No, I'm not going to take 50 minutes out of my day before I'm allowed to respond. What then, do I need to address every point in the video? I have 3 books on the subject in mind that you can read in the meantime.

Nah man. Even if there were genetic propensities, they don't explain variation like that. Reasons are cultural. — fdrake

Yeah, also JADCO was/is basically corrupt, and Jamaican athletes could dope with impunity while officials looked the other way.

"The commission has been under fire since former senior JADCO official Renee Anne Shirley told Sports Illustrated in August the authority had carried out just one out-of-competition test from February 2012 to the start of the London Olympics in July."

Jamaica won 12 Olympic medals in 2012, all in running sports.

Race is now a term properly thrown the trash-bin of historical embarrassments, properly understood today as a one-word lie. Racist, on the other hand, is a term both current and meaningful: meaning the he (or she) as the one who propagates the lie. — tim wood

I’m writing this as I think, so bear with me.

I can see where I’ve gone away from even my own train of thought in previous posts.

There are no races, there is only the idea that there are groups of people different than us. Therefore there is no race only racism. The only difference lies in cultures, but cultures are constructs. So there is no real difference between people. Even if you looked at this through language and the way people use language differently it still doesn’t indicate that people actually think differently from one another. How could that possibly be true? Attitudes of cruelty or perceptions of others, or art, literature or politics is still cultural not a difference in reasoning.

So at our centre we are all the same. But cultural differences will never go away. In all civilisations the culture mutates and creates new perceptions, which alters laws and moral behaviour. The idea of culture still overrides everything.

So instead of race we would have to accept that tensions are cultural. That’s not so unusual. Could we possibly live without culture? Isn’t that what Pol Pot tried to do? Who wants to live in a world like that? We are obviously cultural animals.

I don’t really want to live without those differences. But it’s the cultural aspects that make life interesting. I don’t want an all white bread culture.

I know there are racists who just do not like the way people look and apply negative attributes to those physical features. That’s all cultural, learned. But isn’t it also just one aspect of culture and common to all cultures? It doesn’t necessarily represent that culture. Unless that culture is absolutely racist, like Nazi Germany.

My perception of America is that it is not a racist culture, despite its past. Historically America is very young, a lot has happened, good and bad, the development towards better things is slow but it’s there. To me the problem now is the growing poverty and the way the pieces that make up America are been moved about on the board to suit a few. We might call that issues of class, or the creation of new classes and the destruction of existing classes. Issues of black lives are caught up in that, their position makes them more vulnerable, but they’re not alone there.

Edit: on reflection “construct” is not what I should have used in relation to culture but it doesn’t alter what I meant.

well I woke up today to see a Wendtys on fire in Atlanta. Then I watched CNN, BBC, CBS, ABC, and NBC. All of them had nothing to say at all about the wrongfuness of the arson. The restaurant owner, who normally would be sought for interview but was not even mentioned, had done nothing wrong, and frankly, in most other places in the world today, the people setting the restaurant on fire would have been shot to death on sight. These are acts of terrorism and every one should condemn them. There is no excuse for it.

Regarding elections, elections are not expected to bring about much change at the federal level in the USA due to the tripartite system of government adopted from Montesquieu. While it's well known to have flaws, and has more flaws most people who are not educated in it do not know, on the whole it has proven more resistant to corruption than other systems. But the downside is, it does not allow for rapid change. The slowest moving of the three divisions is the department of justice, and it has a Republican majority now, so democratic concepts are disadvantaged. When both divisions of Congress and the president are republican too, there are very big changes now.

Racial justice has suddenly (like a bolt of lighting) become a hot issue for all sorts of people who are not generally subject to discrimination, and officials in all sorts of institutions. At the beginning of the Memorial Day weekend, it wasn't hot in most quarters.

Will this new concern of the masses last? Will the officials accomplish everything they intend (like defund, dismantle, or abolish the police department)?

My guess is that it will last for a while, and will then gradually fade. The iron is hot right now, but iron cools off. Achieving liberty and justice for all is a very complicated project, and remediating wrongs which have been perpetrated and maintained for many decades is going to be very tough.

Eliminating racism will be about as difficult as eliminating capitalism. Not saying they are the same thing, but they are both deeply, deeply entrenched.

At any rate, it's a job for young people. They have to carry out their projects and live with them. Us old folks will be exiting the stage before long. And as one old leftist said, "Revolution is a young person's game."

Im sorry you seem to be talking to yourself. That has nothing to do with my post. I dont have anything to say about you 'exterminating racism' or 'social injustice.' Nothing atl all. Ive been educated in the philosophy of law and I see nothing in your comments, or in the comments of others not so educated either, that have anything to do with philosophy at all, frankly.

On the political rhetoric that people have substituted for philosophy here, I have nothing to say. I treid discussing the Sapir Whorf hypothesis, and I tried discussing the social contract, and no one who replied except baden even knew what they are. while ridiculing me as an imbecile.

I woke up today to see a Wend[ys] on fire in Atlanta. Then I watched CNN, BBC, CBS, ABC, and NBC. All of them had nothing to say at all about the wrongfuness of the arson. — ernestm

Well, "the headline" is the wrongness that have police killed another unarmed black man, so that's why the arson was treated as a "sidebar" (you saw the video though - what else is there to say about it? No casualties.)

These are acts of terrorism and every one should condemn them. There is no excuse for it.

Agreed. But tell me: what should a community do with their rage at repeated acts of terrorism by the police directed at them? Yeah, two wrongs don't make a right; but the rage of the Oppressed isn't as unjustified as the hate of the Oppressor - considered otherwise, at minimum, would be a false equivalence, no? (C'mon, like IDF snipers versus teen rock-throwers in Gaza, right?)

What should they have done in the heat of another police killing in lieu of venting their impotent rage at this latest injustice? Especially in the historical wake of many decades of peaceful protest and activist engagement with police and politicians here there & every fuckin' where that has not ended predatory paramilitary policing of black, brown & poor communities. What's the alternative to indiscriminate violence against "soft targets" when nonviolent pleas are answered only by continued, state-sanctioned violence?

Should affluent (mostly white) communities and private property remain whole and safe in the midsts of populations herded and hunted like cattle and sport by law enforcement (& white vigilante thugs)? Should anyone be safe in a society wherein a significant fraction of the citizenry, in fact, is not safe from state-sanctioned killers - even in their own homes (e.g. Breonna Taylor, Botham Jean, Stephon Clark, et al)?

Well I started another post for you to comment on then which already contains my reply, since I dont even need to read you any more to know what you are going to say.

Its called sleeping while black, which discusses your right to sleep anywhere you want at all without expecting to be arrested for trespassing.

If you have any integrity, try answering my last post.

I did. Its in a new post called 'sleeping while black.'

I asked 7 questions, you can't answer 1. GFY & your dead cat, ernie. :yawn:

You ignored what I wrote too. Do you realize how childish you are being? My questions were actually to do about philosophy.

Don't fuck with the police. That man deserves every bullet in his body.

From @ernestm

So business owners are NOT advised to call the police at all, if there is someone asleep in a car in their parking lot at the end of the business day. Interfering with those who coose to sleep while black on your property could now result in having your business burned to the ground, without any call for justice whatseover for such an act from any of the mainstream media at all now. Presumably, if a black person chooses to sleep on your property, this means they are to be left entirely to do as they wish? — ernestm

Replies to him, not me.

No, I'm not going to take 50 minutes out of my day before I'm allowed to respond. What then, do I need to address every point in the video? I have 3 books on the subject in mind that you can read in the meantime. — BitconnectCarlos

Why should anyone believe that there is a large effect on sports performance related to whether a body is black when there is so little genetic variation between black bodies and non-black ones?

well I woke up today to see a Wendtys on fire in Atlanta. Then I watched CNN, BBC, CBS, ABC, and NBC. All of them had nothing to say at all about the wrongfuness of the arson — ernestm

Probably because they're still thinking about the black guy being chocked by a cop for eight minutes. If you think that the priority here is Wendy's, fair enough, but understand that's a very peculiar way of thinking, so mainstream media is unlikely to reflect your viewpoint. Niche media do exist that reflect niche viewpoints. You'll find ample outlets that agree that the story here should be Wendy's but you shouldn't insist that we all have to have media that prioritises the lesser concerns of white people over the greater concerns of black people in America.

So a guy can have his business burn3ed to the ground and you dont care about him either. He didnt do anything to deserve this. Why should anyone take your views seriously when you are so obviously hypocritical? Its complicity to terrorism. Again.

didn't say I didn't care, nor can you derive that from what I said. I said that prioritising the lesser concerns of the white Wendy's owner over the greater concerns of black people dying at the hands of racist white cops is a niche way of thinking, more suitable for right-wing radio jocks than mainstream media. — Kenosha Kid

thats called shaping truth as you want. Sure have it your way. There is no law then, except what you approve of. Other concerns being less important are dismissed. So people then dismiss you, as will happen over time, not unsurprisingly, just as you dismiss them. Dont expect any change because you believe you are right but havent thought it through.

There is no law then, except what you approve of. — ernestm

This is your conclusion from the observation that "prioritising the lesser concerns of the white Wendy's owner over the greater concerns of black people dying at the hands of racist white cops is a niche way of thinking"? Care to show your working?

how old are you, and what education do you have?

how old are you, and what education do you have? — ernestm

The answer to both questions is: enough to know that a white man out of a job is not more important than a eighty-eight dead black men this year.

Why do you ask? It seems irrelevant. Do I smell an ill-advised ad hominem on the horizon?

you cant answer direct questions either. If you cant answer direct questions, you will have to live with the injustice you create and not understand why you are responsible. It will be a crushing blow when the realization hits you one day, if you live that long.

you cant answer direct questions either. If you cant answer direct questions, you will have to live with the injustice you create and not understand why you are responsible. It will be a crushing blow when the realization hits you one day, if you live that long. — ernestm

Yes, that happens whenever I don't tell some random weirdo on the internet my age, I'm used to it by now. I appreciate that, according to you, my withholding my age did create injustice, and that might include systemic racism, but I still feel we're going way off piste. Have a safe life, Ernest. Don't kill anyone.

As for me, I am 60 and I have a masters in philsophy7 from oxford, since you didnt ask but decided to insult me without telling me yours. I have seen alot of people go by like you in my life, some of them ended up in prison, and some of them were shot by their friends. If I had a reason to wish you luck I would, but I am one of the people who similarly had their property destroyed by a black gang, in my case, because I was white and in their way. They also tried to kill me. So you will not impress me with your decisions as to what law should care about and what it should ignore as 'less priority.'

I have seen alot of people go by like you in my life, some of them ended up in prison, and some of them were shot by their friends. If I had a reason to wish you luck I would — ernestm

Well thanks for at least considering not wishing me dead. That was probably about as fair-minded as I could expect.

I am one of the people who similarly had their property destroyed by a black gang, in my case, because I was white and in their way. They also tried to kill me. — ernestm

I am sorry to hear that, that must have been terrifying, especially if you already had a fear of black people. I don't condone violence at all but, as with Wendy's and Target, one can at least try to understand the reasons for violence. Surely a philosophy Master, even one on the downward trajectory of life, can reason that it is both irrational and immoral to a) hold all black people in judgement for this one misdeed or b) hold no violent white racist in judgement for their misdeeds, to the extent of weighing the recent unemployment of one white man more heavily than the 88 dead black men killed by racist white cops this year, a conservative context for the George Floyd murder?

This has been without doubt the most random and weird conversation I've ever had. I sense you're not done yet, but, my morbid curiosity notwithstanding, I think the right thing for me to do is to not encourage you further down this trajectory. I'm sure I speak for most when I say I don't like where this is going. Remember: Be safe. Don't kill anyone. And for the love of God don't join the Neighbourhood Watch.

No, I'm not going to take 50 minutes out of my day before I'm allowed to respond. What then, do I need to address every point in the video? I have 3 books on the subject in mind that you can read in the meantime. — BitconnectCarlos

Of course you don't! Everyone has a right to be ignorant, after all, we're all born that way. And to display our ignorance by being stupid. Job well done!

Watch the videos. Learn something.

I read somewhere that of the top 200 times in the 100m dash all of them are held by black men (this was a few years ago but have things really changed much?) Would you like to see the stats for the 200m? Or the 50m? I'm more than happy to go through the stats here. Just curious, is there any point where you'd like "hey, maybe there's something up here...." It's not just Jamaicans, you've got blacks from all across the world but what I believe they have in common is west african ancestry.

Then you're saying that even blacks are racist.
— Harry Hindu
*sigh* No, just that discrimination is a characteristic of human behaviour - also of most other living things. But there is no point in repeating my post. Its just above where you can re-read it. And perhaps with the hint I've just given, understand it better. — tim wood

You're not repeating yourself, you're contradicting yourself.

Racial discrimination is a form of discrimination. The ability to discriminate is essential to staying alive - and this is just trivial. Racial discrimination, then, means at first cut that I, we all, are equipped with some metrics for telling differences between individuals. Insofar as we do, we're racists. — tim wood

discrimination is a characteristic of human behaviour — tim wood

Are black people human beings that possess characteristic human behaviors, or no?

The common scientific understanding of genetics is that the more distant the ancestor, the more differences there are between you and that ancestor, but there are always going to be similarities, because they are your ancestor that you descended from that you acquired deep-seated biological and psychological behaviors from.

There is very little genetic difference between chimps and humans, yet their seems to a larger difference in morphology and physiology, even psychologically. Small differences can lead to big differences over time when small variations in genes coupled with the fact that these different groups of humans were dispersed without any interactions with different racial groups for 1000s of years, once humans moved out of Africa and began and our genes began to drift in different directions.