View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Wed Nov 22, 2017 2:53 pm



Reply to topic  [ 39 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
L.O.L. 
Author Message
Starship Captain

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Posts: 1772
Reply with quote
Mr. Oragahn wrote:
[

Emphasis mine.
I just find it slightly hypocritical that Zionists who do everything to have a sort of pure jewish state in that hell the Middle East is, are often found to be the staunchest advocates of the exact opposite policies in western countries, so often in favour of tolerance, equality, refugees, etc.
A bit of fairness wouldn't hurt, would it? To some people it could easily look dishonest.


Those are called cultural marxists not zionists and Augusto Pinochet had a very effective method of dealing with them. But in all seriousness, that's less a zionist thing and more a social justice, liberal cultist thing.

Diversity only works when one, strong culture filters all the crappier parts of the lesser cultures through a sieve and assimilates the better parts of it. Being told suddenly, this is racism is something that comes from deconstructivism which is a monstrosity that comes from French liberalism...not some nefarious Jewish conspiracy.

So yeah, I take issue with the term zionist..it fundamentally stems from the age ol'left wing ZE JEEWWZZ and always seems like a reactionary term better suited for use on /pol.

Mr. Oragahn wrote:
Since the Middle East has always been a region of tribal conflict between long eras of califate peace, what is your point? .


That Muslims can't be trusted to wield a peaceful, enlightened and developed society, point of order they haven't really since the Mongols left a cultural wound in their collective psyche? That supporting Israel is essentially picking the least shitty of a bunch of shitty options..and through it and its weaponry and economy, ideally you could strong arm a sort of peace there? that constantly undermining their militarism and empowering these shithole countries run by wife beating pedophiles...is probably why an iron hand hasn't slapped the bulk of the ME down?


Mon Nov 13, 2017 8:17 am
Profile
Starship Captain

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Posts: 1772
Reply with quote
Mr. Oragahn wrote:
To follow on the Japanese and Chinese cases, I may add that their populations are barely mixed at all, the overwhelming majorities relinquish nothing at all, and this is reflected in the composition of their respective governments. Now, are they hateful racists or just following plain common sense? Maybe they know some secret sauce? That a nation that is mixed is a nation that is divided, weak, perhaps?


it's unquestioningly both, when Japan has Nuremberg laws against people not 100% Yamato ethnicity by birth, their total lack of repentance for what they did before and during world war two and the words for non Chinese people in any Chinese language, in any Chinese culture translates too "dead thing" more or less...and then you've got their pograms on their own minorities.

Yeah they're hyperracist in the manner in which they go about it...they're not wrong in wanting to preserve their cultures and heritage though.

edit- the strongest nations in history have been mixed nations. From Rome to the Mongols, to the British Empire to the united states...all were mixed ethnic states. The issue isn't mixed peoples, its this disgusting post modern horseshit. This collective guilt nonsense...you can have many peoples united behind one mighty culture and that diversity becomes a strength, because its diversity unified.

But in a society, where all things are blindly equal...then nothing matters, certainly not sovereignty and strength.


Mon Nov 13, 2017 8:21 am
Profile
Admiral
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Posts: 6847
Location: Paradise Mountain
Reply with quote
Well, just do an internet search about Haiti, its history, gruesome massacres and racial tension. Read anything you can find about it.
Then you may try to sell me that so called miracle of a mixed yet united nation...


Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:29 pm
Profile
Starship Captain

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Posts: 1772
Reply with quote
Yes, by all means site to me a backwater, French administrated colony, that they incompetently strip mined and left in a heap of its own self as evidence of anything other than the French fail at everything they do.

Meanwhile, the greatest empires and civilizations in human history were diverse but united by one culture...which is a little bit more important than race. You can have your ethnic diversity, but other peoples need to leave their ways and customs at home and assimilate.

or they can piss off.

you know, what I was actually arguing, not the windmill constructed of horseshit you were tilting at there.

edit- never mind that it was ultimately liberal, progressivism which further degrades Haiti, which is entirely different than what I'm talking about.


Tue Nov 14, 2017 5:32 am
Profile
Admiral
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Posts: 6847
Location: Paradise Mountain
Reply with quote
Admiral Breetai wrote:
Yes, by all means site to me a backwater, French administrated colony, that they incompetently strip mined and left in a heap of its own self as evidence of anything other than the French fail at everything they do.


This is consideraly incorrect. What did you read about Haiti? I'd suggest you look further and renew your search of information.
This "backwater" place was actually so well administrated and exploited that it was called the French Empire's Crown Jewel, with an economical output that rivaled several US States combined at that time. Its downfall was caused by a dearth of French troops so the local authorities armed and trained black people, notably to resist British troops.
That is almost a textbook reproduction of what happened in Ancient Egypt when the leading castes of European stock recruited and armed Nubians to resist invaders coming from the East. Simple, unavoidable racial tensions did the rest.
The order was maintained at San Domingo because the leaders, those who had power, were French. They were twice more numerous than the mixed people but largely outnumbered by the Black slaves by perhaps a whole order of magnitude. In other words, the productivity and excellency were maintained only because of the iron rule of Europeans over non-Europeans. There was no equality, democracy or unity, and the mixing was limited to Afro-European people who were less numerous than the Europeans present on the island.
As soon as the Blacks had access to weapons, the case was closed. As the island's social stability plummeted, Blacks turned against the mixed ones and the Europeans. The mixed ones fought both Blacks and Europeans. Europeans were, too, against the two other groups. There wasn't any kind of coloured banding against Europeans like it's peddled in the US right now; it's just as fake.
What happened was terrible, the island was ravaged as towns burned and people were tortured and massacred. If I remember correctly, France intervened no less than thrice on this island over the last centuries, in order to bring back order and civilization, by rebuilding what was destroyed and dealing with the gangs. Everytime, French forces moved on and gave the keys back to local Black and mixed governmental powers, everytime the tensions resumed and chaos ensued, with the last bloody episode being that of the Macoutes. Oh, it's a very mixed place now.
Unity? Bollocks!

Your notion of unity is just an abstraction, a vain smoke screen: there's only stability when a single and largely coherent group holds power over the others. That is, a group that is known to be capable of order and production to some degree, with access to weapons. A dominant yet uncivilized group will never be able to maintain civilization within its dominion: it will always be a chaotic mess.
Dang, one can already see what's happening in Africa. Genetically, some tribes are about 100% equal, but because of differences of culture and completely arbitrary borders traced by colonists, many areas remain forever unstable and this is well exploited by capitalists for business opportunities when one competing tribe is ready to work and sell its ground resources at a lower price if it gets access to power: it gets armed and war ensues.

Quote:
Meanwhile, the greatest empires and civilizations in human history were diverse but united by one culture...


Yet all these empires fell spectacularly. They ballooned and popped. It's interesting for example to look at the kind of laws —racial laws— that were actually passed in Greece and Rome in order to preserve the bloodlines of the citizens against the increase of mixbreeds. About the same stuff that was put into place in India with the caste system (they actually created it very early). One could look at the US or South Africa too when it comes to such laws and racial limits or ratios. All of these segregations failed. Now, do you know anything about the current sorry state of South Africa or Zimbabwe? Fall from Grace are the words you'd be looking for.
As for the British Empire, if it had been exposed to mixing on its own inner territories (Britain), it would have obviously fell even faster and louder. It also fell because of an obvious transfer or power and wealth to the West, same thing that happened to Spain and Portugal before.

Quote:
which is a little bit more important than race.


Perhaps, but how long can it last? A culture that might be able to provide a vacuous image to hold on to for every single citizen of an empire has less strength than a culture that is the natural outgrowth of a people united by blood. What kind of retarded culture would need to be put in place of what exists today in China for, say, fifty million Indians and Chileans to be considered Chinese?
I personally would find it very fake to see a Pole pretending being a Chinese too. Actually, that's pretty much what people understand instinctively when they denounce the white washing that goes on in Hollywood.
Of course, biased as they are, they only denounce it when it's a cultural appropriation by Hollywood's European actors, but not the opposite. Yet, having a Pakistani dressing up as an Irish man and doing the riverdance is equally bizarre and offputting.
If we look at the US culture, we see that it's largely imperialistic and yet has remained considerably Eurocentric for as long as this country existed. Now there are all sorts of leftist accusations thrown at the Caucasians such as "white privileges" that I don't even understand, something just as stupid if they were saying that the Japanese have Japanese privileges in Japan, or Chinese had Chinese privileges in China, regardless of the wrong doings of some of their ancestors.

Quote:
You can have your ethnic diversity, but other peoples need to leave their ways and customs at home and assimilate.

or they can piss off.

you know, what I was actually arguing, not the windmill constructed of horseshit you were tilting at there.


This is only temporary. In the best case scenario, two distinctively ethnics may be balanced out because found in equal numbers and power, and that is just highlighting how precarious the situation of this nation would be.

As for your former argument that some nations and empire were at their peak when mixed, it's a silly one. You're focusing on quantity alone. Well guess what, China is at its peak and it's hardly mixed. Same goes for Japan.
If China and its one point something billion people were to provide support for some military expansion against a very small country, they would obliterate that small country too. Why? Because numbers.
Mixedness or not has obviously nothing to do with it or the celebrated "peak". You can have all the numbers you want, mixed or not. You just need to breed and outgrow the opposition.
It's also an asinine argument because it's quite congruent that an empire that expands is going to encompass more than its original territory and therefore cover other ethnics too. That is just a result, not a measure of the quality of the whole.

As for the United States, I don't even understand how you can be so misled about the history of this contry: it's the people of European descent who made this country what it is today. The input of non-Europeans is so marginal that it's virtually irrelevant. At the very most, very few non-Europeans excel within the country because they have access to knowledge ammassed by Europeans and distilled through their high grade academies and schools (Chinese also get trained in Japan too).
One must be blind today not to see the complete shredding this country is going through because of ethnical division. The Trump vote just made that all the clearer.

It's just a matter of logic too. A coherent group is obviously stronger and more united than one that is composed of different parts opposed by racial instincts.

Quote:
edit- never mind that it was ultimately liberal, progressivism which further degrades Haiti, which is entirely different than what I'm talking about.


Haiti didn't need this progressivism to be fucked up already, as history shows.


Tue Nov 14, 2017 5:40 pm
Profile
Starship Captain

Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 4:23 pm
Posts: 1634
Location: Sol system, Earth,USA
Reply with quote
Admiral Breetai wrote:
edit- the strongest nations in history have been mixed nations. From Rome to the Mongols, to the British Empire to the united states...all were mixed ethnic states. The issue isn't mixed peoples, its this disgusting post modern horseshit. This collective guilt nonsense...you can have many peoples united behind one mighty culture and that diversity becomes a strength, because its diversity unified.


Hey, sorry to intrude but I think you may be putting the cart before the horse here. Strong nations may, eventually, become mixed nations but the doesn't necessarily mean that's is why they're strong. The British for example may have ruled over a very diverse empire but they themselves, at the time they founded their Empire and became "great", weren't. The British isles only became particularly "mixed" because of their Empire.

Further, for most of its history, the United States had an immigration policy designed to preserve its founding demographics and thus was trying to limit diversity. Indeed by modern eyes the US in the first half the Twentieth century or earlier would be almost monolithic.
-Respectfully, Sonofccn


Wed Nov 15, 2017 4:13 pm
Profile
Starship Captain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Posts: 1191
Location: Protoss Embassy to the Federation
Reply with quote
Mr. Oragahn wrote:
It's just a matter of logic too. A coherent group is obviously stronger and more united than one that is composed of different parts opposed by racial instincts.


Sounds like someone's never heard of the Three Kingdoms Period or the Sengoku Jidai....


Thu Nov 16, 2017 12:13 am
Profile
Admiral
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Posts: 6847
Location: Paradise Mountain
Reply with quote
Khas wrote:
Mr. Oragahn wrote:
It's just a matter of logic too. A coherent group is obviously stronger and more united than one that is composed of different parts opposed by racial instincts.


Sounds like someone's never heard of the Three Kingdoms Period or the Sengoku Jidai....


How are those two cases either relevant or disputing what I stated exactly? I wasn't establishing a law that couldn't trespassed, but only pointed to the reality that within a group, the more elementary attributes are shared, the stronger said group will be. It's not even meant to pass as a judgement on genetics or as a wide sweeping claim that in-fighting couldn't happen. My statement is almost mirroring physics: the greater the quantity and quality of links between the composing bodies of a group, the stronger it's ought to be overall, especially against a diverse group that maintains peace within itself (or pretends to) by the application of a jack of all trades policy to make everybody happy despite the strong natural oppositions.


Thu Nov 16, 2017 10:50 pm
Profile
Starship Captain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Posts: 1191
Location: Protoss Embassy to the Federation
Reply with quote
They were cases where, despite everyone being of the same ethnicity, (Chinese and Japanese, respectively), there was no sense of unity for a long period of time.

And having majored in Anthropology, I have to say that "racial instincts" aren't really a thing, since an instinct is a behavior that's hard-wired into a species' genes.

Also, a big part of the racial tension in the U.S. is actually the fault of rich landowners, who did everything they could to make sure that poor whites, black slaves, and indentured servants (both black and white) never unified, lest they go all French Revolution on their asses (which came close to happening a few times). Now, let this indoctrination continue for the next few centuries, and we have the clusterfuck on our hands today. Basically, it's as Palpatine said in Revenge of the Sith - those with power are always afraid of losing it, and will do anything to keep it.

What I'd like to know is, how the fuck did this thread turn into this? It was just supposed to be about laughing at the fact that SDN got itself an entry on Encyclopedia Dramatica - a wiki originally created to record LiveJournal stupidity.


Thu Nov 16, 2017 11:19 pm
Profile
Starship Captain

Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 4:23 pm
Posts: 1634
Location: Sol system, Earth,USA
Reply with quote
Khas wrote:
Also, a big part of the racial tension in the U.S. is actually the fault of rich landowners, who did everything they could to make sure that poor whites, black slaves, and indentured servants (both black and white) never unified, lest they go all French Revolution on their asses (which came close to happening a few times). Now, let this indoctrination continue for the next few centuries, and we have the clusterfuck on our hands today. Basically, it's as Palpatine said in Revenge of the Sith - those with power are always afraid of losing it, and will do anything to keep it.


Care to elaborate, Khas? What indoctrination are we specifically talking about? Obviously I don't think I would agree but I do want to hear you out.


Fri Nov 17, 2017 6:58 am
Profile
Admiral
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Posts: 6847
Location: Paradise Mountain
Reply with quote
Khas wrote:
They were cases where, despite everyone being of the same ethnicity, (Chinese and Japanese, respectively), there was no sense of unity for a long period of time.


Absolutely true. I wasn't disputing that though. I notice that when people share a lot, they tend to give even more importance to their less intrisic differences: culture, wealth. Fighting for resources, assuming one group is too weak to be worthy of being the leading one, such things create struggle.

Quote:
And having majored in Anthropology, I have to say that "racial instincts" aren't really a thing, since an instinct is a behavior that's hard-wired into a species' genes.


Science (hardly objective depending on the goal and the funds) keeps bouncing off of either positions: race attraction (and therefore alien-race repulsion) is natural, instinctive, or it's not and it's constructed. Maybe it's both. At some point in time, eugenics were all the rage too and even China has such a current programme I heard. There was a lot of theory that went into that and I'm sure back then they said we has teh fa'ts. Admitedly, the human species is quite more evolved and complicated. Some studies I read some time ago went as far, iirc, as analyzing babies' reactions and already found signs of biases because of instinctive memory-shaping of their immediate relatives. Even if this overall racial bias thing were 100% nurtured (and why? since obviously these babies wouldn't even know to do it on their own and couldn't understand their parents telling them to discriminate or else), it seems to happen so soon that it's pretty much impossible to avoid its quite high tendency of development, although the effects may be diminished at a later time.
Even if the biases are not instinctive, they're so deeply automatic that they just happen to look instinctive, even if it were largely nurtured because of one's origins from within a certain group to the point of not having been used to diversity. At some point, it's heavily ingrained and I don't see how this could ever change considering how the populations don't mix much in the US, despite all the push for tolerance that's been going on for decades now (which just seems to fail miserably). That's the issue: there's almost no mixed society on this planet right now where clearly different groups are evenly combined and spread out so as not to form ethnical communities leading to some kind of racial favouritism or bias. It just happens that people naturally tend to want to grow communities based on what they share, often times starting with racial background when possible, perhaps because it is the easiest thing to do.

Quote:
Also, a big part of the racial tension in the U.S. is actually the fault of rich landowners, who did everything they could to make sure that poor whites, black slaves, and indentured servants (both black and white) never unified, lest they go all French Revolution on their asses (which came close to happening a few times). Now, let this indoctrination continue for the next few centuries, and we have the clusterfuck on our hands today. Basically, it's as Palpatine said in Revenge of the Sith - those with power are always afraid of losing it, and will do anything to keep it.


Mkay but these elites, they seem to pretty much be of the racist kind, right? Have you seen much mixing going on up there? If any flavour of racism was just a pure invention thrown on the plebes to keep us divided, why then do they seem to keep the same kind of non-mixing barriers within their own "superior" little circles?


Fri Nov 17, 2017 11:32 pm
Profile
Starship Captain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Posts: 1191
Location: Protoss Embassy to the Federation
Reply with quote
sonofccn wrote:
Khas wrote:
Also, a big part of the racial tension in the U.S. is actually the fault of rich landowners, who did everything they could to make sure that poor whites, black slaves, and indentured servants (both black and white) never unified, lest they go all French Revolution on their asses (which came close to happening a few times). Now, let this indoctrination continue for the next few centuries, and we have the clusterfuck on our hands today. Basically, it's as Palpatine said in Revenge of the Sith - those with power are always afraid of losing it, and will do anything to keep it.


Care to elaborate, Khas? What indoctrination are we specifically talking about? Obviously I don't think I would agree but I do want to hear you out.


Perhaps "indoctrination" was the wrong word, but it was the first one that came to mind. Basically, what I meant was that, in some areas, when poor whites were told that they were of a superior race to blacks, that idea kept being repeated throughout the generations. Of course, not everyone believed this, but the idea got passed on enough to ingrain itself into the culture - believe me, I live in Pennsyltucky, and I've seen plenty of this shit - where it unfortunately lingers to this day.


Sat Nov 18, 2017 12:27 am
Profile
Starship Captain

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Posts: 1772
Reply with quote
sonofccn wrote:

Hey, sorry to intrude but I think you may be putting the cart before the horse here. Strong nations may, eventually, become mixed nations but the doesn't necessarily mean that's is why they're strong. The British for example may have ruled over a very diverse empire but they themselves, at the time they founded their Empire and became "great", weren't. The British isles only became particularly "mixed" because of their Empire.


they certainly were, Norman, Saxon, Frankish. They were a melting pot of people united by a conquerer, galvanized a by a century of warfare and united in a mono culture it all. They weren't diverse in a filled with reprobate, degenerates from the middle east way...though.

Which is an important distinction,.
sonofccn wrote:

Further, for most of its history, the United States had an immigration policy designed to preserve its founding demographics and thus was trying to limit diversity. Indeed by modern eyes the US in the first half the Twentieth century or earlier would be almost monolithic.
-Respectfully, Sonofccn


Yes and that's my point, you can only have diversity when you're extremely selective about who you choose to mingle with, united behind one strong culture and when you act in preservation and enhancement of that culture.

The way its done today is monstrous, negligent and essentially amounts to white genocide, guided gleefully by cultural marxist scum who think the west should be dragged down into the mud with these backwards, worthless cultures as opposed to seizing its birthright in the stars...\

my contention is that diversity is not the real threat, but the fucktards using it to ruin everyone around them.

Deconstructivism is the enemy here, remove that and you can focus on removing the sick fucks, weaklings, inferior and the ignorant, keep the talented and force their assimilation.

But the west needs to purge itself of its own treasonous ideals and peoples first, before you can do anything else. And bitching about Jews is not the way to go.


Banning Islam and making English the defacto official language of the country, sending operatives into activist groups and engineering accidents and the like..would be what should be happening now.

you're talking to an Argentine whose ancestors were the architects of the Conquest of the Desert, we are a nearly 97 or so percent white nation and my great, great grandfathers spent their blood and lives to ensure it...so it ain't exactly like you're arguing against a diversity proponent here...only that I'm a firm believer in cultural rather than Racial supremacy.

Khas wrote:
Mr. Oragahn wrote:
It's just a matter of logic too. A coherent group is obviously stronger and more united than one that is composed of different parts opposed by racial instincts.


Sounds like someone's never heard of the Three Kingdoms Period or the Sengoku Jidai....


..Khas China is hardly monocultural or Monoethnic.

In fact most of Asia contains a metric fuckton of cultural diversity at least.

Japan is the exception because the Yamato people absolutely detested and detest other cultures, so the Emishi and Ryukyu and Ainu peoples were largely obliterated. The Sengoku Jidai had a lot more to do with the fact that the Ashikaga Shoguns were either sadistic, short sighted psychopaths or inept, corrupt weaklings who were overly dependent on Vassals they could hardly control and by the end of it had nothing to keep themselves up.

Not interested in responding to Oreghans stuff because frankly he sounds like a /pol poster.


Sat Nov 18, 2017 3:14 am
Profile
Starship Captain

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Posts: 1772
Reply with quote
Khas wrote:
They were cases where, despite everyone being of the same ethnicity, (Chinese and Japanese, respectively), there was no sense of unity for a long period of time.



Yeah go ahead and compare a Han to a Cantonese person and watch how furious they get.

China is neither monocultural nor monoethical. No matter how much the PRC wants to pretend it is, its always been heavily, heavily racially segregated and divided.

edit- adding to this, the Irish and Scots-Irish and the more French and Anglo descended southern elites, the anglo-Dutch in the north, etc etc. The US had its own racial tensions and cultural clashes even in its own supposedly homogenized society. Much of the union atrocities committing during the ACW were justified under "well they're sharecropping trash by and large, nearly negroid in their lot" etc etc.


Sat Nov 18, 2017 3:22 am
Profile
Starship Captain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Posts: 1191
Location: Protoss Embassy to the Federation
Reply with quote
Admiral Breetai wrote:
Khas wrote:
They were cases where, despite everyone being of the same ethnicity, (Chinese and Japanese, respectively), there was no sense of unity for a long period of time.



Yeah go ahead and compare a Han to a Cantonese person and watch how furious they get.

China is neither monocultural nor monoethical. No matter how much the PRC wants to pretend it is, its always been heavily, heavily racially segregated and divided.

edit- adding to this, the Irish and Scots-Irish and the more French and Anglo descended southern elites, the anglo-Dutch in the north, etc etc. The US had its own racial tensions and cultural clashes even in its own supposedly homogenized society. Much of the union atrocities committing during the ACW were justified under "well they're sharecropping trash by and large, nearly negroid in their lot" etc etc.


Point conceded.


Oh, and BTW, when you said that Mr. O was sounding like a member of /pol/, well, one of his quotes DID show up on FSTDT...


Sat Nov 18, 2017 4:51 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 39 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software.