[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 988 KB, 1600x800, black-people-of-the-world.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7452693 No.7452693[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Can racism be possible 30k thousand year ago among pre-historic humans?

>> No.7452698

>>7452693
I'm sure some tribal wars were caused over racism.

>> No.7452762

>>7452693
Yes I think racism is instinctual for humans, but has no place in a modern society, especially in the systematic and institutionalized manner we have in the US today.

>> No.7452770

>>7452693
No, because obviously racism is an invention of stupid cis white males, ughh like really? It's 2015 shitlords, wake up!

>> No.7452777

Racism was the norm for all of history except the last 60 years, bro.

Racism isn't wrong. You only think it is because you've been brainwashed.

>> No.7452781

No matter when or where humans are racists, we are just tsun to the max.

>> No.7452795

>>7452777
Can you tell me what you think racism is?

>> No.7454787

Of course not, hey had no concept of races back then.

>> No.7454839

Racism is a way for a culture to preserve its traditions and values from being diluted. Racism isn't wrong.

>> No.7454866

>>7452693
Racism is just a form of tribalism. Tribalism is natural to human beings, but that doesn't make it right as >>7452777 seems to think. In a modern society where we don't have to fight over resources, there's absolutely no benefit to tribalism.

>> No.7455638

>>7454866
Thank you. It's nothing more than defending/preserving your own family->village/community->cultural group extrapolated to backing people with same skin color.

>> No.7455652

Of course they were all racist, they had to be for survival.

>> No.7455661

>>7452693
>still believing Evolution

>> No.7455667

>>7454866

Basically this, 30k pre-modern humans had no concept of "race" or genetic differences but did have a sense of tribal unity.

So as long as you were a part of the tribe you were golden...well you know until you do something that angered the "spirits" or pissed of the tribal leader or some shit like that.

>> No.7455674

>>7455667
>Basically this, 30k pre-modern humans had no concept of "race" or genetic differences but did have a sense of tribal unity.
So?

They still only associated and wanted to associate with people who looked and acted like them. Same skin color, facial features etc.

>> No.7455684

>>7455667
>implying colonial Americans knew about genetics or evolution when they forced niggers to pick their cotton and only considered them 3/5ths of a human.
People are conceded and believe that they are better than others by divine right. We do this with animals, each other, individually and as a group. Any animal that isn't colorblind is racist.

>> No.7455706

>>7455684
>>implying colonial Americans knew about genetics or evolution
That wasn't my point, idiot.

>> No.7455717

>>7452770
Played out. You're lame and not funny. Just stop.

>> No.7455727

>>7452693
>Can racism be possible 30k thousand year ago among pre-historic humans?
Yes humanity was incredibly more diverse than it is today. Each tribe looked very different.

For example, the Cro Magnon man found in France looked somewhat like a present day native north american. Whereas the Grimaldi man, found in Italy, had negroid features.

Present day humans are the descendants of the tribes who genocided every other tribe in the area.

>> No.7455730

>>7455674

> They still only associated and wanted to associate with people who looked and acted like them. Same skin color, facial features etc.

Not necessarily, there would have to have been some level of leniency in terms of looks or we wouldn't have such diverse characteristics as we have now.

Modern genetics alone proves mixture between tribes/populations did happen so some form of tolerance existed. How much it was is still up to debate.

>>7455684

>implying colonial Americans knew about genetics or evolution when they forced niggers to pick their cotton and only considered them 3/5ths of a human.

Anon work on your reading comprehension, I made no mention of colonial americans so why are you bringing them up when the topic is about pre-modern society?

>> No.7455735

>>7454839
Appropriation is a form of racism, and the opposite of an attempt to preserve your culture. Dumbass

>> No.7455738

>>7455706
>>7455730
you responded to me twice in the past 20 minutes, are you really that desperate for a response? I'm sure /pol/ would love to have a discussion about this. Anyway, your post seemed to imply that knowledge of genetic difference is necessary for the act of racism, which I think is false. You can be an uneducated nigger or an uneducated redneck and you can still have a superiority complex, whether it be individual or based on something arbitrary like color.

>> No.7455743

>>7454866
To what extent?
Like full open borders around the world? Or lets all move to Africa? Or it doesn't matter if we let every 3rd world nation get nukes?
I mean, your mantra is nice and all, don't get me wrong. But does it stand up to real world situations, or are you talking more about diversity in burger stores?

>> No.7455751

>>7454866
>>7455667
The problem with these ideas, is that there is only one tribe of people that can unequivocally be said to have pulled the entire planet out of that tribal world you are talking about.
Plus, It's no good talking about 30,000 years ago when you can just look at Africa for a living and breathing example.

>> No.7455765

>>7455738

Do you not know how to check for same anon? Because the other post you pointed out isn't me and I'm sure not why said poster replied as such.

The issue with racism is that it's definition focuses on broad categories that 30k pre-modern people most likely wouldn't have conceptualized yet. Now what they would have conceptualize is tribalism which has overlapping characteristics with racism but on a more smaller scale.

So technically there probably was "racism" but to a level where two african tribes within tens of miles of each other could claim they are the "modern equivalent" of different races using subtle differences in features, distance and traditions as evidence.

>> No.7455810

>>7455765
>Do you not know how to check for same anon?
I don't think this is even possible. There's a reason it's called anon.
>The issue with racism is that it's definition focuses on broad categories that 30k pre-modern people most likely wouldn't have conceptualized yet.
Racism was only recently defined, but it has been around for much longer than that. I would say that racism evolved with humans, and as you said technically it existed, but society wasn't capable of expressing racism to it's fullest extent. I look forward to see how racism grows into it's true form over the next millennium.

>> No.7455820

if you're not racist, you're not capable of scientific thought.

>> No.7455919

>>7454866
>In a modern society where we don't have to fight over resources, there's absolutely no benefit to tribalism.
It depends what you define as resources. There's a lot of things worth fighting for.

>> No.7455929

>>7452762
>Yes I think racism is instinctual for humans, but has no place in a modern society, especially in the systematic and institutionalized manner we have in the US today.
bait.jpg

Racism is nothing more than applied statistics. Collect data and calculate the prior probabilities of people of different skin colors doing certain things.

P(Do well in school | skin = black) << P(Do well in school | skin = white)
P(commit crimes | skin = black) >> P(commit crimes | skin = white)

You don't have to use only skin color, you could use facial features as well. If everyone had white skin we would simply use facial features to be racist instead. We use visual features (clothes are another visual feature) because it's very hard for people to hide them and as it turns out they are a fairly good indicator for a persons behavior when you combined them.

>> No.7455934

>>7455929
Ok no that doesn't explain anything.
Explain why different races have different diseases, different chemical balances in their brains.

go vote bernie

>> No.7455937

>>7452693
Yes. Black on black racism in Africa.

>> No.7455938

>>7454866

I would have agreed with you, except for:

>In a modern society where we don't have to fight over resources, there's absolutely no benefit to tribalism.

Hahahah! What a moron.

>> No.7455939

>>7455934
>Explain why different races have different diseases, different chemical balances in their brains.
Races can be somewhat similar in genetics for obvious fucking reasons. I don't see what the problem with this is nor why you think that disproves what I said.

>go vote bernie
fuck off liberal communist faggot

>> No.7455946

>>7452693
>capoids
>black
and yes, racism is instinctive to humans, even among subgroups of a race such as hutus and tutsis.

>> No.7455952

if scots can hate english then absolutely

>> No.7455971

>>7452777
60 years ago we didn't have a thing called globalization. Which changed how we viewed the world. More or less it unified the human race so that those impoverished or treated badly by another group of people, were given a helping hand in hopes of restoring humanity and respect in these people.

>> No.7455973

>>7455820
That's such a bold statement.

Maybe one is not racist because he can use scientific thought.

>> No.7455975

>>7454866
>In a modern society where we don't have to fight over resources
The fights for resources are even bloodier and more merciless than they ever were in history.
A country should protect its own. Not kick out pensioners and citizens from their homes to flood in more immigrants like multiple european countries have done.
That's the shit that destroys tribes and countries.

>> No.7455977

>>7455973
the function of the mind is identification.

the first step of identification is finding differences.

if you can't see differences in different races, you aren't capable of the fundamental skills of critical thought and observing reality accurately.

>> No.7455983

>>7455977
That's part of the reason why the world is so fuck up now.

Liberals have redefined what racism means. It's no longer systematically, physically, and mentally oppressing a certain race, it's becomes about pointing out differences.

Racism isn't identification. That's visual anthropology you speak of.

>> No.7455988

>>7455983

well, practically speaking, pointing out that as a reliable rule of thumb, niggers are stupid, is still considered racist in this day and age.

>> No.7455989

>>7455975
>>7455938
>>7455751
>>7455919
>>7455743

I said "modern society" not "modern world" you chucklefucks.

>> No.7455991

>>7455989

Then who gives a fuck about your "modern society" when you have competing "modern societies"?

Kill yourself, nigger.

>> No.7455996

>>7455751
>The problem with these ideas, is that there is only one tribe of people that can unequivocally be said to have pulled the entire planet out of that tribal world you are talking about.


No specific group pulled the world out of tribalism. It was a combined effort of many cultures and lands. Collective knowledge pulled humans out of tribalism.

>Plus, It's no good talking about 30,000 years ago when you can just look at Africa for a living and breathing example.


Africa has a pretty harsh history. Keep in mind Africa has had empires just as any other group of people. To say "look at Africa now" is quite harsh seeing as what took place in Africa. Something that ripped it's nations apart, destroyed it's economics, and drained it's resources. Of course Africa's different from the rest of the world, because it's history is a lot different.

>> No.7455998

>>7455751
>The problem with these ideas, is that there is only one tribe of people that can unequivocally be said to have pulled the entire planet out of that tribal world you are talking about.

Yes, one tribe of people invented numerical system everyone uses today.

>> No.7455999

>>7455996
africa is a land of incredible richness whose inhabitants greatest kingdoms were completely pathetic compared to every other kingdom that ever existed, and which has had the advantage of having more advanced civilizations contribute vast amounts of knowledge and infrastructure to them, yet, because africans are inherently stupid and animalistic, are shit.

>> No.7456001

>>7455996

>Collective knowledge pulled humans out of tribalism.

Collective knowledge makes more tribalism vs those that are outside or refuse said knowledge. Don't be a Utopian moron.

>To say "look at Africa now" is quite harsh seeing as what took place in Africa.

Nah. Fuck Africa. It's a shit continent.

When you consider that European colonization of Africa was just Africans re-taking Africa after they had left it many thousands of years ago, it's not so bad. Unfortunately, during their travels whitey grew a "conscious" and eventually felt bad that they so easily dominated and subjugated their cousins.

In the end, Africa sucks. It's a shitty continent to live on.

>> No.7456006

>>7456001

europe was just as shitty before white people occupied it for two thousand years. we fixed it.

>> No.7456007

>>7455999
>africa is a land of incredible richness whose inhabitants greatest kingdoms were completely pathetic compared to every other kingdom that ever existed

The Empire of Ghana at, at it's peak, rivaled European kingdoms.

>which has had the advantage of having more advanced civilizations contribute vast amounts of knowledge and infrastructure to them, yet, because africans are inherently stupid and animalistic, are shit.

It's easy to say that from a view point of outside looking in. It's not as if Africa was always what it was today. Pre-Colonial Africa was as civilized as any other nation at the time. As said before, many nations had their cultures destroyed and their economics ruined. So of course getting them back on it's feet won't be simple. There's a lot at play more than Africans being "stupid" or "animalistc."

You're correct vast knowledge were attributed to Africa, none of which had good intents for the country.

>> No.7456008

Yes.

>> No.7456009

>>7452693
Not enough to keep humans from mating with neanderthals.

>> No.7456012

>>7456007
i can't believe you actually believe this shit.

africa has never been civilized. at best they had a prehistoric society of barbarians most likely mimicking eastern cultures.

they have never invented anything.

they are an utterly worthless people.

they should be sterilized and allowed to go extinct.

>> No.7456015

>>7456001
>Collective knowledge makes more tribalism vs those that are outside or refuse said knowledge. Don't be a Utopian moron.

But as a whole, it's not one group of people who change the world, it's the collective bucket of different people throwing in their 2 cents that change the world.

>When you consider that European colonization of Africa was just Africans re-taking Africa after they had left it many thousands of years ago

But that wasn't what European colonization was. It was much more brutal than that. The scramble for Africa deprived the country nad "progress" for African nations were halted in return for other nations getting resources they need to build their society.

>> No.7456016

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6_PCqJR1Dc

>> No.7456018

>>7456009

What's wrong with fucking Neanderthals?

Every non-Sub-Saharan human is part Neanderthal, and look at their success relative to sub-Saharan Africans.

The Chinese and their technologies throughout history. The Europeans. The Japanese. Even the long-gone Aztec, Mayan, Incan civilizations were far greater than any sub-Saharan civilization.

Fuck Africa. It was our homeland, but eventually you have to leave the nest. Enjoy your racial purity.

>> No.7456021
File: 75 KB, 682x596, African empires.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7456021

>>7456012
>africa has never been civilized. at best they had a prehistoric society of barbarians most likely mimicking eastern cultures.

But the many empires beg to differ. They had agriculture and trade as well, long before Arab and European contact.

>they have never invented anything.
They had all they needed, doesn't make them less human or "animalistic." As a matter of fact there's been many groups of people who haven't "invented" anything, why people go at the jugular when talkign about Africa is beyond me.

>they are an utterly worthless people.

A lot of people don't know that many Sub-Saharans did bring agriculture to East Africa IIRC. Either way, it's not like me and you have invented anything. That doesn't mean we're useless and take away our humanity.

>> No.7456026

>>7456021
agriculture and trade. fucking pathetic. they're animals. they are, at a genetic level stupid violent animals that just need to be done away with.

>> No.7456034

>>7456026
>agriculture and trade. fucking pathetic. they're animals. they are, at a genetic level stupid violent animals that just need to be done away with.


>MUH MUH FEELENZ!

Damn, you seem you be very emotional. Take a breath, it's not as serious as you're making it.

Animals aren't capable of the things many Africans have been attributed to do. I don't think you're stupid for not knowing about Africa, history doesn't have to teach you shit about what went on before European contact, but you are quite ignorant of them. I suggest reading a few book and documentaries. You'll come to understand life before and after colonization for African nations.

>> No.7456037

>>7456021

>they have never invented anything.
>They had all they needed, doesn't make them less human or "animalistic." As a matter of fact there's been many groups of people who haven't "invented" anything, why people go at the jugular when talkign about Africa is beyond me.

That's probably the most important line here. "They had all they needed".

In a Utopia, there is stagnation. Intellectual, technological, etc. Why? Because you don't need anything. You have everything you need. When food grows on trees 365 days of the year, you just need the strength to pick them up.

Now, when you have to deal with harsh winters, with tracking and finding animals, with caring for livestock because animals don't die in the winter like with plants and with agriculture, then you need to innovate. Africans didn't innovate as much as other peoples because *they didn't need to*. And that is the problem.

It's not like Africans are more stupid. It's that their societies didn't (and don't?) require the intellect and innovation that other societies did. And so, their societies are shittier.

I mean, you know what I'm talking about.

>> No.7456038

>>7456034
>> i suggest you consume some brainwashing whitewash meant to paint africans as human beings

nice try schlomo.

deny it all you want, make up whatever lies you want, everyone with a brain to think and eyes to see can comprehend the inherent worthlessness of the african race of hominids.

>> No.7456041

>>7456038
Eh, me and you are sitting here debating them. They must of some resonance. You didn't debate what I said, and you're on the verge of tears from your ass hurtery, so i'll leave you alone for now.

>> No.7456044

>>7452693
Yes racism is possible 30k years ago. There were babies who discriminated against people who were a different race than them.Imagine there were three areas filled with people who had different traits like colored hair and eyes,epicanthic fold, and dark skin. It's likely that they would had developed a in-group mentality solely based off distinctive traits.

>> No.7456046

>>7456037
I see what you're saying, but I wouldn't call their societies shittier, more or less suitable for their needs. I always think it's arrogant of people to sit and judge someone else society and home, sitting on a high horse of a land that have failed many times to get it right.

It's as if people need to look down on other's culture. I get it, Africa is fucked up right now, there's no denying that, but Africa has had many great cultures in it's day, however for some reason people look passed that and shit on these people at every turn. I don't think that's fair.

>> No.7456055

>>7455996
>>7455998
You guys are talking about technology, which is definitely part of what has brought us where we are today, but not even close to being the whole picture. It required a specific type of people to build the modern world and those people are the Europeans.

Lets face it, if there is a nuclear war tomorrow, your not going to recruit a bunch of Nigerians to rebuilt civilisation.

>Africa has a pretty harsh history.
Everywhere and every people has had a harsh history, which is exactly my point.

You can keep making excuses for Africa all day but it doesn't really deride my point.

>> No.7456062

>>7456046

>it's arrogant of people to sit and judge someone else society and home

Arrogance happens.

>I don't think that's fair.

Life isn't fair.

Which culture was the greatest sub-Saharan African culture? Empires didn't work in Africa like they did on other continents, with greatly centralized power, and infrastructure projects build to continue the greatness of the regime or dynasty, like with Rome or in China. Or even India and South America.

Without great relics of past infrastructure (e.g. the Pyramids, the Colosseum), you don't really have proof of a "great culture".

Which sub-Saharan African culture to you was the "greatest"?

>> No.7456069

>>7456055
>You guys are talking about technology, which is definitely part of what has brought us where we are today, but not even close to being the whole picture. It required a specific type of people to build the modern world and those people are the Europeans.


With the combined efforts of other scientist from other countries who happened to be developed at the time. They didn't do it alone.

>Lets face it, if there is a nuclear war tomorrow, your not going to recruit a bunch of Nigerians to rebuilt civilisation.

You'd get which ever survivors you can find to rebuild civilization. The people with the best answers no matter the background.

>Everywhere and every people has had a harsh history, which is exactly my point.

Africa of which has the most recent of these problems to happen. Europeans have had many problems from diseases to religious wars. All of which took Europeans quite some time to bounce back from. Years, decades even, but they got back on their feet. Africa has only recently (decades ago) have colonization removed, though some nations still hardships, they are still struggling to overcome their issues and hardships. Hell when European nations pulled out of some African nations they sorta just dropped everything and left, leaving inexperienced people to govern themselves. It was so bad in one country that they had picked a high school principal to lead a nation. Not only that but it seems as if only men with a military background stepped up to lead African nations, because no one else had experience in leading.

That isn't an excuse, it's there for you to put it all in perspective and understand the difficulties of Africa. I feel it's easy to sit on a keyboard and judge, but it's not as easy to understand the issue here. This isn't putting blame on the Europeans for colonizing, because if they hadn't we wouldn't be here talking. It's trying to shed some light on what many men often look over when talking about Africa.

>> No.7456070

>>7452693
In order to have racism, you have to have a societal framework that allows bias.

>> No.7456076
File: 642 KB, 1680x1050, djado.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7456076

>>7456062
>Which culture was the greatest sub-Saharan African culture?

As I mentioned in this thread, The Empire of Ghana. Definitely had a huge impact on West Africa. Arabs scholars even write about how rich the empire was.

>Empires didn't work in Africa like they did on other continents, with greatly centralized power, and infrastructure projects build to continue the greatness of the regime or dynasty, like with Rome or in China.

Just like all empires, even those you mentioned, Ghana rose and fell. As did Rome. They did have centralized power and infrastructure project, I don't understand why you don't think they did. West Africans built villages and morgues. Some even built colleges for Muslim religions (Islam being adopted to better trade with the Muslims).


>Without great relics of past infrastructure (e.g. the Pyramids, the Colosseum), you don't really have proof of a "great culture".


Neither did Europe before the Romans, Monumental architecture comes from a desire to show off to your neighbors. To show how big you are compared to them. Sub Saharan Africa had no rivaled neighbors to show off too. Also, keep in mind that most of Africa's monuments had be torn down so that cities could be built on top of the land.

>> No.7456077

>>7456069
You sure do have a lot of rickety scaffolding holding up your opinions

>> No.7456082

>>7455991
>who gives a fuck about your "modern society"
/pol/ and everyone else who freaks out about different ethnic groups living in their country.

>> No.7456083

>>7456082
yeah /pol/ is fucking insane, i for one enjoy seeing niggers and mudslimes and kikes ruin fucking everything good that we do.

>> No.7456084

>>7456082
Yeah lol, they sure are ignorant of history :^)

>> No.7456087

>>7456077
>Doesn't refute anything
>Only comments on opinions

>> No.7456089

>>7455743
>To what extent?
Well the end-game would be a one-world culture/nation. Though honestly I don't think we'll ever be able to get there until we either discover aliens or colonize other planets.

But there's a chance we can get there even without that if our technology unites us well enough that it eliminates language barriers.

>> No.7456093

>>7456018
What's so great about Neanderthals? None of those things were developed by them, they were developed by humans. Neanderthals were long dead by that point and had even less to show for it.

>> No.7456094

>>7456089
we can get there by whites exterminating all other races.

>> No.7456095

>>7456094
We all know that's not going to happen. So now come up with a realistic way, or just keep holding on to hypothetical until you're a grumpy old man.

>> No.7456097

>>7456095
not with that attitude

>> No.7456101

>>7456089
So what would your one-world culture/nation look like?

An exactly equal percentage of every race making up a persons genetics? Or would you take slightly less African then you would European on average?
Mosque on Friday and then Church on Sunday?

Opinions like yours can only be formed on very unstable foundations. Its the same foundation that allows you to say crap like 'tribalism is silly, we're all out of the stone age now'.
If one is to realise the blatant fact that not all peoples and cultures are equal then you would quickly see how stupid such a thing sounds.

>> No.7456106

>>7456101
what is the mathematical probability of black people and white people having evolved with similar intelligence

>> No.7456110

>>7456106
Very small.

>> No.7456111

>>7455929
>Racism is nothing more than applied statistics. Collect data and calculate the prior probabilities of people of different skin colors doing certain things.

Racism is applied statistics if you're a complete moron. You're chalking up an incredibly complex issue to genetics when there's a shitload better reasons why white people outperform black people in the United States. Namely poverty and discrimination.

>> No.7456113

>>7456101
>'tribalism is silly, we're all out of the stone age now'.

Tribalism is silly though. It's unnecessary in this day and age where rationality exist. Where globalization exists. Say what you want, but globalization abolished all the need for creeds and nationality, because one can't simply be identified by what nation he's from anymore.

>> No.7456119

>>7456111
Where does discrimination occur in the daily life of the average black person? I've never seen a black person in person in my entire life so it's not a stupid question.

>> No.7456120

>>7456119
it doesn't. actually, in america, people are forced by law to discriminate against whites, and in the favor of blacks, and the blacks are protected by innumerable social taboos, when in reality, they're just fucking dumber then a box of rocks, and inherently wicked and uncivilized.

>> No.7456125

>>7456119
>Where does discrimination occur in the daily life of the average black person?

The biggest problem is actually the repercussions of past discrimination. The entire reason why huge numbers of black youth grow up in terrible neighborhoods is because of segregation from the early 20th century.

Other than that, the expectations for black youth are lower. A lot of people in power during a black kid's childhood will treat them as though their lives are aimed at a lower trajectory. Teachers won't pay as much attention to ensuring their success.

Like anything else, this doesn't apply to the life of every single black person, but it's why the bell curve for black people is nudged to the left for so many variables.

>> No.7456129

>>7456120
>and inherently wicked and uncivilized.

Colonizing lands that do not belong to you and enslaving shitloads of people isn't 'wicked'? Praying to idols of gods and carrying little wooden and metal totems around your neck isn't 'uncivilized'? I think Europeans have just as much to answer for.

>it doesn't. actually, in america, people are forced by law to discriminate against whites

I'm pretty sure you're talking about affirmative action plans in education, but I'm not sure. Tell me if that's what you're complaining about so I can go into better detail on why you're an idiot.

>> No.7456134
File: 373 KB, 1366x768, 1394773637477.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7456134

>>7456125
>Teachers won't pay as much attention to ensuring their success.
Wouldn't that just be a problem with Americas education system? Doesn't that happen to white students as well? I'm not at all familiar with students living in poverty, but is it really the systems responsibility to force these students to prioritize the things they hate over the things they love? Why can't they think for themselves?
Regardless, I do see how it could be a huge issue, especially with the black culture which emphasises pleasure rather than hard work and success. However, for the vast majority of black students, how are things like pic related going to bring the entire black community out of poverty and rid them of their 'black culture' which is needed to solve discrimination.

>> No.7456136
File: 53 KB, 540x421, Barkley.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7456136

>>7456119
Towards other black people mostly.

>> No.7456139

>>7456129
man, they teach some fucked up historical falsehoods.

white man went to africa, and operated civilly, purchasing land, setting up shop, and improving everything they touched drastically. the only 'civilized' periods in african history were the periods during which they were under white dominance. this is absolute historical FACT.

>> No.7456141

>>7456134
First of all, that image is laughable. "Chancing websites" go off of their own algorithms that are based entirely off of how they 'think' the process works. I guarantee that the website in that picture adds an arbitrary number to the score for URMs without any evidence that their score actually correlates to a real chance of acceptance. Unscientific and unrealistic.

Not only that, but for every black student who gets into Harvard on 'affirmative action', there's tens of thousands who don't even apply because they know there's no chance that they could get in. Your odds of getting into Harvard as an URM are way worse than the average white guy, even if they get nudged up a bit during the actual application process.

>Wouldn't that just be a problem with Americas education system? Doesn't that happen to white students as well?

It is a problem with America's education system, but it affects black students disproportionately.

>I'm not at all familiar with students living in poverty, but is it really the systems responsibility to force these students to prioritize the things they hate over the things they love?

I don't know what that has to do with anything. Rephrase what you're saying here.

>Regardless, I do see how it could be a huge issue, especially with the black culture which emphasises pleasure rather than hard work and success

I always see the word 'culture' thrown about like it's some kind of substitute for 'free will'. Your culture is a product of your environment, and 'ghetto culture' comes from people who grew up in ghettos.

>how are things like pic related going to bring the entire black community out of poverty and rid them of their 'black culture' which is needed to solve discrimination.

I don't think of affirmative action as the 'ultimate solution' to racism.

>> No.7456144
File: 46 KB, 620x437, congo-hands.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7456144

>>7456139
>white man went to africa, and operated civilly, purchasing land, setting up shop, and improving everything they touched drastically.

You are such an irreparable dumbass that I'm just going to leave you with an image. I don't trust you to read and understand a written explanation of why you're wrong about everything.

>> No.7456148

>>7456144
>>literally posts a picture of niggers holding limbs they cut off of other niggers

3P1C B8 M8 I R8 8/8

>> No.7456150 [DELETED] 

>>7456141
>I don't know what that has to do with anything. Rephrase what you're saying here.
Black people hate school
They love drinking, partying, having sex and fighting instead of studying
Would a nagging teacher make any difference?
>First of all, that image is laughable.
http://www.lawschoolpredictor.com/about/accuracy/
Eh judging by only 1-5% difference in admit rates you may be right. Don't know how this image was made.

>> No.7456151

>>7456148
>British missionaries with men holding hands severed from victims named Bolenge and Lingomo by A.B.I.R. militiamen
>severed from victims named Bolenge and Lingomo by A.B.I.R. miltiamen
>by A.B.I.R. militiamen

looks like I was completely right about you not being able to read and understand a written explanation of why you're wrong.

>> No.7456153

>>7456150
>Black people hate school

So do poor white people, apparently, because poverty affects their scores at school as well. Do the math here, man.

>Eh judging by only 1-5% difference in admit rates you may be right.

For top law schools, a 5 percentage point error is roughly 100% larger than the standard acceptance rate. That's one of the reasons 'chancing' for ultra-selective institutions is dumb.

>> No.7456204

>>7456148
you moron