/liberty/ - Liberty

>why can't it be revived again?

blacks.

>>85149

It was still functional (although not ideal) with a nigger population before, the problem lies, as usual, with socialists. Detroit was the pilot program for Johnson's central-planning tier Great Society program, which shafted businessmen and expanded gibs. Producers went out, welfare queens came in.

>>85152

And was it not the producers who were white and the welfare mooches who were black?

Honest question. For all I know there was middle and upper class black flight too and the white queens were just killed off in chimpenings.

Not by me.

>>85161

Not before I have a turn at it.

>>85152

Even blacks can more or less function in a free market environment, they're just unable to keep it from devolving into a welfare shithole.

>>85148

because it is more economical to have factories in china or india

>>85149

Well, blacks weren't half as bad as they are now before affirmative action was created. Then black nationalism and the ghetto culture kicked in and gave Afroamericans the rest. Now, their culture is pretty much beyond salvation.

In Africa, they were primitive tribal cultures that were lagging over a thousand years behind the west. So no surprise they'd take a long while to catch up to us. You don't undo centuries of eating your enemies, trading your wifes and bashing your firstborn children to death with a few decades or centuries of colonialism. But at least those things stopped when the blacks had the whites to guide them. Nowadays, most blacks at least abstain from those things. Then colonialism found its inglorious end, however, and blacks are either stagnating or even becoming more degenerate, what with the homosexual rape gangs in South Africa and Congolese death squads eating Pygmees.

So, I think the main reason why blacks suck so much is their culture. I believe so because they have shown themselves to be much more industrious, honest and peaceful when the whites gave them a genuine helping hand, while they got worse as we gave them gibs. Not that they are not genetically inferior to whites, but we could probably get along somewhat if blacks were still on the path of improvement they used to be on.

>>85165

The same happens when you don't have any niggers, but still a democracy. It just takes longer. The looters multiplicate once you give them suffrage. Even if you took suffrage from women and minorities, democracy would still enable wide-scale redistribution. It's right in the ideology. If you want voting without redistribution, that's closer to republicanism than democracy.

>>85176

What if it's a direct democracy based where only high IQ citizens are allowed to vote?

>>85177

wealth gauges iq best

>>85177

Then you are moving away from the democratic ideal. Voting is not democracy, rule of the people is. (Although "demos", if I remember correctly, was originally a derogatory term, like "plebs" is today.) When the people as a whole have no say, only high IQ citizens do, then you have a republic or an aristocracy, but no democracy.

Also, IQ is overrated. Einstein had an enormous IQ but I wouldn't have given him a vote after reading his socialist essay.

>>85205

>Then you are moving away from the democratic ideal.

I don't mind. The plebs will be convinced that it's a democracy, when it's actually an aristocracy.

>Also, IQ is overrated. Einstein had an enormous IQ but I wouldn't have given him a vote after reading his socialist essay.

I'm not surprised, Jews usually shill for socialism. If we just restricted voting to the highest IQ citizens, then you will end up with a country ruled by Jews. This is why a high IQ direct democracy can only work in homogeneous societies or wherever Jews are banned from voting on the grounds of not being natives.

>>85215

>They were never on a path to improvement. Blacks only due well when they are controlled and directed by whites. They have to be treated like children. As soon as whites make the mistake of treating blacks as "adults" they devolve into their natural state. There are former colonies in Africa that wish the Europeans would come back because during the colonial era they had public infrastructure, economic development, rule of law, etc. The director of Empire of Dust gave an interview in which he stated that Africans would always ask him, "When you are (the Belgians) coming back?" and he had to explain that colonialism was bad, lol.

Oh, I do not deny any of that. They became rulier and ultimately more virtuous when Europeans guided them, but the process was not complete. We got them to stop some of their more degenerate rites and embrace some of our culture, values and knowledge, but then halfway through the process, we fucked off. It's like taking in a child that takes drugs and cuts the hair of unsuspecting girls, and just when you taught the little shit how to read, you fuck off and tell him he's a grownup now. He won't have internalized any of the values you taught him, and will revert right back to his old self. That's not necessarily proof he couldn't stand on his own given the right parenting, but definitely proof that the parenting stopped way too soon. If it was up to me, voluntary colonialism would be a thing. Kind of like what /pol/ larps about.

>>85232

>I don't mind. The plebs will be convinced that it's a democracy, when it's actually an aristocracy.

Then you are consistent. You can't call yourself a democrat, but if you don't want to anyway, then that's fine.

I'd rather the majority stopped being democratic at all, though. I want a bunch of farmers in charge of their farms, not a bunch of farmers striving to be in charge of a whole nation. That makes the nation worse and it makes them worse.

>>85191

you dont need to pay chinks as much as 1st worlders

>>85215

>It's all SOCIALISM'S FAULT

Well, yeah, I can actually believe this to a strong extent. Socialism was enough to cause lasting, debilitating damage to the human capital and cultural attainment of the Chinese, the Russians, the Venezuelans, and pretty much every other society that achieved anything of historical note. Even today in Germany the West has to keep injecting money into the East to try and unfuck just, what, 45-years of the Soviet system.

I won't make apologies for Africa since I haven't studied their histories as well, but I do know that blacks in America have absolutely succeeded better before socialism. Blacks in middle American cities used to have lower unemployment rates, lower incidences of domestic insolvency (divorce, unwed mothers, teen pregnancy…), and commit fewer crimes than the white population. Black families were more economically mobile in the South during Jim Crow and even Reconstruction. The turning point on their development as a demographic in the USA started with the expansion of the welfare state. Once that happened, even the passage of civil rights laws and imposition of incentives to "rectify past injustices" couldn't stop the decline and then stagnation.

>The black population of detroit doubled and then white flight

Actually there was black flight too. Namely the egress of the middle-class and upper-lower-class working blacks who knew what kind of people, the same they'd run away from, were moving in. This was also present in Indiana without the racial element thanks to an influx of working class Southern whites. There was also a rather fascinating period of it in the New York/New Jersey area between Jews of German descent and Russian descent.

Socialism pretty much is the real X-factor. Without socialism and leftist cultural bullshit coddling and justifying backwards behavior, crap people usually have to either get good or get lost.

>>85285

It's not just that, this was also done on purpose to weaponize blacks against whites.

Detroit is what you get when you combine the low-IQ and socialist thinking with democracy.. Shame, but a pretty effective warning for the rest of the US given its (former) iconic status as a thriving city of industry.

Dealing with blight also seems to be helping:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztKt9W1ei7A