"What about respondents who supported “far right” nationalist parties? Were they less pro-Black and anti-White? Apparently not."
It's all so disgusting;
Think of where we were roughly century ago as a civilization. We had lowered the child and teen mortality rate from 40% to under 10% and would soon reach <1%. We had reached the skies and then far beyond them.
And then, in plain view the dream of social science, the possibility of using that same power to deeply understand the human condition took control of the hearts of men and promised them a near utopia... Something beautiful was coming, a new god was being born. And then a bunch of assholes came around, smothered him and switched him for a monster committed to the dumbing down of civilization. To using the language of science to lie about things dogs can understand.
When you think of bien pensant social science types, as opposed to the few here at Aporia and other places on the periphery willing to challenge them... you should feel hatred. Think of the nightmare of life in a world without Penicillin or anti-virals. Think of a creature so disgusting that he'd suppress these findings and bring it about. Now think of the social science equivalent and then look around. Take the NYC 4 train, smell the scent and hear the psychotic screams and threats of those who are now your equals. Walk through inner-city Chicago. Browse Ok-Cupid - the existing grinderesque one, not the old one...
A beautiful world was stolen from you, a world that you might never get to know. The horror.
Tv advertising 'creatives' (in the UK at least) must be probably the most nauseatingly shallow, phoney types in the whole world of 'woke'. According to them the country is 60% black. But there's something even more insidious and poisonous: Tv schedules across the Western world are awash with drama serials conforming to a formulaic scriptwriter’s tick-box: Non white person traduced but eventually revealed to be a surprisingly decent sort – Tick....Middle class white person eventually revealed to have a sinister dark side – Tick...Gay Couple included – Tick.... It has become an integral part of the story that ‘lgbt’ people are abundant and everywhere. They are bound to be nice as well. Curiously though there is another box to be ticked: there needs to be some graphic depiction of violence especially towards attractive young women (by white men of course). https://grahamcunningham.substack.com/p/non-binary-sibling-is-entertaining
Are you sure that this is the result of pro-black bias per se? Another possible explanation is that people extrapolate crime rates from socioeconomic status and other indicators, and black groups tend to have high crime rates for their socioeconomic status. In the UK, Black British live longer than White British but still have 5x the murder rate. I don't think Black British are poorer on average than Muslims in Britain, but the murder rate appears to be higher.
It’s in every facet of American popular culture and it’s lead to an almost unbelievable ignorance, even among American citizens, of the reality of American life. And, because American pop culture is exported globally, an amazing ignorance worldwide of racial variation.
At least in the US, people subconsciously know that it’s nonsense even if they’re afraid to or unable to say why. “Don’t go to that part of town” etc. But introducing it to countries that don’t have their own resident populations of Sub-saharans is like introducing a new virus to a population without any antibodies.
I’d like to add something. There’s a hell of a lot of white collar crime that does not get reported on let alone acted on. And those who are the richest in our socieities are criminals through and through. For evidence of that we have the fraudulent pandemic of the last 4 years. Nobody yet arrested for it. One of the things that it did was criminally transfer assets from one class (middle mostly) to another (billionaires).
As they say a rich man is not going to get arrested for sleeping under a bridge. As for the rest of us it’s a case of “but for the grace of god..”.
Is the "blackfacing" of advertisements a social contagion? Or is it a deliberate policy? I really don't know. This is an issue that begs for investigative reporting, but such reporting no longer seems to be something that newspapers do nowadays.
Economists still argue about the Great Depression and its causes. I can only say that economists at the time believed that consumerism was needed for sustained economic growth. They felt that the average consumer was afraid to spend (for understandable reasons), and that a cultural shift was needed to overcome that fear. Perhaps they were wrong, but does that matter? People act on their perceptions of reality, and not on reality itself.
Something like that may be happening today. Most economists are arguing that Western countries need high rates of immigration, not only to fill labor shortages but also to increase aggregate demand. And such immigration will inevitably come from Sub-Saharan Africa. Birth rates are falling below replacement almost everywhere else.
Unfortunately, wealth creation doesn't take place in a cultural vacuum. Most of the world's wealth is created within a small number of high-trust cultures, essentially Western Europe, North America, and East Asia. Elsewhere, wealth is less easily created because of the general lack of trust and the need to take special measures to ensure you get what you pay for. Economists are aware of this cultural difference but they see it as a justification for mass immigration. When immigrants move from a low-trust culture to a high-trust one, their productivity increases dramatically. So we're all better off, not only the immigrants but also the immigrant-receiving countries.
On the other hand, immigrants bring their culture with them. If they come in large enough numbers (which seems to be the plan), the immigrant-receiving countries will be culturally transformed. The ways of being and thinking will become those of a low-trust culture. The costs of each economic transaction will therefore increase, and some transactions will no longer be cost-effective. So they will no longer happen. As a result, wealth creation will no longer keep pace with population growth and may even decrease in absolute terms. We will all be poorer, not richer.
It's a mystery to me why economists don't get this point, which is fairly simple to express and understand. The only answer I get is that trust is no longer necessary, thanks to modern surveillance systems. Everybody will be monitored, and their transactions will be monitored. Oh swell ...
Thank you for this thoughtful article. In my view, it would be premature to draw too definite conclusions based on the graph shown. I agree with you that linking the bias with the "Muslim" axis is probably wrong (shows weak correlation) and that correlation between bias and "color of skin" would be stronger. But that is not the only dimension, and there could be many more explanations.
For instance: countries on the very top of the graph (Poland, Mexico, Romania) are big while countries at the bottom (Cape Verde, Antilles) are small. So it could be that the immigrants from those big countries are a visible on the street as well in the media (notorious for negative stories), while the diaspora of those small countries are almost non-existent, so their crime rate seems small.
There could be many more explanations to this graph, such as age composition of the imigrants from each country, their education levels, and the method of selection of the respondents.
Is the crime rate weighted for the seriousness or nature of the crime? Because if we don't know the proportion of, say, non-violent vs. violent crimes, any conclusions drawn from these statistics may be completely misleading.
It is propaganda methods to keep the far right suppressed or to keep the immigration business going on.
They hide crime committed by blacks and arabs on TV and media, while portraying them as innocent victims or good hearted criminals who did not mean their acts in fiction.
It works. You see the mexicans as over presented in the people's minds, it's because people watch the Netflix series with mexican narcos.
People are that gullible. In the specific case of the Netherlands, it could be that black and mixed black criminals are doing less visible crime, or less violent compared to north african crime that has an honour and revenge aspect in it for cultural reasons.
Now highlight how much of black music the British appropriated. You're mad that black people are portrayed equal to their impact on western culture. The British did nothing but steal music from Black Americans and Black Caribbeans. Black people SHOULD be represented in a nation that stole much of it's culture from black people.
"Much of “propaganda” began with techniques originally developed in advertising."
One of the elective requirements I chose during my college education many decades ago was 'Psychological Warfare and Propaganda,' an extremely interesting course. Part of the curriculum was studying and analyzing advertisements, so my professor was familiar with this concept.
"What about respondents who supported “far right” nationalist parties? Were they less pro-Black and anti-White? Apparently not."
It's all so disgusting;
Think of where we were roughly century ago as a civilization. We had lowered the child and teen mortality rate from 40% to under 10% and would soon reach <1%. We had reached the skies and then far beyond them.
And then, in plain view the dream of social science, the possibility of using that same power to deeply understand the human condition took control of the hearts of men and promised them a near utopia... Something beautiful was coming, a new god was being born. And then a bunch of assholes came around, smothered him and switched him for a monster committed to the dumbing down of civilization. To using the language of science to lie about things dogs can understand.
When you think of bien pensant social science types, as opposed to the few here at Aporia and other places on the periphery willing to challenge them... you should feel hatred. Think of the nightmare of life in a world without Penicillin or anti-virals. Think of a creature so disgusting that he'd suppress these findings and bring it about. Now think of the social science equivalent and then look around. Take the NYC 4 train, smell the scent and hear the psychotic screams and threats of those who are now your equals. Walk through inner-city Chicago. Browse Ok-Cupid - the existing grinderesque one, not the old one...
A beautiful world was stolen from you, a world that you might never get to know. The horror.
Tv advertising 'creatives' (in the UK at least) must be probably the most nauseatingly shallow, phoney types in the whole world of 'woke'. According to them the country is 60% black. But there's something even more insidious and poisonous: Tv schedules across the Western world are awash with drama serials conforming to a formulaic scriptwriter’s tick-box: Non white person traduced but eventually revealed to be a surprisingly decent sort – Tick....Middle class white person eventually revealed to have a sinister dark side – Tick...Gay Couple included – Tick.... It has become an integral part of the story that ‘lgbt’ people are abundant and everywhere. They are bound to be nice as well. Curiously though there is another box to be ticked: there needs to be some graphic depiction of violence especially towards attractive young women (by white men of course). https://grahamcunningham.substack.com/p/non-binary-sibling-is-entertaining
Are you sure that this is the result of pro-black bias per se? Another possible explanation is that people extrapolate crime rates from socioeconomic status and other indicators, and black groups tend to have high crime rates for their socioeconomic status. In the UK, Black British live longer than White British but still have 5x the murder rate. I don't think Black British are poorer on average than Muslims in Britain, but the murder rate appears to be higher.
Black privilege.
It’s in every facet of American popular culture and it’s lead to an almost unbelievable ignorance, even among American citizens, of the reality of American life. And, because American pop culture is exported globally, an amazing ignorance worldwide of racial variation.
At least in the US, people subconsciously know that it’s nonsense even if they’re afraid to or unable to say why. “Don’t go to that part of town” etc. But introducing it to countries that don’t have their own resident populations of Sub-saharans is like introducing a new virus to a population without any antibodies.
It’s an intentional campaign of DEMORALIZATION.
You know it’s the truth.
Why have you adopted the just-yesterday political capitalization of "black"?
I’d like to add something. There’s a hell of a lot of white collar crime that does not get reported on let alone acted on. And those who are the richest in our socieities are criminals through and through. For evidence of that we have the fraudulent pandemic of the last 4 years. Nobody yet arrested for it. One of the things that it did was criminally transfer assets from one class (middle mostly) to another (billionaires).
As they say a rich man is not going to get arrested for sleeping under a bridge. As for the rest of us it’s a case of “but for the grace of god..”.
Is the "blackfacing" of advertisements a social contagion? Or is it a deliberate policy? I really don't know. This is an issue that begs for investigative reporting, but such reporting no longer seems to be something that newspapers do nowadays.
Economists still argue about the Great Depression and its causes. I can only say that economists at the time believed that consumerism was needed for sustained economic growth. They felt that the average consumer was afraid to spend (for understandable reasons), and that a cultural shift was needed to overcome that fear. Perhaps they were wrong, but does that matter? People act on their perceptions of reality, and not on reality itself.
Something like that may be happening today. Most economists are arguing that Western countries need high rates of immigration, not only to fill labor shortages but also to increase aggregate demand. And such immigration will inevitably come from Sub-Saharan Africa. Birth rates are falling below replacement almost everywhere else.
Unfortunately, wealth creation doesn't take place in a cultural vacuum. Most of the world's wealth is created within a small number of high-trust cultures, essentially Western Europe, North America, and East Asia. Elsewhere, wealth is less easily created because of the general lack of trust and the need to take special measures to ensure you get what you pay for. Economists are aware of this cultural difference but they see it as a justification for mass immigration. When immigrants move from a low-trust culture to a high-trust one, their productivity increases dramatically. So we're all better off, not only the immigrants but also the immigrant-receiving countries.
On the other hand, immigrants bring their culture with them. If they come in large enough numbers (which seems to be the plan), the immigrant-receiving countries will be culturally transformed. The ways of being and thinking will become those of a low-trust culture. The costs of each economic transaction will therefore increase, and some transactions will no longer be cost-effective. So they will no longer happen. As a result, wealth creation will no longer keep pace with population growth and may even decrease in absolute terms. We will all be poorer, not richer.
It's a mystery to me why economists don't get this point, which is fairly simple to express and understand. The only answer I get is that trust is no longer necessary, thanks to modern surveillance systems. Everybody will be monitored, and their transactions will be monitored. Oh swell ...
Advertisements subvert societies. Put on your "They Live" to see their subliminal demoralized messages: https://yuribezmenov.substack.com/p/how-to-advertise
Thank you for this thoughtful article. In my view, it would be premature to draw too definite conclusions based on the graph shown. I agree with you that linking the bias with the "Muslim" axis is probably wrong (shows weak correlation) and that correlation between bias and "color of skin" would be stronger. But that is not the only dimension, and there could be many more explanations.
For instance: countries on the very top of the graph (Poland, Mexico, Romania) are big while countries at the bottom (Cape Verde, Antilles) are small. So it could be that the immigrants from those big countries are a visible on the street as well in the media (notorious for negative stories), while the diaspora of those small countries are almost non-existent, so their crime rate seems small.
There could be many more explanations to this graph, such as age composition of the imigrants from each country, their education levels, and the method of selection of the respondents.
Is the crime rate weighted for the seriousness or nature of the crime? Because if we don't know the proportion of, say, non-violent vs. violent crimes, any conclusions drawn from these statistics may be completely misleading.
It is propaganda methods to keep the far right suppressed or to keep the immigration business going on.
They hide crime committed by blacks and arabs on TV and media, while portraying them as innocent victims or good hearted criminals who did not mean their acts in fiction.
It works. You see the mexicans as over presented in the people's minds, it's because people watch the Netflix series with mexican narcos.
People are that gullible. In the specific case of the Netherlands, it could be that black and mixed black criminals are doing less visible crime, or less violent compared to north african crime that has an honour and revenge aspect in it for cultural reasons.
Now highlight how much of black music the British appropriated. You're mad that black people are portrayed equal to their impact on western culture. The British did nothing but steal music from Black Americans and Black Caribbeans. Black people SHOULD be represented in a nation that stole much of it's culture from black people.
Consumerism absolutely did NOT help us get out of the depression and it did not produce post-war prosperity. That's an economic myth.
The end of the depression was just a natural rebound.
"Much of “propaganda” began with techniques originally developed in advertising."
One of the elective requirements I chose during my college education many decades ago was 'Psychological Warfare and Propaganda,' an extremely interesting course. Part of the curriculum was studying and analyzing advertisements, so my professor was familiar with this concept.