Post: #176

(03-08-2018 05:42 PM)Repo Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 04:32 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 04:20 PM)kaotic Wrote:  Nope, I'm done trying to have any discussion with you.

You can believe and assume what you want.

I'll quote you from earlier:

kaotic Wrote:Let me put it clearly:
-This chick is a donkey
-There are some thirsty dudes in this thread
-I don't condemn or condone her opinion
-I do think she shouldn't be in a position of teaching students
-Tradthots are a real thing
-Attention whores gonna attention whore

I think the red words indicate that you think it was GOOD that BUZZFEED discovered and rooted out this White Nationalist teacher.

Do you disagree with my inference, meaning that you think it was BAD that BUZZFEED discovered and rooted out this White Nationalist teacher?

Come on dude how can you take the time to retype that and not see how ridiculously illogical that inference is?

Let it go guys. Kaotic only said that he would not want this woman to teach. I disagree with him, but he did not say that Buzzfeed and CNN doxxing and going on a witch-hunt is anything better. Besides - he may even change his mind about that woman when thinking it through to the end. You only have to remember the viewpoints all possible teachers may secretly harbor - Black Lives Matter black radicals, Muslim teachers harboring resentments towards all Westerners, Christian, Hindus, gays, far-left radicals who have all kinds of hang-ups, actual racist teachers etc.

Ideally teachers should reflect our views, but let's be honest here - how high are the chances in our system? You would have to hire your own private tutors or pick a very specific high-end school. At the very least most teachers will be highly anti-male trying to make the boys feel like shit in many instances or pointing out that the evil Whites are the bad oppressors.

We don't even know what that woman really thinks as the hyper-reality of the internet changes things a bit. As others pointed out - she may very well be into black guys and has been dumped and pumped too much.

What is however real here is that she has been convicted of WRONG-THINK. Next in the line will be prison sentences, re-education centers and executions?



Guess this went well.

Post: #177

If having racial bias is grounds for a teacher being fired or even expressing racial bias is grounds for a teacher being fired, how many black and latino teachers would get the axe?

Perhaps the easier question is "how many would be left?"

Maybe it's a cheap shot to make these assumptions, but if most minorities fall to the left on social issues and most teachers fall far left by default, then I'm guessing that America wide you'd be looking at literally firing hundreds of black and latino teachers for expressed bias and thousands for bias that went unexpressed. And that's not even accounting for the vast swathe of white teachers who are actually anti-white, which may be a larger number still!

But that's once again the soft racism of diminished expectations. Black and latino teachers voice bias against whites all the time and rarely get fired for it. We shrug and accept this because "that's just the way it is", but when a white teacher does it we hold them to a far higher standard and say "I wouldn't want someone like that teaching my kid".

Case in point, does anyone here have faith that a black or latino teacher in the public sector has a greater than 50% chance of being unbiased against white people? Have a serious think about the odds on that. If they're male then you might have a 50/50 shot. If they're female then fucking forget about it.

So under the current circumstances, and considering that blacks and latinos are equally racist against blacks and latinos as well as whites, who in the hell would want their kid being taught by someone other than a person of their race? Further, since many white teachers are anti-white who in the hell would want their kid being taught by someone other than a person of their own race and political affiliation?

Or in other words, if expressing racial bias is grounds for firing this teacher then why doesn't it follow that the entire education sector in America isn't completely untenable.

If you advocate for this woman being fired on the grounds of bias then you are inadvertently advocating for virtually the entire education sector to be purged. Why the drama for this one drop of water in an ocean of fuckery? Because it's the one drop moving against the tide of anti-white racism rather than with the tide of anti-white racism?

Post: #178

(03-08-2018 04:08 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

Tony Sandos Wrote:I'm speechless that any man here would knowingly, consciously encourage attention whoring and snowflaking. Mark my words, it's going to blow up in your face.

Complaining that women engage in attention whoring is like complaining that ducks like to be in water, and that women like to beautify themselves. It's in women's nature to seek attention, in duck's nature to love water, and in women's nature to self-beautify.

Tony Sandos Wrote:And no white nationalism is not traditionalism. it's racist liberalism AKA lauren southern can be whore if she wants BUT ONLY FOR WHITE MEN.

I don't think you can discuss White Nationalism and Tradition by pointing out the sexual choices of Lauren Southern.

I think this tactic is so dumb that it means you don't want to seriously discuss White Nationalism and Tradition.

I'm not complaining. I'm marveling at your reaction and attitude toward it. I've seen this before. It end with a guy admitting he'll support open whoredom as long as she's at least a bigot. Loosing the feminine wiles always bites you in the ass kid

Post: #179

Good take of Ocelot on the issue in another thread:

/thread-67241...pid1748618

Quote:Not American and don't have children, but my niece was 11 last year when they made her class learn about white oppression, police brutality and Black Lives Matter. Apparently all the black children in the class (around 70% of the class) were jumping up and down on the tables shouting "BLACK LIVES MATTER! BLACK LIVES MATTER!" and they had to cancel the lessons scheduled for the next period to get things under control.

An American friend also showed me some literature his 7-year-old son was given to study at school, about gender identity and how transexuals are just like you and me, and how the "gender binary" oppresses people who are "different". I thought the 32 genders meme was right wing agitprop, or contained to a few Alice-in-Wonderland countries like Sweden and Canada, but it's very much a reality in other parts of the Anglosphere as well.

The general population is totally unaware, but there currently exists an extremely limited time window in which to force subversives out of the education system and take back control. The extent of the Orwellian indoctrination being foisted on children who can barely read and write is chilling. Taxpayer money is being used to subsidise the creation of a revolutionary class to tear down Western civilisation, and they're using your children to mould into the foot soldiers: do not put your children in state schools, for God's sake.

But of course amid this madness, some white chick having the audacity to teach while being a "race-realist" (whatever the fuck that means) is the real problem deserving 8 pages worth of our attention.

Post: #180

Zelcorpion Wrote:Let it go guys. Kaotic only said that he would not want this woman to teach. I disagree with him, but he did not say that Buzzfeed and CNN doxxing and going on a witch-hunt is anything better.

Perhaps kaotic is unaware that BUZZFEED doxxed this woman, leading to her being suspended (and likely fired)?

Post: #181

Tony Sandos Wrote:Loosing the feminine wiles always bites you in the ass kid.

What does "loosing the feminine wiles" mean?

Post: #182

(03-09-2018 10:34 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  Good take of Ocelot on the issue in another thread:

/thread-67241...pid1748618

Quote:Not American and don't have children, but my niece was 11 last year when they made her class learn about white oppression, police brutality and Black Lives Matter. Apparently all the black children in the class (around 70% of the class) were jumping up and down on the tables shouting "BLACK LIVES MATTER! BLACK LIVES MATTER!" and they had to cancel the lessons scheduled for the next period to get things under control.

An American friend also showed me some literature his 7-year-old son was given to study at school, about gender identity and how transexuals are just like you and me, and how the "gender binary" oppresses people who are "different". I thought the 32 genders meme was right wing agitprop, or contained to a few Alice-in-Wonderland countries like Sweden and Canada, but it's very much a reality in other parts of the Anglosphere as well.

The general population is totally unaware, but there currently exists an extremely limited time window in which to force subversives out of the education system and take back control. The extent of the Orwellian indoctrination being foisted on children who can barely read and write is chilling. Taxpayer money is being used to subsidise the creation of a revolutionary class to tear down Western civilisation, and they're using your children to mould into the foot soldiers: do not put your children in state schools, for God's sake.

But of course amid this madness, some white chick having the audacity to teach while being a "race-realist" (whatever the fuck that means) is the real problem deserving 8 pages worth of our attention.

I think Betsy Davos is a good choice for this but I think a Pinochet shock and awe (minus the violence) approach should be taken. I would have reverse common core. Teach whatever but nothing partisan, with the law written by a legal genius (otherwise liberal rule will lead to only right wing thoughts banned. Cameras in every classroom. Brainwashing made criminal, with Draconian (10 year mandatory minimum no parole) prison sentences.

Of course, this is with me as dictator. Politically very hard to do this.

Edit: have a strike system to avoid throwing the key away.

If this scares teachers away good, if they don't think they can avoid brainwash don't teach.

If there aren't enough teachers fine, illiterates are better than marxist subversives.

Post: #183

Would docking their wages be equally as effective and less disruptive?

Post: #184

(03-10-2018 02:58 PM)Transsimian Wrote:  Would docking their wages be equally as effective and less disruptive?

To be clear this is a fantasy scenario. But no one can monitor every classroom, punishment should be brutal (similar to 10 yard holding penalties in the NFL.)

Post: #185

(03-10-2018 02:36 PM)godfather dust Wrote:  I think Betsy Davos is a good choice for this but I think a Pinochet shock and awe (minus the violence) approach should be taken. I would have reverse common core. Teach whatever but nothing partisan, with the law written by a legal genius (otherwise liberal rule will lead to only right wing thoughts banned. Cameras in every classroom. Brainwashing made criminal, with Draconian (10 year mandatory minimum no parole) prison sentences.

Of course, this is with me as dictator. Politically very hard to do this.

Edit: have a strike system to avoid throwing the key away.

If this scares teachers away good, if they don't think they can avoid brainwash don't teach.

If there aren't enough teachers fine, illiterates are better than marxist subversives.

Look - no such draconian measures are needed. Most people react to peer pressure. The common core marxist education policies were created decades ago and they came from the very top with malicious intent:

Quote:Charlotte Iserbyt served as Senior Policy Advisor in the Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI), U.S. Department of Education, during the first Reagan Administration, where she first blew the whistle on a major technology initiative which would control curriculum in America's classrooms.

She became a whistleblower in the 1980s and published huge books about it. Her father was a Skull and Bones member which explains why she even got the high-level job.

In any case - all you need to do is change it all back to the 1970s/80s when education was still sane and only about the school. The response to a system that wants to implement an Orwellian surveillance state is not to create a counter-system of similar nature.

Yes - we can incarcerate radicals at the top, but leave the bottom alone. Then classify Antifa, BlackLivesMatter or the SPLC as terrorist organisations or radical leftists and have them banned. Those kind of things are not that difficult to do when you are in charge at the top. Most teachers would bow to the changing wind quickly.

Of course in our climate it's utterly impossible and if Trump ever did that, then you would have another Kennedy on your hands or he would get some fast-growing cancer of mysterious origin.

Post: #186

This entire thread is a strong argument for not sending your kid to public school.

Every day the shit gets weirder. What if I don't want my kid force-fed gender identity disorder as a norm? Leonard had a good point in his post above. Black History Month would eliminate almost all black teachers if the same standards applied to them as the powers that be are ascribing to this teacher. Latino Pride--poof, there go all the Latino teachers. Gay pride--poof. Gender identity politics--POOF.

If we applied the same standards across the board, there'd hardly be any teachers left in public schools.

Post: #187

Two people responded to my assertions about white supremacy in America:

(03-06-2018 06:01 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  Race realism is when you allow yourself the politically incorrect option of determining that some races are on average biologically suited to certain tasks and outcomes while being less suited to other tasks and outcomes.
...
This stuff is important, because if your society is based around the misconception that all races are equally suited to all tasks and that only racism can explain differences in outcomes then you will see racism everywhere when in fact it's only really nature that's racist. For example, if blacks are not achieving white, asian or jew levels of literacy and your view is "blacks are better at sports and worse at nothing else" then you're going to assume systemic racism in the education sector is to blame.
...
Race realism involves the possibility that on average blacks are better at sports and worse at academic pursuits. In this context you wouldn't toss shiploads of money into the education sector and police it brutally for "racist" thoughts just because blacks performed more poorly in standardised academic tests.

Leonard is advocating a "modified white supremacy" doctrine here. Instead of advocating complete white supremacy in all ways, his "reality-based" view of race (the one he gets from TV and the Internet) grants that blacks are better at certain stuff, and worse at others. Blacks are better at sports, but worse in educational settings. I don't know what scientific method he utilizes to make his assertions about racial difference, but we are eager to hear about how Leonard has perfected his phrenological science. Maybe found a politically incorrect measuring tape that gave him the "real, SJW-free" numbers on cranial capacity?

Anyways, this "modified white supremacy" is a psychological defense. Note the seemingly snarky, but revealing, bolded passage above. "When you allow yourself...," as if he needs permission to feel superior to others based on race or that black people are just "worse at stuff." He seems to know on a theoretical level that any sort of biological theory of racial inferiority is wrong (or at least seen as wrong), so he needs permission to allow these feelings into his conscious. His permission comes from "science," but as we all know, those Francis Galton-style racial inferiority hypotheses have been proven to be incorrect. All that's left for him is railing against liberals and political correctness, as if those impersonal forces were the ones causing him anguish.

MMX2010 Wrote:My favorite White Nationalist already did a video on this, accusing MLK of being a corporate fraud whose sole purpose was to preach racial integration so that everyone's wages would decrease. The video's thesis that "Slavery and segregation aren't oppression." is well-argued and highly triggering.

MMX2010's response is that MLK was a hypocrite and a fraud. His video details how MLK banged whores, plagiarized his speeches and writings, was egocentric, etc. Calling somebody a hypocrite and a fraud is simply attacking somebody's character and nothing more. No discussion of MLK's ideas or the effects of his actions, of course. For a man that prides himself on his intelligence and critical thinking skills, he seems to have left both at the door here.

Notice how both Leonard and MMX2010 basically sidestepped the reality that white supremacy has always carried the seeds of its own destruction -- either black people rising up to challenge their class oppression or white people rebelling against the powerful classes in society who use white supremacy to justify their power. Both rebellions were never inevitable, but the importation of hundreds of thousands of black people to be used as chattel set the stage for bloody, torturous conflict.

Post: #188

For American, the simplest fix and the one most in keeping with the Constitution is to utterly de-federalise the education sector. No federal curriculum. No federal testing. No federal standards to meet. No federal funding.

The whole point of the American system was to have these airlocks called "states" where federal tyranny wasn't allowed to dictate everything down to how people tied their shoelaces.

Chew on this for a moment. Currently in America most of the nations kids are undergoing federal brainwashing about trannies and other far left bullshit. How many states would be pushing this insanity if left to their own devices.

Two? Three? Out of 50? That gives you an idea of just how tight a cultural stranglehold DC has over the rest of America.

Post: #189

2Wycked what are you talking about a "modified White supremacy"?
Differences in races exist and IQ differences are available across the entire world. If you don't accept that, then I am afraid that you have to go back to SJW talking points of oppression and White privilege to explain away the outcome difference.

Also - what this has to do with supremacy beats me, because that ideology has to do with some race-based right to rule over others. As if anyone would see an 80-IQ inbred White Appalachian superior to a 140+ IQ black CEO of a Fortune 500 company... Besides - even if some groups have a higher IQ does not make them better human being just because of that factor. Don't accuse others of those viewpoints just because you share your perceptions with the SJW- anti-science bunch.

So yes - you may not like what the woman said, but she said not worse things than most cultural marxist teachers do. But hey - better to lump everyone together into the nebulous "White Supremacy" battalion. While we are at it you can enjoy total equality thought models that we are all equal and that Somalis can replace the Japanese equally well and you would get the same results.

Getting pissed about your pet-topics is not the way to go. I understand that you would want her fired just like Buzzfeed, but you are going nuclear here.

Post: #190

This has been studied down to excruciating detail. Some people should read this book.

Post: #191

(03-10-2018 05:18 PM)2Wycked Wrote:  Two people responded to my assertions about white supremacy in America:
...

Leonard is advocating a "modified white supremacy" doctrine here. Instead of advocating complete white supremacy in all ways, his "reality-based" view of race (the one he gets from TV and the Internet) grants that blacks are better at certain stuff, and worse at others. Blacks are better at sports, but worse in educational settings. I don't know what scientific method he utilizes to make his assertions about racial difference, but we are eager to hear about how Leonard has perfected his phrenological science. Maybe found a politically incorrect measuring tape that gave him the "real, SJW-free" numbers on cranial capacity?

Anyways, this "modified white supremacy" is a psychological defense. Note the seemingly snarky, but revealing, bolded passage above. "When you allow yourself...," as if he needs permission to feel superior to others based on race or that black people are just "worse at stuff." He seems to know on a theoretical level that any sort of biological theory of racial inferiority is wrong (or at least seen as wrong), so he needs permission to allow these feelings into his conscious. His permission comes from "science," but as we all know, those Francis Galton-style racial inferiority hypotheses have been proven to be incorrect. All that's left for him is railing against liberals and political correctness, as if those impersonal forces were the ones causing him anguish.

...

Notice how both Leonard and MMX2010 basically sidestepped the reality that white supremacy has always carried the seeds of its own destruction -- either black people rising up to challenge their class oppression or white people rebelling against the powerful classes in society who use white supremacy to justify their power. Both rebellions were never inevitable, but the importation of hundreds of thousands of black people to be used as chattel set the stage for bloody, torturous conflict.

If racial tendencies are all fake then I'd love to hear a lengthy explanation for why Africa is a shithole and so is Detroit. The world seems to create no shortage of plain and obvious examples of the truth, but if you want to be politically correct then you have to go to great lengths to take observable reality and explain why it's all a massive trillion-to-one fluke or the product of some grand anti-black conspiracy.

It's amusing, because I don't hate blacks or asians or jews or indians for any of their advantages or disadvantages in life. I just don't want them stepping on my toes all day while complaining that my feet are wearing a hole in the sole of their shoes. But I would personally love to hear you wax lyrical about how a black ethnostate free of white oppression would rise to the technological and social capacity of Japan, for example.

No matter. If there were a single white man hiding in a cave in the mountains a thousand years after blacks had wiped out every other non-black in the world the 2wykeds of the world would still be complaining that he was the one responsible for "keeping them down with his systemic racism".

I get it, really. You woke up in a world where the borders on your white guilt reservation had begun to vanish and instead of approaching the matter honestly you decided to retreat further into the mental swamp of political correctness. That's why you can't back your opinions up with an argument, opting instead to laugh that "the science is settled and that guy is just insecure".

Sorry, but that dog doesn't hunt any more. Support your argument or enjoy your swamp.

Post: #192

(03-08-2018 01:37 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

kaotic Wrote:The last thing I need is a lecture on game and "enjoy the decline" from you - that fact you're charging men as financially and emotionally unstable FIRST and ignoring the glaring inadequacy of western women truly shows you're putting them on a pedestal.

So when men refuse to marry, it's because the majority of women are fucking inadequate for marriage, but when women refuse to marry, it's impossible for this to be because the majority of men are fucking inadequate for marriage?

Women went through a culture that promotes narcissism, which utterly ruins their ability to become wives, but men went through the exact same culture, and survived largely unscathed?

And because you know both of those things to be true, you can use empty mind-reading phrases like "You're putting X on a pedestal" rather than considering "Maybe I spoke too strongly.", "Maybe you know something I don't.", or "Maybe you're just seeing something I can't.'

Come on, man.

Kaotic is right though. If women actually wanted a nuclear family and married young, players would have to change their tune and the entire manosphere would die out in a week.

As for the culture - the reality is that men have been taught to play by old rules (work hard, be chivalrous, pay for dates), i.e. be a beta - while women have been taught they're God's gift to the world simply for existing and that they should have fun and get dicked in their 20s. Our culture promotes narcissism far more in women than men. Men are still told to man up, and accept their responsibilities, to be real men, bla bla bla, even by guys like Tucker Carlson. Have women been told to stop being sluts yet? Is anyone (besides in RP circles) saying: "maybe riding the cock carousel in your 20s is a really dumb idea, and quite insulting to your future husband. Not to mention you now have a significantly higher rate of divorce'?

In terms of men being fucking inadequate for marriage - that's laughable in my experience. I know way too many engineers with solid careers, outstanding morals and behavior who can't get a girlfriend in their 20s to save their life. Fuck, let alone engineers. One of my close friends is a super social guy, makes amateur movies (they're half-decent), has tons of women who want to be in his movies, he's got massive social proof and he can't get a girlfriend. Dude is genuinely a good guy, but is utterly disgusted by modern day women. Doesn't want to deal with their hoe behavior.

Same for me, everything in my life is great, except for the woman part - which is why I'm even on RVF. I have killer provider status, but women my age and younger are more interested in getting gamed, so game them I shall.

If women really are refusing to marry, it's because their standards are too goddamn high. I'm sure you've read the articles by Lori Gottlieb and Kate Bolick about being too fucking picky in their 20s and ending up alone in their 30s.

On the other hand, the guys who are dropping out of the rat race altogether - well, what do you expect? The reality is that men overproduce because they're incentivized by their wives and children to do so. But if guys don't have wives...and they see having a solid job doesn't give them any pussy...why bother?

Post: #193

Nah - the manosphere would not die out. Seduction would still be seduction and the Red Pill understanding of relationships would still have to be accepted by the mainstream.

The 'sphere would only end when all the Red Pill precepts are accepted by mainstream academia and being taught in school and at universities. Even men in the 1950s would have enjoyed the concepts.

Post: #194

You only have to walk in to a department store and take a rough estimate of how much product is aimed at women vs men to see why female hypergamy will never be shamed by any mainstream outlet.

The amount of useless shit women buy is phenomenal, from their 23rd pair of shoes to the five pounds of make-up they need to try and look 20 when they're 30.

Female liberation > Women in workforce > Expendable income > Marketing focuses on liberation and whatever keeps women single at all costs.

This is why the red-pill right will never have any real money behind it. We are poison for the retail industry who's existence centres around sucking women dry from 18 to cat lady.

Post: #195

"Though they are overpowered by greed and see no evil in destroying families or injuring friends, we see these evils. Why shouldn't we turn away from this sin? When a family declines, ancient traditions are destroyed. With them are lost the spiritual foundations for life, and the family loses its sense of unity. Where there is no sense of unity, the women of the family become corrupt; and with the corruption of its women, society is plugged into chaos. Social chaos is hell for the family and for those who have destroyed the family as well. It disrupts the process of spiritual evolution begun by our ancestors. The timeless spiritual foundations of family and society would be destroyed by these terrible deeds, which violate the unity of life."

- Bhagavad Gita, written 5000 years ago.

The more things chance, the more they stay the same.


I know most people dislike the cast system, finding it outdated. Though it's become highly rigid, it wasn't always the case and originally people were placed in castes based on their skillset.

The caste system led to assortive mating, i.e. putting bounds on female hypergamy - can't keep trying to monkey branch upwards. Anyway, I forgot where I found this quote, but one of the other ancient Indian books once said:

The Kali Yuga (end of times) will come when the castes are intermingled, and the family no more.

In other words, when female hypergamy is unleashed.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Post: #196

White supremacy is really white competence. Anyone using that term is disingenuous.

Post: #197

(03-10-2018 06:47 PM)Genghis Khan Wrote:  "Though they are overpowered by greed and see no evil in destroying families or injuring friends, we see these evils. Why shouldn't we turn away from this sin? When a family declines, ancient traditions are destroyed. With them are lost the spiritual foundations for life, and the family loses its sense of unity. Where there is no sense of unity, the women of the family become corrupt; and with the corruption of its women, society is plugged into chaos. Social chaos is hell for the family and for those who have destroyed the family as well. It disrupts the process of spiritual evolution begun by our ancestors. The timeless spiritual foundations of family and society would be destroyed by these terrible deeds, which violate the unity of life."

- Bhagavad Gita, written 5000 years ago.

The more things chance, the more they stay the same.


I know most people dislike the cast system, finding it outdated. Though it's become highly rigid, it wasn't always the case and originally people were placed in castes based on their skillset.

The caste system led to assortive mating, i.e. putting bounds on female hypergamy - can't keep trying to monkey branch upwards. Anyway, I forgot where I found this quote, but one of the other ancient Indian books once said:

Fucking A - the caste system is like communism - it was simply never applied well. I have heard those idiotic arguments before from proud Indian gurus. The master only needed to come up to the son of the Brahman, see that he is a piece of shit psychopath and place him among the untouchables. And then he only has to go to the untouchables and recognize a saint, then swiftly put him into the Brahman caste. If you believe that this was ever correctly applied, then I have a new Maoist republic for you to champion in the Congo. It will certainly work this time around.

India will remain a semi-shithole so long as it has the caste system and the idiotic dowry system they still practice. It will be a high civilization alright likely in a few centuries, but only after they leave that bullshit aside.

It has nothing to do with monkey-branching of women, but everything to do with one elite creating a hierarchy and even ordaining it divine from above. In addition they added bullshit of meritocracy that the person is chosen not by birth, but by the priest who expertly recognizes a saint from a psychopath while both are a couple days old.



Oh - and the caste system keeping the castes in a system set 5000 years ago with little adjustment to new technologies, aptitudes, abilities or anything even remotely relating reality.

Post: #198

Quote:Fucking A - the caste system is like communism - it was simply never applied well.

Last time I checked the caste system never killed 100mio+ people in less than a 100 years. It's nothing like communism.

It's amazing when you have a system that tells people their place in society and people believe in it, you don't have millions of people getting brainwashed and millions more dying in gulags

More so, the fact that it survived as a system for 5000 years means clearly it did something well.

Quote:India will remain a semi-shithole so long as it has the caste system and the idiotic dowry system they still practice. It will be a high civilization alright likely in a few centuries, but only after they leave that bullshit aside.

Leave that bullshit and replace it with what? The western forms of democracy, feminism, equality, and ensuring communal strife, communism and mass murder?

India already has the first few things going, and its birthrates are dropping in line with the West.

Quote:Oh - and the caste system keeping the castes in a system set 5000 years ago with little adjustment to new technologies, aptitudes, abilities or anything even remotely relating reality.

This is the problem when you look at cultures today and assume they've never worked in the past.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:1_A...e_East.png

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic...oductivity

For such a backward culture, it seemed to have mighty well economically for a long time.

Quote:The master only needed to come up to the son of the Brahman, see that he is a piece of shit psychopath and place him among the untouchables. And then he only has to go to the untouchables and recognize a saint, then swiftly put him into the Brahman caste.

Zel, you got two problems:

1. You actually listen to average Indians today about how the system worked millennia ago. The average person in any culture doesn't understand how their own culture works or worked in the past.

For Westerners, listening to the average Indian will give you a very skewed view of Hinduism (the amount of Indians I've met in the US who actually believe Hinduism let's you do whatever you want) and Indian society at large. If you really want to understand this stuff, Rene Guenon is probably the best source material and he has some strong arguments dispelling common misconceptions of the caste system.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/090058873...ref=plSrch

Think it through though: you actually believe a priest could walk up to a Kshatriya (warrior caste) king and tell him his son was to be an untouchable? And the king would what? Just drop off his infant kid on the street?

2. You don't understand trade-offs. You're not the only one, but this is why a lot of people can be so proud of Western technology and advancement, and completely ignore that the same ideas and systems that gave rise to electricity also gave rise to birth control and is leading to the havoc you see in the West.

You look proudly at the opportunity given to people to move up and down the socioeconomic ladder, not understanding the cost that it inevitably leads to individualization, and massive amount of social disruption.

I don't disagree that the caste system has its flaws. And yes, some systems are better than others. But some systems are not ALWAYS better than other systems. Trade-offs matter and depending on the people and what THEY want, the other systems might be better.

If I was an all-powerful dictator of India, and had to pick between the caste system and whatever the West has today, I'd pick the caste system any day. It's worked for a very long time, I can't say the same for current Western systems. The fact that I might have to give up on electricity is perhaps worth the trade-off in not having a culture filled with cat ladies.

Moreso, I do believe different races have different apptitudes (bringing it back to thread topic).

If there was something better for Indians than the caste system, maybe it would've already been in place a long time ago. Maybe the caste system is what works best for Indians. I don't know the answer, but I'll let history guide my beliefs.

I work on engineering systems all the time. This is why I appreciate trade-offs, because when you mess with one part of the system and improve something, something else almost always has to give. There's always a cost, always trade-off, always.

Fucking with the caste system, with the genetics Indians have, is absolutely not guaranteed to be a good idea. It's easy to only look at removing the negatives and believe that it'll lead to India being some high Civilization, but that is not guaranteed at all. It could just as well lead to complete chaos and destruction.

I don't like fucking with vastly complex systems, not at work and definitely not at a civilizational level. I'm sure people who gave women the right to vote and work thought nothing of it, but look at where we are now.

Quote:If you believe that this was ever correctly applied, then I have a new Maoist republic for you to champion in the Congo

The irony of this statement, where you acknowledge maoism doesn't work in Congo (and actually has never worked anywhere), yet can't seem to understand the caste system has worked for Indians for millennia.

I don't tell Westerners how to run their nations, I've explicitly stated the US should determine its own immigration policy, even if it doesn't benefit me. So why do you think you have the right to tell Indians they should abandon a system that's been integral to their society for millennia?

The even more ironic part is that communism came about because some intellectuals thought it would be a better system.

China minding their own business, have ancient system
Maoists came along, think they can improve upon system
End result: tens of millions of dead.

India minding their own business, have ancient system
Zel comes along, thinks he can improve upon system
End result:?

Post: #199

It's always nice to lecture Europeans and ignore the fact that they built the highest levels of civilization on Earth while only focusing on the last 20 years where a hostile anti-Euro elite has subverted the place. Meanwhile in India average IQs are 85, 40%+ are shitting in the fields and they are still sacrificing girls for lost mobile phones.

And the economic output bullshit back then was based on population - that topic was here before. India had a very high level of population due to fertile lands and good climate - facilitating a much higher population than in the rest. That created their high "economic output".

And yes - the caste system and the ways before were stable, but if they were so superior, why not close off India, return back to the medieval technology? The reason why this won't happen is because even the middle class now lives better than the upper echelon of the past.

I compare the caste system with communism, because it is something that is supposed to work in theory that way, but creates a stable society for the gain of the upper tiers. But it also holds back society when they attempt to move forward into a more advanced system. The same narrative can be made about medieval feudalism across many nations or the ones that have slavery - all those systems are stable, some even surviving for millennia, but they have built into them factors which hold back their development. And industrialization is a necessity and a boon and not a problem.

And advanced is always more tech - sorry that you view engineering and technology as problematic. The pill with honest appraisal of human nature and different except for the current Western leadership would not have that bad of an influence. You are clearly not seeing what is going on in the world.

Plus let me end here, that I believe that India will become the highest civilization on Earth in some 3-5 centuries. I expect them to take that long to get rid of the caste system which is keeping things stable, but backwards. The k-selected nature of the people is already there. (part of the lower IQ is probably mired in the lowered base-rate due to food, water, lack of prenatal care, inbreeding etc - meaning the jump to 10-15 points can be managed relatively quickly) Oh - and I think that Indians will create a stable peaceful system without the caste bullshit - they have that in them without the things that are holding them back.

And even if they are the dominant force on Earth in the year 2500, then I expect them to not be overly genocidal across the world, so all other races can live with it.

Post: #200

Quote:It's always nice to lecture Europeans

Agreed. It's always nice to hear lectures from Europeans as well about what non-European societies should do.

Quote:And yes - the caste system and the ways before were stable, but if they were so superior, why not close off India, return back to the medieval technology? The reason why this won't happen is because even the middle class now lives better than the upper echelon of the past.

And yes - the patriarchy was stable, but if it was so superior, why not return back to it?

And you know the answer: the reason you can't just go back is because most people are dumb fucks. Once you convince them of something (the patriarchy is evil, technology has no downsides, traditions are oppression), the only thing that happens is events play out. Things are baked in for decades. No society just reverts back on a whim, it only happens after some catastrophic collapse. If you really could just revert back that easily, the Roman Republican/Empire never would've collapsed.

Read that quote from the Bhagavad Gita again. That's literally what it says: once you fuck with ancient traditions, and women become corrupt, the only way forward is chaos.

Quote:And advanced is always more tech - sorry that you view engineering and technology as problematic.

I'm sorry that you can't read what I said and understand the concept of trade-offs.

Perhaps you believe I should be grateful that Pakistan, a deranged Islamist fundamentalist country, has nukes pointed at India? You know, nukes that only came about because of science and technology.

Well, I appreciate trade-offs, so I can be grateful for air-conditioning and refrigeration, I can be grateful engineering puts food on my table, but also find other aspects of science and technology (e.g. nukes) problematic.

Quote:The pill with honest appraisal of human nature and different except for the current Western leadership would not have that bad of an influence. You are clearly not seeing what is going on in the world.

The 'if only' argument. If only people had had a honest appraisal. Well they didn't and the pill did have a bad influence. You can't seem to accept reality for what it is.

Quote:ignore the fact that they built the highest levels of civilization on Earth while only focusing on the last 20 years where a hostile anti-Euro elite has subverted the place

As you ignore the fact that everything has trade-offs and that high civilizations always come with the trade-off they eventually get subverted.

Quote:expect them to take that long to get rid of the caste system which is keeping things stable, but backwards.

I'm sure communists thought the same about Russia and China: sure they're stable, but they're so backwards.

And my question still stands: what will you replace the caste system with? Because right now they're replacing it with false notions of equality, feminism, etc.

So why don't you spare me your liberal moral posturing about how OTHER people should live based on what YOU think works, this despite the fact that YOU don't have to live there and will never have to face the consequences.