dads said:
How's that, now?
White College Students Create A Union To "Advance Their Race"
- Thread starter Lucky
- Start date
- Status
How's that, now?
dads said:
Sorry, what?
What is this mythological people that doesn't do shitty stuff?
Are you a part of this people? Are your people better than every other race on the planet? Do your people feel particluarly vehemence against 'white' people, despite white not being a race?
And you wonder why groups troll racists like yourself.
weambulance said:
when your Race is mostly known for doing some pretty shitty stuff :tard:?
some pretty shitty stuff like giving the world electricity, running water, and modern medicine. Pretty shitty stuff indeed...:dodgy:
For example, one "evil heterosexual White man", who did "pretty shitty stuff" that just happened to save tens (hundreds maybe) of millions of lives (not asking a dime for it):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Pasteur
Well, this is why white people (and white men specifically) are "known for shitty stuff" by large swaths of our society:
dads said:
1) Funny how you wouldn't have a problem with Jewish Unions when Jews were massively involved in slave-trades for a long long time. Speaking of genocide... would you have a problem with a Turkish union?
2) So you're saying that because a part of a people has done some very shitty things at some point in history, the descendants of this people aren't allowed to feel proud of their heritage anymore? Even though said people has also done many many good things that actually brought massive developments and improvements to humanity? By this standard, pretty much nobody should be allowed to because almost every people have done tremendous crimes at some point in history. By trend of course, the less a people has achieved altogether, the less preeminent bad things it has done. So I'm not looking at a specific people here :angel: but if all a people ever did was invent a stick and cook mush, then yeah, there is probably also not a lot of opportunity to do some serious damage to others that history teachers will throw at every child that ever crosses their way.
You prove once again that multiculturalism doesn't work and thereby reinforce the point which ethnic nationalists are making: If you mix ethnicities together, then there is going to be tension. One ethnicity will blame the other for the problems the common society has. At some point, separation will have to happen OR one of the ethnicities will get wiped out. By outbreeding, by discrimination or by flight/displacement. You don't seem to realize what problems await you. The whole mixing thing was always opposed by every people throughout history. It is a new phenomenon to embrace it like you guys do, thinking you're above nature. Guess what, you're not and once the quality of life starts to go down the shitter, then just wait and see how people are going to react. Then, the real attitudes will surface. So pepper your angus.
This whole multiculti-experiment already shows a lot of blemish, but it somewhat worked thus far (although much worse than if it had been a mono-ethnic society) because the majority of people live well enough. Once that changes, I'll have the popcorn ready.
I'll say this: no matter who is complaining about "muh bad white people" and all that... all of them will miss us once we're gone, I promise you that. I probably won't be around by then anymore but who cares. Every time I think about this, I get a complacent smile on my evil white face. #Feelsgoodman.
For the love of humanity, and because I genuinely want EVERYONE, regardless of race, to be happy: The non-whites in this forum, talking to you, dads: Don't buy into the crap the media and "education"-system is selling you. It is divisive not in the form of what I preach (separatism) but it is divisive in an actually very dangerous form: it makes people HATE and BLAME each others. You might not like what I say, but I never blame specific races for specific wrongdoings (except for one tribe and I always do that with a disclaimer that most of them are not to blame) and I never come from a place of hatred. All I'm saying is, because this is my conviction, that everyone would be better off amongst their own people. But the media lies tell you that whites are to blame and so on and this doesn't cause feelings of separatism in minorities but feelings of rage and anger towards us. Which in turn causes whites to hate you back. So let's not go there.
Thanks for that. Many people are not capable of taking such a standpoint. It is very important though and I appreciate that.dads said:
I know why they do, I "understand" the train of thought and the mechanisms how they come to their conclusions, but I don't "understand" why they react the way they do in terms of being able to see it as a reasonable reality-based worldview. But I myself did have those same thoughts until about 3 years ago, so yeah, I know all about it.dads said:
Nope. Your answer might have been mostly correct until even 100 years ago. But nowadays, lots of non-Europeans live in Europe. Now, I would say, people of European descent. It is a historic, cultural and genetic depiction.dads said:
Not at all. I couldn't care less about what other peoples think about my people. I'm used to being seen as the enemy since forever. What I am annoyed by is my own people buying the crap and thereby us losing our identity and heritage as a people and going extinct. I'm also worried about the mechanisms I described in my prior post, where I explain how others blaming us will lead to tremendous problems. Appreciate us nor not, I don't care, but if you think we're to blame for the world's evils, then that WILL become an issue further down the road. It already has become one, but this is just the beginning. And I would wish for humanity to live in peace, not constant wars (no matter whether with weapons or psychological).dads said:
I'm not American by the way.
Maybe we also have to look more closely into what is meant by "pride in one's people". It isn't that you have to like everything your forefathers ever did. Concerning US history for example, I obviously don't like the fact that the Native Americans were slaughtered or that Africans were enslaved. It's rather that by their actions, our forefathers showed what our people is capable of. Meaning, yes, Europeans did commit some horrendous crimes, but they also advanced humanity like none others. So it would be ridiculous to claim Europeans weren't capable of doing evil. What we're saying is, we understand that what was done was wrong and WE, who live today, do NOT want to repeat that. However, their blood is flowing through our bodies and we are still capable of everything else (the many good things) our forefathers did. We have it in us to form functioning societies in which as many people as possible can live in peace and prosperity however they like. We are capable of impressive creativity, innovation and achievements. AND we like what our forefathers built and established in terms of traditions, language, nations, etc... we like their way of life. We want to preserve that for the world if it cares, but regardless of that we want to preserve it for ourselves and our children.
LEMONed IScream
Ostrich
In the beginning of this thread I said I found such groups stupid, and I stand by it. But because I said that this sort of white group is stupid do not think that I would endorse a group of another other race, I simply see it as divisive and it perpetuates the problem. And of course I also do understand what led to the existence of such groups for whites, too. I just don't think it will help in the long run.
DjembaDjemba
Pelican
In my university student unions were about helping each other out, not keeping people out.
Example: I'm mixed (white/black), I dated a girl in the Asian student union. I would consistently go to the Asian student union meetings and eat the food (awesome), schmooze, and made life-long friendships strewn all across the world from those meet and greets. She insisted on me going. For obvious reasons, I wasn't part of the union.
As for a white student union, absolutely, why not? If people can help each other out and work hard toward a better goal then it's great. Success is not a zero sum game. However would I be able to date a girl from the white student union, go their meetings, schmooze, eat the food, make long term friends to this day? Maybe. Or would the ghost of Christmas past come back to haunt me. This isn't a rhetorical question.
LEMONed has a point. Multiculturalism isn't good. Integration is far better. If people are given the choice of ethnic collectivism vs individualism, some will choose the latter, some the former, assuming the threat of death of violence doesn't loom over their heads.
ChinitoLoco - multiracialism isn't an anglo/European country phenomenon. Even some Asian societies are mixed, Singapore comes to mind. India, an ancient society that has many groups living in its area (Persian, Turkic, Dravidian, Siddi, etc, all different linguistic groups, all from different parts of Asia-Minor, some even descended from African slaves or travellers like the Siddi). Turkey is possibly one the most historically diverse nations in Asia-Minor. The nations of the mongol steppes - the "Stans", almost all made up of a mixture of mongols, slavs, indo-europeans, huns, turkic tribes etc. An Azeri girl can be blonde as a Swede, or with dark features, some looking almost as a Chinese.
Lest we talk of the new world peoples, the Metis of Canada (French/Indian), Mestizo of Latin America, Mulattos, Douglas (South East Asian/Afro peoples), the Coolies, the list goes on.
If anyone is interested I can post some interesting books you can find on Amazon on the movement of people, the formation and reformation of tribes, societies, and cultures. All highly informative, and will truly make you see how history simply oscillates in cycles. Some people say what's happening now is unnatural or unprecedented, neither of which is true.
White student union? Black student union? Asian student union? All flavours of the month. In 300 years maybe there will be a Dougla student union fighting off a Euro-asian student union - somewhere in East Africa, because one is claiming the others are immigrating and changing their culture for the worse.
I for one hope by the time I reach my twilight years there will be a safe spot for me to find young, feminine, pussy somewhere in a warm paradise. There's rapidly growing numbers of Afro-Chinese in southern Africa, that's always a good mix. By the time I'm 50 these girls will be coming of age, just in time as I'll probably be a dirty old man who wants to get his dick wet and spend his pension money on cheap drinks.
Example: I'm mixed (white/black), I dated a girl in the Asian student union. I would consistently go to the Asian student union meetings and eat the food (awesome), schmooze, and made life-long friendships strewn all across the world from those meet and greets. She insisted on me going. For obvious reasons, I wasn't part of the union.
As for a white student union, absolutely, why not? If people can help each other out and work hard toward a better goal then it's great. Success is not a zero sum game. However would I be able to date a girl from the white student union, go their meetings, schmooze, eat the food, make long term friends to this day? Maybe. Or would the ghost of Christmas past come back to haunt me. This isn't a rhetorical question.
LEMONed has a point. Multiculturalism isn't good. Integration is far better. If people are given the choice of ethnic collectivism vs individualism, some will choose the latter, some the former, assuming the threat of death of violence doesn't loom over their heads.
ChinitoLoco - multiracialism isn't an anglo/European country phenomenon. Even some Asian societies are mixed, Singapore comes to mind. India, an ancient society that has many groups living in its area (Persian, Turkic, Dravidian, Siddi, etc, all different linguistic groups, all from different parts of Asia-Minor, some even descended from African slaves or travellers like the Siddi). Turkey is possibly one the most historically diverse nations in Asia-Minor. The nations of the mongol steppes - the "Stans", almost all made up of a mixture of mongols, slavs, indo-europeans, huns, turkic tribes etc. An Azeri girl can be blonde as a Swede, or with dark features, some looking almost as a Chinese.
Lest we talk of the new world peoples, the Metis of Canada (French/Indian), Mestizo of Latin America, Mulattos, Douglas (South East Asian/Afro peoples), the Coolies, the list goes on.
If anyone is interested I can post some interesting books you can find on Amazon on the movement of people, the formation and reformation of tribes, societies, and cultures. All highly informative, and will truly make you see how history simply oscillates in cycles. Some people say what's happening now is unnatural or unprecedented, neither of which is true.
White student union? Black student union? Asian student union? All flavours of the month. In 300 years maybe there will be a Dougla student union fighting off a Euro-asian student union - somewhere in East Africa, because one is claiming the others are immigrating and changing their culture for the worse.
I for one hope by the time I reach my twilight years there will be a safe spot for me to find young, feminine, pussy somewhere in a warm paradise. There's rapidly growing numbers of Afro-Chinese in southern Africa, that's always a good mix. By the time I'm 50 these girls will be coming of age, just in time as I'll probably be a dirty old man who wants to get his dick wet and spend his pension money on cheap drinks.
DjembaDjemba said:
Would love to read those books. Definitely post them.
DjembaDjemba said:
Singapore being happily mixed? It's more of a juxtaposition of different (and often in competition) ethnicities. With the Chinese businessmen on top, and the Indian laborers at the bottom (Indian laborers who started rioting, couple of years ago, against perceived discrimination). All of that under the furious eyes of the (original dwellers) Malays.
DjembaDjemba
Pelican
Genghis Khan said:
Check your PM
DjembaDjemba said:
The most productive and cohesive asian nations are the most homogenous. (Not to mention the countries with the most beautiful women in asia are also the most homogenous but that is for another topic.) This is undeniable. This used to be true for most of Europe too until more and more culturally and racially different migrants started clogging the social welfare works and eroding previously prosperous nations there.
It also depends on what you call "mixed" to begin with. Even Thailand and the Philippines could be called mixed however there is a unifying racial cohesiveness to those nations (ie. vast majority racially asian) and the disparate asian groups who were separate in the past have had lots of time to meld together into a specific national identity. However the exceptions would be islamic factions in both nations which are separatist and maintain their own ethnic and cultural identity.
Saying that asian nations are mixed is like pointing to the U.K. and saying the white people there are "mixed" and in that case you would be right too since the U.K. is a mix of ancient Anglo-saxon, and Norman people. However you're missing the important point that racially and culturally there are so many similarities that this type of assimilation was feasible.
Singapore is a unique case and it's also important to note that it's 70%+ ethnic Chinese to begin with. Going Strong is right in stating that most of the industrial and business strength stems from the Chinese influence in the nation. The laborers tend to be from the subcontinent, malays, or migrant SEA workers. With that being said there is a business class Indian demographic in Singapore too. If you know some Singaporeans you'd also see that most still hang out with their own ethnic group. Chinese Singaporeans by and large hang out with Chinese Singaporeans. Indian Singaporeans with Indian Singaporeans etc. Recent migrants hang out with recent migrants. It's a stratified society.
Singapore is also not a good case study for multiculturalism or integration because it's also a tiny nation state of around 4-5 million people and a finance hub. It isn't run like and doesn't possess the economy of a normal country.
The latin nations that are heavily mixed are also not really good examples of integration/assimilation. You have large stratifications there with European Latinos who pretty much only date and marry their own for the most part. I will agree that latin-america has less racial stratification than the anglosphere but it's still present in every facet of their society. Just look at the racial makeup of the people in favellas versus the ones in gated communities in latin america. The way different races still prefer to stick to their own and are stratified along those lines. You have more mixing but by and large this fundamental reality remains true.
India is also an awful example of integration. The various religious and ethnic groups there warred with each for almost a millenia until the British set up a ruling hierarchy. Those different religious and various ethnic groups would absolutely not be unified if it were not for colonization. Just look at how quickly Pakistan and India split as an example. People always forget that Pakistan and India have way more similarities than differences and even then they could not integrate or tolerate each other when given the opportunity to separate.
If this is the end product of "assimilation" then it is an abject failure in my opinion. The solution is to not double down on a failed experiment and promote more of this everywhere in the world.
Funny that East Asia was brought up; it has in recent times (and up until now) been more "multicultural" than Westerners realize, and it hasn't been pretty.
Multiculturalism hasn't worked out so well for the non-Han Chinese, Aboriginal Taiwanese, nor Japanese Ainu--who are some combination of mostly dead, outnumbered, assimilated by virtue of their females out-marrying (hypergamy, baby!), or sitting as an underachieving caste under the current hegemonic populations. It's also quite frequently a headache for the hegemonic populations--the Han Chinese, the (predominantly) Han Chinese/Taiwanese, and the (predominantly) Yayoi Japanese, respectively--to deal with them.
For example, Aboriginal Taiwanese are reputed in Taiwan for their faster life-histories (more violent, mature earlier, breed earlier, die earlier) versus the "mainstream" (who are predominantly Han Chinese in descent, some with a bit of Aboriginal mtDNA due to aforementioned hypergamy) and "mainlander" (recent Chinese arrivals, particularly immediately after WII) Taiwanese populations.
They are Austronesian language speakers, and genetically and phenotypically distinct from the Han Chinese, having been on the island since near the Neolithic era, and the Han Chinese didn't start showing up until the 17th century.
The Aboriginals have a reputation for being more athletic on average, but with lower cognitive ability.
They used to be called "Barbarians" in Chinese, but that eventually was considered un-PC, so then they became known as "High Mountain People" or "Mountain Land People." That eventually became un-PC too, so now they're called "Original Denizen People," roughly translated. Cue George Carlin.
Many Taiwanese "intellectuals" attribute these differences to solely socioeconomic differences.
Various Taiwanese political parties like to leverage the Aborigines for the moral high-ground in the independence stance vis a vis China, as well as try to pawn and coddle the Aborigines for votes each election cycle. University entrance exams grant aboriginals more points on exams, but despite being imbued with affirmative action preferences, aboriginals continue to underachieve. And instead of being grateful for the boost or saying "no" to identity-based preferences, they instead clamor for more preferences.
Sound familiar?
Waiting for dis UFC 196 fight. Dey don't have a cursory interest in fringe populations like I do.
Multiculturalism hasn't worked out so well for the non-Han Chinese, Aboriginal Taiwanese, nor Japanese Ainu--who are some combination of mostly dead, outnumbered, assimilated by virtue of their females out-marrying (hypergamy, baby!), or sitting as an underachieving caste under the current hegemonic populations. It's also quite frequently a headache for the hegemonic populations--the Han Chinese, the (predominantly) Han Chinese/Taiwanese, and the (predominantly) Yayoi Japanese, respectively--to deal with them.
For example, Aboriginal Taiwanese are reputed in Taiwan for their faster life-histories (more violent, mature earlier, breed earlier, die earlier) versus the "mainstream" (who are predominantly Han Chinese in descent, some with a bit of Aboriginal mtDNA due to aforementioned hypergamy) and "mainlander" (recent Chinese arrivals, particularly immediately after WII) Taiwanese populations.
They are Austronesian language speakers, and genetically and phenotypically distinct from the Han Chinese, having been on the island since near the Neolithic era, and the Han Chinese didn't start showing up until the 17th century.
The Aboriginals have a reputation for being more athletic on average, but with lower cognitive ability.
They used to be called "Barbarians" in Chinese, but that eventually was considered un-PC, so then they became known as "High Mountain People" or "Mountain Land People." That eventually became un-PC too, so now they're called "Original Denizen People," roughly translated. Cue George Carlin.
Many Taiwanese "intellectuals" attribute these differences to solely socioeconomic differences.
Various Taiwanese political parties like to leverage the Aborigines for the moral high-ground in the independence stance vis a vis China, as well as try to pawn and coddle the Aborigines for votes each election cycle. University entrance exams grant aboriginals more points on exams, but despite being imbued with affirmative action preferences, aboriginals continue to underachieve. And instead of being grateful for the boost or saying "no" to identity-based preferences, they instead clamor for more preferences.
Sound familiar?
Waiting for dis UFC 196 fight. Dey don't have a cursory interest in fringe populations like I do.
Patricius Magnus
Sparrow
DjembaDjemba said:
I agree, please share!
All or Nothing
Pelican
Kabal said:
It's almost like different groups of people around the world behave the exact same way...
I was reading a report on China's economy recently and it was fascinating to see how China's economy is essentially becoming identical in terms of the US as they progress towards a free market economy with a stratification of rich vs poor with much of that being driven by urbanized vs rural society.
People across the world are more similar than we would like to believe.
DjembaDjemba said:
Please PM me those too.
G
- Status