laowai Posted October 11, 2015 Posted October 11, 2015 What am I missing about this black lives matter protest outside the white house? Black people are calling for racial equality, but last time I checked a black man has been president in the white house for the past 8 years. Why are we seeing these types of protests again? I am starting to get the feeling this is just whinging for the sake of whinging.If a black president isn't a gauge of the racial reality in the US, which is that everyone is being treated fairly, than I don't know what will convince these people they will ever feel equal. If anything this proves to me multiculturalism doesn't work. http://www.ibtimes.com/million-man-march-20th-anniversary-national-rally-didnt-bring-much-economic-change-2134910
Donnadogsoth Posted October 11, 2015 Posted October 11, 2015 What if they don't want to be equal? What if, after 400 years of the American experience, they want to be superior? 1
dsayers Posted October 11, 2015 Posted October 11, 2015 Have you partaken of any of Stef's recent youtube videos? He's been unrelenting in holding the media accountable (and rightly so) for the way just about everything is being packaged and sold as priviliged group A holding down less fortunate group B. In his discussion with Jason Richwine called IQ and Immigration, Mr. Richwine mentions how this happens because we're not allowed to talk about IQ disparities among ethnicities, which leads to problems that have reasonable explanation instead being repackaged as group A oppressing group B. Stef has been unrelenting in pointing out how if you tell people these things long enough, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you're a member of group A and are told your whole life that group B is holding you down, you will grow up hating group B and not actually putting forth any effort because you believe it to be futile. He shares a very enthusiastic recount of growing up with nuclear and environmental scares in his talk with Alex Epstein called Why You Should Love Fossil Fuels (which is a worthwhile video to listen to for any reason). I'm not usually one to hold up "Stef says," but there's a substantial body of explanation answering your question. Check them out and see if it helps to understand why ethnicity is going to be decried even when it's not accurate.
The Sage of Main Street Posted October 12, 2015 Posted October 12, 2015 What if they don't want to be equal? What if, after 400 years of the American experience, they want to be superior? Unevolved Primates Used by the Ruling Class to Humiliate All Other White People What would have happened if Africans came to America after 1492 instead of Whites? Experience proves they would have built nothing and engaged in perpetual predatory bloodbaths among themselves and with the Indians. 1
shirgall Posted October 12, 2015 Posted October 12, 2015 What if they don't want to be equal? What if, after 400 years of the American experience, they want to be superior? Heck, my family has been in America for 455 years, so is there any particular reason for this number in this statement? Or do Finns not count?
Donnadogsoth Posted October 13, 2015 Posted October 13, 2015 It just a ballpark number, shirgall. Unevolved Primates Used by the Ruling Class to Humiliate All Other White People What would have happened if Africans came to America after 1492 instead of Whites? Experience proves they would have built nothing and engaged in perpetual predatory bloodbaths among themselves and with the Indians. How would the Africans have gotten to America without the technology the Europeans had? 1
The Sage of Main Street Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 It just a ballpark number, shirgall. How would the Africans have gotten to America without the technology the Europeans had? That's so irrelevant to the judgment that it is evasive. Except for the fact that their proven Low-IQs are the chief reason they live like predatory animals in the jungle and would never have invented such ships. Trying to pretend your objection matters, let's say Whites had the ships but didn't want to go to the America and the Blacks stole all those ships.
shirgall Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 That's so irrelevant to the judgment that it is evasive. Except for the fact that their proven Low-IQs are the chief reason they live like predatory animals in the jungle and would never have invented such ships. Trying to pretend your objection matters, let's say Whites had the ships but didn't want to go to the America and the Blacks stole all those ships. The Africans did get to America without the slave trade, since all modern humans derive from Africa, including the Asians that crossed the Bering Strait to become "Native Americans" ten thousand years ago. 1
Donnadogsoth Posted October 15, 2015 Posted October 15, 2015 That's so irrelevant to the judgment that it is evasive. Except for the fact that their proven Low-IQs are the chief reason they live like predatory animals in the jungle and would never have invented such ships. Trying to pretend your objection matters, let's say Whites had the ships but didn't want to go to the America and the Blacks stole all those ships. That's akin to the "warrior race" fantasies of science fiction, so I would agree with you. Africans merely stealing the ships (and kidnapping a few navigators) would not in itself raise them above stone age technology and culture. The Africans did get to America without the slave trade, since all modern humans derive from Africa, including the Asians that crossed the Bering Strait to become "Native Americans" ten thousand years ago. When does a thing, through change, become other than itself?
shirgall Posted October 15, 2015 Posted October 15, 2015 When does a thing, through change, become other than itself? Man is the measurer of all things. When people start making arbitrary distinctions it's usually because they have an agenda.
The Sage of Main Street Posted October 15, 2015 Posted October 15, 2015 The Africans did get to America without the slave trade, since all modern humans derive from Africa, including the Asians that crossed the Bering Strait to become "Native Americans" ten thousand years ago. Different species evolved from different African primates, so again you are purposely being irrelevant and evasive. If I had said, "I wonder how I would have reacted if I had been working in the WTC on 9/11," you would have said, "But you were in Houston; the World Trade Center is in New York." Man is the measurer of all things. When people start making arbitrary distinctions it's usually because they have an agenda. RAINBOW BOW-WOW WATCHDOGS Your own statement proves you have a multiculturalist egalitarian agenda. You are also passively authoritarian by stating things as if quoting infallible "experts," implying "And that settles that!" Those flunkies are appointed to their positions because of their ability to seductively mind-rape suckers looking for answers from a higher power.
shirgall Posted October 15, 2015 Posted October 15, 2015 My statement does not prove I have a particular agenda. By saying that "Man is the measurer of all things" I am pointing out that arbitrary distinctions come from a will to make them, and are therefore driven by an agenda. I made no value judgement about any agenda, however. If anything, I am a skeptic first, especially of authorities.
Donnadogsoth Posted October 15, 2015 Posted October 15, 2015 My statement does not prove I have a particular agenda. By saying that "Man is the measurer of all things" I am pointing out that arbitrary distinctions come from a will to make them, and are therefore driven by an agenda. I made no value judgement about any agenda, however. If anything, I am a skeptic first, especially of authorities. I'm not sure what Sage's agenda is, but I am curious about you use of the word "arbitrary". What is arbitrary about describing the differences between the races of man?
shirgall Posted October 15, 2015 Posted October 15, 2015 I'm not sure what Sage's agenda is, but I am curious about you use of the word "arbitrary". What is arbitrary about describing the differences between the races of man? Where the lines are drawn. My family has been in America for 455 years. I'm not a "Native American". It may or may not be a useful label, but it is an arbitrary distinction. Instead my race is defined by a mountain range we haven't lived near in a millennium.
Donnadogsoth Posted October 15, 2015 Posted October 15, 2015 Sorry to belabour the point, but what would be a non-arbitrary racial distinction?
shirgall Posted October 16, 2015 Posted October 16, 2015 Sorry to belabour the point, but what would be a non-arbitrary racial distinction? Fact-based ones based on long-term environmental differences seem relevant to me, but maybe that's my agenda.
regevdl Posted October 16, 2015 Posted October 16, 2015 What if they don't want to be equal? What if, after 400 years of the American experience, they want to be superior? Exactly. Anyone who needs to use bullhorns, take over...dare I say for risk of sounding like defending Bernie Sanders.... politcal rallies, etc definitely wants to be superior under the guise of equality. To the Sage of Mainstreet... that's quite a leap of assumption. Let's go with that...the Africans reach the Americas first if they left Africa, they would have to have some level of foresight, planning, organization, deferral of gratification (not gobbling down all the food in the several month journey), cost/risk assessment, navigation intelligence, technology/engineering/design ships, ect and if they successfully reach the Americas, then their intelligence would have been, I guess, equal to those who also reached America by those same means so to assume they would achieve getting to the Americas on their own and then spontaneously resort back to primal base intelligence is a bit of a mental leap, no?
shirgall Posted October 16, 2015 Posted October 16, 2015 http://www.foxnews.com/science/2015/10/16/humans-exited-africa-and-trekked-to-china-fossils-reveal.html Teeth from a cave in China suggest that modern humans lived in Asia much earlier than previously thought, and tens of thousands of years before they reached Europe, researchers say. This discovery yields new information about the dispersal of modern humans from Africa to the rest of the world, and could shed light on how modern humans and Neanderthals interacted, the scientists added.
Mister Mister Posted October 16, 2015 Posted October 16, 2015 the modern left survives on outrage and resentment without clear principles or goals. this ensures that they swell their ranks with as many unintelligent, dissatisfied people as possible, and the "movement" can never end.
Donnadogsoth Posted October 16, 2015 Posted October 16, 2015 Exactly. Anyone who needs to use bullhorns, take over...dare I say for risk of sounding like defending Bernie Sanders.... politcal rallies, etc definitely wants to be superior under the guise of equality. To the Sage of Mainstreet... that's quite a leap of assumption. Let's go with that...the Africans reach the Americas first if they left Africa, they would have to have some level of foresight, planning, organization, deferral of gratification (not gobbling down all the food in the several month journey), cost/risk assessment, navigation intelligence, technology/engineering/design ships, ect and if they successfully reach the Americas, then their intelligence would have been, I guess, equal to those who also reached America by those same means so to assume they would achieve getting to the Americas on their own and then spontaneously resort back to primal base intelligence is a bit of a mental leap, no? I believe the mental leap we need to make is simply that Sage of Mainstreet is aware of the ongoing soft white genocide and finds this unhappy news, and perhaps has a bit of an irritation as a result of it, making him or her seem grumpy. Whether the Africans are supermen or savages makes no difference with regards to the source of this ongoing process. 1
The Sage of Main Street Posted October 16, 2015 Posted October 16, 2015 Exactly. Anyone who needs to use bullhorns, take over...dare I say for risk of sounding like defending Bernie Sanders.... politcal rallies, etc definitely wants to be superior under the guise of equality. To the Sage of Mainstreet... that's quite a leap of assumption. Let's go with that...the Africans reach the Americas first if they left Africa, they would have to have some level of foresight, planning, organization, deferral of gratification (not gobbling down all the food in the several month journey), cost/risk assessment, navigation intelligence, technology/engineering/design ships, ect and if they successfully reach the Americas, then their intelligence would have been, I guess, equal to those who also reached America by those same means so to assume they would achieve getting to the Americas on their own and then spontaneously resort back to primal base intelligence is a bit of a mental leap, no CIVIL RIGHTS FOR THE UNCIVILIZED Exactly right, proving the superiority of those who did create something out of a land that the savages let go to waste, going from one of the poorest areas in the world to the richest, among other great achievements. I can't believe you are sincere if you answer a question that way. The point is, even if the Blacks had not evolved with the intelligence to create transocean transportation, if they had still been able to come to America somehow the way they are, the method is beside the point, they would never have developed anything either and been engaged in perpetual tribal-warfare bloodbaths. So their anarchy and poverty in the ghetto is just a case of a race living in a continent they don't belong in.
Donnadogsoth Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 I can't believe you are sincere if you answer a question that way. The point is, even if the Blacks had not evolved with the intelligence to create transocean transportation, if they had still been able to come to America somehow the way they are, the method is beside the point, they would never have developed anything either and been engaged in perpetual tribal-warfare bloodbaths. So their anarchy and poverty in the ghetto is just a case of a race living in a continent they don't belong in. You know, Europe had its tiffs, too. What are your thoughts about that?
regevdl Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 I can't believe you are sincere if you answer a question that way. The point is, even if the Blacks had not evolved with the intelligence to create transocean transportation, if they had still been able to come to America somehow the way they are, the method is beside the point, they would never have developed anything either and been engaged in perpetual tribal-warfare bloodbaths. So their anarchy and poverty in the ghetto is just a case of a race living in a continent they don't belong in. Your initial words, "What would have happened if Africans came to America after 1492 instead of Whites? We are working on your initial comment which you indicated INSTEAD of whites. if they 'founded' the Americas instead of whites....you didn't indicate stealing to achieve that, you didn't indicate kidnapping whites, (only after) you wrote Africans INSTEAD of whites. So if you want to move the goal posts on how they got there, fine...then make the case. be specific...follow the thought through from start to finish. they steal boats and kidnap white navigators and poof they arrived and remain less evolved? Of course, if a bunch of Africans stole the technology and achieved reaching the shores of America, then it's hard to say what the outcome would have been...maybe you are correct. But that begs the question, let's say they did steal the technology. I could steal NASA technology but I still would have no freaking clue what I am doing so it would be useless to me. However, if I was to steal the technology AND know how to use it without relying on too many NASA engineers, then yes...I would be exhibiting a certain level of intelligence and ability that can't be washed away just because I 'stole' the technology. Whites didn't invent everything. Even their technologies were borrowed and adapted from many other cultures. So even if Africans stole ships....they still would have to know how to map a course and sail. If I didn't know how to drive, I am less likely to steal a car. If they kidnapped a few navigators, etc....well.... having a navigator isn't enough and if they needed a whole white crew who knew more than the blacks, eventually the scale would be tipped and the whites would be smart enough to outsmart the blacks and arrive to the shores before them or take the credit or whatever. They would need to be organized and defer gratification. it was a LONG journey back then on a ship....a self-contained situation with a lot of people/heirarcy, etc. so just because they stole or kidnapped, they would still have to know how to self-organize and regulate without savagely murdering anyone that they disagree with. Also, let's say they do arrived less-evolved but nonetheless arrive. The studies indicate that IQ varies based on geographical placement, meaning usually tropical/warm climates produce lower IQ and colder climates higher IQs. So when they arrive on the shores, I guess it would depend inf they reach Florida or further north. Then, over hundreds of years, the climate will shape their IQs. the Africans that land or migrate to the Northern, colder climates would have higher intelligence compared to the southern, warmer climates. Those who are less intelligent will die off. So you cannot give this broad brush stroke of assumption without at the very least working through your theory. Maybe you are right but you have not given any thorough case to your point.
regevdl Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 I believe the mental leap we need to make is simply that Sage of Mainstreet is aware of the ongoing soft white genocide and finds this unhappy news, and perhaps has a bit of an irritation as a result of it, making him or her seem grumpy. Whether the Africans are supermen or savages makes no difference with regards to the source of this ongoing process. I agree. I guess it doesn't explain the problem when so many whites are joining in. I mean if this black lives matter issue is an indication of their savagery (or however Main Street would word it), then what does it say about the whites who are also part of this? So I think all intelligence is going down the tubes....
Donnadogsoth Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 I agree. I guess it doesn't explain the problem when so many whites are joining in. I mean if this black lives matter issue is an indication of their savagery (or however Main Street would word it), then what does it say about the whites who are also part of this? So I think all intelligence is going down the tubes.... A suggestion: Whites have been bought by the consumer economy. Too many toys to buy, whereas children are an expensive hassle.
Very Ape Posted October 17, 2015 Posted October 17, 2015 It's just more divide and conquer Marxists BS.There's a ton of videos online calling out the "black lives matter" crowd on their BS including several "All Lives Matter" videos which should really just be reduced to "Human Life Matters - Stop Killing People".What bothers me about the BLM crowd (mostly white liberals btw) is they specifically frame the militarization of the police state in the US as a racial issue. There are tons of videos and stories online about all kinds of people of different racial backgrounds getting beaten to a pulp, shot, pepper sprayed, tear gassed, you name it by militarized police online. How people can not see this is happening to everyone beyond me. I admit the black community has taken the worst of it but that doesn't excuse pretending like we are not all dealing with the same problem.Cultural Marxists always want to turn every issue that can really unite people into their own pet cultural revolution aimed at creating a race or sex war they can exploit.
laowai Posted October 19, 2015 Author Posted October 19, 2015 Interesting notion regarding what would happen if black Africans somehow took over what is today the US landmass and inherited it. I kind of can't help but think Haiti is already an example of a 'new world' country that comes as close as possible to such a scenario and gives a lot of insight into what would happen. But to be honest this argument is already over, when you look at the correlation between non-whites and failed states. The proof speaks for it'self. Even the non-white countries that are developed today, such as South Korea and Japan, are really only that way due to heavy white influence during their occupations by western powers. It also depends on what you define as success. If you think material things equate to success then you would say the west was successful. But our over emphasis on the economy at the determent to our citizens, who slave away in their work cubicles every day to go home and watch the idiot box on which we are told our ethnic and social identity as we know it is eroding in our lifetimes for the sake of big business via multiculturalism; leaving us with a feeling of all just being powerless individuals in our own society. Yet if you think non-material things equate to success then you would say the developing countries were a success with their ethnically homogeneous society that doesn't leave your life being defined by work and the dollar; and which leaves you feeling an empowered part of a meaningful community that embodies your racial history and accompanying cultural identity. What frustrates me about ethnic minorities whinging about their lot in life in the west. Unlike the people in the west, minorities have their parent cultures to go back to if they don't like it here.
laowai Posted October 19, 2015 Author Posted October 19, 2015 No, it's not. It's a country founded on slavery and rebellion. It is not remotely similar to blacks conquering or founding a country of their own voluntarily, without the history of slavery and oppression. Yes it is. It has had over 200 years of post slavery autonomous black rule. 'slavery and oppression' That didn't seem to affect the convicts of the first American colonies or the Australian colonies. Yes there were convicts in America. If anything Haiti is the perfect example with very similar histories to western colonies. It had the oppression of slavery which is the white equivalent of convicts. It had the oppression by a more powerful outsider France like America and Australia had with Briton. And it gained freedom from it's former master France like America and Australia did from the British. Or are you saying Haiti is an exception because it's old masters were of a different race? Come on. Get real. Tell my ancestors about having the option to volunteer to be sailed half way around the world as convicts to spend the rest of their lives in Australia if they thought conquering a country voluntarily had anything to do with anything.
The Sage of Main Street Posted October 22, 2015 Posted October 22, 2015 You know, Europe had its tiffs, too. What are your thoughts about that? Whatever We Do Some of the Time, the Unevolved Do All the Time They were preludes to progress. But savages just keep on killing. The goal of "getting the fighting over with so we can get down to business" is especially true of the USA. One of many examples is that after the Civil War, we settled and developed the West.
Recommended Posts