Here the liberal exhibits his strong commitment to the principle of free speech based on how useful said speech is to his agenda.
I'm not a liberal. I am a traditionalist. I also did not talk about free speech, but about whether it is desirable for you to have a public presence. Free speech is a non-negotiable. But more importantly, it makes everything more rational if there are examples of what actual racism is.
And what is the effect of their advocacy? All they do is give whites a false sense of hope that this failed integration experiment can work some day, a hope that ultimately contributes to our destruction.
If you can't win based on color-blindness, what makes you think that you can win based on ethno-nationalist retardation? First, you're going to lose all minorities, so you need 80% of the 60% who are white. That's not going to happen.
The 1790 Immigration Laws suggest otherwise. I noticed you cited a lot of empires. Do you approve of imperialism there, liberal?
Of course I approve of imperialism. What do you think brought civilization to the world, and ended slavery in Africa as well as the Middle East? As for your Immigration Acts, that was just some backwater run by rebels. It was no place that mattered at the time. It most certainly is not respresentative of Western civilization.
Really? Tell me what other civilizations resemble ours. Do you believe race is a social construct?
Yours then, I assume, because I am not white. Western civilization is based on Greco-Roman civilization, as well as Christianity. Christianity is a religion from the Middle East, with most of the influential founders coming from North Africa and Egypt (Tertullian, Basil of Caesarea, Athanasius, Anthony the Great, Pachomius, Augustine). Rome and Greece are Southern European (darker), and they were heavily influenced by Egypt and Babylon, two places that you no doubt despise for being insufficiently white.
How did all of these projects work out:
It's noted that you're trying to shift the goalposts from "race was always at the center of Western civilization" to "IT DIDN'T WORK". As a matter of fact, it worked alright, but it would have been better if colonialism had been more thorough.
You think they're steering the billionaires rather than the reverse, laughably absurd.
It's certainly to the benefit of the billionaires to push woke-ism. But that is not divorced from the broader climate. Corporations follow the path of least resistance, which is made that way because the dangerhairs control institutions such as universities and the media.
It's almost as if woke idpol is in his interest as a black man.
It may be in the interests of Clarence Thomas as well, but he prefers to be judged on quality and not color.
What sort of traditions? It looks like liberal ones to me.
The traditions that made the West great. Namely, those of Christianity - actually, the synthesis of Christianity with Greco-Roman civilization and the early Enlightement.
I see you still think elections are useful, big mistake. Ethno-nationalism is the winner because that's what will get whites to understand how dire our situation is and withdraw from the system to build our own institutions. In order to survive, we must become a nation within a nation.
If you have no way to exert pressure on political authorities, you're doomed before you even started.
Now compare the MENA to places with white majorities.
MENA is a shithole because of Islam. If it's white that make a place like England great, then it's pretty odd that before the Roman conquest and after the legions left, it was a hive of barbarism, to the point that Cicero told people not to buy slaves from England as they were very stupid, and that even a Muslim said that the more north you go in Europe, the paler the people get, and also the dumber they get.
Again, whatever theory you adopt has to explain stuff not just in the present, but in the past as well.
The justification for a ton of brutal colonial projects was seeing the colonial subjects as lesser. Your little quote is probably pretty meaningless. I doubt there was really a serious commitment to treat any of these people as equals.
Of course, colonialism was not done for the good of the ruled, as government does not exist for the good of the ruled, but for the good of the ruler. But as a side-effect, it did have the effect of being good for the ruled. And as a matter of fact, the Indians were at a lower level of cultural development in the 19th century than the British, and it would have been good if they had adopted the parts of British culture that made it the ruler of the world.
It's also funny to me that you are pro-colonialism yet constantly moralize about "stormfags."
How so? I favor colonialism because I think it was good for the ruled, while Stormfags hate anyone who is a Jew or not white.
If there were a budding white nationalist movement on colleges, they would snuff it out as they've done everywhere else.
It's almost as if they want it though. It relieves them of having to tilt at windmills.
It's funny you're saying that given Thomas's own past suspicions about "colorblind" white liberals.
A recent book, from what I have gathered, argues that Thomas is a crypto black nationalist. It makes sense, if you want blacks to actually succeed, you would do that in the way Thomas does, not by begging your white masters for a boon.
I am. But like Polybius, I recognize the dangers of attacking the foundation of a civilization.
No, the idea is to escape their authority. It's not guaranteed to work, but alternatives are guaranteed to fail.
You can't escape their authority. But they are easily pressured, as we have seen. Mostly by billionaires and lobbyists, but rational people can adopt the same methods. Moreover, if you're not using the law, how are you going to get your blacks expelled, or whatever you want to do with them?
Feel free to pick anywhere else in the world, then.
Clearly, Japan is a shithole because people are not white enough.
It's not like shit develops over night, and the Roman empire died anyway. Maybe they shouldn't have underestimated the northern European intellect :D
It didn't take much intellect to destroy. No empire lasts forever. Including Western civilization which is currently in the process of committing suicide.
I thought Islam is what ruined MENA. If Islam is so ruinous, why do you think those Muslims were so smart?
Sapping the life force of the civilizations of the east, the most prosperous, civilized and urbanized areas of the Roman Empire. Now look at them.
Your main motivation is for your non-white self
That makes little sense, as I am far closer to you than the average white person is. Like TheImpossible1, you can't conceive of someone who doesn't think in terms of categories that you are obsessed by. There's plenty that's more important than race, like religion.
Good luck asserting that whites are a group whose future matters and has a distinct interest.
That doesn't sound that bad. It's mostly your 'solutions' that are bad.
I'm not a liberal. I am a traditionalist. I also did not talk about free speech, but about whether it is desirable for you to have a public presence. Free speech is a non-negotiable. But more importantly, it makes everything more rational if there are examples of what actual racism is.
If you can't win based on color-blindness, what makes you think that you can win based on ethno-nationalist retardation? First, you're going to lose all minorities, so you need 80% of the 60% who are white. That's not going to happen.
Of course I approve of imperialism. What do you think brought civilization to the world, and ended slavery in Africa as well as the Middle East? As for your Immigration Acts, that was just some backwater run by rebels. It was no place that mattered at the time. It most certainly is not respresentative of Western civilization.
Yours then, I assume, because I am not white. Western civilization is based on Greco-Roman civilization, as well as Christianity. Christianity is a religion from the Middle East, with most of the influential founders coming from North Africa and Egypt (Tertullian, Basil of Caesarea, Athanasius, Anthony the Great, Pachomius, Augustine). Rome and Greece are Southern European (darker), and they were heavily influenced by Egypt and Babylon, two places that you no doubt despise for being insufficiently white.
It's noted that you're trying to shift the goalposts from "race was always at the center of Western civilization" to "IT DIDN'T WORK". As a matter of fact, it worked alright, but it would have been better if colonialism had been more thorough.
It's certainly to the benefit of the billionaires to push woke-ism. But that is not divorced from the broader climate. Corporations follow the path of least resistance, which is made that way because the dangerhairs control institutions such as universities and the media.
It may be in the interests of Clarence Thomas as well, but he prefers to be judged on quality and not color.
The traditions that made the West great. Namely, those of Christianity - actually, the synthesis of Christianity with Greco-Roman civilization and the early Enlightement.
If you have no way to exert pressure on political authorities, you're doomed before you even started.
MENA is a shithole because of Islam. If it's white that make a place like England great, then it's pretty odd that before the Roman conquest and after the legions left, it was a hive of barbarism, to the point that Cicero told people not to buy slaves from England as they were very stupid, and that even a Muslim said that the more north you go in Europe, the paler the people get, and also the dumber they get.
Again, whatever theory you adopt has to explain stuff not just in the present, but in the past as well.
Of course, colonialism was not done for the good of the ruled, as government does not exist for the good of the ruled, but for the good of the ruler. But as a side-effect, it did have the effect of being good for the ruled. And as a matter of fact, the Indians were at a lower level of cultural development in the 19th century than the British, and it would have been good if they had adopted the parts of British culture that made it the ruler of the world.
How so? I favor colonialism because I think it was good for the ruled, while Stormfags hate anyone who is a Jew or not white.
It's almost as if they want it though. It relieves them of having to tilt at windmills.
A recent book, from what I have gathered, argues that Thomas is a crypto black nationalist. It makes sense, if you want blacks to actually succeed, you would do that in the way Thomas does, not by begging your white masters for a boon.
I am. But like Polybius, I recognize the dangers of attacking the foundation of a civilization.
You can't escape their authority. But they are easily pressured, as we have seen. Mostly by billionaires and lobbyists, but rational people can adopt the same methods. Moreover, if you're not using the law, how are you going to get your blacks expelled, or whatever you want to do with them?
Clearly, Japan is a shithole because people are not white enough.
It didn't take much intellect to destroy. No empire lasts forever. Including Western civilization which is currently in the process of committing suicide.
Sapping the life force of the civilizations of the east, the most prosperous, civilized and urbanized areas of the Roman Empire. Now look at them.
That makes little sense, as I am far closer to you than the average white person is. Like TheImpossible1, you can't conceive of someone who doesn't think in terms of categories that you are obsessed by. There's plenty that's more important than race, like religion.
That doesn't sound that bad. It's mostly your 'solutions' that are bad.