What do you think is the best outcome of the US 2024 election?

AidsVictim69 · 2023-08-22T02:00:08+00:00

Either Trump being imprisoned or disqualified before the election, or winning but being disqualified or imprisoned at that point. Whatever makes majority of American become more hostile to the system.

AidsVictim69 · 2023-08-20T01:55:18+00:00

GDP is only loosely useful as a guide here. Germany had superior industrial capability to the USSR (especially including the combined Euro industry it directly or indirectly owned) yet it severely lagged behind the USSR in material production (tanks, planes, artillery etc) once the war began. By 1942, before lend lease had really significant impact, the USSR had already retooled and raced ahead of German war production. This can largely be chalked up to the USSRs central planning economic model that allowed them to relatively easily direct production as needed and recognizing much earlier the scale needed for "total war".

Conversely Germany was caught up in web of competing capitalist interests and the NSDAP was reluctant to commandeer industry because of how it would have affected the political-economic balance within Germany and their expectations that they would be able to return to a more "balanced" post war economy where private industry took the lead after victory in the East. A further complication was that German industry was less streamlined than Soviets and they built more complex equipment in general. By the time they became desperate enough in 44 to actually take the necessary industrial-economic steps for the total war they were actually in it was too late, they saw a large increase in war production (despite Allied bombings) but by that time the matter had already been decided - they were never going to catch up to the Soviet material already on the field.

While there were other constraints on Germany (chiefly oil production) if Germany had directed towards war production on the scale of the USSR in 1941 it would have been a much closer run war in the East at least. It's less about GDP and more about Germanys industrial failure to match their ambitions, hamstrung by the economic-political model and underestimation of the industrial scale needed to win the war.

AidsVictim69 · 2023-08-19T08:47:35+00:00

No, not in any concrete way. National Socialism was a sort of semi-collectivist capitalism, operating practically as some hybrid between private and state capitalism. To an extent it simply did whatever was politically convenient or necessary in the realm of economics. The capitalist class was maintained although they became subservient to the state (not unlike the US et al). One of the primary reasons Germany lost the war was the unwillingness and/or inability to prepare or adapt the economy for a total war the way the Soviets could; this would have disrupted the semi capitalist system they operated under and might have compromised their political power if capitalists political and financial support shifted too far away from the party (they were subservient but still a powerful group who influence within the party). Nor was there any strong indication the party intended to move away from the capitalist system, if anything they seemed to be preparing post war Germany for a capitalist model. They also purged the party in earlier years of "actual" socialists, rejecting it as possible future for the party/Germany.

I find that thread and most definitions of "right socialism" to be fairly vague and the German state under Nationalism Socialism much more strongly resembled capitalism under wartime conditions than anything meaningfully distinct. Elements of collectivism and state control within Italy and Germany never really materialized into anything more substantial and I don't believe they were evolving in that direction but who knows with enough time. I suspect they would have eventually looked something like France or other "social democracies" in a post world war victory.

Bottom line is there was no ownership of the means of production, workers councils, vanguard workers movements etc in control of the state. The state "guided" the capitalist class but it was essentially still capitalist in production and ownership.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-11-06T17:16:37+00:00

I have a guy who works with me from Ghana. He has a CS degree (from an African university) and is a scrum master (basically a semi technical manager). He makes six figures I'm sure and in general seems like a nice enough guy.

He's also shockingly lazy even in the context of tech grifters and doesn't even show up for his sole team duties of leading meetings (which he sucks at) half the time and I've never seen him offer even a hint of technical analysis despite nominally having a CS bachelors. I would say this is typical for the Africans hired here of the dozen or so others I've known. They're hired because they're black and have degree paper qualifications. While my experience is only anecdotal I'm extremely suspicious when I hear about these "highly successful" African immigrants since in most of my experience it's entirely a scam.

I also used to live in a city with a lot of FOB African immigrants who were more working class/average. While they are definitely less hostile towards whites and preferable socially to African Americans they were definitely on the low side of average IQ, at least the ones I met.

Tangentially I've also worked with some AA devs and they have the same issue average Indians have of never taking any initiative or doing any research on projects unless you're there basically holding their hand explaining what to do. These are probably the in the top 10% for AAs since they do have enough technical competence to write some code, they're just almost always going to be stuck in the "bare minimum" area of coding. Maybe the top 1% will be somewhere around the average non slacker white or East Asian devs.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-09-26T17:16:16+00:00

Dysgenic reproduction patterns and brain damage from overdosing on electronics

AidsVictim69 · 2022-09-23T17:12:12+00:00

61k casualties is actually not that crazy if you include everyone in the contested areas (i.e. the breakaway republics militias, civilians there) as "Russian", although it may be somewhat exaggerated.

Ukraine has certainly had far higher casualty ratios though and 100k+ isn't infeasible either.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-09-23T17:08:48+00:00

Your entire worldview revolves around the idea that the West is going to fall to a more vigorous and masculine power.

I don't think you understand the view of most alt-right types. It's cute that your post is full of racialized thinking and determinism though.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-08-06T03:08:00+00:00

Orban has been involved with GOP/CPAC stuff for many years. He's practical in his diplomacy (or if you prefer, opportunistic) and has always been "pro Jewish". Personally I don't care much since he actually seems interested in implementing border protection and demographic health which is what really matters.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-08-02T16:43:28+00:00

While it's true communism is not anti white by it's nature, communism in the West is far too tied up with the anti white academic left to be of much use. You would have to minecraft almost every academic leftist around, thoroughly burn out their left liberal ideological descendants that makeup the PMC and (to a lesser extent) bourgeoise before anything healthy could grow in the socialist space in the West.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-07-06T20:35:53+00:00

This was most prevalent in the hype around Ukrainian infantry armed with javelins. As if a light infantry force armed with good equipment and squad tactics was enough to match a force with superior armor and artillery.

I think Ukraine has actually been signaling the importance of infantry. Ukraine has only been able to hold out because built up fortifications and lines of infantry have proven so effective at slowing down the materially superior Russian army. Anti air systems have made the Russians somewhat hesitant about fully committing their air assets as well. The US is in a unique position because it's airforce is much (operationally) larger, experienced, and sophisticated but everyone else can't rely on airpower in the same way. It's true artillery has been the "star" of this war but it's in the context of allowing infantry lines to advance.

It's armor that has really been falling behind in importance in modern warfare - Syria and Ukraine have both seen the side with vastly superior armor capabilities relying on other assets and tanks taking more of a supporting role. They still have key roles in certain situations but they aren't nearly as dominant or doctrinally central as they used to be following WWII.

In general military targeting systems have advanced to the point where it's really about who can deliver the most munitions fastest (whether the delivery system is missiles, aircraft, artillery, or infantry level equipment) and it doesn't matter much whether it's armor, infantry, air or other systems in the way because they will all be annihilated, at least in the case of all out war between two modernized and capable forces. Entrenched infantry has the greatest chance of surviving and being able to hold areas, especially urban ones, in the face of these systems.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-06-24T23:27:58+00:00

So why are so many of you,

There isn't strong support for restricting abortions in spaces like these.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-06-24T23:26:48+00:00

Do you think most of these white babies are going to grow up to be healthy right wing whites? Healthy intelligent whites rarely need abortions.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-06-22T21:07:07+00:00

A degree of correctness but you can clearly see the boomer esque conservatism crowding out actual useful thought

What's happening to young white males is similar to what happened to black males in the 40s 50s & 60s. They were marginalized which led to government control over the black family - Uncle Sam became the head of the black household. Today we are experiencing the same being done in white households. Voluntarily, white women are calling for more government control over their futures rather than turning to a family unit for that support.

The same sentiment is re affirmed in several other comments.

Conservatives (mainstream and to an extent less mainstream ones) love this narrative of welfare and some nebulous idea of government intervention being socially destructive and if we could just keep uncle sams hands off the noble black (or whatever race) family they will return to their natural noble state (you know, when black men had class and wore pants above their waist like white people). It's a simple narrative that eludes many complex social and material factors and trends, an ideology handed to them by their betters who just so happen (at least historically) to conveniently benefit from anti government sentiment blunting their tax rates and regulation.

Black families did not fall apart because of the government - they fell apart because of massive urbanization, the destruction of social structures, and lack of said social structures begetting new ones ( centered around polygamy and immediate and spontaneous violence defining social hierarchy) that are more similar to their native African brothers probably not by coincidence. Welfare was a response to the miserable poverty and horrendous conditions blacks urban internal immigrants faced, it did not precede it and it's arguable how much it perpetuates it - yes if you let them starve and murder each other in their desperation maybe by some Darwinian process a more stable black society independent of welfare or enforcement of European social norms would emerge but no one in the (mainstream) first world is going to tolerate that, and in all likelihood it would just look like African tribal social structures again. Conservatives don't like this because it implicates capitalism and invokes race realism (directly or more subtly) which they are taught to revere and abhor respectively.

They are correct that the same process is repeating with white families - in fact the traditional white family has been on its way out for over a hundred years - but whites were more capable and socially robust in the face of these trends and so were able to better weather them for cultural and/or racial reasons. When white families fall apart it's because of social values, declining economic prospects, alienation, atomization, and every social disease common to the modern man not because white women can rely on welfare to help feed their kids (albeit they do vote and evangelize in favor of that out of self interest) or uncle same becoming the "man of the house".

But there is an important distinction between whites and black in this regard. In particular two trends have greatly sped up the destruction of the white family in the last 30 years - the aping of black social values to the point of being unrecognizable and the anti white and specifically anti white male institutions (in government, media, and corporations) which the "left" have captured and use to socially demean (making them more unlikely to be selected by women) and impoverish them (making them unable to afford families). Immigration crushes their labour power and gender and race regimes are designed to uplift selected classes at the expense of the white natives.

Your typical conservative is only half way at best to understanding this or even being able to admit anything beyond "muh welfare" as a cause.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-06-21T18:54:10+00:00

Somewhere around 10% of black Americans are immigrants and close to 20% have recent immigrant ancestors https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/01/27/key-findings-about-black-immigrants-in-the-u-s/

AidsVictim69 · 2022-05-30T02:58:42+00:00

Only parts of Appalachia are really severely impoverished, it's mostly just where Eastern Kentucky and West Virginia meet. Conditions within it are mostly very similar to other rural areas, especially in the modern context. The area is more difficult and capital intensive to develop than other parts of the country because of the terrain (and to a lesser extent the weather).

If you look at county poverty map Appalachia is actually mostly invisible except for those aforementioned areas https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/2018/comm/acs-5yr-poverty-all-counties.html

AidsVictim69 · 2022-05-30T02:38:25+00:00

If that self reported number were actually true, every 10th or 20th guy hitting the top tail of 2 standard deviations walking around in that area of the world would have a larger penis than anyone in porn and setting world records everytime anyone bothered to measure the population.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-05-30T02:32:14+00:00

There are still many millions of migrants that would gladly choose Europe over their own country. I suspect they would want to keep moving there even if their own birth rates dropped significantly sometime in the future - long after Europe would have already become majority non white if these trends continued for a few more decades.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-05-30T02:27:01+00:00

There is no comparable population movement in European history. The Muslim Iberian (and Sicily/Southern Italy) states were principally case of elite replacement not mass migration like we are seeing now, mostly it was in cities that new population arrived and they left a relatively limited genetic legacy in only a few areas. The Steppe invaders likewise were mostly just a ruling caste who basically disappeared into the much larger genetic milieu that looked largely the same before and after their period of dominance.

Modern mass European migrations are true population changes comparable only to something like the colonization of the Americas, except occurring at a much faster rate (it still took hundreds of years for Mexico and South America to become "mixed"). Nor has there really been anything comparable to the level of integration these new populations quickly achieve - the religious cultural and linguistic barriers are much less severe than most historical examples.

In continental history the closest event is probably the movement of Anatolian/Near Eastern farmers mixing with Europeans as semi modern farming spread. Again that's something that took place over probably hundreds of years though and those groups were much more closely related (especially at that point) to Europeans.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-05-30T02:12:47+00:00

women who are looking forward to producing dark children

This is a psyop lie. White women are the least miscegenating group of women on the planet.

Take a look (or more helpfully don't) at white American women under 40

AidsVictim69 · 2022-04-28T02:53:12+00:00

Always ironic when they pop out black girls. Now her kids look exactly like the women their own father would leave in the dirt (and has) to fuck women who are by nature more beautiful. What a monstrous depressing cycle.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-04-28T02:47:54+00:00

If whites don't pursue white women then others will inevitably take them. The people that mix are often poor, lonely, isolated.

The white women that are dumb enough to keep the kids maybe. Fucking blacks for "fun" is extremely common among middle class college educated white women. Walk into any downtown American city or college campus with substantial black population and it's just a coin flip whether the next white woman you run into fucks blacks or not.

Women are pursued, not the other way around.

In the modern world women are the selectors from a pool of men (and always were to a lesser degree). Hell in a lot of highschools like where this girl is likely from it's the white women that are the ones actively pushing to get with black guys. American culture and especially the youth culture is completely afrophillic and that's reflected in their behaviours.

This "Just be a man" thinking that will supposedly fix the problem completely misunderstands how rotten American culture is.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-04-25T19:31:09+00:00

American blacks are still far genetically closer to blacks than whites.

They're still around a quarter white on average. Most are very definitely in the "mixed race" continuum even if they're closer to Africans.

Their average IQ is much higher than sub-Saharan blacks though, which is an argument against the one drop rule.

Raise the average African in Western society with a healthy diet and their IQ is probably closer to 80 i.e. very close to AA IQ. Besides their IQ they're also at least as prone to violence and only a little bit better at long term planning in my experience having spent time around both groups. I don't see how this is argument against the one drop rule.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-04-25T15:50:36+00:00

The vast majority of "blacks" in the US are mixed race, makes a pretty good argument for one drop rule.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-04-25T14:17:10+00:00

Regardless of how their parents feel it's relatively common for MENA women to have black kids, a mixed race population of brown/black with no identity and likely to adopt an anti white mentality to define themselves lacking anything else.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-04-25T14:09:56+00:00

This isn't psychoanalysis, it's more like a reflection of the reality of the rights chances in the electorate/system vs wishful thinking

AidsVictim69 · 2022-04-25T14:01:48+00:00

I doubt much would have changed. Giving people a few more IQ points back is not going to alter the history of the cold war, Joe Average being slightly dumber has no impact on the superstructure of historical development at that level (if he was 15 or 20 points dumber however...). It probably has made society worse to live in though which is one the reasons to seize control and safeguarding the environment instead of spitefully attacking it to "own the libs" like you constantly see from the right.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-04-25T13:56:47+00:00

The Black population didn't increase. It was always 13% of the population. And the biggest spike happened in the 1990s but dropped.

Relative to the white population it's increased massively. Around 1950 the ratio would have been something like 9 whites to 1 black. Now it's probably 4 or 3 whites to 1 black, especially if you discount the boomers (60+) who are irrelevant for most of these types of stats.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-04-25T13:48:09+00:00

Russia has done really well economically (relative to the severity of the sanctions) but it hasn't been long. The larger long term problem is technology and capital for infrastructure/resource extraction. Even the much more competent and materially capable USSR had this issue and it's even more severe in modern Russias case. As parts wear out or simply become unavailable they could enter a Venezuela like economic spiral of being unable to maintain or develop their resource infrastructure.

China can't really fill this gap for a number of reasons (technology/manufacture compatibility, economic geographic orientations) so Russia is put in a tough spot - their greatest strength is their natural resources but exploiting that to it's potential (or even maintaining it) is limited by the West.

But I suspect Europe will be making "exceptions" to the sanctions not long after some kind of peace deal is reached in Ukraine since they will be as desperate as (or more than) the Russians for a return to historical economic norms.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-04-10T23:02:50+00:00

Russia is winning decisively and they'll conquer all of Ukraine within 3-4 months.

Delusional

AidsVictim69 · 2022-04-04T01:09:34+00:00

There's really no need to become overly fixated on seed oils, just like how soy was the "it" problem for a few years. 90% of the average Americans weight problems can be traced back to too many calories and too many of those calories being from some form of sugar. It's great if people are educating themselves about the healthiest diet but the average persons problem is simply that they eat too much.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-03-31T15:45:39+00:00

Honey has a very similar nutritional profile to sucrose as it's essentially fructose, glucose, water and some other compounds. Fructose is a little better than sucrose but the idea that fruits (or honey) are much healthier simply because fructose has a slightly lower GI is nonsense. A small to moderate amount of sweetener of whatever kind in your diet isn't anything especially worrisome IMO but don't think what you're getting with honey is "far more healthy" than sugar.

Wealthy people in the ancient world who could afford to eat lots of honey developed diabetes and got fat just like the average sucrose/HFCS guzzling prole today.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-03-30T16:02:18+00:00

I agree that people should generally cut back on seed oil but you're conflating a lot of things here. I would put simple obesity and especially micro plastics at the forefront of most modern health issues. It's really not clear how bad seed oils are for you while things like high caloric intake, lots of sugar, xenohormones/hormone analogs are pretty clear cut. Even within the oil category there's a lot of questions about which type are bad i.e. vegetable oil is clearly "worse" than grape seed oil but by how much? Is grape seed oil especially dangerous? Is avocado oil dangerous? Is it a matter of cooking temperature and oil type? etc

AidsVictim69 · 2022-03-26T14:04:50+00:00

Russia has no chance at occupying the entire country

AidsVictim69 · 2022-03-26T14:02:49+00:00

Russian and allied forces in total seem to have lost 2000 KIA and 6500 WIA. A total of about 8500 casualties. This amounts to about 4% of pre-war strength.

For Ukraine, the losses are far greater. Russian MoD estimates 14,000 dead and 16,000 seriously wounded with as many as 2000 others made POWs. This amounts to about 11% of pre-war strength.

A four times casualty ratio for Ukraine is believable considering that the Russians have air and artillery superiority. They've launched as many as 1200 land-attack missiles since the start of the war.

I wouldn't trust these numbers too much. As you say air superiority has been limited or pushed into a more restricted role and Ukrainian counter artillery has had at least some effect. Between the relatively slow advances against fortified areas and things like the atrophied/abandoned encirclement of Kiev I'm not inclined to think Russia has anything like a 4:1 ratio. Assaults into fortified areas (which is where a lot of the offensives have been stalling) don't produce those kinds of ratios unless you have massive superiority in equipment (doesn't seem so) and overwhelming concentration of forces (Russia had fewer men total and somewhat of an advantage in trained soldiers at the start). The Russians keep putting out bullshit about their progress in fortified/urban areas although it appears Mariupol is indeed close to falling.

There's tons of propaganda in the West about the Russian army "falling apart" which clearly isn't true but I'm not buying Russias MoD numbers either

Azov took extreme casualties in the last two days and now effectively ceases to exist as a single unit.

Azov has more men outside of Mariupol, definitely some elements in Kharkiv and probably Kiev too where they have training and recruitment centers in both cities. They seem to have lost significant forces in Mariupol (along with other elements of the Ukrainian army that formed the bulk of the defenders) but it's not clear exactly what kind of shape they're in.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-03-19T03:55:45+00:00

I'm sure he is but what he values most is a place at the table with other bourgeoise like himself.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-03-16T04:47:22+00:00

The American economic and social system has destroyed the white populations within it's own borders and exported around the world with similar effects in Europe. The system has been anti national for ~40 years now (and anti white for 20-30) and fundamentally must be so as a pre condition of the transformation of national systems into a unitary international one. In a few generations we will see every previously "white" nation on Earth become minority white (as has already happened in the US and probably several European nations for the under 30 demographic) and likely extinction of the native peoples altogether eventually. The only thing that can assail this trend is the collapse of the international capitalist system which means revolution or dissolution of the Unite States, it's beating heart.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-03-02T05:52:08+00:00

It's merely for internal propaganda.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-03-01T00:29:56+00:00

If you wish to use a whataboutist argument, at least make an effort to understand a smidgen of history.

You're comparing the modern oligarchic multicultural multiconfessional capitalist state of Russia with white nationalism and fascism. You're implying it's (Russian authoritarianism) producing more immoral results than Western liberalism. Never mind that the link between modern Russia and "white nationalism" is extremely tenuous, your argument necessitates comparison ('whataboutism") because it's claiming moral superiority of one system over another.

But if you want to just look at this at isolation and feel good about reading from script that's fine. I feel perfectly comfortable arguing against the modern liberal capitalist abominations of the US and EU in either isolation or in comparison. That's how you develop a more nuanced and complete view of the world. Just go back to sleep and forget about what your masters are scheming https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2022/02/america-defeats-germany-for-the-third-time-in-a-century-the-mic-bare-and-ogam-conquer-nato.html

Perhaps this is, however, an appropriate kind of response one can expect in DAR.

Cope. You just don't have the intelligence or introspection necessary for anything beyond being a midwit liberal.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-02-28T22:17:41+00:00

What's unfortunate here is that anyone on Saidit would support these attrocities. You should see Russian TV at the moment. It's all lies about liberating Ukraine. This is what you get with dictatorships. This is the result of fascism. This is where your white-nationalist ethnostate authoritarian propaganda will lead. This post at Saidit is an example of the worst that humanity has to offer: the promotion of authoritarian states and leaders, which continue to destroy the lives of many, for the sake of a handful of evil people.

This has so far not even come close to a single one of the Western democracies multicultural "adventures" in the last few decades. Russia would have to kill literally tens of millions of Ukrainians, displace tens of millions, and then rape every national asset for the profit of liches in suites while impoverishing the nation before you could drag out your slosh brained moral outrage with any credibility.

Those of you promoting this propaganda are complicit in ruining the lives of innocent people. None of this will benefit you. It's cancer. It will have an impact on you, personally.

Keep thinking that capitalist scum.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-02-18T06:11:59+00:00

Nike would most likely choose to lose the Russian market than compromise on black worship.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-02-17T22:55:31+00:00

It's ironic that such companies look to be becoming a far larger threat to capitalism than communism ever was.

In what way?

AidsVictim69 · 2022-01-28T21:36:42+00:00

The US government has been running a colonization and eugenics (or dysgenics) program for decades now.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-01-25T21:27:28+00:00

Sorry but a lot of this is revisionist nonsense that is endemic on the right stemming from pathological centering of Jews as recent histories prime movers

The west was very chummy with the early USSR.

No it wasn't. The West repeatedly tried to assist the Whites in the civil war, including sending actual combat expeditions and material, and economic encirclement of the red state. There were some elements (including wealthy Jews to a seemingly outsized extent) within the West that supported the USSR but is a great exaggeration to describe the West as a whole as "chummy" with the early USSR. The Western group working closest with the USSR were the Germans (both pre and post nationalist socialist revolution), they traded technology (both military and industrial) for resources. Mobile warfare that defined WWII was developed by German generals using the USSR as testing grounds as part of the military agreement that allowed them to test new military technology and doctrine on Soviet soil to avoid technically violating disarmament agreements with the West.

Western capital and engineering firms built up Soviet industry

Western (including German) capital did help develop Soviet industry, which the Soviets payed for (i.e. it was trade), not some nefarious Jewish plot.

and the USSR would not have won the war without massive American assistance via lend-lease and the air war over Germany.

Western propaganda. The German offensives had already largely failed (1942) by the time lend lease became a significant factor (1943 or 44) in the war effort. The USSR wins either way.

That’s why the Anglo-Saxon powers(Britain and the US) handed all of Eastern Europe over to Stalin during ww2.

They "handed" them over because they would have been militarily incapable of winning the war without the use of nuclear weapons. The Soviet army was larger and more capable than the Western continental armies at the end of the war. Nor would most of the public have supported "part 2" of the largest war even seen.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-01-24T08:19:52+00:00

They fit in and talk and act like me and have similar values in a way that blacks, mexicans, arabs, etc. don't. I'm just using "white" as a stand in for that.

That depends, are you a white liberal? If so they're very similar to you yes, you're both poison to the health of white nations.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-01-24T08:16:46+00:00

I have some sympathy for Uyghur mostly because China has been slowly colonizing and sinosizing the region. But US intelligence is clearly using them for propaganda so it's best to just ignore most of what you hear about it.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-01-24T08:11:06+00:00

I doubt it matters much. The mass of 3rd world immigrants will come and learn whatever basic lingo is required to collect welfare or work the shit jobs. It's mostly a matter of geography and the more nationalist cultures that keep mass immigration from taking place in Asia. Japan would already look like the West if they had the same "humanitarian" policies regardless of any language barrier.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-01-20T17:33:22+00:00

I would want to live in a society where people share my ideas about how the social contracts and economy should be arranged, e.g. those who are similar to me in ideology. If that society was multi-racial or mono-racial wouldn't matter that much to me.

You generally don't pick and choose who get's to live in real world societies, you deal with the reality of group (racial) averages. Anyone can construct some theoretical society full of people who have XYZ qualities or ideology but that's a largely useless exercise except as ideological masturbation.

Libertarians putting ideology over reality is mostly why it's been a useless movement outside of furthering the interests of capital.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-01-20T17:23:29+00:00

All it means is that you figure shit out faster.

Not really. It's extremely difficult to impossible for many high level concepts/forms of abstracted thought to be understood by people with 100 or less IQ, at least in any useful timeframe or dynamically enough for their input to be valuable. Leaders tend to be high IQ (relative to their peers) for a reason. Anyone who has taught can tell you that some people are just never going to understand some concepts in any useful capacity, it's not just that they're slower learning it, it's that the best they can do is rote regurgitation with handholding.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-01-20T04:56:23+00:00

No? We are talking about "hispanics" in America which are mostly not white.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-01-19T04:08:33+00:00

Somewhat. At most around 20% are "white" by the US/Euro definition. The vast majority of immigration in the last three or four decades and presumably for the next decades have been/will be the mixed race underclasses.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-01-17T18:17:59+00:00

Strange that some people seem to find it shameful or odd that a white man would be bothered by it. Personally yes, it does bother me that white women are encouraged to fuck and have children with men who often have a hatred for whites when they aren't being used for pussy and are usually abominable parents with the worst life outcomes in the country, whos offspring perpetuate their dysfunctional society.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-01-06T06:32:42+00:00

The East Asian countries refute this.

Ok, spread was inevitable within the context of existing Western countries without a radical turn in the cultural mentality. It has little to with the vaxx either way though - to your main point, it isn't anti vaxx movements that resulted in the spread since they a) don't significantly prevent the spread b) highly vaccinated Western societies (or areas of the US) are not fairing significantly better in infection rates. All the vaccine is really doing is giving better outcomes in vulnerable people. Which is good but it's not making the point you're making.

And that says it all. Why does a homogenous high IQ nation like Japan take a pandemic more seriously than the "diverse" and hyper individualist Western countries? Because they actually understand the importance of preserving their race and telling foreigners to go away.

Even today, Western countries are still killing themselves by refusing to wear masks or practice social distancing despite the virus being around for 2 years.

It's not a surprise now when we start seeing articles like the one I just posted in the OP, where Asian countries have to start banning flights to the West because it's too hazardous. But we still have conspiracy theorists within our ranks who say "Lol, no virus exists. Just go back to dying and eating horse paste".

The virus isn't a significant threat to Western demographics, perhaps there's some tortured analogy between racial attitudes and the virus response but I don't think it's of much importance.

The viruses importance either way has been significantly overblown. I just ignore most of the right wing fetishization of it, the same as I ignore the liberal paranoia and propaganda for a virus that isn't especially dangerous to most people.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-01-05T23:40:34+00:00

All you had to do was destroy Western civilization to achieve it.

Oh wait... that's the exact same thing as White genocide.

Only in the mind of liberals who think "Western civilization" is entirely composed of bourgeoise materialism and cosmopolitan culture.

But I'm not really sure what your point is. Spread has been inevitable and consistent in regions within the US regardless of vaccination levels and likewise in highly vaccinated countries in Europe with no significant anti vaxx movements.

AidsVictim69 · 2022-01-01T17:12:00+00:00

Chinese researchers are notorious in the academic community for falsifying data and simple "most cited" metric doesn't say anything about the integrity of those papers (for instance if it's a bunch of shitty research papers citing other shitty papers then the citation index climbs without any consideration of quality).

But it doesn't really matter because the trajectory of the West is downwards anyway.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-12-10T06:27:02+00:00

The Jewish elite exist and are a particularly destructive (for whites) force but they are far from the only problem in modern Western nations nor are they the sole or primary origin of all our ills. The pathological view of Jews on the right often crowds out the need for useful and comprehensive analysis since it ends up terminating in useless thinking like expecting society to right the ship simply by removing Jews from power when in reality they are only one aspect of our interconnected and multitudinal problems. It's extremely tiring when 90% of the topics in these spaces begin and end there.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-11-28T16:47:45+00:00

I am against the article being deleted, but mainstream Western estimations about deaths under communism have always been extremely suspect to outright fictitious propaganda. Most historical "holocausts" discussion (in both Western and Eastern histories) are the subject of intense propaganda by the liberal regimes.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-11-28T16:39:43+00:00

The various white races are frequently as different from one another as they are from non-white races.

Not really, at least for Europeans. Everyone in Europe proper is relatively closely related genetically and to a lesser extent culturally. A Swede and Italian are more closely related than an Italian and Algerian.

Sarmatians, Laplanders, Fins, Phrygians, Slavs, Teutons, Anglo-Saxons... William Lawrence categorized the many typologies quite thoroughly. Thomas Huxley correctly divided the white races into 'dark' and 'light' varieties. Remember--as you get further from Africa, genetic diversity reduces. Only the East Asians can claim a relatively small number of typologies.

Europe is a very geographically small area (relative to the rest of Eurasia/Africa) there isn't really enough room for some massive "racial" diversity there and that's reflected in genetic maps where all Europeans are are tightly bound with each other. Once you start talking about "white" races in Central Eurasia/Anatolia/ME things become more complicated but generally these over specialized categorization systems don't make sense in modern genetic landscapes. Slavs, Germans, Italians etc are not radically different from each other, especially compared to their closest relatives in North Africa/ME

AidsVictim69 · 2021-11-28T16:33:08+00:00

foreign state influencers sowing discontent

The people who are most against your own interests are other Americans.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-11-28T16:32:15+00:00

It's great for living on handouts in poverty, but it does not ultimately advance the circumstances of their people.

It advances the interests of the black and liberal bourgeoise ideology, which is to break up and destroy white communities by making illegal their tools of self preservation.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-11-15T05:03:32+00:00

One might speak of the ideological concept of "whiteness" or even race altogether being separate from the localized ethnic reality people live in, you could even point to it as a socially destructive force (by superseding local communal relationships with a trans nationalist one). But of course all these people criticizing "whiteness" support the system replacing and destroying people with the label "white" so this is largely a pointless and harmful mode of inquiry, at least until our communities are stabilized and healthy again.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-11-15T04:55:35+00:00

Correct, although I have some regional questions. The "White means European" definition is affected by how Kazakhstan reaches into Europe, how Russia reaches into Asia (Siberia) and by the Ottoman Empire's expansion into continental Europe as well.

These sorts of questions are not relevant to most Europeans. There's always ambiguity around border regions which are resolved (or not) by the peoples living there. We can say with certainty that the modern or semi modern definition of "white" includes almost everyone living in continental Europe.

Even without race science factored in, there is still the whole "x wasn't considered white" component key to whiteness studies which I am currently having questions about right now.

This is mostly overblown modern liberals as a sort of gotchya. "White" is a modern concept developed in contrast (in some cases literally) to other races. European racism against other European "races"/ethnicity doesn't really matter much for the modern definition - most cases of xyz ethnicity not being "white" is really whatever race (in the US case Anglos) seeing other euro ethnicities as "lesser than" rather than "not white" per se. The most notorious example of Irish (and later Italians) in America not being considered "white" was not in a modern racial sense we use nor was it in any way consistent - the mostly English (Anglo-Saxon) derived Southern plantar classes specifically funneled the Irish into the South to help keep it "white" in the antebellum period.

It's very clear from modern genetics that continental Europeans are a very closely related people (in contrast to say African "blacks" which are really a multitude of diverging races with similar phenotypes).

AidsVictim69 · 2021-11-07T06:31:02+00:00

The "solution" to homosexuality is to simply follow historical Western examples, which is to basically to ignore and culturally marginalize them. If they want to covertly practice their deviancy then whatever. Homosexuality as an identity is a modern narcissistic and anti communal identity (or perhaps replacement of a healthy community with an dysgenic one), when communities are healthy homosexuals will "naturally" contribute to communal health either through reproduction (not uncommon in traditional societies) or through material supplementation (income shared among the family offspring).

I'm fairly sure this post is just someone having a laugh though in any case though.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-11-07T06:20:21+00:00

It's principally German opposition to the British empire and support for nationalist anti British movements during that time, although it never really manifested in any material way (and likely would have stopped or even reversed in the event of German victory). The principals of ethnic nationalism are also highly popular in these areas on their own with some political parties like the Syrian Nationalist Party semi-explicitly modeled after the German Nationalist Socialist platform.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-11-06T01:35:44+00:00

Sure, maybe. So what?

AidsVictim69 · 2021-10-28T05:17:04+00:00

This brings up an interesting question. What laws would a society that your sub poses to create have for situations of abuse within the nuclear family unit?

No, it's not really interesting and there are already laws and institutions to deal with abuse in nuclear families. Abuse (of about any kind) rates are higher among single parents and unrelated "parents" are far more likely to be physically or sexually abusive to their partners kids, especially in the case of racial differences (although I suspect without looking it up it's strongly tied to blacks and latinos having higher abuse rates anyway). Children from single parent households have worse outcomes on average by just about any metric.

It really makes me wonder what the thought process is of people who see this ever expanding sphere of human misery and the first thing that pops into their mind is to start criticizing the society preceded that this trash.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-10-19T03:54:29+00:00

Leftists (Marxists, Leninists, Maoists) and liberals (Sanders, AOC, Trudeau etc) aren't the same thing. Leftists don't really have any substantial power in the US although it's true if you were to compare liberal and modern leftist social policy it would like incredibly similar (the main reason I reject modern Leftism).

When leftists describe the US as having two right wing parties they're primarily talking about economic-material conditions and/or the military-police state (or else they're just delusional about social policy).

Every major politician in the US is pro capitalist including people like Sanders - they mostly just want an expansion of the welfare state while keeping the primary mode of economic organization (capitalism) in place. Mainstream leftists in the US are basically just social democrats or maybe nostalgic for the heydays of unions and social cohesion they associate with pre Reagan America.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-10-09T21:41:08+00:00

The Chinese state has also been pretty open about their own plans. The attitude in the West towards China has been very cynical in that they believe the modern Chinese movement towards socialism is just propaganda even as the State in the last couple of years continually cracks down on the capitalist class. But Xi is a real communist in ideology, he's not just paying lip service to Mao and Marx, he's a true believer and all the material he's published ("Xi thought") makes it clear he will continue to move the CCP closer to "real" socialism.

So, instead of figuring out a way to deal with the fact that China is not on board with the agenda, this current elite have decided to just go ahead and move forward with the next phase in the plan, leaving the China problem unsolved. There seems to be a kind of “it will all work out” attitude. Some of them probably think that they can confront China militarily, or that the impending global economic collapse will shake them loose, or something. Honestly, I read through their literature, and I watch their conferences, and there isn’t a clear strategy.

They have very little leverage on the CCP - their latest attempts at propaganda (Uyghurs, Hong Kong) didn't really accomplish anything. Maybe liberals are a little more hostile towards towards China but so what? What are they going to do?

Their assumptions (which most here are probably aware of) were that either the mixed economy would inevitably lead towards domination of capital (and therefore the liberalization of China) or that the system would collapse (the same articles predicting this have been recycled for nearly 30 years now to no effect) via bad faith credit markets and market manipulation. But in reality it's been the West that has largely stagnated and is now more precarious and bizarrely structured than ever.

It's likely however that any collapse in the Western markets will also have major blowback on China but it's probable they will also be able to endure and recover more readily (although I would be lying if I said I had great confidence in the outcome of such complex systems either way).

Internally China is also much more socially sound than the West- they're homogenous, family structures are still relatively (compared to the West but not the past) intact, and it's unlikely mass immigration will ever take place and result in the multicultural pressures tearing apart the West.

Their largest obstacle is that their social-sexual landscape is almost as bleak as the West, very low fertility young adult urbanites, people who don't want marriage or children, and a massive older generation that will be moving out of the workforce and dependent on a shrinking instead of growing working age population.

However they again have better potential to overcome this problem than the West since they can more easily introduce social-economic incentives/pressures. Look at what the GDR did post WWII - marriage and children very heavily economically incentivized by gating access to university and more desirable jobs behind them. This led to a relatively healthy fertility rate among the college age population that was also well educated and successful in the industrial field. China is capable of actually implementing these kind of measure if they need to - the West is not.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-10-09T17:04:23+00:00

mainly because we're all mixed.

You really believe this discredits the idea of race. Just stupid as hell lmao.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-10-09T17:01:28+00:00

Having ancestry from another closely related species (in a small quantity) is actually incredibly common in lots of animals, including humans.

"race" "ethnicity" "species" etc are all just human abstracted categories measuring the semi arbitrary genetic distance between one organism and another

AidsVictim69 · 2021-10-05T20:56:20+00:00

A bunch of people working at a Tesla factory in San Francisco were regularly calling them racial slurs and writing racist graffiti? Was most of the workforce freshly imported latinos or something?

AidsVictim69 · 2021-09-24T04:56:25+00:00

The Black population was only 10% of the populace, and on top of that most races choose those of their own. What has done the most harm to White America over the last 50 years was mass immigration introduced by parasites and traitors. The Black community has largely remained stagnant.

While mass immigration has been the largest problem for American cohesion the black community has not "remained stagnant" Around the time of these photos the ratio of black to white Americans was 1 to 9 - now it's something like 1 to 4. And in the last 20 years they've become incredibly dominant culturally and politically corresponding with large growth of mulatto population and high levels of outgroup preference by white women. They're also been incredibly destructive to many American urban centers even at 10-15% of the population.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-09-16T20:19:47+00:00

Makes perfect sense to me. The speed of light just tells you the maximum/nearest coordinate you can reach from whatever given point. That coordinate system is not frame dependent.

Relativity has plenty of direct experimental/observational evidence it's not simply abstract untested theory.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-09-16T20:04:12+00:00

Space fetishization by the right is not much different from pseudo religious scientism by Reddit nerds. The future of white ethnic groups and nations depends entirely on what happens on the social-communal and national levels, not small populations of probably mixed people (the way things are going) living on Mars generations from now.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-09-16T19:59:22+00:00

relativity is obviously fake, you can't have speed of light being the same in all reference frames.

Why not?

AidsVictim69 · 2021-09-16T19:47:22+00:00

In general you can't trust anything on TV regarding physics outside some basic stuff, doubly true for space travel stuff. Even men who know better will give dumbed down bullshit answers when the producer says they need to make it sufficiently "exciting" or understandable to the general audience.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-09-12T17:55:22+00:00

But scientific evidence shows that this leads to inbreeding and serious social problems, and there are numerous examples of this.

Eugenics is against inbreeding. Inbreeding is usually caused by cousin marriage in real world populations and has nothing to do with eugenics outside some retarded strawman you've probably concocted in your head.

that the mixing of people has made them smarter, more resiliant, and more attractive

Did it? Funny all the mixed people I live near are uglier, stupider, and more impulsively violent than their unfortunate monoracial ancestors. I guess their IQ scores, crime statistics, and mirrors are lying about it though. I can't think of a single result of mixing European and other racial/ethnic groups where the average was an improvement.

Here's a liberal science devotee saying the obvious though https://twitter.com/richarddawkins/status/1228943686953664512?lang=en

AidsVictim69 · 2021-09-11T22:17:30+00:00

(Since the 1930s much better reseach has shown that there is no scienticific basis, justification or method for assessing eugenics research.)

I'm not even sure what this means. Research has shown that people with downs syndrome actually have an equal chance for having healthy children? That low IQ parents have the same chance to produce normal IQ children as high IQ parents? That schizophrenia doesn't have a strong link to inheritance?

AidsVictim69 · 2021-09-06T21:17:35+00:00

society will become a dystopia

The reality is that we're already living in a dystopia, have been for a while, and it's depressing by it's nature existing in it. They keep things just materially pleasant enough that the heaps of social, cultural, and psychological abuse directed at the average white are tolerated.

To your point though men who can sustain an optimistic countenance in the face of heaping defeats are the most valuable you can have in this sort of marginalized movement. The greatest hope of winning we have are the men who have the courage to imagine a better future and the greatest individual contribution we can make is to have white families in the best environments we can find.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-09-06T20:53:31+00:00

episcopal in bottom tier

Sadly true. I was raised Episcopalian and my church was fine as a non offensive if a little boring community church but it's thoroughly corrupted with modernist values now (or maybe it always and I was just too young to notice). The national church leadership are the usual band of liberal fags that don't even seem to bother hiding that they're there to promote modernism, not serve communities or promote the word of God. It's a shame because I really enjoy the communal and ceremonial aspects of Episcopalianism, I've considered looking for one of the "Anglican" churches that have split off.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-08-27T05:10:54+00:00

Wiggers and wokeoids are retarded, but they can't be blamed too much (or at least some of them can't be) because most people, even among Whites, are sheep who follow the herd

Sure, that's my point. While I find it amusing and somewhat cathartic to see boomers have their noses rubbed in the failures of liberalism the reality this is just petty generational infighting, boomers were indoctrinated to believe this crap at their own offsprings expense. There is a lot of intergenerational bitterness because boomers lived under better conditions (material, social, and cultural) but it's not as if they consciously caused these conditions to deteriorate - they simply did as the system and culture directed them. At this point they are too old and useless to wake up from their stupor and there's no real point in blaming them.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-08-27T05:02:18+00:00

Race cannot be separated from the material and social conditions of society. It's simultaneously true that the average white is affected by both their class and race, the latter being part of their "material conditions" (literally their genetics) as much as class is. The idea that everything must be viewed either through a purely class lens or otherwise be a false consciousness propagated by the elite is a false dichotomy used by leftists as anti racial and ultimately contradictory anti materialist view.

I focus on whites because I am white, desire to live in a white society, and have multiple actors within society working against my individual and group interests as a white. Saying "race" doesn't matter no more affects the material reality of ones genetics than saying class doesn't matter affects the reality of ones material conditions.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-08-26T17:17:20+00:00

It's not as if younger whites are any better. The majority of whites (at least in North America) in any generation are indoctrinated into something resembling a racial cult of Baal where they will feed their children, family, and future into the great fire of diversity in the hopes it will appease the Gods of white guilt.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-08-26T16:42:03+00:00

Elite (those of the capital or highly credentialed bourgeoise classes) whites have power, just like elite blacks or Jews do. This means nothing for the average white in terms of having power within society, elite whites are mostly anti white (for whites outside their class), no power is transferred to some white group socio-political body.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-08-23T19:32:37+00:00

A lot of the elite being white does not mean that whites as a group have significant political power or that those white elites are acting in the interests of the average white - in fact just the opposite is true.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-08-15T23:13:39+00:00

Everyone in power in the US is a liberal and usually Zionists. "Bolshevik" "socialist" "Marxist" are bastardized terms recycled by the right from the cold war without actually understanding the ideology or politics they represent.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-08-14T20:28:02+00:00

What you note here is also ahistorical. Consider for example the 19th century immigrants.

The overwhelming majority of 19th century immigrants were white and I'm sure you know that's the context people here care about.

Consider also the wealth of the US during the time of slave and immigrant labor in the 18th and 19th centuries. The processing of raw materials in the south and the industrial north made the US quite wealthy well before 1900. The US also manipulated Caribbean slave and indentured labour for raw sugar and other goods.

Most of the capital accrued from slavery was destroyed in the civil war, at best you're talking about some fraction of that capital being invested in Northern industry. The US did not become a superpower because some of the mercantile and capitalist classes were making money off the Caribbean either. It became a superpower because of the massive industrial development in the later 19th and early 20th centuries (which was carried out overwhelmingly with white labour), technological development, and socially cohesive society that allowed it to act at a super national level.

In what way were non white ethnicities necessary for the US to become a super power? I see this idea often but it doesn't seem to be based on anything besides "White people made money off non whites" without showing in any substantive way that this majorly contributed to the kind of development necessary for "super power" status.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-08-14T16:19:02+00:00

Not everyone who opposes or is opposed by the current order is in the alt rights ideological sphere simply because they are ethnic nationalists. If you're looking for ideological consistency sans race you're not likely to find it here outside those who are primarily leftists with a slight racial bent. Zimbabwe has been a very badly run country even in the context of the international financial persecution (in later years) carried out against the orders opponents. He would have a lot more sympathy here if some separate white formal or informal statelet had been allowed in tandem with his program of racial nationalism.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-08-13T15:01:33+00:00

Also: the US developed in the 17th - 19th century with a number of other ethnicities, without whom, it would not bave become a superpower.

Like? Black labor has been basically superfluous, native Americans were never part of the country in significant numbers nor contributed much to it, Jews had some inventions but were intellectually superfluous, what group would have stopped the US from becoming a superpower by their absence?

AidsVictim69 · 2021-08-11T16:16:51+00:00

Why should they be against it? They're getting real material benefits from these sorts of initiatives, that's more valuable than any notion of pride for them, and they simply believe they're less capable because of racism rather than innate ability.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-08-06T15:24:50+00:00

Conservatives have a weird issue with defending or explaining away what happened in the US.

It isn't really weird, it's a natural reaction against having history weaponized against you. White guilt is specifically used as an anti white political and ideological device. In mainstream thought whites have a trans generational racial collective responsibility for what (some of) their ancestors did and this is used to justify their replacement and anti identity ideology (or rather an inverted negative white identity is all that's allowed).

What happened in America is basically the same thing that historically happened whenever two radically different cultural, ethnic, and religious groups directly settle the same space. I'm not going to try and defend it or make strong moral judgements on it, it happened, I can't change it, and I won't accept the replacement and discrimination against myself or people like me now because liberal history says we must balance the universal book of moral crimes (which of course happens to biased in favor of the authors). I don't know if that's how you feel (it seems you don't?) but if you have any interest in the survival of white society in the US then you should understand why the right rejects mainstream historical narratives, whether that's "fair" or not.

It was built by slaves, refugees, and patsies. Good people fled here to escape the ethnic and religious cleansing in Europe, and did good things in spite of the system in place in America. They were never well-liked by the powers in this country.

This is a oversimplification designed to fit into a certain ideological narrative (under dog victim like identity) because it's the only one allowed any sympathy in the current system. For your ranting about cultism you seem to fit right into the modern liberal identity cult quite well.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-07-29T14:22:38+00:00

Their wages are rising rapidly and they have a very limited window to make the shift from cheap labor based industry to high tech, value added industry. This will be a daunting task given that Chinese urbanization rate is only 60% and it still hasn't fully become a developed industrial society like the US.

Maybe. Many predictions of doom and reckoning by the capitalist brain trust have been made about the Chinese economy for 20 years now. They have repeatedly shown that conventional capitalist wisdom poorly predicts the reality and outcomes of the Chinese model, which should have collapsed a dozen times over from various credit/liquidity/overproduction crisis according to them. China continues to defy their models and propaganda, with at least some of the negative outlooks on the Chinese economy being motivated by ideological opposition to the Chinese "socialist" system (state capitalist-mixed market model).

The demographic crisis however is inevitable and severe.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-07-28T15:34:44+00:00

The Ivy schools are more or less liberal,indoctrination centers aswell as debt pools

That describes the majority of the college system in the US, not just Ivy leagues. Academia needs totally burned down and reformed.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-07-25T05:56:40+00:00

At least part of it is. A lot of these countries either don't collect ethnic data or obfuscate it but what can be estimated from indirect data seems to be quite negative. The native fertility rate and ethnic composition of under 20's is what's most important.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-07-22T19:37:03+00:00

That's not what I wrote. Read it again. (Economic inequality is fundamental to developments of other problems, even if the other problems already existed.)

Sublimation of all cultural and racial issues into economic ones is the basis of leftist thinking from liberalism to Marx and is what you're doing here, whether you understand that or not. It's an abandonment of materialism (i.e. genetics, literally the materials determining a large part of human behavior and capability) in favor of enlightenment ideals (tabula rasa).

Definitely not happening. Many of those right-wing assholes are Jews. Also the usage of 'fetish' does not work here, FFS.

Poetry? Makes no sense to me.

The opposite is true. I wonder why you or anyone else would think this.

The right (not mainstream conservatism, which fetishizes Jews in a different way) fetishizes (i.e. obsesses with and attributes extraordinary powers to) Jews in a similar way to the way the left fetishizes capitalist class (or 1% as you keep re iterating instead of class nomenclature for some reason, probably because your interest begins and ends at OWS catchphrases). The left believes that racial antagonisms are primarily a result capitalist manipulation to divide the working class - this is sometimes true out of convenience - but largely this is a misinterpretation of the character (which are almost universally liberal and enlightenment in nature) and motivations of the capitalist class. Racial antagonism is a threat to capitalist power structure for a variety of reasons, nor do they have the extraordinary powers necessary to engender these phenomenon. When it's used out of convenience (i.e. agitation propaganda against whites ramping up the last few years) they are exploiting trends that already exist and built out of the genetic and cultural bedrock from which they emerge. Ideally for the capitalist class the antagonisms would disappear and allow the full pacification of the working class and they actively work to achieve that using economic incentives (i.e. the blacklisting of anyone not fully embracing modernist morality) and propaganda.

More importantly the leftist explanation misunderstands that liberal capitalists are true believers in things like "white guilt", systematic racism, complete genetic equality etc. They do not promote and act on these things out of some utilitarian economic function but because they are fundamental aspects of their philosophy.

Not true. Just look at how the 1% promotes racisim on websites and in right-wing organizations. Consider the dumbass parents protesting against the manufactured 'critical race theory'. It's a non issue meant to piss off dumbasses who enjoy racism. Students should learn about history. That's it. End of story. Deleting portions of history you don't like is fascism, to control the masses.

These fuckers (and Jews and the other 1%) are the one's promoting racism. They're not trying to remove themselves. They're in control.

You are delusional about what the ruling class is promoting and believes.

Yes - we agree on this - but should also follow the money, to see how the 1% are gleaning everything from the 99% in the US. This will not work in the long term, but they're not concerned with the fate of young people.

I have no particular reason not to think it will work in the long term. The vast majority of people can be bought off with slight adjustments to tax rates and welfare. They are depressed, dependent on pharmaceuticals, self hating (if white), narcissistic ethno nationalists (if black or latino), losers who are totally unwilling to die or struggle in a way necessary to reform the system.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-07-21T20:20:11+00:00

Yes indeed: these campaigns of hatred &c developed especially in the past 10 years, as a way of distracting people from the rise in income inequality that started with the Reagan Admin. The article partially addresses this, but not appropriately:

This is just naive leftist nonsense that tries to transmute all racial/ethnic/cultural issues into purely economic ones. The rightwing fetishization of Jews as the man behind the curtain simply morphs into capitalists. Wealth is used by the (almost universally liberal in character) rich to suppress racial forces, not encourage them. Racial conflict is not a distraction from rising wealth inequality, it's challenge to their ability to control it. To the extent they direct it now, it's to attack conservative whites and remove them as a potential nationalistic element that might impede their control. The best case scenario for the capitalists is to keep the Western workers as pacified as possible while creating a diverse a workforce as possible so that their ability to form cohesive opposition forces are neutered.

It's well-known that the "happiest" countries are known for a greater percentage of wealth parity, the middle class, social programs, healthcare &c, such as: Finland, Denmark, Switzerland, Iceland, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Luxembourg &c.

Most of these countries are undergoing the same process of division and radicalization as migration and ethno-cultural stress increases despite more robust welfare states and lower income equality, they are just further behind the US in this process for demographic reasons primarily.

The vast majority of Americans are still known worldwide for being among the nicest, warmest, most generous people in the world.

No one thinks this.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-07-18T21:49:36+00:00

I'm not a victim. I represent a genetic and cultural legacy that survived enslavement, genocide, exploitation, and marginalization, and now I am taking what is rightfully mine.

Your entire self description is just listing the ways you were victimized lol.

Unlike whites, Black people actually have a culture. Learn how to season your food and accomplish anything without genocide and enslavement.

Has there ever been a more degenerate, base, and ephemeral culture than modern black American culture? This is what you're proud of? But I guess if you compare it to some white strawman it seems significant - like the idea that whites don't season their food lmao.

But they didn't, because they bought into the idea of White supremacy, and now their ancestors are paying their debts.

*Descendants.

Slave labor reduces the price of goods and increases production. That means whites had access to jobs and resources generated by the productivity of enslaved Black people. Even families that didn't own slaves benefited from the economic productivity.

You're naively applying generalized labour theory to specialized systems. The vast majority of slave labour was just cash crops. The profits of this exploitation were almost entirely returned to the landowners and re invested into the slave system which was a highly capital intensive system. This neither lowered the price of goods or usefully increased production in any useful way for the majority of whites. Some Southern whites benefitted either because they owned a "family" slave or they profited off trade with Europe for the cash crops. Some civic/infrastructure work was carried out by slaves in limited areas of the South. But in reality the area most enmeshed with slavery was also notably poorer and was never enriched materially any significant way outside the elite Southern aristocracy. The majority of the white population never interacted or materially benefitted from slavery. Whites were the majority of the workers in every class outside some areas of the South, they performed the labour that industrialized the country. Black labour was generally limited to sharecropping in the South (which was neither very profitable compared to the slavery system or beneficial to Southern whites in general) or migrating to the North as scab labour in areas already developed and industrialized by white workers.

If slavery never developed in the US the economic and historical trajectory would have been largely the same because most workers in America have always been white. POC labor was never necessary and if anything their dysfunctional socities have probably been a drain on the development of the country overall.

You mean after Europeans showed up to pillage, spread diseases, rape indigenous people, enslave communities, and commit genocide?

I suppose. Most of those things were happening before Europeans showed up as well. Pre colonial American history is full of imperialism, violence, genocides, and plagues.

You mean Black and Indigenous people have a lower score on a metric created by White people that has no real application to actual life? Shocking.

IQ is the best predictor of overall life success for the average person in almost every category, whether they are white or not, whether they live in the West or not. But if you think it doesn't matter you can go live in societies where people have low IQ. Please do.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-07-18T20:02:50+00:00

By exploiting Indigenous people and Black people.

You're either over invested in your identity as a victim or you're too stupid to understand basic relations between demographics and economics, so whatever. From either a classical (capitalist) or Marxist analysis of what you're (and most racial historical revisionists) claiming makes no sense.

Which is just a modification of the plantation system that enriched white people at Black and Indigenous people's expenses. Also, that's not the "rest" of Black history. And capitalize Black, we're talking about a culture, not a color.

Seems your account is just a gimmick.

You're right, the South literally fought a war to preserve their right to keep slaves, which means slave labor was TOTALLY unnecessary. It was just so important they were willing to literally murder for it.

They fought because the elite Southern whites created a false consciousness and convinced them their interests were the same because they were both white, and in some cases that may have been partially true (i.e. Southern families that owned a few slaves). The best thing Southern whites could have done is seized the capital of the plantation owners and deported or sold Southern blacks to the Caribbean, South America, or Africa.

At yet white people saw this as better than the alternative, liberation for Black people.

The majority of white people never held slaves, benefitted from their exploitation, or were particularly interested in them beyond fear of what they might do as free members of society (which was at least partially realized).

As long as we don't literally commit genocide against indigenous people and enslave Black people, it would be impossible to create a WORSE America.

Lots of places in South America and Africa are worse than America in any multitude of ways. Lower IQs, poorer, more violent, more bloody history, etc. American blacks are just insanely narcissistic and stupid to the point of parody.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-07-18T19:47:30+00:00

The argument is the cumulative effect of xenoestrogens in the modern environment. Lots of food stuffs, cooking implements, industrial aerosols, packaging, fragrances, air quality, off-gassing buildings/products, cleaning products, clothing, and even the water supply has xenoestrogens. It accumulates. To fight it you need to analyze all your exposure points and try to bring them down the best you can. Hoppy beers is an exposure point.

I agree with everything you're saying. I just don't think soy and hops in and of themselves are anywhere near as hormone disruptive as most plastic derived xenohormones/hormone disruptors and the focus on them is silly compared to the overall environmental problem. Technically yes they are an exposure point but it really just confuses the public since they end up thinking they can avoid the problem by switching their diet up a bit (in reality almost no one eats enough soy for it to matter anyway and the extra calories from beer are probably much more dangerous than the hops) rather than realizing it's an overall environmental problem.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-07-18T19:27:12+00:00

Exactly. Your racist colonizer ancestors couldn't survive without enslavement and exploitation

Sure they could. Millions of Europeans who came to the US with nothing besides their family and culture created the wealthiest nation in the world almost entirely through their own labour in a wilderness with no infrastructure, development, and often surrounded by mostly hostile natives. The majority never needed or benefited from POC labour. The Southern slave system primarily benefited only the elite (plantation owners and to a lesser extent the coastal merchant class) and the capital derived thereof was mostly reinvested into the plantation system until it was destroyed in the civil war. The rest of black history is sharecropping and scab labour (along with Asian and later Latino immigrants) during the "Great" migration.

and now modern whites have inherited the debts of their ancestors.

I don't owe POC anything because I have the same skin color as a plantation owner from 170 years ago.

White supremacists narratives are exactly that: narratives. It's storytelling from parasitic raiders who can't survive without exploitation

Understanding the reality of historical labour isn't a narrative. The idea that a bunch of slaves concentrated on Southern plantations was necessary, needed, or improved in any significant the majority populations material situation is fantasy. At best a small trickle down profit benefitted a few urban centers via the mercantile class and the Southern families that owned one or two slaves directly benefitted from that labour. And after the accumulation of capital concentrated into that system was destroyed those labourers were nothing but scabs that suppressed Northern whites already developed industrial labour markets.

Any realistic look at the North American labour market is quite depressing for POC. In exchange for enriching a few elite whites, the rest of white society endured a racial plague.

BIPOC said "no more", and y'all reacted with rage, because your success is built on our exploitation. And without that, you lose your privilege. America belongs to the Black and Indigenous. We're just taking back what's rightly ours.

Even if you could, you will only create an uglier, stupider, and more violent society to live in and North America will tumble into the dustbin of history as so much racial garbage.

AidsVictim69 · 2021-07-16T14:58:24+00:00

It's really the hops and weight gain from binge drinking it that's dropping T

I'm skeptical hops really have that much of an effect on hormone balance. Drinking a few hoppy beers and eating something with soy in it a few times a week isn't going to affect an otherwise healthy man much if at all. It's mostly when beer becomes a staple of someones diet and a consumer "identity" (i.e. all the dudes who are homebrewing as their main hobby). Principally it's the weight gain, sedentary lifestyle, and generally bad diet (that introduces quite a few xenohormones) that produces "soy" men.

I think that beer is really important for European cultural bonding though. It's a huge part of our past and present and has been a wonderful way to get people together. If you socialize with people while drinking it might still be a net positive as a lack of social connection can also be bad for health (and test).

Communal meal/drinking bonding is very important for social cohesion.

AidsVictim69