Racial awareness...

Epigenetics have proven lamarck right in the 21st century

People stopped and thought

>Maybe you should treat others as you would want to be treated

>o the point that now in the West stating racial preferences or suggesting segregation is taboo and political suicide.

Could you please explain in what way would segregation in any western country be benefitial and not an unnecessary ticking bomb? Do you also feel confused about why can't we reintroduce slavery?

>We should embrace multiculturalism, all cultures and creeds should be respected
>But also we are all exactly the same, don't even dare to suggest one person is even slightly different from another in any way

Hmmmmmm

WWII mostly. In the US:
A) The Chinese Exclusion Act was repelled in 1943 because the US was allied with China
B) Mexican immigration was encouraged to fill wartime labor shortages
C) Japan and (quickly after, the Soviets) tried to stir up racial hatred and make Americans look hypocritical for their treatment of blacks.
D) America certainly treated black veterans like shit as in the Isaac Woodward case, sparking outrage
When you have so many factors coinciding it's obvious that inclusion and civil rights will progress.

In Europe, it was mostly the same story, colonials and third worlders were called upon to fill post-war shortages due to population depletion and it was hard to refuse the people who shed blood defending your empire.

>How and why did that happen?
Activism, Civil Rights, People not wanting to be treated like shit because of the color of their skin
>Isn't that Lamarckian?
>Wasn't that debunked?
No, 's post is overly simplistic and retarded, but not because of Lamarck
>aeon.co/essays/on-epigenetics-we-need-both-darwin-s-and-lamarck-s-theories
I wouldn't say it's so much that. The bigger issue is that people shouldn't be treated any differently/disrespected for no reason or have opportunities withheld from them etc. solely because of their race. Pseudoscience and religious zealotry also shouldn't be used to justify racism/racialism

Are you implying that this didn't happen? Because it did, a lot.

*Isaac Woodard, fuck.

Also you might want to scroll down to "Economic Costs of Discrimination" here:
slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/20/social-justice-for-the-highly-demanding-of-rigor/

But the tl;dr version is that "ethnic nepotism" as it's called has all the drawbacks of aristocracy with none of the benefits (unless the ethnicity is particularly small and elite, which it is not)

>read about issac woodard
what the actual fuck?

>dude inherited genetics LMAO
intellectual prowess is education, culture, genetics, diet and many other factors

>Could you please explain in what way would segregation in any western country be benefitial and not an unnecessary ticking bomb?
When I say segregation I mostly mean on a national level, meaning some kinds of people would not be welcome to live in a specific country.
Even on a local or state level it could work, but not as well.

The beneficial effects on a society should be obvious, since specific "races" have specific properties.

>Do you also feel confused about why can't we reintroduce slavery?
Not really, but that's a different topic.
I'm by no means advocating harm to anyone, just wondering why we can no longer be honest about these issues.
For example, stopping certain kinds of people from migrating into your country can be done in a humane way, there's no need to draw parallels with nazism or slavery.

>Are you implying that this didn't happen? Because it did, a lot.
No, I am explaining how racism became unpopular.

The worst thing is that it was apparently a sort of trend:

newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-tragic-forgotten-history-of-black-military-veterans

>Drawing on small-town newspaper and court archives, along with interviews of local historians and victims’ descendants across the South, “Lynching in America” tallied four thousand and seventy-five lynchings, at least eight hundred more than any previous count. The new report, “Lynching in America: Targeting Black Veterans,” concludes that, during the same period, “no one was more at risk of experiencing violence and targeted racial terror than black veterans.” The susceptibility of black ex-soldiers to extrajudicial murder and assault has long been recognized by historians, but the topic has never received such comprehensive standalone treatment.

Some choice quotes:

In a speech on the Senate floor in 1917, Mississippi Senator James K. Vardaman warned that the return of black veterans to the South would “inevitably lead to disaster.” Once you “impress the negro with the fact that he is defending the flag” and “inflate his untutored soul with military airs,” Vardaman cautioned, it was a short step to the conclusion that “his political rights must be respected.”
[...]
Whites speculated that, while stationed in Europe, black soldiers had enjoyed wartime liaisons with white French women, increasing their lust—which, in the white imagination, was already dangerously high—for sex with white American women. Many black veterans were denied the benefits and disability pay they’d been promised. In the first summer after the war, known as the Red Summer, anti-black riots erupted in more than twenty American cities, including Houston, Chicago, and Washington, D.C. “This is the right time to show them what will and what will not be permitted, and thus save them much trouble in the future,” one Louisiana newspaper opined, in an editorial titled “Nip It In the Bud.”

More than 50% of a persons intelligence is because of genetic factors.

As E.J.I. staff examined these attacks in detail, they noticed that, often, the only provocation was a black man’s insistence on wearing his uniform in public. “It’s really shocking,” Stevenson said. “Just the sight of a black soldier, just the suggestion that he might take on that empowered, adult, mature identity—that could get him killed.”

[...]
After WWII, multiple veterans were attacked almost immediately, often by drivers or fellow-passengers on the buses and trains transporting them back to their homes. Many more soon realized that the G.I. Bill had been constructed in such a way that most of its benefits—including mortgage support, college tuition, and business loans—could be denied to them. Racial violence spiked.

Also:
Initially, these men were barred from combat, and instead assigned to service duties such as cleaning white officers’ quarters and latrines. Just as in the Civil War, only mounting casualties convinced the generals to allow black soldiers the privilege of risking their lives on the front line. And just as in the First World War, a vast chasm quickly sprang up between wartime rhetoric and wartime reality. Black soldiers stationed at military bases in the segregated South were forbidden from eating in restaurants that opened their doors to German prisoners of war.

this is fucking terrible. It's like /pol/ fetishization taken to action in the streets.
>then some blokes in tulsa bombed north tulsa with military planes.
it's like mad max in the midwest.

I am sure you have a comprehensive source.

The heritability of intelligence is somewhere between 0.4 and 0.8.

that's basically flipping a coin

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982213008440
>Twin and adoption studies provide evidence that differences in intelligence are heritable. The percentage of the variation in intelligence accounted for by genetic causes is usually given at about 50%. Heritability estimates for young children are typically lower, whereas estimates for adults are higher (up to 70–80%).

It's general knowledge.

No, it means tabula raza is false but you can still improve your intelligence with the variable part and childrens intelligence is less due to heritability than adults.

That's not how it works. It's more like half your wealth being inherited from your parents.

It should be stressed that heritability does not quite equal genetics, there are often other factors at play, even biological ones like the environment in the womb.

No civilization has ever existed on the basis of race. Not even the west started through racial self-consciousness. (see Spengler)

The West becoming non-racist is just a sign of maturity, from its previous paranoid and misanthropic behaviour that wiped away whole civilizations and enslaved millions. In this it is the West which is an aberration on the treatment of other cultures and civilizations, partly because of the Christian missionary spirit and because of the Darwinian conception of human society.

The way other civilizations understood one another, was not though colour or the size of skulls, but through cultural behaviour, religion and language.

So for example, it was only by mimicking Western imperialism and colonialism, that the Japanese unleashed their genocidal fury on the Chinese.

at one point the hibernian was a bigger problem even than the negro despite being genetically similar, it really made people think

>from its previous paranoid and misanthropic behaviour that wiped away whole civilizations and enslaved millions.

Wtf are you talking about? The only slavery westerners participated in was integrating into the existing Muslim and nigger slave trade. This was before scientific racial theory was thing. Wiped out whole civilizations? The only thing I can think of was the redskins who really weren't wiped out by the Spanish or Portuguese (just altered) . Again, this is 400 years before Europeans developed germ theory. 90% of redskins dying from disease was a lucky break. Also genocides of tribes are recorded in the Bible for damn sake. It's not exclusively to scientific racism.
>Dem Japanese wuz gud boyz who dindu nuffin until whitey came along and corrupted them
Kill yourself.

I agree

Not even him, but one couldn't possibly strawman harder.

source?

He probably meant this.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3341646/

>Not even the west started through racial self-consciousness.
Because it was pretty much racially homogeneous. Most westerners haven't met a non-white until relatively recently.

>The West becoming non-racist is just a sign of maturity
That's awfully vague and explains nothing, it merely repeats the progressive mantra.

this is quite interesting

Moorish slave trade was quite different my friend, and on another scale.

Slaves in the Muslim world filled nische spots like courtesans, soldiers, eunuchs or labor too difficult and unpleasant to be done by regular Muslims, such a miners, cleaning shit etc.

Western slavery on the other hand used slaves as systematic labor, in plantations and farming, that is as agricultural economic units.

Concerning the Native Indians, of course they were not seen as biologically inferior at first, but they were inferior in relation to Christianity, and were termed savages. It was only later that this evolved, from the missionary conversion mission, to the racial one, of the civilized races and the barbarian tribes. And I didn't use the word genocide when reffering to colonialism, I just said that the West destroyed the native societies in many places, notwithstanding America, India, Africa and some countries in Asia (such as the Philippines)

Yes genocides have happened outside of the western world, but never in a racial sense. The Romans burning and salting Carthage is not racial genocide.

>Kill yourself.

You know it's true, look up the the Meiji restoration and the Rangaku. The Japanese even spelled it directly that they were influenced from the Nazi racial theories. Also look up the Joseon war, which happened directly after Japanese contact with Portuguese and Dutch colonists/missionaries.

I am not saying the west is by its nature evil, I am just saying that that particular type of discrimination known as racism has historical roots.

Thats what communism said. That we are all the same.

The studie you're refering to was comparing western adoptive families. There are many other possible environnements.

Yes, betwin two people raised in the same country in the same social class the difference of intelligence is explained at 20 to 40% by environnement.

It must be more important if you compare non-similar environnements.

>ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3341646/
thank you

"Racial differences in measured intelligence have been observed, but race is a socially constructed rather than biological variable, so such differences are difficult to interpret."

>Moorish slave trade was quite different my friend, and on another scale.Slaves in the Muslim world filled nische spots like courtesans, soldiers, eunuchs or labor too difficult and unpleasant to be done by regular Muslims, such a miners, cleaning shit etc.

>Western slavery on the other hand used slaves as systematic labor, in plantations and farming, that is as agricultural economic units.

You can't be this historically illiterate. Not only did black plantation slavery exist in MENA but by all accounts it was more brutal. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zanj_Rebellion

Also the 100% castration rate of Black slaves taken by Arabs wasn't seen as an act of benevolence. I don't even feel like humoring the rest of your post but protip: the Meiji Restoration and rangaku happened long before nazism existed.

Racial homogeneity never existed.

Race was teh outgrowth of several historical factors in the self-conception of peoples.

For example during the Ottoman empire, the Muslim and the Christian Serbs lived with some self-contained tolerance with each other, It was only after nationalism was born that they begun slaughtering each other like they were of different race. (for example Muslims being of a different race as characterised by Njegoš in Montenegro or the Irish by the English). Ever since modernity happened this tension was always palpable in Europe until the break out of the Holocaust and its aftermath.

>That's awfully vague and explains nothing, it merely repeats the progressive mantra.

I merely outline how one belief system that lead to a lot of harm, was abandoned in favor of another that did not judge humanity merely on its biological basis. So in that since, it is a maturity, as the previous system was no better than a perverse theology of colonialism.

>For example during the Ottoman empire, the Muslim and the Christian Serbs lived with some self-contained tolerance with each other
Yeah all those orthodox Slavic women raped and enslaved by Turks lived in such harmony.

>look up the the Meiji restoration and the Rangaku. The Japanese even spelled it directly that they were influenced from the Nazi racial theories
Imagine being this historically illiterate

There is a certain randomness about IQ that even negroes can have genius IQ. The question is whether society values and allows for high IQ individuals to reproduce. If society or community values intelligence over other qualities, then you will have a lot of IQ individuals. Ex: Ashkenazi Jews have selected for intelligence and are way above their middle eastern cousins in that respect. But it a society only values say, athletic ability, then you will have black societies, which already started with a low IQ to begin with.

I think that selective breeding aka eugenics would be beneficial for all races.

In other words
>Kill Chad!
>Breed Stacy!
>Beta uprising now!

Even if it was a plantation system, it did not have the racial character of European slavery. Brutal or not brutal, Muslim slavery did not have a racial character, in fact slaves in these plantations could be other Arabs or North Africans. The plantation system also in Iraq was a limited phenomenon since the majority of the Iraqi freemen were farmers, and was phased out of use after the 9th-10th century. On the opposite end it took a whole war with and an absurd drama concerning slaves to end teh practice in Southern America. (even more absurd and counter intuitive considering slave labor was useless by that point.)

Are you stupid my friend? Whats so hard to understand?

Rangaku happened after contact with teh Dutch and Portuguese.

Japanese racially motivated violence happened because of Nazi racial theories were adopted by Japan, but as I mentioned before they had deeper historical roots that complemented one another.

>Yeah all those orthodox Slavic women raped and enslaved by Turks lived in such harmony.

That was religiously motivated violence when it happened, not racial.

>Are you stupid my friend?
Are you? Rangaku was 300 years before WW2 or nazis, or even race theory were a thing, what the fuck does it have to do with literally anything you're talking about?

Race is at the basis of everything. Religion is just a pretext.

>The plantation system also in Iraq was a limited phenomenon since the majority of the Iraqi freemen were farmers,
The majority of freemen everywhere throughout all of history have been farmers.
>Muslim slavery did not have a racial character
Wrong. It was subtle but there if you read between the lines
Europeans = sex slavery.
Niggers = plantation labor and work.
>The plantation system also in Iraq was a limited phenomenon since the majority of the Iraqi freemen were farmers, and was phased out of use after the 9th-10th century.
You didn't even know it existed 10 minutes ago, now are an expert on it?
>On the opposite end it took a whole war with and an absurd drama concerning slaves to end teh practice in Southern America.
If you read the link I sent it seems like Arab enslavement of blacks had an "absurd amount of drama" ironically in countries like Mauritania blacks are still slaves to muslims.

Adding to this, Circassians were supposedly the best sex slaves, and they were fellow Turkic muslims

Circassians aren't Turks. Pretty sure they are an Iranian groups like Armenians or Georgians.

Everyone is a Turk according to Turks

>acceptable and mainstream 100 years ago (and probably for the entire human history)

It's a misconception that the theory of races preceded racism. Racism as prejudice isn't some innate phenomenon shared by all humankind traceable to antiquity, but rather has always been motivated by politics. That's why its so arbitrary, and why the same individual can be considered black in the US, colored in the Caribbean, and white in Brazil.

The nouns 'racist' and 'racism' didn't even exist until the 1890's/1900's when it became necessary to describe those promoting racial hierarchy, and even then only gained a negative connotation in the 1920's and 30's thanks to segregationists in the US and nationalists in Europe.

>the same
>blacks literally have soft tissue difference from us like less brain volume or fast twitch muscle fibers.

>So for example, it was only by mimicking Western imperialism and colonialism, that the Japanese unleashed their genocidal fury on the Chinese.
The Mongoloids have hated eachother for centuries, Nips offing chinks is just Tuesday to them.
>No civilization has ever existed on the basis of race
Yes all of them existed on the basis of ethnicity not race since race is a collective.
>The West becoming non-racist is just a sign of maturity
So Africa is not mature since its mostly blacks right?

What about Peru mostly native americans?

China mostly chinese?

Syria full of Arabs?

Your full of shit.

>I wouldn't say it's so much that. The bigger issue is that people shouldn't be treated any differently/disrespected for no reason or have opportunities withheld from them etc. solely because of their race. Pseudoscience and religious zealotry also shouldn't be used to justify racism/racialism
Wouldn't that mean ending racial quotas and affirmative action?

Is an IQ test for immigration inherently racist since some groups will always do better than others? Who decides what laws are racist by default? Is voting ID racist? Are lifeguard swimming requirements racist because some ethnicities have different leg to torso ratios? Are fighters pilot requirements racist because most people of X group are too tall?

I agree that race shouldn't be a factor in what a person can work towards. But we have to admit that all races will never have equal outcomes or representation, and trying for equal outcomes is a mistake.

Haplotypes are real and objective, though.

>it's like mad max in the midwest.

The American Indian's hatred of blacks (and vice versa) during the late Indian Wars is pretty shocking. The Buffalo Soldiers even referred to Indians as "voodoo niggers" and the most brutally mutilated man at Little Bighorn was the one black interpreter;

>Isaiah lay with his breast full of arrows and an iron picket pin thrust through his testicles into the ground, pinning him down. . . . Dorman's penis was cut off and stuffed in his mouth, which was regarded among the Indians as the deepest insult possible. . . . [H]e had small pistol balls in his legs from the knees down. . . . [His] body had been ripped open, and a coffee pot and cup which he carried with him were filled with his blood. What devilish purpose the Indians had in catching his blood I do not know.

>specific races have specific properties

Nigger this isn't Skyrim, you don't get a +2 STR -2 INT +10 Basketball or some shit.

>+10 Basketball
LMAO

Imagine being so void of identity that you could seriously create and image like that and believe it.

>He thinks people with black skin are all one race

Really displaying that superior white intelligence

+2 STR
-4 INT
20 % SPEED BONUS
GAIN EXP SLOWER THEN OTHER RACES

They also don't behave like how race does in the way it's socially-constructed. Someone with a haplotype from Britain would be labeled a nigger by race realists because his dad's dad was black.

He explicitly mentioned the Chinese invasion being linked to the internalization of Nazi racial theories.
You're just conflating 2 of his points into one, I don't really get why.

No, you get +5.5% 2R MAO-A and shit
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monoamine_oxidase_A

Science is racist.

Honestly I don't see why The elder scrolls gets so much flak for this. they pretty much treat race the way most scientists uncontroversially agree race works. the races start out with certain stats but you're able to advance in any direction you want by hard work. you can be a Nordic mage, a high elf warrior or a redguard thief you but you do start out with specialized skill sets.

>Different ethnic groups have predispositions towards different genetic conditions, non-racists BTFO

I don't think anyone informed seriously argues this isn't the case. Are you just autistically hung-up on the "people is the same" phrasing? Would you stop being this stupid if we phrased it "the differences between ethnic groups do not detract from their essential humanity"?

>abbos, chinks, mongols
>not stupid
I'm sure selling NY for some beads and having massive alcoholism problems is because they're so smart right?

And China must have been brilliant to nearly collapse from a civil war over fucking opium too huh?

And those Mongolians must be geniuses to build those yurts right?

Basketball user here:
I don't get it either, I was just mocking that one user for trying to justify segregation with a poorly-phrased argument that's incredibly overly simplistic about how race works (like blacks somehow have a Crime Gene that makes them automatically turn into full chimpout ghetto niggers regardless of what you do 99/100 times).

>I don't think anyone informed seriously argues this isn't the case.

Good. I posted that for the non-informed, so that they can get informed and stop posting stupid shit.

Many people (informed or not) still claim that different populations don't have different mental properties and predispositions.

>2929311
One of my favourite little historical corners is the black GI's in Britian. It's absolutely fascinating, the friction between American and European concepts of race.
The only time segregation existed in Britian is during WW2 hen white US command insisted on it.
It seems that black GI's were so nervous and polite around white people that they fit in and were welcomed by repressed class bound Britons. White GI's were brash and outgoing, which clashed with the reserved British character

>“The general consensus of opinion seems to be that the only American soldiers with decent manners are the Negroes.” - Orwell

This clip is a wonderful historical document:
youtu.be/SyYSBBE1DFw?t=1519

Are you Americuck by any chance?

>shitposting this hard
iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country

No.

its extremely funny because the opposite happened in the colonies.
When American soldiers were deployed to india, the british specifically asked the GIs not to spread american propaganda about liberty to indians.

>1 drop

You kinda do, though. Having longer legs and shorter torso make certain African ethnic groups superior runners, but inferior swimmers and lifters. Having genetic predisposition towards delayed gratification is a real thing as well in mice and men.

Some lineages just got the better end of some things. Intelligence is hugely influenced by genetics, and so is behavior.

Hopefully CRISPR can isolate, screen, and weed things in the future.

Those difference were baaed on the culture your race grew up with. Wood Elves are good archers because they lear archery since childhood and archery has a big role in wood elf society

Nords, redguards and Orcs are all biologically big guys and are good fighters. Wood elves and khajits are all nimble, short guys and they are good thieves. Thus your example falls flat.

Can I haz source? Never realised American troops got that far around.

Racially diverse countries have lower tax rates and weaker governments. In the 50s America had a tax rate of 90% but it went down every decade after because working class whites didn't want to share public goods with blacks or immigrants. The only politicians who wanted blacks removed from America were southern Democrats. Even then it was mostly because southern Whites had to compete with them for jobs.

library.upenn.edu/collections/sasia/calcutta1947/album1.html

here you go. The only reason india has an aeronautics center is because the americans made bangalore into a depot for plane spare parts

Also, ww2 was the time my grandma saw black people. She had the most fascinating stories to tell.

Wow, this is actually horrible even if you consider blacks sub-human this is just cruel

this is what happens when you deheumanize people to such an extent that you forget that they are human beings just like you. I wonder how many people inciting a racewar will be slitting their neighbours' throats

Interesting stuff. Burma campaign really is the forgotten war.
>mfw the pooinloos btfo the weeboos

How does this surprise you? Southern whites are the biggest hypocrites ever. For years all they wanted was big government and welfare programs, but when they were asked to share with niggers they fought to destroy them. I'm not shocked southerners lynched black veterans after they came home. Fits their nature.

that's what black veterans get for bootlicking whites and fighting for america

>In the 50s America had a tax rate of 90% but it went down every decade after because working class whites didn't want to share public goods with blacks or immigrants.

It went down due to meme economics

>Having longer legs and shorter torso make certain African ethnic groups superior runners, but inferior swimmers and lifters.

But long legs and short torso isn't exclusive to them or are in other groups that aren't them. On top of that sports choice is very restricted by location, wealth and those Africans lifestyle choices promote running heavily.

Diversity and integration is still a big part of why people supported trickle down economics. "I don't want to share with niggers" was pretty much one of the top 3 reasons.