/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>>2869350
If it's all about race, how come I know Africans with PhDs and you are a loser faggot who lives in a basement?

>>2869353
Exceptions don't disprove the rule. Elementary logic man

Racists always talk about black people's problems but don't help solve them.

>>2869356
Why is it our responsibility?

>>2869354
Except they obviously do. We can objectively say that other species of animal are not as intelligent as humans. If we could find a dog that could speak human language that would disprove everything we know about canine intelligence.

>>2869358
It's not. I'm team just mind your own fucking business.
>>2869356
Racists are just not smart and not accomplished. This is the only way they can feel good about themselves:
>Well at least I'm not an African or Indian!

>>2869359
That's because the difference in intelligence between humans and dogs is far higher than the difference between races

>>2869360
Good. Then we mind our business in our own countries and they mind their business in their countries.

>>2869361
Ok you're activating those neurons a little now, now start thinking about the effect of education. I think you're a retard, not because of your race, but because you are poorly educated.

>>2869360
Why does it matter how smart or accomplished racists are? It doesn't matter who believes something, only whether they're correct or not.

>>2869363
>the effect of education
On what?

>>2869366
On intelligence retard.

>>2869367
There's not much effect.

>>2869368
The fact you could believe something as obviously false as that is what makes it obvious you have no intelligence yourself. That's fucking crazy, just discounting the accumulation and body of knowledge of human history as if it just spontaneously appears in the anointed. I suppose you could go back 10,000 years and just take any random adult hunter gatherer of whatever race and then train them into a PhD. No, you have to be educated from birth my man. You don't spontaneously have mental ability. Why the fuck do you think you spend the first 2-3 decades of your life in education?

>>2869369
Education increases education. Which is absolutely a good thing, but there are still innate differences in intelligence. Are you denying that innate differences in intelligence exist at all?

Anyways, this debate is pointless, you're obviously on the bottom end of the bell curve. You haven't even studied the /pol/ infographics. I've debated way smarter racists than you and it's all hopeless because your whole belief system is based of emotions not logic even if you try and rationalize it.

>>2869373
Why don't you make a logical argument instead of ad hominems then?

>>2869350
Its always been shit.
Its less shit now than it was 200 years ago so its status isnt anything suprising.

OP is a fed
>Ethiopia was never colonized
Yes it literally was, it was colonized by Italy and incorporated into Italian East Africa, it continues to be Neo-Colonized to this day.
>Korea and China were as poor as Africa 50 years
China is a sovereign communist country and South Korea was allowed to adopt State-Capitalism because it didn’t have as much resources for the west to exploit.
>Happens all across the globe, in Europe and Asia.
Yeah do you think that those countries are not poor too?!?!
>Rhodesia and South Africa were rich when run by whites.
How are you measuring wealth?!?! If you are using GDP then that is a bullshit way of measuring wealth. Also Libya had the highest standard of living in Africa before America raped it.

>>2869377
If Ethiopia was colonized then so was Korea. And it's not poor. Huh

>>2869380
You are using GDP to measure wealth which just measures how rich the richest people are in a nutshell. However South Korea does have a higher standard of living and I already explained that it was because they were allowed to adopt State-Capitalism while Ethiopia was not. It has nothing to do with race, no race functions monolithically, race doesn’t even exist in the first place

>>2869375
I already explained it to you. What we consider "intelligence" is actually a system of knowledge that you have to be brought up in. It doesn't just spontaneously appear. There is no way to test for intelligence outside of knowledge. You know this too, that's why you based your original argument on:
>Whoah, why didn't these countries just spontaneously develop?
Because it doesn't fucking work like that. You're just shitting on the whole of human history.

Honestly MENSA fags have been a detriment to the human race. People with no real world accomplishments who have to pat themselves on the back for being good at sudoku puzzles. The worst part is they enable all the retards like OP who are not even good at the sudoku.

>>2869382
>they were allowed
By whom? Who is deliberately keeping these countries back? Where's your evidence that it's happening?

>>2869383
>intelligence doesn't exist
Figures you'd say this

>>2869387
Let me know when Nigeria isn't a poor slum

>>2869382
Did you ever take econ? We have gini coefficient to measure inequality, and Korea isn't particularly high.

>>2869390
Exactly, you can't be educated because you refuse to be and would rather view the world through your emotional reaction to it vs. logical deductions. I only engaged with this to educate the people who are only halfway retarded that have similar views to you.

>>2869358
The snowuyghurs only acquired intelligence and culture thanks to the Mediterraneans. Now it's your turn (though I assume you're Jewish or Mexican, not white).

>>2869393
Just meaningless posturing lol. You're not even pretending to be up for a debate, just "educating" people who disagree with you. You don't even think it possible theoretically that you could be wrong.

>>2869350
>Rhodesia and South Africa were rich when run by whites.
What if science reveals that Japanese and other East Asians (including Chinese) are smarter than whites? That they have higher than average autism scores? Would it mean that white countries deserve to be run by the Japanese?

>>2869398
Japan was behind until the modern age too

>>2869409
Well East Asians don't create more developed countries than whites. They're on par with each other. I never brought up autism score, you did.

>>2869350
>Ethiopia was never colonized and it's poor, and much of the rest of the world was colonized and it's fine

It was tho

>Korea and China were as poor as Africa 50 years ago.

They weren’t and besides China had a communist revolution and Korea was subsided by America to fight the communists

>Happens all across the globe, in Europe and Asia.

Not to the same extent tho. Can you think of a European leader that was killed by nato liked Gaddafi was?

>Rhodesia and South Africa were rich when run by whites

Both of those countries are richer now, unless you believe gdp is a good measure in which case you should leave this site.

>>2869350
autism score doesn't disprove communism nor does it necessarily mean you have to interfere with other cultures, autism score and lack of perceived development is entirely economically motivated. communism isn't egalitarianism, not even Marx believed this. Egalitarianism is a liberal bourgeois concept.

>>2869419
Ethiopia was colonized by Tigrayans

>>2869420
>Egalitarianism is a liberal bourgeois concept.
I don't know why you people keep running with this.

>The state will be able to wither away completely when society adopts the rule: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs", i.e., when people have become so accustomed to observing the fundamental rules of social intercourse and when their labor has become so productive that they will voluntarily work according to their ability. “The narrow horizon of bourgeois law", which compels one to calculate with the heartlessness of a Shylock whether one has not worked half an hour more than anybody else–this narrow horizon will then be left behind. There will then be no need for society, in distributing the products, to regulate the quantity to be received by each; each will take freely “according to his needs".

>>2869414
>Well East Asians don't create more developed countries than whites.
Depends on how you count white countries. Argentina is mostly European by ancestry but would you say it's more developed than Taiwan or Japan.

>>2869414
>Well East Asians don't create more developed countries than whites.
According to White people's own metrics they do.

>>2869350
>Korea and China were as poor as Africa 50 years ago.
Anyways, there is no point trying to educate this chimp when he just spouts the most obviously false shit. That's right, the country that was the richest country in the world almost into the last century has the same base of development as African countries.

>>2869429
>Iceland Denmark Norway Switzerland Germany Sweden
Those sound Asian to you?

>>2869430
Yes lol in 1980 China's GDP per capita was lower than Nigeria

>>2869472
Yeah, so? Their civilization is one of the oldest and developed in the world. Them being poor was only minor setback in their entire history. That's why they call it the century of humiliation.

>>2869470
There are asian countries higher than 100% white countries.

>>2869474
Japan wasn't historically very developed until the Meiji era. Also why would China having been comparatively advanced in the year 100 BC have any bearing on their ability to be successful today? Unless the people are fundamentally different…

>>2869475
And there are Asian countries lower than white countries. I don't really know what you're arguing. The most developed Asian countries are less developed than the most developed white countries, and the least developed Asian countries are less developed than the least developed white ones (debatably)

>>2869477
>Japan wasn't historically very developed until the Meiji era.
No, it was a highly developed country even if they didn't have all the same technology.
>Also why would China having been comparatively advanced in the year 100 BC have any bearing on their ability to be successful today?
Because development is cumulative.
>Unless the people are fundamentally different…
Anyways, there is no point debating you because you're dead set on your prejudices. You're not asking in good faith. Your working backwards from your emotional beliefs and trying to rationalize them.
>>2869479
>The most developed Asian countries are less developed than the most developed white countries,
For now.

>>2869487
>for now
You're showing your lack of education here. Asia's demographic crisis is far worse than the West's. Japan was actually one of the richest countries in the world in the 1980s, so if anything we're moving backwards
>development is cumulative
What exactly do you mean by this? Their country was just not more developed than Africa in the 1980s, objectively.
>picrel
Unlike you I've actually read the book that quote comes from, and the context makes it clear he was talking about ethnicity and not race. So he didn't believe Italians were actually distinct enough from Germans or Frenchmen or Spaniards to make a difference. Which is a valid opinion.

>>2869388
>By whom?
The United States, the world hegemonic superpower that is ruled by a Cabal of elite Epstein-Affiliated pedophiles.
The United States uses the Dollar as the reserve currency and military intervention to keep the 3rd world poor for the benefit of these elites, look at Libya after America killed Gaddafi.

>>2869494
With respect to Libya:
>It depends primarily on revenues from the petroleum sector, which represents over 95% of export earnings and 60% of GDP.
Extraction economies are famously unstable lol. Econ 101 man

>>2869350
>Ethiopia was never colonized and it's poor, and much of the rest of the world was colonized and it's fine.

you fucking ignorant retard

>>2869350
poor institutions, arbitrary borders, instability and civil war, poor underlying economic structure, lack of urbanisation, attempting to develop too quickly leading to indebtedness, trade barriers by the west…
Rhodesia and South Africa weren't rich, they just had rich people. Rhodesia's GDP per capita in 1970 was $305 against $2305 for England and $390 in Malaysia. South Africa's was better at $935, while Australia had $3310.

this, i admit, is an inference but i would also say poor social structure. to illustrate this, i will compare China and India instead: one reason China got rich faster than India is that Mao smashed most traditional social structures, which are a major barrier to economic development. if you've got a bunch of traditional social ties that say you can't leave your village subsistence farming lifestyle and that women can't work and so on, then you can't move to the city and become an industrial worker, and moving people from rural to urban areas is basically the definition of civilisation. India, being a semi-democracy, never did this. (e.g. legislation was introduced to reform Indian marriage law in 1950 by outlawing polygamy, giving women the right to divorce and inherit property, and allow inter-caste marriage. as a semi-democracy, this was simply voted down in parliament leading the minister responsible to resign. In Maoist China similar reforms were simply pushed through by the party.)

postscript: a racial explanation of GDP really struggles with the Pacific. Why is Samoa poor (GDP pc: $5470) and American Samoa middle-income? (GDP pc: $18,100) Both are more than 90% Samoan by ethnicity! Meanwhile in New Zealand, Samoan adult income per-head is $36,100.

>>2869381
if you like GDP you'll love my numbers :)

>>2869387
this is slowly changing. look at someone like Richard Hanania, who started out as a racist for lQ reasons but then realised that some of the lowest lQ specimens of the human race are white nationalists.

Both the OP and the commenters are wrong. I'm not African, but I'm from South Asia, and many of the same underlying problems that affect Africa also affect South Asia. Imperialism certainly played a role, but I don't think there's some coordinated effort to keep Africa and South Asia poor or stupid.

In my view the biggest problem has been liberal democracy. What democracy often means in the third world is two entrenched, corrupt political parties and sometimes a military establishment that also protects its own interests. Neither side has much incentive to challenge the status quo, so the country stagnates while public services deteriorate and people live in filth. Because political leaders are focused on preserving their own networks of power, long-term development is just never an option. The democratic systems a has been a cancer for the third world.

By contrast even a highly corrupt but stable long-term single-party authoritarian government will be more effective at driving industrialization, building infrastructure, expanding education, maintaining stability and creating economic growth than a democratic system trapped in constant political gridlock.

>>2869421
It was colonized by Italians