Zone1 What is race realism?

[Coyote]

.

Someone's race doesn't make them a better employee, or the employer better equipped to meet their goals.
Unless your job is peddling or marketing race or race relations ... Race has nothing to do with your bottom line.

There is no reason to praise unity if all you are doing is making a bunch of cruddy employees,
regardless of race, feel better about themselves and their work environment.

Priorities ... Product, Service, Quality, Ambitions, Vision, Mission, Standards and Customer Satisfaction ...
None of which are necessarily bound to race ...

.​

I agree, someone’s race doesn’t automatically make them a better employee, but some of what you say is arguable IMO. For one, the assumption that including race (or ethniciyt or gender) as part of your criteris doesn’t automatically mean a less qualified applicant is the result. For another there are vocations where being of a particular race or ethnicity actually enables the company to more effectively reach certain communities. An example could be in the health field or social work where employing someone who understands the culture and/or language can overcome the cultural mistrust of the community.

 

[Coyote]

And so are you willing to factor in the proven racism in the justice system or is that just another thing you will ignore to declare how inferior blacks are?

That right there deserves it’s own thread.

 

[BlackSand]

I agree, someone’s race doesn’t automatically make them a better employee, but some of what you say is arguable IMO. For one, the assumption that including race (or ethniciyt or gender) as part of your criteris doesn’t automatically mean a less qualified applicant is the result. For another there are vocations where being of a particular race or ethnicity actually enables the company to more effectively reach certain communities. An example could be in the health field or social work where employing someone who understands the culture and/or language can overcome the cultural mistrust of the community.

.


The only time I referred to race, it was to disqualify it in the context of the statement ...
Or to address the situations where race or race relations were the goal of the product, service, or marketing.

The problem comes when people think we need to have a better understanding of their misunderstandings ...

.​

 

[Lisa558]

And so are you willing to factor in the proven racism in the justice system or is that just another thing you will ignore to declare how inferior blacks are?

I never said blacks were inferior.

Also, there does seem to be an injustice in prison rates for blacks for DRUG OFFENSES. But there is a disgusting leniency for blacks who commit violent crimes. What about that lowlife black man, about 30, who walked by the elderly lady and just belted her, causing her to fall to the sidewalk and hit her head on the fire hydrant? He has something like 100 (!!) assaults on his record, and the scumbag was walking free.

I’d prefer they release the non-violent drug offenders and lock up the violent repeat offenders.

 

[IM2]

OK, let's get to the facts here.

Racial Realism is a term used for what is scientific racism. Scientific racism as a belief was discredited after the second world war. So what is basically being discussed here is a belief that is the equivalent of "the world is flat." Now that claim was debunked 600 years ago and no one seriously takes that opinion seriously.

There is no genetic evidence of racial superiority because there is no genetic evidence of racial differences. There is no genetic evidence of IQ because IQ tests as currently constituted are not accurate measures of intelligence. The claim of genetic black violence is debunked by two world wars started by white nations along with destabilizing tactics of western nations to control resources in non white nations.

Racial Realism is a bogus theory made up to claim white superiority. There is no scientific evidence supporting this theory and its nothing more than a conspiracy theory that probably doesn't belong in serious discussions about race.

 

[IM2]

I never said blacks were inferior.

Also, there does seem to be an injustice in prison rates for blacks for DRUG OFFENSES. But there is a disgusting leniency for blacks who commit violent crimes. What about that lowlife black man, about 30, who walked by the elderly lady and just belted her, causing her to fall to the sidewalk and hit her head on the fire hydrant? He has something like 100 (!!) assaults on his record, and the scumbag was walking free.

I’d prefer they release the non-violent drug offenders and lock up the violent repeat offenders.

When you claim that standards are lowered only for blacks, you are saying blacks are inferior. Racism in the criminal justice system has been admitted by professionals in law enforcement. So there is really little to debate.

And Lisa, blacks are the victims of the majority of hate crimes every year and whites are the main perpetrators. There is no leniency for blacks in the sentencing for crime.

 

[Coyote]

.


The only time I referred to race, it was to disqualify it in the context of the statement ...
Or to address the situations where race or race relations were the goal of the product, service, or marketing.

The problem comes when people think we need to have a better understanding of their misunderstandings ...

.​

 

[BlackSand]

.

I am saying that you prefaced you comment with the idea you might not agree with something that I posted in the statements ...
and then when describing what you might not agree with, you indicated circumstances that either were not conditional to anything I posted ...
or where in direct conflict to what I actually posted.

You didn't disagree with any what I posted ... I was just somehow not saying it the way you wanted me to.
It led you to the misunderstanding that you might need to qualify your disagreement, for no other reason than you didn't understand what I posted.

Not an insult ... It's possible I am a very poor communicator ...

.​

 

[Coyote]

Race realism is not something I was familiar with until relatively recently so I looked it up to be sure:

race realist - Wiktionary, the free dictionary

en.wiktionary.org

Adjective[edit]​

race realist (not comparable)

1. Pertaining to the belief that scientific evidence exists for inborn racial differences, sometimes used to support racial discrimination, or the idea that some racial groups are inferior to others.

It is also know as “scientific racism”

Scientific racism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Scientific racism, sometimes termed biological racism, is the pseudoscientific belief that empirical evidence exists to support or justify racism (racial discrimination), racial inferiority, or racial superiority.[1][2][3][4] Historically, scientific racism received credence throughout the scientific community, but it is no longer considered scientific.[2][3] Dividing humankind into biologically distinct groups is sometimes called racialism, race realism, or race science by its proponents. Modern scientific consensus rejects this view as being irreconcilable with modern genetic research.[5]: 360 


Sound familiar? It should. It use be called plain old fashioned “racism”.

White supremacists (by no means the majority of whites) have been actively working to rebrand themselves. No more tattoos skinheads, they are now garbed in suits and ties, dockers and polo shirts. Instead of racist and antisemitic slurs, they reference pseudo science and benign code words. They aren’t burning crosses or painting swastikas, they’re referencing black crime rates, and genetically lower IQ. They’re ostensibly at a rally supporting confederate monuments yet carrying torches and chanting “Jews shall not replace us”

That is what this OP is about. Make white supremacy palatable.

 

[Coyote]

.

I am saying that you prefaced you comment with the idea you might not agree with something that I posted in the statements ...
and then when describing what you might not agree with, you indicated circumstances that either were not conditional to anything I posted ...
or where in direct conflict to what I actually posted.

You didn't disagree with any what I posted ... I was just somehow not saying it the way you wanted me to.
It led you to the misunderstanding that you might need to qualify your disagreement, for no other reason than you didn't understand what I posted.

Not an insult ... It's possible I am a very poor communicator ...

.​

Ahhh ok

 

[BlackSand]

Ahhh ok

.

Whew ... Thank goodness it is okay.

You know how difficult this is for me in Zone 1.
If I could just use some cuss words and colorful language, everything I post would be clearer.

I'm working on it ...

.​

 

[Lisa558]

When you claim that standards are lowered only for blacks, you are saying blacks are inferior. Racism in the criminal justice system has been admitted by professionals in law enforcement. So there is really little to debate.

And Lisa, blacks are the victims of the majority of hate crimes every year and whites are the main perpetrators. There is no leniency for blacks in the sentencing for crime.

This again? You’re trying to say that blacks are victimized more than any other minority? It simply isn’t true.

And I’m only reporting what universities are doing. They are dropping the minimal GPA and scores until enough black students get in. It’s the same reason that TJ High School eliminated their entrance test entirely: not enough black kids were getting excellent scores, and too many Asians were (from their racist perspective).

Now that is not saying blacks are inferior. However, it is a simple fact that, as a group, their average GPAs and exam scores are inferior to whites and Asians. This is a fact.

 

[Lisa558]

Can we have a list of which cuss words are not allowed in Zone 1? I’m assuming that a relatively harmless “damn” is acceptable.

 

[Coyote]

.

Whew ... Thank goodness it is okay.

You know how difficult this is for me in Zone 1.
If I could just use some cuss words and colorful language, everything I post would be clearer.

I'm working on it ...

.​

I know what you mean!

 

[Coyote]

Can we have a list of which cuss words are not allowed in Zone 1? I’m assuming that a relatively harmless “damn” is acceptable.

I don’t think there is exactly a list…other than a word filter. I just wouldn’t go overboard.

 

[Lisa558]

I don’t think there is exactly a list…other than a word filter. I just wouldn’t go overboard.

OK, thanks.

 

[Coyote]

This again? You’re trying to say that blacks are victimized more than any other minority? It simply isn’t true.

And I’m only reporting what universities are doing. They are dropping the minimal GPA and scores until enough black students get in. It’s the same reason that TJ High School eliminated their entrance test entirely: not enough black kids were getting excellent scores, and too many Asians were (from their racist perspective).

Now that is not saying blacks are inferior. However, it is a simple fact that, as a group, their average GPAs and exam scores are inferior to whites and Asians. This is a fact.

There is no law that says GPA’s and test scores must be considered much less what the minimum for acceptance should be. They can set the standards as they wish to achieve the outcome they think is good for the institution. Ultimately, they are producing a product: a successful student who goes out in the world and finds a job or fulfills a dream or makes a difference somewhere. As long as the bottom line ($$$ and maintaining accreditation and reputation) is met, admissions can and is flexible.

 

[Lisa558]

OK, I just had a brilliant idea as to how to solve the problem with lowering admissions standards for blacks (which is the case) in order for enough of them to get into prestigious colleges (which seems to be 14% of the student body) WITHOUT unfairly discriminating against higher scoring whites and Asians, who are rejected to make room for a certain number of blacks to get in, and ALSO simultaneously still giving black kids with lower scores a chance at a great university.

Let’s NOT keep dropping the minimal SAT score to allow for more blacks to get in. Let’s Instead encourage black kids to get the equivalent, or better, scores than whites and Asians (speaking in terms of the mean).

INSTEAD, why don’t prestigious colleges encourage the practice whereby blacks, or anybody else, who have scores that are below the “white accepted standard” NOT apply, but instead enroll in a one-year post high school program designed to fill in the missing educational gaps and enable them to score much better on the SAT? Instead of colleges eliminating the SAT because black kids aren’t doing as well in them, which is happening, let’s work on getting the black kids* up to a more competitive level before applying, and thus, one year later, they are applying with equivalent scores to whites and Asians? Now wouldn‘t that be more fair to everyone?

* This one-year SAT enrichment program would only be taken by black kids with scores that would be too low for whites to get in. The black kids with scores equal or better than whites could apply directly from high school.

 

[Lisa558]

There is no law that says GPA’s and test scores must be considered much less what the minimum for acceptance should be. They can set the standards as they wish to achieve the outcome they think is good for the institution. Ultimately, they are producing a product: a successful student who goes out in the world and finds a job or fulfills a dream or makes a difference somewhere. As long as the bottom line ($$$ and maintaining accreditation and reputation) is met, admissions can and is flexible.

NO, Coyote, they can NOT set the standards however they want. Certain things are illegal, and developing subjective tests to achieve and justify racial quotas is one of them. The SCOTUS will so rule.

Instead, look above and see my solution.

 

[Coyote]

OK, I just had a brilliant idea as to how to solve the problem with lowering admissions standards for blacks (which is the case) in order for enough of them to get into prestigious colleges (which seems to be 14% of the student body) WITHOUT unfairly discriminating against higher scoring whites and Asians, who are rejected to make room for a certain number of blacks to get in, and ALSO simultaneously still giving black kids with lower scores a chance at a great university.

Let’s NOT keep dropping the minimal SAT score to allow for more blacks to get in. Let’s Instead encourage black kids to get the equivalent, or better, scores than whites and Asians (speaking in terms of the mean).

INSTEAD, why don’t prestigious colleges encourage the practice whereby blacks, or anybody else, who have scores that are below the “white accepted standard” NOT apply, but instead enroll in a one-year post high school program designed to fill in the missing educational gaps and enable them to score much better on the SAT? Instead of colleges eliminating the SAT because black kids aren’t doing as well in them, which is happening, let’s work on getting the black kids* up to a more competitive level before applying, and thus, one year later, they are applying with equivalent scores to whites and Asians? Now wouldn‘t that be more fair to everyone?

* This one-year SAT enrichment program would only be taken by black kids with scores that would be too low for whites to get in. The black kids with scores equal or better than whites could apply directly from high school.

My first thought would be who would pay for it? Among the the things that make a difference in admissions and test scores are the availability of advanced placement courses and whether one can afford special tutoring or courses on SAT’s.