Low IQ yet again linked to conservative ideas and racism

[twostrokenut]

I get a little annoyed at being lumped in the right wing crowd ever since canna informed me I am in the middle actually.

 

[BigNBushy]

Well, don't like to lump, but the left loves labels. I'm used to them. I've come to discover that I'm fairly left wing. I'm just not a traitor, so I refuse to vote D nationally, Tennessee democrats aren't that bad.

 

[UncleBuck]

curiously,you ARE a dirty fucking racist, which is easily demonstrated by examining any of your posts, selected at random.

wow, you finally acknowledged it. that only took months. more profiles in courage right here, folks.

curiously, you and bignbushy also share the same outlook regarding the destructiveness of multiculturalism and likely both cite rushton in your attempts to convince people (not sure if you're trying to convince yourself or others more).

so, have fun knowing that.

 

[Doer]

An intelligent people are a people worth trading with, and a people determined to trade. They will find others, and others seek them out. If I post the link, it will just get deleted.

It's a quick google search away. Discover magazine is where I found the research, well the article about the research anyway.

Taken from....
http://www.pnas.org/content/108/37/15123.full

Bah. All assumptions. We want to trade with dumbest people we can find, not the smartest. It is how you take money from them.

Give up.

They were too smart to trade, so they fought and lost, were enslaved. The story of the world until recently jelled. It is like musical chairs. Arabs and Europeans wanted the Chair called Africa. So, they fought over that. The Africans never stood a chance after the Maxim was invented to sow death.
And even before that it was the Webley Revolver.

Nothing stupid about blacks. Everything vicious about whites.

 

[Dr Kynes]

wow, you finally acknowledged it. that only took months. more profiles in courage right here, folks.

curiously, you and bignbushy also share the same outlook regarding the destructiveness of multiculturalism and likely both cite rushton in your attempts to convince people (not sure if you're trying to convince yourself or others more).

so, have fun knowing that.

actually i have been observing, and yes he does have strong racist tendencies.

being opposed to a thing for the wrong reasons does not impugn those who are opposed to a thing for the RIGHT reasons.

"Multicultralism" as implemented is only permissive of differing cultures if those cultures are non-european, for european cultures, multiculturalism is quite repressive.

the current form of "Multiculturalism" takes great pains to deny all european virtues, and delights in pointing out european vices and failings, while turning a blind eye to the evil and violence of any society which is sufficiently foreign.

it is not embracing new influences, it is the rejection of MY traditions, and the most successful social forms in history, in favour of celebrating the losers, and creating "Participation Trophies" for the societies which have failed all over the world.

to be truely "MUlticultural" it should embrace ALL social traditions, not just those which are specially selected for their quaintness and backward nature.

 

[NLXSK1]

Bah. All assumptions. We want to trade with dumbest people we can find, not the smartest. It is how you take money from them.

Give up.

They were too smart to trade, so they fought and lost, were enslaved. The story of the world until recently jelled. It is like musical chairs. Arabs and Europeans wanted the Chair called Africa. So, they fought over that. The Africans never stood a chance after the Maxim was invented to sow death.
And even before that it was the Webley Revolver.

Nothing stupid about blacks. Everything vicious about whites.

Whites dont have the market on viciousness...

 

[Beefbisquit]

actually i have been observing, and yes he does have strong racist tendencies.

being opposed to a thing for the wrong reasons does not impugn those who are opposed to a thing for the RIGHT reasons.

"Multicultralism" as implemented is only permissive of differing cultures if those cultures are non-european, for european cultures, multiculturalism is quite repressive.

the current form of "Multiculturalism" takes great pains to deny all european virtues, and delights in pointing out european vices and failings, while turning a blind eye to the evil and violence of any society which is sufficiently foreign.

it is not embracing new influences, it is the rejection of MY traditions, and the most successful social forms in history, in favour of celebrating the losers, and creating "Participation Trophies" for the societies which have failed all over the world.

to be truely "MUlticultural" it should embrace ALL social traditions, not just those which are specially selected for their quaintness and backward nature.

The USA is not a multicultural country. The USA is a melting pot society.

Canada is a multicultural country and has laws that protect that multiculturalism.

Until the USA puts something in law similar to this;

It is hereby declared to be the policy of the Government of Canada to

(a) recognize and promote the understanding that multiculturalism reflects the cultural and racial diversity of Canadian society and acknowledges the freedom of all members of Canadian society to preserve, enhance and share their cultural heritage
(b) recognize and promote the understanding that multiculturalism is a fundamental characteristic of the Canadian heritage and identity and that it provides an invaluable resource in the shaping of Canada’s future
(c) promote the full and equitable participation of individuals and communities of all origins in the continuing evolution and shaping of all aspects of Canadian society and assist them in the elimination of any barrier to that participation
(d) recognize the existence of communities whose members share a common origin and their historic contribution to Canadian society, and enhance their development
(e) ensure that all individuals receive equal treatment and equal protection under the law, while respecting and valuing their diversity
(f) encourage and assist the social, cultural, economic and political institutions of Canada to be both respectful and inclusive of Canada’s multicultural character
(g) promote the understanding and creativity that arise from the interaction between individuals and communities of different origins
(h) foster the recognition and appreciation of the diverse cultures of Canadian society and promote the reflection and the evolving expressions of those cultures
(i) preserve and enhance the use of languages other than English and French, while strengthening the status and use of the official languages of Canada; and
(j) advance multiculturalism throughout Canada in harmony with the national commitment to the official languages of Canada.

It will always be a melting pot.



​

 

[BigNBushy]

actually i have been observing, and yes he does have strong racist tendencies.

being opposed to a thing for the wrong reasons does not impugn those who are opposed to a thing for the RIGHT reasons.

"Multicultralism" as implemented is only permissive of differing cultures if those cultures are non-european, for european cultures, multiculturalism is quite repressive.

the current form of "Multiculturalism" takes great pains to deny all european virtues, and delights in pointing out european vices and failings, while turning a blind eye to the evil and violence of any society which is sufficiently foreign.

it is not embracing new influences, it is the rejection of MY traditions, and the most successful social forms in history, in favour of celebrating the losers, and creating "Participation Trophies" for the societies which have failed all over the world.

to be truely "MUlticultural" it should embrace ALL social traditions, not just those which are specially selected for their quaintness and backward nature.

I get the feeling that you and I share the same beliefs here.

Your manifestation of thought comes out as "failed societies" while mine comes out as "peoples of lower intelligence."

The only society that is pretty much a complete failure, is sub-saharan Africa. There is little evidence of more than just a few cities (great Zimbabwe, Timbuktu, and a couple in Ethiopia come to mind) that were representative of an advanced society, and those flourished for very brief periods of time.

Advanced societies lasting, and indeed thriving for hundreds or thousands of years are common throughout the rest of the planet, except Antarctica.

I am, however, more of a fan of multiculturalism than you are. There is a lot we can learn from Sub-Saharan Africans. While I recognize those folks are slightly less intelligent on average, they have indeed made valuable contributions to the cultures of other areas when transplanted into them. They may be incapable of building and sustaining much civilization on their own, but can be valuable members of another on so long as their numbers and level of control within that culture remain rather low.

It's kind of like adding cayenne pepper to, i don't know, potato salad, it's good as long as you don't put too much in.

 

[Beefbisquit]

I get the feeling that you and I share the same beliefs here.

Your manifestation of thought comes out as "failed societies" while mine comes out as "peoples of lower intelligence."

(*1) The only society that is pretty much a complete failure, is sub-saharan Africa. There is little evidence of more than just a few cities (great Zimbabwe, Timbuktu, and a couple in Ethiopia come to mind) that were representative of an advanced society, and those flourished for very brief periods of time.

* 2 Advanced societies lasting, and indeed thriving for hundreds or thousands of years are common throughout the rest of the planet, except Antarctica.

I am, however, more of a fan of multiculturalism than you are. There is a lot we can learn from Sub-Saharan Africans. While I recognize those folks are slightly less intelligent on average, they have indeed made valuable contributions to the cultures of other areas when transplanted into them. * 3 They may be incapable of building and sustaining much civilization on their own, but can be valuable members of another on so long as their numbers and level of control within that culture remain rather low.

It's kind of like adding cayenne pepper to, i don't know, potato salad, it's good as long as you don't put too much in.

* 1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_empires

* 2 Egypt?

* 3 That's a terrible comparison. How do you suggest 'controlling' the population of black people? Are there any other races that you would like to systematically control the breeding and migration habits of, or just black people? What should 'society' do if the population of blacks gets too high in a certain area?

It's one thing to suggest these terrible, terrible, ideas, but I want to know how much of a cunt you really are, so I want to know how you'd keep populations in check. How sadistic, cruel, and hateful are you really?

 

[twostrokenut]

wow, you finally acknowledged it. that only took months. more profiles in courage right here, folks.

curiously, you and bignbushy also share the same outlook regarding the destructiveness of multiculturalism and likely both cite rushton in your attempts to convince people (not sure if you're trying to convince yourself or others more).

so, have fun knowing that.

Repetition is the most effective form of brainwashing.....you already know that....just know everyone else does too.

 

[BigNBushy]

* 1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_empires

* 2 Egypt?

* 3 That's a terrible comparison. How do you suggest 'controlling' the population of black people? Are there any other races that you would like to systematically control the breeding and migration habits of, or just black people? What should 'society' do if the population of blacks gets too high in a certain area?

It's one thing to suggest these terrible, terrible, ideas, but I want to know how much of a cunt you really are, so I want to know how you'd keep populations in check. How sadistic, cruel, and hateful are you really?

how can you expect to be taken seriously when you propose Egypt as an example of successful sub Saharan African society?

You control it by limiting how many you allow to migrate into your nation.

 

[twostrokenut]

I would like to point out BnB is now on the left, pretty sure I read that correctly.

 

[Beefbisquit]

how can you expect to be taken seriously when you propose Egypt as an example of successful sub Saharan African society?

You control it by limiting how many you allow to migrate into your nation.

You said;

The only society that is pretty much a complete failure, is sub-saharan Africa.

The Egyptians had a thriving society for thousands and thousands of years. Egyptian women donned ornate jewelry and wigs, the men boxed, fenced and wrestled for sport and the children played with board games, dolls and other toys.

They invented the calander, the plow, megastructures, and written language to name a few. No big deal though.

Do you propse anything be 'done' about the black/ethnic population that already exists in the USA?

Are you suggesting that white people be allowed to immigrate, but black people aren't?

 

[Beefbisquit]

Also, I wanted to note that Canada's multicultural laws also protect cultures that already exist in Canada, e.g. European culture.

One needs look no further than Quebec to see how seriously Canada protects its many diverse cultures.

 

[Dr Kynes]

I get the feeling that you and I share the same beliefs here.

ohh yes, we totally share the same beliefs...

Your manifestation of thought comes out as "failed societies" while mine comes out as "peoples of lower intelligence."

ohh. no we dont.

societies can die, even Rome fell. Ur is lost to history, Troy was sacked, Machu Pichu has been reclaimed by the jungle, and the entire civilization of Persia has been consumed by mohammedanism, leaving only a steaming pile of scat in the place of one of the longest lasting and most influential cultures in history.

this does NOT mean those societies were populated with inferior peoples, it means they got their asses kicked by a more aggressive, technologically superior competitor.

FAILED societies are the ones which are moribund, bringing nothing of value to the endless march of civilization, and even those societies are not made up of inferior people, just inferior cultural imperatives.

sub saharan africa, and in fact all black african cultures are simply footnotes, quaint examples of backward social structures, retrograde technology, and ultimately, failure. when black african societies embrace modern science technology and societal norms, they advance, often at an alarming rate, until some shitheel asshole who longs for the ridiculous superstitions and magical thinking of the past throws a coup d' etat and reignites the tribal feuds and baby rape traditions of the not so distant past.

this does not imply that africa is the sole proprietor of shitheels or power hungry assholes, europe has had more than a few (Edward Longshanks, Napoleon, Mussolini, pretty much every Pope ever, etc) asia has had a bunch (Mao and Pol Pot spring to mind) and so has latin america (castro, guevara, peron, chavez etc).

the difference between success and failure in every society clearly lies with the reaction to technological change and progress at the heart of the society. new ideas, new technologies and even new religions were embraced by the persian empire, rome, the greeks, ancient china, and every other society that has ever actually left a positive influence on civilization, while failed societies are the ones which resist new ideas, technologies and advancement based solely on their mistaken belief that they are already the ideal, and thus any change will naturally be for the worse.

it is chauvinism, and a faulty assumption of perfection within a society that leads to stagnation and eventual ruin.

in these retrograde societies, every new idea is relentlessly repressed, all dissent is beaten down in favour of blind traditionalism and dogmatic religious beliefs, and yes this does include a number of american "conservative" groups.

real conservatism asks the proponent of a new idea "Show me how this is better, and convince me i should change", while moribund unthinking fools insist "Our shit is perfect already, by the grace of god, and anything new is an abomination!"

when a society becomes dominated by fools who believe they already has acheived the pinnacle of civilization and technology, thats when they stop advancing and start declining.

the only quicker road to disaster is embracing bullshit ideas that are proved to be failures, and insisting that it only failed because The Right People werent involved last time (which again demonstrates Chauvinism)


thus we can clearly see, i hold NO common ground with your racist ideals, since i KNOW a black man can be every bit as smart, successful and ethical as any european, asian or chicano, but instead find the flaw in african societies' tribalism, and chauvinism, the belief in one's own innate superiority, and the blind faith that this superiority will result in success, no matter how carelessly you play the game.

chauvinism is the flip-side of bigotry, since if one is simply superior, all those outside your group of presumably superior beings must necessarily be inferior, likewise if everyone else is inferior (the core of bigotry), this naturally leads to the assumption that you must be superior.

your bigotry is obvious, while your chauvinism is poorly concealed, and it all rides on the well worn rails of race, rather than the undeniable facts of culture and social imperative.

i got a little chauvinism myself, in that i believe european cultures and social norms are superior, but i am always out to PROVE it, not simply asserting it's superiority, and trusting in european culture to succeed without any help from it's constituent members.

thats how shit gets done, while you rest on the dubious laurels of your "genetic intellectual superiority", and assert that you are simply better than people of african heritage, because you had the good fortune to be born into a society that isnt tearing itself apart, and wallowing in it's own crapulence.

TLDR Version:

no, because im not a racist.
i think european society and culture is superior, not european people. anyone can embrace european culture, in whole or in part, regardless of their race or skin colour.
i am a cultural chauvinist, you are just a bigot.

 

[Dr Kynes]

You said;


[/B]
The Egyptians had a thriving society for thousands and thousands of years. Egyptian women donned ornate jewelry and wigs, the men boxed, fenced and wrestled for sport and the children played with board games, dolls and other toys.

They invented the calander, the plow, megastructures, and written language to name a few. No big deal though.

Do you propse anything be 'done' about the black/ethnic population that already exists in the USA?

Are you suggesting that white people be allowed to immigrate, but black people aren't?

not to defend Bigoted 'N' Pushy, but he did say SUB saharan africa, while egypt is clearly above the sahara, and is not now, nor has it ever been negroid, or in any way black african in chracter.

egypt may be on the african continent, but it is not an "african" nation. it is very much a result of the influences of the fertile crescent, asia minor, the aryans (the real ones, not the nazi McGuffin), the greeks, the persians and the moslems in turn.

 

[Dr Kynes]

Also, I wanted to note that Canada's multicultural laws also protect cultures that already exist in Canada, e.g. European culture.

One needs look no further than Quebec to see how seriously Canada protects its many diverse cultures.

vous êtes exemplaire est la québécoise?

Merde!

vous devez être en état d'ébriété

 

[UncleBuck]

Whites dont have the market on viciousness...

awwww, little racist says what?

 

[UncleBuck]

actually i have been observing, and yes he does have strong racist tendencies.

being opposed to a thing for the wrong reasons does not impugn those who are opposed to a thing for the RIGHT reasons.

"Multicultralism" as implemented is only permissive of differing cultures if those cultures are non-european, for european cultures, multiculturalism is quite repressive.

the current form of "Multiculturalism" takes great pains to deny all european virtues, and delights in pointing out european vices and failings, while turning a blind eye to the evil and violence of any society which is sufficiently foreign.

it is not embracing new influences, it is the rejection of MY traditions, and the most successful social forms in history, in favour of celebrating the losers, and creating "Participation Trophies" for the societies which have failed all over the world.

to be truely "MUlticultural" it should embrace ALL social traditions, not just those which are specially selected for their quaintness and backward nature.

you are retarded and no one buys your false narrative of white persecution besides your buddies over at stormfront.

 

[UncleBuck]

i think european society and culture is superior

just like rushton!

"defend...America’s Judeo-Christian heritage and European identity...from immigrants, Muslims, and African Americans"

"defend REAL AMERICA from the multicultural wasteland of bullshit"

but you're totally not racist.



thanks for confirming what we already knew about your little euphemisms there, kynes. failwilly is trying to step it up with even more abstract ones, like "geographical locations" or some shit, maybe try to take a page from him.