"it is worth keeping in mind that the vast majority of suspects (around 80%) are not black"
Perhaps black ethnicity isn't the relevant factor. Perhaps we should distinguish between two groups:
1) Populations where the state has long exercised a monopoly over the use of violence, i.e., most Europeans, almost all East Asians, most South Asians and certain Middle Eastern groups. In these populations, the state has gradually altered the composition of the gene pool through capital punishment, extrajudicial killings, suppression of rebellions, etc. As a result, the threshold for personal violence is relatively high, and there is strong inhibition against violent behaviour in most social contexts.
2) Populations where the state monopoly on violence is recent and has not influenced the gene pool. All adult males are expected to use violence to defend themselves and their loved ones, and such violence can be pre-emptive or even "for show" (to deter potential assailants).
How does the UK government define "white"? Are there statistics that differentiate between native-born white British and other national groups?
Good points. Racial categories are based on self-identity. As I recall, crime rates for "Other White" are highly similar to crime rates for "White British".
"it is worth keeping in mind that the vast majority of suspects (around 80%) are not black"
That is, if you believe the UK crime statistics.
What is important is the crime RATE. In the United States, the black population is 13% but blacks commit 50% or more of the serious crimes. What is the percentage of blacks in the UK?
That is shown on the chart. They are 4.7% of the population aged 15–40. The crime rate differential is reported in the text. They are 5 times more likely to be homicide suspects than whites.
> Exactly what explains this overrepresentation [of Blacks] is still a matter of debate. We do know that poverty, IQ and family breakdown can only explain part.
Trying to pin it on intermediary “explanations” such as poverty or family breakdown is just politically correct obfuscation at this point. These are just intermediary steps in a causal chain that begins with genetics. Over hundreds of years, there hasn't been an environment where Blacks haven't been disproportionately criminal, promiscuous, and poor. That rules out environmental causes. That means the disparity is genetic. Where am I wrong? What are the viable environmental explanations left?
Thanks for the comment. I mentioned that in my article on the black–white homicide gap:
"It is also worth noting that poverty and family breakdown are at least partly downstream of IQ. So the portion of the gap explained by those two variables necessarily overlaps with the portion explained by IQ."
That wasn't the point of my post. My point was that you are needlessly drilling down to intermediary causes, which are not really explanatory because they are all downstream of genetics.
Are there any viable environmental explanations left that could explain Black disparities in crime, etc.?
My statement above is assuming that the IQ gap is largely caused by genes — so it is roughly the same point. However, I think one could make a case that poverty and family breakdown are not entirely downstream of genetics. In any case, I agree with the general thrust of your posts that environmental explanations are not convincing.
Various hypotheses exist, such as long-run effects of historical racism on wealth accumulation, or a culture of violence that persists over time. I'm not saying I think these are major causes of poverty and family breakdown. I'm just saying that one could make a case that poverty and family breakdown are not entirely downstream of genetics.
Well-known nothing-burger territory that turns vacuous or circular as soon as one tries to translate those slogans into something testable. But thank you for the input.
I think he is just being less explicit about black crime being genetic than you would like. You have to make some allowances for the fact that he is a facefag and has a job in academia. You can't expect him to just scream "Nigger". It would cause friction at High Table.
This is an environmental problem which is quite distinct from genetics, though the genes for skin pigmentation contribute directly to it in a way which can be avoided with proper vitamin D3 supplementation.
Please see the research cited and discussed at https://vitamindstopscovid.info/00-evi/. Most doctors are not aware that we need 50 ng/mL (125 nmol/L = 1 part in 20,000,000 by mass) circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D for our immune systems to function properly. The same is likely true for cell types involved in neurodevelopment in utero and all through the lifespan.
25-hydroxyvitamin D calcifediol (AKA "calcidiol") is made, primarily in the liver, by hydroxylating vitamin D3 cholecalciferol which is either made in the skin or ingested. There's very little vitamin D in food, including that which is fortified with vitamin D3 or the less effective vitamin D2, so a "balanced diet", however defined, is no help in attaining the vitamin D3 we need to attain 50 ng/mL circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D.
Ultraviolet B light with ca. 293 nanometre wavelength can produce good amounts of vitamin D3 in ideally white skin, but this is neither a practical nor a safe way to attain the vitamin D3 we need to be healthy, since: 1) Such UV-B is only available naturally in sufficient quantities from high elevation sunlight without glass, clothing or sunscreen intervening; 2) All UV-B light damages DNA and so kills cells and greatly raises the risk of skin cancer; 3) People with brown or black skin need a great deal more exposure than do people with white skin to produce sufficient vitamin D3.
Fortunately, vitamin D3 supplementation is safe and inexpensive. It need not be taken every day - larger amounts every 7 to 10 days are fine.
Most doctors regard 20 or perhaps 30 ng/mL (50 or 75 nmol/L) circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D to be sufficient for good health, but this is what the kidneys need to perform their role in regulating calcium-phosphate-bone metabolism: maintaining a very low (0.05 to 0.1 ng/mL) level of 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (calcitriol) in the bloodstream, where it acts as a hormone - a long distance signaling molecule - to alter the behavior of multiple cell types in bone, the kidneys and the digestive tract. This is the sole hormonal function of these three molecules. Neither vitamin D3 nor 25-hydroxyvitamin D function as hormones - they are not signaling molecules.
Many doctors assume that the immune system depends on this very low level of circulating hormonal calcitriol, but this is not the case. Many types of immune cell, and likely those involved in neurodevelopment, rely on a good supply of 25-hydroxyvitamin D to supply their intracrine (inside each individual cell) and paracrine (to nearby cells, often of different types) signaling systems. These are unrelated to hormonal signaling and to the very low level of circulating calcitriol. These signaling systems are crucial to each cell's ability to respond to its changing circumstances. The immune system does not use hormonal signaling. There is no tutorial explanation of these signaling systems in the peer-reviewed literature. See https://vitamindstopscovid.info/02-intracrine/ for my non-peer-reviewed tutorial.
Most doctors consider the government recommended supplementary intake quantities such as 20 micrograms (800 IU) sufficient for good health.
In 2022, New Jersey based Professor of Medicine Sunil Wimalawansa published an article with proper vitamin D3 supplementation recommendations, as ratios of body weight, with higher ratios for those suffering from obesity, since obesity reduces the rate of hydroxylation in the liver to 25-hydroxyvitamin D and because the excess adipose tissue absorbs 25-hydroxyvitamin D and vitamin D3: https://vitamindstopscovid.info/00-evi/#obesity- deficit. He later simplified these recommendations somewhat to average daily supplemental intakes of vitamin D3:
70 to 90 IU / kg body weight for those not suffering from obesity (BMI < 30).
100 to 130 IU / kg body weight for obesity I & II (BMI 30 to 39).
140 to 180 IU / kg body weight for obesity III (BMI > 39).
For 70 kg (154 lb) without obesity, this is about 0.125 milligrams (5000 IU) a day. This takes several months to attain the desired > 50 ng/mL circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D. See: https://vitamindstopscovid.info/00-evi/#00-how-much.
This is 8 or more times what most governments recommend. "5000 IU" sounds like a lot, but it is a gram every 22 years - and pharma grade vitamin D costs about USD$2.50 a gram ex-factory. This will safely attain at least 50 ng/mL 125 nmol/L 25-hydroxyvitamin D over several months, without the need for blood tests or medical monitoring. He repeated these recommendations in an article co-written by two other professors - one of medicine and the other of pediatrics: Integrating Endocrine, Genomic, and Extra-Skeletal Benefits of Vitamin D into National and Regional Clinical Guidelines Sunil J. Wimalawansa, Scott T. Weiss and Bruce W. Hollis, Nutrients 2024-11-20 https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/16/22/3969.
Low 25-hydroxyvitamin D is a huge risk factor for neurodegeneration (Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, multiple system atrophy, dementia with Lewy bodies etc.): https://vitamindstopscovid.info/00-evi/#3.3.
Rather than asking why blacks are more violent, a better question might be what explains the relatively low rates of violence among Europeans, Asians, etc. One explanation I've read (Steve Pinker maybe?) is that the more violent types were weeded out via capital punishment over the course of countless generations. In other words, how long your ancestors lived in "civilized" societies might be the deciding factor.
Noah, this is not the first time you have broached this subject. But you only discuss murder. How about rape, pedophilia, physical attack, robbery, or other crimes? Additionally, why would you trust the statistics of a corrupt government? Furthermore, what difference does it make which incompatible ethnic group or race is committing a crime? The point is that the UK is being overrun by groups that are not native to the UK.
Many areas in the UK are shitholes, thanks to one or more of the following: Indians, Hindus, Muslims, Arabs, or any of a myriad of other incompatible cultures.
Thanks for the comment. There is no convincing evidence the picture is substantially different for other crimes. You can oppose mass immigration while still being honest with the data. Indians and Chinese commit crime at lower rates than White British. Does that mean you have to be in favour of immigration of those groups? Obviously not.
The problem is that your articles appear to make excuses by narrowing the subject to one specific crime. You did not address my comment about the stupid, corrupt government in the UK, nor did you address my comment about areas in the UK that are shitholes.
"You can oppose mass immigration while still being honest about the data."
Do you oppose mass immigration?
Here is another article about crime in the UK. It does not state how many of the 53,000 stabbings per year were perpetrated by non-whites, but they have increased 81% over the last decade. Either it's due to mass immigration of non-whites or the UK populace has gone mad.
"You did not address my comment about the stupid, corrupt government in the UK".
If we cannot trust government statistics, then we have no idea what the crime rates for different groups are. As a matter of fact, the figures I posted above are largely consistent with figures for the US. We also know that data from hospitals are consistent with data from the Crimes Survey of England and Wales:
"If we cannot trust government statistics, then we have no idea what the crime rates for different groups are."
Exactly! However, the fact is that the UK has been in free fall for years.
"As a matter of fact, the figures I posted above are largely consistent with figures for the US."
You are using US government figures as a standard? The US government is the most lying, corrupt government in the developed world. The only reason the UK may not be as corrupt is that the UK and the rest of Europe are subservient to the US.
"You are using US government figures as a standard?"
Crime figures published by the US government are highly consistent with those from victimisation surveys — as a report by Jared Taylor's organisation shows. This is how we know, for example, that police aren't biased against blacks.
Regarding the public discussion focusing on Islam, there may be money flowing into politics from Jewish sources that encourages people to focus on Islam as the threat. Nick Griffin has reported in 2007 being offered money to do this. Based on his current focus, I would estimate that he has decided since then to take that money. There are multitudes of Hasbara accounts on Substack focusing on British politics that take a very pro-Israel, anti-Islam line.
Here is another YouTube video on the recent UK stabbing. Granted, it runs at least 35 minutes longer than necessary, but this is indicative of the news media in cahoots with the corrupt UK government. There are numerous examples of corruption within the UK government.
"it is worth keeping in mind that the vast majority of suspects (around 80%) are not black"
Perhaps black ethnicity isn't the relevant factor. Perhaps we should distinguish between two groups:
1) Populations where the state has long exercised a monopoly over the use of violence, i.e., most Europeans, almost all East Asians, most South Asians and certain Middle Eastern groups. In these populations, the state has gradually altered the composition of the gene pool through capital punishment, extrajudicial killings, suppression of rebellions, etc. As a result, the threshold for personal violence is relatively high, and there is strong inhibition against violent behaviour in most social contexts.
2) Populations where the state monopoly on violence is recent and has not influenced the gene pool. All adult males are expected to use violence to defend themselves and their loved ones, and such violence can be pre-emptive or even "for show" (to deter potential assailants).
How does the UK government define "white"? Are there statistics that differentiate between native-born white British and other national groups?
Good points. Racial categories are based on self-identity. As I recall, crime rates for "Other White" are highly similar to crime rates for "White British".
—NC
"it is worth keeping in mind that the vast majority of suspects (around 80%) are not black"
That is, if you believe the UK crime statistics.
What is important is the crime RATE. In the United States, the black population is 13% but blacks commit 50% or more of the serious crimes. What is the percentage of blacks in the UK?
That is shown on the chart. They are 4.7% of the population aged 15–40. The crime rate differential is reported in the text. They are 5 times more likely to be homicide suspects than whites.
—NC
"They are 5 times more likely to be homicide suspects than whites."
And that is just blacks. Add in all the other non-whites.
Do you think that is not a serious problem?
The other non-white groups have homicide rates that are similar to that of whites, as the chart shows.
—NC
You didn't answer my question. Do you think a black homicide rate five times greater than the white homicide rate is a problem?
To the extent that crime is something you want of, blacks having a very high rate is a problem, yes.
—NC
> Exactly what explains this overrepresentation [of Blacks] is still a matter of debate. We do know that poverty, IQ and family breakdown can only explain part.
Trying to pin it on intermediary “explanations” such as poverty or family breakdown is just politically correct obfuscation at this point. These are just intermediary steps in a causal chain that begins with genetics. Over hundreds of years, there hasn't been an environment where Blacks haven't been disproportionately criminal, promiscuous, and poor. That rules out environmental causes. That means the disparity is genetic. Where am I wrong? What are the viable environmental explanations left?
Thanks for the comment. I mentioned that in my article on the black–white homicide gap:
"It is also worth noting that poverty and family breakdown are at least partly downstream of IQ. So the portion of the gap explained by those two variables necessarily overlaps with the portion explained by IQ."
https://www.aporiamagazine.com/p/what-explains-the-blackwhite-homicide
—NC
That wasn't the point of my post. My point was that you are needlessly drilling down to intermediary causes, which are not really explanatory because they are all downstream of genetics.
Are there any viable environmental explanations left that could explain Black disparities in crime, etc.?
My statement above is assuming that the IQ gap is largely caused by genes — so it is roughly the same point. However, I think one could make a case that poverty and family breakdown are not entirely downstream of genetics. In any case, I agree with the general thrust of your posts that environmental explanations are not convincing.
—NC
What possible environmental causes for poverty and family breakdown do you see (that are not two steps down the causal chain from genetics)?
Various hypotheses exist, such as long-run effects of historical racism on wealth accumulation, or a culture of violence that persists over time. I'm not saying I think these are major causes of poverty and family breakdown. I'm just saying that one could make a case that poverty and family breakdown are not entirely downstream of genetics.
—NC
Well-known nothing-burger territory that turns vacuous or circular as soon as one tries to translate those slogans into something testable. But thank you for the input.
I think he is just being less explicit about black crime being genetic than you would like. You have to make some allowances for the fact that he is a facefag and has a job in academia. You can't expect him to just scream "Nigger". It would cause friction at High Table.
As I wrote at: https://www.aporiamagazine.com/p/pinker-is-wrong-we-should-go-there/comment/165192950 and https://glennloury.substack.com/p/the-health-equity-agenda-is-a-bad/comments, a major, easily correctable, cause of poor health outcomes, including lower IQ, neurological disability / mental illness / ADHD / autism in dark and black skinned people, especially far from the equator, is even lower levels of circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D than is normal for people with white skin.
This is an environmental problem which is quite distinct from genetics, though the genes for skin pigmentation contribute directly to it in a way which can be avoided with proper vitamin D3 supplementation.
Please see the research cited and discussed at https://vitamindstopscovid.info/00-evi/. Most doctors are not aware that we need 50 ng/mL (125 nmol/L = 1 part in 20,000,000 by mass) circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D for our immune systems to function properly. The same is likely true for cell types involved in neurodevelopment in utero and all through the lifespan.
25-hydroxyvitamin D calcifediol (AKA "calcidiol") is made, primarily in the liver, by hydroxylating vitamin D3 cholecalciferol which is either made in the skin or ingested. There's very little vitamin D in food, including that which is fortified with vitamin D3 or the less effective vitamin D2, so a "balanced diet", however defined, is no help in attaining the vitamin D3 we need to attain 50 ng/mL circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D.
Ultraviolet B light with ca. 293 nanometre wavelength can produce good amounts of vitamin D3 in ideally white skin, but this is neither a practical nor a safe way to attain the vitamin D3 we need to be healthy, since: 1) Such UV-B is only available naturally in sufficient quantities from high elevation sunlight without glass, clothing or sunscreen intervening; 2) All UV-B light damages DNA and so kills cells and greatly raises the risk of skin cancer; 3) People with brown or black skin need a great deal more exposure than do people with white skin to produce sufficient vitamin D3.
Fortunately, vitamin D3 supplementation is safe and inexpensive. It need not be taken every day - larger amounts every 7 to 10 days are fine.
Most doctors regard 20 or perhaps 30 ng/mL (50 or 75 nmol/L) circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D to be sufficient for good health, but this is what the kidneys need to perform their role in regulating calcium-phosphate-bone metabolism: maintaining a very low (0.05 to 0.1 ng/mL) level of 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (calcitriol) in the bloodstream, where it acts as a hormone - a long distance signaling molecule - to alter the behavior of multiple cell types in bone, the kidneys and the digestive tract. This is the sole hormonal function of these three molecules. Neither vitamin D3 nor 25-hydroxyvitamin D function as hormones - they are not signaling molecules.
Many doctors assume that the immune system depends on this very low level of circulating hormonal calcitriol, but this is not the case. Many types of immune cell, and likely those involved in neurodevelopment, rely on a good supply of 25-hydroxyvitamin D to supply their intracrine (inside each individual cell) and paracrine (to nearby cells, often of different types) signaling systems. These are unrelated to hormonal signaling and to the very low level of circulating calcitriol. These signaling systems are crucial to each cell's ability to respond to its changing circumstances. The immune system does not use hormonal signaling. There is no tutorial explanation of these signaling systems in the peer-reviewed literature. See https://vitamindstopscovid.info/02-intracrine/ for my non-peer-reviewed tutorial.
Most doctors consider the government recommended supplementary intake quantities such as 20 micrograms (800 IU) sufficient for good health.
It is common for people with brown or black skin to have circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels below 10 ng/mL - a fifth of what they need to be healthy. See the graph at https://vitamindstopscovid.info/00-evi/#03-uk-low based on data from Sutherland et al. 2020 https://sci-hub.se/10.1016/j.clnu.2020.11.019.
In 2022, New Jersey based Professor of Medicine Sunil Wimalawansa published an article with proper vitamin D3 supplementation recommendations, as ratios of body weight, with higher ratios for those suffering from obesity, since obesity reduces the rate of hydroxylation in the liver to 25-hydroxyvitamin D and because the excess adipose tissue absorbs 25-hydroxyvitamin D and vitamin D3: https://vitamindstopscovid.info/00-evi/#obesity- deficit. He later simplified these recommendations somewhat to average daily supplemental intakes of vitamin D3:
70 to 90 IU / kg body weight for those not suffering from obesity (BMI < 30).
100 to 130 IU / kg body weight for obesity I & II (BMI 30 to 39).
140 to 180 IU / kg body weight for obesity III (BMI > 39).
For 70 kg (154 lb) without obesity, this is about 0.125 milligrams (5000 IU) a day. This takes several months to attain the desired > 50 ng/mL circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D. See: https://vitamindstopscovid.info/00-evi/#00-how-much.
This is 8 or more times what most governments recommend. "5000 IU" sounds like a lot, but it is a gram every 22 years - and pharma grade vitamin D costs about USD$2.50 a gram ex-factory. This will safely attain at least 50 ng/mL 125 nmol/L 25-hydroxyvitamin D over several months, without the need for blood tests or medical monitoring. He repeated these recommendations in an article co-written by two other professors - one of medicine and the other of pediatrics: Integrating Endocrine, Genomic, and Extra-Skeletal Benefits of Vitamin D into National and Regional Clinical Guidelines Sunil J. Wimalawansa, Scott T. Weiss and Bruce W. Hollis, Nutrients 2024-11-20 https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/16/22/3969.
Low 25-hydroxyvitamin D is a huge risk factor for neurodegeneration (Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, multiple system atrophy, dementia with Lewy bodies etc.): https://vitamindstopscovid.info/00-evi/#3.3.
Likewise in pregnancy and early childhood, preeclampsia, pre-term birth, mental retardation, ADHD and autism: https://vitamindstopscovid.info/00-evi/#3.2.
Rather than asking why blacks are more violent, a better question might be what explains the relatively low rates of violence among Europeans, Asians, etc. One explanation I've read (Steve Pinker maybe?) is that the more violent types were weeded out via capital punishment over the course of countless generations. In other words, how long your ancestors lived in "civilized" societies might be the deciding factor.
Noah, this is not the first time you have broached this subject. But you only discuss murder. How about rape, pedophilia, physical attack, robbery, or other crimes? Additionally, why would you trust the statistics of a corrupt government? Furthermore, what difference does it make which incompatible ethnic group or race is committing a crime? The point is that the UK is being overrun by groups that are not native to the UK.
Many areas in the UK are shitholes, thanks to one or more of the following: Indians, Hindus, Muslims, Arabs, or any of a myriad of other incompatible cultures.
Here are a couple of PJW videos:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Apmo8zeFCTM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M80bpOjZ4aM
There are plenty more on Paul Joseph Watson's YouTube channel. You should visit it.
Thanks for the comment. There is no convincing evidence the picture is substantially different for other crimes. You can oppose mass immigration while still being honest with the data. Indians and Chinese commit crime at lower rates than White British. Does that mean you have to be in favour of immigration of those groups? Obviously not.
—NC
The problem is that your articles appear to make excuses by narrowing the subject to one specific crime. You did not address my comment about the stupid, corrupt government in the UK, nor did you address my comment about areas in the UK that are shitholes.
"You can oppose mass immigration while still being honest about the data."
Do you oppose mass immigration?
Here is another article about crime in the UK. It does not state how many of the 53,000 stabbings per year were perpetrated by non-whites, but they have increased 81% over the last decade. Either it's due to mass immigration of non-whites or the UK populace has gone mad.
https://connect.xfinity.com/appsuite/#!!&app=io.ox/mail&folder=default0/INBOX
"The problem is that your articles appear to make excuses by narrowing the subject to one specific crime."
My previous articles on Muslim crime have dealt with crimes other than murder:
https://www.aporiamagazine.com/p/british-muslims-dont-commit-a-lot
https://www.aporiamagazine.com/p/more-on-british-muslims-and-crime
"You did not address my comment about the stupid, corrupt government in the UK".
If we cannot trust government statistics, then we have no idea what the crime rates for different groups are. As a matter of fact, the figures I posted above are largely consistent with figures for the US. We also know that data from hospitals are consistent with data from the Crimes Survey of England and Wales:
https://www.aporiamagazine.com/p/why-has-violent-crime-declined-in
"Do you oppose mass immigration?"
Yes.
"Here is another article about crime in the UK."
I was unable to open the link. However, I have examined the supposed knife crime epidemic in a piece for UnHerd:
https://unherd.com/newsroom/is-there-a-knife-crime-epidemic-in-britain/
—NC
"If we cannot trust government statistics, then we have no idea what the crime rates for different groups are."
Exactly! However, the fact is that the UK has been in free fall for years.
"As a matter of fact, the figures I posted above are largely consistent with figures for the US."
You are using US government figures as a standard? The US government is the most lying, corrupt government in the developed world. The only reason the UK may not be as corrupt is that the UK and the rest of Europe are subservient to the US.
You seem to have permanent rose-colored glasses.
"You are using US government figures as a standard?"
Crime figures published by the US government are highly consistent with those from victimisation surveys — as a report by Jared Taylor's organisation shows. This is how we know, for example, that police aren't biased against blacks.
https://www.hoplofobia.info/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/2016-The-Color-of-Crime.pdf
—NC
"This is how we know, for example, that police aren't biased against blacks."
Hell no, the police are not biased against blacks...they are biased against whites.
Regarding the public discussion focusing on Islam, there may be money flowing into politics from Jewish sources that encourages people to focus on Islam as the threat. Nick Griffin has reported in 2007 being offered money to do this. Based on his current focus, I would estimate that he has decided since then to take that money. There are multitudes of Hasbara accounts on Substack focusing on British politics that take a very pro-Israel, anti-Islam line.
https://x.com/NickJFuentes/status/1819926526810345507
Here is another YouTube video on the recent UK stabbing. Granted, it runs at least 35 minutes longer than necessary, but this is indicative of the news media in cahoots with the corrupt UK government. There are numerous examples of corruption within the UK government.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKKUy0lrnQQ