Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old July 22nd, 2012 #1
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,756
Blog Entries: 34
Default Facts, Data, Studies Pertaining to Race and Racial Attitudes

As for Mr. Jefferson's alleged affair with Sally Hemmings, it has never been proved. The historian who claimed to have proven it, Joe Ellis, misled the genetic researchers, misrepresented their findings. He was suspended for a year from teaching at a very liberal college when his lies about his own war record were revealed in the liberal Boston Globe.

Then why do so many Americans believe Joe Ellis's sloppily researched libels against Jefferson? Because they want to.


http://fleming.dailymail.co.uk/
 
Old July 22nd, 2012 #2
Steven L. Akins
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: The Heart of Dixie
Posts: 13,170
Default

I recall seeing a news show segment some years ago that revealed Jefferson's own DNA wasn't the sort of haplotype that one would normally expect to find from someone of British origin - that Jefferson was descended from a direct paternal ancestor who originiated (I believe) in Phoenicia.

The ancient Phoenicians have long been believed to have established trading outposts in prehistoric Britain, and of course the Romans occupied Britain and among their ranks there were people from all over the Roman Empire.
 
Old July 22nd, 2012 #3
littlefieldjohn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,105
Default

I'd bet money Louisville's, Muhammed Ali's lightened features spring from his slave great grandpappy's "fambly connections"
to Senator Cassius M. Clay's slave-freeing Kentucky plantation (Henry Clay's cousin). The fambly was grateful so evidently they named lil Cassus after him.
Somebody was dipping the wick , but what else is new - virtually every nigger bandied as a 'great American has a lot of white blood. F.Douglass, Thurgood Marshall, Booker Washington, Colin Powell to name more than a few. Oh yeah who else but B.O.
They ought to research the Clay connection a little. Yeah, the Jefferson story is a great example of people ultimately believing something because they want to, or are afraid not to for various reasons.Re; Hem(m)ings- Somebody, maybe, certainly no scientific proof it was Thomas.

Last edited by littlefieldjohn; July 22nd, 2012 at 01:13 PM.
 
Old July 22nd, 2012 #4
notmenomore
Senior Member
 
notmenomore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,632
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by littlefieldjohn View Post
... the Jefferson story is a great example of people ultimately believing something because they want to, or are afraid not to for various reasons.Re; Hem(m)ings- Somebody, maybe, certainly no scientific proof it was Thomas.

This one just goes on and on...

I'll try to find it: there's some more recent work out on this one that tries to refute the idea that the subject DNA derives from Randolph Jefferson (Thos.' younger brother) by correlating a number of contemporaneaous diary/journal entries to conclude that at the pertinent times needed to account for Sally Hemmings' conceptions of her known offspring, Randolph was definitely elsewhere but Thos. was "around".

I have to admit that it seems likely and reasonable that racialist ideas were rather different in the 18th century from today, and further, that I really don't give a rat's ass if TJ was enjoying a little Brown Sugar (mullatto, it was) back in the day.
__________________
No way out but through the jews.

Last edited by notmenomore; July 22nd, 2012 at 02:11 PM. Reason: fact check
 
Old July 22nd, 2012 #5
Steven L. Akins
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: The Heart of Dixie
Posts: 13,170
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by notmenomore View Post
This one just goes on and on...

I'll try to find it: there's some more recent work out on this one that tries to refute the idea that the subject DNA derives from Randolph Jefferson (Thos.' younger brother) by correlating a number of contemporaneaous diary/journal entries to conclude that at the pertinent times needed to account for Sally Hemmings' conceptions of her known offspring, Randolph was definitely elsewhere but Thos. was "around".

I have to admit that it seems likely and reasonable that racialist ideas were rather different in the 18th century from today, and further, that I really don't give a rat's ass if TJ was enjoying a little Brown Sugar (mullatto, it was) back in the day.
Wasn't Hemmings the illegitimate offspring of Jefferson's father-in-law?
 
Old May 17th, 2013 #6
8Man
"moderate" radical
 
8Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: 33 Thomas St NY 10007
Posts: 3,431
Default Harvard research shows diversity is not strength



The Harvard Institute authors measured for what they call ethnic fractionalization (diversity).

The greener countries are more ethnically diverse and the orange countries more homogenous.

Findings:

African countries are the most diverse.
European countries are ethnically homogenous.
Richer countries are more likely to be homogenous.
Strong democracy correlates with ethnic homogeneity.
In more fragmented societies a group imposes restrictions on political liberty to impose control on the other groups. In more homogeneous societies, it is easier to rule more democratically since conflicts are less intense.

more at: Map of the world’s most and least ethnically diverse countries
__________________
"Israel's values are Canada's values" Canadian PM Paul Martin, Nov. 13 2005
"An attack on Israel is an attack on Canada" Canadian PM Stephen Harper, Feb. 16 2010
 
Old August 6th, 2013 #7
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,756
Blog Entries: 34
Default

Could Bowling Leagues and the PTA Breed Nazis?
By Cass R. Sunstein Jul 30, 2013 9:30 AM GMT-0500

In recent decades, many social scientists have drawn attention to the importance of “social capital.” The term is meant to capture the value, economic and otherwise, that comes from social networks, through which people frequently interact with one another. But what if social capital ends up contributing to the rise of extreme movements, including fascism?

It is well-established that individuals and societies can gain a great deal from civic institutions, such as parent-teacher associations, athletic leagues, churches and music clubs. High levels of social capital have been associated with numerous social benefits, including improvements in health, promise-keeping, trust, altruism, compliance with the law, child welfare and individual happiness.

Harvard University political scientist Robert Putnam has done a great deal to explore the beneficial effects of social capital. In his book “Bowling Alone,” he documented what he saw as its decline in the U.S., connecting that decline with a wide range of social problems.

Pointing to research by Putnam and others, many people have argued that the U.S. and other nations should make a sustained effort to measure and increase social capital, with particular attention to civic associations that help to generate it.

At the same time, social capital can have a dark side. If people are in a social network whose members are interested in committing crimes, the existence of social capital will promote criminal activity. A fascinating recent study called “Bowling for Fascism” goes much further: It shows that the rise of Nazism was greatly facilitated by unusually high levels of social capital in Weimar Germany.

Hitler’s Rise

The research offers an important and novel perspective on Adolf Hitler’s ascension to power. And by identifying conditions that help to spread extremism, it also offers significant lessons for the present, including the risk of terrorism.

The study, conducted by New York University’s Shanker Satyanath and his co-authors, is based on a wide range of original materials, including Nazi Party membership lists and hand-collected data from 112 German towns. The central question: Who was most likely to join the Nazi Party?

In the late 1920s and early 1930s, Germany had an exceptionally vibrant civil society that included clubs involved in hiking, animal breeding, shooting, gymnastics, bowling, firefighting and singing. The authors’ principal finding is that in cities with dense networks of clubs and associations, Germans were far more likely to join the Nazi Party. In their words, “a dense fabric of civic associations went hand-in-hand with a more rapid rise of Nazi party membership.”

It could be suggested that some independent factor, such as socioeconomic status or religion, accounts both for associational activity and for willingness to join the Nazi Party. But that suggestion is inconsistent with the evidence. Even if we control for these and other variables, a dense network of civic associations is correlated with significantly higher rates of entry into the Nazi Party.

This finding undermines the view, held by some, that the Nazi Party succeeded by appealing to people who were socially isolated and that Hitler was able to draw support largely from the lonely and the rootless.

But the evidence strongly suggests otherwise. Nazism spread in part as a result of face-to-face interactions by people who were in frequent contact with one another.

Consider the chilling remarks of a Nazi Party member who recalled his growing acquaintance “with a colleague of my own age with whom I had frequent conversations. He was a calm, quiet person whom I esteemed very highly. When I found out that he was one of the local leaders of the National Socialist party, my opinion of it as a group of criminals changed completely.”

Social Pressures

The authors’ central findings fit well with emerging research on the immense importance of social influences on individual behavior. With respect to music, political convictions, voting and food, we constantly learn from others. Like-minded people tend to go to extremes, in large part because they learn from each other. Within nations and around the world, modern social media connect disparate people and hence build social capital, intensifying social influences on thought and behavior.

For the current period, there is a straightforward lesson. Individuals and nations generally benefit from large numbers of private associations, including sports clubs, religious groups and parent-teacher associations. But in some nations, dense social networks also increase people’s vulnerability to extremism. A great deal of work suggests that terrorism itself can arise not because people are isolated, poor or badly educated, but because they are part of tightly knit networks in which hateful ideas travel quickly.

No one should doubt that private associations are desirable and valuable, and that they can produce a dazzling range of social goods, including checks on the power of government. But Satyanath and his co-authors reveal another possibility: that such associations can facilitate the spread of extremism, ultimately laying the groundwork for serious challenges to democracy itself.

(Cass R. Sunstein, the Robert Walmsley University professor at Harvard Law School, is a Bloomberg View columnist. He is the former administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, the co-author of “Nudge” and author of “Simpler: The Future of Government.”)

To contact the writer of this article: Cass R. Sunstein at [email protected].

To contact the editor responsible for this article: Katy Roberts at [email protected].

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...ed-nazis-.html

[kind of a dopey article, but the sophisticated goy should grasp that the above is one reason jews favor the destruction of non-state institutions, intermediary institutions, and the centralization of power through a tittle-tarian tyranny that dictates the smallest details of everyday life. goyim unmonitored can create problems for ruling jews]
 
Old August 11th, 2013 #8
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,756
Blog Entries: 34
Default

[quote]Smart people are just as racist as their less intelligent peers -- they're just better at concealing their prejudice, according to a University of Michigan study.

"High-ability whites are less likely to report prejudiced attitudes and more likely to say they support racial integration in principle," said Geoffrey Wodtke, a doctoral candidate in sociology. "But they are no more likely than lower-ability whites to support open housing laws and are less likely to support school busing and affirmative action programs."

Wodtke will present his findings at the 108th Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association. The National Science Foundation and the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, part of the National Institutes of Health, supported his research.

He analyzed data on the racial attitudes of more than 20,000 white respondents from the nationally representative General Social Survey. He examined how their cognitive ability, as measured by a widely used test of verbal intelligence, was linked with their attitudes about African-Americans, and about different policies designed to redress racial segregation and discrimination.

Respondents were about 47 years old at the time of the interview, on average, and had completed 12.9 years of education. They correctly answered an average of about six of the 10 cognitive ability test questions.

Among Wodtke's findings:

--High-ability whites were more likely than low-ability whites to reject residential segregation and to support school integration in principle, and they were more likely to acknowledge racial discrimination in the workplace. But there were only trivial differences across cognitive ability levels in support for policies designed to realize racial equality in practice.

--In some cases, more intelligent whites were actually less likely to support remedial policies for racial inequality. For example, about 27 percent of the least intelligent whites supported school busing programs, compared with 23 percent of the most intelligent whites.

"The principle-policy paradox is much more pronounced among high-ability whites than among low-ability whites," said Wodtke, who is also affiliated with the Population Studies Center at the U-M Institute for Social Research. "There's a disconnect between the attitudes intelligent whites support in principle and their attitudes toward policies designed to realize racial equality in practice.

"Intelligent whites give more enlightened responses than less intelligent whites to questions about their attitudes, but their responses to questions about actual policies aimed at redressing racial discrimination are far less enlightened. For example, although nearly all whites with advanced cognitive abilities say that 'whites have no right to segregate their neighborhoods,' nearly half of this group remains content to allow prejudicial real estate practices to continue unencumbered by open housing laws."

According to Wodtke, the broader implication of this study is that racism and prejudice don't simply come about as a result of low mental capacities or deficiencies in socialization. Rather, they result from the need of dominant groups to legitimize and protect their privileged social position within an intergroup conflict over resources.

"More intelligent members of the dominant group are just better at legitimizing and protecting their privileged position than less intelligent members," he said. "In modern America, where blacks are mobilized to challenge racial inequality, this means that intelligent whites say -- and may in fact truly believe -- all the right things about racial equality in principle, but they just don't actually do anything that would eliminate the privileges to which they have become accustomed.

"In many cases, they have become so accustomed to these privileges that they become 'invisible,' and any effort to point these privileges out or to eliminate them strikes intelligent whites as a grave injustice."

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0811005342.htm
 
Old August 11th, 2013 #9
Hunter Morrow
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,803
Default White/Black IQ Gap Manifests On Every Form Of Intelligence Testing: The Poorest Whites Outscore The Richest Blacks!

Quote:
However, black students from families earning more than $70,000 (1995 dollars) score lower than white students whose families earned less than $10,000. Figure 4 shows more of the same for the verbal SAT. Here too, the wealthiest blacks score below the poorest whites. (Complete data can be found in Appendix B.)




Furthermore, Whites whose parents have only have a high school level education outscore blacks whose parents have graduate degrees!

http://lagriffedulion.f2s.com/testing.htm

Whites Discriminated Against In College Admissions And Admissions To Law School And Medical School

http://www.sullivan-county.com/racism/tequila_part.htm

In the article How Diversity Punishes Asians, Poor Whites and Lots of Others by Russell K. Nieli that concerns this study, proves this point. To quote,
Quote:
When lower-class whites are matched with lower-class blacks and other non-whites the degree of the non-white advantage becomes astronomical: lower-class Asian applicants are seven times as likely to be accepted to the competitive private institutions as similarly qualified whites, lower-class Hispanic applicants eight times as likely, and lower-class blacks ten times as likely.
Asians, hispanics and blacks are 7, 8 and 10 times as likely to be admitted to college as a White person below the poverty line.

When it comes to law school admittance, the gap is several dozen times wider than even a 10 to 1 disparity! Seeing as how almost no blacks are qualified for law school, Whites with superior qualifications than even "above average" black and hispanics applicants are turned away by the hundreds each year at every law school.

For instance, in the years of 2006 and 2007 alone, the University of Nebraska rejected nearly 400 White applicants with higher GPA and LSAT scores than the average admitted black and even controlling for income, test scores, grades in college and sex, a black was 440 times more likely to be admitted to the University of Nebraska's law school than a White. The highest recorded discrepancy rate was at Arizona State: A black was more than 1000 times as likely to be admitted than a White. Not percent, as in 11 times. But TIMES. 1100 times more likely or 110,000 percent more likely.

Further Discrimination Against Whites:

Whites from the country, Whites in patriotic or military associated events such as the Boy Scouts and the R.O.T.C., military veterans and those associated with rural activities such as 4-H and Future Farmers of America see those activities not just hurt, but ruin their chances of going to a "top" (jew-infested) college. There is open bias and disdain for the military, for farmers and those who say their majors are criminal justice and agriculture.

A White "male" who was in 4-H and wants to be a cop? You might as just save the application fee and not even bother making one. You aren't what "they" want in college.
 
Old September 2nd, 2022 #10
Tiwaz
Senior Member
 
Tiwaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Europa, Serbia
Posts: 778
Default Positive Racism

 
Old September 3rd, 2022 #11
Fico
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 974
Default

Racialism is evolution fact. Darwin explains it in his book "The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex". You do not must read Mein Kampf for it. It had been written before it.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:10 AM.
Page generated in 0.12193 seconds.