What is your most controversial opinion? by Popper in whatever

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

What alt-right views would you consider the most moronic?

Excellent video from Keith Woods showing the Anglo-Jewish led globalization movement via the CFR by [deleted] in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW [score hidden]  (0 children)

I myself am not an Anglo (I'm Dutch), but I most strongly support groups that have benefited the white race the most. The Anglos have disproportionally contributed to the invention of modern technology (which has greatly benefited whites, as well as humanity in general), and through their colonial efforts they've given whites additional "Lebensraum" larger than Europe itself and as a result caused the white proportion of the global population to massively increase at the expense of non-whites (mostly during the late 19th and early 20th century), so in both regards Anglos top the list of greatest contributors to the white race. America, founded by Anglos, was literally the first explicit white nationalist country in the world (and one of the few ones to ever exist, aside from Australia, South Africa, Rhodesia and arguably Canada, all Anglo colonies as well).

You can try to direct the blame for the clusterfuck the world is today away from the Jews and towards the Anglos, but the direct correlation between the proportional decrease of WASPs and increase of Jews in positions of power in America and the transition from the old white-centric order towards today's order is simply undeniable. In retrospect, the biggest mistake the Anglos made was trusting the Jews too much, if the Anglos had been more aware about the Jews and simply barred them from any positions of power (and politics in general), the Anglos would probably still rule the world instead of Jews; it wouldn't be a perfect world, but it would no doubt still be many times better than the shitshow we're in today.

I found u/ayotollahsiniran on the old reddit DAR archive. He/she pretended to a british actress. by Blackbrownfreestuff in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW [score hidden]  (0 children)

that post where he talks about being 400lbs and fucking his sister is ironically the only thing I believe from him

My fucking sides lmao

I found u/ayotollahsiniran on the old reddit DAR archive. He/she pretended to a british actress. by Blackbrownfreestuff in debatealtright

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

My wild guess is that it was something showing how "probgoingtohell" (the sister fucker account, which Salos admitted to be one of his alts by the way) and "ayotollahsiniran" are the same person. It's so annoying that Saidit removes deleted replies to your own comments from your inbox, but it's probably intended to protect the privacy of users who delete their comments.

I found u/ayotollahsiniran on the old reddit DAR archive. He/she pretended to a british actress. by Blackbrownfreestuff in debatealtright

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

What did the deleted comment say?

I found u/ayotollahsiniran on the old reddit DAR archive. He/she pretended to a british actress. by Blackbrownfreestuff in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Coming from someone who himself constantly includes personal attacks in his bad-faith replies full of anti-white blood libel, but when other people push back suddenly starts crying about getting "bullied" and "muh pyramid of debate" lmao. Reminds me of a certain Polish proverb, something about crying out in pain.

I found u/ayotollahsiniran on the old reddit DAR archive. He/she pretended to a british actress. by Blackbrownfreestuff in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Someone who sees "nazis"/"fascists"/"white supremacists" behind every tree and thinks men in dresses are women calling us paranoid and mentally ill, oh the irony. You should be grateful you're even still allowed to post here despite months of trolling our sub, the mods are very generous towards you. Consider yourself lucky I'm not one of the mods on this sub, because if I were I would've banned your ass months ago.

I found u/ayotollahsiniran on the old reddit DAR archive. He/she pretended to a british actress. by Blackbrownfreestuff in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Totally unrelated question, but why did you fuck your sister?

I hear salos6000 has been permabanned. What was his offense? by casparvoneverec in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Socks never misrepresented himself

Not true, "socks" falsely presents himself as an egalitarian who equally loves/hates all races and is merely against "racial injustice" and "racial hatred/supremacy", but in practice he's just anti-white, since he'll automatically take the 180 degree opposite side of what's good for whites in any argument, pathologize ingroup preference from whites and whites only, and scapegoat whites for all evil in the world. That's definitely misrepresenting yourself, and it's exactly the same as with any other woke reddit leftist/shitlib.

I hear salos6000 has been permabanned. What was his offense? by casparvoneverec in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 11 insightful - 4 fun11 insightful - 3 fun12 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Unpopular opinion, but while I agree that Salos is annoying, as well as probably borderline retarded or mentally ill (or both), I still tend to think permanently banning him takes it a step too far. There have actually been explicitly anti-white trolls and shills (such as "socks") active on this sub for months, if not years, who still haven't been banned up to this very day despite constantly arguing in bad faith and violating the Pyramid of Debate, so I personally think we've got bigger fish to fry than some dull boomer cuckservative (whether genuine or a concern troll) who constantly bitches about optics. Of course, to the mods, this is just my personal opinion. It's your decision, and I also understand that you finally have had enough of Salos after all those years.

Columbus Day isn't based by Noloben in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

As far as I know, pretty much all of the old guard pro-white alt-right figures, including but not limited to Jared Taylor, Richard Spencer, David Duke, Henrik Palmgren and Lana Lokteff, Millennial Woes and Mark Collett, have nothing against women. A more recent example would be CatboyKami. Being both pro-white and anti-woman is inherently contradictory anyways, and I suspect a lot of the anti-women stuff is probably coming from hapa, pajeet and mestizo incels, rather than genuine pro-whites.

Columbus Day isn't based by Noloben in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This is nonsense. David Duke has been doing non-supremacist pro-white stuff for decades with the framing of human rights activism, this was always very popular. "A homeland for every race, Africa for Africans, Europe for Europeans" etc was always way more common than Richard Spencer's imperial ambitions. This is a massive retcon by you.

You're either misinterpreting or deliberately misrepresenting me. My point wasn't that the alt-right used to be fully comprised of people with "supremacist" attitudes, I know it wasn't, but to illustrate how its explicitly white nationalist character got subverted by people who think like OP. It's undeniable that "supremacist" attitudes were much more common in the alt-right before it started getting subverted a couple of years ago.

I have nothing against pro-whites/white nationalists who are non-"supremacist", such as David Duke, but that's totally different from actively pushing for white guilt and ethnomasochism and defacing our history (like OP is doing). By the way, "supremacist" in the way people like you use it is an anti-white slur anyways, which is used to pathologize healthy ingroup preference in whites and whites only. It's perfectly natural to want your race to have power, and among all other races people with strong ingroup preference hold "supremacist" attitudes (often far more extreme than those found among white nationalists), but somehow only whites are supposed to be pacifist isolationists and just let black and brown people dominate the world.

Alt right was a big tent descriptor for everyone pro-white, and even broader than that until Charlottesville lol. Both isolationists/nativists and white supremacists were included. You both are talking out of your arses pretending it specifically referred to one particular strain. Especially when it used to be such a broad tent that before Charlottesville it included non-racialist classical liberals who just didn't like muh crazy sjws and dumb shit like that.

The non-racialist and non-JQ part of the alt-right was never truly part of the alt-right to begin with (just like the previously mentioned retards and shills who've flooded it in recent years), that's the alt-lite and it emerged years after the alt-right itself emerged. A lot of "anti-SJWs" and other alt-liters turned alt-right though, as they watched the alt-lite get BTFO'd by the alt-right in debates (such as the famous Richard Spencer vs. Sargon debate). The alt-right itself was undeniably founded as an explicitly white nationalist movement, considering Jared Taylor, Richard Spencer and ironically enough also David Duke, key figures in the formation of the alt-right, were all explicitly pro-white.

Columbus Day isn't based by Noloben in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Third worldism is based.

Being white but ethnomasochistic is based? If non-whites and governments of non-white countries that are anti-ZOG want to collaborate with us in fighting against ZOG, no problem, but they can't also be explicitly anti-white. Most non-whites however, even the ones who also supposedly hate the Jewish elites, will just laugh at you and spit in your face if you're white and try to pitch the idea of "muh one struggle" to them, and it's honestly laughable for those non-whites to claim to hate ZOG/the Jewish elites while also being anti-white, since anti-white ideology is literally the product of those same Jewish elites they claim to hate in the first place.

Duginism is a bogeyman used by neocon ZOG apologists, so it's based too because it makes all the right people seethe.

"The right people" being people who are unapologetically pro-white? I thought you considered yourself to be pro-white. Neocons are against Dugin because, according to them, Dugin is a "racist" white nationalist who wants Russia to annex Western Europe. People like me are against Dugin because we know he's anti-white, literally the opposite reason from why neocons are against him. The enemy of your enemy isn't always your friend, sometimes it's just another enemy.

primitivism/luddism

Nothing better than destroying the Aryan folk ways, folk soul and tribal culture in favor of globalism, muh progress and capitalist exploitation. BASED!

Such a pathethic strawman. Having modern industrial and advanced technology is totally separate from ZOG/globohomo and woke culture. You might as well say that using a AR to defend yourself against a murderer is being pro-ZOG, since ZOG also uses ARs to enforce their power. Being a primitivist/luddite and being pro-white are literally inherently contradictory, since getting rid of technology in white society will both cause mass-death and suffering among whites as well as leave us extremely vulnerable from external attacks. Other intelligent peoples, like the Jews and the Chinese, will never get rid of their technology like you insist us whites should do, so they could just come in and instantly BTFO us if we refuse to pursue the same technological innovations as them. I'm also pretty economically left-leaning, so your claim about capitalist exploitation doesn't make much sense either.

I was wondering if you were Brandon Martinez up to this point. Martinez is a hardcore incel but otherwise is on board with your views.

Isn't Brandon Martinez also unapologetically pro-white? In that case, I'm not really surprised that you equate me to him. I've indeed heard that he's very anti-woman, which is very cringe though.

He used to be a pro-Russian Duginist who was sympathetic to the European New Right. Now he's just a midwit vaccine shilling liberal and probably a glowie.

Funny enough, I also used to like him more in the past, and now don't like him anymore. Is he even still pro-white? He doesn't even come off as pro-white anymore nowadays. And although I disagree with Keith Woods pretty strongly (on mainly the same things I disagree with you), I also think it's very low how Richard Spencer constantly attacks Keith Woods nowadays.

Columbus Day isn't based by Noloben in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Vietnam and Afghanistan are completely powerless in any meaningful sense (just like most other third world backwaters that managed to fight off invaders), and it took them devastating wars on their own soil to not get conquered, so if anything you're actually further strengthening my argument in favor of being imperialistic rather than just defensive. The truth of the matter is that in geopolitics you're either on the long end of the stick or the short end of the stick, so in geopolitics there isn't really room for morality and moral consistency in the same way there should be on an interpersonal level.

That doesn't mean, however, that we should just oppress and exploit non-whites living in countries to be colonized or indirectly controlled, which I strongly oppose. Under the type of imperialism I advocate for, we would build infrastructure, farms, schools and hospitals for them, help them improve through eugenics, and give them access to the same social safety net and public facilities as people in white countries in general. In exchange, they aren't allowed to leave for white countries anymore, can't have too many children, and have to give us whites unlimited acccess to the valuable resources located in their lands. This would be a win-win scenario: They won't have to live in poverty anymore and get to enjoy a Western standard of living, while we get to curb non-white overpopulation and gain access to the resources needed for our advanced technology.

Columbus Day isn't based by Noloben in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Originally, "alt right" was supposed to mean a third positionist movement that would introduce people in the English speaking world to people like Alain de Benoist, but it ended up just meaning old-fashioned colonialist white nationalism.

You got it the other way around. The alt-right's main focal point used to be race realism/human biodiversity, the JQ, and being unapologetically pro-white (which also means being at least open to, if not outright supportive of, the idea of bringing back some form of white colonialism and global white hegemony).

In recent years, however, the alt-right has seen an ever-increasing (probably mostly astroturfed) influx of retards, schizos and shills injecting it with ridiculous LARP ideologies that suvbert the alt-right's original white nationalist character and intentions, and in many cases would be even explicitly harmful to white racial interests (i.e third worldism/Duginism, Islamism/"white sharia", primitivism/luddism, flat earth theory, boomer cuckservative religious fundamentalism, incel/anti-woman views, etc.).

Furthermore, it's kinda ironic how the very same people who most strongly hold the views you hate the most about the alt-right, such as Jared Taylor and Richard Spencer, are actually the ones who in part originally founded the alt-right to begin with.

Columbus Day isn't based by Noloben in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Imperialism itself wasn't what introduced blacks into America, they were introduced by Jewish slave traders who bought them from African tribe leaders. Canada and Australia are unquestionably a product of imperialism, yet they have basically no blacks as slavery was already banned when their colonization really kicked off, and Canada and Australia used to be almost 100% white until the recent non-white mass-immigration.

Imperialism doesn't have to lead to large-scale miscegenation either. The former Spanish and Portuguese colonies mostly consist of mestizos today, because the Spanish and Portuguese sent mostly single men to their colonies and let them fuck anything that moved. The Anglo colonies, on the other hand, prove that it's perfectly possible to maintain racial purity under imperialism, by sending both men and women from the UK to the colonies, and by having a "racist" value system that condemns whites who miscegenate as race traitors and punishes non-whites who try to miscegenate with whites. Hence why even the US, despite its large slave-descended black population, used to be over 85% white until the 1965 Hart-Celler immigration act (read: white genocide act).

The idea that non-white mass-immigration into white countries is just a natural consequence of white/European imperialism, rather than something deliberately facilitated by subversive, malicious Jewish elites in order for them to gain more control over the whealthy white countries, is basically just woke anti-white nonsense. Don't let anti-whites guilt you into blaming our people for all our current problems and defacing our own history. I still appreciate it that you still support Columbus Day even though you morally disagree with him though, that's the unapologetic nationalist spirit I want to see more in our circles. For the same reason, I'm against slavery but at the same time I'm strongly against tearing down statues and monuments of Confederates.

Regarding imperialism itself: Even if you morally disagree with imperialism in principle, it's basically a tragedy of the commons. If we as whites are unwilling to reclaim our dominant position on the global stage, which would also mean either directly or indirectly taking back control over most non-white countries we used to occupy, some other race or civilization (such as the Jews or the Chinese) is going to take our place and do it anyways. So if you're opposed to white imperialism/colonialism, what you're essentially implying is "I want whites to be powerless and get dominated by the rest of the world, and I want more power to the Jews and the Chinese!", which is inherently contradictory to being pro-white. I'm not saying you think like this or that you aren't pro-white, I'm just taking the idea of being white and being against white imperialism to its logical conclusion.

Columbus Day isn't based by Noloben in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

imperialism is based

FTFY.

List of evidence suggesting "Salos", "probgoingtohell", "ayotollahsiniran" and "Republican58" are almost certainly the same person by YORAMRW in debatealtright

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

Some of his posts and comments remind me of what a Jewish neoliberal thinks the alt right believes. For instance in his the wrong side won ww2 post the FIRST thing he lists as the number one negative effect of ww2 is the eventual destruction of Rhodesia? lmao. Jewish liberals seem to think Rhodesia figures greatly into alt right thinking for some bizarre reason. I guess because some old school white nationalists use to talk about it.

Assuming u/radicalcentrist and his sudden change in political views are genuine, he might've actually picked up the bit about Rhodesia from me. I regularly talk about Rhodesia (as well as Apartheid South Africa), about how I think it was a shining example of how a country or territory with a white minority and a black majority should be organized, and I also specifically mentioned Rhodesia and Apartheid South Africa a lot in my first discussions with radicalcentrist back last February.

List of evidence suggesting "Salos", "probgoingtohell", "ayotollahsiniran" and "Republican58" are almost certainly the same person by YORAMRW in debatealtright

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

I'm not fully convinced u/radicalcentrist is necessarily a shill, but it's definitely at least peculiar how his views changed so drastically in such a short period of time, hence why I asked him to explain himself earlier in this thread.

List of evidence suggesting "Salos", "probgoingtohell", "ayotollahsiniran" and "Republican58" are almost certainly the same person by YORAMRW in debatealtright

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

I've just search "valkyria1488"'s profile, but I didn't find any "yous". He/she/xir/it did, however, constantly bring up the exact same talking points as Courbeaux/Noloben, and similarly accused anyone who disagreed with him/her/xir/it of being anti-white or a ZOG shill.

List of evidence suggesting "Salos", "probgoingtohell", "ayotollahsiniran" and "Republican58" are almost certainly the same person by YORAMRW in debatealtright

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

It's possible, but I don't really see how a troll/shill starting out as a shitlib and then changing his persona into a white nationalist would benefit the left. Usually when the left wants to "deradicalize" people like us and sabotage our communities, they'll do the opposite, pretending they used to be one of us but "escaped the rabbit hole" (i.e: "Faraday Speaks").

You have to keep in mind that a lot of us used to be shitlibs/leftists, or at least some type of liberal or normie cuckservative, ourselves before we started to develop awareness of the attack on white people and started to develop more white ingroup preference as a result, so it could just be the case that radicalcentrist is genuine but just late to the party.

To u/radicalcentrist, maybe it's the best if you explain for yourself what caused you to change your political views in such a short period of time.

List of evidence suggesting "Salos", "probgoingtohell", "ayotollahsiniran" and "Republican58" are almost certainly the same person by YORAMRW in debatealtright

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

I doubt whether "valkyria1488" is Salos. His/her/xir/its behavior and writing style are both very different from that Salos. "valkyria1488" also had a different writing style and persona from Courbeaux/Noloben, playing more of a low-IQ meth-addicted trailer park skinhead character, whereas Courbeaux/Noloben acted as a more intellegent Duginist NazBol LARPer, but in essence all three of them spewed the same talking points and used similar rhetoric.

The wrong side won WW2. by radicalcentrist in debatealtright

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

After a space of 100,000 or even 10,000 years, our descendants would be so far apart from us that they'd feel like a different species altogether.

It doesn't really matter. However different they will be from us, they will still be the closest thing resembling us genetically and phenotypically compared to other races and species. Maybe you don't care about your descendants surviving long-term, but I sure do. Of course, assuming we will win, eugenics and human genetic modification can also do its part in "fossilizing" traits common in whites, while making beneficial traits in whites more prominent and dysgenic traits less prominent. But no matter how different our descendants will be from us in hundreds of thousands of years from us, this will be such a gradual evolutionary process that we won't even notice it. Whites from 10 000 years ago were pretty much the same as us genetically and phenotypically, so assuming we will manage to stop dysgenics by implementing eugenics and human genetic modification, whites from 10 000 years in the future will still be very similar to us, definitely similar enough to the point that they would be biologically classified as white by today's standards.

The wrong side won WW2. by radicalcentrist in debatealtright

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

Doesn't it seem excessive to plan "hundreds of millions of years" into the future?

I don't see why. If we're serious about the survival of our race and our species, and their descendants, I think there's no such thing as thinking too long term. I consider low time preference to be a very virtuous trait which whites (and also East-Asians) possess, and I don't think we should be ashamed to fully embrace it.

Of course, all the nihilist propaganda by the progressive Jewish media would have us give up low time preference: "lmao why do you care if your great-grandchildren will be living as a hated minority in their own country, you'll be dead by then", "lmao why do you care about stuff that doesn't affect your personal life, we're all just stardust/molecules"

It would be interesting to see if humanity can even reach a million.

If the current psychopathic Jewish elites will remain in power for the foreseeable future, humanity (except maybe some East-Asian countries, because they're both intelligent and industrious like whites, but are more politically independent of the ZOG world order unlike us) definitely seems to be heading towards a path of "self"-destruction: Usury, plutocracy/kakistocracy, endless wars, forced dysgenics, forced racial integration, forced mass-immigration of low-IQ non-whites, a culture celebrating weakness, uglyness and insanity and demonizing strength, beauty and normalcy, etc.

In the period roughly between the 1880s and 1960s, before the current Jewish elites managed to completely take over America (and therefore its satellite states in Western Europe), we were definitely going in the right direction: Eugenics, racialist immigration policies, rapid advancements in space travel (and technology in general), ever-increasing prosperity, increasing pan-European cooperation, etc. But somewhere around the 1960s and 1970s, we gradually saw an almost 180 degrees inversion of those things, and people who still supported those things were suddenly called "racist", "white supremacist", "nazi", etc.

I hope that we as whites will manage to remove the current Jewish elite from power as soon as possible and replace them, so we can continue with what we were doing between the 1880s and 1960s, and eventually, in the coming centuries and millennia, create a utopian white civilization and establish the presence of our race and species throughout the Galaxy. If the path we were on between the 1880s and 1960s never got sabotaged and inverted by the current Jewish elites in the first place, we probably would already have managed to build a permanent moon base and put a man on Mars by now.

List of evidence suggesting "Salos", "probgoingtohell", "ayotollahsiniran" and "Republican58" are almost certainly the same person by YORAMRW in debatealtright

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

Not really. Part 1 and 2 are just patterns I've noticed over a longer period of time. Part 3 literally just required me to do three quick Google searches.

The wrong side won WW2. by radicalcentrist in debatealtright

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

I have no idea what you people see in space exploration.

Within a couple of hundreds of millions of years from now, the Sun will become so bright that it will boil the Earth, guaranteed to kill all complex life on Earth. In around 5 billion years, when the Sun will start to reach the end of its life cycle, it will massively grow in size and literally swallow the Earth.

So for people like me, reasons for supporting space exploration aren't just because "it's cool" or "I F*CKING LOVE SCIENCE!!", it's literally about survival. If you want the white race, or the human species as a whole, to survive long term (which I do), developing interstellar space travel, and the subsequent colonization of Earth-like exoplanets, will be an absolute necessity.

Alternatively, we could try to develop highly advanced technology to move the Earth further away from the Sun, and try to harness enough energy from the Sun (with a Dyson sphere or something similar) to be able to actually power this technology, but given how unfeasible this would be even compared to something like interstellar space travel, we're probably better off continuing to focus on developing more advanced and efficient space travel technology in the hope that it will eventually enable us to reach for the stars and spread our posterity all throughout the Galaxy.

The wrong side won WW2. by radicalcentrist in debatealtright

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

Just some advice: Use more spacing in your replies, to cut them up into more paragraphs. Right now, your reply is basically just unreadable (except for the beginning part, where the spacing was done correctly).

List of evidence suggesting "Salos", "probgoingtohell", "ayotollahsiniran" and "Republican58" are almost certainly the same person by YORAMRW in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I don't really believe Salos and u/Soylent (Blork3D) are the same person at all. As far as I know, Soylent/Blork3D used to be something like a woke shitlib years ago (which a lot of us used to be before we started to become pro-white), and used to troll our sub back then (before I was even part of this sub), but has since bettered his life and now more or less holds the same views as us (similarly to u/radicalcentrist, who also came here as a shitlib last February but has since gradually become pro-white), so I don't really have an issue with him anymore. When Soylent/Blork3D replies to Salos, this could just be genuine disagreement on his part, and I can't imagine he'd put so much effort in those replies if he was just another alt account run by the same person as Salos.

List of evidence suggesting "Salos", "probgoingtohell", "ayotollahsiniran" and "Republican58" are almost certainly the same person by YORAMRW in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW[S] 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I don't know about "WeestGang", but I just checked his profile and he definitely also seems like a troll/shill. "Courbeaux" is probably the same person as "Noloben", and possibly also "valkyria1488" (I thought there were more of them, but those three are the only ones I can recall off the top of my head). All three of those accounts were self-proclaimed Duginist NazBols, constantly celebrated white criminals and prison gangs, and "white trash" culture, and insisted we should ally ourselves with them and talked about how people who support any type of legal system or police force (even for in a white ethnostate) are anti-white because that would also get white criminals killed or imprisoned, and all three of them behaved very similarly in general. I really doubt whether Salos is also behind Courbeaux/Noloben/valkyria1488 though, those accounts seem to be run by a different troll, judging by the behaviour (or Salos must have really good acting skills).

List of evidence suggesting "Salos", "probgoingtohell", "ayotollahsiniran" and "Republican58" are almost certainly the same person by YORAMRW in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW[S] 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Ok wow man, wait a minute. I'll admit one of my old accounts was probgoingtohell but I'm neither of those other 2. ayotollahsiniran is a liberal and Republican58 is probably some 60 year old Republican beginning to open up to nationalist views.

Of course, the evidence for "probgoingtohell" being you is the strongest, and it turns out I was right about that one as you've just admitted, while the evidence for "Republican58" being you is the weakest. "probgoingtohell" fitted every pattern of being you: Acting in the same way on this sub, making the same grammar and spelling mistakes as you, using, and having a history of posting on the same specific subreddits on reddit as you. "ayotollahsiniran" presents himself as having different poltical beliefs than you, but he also shows similar behavior to yours on this sub, has a history of posting in the same specific subreddits on reddit as you, and also uses "yous" just like you. "Republican58" only behaves the same as you, uses the same grammar and spelling mistakes as you, and also uses "yous", but I still think even that is too much of a coincidence for him to not be one of your accounts.

ayotollahsiniran is a liberal and Republican58 is probably some 60 year old Republican beginning to open up to nationalist views.

Just because "ayotollahsiniran" and "Republican58" present themselves as having different politcal beliefs than you, doesn't necessarily mean they aren't you. You could be playing different personas based on the account you're logged into at the moment. And like I already said, "ayotollahsiniran" also just so happens to have a history of posting in the same specific subreddits on reddit as you, as well as saying "yous" just like you, coincidences so unlikely that they could otherwise only be explained by magic.

I agree with the JQ but not to insane schizophrenic levels, and most of the Nationalist ideology, I think being en garde against users that have the potential for violence is a positive since those incidents are the equivalent of strikes to the balls for our movement globally as well as all round horrific.

If what you're saying here is true, we're on the same level regarding nationalism and the JQ. But I remember you praising Dwight D. Eisenhower for his violent enforcment of desegregation policies against white people, which is an extremely weird thing to do for a supposed white nationalist, to say the least. Regarding the part about right-wing hate crimes and people on our side who are prone to violence: I'm also against those things, and so are most people on this sub I assume, but there's no reason to constantly whine about it on this sub. Instead, if right-wing hate crimes or terrorist attacks are brought up by someone (whether complaining about it or praising it), simply denounce it and move on, and if you see people on this sub advocating or threathening violence, simply use the report button and move on.

.

The word yous isn't evidence either and I've seen it used a ton on this site. Am I supposed to say something like "gang" or "you guys"?

You can simply do a Google search on ["yous" site:saidit.net] and see for youself. Only one of the many results are from someone else, all other results are from you, "ayotollahsiniran" or "Republican58". "You" on it's own is already also plural, so there isn't really a need for using "you guys", "yous" (black Ebonics), "y'all" (mostly used by woke leftists, aside from blacks and Southerners), but none of these forms is technically incorrect so it's up to you.

.

What's your sources for point 3? I don't recall ayotollahsiniran even being on reddit.

I'm not gonna waste my time fetching all the URLs from all your reddit posts on those subreddits just for you, you disingenuous prick, I'm not your fucking dog. I just did Google searches on ["salos10000" site:reddit.com], ["probgoingtohell" site:reddit.com] and ["ayotollahsiniran" site:reddit.com], which is how I came across your posts in the same specific subreddits (r/victoria2, r/victoria3 and r/TNOmod) from all three of those reddit accounts in the first place. If you, or anyone else who happens to read this, wants a sOuRcE, just do the same Google searches I just mentioned.

.

In general, what was the point of this post? Why couldn't you have put this energy into an actual post with meaning rather than pointless infighting which is the bane of nearly every White Nationalist cause?

I'm not posting this out of hate against you, to start a fight with you. The point of this post is to clear things up for everyone else in this sub, by publishing my findings, so everyone can make up their own minds about it. You are very obssesed with this sub, in a very weird and unhealthy way, as your behavior from all of those fake accounts has shown, and whenever people ask you why you do this in private messages you won't even respond to them, so this isn't infighting. Infighting would be someone on this sub (or another dissident right community) claiming to be a Pagan and constantly talking shit about white Christians, someone claiming to be a Christian and constantly talking shit about white Pagans, someone claiming to be Nordic and constantly talking shit about Mediterranean whites, someone claiming to be Mediterranean and constantly talking shit about Nordic whites, etc.

A question about point 4 of the NJP's platform by ayotollahsinIran in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Also, how on earth could forcing companies and institutions to reduce their Jewish proportion cause massive riots that would be able to seriously disrupt American society? It will be mostly Jews who would be mad about this, and they're only 2% of the US population and don't have it in them to violently riot anyways. Blacks definitely wouldn't riot over this either, they only riot when something bad happens to another black person or a group of black people, and they don't really like Jews and generally don't distinguish between Jews and white gentiles anyways (so given that they might even celebrate this policy).

I also don't see how these companies going on stike would be able to long-term paralyze the economy; these companies would mostly just destroy themselves and go bankrupt, and other companies that are willing to comply would fill in the void they left behind and benefit from it.

A question about point 4 of the NJP's platform by ayotollahsinIran in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

To answer your question seriously: Effective ways to force companies and institutions to keep the compostion of their leadership positions (or their workforce as a whole) at max. 2% Jewish without having to force them to fire already employed Jews, would include:

  • Forcing companies and institution to not hire any more additional Jews until the Jewish proportion has dropped to max. 2%, in the same way companies and institutions are currently forced to not hire any additional white people until the white proportion has dropped to the required percentage under affirmitive action/"diversity" hiring policies.

  • Forcing companies and institutions to implement anti-loxism training courses which all Jewish employees will be required to follow before they can start or continue their job, in the same way companies and institutions are currently forced to implement "anti-racism" training courses which all white employees are required to follow. These anti-loxism training courses would filter out most Jews with Jewish supremacist attitudes and convert the fence-sitters to anti-loxism, in the same way the current "anti-racist" training courses filter out most white people with pro-white sentiments and turn the fence-sitters into self-hating whites.

  • Simply hiring additional white gentiles, until the Jewish proportion had dropped to max. 2%, thus expanding the total workforce of companies and institutions. To make up for the inefficiency forcibly expanding the workforce of companies and institions would cause, they'd have to start firing people more quickly for incompetence.

A question about point 4 of the NJP's platform by ayotollahsinIran in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Another "yous" again, definitely very suspicious at this point. 🤔

u/literalotherkin

A question about point 4 of the NJP's platform by ayotollahsinIran in debatealtright

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

Nice try, fed.

A question about point 4 of the NJP's platform by ayotollahsinIran in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What would happen under the current affirmitive action policies if a white guy refuses to quit his job and the company/organisation he's employed at refuses to fire him and goes on strike if police arrive to "remove" him?

A question about point 4 of the NJP's platform by ayotollahsinIran in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Yo, u/Blackbrownfreestuff told me that you post pictures of yourself pretending to be a British actress. Why do you do this? What mental illness do you have?

Please debunk this TRA article by [deleted] in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What makes this even weirder is that those accounts all have an organic comment history, all talking about trans-related stuff in those subs. Assuming all of those accounts are just alts from the same person (which they probably are), why on earth would he use all of those accounts to talk about the same topic, instead of just using one (on top of continuing to spam the same post for so long, which on its own is already very weird)?

SaidIt Survey: Which non-default subs do you think should be added to default and/or which subs do you think deserve more attention and/or subscribers? by JasonCarswell in AskSaidIt

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

You clearly take issue with the idea of our sub being added to default subs, or else you wouldn't have felt the need to write your initial reply to me, but nice backpedaling. Either that, or you're just poor at communicating, and shifting the blame on me for misintepreting you in order to avoid having to admit fault.

SaidIt Survey: Which non-default subs do you think should be added to default and/or which subs do you think deserve more attention and/or subscribers? by JasonCarswell in AskSaidIt

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

In that case you're not really in the position to complain about our sub being added to default subs, let alone complain about it being on s/all.

SaidIt Survey: Which non-default subs do you think should be added to default and/or which subs do you think deserve more attention and/or subscribers? by JasonCarswell in AskSaidIt

[–]YORAMRW 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

There's a "mute sub" button below every post on s/all for a reason. If you press it on any post from s/DebateAltRight, you'll never have to see another post post from our "idiotic" sub ever again.

What do you think of this anti communist argument? by Salos60000 in debatealtright

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

Want who to make a what?

What do you think of this anti communist argument? by Salos60000 in debatealtright

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

How?

What are your thoughts on recreational weed/marijuana? by YORAMRW in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

So you're a ZOGbot? Got it.

What are your thoughts on recreational weed/marijuana? by YORAMRW in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

So you base your morality on the law (written by Jews and shabbos goys), instead of your own sense of right and wrong, and on what's best for our people? What if being a white nationalist became illegal tomorrow? I'm assuming you're also pro-white.

Chinese state media label George Soros a ‘terrorist’ by Ethnocrat in debatealtright

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

Wtf I love ching-chongs now

The jews aren't White theory doesn't really have a strong basis to be honest by Salos60000 in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I know, but Neanderthals weren't one of those three ancestral populations. Those three (proto-)white ancestral populations emerged thousands (if not tens of thousands) of years after the Neanderthals were still around and the mixing occurred. Those three acestral populations were the Western Hunter Gatherers (Nordic whites, Northwestern Europe), Indo-Europeans/Yamnaya (partially Nordic whites, eastern Ukraine and the Caucasus), and Neolithic Farmers (non-Nordic whites; Southern Europe, North Africa and the Levant/Near East). All three of those ancestral populations of mordern-day whites already had Neanderthal admixture, just like non-white Caucasoids, Central Asians (Caucasoid-Mongoloid hybrids) and East Asians (most pure Mongoloids).

Furthermore, West-African blacks (Congoid Negroids) have admixture of up to 20% of previously unknown "ghost DNA", which has recently been revelead to have been a hybrid of Homo Sapiens and Homo Erectus (a now extinct human subspecies which is known for looking like a racist caricature of a black man, which has been found to have been very lazy and low-IQ), meaning modern day blacks are the closest thing still alive to the Homo Erectus.

The jews aren't White theory doesn't really have a strong basis to be honest by Salos60000 in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Also, you have to keep in mind that, although modern-day whites are technically a mix of three ancestral populations, those three ancestral populations were by no means different races. Based on the archelogical evidence, those three ancestral populations were distantly related to each other and would all fall into the Caucasoid category based on physical characteristics, and were at most different sub-races.

So modern-day whites aren't a mixed people in the way mestizos and and South Asians are for example, and comparing the "mixed" origins of whites to the actually mixed origins of mestizos and South Asians (as "socks" was likely going to do, thinking it's an "own" against us) would be like comparing people who are half German half English to people who are half German half Somalian.

The suffragettes were rabid eugenicists by BiglyBased in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Why go to the trouble of writing this while making insulting comments? Are you not confident in what you write? Do you know the definition of 'disingenuous'? Do you really want to lower the discourse while you make your arguments? Do you think anyone will take you seriously when you do this? (No, they won't.)

Of course that's the only thing in my reply you're focusing on, instead of focusing on the actual substance of it, because you can't come up with any rational arguments of your own. This is tone policing by the way, and thus a Rule 2 violation on this sub, considering you yourself are all about people following the rules. Me throwing insults in at you in my reply has nothing to do with confidence, I do this because pathological liars and sophists like you require this in order for the arguments to get through your head, since you clearly aren't responisive to logic and reason on its own.

Judging by the amount of likes my reply verus your reply has gotten so far, I'm clearly the one that's being taken more seriously than you here, and almost any white person who has ever had biology classes (except for a small minority of brainwashed woke anti-white Reddit freaks like you) would definitely take my side regarding eugenics when presented both of our sets of arguments, as any sane person who has any grasp of evolution would simply have to lie to himsels to deny that I'm right on this.

And yes, "disingenuous" is actually a perfect description for someone who falsely claims that there's a risk of inbreeding depression with a population of millions of people just because some pathological traits have been removed from it, whereas in reality all scientific evidence suggests inbreeding depression can only occur without any deliberate actions of incest in very small, isolated populations of a couple of thousand people or less.

.

It amazes me the lengths to which people will go to try to justify the recent rise in "scientific" racism. I see that they are very serious about it and have a substantial, which is doubly worrying. Comments like these help me learn about the resurgence of interests in eugenics (but at the cost of dealing with insults from insecure people).

That was a long-winded way of telling us we're living in your minds rent-free. We were already aware of the fact that the alt-right lives in everyone's minds rent-free nowadays, even more so in the minds of woke anti-white leftists and shitlibs like you, but thanks for the additional confirmation. Keep coping and seething. ;)

.

The other problem is that those who favor the resurgence of eugenics are now primarily arguing for the hatred and removal of (or distancing of) the 'other' - to breed a better race - rather than for 'science' and 'humanity'

My support for eugenics has never been about hatred, or at least not primarily, it's about improving the white race, and by extension humanity as a whole, and about creating a safer, more prosperous and more socially cohesive future for my people and humanity in general. If you've actually paid any attention to my statements (including my previous reply to you) on eugenics from the past couple of years, you'd have known that I regularly talk about how I'm of the opinion that those who shouldn't be allowed to reproduce (the dumb, the weak, the ugly, the disabled, the mentally ill, etc.) should still be taken care of by the government, should still retain most of their other rights and freedoms (except for the right to vote and actively participate in politics), and should still be treated with respect by the rest of society. I do hate anti-whites (regardless of whether they're white themselves, Jewish or non-white) with a burning passion though, and they are obviously among the first who should be considered for forced sterilization under any eugenics policy.

PS: Furthermore, anti-eugenicists (like you) are on the same level of either delusional insanity or pathological lying for political purposes as flat earthers, young earth creationists and people who unironically claim 2 + 2 = 5, the only difference being that your lie/delusion is currently backed with money, propaganda, censorship and violence by the ruling elites, whereas the other lies/delusions aren't. So I sincerely hope that one day, once we've managed to remove the current elites, and your pro-dysgenics/anti-eugenics (bioleninist) shilling doesn't have any institutional support anymore, we can just simply neuter you, put you away in an insane asylum together with the other woke Reddit freaks, and be done with it, for the betterment of the rest of society.

Worm Farming--Based or Not? by Frenologist in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

I can already imagine the ADL declaring worms a hate symbol, and many hitpieces from woke leftist newspapers about it being written: "White Supremacists' Most Recent Obsession: Worm Farming, And Why We Should Be Worried About That" lmao

Worm Farming--Based or Not? by Frenologist in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

The "New Worm Order"?

Keith Woods & Joel Davis vs Logo Daedalus & Infrared Haz by LGBTQIAIDS in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

He's a full-blown Marxist now? Well, that explains a lot. Some of his anti-white tweets have very strong Michael Moore energy: The condescending, gleeful anti-white radlib attitude towards working class whites, by expressing fake pity for the bad situation they're in coupled with concern trolling along the lines of "If these dumb rednecks stopped being so racist they might actually be able to unite with the black and Hispanic working class against the capitalist pigs and defeat them", if you know what I mean.

Keith Woods & Joel Davis vs Logo Daedalus & Infrared Haz by LGBTQIAIDS in debatealtright

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

Logo Daedalus is a Jewish supremacist, anti-white piece of shit. Just search for his username plus "white" or "jewish" on Twitter and you'll see what I mean.

The suffragettes were rabid eugenicists by BiglyBased in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

regardless of whether negative or positive [eugenics] policies are used, they are susceptible to abuse because the genetic selection criteria are determined by whichever group has political power at the time.

This is a very common lolbert talking point. The same tactical nihilism you anti-eugenicists apply to eugenics could just as well be applied to any type of policy backed by state power. The eugenics example of this argument with some other examples to put it into perspective:

  • "Using state power to implement eugenics that promotes traits we deem good and selects against traits we deem bad is dangerous and hypocritical, because that would justify our enemies using state power to implement eugenics that promotes traits we deem bad and selects against traits we deem good if they ever take over the state from us in the future!"

  • "Using state power to prohibit, restrict or deplatform white nationalist groups is dangerous and hypocritical, because that would justify white nationalists using state power to prohibit, restrict or deplatform antifa and BLM if they ever take over the state from us in the future!" (something someone who's on your side or is a concern troll who pretends to be on your side might say)

  • "Using state power to sentence rapists and serial killers to death is dangerous and hypocritical, because that would justify rapists and serial killers using state power to sentence people who hate rapists and serial killers to death if they ever take over the state from us in the future!"

Of course, this lolbert argument is totally ridiculous and has no bearing in practical reality, since any serious politicians and elites who genuinely want to enact certain policies will do everything they can to achieve this, regardless of whether their opponents are as fanatical as themselves (such as people like me) or whether they are lolbert cucks and boomer cuckservatives who refuse to play their enemies' game because "muh principles" (hence why they will always lose out against their more machiavellian opponents).

.

Furthermore, many criticize negative eugenics in particular as a violation of basic human rights, seen since 1968's Proclamation of Tehran as including the right to reproduce.

LOL, the same "human rights" council that considers any form of "racism", prohibiting fags from adopting and molesting children, or pointing out that MTF trannies will never be real women "human rights abuses". Also, in a lot of countries, including the Netherlands, people who are more severely mentally disabled (around sub-75 IQ) are already de facto prohibited from reproducing, and in the rare occasion they decide to reproduce regardless the child is usually forcibly taken away and put up for adoption. So a lot of countries, the Netherlands included, already have a form of eugenics, albeit an extremely soft one. Maybe you can go cry crocodile tears at the UN "human rights" council and set up a petition for "free love for the retards" or something.

.

Another criticism is that eugenics policies eventually lead to a loss of genetic diversity, thereby resulting in inbreeding depression due to a loss of genetic variation.

Eugenics doesn't lead to a loss of diversity and inbreeding, you disingenuous prick. Inbreeding depression only occurs when you have a tiny, isolated population of less than 100 000 people, which definitely isn't the case with eugenics, as it would only prohibit a small minority of the population from reproducing and would allow for any genetic traits not deemed dysgenic to continue spreading.

The only way eugenics could cause issues with loss of genetic diversity and inbreeding would be if it was done in a similar way as how dogs were bred for specific traits, forcing generations of people with certain traits to mate with their siblings and cousins just because they also posess those traits, but that's a woke leftist strawman definition of eugenics that has no bearing in reality regarding the ways in which eugenics has actually been historically practiced from the late 19th century up to around the 1970s.

Actual eugenics in the way almost all eugenicists historically advocated for and how it was actually practiced is totally alien from your ridiculous strawman conception of eugenics as "breeding humans like dogs", instead it just seeks to prohibit a minority of the population with traits deemed dysgenic from reproducing and to positively incentivize a minority of the population with traits deemed good to reproduce the most.

.

Yet another criticism of contemporary eugenics policies is that they propose to permanently and artificially disrupt millions of years of evolution

If you're truly that concerned about millions of years of evolution being "artificially disrupted", you should be very upset at the fact that governments are, through incentives like non-discriminatory (or even low-income specific) child benefits and foreign aid to Africa, artificially enabling (or even rewarding) specifically the low-IQ and mentally ill in our societies to shit out as many babies as they want to like rabbits, instead of just letting them undergo sterilization but allowing to them keep their welfare in exchange. Many of those low-IQ and mentally ill people either would've had way smaller families or simply would've died off before the industrial revolution, but now that we have eugenics it would just be cruel to let them die off if we can also achieve the same outcome by simply paying them to get themselves sterilized.

But of course, you have no problem with that type of (actual) artificial disruption of evolution (dysgenics), you only have a problem with our type, the one that would actually improve and benefit humanity (eugenics). Whenever people (like yourself) insist we actively encourage and incentivize the dumbest, ugliest, weakest and most mentally ill members of society to reproduce the most, it's either ignored or applauded by Jewish leftists and other bioleninists (like yourself), but when people (like me) insist we do the opposite and actively encourage and incentivize the smartest, most attractive, strongest and most mentally stable members of society to reproduce the most, it's considered evil nazism and we're told that it wouldn't work and would "artificially disrupt" millions of years of evolution.

Also, if eugenics in favor of traits deemed positive would supposedly "artificially disrupt" millions of years of evolution, then by your own logic, so would any natural evolutionary selection pressures that had/have similar effects on humans (such as the selection pressure the Ice Age had on the humans that left Africa for Europe and eventually became modern-day whites), so this would mean evolution itself "artificially disrupts" millions of years of prior evolution, making your argument self-refuting.

The suffragettes were rabid eugenicists by BiglyBased in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I'm reading through this thread together with my wife's Black boyfriend's beautiful Brown sons, and they started applauding and told me that this gives them hope of a brighter, more diverse and equal future, despite the dark times we're going through in the current white supremacist Amerikkka with Drumpf's legacy! Wholesome Reddit moment!! Science says racism bad!

The suffragettes were rabid eugenicists by BiglyBased in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

So true!! Charles Darwin, much like Jesus, was also a trans queer lesbian intersectionalist who supported drag queen story hour, wanted to abolish the police and wanted to enrich white majority countries with endless diversity! But most people are ignorant bigots who don't know any of this, because the history books in school (written by the racist white devil) don't teach us any of this! All "science" before the 1930s was just medieval quackery, because it was a bunch of old racist white males who believed in problematic constructs such as "genetics", but thankfully the enlightened Jewish heroes came along to save the day and tell us that eugenics is incorrect and the greatest evil in human history, and rightfully shut down anyone who disagreed with them, so now it's all good and I f*cking love Science!!!

Was the car a positive or negative development for society? by Ponderer in debatealtright

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

I agree, but whites becoming the most powerful group on the planet again (and possibly having colonies) wouldn't be globalism, that would just be imperialism or expansionism (nationalism and ingroup preference taken to its logical conclusion).

Was the car a positive or negative development for society? by Ponderer in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Is a white person who wants whites all over the world to gain more political power, at the expense of the political power of Jews and non-whites, a "white globalist" to you? And if so, why would you consider that a bad thing, assuming you're white yourself? Because most of the time I've heard the term "white globalist" being used, it wasn't someone calling himself that, it was being used as a pejorative/accusation, similar to terms like "wignat", "Duginist", "racist liberal", "MarxNat", etc.

Was the car a positive or negative development for society? by Ponderer in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Are patriotic, ethnic-europeans actually self-identifying as "white nationalists"?

Seems unlikely...

Some definitely are (myself included), especially in Northwestern Europe, probably because that's where the attack on white people is the strongest in all of Europe (just like in the US and Anglo colonies), as well as because racialism historically isn't just an exclusively Anglo colonial thing but a Germanic thing in general. But I meant white people with racial ingroup preference in general, regardless of where they live and of what label they give it. Being pro-white and being pro-[your specific European ethnic group] aren't mutually exclusive. In fact, I'd argue you can't be truly ethno-nationalist without having at least some racial ingroup preference if you're white, since your race is an essential component of your ethnic group (which couldn't even have existed without your race existing).

Then again...

Something. Something. FBI surveillance.

IDK.

It isn't just about surveillance. Governments and corporations can easily deny anyone access to public transportation and air travel (see Nick Fuentes being on the no-fly list for example), something that's a lot more difficult for them to pull off with car travel. Regarding surveillance, with public transportation and air travel, governments and corporations automatically track you by mere virtue of you checking in and out. With cars, if you completely shut off your electronic devices, the only way they can track you is if you happen to drive past highway surveillance cameras, unless you have tracking hardware built into your car (which sadly is the case with more and more cars today, as a way to bypass the privacy we used to have in them, so in that regard you're better off driving an older car). With cars, you also have the ability to change your course any time you want, unlike with public transportation and air travel.

Was the car a positive or negative development for society? by Ponderer in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Cars allow White people evade crime populations by fleeing to rural areas and suburbs. The car can be a useful buffer against a criminal. Going into the wrong side of town on accident with a car is safer than without one especially if there is a "gathering".

This argument was actually part of the long reply in favor of cars which I was gonna write on this post, but you already beat me to it. It's perhaps one of the most important reasons why any serious white nationalists should support cars and strongly resist any potential future government attempts to ban them (or only allow self-driving cars), aside from maybe the essential role cars play in enabling white nationalists and other dissidents to effectively organize across vast distances outside of corporate and government control. Also very based reply in general!

Hiroshima Nagasaki-scale self own by casparvoneverec in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The tranny blocked me for some reason, even though I've never interacted with it.

Massive Bolsonaro rallies in Brazil by DisgustResponse in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

as if that would be a serious thing in a country with a 54% black population and < 10% White population

Almost 50% of Brazil's population self-identifies as white. That being said, a lot of the self-identifying "whites" in Brazil aren't actually really white, but rather "pardos" (meaning castizos or even mestizos), unlike with whites in the US (who are 98% genetically white on average). So Brazil's actual white population is definitely much less than the official almost 50% figure, but it's also very unlikely that it's as low as only 10% (unless you're going by the one drop rule, which is peak autism in my opinion, even more so in such a mixed third world country). True blacks are actually a small minority of less than 10% in Brazil (much like in the US), but of course a lot of self-identified "pardos" have large amounts of black ancestry.

What do you think of this anti communist argument? by Salos60000 in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Salos has been on this sub for over a year now, concern trolling, posting boomer cuckservative tier memes and talking points, and generally acting like an annoying prick. He refuses to seriously listen to any polite criticisms of his views and behavior, refuses to improve anything about how he interacts with this sub, and has been banned for this many times but constantly creates new alt accounts to resume his trolling. Whenever people ask Salos why in the hell he does all of this, he just ghosts them, just like he does with most replies to his posts and comments that only contain non-offensive, serious arguments.

If anything, trolls such as Salos "lower the standard for users here", and roasting him (in the way u/literalotherkin does) is the only way to get through to him since, as I already mentioned, Salos ignores almost all replies he gets that aren't abrasive to him and instead only contain friendly disagreements. The Australian-style banter literalotherkin engages in has so far only been directed at people who deserve it anyways (such as trolls like Salos), and I think he does a excellent job at it.

What do you think of this anti communist argument? by Salos60000 in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The same way of structurally forgetting to use spaces after commas is also suspicious.

What do you think of this anti communist argument? by Salos60000 in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

He was funny due to his endless stupidity, not because of his sense of humor (which he doesn't have). We laughed at him, not with him.

What do you think of this anti communist argument? by Salos60000 in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

How did who go after what?

What do you think of this anti communist argument? by Salos60000 in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This shitty strawman again. Just because people oppose Jewish globalist neoliberal capitalism doesn't make them communists, most on this sub are about equally as opposed to communism. If you're truly pro-white, you should stop buying into or pushing this kosher capitalism vs. communism false dichotomy, and instead focus on what policies are in the best interests of our people and what policies will improve the wellbeing of our people the most (irregardless of whether these policies may be labelled communism, capitalism or something else).

By the way, you're raising my suspicion of you being the same person as u/Republican58 again, since he literally constantly did the exact thing you're doing right now: Accusing us of being communists, and then spamming shitty, outdated, low-IQ, boomer-tier pro-capitalist and anti-communist memes on our sub. You definitely seem to be a slow learner, given you're still acting the same after having been banned by us so often.

What do you think of this anti communist argument? by Salos60000 in debatealtright

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

Then go after those globalist megacorps, instead of going after the workers.

Hot take: activist moderators are better than laissez-faire ones, and absolutely essential for dissident success. by Ponderer in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I'm not sure whether I'd consider a bunch of low-IQ schizo boomers rambling about how Bill Gates is an evil white supremacist eugenicist who's trying to depopulate Africa with vaccines a valuable addition to the userbase of our alt-tech platforms.

I think the White Nationalist cause needs to be pragmatic if we want to succeed. by Salos60000 in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You only call me retarded because I refuse to kiss your ass, if I had become an anti-white leftist (like you) and would've argued in your defense you probably would've praised me. If anyone is retarded, it's white people who hate their own race. They're genetically messed up to the point where they're literally so mentally ill that they not only lack any group survival instinct, but even actively fight against it. But judging by your post history, you're non-white, so I guess from your perspective it makes sense to try and undermine white group interests.

"White supremacy" in the sense you anti-white vermin use it is just an anti-white slur used against any whites who don't cuck to other races and who want their own kind to continue to exist and prosper, to justify violence and persecution against them, because you hate whites and want them to go extinct. If your warped definition of "white supremacy" was correct, then white supremacy wouldn't even have been a thing until a 100 years (or less) ago since whites didn't have to fear anything as they still were in power back then, which just goes to show the utter ridiculousness of defining white supremacy as "a sense of entitlement + fear".

But even if we went by your definition of "white supremacy": Us whites are absolutely entitled to be supreme in our own countries, and fear is absolutely normal and rational, given how quickly and effectively rich and powerful Jews have been able to remove us whites from power in our own countries, and given the huge amounts of crime and violence from non-white scum which us whites have to deal with in our own countries, in the same sense that fear for a highly intelligent extraterrestrial species invading and conquering the earth (and thus removing us humans from our position of power on our own planet, if not outright enslaving or exterminating us) or fear for a pack of silverback gorillas that escaped from the zoo would be normal and rational.

I think the White Nationalist cause needs to be pragmatic if we want to succeed. by Salos60000 in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

There's no reasonable way in which protesting against the genocide of your own race or simply pointing out the overrepresentation of certain groups in positions of power (in this case Jews) makes someone a shitty person, unless you're anti-white or a Jewish supremacist (which you're clearly both). You literally want to exterminate white people, so you aren't really in the position to talk shit about your enemies being shitty people regardless.

Besides, if us whites were truly in power, why the hell wouldn't we use our power to our full extent to fully suppress anti-whites and their activities. If the system actually was white supremacist, as you and your ilk love to pretend it is in order to justify violence against random white people, subhuman psychopathic anti-white scum like you would literally be lifetime slaves, which you fully deserve since you're genocidal terrorists. ;)

PS: Just a reminder that your nigger saint, Fentanyl Floyd, is still burning in hell for robbing a pregnant woman at gunpoint, among other things. <3

A quick note to /u/d3rr about his piss pooor managements skills. by skeeter in whatever

[–]YORAMRW 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Saidit is just a safespace for those who have been banned from reddit or want to visit offshoots of subs that were banned from reddit.

Hell yeah nigger, that's right! What are you gonna do about it? Reddit is now one giant safe space for anti-white scum like you. If you don't like the fact that people who don't share your disgusting anti-white and Jewish supremacist views are also allowed to speak freely here, you're completely free to fuck off back to Reddit where everyone already agrees with your shitty political views.

E. Michael Jones Post-Debate Reply by Nombre27 in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't think Nick Fuentes is a bad actor, although he might be a "useful idiot" to anti-whites seeking to sow religious infighting among pro-whites. At least Nick Fuentes is more or less pro-white (unlike EMJ), and he does a great job of getting normie/boomer conservatives off the GOP plantation and marketing political views similar to ours to them.

EMJ, on the other hand, would fall more into the bad actor category in my opinion, since his entire schtick is basically neutralizing pro-white sentiments and activism. I highly suspect most of EMJ's fans are young mestizo immigrants (rather than white zoomers, as is the case with Nick Fuentes' fans), since no sane white person (let alone a socially conservative white person) would want to listen to someone constantly deconstructing his race and telling him give up his racial ingroup preference.

What Does "America" Mean in 2021? by BiglyBased in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

How is Eisenhower the best US president of the 20th century according to you? Can you name any specific things he did that make you like him? You know that after Brown v. Board, Eisenhower's administration was responsible for literally sending the US military into Arkansas to force white parents and their children to attend racially integrated schools at gunpoint, right?

I think Calvin Coolidge was the best US president of the 20th century, because his administration was responsible for passing the 1924 Johnson-Reed Immigration Act, which completely barred non-whites from immigrating to the US and obtaining US citizenship and prioritized Northwest European whites over other whites.

Lyndon B. Johnson was probably the worst US president of the 20th century, being both very zionist and very pro-"civil rights", as well as being responsible for passing the anti-white 1965 Hart-(((Celler))) Immigration Act (which removed the white-only immigration restrictions and opened America's floodgates to people all races, turning America for 90% to only 60% white in less than 60 years). Lyndon B. Johnson was basically the first president who really started all the "woke" anti-white shit we still have today.

I think the White Nationalist cause needs to be pragmatic if we want to succeed. by Salos60000 in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

>literally regurgitating Jewish shitlib talking points

I think the White Nationalist cause needs to be pragmatic if we want to succeed. by Salos60000 in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If us white people truly still have a solid grip of power nowadays, then why are our countries flooded with millions of non-white immigrants by the system without our consent, why do we get attacked by the system (getting fired from our jobs, getting our bank accounts frozen, being put on no-fly lists, getting investigated by intelligence agencies, getting fined or imprisoned for "hate speech", etc.) whenever we protest this forced demographic replacement or dare to call out Jewish overrepresentation in positions of power, while simultaneously being praised by the system for talking about "white privilege", "systemic racism", "anti-Semitism" and for wanting white people to go extinct?

White people are generally still alowed to live a relatively normal life as long as they don't question the system's attack on their race or the Jewish role in it and express hatred of their own race, but as soon as a white individual goes against this he risks losing his livelihood and any power he used to have. That doesn't sound like white people having a solid grip of power.

Why does the sidebar link to thuletide? by Noloben in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You've been defending Russia's regime a lot, you've said that your reason for supporting people like Mugabe is because they're cool with Russia's regime unlike the west, and you're a fan of Dugin who's a fanatical supporter of Russia's regime, so I just assumed you're a strong supporter of Russia's regime on this basis, but I don't care to keep good track in the same way you don't care to keep good track. Don't get me wrong, I still hate ZOG/GAE far more than Russia's regime, because Russia's regime at least isn't explicitly anti-white (unlike ZOG/GAE), and Russia's regime also takes in white South Africans (unlike ZOG/GAE, which rejects them for being white), so I don't blame you for preferring Russia's regime over ZOG/GAE.

I think the White Nationalist cause needs to be pragmatic if we want to succeed. by Salos60000 in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

We're currently enslaved by psychopathic Jewish elites and our race is basically dying out, so sea levels rising a couple of centimeters and the weather becoming a bit warmer isn't really high on my list of concerns right now. After we've liberated ourselves (hopefully as soon as possible), we can just protect our coastlines from rising sea levels with huge dikes (like the Northern European Enclosure Dam), fully transition to nuclear energy, and cool down the earth by greening the deserts with water from desalination plants anyways.

Why does Race & IQ differences make people angry, but Gender differences does not? by radicalcentrist in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Because the whole "woke" stuff in essence just boils down to Jewish elites (and their black and brown attack dogs) hating white people. The "gender is a social construct" stuff was just one of their stepping stones towards selective race denialism (applied to only the white race), and then open scapegoating, demonization and dehumanization of white people, and its intended resulting anti-white violence.

Why does the sidebar link to thuletide? by Noloben in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I was going based on what I think you said in response to a post by u/Valkyria1488

Thanks for your clarification. You mean that I think there should still be laws and a police force even in a potential future white ethnostate? How can someone claim to care about white people while thinking criminals who victimize innocent white people should get away with it just because they're also white? By that logic you might as well be against self-defense because that might also result in an innocent white person killing his victimizer who might also be white.

If you care about white people, you must support the existence of some sort of legal system and a police force in white societies, so innocent white people are protect against criminals (both white and non-white). What valkyra implied in her post was that white people who rape, assault, rob, murder, etc. should be treated equally to normal white people who never harmed anyone, effectively cheapening the lives and wellbeing of normal white people in favor of criminals who happen to be white.

Of course I agree that white people are now often unjustly killed/murdered by the police, and I want that to stop just as much as you, but that doesn't mean law enforcement is bad in and of itself. We just need to decriminalize/legalize most victimless crimes, while simultaneously raising the sentences on more servere crime.

I just reject neocon bullshit.

Definitely couldn't argue with that.

Why does the sidebar link to thuletide? by Noloben in debatealtright

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

Why even respond to such an absurd strawman? I made clear my opinion on Russia before.

You mean like the absurd strawman/accusation that I support cops in Western countries murdering white people? If you can call me anti-white based on a made up accusation that I support cops mudering white people, it's more than reasonable that I call you anti-white based on your support for genocidal anti-white black marxists (like Mugabe) which you've admitted to.

You still haven't shown what makes you think that I support cops murdering white people by the way, nice dodge. By your own logic, you definitely can't be pro-white, since you consider any pro-whites (like me) who don't adhere to your specific weird and shitty thirdworldist cult the enemy.

Why does the sidebar link to thuletide? by Noloben in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Where in the hell did I support the murder of white people by cops? Fucking prove it.

Sounds like projection to me by the way. You literally worship Russia's regime, which assasinates its own white people merely for being pro-white or any other type of political dissident. You also support Mugabe, who's literally responsible for the murder of thousands of innocent white people.

Why does the sidebar link to thuletide? by Noloben in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Maybe because this is a pro-white sub and Thuletide is also pro-white? You may hate Thuletide because you're a fan of Dugin and Thuletide has beef with Dugin and his fans, but Thuletide has written many great articles on race, and he has also done a great job on calling out anti-white subversion both from external sources as well as from within our own political sphere.

Taylor vs Jones debate back on and scheduled for this weekend. Winner to be declared pope or future emperor of north American ethnostate. by literalotherkin in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I was thinking of posting this myself, thanks for letting everyone here know about the debate! If wish the debate would also be about the JQ, or that there would be a separate future second debate on the JQ between Jared Taylor and EMJ. The desired outcome, of course, would be that Jared Taylor destroys EMJ in the race debate whereas EMJ destroys Jared Taylor in the JQ debate, resulting in both Jared Taylor and EMJ becoming redpilled on both race and the JQ. Jared Taylor will then be declared emperor and EMJ pope of the ethnostate simultaneously.

The American right needs to snap out of blind patriotism by Nasser in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

u/Republican58: *brain.exe has stopped working*

How does Canada keep doing well on the PISA by [deleted] in debatealtright

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

That isn't how regression to the mean works. This is a popular misconception, which, by the way, is also used by leftists deliberately, to "debunk" race realism, eugenics or hereditarianism in general.

If you take a group of high-IQ individuals from a race with a low average IQ and separate them from the overall population of their race, their descendants' IQs won't regress all the way back to the low average of their race, but rather regress to IQs somewhere inbetween their racial average and the high IQs of their particular ancestors in a couple of generations, and then more or less remain the same for their descendants.

If regression to means worked in the way you think it does, evolution wouldn't even be possible in the first place, since any traits in an individual that get favored by natural selection (or eugenics) over the average traits of the race he belongs to would simply regress back to the racial average in his descendants anyways.

Predictably awful reading from reddit by CharlesOlivera in debatealtright

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

You naturally suspected racial differences were real and then searched out the evidence on the internet. Why aren't all whites doing that if they aren't too dumb to save their race?

Because apparently for some white people, like me and most on this sub, ingroup preference is deeply enough embedded in my genes that it was going to express itself eventually. I don't think I'm particularly smart by white standards, and there are many whites who are smart but don't have as much ingroup preference.

Edit: You also have to keep in mind that most of us who became pro-white (including myself) did so before all pro-white content was deplatformed in 2019-2020. Bacl when YouTube was full of pro-white content, it was very popular and white nationalism was growing rapidly, but once the pro-white content was gone this growth rapidly declined, hence disproving the common boomer cuckservative talking point that "deplatforming doesn't work".

Besides, you can't say propaganda excuses them. Even if they succumb to propaganda it is still because of their stupidity.

The majority of people in any race (not just whites) don't naturally have strong political beliefs, but are more like NPCs who just internalize whatever propaganda/brainwashing they recieve at the moment. Some people, like this sub, are less suspectible to this, while others (like white redditors) are so suspectible to this to the point that they lack an internal moral compass whatsoever, and most people (like non-woke white normies) fall somewhere inbetween.

It's just the truth that the main reason why most whites lack ingroup preference right is simply because they've been propagandized for over half a century. Non-whites are more ethnocentric because they simply have the luxury of not having been brainwashed to hate themselves for over half a century like whites have been. Now that you know this, if you still want to blame normal white people themselves for not actively supporting our ideas, it probably means you have something against white people and don't want to save the white race to begin with.

Also, if whites supposedly hate themselves so much, why was it the necessary for the Jews in power to deplatform all pro-white content? That doesn't sound like something they would feel the need to do if white people were just naturally self-hating.

.

I regularly talk with random white people

Tell us what you say to turn them pro-white.

There isn't anything specific in particular I say, I usually just start by asking their opinions about current race-related events. When they espouse MSM talking points about it, I debunk them and show them how the MSM is illustrating an anti-white narrative about it that's out of touch with reality to demonize white people. If they still disagree with me after this, I usually give up, but if they agree with me I go on to talk about pro-white stuff like non-white mass immigration being deliberately used to replace white people in white countries. When they have the same type of opinions on the issue from the get go, I tell them I agree and then go on about the same pro-white stuff.

Kinda what CatboyKami does on Omegle, but obviously only to white people and in a non-offensive manner. Other things I might do is pointing out how being pro-white as a white person is in essence no different (and therefore no worse) than caring more about your own family than about other families, or caring more about humans than other animal species.

Of course, if they're genuinely self-hating this obviously couldn't work, they have to already have a bit in of white ingroup preference in them hidden under the layers of Jewish brainwashing. You can't magically transform genuinely self-hating/anti-white whites into white nationalists this way. This goes to show that woke anti-whites are right about something, namely that normal white people are secretly far more "racist" than it would seem, the difference is that they consider that a bad thing while I consider that a good thing.

Predictably awful reading from reddit by CharlesOlivera in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Both, actually.

Predictably awful reading from reddit by CharlesOlivera in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Try talking to whites to wake them up and see how most of them oppose you. Liberal whites and most conservatives will oppose the creation of an ethnostate.

Just because most white people don't literally support the creation of an ethnostate doesn't mean they're actually anti-white. They've been brainwashed for over half a century to not have any ingroup preference and associate white people with ingroup preference with nazism and the KKK, so you can't blame them for not instantly being fully on board with the alt-right, especially since most of them have never even been seriously exposed to our ideas. Woke redditors, on the other hand, are for the most part psychopaths who actively want to destroy the white race.

Do you even talk to large numbers of white normies?

Do you? I regularly talk with random white people, quite a lot of them agree with my ideas when I bring them up, and none of them has reacted to me anywhere close to how hostile woke redditors react whenever they encounter someone who's pro-white on Reddit.

Predictably awful reading from reddit by CharlesOlivera in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't think Reddit reflects normal white people. Do you have any evidence?

Change my mind: There is nothing an American should hate more than a communist by Republican58 in politics

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

OK, communist...

I'm by no means a communist, if I was in charge economic policy would still resemble capitalism much more closely than communism, I'm just economically left-leaning. I guess what they have in Scandinavia comes closest to my vision for economic policy.

explain what a "fair share" of taxes is...

At the very least enough to keep society running smoothly and ensure every citizen can live a normal life.

explain why a person that earms $50,000/yr should pay a mere 18% but a person that earns $50,000,000 should pay 50%? How is that "fair"?

Because the quality of life for someone who earns $50 million a year wouldn't be impacted in any negative way by having to pay 50% in taxes, he can still afford to buy all the same luxury he could if he wouldn't pay any taxes, unlike someone who only $50 000 a year for having to pay 18% in taxes. For someone who only earns, let's say, $10 000 a year, even having to pay as little as 5% in taxes could be enough to cause him to be unable to pay his rent or get food on the table. Not that you care about any of this, you're clearly have some sort of antisocial personality disorder.

A "fair share" of taxes means that he pays the exact same percentage of his/her income as every other wage earner in the country.

That's a flat tax, and would either cause society to collapse into a third world shithole because it's so low that the government can't get enough money to keep things running at even a basic level, or it would be so high for low-income people that it would cause a mass epidemic of starvation and homelessness. Again, not like a sociopath like you cares about any of that, of course.

Now, also explain how internet access is a right...

Nothing is technically a right, since rights only exist in pratice if they can be backed up by force. I just think internet access is something that should be available to everything.

internet access is not vital to remaining alive, you cannot DIE if you go three days without reading Reddit or logging into Facebook, so why should it be government controlled and freely given to every person in the country.

With basic necessities I obviously didn't just mean things that are literally necessary to prevent you from dying, but also things that are necessary to live a normal life and function in today's society. Internet access is very much necessary to live a normal life and function in today's society, or even to survive one could argue. Job applications, finance, watching/reading the news, aquiring new knowledge outside of education and staying in touch with friends and family who live far away all usually involve the internet (and if not, other forms of modern communication like phones) in some way or another nowadays.

"All businesses are held responsible to act in the interests of the common people"... please explain what these "interests" are and how they are common to all people.

How about paying their employees decent wages, not lying to their customers, not importing resources/products from abroad when they're available in your own country, not offshoring factories to other countries, not importing migrant workers to replace the native workers, not supporting woke causes like the anti-white agenda and the LGBBQ agenda?

please explain what these "interests" are and how they are common to all people. What you may consider to be important to you may not be of interest to me.

So you admit that you neither give a shit about the inerests of your own people nor about the wellbeing of other people in general? Then why shouldn't we return the favor to you and just cut you out of society completely, making you stateless and blocking access to any public and private services for you? These interests aren't common to scum like you of course, only to normal people. You're just another neoliberal/neocon boomer piece of trash who can only think in black and white and calls anyone who supports any type of progressive taxation or social programs a communist. Ironically enough, your vision for society resembles communism much more closely than mine, since in both communism and your neoliberal capitalism, the elites are above the law and can just endlessly parasite off of the lower classes whereas the lower classes are just considered cattle to be abused, taxed to death and generally exploited.

What if such interests are so expansive that it puts my business out of operation?

If your business is small enough to go bankrupt purely due to the stricter regulations I support, then you should be compensated with tax breaks (or the taxes on businesses should simply be made more progressive so you would have to pay less taxes and bigger businesses would have to pay more to make up for it).

Why shouldn't YOU be required to support my business because not doing so would pu9t workers out of a job and thus violate "their interests"?

If your business goes bankrupt due to your own incompetence even despite the tax breaks given to you, that's just how the free market works I guess. I thought you loved free markets so much, no? Your employees would be able to find another job since I would ban outsourcing and using migrant workers, and even if they didn't they could apply for welfare and live a relatively normal life, and the same thing applies to you after you're out money due to losing your business.

Alt-right and Mugabe by Noloben in debatealtright

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

That sounds fun, do you have a link or the title of the video? I can't find it anywhere

Alt-right and Mugabe by Noloben in debatealtright

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

Maybe you should understand Dugin's perspective. He isn't really anti-White since he is a Russian Nationalist and Russians are White.

I don't know, Dugin's remarks he made in the quote I sent to you sound pretty anti-white to me. Since Russians are white, you can't be a Russian nationalist and be anti-white simultaneously, as that would necessarily make you anti-Russian as well.

But it is the "white" ZOG controlled countries that have been the biggest bullies of Russia and Belarus and supporters of the genocide of WHITE Russians by the Kiev kike junta.

I hate to break it to you, but Russia isn't the based paradise you think it is. If you merely espouse white nationalist views in Russia, you literally risk going to prison or getting assassinated by the FSB, even worse than how white nationalists are treated by governemnts of the US and its allies. It was a hard pill to swallow for me, I also wanted to keep believing Russia to be this last bastion of white identity and Christian conservatism standing against a ZOG world order, but the Russian government engages in just the same ZOG-like practices suppressing their white population. This of course, is in no way a dig at the Russian people, only its government, I know there are many based Russians. The ongoing Russia-Ukraine war is yet another example of whites being forced to kill whites (in this case even of the same ethnicity) by powerful people who obviously don't care about whites, so I don't see a reason to root for either side of this brother war.

Meanwhile, third world leaders including Mugabe have been allies of Russia and opposed the ZOG bullying of Russia. Why the fuck should Dugin not support them?

Well, for Dugin of course its only logical to support an anti-white terrorist-turned-dictator since he's anti-white himself. The question is, why the fuck would anyone who is white, let alone anyone who actually cares about white people, support this genocidal anti-white maniac called Mugabe?

Alt-right and Mugabe by Noloben in debatealtright

[–]YORAMRW 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

So all you care about is white people? So you'd be fine under a hostile occupation of the most evil white capitalists that behave exactly like jews? You're fine with liberalism? You'd be fine under an all-white communism?

No, I don't just care about white people, stop putting words in my mouth. However, white people are what I care most about. If I supported liberalism or communism as long as it was all-white, I couldn't be genuinely pro-white in the first place because those things harm white people and being pro-white requires opposing whatever harms white people.

If you've paid attention, I quite often talk about how anti-white whites shouldn't be treated as white just because they're genetically white, but rather as enemy combatants just like non-white anti-whites, so obviously I wouldn't support liberalism or communism just because it's all-white.

Opposing anything and anyone that's anti-white doesn't equal being okay with or supporting anything no matter how immoral or harmful to whites as long as it's white. Putting your race above ideology doesn't equal not caring about ideology and non-racial issues whatsoever.