Thursday, January 26, 2012
Talk Amongst Yourselves
No new post today either. I've been simultaneously very busy and sort of not in the mood to post this week. Talk amongst yourselves - preferably with horribly racist, sexist, bigoted, idiotic, and close-minded rhetoric.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
87 comments:
Black people ARE dumb.
Whites merely ACT dumb.
Meditate on this.
White women HATE HATE HATE beta males.
Except Obama.
wouldnt it be nice if we could castrate all minorities in order for them to recieve welfare? wouldn't it be nice if europe didnt have to refight the reconquesta in our lifetimes?
also go to hell mooncricket troll, ill never be "nice", ill die if it come to it
http://youtu.be/pBSj3DUI2to
I would like to abolish the crime of "marital rape" for being a contradiction in terms.
Piggy changed his name to CRUDD
fitting, but more apropos is
CRAPP
THAT'LL get more readership...
There is a great need for a White Renaissance to save civilization. This time instead of Christianity leading the charge it should be rationality and truth. The truths that are being championed all across the internets on boots like this. Neo-Liberalism is waning. Here's to the hope that it is replaced by something favoring Truth, Liberty and goodness rather than the Fascist ideology pervading the Neo-Con movement.
Sites*, not boots. Fucking autospell.
have any of you ever noticed that ohter non whites seem to get along really well with each other and it seems that only hwhites have nay sort of problem with other races?
Nickrit, earlier you disagreed with my argument that the word “racist” is the white equivalent of the word “nigger.”
My argument was that in both cases, its purpose is dual in the same way: to cast a collective racial guilt on individuals, and to put individuals of a specific race in their place.
You countered that the comparison is invalid because t-word refers to a person's behavior or attitude while the n-word refers to a person's inescapable identity.
My response to your objection: you're hair-splitting.
We're about the same age. Surely you remember race-realist back in the day trying to be nice by qualifying things with "there is a black man, and there is a nigger." Similarly, now people say "all whites are evil except non-racist ones like him/me."
"Racist" really just means a normal white person, unless proven to be free of his original sin of being white with all of the physicality of being white: a proven Leftist.
Same way, "nigger" really just means a normal black person unless proven to be free of his original sin of being black with all the physicality of being black: a polite, well-spoken Negro.
Anonymous lied...
have any of you ever noticed that ohter non whites seem to get along really well with each other and it seems that only hwhites have nay sort of problem with other races?
Yaaah...those beaners n' nigs in LA really hug it out. Plus, those Tutsis n' Hutus in Rwanda - oh, and all those rabs in Libya really have a Rainbow Connection.
You're suffering from too much African-American sperm ingestion.
For anyone who thinks black people can be reasoned with, search Twitter for #ThingsWhitePeopleInvented.
#thingswhitepeopleinvented Aids. If you don't believe me do your research.
#ThingsWhitePeopleInvented were made in China. All the credit should go to the Asians.
#ThingsWhitePeopleInvented putting leashes on their children (This one is really popular.)
#ThingsWhitePeopleInvented Nothing, they just used African Slaves to invent it for them and then took the credit for it.
#ThingsWhitePeopleInvented molestation
I'm gonna save a copy of these to my hard drive and show them to my kids when they're old enough for "the talk."
White men are the biggest beneficiaries of affirmative action this country has ever seen. Slots for academic admission, for employment and promotion, for bank loans and for public office have routinely been set aside for white men.
http://www.racematters.org/affirmativeactionhelpwhites.htm
Leonard Pitts nails it. You cannot refurte it. I DARE you
the greatest heart surgeon of all time was a black man
name one thing whites created
What the hell is up with all this shit posting?!
Why are trolls so attracted to OneSDTV's site?
Anonymous said...
name one thing whites created
Affirmative Action
to reiterate:
White men are the biggest beneficiaries of affirmative action this country has ever seen. Slots for academic admission, for employment and promotion, for bank loans and for public office have routinely been set aside for white men.
http://www.racematters.org/affirmativeactionhelpwhites.htm
Leonard Pitts nails it. You cannot refurte it. I DARE you
So true!
http://news.yahoo.com/low-iq-conservative-beliefs-linked-prejudice-180403506.html
have any of you ever noticed that ohter non whites seem to get along really well with each other and it seems that only hwhites have nay sort of problem with other races?
Hmmm. I seem to remember reading something somewhere about black people not being particularly popular in china. Does that count?
Modernity glorifies recreational sex and hypersexualization against modesty and reproduction.
chinese racism is imported white racism
http://www.racismreview.com/blog/2009/11/15/importing-white-racism-into-china/
name one thing whites created
As much as I try not to respond to trolls, I can't help but laugh at this. That takes the cake.
From that "Importing White Racism" article:
Significantly, the Chinese wife of one African businessperson notes in the article that in Guangzhou the Cantonese term for black people translates into “black ghosts.” I wonder where they got that idea. That Chinese phrase sounds remarkably like the old white-racist term for black Americans, “spooks,” doesn’t it?
Of course those of us who aren't dumb jigs know that the Chinese call all foreigners ghosts.
What makes this doubly infuriating is that Chinese-American grievance merchants won't hesitate to push this libel in their quest to get some good old American gimme dats.
What do you guys think of Rihanna? I LOVE her! I am a typical "angry white guy who reads these sort of HBD sites" but I find Rihanna to be fantastic! Her videos are so bizarre and weird and sexy and beautiful.Like any white man,I have NO attraction,not the slightest,for that btranny Beyonce. Nor am I the least bit interested in that plain jane Lady GaGa.Rihanna has,to coin a phrase,brought sexy back. Yes she is a typical slut,onstage if not in teal life! But at least its genuine sexuality,not the creepy pantomime of sexuality that a Gaga or a Katy (ugh)Perry projects. Check out these videos:"Chhers","Only Girl In The World" and "Whats My name". (In the last one you will have to endure the repulsive Drake,the black/jewish rapper who looks like a black David Schwimmer,and is Godawful. (Sorry philo-semites,I'm not trying to hurt your tender feelings.) Enjoy,and tell me you dont love this lil old colored gal!!Nomesayne?
this country was built on backs of People of Color
whites have made no contributions to America or the world at large
you would not be sitting here without the hard work and ingenuity of Colored folks
PA says of my opinion on whther or not "Racist" as the modenr-day rhetorical equivalent of "nigger":
"You countered that the comparison is invalid because t-word refers to a person's behavior or attitude while the n-word refers to a person's inescapable identity."
I don'lt have my quote handy, but I'm pretty sure I didn't say your comparison was 'invalid'; actually, I believe I said I felt your interpretation was true to the degree each slur intends to ostracize and besmirch; the difference I noted, which I do think is relevant, is that, at least in theory, being a 'racist' is a changeable condition, something redeemable via 'the new orthodozy,' while being a 'nigger,' again theoretically denotes a condition of immutable inferiority of caste.
I don't think that's 'splitting hairs,' because I agree with your belief that 'racist' does at times try to make genetic whiteness and blameable guilt one and the same. So, in that sense, I agree and never really did disagree.
I mean, I've used the word 'racist' in my life; I've also been the subject of 'racism' in my life; the incidents were pretty clear cut and I believe the word i used to define them as such were too.
None of which is to say that the word 'racist' and its contemporary definition hasn't been abused and may even now come to connote something as fundamental and germane as 'white' itself; that's outrageous and quite wrong IMO, but also quite separate from the way I have historicaly viewed and/or used the word 'racist.'
I mean, the commong modern-day abuse of the word and the still at-times classic and correct use of the word each manifest often to this day. And yeah, the irony is a lot of leftist, p.c. talk and orthodoxy often better or more purely offer examplars of classical 'racism.'
Re PA:I couldnt agree more that "racist" is a perjorative term that is used to degrade Whites. Its far more offensive than "nigger","kike" "faggot" "cunt" et al as the term "racist" is not only a social shaming device but often a call to violence against the victim.Never forget thsat primitive nigger fool that shot up those 8 good white men who had given him a job-- a job he was too lazy,dishonest and stupid to perform. Every other word out of his filthy pig-mionkey mouth was "racist". Its a crime,that calls for more crime.
Nomesayne?
OneSTDV said...
Do any of you have any information about penis enlargement techniques?
1.Buy a bigger mirror.
2. Only fuck midgets - virgin midgets
It works for roosh
Anonymous squealed...
name one thing whites created!!Free Welfare for single moms of eight
Hey Firepower, a friend of a friend told me you don't like watching the 1962 movie Lolita anymore. Is this true?
Just an average night in Finland:
http://i.imgur.com/8qZW6.png
"Science" and "journalism" in action.
Link.
"Socially conservative ideologies tend to offer structure and order," Hodson said, explaining why these beliefs might draw those with low intelligence.
Structure and order are wicked, wicked things which only those with low intelligence see as valuable. Or something.
chinese racism is imported white racism
Wow! You really think we white people are just all-powerful, don't you? Why it's almost as if you are saying we deserve to rule!
:-)
There should be a government agency which ensures that all young white women ball a black man at least once a year. This will eliminate black crime. Once black men get over the novelty of white pussy, they will rededicate themselves to the life of the mind. Berkeley will probably have to resurrect the major in Epistemology, to accommodate all the new black male scholars.
@Not A Hacker
Are you black? Between your insistence on several blogs that black guys are 'the toughest' and your 'white pussy for every black guy' scheme, I'm 95% sure you're a negro.
Wow! After taking in this rather pungent potpourri of conversation topics, I bet OneSTDV regrets opening the gates to such a wide degree.
Looks like your readers need the focus and scrutiny that a specific topic brings.
Remember what Montaigne warned about idle but active minds. (Lol!)
I posted the following at Roissy but nobody bothered to answer, so I'll try again here:
I seldom attempt conversation with young women, but as I approached three 21-year olds the other night on the street in SF, something came over me. One girl was wearing those pre-ripped jeans, which I recall having been trendy perhaps a decade ago. So I said to her, "isn't that like 1999 or something?" At this, all 3 simultaneously went into wide-eyed spasms of "Oh my GOD!!!," repeating it over and over. My theory is that this was not a response to the content of my remark, but to the mere fact that a 50-ish man would even attempt to address them, i.e. among this demo an unwritten rule precludes banter from those not already initiated into the group.
Also, I don't think notahacker is black. Blacks don't construct sentences like that.
@smead jolley
And is it also a random coincidence that both you and Not A Hacker are 50ish and live in San Francisco?
@anon:
notahacker could never hit the curveball.
@ smead jolley
Regardless of how tight your "game" is America is a very uptight and cliquish culture. The majority of couples meet through friends/acquaintances and NOT through bars/clubs. Since the rise of ubiquitous digital technology people keep in touch 24/7 making them even more withdrawn into their little cliques. A night on the town used to be a great way to meet single girls but now friends and couples dominate the night scene. If you're not socially plugged it's pretty rough.
What the fuck is it with the alt. right and their obsession with "miscegenation"? I mean look at this fucking shit:
"In keeping with this week's theme of miscegenation and its significant drawbacks..."
"The hypocrisy of female racemixers."
"...her selfish desire to miscegenate..."
"They don't give a damn about the white race, and they are behaving in accord with their beliefs. Far from being hypocritical, they are consistent liberals."
Fuck all of these wannabe Nazis.
@conquistador:
I accept your take on current dating mores, but as I said this had nothing to do with that. It seems to me that if the same exchange had taken place in 1985, there was no meme in place that required the recent high school grad to feign outrage. Am I wrong?
My take on interracial relationships:
I think it's incredibly strange-looking. I can't help but stare at interracial couples, even WM/AF. But I don't really have a moral opposition to it, primarily because it's nowhere near widespread enough to make an impact. If whites (or Asians) as a race were nearing extinction, like some indigenous tribes or even Jews, I would understand opposition to those that diluted the gene pool.
@ P.A.,
BTW, yes, you're correct: I certainly am a contemporary to the common "See, there're black and then there're niggers'-trope; I always thought of that riff as a sort-of 'first baby-step in getting away from racial essentializing' type of theory. (lol!)
I looked up that exchange we had; I don't see how i was disagreeing with you. But I do think the 'biological destiny'-point I brought up is a valid distinction. (though, I suppose it's no surprise I WOULD say that). Yet I don't think that distinction diminishes your point; the term 'racist' has become a way to stop further argument and defang your opponent without any further evidence. It's
become Salem-like in its chill and effect.
The fact that sites like this are more and more common prove that fact is slowly changing; while the fact that I've yet to see a commenter on one of those sites use his or her real name is proof that the power of such slander and/or taboo is still incredibly strong.
Back from the retreat already, one?
@Jesus Christ Supercop
I can hear that guy's beta whining through the screen.
I'm not surprised Auster's site plays host to such mangina tantrums.
Back from the retreat already, one?
Yes, it was amazing.
@ PA/nikcrit:
I haven't followed the various arguments back and forth but from my cursory reading I actually agree with nikcrit. While I think "nigger" is often an apt term, there really is no equivalent. That being said, the concept of "original sin" (PA: somehow else has finally started using perhaps my favorite self-created racial concept?!!?) impugns all whites, as whites, no matter what.
So while "nigger" reduces a black person to moral nothingness merely on the account of race, our entire intellectual landscape does this to whites. So while no specific parallel term exists for whites, our entire culture is sort of calling whites "nigger".
The commenter 'Undiscovered Jew' is quite fond of the term 'white niggers' to describe anyone who criticizes Jews or Jewish culture. I guess sometimes 'anti-Semite' and 'exterminationist' don't carry enough impact.
Does anyone here need a lawyer who's a mediocre golfer?
@ smead jolley
Age segregation is rampant nowadays much more so than even in the past. We keep young people isolated in bubbles of youth culture often until the age of 24. It's pretty harmful to their development in a lot of ways.
Opposition to race mixing is understandable. Mixed race couples are indeed strange looking especially if there is a big disparity in color. I'm not opposed to it personally but I do find certain parings to be grotesque particularly white woman/black guy couples. Once she goes black I don't want her back.
Kevin MacDonald is right, and I've yet to see anyone take a serious stab at disproving him. Saying he misrepresents sources, or questioning such a thing as a group evolutionary strategy, but leaving it at that (i.e., no examples of said misrepresented sources, or why group evolutionary strategy is a shaky concept) is all I've ever read. Have any of the Jewish alt-right/HBD sphere even read Culture of Critique?
Conquistador, would you date/marry a woman who'd been raped by a black guy.
What do you mean 'mediocre'? I recently shot a 73.
Undiscovered Jew thinks Ron Paul is a closet Hitler. Half Sigma is also like him in that they both correctly refute some of the really absurd anti-Jewish stuff but they go overboard in their sensitivity towards ANYTHING critical of Jews or Israel.
@outed by anon
I had asked you a question on this thread that you never answered:
http://onestdv.blogspot.com/2011/12/thoughts-on-race-and-intelligence.html
would you care to now?
Kevin MacDonald is right, and I've yet to see anyone take a serious stab at disproving him. Saying he misrepresents sources, or questioning such a thing as a group evolutionary strategy, but leaving it at that (i.e., no examples of said misrepresented sources, or why group evolutionary strategy is a shaky concept) is all I've ever read. Have any of the Jewish alt-right/HBD sphere even read Culture of Critique?
I think the problem with KMac is that he goes way overboard, primarily because he wants to blame Jews for almost all the West's problems. And his argument is very hand-wavey when it comes to this whole notion that Jews are biological automotants out to destroy traditional culture.
I'd wager that if KMac confined his study to negative attitudes of Jews towards gentiles, something even leftist Jews admit:
http://www.jewcy.com/post/are_christians_more_tolerant_than_jews
then he would have actually done more in getting his ideas out there.
OneSTDV says,
"haven't followed the various arguments back and forth but from my cursory reading I actually agree with nikcrit. While I think "nigger" is often an apt term, there really is no equivalent. That being said, the concept of "original sin" (PA: somehow else has finally started using perhaps my favorite self-created racial concept?!!?) impugns all whites, as whites, no matter what."
PA says,
"We're about the same age. Surely you remember race-realist back in the day trying to be nice by qualifying things with "there is a black man, and there is a nigger." Similarly, now people say "all whites are evil except non-racist ones like him/me."
"Racist" really just means a normal white person, unless proven to be free of his original sin of being white with all of the physicality of being white: a proven Leftist."
There's a blogger who spoke of this "nigger=racist' meme, however latent; he used to comment a lot at Guy White; I really appreciated his insights, as he was considerably more academicized on many of these issues, but was earthy enough to comprehend. I still check on his site but it's heavy on the science and genetics and is usually a few pay bumps beyond my comprehension level.
here's 'Chuck' speaking on this very subject a couple years back:
https://occidentalascent.wordpress.com/2010/07/17/racist-the-new-nigger-or-the-new-redneck/
"Conquistador, would you date/marry a woman who'd been raped by a black guy."
Nobody wants a partner with a lot of baggage that goes for both men and women alike but if someone were to share something like that I'd be grossed out to be honest. I don't think I'd be comfortable continuing a relationship after that.
Question (and there's no way I'd ever actually post about this on the front page):
Would anyone date/sex a girl who has had sex with a black guy? I know they say, "once you go black you never go back", but maybe that's just because white guys sort of view the girl as sullied.
"Would anyone date/sex a girl who has had sex with a black guy?"
Well, I confess: I've done it a few times. (lol!)
I know this is a topic in which we go back and forth, but let me tell you a brief story about me and my friends' dating and going-out habits ----- single-life habits ----- while I was in grad school.
My friends were mainly black, a few whites, a few Asians and several Jews (the basic demography of Hyde Park with 'Chinatown' not too far awaay and more than a few Asian UC students; on weekends, the big hang for young people are the north-side neighborhoods in Chicago: Wrigleyville, Lincoln Park, Uptown, Wicker Park; touristy parts of downtown,like River north etc. Then (the mid-to-late '90s) there was a incredible amount of mixed dating among young people; so much so that my black friends, who usually stuck in their s.side 'hoods in or nearby Hyde Park, would when they wanted a surefire lay, would go hit the college bars in Wrigleyville.
The thing is, and the part most of you here may not believe, is they were somewhat sheepish about doing or even admitting this; there 'gold standard' where the black, white or Asian girls in Hyde Park or in some of the nearby s.side neighborhoods; going across town to hit on the more naive (and more drunk) party girls, who went to more rah-rah, joe-college shcools like Loyola, Northwesten and DePaul, was less valued and considered to be somewhat taking the easy route.
This was so to the point that me and many of my friends, upon learning of one of our group heading north on the weekend, would say 'so-and-so is bucket-hanging it tonight!" (LOL!).
I'm not saying that was true everywhere; but it definitely was a routine and widely agreed-upon norm in my day.
I think the problem with KMac is that he goes way overboard, primarily because he wants to blame Jews for almost all the West's problems. And his argument is very hand-wavey when it comes to this whole notion that Jews are biological automotants out to destroy traditional culture.
Where do you think he goes way overboard? Aside from various articles of his, the only thing by KMac I've read is CofC. I think it would be best to say that he is indicting elite Jews for anti-European mischief. In CofC, when outlining his methodology in the Preface, he says, "Find influential movements dominated by Jews, with no implicatons that all or most Jews are involved in these movements [...] In general, relatively few Jews were involved in most of these movements and significant numbers of Jews may have been unaware of their existence. [...] when I criticize these movements I am not necessarily criticizing most Jews. Nevertheless, these movements were influential and they were Jewishly motivated." (CofC, Preface, v).
The selection I quoted is an important point to keep in mind when reading CofC. KMac doesn't believe that every Jew from the delicatessen owner and doctor all the way up to Freud, Adorno, Friedan, et al, is engaged in a conspiracy to undermine Western civilization. If anything, CofC is an indictment of elite Jews whose pro-Jewish interests ran counter to those of the European majority.
Does he want to blame Jews for all of the West's problems? Not being him, I couldn't say. CofC doesn't give that impression. Not to say it's a poorly written book, but if it wasn't about such a hot button issue it would be a rather tiresome read what with all of its evopsych jargon, copious footnotes, etc. I get the impression that KMac is a late comer to beyond the pale, non-mainstream thought. In his interview with Alex Kurtagic, he said he was a Reagan conservative. What I'm getting at is that he hardly seems to be a candidate for a dyed in the wool anti-Semite, a would be SS officer or Der Sturmer columnist. I've yet to see any compelling evidence that KMac hates hates HATES Jews. He might! But he might not just as well. If he writes alot on them, then it shouldn't be surprising considering he knows alot about the subject. If KMac is Jew "obsessed" for writing alot on it, then one might as well call Jared Taylor race obsessed for writing alot about race.
Where do you think he goes way overboard? Aside from various articles of his, the only thing by KMac I've read is CofC. I think it would be best to say that he is indicting elite Jews for anti-European mischief. In CofC, when outlining his methodology in the Preface, he says, "Find influential movements dominated by Jews, with no implicatons that all or most Jews are involved in these movements [...] In general, relatively few Jews were involved in most of these movements and significant numbers of Jews may have been unaware of their existence. [...] when I criticize these movements I am not necessarily criticizing most Jews. Nevertheless, these movements were influential and they were Jewishly motivated." (CofC, Preface, v).
If I only knew that about his writing I'd be 100% convinced that he was not an anti-semite or that he wasn't trying to paint Jews as a whole negatively.
But in going with evo-psych and saying that there's a biological imperative for Jews, due to their relatively isolated breeding, to undermine traditional culture and the majority people, he does paint ALL Jews as nefarious. Note he doesn't merely say that Jews are on average more intolerant of the majority (a fact that even leftist Jews agree with); he says that biology has created Jewish genes to this end.
[I must admit that a lot of this is eerily similar to what HBDers say about blacks and I honestly can't FULLY resolve the logical conflict. So I'll just say that KMac gets some stuff right, but overall his writing points to the fact that he sees Jews as deterministically bad for society and a sort of nepotistic cabal behind every anti-Western idea, not to mention he reduces every Jew to being merely a result of his unique Jewish attitude and paranoia. I object to this, even for blacks.]
(I honestly don't care if he hates Jews or not. I can't imagine he particularly likes them, but it's inconsequential to his ideas. Just as with "racists" who champion HBD.)
have any of you ever noticed that ohter non whites seem to get along really well with each other and it seems that only hwhites have nay sort of problem with other races?
No, I've never noticed your fantasies in the real world. Ever notice how no one likes you? How disappointed your mother is in herself for having given birth to you?
(I mean, how *$#@ing dumb is this guy, anyway? Yes, the Japs get along great with all the non-Japs they don't let into their country. The Saudis get along great with all the non-Saudis they let into their country and treat like slaves/shit. The Africans get along great with all the non-Black people too terrified of Blacks to contemplate moving to Africa. The Uzbeks get along great with all the non-Uzbeks they don't let into their country. The Chinese, the Indonesians, the Indians, bla bla bla. FFS man.)
But sure, let's go with that. All non-Whites should leave their White lands. Whites are just dangerous, too difficult to get along with, etc.
Racial harmony = a take-no-shit majority. I'll give stupid that one - he has a point. But his mother's still a whore.
My humble five, as a guy who's familiar with the sensibilities of the SWPL-leaning, multi-culti mores and orthodoxy.
K-Mac is one of the single biggest reasons that HBD elements cannot be as much as lighty countenanced by mainstream academia and debate; this whole willing jewish history into 'genetically selected cabalism' theory re. Jews is so risible and ripe for ridicule, combined wth the fact that K-Mac is the face of HBD as far as the mainstream is concerned, guarantees the discussion won't take place. There is a real need for a populist scientist who pushes solely the 'genetically selected for different things'-argument among various races; that way various average racial intelligence would be considered more as a horizontal rather than vertical difference, which of course would take tons of angst, anxiety and trepidation out of the issue. And that is the truth the matter, anyhow; intelligence-levels are ultimately subjective; all that really needs to be pointed out are hte correlations between IQ and societal elements that ALL races seem to value, even those with lower aggregate IQ's.
If approached with diligent mindfulness of those protocols, there is no valid moral reproach to this method.
BUt it ain't gonna happen with the jew-obsessed idiots continuing to the be the 'faces of the movement.'
Smart libs and mainstreamers ultimately consider K-Macs and their ilk to be jealous wannabes; guys who couldn't get into Harvard, so they had to become rebellious iconoclasts to the ideal white hierarchy of wealth and hipness.
Conquistador: "Nobody wants a partner with a lot of baggage that goes for both men and women alike but if someone were to share something like that I'd be grossed out to be honest. I don't think I'd be comfortable continuing a relationship after that."
Oh wow. You really are a credit to our species.
Everything you want to know about KMac's true beliefs, you can find by reading his blog posts on the Occidental Observer.
and of course no one refutes the Pitts article
Nikrit, if you want people to read that mess, try paragraphs. With empty lines between them.
and of course no one refutes the Pitts article
Could it be because we were actually asked to "refurte" the article? :-)
Nevertheless, I did take a look at the article, and I have to agree that it is hard to refute. Not because it makes a good argument mind you, but because there is nothing there to refute! No arguments at all, just a handful of unsupported assertions which -- aside from being spell checked -- show no more intellectual sophistication than the writings of the commenter who posted the link. Seriously! I encourage everyone to check it out, just as an example of what passes for critical thinking on the left hand side of the black bell curve.
nikcrit - I don't see how Jewish interests (perceived or real) running counter to gentile interests, and Jewish elites pursuing said interests is "risible" or "ripe for ridicule". MLK pursued black interests in his capacity of the leader of the civil rights movement. Large transfer payments and affirmative action for blacks are two of the more salient results of his activism (these clearly run counter to European interests). I don't see how this is any different from Jewish intellectuals working to stamp out anti-Semitism (an understandable goal). However, their work against anti-Semitism did not involve any discernible degree of looking inwards, but rather saying that anti-Semitism is the result of a completely irrational psychic disease, and/or jealousy of Jewish success. This is like blacks who blame all ill feeling against them on account of "racism" and don't care to reflect on the huge amount of poor black behavior.
Smart libs and mainstreamers ultimately consider K-Macs and their ilk to be jealous wannabes; guys who couldn't get into Harvard, so they had to become rebellious iconoclasts to the ideal white hierarchy of wealth and hipness.
I do consider this ridiculous. First, that liberals and mainstreamers consider Kevin MacDonald at all! The only people outside of HBD and alt-right circles who know or care about him are the PC stazi who make a career out of keeping a close eye on "hate" groups. The closest KMac ever came to the mainstream was taping an interview with The Daily Show, which never aired:
http://www.vdare.com/articles/kevin-macdonalds-daily-show-adventure
I don't know how The Daily Show found out about KMac, but considering that Bee interviewed "A San Antonio good Samaritan [who] uses camera-mounted rifle technology to allow disabled hunters to shoot live exotic animals via the Internet" I get the impression that they go out of their way to find weird right wing people to make fun of and thought MacDonald fit the bill. The interview never aired, so one could reasonably assume that MacDonald wasn't the freak show exhbit they thought he was.
As for becoming a "rebellious iconoclast" to compensate for not getting into Harvard, are you just making things up because you don't like the man? I guess Galileo wrote what he did just to piss off the Church.
Now for your point in advocating a hierarchical vision of race differences: I don't really see it happening. In industrial society, the spoils by and large go to people with high IQs. Blacks may be better athletes and jazz musicians, but those that will be able to make a living out of those professions are tiny. That leaves a huge number who must work otherwise, and a huge number of hispanics who make better workers than them in menial tasks. It would be a much better world if the races were left to their devices in their own lands so the ugliness of interracial conflict would be kept to a minimum.
FYI, Macdonald himself has abbreviated his name to KMac on his blog at times.
Without them the HBD movement would have no reason to exist.
This is false. For one thing, Jew-friendly white nationalism existed before HBD became a buzzword (Amren).
There are fundamental differences between "WN" and "HBD" other than philosemitism. The latter generally tends to be mellower, more eclectic, and less politicized - as befits a clique with intellectual/academic pretensions.
@One
For anything serious, no. Blacks have much higher incidence of STDs and a white girl who is willing to sleep with a black guy is displaying a lot of negative personality traits (basically, sluttiness). Turn off both for a thing and a girlfriend.
A lot of guys seem to take the route of,"Lets fix the anti-white shit but oh dear! let us not have conflict with our dear beloved jooze.(Spelling deliberate)" But anyone who stands up for Whitey attract the jooze. Conflict=unavoidable because THEY will initiate it. BTW %75 of jooze will vote for Obama,the wealthiest of jooze will shower the ape with $$$$. The jooze you love so well have nothing but contempt for YOUR interests. Nomesayne?
So you're saying that any organization, ideology or following which isn't antisemitic, exists only because Jews are powerful?
From that I'd conclude that your view is that the "natural state" for any non-Jew is to despise Jews, a natural state that the non-Jew is prevented from reverting to only through overwhelming force.
Seems far-fetched.
It's ironic. The white nationalist belief that all whites are really ultra-ethnocentric Nietzchean "blond beasts", their awesome wrath shackled only by dastardly Semitic machinations, is exactly identical to to the radical leftist notion that all whites are "racist" without knowing it.
A pox on both their houses.
why did both of my comments regarding the Chosens get deleted ? Aren't we supposed to be talking amongst ourselves ? I expect that type of censorship over at Halfsigma
why did both of my comments regarding the Chosens get deleted ? Aren't we supposed to be talking amongst ourselves ? I expect that type of censorship over at Halfsigma
I deleted one because you used the term "Jewish brainwashing." Avoid stuff like that and you're free to comment, even negatively about Jews. Plus, I'm usually more likely to delete a comment regarding Jewish influence rather than Jewish attitudes towards the "goys". The former makes this site seem crazy, the latter is sort of just the truth.
Anonymous says,
"I do consider this ridiculous. First, that liberals and mainstreamers consider Kevin MacDonald at all!"
Actually, that referencing of McDonald was a error on my part; my remarks about how such thought played on mainstream liberals or centrist SWPL's was extrapoloated from a show by a local pundit in my town, Charlie Sykes; he actually did a segment on HBD.
But I realize now he was talking about Jared Taylor; not McDonald ----- I guess Taylor is more widely known, but I wouldn't think that much more so.
Having said that, I guess my overall remarks in that comment weren't too well thought out. But I don't really have much thought about K-Mac, period, as i'm not very familiar with. And now that i mention it, ditto for Taylor.
Anonymous says,
"I do consider this ridiculous. First, that liberals and mainstreamers consider Kevin MacDonald at all!"
Actually, that referencing of McDonald was a error on my part; my remarks about how such thought played on mainstream liberals or centrist SWPL's was extrapoloated from a show by a local pundit in my town, Charlie Sykes; he actually did a segment on HBD.
But I realize now he was talking about Jared Taylor; not McDonald ----- I guess Taylor is more widely known, but I wouldn't think that much more so.
Having said that, I guess my overall remarks in that comment weren't too well thought out. But I don't really have much thought about K-Mac, period, as i'm not very familiar with. And now that i mention it, ditto for Taylor.
I'm usually more likely to delete a comment regarding Jewish influence rather than Jewish attitudes towards the "goys". The former makes this site seem crazy, the latter is sort of just the truth.
Only a crazy person would think that Jews possess an unusual degree of influence!
"Kevin MacDonald is right, and I've yet to see anyone take a serious stab at disproving him."
John Derbyshire deflated his theory of a Jewish genetic strategy a little bit. He is the only person I can think of who has.
"Kevin MacDonald is right, and I've yet to see anyone take a serious stab at disproving him."
John Derbyshire deflated his theory of a Jewish genetic strategy a little bit. He is the only person I can think of who has.
Derb and an author at Jewcy.com carefully consider KMac's arguments. The Jewish author, Joey Kurtzman, is partially sympathetic to KMac's points, though I bleieve their conversation focuses more on Jewish attitudes than Jewish influence.
Only a crazy person would think that Jews possess an unusual degree of influence!
Only a crazy person would deny that Jews have a lot of influence. But there's a difference between disproportionate influence and "brainwashing" and "control".
Anonymous says,
"Now for your point in advocating a hierarchical vision of race differences: I don't really see it happening. In industrial society, the spoils by and large go to people with high IQs. Blacks may be better athletes and jazz musicians, but those that will be able to make a living out of those professions are tiny. That leaves a huge number who must work otherwise, and a huge number of hispanics who make better workers than them in menial tasks. It would be a much better world if the races were left to their devices in their own lands so the ugliness of interracial conflict would be kept to a minimum. 1/27/2012 12:46 PM"
Actually, I was calling AGAINST the typical hierarchy of race differences and for a more horizontal measure and public presentation, as I believe A) that truly does represent those differences subjective nature; and B) such an approach would be much more widely accepted by mainstream mores without compromising the reality of the information.
it's complicated, but I really do believe that the whole 'parity' issue is overblown and leads to a lot of unnecessary problems. Some might think that's evasive, but I don't, though I admit I haven't thoroughly thought it out completely yet.
i've been to Finland twice. didn't see a negro either trip so I think that photo is faked
I would not a have race mixer in my life at any level. On top of the higher STD rates already mentioned, it'd be like dating a woman who was into bestiality. Maybe if she had sex with a Jap, since I view orientals as fully human. Maybe.
I too would avoid a relationship with a woman who was rapped. Marriage etc is hard enough an extra baggage won't make it easier. Sympathy for a crime victim is a righteous thing. So is justice but wise choices are wise choices and the extra baggage is not a wise choice
Stonelifer, google the club's name. It's an actual bar attached to the University of Helsinki that caters to African students.
Post a Comment