Originally Posted by Babylon

So lemme guess, every thread rain made with his (obviously skewed) debate will continue to be closed while freaks direct response to it will stay up. Whack shit. That second thread wasnt even inflammatory, and couldve lead to some real discussion.
Like freeks claim that iq isnt an accurate measure of skill or intelligence, I'd browse a source for that claim if it gets provided. Ghosted ass dead site & yall wanna block shit you dont agree with lol. Rains wrong af, but yall weak for liberal safe-spacing battle rap forums

Rains obviously trolling but it's true, this thread will stay up (or now be closed to prove a point) while Rain's will always be closed.

I laughed at the idea that NOBLE would destroy his opinions though. All NOBLE would post is "The reason for every negative you posted is from white privilege".

Anyways, while it's easy to consolidate a lot of accomplishments into a thread, the reason why racists bring this innovation point up is because it's just fact that white people have created a lot more. Why? Well it's hard as fuck to be a top level scientist and innovator when you're being kept as a slave. In countries where modern technology has developed most, it's not that long since black people were given the freedom and platforms to actually be able to create and invent. It's like dissing Nikki Minaj for not winning a Grammy in 1967.

Regardless, whenever I see crime rate facts, or innovation facts, I'm always wondering what the person actually believes. What are those statistics being used to represent? They imply the conclusion that skin pigment can have some sort of adverse effect on the likelihood to become involved in crime, or your pigmentation to have a biological reflection on intelligence. Very few people actually will admit to this belief, because frankly it's effortlessly proven to be untrue by essentially any scientist, but there's always an implication that this is the conclusion they are coming to at the end of people mentioning things like this.


The stupidest thing about race, always, is people's focus on how dark your arms are as opposed to what social class you are in. Black folks driving a benz in Beverly Hills whilst wearing a tuxedo and going the speed limit aren't getting pulled over more than white folks in hoodies driving a Toyota Starlet in Detroit. The reflection of a lack of black people in high positions, or the larger number of crime amongst black people, is a reflection on the social class which most of them belong to. Due to the "ghettoification" in America, many black people are born into low income families, obviously giving them more hurdles than if they were born to a more well of family in a better area. Now, I don't hand out excuses. If you're born in the ghetto and decide to sell drugs and get a record for it, I'm not giving you an excuse that you were born in a bad place. That's your fault for being stupid. But we're talking an overall scale.

I don't specifically see a need for affirmative action because I don't personally see a need for diversification. You shouldn't be inspired to become great by looking up to people strictly of the same skin colour as you. If I imagined being a fighter, I'm not thinking "Nah I don't wanna be Tyson or Anderson Silva, I wanna be Ricky Hatton or Michael Bisping" just because of their skin colour. You shouldn't require people to pander to your skin colour in creating television and media. Sure, to some degree you want media which reflects your experiences and creates that bond, but you shouldn't be thinking "Pffft, everyone says Godfather is supposed to be great but it's got no black folks so I'll watch New Jack City".

In summary, who the fuck cares what skin colour someone is? Next time someone tries to talk about skin colour to you, or you think about it as some important thing, just replace the word "skin" with "eye" and see if you still sound as sensical.

Originally Posted by Babylon

So lemme guess, every thread rain made with his (obviously skewed) debate will continue to be closed while freaks direct response to it will stay up. Whack shit. That second thread wasnt even inflammatory, and couldve lead to some real discussion.
Like freeks claim that iq isnt an accurate measure of skill or intelligence, I'd browse a source for that claim if it gets provided. Ghosted ass dead site & yall wanna block shit you dont agree with lol. Rains wrong af, but yall weak for liberal safe-spacing battle rap forums

Rains obviously trolling but it's true, this thread will stay up (or now be closed to prove a point) while Rain's will always be closed.

I laughed at the idea that NOBLE would destroy his opinions though. All NOBLE would post is "The reason for every negative you posted is from white privilege".

Anyways, while it's easy to consolidate a lot of accomplishments into a thread, the reason why racists bring this innovation point up is because it's just fact that white people have created a lot more. Why? Well it's hard as fuck to be a top level scientist and innovator when you're being kept as a slave. In countries where modern technology has developed most, it's not that long since black people were given the freedom and platforms to actually be able to create and invent. It's like dissing Nikki Minaj for not winning a Grammy in 1967.

Regardless, whenever I see crime rate facts, or innovation facts, I'm always wondering what the person actually believes. What are those statistics being used to represent? They imply the conclusion that skin pigment can have some sort of adverse effect on the likelihood to become involved in crime, or your pigmentation to have a biological reflection on intelligence. Very few people actually will admit to this belief, because frankly it's effortlessly proven to be untrue by essentially any scientist, but there's always an implication that this is the conclusion they are coming to at the end of people mentioning things like this.


The stupidest thing about race, always, is people's focus on how dark your arms are as opposed to what social class you are in. Black folks driving a benz in Beverly Hills whilst wearing a tuxedo and going the speed limit aren't getting pulled over more than white folks in hoodies driving a Toyota Starlet in Detroit. The reflection of a lack of black people in high positions, or the larger number of crime amongst black people, is a reflection on the social class which most of them belong to. Due to the "ghettoification" in America, many black people are born into low income families, obviously giving them more hurdles than if they were born to a more well of family in a better area. Now, I don't hand out excuses. If you're born in the ghetto and decide to sell drugs and get a record for it, I'm not giving you an excuse that you were born in a bad place. That's your fault for being stupid. But we're talking an overall scale.

I don't specifically see a need for affirmative action because I don't personally see a need for diversification. You shouldn't be inspired to become great by looking up to people strictly of the same skin colour as you. If I imagined being a fighter, I'm not thinking "Nah I don't wanna be Tyson or Anderson Silva, I wanna be Ricky Hatton or Michael Bisping" just because of their skin colour. You shouldn't require people to pander to your skin colour in creating television and media. Sure, to some degree you want media which reflects your experiences and creates that bond, but you shouldn't be thinking "Pffft, everyone says Godfather is supposed to be great but it's got no black folks so I'll watch New Jack City".

In summary, who the fuck cares what skin colour someone is? Next time someone tries to talk about skin colour to you, or you think about it as some important thing, just replace the word "skin" with "eye" and see if you still sound as sensical.