Sergei Rebrov launches repulsive racist rant

[Guest Jawesome]

Black people are different to white people though.  Why do you think there were more black track athletes at the Olympic games?  Whos to say that the differences end at the physical side of things. 

 

I have a funny feeling that if a black footballer had said "England have a lot of white players, so naturally they're not going to win the world cup" people would be less forgiving.

 

You can't make that judgement and neither can any of us for that matter.

 

So are you agreeing that people can't make the judgement of "There's naturally crime in that area because there's a lot of blacks there" or "Black people are naturally less intelligent than white people" or not?

 

The second one.  You can make judgement on the first one.  It's called looking at the facts.  I'm not saying it's right or wrong btw.

[BlueStar]

Black people are different to white people though.  Why do you think there were more black track athletes at the Olympic games?  Whos to say that the differences end at the physical side of things. 

 

I have a funny feeling that if a black footballer had said "England have a lot of white players, so naturally they're not going to win the world cup" people would be less forgiving.

 

You can't make that judgement and neither can any of us for that matter.

 

So are you agreeing that people can't make the judgement of "There's naturally crime in that area because there's a lot of blacks there" or "Black people are naturally less intelligent than white people" or not?

 

The second one.  You can make judgement on the first one.  It's called looking at the facts.  I'm not saying it's right or wrong btw.

 

You can say it's a fact that there's crime in an area and that there are a lot of blacks there, I fail to see how you can say it's a fact that there's crime there because there are a lot of black people there, short of magically genetically altering them to become white and seeing if the crime rate falls.

[Guest Jawesome]

Black people are different to white people though.  Why do you think there were more black track athletes at the Olympic games?  Whos to say that the differences end at the physical side of things. 

 

I have a funny feeling that if a black footballer had said "England have a lot of white players, so naturally they're not going to win the world cup" people would be less forgiving.

 

You can't make that judgement and neither can any of us for that matter.

 

So are you agreeing that people can't make the judgement of "There's naturally crime in that area because there's a lot of blacks there" or "Black people are naturally less intelligent than white people" or not?

 

The second one.  You can make judgement on the first one.  It's called looking at the facts.  I'm not saying it's right or wrong btw.

 

You can say it's a fact that there's crime in an area and that there are a lot of blacks there, I fail to see how you can say it's a fact that there's crime there because there are a lot of black people there, short of magically genetically altering them to become white and seeing if the crime rate falls.

 

I was referring to the fact that you can get percentages of crimes committed in certain areas and measure them up to each other.

[BlueStar]

Black people are different to white people though.  Why do you think there were more black track athletes at the Olympic games?  Whos to say that the differences end at the physical side of things. 

 

I have a funny feeling that if a black footballer had said "England have a lot of white players, so naturally they're not going to win the world cup" people would be less forgiving.

 

You can't make that judgement and neither can any of us for that matter.

 

So are you agreeing that people can't make the judgement of "There's naturally crime in that area because there's a lot of blacks there" or "Black people are naturally less intelligent than white people" or not?

 

The second one.  You can make judgement on the first one.  It's called looking at the facts.  I'm not saying it's right or wrong btw.

 

You can say it's a fact that there's crime in an area and that there are a lot of blacks there, I fail to see how you can say it's a fact that there's crime there because there are a lot of black people there, short of magically genetically altering them to become white and seeing if the crime rate falls.

 

I was referring to the fact that you can get percentages of crimes committed in certain areas and measure them up to each other.

 

But that 'fact' isn't even the controversial issue, it's the 'fact' that it's natural to have crime where there are black people, something which I can't see ever being more than an opinion.

 

Edit: Let's put it this way, I imagine that you could make a correlation between strength of local accent and likelyhood of ending up in the nick and if you looked at those two factors in isolation you'd think that speaking with a strong geordie accent caused social deviancy - but of course it's not that simple, is it, because there are lots of other factors to take into account.  People with strong local accents are likely to have a background based more in the working class, in urban centres, in poorer communities where they are exposed to more crime themselves, be exposed to drugs and have less opportunities.  Someone who lives in a cottage in the sticks on an inheritance is likely to have less of an accent and also is less likely to end up in jail.  But finding a correlation doesn't equal finding a cause, it doesn't mean that you're more likely to commit crimes because you have a strong accent.  That's the kind of logical fallacy you see lampooned in things like the "Pirates vs Global Warming" graph, from which you can gather that it was the presence of pirates that kept global temperates down.

[johnnypd]

comments about black people being faster runners is so dumb - an olympic final is hardly representative of a general population. we could just as easily say black men are slow as fuck because of Ameobi, Geremi and Cacapa.

 

yes, the fastest 30 or so men in the world might be black, but not just 'black', they tend to be from a very localised part of west africa, and even then tend to live in colonised nations like US or Jamaica, where for many reasons only the fittest slaves survived (surviving capture, detention, starvation, disease, centuries of slavery, deliberate inbreeding etc). once you start going down the list you see that it is fairly even, til you get to the general population and theres no discernable difference. even at the highest levels, if you put in a black long distance runner from kenya in the 100 m final i think they might struggle a bit. and who is to say 100m is the barometer of speed? it's an arbitrary distance limit, why not look at 40 metres or 400 or 800 meteres.

 

and that's before you even get into discussing culture which has a huge impact on things like these. take for instance academic results. afro-caribbean students tended to come at the bottom of results rankings by race. yet african students were up near the top, above white students, despite being the same 'race' as the afro-carib. why? migrants from the caribbean tend to be poor, working class, and people who are poor or working class tend not to do as well as school. african students, that is migrants from africa, tended, til recently, to be middle-class, and this is a group that usually did well. divide the white students up into working and middle class, and you will get the same results. another example - bangladeshi students often come bottom of such groups, women in these migrant groups are given little independence and often dont speak english, so their kids go into the school system behind everyone else. meanwhile Hindu students often come out on top as more from this group tend to be middle-class.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Two good posts there lads, I couldn't be bothered to come up with anything as reasoned as that!

 

I'm always amazed at the way a correlation is taken to indicate a 'cause and effect' scenario - even the most respectable people and public bodies make that mistake all the time.

[Chris_R]

Your ignorance is quite astounding. I think it's scary that there are regular people like you walking around everyday with such thoughts in your head.

 

Ignorance? I'm posting links to studies that have been carried out. How's that ignorance? Surely being ignorant is burying your head in the sand and screaming "RACIST" without having the ability to look at the facts? I think the biggest ignorance of all would be to say that the only difference between black people and white people (Or Asians or any other group) is the colour of their skin, and that it's completely beyond the bounds of possibility that any other differences exist in relation to physical or mental abilities.

 

Maybe black people are poorer because they are less intelligent? Yikes.

 

See above. If you take issue with the comment, post something that disproves it rather than resorting to calling me "Ignorant" or just saying "Yikes". It's called having a debate, you should try it.

 

Did all races start off on a level playing field? Or was a certain race's way of life forced upon another's. How much time has passed since then? How long do you figure it will take to overcome that? Especially as the one race were considered as nothing more than animals and weren't given the same opportunities as the other.

 

If Africans had invaded europe and forced white people to return to Africa as slaves and forced them to live as Africans did prior to colonialism, how would they have fared in those circumstances? Would things be exactly as they are now?

 

Surely that's fairly irrelevant. What's happened has happened. If a series of tragic, shameful circumstances have forced an inequality upon the various races then that's highly regrettable, but it doesn't change the fact that this inequality exists (Which by what you say you're tacitly agreeing to, and therefore to my whole argument ). And if the inequality exists, be it geneitc or caused by years of oppression and slavery, why is it wrong to mention that it exists?

 

Like I said in my post before, talking about it and acknowledging a difference is the first step to addressing it.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Like I said in my post before, talking about it and acknowledging a difference is the first step to addressing it.

 

That's completely true, but what you can address (and therefore worth discussing) are economic and social factors like the ones we've mentioned - not genetics.

[KaKa]

Like I said in my post before, talking about it and acknowledging a difference is the first step to addressing it.

 

That's completely true, but what you can address (and therefore worth discussing) are economic and social factors like the ones we've mentioned - not genetics.

 

Precisely.