themitigating

If they are lying or stating opinions based on false facts then I blame the person.

However the internet exists and information is accessible to anyone.

You're right though, I'm making it too simple. People are to blame and so is the media. Different levels depending on the person or media source.

That's subjective. Maybe happiness is the most important aspect of a society

Would you say Native Americans were behind? They had a thriving society.

Because those countries were devastated by Europeans

Using the term launched, similar to how tech companies launch products, implies a conspiracy to bring this word to the public's attention

Do you mean each successive generation of blacks were wealthier than the previous? What about a comparison to the average white person?

There were many laws that existed well after slavery that could prevent a black person from succeeding.

That's my justification for affirmative action (not reparations). Should it last forever? No but it hasn't been that many generations since the civil rights act

I also don't understand protesting inflation a global phenomenon (in varying amounts) that is difficult to solve.

????

Then how do you know it's prevalent?

Example

You're asking what the default state is? I assume you mean instincts right?

Why does it matter, what's the relevance?

So? Just because people have done something for a long time doesn't mean it's right.

Or are you disputing the historical claim that humans on average have never been more tolerant towards strangers than today?

This seems like it is true but what's the evidence for this claim and why are you asking if I dispute it? Where did I say anything about changes in tolerance over time?

Tolerance for strangers is more in need of sociological explanation than the opposite

Why? What if humanity over time grows and learns thanks to our ability to store information, like in books.

More importantly why do we need an explanation and why does it matter?

If you are trying to use the fact that something happened for most of human history then changed recently and that makes it abnormal. Think slavery, rape, woman's right, etc

We aren't animals.

2. If you don't like foreigners you're a bigot and terrible person.

Hating someone because of where they are from is illogical because not all people from a specific location act and think the same. Therefore your hatred has no specific valid target.

Another generalization without evidence?

Merely claiming? This is reality 101. Anything you can directly observe is more real than some third or fourth-hand statistical "knowledge".

No where did I say your observations are false. If you use limited observations to reach a conclusion. You're not even documenting your observations if you are simply relying on your memory.

This is literally how racists think. They observe behavior then generalize about a race. However confirmation bias, media manipulation, and cultural bias muddy your "recorded" observation. I'm not saying you're a racist but I'm showing using your own input of the world to generlize leads to faulty conclusions.

Making generalizations is the cornerstone of understanding the world, and the basis of science

No, the scientific method is the cornerstone of science. Observations are only the first step to creating a hypothesis then attempting to disprove it.

Statistics can be wrong but that doesn't mean you should dismiss them.

When did people lost the ability to experience empirical reality, and generalize and draw conclusions from it

No one lost this ability it's just an objectively worse way to come to a conclusion. Making generalizations is bad, it's weird you would openly propose doing it.

empirical experience of reality (and, in this case, their years of exposure to watching media, reading media, reading about media, and seeing media coverage unfold and evaluated)

You're simply describing anecdotal evidence which has little value especially if there's alternatives and it's being used to make a conclusion. It's fine to offer up anecdotes but with supportering information. However what the media does and tells you isn't your own personal experiences.

Also, watching and observing all media or just your own selected media where people tell you something is the way it is.

The issue is a persons limited ability to observe as well as confirmation bias,and memory lead to faulty conclusions.

as opposed to having everything force-fed in the form of some statistic?

You're claiming statistics have less value than limited personal observations?

You also used the phrase "forced-fed" as a manipulation tactic to make people think whatever you mentioned after it is bad. Like if I said "My mom force fed us hamburgers for dinner" instead of "My mom made hamburgers for dinner".