i_have_thick_loads OP t1_j39drj7 wrote

Should Asian shop owners in NYC be allowed to prohibit violent patrons? If blacks are silent to black-on-Asian violence then aren't they acting violently toward marginalized Asians ?


i_have_thick_loads OP t1_j39cxnx wrote

>You're being disingenuous with that Biden quote

That's a straightforward conclusion of the quote.

>discriminated against

But blacks aren't societally discriminated against. In fact, whites are societally discriminated against. So how are whites to speak out against discrimination when they're the actual victims?

>If Black or Muslim people were the majority

In many urban areas blacks are in fact the majority or plurality, and often hold institutional political power, and carry out disproportionate violence against ethnic groups such as Asians and Jews. In Chicago and New York the mayor and police chief are black.

Do you agree black silence is violence (against Asians)?

Shouldn't blacks openly condemn black-on-Asian violence before entering Asian owned stores where there's a power dynamic favoring blacks over Asians?

>It's relative to the balance of power.

So it's ok to use violence against a group until they follow the disputed beliefs you hold? If white silence is literally violence don't you agree violence is justified in self-defense?

Or do you oppose violence in self-defense?


i_have_thick_loads OP t1_j39aaoe wrote

>This is him saying that diversity is good, not that fewer white people being in the US is good

That's called reducing the percentage of whites in the US.

Notice no one says this of the black population in an inner city neighborhood becoming a minority.

>I don't think you understand what this statement means

What do you think violence means? Isn't it ok to use violence in response to violence? Calling whites violent is literal incitement.

Notice how you avoid replacing "white" with muslim or black in a different context.


i_have_thick_loads OP t1_j397frx wrote



"Folks like me who were Caucasian, of European descent for the first time in 2017 will be in an absolute minority in the United States of America, absolute minority. Fewer than 50 percent of the people in America from then and on will be White European stock. That’s not a bad thing. That’s as a source of our strength.”

>"White silence is violence" is not racist.

It's literal incitement to violence against whites, and that's what you'd say if whites held posters claiming "muslim silence is violence" after a terror attack.


i_have_thick_loads OP t1_j396kw9 wrote

Isn't that just a lie or a lie promoting violence? Also, is fascism just right-wing authoritarianism? Wouldn't that be time variant because right wing today has a different idea cluster than right-wing 80 years ago.


i_have_thick_loads OP t1_j392dta wrote

An example or two why someone might think that:

Biden has previously said reducing the percentage of whites in US society is a good thing;

I recall Jimmy Fallon's audience once applauding when he announced a report of whites becoming a minority in a certain projected year

I could give others: police investigations over signs saying "it's ok to be white";

Racist signs during blm supremacist rallies claiming "white silence is violence";


i_have_thick_loads OP t1_j216v0c wrote

This is what i could find on Wikipedia:

Cold Harbor Springs Laboratory (CHSL)

>James D. Watson, shared a Nobel Prize with Francis Crick and Maurice Wilkins in 1962 for their discovery of the double helix structure of DNA.[45] From 1968 to 1993 Watson served as the CSHL Director. In 2007 the CSHL suspended him for his support for scientific racism but after he issued a public apology he was allowed to retain honorary titles, though he was relieved his leadership and managerial roles.[46] In 2019 CSHL rescinded his honorary titles after he made public remarks again suggesting IQ and race were related, comments which CSHL viewed as a reversal of the apology he gave in 2007.[47] In 2020 the Watson School of Biological Sciences (WSBS) was renamed to delete any reference to him.[48]


i_have_thick_loads OP t1_j20ai0p wrote

>The data also shows that children whose parents were high achievers aka smart, created home environments that benefited their offspring in schooling.

Yes; shared environment impacts EA and IQ in 10 year olds , but seems to have no role on the variance in EA and IQ by adulthood - by which time 70% of the variance is heritable and probably genetic.


i_have_thick_loads t1_iz4m22x wrote

You kinda do because it's a common misconception to think poverty generally has a significant impact on criminality and ignore confounders. I think household income/wealth on criminality is quite weak. Neighborhood wealth on criminality is maybe moderate. Most of the known portion of criminal variance is probably heritable.


i_have_thick_loads t1_ivk68nx wrote

Yes; you continue claiming i didn't understand your point that police presence mediates a lower actual - documented crime gap in low income urban settings, but this is unlikely. Homicide rates are measurement invariant, and because there's a positive manifold for criminality, you should be able to extract theoretical actual crimes rates from homicide rates plus a few other hopefully somewhat orthogonal (and measurement invariant such as reported stolen vehicles to insurance companies or law enforcement?) input variables. The gap between theoretical crime - documented crime would give you the evidence for which regions have the highest crime gaps, and whether crime gap variance is associated with law enforcement presence variance to establish an unlikely hypothesis.


i_have_thick_loads t1_ivj7o57 wrote

>I was talking about a nonlinear relation between the actual crimes committed and the crimes discovered - this 'non-linearity' is moderated by the amount of police activity

And again, police presence is driven by homicide rate and reports to police.

>The discovery rate is higher in poor neighborhoods compared to rich neighborhoods.

We know what you said. Just because you typed out a stupid thought experiment doesn't make your concern valid. There are independent measures of crime to which you could measure reasonably appropriate level of police activity. One measure is homicide rate. And there's more or less a general factor for crime. Areas with higher homicides will most probably have higher rates of other crime.