U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Are Black men as capable as White men?
Yes, but changes must be made 23 53.49%
No, they simply aren't 17 39.53%
I don't know 3 6.98%
Voters: 43. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread Start New Thread
Old 06-09-2016, 04:01 AM
28,981 posts, read 15,249,919 times
Reputation: 19771


Originally Posted by Gunion Powder View Post
The wealthiest Black person in America is a woman. That should bother us but it doesn't.
Wow, nice sexism there!

Old 06-09-2016, 05:34 AM
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
30,359 posts, read 19,996,624 times
Reputation: 8307
Originally Posted by skepticratic View Post
Yes, but I can't vote in your ****ty pole. The only yes options comes with some qualifier I don't understand at all.

Bare in mind, some people of both races will objectively be better than the other. Some people are smarter, stronger, kinder. White people, statistically speaking, have higher IQs than black people. Some black people will still be smarter than some white people, and this information alone is not enough to say which race is better. Ultimately, neither race is better, though individuals within each could be.

"Better" is relative to one's circumstances.

Being smarter might be an advantage for a while, but once you have been out reproduced, that doesn't matter.

The Neatherthals and Denisovians are gone because modern humans migrating out of Africa out ****ed them.
Old 06-09-2016, 06:17 AM
36,369 posts, read 15,918,290 times
Reputation: 8256
Originally Posted by Gunion Powder View Post
Just wondering what the general consensus is here.
I didn't respond to the "poll" becuae it is NOT valid.

Black, white yellow or red has NOTHING to do with it.

People are people.

Some can do anything the put their minds to and some can't.

Skin color has NOTING to do with it.

Old 06-09-2016, 06:24 AM
36,369 posts, read 15,918,290 times
Reputation: 8256
Originally Posted by skepticratic View Post
But what change? And why do you assume that anyone who thinks black and white people are equal also want to see some unspecified change?

Under current conditions, I don't think black and white people are actually treated all that differently in the eyes of the law. The primary factor is poverty. Poor black people have it worse than poor white people, but I'm not so sure that middle class black people really have things any worse than middle class white people.

Now, if we assume that the change is something like better funding for public schools in poor areas, then yes, a change is in order. But I don't think the primary issue with a change like that is about race.
"Poor black people have it worse than poor white people"

Why do you think that?

Have you ever been to Appalachia?

"Now, if we assume that the change is something like better funding for public schools in poor areas,"

In the "poor" areas of Wash, D.C. we have the HIGHEST cost ratio per student in the country and one of the LOWEST performing rates in the country.

Contrary to what a lot think, more money is NOT always the answer.

Do you have any data to back up that "poor" areas get LESS money?

In the state I lived EVERY school in the state got the exact same based on "cost per student".
Old 06-09-2016, 06:40 AM
Location: Huntsville
5,411 posts, read 4,024,978 times
Reputation: 6180
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post

But why add "if changes are made"

No changes need to be made at all and anyone can be all they can be.

I voted yes. ANY human being can do anything they put their minds to. I can only guess at the change the OP thinks needs to be made, but if it involves race (which seems to be a really big deal in this forum) any person who puts their mind to achieving their goals doesn't look at race. They look at their obstacles and how they can overcome them. They don't care about race.

As far as a black man doing anything, Ben Carson comes to mind. He had a troubled youth, came from a poor family in which his father abandoned him, and was violent as a teenager... once attempting to hit his mother over the head with a hammer... and a second attempt was at stabbing a friend but the blade broke off in his friends belt buckle. He took it upon himself to change his ways and was accepted into Yale, where he graduated and went on to Med school to become a well known neuro-surgeon at John Hopkins.

Just goes to show that your past is just that... the past. Everyone has a struggle and a burden to bear. But with enough motivation and tenacity any human being on this earth can do what they set their mind to.
Old 06-09-2016, 06:47 AM
15,273 posts, read 7,790,079 times
Reputation: 7922
Originally Posted by Fox Terrier View Post
I can't believe people actually voted.
I agree, very sad excuse for a thread. IMO it was just a way for the OP to spout his/her views on racial inferiority/superiority of one group over another.

Very odd "answers" to choose from with all the qualifiers.

Originally Posted by SWCM7950 View Post
Maybe not in the modern world but having negroid skin sure as heck made a big difference thousands of years ago. The entire genetic make up of negroids vs. caucasoids allowed the former vs the latter to live in different climates. Your comment is so utterly ignorant but such a widely held politically correct typeof platitude that makes no sense in the grand scheme of human eveolution and the creation of civilization and societies. Just based on their inherent biological and genetic make up negroids would never have survived or thrived in the vast cold and harsh winters of say Scandinavia.
FYI, the human race is made up of only one "race" of people. Science no longer recognizes the terms "negroid" or "caucasoid" or "mongloid" because they have been determined to have no scientific basis and were created during an era where racism permeated scientific research.

On the OP at hand, there is nothing wrong with black men today and there is nothing that makes them less qualified or "worse" than white men on the whole.
Old 06-09-2016, 06:53 AM
66,212 posts, read 30,074,688 times
Reputation: 8600
Yes. No qualifier needed.

The tragedy is that so many choose to not do so.
Old 06-09-2016, 07:04 AM
Location: Southern California
15,088 posts, read 17,495,048 times
Reputation: 10298
Originally Posted by Gunion Powder View Post
Just wondering what the general consensus is here.

[like any other man]
Old 06-09-2016, 08:50 AM
4,491 posts, read 1,652,658 times
Reputation: 1986
Originally Posted by SWCM7950 View Post
I never said Greek and Roman civilizations were the best to ever exist. I said if you compare the knowledge, discoveries ect. that came out of those periods and for that matter the Enlightenment etc. it dwarfs anything that any other group of people or civilizations have achieved. And yes I wear the description xenophobic as a badge of honor as I believe in true human diversity just as much as I believe in say ecological or biological diversity in other aspects of nature. I have no desire to see a washed out world where every race eventually breeds with every other race.

And no of course not! Blacks are capable of doing great things, maybe for their own people. But as far as western civilization's reliance on or their contribution to, meh, it's trivial.

The ball is in your court, tell me all the black or African inventors, philosophers, scientists that have revolutionized the modern world of the last 100 years?? Neil Tyson (a product of western white civilization)? For every person you name I can name 10 whites. Where are the W. Edwards Demings and the Glenn Seaborgs of the black race in the last 75 years?

I can already see where this thread is headed.........like I said lack of African/negroid/black accomplishment is always blamed on things like slavery, colonialism, entrenched racism blah blah.
This isn't a dick measuring contest, and even if it was, I can see where this leads. You say Neil Tyson can't count because he's a product of the west. That discounts a lot of people. Given the topic at hand, that shouldn't matter. The question is can a black person accomplish as much as a white person, and the answer is yes. But if you're basing your views on this on where they're from, it's almost impossible. In the time in which great recognition for brilliant insights is more easily recored, the West has influenced everywhere. I could say Nelson Mandela, but the existence of South Africa is the result of Western influence creating their conception of nation-states everywhere else on the planet. You've given me an impossible task, which I assume you did on purpose so you can feel you've won.

But reality is that Neil Tyson is smarter than most white people. Nelson Mandela has done more to benefit humanity than most white people. W. E. B Du Bois is a better writer and scholar than most white people. I would imagine there are more influential white people than black people. But why? Can it truly come down to one race being objectively superior than the other? Africa was less technologically developed than Europe. Is it really because white people are smarter or is it because white people created a need for these development. A lot of technological innovation is not the result of some beautiful human ingenuity but rather some awful reason. A lot of technology is developed by the military as weapons of war or some equivalent. And it's always been like that. For example, the idea of a nation-state, which was the inspiration for a great deal of the thinking in the enlightenment, was formed because it was a more efficient way to make money to fight wars. Once cannons came along, single sovereign rulers realized that castles only get you so far. Forming powerful empires was the solution not because they wanted to make the world better, but because there were people to be killed (and in fairness, those people thought the same about them).

Do you see what I'm saying? Western culture has done amazing things and is the most influential of societies, but can that really come down to 'white people are better?' I mean, statistically, Asians are smarter, and I'd actually argue that Eastern philosophy is more human and moral that Western ones. I'm a huge fan of the enlightenment and liberalism, but honestly, Aristotle's idea of good is worse than Laozi's in many ways. Buddha is better than Jesus. At least what Buddha says can possibly conform to reality in some way. Many Christians still think that evolution is a lie simply because Jesus says he believed in Genesis (which interestingly enough, the idea that evolution and religion have been at odds since evolutions conception isn't actually true; the church wasn't overly reluctant to allow evolution in; the level of resistance we see now is actually higher than it was in 1860, which is horrifying). The Dalai Lama said, quite seriously, that Buddhism should change is science proves one of it's claims wrong. Would you ever here the Pope say that? Not even hippie dippie Pope Frank would say that.

So, to wrap this up, I think your idea that the West is objectively superior is totally subjective. There isn't one clear way to measure superiority. And even so, this does little to make a certain claim that some races are clearly better than others, for more or less the same reason. Gandhi was a better human than most white people. Hitler was a worse human than most black people. Your asking me to name special people isn't a worth while assignment for reasons like that. For every influential white person you can name, there are 100 white people who never did anything noteworthy. Influential people are exceptional; not evidence of racial superiority.
Old 06-09-2016, 09:37 AM
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
9,770 posts, read 21,065,714 times
Reputation: 9354
Originally Posted by skepticratic View Post
For every influential white person you can name, there are 100 white people who never did anything noteworthy. Influential people are exceptional; not evidence of racial superiority.
The person who started the whole modern race / IQ controversy (Charles Johnson) has said as much himself. The number of truly great people throughout history is tiny, maybe several thousand. Often this people tend to be highly eccentric and odd, which in a strict religious or tribal society would mean being persecuted rather than nurtured. Western Europe produced very few great people until the vice of fundamentalist Christianity loosened. The earliest scientist in Europe were often murdered by the church. Islam has reversed course, it used to be more tolerant and had many great civilizations, today Islamic countries are mostly very intolerant, the great people it produces mostly leave for the West.

Technology has historically lagged in the Americas pre Columbus, Sub Saharan Africa, and Oceania because those placed were geographically isolated. Eurasian peoples had an easier time passed around their innovations.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.

Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top