Good News From South Africa

[Bananaman]

In our society for example it is those who are the poorest who as a group have a higher mortality than those few who are very well off. However, given the economic and political make-up of society the result of wealth inequality and power structures is not down to heritable traits. And the same can be said in regions or even most of Africa in the modern quasi-capitalist world.

 

Lala, I'm getting close to putting up my special picture for you. But basically what you're saying is the ultimate of all Communist values.

 

 

Which doesn't work unless you have a very stout rod. Preferably a ferrous based one. That'll smart once given a clobber by one. A lot.

 

 

I think you need to watch 'The Last King of Scotland' my friend.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Fucking hell. Watch some movie about Idi Amin in Uganda? Why? I watched that movie about the Israelis getting the hostages out of Entebbe airport if that counts.

 

I am talking about Rog's comments about natural selection operating in Africa. Anyway, I am not a community so what are you talking about?

[Bananaman]

Fucking hell. Watch some movie about Idi Amin in Uganda? Why? I watched that movie about the Israelis getting the hostages out of Entebbe airport if that counts.

 

I am talking about Rog's comments about natural selection operating in Africa. Anyway, I am not a community so what are you talking about?

 

 

No you were not! Well not originally anyway.

 

What originally caught my eye on this thread was the clusterfuck that nearly the whole of Africa can not govern it self in any way, shape or form. When it was 'Administered' by the various Empires it was a rich and fertile land.

 

Schooling, work, food for all, even pennies in the pockets.

 

Look at how rich Kenya was, look at how rich and fertile (the bread basket of Africa as it was known) Zimbabwe was. Nigeria on paper should be a world player today.

 

I don't agree with Rog's draconian sentiments with his Darwinian outlook. But what's wrong with some one in the 'know' telling the masses how to run things and keep them ship shape and Bristol? Hey?

 

You can not in any way deny that Africa made riches for all and a (which is where I think you get your hackles up) select few, very very rich.

 

Theoretically the old Empire states should be in a Utopia of freedom and advancement now that they've cast the tyrannical cloak of the evil masters?

 

I see otherwise LDV mate. Now tell me different.

[Rog]

And what of those living in Indochina where it is very hot and where I would presume food to have been in abundance - they are generally rather short.

 

I understand a certain common sense to what you stating, however, I have not come across any evidence to back-up your statements and can see some contradictory examples.

 

In every case, if you look deeply, you will find races differ because of the environment in which they evolved.

 

There may some variation in respect of height, broadness of body, skin colour, sickle cell immunity but other than that I don't see what else actually discerns one group from another.

 

Mental ability in particular skills is one very important difference. A predisposition to approach problems in different ways for another, Things that I have seen time and time again in people of different races when being faced with similar problems to solve or jobs to do.

 

You may not like the thought that such is the case, it may jar with your sensitivities, but remains a fact.

 

It depends on what behavioural factors you are referring to here - you ought to be far more specific. Besides, you might assume that particular behavioural traits are inherited, however, they could be learned and reproduced in that society.

 

Homosexuality is not a classic example, you are making a big assumption there.

 

Then homosexuality is never a genetically imposed condition? Or largely a genetically imposed condition? Homosexuality is mostly a sexual preference of choice?

 

 

And a predisposition towards violence is not an inherited characteristic?

 

Then explain the ‘Mediterranean character’, or the fact that breeds of dog vary widely in their character an intelligence in spite of being very similar in all other ways.

 

Yet such a statement is not natural selection in itself. Does the woman who is hit by a car serve as an example of natural selectio? Does the young boy who is stabbed by someone offer an example of natural selection?

 

Possibly so. It could be down to inherited stupidity on their part.

 

If we are to use natural selection properly and see it as those who are most likely to survive due to heritable traits then what can we see in Africa? You seem to imply by your sweeping use of the term that any deaths serve as examples of natural selection - I disagree.

 

Of course I don’t infer that any death is natural selection in action.

 

In our society for example it is those who are the poorest who as a group have a higher mortality than those few who are very well off. However, given the economic and political make-up of society the result of wealth inequality and power structures is not down to heritable traits.

 

You’ve just contradicted yourself. In most cases it’s being born scum that sees people dying as scum. There most defiantly IS a genetic factor involved. Not ALWAYS the case, Not the ONLY factor, but a key factor nonetheless.

 

And the same can be said in regions or even most of Africa in the modern quasi-capitalist world.

 

Only if your assumption is accepted as being correct.

 

But it isn’t. Your assumption is incorrect. Race is far more than skin colour.

 

Not a thing that creates an absolute super race, bur races that are better fitted to the environment in which they evolved and not best fitted when placed in environments that differ from where they evolved.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

What originally caught my eye on this thread was the clusterfuck that nearly the whole of Africa can not govern it self in any way, shape or form. When it was 'Administered' by the various Empires it was a rich and fertile land.

Really? I don't know where you get this idea from. Agriculture and production of the raw resoures was heavily ordered and structured, but that's all I am aware of. We are talking about a huge continent.

 

Schooling, work, food for all, even pennies in the pockets

In the Congo, Mali, Chad, Sudan, Italian Somiland, South-western Africa, Angola, etc.... Is this really true?

 

Look at how rich Kenya was, look at how rich and fertile (the bread basket of Africa as it was known) Zimbabwe was. Nigeria on paper should be a world player today.

Kenyan productivity was pretty high, in absolute terms it is far far higher today. Zimbabwe is an obvious disaster story.

 

I don't agree with Rog's draconian sentiments with his Darwinian outlook. But what's wrong with some one in the 'know' telling the masses how to run things and keep them ship shape and Bristol? Hey?

It might be preferential to having those who DON'T know do the same. My stance is that nobody has the justification to govern in the manner that governance is undertaken today, the people should govern themselves. Though a less corrupt, less oppressive, and better managed State is an obvious improvement. However, that runs against the issue of nationality.

 

Theoretically the old Empire states should be in a Utopia of freedom and advancement now that they've cast the tyrannical cloak of the evil masters?

I don't see how you work this one out. How would they have become advanced and reached a utopia. Besides the old imperial masters were replaced by new ones: members of their own people coming to power and the western corporations that have gained far far greater controlled over the economy.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

In every case, if you look deeply, you will find races differ because of the environment in which they evolved.

I don't see it I am afraid, not in respect of certain 'strong' heritable traits other than matter of skin colour (melanin).

 

Mental ability in particular skills is one very important difference. A predisposition to approach problems in different ways for another, Things that I have seen time and time again in people of different races when being faced with similar problems to solve or jobs to do.

A predisposition to approach problems differently by my understanding is to be cultural/socially derived. I don't agree that mental abilites differ between ethnic groups and race because of genetics.

 

Then homosexuality is never a genetically imposed condition? Or largely a genetically imposed condition? Homosexuality is mostly a sexual preference of choice?

False dichotomy. I needn't be between genetic predisposition and choice. Sexuality itself is culturally/socially derived. My assumption, is that although there may be a predisposition to be attracted to one sex slightly (or possible even greatly) more than the other.

 

And a predisposition towards violence is not an inherited characteristic?

I don't believe people have a predisposition towards violence that is heritable.

 

Then explain the ‘Mediterranean character’, or the fact that breeds of dog vary widely in their character an intelligence in spite of being very similar in all other ways.

Cultural. And dogs are quite peculiar in the extent of 'morphism' that their species demonstrates.

 

Possibly so. It could be down to inherited stupidity on their part.

It just very might well be, there might be a slight chance that it is due to be less intelligence, but that's not what I am getting at. Many people are hit by cars, and I would assume that you would think it is not all or mostly those of lower intelligence, so is natural selection still operating in those instances?

 

Of course I don’t infer that any death is natural selection in action.

On the greater schemes, how do you see natural selection operating in Africa. You seem to really believe it is, but it deserves a good explanation.

 

You’ve just contradicted yourself. In most cases it’s being born scum that sees people dying as scum. There most defiantly IS a genetic factor involved. Not ALWAYS the case, Not the ONLY factor, but a key factor nonetheless.

Where is the evidence for this? What I do know are those born impoverished or from poorer backgrounds transfer their societal, cultural understandings and their baggage onto their children, who then carry it on theirs. This is very easily seen in society.

[DjDan]

Unfortunately, it seems that 'Our' very interference has generated an expectation of sorts, where humanitarian aid has caused a dilemma, that in providing basic needs and saving lives, has consequently caused a bigger problem by increasing the population which means that further Aid is needed on top of what they're getting now.

 

Not sure how providing aid has created the problem of africa having a large population. I would suspect that the reasons for Africans having large families is due to their cultural & tribal traditions. That and a lack of understanding/education - which is a consequence of poverty (lack of education opportunities) and traditional/cultural beliefs.

[Rog]

I don't see it I am afraid, not in respect of certain 'strong' heritable traits other than matter of skin colour (melanin).

 

Maybe because to see it you would have to ditch a belief that you simply can not, the opinion that everybody of every race is equal.

 

And know what? That’s fine because people with that opinion are essential in order to provide a counter to those who would use the inequality not simply to use as a fact to live with, but as an excuse to hurt those less able in given environments.

 

post='495678']A predisposition to approach problems differently by my understanding is to be cultural/socially derived. I don't agree that mental abilities differ between ethnic groups and race because of genetics.

 

And yet it is my experience that people with different ethnic backgrounds, even if second or third generation Brits and from similar socio-economic backgrounds and education, do have differing strengths when dealing with problem solving.

 

It’s based on working with and managing people with degrees in the sciences and dealing with what they do and what they produce.

 

 

post='495678']It needn't be between genetic predisposition and choice. Sexuality itself is culturally/socially derived. My assumption, is that although there may be a predisposition to be attracted to one sex slightly (or possible even greatly) more than the other.

 

And that in itself emphasises the principle that behaviour can be and is genetically communicated.

 

post='495678']I don't believe people have a predisposition towards violence that is heritable.

 

I do. Certain races of people are more aggressive than others irrespective of upbringing.

 

----- there might be a slight chance that it is due to be less intelligence, but that's not what I am getting at. Many people are hit by cars, and I would assume that you would think it is not all or mostly those of lower intelligence, so is natural selection still operating in those instances?

 

You assume incorrectly.

 

post='495678']On the greater schemes, how do you see natural selection operating in Africa. You seem to really believe it is, but it deserves a good explanation.

 

Put simply, survival of the fittest to survive. As the environment changes if people can’t or won’t adapt to those changes then they are, as a sub species, redundant. And environment includes the changes that modernity brings.

 

 

You’ve just contradicted yourself. In most cases it’s being born scum that sees people dying as scum. There most defiantly IS a genetic factor involved. Not ALWAYS the case, Not the ONLY factor, but a key factor nonetheless.

 

Where is the evidence for this? What I do know are those born impoverished or from poorer backgrounds transfer their societal, cultural understandings and their baggage onto their children, who then carry it on theirs. This is very easily seen in society.

 

I’ve seen on several occasions cases of kids who’ve been adopted as babies by good and decent families turn out to be immoral bastards as adults. When they went on to find their birth mother in all cases that I’ve first hand knowledge of she turned out to be scum.

 

The old adage ‘like father like son’ is not just brouhaha. Take a look at the writings of Lamarck and in particular his work Philosophie Zoologique, in which he showed how characteristics including (in his words) “swiftness and skill” are inherited traits. What applies to animals applies to us.

 

Anyway. It matters little. We’re just like a fart in a thunderstorm when it comes to having any real affect on how other people think.

 

What I DO think is wrong is how kids in school, especially junior school are now being indoctrinated in the “we’re all equal” garbage and “we should give to the poor Africans”, and that in SCHOOL FFS. Disgraceful.

 

As regards providing aid to Africa is aggravating the overpopulation problem, what we’re doing is interfering in the natural selection processes as well as adversely biasing the culture of having many kids in the expectation that many will die.

[MilitantDogOwner]

Unfortunately, it seems that 'Our' very interference has generated an expectation of sorts, where humanitarian aid has caused a dilemma, that in providing basic needs and saving lives, has consequently caused a bigger problem by increasing the population which means that further Aid is needed on top of what they're getting now.

 

Not sure how providing aid has created the problem of africa having a large population. I would suspect that the reasons for Africans having large families is due to their cultural & tribal traditions. That and a lack of understanding/education - which is a consequence of poverty (lack of education opportunities) and traditional/cultural beliefs.

 

The problem is that an education is never going to happen. Not while AK's are cheaper than text books.

 

Oh and life is cheap, oh so cheap in Africa.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Maybe because to see it you would have to ditch a belief that you simply can not, the opinion that everybody of every race is equal.

Or maybe because I am simply unaware of such inequalities.

 

What are these inequalities?

 

And yet it is my experience that people with different ethnic backgrounds, even if second or third generation Brits and from similar socio-economic backgrounds and education, do have differing strengths when dealing with problem solving.

 

It’s based on working with and managing people with degrees in the sciences and dealing with what they do and what they produce.

But then I would still be under the assumption that such differences are cultural.

 

And that in itself emphasises the principle that behaviour can be and is genetically communicated.

It opens up the possibility that's one feelings towards another can show some variance depending on someone's sex. It doesn't necessarily determine behaviour.

 

I do. Certain races of people are more aggressive than others irrespective of upbringing.

Maybe there are cultures that place greater emphasis on male posturing or do not quite apply such a moralism in terms of the use of violence as we see in Western Europe. But going back to your previous post, this 'Mediterranean race' - who are its 'members', i.e. what nationalities?

 

Put simply, survival of the fittest to survive. As the environment changes if people can’t or won’t adapt to those changes then they are, as a sub species, redundant. And environment includes the changes that modernity brings.

It seems to me that you are just arguing that those who are most able to survive in whatever circumstances that have resulted from whatever cause are redundant, will die out, and aren't worthy of support.

 

"The changes that modernity brings" - well what is modernity and what are these changes? In your arguments you present these terms when they require a great deal of explanation. Unless you wish me to think that your theory on the survival of the fittest should stretch to absolutely every circumstance and situation as it relates to every person

 

This isn't natural selection at all. And Man can change his environment.

 

I’ve seen on several occasions cases of kids who’ve been adopted as babies by good and decent families turn out to be immoral bastards as adults. When they went on to find their birth mother in all cases that I’ve first hand knowledge of she turned out to be scum.

But you idea of good and decent is not the same as mine. And such people may just have been bad parents. I do find it somewhat funny that there was a search for the birth mother - was that as a direct result of recognising that this child was apparently inexplicably so naughty?

 

As regards providing aid to Africa is aggravating the overpopulation problem, what we’re doing is interfering in the natural selection processes as well as adversely biasing the culture of having many kids in the expectation that many will die.

And here we go again... You have done much to give your perspectives on whether there are genetic differences between races that determine different behaviours.

 

But do what I have asked. Tell me how natural selection, or more appropriately your theory about the survival of the fittest (with your associated values) actually operates in Africa.

 

What is the environment for them? What are the modern circumstances that they cannot adequately survive in?

[jimbms]

What is more annoying than this debate on Africa is the tossers who insist on quoting every fucking word of previous long posts, dont you get it we just want a friggin simple answer not war and fucking peace unabridged version

[Rog]

What is more annoying than this debate on Africa is the tossers who insist on quoting every fucking word of previous long posts

 

LOL!

 

No, really, I did!

 

You’re SO right, and I admit ‘mia culpa’ and I apologise.

 

LDV and I are polls apart and would never agree because we see life and people so differently.

 

(He’s got it wrong by the way!)

[Khunbaan]

every time i fly from heathrow or gatwick its looks like half of africa are in the uk,,,, so why dont the uk send their forighn aid to themselves.

[manxy]

every time i fly from heathrow or gatwick its looks like half of africa are in the uk,,,, so why dont the uk send their forighn aid to themselves.

I thought that was quite inventive and funny

[jimbms]

Way things are going I would say UK and the USA are more in need of foreign aid ATM