Japanese guy puts it well
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (61)
sorted by:
The basic problem is not ideology. It is race.
Japan is 99% racially homogenous.
"Japan never had a civil war because it's racially homogeneous, so there wouldn't be any division in the country"
That's what you basically just said with that idiotic statement.
Since Europe is filed with white people, and Africa is filled with black people, and Central America prior to 1492 was filled with Mezo Americans, I'm sure there wasn't any division there either!
TIL the Sengoku Jidai is not real. Or the Genpei War. Or the Onin War. Or the Boshin War. No, Japan totally hasnt fought almost as many civil wars as it has external ones.
But then again, that probably applies to most nations. Maybe Europe had more external than internal wars, but that would be because they are so packed in that they are going to be beating on each other over issues instead of themselves.
Maybe this weird racialism is an American disease of the mind. I genuinely think it comes from Anglo Supremacism where the English smugness mixed with misunderstanding the value of Capitalism, created a pseudo-science of innate superiority in the minds of English decedents; while the American continent itself was heavily ethnically diverse. Perhaps living in an ethnically mixed society has given some Americans a disease of the mind where they think everything would work out if everyone kind of generally looked the same.
You know, like Liberia.
That was basically the whole thought process.
Having had this conversation with a WigNat type before, their argument was that America was founded by White Englishmen, therefore it deserves to remain a nation of White Englishmen, in the same way that England should be English, France should be French, Germany should be German, etc.
The problem is that the United States was not founded on an ethnicity like most of Europe, it was founded on ideology. And by definition, anyone can be part of an ideology. And its why, when you present the option to most people who are even remotely Liberal (as in, they value Liberty like the nation was founded on), they will pick someone who is not the same race as them but holds the same sort of Liberty-based views (your Larry Elders, Thomas Sowells, Andy Ngos, etc) LONG before they accept Richard Spenser type WigNats, even though they are the same race.
Incidentally, I think this is why you have started seeing parents push back and dig in on the topic of CRT: even after all of the Lefts attempts to do otherwise, most people still think they should bve treated the same, and so they are looking at this ideology saying "One of you is superior and an oppressor, one of you is inferior and oppressed" and their response is "You fucking what, mate?"
So the Irish have never fully integrated? What about the Scandanavians? How about the Germans? Maybe the Japanese?
While immigrant populations take some aspects of their homeland into their new country, they tend to integrate (as can be seen by the fact that 3rd generation immigrants do not speak their grandparent's language). Even if some of those groups live in isolated communities (as the Germans once did) they do not see their new country as a place for exploitation for their own tribal benefit, but a place where they can live their own lives better.
Or, perhaps you are going to tell me as a 7th generation Lithuanian immigrant, I'm actually just working to dominate America for the inevitable Lithuanian take over.
GamersLithuanians Rise UP!Or at least, I think it might be Lithuania, because no one fucking remembers and we consider ourselves American.
Didn't you call yourself Jewish before on reddit? . A country with diverse groups will always be weaker off . Hell even just a mix of European groups like America would never be as unified or strong as Germany used to be as a single ethnic group with thousands of years of shared history. Do you think diverse groups would have the same loyalty and dedication to their country as Japanese did to theirs when they committed kamikaze attacks?
The point is diversity is not something to strive for. Ever. Especially globalist enforced diversity. And if you argue with this at this point you are just a shill
You literally just made the point we were saying, diversity just creates division that people can exploit. Also India is not homogenous. Their caste system made it so they practically created entire new races after thousands of years of only marrying within their own caste and having their own culture and identity within that caste and heritage is passed from generation to generation . And you can see physical differences between them too. Also the politically incorrect thing to say is that not all races are equal.
Also do you think values is enough to make someone so loyal to their country they would die for it like the Japanese did before with their kamikaze attacks?
India pre-divide was NOT racially homogenous.
India is made up of dozens of racial groups, divided by race and by caste.
They are constantly at each other's throats and the country is absolutely destroyed by the divisions that creates.
Clearly, you have never been to india nor ever opened a book on the subject.
India is the classic diversity basketcase.
i think you are replying to the wrong person or didn't read what i said....i was literally saying those points....
You're missing the fact India still has a social caste system and Northern Indians look down on the Southern Indians and consider them akin to niggers in same sense people called the Irish niggers.
They aren't racially homogeneous though. The Ainu, Ōbeikei, Nivkh, Yamato and Ryukyuans aren't ethnically or even racially the same at all. Obeikei are closer to Pac Islanders, Ainu are closer to Inuit and Nivkh are closer to Asian Russian. Yamato are the largest demographic but even with them there's some contention since there's different looks so some suspect that some Yamato are closer to Chinese in origin and some are closer to Mongolian in origin. There were disagreements about considering the Ryukyuan's are the same as the Yamato, or identify them as an independent but related ethnic group, or as a sub-group that constitutes Japanese ethnicity together with the Yamato but recent genetic studies say the Ryukyuan people share more alleles with the southern Jōmon (16,000–3,000 years ago) hunter-gatherers than the Yamato Japanese, have smaller genetic contributions from Asian continental populations, which supports the dual-structure a widely accepted theory which suggests that the Yamato Japanese are more admixed with Asian agricultural continental people (from the Korean Peninsula) than the Ainu and the Ryukyuan's, with major admixture occurring in and after the Yayoi period (3,000-1,700 years ago).
they are not racially homogenous holy shit. you dont know anything about india
60 million people in America don't speak English as their primary language at home.