Inequality will always exist, but the greater the diversity, the greater the inequality.
That shit just don't make no sense.
You're still abiding to a Leftist philosophy that Inequality and Diversity have a causal relationship. They don't. Inequality exists everywhere in all things because nothing is equal. Neither homogeneity nor diversity change that. Inequality will either continue to occur among "homogenous" groups, or it will emerge regardless.
But a European has no more business being ruled by a Jew than an African has being ruled by a European. Incompatibility leads to conflict.
Why? Incompatibility doesn't originate from a geographic stance. I would not claim that an Afrikaans could not be president of the US, nor would I claim that a Portuguese man couldn't be in charge of the Congo, nor would I claim that Mongol couldn't rule Japan.
Incompatibility of culture comes from... culture. Culture is not sufficiently influenced enough by geography to be a determining factor of culture on a single individual's place of birth. Not unless that person's life an culture is intertwined with geography. And even then, this doesn't necessarily carry over to any sort of established system of power.
Incompatibility of culture comes from... culture genetic selection pressure.
Culture is informed by genetics, and genetics, in turn influence culture.
Ultimately, Africans, as a demographic group, both require and crave authoritarian rule to establish enough stability to have some semblance of civilization. Individuals can exist within the European framework, but as a population, they will destroy that framework, as we can bear witness to. Jews have selected to deceive and subvert, in order to weaken a host demographic and engorge themselves on it until a peoples immune response kicks in. While the Jew is adapted to European people far better than the African, they're adapted in the way of the lamprey.
Culture is only minimally informed by genetics. Any actual cultural impact from genetics is going to in along term evolutionary time frame across a broad spectrum. Human societies have gender roles because of genetic and biological imperatives. The difference between any particular ethnic group, it's place, and it's time are largely irrelevant from a genetic perspective.
Ultimately, Africans, as a demographic group, both require and crave authoritarian rule to establish enough stability to have some semblance of civilization.
Uninformed and assinine.
The range of cultures across the African continent varies wildly. If you're going to claim that something has an effect on culture, you should be aiming at the high number of man-eating predators, low amounts of protein, and geographic isolation; even then that only applies to specific regions.
Individuals can exist within the European framework, but as a population, they will destroy that framework, as we can bear witness to.
Again, this is nonsense. Not only do individuals exist in Europe, but individualism as a philosophy stems from Europe.
Jews have selected to deceive and subvert, in order to weaken a host demographic and engorge themselves on it until a peoples immune response kicks in.
Just more racist assertions based off of nothing. It's wrong from basically from every angle that you can take that sentence. There's no such thing as a 'host demographic'. You've ascribed Jews as inherently parasitical, when we know that they tend to form an independently wealthy & educated class in many societies, not based on parasitism but on saving money, work habits, and literacy. There is also no such thing as a "people's immune response". That is simply not a thing because that's not how humans interact with each other. Humans respond negatively to negative actions by other humans, they are not extensions of a collective summoned to action by some larger 'collective soul'. Your just making shit up at this point.
While the Jew is adapted to European people far better than the African, they're adapted in the way of the lamprey.
More ignorance. Jewish Communities have existed in Africa, possibly longer than they have existed in Europe. Again, not with parasitism, but with trade. Trade is not parasitical, unless your a socialist.
No it isn't, because most societies are explicitly not racially homogenous, nor do they even accept most western definitions of race. There is no 'collective soul' that responds to anything.
That shit just don't make no sense.
You're still abiding to a Leftist philosophy that Inequality and Diversity have a causal relationship. They don't. Inequality exists everywhere in all things because nothing is equal. Neither homogeneity nor diversity change that. Inequality will either continue to occur among "homogenous" groups, or it will emerge regardless.
Why? Incompatibility doesn't originate from a geographic stance. I would not claim that an Afrikaans could not be president of the US, nor would I claim that a Portuguese man couldn't be in charge of the Congo, nor would I claim that Mongol couldn't rule Japan.
Incompatibility of culture comes from... culture. Culture is not sufficiently influenced enough by geography to be a determining factor of culture on a single individual's place of birth. Not unless that person's life an culture is intertwined with geography. And even then, this doesn't necessarily carry over to any sort of established system of power.
Culture is informed by genetics, and genetics, in turn influence culture.
Ultimately, Africans, as a demographic group, both require and crave authoritarian rule to establish enough stability to have some semblance of civilization. Individuals can exist within the European framework, but as a population, they will destroy that framework, as we can bear witness to. Jews have selected to deceive and subvert, in order to weaken a host demographic and engorge themselves on it until a peoples immune response kicks in. While the Jew is adapted to European people far better than the African, they're adapted in the way of the lamprey.
Culture is only minimally informed by genetics. Any actual cultural impact from genetics is going to in along term evolutionary time frame across a broad spectrum. Human societies have gender roles because of genetic and biological imperatives. The difference between any particular ethnic group, it's place, and it's time are largely irrelevant from a genetic perspective.
Uninformed and assinine.
The range of cultures across the African continent varies wildly. If you're going to claim that something has an effect on culture, you should be aiming at the high number of man-eating predators, low amounts of protein, and geographic isolation; even then that only applies to specific regions.
Again, this is nonsense. Not only do individuals exist in Europe, but individualism as a philosophy stems from Europe.
Just more racist assertions based off of nothing. It's wrong from basically from every angle that you can take that sentence. There's no such thing as a 'host demographic'. You've ascribed Jews as inherently parasitical, when we know that they tend to form an independently wealthy & educated class in many societies, not based on parasitism but on saving money, work habits, and literacy. There is also no such thing as a "people's immune response". That is simply not a thing because that's not how humans interact with each other. Humans respond negatively to negative actions by other humans, they are not extensions of a collective summoned to action by some larger 'collective soul'. Your just making shit up at this point.
More ignorance. Jewish Communities have existed in Africa, possibly longer than they have existed in Europe. Again, not with parasitism, but with trade. Trade is not parasitical, unless your a socialist.
There absolutely is. It's sometimes called racism, sometimes called anti-semitism. Anti-racism is immunosuppression.
No it isn't, because most societies are explicitly not racially homogenous, nor do they even accept most western definitions of race. There is no 'collective soul' that responds to anything.