It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

“White Genocide”: The racist reason there are less and less white people.

page: 7
25
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 6 2018 @ 08:41 AM
link   
a reply to: sapien82


www.irishcentral.com...

The Irish are just as bastardized as any other groups of people on this planet. Unless you find a long lost tribe that has been hidden away with no contact with the rest of the world, are you going to find a halfway pure group of people. Any contact that resulted in progeny will change that dynamic in a hurry. Recessive genes don't go away and they can pop up at any time.

edit on 6-3-2018 by NightSkyeB4Dawn because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 6 2018 @ 08:51 AM
link   
a reply to: snowspirit

If you tan well , like me ! then you probably have a good amount of Celt genes in you!

as I said I was born with a mongolian spot , a birth mark commonly found on children born in africa , eastern asia and south east asia and I had white parents , but my genes come from the steppes !



posted on Mar, 6 2018 @ 08:54 AM
link   
a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

well my great great great great grandmother came to Ireland with the Spanish armada in 1588 and she moved from there to scotland , and she had dark skin , darker than mine in comparison Im more olive skinned and go really dark in the sun
where you'd think I wasnt white
her skin was more like dark brown colour really coffee bean type brown.



posted on Mar, 6 2018 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

I seem to have colouring no one else in the family has. My dads side had dark hair and mostly grey or light eyes, my moms side from northern Scotland had freckles, reddish brown hair, although eyes of every colour. I'm the only blonde from either side, both parents had large families. Dark blue eyes too.
Apparently the Vikings pillaged way back centuries ago, likely lots of mixing going on.

I like my recessive genes...



posted on Mar, 6 2018 @ 09:25 AM
link   
a reply to: snowspirit

the guy in my team has heritage from indigenous peoples of the big turtle and also from vikings
he thinks they went raiding in the big turtle and took some slave wifes back with them.

I love our mixed genetics as well , its how we have survived this long as a species we breed among ourselves and pass on the best genes.

Sadly there are those who still believe in purity , i say let them breed amongst themselves with no mixing and in a few generations they'd have negative mutations and birth defects so we could effectively say ok cool , let all the racial purists stay together and breed no mixing, and we would eventually breed them right out of existence
edit on 6-3-2018 by sapien82 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2018 @ 09:33 AM
link   
a reply to: sapien82

Lol, yes purity isn't always a good thing.

In the animal kingdom, like dogs, the mixed breeds are the healthiest. It only makes sense that humans (which are still animals 🤔), should mix it up more.



posted on Mar, 6 2018 @ 09:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: SailorJerry
a reply to: burgerbuddy

well to be fair, you are a racist..

From you on another post about blacks :




posted on Mar, 3 2018 @ 06:33 AM quote reply originally posted by: Doxanoxa a reply to: dizzie56 So, won't the 'white folks' just incorporate thier farms in companies under nominal 'black folks' ownership, and thus keep the farm, the rules, and the status quo? Gotta play by their rules. Might have a chance at winning.


Doesn't even sound like me.

Ya gots the wrong guy hoss.

I married yellow. 17 yrs this friday.



Yellow? wow man, just wow, well if anyone doubts anything ive said its pretty easy to look up past posts of yours
edit on 6-3-2018 by SailorJerry because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2018 @ 10:11 AM
link   
a reply to: SailorJerry

I married brown.

Whats so wrong with that?

I make all sorts of references to her being "Mexican". She does the same about me being white.

If i didn't love her i would have stayed married to her for 22 years.

Lighten up a bit, man. Racism is intention, not words.



posted on Mar, 6 2018 @ 10:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: JoshuaCox

This # is so annoying. Too bad humans can't get their # together and just start viewing people as people.
It's 2018 and there are still dudes at work who run the mouth about how their daughter better not come home with a black guy.
I hear that # all the time.

Sucks big time


And the alternative would be what? Coming home with Warren Jeffs?



posted on Mar, 6 2018 @ 10:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: SailorJerry

I married brown.

Whats so wrong with that?

I make all sorts of references to her being "Mexican". She does the same about me being white.

If i didn't love her i would have stayed married to her for 22 years.

Lighten up a bit, man. Racism is intention, not words.


its not that specific comment its the other comments hes made on other threads that were blatantly racist. And im not even sensitive about it. Im a conservative from a southern state I have heard it all, but some of the offhand comments hes made in other threads would be more at home on StormFront, feel free to go through his posts. This isnt about an isolated remark



posted on Mar, 6 2018 @ 12:40 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

And every other NAACP leader married white..

That doesn’t stop people fromCONSTANTLY accusing them of being racist..

I can’t claim to remember you specifically doing that, but I would be suprised if not.



posted on Mar, 6 2018 @ 12:42 PM
link   
a reply to: snowspirit

The more we mix the more the more beneficial traits rise to the top.



posted on Mar, 6 2018 @ 12:42 PM
link   
The reason is self inflicted "genocide" AKA "Infanticide" committed by white women by means of abortion. White women in America in particular are guilty OF MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE. They truly are a disgusting lot.

Its legal by means of an illegal (Roe vs. Wade) SCOTUS ruling. They are worse scum than the actual murderers themselves.



posted on Mar, 6 2018 @ 12:45 PM
link   
a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

No they were not..

They might be really close to the bottom of the list, but Native Americans win that title, followed closely by Africans.

The fact is America the melting pot became mutts pretty quickly and stopped discriminating against specific nationalities and focused on Asian, Indian and black populations.



posted on Mar, 6 2018 @ 12:48 PM
link   
a reply to: MontiKristo

Then why is the extent of your actions to complain on a BS conspiracy site???

If I believe that the local clinic is gonna be murdering children at 9 am tomorrow. I kick the door in law be damned..

I DO NOT go on acheesy conspiracy site and complain about it

I intervene and stop the murder.. if that means I am jailed. So be it..


So are you a coward or just pretending like you believe abortion is murder????

I see no third option. .


edit on 6-3-2018 by JoshuaCox because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2018 @ 01:07 PM
link   
a reply to: toms54

All you're doing is displaying your ignorance. The fact that virtually every country has different classifications and definitions for "race" is proof enough that they are arbitrary categories. In fact, screw our opinions. Let's look at the US's official "race" categories from the federal Census Bureau's official website so everyone here can see just how arbitrary these terms are (HERE).

Exhibit A:

The racial categories included in the census questionnaire generally reflect a social definition of race recognized in this country and not an attempt to define race biologically, anthropologically, or genetically. In addition, it is recognized that the categories of the race item include racial and national origin or sociocultural groups. People may choose to report more than one race to indicate their racial mixture, such as “American Indian” and “White.” People who identify their origin as Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish may be of any race.


They spelled it out right there! lol I could probably close my argument right here since they're literally agreeing with me, but I'm a jerk so I want a more concrete example. Hence, the following...

Exhibit B: The definitions of each "race", according to the federal government.

The U.S. Census Bureau must adhere to the 1997 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) standards on race and ethnicity which guide the Census Bureau in classifying written responses to the race question:

White – A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa.

Black or African American – A person having origins in any of the Black racial groups of Africa.

American Indian or Alaska Native – A person having origins in any of the original peoples of North and South America (including Central America) and who maintains tribal affiliation or community attachment.

Asian – A person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the Indian subcontinent including, for example, Cambodia, China, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan, the Philippine Islands, Thailand, and Vietnam.

Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander – A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Hawaii, Guam, Samoa, or other Pacific Islands.


Yes, according to the US government, Arabs, Moors, Assyrians, Kurdish people, and virtually all Jewish communities are "white". Do other countries also consider Arabs to be "white"? Do you consider Arabs to be "white"?

And if you noticed, they consider anyone with origins in any Black African groups to be "black". That means that even if someone has a single ancestor with a "black African" origin, that person classifies as part of the "Black" race here. This is why I suggested earlier that people just get DNA tests. It would clear up this nonsense quite easily.


And for anyone who's interested in just how much "race" differs based on countries, here's a separate article about Brazil's racial categories (HERE). It's a fascinating read so I'd suggest people just read the whole thing, but here are 2 excerpts to whet the appetite.

Because race is a cultural concept, beliefs about race vary dramatically from one culture to another. In this regard, America and Brazil are amazingly different in the categories they use. The United States has a small number of racial categories, based overwhelmingly on ancestry. Thus, it is possible for an American who "looks white" to "really be black" because he or she has "black blood."

In contrast, Brazilians classify people according to what they look like, using a large number of different terms. For example, one study in the Brazilian northeast conducted by the Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (IBGE)--the entity responsible for the census--asked people what color (cor) they were, and received 134 different answers! (Other studies have found even larger numbers; and the results vary regionally, with much fewer categories used in the south of the country.) In many Brazilian families different racial terms are used to refer to different children, while such distinctions are not possible in the United States because all the children--no matter what they look like--have the same ancestry.



Of course, Brazilians do not use American racial categories, and are critical of Americans for "calling people black who are not black." Put differently, Brazilians would say that the American census over-counts the number of blacks, while Americans would say that the Brazilian census over-counts the number of whites. Specifically, the 2010 Brazilian census lists 47.7% of the population as white, and only 7.6% as black--numbers that would seem unreal to visitors from the United States. (43.1% were classified as mixed.)

Just as American census categories of race are unscientific and do not correspond to the cultural categories Americans use to think about race, Brazilian census categories of race are also unscientific and also do not correspond to the cultural categories Brazilians use to think about race. For example, the largest number of non-white Brazilians would be classified as pardo, a census term that Americans can think of as roughly meaning mixed. However, pardo is a term that is rarely used in everyday speech. So the census categorizes tens of millions of Brazilians by a term they would not use to describe themselves or others.

I doubt anyone got this far, but if so, you get an imaginary cookie lol. I'd also suggest you do a basic google search for "census race categories" and add the country of your choice to that search. You'll see that "race" literally is categorized differently depending on the country.



posted on Mar, 6 2018 @ 01:10 PM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

According to the US Federal Government, "latino" isn't a race. So my mixed race son is no longer mixed race.

I guess its not racist to want to make all the Mexicans leave, right? Since they aren't a race?

LOL...the whole thing is so far beyond absurd.....



posted on Mar, 6 2018 @ 01:33 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan



According to the US Federal Government, "latino" isn't a race. So my mixed race son is no longer mixed race.

That's because "Latin American" countries have their own racial categories. "Latina/Latino" is their version of "white" because it was supposed to show direct links to the European conquistadors and the other Europeans who came afterwards (aka, the Latins). Latinas & Latinos were are the first class citizens in their countries and their racial classification historically had the majority of the political, economic, and social power.

Other racial classifications in "Latin" American countries often included "Negroes" (people of full African origin). Then there were "Mulattos", who were mixed between Latin & Negro. Then there were Indigenous peoples. Then there were "Mestizos" who were mixed between Latin and Indigenous. "Latin" American countries typically had what Americans would consider a "reverse one drop rule", meaning that your class, rights and privileges were increased the more "white/Latin" blood you had. Some placed Indigenous people close to the same level as Latins.

So you wound up with "Latina/Latina" as the 1st class, Indigenous, Mestizo, and Mulatto as 2nd class, and Negro as the lowest class. That's just a generic listing though, since some countries had 4 classes and others lumped the groups together differently (and added other groupings).

That's why a lot Latinos/Latinas come to Western countries and identify themselves as "white". Because in their countries, they are considered white. And in the US, some forms and official reports list things like "Hispanic whites" and "non-Hispanic whites" for this very reason.



I guess its not racist to want to make all the Mexicans leave, right? Since they aren't a race?

To be fair, racism is just one form of bigotry. Bigotry deals with a strong intolerance of specific groups. So no, it wouldn't be racist but it would be bigoted. Just like it would be bigoted if I wanted all British people to leave the country, since "British" isn't a race either.



posted on Mar, 6 2018 @ 01:39 PM
link   
All the race problems on Earth stem from one race and it ain't blacks, whites, etc....

And every damn last one of you posting here know who that group is but will remain silent.



posted on Mar, 6 2018 @ 01:57 PM
link   
a reply to: wingsfan

I bet no one has ANY CLUE what you mean lol



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join