Another mass shooting by whitey
Comments
-
Bump.TheKobeStopper said:
I mean if we’re just going to ask questions back and forth, do you think different races can be more or less violent based their genetics?SFGbob said:
Since you appear to know the answer why don't you tell us?TheKobeStopper said:I wouldn’t want to answer that question if I was you guys either.
-
Systemic racism causes black folks to shoot each other. You know you may be right but I don't think the racism is coming from where you think it might be coming from. Believing that white people are responsible for the breakdown of the black family and for black and Hispanic kids shooting each other is probably one of the more racist things I've heard.TheKobeStopper said:
Systemic racism. Now answer my question.SFGbob said:
Wasn't the Kunt just crying about other people dodging his questions?TheKobeStopper said:
I mean if we’re just going to ask questions back and forth, do you think different races can be more or less violent based their genetics?SFGbob said:
Since you appear to know the answer why don't you tell us?TheKobeStopper said:I wouldn’t want to answer that question if I was you guys either.
You don't see black people as your equals do you Kobe?
-
Bump.TheKobeStopper said:
I mean if we’re just going to ask questions back and forth, do you think different races can be more or less violent based their genetics?SFGbob said:
Since you appear to know the answer why don't you tell us?TheKobeStopper said:I wouldn’t want to answer that question if I was you guys either.
-
White people established the Great Society.SFGbob said:
Systemic racism causes black folks to shoot each other. You know you may be right but I don't think the racism is coming from where you think it might be coming from. Believing that white people are responsible for the breakdown of the black family and for black and Hispanic kids shooting each other is probably one of the more racist things I've heard.TheKobeStopper said:
Systemic racism. Now answer my question.SFGbob said:
Wasn't the Kunt just crying about other people dodging his questions?TheKobeStopper said:
I mean if we’re just going to ask questions back and forth, do you think different races can be more or less violent based their genetics?SFGbob said:
Since you appear to know the answer why don't you tell us?TheKobeStopper said:I wouldn’t want to answer that question if I was you guys either.
You don't see black people as your equals do you Kobe?
-
I don't think race and genetics have anything to do with people being more or less violent Kobe.TheKobeStopper said:
Bump.TheKobeStopper said:
I mean if we’re just going to ask questions back and forth, do you think different races can be more or less violent based their genetics?SFGbob said:
Since you appear to know the answer why don't you tell us?TheKobeStopper said:I wouldn’t want to answer that question if I was you guys either.
Do you think skin color has something to do with a person's ability to avoid having kids out of wedlock? -
TKS is a perfect useful idiot. Obsess about race 24/7/365, and the real culprits - culture and environment - never enter the discussion.SFGbob said:
I don't think race and genetics have anything to do with people being more or less violent Kobe.TheKobeStopper said:
Bump.TheKobeStopper said:
I mean if we’re just going to ask questions back and forth, do you think different races can be more or less violent based their genetics?SFGbob said:
Since you appear to know the answer why don't you tell us?TheKobeStopper said:I wouldn’t want to answer that question if I was you guys either.
Do you think skin color has something to do with a person's ability to avoid having kids out of wedlock?
TKS is the oppressor, sinning by omission, but remains clueless of his own culpability. -
Who started this thread?TurdBomber said:
TKS is a perfect useful idiot. Obsess about race 24/7/365, and the real culprits - culture and environment - never enter the discussion.SFGbob said:
I don't think race and genetics have anything to do with people being more or less violent Kobe.TheKobeStopper said:
Bump.TheKobeStopper said:
I mean if we’re just going to ask questions back and forth, do you think different races can be more or less violent based their genetics?SFGbob said:
Since you appear to know the answer why don't you tell us?TheKobeStopper said:I wouldn’t want to answer that question if I was you guys either.
Do you think skin color has something to do with a person's ability to avoid having kids out of wedlock?
TKS is the oppressor, sinning by omission, but remains clueless of his own culpability. -
Look you fucking racist, it's about poverty not genetics.TheKobeStopper said:
I mean if we’re just going to ask questions back and forth, do you think different races can be more or less violent based their genetics?SFGbob said:
Since you appear to know the answer why don't you tell us?TheKobeStopper said:I wouldn’t want to answer that question if I was you guys either.
-
Fuck off, Vichy.TheKobeStopper said:
Who started this thread?TurdBomber said:
TKS is a perfect useful idiot. Obsess about race 24/7/365, and the real culprits - culture and environment - never enter the discussion.SFGbob said:
I don't think race and genetics have anything to do with people being more or less violent Kobe.TheKobeStopper said:
Bump.TheKobeStopper said:
I mean if we’re just going to ask questions back and forth, do you think different races can be more or less violent based their genetics?SFGbob said:
Since you appear to know the answer why don't you tell us?TheKobeStopper said:I wouldn’t want to answer that question if I was you guys either.
Do you think skin color has something to do with a person's ability to avoid having kids out of wedlock?
TKS is the oppressor, sinning by omission, but remains clueless of his own culpability. -
Atta boy. I don’t really understand how you justify thinking IQ and race can be tied to genetics but violence can’t, but baby steps.SFGbob said:
I don't think race and genetics have anything to do with people being more or less violent Kobe.TheKobeStopper said:
Bump.TheKobeStopper said:
I mean if we’re just going to ask questions back and forth, do you think different races can be more or less violent based their genetics?SFGbob said:
Since you appear to know the answer why don't you tell us?TheKobeStopper said:I wouldn’t want to answer that question if I was you guys either.
Do you think skin color has something to do with a person's ability to avoid having kids out of wedlock?
There is no biological basis for race, there is no genetic basis for race, there is no scientific basis for race. So, if you’re asking if one race is intrinsically more likely to have kids out of wedlock, the answer is obviously no. -
Christ, you are one dumb motherfucker.TheKobeStopper said:
Atta boy. I don’t really understand how you justify thinking IQ and race can be tied to genetics but violence can’t, but baby steps.SFGbob said:
I don't think race and genetics have anything to do with people being more or less violent Kobe.TheKobeStopper said:
Bump.TheKobeStopper said:
I mean if we’re just going to ask questions back and forth, do you think different races can be more or less violent based their genetics?SFGbob said:
Since you appear to know the answer why don't you tell us?TheKobeStopper said:I wouldn’t want to answer that question if I was you guys either.
Do you think skin color has something to do with a person's ability to avoid having kids out of wedlock?
There is no biological basis for race, there is no genetic basis for race, there is no scientific basis for race. So, if you’re asking if one race is intrinsically more likely to have kids out of wedlock, the answer is obviously no.
Nature vs. nurture. This is Life 101 shit.
Fuck.
-
And the fact that there has been no white defensive backs in the NFL for 20 years and that nearly all elite sprinters are black is due to systemic racism. Got it.TheKobeStopper said:
Atta boy. I don’t really understand how you justify thinking IQ and race can be tied to genetics but violence can’t, but baby steps.SFGbob said:
I don't think race and genetics have anything to do with people being more or less violent Kobe.TheKobeStopper said:
Bump.TheKobeStopper said:
I mean if we’re just going to ask questions back and forth, do you think different races can be more or less violent based their genetics?SFGbob said:
Since you appear to know the answer why don't you tell us?TheKobeStopper said:I wouldn’t want to answer that question if I was you guys either.
Do you think skin color has something to do with a person's ability to avoid having kids out of wedlock?
There is no biological basis for race, there is no genetic basis for race, there is no scientific basis for race. So, if you’re asking if one race is intrinsically more likely to have kids out of wedlock, the answer is obviously no.
-
Everything in TKS's world is Socially Constructed.
Or not. -
He had a white soulDJDuck said:
Aminadab Gaxiola Gonzalez
-
He has a friend who is white.greenblood said:
He had a white soulDJDuck said:
Aminadab Gaxiola Gonzalez
-
Hispanics as we know are passionate and killings of wives, girlfriends, husbands, lovers are not that uncommon when when relationships go wrong. Happens with everyone just a higher rate with the white Hispanics.greenblood said:
He had a white soulDJDuck said:
Aminadab Gaxiola Gonzalez -
Some ancestor of his 500 years ago was mistreated.PurpleThrobber said:
He has a friend who is white.greenblood said:
He had a white soulDJDuck said:
Aminadab Gaxiola Gonzalez -
Systemic racism is complete garbage, a myth propped up by woketards. I can now see why bob brings up strawman buggery.TheKobeStopper said:
Systemic racism. Now answer my question.SFGbob said:
Wasn't the Kunt just crying about other people dodging his questions?TheKobeStopper said:
I mean if we’re just going to ask questions back and forth, do you think different races can be more or less violent based their genetics?SFGbob said:
Since you appear to know the answer why don't you tell us?TheKobeStopper said:I wouldn’t want to answer that question if I was you guys either.
-
When you can't present facts or evidence, you indict the whole "system."
Much easier than owning your shit. -
This is a monumentally stupid thread. Folks like Glenn Loury have clearly laid out the chronology of this issue in a way that should be nearly unanimously agreed up. Yet we always get these shit back and forths instead.
It should be easy to recognize that minorities, black people in particular, have been dealt a shit hand through centuries of state-sanctioned racism. While those de jure practices have more or less been effectively eliminated since the 70s, their legacy isn't hard to trace to the present day. Glenn is perfectly happy to first clearly recognize that history of racism and the inequities it created, but also recognize that the state itself can do little to rectify that problem from this point forward. The gap that remains can only substantially be bridged by the black community itself, with little aid from the state. A patronizing "nanny-state", while well intentioned, has often caused more harm than good (public housing devolving into ghettos, perverse incentives from affirmative action, etc). The number of people who can simultaneously hold these two thoughts in their head at the same time is embarrassingly small. -
I agree. Loury, John McWhorter, Thomas Chatterton Williams, etc are very good voices to listen to. You can be realistic about the past and still reject wokeism. Still lots of work to do, but dismantling 'western culture' will achieve nothing.GreenRiverGatorz said:This is a monumentally stupid thread. Folks like Glenn Loury have clearly laid out the chronology of this issue in a way that should be nearly unanimously agreed up. Yet we always get these shit back and forths instead.
It should be easy to recognize that minorities, black people in particular, have been dealt a shit hand through centuries of state-sanctioned racism. While those de jure practices have more or less been effectively eliminated since the 70s, their legacy isn't hard to trace to the present day. Glenn is perfectly happy to first clearly recognize that history of racism and the inequities it created, but also recognize that the state itself can do little to rectify that problem from this point forward. The gap that remains can only substantially be bridged by the black community itself, with little aid from the state. A patronizing "nanny-state", while well intentioned, has often caused more harm than good (public housing devolving into ghettos, perverse incentives from affirmative action, etc). The number of people who can simultaneously hold these two thoughts in their head at the same time is embarrassingly small. -
It's clear every race has been subject to persecution and slavery over history and all those races are supposed to just "get over it". This is about voting democrat and nothing more. Own it.GreenRiverGatorz said:This is a monumentally stupid thread. Folks like Glenn Loury have clearly laid out the chronology of this issue in a way that should be nearly unanimously agreed up. Yet we always get these shit back and forths instead.
It should be easy to recognize that minorities, black people in particular, have been dealt a shit hand through centuries of state-sanctioned racism. While those de jure practices have more or less been effectively eliminated since the 70s, their legacy isn't hard to trace to the present day. Glenn is perfectly happy to first clearly recognize that history of racism and the inequities it created, but also recognize that the state itself can do little to rectify that problem from this point forward. The gap that remains can only substantially be bridged by the black community itself, with little aid from the state. A patronizing "nanny-state", while well intentioned, has often caused more harm than good (public housing devolving into ghettos, perverse incentives from affirmative action, etc). The number of people who can simultaneously hold these two thoughts in their head at the same time is embarrassingly small. -
McWhorter and Loury are two of the best on this subject (haven't listened to Williams much, but I'll add him to my list). But it's also depressing that they're left holding the torch for this viewpoint and that so few prominent black figures are in their corner. It's literally mind boggling that this isn't a majority-held stance in this country.hardhat said:
I agree. Loury, John McWhorter, Thomas Chatterton Williams, etc are very good voices to listen to. You can be realistic about the past and still reject wokeism. Still lots of work to do, but dismantling 'western culture' will achieve nothing.GreenRiverGatorz said:This is a monumentally stupid thread. Folks like Glenn Loury have clearly laid out the chronology of this issue in a way that should be nearly unanimously agreed up. Yet we always get these shit back and forths instead.
It should be easy to recognize that minorities, black people in particular, have been dealt a shit hand through centuries of state-sanctioned racism. While those de jure practices have more or less been effectively eliminated since the 70s, their legacy isn't hard to trace to the present day. Glenn is perfectly happy to first clearly recognize that history of racism and the inequities it created, but also recognize that the state itself can do little to rectify that problem from this point forward. The gap that remains can only substantially be bridged by the black community itself, with little aid from the state. A patronizing "nanny-state", while well intentioned, has often caused more harm than good (public housing devolving into ghettos, perverse incentives from affirmative action, etc). The number of people who can simultaneously hold these two thoughts in their head at the same time is embarrassingly small. -
Can you explain why race and genetics don’t impact violent behavior but athletic ability is impacted by it?SFGbob said:
And the fact that there has been no white defensive backs in the NFL for 20 years and that nearly all elite sprinters are black is due to systemic racism. Got it.TheKobeStopper said:
Atta boy. I don’t really understand how you justify thinking IQ and race can be tied to genetics but violence can’t, but baby steps.SFGbob said:
I don't think race and genetics have anything to do with people being more or less violent Kobe.TheKobeStopper said:
Bump.TheKobeStopper said:
I mean if we’re just going to ask questions back and forth, do you think different races can be more or less violent based their genetics?SFGbob said:
Since you appear to know the answer why don't you tell us?TheKobeStopper said:I wouldn’t want to answer that question if I was you guys either.
Do you think skin color has something to do with a person's ability to avoid having kids out of wedlock?
There is no biological basis for race, there is no genetic basis for race, there is no scientific basis for race. So, if you’re asking if one race is intrinsically more likely to have kids out of wedlock, the answer is obviously no. -
One trick pony weighs in.TheKobeStopper said:
Can you explain why race and genetics don’t impact violent behavior but athletic ability is impacted by it?SFGbob said:
And the fact that there has been no white defensive backs in the NFL for 20 years and that nearly all elite sprinters are black is due to systemic racism. Got it.TheKobeStopper said:
Atta boy. I don’t really understand how you justify thinking IQ and race can be tied to genetics but violence can’t, but baby steps.SFGbob said:
I don't think race and genetics have anything to do with people being more or less violent Kobe.TheKobeStopper said:
Bump.TheKobeStopper said:
I mean if we’re just going to ask questions back and forth, do you think different races can be more or less violent based their genetics?SFGbob said:
Since you appear to know the answer why don't you tell us?TheKobeStopper said:I wouldn’t want to answer that question if I was you guys either.
Do you think skin color has something to do with a person's ability to avoid having kids out of wedlock?
There is no biological basis for race, there is no genetic basis for race, there is no scientific basis for race. So, if you’re asking if one race is intrinsically more likely to have kids out of wedlock, the answer is obviously no. -
Plenty of the majority have been dealt a shit hand as well, over the centuries. Why else did they leave their homelands to come to a new and in many cases hostile and deadly new land?GreenRiverGatorz said:This is a monumentally stupid thread. Folks like Glenn Loury have clearly laid out the chronology of this issue in a way that should be nearly unanimously agreed up. Yet we always get these shit back and forths instead.
It should be easy to recognize that minorities, black people in particular, have been dealt a shit hand through centuries of state-sanctioned racism. While those de jure practices have more or less been effectively eliminated since the 70s, their legacy isn't hard to trace to the present day. Glenn is perfectly happy to first clearly recognize that history of racism and the inequities it created, but also recognize that the state itself can do little to rectify that problem from this point forward. The gap that remains can only substantially be bridged by the black community itself, with little aid from the state. A patronizing "nanny-state", while well intentioned, has often caused more harm than good (public housing devolving into ghettos, perverse incentives from affirmative action, etc). The number of people who can simultaneously hold these two thoughts in their head at the same time is embarrassingly small.
The problem won't be solved so long as group identity is the key differentiator among people. The US is a country built upon individual rights, responsibilities and liberties first. If you're a respectable individual, you'll get respect and be treated well 99.99% of the time in the US.
If you're a whiney bitch, you'll get treated like one. -
My man Loury actually talks about that as well. Tl;dr - the concept of racial stigma and the very unique oppression that black people in America experienced versus other minority groups is a reality worth recognizing. Doesn't really change how we explore policy going forward, but it's key context to keep in mind. Worth a read.TurdBomber said:
Plenty of the majority have been dealt a shit hand as well, over the centuries. Why else did they leave their homelands to come to a new and in many cases hostile and deadly new land?GreenRiverGatorz said:This is a monumentally stupid thread. Folks like Glenn Loury have clearly laid out the chronology of this issue in a way that should be nearly unanimously agreed up. Yet we always get these shit back and forths instead.
It should be easy to recognize that minorities, black people in particular, have been dealt a shit hand through centuries of state-sanctioned racism. While those de jure practices have more or less been effectively eliminated since the 70s, their legacy isn't hard to trace to the present day. Glenn is perfectly happy to first clearly recognize that history of racism and the inequities it created, but also recognize that the state itself can do little to rectify that problem from this point forward. The gap that remains can only substantially be bridged by the black community itself, with little aid from the state. A patronizing "nanny-state", while well intentioned, has often caused more harm than good (public housing devolving into ghettos, perverse incentives from affirmative action, etc). The number of people who can simultaneously hold these two thoughts in their head at the same time is embarrassingly small.
The problem won't be solved so long as group identity is the key differentiator among people. The US is a country built upon individual rights, responsibilities and liberties first. If you're a respectable individual, you'll get respect and be treated well 99.99% of the time in the US.
If you're a whiney bitch, you'll get treated like one. -
The problem is that this isn't centuries ago or even 20 years ago. The problem is now and the fact that inner city black kids are forced into sh*tty public schools is the fault of dems and those who vote for them. This is institutional racism, just that I have nothing to do with it and GRG and the Slobberer have everything to do with it. I have nothing to do with some black guy fathering 6 kids with 4 different baby mamas. Just like I have nothing to do with some white guy fathering 6 kids with 4 different baby mamas. When I walked into Jefferson High School for a summer basketball game and hard rap was being played over the speakers pre-game (lots of the N word and hoes and bitches) and little 4 year old kids were dancing to the music I'm not sure how that is a me problem or how I'm supposed to fix that huge cultural blight that is hip hop/rap culture.
-
Do you actually think the uniquely negative experiences of black people in the U.S. are not recognized?GreenRiverGatorz said:
My man Loury actually talks about that as well. Tl;dr - the concept of racial stigma and the very unique oppression that black people in America experienced versus other minority groups is a reality worth recognizing. Doesn't really change how we explore policy going forward, but it's key context to keep in mind. Worth a read.TurdBomber said:
Plenty of the majority have been dealt a shit hand as well, over the centuries. Why else did they leave their homelands to come to a new and in many cases hostile and deadly new land?GreenRiverGatorz said:This is a monumentally stupid thread. Folks like Glenn Loury have clearly laid out the chronology of this issue in a way that should be nearly unanimously agreed up. Yet we always get these shit back and forths instead.
It should be easy to recognize that minorities, black people in particular, have been dealt a shit hand through centuries of state-sanctioned racism. While those de jure practices have more or less been effectively eliminated since the 70s, their legacy isn't hard to trace to the present day. Glenn is perfectly happy to first clearly recognize that history of racism and the inequities it created, but also recognize that the state itself can do little to rectify that problem from this point forward. The gap that remains can only substantially be bridged by the black community itself, with little aid from the state. A patronizing "nanny-state", while well intentioned, has often caused more harm than good (public housing devolving into ghettos, perverse incentives from affirmative action, etc). The number of people who can simultaneously hold these two thoughts in their head at the same time is embarrassingly small.
The problem won't be solved so long as group identity is the key differentiator among people. The US is a country built upon individual rights, responsibilities and liberties first. If you're a respectable individual, you'll get respect and be treated well 99.99% of the time in the US.
If you're a whiney bitch, you'll get treated like one.
Name one living, breathing human who doesn't recognize it.
Some people are incapable of not dwelling on it, constantly, and must inject and re-inject it into every conversation and aspect of their lives.
That's called an obsession and beating a dead horse. This generation has exhumed matters that were already overcome, for the spectacle they hope to cash in on and invoke for currency and power purposes.
See it for what it is.
