Kill me now.
Other urls found in this thread:
I signed up with [email protected]/* */
Do it yourself.
someone fucking shoot her already
Trump should be calling Hillary right now and thanking her for his second term.
You fool, we want her back. Now we will know for sure whether Bernie is a sellout or not. The Democratic party will have to die and be replaced with a true movement of the working class. The power vacuum brought by HRC is absolutely necessary.
Oh christ, you Leftists are fucking retarded. Take your grand leader Clinton and fuck off already.
Can you read, Holla Forumsyp?
I can't be the only one who automatically read this in Felix Biedermann's Hillary voice.
lurk more, faggot.
You're of the same ideology as Antifa. Antifa supports Clinton. Therefore you support Clinton.
The only reason why we'd support Anti-fa is because they trigger the alt-right. Either than that, they're liberal foot soldiers (at least the American segment)
1) Most of us dont support ANTIFA
2) Most of ANTIFA doesn't support Clinton because they are ANTICAPITALIST and Clinton is the quintessential CAPITALIST.
Antifa are idpol liberals using our flags to be edgy.
Thats a good theory, do you have any evidence for it? But I find that easy to believe and saddening.
Huh, really makes you think.
You're not one of the people who believe Clinton is a socialist, right?
Well let's put it this way. Both you Lefties and Clinton believe in "no nations, no borders."
What did she mean by this.
Is that why Clinton deported unaccompanied refugee children to Honduras? Porkies believe in borders and nations, it's how they get away with murdering dissidents in some "nations" without proles in other ones getting angry and thinking they'll be next.
You realize that there are a lot of NazBol or National Bolsheviks on this board right. Its in their fucking name, a large portion of this board believes in borders.
It's a free-trade euphemism. Clinton believes in keeping nations and borders so that western capitalists can profit by outsourcing labor to the third world.
What's it look like inside your own asshole?
She's creating a militia.
We believe in internationalism, not globalism. In regards to "open borders" We'd only do this via internationalism. We don't believe in mass immigration, but rather tackling the sources of the problem which causes it.
Hell most immigrants nowadays are economic migrants, a symptom of capitalism. It is an economic system that is heading down the gutter as we speak.
Sorry, a Leftie can not be a Nationalist. It's a contradiction. Leftist political ideologies are the antithesis of Nationalism. They destroy the Nation. Without a Nation you can not have Nationalism. The United States is a country of many Nations. Leftiest ideals for decades have undermined the true Nation that is the European peoples whoa re the founders and builders of the country. If you destroy your Nation, how can you be a Nationalist? You can't be a Nationalist and invite diversity.
The 19th century called, they want their dumb argument back
The forest radicalized Hillary.
A people's guerrilla front.
Capitalism doesn't create economic migrants, the ineptitude of the migrating hordes and their inability to create a strong foundation in their own countries is what creates economic migrants. The fact that we have more than others should not be incentive to abandon one's Nation and country to be a leech off another people. Inferior genes are the issue.
Patriotism is loyalty to government, while Nationalism is loyalty to people. Makes sense that a Socialist would propagate an ideal of total adherence to government.
Funny how "globalization" neither prevents dictatorships of Capital in the third world, nor porkies hopping between nations to dodge taxes - and of course, "free trade" agreements wreck labor rights, instead of mandating them!
The "globalization" which capitalists advocate isn't the abolition of nations, it's the use of the nation-state system to enhance the power of Capital at worker expense.
So you're telling me that a system which funds the overthrow of governments in order to establish corporate control and exploitation of labor doesn't create economic migrants?
Geewhiz, color me surprised.
read pdfs attached.
You imply that these inherently inferior peoples are capable of any level of economic or social success, and I don't believe they are.
Please explain Bolivia then user. If Latin Americans are incapable of economic progress, why are they succeeding?
Why are the Holla Forumsyps that wander into Holla Forums always the most retarded ones?
Yes, because if there's one thing capitalists hate it's a constant influx of ethnically/religiously diverse consumers/labourerers that can easily be pitted against each other and to the native consumers/labourerers.
For adherents of an ideology that prides itself on a "scientific analysis of how society really operates" you all seem hellbent on dismissing how fucking difficult it is to rally workers of diverse backgrounds together to advance the good of all the workers.
All that money and the website is lazy that says nothing. Hillary can't even do e-begging without being half-assed.
Unfortunately, they're not. You should see some of the /ptg/ threads.
Explain what? Their development, even with or assistance, will never reach our development a century ago, let alone now.
I don't believe they can. Where do you live?
Why does that matter you weirdo, you trying to stalk me?
Well if I tell you why, you'll lie to me, thus defeating the purpose of asking.
You aren't supporting people by being a nationalist. You're merely supporting the modern nation-state that emerged in the 18th century. Nationalism is an ideological tool created by the bourgeois to bend people to their will.
OK then. So why was the Indian and Chinese civilization more developed than the Europeans at one point in time? Were their genes better at that point?
Why are her arrows pointing rightward?
Also I would like to add that you said they were incapable of economic progress. Well, the Bolivians are progressing now.You LIE.
Actually they're pointing east because that's where she wants to send all the bombs, US forces and money for gulf oil barons.
I can't take anyone using this dated rhetoric seriously. Please stop LARPing. Also Nationalism, or Nations, did not emerge in the 18th century. The concept of a Nation, or a people, has existed far longer, and Nationalism is the direct expression of loyalty and love for your people.
Irrelevant. They were surpassed. They peaked. We did not. Now they serve as little more than meat tools on factor lines for corporations because their intelligence does not allow for independent innovation and development.
Yes, user. Feudal kingdoms were just like modern day nation states and it's not at all like the nobility greedily blobbed in every direction they could through conquest and dynastic politics without any regard for the local identities of the serfs.
That's like comparing a child's lemonade stand to a man's international business.
So what was the point in asking the question in the first place, if you knew I was going to lie?
No its not irrelevent. Time is not a constant and civilizations rise and fall. Western Civilization is falling now and China seems to be on the rise. Once they inevitably surpass the west, what will you say then? Your arguments could have been used by the Chinese and Indians in the past. Do you not understand how shitty your reasoning is?
What's your point? That does not dispute what a Nation, and thus Nationalism inherently is.
Don't remind me, user. ;_;
I see zero evidence of their rise. They're being propped up by development created by Europeans. I see no social advancement. They're an ant people with money coming to their doorstep at the behest of international corporations. It has nothing to do with their intelligence and everything to do with their lack of development, thus giving corporations free reign to produce as cheaply as possible.
Nationalism is spooked.
Lefties tend to have very little experience with diversity, so I was hoping if I just threw the question out there I might get a semi-honest answer and to help pinpoint your ignorance. That time is passed though, and any answer given now will be considered a lie to support your position.
My point is that user was right, nation states are a totally new phenomenon.
It disputes that nationalism is some kind of inherent force of nature and rather indicates that its a fabrication of recent history based on identities that were of marginal importance historically.
My point exactly, in response to the person who posted earlier. Leftists are destroyers of Nations and peoples.
The Chinese are literally buying up the real-estate and inflating the real estate market of western nations. The Europeans are entirely reliant on them for production and they hold enough of Western currency to tank their economy.
Their problem is that Western countries are getting so fucking poor that they cant buy even shitty Chinese goods anymore.
And btw there is huge social advancements. They have lifted more people out of poverty in the last 40 years than any civilization EVER. They have a huge growing middle class and have made tremendous gains in literacy. While Westerners are blaming immigrants for their self inflicted problems, the Chinese have been building up their own infrastructure.
It must hurt knowing deep down that Westerners are not inherently superior and that your shitty ideology holds no answers to the problems facing the world.
Historically, because a German and a Swede, genetically, are very similar, but a Swede and a Nigerian are very different, and the mixing of the two produces a person far lesser than the Swede.
But regardless of the fact, you would have called my evidence annecdotal and whined about "muh social cohesion", which BTW, isn't as big of a deal as you stormfags like to parrot.
The difference between us and liberals is that we don't give a shit about identity. We're going to go to a neighbourhood and say "huh, this community/company needs more DIVERSITY with more BLACK AND MUSLIM CEO's/Council members"
The fact is, they're still operating within a state/ capitalist system.
China is a bubble waiting to pop, with large empty cities and no Middle Class to fill them. The majority of their people live in third world conditions. Their society has little freedoms and no empathy for their own. They're an ant people. They work. They die. They don't care. They work for the queen. Or, in this case, the government. China can't support its population, and as wages rise and conditions improve cross the country, if that even happens, the Chinese economy has no way of introducing the hundreds of millions of people currently left out of it.
Historically no one gave a shit. I'm not sure what the point of putting "historically" at the beginning of that sentence was since obviously you think this is an immutable scientific fact that's above any historical context.
Go live in Chicago for a year and tell me how grand diversity is and how little genes or "identity" matter.
Because of western written word reading direction we think of right as "forward" and left as "backward."
Now what she probably SHOULD have done was have an arrow pointing UP
Because historically is not now. Modern immigration patterns and ease of travel make migration an entirely different animal now. You didn't have 2 million primitive brown people migrating to Germany in a two year span in 1600.
"Nationalism" is simply the expression of innate tribal feeling on a larger level that was enabled by the development of new methods of transportation/communication that in itself led to the idea of the nation-state.
of, and trust in, fellow neighbours. This is a puzzling finding: although people living in racially diverse neighbourhoods do not interact less with their neighbours, they declare less trust in them and less satisfaction from living in their neighbourhood.
Capitalism pulled billions out of poverty.
Typical Leftie from a homogeneous area, speaking down to people originating from diverse areas, telling us how things really are. You're a fool. Also, tell me, why would I believe articles written by the same filth peddling Marxism in Universities, propagating a movement that is anti-European/White and bent on the total submission of European peoples and their heritage? Written by people who never spent a single day living amongst diversity.
Of course you didn't but where is the argument?
In case you've forgotten the topic at hand is that nationalism is a recent invention and nationhood was insignificant in earlier history.
No, I'm pretty sure the dissolution of monarchies and the decline of religion in public life leading to a need to unite society around something else led to the nation state.
I'm not sure I agree with this. I understand how I could have tribal feelings around my local community but I have about as much to care about for someone on the opposite side of the country as I do for someone on the opposite side of the continent.
Hey dipshit read the articles presented
Also you are implying that Western economies are not gonna pop either. Unlike them though, China actually has a contingency plan. Another point is this: why are ghost cities a problem but QE to the banks not. Unlike Western economies China has used fiscal stimulus to get out of crisis, and as a result they have cities made for the rapidly growing urban population.
Accept it faggot, your precious western civilization is done.
What was the system that put them there in the first place?
See He's pretty much for the point.
If you aren't going to believe anything written by people who peddle Marxism what are you doing here?
FIFTY NIGGERS, WHY DOES THIS KEEP HAPPENING
*Read articles presented
And sent billions more into poverty.
Best way to harvest profit is by exploitation, which means if you would take all regulations off, people would tear each other to pieces for "profit".
No system put them there. The history of civilization of one of constant progression. Capitalism has done more to progress it than any other ideal by creating a dispersion of wealth and giving an accessibility to it that made it possible for even the common man to pull himself out of poverty and live, at the least, comfortably. For most of history this is simply not the case, and it's not because someone put them there, but because their methods were primitive.
I'd tell you I've lived most of my life overseas and in various communities made up of various people, but you'd just ignore me and say that I'm lying. :^)
Stay mad, lad.
This implies poverty was not the natural state of being absent the wealth creating power of capitalism or some other system. All of us somewhere down the line come from poverty, unless you're some form or royalty. The beauty of capitalism is, somewhere down the line one of our ancestors was given the opportunity to do something about it.
Why don't you goofy motherfuckers get off your ass and actually try to be a job creator, oh wait, you'd all rather sit around playing video games and jerking off all day, and complaining about capitalism. Without capitalism you wouldn't get to play your games, and live off the TV dinners mom makes you.
2010, Hillary Clinton uses the chaos of the Haitian earthquake as an opportunity to prop up one of Baby Doc's flunkies in the Haitian Presidential election. He wins, and his reign is such a clusterfuck that the country was unable to even hold the next scheduled elections because he'd dismissed Parliament.
Hold on, let me link you to some of the potential professors who could ave peer reviewed this, screaming their heads off at an Antifa riot… This is why I call Leftists establishment rebels. You feign rebellion while wholly supporting that which you feign rebellion from.
Nice strawman faggot.
Yes, unlike those punk-rock conservatives on Holla Forums and their unwavering total support for the president of the United States and the Republican party. They're the real rebels.
We're all "job creators" you fucking retard. Do we all purchase goods? Yes, therefore we are all helping create jobs.
Cultural Marxism is bullshit too btw, so you can cry about Soros all you want. Again, you're still mistaking us for Liberals and Hillary supporters.
Stay forever mad and BTFO
Resources that these inherently primitive peoples lack the intellectual capacity to make use of; hence why, in the twenty-first century, they're still centuries primitive. If capitalism didn't build the infrastructure to put these people to work, they'd be living in huts instead of shitty apartments. They'd be impoverished either way.
I haven't seen that on Holla Forums actually. It was like that during the election, but not now. Loads of people call him a Jew puppet now.
Except all instances of "diversity" are not the same - the experiences of a "diverse middle-class neighbourhood" are not the same as the experiences of a "diverse working-class neighbourhood", because the diversity present in the former is not going to be the same that's present in the latter
Then stop fleeing to them and their status quo establishment and their skewed information as supporting evidence for your claims, when that evidence was funded by Federal programs and works in unison with the Federal government to keep our borders open.
Without any external factors, capitalism will never pay more than a basic subsistence rate to its laborers and it will never employ more laborers than necessary.
So while there are some at the very bottom who are lifted out of abject poverty and into normal poverty, there are also a vast number who were doing alright before but are slowly ground down into poverty themselves.
Meanwhile, there are millions who are simply allowed to starve to death because they have no money and therefore are not customers for the capitalist food distributors.
In other words ==CAPITALISM STOPS YOU FROM STARVING IF IT'S PROFITABLE TO DO SO, AND FUCKS OVER EVERYONE ELSE==.
Never, under any circumstances, cite anything produced by academic research. That is cultural Marxist propaganda.
Youtube videos and unsourced infographics are the only things it's okay to cite.
read a book already
When it's a direct contradiction to reality and real world experience, then yes, ignore it, it's politically motivated bullshit.
Perfect. You are too far gone my friend. Perhaps when capitalism wrecks your life you will realize just how much of a slave you are. But then again probably not. Best of luck to you.
That is exactly what's being peddled above.
Anecdotes that user told me.
I'm also going to take a big guess and assume you don't actually have anecdotal evidence, your worldview is based on things you've read or seen on the internet as opposed to IRL experience.
Leave the seclusion of your homogeneous community and go live in Chicago, if you're white, and tell me how grand diversity is.
You'd guess wrong. It's a combination of both. Let me ask, if my experience isn't real, and the propaganda pushed by Marxist ideologues from their ivory tower is, then why does white flight exist?
Can you stop munching on every single bait, you morons?
Not only did you not read and review what was presented before commenting, you offer no research that supports your argument. You seem to have no idea what peer-reviewed mean or how the academic world operates in general. There are many peer reviewed studies that go against the establishment views that are published, because the data is sound.
You are so blinded by ideology that facts no longer sway you. You do not realize it but you are a perfect example of the man stuck in a cave, fixated on the ideas presented by your corporate overlords who fashion fascist and ethnonationalist ideas.
The idea of "nations" (that is, people united by a common language/heritage/ethnic history etc) has been around since at least the time of the Greeks and Romans
Please tell me exactly how the dissolution of monarchies and the decline of religious public life lead to the creation of that work by Bede, user - unless pagan Nordics butchering monks and looting monasteries also counts as the "decline of religious public life"
Again, I already provdided you with resources and people who have, people who you deem "genetically inferior", who you then proceeded to ignore and then ask about where I live.
But of course, its all a bunch of "Marxist bullshit", so why even bother? :^)
Also remember to see
But hey, that's probably MARXIST BULLSHIT TOO!
Poor neighborhoods where workers are forced to compete against one another for jobs end up developing very tribalistic views.
I AM SHOOK.
Hey, I'll have you know that the retarded Holla Forumsyp has read plenty of very thoughtfully curated infographics put together by such intellectual heavyweights as @pepecummies1488
Yes, if there's one thing the S&P 500 can all agree on it's that the world's various fascist and ethnonationalist movements aren't supported as much as they should be.
Christ, what kind of hysterical mong do you have to be to believe it's still the 19th century and business owners cynically push racism to advance their own interests
Just stop lad, you're embrassing yourself.
I do. I also know how Federal funding and political incentives in academia have demeaned the entire process and made it worthless. I wouldn't trust Bush, Clinton, and Obama to peer-review a paper put forth by McCain. Why would I believe biased, politically motivated propaganda when it a direct contradiction to everything I've personally experienced, seen, and the statistics I've read?
Well white flight happens when the local economy collapses (e.g Detroit) and people with the capital to do so leave to look for opportunities elsewhere. Naturally the people with the most ability to do this tend to be white, leaving behind an entirely poor but mostly black population.
If your hypothesis is true then why is it that in the previous example of Detroit white flight didn't occur simultaneously with black migration, however it did occur simultaneously with the decline of the automobile industry in the city. This would seem to indicate that it's caused chiefly by economic factors.
I would fight for hardened street fighter Hillary. No more kindly grandmother schtick. Class warfare now.
If you keep using "nation", "nationalism", and "nation state" interchangeably I'm not going to reply to you.
It reminds me of that Goebbels quote where he says trying to argue with a Jew is like trying to have a fist-fight with jam or something.
Meanwhile no matter what rung of the financial latter you observe, they perform worse in school and commit more crime. Disregard the fact that the poorest areas of the united States are inhabited by white people and the violent crime is low. Couldn't possibly have anything to do with our genetic differences. Genes don't affect behavior or intelligence. White flight doesn't exist and whites aren't drastically more likely to be murdered by a negro than vice versa.
when will this meme die?
no they dont you fucking faggot. keep pulling at straws
Too bad it isnt Bush, Clinton, and Obama that conduct peer reviews. The data HAS to be sound in order to get published. The CONCLUSIONS that you draw from the data is up to you.
And you answered the question yourself. You wont believe what is presented because you are not even open to the idea of reading the studies in the first place. YOUR worldview supports ethnonationalism, but for others their worldview and life experiences support diversity. That is why we use peer reviewed data to make sure that we dont let our biases affect the truth. Or do you not know what a case study is, or why scientists do not use it to determine what is true.
Thats because the police don't target white populations you ginormous fucktard. If police disproportionately go after black people, then ofcourse you will get data that shows that blacks commit greater crime(most of which is drug related).
What the fuck are you even arguing?
The idea of "nation" (i.e. a people of common linguistic/religious/ethnic/historical heritage) predates the concept of the nation-state - as Bede (a person who lived through a time when Britain looked like pic related) and his work clearly attests.
I never argued that "nation" = "nation-state", or why the fuck would I cite a person talking about "the English nation" when his own home kingdom was bitterly feuding with other English kingdoms?
So you agree those links are shit.
No, it occurs when a neighborhood experiences rabid diversification and the crime rates skyrocket. It happens in small towns and neighborhoods across the country. I personally know a large community which experienced it, and it has zero to do with the local economy and everything to do with the fact that the community was opened to section 8 housing and in came waves of negros from Philly and NYC. Now if you drive through you see windows busted out of the car windows of white peoples' cars. If you're white you'll get the finger, or attacked if you walk the street. "muh poverty" simply isn't an excuse. Genes are.
Also in Detroit they elected negros into politics who taxed (you love taxation) and abused whites in Detroit.
Yes they do. White people just commit less crime. It's a fact.
No it doesn't. There's too much money and too much political incentive in the process to make it a sound process.
The police don't "target" white populations because white areas already have low crime levels anyway (unless you're in Slavistan).
What I'm arguing is this. Here's what I said that you took issue with
and here is what you said in response
You read "nation state" as being interchangeable with "nation" and based your argument on that. No, I never said nationhood came about following the decline of feudalism, I said nation states did. Indeed earlier in the argument I acknowledge that "nations" as an identity are quite old. I just also pointed out that they were marginal in importance to state-building compared to feudal politics and religion.
Only that's exactly what you did, that's the entire basis of your counter-argument.
A peasant would usually never leave for one kingdom to another, I don't think they knew or cared what an englishman was.
Of course the aristocracy are fonder of those who speak the same language as them, doesn't mean it's a universal human trait.
And when those involved in the peer review process themselves have ideological biases and motivations that aren't strictly objective?
Putnam - the guy that first noticed the correlation between low social capital and diversity - sat on his findings for years until one of his underlings threatened to publish them first.
I know you SCIENCE!-worshipping reddit goons love the idea that universities are organized and run by utterly-dispassionate Aspergers sufferers that would happily publish and endorse studies that concluded once and for all that race exists on the genetic level "but unfortunately SCIENCE! doesn't support that", but come on
When antifa stops being retarded liberal reactionaries. If they had protested Obama or Clinton even a little bit maybe somebody might take them seriously.
Only it doesn't. As said in our historical example white flight occurred in response to the decline of industry in the 1970s. Black migration to the city had been happening since decades earlier and had largely ceased by this point.
Yes they do. The police system is a racist institution by nature. You should read up on the history of the police in the United States. But of course that would not fit into your narrative of the police being defenders of justice.
Where did I state that the nation-state and nations were completely interchangeable?
…in response to my claim that "nationalism" arose thanks to technological changes that made inherent tribal feeling apply on a larger level.
Actually in England for much of the middle-ages the nobility and the peasantry didn't speak the same language. The nobility spoke French whilst the peasants spoke English.
Even more to the point that it wasn't anything resembling a nation state.
Gee, it's almost as if sections of the population that commit higher-than-average levels of crime are going to be treated more suspiciously by the local law enforcement than sections of the population that commit lower-than-average levels of crime
But of course the police are at fault for falling for the human tendency towards pattern detection as opposed to just treating all populations equally
Only it does. White people leaving a homogeneous small town to find a better life somewhere else because the local economy dried up isn't white flight, genius. White flight is literally when white people flee an area as a result of diversification, and it happens every day. Two different races living in a city isn't direct diversification of white neighborhoods and living areas. Cities are large. White flight occurs when diversity is forced on white people. Why? Because blacks commit a literal epidemic of violent crime against whites. If you're in a turning neighborhood, you're the target of harassment, theft, violence, destruction of property etc. Also, let's no forget that blacks have a tendency to harm local economies as businesses are negatively affected by black populations through theft and destruction, among other things. People aren't just keeping wealth out of the hands of negros. Negros are simply too stupid and too violent to a obtain it the majority of the time. If you're going to get robbed 5 times a month opening shop in a black neighborhood, would you?
Are you fucking retarded? I brought it up because you made an argument about nationhood in response to my argument about nation-states.
So why have you picked an arbitrary point in the argument and act as if there I declared that you explicitly stated that "nation-state" and "nation" are interchangeable? This is next-level backpeddling.
Which itself was a response to my claim that nation-states are a new phenomenon. How deep do you want to go?
Maybe, just maybe, whether it's Chicago, Paris, London, or Somalia, there's something to note–blacks are more violent. Maybe, just maybe, if your job is to prevent crime, you're going to keep a closer eye on the ones who statistically commit more violence and crime in general.
Not the original poster of the above,
And your response
I've cited a historical example.
If you want to wax lyrical about savage "negros" then go ahead until you're blue in the face but it's worthless to continue this discussion.
You've cited something irrelevant to what I was saying. When I said go to Chicago, I did so because it's a shit-hole filled with niggers and I wanted you/him to experience life around them. You then came in claiming "Detroit is evidence of white flight." I didn't say that.
Please refer to the data in this before commenting. The police–in the south especially– were literally formed from slave patrols. It is hardwired in the institutions themselves to go after "shitskins", But I guess its just the blacks fault for being "vile mongrels", might as well make them slaves again cause they are beneath us after all.
For your point about all african nations, perhaps being exploited by colonizers, empires, and the IMF would lead to terrible conditions. The problem with you fascists is that you ascribe way too much of a simple solution for complex problems. But its no use arguing with you people. You are too far gone into your ideology.
I notice you slyly left out the preceding sentence of his post which is as follows
This is the importance of my reply. "Nationalism", did indeed emerge in the 18th century manifested in the newfound desire to build nation states as in the lack of church or nobility it was important to unite society about the hitherto unimportant identity of nationhood.
Or in brief.
>But of course the police are at fault for falling for the human tendency towards pattern detection as opposed to just treating all individuals equally
I cited Detroit because it's the ur-example of white flight and indeed I brought it up in response to you asking for an explanation of white flight. It wouldn't be much of an explanation without historical examples would it?
I didn't bring it up in response to you telling user to move to Chicago did I? No, you asked me for an explanation and you got it. Now you're backpeddling.
Ah yes, the original sin of racism which taints all American institutions beyond reasonable explanation.
Do you not realize how absurdly stupid it is to defend that stance that we're all exactly the same? Go spend a month in any city or town in New Hampshire, then spend a month in Chicago. Tell me there's not reason, after that, for increased police presence in black communities and increased police suspicion of black peoples. This is the same level of thinking that calls it hate for police down in Texas to check Hispanic drivers' legality as a citizen when being pulled over. It's just common fucking sense.
I never said Detroit is an example of white flight, I say that Detroit is a nigger infested shit-hole that not a single one of you diversity peddling fools will dare live. Also you can't create a straw man definition of "white flight" then given an example for it. White flight has zero to do with the economy. It is about white people fleeing their communities under threat of diversification and the crime and instability that follows.
Isn't crime like at it's lowest point in America anyway?
That trashcan must be addicting. Is anything but capitalism. Today are the non whites, tomorrow you will scapegoat something else, single moms or whatnot.
You questioned the motives as to why blacks are targeted more. I'll do it in steps so your retard mind can process it.
1) Police force formed from remnants of slave patrol
2) Go after "shitskins" because those groups are what you are used to targeting.
3) Most of crimes committed are therefore by shitskins
4) Process repeats for decades
5) Becomes part of police culture: "Blacks are usually the ones who commit crime–here's the stats"
I know you didn't. I did. In fact I said in that very post you're replying that it was me who brought it up.
You are retarded
This is absolutely ridiculous goal-post shifting. "white flight" as a sociological concept is generally attributed to economics by virtually all academic research. Your ad hoc "definition" is very obviously designed to try and tilt the argument in your favour dishonestly.
But of course you don't believe in academic research and think arguments should consist of shouting about how much you hate niggers.
Thats a good meme there, but do you realize the problems with all 3? (2nd and 3rd rows of each column) there is no "one size fits all" solution to this. We need all 3 ideals (top row of each column) so we can fight the problems (in rows 2 and 3) I'm not implying, "we should all just get along," but there are plusses and minuses to each ideal.
Most minorites are concentrated in cities. Because of the high concentration of people, crime is more likely to occur in city areas. Now add poverty and low wage jobs into the mix. Then add shitty public funding due to remnants of Jim-Crow/segregation laws. Now lets recap.
Urban area+poverty+shitty public funding+remnants of Jim Crow/Segragation= Crime.
Gee, I wonder why these goddamn black people living in shitty and packed neighborhoods, with terrible schooling, and no opportunities would have more crime than rural poor whites. Really makes me think.
You do know that despite being only around 21% of the NC population blacks commited 48% of homicides in 2010?
Except they're still responsible for disproportionately high levels of crime in rural parts of the South too, fuckface
I haven't shifted anything. You're trying to redefine white flight to suit your narrative. You've not disputed a thing I said.
This moron is a lost cause. I bet he was bullied by a black dude in highschool.
Crime is just flat out higher in black and brown communities, whether we're talking the United States, the UK, France, Australia, Sub-Saharan Africa etc., cities, town, villages etc. It's just higher. It's a fact. You can't just blame a peoples' financial situation, because they commit more crime regardless of the financial situation, the culture, or the country. It's genetic.
I love how this is literally what I just said to you and your only comeback, rather than citing a dictionary or something that supports your definition, is to say "no u".
Anyway, fuck this thread I need to sleep.
I mainly lurk on Holla Forums but this identity politics has gotten out of hand. I do think that there are some slimy rich people on top dictating and controlling the marionette strings and attempting to further distance us from another with promoting identity politics. There needs to be some dialog and action that we can take together that can enmesh these groups. Some in my family are antifa and I am pretty much a nationalist, but we do have some common ground between us. The hurt feelings of violating current political correctness etiquette has got to go though. Its driving me nuts.
Sorry, a Leftie can not be a spookalist. It's a contradiction. Leftist political ideologies are the antithesis of spookalism. They destroy the spook. Without a spook you can not have spookalism. The United States is a spook of many spooks. Leftiest ideals for decades have undermined the true spook that is the European peoples whoa re the founders and builders of the spook. If you destroy your spook, how can you be a spookalist? You can't be a spookalist and invite spookity.
I've defined "white flight" in the context of my usage multiple times, and then you come out trying to disprove it using an apples to oranges comparison. All you did was waste our time. Good job.
When was the civil rights era again?
I don't understand why the idea of the aftereffects of Jim Crow is so difficult for you to grasp. Racist social structures don't just magically go away.
These people live in terrible conditions with excess authority imposed on them. Of course there is backlash. But unlike you fascist retards we actually have ideas to get rid of the problem that doesn't involve mass deportations or genocide.
You get rid of poverty for all poor people regardless of race by ramping up public services and improving material conditions. That has been PROVEN to lower crime.
Rather than blaming the victims of a shitty system, we try to change it to benefit all. The main problem with your shitty ideology is that it offers no solution just scapegoating and hate.
plz don't force "kill all men" 2 be a liberalism, it is too much fun to say
Oh, so this is why negros in Paris and London, and throughout Sub-Saharan Africa, are such rabidly violent beasts? Who knew?!
Boo! Just for the cute-sie lelz
At least you and I both agree the negro is a stupid beast. You just imply it by refusing to hold them to the same standard as whites. Tell me, how come negros, regardless of their financial situation, perform worse in school and commit more crime?
t. Paul Joseph Watson's anus
Never understood this reasoning. It is a misinterpretation of statistics.
Just because A is more likely than B, doesn't mean A is likely.
Suppose you're 50x more likely to get struck by lightning than killed by an asteroid. Would you therefore think you are about to be struck by lightning?
If a black person is, say, 50x more likely to commit a crime than a white person, but they are both very unlikely to commit a crime, then why would you act as if some black person you meet is about to kill you, in general, without assessing the particular situation?
Ha ha - triple zeros
My favorite thing about Holla Forumstards is their basic inability to read statistics or check sources.
Live around blacks and you'll understand. If every theft, every harassment, every assault etc. were reported to the police, the numbers would be far higher. Do you think every time a white guy gets punched by a random negro on the street he runs to the police to report a crime? No. Statistics are only a tiny sampling of life around blacks.
Holy fuck is Holla Forums really this bad at arguing
Life must be hell for you. I can't imagine living your entire life afraid of everything, even stuff you make up in your head.
You're missing my point.
You, a male, are statistically more likely to commit a crime than your mother (a female). Should I throw you in jail?
No, because men and women are, in general, unlikely to commit crimes. And just because a man is more likely to commit crimes than a woman is, doesn't mean the man is likely to commit crimes.
This is a very simple point.
Being aware of the violent nature of the negro doesn't mean you fear it, it just means you're less likely to be punched in the back of the head, or have your stuff stolen. Also I moved from a diverse area to a homogeneous one, so I no longer live around negros.
Gee I wonder why that might be.
No, you sound absolutely terrified. I pity you.
I don't pity him. He sounds like he needs a cock-slap in the face from reality.
You're missing the point. A white person living around blacks deals with intimidation and assault on a daily basis. This is not represented in statistics. This is why the saying exists. The innate nature of the beast is to act this way. Statistics only represent a tiny sampling. This is not the case between a white man and a white woman. You won't see white man threatening to shoot a white woman to scare her from walking in front of his house, but you'll see a negro saying that to a white person.
They crime part I have already addressed in my previous posts. As for school, that is simply not true.
And even if it were, so what? Does that mean I have to look down on every black person because somehow the avg test scores of my race is greater than that of theirs? Does that mean I have to regard any significant achievement by a black person as some unique phenomenon. What solution or changes will that lead me to? Mass extermination? Deportations? Reinstitution of slavery?
Your entire ideology is based around quirks of some statistics which justify actions which are of no benefit to anyone. Your ideology will not improve the conditions of the working class in anyway and will give legitimacy to capitalists seeking to divide and conquer the common population. You should reconsider your entire worldview, because it is worth nothing to humanity.
I didn't link anything. If you find it so difficult to use a search engine, that's your problem…
Confronted with reality? "haha us juss scared!" Go walk through a few Chicago neighborhoods.
So basically, you're admitting you don't actually have any empirical proof of this, and that we're basically just supposed to take your word for it?
Holy fuck, you're bad at this
A reality you fabricated in your own mind. That's the saddest thing. You created the spooks you live in fear of. Victim of your own retardation. Sad.
It means there's blatant genetic differences between us and the forced mixing of our populations is a terrible thing.
Why's that? My people–my Nation–are the only thing that truly matters. If European peoples cease to exist, then why the fuck am I expected to care about state of humanity or its survival, in any regard? If European peoples can't be allowed to live absent forced diversification, then there's zero reason for me to seek a better tomorrow for brown children. I want an end to diversification and the preservation of European peoples. Your preferred economic system takes a backseat.
I love this guy
The words of a man who's never lived around sizable non-white communities.
Yup, the stereotypes, white flight, the old sayings etc. all just exist for no reason. Or maybe you're just an ignorant fool with no first-hand experience speaking from a homogeneous community.
Walking through Chicago neighborhoods cannot inform us anything about your black coworker or the black people you see in everyday settings. These are independent events.
You have no people, you have no nation, you have a world of spooks that only live inside your head.
I grew up in low-income, predominantly non-white communities and went to predominantly non-white schools. Most everyone there were smarter than you.
Do your parents know that you have a picture of Bobby Hill climaxing over a photograph of the 9/11 attacks?
Seems like they really ought to know
They exist for a reason, but they are not applicable to the vast majority of people.
Kek is dead, friendo
IF that is what you want, then you will receive a state with people of your race ONLY with material conditions unchanged. You would enjoy it surely, as you would feel safer. But for the rest of your country it would make no noticeable difference. The rest of your country would still have their wages exploited, their taxes used to fund wars, and their standard of living in an ever downward spiral.
Your people would still be fucked.
It is of no use arguing with you as you seem to think the root of your troubles are due to minorities who are trying to live out their daily existence in peace. Rather than having the balls to go after the capitalist system which created the conditions of crime and poverty, you go after the weak.
I hope one day you see the light, but you probably wont. Please keep thinking that the blacks, mexicans, and refugees are the source of your problems. I'm sure that will lead to some interesting results.
They're independent events, and if you have no in-depth experience with a negro, like you would a co-worker, then you'd be a fool to not expect the same behavior from him, regardless of the setting.
Reading that comment I'm led to believe you're not even white. The dialect expressed in your writing certainly doesn't come off as sounding "white" to me.
Yup, they must all just exist for no reason. We all bleed red. We're all the same!! HAHAH!!! Yay! Idiot…
They are applicable to a large portion of teen and young adult black males actually. Again, regardless of the country, culture, history, or financial standing.
Ok you're either just larping or just a gigantic fucking retard with that one
Holy shit, this is peak confirmation bias
Assuming you were raised there, did you bring your family with you? Or are you a coward, letting your own blood and flesh, closer to you than your hwhite "brethren" on Holla Forums, stay behind in what you deem a criminal hellhole?
That's a problem to deal with after the fact. But I'd find comfort in knowing there's a future one way or another. Right now, in the United States especially, so long as things remain the same, there's zero future for white people and zero reason for me to care about any form of improvement.
No, I think the existence of them is a threat to the future of my people. Once you've introduced internal competition between groups in a single country, you'll either mongrelize or experience something like mass deportations, genocide, balkanization. Mongrelization is worse than immediate discomforts or displeasure, because it destroys your future. It's like Socialism. Why bother striving for anything when there's no incentive because what's yours will be taken? I'd sooner see white people live uncomfortably for the next 50 years, myself included, than see them gone off this earth in 500. I'd sooner see humanity wiped out than create a better tomorrow for brown children at the expense of my own.
All I can say is that you've unfortunately grown up around certain black people that have left you with bad experiences. You can either find the right people or continue to look for the worst in everyone.
I didn't move on my own, I was only around 16. I moved with my family. My father grew up and worked as a carpenter in this shit-hole city, and experienced first-hand the nature of the negro. I had negros bused into my local high school and middle school, which my father and other whites paid taxes to support. Those blacks then proceeded to destroy those schools and chase whites out, causing white taxers to fund their lack of education, while we had to be bused off to another county to safely receive our education amongst white students.
Well you didn't deny it.
Really scratches the noggin, don't it.
Not like it matters. Holla Forums is whiter than Holla Forums anyway.
I don't need to, your argument is fallacious as all hell.
No. The United states built its foundation post-WWII, largely as a result of the war, and did so during a period in which the country was a mostly homogeneous country. Immigration was shifted in the '60s and since our social spending has gone out of control, our cities have seen a rabid decline in all areas where minorities settle etc. China is not diverse. Russia is not one of the most powerful countries on earth, they just have a lot of nukes. Militarily and economically they're fairly weak. They're also not diverse to any significant degree, nor do they prop up their minority populations at the expense of the host population, like we see here, or in other Western countries.
Yeah, that's because only ignorant whites from homogeneous, secluded areas propagate Leftist ideals, save for the rare exceptions. You're not going to find many working class white men down in Philly supporting Socialism.
t. richard spencer's twitter
I've never read a word he's said, nor listened to a word he's said. I just got in an argument on Holla Forums last night about this guy. He's nothing more than a talking head who's latched himself onto an ideology I believe in.
user, what if I told you that you can support democratic socialism or libertarian socialism (ideally) without being a massive SJW? You can take the economic regulation points without the open border ones, or the equal treatment points without the reinforced white shaming ones?
I disagree with Socialism, however you want the phrase it. I don't think it works. If this were a homogeneously white country though, I'd be far less against it.
I guess my grandparents that fought in the IRA aren't white either.
Pure socialism? Socialist elements with a dash of another ideology? Can you be more specific? What about it turns you off? I can infer immigration might be an aspect. Would you be for nationalistic socialism?
I'm content with a more regulated form of capitalism. I don't know what you mean by "socialist elements." I often see people saying the remark that "public schooling is socialism" or that "highways are socialism," which is ridiculous, because neither is true. But if that's what you mean, then I'm content with that. I don't want "social ownership of the means of production." I want my private ownership to remain my own, and the product of my work to be my own.
Except for that COINTELPRO was highly publicized in the 1970s, after which the govt promised never to do anything of the sort again and passed laws against it. Of course, the FBI was back to its old antics of infiltrating leftwing groups and destroying them from within after a few years and hasn't stopped since.
It's funny because the Right is the side which always fantasizes about being destroyed by "evil liberals", and yet it is the Left, the actual Left, which is continually assailed on all sides and dismissed by means of horseshoe theory.
As a worker, the product of your work is not your own. That's the point. The bosses own the product, you merely sell your labor power.
Yeah those are the elements I'm referring to. Why do you think they're not a form of socialism? I'd argue that any sufficient regulation to capitalism would be socialism. I don't want the latter either, that's pure socialism or communism that simply can't work.
Dumb socdem poster.
High-quality argument. Very top-notch. Activated almonds I didn't even know I had.
You get the responses your weak socdem views are worth: shit.
I'm the last image in that enlightened brain meme right now. This is incredible. You're incredible. I-is this the power of Holla Forums shitposting? W-woah.
I'm not the Holla Forumsyp you've been talking to. There are roughly 1000 other people on this board. Most of which are actual socialists, unlike yourself.
They can bring up why pure socialism's a good idea, then.
Or you know, you can read a fucking book.
I don't have a boss. I'm a carpenter. My work is my product. If I work for someone else's business, then they deserve a portion of my earnings for creating the potential for my employment and creating the excess wealth that I'm able to earn.
How's that? By regulation I mean protectionism. No more international free trade. I don't believe the means of production should be owned by the population, but that the means of production should benefit the population, but at the very least it certainly shouldn't harm the population through imported workers or the export of wealth creation. Again though, none of this means anything to me anymore so long as there's no future for white people. I wouldn't put an ounce of effort toward creating a better tomorrow for brown children.
So in your worldview, you think its impossible to create a better world for both brown and white children. What is it thats different from a random brown child and a random white child–assuming you had no family relations to either. Why do you assign greater value to the white child versus the brown child? Both of these children would grow up to not give a shit about you.
Marx said it best "the working men of the world have no country, we can't take what they have not got."
If you think that your free in America or whatever capitalist Eurotrash country all you have to do is quit paying your rent. Then you'll see how much the capitalists care about the fact that you were "born there" or how loyal they are to their fellow countrymen.
Marx was filth.
Sure. In separate countries. Resigning both to a single country ensures either the destruction of both, the destruction of the country, or the destruction or oppression of one. Diversity ends in destruction one way or another 100% of the time. As for why I'd care less about the brown kid, he or she is too genetically dissimilar from me. Europeans, especially Germanic Europeans, are very unique. All people are unique, and I want to preserve my people. Through our unique genetic makeup we have different potentials and different outputs. I want to preserve that. Had Europeans not existed, "modern civilization" would take on a whole new face, it would be drastically less advanced, and socially it'd be far more oppressive, going by how other peoples have historically lived and their rates of advancement.
She doesn't, buddy
I'm not even gonna argue with you on that because there are numerous examples of multi-ethnic communities flourishing, but I just have a question for you out of curiosity. What do you think of mixed-race children, would a white-brown mix baby be accepted in your society?
I see that as the slow death through mongrelization of white people. A mixed child's intellectual capacity is less, its behavioral tendencies and predisposition are different, its physical look is different etc. Mixing is an absolutely horrible thing and I'm against it. Interracial couples should not have children. A mixed child to me represents the extermination of a bloodline and thousands of years of survival.
So was Hillary a Trump plant all along?
There are studies which show that mixed race children are taller, healthier, and even smarter.
Yeah, I'd love to see the Somalian and Swede who produce children more intelligent than a pure Swede. That would be a rare exception.
What about a Swede and Asian? Or a German and a Latino? But the studies do speak for themselves. After all who wouldn't want healthier and smarter kids.
I bet you haven't read of word of Marx beyond the communist manifesto.
This concerns ethnic diversity amongst ethnically similar peoples, and yet they insert race to push an agenda. Europe is not racially diverse, it's ethnically diverse, and has see the spread of genes through warfare across Europe.
I see this as the destruction of European peoples. Well, not the Latino part, considering true Latin people are European, not the brown mutts from down south. They're mutts. Latin heritage and people belong to Europe. Nonetheless, ethnic mixing should be on a limited scale as well. According to the article, it would suffice, and it works apparently. We're not talking racial mixing here, after all, because historically it hasn't happened much to us.
The study looked at a sample of 370,000 people from around the world and found that the couples with most genetic diversity(different races) tended to have babies that were smarter, taller, and healthier. Hate to break your bubble, but your racial homogeneity idea is just a myth. You want a master race? Better start irrelevant shiting.
Irrelevant shiting is also known as irrelevant shiting btw.
You know what I mean, lol.
No thanks, no glorified blog posts from diversity pushing Marxist filth.
What's your point? Genetic diversity does not equate to racial diversity, nor is a German and a Swede mixing on par with a Swede and a Somalian mixing. A Swede and a Somalian mixing if, indisputably, a "downgrade," producing an objectively dumber human the majority of the time.
Trying reading it, genius. Where does this say me fucking a nigger will produce a genetically superior offspring? It concerns selective breeding patterns, and they all, historically, took place amongst peoples of the same race.
What the fuck does Marx have to do with diversity you fucking moron?
Fuck Marx and everyone who likes him.
Enjoy your Hapsburgs.
Actually marxists get called brocialist by liberals/idpolers
I just had a guy in this thread preach diversity to me using Marx to reinforce his beliefs.
That Marx's followers preach diversity is not his fault and has nothing to do with any of his ideas.
He also doesn't advocate that we're all the same and in Critique of the Gotha Program explicitly draws attention to the fact that we aren't, even saying that meritocracy would a characteristic of socialism before communism.
So let me get this straight, despite all evidence we have presented to you of Hillary not being a leftist, that other groups aren't """genetically""" inferior and that anuddah shoah isn't real, you're still going to reject evidence, and think that Marx said that """""everyone is equal""""" despite the fact that he clearly states within his work that people aren't.
Are you completely forgetting about to each their own according to their need?
Of course you have, because you're a wilfully ignorant Holla Forumsyp.
In other words the more diverse your genome is(the more different your parents are) the greater the chance of you being smarter, taller, and healthier. Since different races have greater differences in genes, then mixed race children would have a very diverse genome.
There's no need to get so riled up over the "mongerlization of white people". I am simply responding to your claim that " a mixed child's intellectual capacity is less, its behavioral tendencies and predisposition are different" whereas the studies clearly indicate otherwise. You also said that "a mixed child to me represents the extermination of a bloodline and thousands of years of survival". What do you mean by this? Wouldn't both races live on in the child. Maybe you grew up in a bad environment, but I grew up in an area with a very diverse community and had lots of friends who were of different races. Some were assholes, some were stupid, but race really didn't play a factor. Turns out that there are good people in different races, who knew?
fuck this is cringy. why do people just stand there?
I feel so bad for that cashier.
That was shit-posting, you retard. As for the evidence of the rest, I have not seen it.
To each their own according to their productive ability. I prefer that.
yet you would gladly spend 10 hours surfing around Holla Forums conspiracy videos about muh karltural marxism, really stimulates my neurons
Marx said no such thing.
Holy shit. This is cringy as fuck.
Marx also writes about that too, you spastic.
Classic Holla Forums response
I do live in Chicago, EVERYONE is an asshole, black or white.
That's not what it says at all because there's zero evidence for that. The evidence supports genetic diversity amongst ethnically similar groups. Genetic diversity in and of itself is irrelevant. It's the genes constituting the diversity that matter. A negro has inferior genetics. This study is not, in any shape or form, advocating or supporting mixing races, it's merely speaking of genetic diversity, and the genetic diversity considered is between ethnically similar peoples, because the vast majority of mixing occurs between ethnically similar peoples.
Also you're forgetting the "directional dominance" factor, which is the selective breeding of people who display desired traits. Height being one.
No. Not to me. To put it simply, when you mix blue and red, you no longer, nor will you ever again have blue or red. A mixed child will have different predispositions and intellectual capacities. Plus, at the end of the day, it's just not European, and so no matter what, I do not support it. Even if I were some dumb negro form Sub-Saharan Africa who bathes in cattle urine, I would not support my people mixing.
Okay? That's an environmental factor. Give them some tools and materials and see who robs someone with a hammer and who builds a usable structure. A negro's brain functions differently and isn't as adapt at innovating.
Odd considering those two things contradict themselves.
When someone calls a Neolib a Leftist, clearly they're shit-posting.
You do realise that having genetically diverse kids is healthier, right?
Whoms is she
But surely you as the """pure aryan european ubermensch"""" are innovative?
Haven't the foggiest, I'm just collecting as much smug anime girls as I possibly can.
So is he going to call wikipedia and UNESCO marxist now?
So this is the power of Google reverse image search. whoa
Sure, a German and a Sweden mixing on a small scale is fine. Now a German and a Nigerian mixing, that's not good. Throwing both under the same banner is ridiculous and nothing you link supports it.
"To each according to his ability" describes socialism, while "to each according to his needs" describes communism. The whole point is that before the technology and infrastructure for communism exists a meritocracy will be a necessary facet of society.
You're really making me think. The fact is, Negroes can innovate.
Holy fuck you're retarded.
How about this?
1) Are you white?
2) Are the scientists mentioned black?
3) Are those scientists more innovative than you?
4) Are you superior to those scientists?
Nothing is worse than someone who believes that their self worth is generated from the achievements of others in their so called superior category.
A spectre is haunting America — that spectre is Hillary. All the white male ignorant rednecks have entered into a holy alliance to exorcise this spectre: Berniebros and brocialists, Russians and sexist poor people who only think about themselves rhather than what hilldawg is entitled to, the FBI and purity progressives who don't recognize the value in intersectional airstrikes.
damn son, where'd you find this
I made it, friend
looks like somebody belongs on the right side of that chart
This is your brain on spooks
Follow your advice so we can stop having these edgy teen "memes"