Why are Africans so violent, as populations?

What about US? OH Stop here : I don't want to read that I'm still attacking USA because of something or something else... I just use them as an exemple (that's so easy

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

)

Is it a different race?
- "war gene" (Dr Lou Natic) : it is something that make its owner to be ready for war 24/7. Why do US have weapons? For protection... if someone try to attack them, they will reply with a gun. They are living in a so wild society that they need to protect themselves. The difference with Africans : their "neighbours" don't attack them for survival, so it's less often.
- animals sacrifices (Dr Lou Natic) : No hunters in USA? Are they Africans? Do they hunt for eating or for fun/tradition?
- technology (Galt) : US love to destroy the Earth... while they could do much better! Why do they use so polluting cars, so polluting factories...? So they have the ability to use very high technolgies but they don't... a brain disease or a genetic difference?

Of course I could do the same exercice with some other nations...

The names are those who first talked about the "ideas" (if no mistakes).

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I get the impression you didn't read my post, or understand it, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you didn't read it.

I find it interesting you said africans don't have wars with eachother for survival as though america does.
Its not the opposite because africans aren't exactly warring with eachother for survival anymore either but america never has.
The point I was making is we have this "war gene"(not a real physical thing I assume) because we used to need it when we were all in africa.
I pointed out that many of the social african animals have wars. We are a social african animal and that is the reason there are wars to day. We have this left over "war gene" and naturally we want to use it so we find ways to do so.

Originally we would have had wars with our neighbours due to competition. Our ancestors would have patrolled their territories and if they found a clan of humans in their territory they would have attacked them. They would have felt as though they just didn't like the other clan or like fighting was fun or something. But the real reason these feelings were ingrained into their instincts was to ensure they had ample food.
Lions do this, hyenas do this, african cape hunting dogs do this, even chimpanzees do this. Its never pretty when they find an outsider in their territory.

But it is a "good" trait to have. It was designed to stop what humans have now done. An ignorant person after watching a mob of chimpanzees litterally tear another apart would say "why can't they just get along and live alongside eachother? Damn savages...etc". Well the reason is fruit doesn't grow on trees.... oh ... wait ... ummm.... well it doesn't grow at a rate fast enough to sustain more than a certain amount of chimps. Their territory is just right for them and thats the way nature intended, our ancestors would have learned quickly the hard way that friendly doesn't cut it.

It does now(hell anything cuts it now, you don't even need legs anymore) but its still deeply ingrained into some of us us that war is the name of the game. We just don't understand why, if we did we would never have become civilised, villages, towns and cities would not exist because as soon as a clan of humans came close enough to another to be noticed one of them would have been destroyed. What villages, towns and cities are is human clans "joining forces".
Perhaps they figured out competing with other species is alot easier than competing with their own.

But it is clear to anyone that knows the nature of working eco-systems that there is no future for this. Ofcourse we can outcompete all the other species, and it might seem like we are doing pretty well for ourselves by cheating the system like this but eventually it will catch up.
If you outcompete the other species too hard they start dissappearing altogether, this inevitably leads to the whole system that is sustaining everything deteriorating which obviously will eventually lead to our demise.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Um first thing.....back 500 years ago their were no "3rd world" and "1'st world" countries.

You cant really trust IQ tests. THey are based on the assumption of some scientists who makes a list on what they think you can do at some specific age.Guess what. Theirs alot of difference types of intelligence. It's more about ambition.


Perhaps the ancient Africans werent so ambitious. Back 5000 years ago, most cultures were pretty much on the same level of existence.The african like it. THey enjoyed their living. So they didnt want to change. While their ambitious counter parts in the middle east fought wars because they wanted to be better than each other. The africans were content. The asaisn, europeons, and middle easterners werent content.


Unfortunatley, The whites came.They screwed the blacks up. Africa only had 2 freee independt nations in early 1900. The europeons were stripping africa. THey were milking it and leaving the inhabitants really poor. Well when Europeons left......they didnt leave much. Well then started the conflicts. Unfortuantley, many greedy men saw chance for power. After centuries of oppression from Europe, they copied their methods. Well with alot of wars you cant really advance.



One last thing. To say africa has been more violent is funny. What about world war 2?50 milion ww1, 9 million. What about all those napoleanic wars, the 100 year war. If you add the figures up it is clear that the old white boy's are the most violent.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Your post was easy to read and to understand (even for me...) so don't worry about it.
I'm sorry about my last post : I realise that one sentence was not clear! The difference with Africans : their "neighbours" don't attack them for survival, so it's less often. "their" is used for "US". It means that US don't have to fight for territories or food (in USA of course... I don't want to speak about their foreign policy) while it's different in Africa (even if it's not always the only/main source of war).

 

i grew up in the ''projects'' back in the early 50's on the far side of chicago and most my friends were black and there was a lot of violence there (according to my mother) but we still have a lot of fun and i do remember a lot of prejudice from the white crowd. couldn't understand why and still don't.

as for black history, in central america there are statues/sculptures of black and europeans that date back some 15 to 40,000 years. so these people were of prominence then.

in africa (from ethopia to south africa) some 4,500 years ago they were very advanced and powerful but they did threaten the egyptians who conquered them.

and in europe we had the dark ages where the white man was thrown into barbarism.

this is just goes to show that we are all human no matter color we may be, we're all just trying to get through this the best possible way we can and as noted above money does matter.

andy

 

prozak: I was replying to your first post where you claimed that the africans where primitive and violent, and It seems to me like you're juding a whole "race" because of a few individuals? If you ask me the reason why many africans seem "violent" and are criminals is because of the bad enviroment they grew up in, just look at the africans who grew up in rich neighbourhoods and watch their crimerate.

anyhow Im not even sure why Im writing this, you havent probably even met an african in your life and until you do I dont think your narrowminded thinking will change =)

 

Do you find it mildly amusing that he cites his own "ideas" as somehow dangerous, edgy and innovative? Wow! Racism was YOUR idea? OMFG I thought it had been around since the dawn of humanity! Hehe.. eh. I'll shutup.

 

wesmorris: some people just like to have an easy answer to everything, "omg those africans behave that way, there must be something wrong with all africans!"

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

reminds me of that scene in "American History X" where a black man imitates a KKK member to Ed norton: "I dont know what a n*gger is, Ive never seen one, but I sure as hell hate them" =))

 

I didn't mention any examples of evidence of DNA structure affecting behavior because it is very obvious if you've ever taken a course in Biology. It's a given. But here's an example anyway. Say a black, white, red, whatever person has a physical make-up directed by his DNA that made his body create more testosterone. Wouldn't that make him more aggressive?

As for IQ tests, you said that "there's no IQ difference and blah blah blah"

First you say everyones' IQs are the same and now you say they can't be compared with one another? That's BS you can't weasel out of.

 

The answer is "yes". But is there something that show you a difference in testosterone levels when you compare a black to a white? (I would bet on the whites to have more testosterone...)

You should read my post before saying something wrong : I said IQ was not different from a race to an other (for the real IQ) AND I said that the test that are used to calculate the IQ are not usable to compare Africa to "high educated" countries. It seems to me that you can't understand that...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I was totally taken aback when I was told that my continent, thus my country, thus my family and thus I, were violent. Following the same logic, I was next told that I was intellectually inferior. You can imagine the shock as I did and do not consider my intellectual inferior to Whites, especially to the originator of this thread or for that matter, overly violent.

Well, blessed is he who can sit behind a computer desk in total anonymity and utter ignorance and stupidity, for they escape the reach of my vengeance and wrath. As a forum whose aims I thought were intelligent discourses on philosophy, math, politics, and the sciences, I must say it is disappointing to find racist viewpoints, pseudo-science, ignorance and the unwillingness to mitigate that ignorance, almost ubiquitous. It is a shame.

I suggest you study the nature of war/violence in Africa’s history in more detail; then compare with the Europeans, Middle Easterners, South Americans and the Asians. I am certain you will be surprised. But then again, the resources have been there for you to learn about a continent you seem to hate and you have not used those resources. I do not envision a change.

Peace.

 

this question was loaded by the originator of this thread ......by African ,he, was referring to all coloured black people and this shows a lack of ,intelligence, decency and proclaims his ignorance and stupidity.
Racism belongs into the realms of the ignorant and arrogant ...................I would like the "author"of this thread to be made up to look like a black coloured person for a year, and to feel and experience the discrimination , hate and antagonism for himself....
myself I am white ...but some people in this world are stained with the "blackness" of ignorance!!

 

it is them. internal hate eternally. muslims create muslim countries. caste system=caste, tribal=tribal, bogus excuses because the reason it is them. They sell each other and sell each other out, = criminals, If the British hadn't gone in it would be still all jungle. They want everything given to them so LIE distort ... ignore others but won't bring their characters up. Truth from observation is NOT racist. the racist is not fixing that and blaming others.

 

You are replying to a thread that died 20 years ago.

And you are fairly clearly some kind of unpleasant troll. I don't expect you will be around for long. But I'll get out the popcorn.....

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

It is not "racism" when one has used their eyes for decades and not the likes of cnn lying propagandas of bogus excuses. Summer of 2020 they again rioted for criminals not caring that their criminals are a danger to themselves, but beat the lying drum whitie did this. So Afr. they have murderous coup after murderous coup with always the same extortionist dictator. Chicago new mayor a lightfoot clone and he was a teacher who did not believe in teaching no grades no test to see where his students lack in knowledge I suppose he taught the propagandas of hate for gain for excuse to be criminals. So pick a lightfoot, that is bad for "your communities" that's wicked racist.

 

64 million people died as a result of WWI and WWII.

*mic drop*

 

What's a "lightfoot"?

 

Apparently some kind of pejorative character template abstracted from Lori Lightfoot, the former mayor. The nearest urban dictionary gets to defining such is narrowly Covid related:

Lightfoot (or lightfooting, lightfooted, etc): 1: The inability to partake in social events or outings in response to Lori Lightfoot's extensive safety countermeasures enacted, aimed towards "flattening the covid curve". This is a term most applicable to those closer to downtown Chicago, but also to those who live within nearby areas.

As if anybody but Chicagoans care what Chicagoans are doing to themselves good or bad, voting wise.
_

 

OK thanks. So we know where our new troll lives, then….

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!