Is Jow Forums right or retarded? Explain yourselves

It's retarded to think either side is unequivocally right or retarded. Only the ones who can point to the limits of where either side is wrong or right has seen the light.

Attached: 19884.jpg (1600x893, 208K)

They are just a bunch of edgy contrarians with no real convictions.

pol is wrong 100% of the time.

>Racism is retarded and factually wrong as all generalizations are worthless, psuedo science is cancer

colorlines.com/articles/3-stats-department-justice-disprove-racist-talking-points-crime

>Jew conspiracy is flat-earth level of delusion

>Mixed races would reduce the likelihood of genetic diseases that are prevalent in a certain race, such as sickle cell anemia in African Americans.
Isolation is impossible & death
>Recently scientists were able to sequence the DNA from a specimen group of Mammoths that had become geographically isolated. In evaluating the DNA sequence, the scientists discovered that DNA errors in the Mammoth genome had accumulated to the point where these animals had lost their sense of smell (among other things). As a result of their remaining gene pool being unable to produce healthy Mammoths, this small group, cut off from any other Mammoths, died out.

I just can’t take an article seriously if it uses the word “Latinx”. Not even a word. Kms.

Jow Forums used to be wrong and just edgy back in the day
Nowadays I swear to God it's the only sane board on this website

I do think it's a cringy written but the focus are the statistics.

Jow Forums is even cringier now that they’ve decided to insert themselves into every fucking board

Nah, we've always been everywhere, diverse interests and all that stuff
Nowadays the divide between the left, the right and normality is so great you can't help but notice people outside of your "tribe"

GIVE THIS POST A (you) IF THE ONLY TIMES SJWs SHIT GETS SHOVED DOWN YOUR THROAT IS WHEN Jow Forums IS DOING IT AND TELLING YOU WHAT TO THINK ABOUT IT

stop spamming this thread. it’s not an advice request. it’s also an idiotic question because not all people on Jow Forums are the same.

Get fucked, newfag. Political shit used to actually stay on Jow Forums pretty well. Believe it or not, there was a time when you could actually go on other boards without encountering Jow Forums threads

Calling each other faggots or niggers for fun, raiding tumblr pussies and being edgelords used to be Jow Forums's favorite pastimes, nowadays somebody's bound to call you a bigot for that, regardless of board
/v/ is constantly getting raped by the vidya industry going farther to the left every day, /tg/ is in the same boat and /b/ is /lgbt/'s retarded cousin
You can't seriously believe Jow Forums would take that and not fight back (aka go political), although there are people on both sides

Being an edgelord =/= being Jow Forums
All this shit started with gamergate so yeah /v/ does share some of the blame. But then again it was always /b/ lite.
>Jow Forums would take that and not fight back (aka go political)
That’s really cringey, man. Jow Forums raiding other boards is not fighting back. There was never a need for them to fight back in the first place. It was newfags like you who came a couple years ago and decided that the entire board was their secret far-right playground.

>/v/ is constantly getting raped by the vidya industry going farther to the left every day

Diversity of characters was always a thing both on tv and vidyas. (FF7).
Just stop making those threads.

It is a truly beautiful holiday that celebrates an oppressed peoples' triumph over tyranny.

It might've been the other way around, modern Jow Forums could be full of refugees from other boards and the autism feedback loop / echochamber made most of us political
I would've only visited Jow Forums occasionally before 2015, then I pretty much moved there

Yeah but Jow Forums didn't used to do that shit with a neo-nazi or fascist or European-style far right political agenda.

At worst the media and by extension the government thought people who posted here were radical anarchist hackers.

>Love politics, politics is my passion
>Can't shut up about subjects ranging from elections to diplomatic news to classical political theory
>Can't have a political discussion on the chans without some Alex Jones fanboy shouting about the globalists turning kids gay or the Clintons being literally Satan

thanks Jow Forums

/s

Yeah, when it's natural and reasonable, diversity can be good
However, forced diversity (battlefield 5, marvel comics, Netflix etc) completely ruins it

WAITER, WAITER! COME OVER HERE!

THERE IS A BLACK MAN IN MY CARTOON. CAN I SPEAK TO YOUR MANAGER?

Retarded.

Pretty much .

While it's fitting since most are anti-semites, this goes in general for anyone with the Jow Forums bad faith argument tactics:

"“Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.”

I see arguing with Jow Forums-types the same way I see my dog when I want her to come back inside the house. I could open the door, try to catch her, and get annoyed as she always darts away when almost have her (Jow Forums moving goalposts or resorting to insults), OR I could just open the door to her (extend an offer of conversation), and when she comes up and runs away when the moment I move a bit to give her room (Jow Forums shitposting when you try to argue), I call her a faggot and tell her to freeze outside and shut the door (ignore future Jow Forums posts)

After about 15 minutes she's always whining at the door and comes inside the second I open it (Jow Forums going away to allow normal conversation to continue once they see no one takes the bait).

Interesting. We would need to have a discussion about what forced diversity is. Surely some people on /v/ think every single instance of minorities in media are, those make the cringy threads

But what I think is, the left is gaining power and consensus. The videogame industy wants to make money, so they'll acknowledge the current times.
Same for all medias. If the right would be gaing power than industries would reflect that cause $$

The fights of the left however shouldn't be dismissed by the reflection of the medias

Any type of extremism is bad, whoever really wants full-on authoritarianism or complete anarchy is mentally retarded, whether they're on the left or the right
It would be nice to go back to when we could just say whatever we wanted and getting offended was one's own problem and nobody else had to give a fuck about it

Kek't
Seriously though, a black James Bond would make as much sense as a white Black Panther
I mean, companies that try to pander to the leftist media tend to get their media praise, but they usually piss off their fans while doing that and lose a lot of money

I bet you must really like Rick & Morty

This.
But I wonder, why they believe that in 2018?
Why would you make yourself so miserable for delusional baseless ideas? Living in today's time and dreaming of dictatorship is retarded.

>Calling each other faggots or niggers for fun, raiding tumblr pussies and being edgelords used to be Jow Forums's favorite pastimes, nowadays somebody's bound to call you a bigot for that,

There's still nothing wrong with that. It's the motivation behind it that bothers me. I don't care how much revisionism you want to claim I'm making, been here since 2007 so I know exactly what I've seen. The tone behind it is now hateful, no longer joking, casual off-color humor. It's full on edgelord cringey ass shit like a broken fucking record.

It used to be
>hey look at this retarded shit (video of some guy doing stupid shit)
>standard response: "lol what a dumb nigger" (could literally be a white guy), "OP's a faggot"

Now it's
>hey look at this shit (same video but longer, shows a 2 second glimpse of a black dude in the background walking by)
>"FUCKING LYNCH ALL NIGGERS (((GLOBALIST AGENDA)))"
>user shut the fuck up
>"WOOOOOOOOW I CANT EVEN SAY NIGGER ANYMORE? FUCKING SJWS HERES AN INFOGRAPH DUMP ON HOW TRANNIES ARE RUINING THE NATION"

It's just fucking obnoxious now. Literally everything has to be turned into some white victim complex shit like a fucking reverse SJW, only backed up by somehow even shakier arguments than SJWs, and way more annoying.

TRS is better and there is no serious discussions on Jow Forums, the /wsg/ Jow Forums webm threads are good though

>Jow Forums is wrong because it hurts my feelings.
this whole thread

>promote white genocide
>offended that whites are pissed
Than you chaim for your valuable opionions

Unfortunately Jow Forums is always right. Everytime I think they’re over exaggerating they always prove themselves right in my personal life. Here are things I ended up underestimating that made me realize otherwise
>the prevalence of SJWs outside of colleges and media. I had to find out the hard way that they literally made up 30% of my workplace when I used to do contract work for USCIS (United States Citizenship and Immigration Services)
>Blacks being dumb af regardless of their upbringing and lifestyle also most do the “dindu nuffin” when they get in trouble and some will pull “das racists” when they don’t get their way among other things. This seems pretty consistent from my interactions with them
>white women having nigger-tier brains

I don't hate Rick and Morty, but I don't particularly like it. Irrelevant either way.

If minorities breaking out of oppression = white race being threatned you must be a really weak minded person.

We just had this fucking thread last week. Don't forget to sage.

>>Mixed races would reduce the likelihood of genetic diseases that are prevalent in a certain race, such as sickle cell anemia in African Americans.
By spreading it to other groups. This isn't to mention the effect on social cohesion atomized masses of mutts has, or the increased prevalence of mental illnesses (and this is even after accounting for the unfalsifiable meme of "structural racism"--you can smother them in tolerant liberal environments, they still end up fucked--and those are the ones where the parents don't divorce).

The "Jew conspiracy" is simply pointing out the vastly disproportionate influence Jews have in their host societies--concentrated in the media, law, and finance especially. Only retards would claim that they huddle together in a darkened synagogue to plan how to take over the world, but seeing their impact as an ethnic group is obvious--it's just that it is socially taboo to say anything negative about it.
Pic related. If you care about conserving society, you don't want the most liberal and the most 'capable' (in quotes because that capability is towards certain things, not a blank slate) group subverting it. It's the same reason why it's retarded if a feminist screams about "rape culture" as something all men do, but it's perfectly reasonable to say you're more likely to get raped by a man.

>DNA errors in the Mammoth genome had accumulated to the point where these animals had lost their sense of smell
That's from a minuscule population size. There are about 800 million whites, and even some of the smallest ethnic groups like the Icelanders have very low rates of inbreeding. A nation the size of Poland or Romania would have zero problems whatsoever related to involuntary "inbreeding".

tl;dr no ideology has a shortage of retard followers, reddit didn't help Jow Forums get better, and this thread is bait.

Poor guy, brainwashed by this shitty place.
You are really stupid if you think your personal experience has any worth

If you think minorities are unjustly oppressed, you're a really weak person.

Most of the time it's the same, but perceived as hateful because of the current political climate
The "it's okay to be white" thing did prove that SJWs demonize us, plus many other similar things
If anything, the autism-powered Jow Forumsmachine has literally nothing better to do than dig up facts and statistics, there are eniugh arguments out there and they're pretty solid for why Jow Forums > SJWs, and most of the time our beliefs are challenged we spit those out like broken records

Minorities haven't been oppressed for a very long time, now they're trying to become the oppressors and it really won't end well for anyone

hey dude you got any more photos like that, they make great reference

>literally getting defensive over ancetodes

First of all, the white race is threatened because its group identity is actively reviled even in white countries, borders are opened for neoliberal economics and leftist votes, and racemixing is propagandized everywhere. It has nothing to do with "oppression of minorities". In fact, the only groups to expressly have racial laws today are the Natives in the US and Canada (where tribal benefits are assigned by blood quantum, i.e. racial ancestry), and Liberian blacks (their constitution, modeled after that of the US, limits citizenship to blacks). Who gave them that? the "oppressive" whites. Did bad things happen in history? No shit, and I hardly want to repeat it. But the fact is whites were comparatively nice, and when whites are about to go into demographic oblivion (something people openly cheer about on the left), do you think they'll get the same treatment to preserve their people? Hell no.

Next, let's take your point at face value--you say whites are threatened by minorities breaking out of oppression.
Well, there were no minorities to oppress in white nations. Reminder that actual white nationalists opposed things like slavery and apartheid for exactly this reason, because having a nonwhite underclass would undercut white labor. But the greedy elites and industrialists wanted cheap labor, and they got it. Now those same industrialists are importing migrants en masse for the same reason, and leftists swallow the bait again to attack the people who didn't want any part of exploitation to begin with.

Also, if they're so "oppressed", why do they fight tooth and nail to get into white countries?

these are the people that deny the holocaust in one sentence and then advocate its completion in the next

didn't happen, but it should

pasty basement dwellers from Jow Forums would be in the very first cattle cars

This.

I mean, the real Auschwitz would be a dream for basement dwellers
>always socializing with other people
>library full of books to read
>food and water
>secure workplace
>even a fucking pool
They'd go from virgin betas to alphachads in months

>always socializing with other people
>dream
Although a Jow Forums concentration camp sounds like it would be hilarious to be in.

The white race never had a group identity.

>there were no minorities to oppress in white nations.

That was possible under dictatorship.
I'd rather make the encounter with the foreing easier.
You too, believe me.

>But the greedy elites and industrialists
I agree capitalism is bad though.

>my feelings are superior to your objective, lived experience
leftists, everyone.

>The white race never had a group identity.
imagine being this retarded

When I see whites being killed en masse for the express reason that theyre "white", then I'll say people are promoting white genocide.

I also don't particularly give a fuck about anyone's race, my ancestors or whatever my mutt great grandkids will be (if society makes it that far) because they're irrelevant to my life entirely. I can be inspired by them, but I don't take personal pride in the accomplishments of other people, and I damn sure don't try to act like I'm better than anyone else because my great great whatever decided to shit out some kids that eventually lead to me. You can be happy you live a nice life, but attributing it to anything BUT luck is just a fucking denial of reality.

I'm very glad I was born in America vs some war torn 3rd world country, but I don't for a second think less of them because of what plot of dirt they were unfortunate enough to be born on. Anyone who does is absolutely retarded and not worth arguing with.

Yes, until whites are entirely erased, white genocide isn't real and Drumpf btfo.

I suppose Tibetans and Uighurs aren't being genocided either.

It's true though. "White people" doesn't mean anything. The only concept of unified white race comes from nazism.

The problem is the "facts" are often blatantly false, misconstrued, or taken from blatantly biased sources that are spinning things, and the "statistics" are often taken out of context and just posted for face value. There's never a deeper discussion as to WHY the statistics are like that, and the conclusions often end up being incorrectly drawn, while shittons of factors that go into these statistics are completely ignored in favor of whatever talking point is being used as "irrefutable proof" by whoever is providing it. I understand correlation and I'm willing to lend credence to certain less accepted ideas, but when you try to mix that shit with blatant conspiracy nonsense, hypocritical statements, and almost full on lying propaganda like Jow Forums does so much of the time, it becomes tiresome to try to argue with them.

A good faith discussion doesn't have one person just spewing out 40 tons of shit that you have to wade through to reach a diamond in the discussion every goddamn time, and thats what happens every goddamn time with Jow Forums.

Neither does “Black people”, “Asian people”,or “Hispanic people”

>Nah, we've always been everywhere, diverse interests and all that stuff
I thought it was the jews who rewrote history and the immigrants who pretend they've been here the whole time.

>muh Drumpf

Also way to completely sidestep the point. Tibetans and Uighurs are being genocided by literal genocidal tactics, not just fucking being outbred cause no one wants to fuck them. The Chinese government is actively fucking killing these groups. There's no comparison. I also don't even know why you're bringing them up like they have anything to do with "white genocide". Does matter how pale they are, you post this motherfucker on Jow Forums complaining about white genocide and you'll instantly be met with tons of replies saying they're not white. It's not like you actually fucking care about them, it's just convenient to your argument to call them white right now. It's like when you post a hot black chick shes "got white features" or obviously must be mixed, but she's still a nigger at the end of the day because of muh one drop rule. The hypocritical nonsense and complete lack of self-awareness makes for completely dogshit discourse.

While we're on the subject, the people being killed are not being killed because of their skin color, they're being killed cause of their religious background, and the Chinese government largely wants an athiest type state. Any sort of religion often creates zealots and those who are devout are loyal to their God, and not the state. Any hint of insurrection would spread like wildfire amongst religious groups if the leaders start calling for it.

Attached: uighurs.jpg (293x172, 11K)

youtu.be/ZR5qybydEzY
This is what arguing with /pol feels like

>By passing it
No.
You need two copies of the recessive mutation for most genes, and you're less likely to get it if your parents are less likely to share genes.
So the diseases prevalent to a specific group die.
You have no proof of mental illness and even if you have it there's no enviorment w/o racism.
Greater genetics variety is an advantage.

>The only concept of unified white race comes from nazism.
That's just false. While various ideological movements, including National Socialism, had a smattering of references to "white" identity, it was never an integral part of any fascist doctrine, which in all its iterations was decidedly nationalists. Which is good--white is a category much broader than the individual nations of Europe, and should only be used for the New World which is much more pan-European.

The Spanish and Portuguese were the first to make reference to it in a legal sense, in their colonial caste systems, while the US (and the preceding colonies) already adopted race-based laws for citizenship.
Fun fact on that note, the first slaveowner in the English colonies was a black guy. But that's neither here nor there.

Bad user! "Tu quoque" only says you're both wrong or both right--which is nonsensical as an argument.

>Tibetans and Uighurs are being genocided by literal genocidal tactics, not just fucking being outbred cause no one wants to fuck them.
Genocide isn't necessarily about killing of the groups' members, it is about neutralizing them as effective groups. Pic related is the guy who coined the word. Also, China's policy towards both involves exactly the tactics whites face--Han Chinese are encouraged to settle in Tibet and Xinjiang, which skews demography massively to the point where they're politically, socially, and economically impotent in their own homelands. Whites, by the same token, are completely barred either by law or social convention from organizing as whites, and face large influxes of nonnative migration which is already swamping them.

Attached: point blank admission.jpg (1141x657, 238K)

Jow Forums isn't one person.
You should be skeptical of Jow Forums just like Jow Forums asks you to be skeptical of everyone else.

>Whites, by the same token, are completely barred either by law or social convention from organizing as whites, and face large influxes of nonnative migration which is already swamping them.
This is at best a complete misrepresentation of the truth, at worst a blatant lie. "Whites" aren't restricted from organizing because of their race, they're restricted from organizing because every group that has organized espouses violence against nonwhites and general actions that would be considered treasonous to their country, and they also happen to be white. You faggots are all about calling out when blacks use the dindu nuffin card, dont expect it to work when you try it too

>You need two copies of the recessive mutation for most genes
Which whites almost never have to begin with. Again, this is only a 'gain' for a specific group.
>You have no proof of mental illness
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1448064/
>"Mixed-race adolescents showed higher risk when compared with single-race adolescents on general health questions, school experience, smoking and drinking, and other risk variables."
Not surprising, given their wrecked home lives and lack of identity. Is racial prejudice part of it? Probably. But then again, as you said, "there's no environment without racism". People inherently recognize difference, and atomizing people is not good for their mental health.

>Greater genetics variety is an advantage.
To what end?
If you simply care about humanity, homo sapiens sapiens, then having multiple distinct groups is either no different than or better than one amorphous mass, since the same genes are present regardless, but in the latter they can express themselves in multiple ways at the same time, rather than all at once in the same direction--the evolutionary equivalent of having six shots instead of one to hit a target. For example with sickle cell disease, that does have an evolutionary purpose against malaria--and just for the sake of argument, if a "super-malaria" plague swept the planet, having bred it out of the populations would increase the death toll. The point being, human biodiversity is not really at the individual level but at the group level, since only groups are viable populationwise.

The notion that racial interbreeding is desirable, let alone necessary, is simply propaganda by those who don't like structures which are independent of their control--it's the same reason why religion and family are delegitimized.

>It's true though.
I just have one question. Is Lawrence Fishbourne white?

Forced assimilation and almost-mandatory chinese dick is chosen tactic of genocide.

If you can't see the parallel with the west, then you're the kind of stupid person that caused this begin with.

>You need two copies of the recessive mutation for most genes
>Which whites almost never have to begin with.
You'd think a tripfag who uses the name of a guy who was very interested in eugenics would have any idea how reproduction worked

And yet if you do organize based on race, you will be sued out the ass and listed as an extremist organization by the FBI like the Proud Boys (which is like a civ-cuck adult boy scouts organization).

Please describe how taking in immigrants constitutes as "forced assimilation" last time I checked no one is forcing me to fuck black chicks

>no one is forcing me to fuck
Rape exists and is a cultural staple of your pet monkeys.

Forced assimilation is when, without a vote, my once 90% white hometown is now spicville with literal methlabs dotting the apocalyptic landscape. \Where can I turn to if my birthplace is no longer mine?

Thanks for continuing the proud /pol tradition of not even reading a post thr post your responding too and just continue spouting your creed. Have you ever considered that no one takes you seriously because you're a caustic retard who can't even accept that people disagree with your blatantly false ideas and not that the jews control everything?
inb4 Wikipedia is Jews

Attached: 20181204_215539.jpg (1080x636, 161K)

>It is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves.

I'm sorry, didn't know words stopped evolving the second someone "coins" them. Not to mention
>"The word genocide is the combination of the Greek prefix geno- (γένος, meaning 'race' or 'people') and caedere (the Latin word for "to kill")." Genocide's origins are irrelevant when 99% of the time you're talking about mass murder. Don't try to derail the argument into fucking semantics. You're also completely ignoring the second half of my post explaining why the Chinese state is doing it. The groups that are """""""""""""white"""""""""""""""" are largely fucking religious, an anti-religion state = anti-them. They could be fucking purple and it'd be the same fucking situation.

This is exactly what I mean by arguing in bad faith. You aren't addressing the crux of the argument, merely tidbits to distract and convolute. The core of the argument is that a "white genocide" by the definition a majority of people use isn't happening worldwide as always claimed on Jow Forums. Even to fucking say its happening in China still has nothing to do with the fact that people say its happening in the USA, because it implies theres a "coordinated effort" to do so. The only way to corroborate such an effort would be to start going down the rabbit hole of conspiracy nonsense about Jews/globalists/media/whatever the fucking shit. Fuck this thread. Fuck you you faggot dog. Enjoy the goddamn freezing weather.

>Forced assimilation is when, without a vote, my once 90% white hometown is now spicville with literal methlabs dotting the apocalyptic landscape
I guess you shouldn't have chosen a trailer park as your birthplace then. You'd think a white supremacist would be aware of all the completely legal ways to keep out minorities like price gating.

>because every group that has organized espouses violence against nonwhites and general actions that would be considered treasonous to their country
Quite untrue. This is at best a post-hoc justification of prior restraint, where you ban something and then complain about the people who are either crazy or stupid enough to flaunt it anyway.
It's like saying during prohibition "See? Look at all these violent gangsters! This is why we banned alcohol!"
Go ahead, try to set up a "White student union". Even if you were allowed to set it up, which is doubtful, you'd be drowned in protests and even threats because of "racism", even if you made clear you had no motivations of hatred but only concern for your group.

As for treason, this is a question of state or nation. I don't think anyone would value the sterile mechanism of power that is the state over the lifeblood of its people, and this is fundamentally what white nationalists argue--that the state no longer serves the people but endangers them. If that's "treason", fine, but I would say it's as justified as starving peasants rebelling against a selfish and cruel king.

>You faggots are all about calling out when blacks use the dindu nuffin card
That's a meme about ebonics. I would hardly say that by virtue of the meme, all blacks must be guilty. That's absurd.
Are there violent skinheads? Yes, and frankly they're just degenerates who like the edgy label as an excuse to be antisocial.

I was talking about user's example of sickle-cell anemia, which isn't present in European populations to any significant degree, barring the far south of Europe that got MOORED.

You're not allowed to self-segregate. I.e. forced assimilation. You don't have to break individuals when the groups erode over time anyway.

>which in all its iterations was decidedly nationalists
Even classical nazis were pan-nationalist in that Aryan was used to describe what we'd call Germanic today. North and South Germans are not a single nation and if that's not enough for your France and England certainly are separate nations as well. Yet these were "Aryan" to the nazis.

t. retard who can't even skim a wiki article

Proud Boys is a mixed raced, civic nationalist, pro LGBT organization founded by the co-founder of Vice who calls himself a Zionist and has toured Israel on a paid vacation. Despite all this cucking, they're still targeted by the FBI.

And this kind of jewish response is why some people need to be unironically gassed one day. Unironically.

>Which whites almost never have to begin with. Again, this is only a 'gain' for a specific group.

And, that's bad because..?

Nice, you cropped this out:

>Nevertheless, most mixed-race adolescents are at low risk. Most of the risk items we assessed may be interpreted as related to stress, so we may therefore choose to interpret mixed race as a source of stress. We cannot identify further the source of the stress.

Stress that could be caused by a ton of factors.

You then went on and had a mental breakdown. Too bad it can't deny the genetic reality: greater genetic variety is an advantage.

Ironic that you say those "who don't like structures which are independent of their control" when you had a breakdown because you don't like people procreating with who they please.

And in the filters it goes.

It's complicated, there are two categories:

>On the stuff about the jews
100% wrong
>On everything else
100% right

>Genocide's origins are irrelevant when 99% of the time you're talking about mass murder. Don't try to derail the argument into fucking semantics.
Except that's also how even the UN defines it, too. To "kill" an ethnic group isn't killing every single member of it, it is destroying the group as an entity unto itself. Hence why, for example, US programs to assimilate the Native Americans by forcing them into Western-style schools could be called "genocide" even though large-scale killings against the groups as such didn't exist.

>it implies theres a "coordinated effort" to do so.
Well, considering whites are denied group organization, and that there were massive, top-down, and disingenuous pushes to enable the changes to take place now, it would certainly seem so. The immigration act of 1965 was promoted by its authors as "not a revolutionary bill", one which would "not flood our cities with immigrants, and would not alter the ethnic mix of our country". It was passed when the country was 90% white, now it's dubiously 56% at most. The US government has active programs in basically all-white countries to have them "accept diversity",and so on.

>Enjoy the goddamn freezing weather.
Thanks, you too.

You can talk about their autistic race-nation theory (which I don't subscribe to) all you want, but they didn't use "white" in anything but passing, and that was the original claim.

Oy vey

Nigger are you fucking illiterate? It's literally says "promotes political violence" in the fucking preview

>average leftist
>literally unable to read
If you fucking bothered to read more than the first words you see on a google search, you would find that Proud Cucks are explicitly anti-violence as the cuck founder Gavin Mcinnes states every time he's in front of a camera.
The "promotion of violence" charge comes from defending yourself against Antifa after they attack you.

>Oy vey
לקבל את העורלה כושי

The difference between the nazi's "Aryan" and the modern "White" nationalist is a difference of degree. They're the same concept ie certain nations are lumped together in an aggregate. The degree of similarity or criteria for aggregation is irrelevant. If you concede the nazis had pan-nationalist (Aryan) dogma as an "integral part of (their) facist doctrine" then your statement is ipso facto untrue.

>And, that's bad because..?
It's something which doesn't benefit whites, nor for that matter would it unconditionally benefit blacks. The mixing itself has other damaging effects.

>Nice, you cropped this out:
2000 character limit. I never said that it was direct causation, either, but the fact is that they are still at greater risk from a variety of factors--and asserting that they can't possibly be innate is pure dogma. You want a downside to mixing? You got one.

>because you don't like people procreating with who they please.
I wouldn't mind too much if they were contained, but when it means eventual destruction of a group (and moreover, when it is actively propagandized), I do have an issue. If making the US a permanent free-for-all meant Europe would remain European, I'd be quite content.

We already do this with animals, by the way. We spend effort trying to preserve species (or in the cases of domestic animals, specific pedigreed breeds) from all sorts of things including hybridization. They're unique groups with intrinsic value, and leaving their fate purely to individual choice and opportunism is short-sighted for an inherently social species like humans.

Lastly, if you want to pull the "still at low risk" card, I could do exactly the same with sickle cell anemia--the vast majority of blacks don't have it.

>Too bad it can't deny the genetic reality: greater genetic variety is an advantage.
And I'm saying that not only is the effect minute for gigantic populations like now, but also that the variety already exists--so paradoxically the only argument for racemixing in this line of thought is if you want to strengthen a particular group, rather than humanity as a whole, since humanity would have the genes somewhere with or without mixing. And if you want to strengthen the group, why mix?

>I don't like what you're saying so I'll mute you
And I'm the one having a mental breakdown?

He probably already filtered you as leftist cuckolds tend to do when they get assmad.

Don't bother.

>The difference between the nazi's "Aryan" and the modern "White" nationalist is a difference of degree
Obviously. I'll concede that I gave a weak definition for nationalism, and I should have clarified that better. The core point is that Nazis did not invent the term "white", nor did they use it in any meaningful sense of policy, and that's what I wanted to say in the beginning.

>It's something which doesn't benefit whites, nor for that matter would it unconditionally benefit blacks.

It would literally kill a diasease. It would benefit everyone. Not only for the group that has it but for medicine as a whole. If you are a delusional nazi we haven't much to argue about this point.

>2000 characters limit

Try to not laugh challenge? Like the other user said, and as everyone knows, nazis always argue in bad faith.

>You got one

Yeah.. stress caused by what knows what. There's a chance it could be racism so you are basically saying racism bad. The advantage kills diaseases.
Most disorders caused or affected by genetics are not single-gene disorders. Regardless, because they are far less likely to get matching copies because their parentage is so diverse, mixed-race people tend to do better in the genetic lottery than most of us.

>I wouldn't mind too much if they were contained, but when it means eventual destruction of a group

It's not a destruction of a group. It's a natural process that'll lead to whatever it'll lead. It's always been like this.
People all around the world are cluster fucks of genetics already.

>We spend effort trying to preserve species
Comparing animals to humans is really silly. Animals would be better off mixing as they would be stronger, but we stop them because.. we can.

psychologytoday.com/us/blog/canine-corner/201806/are-mixed-breed-dogs-really-healthier-purebreds

>The data did confirm one aspect of the hybrid vigor notion since 3.9% of the purebred dogs showed some form of genetically related disorder while only 1.4% of the mixed breed dogs did so.

>is if you want to strengthen a particular group, rather than humanity as a whole,

Humanity is made by groups. If these groups mix, they'll give birth to people with stronger genetics, these people being part of 2 groups. Eventually humanity as a whole will be stronger. Again, it's always been like this.

>It would literally kill a diasease. It would benefit everyone.
It doesn't affect other groups at present, and it wouldn't kill the disease but merely disperse its effects.
If you want to go the ad hominem route, then you're probably right we have very little to say, but that's simply because you don't have an actual argument.

>Like the other user said, and as everyone knows, nazis always argue in bad faith.
Well, there is a limit, and I picked the most pertinent part of the source. You said I had no sources to show it, so I gave you one, and then you attacked it. I then explained why it was still relevant despite your concern. I dont see how that's bad faith. Pretending like my words are invalid because of how you perceive me, that's another story, but I don't want to get into that.

>There's a chance it could be racism so you are basically saying racism bad.
Not at all. It's a mechanism which exists for a reason, and which is instinctual. The fact is you can avoid the negative impacts of this entirely by not mixing--both directly and indirectly. "Racism" in the sense of hating someone simply for who they are, regardless of other conditions like where they are or what they did, is silly and very few do it. I certainly don't.

The 'advantage', as we went over, doesn't make any sense. Genetically speaking, mixing doesn't create anything past random mutations, all you'er doing is spreading the effects of genes across groups--and if your position is simply in favor of humanity without group distinction, then there is little incentive to mix because it's not adding or detracting from humanity. Long term, if everyone mixes to exactly the same degree, you'er actually more at risk since you just artificially homogenized the population. That is, a viral pandemic which might have wiped out 25% of humans instead wipes out 90% because the genes it exploited were dispersed from one group to a bunch of different ones.

>It's not a destruction of a group. It's a natural process that'll lead to whatever it'll lead.
There is nothing natural about current patterns of mass migration, but even leaving that aside all of nature is destruction. Those which can't survive, go extinct, and those organisms within a species which are unable to adapt die out. The diversity of traits, so to speak, is what keeps the species going. For humans, as pure humans, the more distinct groups, the better. And back to tribalism, that's why it's good for us evolutionarily--more bang for your buck, so to speak.

>Comparing animals to humans is really silly
I'm not saying we should become animals (although you seem fine using the appeal to nature above), just that the value of distinctiveness is seen in our actions elsewhere.

>The data did confirm one aspect of the hybrid vigor notion since 3.9% of the purebred dogs showed some form of genetically related disorder while only 1.4% of the mixed breed dogs did so.
Definitely. Domestic animals aren't a perfect analogy since they were selectively bred over a short period of time, rather than evolving naturally like human groups. But even within that, specific breeds have specific traits which would be largely lost by mutts. A German Shepherd is an excellent guard dog, strong but they're prone to hip problems, I believe. Shiba Inus, while very healthy, aren't really going to put up anywhere near the kind of strength that a German Shepherd could. They each have their niches. A mutt of the two would likely be weaker than the Shepherd and somewhat less healthy than the Inu.

>If these groups mix, they'll give birth to people with stronger genetics
Not how it works. Hybrid vigor is what happens when you reverse inbreeding like with dogs. For two large, self-sustaining populations, it simply doesn't happen. All you're doing is diluting what makes them unique, and in doing so reducing human biodiversity and thus evolutionary longevity.

You can cry all you want about us. Fight us. Deny us. Whatever. Nothing will ever bend our will. Nothing can ever break our resolve. Mark my words. 100 years from now, the civilized world will enjoy unprecedented prosperity thanks to our efforts. It is blood and iron alone which can turn the wheels of history. Unlike you, we will create a world in our own image. Unlike you idle children who will never bring your vision into reality. When we fulfill our final triumph, it will be supported by the masses.

Vae victis.

Attached: CD72A459-2703-4B6F-A769-DFFAEC187BEB.png (480x400, 17K)

>It doesn't affect other groups at present, and it wouldn't kill the disease but merely disperse its effects.

It would kill it in the long road. It would benefit everyone. Not only for the group that has it but for medicine as a whole.

>The fact is you can avoid the negative impacts of this entirely by not mixing-

People should sacrifice their freedom of procreating with whoever they like because of it?
No, racism would still be a thing. When ethnics are organizated it becomes a much more dangerous thing. One tace would end up feeling superior to the others, and humanity would be triggered into an hateful hellhole.
The encounter with the foreing is inevitable.
So let's make it a less dangerous thing.

The mixing dystopia you went on to describe isn't possible as we are all to different to end up like that.

>HBD
debunkingdenialism.com/2016/04/30/mailbag-modern-high-throughput-genomics-versus-race-realism/
we must not be misled by how the world seems. Instead, we must boldly explore beyond the limited scope of our own personal beliefs and biases by testing them against broad scientific data without being selective and seeing what we want to see.

When scientists carry out high-throughput genomics research and look at 650 000 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and close to 400 microsatellites, they find that the vast majority of human genetic variation, ranging from 84.7%-95% depending on the study and genetic elements, occurs within populations (Li et al., 2008; Rosenberg et al., 2002). Only a tiny minority of genetic variation occurs between continental groups.

Race is not science. We aren't like dogs how we end up being is mostly on circumstances. Expect appareance speaking.

What are afraid is going to happen already did.

I'd respect you much more if you were sincere and stopped acting like any of the stuff you say has any scientifical value.

>It would kill it in the long road.
We're both laymen in genetics, but this tells me it's more the case for you. We share DNA that goes back hundreds of millions of years with other species, and while we've obviously diverged quite a bit, the information doesn't go anywhere. You reduce the manifest rate, yes, but you don't eliminate it. As for "benefiting everyone", you say this, but it doesn't affect people who don't have it in the slightest. In fact, if you actually wanted to get rid of the disease totally, then you would either kill or sterilize everyone who carried the gene--that'll ensure it not only isn't active, but it doesn't even exist. And that objectively will benefit everyone else, since there would then be zero chance of anyone ever getting it.
But obviously we don't do that.

>Not only for the group that has it but for medicine as a whole.
Getting rid of it wholesale wouldn't be related to medicine per se. If anything, it would limit research in that specific area--even after we eliminated smallpox globally, the US and USSR kept samples of it preserved.

>People should sacrifice their freedom of procreating with whoever they like because of it?
We sacrifice freedom for all sorts of things--to the point of nebulous "racism", I can't open a bar and say "no nonwhites allowed". That's not freedom.
>racism would still be a thing
Tribal thinking? Yes, of course. You said yourself that's just what humans do. But outright hatred? People don't really do that without a perceived threat. Ever heard the saying "good fences make good neighbors"?
>When ethnics are organizated it becomes a much more dangerous thing.
To whom, though? Being "dangerous" is what ensures survival against those who might threaten you. That's why frontiersmen praised Samuel Colt for "making them all equal"--a hedgehog without its quills is going to be eaten.