so what some jewish guy scammed some people

that's not how it works

you know immigration actually benefits a country's economy

Because a citizen born in their own country starts off as having contributed negatively to the country due to money spent on education, housing etc. But someone who had all that in another country starts off with 0 net contribution.

So immigration is very beneficial in growing economies.

@English Pirate

its almost as though blacks are systematically discriminated against and generally are more poorly educated plus discriminated against by employers

stop speaking in circles and tell me what you're trying to say., If you're going to be racist at least be upfront about it

thats what i was looking for

do you think that black crime being higher and iq being lower is purely genetic?

That's a really foolish way of viewing things.

In the US blacks were more likely to be in low quality accomodation, and many of the houses had lead pipes that gave children lead poisoning, resulting in stupidity and violence

Well regarding Africa it has such poor education and nutrition that those can be attributed to poor iq and high crime

IQ isn't an action

and crime has its roots in the existing conditions.

Nobody is born a criminal.

what virtue signalling?

I am pointing out that there is far more to IQ and Crime than genetics

to say that someone can be genetically a criminal is absurd

@English Pirate This is worth your time whether you like it or not

hopefully i've given you something to think about at least

not an argument

@calebcool really?

@Romulus when did i use a "like OMG, how can you say that, how dare you" argument

and not at least elaborate

yes i am.

I have every right to be angry

but i try to keep anger out of my arguments

Even ifm that's true it doesn't make me wrong

this is an ad hominem argument

but back to what we were discussing yesterday, humans don't have a crime gene, and IQ tests involve vocabulary, something which is taught, not inherent. It is foolish to attribute both purely to genetics

Not genetically

or maybe their culture suppresses their feelings, telling them to keep in line. East Asian culture is very conservative usually

Material conditions in Africa did not lead to developement of agriculture in many places, meaning that society could not be formed neither could advanced cultures

Someone who is socially ostracised for being gay is much less likely to identify as gay than someone who is accepted for being gay, as an example

Impulse control can be affected by upbringing and experience

Agriculture has only arisen in the last 10,000 years, even for Europeans. That's not a long enough time for substantial genetic difference, but europeans aren't "impulsive"

not social darwinism though

only due to selective breeding

Also you all act like there was never any civilisation in Africa whatsoever. This isn't true.

not just north africa

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mali_Empire
explain this

but they still managed an extensive civilization

which supposedly these blacks were not capable of

it lasted 400 years and was pretty big if you look at the map there

Civilization itself has only existed for about 7000 years

I haven't heard of any civilization that old

name one civilization existing before 5000 BC

hmmm... seems like just tribes with some small technology

ok i concede i was wrong

but then how does this explain Native American civilization

aztecs

they couldn't have been natufian

wouldn't the natufian genes be diluted so much not to matter after a certain point

even if supposedly they were so different

That's a pretty hefty claim

source?

wait

if africans are descended from natufians then how can they be inferior or whatever?

but the inhabitants of africa are still black

i said 'n1g3eria'

fucking hell

well what about n1g3ria

its sub saharan

and they are doing pretty good rn

it has overtaken south africa

the largest economy in africa

well surely egypt or something should be doing better than the supposedly filthy sub saharans

yeah thats true

n1g3eria still maintains a higher GDP per capita than moldova

lol

well then you acknowledge that there is more to a country's developement than their race

what about the swahili city states

ugh always an excuse

alright even if supposedly natufians were in every society it doesn't mean that their genetics were directly responsible for all of it.

i said 'even if'

aha what about hungary

hungarian language is not afro-asiatic

well hungary had civilization despite not speaking afro-asiatic. Plus hungarans weren't very ethnically different from others in the area

sorry if i'm misunderstanding you

>all african civilizations of any notability
mali empire tho

it was notable

it was even in Civ 5

Mansa Musa became the richest guy ever

Kublai Khan didn't 'own' all of china

it wasn't all his

there were lower down lords who owned parts surely

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongolian_nobility#Mongol_Empire_(1206%E2%80%931368)_and_Yuan_dynasty_(1271%E2%80%931368)
Others who owned Yuan China partially

there are otehres

well regardless Mali Empire was still very rich

well surely if they were such savages they wouldn't be able to create an economy and civilization

Who was setting up the mines?

probably sub saharan africans

>and their descendants
basically everyone

well given ~2000 years of breeding basically everyone would have some kind of shared ancestry. For instance all Europeans are descended from Charlemagne

how is it not true

but charlemagne had so many descendants spread throughout europe that everyone can trace their ancestry back to him

adna?

but surely the mathn is right

logically his ancestors would have spread through europe