Pat Condell: 'There's no racist like a liberal racist'

Page 5 of 6 [ 88 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

The_Walrus
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Age: 25
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,818
Location: Reading, England

21 Oct 2013, 4:59 am

Goddard wrote:
What the number of countries with majority of black people that have progressive culture??

Correlation-causation...

What is the number of countries with a majority of black people that have a high GDP?

What is the number of countries with a low GDP that have a "progressive culture"?

Compare Belarus (very low black population) to the USA (12-13% black).



Goddard
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 3 Oct 2013
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 113

21 Oct 2013, 6:35 am

The_Walrus wrote:
Goddard wrote:
What the number of countries with majority of black people that have progressive culture??

Correlation-causation...

What is the number of countries with a majority of black people that have a high GDP?

What is the number of countries with a low GDP that have a "progressive culture"?

Compare Belarus (very low black population) to the USA (12-13% black).


Certainly, there many belarrusian people who are 'progressive' the same way than their american counterparts.
Majority of afro-americans aren't progressives, they vote largely on Democratics by racial reasons, the same way that white ''deep south'' americans also vote to republican party.
GDP is not one good meausure for analyse personality and cognitive traits, GDP is a result of many specific traits and not the cause. Progressive people tend to be more creative than others and tend to earn more.

Progressive culture is a specific north euros invention, even in southern european countries, one a minority of the population are ''progressive or liberal''. High iq, centuries of exogamic patterns and personality traits explain better than income.



Jono
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,467
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

21 Oct 2013, 7:56 am

thomas81 wrote:
Jono wrote:
thomas81 wrote:
Thats why its a source of puzzlement to me why us westerners act all surprised whenever we bomb or invade their countries or loot their oil and we get terrorist attacks.


Exhibit A. That's exactly the kind apologism that Pat Condell was talking about when he spoke about "progressives" making excuses for islamic terrorists and it's exactly the kind of hypocrisy I was talking about in my earlier post. By the way, it's perfectly possible believe that Taliban and Al Qaeda are a bunch of utterly evil mother-f**** without supporting US actions in the Middle East.


Don't you think its even a little bit too coincidental to be true that we didn't really have any beef with the Islamic world between the crusades and the British mandate of Palestine for no apparent reason?

Its not like during 1946 a rat crawled up their arse that made them suddenly think out of the blue "I know, I'm going to start bombing british diplomatic interests" Incidentally, the Irgun terrorists shouldn't get off lightly for their contributions either.

Also, what if the shoe was on the other foot, where it was America with all the oil and Gadaffis Libya, Syria or Husseins Iraq with all the cash and military might who were invading the USA with their industrial military complex, their hypothetical oil corporations and hypothetical arab-centric mass media propagandising? What if the USA was mass settled by muslims claiming they had divine right to the land, and indigenous americans were relegated to California and New York State, had their utilities curtailed and a huge wall built round their territory where they were subject to internment and military border checks? Do you think for even a second the american people would just lie back and take it with acquiescence? f***ing of course not.


I don't care or even give a damn about any of that. Do you want me to post that picture of that Afghan girl who had her nose and ears sliced off by Taliban thugs just because she tried to flee her abusive husband? Should we perhaps talk about Malala Yousafzai, that Pakistani schoolgirl who was shot in the head by the Taliban in northern Pakistan for fighting for the right of girls to get an education? (You know, the same girl who should of gotten the Nobel Peace prize this year but apparently didn't?) You simply don't get to blame all the problems in the Middle East on the actions of the US when groups like the Taliban actually throw acid into little girls faces for going to school. And the Taliban were evil long before 9/11 took place, remember that they destroyed those 2 Buddha statues in Afghanistan and used that football stadium for executions before either the invasion of Afghanistan or even 9/11 took place. By the way, Al Qaeda, the guys you are making excuses for, have an ideology that is actually based on Wahhabism, the same evil, utterly hateful sect and ideology that the Taliban support and what they use to justify what they do. Not to mention that Wahhabis believe it's totally OK to murder anyone who is not muslim. So yes, I damn well can call them evil regardless of any US actions in the Middle East. So are you still going to use "western imperialism" to excuse them? Or are you going to shut up now?



Schneekugel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jul 2012
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,944

21 Oct 2013, 8:36 am

Jono wrote:
Again, according to the progressives, we are allowed criticise every other religion except for Islam and if criticise Islam you're a racist.
Nope. If you say nonsense like "All christians are extreme-fanatic idiots, doing attacks on doctors of abortion-hospitals." its as well a religious racism. So when it comes to generalizing prejudices about huge groups of very different beings, its in every way racistic. The irish are as well no race, but if I say idiotc nonsense like "Irish people were radical terrorists, doing bomb-attacks on little school girls." this is simply racistic nonsense.

The usage of words, describing certain amounts of people like "some", "few", "many", "most" may sound not as important to some people, but actually can be the difference between an total racistic nonsense and an statistical relevant fact. So there are very few irish people, that really did such attacks. Luckily "most" seem to be pretty normal people. Isnt that marvelous, what transformation the idiotic meaning of "Irish people were radical terrorists, doing bomb-attacks on little school girls." by only using the word "few"? So it might seem like a magic trick, but I swear, its only about the basic usage of language. :)



Schneekugel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jul 2012
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,944

21 Oct 2013, 8:39 am

Schneekugel wrote:
Jono wrote:
Again, according to the progressives, we are allowed criticise every other religion except for Islam and if criticise Islam you're a racist.
Nope. If you say nonsense like "All christians are extreme-fanatic idiots, doing attacks on doctors of abortion-hospitals." its as well a religious racism. So when it comes to generalizing prejudices about huge groups of very different beings, its in every way racistic. The irish are as well no race, but if I say idiotc nonsense like "Irish people were radical terrorists, doing bomb-attacks on little school girls." this is simply racistic nonsense.

The usage of words, describing certain amounts of people like "some", "few", "many", "most" may sound not as important to some people, but actually can be the difference between an total racistic nonsense and an statistical relevant fact. So there are very few irish people, that really did such attacks. Luckily "most" seem to be pretty normal people. Isnt that marvelous, what transformation the idiotic meaning of "Irish people were radical terrorists, doing bomb-attacks on little school girls." by only using the word "few"? So it might seem like a magic trick, but I swear, its only about the basic usage of language. :)


Quote:
Should we perhaps talk about Malala Yousafzai, that Pakistani schoolgirl who was shot in the head by the Taliban in northern Pakistan for fighting for the right of girls to get an education? (You know, the same girl who should of gotten the Nobel Peace prize this year but apparently didn't?)
Yes, please tell us, in which way this little muslimic girl is responsible for other people, sharing another tree of muslimic believe, attacking other people. If thats all based on the muslimic believe, then she must as well be involved and be responsible for that attacks somehow.



Jono
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,467
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

21 Oct 2013, 9:14 am

Schneekugel wrote:
Quote:
Should we perhaps talk about Malala Yousafzai, that Pakistani schoolgirl who was shot in the head by the Taliban in northern Pakistan for fighting for the right of girls to get an education? (You know, the same girl who should of gotten the Nobel Peace prize this year but apparently didn't?)
Yes, please tell us, in which way this little muslimic girl is responsible for other people, sharing another tree of muslimic believe, attacking other people. If thats all based on the muslimic believe, then she must as well be involved and be responsible for that attacks somehow.


She is not responsible for what they believe but the fact that she was shot in the head by the Taliban, simply for fighting for the right of girls to have an education, which the Taliban oppose, just tells how utterly evil and oppressive the Taliban are. She is an innocent victim. Also, where in this thread have I ever said that all muslims are like this. I have actually said many times in elsewhere and in this thread that I actually know some muslims who are actually decent people. I was talking about people with a specific ideology. Stop strawmanning my position.



thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,434
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

21 Oct 2013, 9:17 am

Jono wrote:
I don't care or even give a damn about any of that. Do you want me to post that picture of that Afghan girl who had her nose and ears sliced off by Taliban thugs just because she tried to flee her abusive husband? Should we perhaps talk about Malala Yousafzai, that Pakistani schoolgirl who was shot in the head by the Taliban in northern Pakistan for fighting for the right of girls to get an education? (You know, the same girl who should of gotten the Nobel Peace prize this year but apparently didn't?) You simply don't get to blame all the problems in the Middle East on the actions of the US when groups like the Taliban actually throw acid into little girls faces for going to school. And the Taliban were evil long before 9/11 took place, remember that they destroyed those 2 Buddha statues in Afghanistan and used that football stadium for executions before either the invasion of Afghanistan or even 9/11 took place. By the way, Al Qaeda, the guys you are making excuses for, have an ideology that is actually based on Wahhabism, the same evil, utterly hateful sect and ideology that the Taliban support and what they use to justify what they do. Not to mention that Wahhabis believe it's totally OK to murder anyone who is not muslim. So yes, I damn well can call them evil regardless of any US actions in the Middle East. So are you still going to use "western imperialism" to excuse them? Or are you going to shut up now?


Oh dear, you seem to interpret that i've said that invading one's country and looting their resources gives one a carte blanche to abuse children and persecute minority religions. Try harder next time. How the taliban (or any other similar group whose actions you use to tar a group of a billion people) treat their people is a totally seperate matter to international relations between the west and Islamic world.

So are you just going to continue throwing emotive sanctimony at me or actually address my analogy?


_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile


Jono
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,467
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

21 Oct 2013, 9:49 am

thomas81 wrote:
Jono wrote:
I don't care or even give a damn about any of that. Do you want me to post that picture of that Afghan girl who had her nose and ears sliced off by Taliban thugs just because she tried to flee her abusive husband? Should we perhaps talk about Malala Yousafzai, that Pakistani schoolgirl who was shot in the head by the Taliban in northern Pakistan for fighting for the right of girls to get an education? (You know, the same girl who should of gotten the Nobel Peace prize this year but apparently didn't?) You simply don't get to blame all the problems in the Middle East on the actions of the US when groups like the Taliban actually throw acid into little girls faces for going to school. And the Taliban were evil long before 9/11 took place, remember that they destroyed those 2 Buddha statues in Afghanistan and used that football stadium for executions before either the invasion of Afghanistan or even 9/11 took place. By the way, Al Qaeda, the guys you are making excuses for, have an ideology that is actually based on Wahhabism, the same evil, utterly hateful sect and ideology that the Taliban support and what they use to justify what they do. Not to mention that Wahhabis believe it's totally OK to murder anyone who is not muslim. So yes, I damn well can call them evil regardless of any US actions in the Middle East. So are you still going to use "western imperialism" to excuse them? Or are you going to shut up now?


Oh dear, you seem to interpret that i've said that invading one's country and looting their resources gives one a carte blanche to abuse children and persecute minority religions. Try harder next time. How the taliban (or any other similar group whose actions you use to tar a group of a billion people) treat their people is a totally seperate matter to international relations between the west and Islamic world.

So are you just going to continue throwing emotive sanctimony at me or actually address my analogy?


Ok, let me put it to this way. My whole point is that they are not totally separate issues. You are equating terrorism such as the 9/11 attacks with a single cause, that being the west's involvement with the Middle East. However, there are other causes, one of them being the same ideology that allows them to justify such abuses. Al Qaeda is part of a Jihadi movement that believes the murdering of any innocent people are justified, as long as they are either non-muslim or even if they are muslims who do not agree with their particular brand of Wahhabism. That is why they can justify acts like 9/11 and so on, they also believe it is their duty to fight anyone who does agree with them. Again, I have never used the Taliban or anyone else to tar all muslims with the same brush.

Regarding your analogy, I have never agreed with all US actions in the Middle East but that does not mean that I won't call out specific abuses by these particular groups (notice that I did not say all muslims). Though these ideologies that are responsible for this kind of abuse are actually drawn from particular interpretations of Islam, though again that does not mean that all muslims should be tarred with the same brush. Is that fair?



starkid
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Feb 2012
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,185
Location: California

21 Oct 2013, 11:00 pm

The guy in the video gets it. I'm glad I'm not the only one who recognizes liberal racism, or progressive racism, as he calls it.

Goddard wrote:
GDP is not one good meausure for analyse personality and cognitive traits, GDP is a result of many specific traits and not the cause. Progressive people tend to be more creative than others and tend to earn more.


"Progressive culture" tends to be a facet of countries that have a history of traveling all over the world, enslaving, colonizing, and stealing from others. That's why they "earn more." Their entire lifestyle (and thus, their earnings) are based on stolen goods and exploitation. That's where their GDP and leisure time for creativity come from.


_________________
Assume nothing; question everything.
DX Central Auditory Processing Deficit
+ Hyperacusis


starkid
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Feb 2012
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,185
Location: California

21 Oct 2013, 11:02 pm

Schneekugel wrote:
Jono wrote:
Again, according to the progressives, we are allowed criticise every other religion except for Islam and if criticise Islam you're a racist.
Nope. If you say nonsense like "All christians are extreme-fanatic idiots, doing attacks on doctors of abortion-hospitals." its as well a religious racism.


WTF is "religious racism"?


_________________
Assume nothing; question everything.
DX Central Auditory Processing Deficit
+ Hyperacusis


Schneekugel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jul 2012
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,944

22 Oct 2013, 3:22 am

The same like racism against people of a certain skin colour, telling dumb prejudices like "All black are like this and that...", only done on people of a certain religion like "All christians are completely weirdos and do bomb attacks of employees of abortion-hospitals." or "All muslims are completely weirdos and want to have sex with little 9 year old girls."



Jono
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,467
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

22 Oct 2013, 3:24 am

Schneekugel wrote:
Jono wrote:
Again, according to the progressives, we are allowed criticise every other religion except for Islam and if criticise Islam you're a racist.
Nope. If you say nonsense like "All christians are extreme-fanatic idiots, doing attacks on doctors of abortion-hospitals." its as well a religious racism. So when it comes to generalizing prejudices about huge groups of very different beings, its in every way racistic. The irish are as well no race, but if I say idiotc nonsense like "Irish people were radical terrorists, doing bomb-attacks on little school girls." this is simply racistic nonsense.

The usage of words, describing certain amounts of people like "some", "few", "many", "most" may sound not as important to some people, but actually can be the difference between an total racistic nonsense and an statistical relevant fact. So there are very few irish people, that really did such attacks. Luckily "most" seem to be pretty normal people. Isnt that marvelous, what transformation the idiotic meaning of "Irish people were radical terrorists, doing bomb-attacks on little school girls." by only using the word "few"? So it might seem like a magic trick, but I swear, its only about the basic usage of language. :)


Do you understand the difference between a religion and religious ideology and the people who follow that religion? I'm not saying anything about at all about all muslims. When I criticise islam, I'm criticising a religious ideology. I've criticised christianity too, especially Catholicism and the Catholic Church but the fact that there are some things that the Church has said, or even interpretations of the bible, which I don't like doesn't mean that all christians believe those things either. Attacking religions, any religion, is fair game but attacking followers of that religion just for being followers is not. For some reason though, it's only when one criticises islam that you are accused of attacking muslims for being muslims by the so-called liberals and "progressives", you are generally not accused of attacking christians for being christians if you criticise christianity (except perhaps by few fundamentalist christians but most christians don't accuse you of that).



Goddard
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 3 Oct 2013
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 113

22 Oct 2013, 7:37 am

starkid wrote:
The guy in the video gets it. I'm glad I'm not the only one who recognizes liberal racism, or progressive racism, as he calls it.

Goddard wrote:
GDP is not one good meausure for analyse personality and cognitive traits, GDP is a result of many specific traits and not the cause. Progressive people tend to be more creative than others and tend to earn more.


"Progressive culture" tends to be a facet of countries that have a history of traveling all over the world, enslaving, colonizing, and stealing from others. That's why they "earn more." Their entire lifestyle (and thus, their earnings) are based on stolen goods and exploitation. That's where their GDP and leisure time for creativity come from.


Not exactly, it is very typical to liberal leftoid people that enjoy to criticize ''Western World'' and believe on an ''Noble Savage''. All people around the world, the humanity on the majority, is not so different than ''western colonizers''. To you see your incongruence. At the industrial revolution, while some thousand of europeans invaded and colonize other continents, majority of english people was very poor and worked in a semi-slavery regime, with pregnant women, childrens worked by 10-14 hours by day, without any rights.
The only people who can reclaim about the liberal lifestyle (your elites) are the white folks, because they pay for it. The red America sustains the leftist urban people with food, infrastructure and their own salaries.
Creativity is a hereditary traits, like all other human traits and need to ''mental disorder'' with some intelligence to produce. Creative geniuses are composed basicaly by this two elements, mental ''disorder'' or excepcionality and higher intelligence. China and other asian rich countries doesn't produce much more creativity achievements like Western World even today.



GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,139

22 Oct 2013, 9:01 am

Goddard wrote:
Creativity is a hereditary traits, like all other human traits and need to ''mental disorder'' with some intelligence to produce. Creative geniuses are composed basicaly by this two elements, mental ''disorder'' or excepcionality and higher intelligence. China and other asian rich countries doesn't produce much more creativity achievements like Western World even today.

Relatively speaking (compared to their proportion of the population), the most prominent "creativity achievements" in the Western World come from Jews.

For instance, here are the recently awarded Nobel Prizes for 2013 - in the 3 original scientific categories:

Physics:
Peter Higgs
François Englert - Jewish

Chemistry:
Martin Karplus - Jewish
Michael Levitt - Jewish
Arieh Warshel - Jewish

Medicine:
James E. Rothman - Jewish
Randy W. Schekman - Jewish
Thomas C. Südhof


_________________
Our comforting conviction that the world makes sense rests on a secure foundation: our almost unlimited ability to ignore our ignorance.

- Daniel Kahneman


techstepgenr8tion
SomeRandomGuy
SomeRandomGuy

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 21,284
Location: The 27th Path of Peh.

22 Oct 2013, 9:29 am

@ Pats video, it goes to show how much a full-life philosophy that's meant to address all points can ensnare people to compile and assimilate everything they see and hear into that perspective - classic cases being Freudianism and Marxism. Most of the progressives of the variety he's addressing quite likely can only see human relationships in respect to economic class, by extension race, and hence everything and anything else is a secondary or tertiary issue to that to which similarly all religion was given to us by way of rich dominant race/class members in any particular culture sitting in a smoke filled room trying to dream up new ways to oppress the poor and similar anything new that's religious or even spiritual is more of that same master/control ethnos (in American and Europe 'white people') trying to think of new ways to Scientologize the poor against themselves.

Anymore I just vote, I hardly think it's even worth debating because I've seen how little impact that has. Most people tend to have a way of weeding out evidence to the contrary of their beliefs and do so well at it that it almost completely disappears. When selective attention has this much power to where people can take on a prefabbed and ready-without-thinking belief system which makes sense of 80% of life perhaps on it's own logic but either ignores the other 20% of life that doesn't match the mold or buries it in calumny - it's a scary thing and I'm not sure how much of it is pure laziness or whether people are just that hypnotized.