(07-25-2016 04:53 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

(07-24-2016 11:24 PM)quino_16 Wrote:  

(07-24-2016 10:53 AM)redpillage Wrote:  Welcome to the forum and I would agree on all fronts. Regarding Latinos - I never understood the beef many whites in the U.S. have with Latinos. Most of them are not out to get you or represent a completely incompatible culture. They continue speaking Spanish at home but do not force it on anyone else in public. Sure there are the occasional assholes in any segment of a population, but if I have a choice between Latin and ME immigration, brother - I will pick the former any day.

I'll keep my response short since I don't want to derail the thread.

The massive Hispanic immigration to America is turning it to a third world country. For example, compare 1960's California to the California of today. It has completely changed and California resembles more like Mexico than the rest of America.

I don't hate Hispanics or Latin America. However, behind the facade of feminine women, good food, and the beautiful beaches in Latin America, there is a little else of value there.

Latin America is considered a third world society for a reason. Hispanics are leaving because their government, society, and culture, and, ultimately, civilization has failed them.

Regardless of the ME migration to Europe, I don't see how bringing Hispanics - who are members of a failed society - is beneficial to America.

Of course Latin Americans are better than Middle Eastern Muslims and 70 IQ Somalis.

But let us look at the facts in South America:

In most countries you have descendents of the Europeans ruling over the other more darker (and lower in IQ) groups in cleptocratic corrupt systems. The Christian heritage helps a bit, but there are strange twists of infatuation with death and a high disregard for life itself.

Also when looking at the American system, does anyone truly believe that if you replaced 90% of European Whites in the US with current South American immigrants, then you would have a similar country? No - that place would resemble Brazil pretty soon. However you could replace Americans with Europeans, Russians, Chinese, Japanese or Jews - you would have an almost identical system with some twists, but at similar levels of civilization.

All other ethnicities taken from around the world and put into the US system would fuck that very said system up pretty fast.

In addition there is also another problem with immigration to the West - ECONOMICS. Menial work is disappearing, corporations are offshoring work, middle class is disappearing, a vast economic underclass is appearing. That trend has been happening since the 1970s and was only econoimically halted in the 1980s to 2000s via a massive private debt expansion (but no effective rise of disposible income).

So to put it short - even if all South Americans coming in were almost identical to Americans - there would be hardly any advantage for most Americans. There are only disadvantages for the wide majority.

Minor quibble, but if you expect Russians to continue western/American culture you're going to be rather disappointed. There's a damn good reason Russia is largely a shithole compared to western countries.

(07-25-2016 05:57 PM)1026 Wrote:  I dunno about all this X-race has higher average IQ than Y-race.

As if IQ is the be all & end all of human value.

Well, it has some value. Otherwise, apes and the cognitively disabled would be exchangeable with those of low-to-average IQ. Now extrapolate the social effects of those IQ differences to IQ differences, between other levels, across populations.

What's the social difference between someone with a 40 IQ and a 70 IQ? How about between a 70 IQ (legally retarded) and a 100 IQ person? How about between someone with a 100 IQ and a 130 IQ? These IQ gaps are all numerically equivalent. IQ has a social effect that increases with relative population numbers at any one level. If you look at IQ numbers by nation just in Europe, you can see that it has an effect even when there are merely a few points of difference in the average. A gap in the average of, say, 10 points seems to have immense social effect.

If you're looking at averages then IQ is actually the ONLY relevant factor in determining societal outcomes.

Which is why if you want any form of multiculturalism it pays to screen applicants by intelligence.

quickedit: But America gets some of the worst latinos anyway. Scum escaping the authorities in their own country. Gang members sent to reinforce their US branches. Rent-seeking parasites. Marxist LaRaza agitators.

This is precisely why Trump is doing well with a cross section of middle-class latino voters. Because they're tired of having their racial identity stomped into the mud and seeing the nation they love being turned into another failed socialist state.

(07-25-2016 05:57 PM)1026 Wrote:  I dunno about all this X-race has higher average IQ than Y-race.

As if IQ is the be all & end all of human value.

I don't think there's anyone advocating that argument here that one race is better than another.
It's moreso a matter of what races are better adapted to what parts of the planet, their geography and particularly their climate.
IQ is at least partly a result of adopting to specific climatic conditions.
If you look back to our ancestors, a black man living in warm central Africa didn't need to have as high an IQ as a white man living in cold northern Europe for instance who would have perished in those conditions but for those extra points of IQ which allowed him to figure out how to thrive in such a climate.
Then take that same black man and put him in northern Europe, and he's going to struggle, he's not adapted to those conditions.
Same for the white man transplanted to central Africa, regardless of his relative higher IQ, he will likely perish or at least really struggle there compared to the African man.
Over time, he will figure out how to survive, but initially at least, he will struggle.
I've simplified things quite a bit here, but you get the picture.
There's several really good videos from Stefan Molyneux where he talks about this topic with various people who've researched the area (some more PC than others, but all willing to present the facts of the matter, unlike many academics and journalists in the mainstream today)

(07-26-2016 04:52 AM)amity Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 05:57 PM)1026 Wrote:  I dunno about all this X-race has higher average IQ than Y-race.

As if IQ is the be all & end all of human value.

I don't think there's anyone advocating that argument here that one race is better than another.
It's moreso a matter of what races are better adapted to what parts of the planet, their geography and particularly their climate.
IQ is at least partly a result of adopting to specific climatic conditions.
If you look back to our ancestors, a black man living in warm central Africa didn't need to have as high an IQ as a white man living in cold northern Europe for instance who would have perished in those conditions but for those extra points of IQ which allowed him to figure out how to thrive in such a climate.
Then take that same black man and put him in northern Europe, and he's going to struggle, he's not adapted to those conditions.
Same for the white man transplanted to central Africa, regardless of his relative higher IQ, he will likely perish or at least really struggle there compared to the African man.
Over time, he will figure out how to survive, but initially at least, he will struggle.
I've simplified things quite a bit here, but you get the picture.
There's several really good videos from Stefan Molyneux where he talks about this topic with various people who've researched the area (some more PC than others, but all willing to present the facts of the matter, unlike many academics and journalists in the mainstream today)

Not even.

Whites colonized Africa because high IQ allows you to adapt and bend nature to your will. When they were turfed out for political reasons the region turned back to crap.

(07-25-2016 08:40 AM)hydrogonian Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 05:57 AM)Mercenary Wrote:  Continued uninterrupted blind German obedience to authority

In my opinion, you have to separate their nature, which almost always leads to incredibly efficient and safe societies that kick everyone else's ass, and the effects of the psychological abuse that they continue to endure since WWII that has taken advantage of and warped that nature.

You can be sure that the cutting edge of demoralization and indoctrination mass psychology research has been applied to them for at least 75 years.

I was raised by Germans on one side of my family, and German-Brits on the other. The full German side fully retained their German personality characteristics, and so I can speak to it (but of course not better than Prazival).

Following rules and authority is not a defect, absent this characteristics willful deformation. It's actually the precise opposite of chaos.

It comes from a place of knowing how things best work, being correct, and applying yourself to that standard without apology. In short, it comes from a place of intellect and a control over emotion.

Today, through institutionalized shame and psychological abuse, that instinct has been directed toward the globalist project.

Their sense has been warped to see their self interest as illogical as they used to see it as logical, and to ignore the defects in others that prohibit them from comprehending and executing on the German social standard.

In short, they've been trained to ignore and devalue their own nature except when it comes to enforcing the rules that help wipe out that nature and their society.

It isn't their fault, nor the fault of their nature, but the result of social programming that did not come from their authority.

Hydrogonian - can you find any examples of German peoples seriously challenging and overthrowing their rulers before 1945 or even 1933 ?

If you look at the history of Europe you will find violent overthrows of rulers in Greece, France, Russia, Spain, and serious resistance from people like the Serbians during the Austria Hungarian empire, eastern Europeans under the Soviets, and most amazingly the Poles who managed to survive as a unique people with their own language and culture for over 100 years when their country was partitioned 3 ways in 1795.

Among all the European nations, I really don't see any examples of Germans either resisting or overthrowing their rulers, even if you go back 100, 200 or even 300 years.

They may have been totally neutered since 1945, but it just doubled down on a condition they have always had anyway.

Resisting and revolting against authority is not in most German's DNA and has never been there.

Throughout history, the really smart Germans who get so fed up with their compatriots blind obedience, sell all they have, pack their bags, move abroad, marry a foreign girl, and never ever come back.

(07-26-2016 05:00 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 04:52 AM)amity Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 05:57 PM)1026 Wrote:  I dunno about all this X-race has higher average IQ than Y-race.

As if IQ is the be all & end all of human value.

I don't think there's anyone advocating that argument here that one race is better than another.
It's moreso a matter of what races are better adapted to what parts of the planet, their geography and particularly their climate.
IQ is at least partly a result of adopting to specific climatic conditions.
If you look back to our ancestors, a black man living in warm central Africa didn't need to have as high an IQ as a white man living in cold northern Europe for instance who would have perished in those conditions but for those extra points of IQ which allowed him to figure out how to thrive in such a climate.
Then take that same black man and put him in northern Europe, and he's going to struggle, he's not adapted to those conditions.
Same for the white man transplanted to central Africa, regardless of his relative higher IQ, he will likely perish or at least really struggle there compared to the African man.
Over time, he will figure out how to survive, but initially at least, he will struggle.
I've simplified things quite a bit here, but you get the picture.
There's several really good videos from Stefan Molyneux where he talks about this topic with various people who've researched the area (some more PC than others, but all willing to present the facts of the matter, unlike many academics and journalists in the mainstream today)

Not even.

Whites colonized Africa because high IQ allows you to adapt and bend nature to your will. When they were turfed out for political reasons the region turned back to crap.

I take your point, the overall higher IQ of whites will mean they tend to figure out more quickly(than their black counterparts) how to survive and thrive in unfamiliar surroundings, that's true.
Anyway, I guess we better stop going down this road now, we're getting a little off topic here(partly my fault I know).

Science! End of discussion.

(07-25-2016 06:57 AM)seniol Wrote:  In just 1 single week, how many attacks were in Germany?

- axe afghan refugee in train, who attacked 20 people

- arab muslim shouting pro islam, who killed 9 in Mc Donalds in Munich

- the machete guy who cut and killed a pregnant woman

- today's explosion

- the 3 girls cut to their death for being improperly dressed...

Still, today I posted on a german forum and I predicted that
a guy named Ahmed or Mohammed will do at least one new mass attack
this summer.

They banned me in a matter of minutes.

I cant find the quote, but way back in the thread someone compared how the migrants where cheered and welcomed last year just how soldiers of WWI also where, when they didnt know what would soon come. Pretty accurat. Looking back in this thread its tradgic and fascinating how a lot of the predictions are starting to come true.

Quote:The Favourites of the Emperor Honorius is a painting by John William Waterhouse completed in 1883. The painting depicts Honorius feeding birds which are on the rug in front of him; the dark colors of the rug and his clothes define a space. Separated from him and the birds are the councillors seeking his attention, and who along with the attendant are dressed in paler shades

Honorius (Latin: Flavius Honorius Augustus; 9 September 384 – 15 August 423) was Western Roman Emperor from 393 to 423.
Even by the standards of the rapidly declining Western Empire, Honorius's reign was precarious and chaotic.
Honorius is widely considered as one of the worst of the emperors.

Honorius issued a decree during his reign, prohibiting men from wearing trousers in Rome.



It was during his reign that Rome was sacked for the first time in 800 years.




....

(07-26-2016 05:46 AM)HD668B Wrote:  Science! End of discussion.

Good video.

@ ~ 38mins Helmuth Nyborg says (paraphrased):

Quote:Denmark IQ levels will go from 97.33 in 1980 down to 92 in 2075. It will reach in 2100 the limit of 90 - at which point the concept of democracy in Denmark with begin to falter.

(07-26-2016 05:01 AM)Mercenary Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 08:40 AM)hydrogonian Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 05:57 AM)Mercenary Wrote:  Continued uninterrupted blind German obedience to authority

In my opinion, you have to separate their nature, which almost always leads to incredibly efficient and safe societies that kick everyone else's ass, and the effects of the psychological abuse that they continue to endure since WWII that has taken advantage of and warped that nature.

You can be sure that the cutting edge of demoralization and indoctrination mass psychology research has been applied to them for at least 75 years.

I was raised by Germans on one side of my family, and German-Brits on the other. The full German side fully retained their German personality characteristics, and so I can speak to it (but of course not better than Prazival).

Following rules and authority is not a defect, absent this characteristics willful deformation. It's actually the precise opposite of chaos.

It comes from a place of knowing how things best work, being correct, and applying yourself to that standard without apology. In short, it comes from a place of intellect and a control over emotion.

Today, through institutionalized shame and psychological abuse, that instinct has been directed toward the globalist project.

Their sense has been warped to see their self interest as illogical as they used to see it as logical, and to ignore the defects in others that prohibit them from comprehending and executing on the German social standard.

In short, they've been trained to ignore and devalue their own nature except when it comes to enforcing the rules that help wipe out that nature and their society.

It isn't their fault, nor the fault of their nature, but the result of social programming that did not come from their authority.

Hydrogonian - can you find any examples of German peoples seriously challenging and overthrowing their rulers before 1945 or even 1933 ?

If you look at the history of Europe you will find violent overthrows of rulers in Greece, France, Russia, Spain, and serious resistance from people like the Serbians during the Austria Hungarian empire, eastern Europeans under the Soviets, and most amazingly the Poles who managed to survive as a unique people with their own language and culture for over 100 years when their country was partitioned 3 ways in 1795.

Among all the European nations, I really don't see any examples of Germans either resisting or overthrowing their rulers, even if you go back 100, 200 or even 300 years.

They may have been totally neutered since 1945, but it just doubled down on a condition they have always had anyway.

Resisting and revolting against authority is not in most German's DNA and has never been there.

Throughout history, the really smart Germans who get so fed up with their compatriots blind obedience, sell all they have, pack their bags, move abroad, marry a foreign girl, and never ever come back.

You raise an interesting point about German culture.

They definitely do things differently to other Europeans. And bare in mind that 'Germany' as a nation state has only existed since about the 1860s(correct me if I'm wrong). The only other German revolution I can think of is the Reformation when Martin Luther overthrew the rule of the Vatican. Probably considered a 'macro-historical event'.

When we talk about IQ and also how people say better education for people will solve all the problems then I think about Lenin, Pol Pot, Hitler. All very high IQ men. I think about the today leaders, also mostly high IQ people. And where is the benefit those people brought? I'm quite sure if you restore law and order in the middle east and africa, send all the kids to school then the average IQ will rise as well. And there is the issue, a society that has law and order, that also use them will run. No matter if the average IQ is higher or lower. If you have no order in a state then people will get mostly more violent in lower IQ places then for example in Japan, Norway or Germany.
Still look at Germany, we have a high IQ population and we have high IQ leaders and still they bring in millions of low IQ people. Where is the smart move there? And then when the new arrivals commit crimes, they do nothing because of PC ideology. When you talk with more normal people, they will tell you that you have to react when someone don't play by the rules. But those super high IQ people are complete in deny of reality. Look also at SJW, they go to college and I'm sure they score higher at IQ scores then some construction worker. And still the construction worker will be the smarter one.

High IQ people support the open border politics because they believe, everyone can self behave like them. They complete underestimate the laws of nature and the human nature. So an high IQ means nothing so far when you are still blind.

(07-26-2016 09:53 AM)Lizard King Wrote:  You raise an interesting point about German culture.

They definitely do things differently to other Europeans. And bare in mind that 'Germany' as a nation state has only existed since about the 1860s(correct me if I'm wrong). The only other German revolution I can think of is the Reformation when Martin Luther overthrew the rule of the Vatican. Probably considered a 'macro-historical event'.

Modern "Germany" was founded around 1870, but Prussia which was essentially an enormous German land empire, existed for a long time before that.

(07-26-2016 09:53 AM)Parzival Wrote:  When we talk about IQ and also how people say better education for people will solve all the problems then I think about Lenin, Pol Pot, Hitler. All very high IQ men. I think about the today leaders, also mostly high IQ people. And where is the benefit those people brought? I'm quite sure if you restore law and order in the middle east and africa, send all the kids to school then the average IQ will rise as well. And there is the issue, a society that has law and order, that also use them will run. No matter if the average IQ is higher or lower. If you have no order in a state then people will get mostly more violent in lower IQ places then for example in Japan, Norway or Germany.
Still look at Germany, we have a high IQ population and we have high IQ leaders and still they bring in millions of low IQ people. Where is the smart move there? And then when the new arrivals commit crimes, they do nothing because of PC ideology. When you talk with more normal people, they will tell you that you have to react when someone don't play by the rules. But those super high IQ people are complete in deny of reality. Look also at SJW, they go to college and I'm sure they score higher at IQ scores then some construction worker. And still the construction worker will be the smarter one.

High IQ people support the open border politics because they believe, everyone can self behave like them. They complete underestimate the laws of nature and the human nature. So an high IQ means nothing so far when you are still blind.

Education will not raise the IQs of these people. IQ is largely genetic. Positive breeding (K selection), however, can raise the IQs of these people. It will take time, but it can happen. Christian Africa I think is capable of these. Muslim Africa, however, and the middle East, are not. Unless they do away with 1st cousin marriage or Islam (or both, I don't know if one influences/aggravates the other or not) these countries will remain shitholes.

As for high IQ, there's such a thing as being TOO smart. Clearly we're seeing this now.

(07-26-2016 09:53 AM)Parzival Wrote:  When we talk about IQ and also how people say better education for people will solve all the problems then I think about Lenin, Pol Pot, Hitler. All very high IQ men. I think about the today leaders, also mostly high IQ people. And where is the benefit those people brought? I'm quite sure if you restore law and order in the middle east and africa, send all the kids to school then the average IQ will rise as well. And there is the issue, a society that has law and order, that also use them will run. No matter if the average IQ is higher or lower. If you have no order in a state then people will get mostly more violent in lower IQ places then for example in Japan, Norway or Germany.
Still look at Germany, we have a high IQ population and we have high IQ leaders and still they bring in millions of low IQ people. Where is the smart move there? And then when the new arrivals commit crimes, they do nothing because of PC ideology. When you talk with more normal people, they will tell you that you have to react when someone don't play by the rules. But those super high IQ people are complete in deny of reality. Look also at SJW, they go to college and I'm sure they score higher at IQ scores then some construction worker. And still the construction worker will be the smarter one.

High IQ people support the open border politics because they believe, everyone can self behave like them. They complete underestimate the laws of nature and the human nature. So an high IQ means nothing so far when you are still blind.

The thing is that most of these high IQ people have been surrounded by equalist dogma their whole academic lives, they've completely internalised it, even to the point of rejecting emperical facts and evidence.
Their high IQ can even be a detriment to them unplugging from their utopian belief systems, as almost everyone else they know (of similar IQ) is also a progressive/SJW or at the very least, left leaning.
They're programmed to think of anyone who questions this equalist dogma as less intelligent or uncivilised and uneducated, they really are 'brainwashed' in a sense.
I know (and probably quite a few others RVF members too) that I was that same guy for a long time in my twenties and much of my thirties.
I read 'The Guardian', 'The Observer', 'The Independent', I watched Channel 4 news every evening after work, I soaked up all the progressive propaganda every day without even realising I was only getting one side of the picture.
I had a load of university educated friends and acquaintances, almost all of whom were on the left, some very much so, almost every women I knew was a leftist and quite a few of the men in my social circle too.
I thought that anyone who questioned Multiculturalism must be at least somewhat intolerant and I assumed that people like Tommy Robinson or Farage must be racists.
I imagine this environment is not so different to that which most young Germans grow up in today.
It took a few seismic events in the space of a few years of my life(the ending of a couple of LTRs, death of a parent) to shake me out of this simplistic mindset and force me to wake up to reality.
Finding Roosh and a few other red pill websites also massively helped steer me in the right direction.
You could say I was lucky in a way, that events transpired that forced me to re-examine my life and my beliefs.
And I'm in my forties, so I've had circa twenty years of life free from the influence of social media and mobile phones, which I'm sure helped in my unplugging.
Today's millenials never had that, so I expect it will take a lot more craziness and chaos in society before we might hopefully see that generation starting to slowly unplug.
Here's hoping it won't take for civilised Western socety to collapse before that happens.

(07-26-2016 09:53 AM)Parzival Wrote:  When we talk about IQ and also how people say better education for people will solve all the problems then I think about Lenin, Pol Pot, Hitler. All very high IQ men. I think about the today leaders, also mostly high IQ people. And where is the benefit those people brought? I'm quite sure if you restore law and order in the middle east and africa, send all the kids to school then the average IQ will rise as well. And there is the issue, a society that has law and order, that also use them will run. No matter if the average IQ is higher or lower. If you have no order in a state then people will get mostly more violent in lower IQ places then for example in Japan, Norway or Germany.
Still look at Germany, we have a high IQ population and we have high IQ leaders and still they bring in millions of low IQ people. Where is the smart move there? And then when the new arrivals commit crimes, they do nothing because of PC ideology. When you talk with more normal people, they will tell you that you have to react when someone don't play by the rules. But those super high IQ people are complete in deny of reality. Look also at SJW, they go to college and I'm sure they score higher at IQ scores then some construction worker. And still the construction worker will be the smarter one.

High IQ people support the open border politics because they believe, everyone can self behave like them. They complete underestimate the laws of nature and the human nature. So an high IQ means nothing so far when you are still blind.

Respectfully, you really need to get out of the German indoctrination and information bubble That high IQ people can be hostile to your well being and harm you, doesn't mean that high IQ is a bad thing. In fact, it's the only thing that probably keeps things from being much worse than they are when competing against your psychopathic, politically compromised leaders. What most Germans need is a good couple of years living next to a ghetto in the United States. It'll disabuse them of the last psychological vestiges of the need to apologize for low IQ people. IQ is IQ. There is no changing it, significantly, with education. As you will find out within a couple of generations in Germany.

(07-26-2016 10:55 AM)hydrogonian Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 09:53 AM)Parzival Wrote:  When we talk about IQ and also how people say better education for people will solve all the problems then I think about Lenin, Pol Pot, Hitler. All very high IQ men. I think about the today leaders, also mostly high IQ people. And where is the benefit those people brought? I'm quite sure if you restore law and order in the middle east and africa, send all the kids to school then the average IQ will rise as well. And there is the issue, a society that has law and order, that also use them will run. No matter if the average IQ is higher or lower. If you have no order in a state then people will get mostly more violent in lower IQ places then for example in Japan, Norway or Germany.
Still look at Germany, we have a high IQ population and we have high IQ leaders and still they bring in millions of low IQ people. Where is the smart move there? And then when the new arrivals commit crimes, they do nothing because of PC ideology. When you talk with more normal people, they will tell you that you have to react when someone don't play by the rules. But those super high IQ people are complete in deny of reality. Look also at SJW, they go to college and I'm sure they score higher at IQ scores then some construction worker. And still the construction worker will be the smarter one.

High IQ people support the open border politics because they believe, everyone can self behave like them. They complete underestimate the laws of nature and the human nature. So an high IQ means nothing so far when you are still blind.

Respectfully, you really need to get out of the German indoctrination and information bubble That high IQ people can be hostile to your well being and harm you, doesn't mean that high IQ is a bad thing. In fact, it's the only thing that probably keeps things from being much worse than they are when competing against your psychopathic, politically compromised leaders. What most Germans need is a good couple of years living next to a ghetto in the United States. It'll disabuse them of the last psychological vestiges of the need to apologize for low IQ people. IQ is IQ. There is no changing it, significantly, with education. As you will find out within a couple of generations in Germany.

High IQ does not come equipped with life experience, that's an extra feature which is usually hard earned. Germans are very academic, cerebral, analytical, and logical people. Most of them however have been indoctrinated with a political ideology that turns their high IQ against them. You can only con a highly intelligent populace if you can convince it that a course of action is 'in the best common/shared interest'.

I mean think about it. Not even a century ago the German people organized and created the perfect K-selected nation. It took an allied force of a dozen nations to finally thwart them. Once smashed they considered the errors of their ways and then dedicated their considerable talent and work ethic to create the perfect r-selected nation. And once again chaos descends on all of Europe. I must admit that the rest of the EU is playing its part - but they couldn't do any of it without the Germans at the economic steering wheel.

Fazit/Summary:

The Germans unfortunately have a history of being easily steered into one direction. I've said this here before and I'll say again - the Germans are like locust. On each own they're harmless and rather pleasant. But once they start swarming it usually ends up badly for everyone.

I'm just waiting for the final solution of all this. So don't worry about me guys.
Also just want to add some critical points on IQ, but I had my encounters with certain people and I don't stick to the illusion that you can "educate" everyone or that we have to be always tolerant and understand why someone does something. Sometimes its just better to beat some people up or do others things because there will be no way to bring reason into them.
My point was more, just because someone has a lower IQ don't make him a menace to society but also it need a strict frame to keep social behavior in line. Also the less intelligent people in Germany, Japan or other high IQ countries still behave better then some average IQ people in the middle east. Not to mention the cultural effects beside the IQ.


Anyway, more cultural enrichment:

http://www.radiobremen.de/nachrichten/ge...le100.html

Quote:The number of cases of alleged sexual harassment at the Breminale has increased significantly. Meanwhile, the police found in 24 suspected cases. Five suspects could be identified, said a police spokeswoman. In all it were asylum seekers from Afghanistan.

That it has come to a solid so massively attacks, we have not had in Bremen. That group women surround targeted to touching them then that there was not yet in this magnitude. This is a new problem, which the police have to deal with it.

Lizard King Wrote:You raise an interesting point about German culture.

They definitely do things differently to other Europeans. And bare in mind that 'Germany' as a nation state has only existed since about the 1860s(correct me if I'm wrong). The only other German revolution I can think of is the Reformation when Martin Luther overthrew the rule of the Vatican. Probably considered a 'macro-historical event'.

Mercenar Wrote:Modern "Germany" was founded around 1870, but Prussia which was essentially an enormous German land empire, existed for a long time before that.

Don't forget the holy roman empire of the german nation, officially it was called that around 1500,but germans ruled it since 900a.c. 500-900 controlled by Frankish tribes who are also germanic.

We are not calling us Germanen, but Deutsche, because there were so many german tribes, which today make the majority of all western countries white people, followed by slavic.

And US americans often forget that a huge part of them are not just part of a german tribe heritage, but directly germans, more than italians, French, possibly even english people.

The germans often took over the new identity everywhere they went or created a new one, without the first or second world war German would have been this worlds english.

Prussia was the result of hundreds of years of divide and conquer, to always keep the germans split. And catholics versus protestants who were banned from their countries or murdered.

and the german March revolution 1848/49 during the time of the holy alliance of prussia, russia and austria

I'll just end my commentary, other than a reply coming in regard to Mercenary's historical assertions, by stating that I think you guys are using a lot of unwarranted conjecture and de-contextualized assertions about the nature of Germans and the nature of intelligence.

You're not going to do better with lower IQ populations. You aren't. Witness the DNC. Witness the lower IQ European nations. Witness the lower IQ nations elsewhere.

And Germany is not a "perfect R-selected society". C'mon. I can't really have this conversation if I have to refute such baseless perspectives. Respectfully, and no offense.

My coming historical post will refute, imo, any generalization that comes from butt-hurt over their current larger political effect as "followers" in a militarily, legally, and psychologically controlled nation occupied by communists / internationalists.

You guys keep omitting the psychological conditions that they have been under for two generations now.

Also, you are omitting their legal restrictions. I doubt any of you would sacrifice your lives to revolt under any circumstance that they have yet been under, and in Germany it takes very little true "revolt" for you to ruin your life in this day.

Generalizing them negatively shows not enough analysis and it seems, to me, that it comes from an easy place where you can yell at the stronger dog while he is tied to his leash.

ARAB = All Refugees are bastards

Just seen it.

(07-26-2016 05:01 AM)Mercenary Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 08:40 AM)hydrogonian Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 05:57 AM)Mercenary Wrote:  Continued uninterrupted blind German obedience to authority

In my opinion, you have to separate their nature, which almost always leads to incredibly efficient and safe societies that kick everyone else's ass, and the effects of the psychological abuse that they continue to endure since WWII that has taken advantage of and warped that nature.

...

Following rules and authority is not a defect, absent this characteristics willful deformation. It's actually the precise opposite of chaos
...

Hydrogonian - can you find any examples of German peoples seriously challenging and overthrowing their rulers before 1945 or even 1933 ?

If you look at the history of Europe you will find violent overthrows of rulers in Greece, France, Russia, Spain, and serious resistance from people like the Serbians during the Austria Hungarian empire, eastern Europeans under the Soviets, and most amazingly the Poles who managed to survive as a unique people with their own language and culture for over 100 years when their country was partitioned 3 ways in 1795.

Among all the European nations, I really don't see any examples of Germans either resisting or overthrowing their rulers, even if you go back 100, 200 or even 300 years.

They may have been totally neutered since 1945, but it just doubled down on a condition they have always had anyway.

Resisting and revolting against authority is not in most German's DNA and has never been there.

In fact, a German is responsible for one of the most important and far-reaching revolts of modernity: the Protestant Reformation

EDIT: Lizard King already beat me to it.
It comes from a place of knowing how things best work, being correct, and applying yourself to that standard without apology. In short, it comes from a place of intellect and a control over emotion.

(07-26-2016 11:38 AM)TooFineAPoint Wrote:  In fact, a German is responsible for one of the most important and far-reaching revolts of modernity: the Protestant Reformation

Friedrich Nietzsche argued the opposite.

That German/Nordic societies were finally ready to revolt and abolish the dictatorship of the pope and catholic church, but Luther came along and created "Christianity lite" and reinstated the whole thing, crushing the potential of a real revolution in thought and society.

Nietzsche was a German, but always wrote a lot about his disgust for the submissiveness and obedience of Germans.
He wrote his books in the 1870-1890s...well before any modern indoctrination of German society.

Pick up any of his books and you'll see it's always jam packed full of jibes against his fellow countrymen.

(07-26-2016 05:01 AM)Mercenary Wrote:  Among all the European nations, I really don't see any examples of Germans either resisting or overthrowing their rulers, even if you go back 100, 200 or even 300 years.

To start, I need to note that how you are phrasing your statement leaves for an open-ended perception that there have been innumerable periods during which an overthrow of "Germany's" rulers has been desirable from the perspective of the German people.

I don't believe that this is a historically accurate nor fair perspective from which to conduct the discussion. There have been select instances in which the 'German" tribe(s) have been oppressed by others, but it can't be assumed that because these people live during periods of non-revolution that they are a docile people.

Simply, specific periods have to be pointed to and assessed if we are to march down this road of putting the "German" personality and Will on trial. Furthermore, I personally believe that it is a sound perspective to view many tribal wars as revolutions against those who would dominate them.

I could assert that, at any given period of time, any relatively lawless society is "in revolt" against law and order. That doesn't mean that its inhabitants have a noble revolutionary personality trait.

It more probably means that they are savages who are incapable of civilization and revolt against those who would "control" them by breaking any number of small to more serious laws. Flouting the law is almost always a revolutionary act.

Thus, to take this conversation down the road of trying the German personality, we have to get more specific.

And I hold that the trial can mostly be held to have sufficient evidence in favor of the strength of the Righteous (in the sense of a revolution that is conducted for their sense of widespread self-interest) German revolutionary Will through revisiting to the most famous and recent revolution in their history: the rise of the Third Reich.

I'm unsure as to what you count as "revolution". The evidence is staring at you in the face, respectfully, and staring at everyone else who is aware of the history of the Third Reich. Which is everyone, at least superficially.

Counting revolution as only beginning with street mobs isn't really historically consistent with Europe as a whole. There has been plenty of revolution, some of which later became engaged in violence or had a more controlled yet somewhat violent ascent, that later formed armies.

The same personality characteristics that lead to more controlled revolutions are those that enable civilization to thrive in peacetime. You really can't have both aspects of populations, meaning both law and order abiding populations and those that are ready to burn their communities down, in the same homogeneous group.

Working backwards:

The rise of Nazi Germany indisputably, and whatever else you might think about it, was a revolution against their former rulers both nationally and internationally; as well as the internationalist communist threat that was building. What the Germans managed to accomplish there does not need to be recounted.

Given the scale, I don't feel that I technically need to provide further evidence.

It's simply inaccurate to paint Germans as you are, given the reign of the Third Reich. Moreover, there was plenty of the small-group organized paramilitary action in their ascent, whether you see it as offensive or defensive action, that you might be looking for to signify your violent revolution. You simply need to read the history. There has been no larger Revolution than what the Third Reich accomplished given the resources of its opponents, whatever else you might think about it.

But I'll continue to work backward to the best of my ability, using select examples.

WWI, when you dig into the true causes, was essentially Germans, as a unified nation, fighting back against British imperialism.

From the British standpoint, you could reframe this statement to reflect a fair war over territorial conflict. However you might wish to frame it, it was in essence Germans standing up to people who wished to dominate them. Given the international effort to thwart Germany, and the governmental and territorial result forced on Germany after their loss, I'd hold that to be accurate.

The German Empire, or what you might refer to as the modern German State, was only founded in 1871. Thus, as we march backward we aren't even speaking about one unified tribe but a conglomeration of States moving toward simple tribalism. Therefore, as you can infer, claiming the relative willingness of "Germany" to revolt against its rulers will get muddy.

The German Civil War of 1866 was fought to resist Prussian dominance over the German Confederation.

The 1864 War on Denmark asserted German interests over those of the Danes (also a Germanic people).

The Revolutions of 1848-49 against the German Confederation.

The German peoples participation in the War of the Seventh Coalition against revolutionary (globalist) France.

(Throughout the Coalition Wars, mention of the German peoples variously may imply The Holy Roman Empire, Austria, Saxony, Prussia, Sweden, Norway, Netherlands, Brunswick, Nassau, Hanover, or Switzerland).

The German peoples participation in the War of the Sixth Coalition against revolutionary France.

The German peoples participation in the War of the Fifth Coalition against revolutionary France.

The German peoples participation in the War of the Fourth Coalition against revolutionary France.

The German peoples participation in the War of the Third Coalition against revolutionary France.

The German peoples participation in the War of the Second Coalition against revolutionary France.

The German peoples War of the First Coalition against revolutionary France.

The Protestant Reformation that challenged and later forever fractured the geopolitical influence of the Roman Catholic Church. This led to the Thirty Years War, which decimated the German population.

The Saxon revolt (The Saxon Wars) against Christianization under Charlemagne, that had 5,000 Saxons executed in lieu of their conversion.

The hundreds of years of continuous conflict for control between the Germanic Tribes and Rome, eventually resulting in the Frankish Kingdom.

Quote:They may have been totally neutered since 1945, but it just doubled down on a condition they have always had anyway.
...
Resisting and revolting against authority is not in most German's DNA and has never been there.

Clearly, the Germans have a history of both revolution and self-interested war; it is probably more of a part of their DNA than anyone else. They've been central to thwarting the globalist agenda since the time of the early Holy Roman Empire, which is why they are now so carefully controlled. You viewing that controlled state, and commenting on it as a part of their DNA, ignores almost the entirety of their history.

Every population is easily led, or at lest has its easily led contingent. Generally, they're mostly either the young or self-interested minorities and they like to do things like hold socialist revolutions. Isolating specific instances wherein this was the case in Germany, to generalize the entire society because of a frustration with the current sophisticated control techniques and their effects, isn't legitimate in my opinion.

Quote:Nietzsche was a German, but always wrote a lot about his disgust for the submissiveness and obedience of Germans.
He wrote his books in the 1870-1890s...well before any modern indoctrination of German society

An appeal to authority, and especially a probably insane philosopher, is a rhetorical fallacy.

I'm all for a good discussion. This is my contribution to this discussion.