Brotha Wolf has done an amazing job debunking me, guys! Absolutely stunning work:
Instead of actually debunking anything, Brotha Wolf exposes himself as either a genuine IQ-of-10 individual or, more likely, a professional troll.
I jump to this conclusion after our small and intellectually non-stimulating comment back-and-forth of my last post epicly debunking him. I got the idea when he confused me for another blogger he had a feud with a while back called Gentlemen’s Foundry. I checked out Gentlemen’s Foundry’s page – basically a page dedicated to protecting white, male identity. Cool, cool; gave a follow. I also found one of his posts meant to respond to Brotha Wolf.
In this post Brotha Wolf identifies Gentlemen’s Foundry as a right wing troll. Now I thought some of the sources he referred to were kind of sub-par, and some of his terminology like “white genocide” were… let’s just say: not my go-to terms. It’s just kind of silly and makes people cringe. But, he was no troll. And he refuted Brotha Wolf very easily (kind of reminds me of the feud between Anglin and Liddell). As I have and will one more time.
I am paying a service to Brotha Wolf with this post. I am refusing to believe anyone can be as stupid as he is acting and even going to the point to saying he is a true intellectual. After all, to be running a troll page for as long as he is and stay in good character, you must at least have an average or above average IQ. So good for you Brotha Wolf (I’ll just say BW from now on; it’s easier). Along with quickly addressing his points, in the small chance he is as dumb as he looks, I’ll prove to you all how he must be a troll. So, let’s see what BW has to say:
“A blog post I wrote discussing, or rather debasing, scientific racism has caught the attention of a blogger who runs Dissenting Academia (DA). The premise, according to the homepage, is to center on “HBD-related topics”. ‘HBD’ stands for human biodiversity which is the “study” that human beings differ from one another biologically, usually right down to genetics, and that such diversity predetermines every aspect of a person – or rather “groups” of people. It’s also known as ‘race realism’ or ‘eugenics’.”
This first paragraph has done a fair amount of the exposing of BW by itself. Some quick points:
1) No hereditarian believes everything is 100% down to genetics and that genetics create every aspect of a person. One of the most hereditarians, J. Phillipe Rushton, was a 50/50 guy – others, like me, believe phenotypic variance within a population is 50-80% due to genetic differences. Still plenty of room for environmental causes.
2) The real knee-slapper here: “It’s also known as ‘race realism’ or ‘eugenics’.” No one is this dumb so as to say hereditarianism is a synonym for eugenics. Some hereditarians are eugenicists, (but hardly any are in favor of old American eugenics), but that doesn’t mean the two are the same at all. Eugenics is artificial breeding – hereditarianism is the belief phenotypic differences in populations are generally due to genetic variation.
For the record, I don’t fit into the group that is eugenicists. I’m religious, pro-life, and anti-death-penalty. I’m very much against eugenics.
“DA’s blog entries include asking if slaves committed “lots of crime”, education and I.Q., and for reasons that can only amount to antisemitism, the claim that most slave owners were Jews. DA, like his peers and comrades, is hooked with the subject of the I.Q.s of blacks. It’s a trend with these race realists to always bring up this topic, and it’s a push to argue that black people fall behind not because of forms of oppression and discrimination against them, but by their own personal and biological failings that are “built in” at a genetic level. To that end, public policy to control, imprison and even put them down is understandable as they believe that blacks are not only different from whites, but are intellectually and emotionally inferior to whites. And these “scientists” assert that their “data” is empirical and non-refutable. There’s no room for disagreement even if you brought data and articles to disprove them, and there’s certainly no room to call it what it is: racism.”
Let’s work our way from the bottom-up.
If you briefly read through the comment dispute, I obviously stopped caring to respond with anything worthwhile. There was no point. But, my article did link to some sources proving the racial hereditarian case to be accurate, and even some polls showing it is actually a very popular belief. BW, on the other hand, has never cited anything. This is how we know he’s a troll. Like before, no one is this dumb. When I have cited sources and told him to over and over, something he refused to do in the comment section, and then he says “There’s no room for disagreement even if you brought data and articles to disprove them”, there’s no way we can not legitimately say this is an actual person, and not a character.
He says “To that end, public policy to control, imprison and even put them down is understandable as they believe that blacks are not only different from whites, but are intellectually and emotionally inferior to whites.”. But, I’m a moderate on the War on Drugs, I want rehabilitative justice, I’m anti-death penalty and anti-eugenics, and I’m not even a white nationalist. So, now what?
In the beginning he says, “DA’s blog entries include asking if slaves committed “lots of crime”, education and I.Q., and for reasons that can only amount to antisemitism, the claim that most slave owners were Jews.” I proved slaves committed a lot of crime and I proved education doesn’t affect IQ. Good articles; check ’em out. Then, he misrepresents one of my posts. I literally made my post on slavery and Jews about how most slave owners weren’t Jews and how that was a myth made up on 4chan. I conceded most Jews in America were slave owners, something even the Jewish Virtual Library gave me the source for (which was an entire book dedicated to debunking Farrakhan, for that matter). So, I have to point out the only way someone can use my post on Jews and slavery in such a way is if they’re a troll or lack cognitive ability.
“Okay. He says that he agrees with the hangup that HBDs like himself have regarding blacks and I.Q.s. It’s almost like a catchphrase with them. At the same time, he glosses over North America and Europe’s “artistic achievements” and cited Charles Murray – yes, that Charles Murray – as a source driving home the case that it has something to do with white genes. Yet, he disagrees with my claim about their deluded conviction of them being superior, but never explains why.
DA objects to being called ‘racist’ even though what he delves in is, by the simplest definition RACIST. And he calls me a white supremacist to boot.”
So, first of all I actually didn’t agree with BW here. I said blacks had lower IQs, not that hereditarians were too hung up on it. The reason hereditarians focus on it so much is because it is the most relevant in America, and to some degree, Europe right now.
I cited a book by Charles Murray which has a good methodology and is appraised by both sides of the aisle.
And I said it’s not a game of superiority because I don’t believe objective superiority exists. I then called BW a white supremacist because a) he does believe there are objective standards of superiority or at least ones that he and I agree upon (I disagree) and b) he is using those standards to claim the hereditarian case is that whites are superior. The only way he can come to that conclusion is if he believes the things that whites are different than blacks in are also superior traits, something I disagree with.
“So, I confronted him. He responds by repeatedly asking for proof, data and evidence to my claims and ends by cursing me out. I reminded him that his “field” is nothing more than a con to justify and advocate hate against black people, and he finishes by saying how he didn’t read it, because I had no references.
I’m no expert in the study of genetics, but I don’t think DA or any of these race realists are either. Judging by his response, he’s as far from a scientist as Donald Trump is from being a world leader. This is just me, but I can only guess that these people believe in this pseudo-science not so much out of curiosity but more likely out of a need for a self-esteem booster. They take this in as a genuine study mostly to want blacks to be less than they, and by ‘they’ I meant these particular individuals, not white people or any group of nonblacks in general. I guess that’s why so many bring up achievements and innovations by white Americans and Europeans. They want to attach their greatness onto them at the expense of those they see as detrimental to their existence for personal reasons.
But that’s just a theory.”
Well BW, I have a theory too. You’re a troll.
Most of my friends are black and I tend to even enjoy the company of black people more sometimes. I listen to rap music and enjoy many aspects of black culture such as the extroverted, individualistic personalities and the deep connection to community. I grew up in the ghetto as a kid. So, do you really think I have a hatred for black people and need some sort of self-esteem boost?
I’ve read into this topic for a while and I know my stuff. BW, on the other hand, probably hasn’t even read the RationalWiki page “debunking” hereditarianism, for at least it actually tries to give some sort of treatment to the facts.
I have no point in wasting any more time with this. If he responds, so be it. I don’t care. I think I have made it clear this guy is an obvious troll. Or maybe he’s just black or something. I don’t care.