"Racism" is 100% natural, and is not evil. Homogenization is.

page: 5
59
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 11:25 AM
link   
reply to post by RoderickBateman
 


Okay, I tried to talk intelligently to you. I tried to make you understand the plight of people in non-Western countries, and I tried to bring the issue into a more truthful scope so that you could understand the world we live in. But it's clear that you just don't care about anything but your own preconceived opinion, so, whatever. Continue to say "anti-racist is anti-white" without having any context or evidence of this being so, continue misappropriating history for your own agenda. Just stay away from my future children's education, alrighty? I want them educated in truth, not opinion.




posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 11:26 AM
link   
reply to post by CaticusMaximus
 


My other half used my account to post that so I will sure to pass that along...and make him his own account




posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by RoderickBateman
reply to post by spacekc929
 


It sounds to me like all you're doing here is justifying the genocide of white children.
"FOR THE ECONOMY!!!"
"FOR JUSTICE!!!"
"FOR EQUALITY!!!"

Nothing justifies genocide.
By doing so you are just proving that you are anti-white.
That you want the genocide of white children.
Your "anti-racism" is just a codeword for anti-white.



Using "children" in sentence might get you some sympathy points but.. we are talking about integration and living side by side, you can still keep your "whiteness" if you like. You are talking like there is a law stating all whites should not marry other whites or have kids with other whites.

You can preserve you unique skin colour if you want and isolate yourself from central humanity, but as the years go by you will be part of a "race" that is isolated and separated from evolving world.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bex33
reply to post by CaticusMaximus
 


My other half used my account to post that so I will sure to pass that along...and make him his own account





I wouldn't feel too bad.
He wasn't wrong and he made a good point, don't be too harsh on him.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 11:43 AM
link   
I reserve the right to choose who I hate or dislike and no-one will tell me otherwise, politically correct or not, it may make me a (insert expletive here) but I'll keep my own counsel.

DISCLAIMER: I don't actually "hate" anyone but I still believe people should be able to decide for themselves who they like or dislike.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Oneiros247

How about preserving oneself through unifying ideals or philosophies? How about 'preserving oneself' through concepts like empathy and tolerance? How about preserving oneself through the ability to bridge gaps between cultures, and the drive for all mankind to love each other as brothers and sisters, unconditionally?


Sure, why not?

But is that, and preserving ones own culture, mutually exclusive concepts? I would say no.


Originally posted by Oneiros247

If you grow up with a brother of a different race, who was adopted into your family while you were both 5 years old, would you bar that brother from participating in traditions specific to your own race? Would you refuse to partake in traditions specific to your brother's race, simply because you're trying to 'maintain your sense of identity?' I would hope that your answer is no.


Identity is not limited to skin color nor race. Those things can be a PART of cultural identity, but they do not necessarily DEFINE it.

Lots of people are seeing "cultural identity" and immediately thinking "race". I think thats way to narrow a scope for people to be using, and was using a much broader one when posting.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bex33
reply to post by CaticusMaximus
 


My other half used my account to post that so I will sure to pass that along...and make him his own account



Just tell him to actually read the thread before commenting. He fundamentally misunderstood my post by not reading it



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 11:46 AM
link   
reply to post by spacekc929
 


There are thousands of organizations, groups, and laws trying to help out non-whites.
There are none preventing the genocide of white children.

Your perception of the world is extremely distorted.

Japan has a horrendous colonial history. It has an aging population and a high standard of living. It is more then 90% Japanese and kicks non-japanese people out all the time. But nobody demands they have to bring in millions of non-japanese people and "mix together" until there are no more Japanese children.

Saudi Arabia has murdered millions of people and wiped out countries. It has lots of living space and lots of money. It is close to 100% Muslim and non-Muslims are kicked out or murdered all the time. But nobody demands they have to bring in millions of non-muslim people and "mix together" until there are no more Muslim children.

Blacks have 40+ countries in the world. Have over half the worlds natural resources. Have the fastest growing population in the world. They sold alot of their own people into slavery. They have commited many genocides of non-blacks and blacks. But nobody demands they have to bring in millions of non-Black people and "mix together" until there are no more Black children.

I could go on and on but it's pretty obvious what I'm saying.
Such policies are for all White countries and only White countries.
Such policies are conditions enforced that would result in a group of people dieing out.
Such policies are genocide.

And you think you are somehow morally superior because you support it?
You disgust me.
And most people here see that your "anti-racism" is a codeword for anti-white.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 11:55 AM
link   
Humans by nature need to belong. It is hardwired because it helped us survive. The cr**p about we were one race once breaks down because not only is it not true [neanderthals lived at the same time as homo sapiens and homo denisova] but even amongst those different humans there were tribes. Tribes that would go and kill each other over things we would call trivial. Such as honour or insults. So far all of this is still completely natural.

The next thing is that even though we are being forced to love and be nice to absolutely everyone is completely unnatural. It is impossible, There will always be people we like and dislike. Are yo a racist because you don't get along with your same race neighbour for example?

I am a football fan and during matches, I do not love nor cherish the opponent fans. I do not go an kill them or waste my days hating them but they are of a different tribe to mine. That is natural. Even at school, we didn't see eye to eye with the kids from the other class. We had our tribe and thy had theirs. Natural.

I am an immigrant. I moved from Germany to the UK, because I love England and wanted to be here. I learned the language and you can't tell me apart from the natives. I don;t commit crimes, I don't ruin British customs by saying they offend me etc and I don't hang out with Germans. I have completely blended in and I am behaving for all that's worth British.
I still have my own customs but I don't shove them into people's faces and I don;t want anything special to accomodate me.

However I have noticed how this beautiful country has changed in the past 20 years. They call it multiculturalism, I call it complete disregard to what the people of Britain want.

Let me compare a country to a home. If you have a nice home with a nice garden and happy people living in it but someone told you that you need to get a few more room mates because money is tight you normally get to interview who comes to live with you. In the end you choose people who would fit in with your household and hopefully the place stays as pleasant as it has been. A few quirky but generally good guys can even bring more fun.
But what has been done to Europe and America is that we are being forced to take absolutely anybody in. Even if they do not fit in, ransack the house, disregard our rules, refuse to talk to us, stick together in their rooms and often hating us. these new house mates are not happy to live in a once beautiful home. What is worse, we are not to say anything against what is blatantly obvious or we will be called names by those who never have to share the main living space with any of the new comers. I think it is this unfairness which completely undermines those who have build their house and have made it a good place.

I am by no means saying that everyone who moved into our house is misbehaving. Yet there are those that do and there are too many on top. But it is those that are 'taboo'. But we are not allowed to complain because that makes us the villains and racist.

I worked with all creeds and races, met brilliant, funny, good people whom I am still friends with. Yes I have a best friend from Cameroon and a couple of Indian friends. I also have Latvian and Check friends. however I also worked with people who use their race as a get out clause for shi**y work ethics, brought back from their home land.
The biggest crime is that we are not allowed to discuss race and behaviour, it is a no go zone. Discussing other races is equal to being a herbalist in medieval times. You got burned at the stake because there was no discussion allowed. To me it is fascism to silence people who want to discuss races. and no, we are not all the same, there are quite a few differences between all races.

If we all want to get along, we have to be able to discuss everything, the good and the ugly, or the discussion is useless and no advances will ever be made.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by RoderickBateman
reply to post by spacekc929
 


There are thousands of organizations, groups, and laws trying to help out non-whites.
There are none preventing the genocide of white children.

Your perception of the world is extremely distorted.

Japan has a horrendous colonial history. It has an aging population and a high standard of living. It is more then 90% Japanese and kicks non-japanese people out all the time. But nobody demands they have to bring in millions of non-japanese people and "mix together" until there are no more Japanese children.

Saudi Arabia has murdered millions of people and wiped out countries. It has lots of living space and lots of money. It is close to 100% Muslim and non-Muslims are kicked out or murdered all the time. But nobody demands they have to bring in millions of non-muslim people and "mix together" until there are no more Muslim children.

Blacks have 40+ countries in the world. Have over half the worlds natural resources. Have the fastest growing population in the world. They sold alot of their own people into slavery. They have commited many genocides of non-blacks and blacks. But nobody demands they have to bring in millions of non-Black people and "mix together" until there are no more Black children.

I could go on and on but it's pretty obvious what I'm saying.
Such policies are for all White countries and only White countries.
Such policies are conditions enforced that would result in a group of people dieing out.
Such policies are genocide.

And you think you are somehow morally superior because you support it?
You disgust me.
And most people here see that your "anti-racism" is a codeword for anti-white.





Okay, tell me who is asking for millions of "non-white" people to come into Europe and mingle with Europeans until only non-white people are left? Who is asking for white people to be exterminated from the planet? What genocide are you referring to? Can you provide any statistics or evidence for your claims about the anti-white sentiments? I am just starting to get confused, because it's like you are equating someone who wants to celebrate world cultures into someone who wants to get rid of all white people by mingling non-whites with the whites until the whites disappear? Just how and where is this happening and who is perpetrating it? What are the death tolls?



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 12:13 PM
link   
I think it's funny how defensive certain members are getting, about how people choose to marry interracially, or how they perceive some kind of large-scale ethnic conspiracy toward the 'genocide' of the white race, since 'white countries' are being 'invaded' by other cultures.

As another member stated, a major reason that there is such an influx of other cultures into those countries is because of the colonization of said countries at the expense of those other cultures. Another, related, reason is that because most of those 'white countries' BROUGHT those other cultures to their countries to work as slaves. So, when slavery became taboo, they were left with these other ethnic groups that now called these places 'home.' (I'm looking at you, here, America.) I don't know what one would expect: That everyone just "go home, folks, because this is a white country again! Slavery is done, so GTFO'? It doesn't work that way. The M.O. for most of these developing countries was to take-take-take and to leave the other cultures (whose resources they were taking and continue to take) in impoverished states.

The idea of 'nobody is demanding that white people go into those non-white areas and mingle is pretty ridiculous because...why would they? Somebody mentioned Japan. Did Japan import hundreds of thousands of other races into their country as slaves? NO. They were indigenous Japanese slaves. Therefore, comparing the push for other cultures to feel like Japan is a home that they are entitled to (which is non-existent), and the ALLEGED (fabricated?) 'demand' for other cultures to feel like places like America and Europe are homes they are entitled to (due to the involuntary distribution of said cultures into those regions) is like the quintessential "apples and oranges" comparison. (But, of course, you won't acknowledge that truth, because it doesn't fit your agenda.)

Mr1alphaalpha Your question is not a 'yes or no' question. Your push to make it one completely displays the answer that you are trying to coax. If a culture wants to try to preserve itself in it's own region, then that is fine. But when that culture ships scores of other races into its midst - as, say, white America did - then that culture makes it all but impossible for that region to 'belong' to that single culture anymore. This is what you are seeing in places like America, and much of Europe. When it comes to sex and marriage, interracial unions have been happening since the times of slavery and the colonization (excuse me, the invasion) of America - although on a much quieter scale - and much of it was perpetuated by white slave owners having sex with their slaves. To act like interracial unions are apart of some conspiracy to 'kill off the white man' (which realistically would never happen) is both paranoid and xenophobic.

As far as that ridiculous mantra "Anti-Racist is Anti-White," that takes paranoia and ethnocentrism to the extreme. Not only is it a complete fabrication, but it has absolutely nothing of substance to back it up. Nothing. It is like saying 'Anti-Sexist is Anti-Male', seeing as how men were the strongest proponents of sexism throughout history. It is absolutely false (maybe not in all cases, but it is a false generalization). 'Anti-racist', in most contexts, means being against the exclusion or degradation of other people based on the color of their skin. That's it. My very best friend in the world is white. Being that I'm an only child, he is the closest thing to a brother that I have. He is the Godfather of my child, and we have been best friends for almost 20 years. We both share similar views on racism, in that we believe it to be wrong to value someone differently, or exclude them from aspects of your life, simply because they are of a different skin color / race culture. It doesn't matter if that skin color happens to be white, black, brown or yellow. That is Anti-Racism. For you to insinuate that Anti-Racism, at it's core, is part of a conspiracy against the white man is just as paranoid (if not more-so) than most everything else you said...



CaticusMaximus
Identity is not limited to skin color nor race. Those things can be a PART of cultural identity, but they do not necessarily DEFINE it.

Lots of people are seeing "cultural identity" and immediately thinking "race". I think thats way to narrow a scope for people to be using, and was using a much broader one when posting.


Then omit 'race' from that section of my post, and replace it with 'cultural identity'. I would still ask the same question.
edit on 13-1-2012 by Oneiros247 because: Adding response to another member.
edit on 13-1-2012 by Oneiros247 because: (no reason given)
edit on 13-1-2012 by Oneiros247 because: Typos



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by VivaLaEvolution
reply to post by mr1alphaalpha
 

I will answer your question, even though you didn't address me, as soon as you would kindly answer mine.

I am a product of imperial conquest, colonialism and the triangle trade. My mother's side is 100% Native American, my father's side is African American / Creole.
I do however, now live abroad, in an "all-White" country.

Now, my question is - Could you kindly direct me to my racially designated country, where I can live unbothered by other races?

If I were to go by just one half of my racial makeup, (and I will pick the Native side, for lack of knowledge of the exact origin of my Black side, due to the Europeans' negligent human cargo book keeping), I would have to say, I have NO right to live in my country, unbothered by people of other colors or creeds.
I would however, by your theory, have the natural right of helping everybody who wrongfully occupies my territory, to pack and take their behinds back to wherever they came from.
That would make for a LOT of insanely over-populated, crowded "all-White" countries, wouldn't it?

I'd like to ask you another question, if I may. Would you have a problem with other White people, coming to live in your country?
Like let's say a bunch of Polish, Romanian and Ukrainian people, given they are all White and of some type of Christian faith.

One more thing, the reason why nobody talks about the Zulus and the Chinese and whatever example you might want to bring up is simple! They only colonized/killed/oppressed/destroyed ONE, maybe 2 other, (mostly neighboring) nations.

The White People, (I will just generalize here like you do), actually went out and ventured across oceans and continents and managed to colonize/kill/oppress/destroy EVERYBODY they encountered.
So, naturally, a lot more people may have been left p*ssed and complaining .

Do I have a problem with Whites in general? NO.
Do I think they should be actively punished for their ancestors' guilt? NO.
Is it something they will just have to deal with? YES! As we, the rest, have learned and try to deal with the outcome of their AND our ancestors' deeds.


The answer to your question is that you are still in 1800, fighting the New England slave trade, while I am living in 2012, where the real situation is this: Every White country and ONLY White countries are being flooded with other races in the name of "diversity", 'multiculturalism" and all the other code words for "too many White people." This forced immigration and assimilation is genocide. If we cut immigration to a trickle and just marry in the non-whites we have now, there still will be no white race.

Anti-White logic blames the White race collectively for all the evils of history and you prove this point by referring to YOURSELF as "a product of imperial conquest, colonialism." You even go on to claim that non White countries should NOT be blended out of existence with mass immigration and assimilation because " They only colonized/killed/oppressed/destroyed ONE, maybe 2 other, (mostly neighboring) nations." If that's not a perfect example of anti-racism being a code word for anti-White i don't know what is!

Anti-Whites also try to claim they have no idea what a White country is by putting it in quotation marks. Its really quite absurd. How many times have we seen someone type an "African" country or an "Asian" country or an "Arab" country or a "Jewish" country? Nope never. This rule seems to only apply to White countries-yet more anti-White logic

Whats funny is after all the above you try to imply you are not justifying the genocide of my race and we should learn to "deal with the outcome"

Nope buddy. Not happening. Everyone White and normal doesn't fall for this BS anymore. We all know know that the anti-White mantra of "Africa for Africans, Asia for Asians, White countries for EVERYONE!" IS genocide.

Now back to my question. I think this is the SEVENTH time i have asked this to someone in this thread and had no reply! I wonder why?! LOL

A simple yes or no answer is all i ask:

Do you agree that all races. Be it Blacks in Africa, Asians in Asia, or Whites in Europe, have an equal right to ensure the survival of their own race and cultures in their own countries?



edit on 13-1-2012 by mr1alphaalpha because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by spacekc929
 


1. Genocide does not have to involve killing people. It does not have to be violent. It simply involves conditions enforced that results in a group of people dieing out. That is what international law and the guy who wrote that law said.

2. You really need me to show you all the "anti-racist" organization demanding "diversity" for all and only white countries and communities? You really need me to show you how the government, media and these "anti-racist" organizations call anyone who opposes this a naziwhowantstokill6millionjews? You really need me to show you the demographics of white countries since the governments and medias put these policies into effect? And that these same governments and medias are predicting that whites are expected to be minorities and eventually extinct in all white majority countries and that this is a "good thing?"

Are you just playing dumb or are you actually asking these question? Because they aren't that hard to look up.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 12:31 PM
link   
Than why does nobody ever talk about this? Honestly, I've never in my 31 years of life have heard anyone speak out against this and don't blame it on apartheid because under that rule things were much better for that country.

whatishappeninginsouthafrica.blogspot.com...

www.youtube.com...


fromtheold.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.africancrisis.co.za...


And that is only 1 country. So, fellow ATS'rs, why doesn't anyone speak out against this? To me it only affirms that anti racist is code for anti white.

Mr.1alpha, I answer YES to your question. What do I win?!
edit on 13-1-2012 by kimish because: (no reason given)
edit on 13-1-2012 by kimish because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by mr1alphaalpha
Anti-Whites also try to claim they have no idea what a White country is by putting it in quotation marks. Its really quite absurd. How many times have we seen someone type an "African" country or an "Asian" country or an "Arab" country or a "Jewish" country? Nope never. This rule seems to only apply to White countries-yet more anti-White logic

Once again, your question is invalid. An 'African' country is a country IN AFRICA. An 'Asian Country' is a country IN ASIA. There is No Such Thing as a "Jewish Country" (well, maybe Israel..heh) and the Arab countries are called so because they are a part of the 'Arab League' and the term isn't even recognized by many people in the area who don't identify themselves as Arabs. So yes. That term can very conceivably have quotations around it.

What exactly is a "White Country?" Can you point one out on a map? Not just a country that is primarily white (just as countries in Africa aren't known as "Black Country"), but a country that is actually referred to and recognized as a "White Country." Where?
edit on 13-1-2012 by Oneiros247 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 12:35 PM
link   
there should be nooooooooo racism at all when people realise we are all the same we are not white/brown or black we are all human beings

all of us are from the same stock



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by AllUrChips
Discrimination is NATURAL, racism is not. It is quite common, in every living thing, to discriminate, even animals. "Racism" is an emotionally derived personal decision one makes.
edit on 12-1-2012 by AllUrChips because: (no reason given)


So say for instance I think a certain person is ugly because of their features which are race specific, so then I am a racist because I prefer certain features in my mate than others?
That's the craziest thing I have ever heard.



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 12:38 PM
link   
reply to post by theruthlessone
 


If we are the same then when skeletal remains are found forensics specialist would say "we have the remains a a male/female human". They don't. Instead we hear "we have the remains of a Caucasian male/female or we have the remains of a black male/female". So are you saying that forensics pathologists (or whatever they are called) are wrong? I'll answer it for you, no. And that is because we are all human, yes, but race is a biological construct not a social one.

Evidence suggest that humans are %1 different than chimps. We all know how different we are from chimps. Now, there is a %1 difference between male and female. There is also a difference of %1 between black and white. But yet you say we are all the same. How is that?
edit on 13-1-2012 by kimish because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Oneiros247

Mr1alphaalpha Your question is not a 'yes or no' question. Your push to make it one completely displays the answer that you are trying to coax. If a culture wants to try to preserve itself in it's own region, then that is fine. But when that culture ships scores of other races into its midst - as, say, white America did - then that culture makes it all but impossible for that region to 'belong' to that single culture anymore. This is what you are seeing in places like America, and much of Europe. When it comes to sex and marriage, interracial unions have been happening since the times of slavery and the colonization (excuse me, the invasion) of America - although on a much quieter scale - and much of it was perpetuated by white slave owners having sex with their slaves. To act like interracial unions are apart of some conspiracy to 'kill off the white man' (which realistically would never happen) is both paranoid and xenophobic.

As far as that ridiculous mantra "Anti-Racist is Anti-White," that takes paranoia and ethnocentrism to the extreme. Not only is it a complete fabrication, but it has absolutely nothing of substance to back it up. Nothing. It is like saying 'Anti-Sexist is Anti-Male', seeing as how men were the strongest proponents of sexism throughout history. It is absolutely false (maybe not in all cases, but it is a false generalization). 'Anti-racist', in most contexts, means being against the exclusion or degradation of other people based on the color of their skin. That's it. My very best friend in the world is white. Being that I'm an only child, he is the closest thing to a brother that I have. He is the Godfather of my child, and we have been best friends for almost 20 years. We both share similar views on racism, in that we believe it to be wrong to value someone differently, or exclude them from aspects of your life, simply because they are of a different skin color / race culture. It doesn't matter if that skin color happens to be white, black, brown or yellow. That is Anti-Racism. For you to insinuate that Anti-Racism, at it's core, is part of a conspiracy against the white man is just as paranoid (if not more-so) than most everything else you said...



Its always funny to read what anti-Whites say. Its always just some long winded way of typing "there are too many White people and i support the genocide of your race through mass immigration and forced assimilation." In this instance its just some jumbled convoluted variation of the "because of colonization" justification i have already dealt with in this thread several times.

Shall i preempt some others so we get these straw men out of the way now?

I think i shall:

“Because of history ” does not justify White genocide.
“For the economy” does not justify White genocide.
“Low birth rates”, does not justify White genocide.
“We all bleed red!” does not justify White genocide.
"A shortage of doctors" does not justify White genocide
"The Irish immigrated" does not justify White genocide
“Race is just a social construct!” does not justify White genocide.
“We are all from Africa!” does not justify White genocide.
"Slavery" does not justify White genocide
"England has always been mixed" does not justify White genocide
And so on and so forth

As the "slogan" being a "fabrication?" LOL
You anti-whites prove that it is anything but everything you type a response.

Anti-racism is just a code word for anti-White



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by kimish
 


so your telling me that black people came from a different species than white people and so on now correct me if im wrong but cant every race apart from the chinese be traced back to one woman in ethiopia............ ?





new topics
top topics
 
59
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join