<Pograms were ethnic and class-based riots. They were never done in the name of Christian values.
Very interesting considering many of them were organized by local leaders of the Orthodox Russian Church and tacitly sanctioned by the Russian Imperial State in which Orthodox Russian Christianity was the official state sanctioned and supported religion.>
Pogroms were happening in Orthodox, Protestant, Catholic regions. Interestingly, pogroms intensified during the revolution and the WWI. Pogroms were often organized by Bolshevik / Menshevik (atheist groups).
Most pogroms were class based. Poor, marginalized “disadvanged population” riots against rich Jewish neighborhoods. Looting, trashing neighborhoods, intimidation, looting. Family stories.
You have to be a Creester (Christmas & Easter). Even better - call 'em Keesters - You show up for Christmas and Easter and the rest of the year you sit on your Keester.
@zinhead at #417 sorry I wasn’t clear. I actually do think that some of the escalated anti-semitic incidents are real. Glad to see that the headstone issue is NOT included in that list. The threats on several Jewish centers are absolutely real and even if some huge joke or attempt to frame someone (as at least one set seems to be), very disturbing and intolerable.
@cobrat is correct. What was interesting is that Trump did better among some minority groups than did Romney. For all his inflamed rhetoric, his performance was surprisingly strong. Very odd - but then a lot about this election was odd.
“Crime rate” is a statistic, not a piece of data.
It summarizes a set of data points which correspond to the geographies where the data is collected.
“Police Killings” is also a statistic, not a piece of data.
It also summarizes a set of data points which correspond to the geographies where the data is collected
For the equivalence that you are proposing to be true, the two data sets need to be highly correlated (i.e. in a given geography a high crime rate should correspond to a high killing rate).
As it turns out, someone has already done an analysis to measure the correlation between crime rate and police killings and discovered that there is little to none (see link).
This means that it is highly unlikely that the equivalence that you are proposing is true.
Please note that I am neither contesting the crime rate statistic, nor making any subjective claims of bias with respect to the crime rate statistic, I am just using standard statistical reasoning principles.
Unfortunately, this means that real life is just not that simple. and that life’s complexity is often masked if we rely solely on simple statistics (without examining the underlying data).
I didn’t read all the post, but did anybody bring up the percent of serial killers who are black. They always seem to forget that one when bringing up all their stats blaming all the crimes on them.
“Has Murray ever come out and said that all races have the same capacity for intelligence or stupidity? A simple statement would clear that up? If so, I would be open to what he has to say about other topics. However, if not, everything else FOR ME is tainted.”
Do all races have the same capacity for athletic ability? Roughly 70% of NFL athletes and 75% NBA athletes are African American. No one would call me a racist for accepting the fact that nature as much as nurture has something to do with creating that reality.
Seems to me all Murray has ever done is propose that the same could hold true with respect to intelligence. That doesn’t make him a racist, at least not in my book. It makes him rational and objective. And perhaps somewhat suicidal.
“Seems to me all Murray has ever done is propose that the same could hold true with respect to intelligence. That doesn’t make him a racist, at least not in my book. It makes him rational and objective.”
NO It makes him a racist. He is neither rational or objective. He is a scientific racist who spews hate and venom under the guise of sham science.
@collegedad13 - your response was very timely. Please see below which, I hope, addresses your question in #435.:
Not really sure why “intelligence” and height or body type would somehow be assumed to have different originating causes. Obviously nutrition plays a big role but once you account for that . . .No matter, because - as Murray has pointed out - he didn’t originate the Nature vs. Nurture studies. A big player in that study has been the University of MN with their various Twin Studies. All are welcome to google and learn more about it. IIRC, cognitive ability is something like 2/3 - 75% attributed to genetics. It’s a pretty definite conclusion.
Murray, it should be pointed out, does not distinguish among “race” or ethnic groups for the majority of his Bell Curve book. In fact, holding “race” constant, you will still see analysis that strongly suggests better outcomes for higher IQ.
One can argue with these results academically, or polemically. One thing I think is very interesting is that the arguments about “white privilege” are inherently agreeing with the results this analysis!!! They might call it “white privilege” - call it what you want! But at least let’s honestly look at what the data is telling us because only then can we find effective policy solutions that will address the challenges and overcome them.
We can always rely upon @collegedad13 to give an emotional response to Charles Murray, despite giving zero evidence of ever having read him.
Sadly, this ability to criticize Murray without even reading him (i.e. outsourcing your opinion) seems to have happened at Middlebury as well. Not just among students, who are young and somewhat excusable, but among faculty too. Here are the words of Prof. Stranger (who was assaulted and had to go to the hospital):
@hebegebe. It is not an emotional response. It is an intellectual response to bigotry, hatred and venom. Nice try though. I DO NOT believe that vile should have have a platform. I don’t want to give David Duke a platform either.
Here is a helpful start for all that have asked for a scientific critique of his work
Here is an interesting fact. Charles Murray BURNED crosses on a hillside and when caught claimed he didn’t understand what he was doing. I guess boys will be boys???
Outsourcing your opinion again? In addition to not reading Murray, it appears that you haven’t read what I wrote either. For example, I have mentioned that Stephen Jay Gould was guilty of academic fraud in trying to refute Murray. And yet, the article you selected says:
