Zone1 Explain This

Everything Lisa posts is anti black hate. She believes in white superiority. And when she gets called on it, she becomes the poor Jewish victim of anti-semitism.
You have been reported for calling me a racist and a white supremacist.
 
Nobody uses the term "Orientals" anymore to describe Asians.
Once on Quora I asked if the word "Oriental" was derogatory. None of the Orientals who responded said it was. One Oriental was surprised by the question.

When I told a Vietnamese woman I was dating, "I prefer Oriental women."

She smiled and said, "You think we are much more wonderful."
 
Because there are racist assholes. That's why. For some reason, there are idiots, of ever color, that raise their children to be racists, or there are impressionable people who, for some reason, get caught up in nationalism and into racism. It's a shame. But the problem is that there is a narrative that many, such as yourself, have accepted this narrative of systemic racism and that all white people, regardless of their own personal history need to feel shamed and continue to contribute to racism. That's a false narrative that many have bought into.

Again, you label, incorrectly what you think and ASSume you know about people. Just because someone has an opinion on a socioeconomic situation, that you disagree with, doesn't make them a racist. But you seem to take that road. Which discredits you, largely, and even completely. There whites that are terrible people, no one isn't saying other wise. But the data and statistics show crime rates and who commits them. You ignore them entirely and excuse them away, which only invalidates you even more. Do you actually understand that? In any debate class or any paper that you are to write that asks you to examine and argue for a specific point, you must provide facts and data that comes from peer reviewed articles, journals and reliable, unbiased sources. You do understand that, right? As soon as you throw in your emotion, opinions, you invalidate your paper. You are that person IM2. You refuse to accept facts and data. You live in a narrative that is created by racism and hate.

Here is where I stand with you:
You are either crazy and have mental issues, and therefore, you can't be taken seriously. Which explains your inability to have reasonable and rational discourse.

Or

You are a troll. This might be worse because you may actually believe and understand some of the arguments and counter points, yet you choose to ignore them on this forum and therefore like to get a rise out of people on the internet. Therefore, see the above.
I don't if it's the case this time, but I believe there are people of all colors who start racist threads either aggressively....or passive-agressively....knowing fully well the end result will have people of all colors in heated dead-end debates where everyone leaves more divided than they already were. This sets the stage for the leadership and the agenda of the American Democrat Left. They have their covert agents create a problem so their politicians can pretend to be saviors to get votes. All thanks to paid influencers.
 

Poverty and Violent Crime Don’t Go Hand in Hand​

New data on Asian-Americans in New York City undercut a common assumption.

Wow, frankly, this is nothing to be proud of. Crime is a result of poverty, just because some poor people put up with it because of culture isn't impressive.

White people only fix things when you threaten to break their stuff.
 
Once on Quora I asked if the word "Oriental" was derogatory. None of the Orientals who responded said it was. One Oriental was surprised by the question.

When I told a Vietnamese woman I was dating, "I prefer Oriental women."

She smiled and said, "You think we are much more wonderful."

Uh, no, guy, it's still racist.

But I'm glad you got your yellow fever taken care of.
 
Wow, frankly, this is nothing to be proud of. Crime is a result of poverty, just because some poor people put up with it because of culture isn't impressive.

White people only fix things when you threaten to break their stuff.
Why is obeying the law not something to be proud of?

Committing crimes is never a legitimate response to poverty. Orientals are prone to deal with their own poverty by obeying the law and working hard and conscientiously. They are able to work conscientiously because of their high IQ averages.

Your comment seems to imply that the black ghetto riots that happened from from 1964 to 1968 benefited blacks. Instead they destroyed the New Deal Coalition which had passed the civil rights legislation, and they led to the Republican ascendancy.

The crime rate began to decline during the Reagan administration. It did not decline because Reagan ended poverty and racial inequality. Both became more noticeable during his administration with the rise in homelessness. Crime began to decline because the prison population began to grow.
 
Wow, frankly, this is nothing to be proud of. Crime is a result of poverty, just because some poor people put up with it because of culture isn't impressive.

White people only fix things when you threaten to break their stuff.
Crime is the result of disrespecting the law. My parents, their siblings, and their friends were dirt-poor, and nobody ever broke the law.
 
Uh, no, guy, it's still racist.

But I'm glad you got your yellow fever taken care of.
I learned that Oriental girls existed when I was six or seven years old. I watched a television documentary about Japanese school children. I remember thinking, "Some white girls look pretty. Some white girls do not look pretty. All Japanese girls look pretty." I soon learned that Chinese girls looked just as good.

heart.png
 
Why is obeying the law not something to be proud of?

Committing crimes is never a legitimate response to poverty. Orientals are prone to deal with their own poverty by obeying the law and working hard and conscientiously. They are able to work conscientiously because of their high IQ averages.

Okay, guy, I can't take you seriously if you keep saying "Orientals" like this was the 1950's or something.

You can't have the inequities we have in our society and NOT expect crime to result. But keep clinging to your gun and your bible.

Your comment seems to imply that the black ghetto riots that happened from from 1964 to 1968 benefited blacks. Instead they destroyed the New Deal Coalition which had passed the civil rights legislation, and they led to the Republican ascendancy.

Actually, it absolutely benefited them, because that's when the government got serious about addressing inequality. The New Deal was very good for white people. Black people got left behind until they rioted. Never should have gotten that far in 1968 OR 2020.

Let's actually fix legitimate complaints BEFORE we get to the point of rioting, M'kay?

The crime rate began to decline during the Reagan administration. It did not decline because Reagan ended poverty and racial inequality. Both became more noticeable during his administration with the rise in homelessness. Crime began to decline because the prison population began to grow.

No, Reagan had nothing to do with it, and crime didn't peak until 1993. What caused a decline was that the Baby Boomers aged out of the "young and stupid" demographic.

Crime is the result of disrespecting the law. My parents, their siblings, and their friends were dirt-poor, and nobody ever broke the law.

Did you miss the part in History Class about Jewish Gangsters like Meier Lansky and Bugsy Seigel?
 
Okay, guy, I can't take you seriously if you keep saying "Orientals" like this was the 1950's or something.

You can't have the inequities we have in our society and NOT expect crime to result. But keep clinging to your gun and your bible.
I have already explained why "Oriental" is not a term of derogation. Although I am a white Gentile, I prefer Orientals to whites. This is because Orientals tend to be more intelligent than whites, and they have lower rates of crime and illegitimacy.

I also use the word "Negro" a lot. Martin Luther King, Jr. used that word fifteen times in his "I have a Dream" Speech.

I do not have a gun. I do not like guns. I have read the Bible in eight English translations, including the Apocrypha.
 
Actually, [black ghetto rioting] absolutely benefited them, because that's when the government got serious about addressing inequality. The New Deal was very good for white people. Black people got left behind until they rioted. Never should have gotten that far in 1968 OR 2020.
The American people respond negatively to those who use violence politically. The civil rights legislation was passed in reaction to segregationist violence against peaceful civil rights demonstrations.
 
No, Reagan had nothing to do with it, and crime didn't peak until 1993. What caused a decline was that the Baby Boomers aged out of the "young and stupid" demographic.
One of the few successful social experiments in the United States has been the increase in the prison population.

From 1960 to 1970 the prison population declined from 212,953 to 196,429

The civil rights legislation was passed. Poverty declined because of a broadly based economic expansion, and War on Poverty Programs.

During this time the crime rate per 100,000 inhabitants increased from 1,887.2 to 3,984.5

From 1980 to 2016 the prison population increased from 315,974 to 1,380,427

Poverty increased because the economy became more competitive, and because of cuts in welfare.

During this time the crime rate per 100,000 declined from 5,950,0 to 2,489.3.


https://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm
 
I have already explained why "Oriental" is not a term of derogation. Although I am a white Gentile, I prefer Orientals to whites. This is because Orientals tend to be more intelligent than whites, and they have lower rates of crime and illegitimacy.

I'm sure that this is the stereotype in your head, a nice minority that doesn't act up.

The American people respond negatively to those who use violence politically. The civil rights legislation was passed in reaction to segregationist violence against peaceful civil rights demonstrations.

Do they do? IF they did, we'd have taken all the January 6th Terrorists out and shot them behind the nearest wall. (Including Trump).

One of the few successful social experiments in the United States has been the increase in the prison population.

From 1960 to 1970 the prison population declined from 212,953 to 196,429

The civil rights legislation was passed. Poverty declined because of a broadly based economic expansion, and War on Poverty Programs.

During this time the crime rate per 100,000 inhabitants increased from 1,887.2 to 3,984.5

From 1980 to 2016 the prison population increased from 315,974 to 1,380,427

Poverty increased because the economy became more competitive, and because of cuts in welfare.

During this time the crime rate per 100,000 declined from 5,950,0 to 2,489.3.

It's fun to watch a moron repeat statistics and not understand them.


OF COURSE the prison population went up, after we created the War on Drugs and the Prison Industrial Complex. Not because we had "more Crime" but because we criminalized more activities to create a profitable labor force.
 
Did you miss the part in History Class about Jewish Gangsters like Meier Lansky and Bugsy Seigel?

Poverty and Crime

the residents of San Francisco’s Chinatown were among America’s poorest people—with the most unemployment, the worst housing conditions, the least education, and the highest rate of tuberculosis in their city. Yet despite such hardships, only five people of Chinese ancestry went to jail in the entire state of California in 1965.[1]

Similarly, Jewish immigrants to America during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries also repudiated criminality despite having to face extreme economic deprivation. Historian Max Dimont describes them:

“The majority of these immigrants had arrived penniless, all their worldly belongings wrapped in a bundle…. Most of [them] arrived in New York. Some made their way into other cities,… but the majority remained in New York, settling in the Lower East Side of Manhattan, [which was] a neighborhood of the poor. Sociologists, with their impressive charts showing the number of toilets (or lack of the), the number of people per room, the low per capita income, paint a dismal picture of the Lower East Side Jewish slum. But their charts do not capture its uniqueness. Though it bred tuberculosis and rheumatism, it did not breed crime and venereal disease. It did not spawn illiteracy, illegitimate children, or deserted wives. Library cards were in constant use.”[2]
The late political scientist James Q. Wilson debunked the theory that crime results from poverty, or that redistributive government programs can reduce crime rates by alleviating poverty, by pointing out that “crime rose the fastest in this country at a time when the number of persons living in poverty or squalor was declining.” He added: “I have yet to see a ‘root cause’ or to encounter a government program that has successfully attacked it.”

In modern America, the correlation between high crime rates and poverty has a great deal to do with the proliferation of single-parent, father-absent households. According to the U.S Census, in 2008 the poverty rate for single parents with children was 35.6%; the rate for married couples with children was 6.4%. For white families in particular, the corresponding two-parent and single-parent poverty rates were 21.7% and 3.1%, respectively. For Hispanics, the figures were 37.5% and 12.8%, and for blacks, 35.3% and 6.9%. According to Robert Rector, a senior research fellow with the Heritage Foundation, “the absence of marriage increases the frequency of child poverty 700 percent” and thus constitutes the single most reliable predictor of a self-perpetuating underclass.

Children in single-parent households are burdened not only with profound economic disadvantages, but are also far likelier to eventually get into trouble with the law. As a Heritage Foundation analysis notes, youngsters raised by single parents, as compared to those who grow up in intact married homes, are much more likely to be physically abused; to be treated for emotional and behavioral disorders; to smoke, drink, and use drugs; to behave aggressively and violently; to engage in criminal activity; and to be arrested for a juvenile crime. According to the National Fatherhood Initiative, 60% of rapists, 72% of adolescent murderers, and 70% of long-term prison inmates are men who grew up in fatherless homes.

Footnotes:​


  1. James Q. Wilson and Richard Herrnstein, Crime and Human Nature (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1985), p. 473.
  2. Max I. Dimont, Jews, God, and History (New York: Penguin USA, 1994), pp. 373-374. (This book was originally published in 1962.)
  3. Discover the Networks
 
I know from personal experience that poor Orientals are safe to live with. I lived in downtown San Jose, California during the early 1980's, when the area was engulfed by Vietnamese war refugees. most of these people were very poor. They were also good people.

Vietnamese teenagers did not spend their days harassing their teachers. They respected their teachers, and tried to learn, although many had poor English skills. Vietnamese teenagers did not spend their nights getting into trouble; they did their homework.

I would often get off work at 10:00 pm, and walk three miles to get home through what was becoming "Little Saigon." I was perfectly safe. I would not have been doing that in many neighborhoods.
 
I'm sure that this is the stereotype in your head, a nice minority that doesn't act up.



Do they do? IF they did, we'd have taken all the January 6th Terrorists out and shot them behind the nearest wall. (Including Trump).



It's fun to watch a moron repeat statistics and not understand them.


OF COURSE the prison population went up, after we created the War on Drugs and the Prison Industrial Complex. Not because we had "more Crime" but because we criminalized more activities to create a profitable labor force.
As the prison population rose, the rate of all crimes declined.

 
One of the few successful social experiments in the United States has been the increase in the prison population.

From 1960 to 1970 the prison population declined from 212,953 to 196,429

The civil rights legislation was passed. Poverty declined because of a broadly based economic expansion, and War on Poverty Programs.

During this time the crime rate per 100,000 inhabitants increased from 1,887.2 to 3,984.5

From 1980 to 2016 the prison population increased from 315,974 to 1,380,427

Poverty increased because the economy became more competitive, and because of cuts in welfare.

During this time the crime rate per 100,000 declined from 5,950,0 to 2,489.3.


https://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm
Thanks. You’re relatively new here, so you might have missed my personal history, which exemplifies your post.

My parents and their siblings were the children of poor, uneducated Jewish immigrants. They came with nothing but the proverbial Shabbat candlesticks and less than $10 in their pockets. My dad tells how they were so poor that they couldn’t afford the extra penny to have the ice delivered.

When my dad was in high school, Hitler struck - and they never knew what happened to my dad’s grandmother (my grandma’s mom), his aunt, his uncle, or his four cousins - other than they were never heard from again. Yet under this backdrop of unimaginable prejudice, my dad and uncle remained focused on their studies and both won free college educations. Ten years later, they both owned homes in the suburbs.

It is ridiculous, but in an effort to explain how Jews can succeed during a current genocide of their people, and blacks still have problems like high crime and poverty rates when their horrific racism is generations removed, leftists downplay the horror of the Holocaust. We even had a moderator suggest that blacks in poor areas today may have had it as bad as a concentration camp victim.

P.S. The leftists HATE the story of Jews succeeding DURING the Holocaust.
 
Thanks. You’re relatively new here, so you might have missed my personal history, which exemplifies your post.

My parents and their siblings were the children of poor, uneducated Jewish immigrants. They came with nothing but the proverbial Shabbat candlesticks and less than $10 in their pockets. My dad tells how they were so poor that they couldn’t afford the extra penny to have the ice delivered.

When my dad was in high school, Hitler struck - and they never knew what happened to my dad’s grandmother (my grandma’s mom), his aunt, his uncle, or his four cousins - other than they were never heard from again. Yet under this backdrop of unimaginable prejudice, my dad and uncle remained focused on their studies and both won free college educations. Ten years later, they both owned homes in the suburbs.

It is ridiculous, but in an effort to explain how Jews can succeed during a current genocide of their people, and blacks still have problems like high crime and poverty rates when their horrific racism is generations removed, leftists downplay the horror of the Holocaust. We even had a moderator suggest that blacks in poor areas today may have had it as bad as a concentration camp victim.

P.S. The leftists HATE the story of Jews succeeding DURING the Holocaust.
There never was an affirmative policy to help Jews. Quotas were used to reduce the Jewish percentage in the Harvard student body. Jews were often not hired for executive positions in American corporations.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top