Can Racism be Based on Science?

block_socks · 2021-10-09T02:17:10+00:00

'Abnormal person AMA', and general pseudointellectual lowlife who will get triggered hard by this response.

You have, of course, regurgitated the answer provided by the Marxist pseudoscience that you have thoroughly and irreversibly internalized. Your constant drivel about the 99%-1% (or 99.9%-0.01%!) comes from Occupy Wall Street—thanks for telling us that you were most likely involved with this gaggle of lumpen lowlives—and is simply the proletarian-bourgeois distinction put in more sanitized terms that do not remind people of the Holodomor, Killing Fields, Qay Shibir, etc. Of course, there is no such thing as the 99.9% or proletariat; for I have far more in common with a 0.01% brother than I do with you or the 99.9% when they do not look or sound like me, nor share my beliefs, nor speak my language, etc. Your Marxisant class reductionism is truly the stuff of fools—it is pathetic to make something as utterly useless as your own relations to the 'means of production' your primary identity. Unlike racial identity, class doesn't even tell one just whose histories one is a product of. And if the 99.9% consists solely of those even remotely as insufferable as you, long live the 0.01%!

Your answer is, of course, 100% ideological and 0% scientific. For example, if 'scientific neoracism' normalized 'racism' in the West, you would predictably continue to insist that it was merely 'disinformation', 'fake news', 'propaganda', etc. as you have been wont to do with absolutely anything that clashes with your preconceived and unquestionable assumptions, which are incidentally the same as your conclusions. Why continue to believe nonsense at odds with reality? It is because your 'reasoning' comes from Leftist pseudomorality which takes absolute precedence above all else. Your ideology has simply told you what to assume-conclude without giving you anything other than pathetic appeals to emotion.

Now, we live in an age where we can determine ancestry down to the percentage, something which would obviously be impossible without observable genetic differences between the races. Race denialism is simply pseudoscientific hokum. Chinese and Eastern European scientists overwhelmingly accept the existence of race. They will continue to do so. Your view is (thankfully) a minority outside of the West, and it is important that the West catches up with the rest of the world rather than fall behind as a result of extreme Leftist ideologies that postulate conclusions grossly at odds with non-Western science.

And all this coming from the same fool who has insisted that 'fascists' cannot be 'intellectual' because the belief that 'ends justify the means' is laughably at odds with (his conception of) intellectualism! This, of course, means that every single Marxist and utilitarian is no longer an intellectual! Now, when you see Marx or Engels, Gramsci, Bentham, Mill and Singer when you arrive down in the Hell in which they are surely dwelling, please be sure to tell them: 'Hey! Hey you! You are not intellectuals!'. I imagine that they will find your presence little more than a bit of comic relief.

The world has a dichotomous choice between what you call 'Fascism' and barbarism. Your way of life is thankfully coming to an end. You cannot even reproduce your numbers, the hilarious result of the grossly abnormal, immoral and truly twisted pseudo-society that you farcically consider 'progressive'; and it is not long before you will be no longer welcome in a majority non-white Democratic Party. You will be marginalized and replaced real good, and you deserve it. You're likely in your 60's, which means that you will live long enough to see the consequences of your actions unfold.

Now, don't you commit suicide or overdose any time soon. I want you to live long enough to see this unfold. Man's choice is between 'fascism' or barbarism, but there will be no 'liberalism' or 'socialism' ever again. I hope you live long enough, just to see your way of life end not with a bang, but with a whisper, nay, with a whimper, the result of a non-white's boot planted firmly on every Leftist's head. I for one will not mind if they treat you the way the Haitians treated the French.

block_socks · 2021-10-08T08:11:26+00:00

When you think about it, vetting suggests exclusion/intolerance and exclusion/intolerance (consider what happens to those who fail vetting, they get... deported, i.e. excluded) falls afoul of liberal pseudo-morality. Obviously anyone who arrives at this reasoning and yet is tasked with a vetting process cannot be trusted to do anything short of admit practically everyone. It is similar to how 'liberals' hate generalization, stereotyping and a wide range of other things for similar reasons. The answer is probably as simple as this: The people leaving Afghanistan tend toward being urbanite feminists, queers, trannies, etc. and these people don't need to be 'vetted' simply because they are practically already 'morally pure' under liberal pseudo-morality. They are always 'victims' and never 'oppressors', 'threats', 'villains', etc. To even consider that they may be oppressors is actually all that one needs to do in order to himself become an oppressor or villain himself (the fact that 'RadFems' or 'TERFs' question whether 'trans women' may in fact merely be men intruding into women's safe spaces where they will then 'oppress' them, is all it takes to get people calling them 'Far-Right TERFs', for example).

I don't even think we're getting these more desperate or 'mercenary' types. Most of these Afghan military types are probably straight and, by American standards, socially reactionary, men who would probably fit in fine with the Taliban if they didn't fear retaliation for supporting the Westerners. They might pass because their race is correct (they are oppressed browns in the eyes of the 'liberals'), but they're still practically religious straight conservative men who will make the average Republican voter look radical on average.

block_socks · 2021-10-08T07:32:16+00:00

I think Zemmour is basically legitimate as a person. He's been in this for too long and isn't someone who has... cohenveniently cohenverted... to a position Rightward of RN to play some role. I don't know anything about 'Eric Striker' other than that he's routinely lambasted as a NazBol by the few content creators who I do follow and that he's involved with TRS.

Now, the question is whether Zemmour's sudden rise is actually genuine or whether he's just being used, e.g. blackmailed, or simply being egged on without realizing he's being played, in order to serve an agenda of some sort. That agenda would be obvious: Keep Macron in power or (admittedly much less likely) give someone even more disastrous like Melenchon a more serious shot where he otherwise wouldn't have had it. Without Zemmour, after all, the election result would be quite predictable: First round, Le Pen #1, Macron #2; second round, Macron #1, Le Pen #2. But maybe the political classes, bureaucracy, pro-EU types that support the Volt parties around Europe, etc. are just playing safe—from their point of view, Le Pen coming #1 in round two would be like restoring Vichy France. They're obviously wrong, but that's how they view it as Left or Left-leaning paranoiacs who suffer from what one might call extreme cases of 'conservaphobia' or 'nationalphobia', and who think Marx was well-intentioned and guiltless like Juncker and some other EU bigwigs do, and who see a massive asymmetry between Far-Left and Far-Right because of their Left-ish biases (e.g. the Far-Left is misguided, bad for business, etc. at most, but the Far-Right is downright analogous to a political Satanism).

I am also skeptical of Zemmour because he has no party behind him. So unless people can rally around him and institutionalize quickly after he is elected, it seems safer just to hope that the RN gets normalized instead. Otherwise, he might serve as a kind of Trump-style (remember the 'Trump slump') release valve who simply pacifies our French brothers and at the same time leads to further radicalization and unification of the Left. The French Left's biggest weakness is how many parties they have split into (PS, PCF, LFI, PDG, EELV, etc.). If they united tomorrow they would easily defeat Macron and anyone Rightward of himself. For example, if Hamon alone stood down in the last election, Melenchon would have faced Le Pen in round 2 and Macron would not have become President. In party politics one has to break into the top two or three parties and ensure they stay there, so getting RN to replace other 'Right' parties like LR seems the best macro-level option. Furthermore, consolidating a new party of the Right will be extremely difficult. For starters, literally everyone will assault this new party (Left - motivated by Zizek-style paranoia, a Zemmour party makes them fearful of a (non-existent) supposed Rightward shift; Right - motivated by self-interest, a Zemmour party could steal their voter bases).

I expect Zemmour to fade away back into his usual activities after the election—in which case I will feel particularly vindicated in my assumptions about the man. However, if he does well it may also remind RN that the seemingly commonsense logic that the 'Centre' is electorally the best position to stand in is in fact erroneous and leads only to losing more Rightward voters than it picks up Leftward voters. There may only be a few 'satisfactory' choices in round one (Le Pen, perhaps Zemmour, Dupont-Aignan, the Christian Democrat Party was oddly perhaps best on social issues, but worse than the other three on matters of borders/immigration, and we have to prioritize the latter over the former because we have a time limit to solve it). Either way, only Le Pen or Zemmour might make it to round two. Macron is throwing a few bones to the Right before election time, but is obviously garbage. Bertrand and Melenchon are both garbage. Some Leftists are calling for all Left candidates to stand down bar one (which may win them the Presidency), but they are probably too divided to pull that off. At the very least PS (candidate currently undecided) and PFI (definitely Melenchon) will put up separate candidates. However, I would like Macron to come third to a Leftist because Le Pen or Zemmour could easier beat Melenchon.

We should also be under no illusions about Zemmour's popularity. Indeed, there is Harris-Interactive as cited somewhere by Ethnocrat: Macron 55%, Zemmour 45%. But there is also Elabe: Macron 63%, Zemmour 37%. But Harris-Interactive has Macron 53%, Le Pen 47%; Elabe has Macron 60%, Le Pen 40%. The takeaway from both is that Le Pen has a marginally better chance (+2% Harris-Interactive, +3% Elabe) of beating Macron than Zemmour.

block_socks · 2021-10-07T11:35:24+00:00

Pretty sure this will be the effect of Zemmour whether by intention or not. I think he would be a disaster for numerous reasons; in particular, that he doesn't actually have a party to keep the Right in power after his Presidential term. It is much safer to vote for Le Pen in the hope that RN becomes a lasting force after they get into power.

If this happens, I imagine French politics largely becoming RN vs. EELV. The Green Left is replacing the Red Left in Europe, even after choosing a disastrous candidate in Germany they were still surpassing the SPD, but the SPD has now won because Green voters have shifted back because of the scandals around the Green candidate.

Then we'll see something like a Macron vs. Melenchon second round. Macron will win this safely. Whatever happens, Macron's second term is practically secured. The only question is whose votes he will win on (if against Melenchon, he'll win with Right votes; if against Le Pen or Zemmour, he'll win with Left/non-white votes).

block_socks · 2021-09-12T01:02:06+00:00

You just BTFO'd that cretinous imbecile.

I mean, look at this shit that he posts:

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

As if multiracialism doesn't do the exact same thing, except without any positive outcome? Literally nobody thinks of Brazilians as some kind of master race... though they're very easy to think of as totally subhuman. Nobody wants to immigrate to Brazil—the result of understanding that on an implicit level.

Eugenics has existed in some form at least as far back as Sparta, and its contemporary unpopularity is simply the result of the prevailing slave morality which glorifies mediocrity, despises excellence, and is fearful of any attempt to improve the state of Man; that is, because degenerate humans have good reason to fear that they themselves will disbenefit from it.

Ask yourself why 'socks' and other Leftists fear eugenics? Yeah, it's because they realized that they'd be on the losing end of it, whereas the idiot suffragettes probably thought (hilariously) that they would end up on the winning side. But feminism is obviously regressive, and so its adherents clearly belong on the losing side. They had to double-down on slave morality upon realizing that.

Unfortunately, the bad always outnumber the good, which is why regression is winning. Too many idiots drag the few geniuses down to their level.

One would never think that the average American once had a three-digit IQ given the state of the average American in 2021, because the 'average American in 2021' now seems exceedingly to be some weird combination of obese, mentally ill, brown, pansexual and trans. That is, the end result of rapid dysgenics. The American of 1921 would not recognize the filth of today as being worthy of inheriting their legacy.

block_socks · 2021-08-27T14:46:06+00:00

Yep. His goal is simply to try to get this sub off of s/all and preferably banned. This is why he has to raise these faux-outrages, similar to how he wrote a winding post when he was banned from this sub for less than a day. He was, of course, trying to get the admins to believe that this sub was not abiding by the rules required to remain on s/all. He seems like one of those AHS types trying to 'deplatform hate' or some nonsense. He will continue to do this bullshit with the aim of trying to deplatform the sub. I've obviously triggered him real good with his response below this. I mean just look at how angry he is! Probably because my comments land far too close to the truth.

It's just the tribalism in America. The Democrats have taken ownership of the same war that they used to call the result of 'Right-wing, Republican warmongers' or outright 'racists wanting excuses to bomb browns', because quitting it reminds them of the weak idiots they are. Now all of a sudden many of them defend the continuation of the same damn war. Luckily I don't think these people are going to win out in that regard.

It's no different to how they were all anti-vax until Biden was elected, when they suddenly and mindlessly flipped to being pro-vax. They flip their view on a wide range of issues based on who is in power and nothing else. If Trump was there right now and wanted to stay, they'd all be pro-withdrawal instead.

block_socks · 2021-08-27T14:04:26+00:00

Oh boy, look who decided to resort to a pseudo-patriotic faux-outrage today! I bet anything if those dead Marines were found to be Republicans you wouldn't be sperging out like this. No way, you'd be cheering!

Your attempts to get this off s/all aren't going to take off. This post has 9 insightfuls and 2 using 'fun' either as an alternative upvote or as a downvote. In other words, few or perhaps nobody agrees with your stupid view about this post. That is, of course, why you are drawing attention to it—hoping that a faux-outrage will lead to the moderators taking action against this sub more generally. It is the same reason why you sperged out real good when you were banned for less than a day from here.

Here's the best thing any reader can do today: block socks. If you hate Redditors, well, this guy has been one for many years. It is the single best thing you can do on this site.

block_socks · 2021-08-26T07:04:23+00:00

Ausfailia is a pozz-ridden shithole. Let's rewind to last year.

Africans are around 1% of the population. But violent Leftism just has to have an excuse to take to the streets. So... what do they do? Well, they take the so-called 'indigenous' (still only 2-3% of the population) and claim that they are black. There ya' go, violent Leftism combines with an already problematic indigenism and so the big cities were wracked with destructive protests for a time, all triggered because a worthless black criminal died half way around the world with not a single Ausfailian in sight. Of course, Floyd's death was racialized such that all Whites were guilty of it, which is why the Left felt justified in having a chimp-out all across the White world and not just in majority-black cities in America where chimp-outs were usually contained.

Just like America, you also have the farcical double standard where anti-lockdown protests must be banned because they 'spread' the virus... but BLM protests are 100% fine because they 'do not spread' the virus. Basically, explicitly Leftist causes can be protested for with impunity, relatively apolitical causes cannot be. BLM or some retarded 'pride' parade is fine whereas a Christian gathering is deeply problematic. For example, in recent days the Ozfailian media have been going off at some Pastor for being anti-mask at his sermon or something very similar and mundane.

As if every single BLM protester and/or queer is pro-mask? Is there not a single anti-mask queer out of over a million Ausfailian queers? Wait... he's a straight Christian White male and not a queer, so unfairly targeting him is 100% okay.

block_socks · 2021-08-26T04:33:46+00:00

The 1% you so fear are hilariously the same people who both designed and distribute the Covax. Bugger off, abnormal nonce.

Notice how you actually love the so-called 1% outside of a purely rhetorical sense? They could tell you to take ten vaccines and you'd happily take them all. They obviously want you to take them so that business will return to usual, i.e. lockdowns end and borders reopen.

Also hilarious how utterly Marxisant your world-view is, i.e. success is reinterpreted as the result of oppression or some such nonsense, and failure is reinterpreted as the result of being oppressed. You, of course, rhetorically hate the 1% because they remind you constantly of your own obvious inferiority. You love them in every other respect because without them your life would be in total ruins. Without them, there would be no more Walmart or Amazon, etc., that is, the companies without which you could not live.

When are you having the name of a Covax manufacturer tattooed on your arm, like the rest of your moronic suicide cult? Provided you haven't already done so, of course.

block_socks