Refutations of White Nationalist Arguments

[the debater]

Today's been a pretty busy day for me, but I've been itching to get these sources posted. In this first post and in future posts, I will submit arguments that white nationalists/supremacists commonly use to justify their positions, and then I will post a link that will either contradict that argument, or will at least shed new light on it. Without further ado, here are refutations of white nationalist arguments:

1) Blacks have a higher propensity towards crime.

Not necessarily. Yes it's true that African-Americans have higher crime rates than whites. And yes, it's true that predominately white West Virginia, despite being a heavily poor state, does in fact have a low crime rate. However, West Virginia is a rural state, and many of its residents live in the countryside. Many poor blacks on the other hand, live in the city or in urban areas. Does this affect the crime rate? Take a look at this link:
POVERTY, NOT RACE, TIED TO HIGH CRIME RATES IN URBAN COMMUNITIES (http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/badcomm.htm)

In case you're wondering, Krivo states in the study that Columbus Ohio is the only large city to have large numbers of poor white neighborhoods. For whatever reason, crime rates in certain situations can be affected by location as well as by poverty.

2) Whites have higher IQs than blacks, so thus we need to be separated.

Yes, it's true that in America, blacks do have lower IQs on average than whites. However, certain studies have indicated that blacks can on average have IQs on par with whites provided they are influenced by similar environments: http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-IQgapgenetic.htm

It's also interesting to note that even non-poor black families sometimes still choose to live in poor neighborhoods. Perhaps that has something to do with why poor whites do better on the SAT than rich blacks? According to one of the study's co-investigators:


Black families are more likely to live in poor neighborhoods, whether or not they are poor themselves. "Almost one half of all black children whose families were not poor resided in poor neighborhoods, compared with less than 10 percent of white children," said Duncan.Likewise, we shouldn't forget about British GCSE exams, where poor white boys have the worst passing rates: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/8237330/Poor-white-boys-score-worse-grades-than-deprived-black-Chinese-and-Asian-classmates.html


By the age of 16, only 23% of white boys eligible for free school meals achieved five or more GCSE exams at grade C or better, in subjects including English and maths.
The new analysis of Government data, released by the Conservatives, showed that 61 per cent of the poorest Chinese boys and 42 per cent of Asian boys on free school meals achieved the GCSE target last year. Among black boys, the figure was 34 per cent.
Across state schools in England, 55% of all pupils achieved five GCSEs at grades A*-C, including English and maths. 3) Whites are superior when it comes to upper-body strength.

Well, if you're trying to say that the white race is superior to all other races in terms of upper-body strength and holds a monopoly on strength accomplishments, than no. Yes, whites are overrepresented in strongman competitions and perhaps among power-lifting champions. However, many of these whites are Scandinavians and Eastern Europeans, and whites from Latin America and Southern Europe are less represented. This indicates that strength athletics are more popular in Scandinavia and Eastern Europe than elsewhere, which might explain why whites seem to dominate these types of contests. The question then becomes, can non-whites succeed in strength athletics if they are interested in them? You better believe it. The following is a list of strong non-white athletes.



Mark Henry

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Henry


By the time Henry finished high school, he was a three-time Texas state champion with state and national records in all four powerlifting categories—the squat at 832 lb (377 kg), bench press at 525 lb (238 kg) and deadlift at 815 lb (370 kg) as well as the total at 2,033 lb (922 kg).
* official weightlifting total + official powerlifting total = Combined Supertotal:

400.0 kg + 1060.0 kg = 1460.0 kg / 881.8 lbs + 2336.9 lbs = 3218.7 lbs raw with wraps
→ current all-time highest combined weightlifting/powerlifting total in history (since 1996*)
When asked in September 2003, who the strongest man in the world is today [2003], Bill Kazmaier, considered by many to be the greatest strongman of all time, stated: "It would have to be Mark Henry.[...] I think he's one of the strongest men in the history of the world, without a doubt."Likewise, Mark Henry was also the winner of the 2002 Arnold Strongman Classic:


Since Mark had only trained for 4 months and defeated the crème-de-là-crème of worldwide strongman, who had been practicing for years, his win was a shock for strongman experts worldwide,

Andrew Billings


http://www.ourdailybears.com/baylor-football-recruiting-2013/2013/3/23/4139908/baylor-2013-dt-andrew-billings-breaks-mark-henrys-state-powerlifting-record


I'm waiting for video or an official posting, but the word is that he went 805 on the squat, 500 on the benchpress, and 705 on the deadlift for a combined weight of 2010 lbs.

Stephen Paea/Justin Ernest


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Paea


At the NFL Combine, [Paea]recorded 49 repetitions in the 225-pound bench press, the highest since Justin Ernest's 51 reps in 1999.

Ray Williams, 2013 African-American powerlifting champion

http://www.usapowerlifting.com/results/2013/2013USAPLRawNationalPowerliftingChampionshipsResul ts.pdf


1
Ray Williams
26
Open
162.6
120+
390.0
400.5
-410.0
215.0
222.5
227.5
628.0
317.5
340.0
-365.0
968.0 (NOTE: this number is Ray's 3-lift total in kg)
12
529.3992

Last but not least, there are Asian weightlifters from countries like China that have set Olympic records in their sport:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_world_records_in_Olympic_weightlifting

That's all for now.

[Skyhilist]

Shit, I don't have the strongest upper body myself

Sorry for being inferior :laugh:

[cyu]

A partial debunking of Darwinism - or at least "Darwinism" as it is popularized in pro-capitalist media:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Evolution_of_Cooperation

http://everything2.com/user/seeya/writeups/Darwin%2527s+Dangerous+Idea

[the debater]

Shit, I don't have the strongest upper body myself

Sorry for being inferior :laugh:

You sir, are a disgrace to the proud Aryan lineage. If only Hitler was alive today to give you a good talk on what it means to be a white man. You don't realize how special you are! :thumbdown::cool:

[Tim Cornelis]

Similar sharp differences occur in the case of Italian populations separated historically and geographically. Today, Italian-Americans are very close to the national white average in income and education, and the limited data we have seem to put their IQ close to this average as well. This would appear consistent with the IQ figures reported for Italy by Lynn and Vanhanen, which are based on large samples and come in at just above 100. However, there is a notoriously wide economic gap between northern Italy and the south, including Sicily. The overwhelming majority of Italian-Americans trace their ancestry to the latter, quite impoverished regions, and in 2010 Lynn reported new research indicating that the present-day IQ of Italians living in those areas was as low as 89, a figure that places them almost a full standard deviation below either their Northern Italian compatriots or their separated American cousins. Although Lynn attributed this large deficit in Southern Italian IQ to substantial North African or Near Eastern genetic admixture, poverty and cultural deprivation seem more likely explanations.


In his 1978 book American Ethnic Groups, Thomas Sowell included a chapter that summarized the 1920s data on the average IQ scores of various Eastern and Southern European immigrant groups and showed that these were generally quite low, with Slovaks at 85.6, Greeks at 83, Poles at 85, Spaniards at 78, and Italians ranging between 78 and 85 in different studies. A separate analysis of the aptitude scores of World War I draftees published in 1923 came to similar conclusions. These published IQ studies by prominent academics led to widespread belief that the more recent European immigrant groups were much less intelligent than earlier ones and might drag down the national average, a belief that may have contributed to passage of the highly restrictive 1924 Immigration Act.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/race-iq-and-wealth/


His 2012 book places the Bulgarian IQ at 92.5 and the Romanian IQ at 91, with the largest and most recent Romanian study coming in at only 88. Just I claimed, these figures tend to be 10 points or more below such northern European peoples as the Germans, Dutch, or Swiss, and I find a strictly genetic explanation of this huge gap far less plausible than the obvious social differences between Europe’s wealthiest and its poorest countries. Lynn claims these very low Balkan IQs are due to substantial African and Middle Eastern ancestry, but I have never heard of this being the case for Balkan Slavs, and would like to see some evidence.

http://www.ronunz.org/2012/08/05/unz-on-raceiq-response-to-lynn-and-nyborg/

This data suggests socio-economic conditions influencing IQs.

Ignoring this, we can assert that it's senseless to use average IQs to judge every member of a group. An African with an IQ of 130 would be regarded as intellectually inferior to a European with an IQ of 80 because the average IQs of their respective races are reversed in terms of height. Racism is an ecological fallacy.

[helot]

In his 1978 book American Ethnic Groups, Thomas Sowell included a chapter that summarized the 1920s data on the average IQ scores of various Eastern and Southern European immigrant groups and showed that these were generally quite low, with Slovaks at 85.6, Greeks at 83, Poles at 85, Spaniards at 78, and Italians ranging between 78 and 85 in different studies. A separate analysis of the aptitude scores of World War I draftees published in 1923 came to similar conclusions. These published IQ studies by prominent academics led to widespread belief that the more recent European immigrant groups were much less intelligent than earlier ones and might drag down the national average, a belief that may have contributed to passage of the highly restrictive 1924 Immigration Act.


http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/race-iq-and-wealth/


It's been a while since i did psychology A-level but we studied the WWI draftee IQ tests that were devised by Robert Yerkes (noted eugenics advocate) et al and it was immediately apparent it was an incredibly flawed study. Its very methodology was dodgy. It was inherently biased towards English speaking Americans. Hell, there was questions about brand mascots ffs! If you didn't actually live in the US for a sizeable amount of time you wouldn't have been able to answer most of the questions.


The fact that right wingers continue to claim these studies were factually based has its origin in their obvious racism and ignorance of the history of intelligence testing.

[MarxSchmarx]

I hate to say it, but I don't think racists, or for that matter anyone who takes racist arguments seriously, are persuaded by logic or science.

You could give them all the evidence in the world that humans are the same basically and they will refuse to believe it.

[Bardo]

3) Whites are superior when it comes to upper-body strength.


Is this a real argument from white nationalists? Talk about unfounded and arbitrary criticism :blink:

[Flying Purple People Eater]

How about the fact that they want to segregate human beings based on the amount of melanin in their skin tissue? That's a pretty good one.

The truth of the matter is that, despite all the pseudoscience they spew which you could spend ages debunking (something that has already been done (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luigi_Luca_Cavalli-Sforza)), you don't really need any argument against white nationalists - especially if you're not 'white' (western-European?). It's like asking if there are arguments against someone coming at you with a baseball bat, or arguments against living with an abusive partner.


Whites are superior when it comes to upper-body strength.

Lol nope.

Say that to a 6ft guy from Tonga with an arm like an Ox.


It's been a while since i did psychology A-level but we studied the WWI draftee IQ tests that were devised by Robert Yerkes (noted eugenics advocate) et al and it was immediately apparent it was an incredibly flawed study. Its very methodology was dodgy. It was inherently biased towards English speaking Americans. Hell, there was questions about brand mascots ffs! If you didn't actually live in the US for a sizeable amount of time you wouldn't have been able to answer most of the questions.


The fact that right wingers continue to claim these studies were factually based has its origin in their obvious racism and ignorance of the history of intelligence testing.

Didn't someone make a documentary about this? I seem to remember it from somewhere (i.e. giving obscure American cultural questions to migrants in order to 'gauge their intelligence' being a form of racism).

EDIT: I remembered. It was part of a doco on this famous social experiment.

VeK759FF84s

Incredible how she nails the typical racist conservative American!

[TaylorS]

I tried reasoning with all the racist nimrods over on Reddit. It's impossible, they have convinced themselves that any criticism of their BS is "politically correct Cultural Marxism". :rolleyes:

[the debater]

Thanks to everyone who replied. I would like to mention that when I said "shed new light on", I was not implying that these links and arguments had never been used before. I am simply trying to gather them together for this thread, so that people can find them in one place. Some prominent white supremacist/nationalist forums censor intelligent arguments that disprove or contradict neo-nazi myths about racial science, so hopefully this thread can be a refuge for those arguments. Continuing on:

4) Mixed race people are not healthy.

Well, not necessarily. I am not an expert on this subject because my major in college is physics. However, many people, especially Americans, may be familiar with a phenomenon known as the "Hispanic Paradox." This paradox refers to the fact that Hispanic Americans have longer lifespans than white Americans and comparable infant mortality rates, despite higher poverty levels and lower educational attainment:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/13/hispanics-lifespan-longes_n_761158.html


U.S. Hispanics can expect to outlive whites by more than two years and blacks by more than seven, government researchers say in a startling report that is the first to calculate Hispanic life expectancy in this country.
Health researchers have seen a strong link between poverty, lack of education and life-shortening health problems. Hispanics are disadvantaged in those areas: About 19 percent of Hispanics live at or below the federal poverty level – three times more than whites. As for education, fewer than 13 percent of Hispanics have a college degree, compared to 17 percent of blacks and 30 percent of whites.To be fair, the article does state that many immigrants who come here are healthy to begin with, as they are physically fit manual laborers. Likewise, it's been said that Hispanics have strong family ties and are less likely to smoke and partake in other similar bad habits. There is obviously more to one's lifespan than genetics, but nevertheless, it doesn't seem as if being mixed-race poses any major health disadvantages. According to the CIA, Cuba has a lower infant mortality rate than either the U.S. or Canada:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2091rank.html

[4MyNation]

Their might be a lot of lazy people on welfare, but that's only thanks to fake liberals who allow them to be. Marxism/Communism is a team effort, nobody leeches off anybody.

[Bardo]

^What makes them fake liberals rather than real liberals?

I think it's important for marxists to acknowledge that the welfare state is a symptom of capitalist decay and contradiction. While welfare programs alleviate some pressure on the working class, they're not single handedly inhibiting class consciousness or preventing revolutionary thought. It's just a natural outcome of capitalism, not only in crisis, but by design.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

Their might be a lot of lazy people on welfare, but that's only thanks to fake liberals who allow them to be.

I seriously don't think you know anyone on welfare if you think in this brash right-wing logic.


Marxism/Communism is a team effort, nobody leeches off anybody.

Are you implying people on welfare are leeches? What about, you know, capitalists? The people who own the tools of production? The people who make more money off what you create than what you get paid for working under them? The people who are sitting in their luxury yachts and getting their secretaries to promote 'company growth' when an impoverished labourer in Addis Ababa is paid less than a dollar a day for backbreaking work on long hours with no health and safety coverage?

I think those people are the 'leeches' you're looking for, not someone who can barely get by and would probably starve and die if a welfare system wasn't in place. Hell, I wouldn't even have been able to go to the school I did if there was no social safety net and welfare where I was. Honestly, the racist ray-gun derived myth of the welfare queen needs to be slaughtered where it stands. I'm surprised sections the left doesn't jump on this shit more thoroughly.

I'll try and get up some works on dispelling dole myths.

[bad ideas actualised by alcohol]

Their might be a lot of lazy people on welfare, but that's only thanks to fake liberals who allow them to be. Marxism/Communism is a team effort, nobody leeches off anybody.

Yeah if only those lazy bastards work for once. It's really easy to get a job, right? Welfare is just for leechers!

Geez, no wonder your organization is CPUSA. I don't cite telly shows often but this from It's Always sunny applies: Oh, get a job? Just get a job? Why don’t I strap on my job helmet and squeeze down into a job cannon and fire off into job land, where jobs grow on little jobbies?!

[Flying Purple People Eater]

Also the term 'Hispanic' is a misnomer. Inhabitants of native America come from many different ethnic groups and backgrounds (there was large ethnic variation throughout pre-Spanish Mexico alone), and this was even more intensified by the entrance of Spanish people and slaves from Africa (which has some of the largest ethnographic variation of any place on earth). So even in the realm of genetics and anthropology that these faux-biologists like to prance around in, they fail miserably at their little game by generalizing millions of different ethnic groups as a single 'other', before attributing their racist mythology to this other and subsequently coming out as a dignified little 'racial realist' for all the modern world to see.

Here's a map by Luca Cavalli to demonstrate the ludicrous notion of a 'Hispanic' person.

http://unamusementpark.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Cavalli_Sforza_Americas.jpg

Edit: Images don't seem to be working so i'll post a link instead.

Here (http://unamusementpark.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Cavalli_Sforza_Americas.jpg)

[Comrade Jacob]

I hate to say it, but I don't think racists, or for that matter anyone who takes racist arguments seriously, are persuaded by logic or science.

You could give them all the evidence in the world that humans are the same basically and they will refuse to believe it.

Have you ever noticed that the vast majority of people who advocate the idea of superior races are white and surprise surprise the "white-race" just so happens to be the one that is superior? They believe it because they want to feel superior.

[the debater]

5) Whites still have the most creativity of all the races, even if their IQs aren't necessarily superior.

Well, it's true that Western Europe was responsible for the Industrial Revolution. However, to focus solely on this time period in history is deceptive. Even if whites have had the advantage intellectually and technologically for the past two-three hundred years, what about other times in human history? What about advanced non-white civilizations like China, Egypt, India, the Aztecs, Islamic civilization, etc, etc? If whites truly are superior to other races, then we would expect to see white intellectual and scientific domination going back thousands of years, rather than just a couple hundred. But that is not what we see. Indeed, many of the tribes in Europe during the times of Greece and Rome were not considered superior: http://fjor.net/etome/grecoroman/strabo-bi.html


For modern scientific writers are not able to speak of any country north of Ierne, which lies to the north of Britain and near thereto, and is the home of men who are complete savages and lead a miserable existence because of the cold; and therefore, in my opinion, the northern limit of our inhabited world is to be placed there.-Strabo


Their habits are in part like those of the Celti, but in part more simple and barbaric—so much so that, on account of their inexperience, some of them, although well supplied with milk, make no cheese; and they have no experience in gardening or other agricultural pursuits.-Strabo, in reference to Britain


Concerning this island [Ireland] I have nothing certain to tell, except that its inhabitants are more savage than the Britons, since they are man-eaters as well as heavy eaters, and since, further, they count it an honourable thing, when their fathers die, to devour them, and openly to have intercourse, not only with the other women, but also with their mothers and sisters; but I am saying this only with the understanding that I have no trustworthy witnesses for it; and yet, as for the matter of man-eating, that is said to be a custom of the Scythians also, and, in cases of necessity forced by sieges, the Celti, the Iberians, and several other peoples are said to have practised it.-Strabo


They [Gauls] also observe a custom which is especially astonishing and incredible, in case they are taking thought with respect to matters of great concern; for in such cases they devote to death a human being and plunge a dagger into him in the region above the diaphragm, and when the striken victim has fallen they read the future from the manner of his fall and from the twitching of his limbs, as well as from the gushing of the blood, having learned to place confidence in an ancient and long-continued practice of observing such matters.-Diodorus

From another source:
http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/politics.7.seven.html


Those who live in a cold climate and in Europe are full of spirit, but wanting in intelligence and skill; and therefore they retain comparative freedom, but have no political organization, and are incapable of ruling over others.-Aristotle

[the debater]

6) The Bell Curve was a legitimate book that strongly showcased racial differences in IQ.

That's not the whole story. While supporters of the 1994 book may point to the statement "Mainstream Science on Intelligence" as evidence that The Bell Curve was legitimate, the statement itself does mention that "Genetically caused differences are not necessarily irremediable." Likewise, there was a medium amount of criticism to go around for Bell Curve: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bell_Curve#Author.27s_follow-up


William J. Matthews writes that part of The Bell Curve's analysis is based on the AFQT "which is not an IQ test but designed to predict performance of certain criterion variables". Heckman observed that the AFQT was designed only to predict success in military training schools and that most of these tests appear to be achievement tests rather than ability tests, measuring factual knowledge and not pure ability. He continues:
Ironically, the authors delete from their composite AFQT score a timed test of numerical operations because it is not highly correlated with the other tests. Yet it is well known that in the data they use, this subtest is the single best predictor of earnings of all the AFQT test components. The fact that many of the subtests are only weakly correlated with each other, and that the best predictor of earnings is only weakly correlated with their "g-loaded" score, only heightens doubts that a single-ability model is a satisfactory description of human intelligence. It also drives home the point that the "g-loading" so strongly emphasized by Murray and Herrnstein measures only agreement among tests—not predictive power for socioeconomic outcomes. By the same token, one could also argue that the authors have biased their empirical analysis against the conclusions they obtain by disregarding the test with the greatest predictive power.

Regarding Murray and Herrnstein's claims about racial differences and genetics, the APA task force stated:
There is certainly no such support for a genetic interpretation... . It is sometimes suggested that the Black/ White differential in psychometric intelligence is partly due to genetic differences (Jensen, 1972). There is not much direct evidence on this point, but what little there is fails to support the genetic hypothesis.
Going back to the link from my second argument:


Since the publishing of The Bell Curve, a definitive study has come out of Columbia and Northwestern Universities demolishing the theory that the white/black IQ gap is largely genetically caused. But even at the time The Bell Curve was published, there was no reason to make such a claim. Of the seven major scientific studies on genes, race and IQ, six suggested that genes play no role in the IQ gap between whites and blacks, and only one suggested a genetic cause. Statistical objections can be raised to all seven early studies, but at the very least, The Bell Curve had no grounds whatsoever to imply that the IQ gap is largely genetic.

[aty]

Very easy. Nationalism splits the working class. It makes us workers fight against each other when we infact share the same interests.
Nationalism only serves the capitalists, they can more easily control the working class if we are busy fighting against each other about ridiculous things as race, nations, culture, religion etc.

I have more incommon with my friend from another race who I work with than I have with the rich capitalists from my own race. Only an idiot dont see this.

The constant question to any nationalist should be "Why do you want to split the working class and make us fight against each other so the rich capitalists, financial elite and bankers can exploit us and steal from us more easily"?
This question should just be repeated all over, making them talk about class instead of us being drawn into silly debates about race.

[the debater]

7) Intelligence is still mostly hereditary.

This is a very, very, very, very complex and complicated issue, and in this argument, I will not necessarily seek only to contradict this statement, but also, to shed light on errors that are associated with studies proposing "nature" as being the winner of the nature vs nurture debate as it pertains to the heritability of IQ. In this link, I recommend not necessarily reading the article provided by the link, but rather, going to the comments section and reading the comments made by Jay Joseph, Ken Richardson, Susan Clotfelter, and Alison Cantor. I am NOT saying that these people were 100% accurate in their arguments, but rather, that I believe that they were more intelligent and less biased than the author of the article in making their points, and that they did a good job of referencing legitimate studies/sources in their comments. Here is the article: http://www.slate.com/articles/life/twins/2011/08/double_inanity.2.html

And some important quotes from the commentators whose names I mentioned:


Once again, the highly stochastic nature of chromosomal aneuploidy and resulting chromosomal mosaicism insures that MZTs will have differences in their neuronal chromosomes, and that siblings will depart from a presumed 50% possession of the parental nuclear genome.-from comment by Alison


well-known interactions at various levels confound the model of simple additive effects on which the classical twin method is predicated and results are interpreted. For example, at a socio-cognitive level, DZ twins may respond to treatments differently from MZ twins. This interaction may further explain MZ–DZ correlation differences. There is abundant evidence for such interactive effects in published twin data. We suggest that there is a need for a more thorough examination of these problems.-from comment by Susan, taken from a study that was mentioned in the British Journal of Educational Psychology


1. In no study to date of twins raised apart is it the case that all of the twins being studied were separated at birth; most often, in fact, they have not. In some well-known studies, twins who have been raised together up until ages 4, 6, and 11 were held to be “twins raised apart” for the purposes of the study. This astonishing (and oddly unnoticed) fact means that so-called studies of twins raised apart are in fact no such thing; at best, they are studies of twins raised partially apart. This leaves open the possibility of many years of confounding environmental influ- ences during the most formative period of development in a child’s life.
2. In no twin study to date is it the case that all of the twins studied have had no contact after separation. Often, many of the twins have had ongoing relationships lasting for many years. The potential con- founding effects here are significant because given the demonstrated greater levels of contact between MZ as opposed to DZ twins—“MZAs [“monozy- gotic twins raised apart”] are more likely to be aware of each others’ existence and to have had more pre- study contact than DZAs [“dizygotic twins raised apart”]—there is a greater opportunity for MZ twins to influence each other’s attitudes.
3. Studies of twins raised apart depend upon the assumption that the environments in which the separated twins are raised are “dissimilar.” But over thirty years ago, researchers found this not to be the case:
Kamin found that twins who were placed in new homes by adoption agencies [I]tended to end up in similar environments; for example, the adopting families tended to be from the same social class. Second, in many cases the separated twins were placed by family members in the homes of relatives, so that they often went to the same school, and interacted with each other frequently. -from comment by Susan, in reference to some objections that have been brought up against "twins reared apart" studies


Although Palmer's article has problems, his conclusion that "twin studies are…fundamentally flawed" is absolutely correct, and this position finds further support in the ongoing decades-long failure to identify genes for psychiatric disorders, personality traits, and IQ.-from comment by Jay


Actually, adoption studies of personality and twin studies of personality find strikingly different results, at least when we speak of far-and-away the most carefully performed and least biased of these studies: The Colorado Adoption Project (CAP) performed by leading behavioral geneticists headed by Robert Plomin. Their 1998 study found no personality test score correlation between birthparents and their 245 adopted-away biological offspring. These results suggest that there are no genetic influences on personality. See http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9686459 . However, the genetically-oriented authors did not interpret their results this way, and tried to explain them in the context of "triangulating" the results with the alleged evidence supplied by twin studies. By the way, the results of this Plomin et al. 1998 personality adoption study completely overturn the claims of the Minnesota TRA researchers that their studies demonstrated the importance of genetic influences on personality. Amazingly, the CAP zero personality correlation is rarely mentioned in the behavioral genetic literature.-from comment by Jay, in reference to a study that contradicted the Minnesota TRA study


Loehlin and Nichols themselves say that their results do ‘not altogether exclude a completely environmentalist position’, adding that the environment seems to operate ‘in remarkably mysterious ways’ (p. 94).-from comment by Ken, in reference to a 1976 twin study.

This post was pretty beastly, I have to admit. I may have missed a few things here and there by accident, so to any Revlefters here, don't be afraid to re-examine these claims that I have collected. (If you're brave enough.) :cool: This post is by no means meant to be a final, once and for all refutation of anything, so tread cautiously. :marx:

[the debater]

I hate to say it, but I don't think racists, or for that matter anyone who takes racist arguments seriously, are persuaded by logic or science.

You could give them all the evidence in the world that humans are the same basically and they will refuse to believe it.

What I seem to notice with white nationalist types is that they latch onto studies that may support their viewpoint, but they don't investigate those studies further, and many of them don't even look up opposing/contradictory studies. But what do you expect from these people? Pride and objectivity are like oil and water.

[4MyNation]

I think it's funny how WNs get butthurt when a white dies, but when a non-white dies they celebrate.

[the debater]

I think it's funny how WNs get butthurt when a white dies, but when a non-white dies they celebrate.

I personally am beginning to wonder how many trolls are on Stormfront, and not obvious ones, but more intelligent, stealthy ones. There's one person I'm starting to suspect may be a troll, maybe an informant or something. But yeah, getting back to how biased racial nationalists can be, there was a thread on SF talking about how white men were the most masculine, apparently because they had the most body hair? :confused: Of course, the painfully obvious question to ask afterwards was whether white women were thus the least feminine? There were obviously various opinions expressed on that thread, but the main theme at the beginning seemed to be body hair, as far as I can remember.

[the debater]

8) White nationalism is still gaining ground throughout Europe.

Perhaps in some countries. While a lot of attention has been paid to the rise of Islam in certain parts of Europe, we also shouldn't forget about white, Eastern European immigrants arriving in countries like Britain: http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/380512/How-Romanian-criminals-terrorise-our-streets

Some statistics on London crime waves:


Shock figures show that the *Metropolitan Police made 27,725 *arrests over the past five years for offences including rape and *murder. This is despite just 68,000 *Romanians living here at present – a figure set to soar when Britain has to open its borders next January under an EU directive.
The Met’s figures show the 27,725 arrests of *Romanian suspects were in connection with 142 rapes, 10 murders, 666 sex crimes, 303 robberies, 1,370 burglaries and 2,902 offences of violence.
The 34,905 arrests in London among Polish citizens in London were for suspected involvement in 84 murders, 129 rapes, 866 sex assaults, 480 robberies, 2,094 burglaries and nearly 7,500 violent crimes.
Lithuania was in third place on the list with more than 18,500 arrests, followed by Nigeria on 15,600, India with 15,200 and Jamaica with 14,072.At least for the city of London, I would imagine that the natives are more concerned with ethnicity rather than race as it pertains to immigration patterns. Likewise, in the U.S., crime rates for African-Americans have fallen significantly according to a previous post of mine, post #11: 182912

Likewise, we shouldn't forget about college-educated immigrants who are not trouble-makers, and who do contribute to their respective countries of destination in countries like the U.S.:

http://www.bet.com/news/national/2012/03/20/survey-nigerians-most-educated-in-the-u-s.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/15/asian-immigrants-surpass-hispanics_n_3446441.html

This argument is meant to show that WN will probably not succeed on a large scale. There may be exceptions, such as for Greece and Hungary. However, with Golden Dawn, Ilias Kasidiaris's race is questionable, and many WNs probably will not accept him. The nationalists in Golden Dawn will have contradictory opinions with WNs who have stricter "purity standards". Likewise, other nationalist movements in Eastern Europe will probably be more active at the local level, rather than at the international level.

[Ultra-Imperialist]

One can simply note that they are wrong according to DNA Polymorphic studies.

[the debater]

9) The races are still very different from each other physically, so they should still be separated.

I need to give credit to ConsulPrinceps over on Stormfront for highlighting this link, in addition to the SF guest who provided the link on the 7 racial IQ studies that I highlighted earlier in the second argument. The link provided by ConsulPrinceps: http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/dl/free/0073380059/577812/Rosenblum_Section1.pdf

And an excerpt:


If our eyes could perceive more than the superficial, we might find race in chromosome 11: there lies the gene for hemoglobin. If you divide humankind by which of two forms of the gene each person has, then equatorial Africans, Italians and Greeks fall into the “sickle-cell race”; Swedes and South Africa’s Xhosas (Nelson Mandela’s ethnic group) are in the healthy hemoglobin race. Or do you prefer to group people by whether they have epicanthic eye folds,
which produce the “Asian” eye? Then the !Kung San (Bushmen) belong with the Japanese and Chinese. . . . [D]epending on which traits you pick, you can form very surprising races. Take the scooped-out shape of the back of the front teeth, a standard “Asian” trait. Native Americans and Swedes have these shovel-shaped incisors, too, and so would fall in the same race. Is biochemistry better? Norwegians, Arabians, north Indians and the Fulani of northern Nigeria . . . fall into the “lactase race” (the lactase enzyme digests milk sugar). Everyone else—other Africans, Japanese, Native Americans—form the “lactase-deprived race” (their ancestors did not drink milk from cows or goats and hence never evolved the lactase gene). How about blood types,
the familiar A, B, and O groups? Then Germans and New Guineans, populations that have the same percentages of each type, are in one race; Estonians and Japanese comprise a separate one for the same reason. . . . The dark skin of Somalis and Ghanaians, for instance, indicates that they evolved under the same selective force (a sunny climate). But that’s all it shows. It does
not show that they are any more closely related in the sense of sharing more genes than either is to Greeks. Calling Somalis and Ghanaians “black” therefore sheds no further light on their evolutionary history and implies—wrongly—that they are more closely related to each other than either is to someone of a different “race.” (Begley, 1995:67, 68) ]

[RedAnarchist]

In 10,000 years we most likely won't have the same "races" as we do nowadays. Even if you separated white people, black people, Asian people etc and made them unable to procreate with someone from another group, eventually genetic differences and societal constructs will create new "races" within humanity. Also, if they wanted to preserve their precious white skin so much, they would have to make sure whites lived only in the colder parts of the world.

[Red_Banner]

I seriously don't think you know anyone on welfare if you think in this brash right-wing logic.



Are you implying people on welfare are leeches? What about, you know, capitalists? The people who own the tools of production? The people who make more money off what you create than what you get paid for working under them? The people who are sitting in their luxury yachts and getting their secretaries to promote 'company growth' when an impoverished labourer in Addis Ababa is paid less than a dollar a day for backbreaking work on long hours with no health and safety coverage?

I think those people are the 'leeches' you're looking for, not someone who can barely get by and would probably starve and die if a welfare system wasn't in place. Hell, I wouldn't even have been able to go to the school I did if there was no social safety net and welfare where I was. Honestly, the racist ray-gun derived myth of the welfare queen needs to be slaughtered where it stands. I'm surprised sections the left doesn't jump on this shit more thoroughly.

I'll try and get up some works on dispelling dole myths.


I don't think you know anyone who's ever been on welfare.
There are people on welfare that are actually lazy.
Not everyone is, but it is common enough.

[Red_Banner]

Also the term 'Hispanic' is a misnomer. Inhabitants of native America come from many different ethnic groups and backgrounds (there was large ethnic variation throughout pre-Spanish Mexico alone), and this was even more intensified by the entrance of Spanish people and slaves from Africa (which has some of the largest ethnographic variation of any place on earth). So even in the realm of genetics and anthropology that these faux-biologists like to prance around in, they fail miserably at their little game by generalizing millions of different ethnic groups as a single 'other', before attributing their racist mythology to this other and subsequently coming out as a dignified little 'racial realist' for all the modern world to see.

Here's a map by Luca Cavalli to demonstrate the ludicrous notion of a 'Hispanic' person.

http://unamusementpark.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Cavalli_Sforza_Americas.jpg

Edit: Images don't seem to be working so i'll post a link instead.

Here (http://unamusementpark.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Cavalli_Sforza_Americas.jpg)

Well what about this name "Latino"?

How are Mestizos "Latin"?

What do they have in common with the Roman Republic or Empire?

Why should they have the monopoly on the term "Latin American"?

Why shouldn't the French and Italians be able to use this?

[the debater]

10) But Jews control everything, the media, the banks, the sports organizations, etc. They're still a threat to European nations.

It's not quite that simple. White European Jewish people may be overrepresented among ultra-wealthy individuals, but that does not mean that Jewish people are genetically hardwired to be rich and greedy. There are cultural and historical reasons for why Jews may be overrepresented in white collar professions. And besides, plenty of wealthy people, especially in America's past, were not Jewish, but rather Gentile European: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robber_baron_%28industrialist%29

The industrial robber barons mentioned in this article appear to be for the most part, all Gentile European. John D. Rockefeller, considered to be one of the richest people of all time, is himself non-Jewish. The Rockefeller family is German.

Now some white nationalists may still claim that Jews are overrepresented in the music industry, the media, and in finance. Maybe. But apparently, Jews are also overrepresented among chess champions and among Nobel prize winners. So it seems the "issue" so to speak, is not Jewish over-representation in a specific area, but rather, Jewish over-representation in any field or industry that requires a lot of intelligence, regardless of whether that field/industry is a respectable one such as physics, or a non-respectable one such as music or finance. (I use the term "non-respectable" in an informal manner in regards to the music industry in reference to some music industry executives who may peddle inappropriate content in popular songs.)

It's important for me to state that I am not trying to label Jews as being great and wonderful people who never commit any crimes. That is not the purpose of this argument. I am simply trying to say that they are not any better or worse than any other group of people. If anything, I support being wary of people who are exceedingly wealthy and/or powerful, regardless of whether they are politicians, businessmen, music executives, media moguls, Jewish, Gentile, Black, White, Asian, Extraterrestrial, etc.

An interesting question that I have for anti-semites, (not anti-Zionists) is this: Is it possible that Jews are not out to take over the world, but rather, are intended to serve as a sort of scapegoat to distract attention away from the people who are the real bad guys? If the Jews truly are the bad guys that people sometimes make them out to be, then why have they not kept their identities more of a secret? Wouldn't villains seeking global domination seek to keep their identities as secretive as possible? This is something to ponder over for people who may be too quick to blame Jews for all of the world's problems.

[the debater]

Bump. Could this thread be made a sticky, by any chance?

[cyu]

http://www.revleft.com/vb/do-races-existi-t183735/index4.html

1. Discussing the usefulness of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divide_and_rule as a tactic for the ruling class to control both racists and non-racists.

2. Disputing "Darwinian" concepts of competition as a mistake in interpretation, as opposed to the use of cooperation in human civilization. Presenting arguments as to why ideologies based on competition (like Nazism) are in fact less fit to survive than ideologies based on cooperation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy

Simon, Karl, Jared, and Brett are all friends of Josh, and they are all petty criminals. Jill is a friend of Josh; therefore, Jill is a petty criminal.

My opponent for office just received an endorsement from the Puppy Haters Association. Is that the sort of person you would want to vote for?

Citizens of Country X won more Nobel Prizes, gold medals, and literary awards than citizens of Country Y. Therefore, a citizen of Country X is superior to a citizen of Country Y.

All dogs have four legs; my cat has four legs. Therefore, my cat is a dog.

[Alonso Quijano]

If the Jews truly are the bad guys that people sometimes make them out to be, then why have they not kept their identities more of a secret?
Like Marx and Luxemburg? Jews tried their best to assimilate, to counter arguments that we were not loyal enough. Then we were blamed for trying to hide our intentions. And then Jews gave up on European Politics and turned Zionist, unfortunately.

Marx's youngest daughter, Eleanor ("Tussy"), for example, declared herself a proud Jew, learnt Yiddish and worked with Jewish immigrants from Russia to Britain. And that was the only difference between her and her father, I think. Basically, Karl and Tussy were part of a not-so-unique story for European Jews - trying to hide your Judaism, then growing tired of it and realising that probably doesn't work. Herzl was in favour of assimilation, and so was the father of both modern Communism and Zionism, Moshe Hess, who introduced it to Karl.

Don't forgot that even in the left (Bakunin, for example) people assumed Marx of a Jewish conspiracy. Basically, if Marx wouldn't have hidden his Jewishness (that was known nonetheless), there would be no Communist movement. But there also would be no Communist movement if he didn't have to apologise for his origins. Engels saw what happens in his family business - but didn't you ever wonder how come a son of a petit-bourgeois man, who could have succeeded his father, decided that his goal is creating one social class with no distinctions or divisions? Given that even the left then was antisemitic? Hess himself claimed that Communism should be the solution for Jews, before he grew tired of antisemitism, and started embracing some Jewish pride.

The original Jewish communists weren't conspiracists, and they were also not better, they just suffered racism that made them appreciate only money, because that's all they could have, or stay in the ghetto, even if they renounced Judaism. That's why Marx was the first to see that money and occupation aren't enough. Contrary to Christian belief that the Jew was happy with the situation, and was the one that gained the most, they knew how degrading that is, and understood the need for a unified society.

That's my interpretation, but not only mine. I've ran into other Jewish Marx scholars who claimed so. I say that it's not only mine because it'll seem weird to most of you. You have to be Jewish, or to have a very exceptional understanding of Jews and their history I think, to understand.

[Alonso Quijano]

Well what about this name "Latino"?

How are Mestizos "Latin"?

What do they have in common with the Roman Republic or Empire?

Why should they have the monopoly on the term "Latin American"?

Why shouldn't the French and Italians be able to use this?
Mainly because there is no Italian America :)
It's obviously in reference to English-speaking America.

They speak latin languages, that are continuation from vulgar dialects of Latin. Take in account that one of the names for the Judaeo-Spanish language is Ladino, which means the same. I also heard that the Spanish in New Mexico is called by local Spanish speakers Ladino.

A lot of those definitions relate to language. Otherwise, Egyptians are not Arab (as the Copts claim not to be), and so are Palestinian who live in the Levant, and developed the notion of Palestine as something different from the rest of the Levant (i.e Syria, Lebanon) thanks to British colonialism, and you still don't accuse them for that, even though they have nothing to do with the ancient Phillistine people.

You can also ask how come the Spaniards have a monopoly on the term "España" which historically includes also Portugal, why is Castillian called Spanish, why are Germans the only Germanic people called so, etc., etc.

For me as long as there isn't any other group who claims they stole their identity or something, it doesn't really matter. It's interesting as an anecdote, and for research, but that's usually mostly it.

[RevolucionarBG]

Really, explaining the idea of racism today is just unproductive work, withouth any need.

Every normal person understands that conditions of living, and some genetical predispositions are main reason why some people are good at this, and someone aren't and vice versa. And it's not connected to the races, but to people as individualists...

[the debater]

I went to the link for argument #7, and apparently, the comments that originally followed after the article are now gone. So, this means that those quotes I put up in argument #7 are going to have to be re-verified somewhere else.

On a side note, what the heck are you guys waiting for? There's nothing wrong about online debating. Unlike violence, when we use intellectual arguments, we actually get taken more seriously by potential Leftist "recruits," if you will. It's fast, it's easy, it's convenient. No blood, no loss of life. So why the hell am I the only one who seems to care about online debating?

[FreedomForAll]

The easiest way is to tell them that if they want to preserve certain genetic features, there's no reason they cannot do that in a society that supports the rights of workers. A lot of these people are sadly misguided proletariat who would gladly side with their own oppressive corporate boss, just because they share the same genetic traits as them, over siding with someone who would directly improve their existence.

Basically if they want to preserve a race, it is up to them to do it. What really boggles my mind though is that they act as though they are going to be forced into procreating with people they don't want to in a communistic or anarchistic ideal world, when in reality, nobody would be forcing anyone to procreate.

I don't even accept the argument that racial traits would die out, as trends tend to gravitate that people of similar genetic traits end up with other people like them anyways, which really nullifies this argument. The whole race argument is just a way to keep the workers from ever posing a threat to their masters.

What better way then to divide and conquer those who could otherwise pose a threat to you if you were such a person?

It really is tragically sad...

[Bolshevik Sickle]

No one fears the White race anymore. In movies and in TV shows White people are constantly depicted as nerdy, socially awkward, wimpy, timid, shy, cowardly, etc. If we were a feared people, then such media attacks would not be so prevalent.

If Whites were so feared, then why all of the "White privilege" courses taught in every major college around the nation?

The TRUTH is that we ARE hated. We are the most hated group of people on the planet, especially the White males. Deny it all you want, but you're living in a delusion if you seriously think otherwise. However, I don't truly believe that you do think otherwise. I think that this post of yours is just another attempt to play your little psychological parlor tricks on pro-White people.


Let's break this down, shall we?


No one fears the White race anymore.

No one: No person, Nobody. Which means nobody on the planet.
fear: to be afraid of (something or someone)

Unless you have sat down and had an interview with every person on the planet, to say no one fears the white race is a hasty generalization. Although google searches tend to suffice as nice pseudo-interviews.

Godlikeproductions: "I'm scared of White people" (http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message2104757/pg1)
Y!A: I'm scared of white people (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130323134824AAnmnMF)


In movies and in TV shows White people are constantly depicted as nerdy, socially awkward, wimpy, timid, shy, cowardly, etc.

What would be the opposite of nerdy, awkward, and wimpy? It would definitely be someone witty, confident, and strong. A perfect person to fit that persona would be a superhero. Let's roll up a few superhero movies with White Protagonist shall we.
https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/3694632966/ffadd5ce79a184b43fbcdeeeaac1d35d.jpeg
Superman; Man of Steel (2013)

https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/3207167658/6d317baef88e2f711ae5173d09342e0a.jpeg

Bruce Wayne; Dark Knight Trilogy (2005-2012)

https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/3284248147/d631a27d74bff0b51e156d4e2bdd4149.jpeg

Tony Stark; Iron Man trilogy (2008-2013)

I'm pretty sure none of these characters (played by White men) were portrayed as being "Beta Males".

http://thoughtswemighthavehad.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/lord_of_the_rings_calendar_photo.jpg
The Lord of the Rings trilogy had a 100% mayonnaise-flavored cast. Killing dragons and slaying orcs (who all had black skin, hmmm...) isn't exactly nerdy, it's also far being anti-white.


More of the "Anti-White Jew Media grrr"
https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/378800000139886668/c5b28bae1e86d984eb2529ab3c9b9546.pnghttp://screencrave.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Top-Gun-Tom-Cruise-28-10-10-kc.jpghttp://themovieblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/resident-evil-5-poster.jpghttp://www.seanpaune.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/the-grey-movie-poster.jpghttp://www.lasplash.com/uploads//3/poster_narnia-foreign-2.jpghttp://images4.fanpop.com/image/photos/23200000/DVD-cover-cheaper-by-the-dozen-23285115-366-522.jpg
Minorities always portrayed as nice!
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_d5r0_wzRF0A/S8RFifz0N0I/AAAAAAAAABk/gH8cTzFF7to/s1600/Paid_In_Full.jpghttp://www.lilwaynehq.com/blog/wp-content/plugins/magic-gallery/uploads/6/lil-wayne-chest-arm-tattoo18.jpghttp://cdn2.pitchfork.com/news/50138/021544fb.jpg


Are non-white peoples portrayed the opposite of "nerdy and socially awkward" in movies?

http://thezoufeed.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/cookie.jpg

Cookie (Ned's Declassified School Survival Guide)

>He is a cybernerd and is usually in some kind of crisis.
>He is shown to be the mostly unlucky character in the series, usually being harmed or giving wrong
>he is shown to be very troublesome
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ned%27s_Declassified_School_Survival_Guide _characters#Simon_.22Cookie.22_Nelson_Cook (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ned%27s_Declassified_School_Survival_Guide _characters#Simon_.22Cookie.22_Nelson_Cook)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/da/2005_0308_urkel.jpg

Steve Urkel (Family Matters)

>Steve is the epitome of a geek/nerd, with large, thick eyeglasses, "high-water" or "flood" pants held up by suspenders, multi-colored cardigan sweaters, and a high-pitched voice.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Urkel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Urkel)


then why all of the "White privilege" courses taught in every major college around the nation?

http://collegeprowler.com/majors/ (http://collegeprowler.com/majors/)
Not one college major is literally called "White Privilege". People have the option of studying European history in college, how one interprets it is ambiguous.



The TRUTH is that we ARE hated.

Fear and Hate are two sides of the same coin. People tend to hate what they fear, and fear what they hate. Mankind fears what it does not understand. One can assume this is why the Ku Klux Klan was anxious to get the ropes and hang black people on trees back in the day. They didn't know who they were, they feared them, so in turn they ended up hating them.

http://www.circleofa.org/question/what-is-the-relationship-between-fear-and-hate/ (http://www.circleofa.org/question/what-is-the-relationship-between-fear-and-hate/)

http://imageshack.us/a/img11/4874/qfot.png
Unfortunately, this google search would suggest a 995,000 people do infact have a hatred for white people...

http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/9313/b4y6.png

As opposed to a good 13,700,000 people who stated they did not have a hatred for white people. A very staggering contrast.



We are the most hated group of people on the planet, especially the White males.

:laugh:http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Persecution_complex (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Persecution_complex)

"The central belief of every moron is that he is the victim of a mysterious conspiracy against his common rights and true deserts. He ascribes all his failure to get on in the world, all of his congenital incapacity and damfoolishness, to the machinations of werewolves assembled in Wall Street, or some other such den of infamy."
—H.L. Mencken ;)

[Bolshevik Sickle]

2. "White people can not take pride in their heritage without being labeled a racist

While the term "white" and "White Pride" has in fact gained negative connotations, practically synonymous terms such as "European", "Australian", and "American" have not.

http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/7343/c4ar.jpghttp://img856.imageshack.us/img856/8450/qxrh.jpg

Saint Patrick's Day and Oktoberfest are two examples of holidays that celebrate European heritage (Irish and German respectively), and are by default exclusively White orientated holidays.
http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/4567/aoo3.jpghttp://img826.imageshack.us/img826/8355/vn2g.jpg
List of European festivals and Holidays (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_festivals_holidays.shtml)
If White people were actually taught to hate themselves and their culture, these holidays wouldn't exist.

http://scrapetv.com/News/News%20Pages/Everyone%20Else/images-2/neo-nazis-saluting.jpg

If you go around wearing Swastikas and preforming Hitler salutes of course you are going to be called a racist (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Common_sense) (because in that case you most likely are). Don't try to sugar-cote it with "sun wheels" either.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.singleblackmale.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/red-flag.jpg

On a personal note, I do not approve of nationalism. It is a poisonous and diving system, that starts off as "pride" and "joy" but usually leads to arrogance, narcissism and conflict.

[the debater]

"The central belief of every moron is that he is the victim of a mysterious conspiracy against his common rights and true deserts. He ascribes all his failure to get on in the world, all of his congenital incapacity and damfoolishness, to the machinations of werewolves assembled in Wall Street, or some other such den of infamy."
—H.L. Mencken ;)

:thumbup1: I do not hate "groups." I only "hate" individuals, without grouping races or ethnicities together. Now, when I was on Stormfront, I ran into plenty of idiots who were definitely worthy of scorn. The thing that really frustrated me was when I stuck to using scientific and logical arguments against white supremacy, and some folks would still call me a pseudo-intellectual. I used good arguments, I was civil, I didn't rely on guilty white liberal emotions. I only relied on science and logic. There was one time when I asked someone some questions pertaining to white supremacy, dealing with the Columbus Ohio crime study, and the lack of white inventors from Latin America compared to Europe. And guess what? No one answered my questions. The thing is, if you don't answer your opponents' questions, you lose the debate, plain and simple. White supremacists, and all types of supremacists, are pathetic, worse-than-pseudo-intellectuals. It's as simple as that.

Now, here's the deal Racial Consciousness. I'm not sure where your post came from, but the thing is, if you want to discuss issues such as affirmative action, welfare, the black crime rate, and etc, and etc, you don't have to be a white nationalist Hitler worshiper. If you want to have reasonable discussions about these issues, it's not required of you to oppose interracial marriage or to ban all non-white immigrants to Europe or America. Most of us Rev-lefters don't fit the stereotypes you'll find on Stormfront. We don't support genocide of any kind, and we don't hate white people more than any other races. It's just that we recognize that there are things vastly more important than race, such as common values, common goals in life, common struggles, and other such similarities.

[Bolshevik Sickle]

3. The Judicial System is stacked up against Whites

Minorities are more likely to put in jail for a certain crime (http://www.theguardian.com/law/2011/nov/25/ethnic-variations-jail-sentences-study)
Minorities receive longer sentences in prison (http://www.kansas.com/2010/03/13/1223332/minority-men-get-longer-jail-terms.html)

http://www.informationliberation.com/files/27930296.jpg

Neo-Nazi rallies usually if not always receive the highest of protection from Law enforcement. Which usually ranges from SWAT teams to armed soldiers.

Counter protesters against the Neo-Nazis are actually hit with pepper spray by the police force (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XY3fCT-usNY)
Riot Control is armed to teeth to protect Neo-Nazis (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXsuVYsqCl8)

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lv11r8NXye1qzsejk.jpg

As opposed to civilians protesting financial greed (at Occupy Wall Street), who receive minimal protection.



Edit: If Neo-Nazis ever rally again, simply ignore them. If you rally by default you are doing it because you want attention (whether it be positive or negative). Just don't give them attention at all.

[Yuppie Grinder]

http://listverse.com/2013/12/04/10-insane-ways-race-still-shapes-society/
this is a good article explaining a lot of the disadvantages black american's face from cradle to grave

[cyu]

There are people who want to feel good about themselves because of their racial identity.

There are people who want to feel good about themselves when their favorite football team wins or when their country wins Olympic gold medals.

There are people who want to feel good about themselves when their choice of operating system, browser, or gaming console is "proven" to be the better one.

I would say that one thing these kinds of people share is a low sense of self-esteem. They don't have any personal reasons to feel good about themselves, or their society / social circle will not give them any personal reasons to feel about themselves as individuals, so they seek to boost their own self-esteem by identifying with some group, and hoping to latch on to some of the "glow" given off by that group.

It's all pretty silly in the end though. Just because your favorite sports team wins, that says nothing about how superior you are. In some ways, it's a pitiful attempt to grasp at any straws that they can to boost their own self-esteem. In another sense, it truly is deserving of pity, in that they live in a society where their emotions are controlled by others in such a way that they cannot find peace within themselves, and feel the need to latch on to some arbitrary group just to achieve some semblance of happiness.

[Bolshevik Sickle]

4. "The Southern Poverty Law Center is vehemently Anti-White and Pro-Zionist Jew"

http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/5136/su5q.png
SPLC - Jewish Defense League (http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/groups/jewish-defense-league)


http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/793/7qib.png


The NBPP is notable for its anti-white and anti-Semitic hatred.
"I hate white people. All of them. Every last iota of a cracker, I hate it. We didn't come out here to play today. There's too much serious business going on in the black community to be out here sliding through South Street with white, dirty, cracker whore *****es on our arms, and we call ourselves black men. … What the hell is wrong with you black man? You at a doomsday with a white girl on your damn arm. We keep begging white people for freedom! No wonder we not free! Your enemy cannot make you free, fool! You want freedom? You going to have to kill some crackers! You going to have to kill some of their babies!"
— King Samir Shabazz, head of the party's Philadelphia chapter, in a National Geographic documentary, January 2009
SPLC - New Black Panther Party (http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/groups/new-black-panther-party)



Although the Southern Poverty Law Center recognizes that much black racism in America is, at least in part, a response to centuries of white racism, it believes racism must be exposed in all its forms. White groups espousing beliefs similar to black separatists would be considered clearly racist. The same criterion should be applied to all groups regardless of their color.
SPLC - Black Separatists (http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/ideology/black-separatist)

"The Southern Poverty Law Center is a Europhobic hate group"

SPLC - Hate Group List (http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/groups)
The SPLC has a number of hate groups. While it does have a plentiful list of White Nationalist and Supremacists groups, not once do they list White people as a whole as being "z0mg evil".

[the debater]

For those who complain about how the white supremacists constantly get so much more money than we do, just remember that the ADL still trumps everyone, including Stormfront.

[Bolshevik Sickle]

"White people are losing their jobs and homes to affirmative action!

Yeah, I don't believe any sensible or reasonable person would support a discriminatory prejudice and inconsiderate program like Affirmative Action (with the exception of it's beneficiaries, i.e. the Elite who ends up paying the employee less anyway).

http://www.newser.com/story/169631/why-elites-love-illegal-immigration-cheap-labor.html (http://www.newser.com/story/169631/why-elites-love-illegal-immigration-cheap-labor.html)
http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/11/opinion/frum-immigration-income/ (http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/11/opinion/frum-immigration-income/)
http://articles.latimes.com/2007/sep/26/opinion/la-oe-sander26sep26 (http://articles.latimes.com/2007/sep/26/opinion/la-oe-sander26sep26)
http://sundial.csun.edu/2011/09/study-finds-minorities-with-college-degrees-earn-less-than-whites/ (http://sundial.csun.edu/2011/09/study-finds-minorities-with-college-degrees-earn-less-than-whites/)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_wage_gap_in_the_United_States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_wage_gap_in_the_United_States)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1247344/Ethnic-minority-staff-paid-10-white-workers-Trevor-Phillips-equality-watchdog.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1247344/Ethnic-minority-staff-paid-10-white-workers-Trevor-Phillips-equality-watchdog.html)

"It's not politically correct to be racist to white people!"

Not everyone is politically correct... :glare:

[cyu]

just remember that the ADL still trumps everyone, including Stormfront.

While it's understandable that victims of genocide would want to do everything they can to prevent it from happening again (especially if the genocide was recent), different tactics would of course have different degrees of success.

While media control can both promote and discourage genocide, ultimately it's a question about media control itself, not a battle over who has control, but how media is structured that allows those in power (whether "good" or "bad" guys) to enforce their ideas.

It's the same with relying on, say, the United States as the sole guarantor of your security. Even relying on multiple "superpowers" for security is merely a bandaid on the problem. You don't prevent genocide by convincing the local cop (or cops) to stop genocide, it has to go much deeper than that.

Why do most societies have laws against murder? Why do most religions say murder is immoral? I would say if you can't answer that question convincingly for yourself, then you really don't know what you're talking about - blind fear is not conducive to forming effective strategy - especially not effective longterm strategy.