Is it Racist for White Countries to Remain White?

[PoS]

yes it does you are just dodging facts.
How is recognizing the difference in people racist?

You have failed to provide any credible links that there is a scientific basis for race. Until you do its just racism since you judge people based solely on their appearance.

 

[HowardBThiname]

Yeah it is.

People decided that people were different because of how they look, and built a social framework around that.

It was a lie, but it became true in some ways because the social framework forced it to be.

That's not racism -- that's ethnocentrism -- and it occurs in various groups of humans everywhere. People tend to flock toward what they know -- what's familiar. Race is just a tiny factor in that. 100 years ago, people shied away from retarded and "special" folks, because they didn't understand and they weren't familiar. We had institutions where parents could lock them away from society -- and society appreciated that.

Same with midgets and dwarfs.
Same with people who spoke a different language.
Same with people of a different religion (or even denomination)

It's not about disliking someone because the color of their skin is different from the color of yours (although that does happen, but minimally), it's about not understanding and shying away because of that.

Go into any nursing home in the nation and talk to the residents about homosexuals. You'll see fright and condemnation in their eyes - but the vast majority of those residents are probably wonderful people. They just were not made aware of homosexuality (because it was in the closet) and they therefore think it should stay there.

There's no sense in getting all hateful and judgemental -- when you do that -- you're just like them. You're judging because you don't understand.

It's all good. Just be kind and accepting to all and you'll set in motion a wave of acceptance that will spread through society.

 

[Grand Mal]

In other words, there is no real life example of this working, it's just something that you want to be true.

How about this, you go try to make this society for yourself and you let everyone who doesn't want to join you alone.

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

How about this? I speak up when I see someone voicing an opinion I strongly disagree with?

 

[Tigerace117]

The Irish were the 2nd most visible group in the founding of this country. By the time of the great wave of
Irish immigration there were far more Irish born generals in both armies 18 in all than from all other foreign
lands put together. Though born in America Sheridan was the most prominent officer of Irish descent.
They were entrentched in the upper echelons of American life moreso than any other
nationality other than the WASP. Concede the point!

The Irish were absolutely despised by the nativist scumbags due to their coming to this country en masse as a result of, among numerous other factors, the Potato Famine. Nativism as an ideology got off of the ground due to hatred of the Irish. Again, very basic American historical fact.

Yes, there were tons of Irish guys in the army. Know why?

Because they were by and large shunned from a lot of civilian professions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Irish_sentiment#"No_Irish_need_apply"

But before the Civil War, and for many years after it, the Army was kept small, uninfluential, and isolated across much of the continent.


I already knew you were historically ignorant, but this is a whole new level of ignorance.

 

[Tigerace117]

The ones buying small lots in Arcadia, building huge houses, and taking over the school districts?

No.

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

They are a lot more American than "traditionalists" who think we shouldn't have fought Adolf Hitler.

 

[Tigerace117]

What comparable event happened to Detroit that would require it to receive such aid? No, the city just fell apart because citizens there had no common identity.

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

Yep, your ideology caused Germany and Japan to commit horrific atrocities far worse than anything that's ever happened in Detroit, and as a result caused them to be rightfully leveled by the Allies. Japan had a "common identity"--all it got them was death and destruction. As usual, that is all your ideology is good for.

 

[late]

You have failed to provide any credible links that there is a scientific basis for race. Until you do its just racism since you judge people based solely on their appearance.

"Racism is an illusion."

We are one species, with all that that implies.

 

[LowDown]

As I understand it, it depends on what you want to come to the country for. To qualify they use a point based system. You get points for annual income, Japanese language fluency, and a bunch of other stuff.

Ok, but is permanent residence possible?

 

[<alt>doxygen]

The ones buying small lots in Arcadia, building huge houses, and taking over the school districts?

No.

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

Which Arcadia are you referring to?

As for this thread in general, you might have more success on a platform run by Richard Spencer. You seem to share his views.

 

[slick]

The Irish were absolutely despised by the nativist scumbags due to their coming to this country en masse as a result of, among numerous other factors, the Potato Famine. Nativism as an ideology got off of the ground due to hatred of the Irish. Again, very basic American historical fact.

Yes, there were tons of Irish guys in the army. Know why?

Because they were by and large shunned from a lot of civilian professions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Irish_sentiment#"No_Irish_need_apply"

But before the Civil War, and for many years after it, the Army was kept small, uninfluential, and isolated across much of the continent.


I already knew you were historically ignorant, but this is a whole new level of ignorance.

Because the Irish had been in conflict with the Anglo-Saxons for hundreds of years you interpret the
plight of the irish with the old 'No Irish need apply' slogan.

Fact of the matter is that the irish fit into this country far better than every other immigrant group
that followed to WASP's to the USA. Know this the colonists were white supremacists who without moral qualms
drove the Indians over the mountains & established a society of Christian men & women along with African slaves.
When Washington became president citizenship was offered to free whites of moral character ONLY!
Those included were the WASP's, Irish (mostly protestant from Ulster) & Dutch.

To make a big deal about the Irish being discriminated against is forgetting the reality that the Irish for many reasons
had a far better chance of being accepted than those from eastern europe & southern europe.

Andrew Jackson, James Knox Polk, James Buchanan & Woodrow Wilson were pure Irish ethnic presidents who were
born before the great migrations.Andrew Johnson , Ulysses S. Grant , Chester A. Arthur,, Grover Cleveland, Benjamin Harrison,
& William McKinley were Irish ethnics with a British mix who served as presidents & were born before the great migration.

So give it a rest. How many of the other ethnics of those times reached as high! There to this day have been no presidents
with even a hint of Spanish, Italian, French, Portuguese, Danish, Grrek, Polish, Jewish or Balkan blood.

Of all those who followd the WASP's only the Dutch & perhaps the German had as easy a time as the Irish!

 

[Redress]

Ok, but is permanent residence possible?

Yes, up to and including citizenship.

 

[maxparrish]

You have failed to provide any credible links that there is a scientific basis for race. Until you do its just racism since you judge people based solely on their appearance.

Of course there is a scientific basis for race, in the same since that robust facts under-lie all so called "social constructs". All social constructs such as money, property, government, nationality, borders, political affiliation, religion and marriage are categorizations and symbolic language descriptions and abstractions of physical world facts behaving in certain ways. That does not make them any less real.

“Race” is not an arbitrary social construction and the fuzziness of racial definitions does not negate their reality in several contexts. The most concrete of these differences, based on genetics, is where most of a persons ancestors originate. Blacks (African Negroids) are those who have most of their ancestors from sub-Saharan Africa; Whites (European Caucasoids) have most of their ancestors from Europe; and East Asians (Orientals, Mongoloids) have most of their ancestors from Pacific Rim countries. Although he dodged the term race, Cavalli-Sforza’s (2000, p. 70) showed a maximum likelihood tree made on the basis of molecular genetic markers substantially supports the traditional racial groups classification (Indeed, in 2018 all the gene testing services can provide an approximate breakdown of the regional-racial ancestry of person). Of course, in referring to population or racial group differences we are discussing averages.

Based on research models used in behavioral genetics and cognitive abilities a substantial part (say 50%) of both individual and group differences is genetic. It therefore it follows that even if all individuals in both groups were treated identically, average group differences would not disappear - those group differences closely aligned to racial group classification (ancestry origin and physical traits).

So yes race exists "scientifically" based on facts, in spite of the post-modernist delusions to the contrary.

 

[Grand Mal]

What comparable event happened to Detroit that would require it to receive such aid? No, the city just fell apart because citizens there had no common identity.

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

Whatta crock. What the hell is 'common identity'? Are you saying white people have a 'common identity'?
Want some examples of cities destroyed by white 'common identity'? The white homeland is pockmarked by examples.

 

[ataraxia]

What comparable event happened to Detroit that would require it to receive such aid? No, the city just fell apart because citizens there had no common identity.

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

Detroit fall apart because of lack of economic diversification. Their entire economy was based on the car industry.

 

[Grand Mal]

Detroit fall apart because of lack of economic diversification. Their entire economy was based on the car industry.

That, and one or two other things that just give the average racist bastard a headache. Much easier to point and say it's because a lot of black people live there.

 

[PoS]

Of course there is a scientific basis for race, in the same since that robust facts under-lie all so called "social constructs". All social constructs such as money, property, government, nationality, borders, political affiliation, religion and marriage are categorizations and symbolic language descriptions and abstractions of physical world facts behaving in certain ways. That does not make them any less real.

“Race” is not an arbitrary social construction and the fuzziness of racial definitions does not negate their reality in several contexts. The most concrete of these differences, based on genetics, is where most of a persons ancestors originate. Blacks (African Negroids) are those who have most of their ancestors from sub-Saharan Africa; Whites (European Caucasoids) have most of their ancestors from Europe; and East Asians (Orientals, Mongoloids) have most of their ancestors from Pacific Rim countries. Although he dodged the term race, Cavalli-Sforza’s (2000, p. 70) showed a maximum likelihood tree made on the basis of molecular genetic markers substantially supports the traditional racial groups classification (Indeed, in 2018 all the gene testing services can provide an approximate breakdown of the regional-racial ancestry of person). Of course, in referring to population or racial group differences we are discussing averages.

Based on research models used in behavioral genetics and cognitive abilities a substantial part (say 50%) of both individual and group differences is genetic. It therefore it follows that even if all individuals in both groups were treated identically, average group differences would not disappear - those group differences closely aligned to racial group classification (ancestry origin and physical traits).

So yes race exists "scientifically" based on facts, in spite of the post-modernist delusions to the contrary.

If you havent got a legit link to prove this mumbo jumbo you just wrote, then it's just nonsense.The out of Africa theory remains the most agreed upon theory for all so called ethnicities.

The fact is there are no unique factors that can differentiate people of different color. We are genetically compatible with each other and the only physical difference is the amount of melanin on our skin.

 

[<alt>doxygen]

Whatta crock. What the hell is 'common identity'? Are you saying white people have a 'common identity'?
Want some examples of cities destroyed by white 'common identity'? The white homeland is pockmarked by examples.

Appalachia and the rust belt are dead and filled with drug addicts collecting disability payments from the FedGov. They are almost completely white. The OP should move there where he'd fit in better among his people/kind/ethnicity/race - whateverthehell he's whining about losing.

4. Kentucky
> Pct. of working age population with benefits: 8.1%
> Pct. with recurring neck and back pain: 34.8% (5th highest)
> 2011 labor force participation rate: 61.5% (10th lowest)
> 2011 unemployment rate: 9.5% (12th highest)

More than 19% of Kentucky’s population lived in poverty in 2011, a higher percentage than all but four states. Many people in Kentucky may not have the means to get well-paying work. Just 83.1% of people have at least a high school diploma, the sixth lowest percentage of all states. Meanwhile, just 21.1% of adults have at least a bachelor’s degree, the fifth lowest percentage of all states. As of 2011, just 61.5% of Kentuckians were considered to be in the labor force, among the lowest rates in the nation. In a well-publicized case, a Kentucky judge, David Daugherty, was accused in a civil suit filed in February of improperly approving Social Security benefits in order to help local attorney Eric Conn, arguably the most prominent disability lawyer in the region, receive millions of dollars from the federal government for handling these cases.

3. Alabama
> Pct. of working age population with benefits: 8.1%
> Pct. with recurring neck and back pain: 34.6% (6th highest)
> 2011 labor force participation rate: 58.5% (2nd lowest)
> 2011 unemployment rate: 8.7% (19th highest)

Alabama was one of the nation’s poorest states as of 2011, with a median annual income of just $41,415. Additionally, educational attainment in the state was limited, with just 82.7% of all residents holding a high school diploma and just 22.3% a college degree in 2011. That year, the state’s average unemployment rate was 8.7%, slightly lower than the U.S. average rate of 8.9% for the year. However, just 58.5% of the population participated in the labor force as of 2011, lower than all states except for West Virginia. In December 2011, SSDI recipients in Alabama were far more likely to receive payments due to diseases of the circulatory system or the musculoskeletal system than recipients in the large majority of other states. Alabamians were among the most likely Americans surveyed in 2012 to state they had experienced a heart attack or were diabetic.

2. Arkansas
> Pct. of working age population with benefits: 8.2%
> Pct. with recurring neck and back pain: 36.1% (2nd highest)
> 2011 labor force participation rate: 60.4% (8th lowest)
> 2011 unemployment rate: 7.9% (24th lowest)

In 2011, the median annual income in Arkansas was just $38,758, the third lowest of all states in the United States. Arkansas is also among the least educated states in the country. Workers with limited education and who are out of work generally have a harder time getting back to work. For instance, just 20.3% of Arkansas residents had at least a bachelor’s degree, lower than all but two other states. An estimated 31.6% of SSDI recipients in Arkansas had musculoskeletal system disease in December 2011, more than any other state except for Alabama. Meanwhile, more than 9% of recipients had diseases involving the circulatory system, higher than all but six other states.

1. West Virginia
> Pct. of working age population with benefits: 9.0%
> Pct. with recurring neck and back pain: 39.0% (the highest)
> 2011 labor force participation rate: 54.1% (the lowest)
> 2011 unemployment rate: 7.8% (23rd lowest)

No state had a higher percentage of working age people receiving SSDI benefits than West Virginia. In addition, the benefits received from by the federal government were more generous compared to most states. The average monthly benefit of more than $1,140 in 2011 was the 10th highest of all states. Almost 21% of recipients received monthly benefits of at least $1,600, a higher percentage than all but three states. Like most states on this list, West Virginia is among the less-educated states in the country. Just 18.5% of the adult population had a bachelor’s degree, the lowest percentage of all states. Also, few residents in the state had jobs. Just 54.1% of residents were considered part of the labor force in 2011, by far the lowest percentage of any state in the nation.

https://247wallst.com/special-report/2013/05/20/states-with-the-most-americans-on-disability/3/

 

[Grand Mal]

Of course there is a scientific basis for race, in the same since that robust facts under-lie all so called "social constructs". All social constructs such as money, property, government, nationality, borders, political affiliation, religion and marriage are categorizations and symbolic language descriptions and abstractions of physical world facts behaving in certain ways. That does not make them any less real.

“Race” is not an arbitrary social construction and the fuzziness of racial definitions does not negate their reality in several contexts. The most concrete of these differences, based on genetics, is where most of a persons ancestors originate. Blacks (African Negroids) are those who have most of their ancestors from sub-Saharan Africa; Whites (European Caucasoids) have most of their ancestors from Europe; and East Asians (Orientals, Mongoloids) have most of their ancestors from Pacific Rim countries. Although he dodged the term race, Cavalli-Sforza’s (2000, p. 70) showed a maximum likelihood tree made on the basis of molecular genetic markers substantially supports the traditional racial groups classification (Indeed, in 2018 all the gene testing services can provide an approximate breakdown of the regional-racial ancestry of person). Of course, in referring to population or racial group differences we are discussing averages.

Based on research models used in behavioral genetics and cognitive abilities a substantial part (say 50%) of both individual and group differences is genetic. It therefore it follows that even if all individuals in both groups were treated identically, average group differences would not disappear - those group differences closely aligned to racial group classification (ancestry origin and physical traits).

So yes race exists "scientifically" based on facts, in spite of the post-modernist delusions to the contrary.

Want to know the most significant genetic difference between Africans and almost everyone else? Africans have no Neanderthal DNA.

 

[Tigerace117]

Because the Irish had been in conflict with the Anglo-Saxons for hundreds of years you interpret the
plight of the irish with the old 'No Irish need apply' slogan.

Fact of the matter is that the irish fit into this country far better than every other immigrant group
that followed to WASP's to the USA. Know this the colonists were white supremacists who without moral qualms
drove the Indians over the mountains & established a society of Christian men & women along with African slaves.
When Washington became president citizenship was offered to free whites of moral character ONLY!
Those included were the WASP's, Irish (mostly protestant from Ulster) & Dutch.

To make a big deal about the Irish being discriminated against is forgetting the reality that the Irish for many reasons
had a far better chance of being accepted than those from eastern europe & southern europe.

Andrew Jackson, James Knox Polk, James Buchanan & Woodrow Wilson were pure Irish ethnic presidents who were
born before the great migrations.Andrew Johnson , Ulysses S. Grant , Chester A. Arthur,, Grover Cleveland, Benjamin Harrison,
& William McKinley were Irish ethnics with a British mix who served as presidents & were born before the great migration.

So give it a rest. How many of the other ethnics of those times reached as high! There to this day have been no presidents
with even a hint of Spanish, Italian, French, Portuguese, Danish, Grrek, Polish, Jewish or Balkan blood.

Of all those who followd the WASP's only the Dutch & perhaps the German had as easy a time as the Irish!

Neither the Dutch nor the Germans nor the Irish had an “easy time”. As usual, your historical ignorance is truly asyroyndibg.

Yes, we know that you deeply admire white supremacy in a society. That does not change the historical reality that hatred of the Irish was widespread and constant—-at least until the next wave of immigrants/punching bags cams along.

And yet, as usual, you ignore that fact that isolated individuals gaining power does not describe the plight of the group at large. The vast majority of your examples became President long after nativists had snivelingly moved on to attacking other groups of immigrants.

Nativism is an ideology born out of sheer stupidity, and the fact that the Irish overcame it does not change the fact that society was bigoted against them for many years.

 

[ALTOY459]

So not wikipedia, and some blog...

sooo i just did a quick google search because i didnt have time, look it up yourself lol

 

[ALTOY459]

You have failed to provide any credible links that there is a scientific basis for race. Until you do its just racism since you judge people based solely on their appearance.

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(sociology)

https://biologywise.com/list-of-human-races

There are probably some more different ways to categorize but races are not really defined by skin color always. Just because we are different doesn't mean anyone is superior

 

[maxparrish]

If you havent got a legit link to prove this mumbo jumbo you just wrote, then it's just nonsense.The out of Africa theory remains the most agreed upon theory for all so called ethnicities.

The fact is there are no unique factors that can differentiate people of different color. We are genetically compatible with each other and the only physical difference is the amount of melanin on our skin.

The "mumbo-jumbo" that eludes you is called using common knowledge of population genetics already used as identification (as in DNA is now used by police and by genealogy sites to identify racial heritage) along with the well known geographical origins of those groups. No one needs a link, just an attentive brain.

That said, before passing you on to the citations, I assume your conception of race is warped by the nonsense in the popular literature passed around by left center cultural anthropologists, the denial of "biological races" in the human population. While I have no idea what criteria would have to be met to become a "biological" race, it is essentially a straw man. Race as a category exists because average characteristics (physical and mental) are different in different populations. It matters not if in the lay vernacular you call it "race" or (to be PC as a scientist) call it certain "populations".

For an unvarnished look at racial populations:

https://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf

 

[Redress]

sooo i just did a quick google search because i didnt have time, look it up yourself lol

I did not make the claim, you did. It is up to you to prove the claim. Most of the sources I find with google disagree with your claim. So do you want to support your claim with actual science sources, or should I go ahead and discount it?

 

[d0gbreath]

You realize the implication of this, right? If remaining white is racism, then by necessity white existence is itself racist. You're essentially supporting the notion that all white people are racist, which while common among SJW types, will totally isolate you from most decent, working Americans.

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

Are they decent Americans because they are working, or because they are white? We have a smörgåsbord of colors in the US, so we can't be the ones bent on whiteness.

There are no all white countries. Dumb thread.

 

[maxparrish]

Want to know the most significant genetic difference between Africans and almost everyone else? Africans have no Neanderthal DNA.

Actually you mean sub-Saharan Africans have no DNA contributed by Neanderthals, while modern Europeans and North Africans have between 1 and 4 percent (as well as a lesser amount in Asians). Apparently ancient pre-history human populations had even more, but natural selection of the most useful variants winnowed that down to the current percent.









.