Org Mobile Site
Thread: Free speech is censorship!
The racist right has been most Orwellian in their terms this fall.
The blogger Fjordman has been given access in all three national newspapers, and has had several chronicles published. Many more than any other person could ask for. And yet, he sees himself as censored, as this blog post on not-racist gates of vienna is an example of.
You see, if Fjordman is not given unrestricted and immediate access with whatever he writes, he is censored. In his mind, it is the responsibility and duty of any newspaper to immediately publish any and all drivel he comes up with. The stupidity boggles the mind.
He is not alone though. Christian Tybring-Gjedde published a chronicle in Aftenposten, where he claimed to be an "oppressed dissident". Tybring-Gjedde is a member of parliament for the Progress Party. Not a random member either, he is one of the most prominent. Before that, he was a leading politician in the capitol, Oslo. he is a member of the select group of people with near unrestricted access to the media. The media are drooling for his comments, all he needs to do to get a front page is to pick up the phone and call a reporter. And yet, he sees himself as censored, oppressed and hunted, thus proving that bottomless stupidity isn't restricted to random bloggers.
Has the racist right lost its grip on reality completely?
The blogger Fjordman has been given access in all three national newspapers, and has had several chronicles published. Many more than any other person could ask for. And yet, he sees himself as censored, as this blog post on not-racist gates of vienna is an example of.
You see, if Fjordman is not given unrestricted and immediate access with whatever he writes, he is censored. In his mind, it is the responsibility and duty of any newspaper to immediately publish any and all drivel he comes up with. The stupidity boggles the mind.
He is not alone though. Christian Tybring-Gjedde published a chronicle in Aftenposten, where he claimed to be an "oppressed dissident". Tybring-Gjedde is a member of parliament for the Progress Party. Not a random member either, he is one of the most prominent. Before that, he was a leading politician in the capitol, Oslo. he is a member of the select group of people with near unrestricted access to the media. The media are drooling for his comments, all he needs to do to get a front page is to pick up the phone and call a reporter. And yet, he sees himself as censored, oppressed and hunted, thus proving that bottomless stupidity isn't restricted to random bloggers.
Has the racist right lost its grip on reality completely?
Originally Posted by HoreTore:
Has the racist right lost its grip on reality completely?
Did they ever have it?Has the racist right lost its grip on reality completely?
It's fashionable nowadays for the more... "driven" right-wingers to portray and to think of themselves as victims. Look at Newt Gingrich' reaction to a question about his martial infidelity ("I'm appalled...I'm sick of the liberal media protecting Obama!") and how well that turned out for him in the primaries.
Or in the Netherlands: a majority in our "house of commons" wants to introduce legislation that will force political parties to publicize financial gifts that exceed 4500 euros. The PVV (Wilders) is against this, and not only comes up with a load of contrived excuses of why they're against it, but also proclaim that the measure is only intented as an attack on them.
Or in the Netherlands: a majority in our "house of commons" wants to introduce legislation that will force political parties to publicize financial gifts that exceed 4500 euros. The PVV (Wilders) is against this, and not only comes up with a load of contrived excuses of why they're against it, but also proclaim that the measure is only intented as an attack on them.
Haha!
"Openness - the primary weapon of tyrants!"
"Openness - the primary weapon of tyrants!"
Again, show me how Fjordman is racist. You won't find him shaking hands with the fatah-jugend on a certain island like your PM, that much is true
Originally Posted by Fragony:
Again, show me how Fjordman is racist.
When you buy into the pseudo-science of racial IQ-levels, defines roles for ethnic groups based on their presumed average IQ level and claim that culture is genetic, I find it hard to class him as anything else.Again, show me how Fjordman is racist.
Plus a bunch of other stuff, but I don't really feel like rambling on and on, I leave the rambling to Little Chubby Curlyhair.
EDIT: His racism is trumped by his hatred of women though.
Originally Posted by HoreTore:
When you buy into the pseudo-science of racial IQ-levels, defines roles for ethnic groups based on their presumed average IQ level and claim that culture is genetic, I find it hard to class him as anything else.
Haven't followed him extensively but haven't seen any of that. Does mention genetic defects because of inbreeding. Don't know about Norrway but that's nothing new here. As for IQ, it's a fact that people from islamic countries have lower IQ's, that's not an opinion it's a fact.When you buy into the pseudo-science of racial IQ-levels, defines roles for ethnic groups based on their presumed average IQ level and claim that culture is genetic, I find it hard to class him as anything else.
Originally Posted by Fragony:
Haven't followed him extensively but haven't seen any of that. Does mention genetic defects because of inbreeding. Don't know about Norrway but that's nothing new here. As for IQ, it's a fact that people from islamic countries have lower IQ's, that's not an opinion it's a fact.
If you haven't read his drivel, why do you challenge the claim that he's racist? Why challenge something you actually have no knowledge of?Haven't followed him extensively but haven't seen any of that. Does mention genetic defects because of inbreeding. Don't know about Norrway but that's nothing new here. As for IQ, it's a fact that people from islamic countries have lower IQ's, that's not an opinion it's a fact.
I've no idea about IQ levels (measuring intelligence without measuring bias is very, very tough), but it does seem to be the case that certain races are faster sprinters for example - unless the Olympics also has some affirmative action going on. There may well be other areas where some races perform better than others, rather than the production of melanin.
Originally Posted by HoreTore:
If you haven't read his drivel, why do you challenge the claim that he's racist? Why challenge something you actually have no knowledge of?
Not having followed him extensively doesn't mean I haven't read his stuff, site I frequent used to link him. What you say is there I haven't seen there, I mostly agree with him reallyIf you haven't read his drivel, why do you challenge the claim that he's racist? Why challenge something you actually have no knowledge of?
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk:
I've no idea about IQ levels (measuring intelligence without measuring bias is very, very tough), but it does seem to be the case that certain races are faster sprinters for example - unless the Olympics also has some affirmative action going on. There may well be other areas where some races perform better than others, rather than the production of melanin.
That's a perfectly non-racist position.I've no idea about IQ levels (measuring intelligence without measuring bias is very, very tough), but it does seem to be the case that certain races are faster sprinters for example - unless the Olympics also has some affirmative action going on. There may well be other areas where some races perform better than others, rather than the production of melanin.
Turning it racist is easy, however, all you need to add is "...and so african people should only be allowed to take jobs in transportation" or something like that, which Fjordman has done.
IQ-research is pseudoscience at best, and the claim that it is genetic is silly, unless the pakistani immigration to Norway all had superhigh IQ and bred with most norwegian women, as IQ levels as measured at conscription has risen significantly over the last 50 years. Not to mention that IQ tests was designed as a way to keep african americans from being allowed to vote....
Some of the research on IQ may be solid. But those claiming their findings to be "fact" comes off as loonies.
'Turning it racist is easy, however, all you need to add is "...and so african people should only be allowed to take jobs in transportation" or something like that, which Fjordman has done.'
Show me
Show me
Originally Posted by Fragony:
'Turning it racist is easy, however, all you need to add is "...and so african people should only be allowed to take jobs in transportation" or something like that, which Fjordman has done.'
Show me
It was in the same post where he claimed that the current mess Somalia finds themselves in is because of their genes, as "culture is decided by genetics".'Turning it racist is easy, however, all you need to add is "...and so african people should only be allowed to take jobs in transportation" or something like that, which Fjordman has done.'
Show me
Feel free to dig it up, I can't be bothered.
Could be bothered to open no less than 3 rant-threads about the good man. Not saying you are making things up but I haven't seen it
I would very much like to see a source on the claim that people from Islamic countries have lower IQ's.
And even if it were true, that would have nothing to do with ethnicity, right?
And even if it were true, that would have nothing to do with ethnicity, right?
Here's a global map with the average IQ per nation https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...-Map-World.png
Can't edit, that one looks like they are making fun of Australe, here's another there are plenty http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-84yaQQ9AVW...ge_iq_2000.png
I don't know man, Turkey and Malaysia appear to come out relatively well. Still, don't you think that increased urbanisation and education have more to do with the average IQ than say, religion or (God forbid) ethnicity?
For example, an Iranian scientist was awarded a prize for best research on cancer treatment. Still, Iran looks pretty bad on the map, right?
For example, an Iranian scientist was awarded a prize for best research on cancer treatment. Still, Iran looks pretty bad on the map, right?
Not directly linked to the topic at hand, but very relevant.
Originally Posted by Hax:
I don't know man, Turkey and Malaysia appear to come out relatively well. Still, don't you think that increased urbanisation and education have more to do with the average IQ than say, religion or (God forbid) ethnicity?
Sure looks that way.I don't know man, Turkey and Malaysia appear to come out relatively well. Still, don't you think that increased urbanisation and education have more to do with the average IQ than say, religion or (God forbid) ethnicity?
Originally Posted by Fragony:
Can't edit, that one looks like they are making fun of Australe, here's another there are plenty http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-84yaQQ9AVW...ge_iq_2000.png
lol... ofcourse australia cant have such a low iq... ofcourse not... i can tell you why the maps differ. the one takes into account the australians and the other one is higher because they also take into account the mass influx of asian students that come to australia to study. hence the 30 point increase on average... its all just a big joke 0_0Can't edit, that one looks like they are making fun of Australe, here's another there are plenty http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-84yaQQ9AVW...ge_iq_2000.png
if it were genetic it would make sense. australians descend from criminals and all criminals are total idiots, they have smaller headsize, like prostitutes. you can read that 19th century scientific paper as proof... lmao
iq is the result of education. get proper education in any of these countries, or bring the people to a country with a proper education system and the iq will rise.
Considering that the Norwegian IQ has risen over the last 50, linking IQ to genetics seem....well, not that clever.
Originally Posted by HoreTore:
Considering that the Norwegian IQ has risen over the last 50, linking IQ to genetics seem....well, not that clever.
No but it's still true that people from islamic countries have lower IQ's.Considering that the Norwegian IQ has risen over the last 50, linking IQ to genetics seem....well, not that clever.
Define 'people'.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Originally Posted by Subotan:
Not directly linked to the topic at hand, but very relevant.
That cartoon doesn't recognise the fact that any supposed disadvantages that the lower-IQ ethnic group has have been accounted for in plenty of studies. The Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study gave white and black children the exact same conditions in their upbringing and still found the white children to have IQ's that were high enough to be statistically significant. The nature of that study meant that any educational or cultural factors were made redundant.Not directly linked to the topic at hand, but very relevant.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
What I see in everyday life tells me that there are not huge differences in the mental capabilities of white and black people. But when you are talking about races that have lived in isolation from each other for thousands of years and begin from a very limited gene pool, then the way in which they develop certain racial characteristics over the generations is simply an extension of the same principle where children tend to take on their parents features. That's why Mongoloids have epicanthic folds, Northern Europeans have fair hair, Africans don't have crowns on the tops of their heads, native Americans can't grow facial hair, Ashkenazi Jews are particularly prone to certain genetic defects etc. These are not evolutionary traits that were selected for in some sort of Darwinian survival of the fittest enviroment. They are just hereditary traits passed down from parent to child, but magnified over many generations, as is the way of things. I don't think it is therefore outrageous to suggest that mental differences will complement these physical ones, in fact common sense says that is is impossible for them not to not exist at all (no matter how insignificantly).
Although at the same time using white and black as the categories to base the study of intelligence and everything else on is not ideal. 'Race' isn't something clear cut, different races aren't billiard balls (to use the political comparison with nation states) that never interact. Different races or peoples or whatever you want to call them have never been completely isolated, and thats why for example even though Somalians have black skin, they tend to have more Semitic facial features.
But just because race isn't something as simple as being black or white doesn't mean that it can be dismissed entirely, I think that is just wishful thinking and ignoring common sense and reality.
And although I don't think that racial differences are anywhere near significant enough to trump what all of humanity has in common, I've got to say I find the prospect of a world where everyone has brown skin, brown eyes and black hair to be pretty terrifying.
Since when has IQ ever been a relevant measure of anything, except what tack the trick cyclist is going to try with you next?
Originally Posted by Subotan:
Not directly linked to the topic at hand, but very relevant.
It would be better to have "get a bunch of whites to enslave other whites and sell them to black traders". Or would that muddy the waters of one lot utterly guilty and one lot utterly innocent?Not directly linked to the topic at hand, but very relevant.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
also, dont forget the part where you are make sure that they understand in every possible way that they are not human.
or would forgetting that just turn it into 'common slavery'...?
or would forgetting that just turn it into 'common slavery'...?
Originally Posted by Rhyfhylwyr:
That cartoon doesn't recognise the fact that any supposed disadvantages that the lower-IQ ethnic group has have been accounted for in plenty of studies. The Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study gave white and black children the exact same conditions in their upbringing and still found the white children to have IQ's that were high enough to be statistically significant. The nature of that study meant that any educational or cultural factors were made redundant.
What I see in everyday life tells me that there are not huge differences in the mental capabilities of white and black people. But when you are talking about races that have lived in isolation from each other for thousands of years and begin from a very limited gene pool, then the way in which they develop certain racial characteristics over the generations is simply an extension of the same principle where children tend to take on their parents features. That's why Mongoloids have epicanthic folds, Northern Europeans have fair hair, Africans don't have crowns on the tops of their heads, native Americans can't grow facial hair, Ashkenazi Jews are particularly prone to certain genetic defects etc. These are not evolutionary traits that were selected for in some sort of Darwinian survival of the fittest enviroment. They are just hereditary traits passed down from parent to child, but magnified over many generations, as is the way of things. I don't think it is therefore outrageous to suggest that mental differences will complement these physical ones, in fact common sense says that is is impossible for them not to not exist at all (no matter how insignificantly).
Although at the same time using white and black as the categories to base the study of intelligence and everything else on is not ideal. 'Race' isn't something clear cut, different races aren't billiard balls (to use the political comparison with nation states) that never interact. Different races or peoples or whatever you want to call them have never been completely isolated, and thats why for example even though Somalians have black skin, they tend to have more Semitic facial features.
But just because race isn't something as simple as being black or white doesn't mean that it can be dismissed entirely, I think that is just wishful thinking and ignoring common sense and reality.
And although I don't think that racial differences are anywhere near significant enough to trump what all of humanity has in common, I've got to say I find the prospect of a world where everyone has brown skin, brown eyes and black hair to be pretty terrifying.
I've heard that Africa is the most genetically diverse continent. So your argument that it's possible for blacks to have a lower average IQ because of relative genetic isolation is false, imo.That cartoon doesn't recognise the fact that any supposed disadvantages that the lower-IQ ethnic group has have been accounted for in plenty of studies. The Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study gave white and black children the exact same conditions in their upbringing and still found the white children to have IQ's that were high enough to be statistically significant. The nature of that study meant that any educational or cultural factors were made redundant.
What I see in everyday life tells me that there are not huge differences in the mental capabilities of white and black people. But when you are talking about races that have lived in isolation from each other for thousands of years and begin from a very limited gene pool, then the way in which they develop certain racial characteristics over the generations is simply an extension of the same principle where children tend to take on their parents features. That's why Mongoloids have epicanthic folds, Northern Europeans have fair hair, Africans don't have crowns on the tops of their heads, native Americans can't grow facial hair, Ashkenazi Jews are particularly prone to certain genetic defects etc. These are not evolutionary traits that were selected for in some sort of Darwinian survival of the fittest enviroment. They are just hereditary traits passed down from parent to child, but magnified over many generations, as is the way of things. I don't think it is therefore outrageous to suggest that mental differences will complement these physical ones, in fact common sense says that is is impossible for them not to not exist at all (no matter how insignificantly).
Although at the same time using white and black as the categories to base the study of intelligence and everything else on is not ideal. 'Race' isn't something clear cut, different races aren't billiard balls (to use the political comparison with nation states) that never interact. Different races or peoples or whatever you want to call them have never been completely isolated, and thats why for example even though Somalians have black skin, they tend to have more Semitic facial features.
But just because race isn't something as simple as being black or white doesn't mean that it can be dismissed entirely, I think that is just wishful thinking and ignoring common sense and reality.
And although I don't think that racial differences are anywhere near significant enough to trump what all of humanity has in common, I've got to say I find the prospect of a world where everyone has brown skin, brown eyes and black hair to be pretty terrifying.
Also, not that it matters, but Native Americans can grow facial hair. Just throwing that out there.
Originally Posted by Tellos Athenaios:
Since when has IQ ever been a relevant measure of anything
You see any reason to dismiss it's importance?Since when has IQ ever been a relevant measure of anything
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO