South African 'Redistribution' of White Land

[Pontifex Maximus]

It has nothing to do with race and everything to do with ideas. African governments generally pursue policies that spring from bad ideas. They could very easily adopt ideas and systems and policies that work. They choose not to for a variety of reasons ranging from corruption to racism, but their decisions have nothing to do with the color of their skin and the inherent qualities implied from it. Of course it would affect a racist motivation, as a caveat.

Plenty of majority nations also make awful policy decisions. It also has nothing to do with their race. The leftist support of this policy so fervently supported by the likes of hannibalexmachina is proof enough of that. Of course, leftists generally don't care how much blood is spilled to accomplish their goals sadly. It boils down to bad ideas, not bad races.

[Love Mountain]

It has nothing to do with race and everything to do with ideas. African governments generally pursue policies that spring from bad ideas. They could very easily adopt ideas and systems and policies that work. They choose not to for a variety of reasons ranging from corruption to racism, but their decisions have nothing to do with the color of their skin and the inherent qualities implied from it. Of course it would affect a racist motivation, as a caveat.

Plenty of majority nations also make awful policy decisions. It also has nothing to do with their race. The leftist support of this policy so fervently supported by the likes of hannibalexmachina is proof enough of that. Of course, leftists generally don't care how much blood is spilled to accomplish their goals sadly. It boils down to bad ideas, not bad races.

Such as? You come off to be very knowledgeable on the country and region. So tell me, what are the decisions the South African made in the last twenty years that were so awful and were motivated by "racism"?

[Aexodus]

Using ancient quack science now. Automatically fails the argument.For a start there is no such thing as a generic black person. Racists tend to beleive such guff presumably because similar duff science says that racism is aligned with low IQ. India was screwed more than South Africa, they had misrule covering around a century more. Look at them now. South Africa has been free for 28 years , I reckon that as long as they forget the revolutionary bollocks and concentrate on governance, Wakanda status will follow, eventually. Zimbabwe? , did feck-all to raise the general well being of all citizens, the white leadership and those who 'fled' contributed nothing, but even a racist like Mugabe declared secondary education for all a basic human right, changing the constitution to recognize primary and secondary public education as free and compulsory regardless of the melanin content of pupils. It seems that you have done zero research .

It is not 'quack science'

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

"Race differences show up by 3 years of age, even after matching on maternal education and other variables," said Rushton. "Therefore they cannot be due to poor education since this has not yet begun to exert an effect. That's why Jensen and I looked at the genetic hypothesis in detail. We examined 10 categories of evidence."

1. The Worldwide Pattern of IQ Scores. East Asians average higher on IQ tests than Whites, both in the U. S. and in Asia, even though IQ tests were developed for use in the Euro-American culture. Around the world, the average IQ for East Asians centers around 106; for Whites, about 100; and for Blacks about 85 in the U.S. and 70 in sub-Saharan Africa.
2. Race Differences are Most Pronounced on Tests that Best Measure the General Intelligence Factor (g). Black-White differences, for example, are larger on the Backward Digit Span test than on the less g loaded Forward Digit Span test.
3. The Gene-Environment Architecture of IQ is the Same in all Races, and Race Differences are Most Pronounced on More Heritable Abilities. Studies of Black, White, and East Asian twins, for example, show the heritability of IQ is 50% or higher in all races.
4. Brain Size Differences. Studies using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) find a correlation of brain size with IQ of about 0.40. Larger brains contain more neurons and synapses and process information faster. Race differences in brain size are present at birth. By adulthood, East Asians average 1 cubic inch more cranial capacity than Whites who average 5 cubic inches more than Blacks.
5. Racial Admixture Studies. Black children with lighter skin, for example, average higher IQ scores. In South Africa, the IQ of the mixed-race "Colored" population averages 85, intermediate to the African 70 and White 100.
6. IQ Scores of Blacks and Whites Regress toward the Averages of Their Race. Parents pass on only some exceptional genes to offspring so parents with very high IQs tend to have more average children. Black and White children with parents of IQ 115 move to different averages--Blacks toward 85 and Whites to 100.
7. Race Differences in Other "Life-History" Traits. East Asians and Blacks consistently fall at two ends of a continuum with Whites intermediate on 60 measures of maturation, personality, reproduction, and social organization. For example, Black children sit, crawl, walk, and put on their clothes earlier than Whites or East Asians.
8. Race Differences and the Out-of-Africa theory of Human Origins. East Asian-White-Black differences fit the theory that modern humans arose in Africa about 100,000 years ago and expanded northward. During prolonged winters there was evolutionary selection for higher IQ created by problems of raising children, gathering and storing food, gaining shelter, and making clothes.
9. Do Culture-Only Theories Explain the Data? Culture-only theories do not explain the highly consistent pattern of race differences in IQ, especially the East Asian data. No interventions such as ending segregation, introducing school busing, or "Head Start" programs have reduced the gaps as culture-only theory would predict.
10. Trans-Racial Adoption Studies. Race differences in IQ remain following adoption by White middle class parents. East Asians grow to average higher IQs than Whites while Blacks score lower. The Minnesota Trans-Racial Adoption Study followed children to age 17 and found race differences were even greater than at age 7: White children, 106; Mixed-Race children, 99; and Black children, 89

1. Facts aren't racist, I'm afraid. Race-differences-in-average-IQ-are-largely-genetic.aspx

Such as? You come off to be very knowledgeable on the country and region. So tell me, what are the decisions the South African made in the last twenty years that were so awful and were motivated by "racism"?

The topic of this thread......

[Pontifex Maximus]

Such as? You come off to be very knowledgeable on the country and region. So tell me, what are the decisions the South African made in the last twenty years that were so awful and were motivated by "racism"?

Permitting this sort of thing to go on by looking the other way

And by openly supporting its inevitable results under the guise of "democracy" without due process.

[Love Mountain]

Permitting this sort of thing to go on by looking the other way

And by openly supporting its inevitable results under the guise of "democracy" without due process.

One is about the exact same thing that we are talking about and the other is a high school news report project. Neither covers legislation or context surrounding the last twenty years. Neither demonstrates you are any kind literacy about the region.

It is not 'quack science'


The topic of this thread......

Read what I said.

[Pontifex Maximus]

Wrong on both accounts again, but hey, if you're not going to engage honestly with sources I provide you and instead stick to your own uninformed perceptions and opinions then there's not much more to be gained by debating with you.

Now, presumably you think that a policy depriving owners of land of their real property on the basis of their race to be redistributed to another race is a good policy (despite the fact we know that it isn't). Would you care to explain and defend this stance?

[Love Mountain]

Wrong on both accounts again, but hey, if you're not going to engage honestly with sources I provide you and instead stick to your own uninformed perceptions and opinions then there's not much more to be gained by debating with you.

Do you actually take these things literally? And they tell me Conservatives are supposed to be "funnier" whatever that means. As for debate, don't humor me. I know I won't get any substantive information out of you because this is the second time you've refused to demonstrate your understanding of South Africa. I don't claim to be a great expert myself, but then again I don't present myself as one.

And no, not wrong on both counts. One of the links literally talks about the same exact thing as the OP. Do you even read the stuff you reply to?

Now, presumably you think that a policy depriving owners of land of their real property on the basis of their race to be redistributed to another race is a good policy (despite the fact we know that it isn't). Would you care to explain and defend this stance?

I think there is a great deal of context you're not telling me because you don't actually know what you're talking about. Painting an issue black or white is amateurish framing as any student of geopolitics will tell you.

[Pontifex Maximus]

The only weapon you have in your debating arsenal is to claim that the person making arguments with sources (who never claimed to be an expert) isn't an expert so you, a self professed non-expert, do not have to engage with the sources and paradoxically, do not have to provide any of your own. If you can't see how that is...completely asinine...then there's no hope of ever having a productive discussion with you. ta-ta!

[Love Mountain]

The only weapon you have in your debating arsenal is to claim that the person making arguments with sources (who never claimed to be an expert) isn't an expert so you, a self professed non-expert, do not have to engage with the sources and paradoxically, do not have to provide any of your own. If you can't see how that is...completely asinine...then there's no hope of ever having a productive discussion with you. ta-ta!

I'll take that as a surrender. You actually have no idea what you are talking about.

[Aexodus]

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...1#post15538706

Still waiting on why this regressive policy isn't harmful to South African society and economy, as well as being a part of wider problem within African culture. @anyone

[Pontifex Maximus]

You're not going to find any answer beyond justifying the confiscation, and even genocide, under the auspices that the whites did it first and two wrongs make a right.

[mongrel]

It has nothing to do with race and everything to do with ideas. African governments generally pursue policies that spring from bad ideas. They could very easily adopt ideas and systems and policies that work. They choose not to for a variety of reasons ranging from corruption to racism, but their decisions have nothing to do with the color of their skin and the inherent qualities implied from it. Of course it would affect a racist motivation, as a caveat.

Plenty of majority nations also make awful policy decisions. It also has nothing to do with their race. The leftist support of this policy so fervently supported by the likes of hannibalexmachina is proof enough of that. Of course, leftists generally don't care how much blood is spilled to accomplish their goals sadly. It boils down to bad ideas, not bad races.

Hurrah at last someone gets it. Best if you didn't type further than the first sentence though. Could have done without the gratuitious use of the term lefist, which must now qualify for its own equivalent of Godwin's law, but still....Many of these governments had their origins in Marxist revolution. Enough said.

It is not 'quack science'

It's quack science. We have full-spectrum DNA analysis now, not Nazi head measurements and so forth. Hell , the original Britons, Cheddar Men were black , we now know and their genetic material is present throughout modern descendents. Genetically there is no such thing as a singular black race, DNA doesn't lie. The fact that some racists/eugenicists still carry on with discredited ideas doesn't make it any more legimate as the ideas of a flat earth or aliens building the pyramids.

That 'science' was used to excuse the murder of 6m Jews. Do you feel the benefits of that atrocity?

[Magnum_Opus]

Nazi racialism was quack science. Admitting there's a difference between the races =/= nazi racialism. The science of the allies was far closer to what we'd call race realism today than the Nazi's science, and the allies (reminder) defeated the Nazis.

Conclusion: accepting certain scientific facts does't automatically lead to genocidal outlooks

[mongrel]

Nazi racialism was quack science. Admitting there's a difference between the races =/= nazi racialism. The science of the allies was far closer to what we'd call race realism today than the Nazi's science, and the allies (reminder) defeated the Nazis.

Conclusion: accepting certain scientific facts does't automatically lead to genocidal outlooks

Oh boo hoo, molecular science has an issue with racist quacks. Let me get a molecular violin.

the reality:

"Although biological notions of race have largely been discredited, the social construction of race remains a potent force in society, fuelled by outdated social attitudes and language, as well as misdirected pseudo-scientific studies. The process of social construction of race is termed “racialization,” which has been defined as “the process by which societies construct races as real, different and unequal in ways that matter to economic, political and social life”
(Quote: Commission on Systemic Racism in the Ontario Criminal Justice System, 1995: 40).

Nazi racialism was directly taken from American eugenicist thinking at the time.Hitler refers to it in Mein Kampf ffs.

And the answer is what benefit did the ultimate expression of racist eugenics, the Holocaust, bring you, is nothing at all. Nada, squat.

And at a biological level, there is no such thing as "the races". Mind you it's bloody obvious that there is more than 5 kinds of people, let alone cultures on this planet, just by looking at ,and speaking to, real human beings.



Like Mr T , I have no tolerance to foolishness. That includes people who insult the forum with quack science, which has nothing to do with the discussion of current events, Other than perhaps it provides racists a reason for their behaviour.

Posts will be reported until you understand that the Mudpit is supposed to cover current events.

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...1#post15538706

Still waiting on why this regressive policy isn't harmful to South African society and economy, as well as being a part of wider problem within African culture. @anyone

Are they redistributing land in Tanzania, Nigeria or Chad? If not then the latter part of your question may as well have come from out of Djibouti. As there are presumably no hardened ANC party members here you will be waiting a long time to find someone in favor of dishing out free land on racial lines. Clearly not taking the issue seriously.

The handling of the thread seems to go roughly like this.

You:Giving confiscating white land to give only to black people is racist and counterproductive.

Everyone : Yes we agree. Modest reasons why that could be but right now the policy is crap.
HH: apartheid rocks
Me:apartheid collapsed, have you never heard of Nelson Mandela?
You and others: All Africans/Black people are terrible, must be due to their blackness, look at Chicago and some graph from the IRA (Institute of Racist Asshats).

Me and others: Hang on, what is that got to do with the OP?

Me: Report the off topic bollocks:

Others: Waah!

Thread inevitably runs into the sand, although much credit to Séverus Sñape who almost uniquely says the one thing that is directly relevant , that the redistribution is driven by policy, not biology (obviously).

Now tell us, is this thread about the ANC's misguided policy on land distribution or was is intended as a gateway for promoting anti-black sentiment in the forum? Quite frankly you have earned the Larry David stare on this issue. Better shape up if I were you.

[Aexodus]

Mongrel, you seem to think it's racist to bring up a scientific study if you don't agree with it. There's a massive leap from recognising cultural/ethnic problems and dealing with them, to gassing Jews en masse. That's hysterical, as well as disingenuous.

These problems have a link to why many African countries aren't governed properly, and in my view never really have been before colonisation either.

If the ANC doesn't get its act together, and learn how to govern, SA will end up as a tinpot Republic where no one wants to live, just like many other Sub-Saharan countries.

[mongrel]

Mongrel, you seem to think it's racist to bring up a scientific study if you don't agree with it. There's a massive leap from recognising cultural/ethnic problems and dealing with them, to gassing Jews en masse. That's hysterical, as well as disingenuous.

These problems have a link to why many African countries aren't governed properly, and in my view never really have been before colonisation either.

Reputable scientists don't beleive in quack race science end of. The discovery of DNA ended all pretence such studies were credible.

African cultures outside of SA of which there are many have no bearing on ANC policies, for example How does Sharia law in Niger cut across to the ANC manifesto? Tell the forum. These points I make are entirely rational, seeing that they refer to the observable world that is, not the stereotype you wish to promote.

It is you that's being hysterical by insisting that these off-topic points has anything to do with the ANC's policies, much of which are not derived from Africa at all, but from Europe, Marxism as any fool knows hails from Europe, ffs.

If the ANC doesn't get its act together, and learn how to govern, SA will end up as a tinpot Republic where no one wants to live, just like many other Sub-Saharan countries.

So says the person who appears to be supporting the notions of another notorious failed state.It's a democracy, they can vote for someone else.


But you have made it clear, the issue isn't about land distribution, is it? Finger remains hovering over the report button , because I had guessed the thread has indeed run into the sand.Dishonest OPs have a tendency to do that.

[Aexodus]

The issue has always been land expropriation, and the fact that black communities consistently underperform inside and outside of Africa. Reversing this trend begins with repealing the land reform bill, and actually trying to learn from another culture as everyone else has done instead of driving the white people out.

[alhoon]

While modest discussion about the quality of Racial research (by Nazis or others) is tolerated since Racism and the Apartheid are still important in South Africa, please don't derail the thread to discuss that. You can use the appropriate forums (Athenaeum or VV) to discuss their scientific or historical impact further.
Also, remember that per the rules of the mudpit your posts should be respectful of other members even if you strongly disagree with them.

[Aexodus]

History has shown that when governments pursue racist policies like these they end in ruin, be they Zimbabwe, Nazi Germany, or South Africa. It has to stop, it is indefendable racial discrimination. The low IQ in the research I linked served to reflect the lack of education and academic achievement common to all black conmunities, due to culture, not an inherent 'stupid gene' as some seem to interpret it.

[Magnum_Opus]

IQ is mainly determined by genes, not education or culture. There isn't a single "dumb gene", but rather IQ is determined by a large number of genes, though identifying which genes or the number of genes that contribute to intelligence, or the g factor, isn't particularly important for the purpose of debate. Of course it would be nice if we could just change intelligence through social engineering, but that just doesn't work, and all efforts thus far to this end have failed.

Education does little to improve general intelligence, rather, better education allows one to capitalise on an already existing intelligence. For this reason, spending a significant amount of money on educating Blacks to the extent of whites would be a significant misappropriation of resources. Personally I believe in freedom of association and I don't believe in Public education, but if you are to have public education, it's prudent to discriminate based on IQ which correlates strongly with race. In this regard, I think Rhodesia did a lot better job than modern societies like America, which expend a significant amount of money on the black population in terms of welfare and education, which all goes to waste, and the blacks are overall a significant drain on the resources of the country. There is also evidence that black populations within mixed race societies decrease the productivity and advancement of the White population if you look at the metric of patents produced, presumably because of the burden/disorder caused by living with Blacks.

So overall, I don't believe in the idea of the "white man's burden"; I don't believe that any country should have its tax money, which is disproportionately produced by Whites, go disproportionately to Blacks. I think that in any successful mixed race country there needs to be a degree of segregation between the races, I think that Blacks should have a large degree of autonomy within their own areas and Whites within theirs, and I think this can be mutually beneficial as the Blacks can benefit from the jobs and stable government, exceptional blacks can take advantage of the Whites education institutions, while economic contributions by the black population can actually be contributions instead of just partially offsetting the social cost caused by the forced mixing of the races.

In conclusion, I don't think that anything was inherently wrong with the Rhodesian model, but rather I think its collapse was mainly due to outside pressures.