Pol tardkills black man on campus

The attackers autistic battle cry
>Mitchell said that, according to witnesses, the suspect had approached Collins and his friends early Saturday making statements "yelling -- in fact perhaps screaming is one description."
"He then said step left, step left if you know what's good for you," according to Mitchell.

Cant wait till the white people come in here and start talking about "dindu nuffin" , smh.

I still dont get why people even factor color beyond the fact that it just is skin color and nothing else.

>>141962

Maybe he just wanted to be with his neo-nazi brothers in prison? I'm sure he's going to get all sorts of respect now, from behind bars. He can fight race battles all day every day for the rest of his life.

>>141969

Got to keep the lower classes fighting with each other over trivial bullshit so they don't realize how fucked they getting from the upper 1%. That's how any ruling class stays in power, history shows it happens to work.

>>141969
>beyond the fact that it just is skin color and nothing else
Not that it matters but this is 100% wrong. Race isn't just "skin deep" as is often perpetuated by people whoi want to look oh so enlightened and progressive. There are genetical, physiological, hormonal and anatomical differences between races from simple stuff like lactose intolerance effects of alcohol to more serious stuff like predisposition to certain diseases. Does that mean one is worth less than the other? No. But repeating the same bullshit of "it's just different skin color" is meaningless and helps no one.

>>141984
Any characteristic that can be predetermined judging by looking at one's skin is by definition skin deep.

The thing about any two populations, whether defined by difference of race or the one's preference in films or language, is that one is a little more of a given characteristic, and one is a little less, unless of course they happen to be identical.

>>141984
But anon, race as a biological concept simply doesn't makes sense either for too many reasons. Take lactose-intolerance, for an example; most Asians and Southern Africans are known to have this condition due to genetics, so could I classify them as a 'race' by this arbitrary standard? And what about the fact that the human gene-pool isn't a closed environment, and that genetic variation within populations is much greater than that between them? How many 'races' could you make just out of Africa on the basis of these differences?

Take a look at this:
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Racialism

for more details about why race doesn't cut it in science anymore. Just swallow your pride for 15 minutes and give it a read.

>>142031
>Take lactose-intolerance, for an example; most Asians and Southern Africans are known to have this condition due to genetics, so could I classify them as a 'race' by this arbitrary standard?
No, because that's an oversimplification of genetics and because that's not how races are classified. You're picking one trait out of thousands of genetic markers researchers use.

>Links to Rational Wiki
Explains the oversimplification

>>142039
But that's exactly what racialists do; pick one genetic or phenotypic trait like skull-shape or physical build or genetic disposition to particular diseases and use it to draw arbitrary lines. My example was aimed to show how misguided that approach is, because as you said there are hundreds of variations of traits within populations that make any kind of homogenisation virtually impossible, to the point that measures like ethnicity have all but replaced it.

I can accept that you find my explanations simplistic as I'm not an expert in anthropology, but please go through the article I linked in more detail. If you truly care about scientific truth, why are you so resistant to having your views challenged?

>>142044
>My example was aimed to show how misguided that approach is, because as you said there are hundreds of variations of traits within populations that make any kind of homogenization virtually impossible
That's not what I said. Your habit of oversimplification is leading you to completely misrepresent what is being said to make it appear congruent with your own ideals.
I said there were thousands* of genetic traits researchers use. Many of those traits can and are regularly be used to analyze a person's lineage and makeup etc- and these can be used in conjunction with other traits to make guesstimates of a person's ethnicity and/or racial background. This is done all the time.

>but please go through the article I linked in more detail.
The article you linked is from an untrustworthy wikipedia clone made by self-attributed biased individuals who treat sarcasm as a hobby and live as if they were in a sitcom.

>If you truly care about scientific truth, why are you so resistant to having your views challenged?
I do truly care about scientific truth, which is why I don't use and peddle oversimplified pop-entertaiment references like RationalWiki. If you truly care about scientific truth, you shouldn't either.
Unless you also have an unending need to role-play as a sarcastic and witty sitcom character, then continue. Just don't act surprised when people tune you out.

>>142013
That's just to gloss over the averages of a racial population. Of course, individuals are not defined by the group of which they belong, it is that group that is defined by them and the rest of those which compose it. However, you cannot refute the fact that off of those averages you can determine the statistical likelihood of a person of one race committing a crime versus that of another. You cannot plead that we're all individuals and then ignore the picture that the group of individuals paints.
So, bring in some amount of group 1 into an area inhabited by group 2 which has on average lower crime than group 1, you're going to be raising the crime rates of that place.

>>142031
You could easily classify the different races of humans into sub-species, and other groups within those races as other varying sub-groups. Sure.
However, as a cluster, just based off of skin color, we can determine whether one is likely to be more or less successful, be more or less intelligent, or be more or less prone to commit crimes.
Until you can deal with this fact, you're fucked and simply trying to split hairs.

>>142058
Surely you mean by social norms

>>142061
Fair point, these sorts of things can be also determined by social norms such as religions and cultures. That doesn't stop racial classification from also being an important factor though.

>>141984
>Genetical
??
Also, as prominent and observable as those physiological differences are, how are they at all relevant to equality or an innocent college veteran being stabbed in the chest by a racist sociopath?

>>142046
So according to you, is every single academic cited in that article a sitcom character, and the stats and papers are just set dressing? Do you have an issue with the researcher's results, or the writers who compiled them in that article? If it's the latter, just read the papers they link to.

And now that I understand your comment about profiling using genetic traits, that's not quite accurate either; even though you might share genetic traits with Greeks, that doesn't mean you came from Greece, it just means you inherited said traits from somewhere. If certain traits are found in a certain area, that just means they're more frequently passed on in that particular location, rather than being a clear marker for 'race'.

At the end of the day, we're either more or less related to each other in a big soup of people. Dividing that up into arbitrary homogenous groups really is too simplistic an ideal.

>>141969
0/10 try reading the article

>>142013
The term "skin deep" implies that tge only difference among races in their skin.

It's an exageration and it's not helpful.

There are differences between races. Blacks have lower IQs and are more prone to violence than whites. Denying that is exactly the same as denying climate change.

>>141984
Even if race is skin-deep, you can't see black people in the dark, as well as several other adaptations.

>>142126
Riiiiiight, because all blacks and all whites fall into that exact category. Got any data to back that up? No? Didn't think so.
So, according to you, a black harvard med school graduate is automatically going to have a lower IQ than a white trash redneck, and is going to be more prone to violence than said redneck. Or wait - maybe it has something to do with where certain types of people are raised! Maybe, just maybe, a black born and raised in a shitty part of town will have a lower IQ and a higher propensity for violence than a black raised in a better neighborhood. Maybe, instead of being a retard, you could actually think about this, and you'd see that the truth is that there is a large population of poor blacks who are kept in certain neighborhoods, and with the right touch of clever city planning and police abuse (excessively long response time to calls in those areas, constant harassment and general oppression) the community takes care of the rest, by falling into violence, gang politics and general drug use. Could it be that the same patterns of violence and drug use, albeit sans gang affiliations, exists in poor white neighborhoods, too? Hmm, maybe now we're starting to open up a can of worms that shows deep underlying differences in treatment between economic classes. But no, you'll just say something unfounded with your smug self-assuredness and go back to /pol/ where everyone claps you on the back and cheers about those butthurt libtards (which, before you insult me, is false; I've been a registered libertarian for 15 years).

>>142521
Which is why /pol/ needs to be reformed.

>>141962

What psychomeds did the pharmaceutical industry have him hopped-up on?…

>>142104
Skin deep isn't literal. It's a metaphor for something being superficial.

>>142521
butthurt libtard detected

The point is, a degenerate white man stabbed a successful black man. Racial standards don't matter when you're doing something beneficial to the community.

Lets say that nearly all mountain trolls pose a danger to humans, as a statistical norm. If you were confronted by a intelligent troll that saw you were cold and offered you tea and cakes, would you stab him?

I believe most black people are degenerate, but I've met some nice black folk that I'd hang out with.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2017/05/23/man-yells-racist-slurs-after-son-talks-to-mom-orig-tc.cnn/video/playlists/atv-trending-videos/

Heres some more /pol/tard news

>>142521
>not all X are like that!

This is the depth of liberal wisdom. They think this is all one really need to know. That is, one can't really know anything. Therefore, tge person most honest about his ignorance is the smartest person.

But you need to have a college degree to understand this nuanced bullshit.

If you're white and you're defending non-whites and claiming they are as intelligent then you are a traitor.
One should NEVER treat outsiders equally, to create an even playing field you must only defend your people, if you start treating everyone equally while others treat their kind above all you ARE going to lose.

Race reality can't be debunked, I've read all the stuff that's posted at /leftypol/, I've read the entire rationalwiki article, they're not debunking race reality at all and they're providing no evidence for race equality as well. What they're doing is debunking known hoaxes such as the IQ test and pretending that stupid shit like that is the only thing racists base their position on, if you've actually researched a bit on race the various "debunk's" just appear laughable and it's obvious that they were written only to satisfy the feeling of antiracists that can't, or more likely, do not want to look at the issue from the other side because deep down inside they know that when they swallow the red pill they can't go back, they want easy answers, they want heroes to cheer for and enemies (racists) to hate. Cognitive dissonance.

Btw I don't hate outsiders, I like all the people unless they are criminals, some antiracists think that once they'll read a book or two they'll become genocidal maniacs, this is false, new knowledge doesn't harm you if you don't let it consume you, you'll still hang around all your black friends and stuff. Also anyone aware of the basics of statistics knows that there's nothing wrong with prejudice and that closing your eyes on it would instead backfire.

>>142590
>Btw I don't hate outsiders
You should. Hate is the glue of society. People should hate outsiders so much that they'd personally torture them to death for their own amusement. That is a strong society.

>>142590
White people don't identify as "white people."

There's a reason the Nazis and the KKK lost. Most white people don't support that kind of thing.

>>142078
>Dividing that up into arbitrary homogenous groups really is too simplistic an ideal
"Different shades of orange exist, therefore there is no reason to acknowledge the existence of color red and color yellow"
>>142592
I'm a pragmatic person, hating them would give me or my people nothing in return. Also torture and stuff like that is a primitive trait, I won't sink that low.

>>142594
Nazis didn't lose because of that, even mainstream history will disagree with you, Hitler was uberpopular among the people
And KKK was a FBI honeypot, I don't even know why you brought it up.

>>141969
Man you are living in a fucked up country
If you lived in France you would not have to put up with this shit

>>142595
>I'm a pragmatic person, hating them would give me or my people nothing in return. Also torture and stuff like that is a primitive trait, I won't sink that low.

Primitive by the definitions of the liberal enlightenment. Before the so called age of reason, people tortured outsiders for fun. There have been multiple movements to throw off this poisoned fruit of liberalism, but not of them have been successful. However, with the rise of the internet of /pol/ and other alternative conservative communities, we may yet realize the dream of Hitler and establish a monoethnic global super state for the 21st century.

>>142594
That's what the liberals want you to believe. But with the mongrelization of the US, whites are waking up to their identity as conquerors once more.

>Race doesn't exist
>That's why the most rich and powerful people in this world practice eugenics and arrange marriages with geniuses to improve the intelligence of their tribe. Those uneducated rich people that run this world need to read rationalwiki, amirite??

>>142601
Hitler wasn't a genocidal maniac and didn't appreciate torture and inhumane methods. I personally hate kosher skinhead "nationalists" that were brainwashed to believe this.
Also call me blackpilled, but we will never see another Hitler, it's just not going to happen in this new world order we're living in.
Also even Hitler was a failure, the first 6 years were amazing, but then a world war started, and it was inevitable, in the end the whole reich just backfired and dozen millions of people died, if Hitler knew how bad things would end up and the horrors of WW2 that humanity would see he would never even started the whole thing, it wouldn't be worth it in the long run

>>142603
Marriage and reproduction out of "love" was always a conspiracy by the (((elites))) to destroy whites. For most of history, marriage was purely pragmatic and economical. A joining of resources between two tribes. Familial love was seen as laughable. Your family was just a tool for survival, children to be used by parents, and wives by husbands. In fact, in rich families, parents may never actually see their children again after birth until they were adults themselves as child rearing was outsourced to others. This degree of separation bred strength and resilience, something we don't have in modern society.

>>142604
Hitler was a rejection of the effete post-enlightenment liberal paradigm. One of his stated goals was to return culture to a more pure time such as the heyday of the Roman Empire. He rejected the empathy and pacifism that defined modern civilization as weak and stupid.

>>142609
How is my and your statement mutually exclusive?

>>142599
Uhhh... do you not remember the shit your footballers go through? Even the ones who have skin indistinguishably colored from the rest (e.g. Zidane)? Maybe the racist taunts are worse when they play in Spain and Italy, but they still get it in the boonies at home.

>>142601
>That's what the liberals want you to believe.
No liberals tell me whites are KKK nazis. Only by observing whites in the wild did I realize they aren't into thst kind of tribalism. Which makes sense, because a german has no relation to the french.

You're just a meme parroting tool with an agenda. Go fuck yourself you stupid child. Liberals want you this way, fucking IDIOT, it doesn't work against jew.

>>142606
>Familial love was seen as laughable
You're retarded and overly edgy

As if fathers and mothers never loved their kids. You're incredibly stupid.

>white

>>142013
I suppose organs and blood are also only skin deep by your definition. We try to match patients by race in order to reduce risk of rejection. The fact that almost everything, from blood type to IQ to behaviors, can be stratified into subgroups which reflect that of stratification by eace would suggest that it is at least a good preliminary metric.

>>142599
>France
>No racial problems
Zut alors!

>>141962
That's a shame.

>>142606
So by that logic, orphans and blacks abandoned by their fathers have greater strength of character? What kind of childhood did you have that lead to this post, anon?

>>142604
Putting aside the fact that Hitler fully intended the death and slavery of every non-German he could get his hands on, he fully intended to start a massive war both to avenge the punishment inflicted on Germany after the Great War and his own personal ambitions. Otherwise, the war economy he'd rebuilt Germany on would've collapsed under his own weight. Conflict wasn't a possibility, it was an inevitability.

>>142609
Your argument rings hollow when not only did the (relatively) nobler and more democratic side triumph over its totalitarian enemy, but the very same 'empathy' forced Speer to disobey Hitler's decree to turn Germany into a barren wasteland. But knowing /pol/, they'd argue having your house burned down by Nazis would still be better than having non-whites as neighbours.

>entire thread is about "MUH RACE WAR" and not the article itself
nice

>>147454
It was a /pol/ bait thread from the start. What did you expect?

>>147454
Avoids the elephant in the room.

4chan has a board where people applaud each other for promoting acts of violence like this.

>inb4 based/maga back men threads - /nsg/ is far more common

>>147461
>but /pol/ culture anon
>4chan freedom

https://youtu.be/qfwtp_DbTNo?t=31s

>>142039
https://jenjdanna.com/blog/2012/7/10/forensics-101-race-determination-based-on-the-skull.html

Just read this, i don't think anything i say will get through to you anyway.

>>142057
It's easier to use the "men are taller than women" argument. Are men on average taller? Yes. Can a woman be taller than men? Yes. Can a man be shorter than women? Yes.
Can you tell via genetics which will be tall or short? Not really (that I know of anyway). And yet this observable pattern exists.