Post: #51

(08-06-2013 03:18 PM)Moma Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 01:50 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  You really should visit Brazil to get a firsthand understanding of the social dynamic there. I've been there several times and even the most race-conscious people I know who have been will agree that racism as is known elsewhere is quite muted there.

Brazil is the most socially advanced country I've ever been to personally. Keep in mind it's not only a country with a large number of blacks but it also has the largest Japanese population outside of Japan and is home to the largest population of Lebanese people in the world (even more than in Lebanon). Yet you won't find racial/ethnic tension as it exists in most other parts of the world. The level of social cohesion in Brazil is pretty remarkable.

I will visit. I've wanted to ever since I was in the UK. And tell me, who holds the economic clout in the country? Is it as equally dispersed as the social climate you describe? Or is it in the graps of the usual few? I would love to see that and be proven wrong.

Brazil is a deeply unequal country period, just like many Latin American countries, regardless of how diverse they may or may not be.

Much of that inequality is a result of the persistence of the old colonial system following slavery which made land difficult to amass (wealthy descendants of original Portuguese settlers were given enormous tracts of land to save the colony in its earlier days from regional Spanish hegemony). That land ownership inequality has never been addressed until this day.

That's the thing about Brazil. As a black man from a relatively wealthy country you'd have a pretty awesome experience there where you would find race is not an obstacle or barrier to your goals.

Race isn't exactly a social identifier in Brazil, though class certainly is. To the extent the two relate has to do with historical reasons that I've already explained, which are similar to those that affect most Brazilians generally. The Italian immigrants to the coffee region near Sao Paulo, for example, did jobs that blacks once did.

But the notion that there's widespread conscious racism or even a cultural obsession with race as you find in the United States and elsewhere is untrue.

Post: #52

Quote:Race means nothing, class and ethnicity mean everything, and neither is dependant on your race.

"race" and "ethnicity" and "culture" and "nationality" have been conflated, at least in the USA

Post: #53

(08-06-2013 10:58 AM)numanist Wrote:  

Quote:But it is a mistake to focus on differing races. The real problems white face isn't other races, but other whites themselves. It is whites who control the media and fuel the race war against other whites.

The entire "diversity" movement is led by liberal whites against conservative whites. Liberals are more than willing to sell their own kind out for the vote. And ultimately, this is why I do not side with any race. I do not believe for even a second that just because someone is white that they are looking out for my best interests. In fact, quite the contrary.

I agree with you to some extent: white liberals are a huge problem. I work with a white liberal co-worker who always bemoans "racism" and "slavery" on a daily basis. He also is a conspiracy theorist who thinks the churches, corporations, and the government are all in collusion to oppress black, hispanic, and asian people. Furthermore, he whined vociferously about the number of immigrants being accepted into this country as, "too low". "Yeah, as if any other country in the world accepts more immigrants than America".

One item I have to disagree with you on is media control: the media is not run by white people but it is run by semites. It is well documented that Jews run most of the media industry; something like 42 of the 46 top executives in hollywood and the media are Jews; also, the screen-actors guild president is Jewish. In proportion to their numbers, Jews are much overrepresented in the media as news anchors, actors, actresses, directors, and screenwriters. This explains why their is such a left-wing ideological bent to most things on TV. Something like 80% of Jews describe themselves as orthodox liberals.

From the horses mouth: Joel Stein's article on Jewish media control

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/comm...183.column

If the Jews are really the ones in control, then why does Germany suffer from nearly every single problem America does?

Immigration problem - Yes
Runaway socialism - Yes
Media censorship - Yes
Diversity worship - Yes

And yet Germany only has around 110-130K Jews, compared to the 7.4 million Jews in America.

Thus I conclude that even if you removed every single Jew, there would be plenty of liberal whites conspiring to bring their political plans to fruition.

Moreover, many Jews have been at the top of conservative/right-wing movements as well, such as Milton Friedman or Leo Strauss.

Post: #54

(08-06-2013 04:04 PM)GameTheory Wrote:  

Quote:Race means nothing, class and ethnicity mean everything, and neither is dependant on your race.

"race" and "ethnicity" and "culture" and "nationality" have been conflated, at least in the USA

True.

Post: #55

(08-06-2013 04:20 PM)Samseau Wrote:  And yet Germany only has around 110-130K Jews, compared to the 7.4 million Jews in America.

Thus I conclude that even if you removed every single Jew, there would be plenty of liberal whites conspiring to bring their political plans to fruition.

Moreover, many Jews have been at the top of conservative/right-wing movements as well, such as Milton Friedman or Leo Strauss.

Good lord. Germany's political system and society is the most submissive and deferential to Jewish elite opinion of *any* Western nation or any country, period, aside from Israel itself.

It's essentially illegal to be anti-Semitic in Germany, as it is in many other European nations.

Despite their minuscule numbers, Jews in the majority of European nations form a substantial element among political, academic, financial, and media elites. For example, the Swedish-Jewish family the Bonniers has a controlling stake in major newspapers, television networks and book publishers in Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, etc., owning multiple dailies in the same countries.

In the end, the political elite of any country amounts to a tiny fraction of one percent of the population and comprises just thousands of people. This is why an industrious, intelligent, and passionately tribal minority can attain vast and overwhelming influence entirely out of keeping with their number.

At any rate, anti-Semitism is a good demonstration of how racism can die out. Scarcely anyone is anti-Semitic in the U.S. today - it is the most fringe of political views. I see no reason why other forms of racism cannot similarly continue to diminish. They clearly already are.

Post: #56

(08-06-2013 05:31 PM)Therapsid Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 04:20 PM)Samseau Wrote:  And yet Germany only has around 110-130K Jews, compared to the 7.4 million Jews in America.

Thus I conclude that even if you removed every single Jew, there would be plenty of liberal whites conspiring to bring their political plans to fruition.

Moreover, many Jews have been at the top of conservative/right-wing movements as well, such as Milton Friedman or Leo Strauss.

Good lord. Germany's political system and society is the most submissive and deferential to Jewish elite opinion of *any* Western nation or any country, period, aside from Israel itself.

It's essentially illegal to be anti-Semitic in Germany, as it is in many other European nations.

Despite their minuscule numbers, Jews in the majority of European nations form a substantial element among political, academic, financial, and media elites. For example, the Swedish-Jewish family the Bonniers has a controlling stake in major newspapers, television networks and book publishers in Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, etc., owning multiple dailies in the same countries.

In the end, the political elite of any country amounts to a tiny fraction of one percent of the population and comprises just thousands of people. This is why an industrious, intelligent, and passionately tribal minority can attain vast and overwhelming influence entirely out of keeping with their number.

At any rate, anti-Semitism is a good demonstration of how racism can die out. Scarcely anyone is anti-Semitic in the U.S. today - it is the most fringe of political views. I see no reason why other forms of racism cannot similarly continue to diminish. They clearly already are.

Agreed on all points. Even though Germany is the economic engine of the EU, France has historically had the most political influence, especially when Sarkozy was running it. They also have the largest Jewish population in Europe.

In fact, the decision of France and ultimately the UN/EU to remove Gadaffi from power in Libya was largely due to the efforts of one (Jewish) man - Bernard-Henry Levy.

Actually, it's quite common to find minorities of all kinds with outsized influence and power in many societies/countries.

Post: #57

Samseau Wrote:Moreover, many Jews have been at the top of conservative/right-wing movements as well, such as Milton Friedman or Leo Strauss.

For sure many of the greatest champions of classical liberalism have been Jewish, such as Milton Friedman, Robert Nozick, Ludwig von Mises, Ayn Rand, Murray Rothbard. They're "right-wing/conservative", but looking at our society today, the government has consistently gone in the 180-degree opposite direction of their views the last several decades:

Friedman advocated that the money supply be controlled by a strict computer algorithm and was a staunch opponent of inflation. Champion of freedom and individual choices.

Nozick did pioneering political philosophy work in the viability of anarchy, and favored a small, limited state, and was the highest profile opponent of Rawls.

Ayn Rand formulated Objectivism, and rejected the subjective theory of money. Eminently capitalist, small government, at one time personally convinced former Federal Reserve Alan Greenspan that gold was key to economic freedom. (By the time Greenspan actually got into office though, we'd already been taken off the gold standard, and he turned his back and went forward with the cheap money "Greenspan put" policy that is largely responsible for our woes today.) She outright predicted the death of Detroit by socialism (Starnevesille in Atlas Shrugged) when at the time Detroit enjoyed the highest income per capita in the country.

von Mises denounced socialism and was a supporter of Rand. Small government, economic freedom is important to a free society. Government debasement of currency would lead to a welfare and warfare state. Taught H.A. Hayek.

Murray Rothbard was hardcore, and wanted NO state whatsoever. The founder of anarcho-capitalism. (Rothbard also chronicled the dismantling of the Old Right, which used to the Republican Party prior to the rise of the neoconservatives. So I don't consider the presence of Jewish neoconservatives in our ruling bodies now to be classically right-wing. They're redefined conservative to mean defending Israel.)

Their names have essentially been dead in the mainstream media channels for decades. None of their works are taught in the classroom, at any level of public education and (to my knowledge) not in the universities.

Subtract out the Zionists like Leo Strauss, and compare these guys vs. the overrepresentation of polar ideological opposites in the Supreme Court, Wall Street, and regulatory bodies within the Department of Justice, DHS, the Federal Reserve, the CEOs and principal shareholders of the banks compromising the FR consortium, the major tax-exempt trusts and foundations, education policy boards, and the SEC. And the classic example is AIPAC and other groups that fairly explicitly lobby for Israel, yet aren't registered as foreign agents.

The Jews aligned with small government, hard currency, anti-welfare/warfare, free market economics, negative liberty, constitutionalist, past the 1940s, didn't acquire anywhere near the level of useable, concrete political influence compared to the ones on the left who acquired some of the most powerful seats in the land, with literally unlimited capital, and monopoly over the minds of our young. They weren't able to stop America's entry into WWI, prevent the creation of the Federal Reserve, prevent the New Deal, then weren't able to prevent the Great Society programs and entry into Vietnam (and therefore weren't able to prevent taking us off the gold standard), and weren't able to prevent the police state.

On the other hand, the expansion of government has been at work long before there was any kind of Jewish influence. For example, the original Federalists based in Massachusetts were able to establish the first national bank by using the post office to their advantage, faster communication while spying on their opponents' letters and organizing wintertime votes and generally outmaneuvering the subsistence farmer Anti-Federalists based down in Virginia. (Though up till the last half-century or so, they still had to deal with ferocious resistance, such as President Andrew Jackson, though things were more favorable, with a more privately-educated population etc. plus America was closer to its history of hyperinflation so its memory was clearer.)

Post: #58

Quote:If the Jews are really the ones in control, then why does Germany suffer from nearly every single problem America does?

Immigration problem - Yes
Runaway socialism - Yes
Media censorship - Yes
Diversity worship - Yes

And yet Germany only has around 110-130K Jews, compared to the 7.4 million Jews in America.

Thus I conclude that even if you removed every single Jew, there would be plenty of liberal whites conspiring to bring their political plans to fruition.

Moreover, many Jews have been at the top of conservative/right-wing movements as well, such as Milton Friedman or Leo Strauss.

Actually, Jews run Bertellsmann media group - the largest media conglomeration in Germany. Simply put, if you control the press, you control the people; and you control politics. Furthermore, I'm not insinuating that all Jews are a problem, that's a rather common canard. There is certainly many red pill Jews I have respect for: Paul Gottfried, Paul Novak, Oliver Stone (sort of), Gilad Atzmon, and Sever Plocker. I can't say I'm a huge fan of Milton Friedman's or Leo Strauss's policies, myself; I tend to be more of a moderate in terms of economic policy.

Honestly, I'm like all civil people: if you don't step on my toes, I won't step on yours. If you treat me nicely, I will reciprocate - that's my views on race relations.

Post: #59

(08-06-2013 11:43 PM)numanist Wrote:  

Quote:If the Jews are really the ones in control, then why does Germany suffer from nearly every single problem America does?

Immigration problem - Yes
Runaway socialism - Yes
Media censorship - Yes
Diversity worship - Yes

And yet Germany only has around 110-130K Jews, compared to the 7.4 million Jews in America.

Thus I conclude that even if you removed every single Jew, there would be plenty of liberal whites conspiring to bring their political plans to fruition.

Moreover, many Jews have been at the top of conservative/right-wing movements as well, such as Milton Friedman or Leo Strauss.

Actually, Jews run Bertellsmann media group - the largest media conglomeration in Germany. Simply put, if you control the press, you control the people; and you control politics. Furthermore, I'm not insinuating that all Jews are a problem, that's a rather common canard. There is certainly many red pill Jews I have respect for: Paul Gottfried, Paul Novak, Oliver Stone (sort of), Gilad Atzmon, and Sever Plocker. I can't say I'm a huge fan of Milton Friedman's or Leo Strauss's policies, myself; I tend to be more of a moderate in terms of economic policy.

Honestly, I'm like all civil people: if you don't step on my toes, I won't step on yours. If you treat me nicely, I will reciprocate - that's my views on race relations.

The Boston Globe and Washington Times just got sold for firesale prices.

Will the internet mark the end of Jewish media domination?

Post: #60

(08-06-2013 11:43 PM)numanist Wrote:  

Quote:If the Jews are really the ones in control, then why does Germany suffer from nearly every single problem America does?

Immigration problem - Yes
Runaway socialism - Yes
Media censorship - Yes
Diversity worship - Yes

And yet Germany only has around 110-130K Jews, compared to the 7.4 million Jews in America.

Thus I conclude that even if you removed every single Jew, there would be plenty of liberal whites conspiring to bring their political plans to fruition.

Moreover, many Jews have been at the top of conservative/right-wing movements as well, such as Milton Friedman or Leo Strauss.

Actually, Jews run Bertellsmann media group - the largest media conglomeration in Germany. Simply put, if you control the press, you control the people; and you control politics. Furthermore, I'm not insinuating that all Jews are a problem, that's a rather common canard. There is certainly many red pill Jews I have respect for: Paul Gottfried, Paul Novak, Oliver Stone (sort of), Gilad Atzmon, and Sever Plocker. I can't say I'm a huge fan of Milton Friedman's or Leo Strauss's policies, myself; I tend to be more of a moderate in terms of economic policy.

Honestly, I'm like all civil people: if you don't step on my toes, I won't step on yours. If you treat me nicely, I will reciprocate - that's my views on race relations.

Gilad Atzmon is an unusual figure. He condemns not only the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza.

He also condemns what he accurately describes as "anti-Zionist Zionism", that is Jewish secular leftists who favor Palestinian rights and independence while still identifying as primarily Jews.

He recognizes that most Jewish intellectuals, on the right and the left, share much in common and in fact are expressions of tribal identity and supremacy.

In other words, he is an exceptional exemplar of a genuine humanist.

I would suggest people should read his book "The Wandering Who? A Study of Jewish Identity Politics" for details.

Basically Atzmon puts Jewish identity politics to the same test that black identity politics such as that of Sharpton and Jackson or white identity politics of the pre-Jim Crow era have already been put to.

Post: #61

(08-06-2013 03:15 PM)Therapsid Wrote:  But then, if you're defining racism to include every last iota of bias and every remaining stereotype a person may have about other races, then sure, almost everyone is racist.

I personally don't think it makes sense to call someone racist who generally deals amicably with people from all racial and ethnic groups, and who isn't prone to judge individuals merely on account of their background. By my definition, I rarely encounter genuine racists in America, especially among whites.

I agree, however I don't always get to choose the definition. The US is increasingly moving towards an "every last iota of bias" definition of racism while equivocating with classic racism and extreme bigotry.

Post: #62

(08-06-2013 04:04 PM)GameTheory Wrote:  

Quote:Race means nothing, class and ethnicity mean everything, and neither is dependant on your race.

"race" and "ethnicity" and "culture" and "nationality" have been conflated, at least in the USA

They're correlated, especially in a particular context. One is often a marker for another. Human intuition can easily rationalize exceptions.

Post: #63

They say that the average black IQ is 85, white IQ 100 and Chinese 105.

I think there is a strong correlation between IQ and economic achievement.

It is no surprise to me that when the white people left Detriot the crime levels went out of control and the city failed. Equally in London the black population is rising and it had serious riots.

My personal opinion is if a society has a black population overtaking 50% there will be serious troubles. Black people can function in society if they are a small minority; when their population size bgrows the area will fall into serious problems.

Conversely an area that has an increased number of Chinese people will have decreased crime and increased economic activity. When I was in malaysia it was very apparent the Chinese were the most successful of all groups, I have seen similar things in places like Vancouver.

What is the conclusion if you want a successful society: Limit the number of black people you have and increase the numbers of Chinese.

When I lived in London; i lived in a black area and saw the most violence in that year than the rest of my life combined.

Post: #64

http://www.photius.com/rankings/national...ranks.html
http://www.statisticbrain.com/countries-...verage-iq/

The wealthier countries are usually at the top. Notice Singapore is one of the highest, if not the highest IQ out of all of them. Just so happens to be the one of the wealthiest cities in the world.

Post: #65

(08-07-2013 09:31 AM)NY Digital Wrote:  http://www.photius.com/rankings/national...ranks.html
http://www.statisticbrain.com/countries-...verage-iq/

The wealthier countries are usually at the top. Notice Singapore is on of the highest, if not the highest IQ out of all of them. Just so happens to be the one of the wealthiest cities in the world.

Or maybe countries with high IQ populations become wealthy.

Post: #66

^^ Well yeah that's sort of what I meant to say, but there are also a lot of other variables.

Poland, Mongolia, Czech, and Hungary aren't really 1st world countries. However 3 of those are FSU so they got screwed over by communism.

Mongolia is a completely different story. However, they still have those Asian genes.

I'd be careful with this topic V6...stay away from the racial comments... it gets heated very fast.

Post: #67

(08-07-2013 09:35 AM)NY Digital Wrote:  ^^ Well yeah that's sort of what I meant to say, but there are also a lot of other variables.

Poland, Mongolia, Czech, and Hungary aren't really 1st world countries. However 3 of those are FSU so they got screwed over by communism.

Mongolia is a completely different story. However, they still have those Asian genes.

I'd be careful with this topic V6...stay away from the racial comments... it gets heated very fast.

I often believe that economic policy changes the personalities of those who live under them.

For instance under a communist/socialist system people become lazy and lose initiative. This was stated by Hong Kong business owners about the Chinese who moved there after living under a communist system.

Equally I see similar effects living in the UK. When the state can offer you a standard of living comparable to a middle class professional there is little incentive to work hard or get education/skills.

It is no surprise to me that those countries with free market capitalism and high IQs are also the wealthiest nations. These other high IQ nations that ahve a history of communism appear to be trailing.... although I think this will change.

For example I think Poland would be a lot wealthier in the future. I may invest there.

I don't really care NY digital. Black people have no qualms telling me what great athletes they are, or how they are sexually superior. Apparently it's socially acceptable for black people to claim their superiority but anything to the contrary is a taboo subject.

I am only interested in the facts and I am well aware that some black people are very successful; although proportionally lower than other groups. However there is no denying the economic and educational success of south east Asian people; they have a clear advantage over all over groups.

Post: #68

Any race of people can flourish under the right circumstances.Those circumstances have just historically been harder to come by for certain races due mainly to politics.

Post: #69

On a long enough timeline, all race discussions on RVF turn into Stormfrot.

Post: #70

I welcome the discussion.We honestly need more of it.

Post: #71

(08-07-2013 09:54 AM)j r Wrote:  On a long enough timeline, all race discussions on RVF turn into Stormfrot.

at least the race threads expose the trolls. then the RVF gene pool is cleansed when the trolls are banned.

Post: #72

(08-07-2013 03:04 PM)GameTheory Wrote:  at least the race threads expose the trolls. then the RVF gene pool is cleansed when the trolls are banned.

(08-07-2013 09:13 AM)V6Wrestler Wrote:  They say that the average black IQ is 85, white IQ 100 and Chinese 105.


My personal opinion is if a society has a black population overtaking 50% there will be serious troubles. Black people can function in society if they are a small minority; when their population size grows the area will fall into serious problems.

Limit the number of black people you have and increase the numbers of Chinese.

When I lived in London; i lived in a black area and saw the most violence in that year than the rest of my life combined.

(08-07-2013 09:35 AM)NY Digital Wrote:  I'd be careful with this topic V6...stay away from the racial comments... it gets heated very fast.

(08-07-2013 09:46 AM)V6Wrestler Wrote:  I don't really care NY digital. Black people have no qualms telling me what great athletes they are, or how they are sexually superior. Apparently it's socially acceptable for black people to claim their superiority but anything to the contrary is a taboo subject.

Post: #73

^^^ ban hammer in 3...2...1...

Post: #74

Mostly I'm just fucking sick of people in the manosphere writing about how genetically/culturally/socially inferior I am.

"Oh look, another Roissy post about my low IQ being a threat to proper white society! Gee shucks that seems fun!"

It annoys me how much the manosphere obsesses over shit like that.

Post: #75

(08-07-2013 04:32 PM)Sumanguru Wrote:  Mostly I'm just fucking sick of people in the manosphere writing about how genetically/culturally/socially inferior I am.

"Oh look, another Roissy post about my low IQ being a threat to proper white society! Gee shucks that seems fun!"

It annoys me how much the manosphere obsesses over shit like that.

And this was my point with the OP. Why are we shooting each other in the back? There's nothing constructive about that.