you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]blackpoop321 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

hate speech is OK based on the color of the people doing it

See. That's where you're right. Our ancestors built all these countries niggers are rushing to. They didn't build it for niggers or to make baby soldiers to fight Israel's wars. They built those countries for their lineage to prosper.

If there must be "hate speech" laws, it should be for anything that opposes the legitimate biological imperative that is White supremacy.

Until then, as it is, if it's good for them it's good for us.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

If there must be "hate speech" laws, it should be for anything that opposes the legitimate biological imperative that is White supremacy.

White supremacy is a very crude heuristic. Is an inbred white child molester with an IQ of 80 superior to a black scientist non-criminal with an IQ of 150? Clearly not. Now obviously its true that statistically a given black person is probabilistically more likely to be criminal or have a low IQ, but this is a crude and inaccurate system of classifying people as undesirables, when in fact what makes the people undesirable is criminality or stupidity, which exist quite independently of skin color.

Also in that case OP should just state his true beliefs as a white supremacist rather than disingenuously representing himself as a supporter of hate speech laws, which I rather agree was really the reason he posted this article, and precisely what I was trying to point out

[–]blackpoop321 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

So is it "obviously true" or "crude and inaccurate"? You're jewish aren't you.