No Choice!" are worth nil. There are plenty of jobs. Menial tasks, maybe, but still, paying jobs. Meanwhile, this begs the question: Why didn't they take advantage of educational oppurtunities? Hm?

*I acknowledge that you may not be a Democratic Socialist. The arguments you put forth, however, at least indicate that you have some of the childish naivette inherent and essential in/to Democratic Socialism :)

I would say that what African states faced upon independence, the legacy of the colonial era, was what led to many nations having despotic leaders.

Are you suggesting that all of the problems that Africa faces are due to imperialism?

I hate simlpe answers to complex problems, because 99.9% they're wrong. Or at least not right enough.

So, all of your arguments about "They Have No Choice!" are worth nil. There are plenty of jobs. Menial tasks, maybe, but still, paying jobs. Meanwhile, this begs the question: Why didn't they take advantage of educational oppurtunities? Hm?

I partially agree with you. There are times when a situation is out of a person's control. He comes from an abusive household. His father refuses to allow him to go to school. His father dies and he has to go to work.

However, none of these scenarios eliminate that person's responsibility for his actions. He has an inner sense of right and wrong. We can argue about where that sense comes from, but that's not the point. Someone at some point told him rape was wrong. And he rejected that morality and did it anyway. Or he stole, or does drugs, or whatever.

Quick question - is someone who mugs a person on the street and steals their wallet better/worse/the same as someone who commits fraud for thousands/millions? After all, it's exactly the same attitude and the same sort of crime, the only difference is the scale.

In God's eyes, stealing a wallet is as bad as murder. In society's eyes -- how it SHOULD be, anyways -- the latter is much worse. But don't start your anticapitalist propaganda that "all business owners are evil thieves." THat's no better than saying "all blacks are uneducated and criminals." Both statements are wrong in the sense of false and a blatant cry of stupidity.

I partially agree with you. There are times when a situation is out of a person's control. He comes from an abusive household. His father refuses to allow him to go to school. His father dies and he has to go to work.

However, none of these scenarios eliminate that person's responsibility for his actions. He has an inner sense of right and wrong. We can argue about where that sense comes from, but that's not the point. Someone at some point told him rape was wrong. And he rejected that morality and did it anyway. Or he stole, or does drugs, or whatever.

Another possibility is to change the environment. Inner-city ghettos are not child-friendly and morally straight environments. Unfortunately, there's not a whole lot of manoevuring room, but there are still some, as well as some church charity organizations that can help (as well as secular).

Another possibility is to change the environment. Inner-city ghettos are not child-friendly and morally straight environments. Unfortunately, there's not a whole lot of manoevuring room, but there are still some, as well as some church charity organizations that can help (as well as secular).

I prefer the church groups.

I wasn't speaking to solutions, but you are correct. I think, though, that the only possibility is to change the enviorment. That may mean moving out. It may mean cleansing the inner-city. The second will be a more lasting solution (It also won't encourage that travesty called suburbia).

But it is the responsibility of those who know better to try to change the mindsets of those whose mindsets are wrong. We need to change how the "less blessed" in the world, especially those in the inner-city view life: particuarally how they view work and morality.

Blackredwithyellowsuna [That's a mouthful], just don't say another word about "The Man" keeping the minorities down. No one seriously believes that socialist dogma anymore. No one worth anything, at least.

Human beings have autonomy of action, ESPECIALLY in the U.S. You and the rest of your little happy-happy Democratic Socialist* buddies might not like it, but they PUT themselves in a position of being homeless, starving, etcettera etcettera. They had equality of OPPURTUNITY, and they DENIED it.

So, all of your arguments about "They Have No Choice!" are worth nil. There are plenty of jobs. Menial tasks, maybe, but still, paying jobs. Meanwhile, this begs the question: Why didn't they take advantage of educational oppurtunities? Hm?

*I acknowledge that you may not be a Democratic Socialist. The arguments you put forth, however, at least indicate that you have some of the childish naivette inherent and essential in/to Democratic Socialism :)

Thread is about RACE AND CRIME - aint that just rascist?

Yeah, there are plenty of jobs, but somehow USA is country with largest number of homeless in the WORLD, so could you please enlighten me about "advantage of educational oppurtunities"?

I partially agree with you. There are times when a situation is out of a person's control. He comes from an abusive household. His father refuses to allow him to go to school. His father dies and he has to go to work.


Even in these extreme cases, he is still ultimately... a human being.

The human mind is the most complex bit of tissue in the universe. It is perhaps the only mind of all animal organisms that does not react purely on instinct.

The environment argument can work on dogs. It can work on cats. It can work on horses. However, it canNOT work on humans, simply because between the stimuli and the response, we have something animals do NOT: free will. We have "the choice."

As far as the "Father" arguments go [where the stimuli are so overbearing that a reaction that strays from education might be overpowering], I have one response for each. In the first case, keep in mind that education in America is compulsory. If the Police would stop peering into cars to make sure we're wearing our seatbelts, maybe they could enforce the compulsory education. For the second one, there are still plenty of individuals who had no formal education that made it fairly well.

Even in these extreme cases, he is still ultimately... a human being.

The human mind is the most complex bit of tissue in the universe. It is perhaps the only mind of all animal organisms that does not react purely on instinct.

The environment argument can work on dogs. It can work on cats. It can work on horses. However, it canNOT work on humans, simply because between the stimuli and the response, we have something animals do NOT: free will. We have "the choice."

As far as the "Father" arguments go [where the stimuli are so overbearing that a reaction that strays from education might be overpowering], I have one response for each. In the first case, keep in mind that education in America is compulsory. If the Police would stop peering into cars to make sure we're wearing our seatbelts, maybe they could enforce the compulsory education. For the second one, there are still plenty of individuals who had no formal education that made it fairly well.

I agree with you. But, I'm pointing out that there are some very negative stimuli that affect persons. This does not eliminate responsibility, but it does make us understand why the person chose to do something wrong.

Some persons argue that it's all enviorment. They are wrong. Some argue that it's all choice. They are wrong. The enviorment affects the choice, but it does not change the fact that there was a choice.

I especially agree with you about the seatbelts. This is another example of the government taking away individuals' responsibilities. If I'm to stupid or stubborn to use my seatbelt, that's my affair. I could understand in the case of children, though I disagree. But adults ought to be able to make their own decisions about things so tertiary to tertiary. And in Pennsylvania, where I live, it's legal to not wear a motorcycle helmet, but illegal to not wear a seatbelt. The hypocritical government rages on!

Anyway, back to the topic...

Thread is about RACE AND CRIME - aint that just rascist?

Yeah, there are plenty of jobs, but somehow USA is country with largest number of homeless in the WORLD, so could you please enlighten me about "advantage of educational oppurtunities"?

One, yes. The very nature of this thread IS racist. I would no more associate skin color with anything than hair or eye color. That's me personally.

Secondally, your assertions regarding the U.S. having the largest homeless population are simply... false.

The world's largest homeless population according to the UN is Sudan, which is in... Ha ha ha, AFRICA. The other countries on a list of humanitarian aid on this basis are mostly... African Countries.

You want miserable lives, look to Africa and the rest of the third world, as well as the Communist regimes of Cuba and North Korea. Don't you dare assert that the capitalist, Libertarian paradise that is the United States is an oppressive one.

I think white countries are a bit racist, even if they don't realize. For hundreds of years they've been racist. The end of colonialism, fueled largely by racism, did not signify the end of the Eurocentric/American position of power over those countries.
Take, for instance, what's happening in Iran now. If they are pursuing an energy source, why should they be stopped? If their taking some uranium for a bomb, then so what? The U.S. does too. Yet they fuss, and talk about the "Iran might attack us" rational. I think Iran more of a reason to fear being attacked than the States do. This regime, that took power following the oppresive Pahlavi dynasty, must be thinking of them, "These are the guys that overthrew our government in 1953 and made us live under the Shah for 25 years. Fuck them." I think a lot of the Western world just sees that as hostile. But damn right their hostile, the U.S. installed a government that for years oppressed the people while taking money in exchange for feeding the Western world crude oil. Let's assume they are enriching uranium for a bomb. The press is daily reminding us that Iran is an Islamic Republic. Perhaps Iran, seeing a few other Islamic countries go down, wants to build a bomb as a deterrent(which is precisely the reason the U.S./Israel has them). But the countries that have been adamant in opposing them still have this colonial attitude of interference and "they can't have it because they won't use it peacefully because they can't govern themselves."
But this is all thickly veiled beyond our conciousness. It's how we grew up, as a nation. It's been part of history for hundreds of years, and I don't believe that it has been stamped out in 2006.

And I don't think black people, by and large, are racist. Let's face it, they're defensive.

I know this will sound racist, but has anyone noticed that black people are usually blamed for crimes, but its the white people screwing the world. And when a black persondoes commit a crime, and are caught, they claim racism. I'm wondering what everyone thinks about this.
It's stupid. I'm happy we see eye-to-eye on this one. Races (IN GENERAL, DO NOT CALL ME RACIST!) have traits. Europeans were equally crime-ridden at some point, it just takes time. Shoot, for all we know, after 10,000 years Europeans may be the most criminal society. No racism, just plan fact. P.S. A test shows on average a LOT of BLACKS are somewhat biased agaist B-L-A-C-K-S.

Take, for instance, what's happening in Iran now. If they are pursuing an energy source, why should they be stopped? If their taking some uranium for a bomb, then so what?

I'm going to answer these two questions as calmly as I possibly can.

One, they're only on top of one of the singlemost gigantic pools of black liquid ENERGY on/in (however you want to look at it, really) the globe.

Two, keep in mind that Mr. Iran is not a very happy man. Meanwhile, Mr. Israel wants to keep existing. Mr. Iran has declared his intent to wipe Mr. Israel off the face of the globe.

Minor signs of hostility there.

Ok, Im not going to pretend like im a lawyer who knows everything there is to know about the law. But, since I was a little vauge, let me clarify.

Obviously, Im not suggesting that you get shot for speeding, or something as minor as that. But, if you break a serious law (such as rape, murder, extortion, etc.) you should get the death penatly.

The more criminals that die doing such crimes will, by dying, deter other would-be criminals from committing a crime in the first place.

Also, "criminals" are a psudeo-race of people. This race isn't determined by skin color, or other such physical features. Instead, "criminals" are people that feel that they are more important than the law, and feel that the law doesnt apply to them
well i guess that would take care of the incumbency problem in the US congress.....

Are you suggesting that all of the problems that Africa faces are due to imperialism?
Did you read the rest of the thread after that post?

Did you read the rest of the thread after that post?

Because God knows that it's the Europeans' fault that Africans can't learn from History like everyone else. Damn those Europeans.