It kind of makes me laugh but also get frustrated to see all the people who think different races should have...

>separate but equal is inherently impossible
Where did we say they had to be equal?

There is no Equality in this world, and never has been. This is not to argue an unchanging racial hierarchy for all time, either: only to say that Equality plainly does not exist in the world.

It was conceived as an idea precisely of out of men's despair over *the very fact* that it doesn’t exist.

This is a cruel world of weak and strong, of rulers and ruled, the murderer and the murdered. Certainly it is possible to change position and role, but the fact that all may rise and fall depending on the time and occasion doesn’t mean that all are equal in the end, quite the opposite.

The vanquished, the defeated are even more so BECAUSE they previously were not. And so also for the triumphant and victorious: if previously mean and lowly, their rise to superiority is even greater.

Consider the whites: if in a century’s time, they are utterly defeated, smashed, enslaved, raped, maybe ultimately exterminated. Will their being brought low ‘prove’ racial equality?

Quite the opposite: their defeat will be all the more stinging and bitter BECAUSE of their previous position of strength and power.

The slave does not want equality with his master: he wants to BE the new one, and for his master to be the slave. The slave believes less in equality than his master does, for he knows even better the lie of it.

Attached: 899EBB7E-0E09-49CE-8A39-A2D6702E4BBD.jpg (1024x685, 889K)

it's not about ethno, but culture and assimilation.

this is wrong. you can have equal rights among populations. rights aren't natural physical objects but abstract ideas and there's nothing to prevent them from being equal.

irrelevant if true

equality is important if you are moral, which you aren't

yeah it's only the very reason the authorities intervened to force people to end segregation and the legal decision that outlawed segregation, you go ahead believing you know dick about anything in your racist stink bubble world

>breed
Oh yeah I'm sure gonna shit out 10 kids just for the sake of it. White people don't have either time or money to care for a kid, while niggers, spics and indios can pop one kid after the other and get government gibs for it, all the while (((they))) keep importing refugees because you need an always increasing population to keep the pyramid scheme running. At least it isn't so bad in this shithole, we're already full of niggers anyway.

@216194107
>irrelevant if true
It is immoral to treat people differently than they deserve based on their race. You are a racist.

Because I'm a decent human being.

>White people don't have either time or money to care for a kid,
wrong, you just don't hold the same family values of the populations you complain about. If you did you would have more kids.

Palestine Ethnostate NAO.

nobody 'deserves' anything based on their race you racist buffoon.

Do a bike tour through Africa and stream it
If you don't get killed, I might consider taking you serious

No, they don't. They deserve things independent of their race, and you treat people differently based on race.

You are a bigot and illiterate.

Equality doesn't equal morality. I don't care if things are "equal" I care if things are fair. When they have their own land, they'll be on their own without our help. And then, inevitably, they'll come knocking at our door like they always do. But this time there won't be any kikes to guilt us into letting them in.

>Separate
>Equal
I'm pretty sure we only advocate one of those two...

>you treat people differently based on race.
how? In what way at all? your posts are the more confusing thing I've seen all week. It's so shockingly stupid I now assume you are trolling, at least I pray you are cause i'm scared to live among people this stupid.

>how?
You want forced equality. This is racism.

>this is wrong. you can have equal rights among populations. rights aren't natural physical objects

Yeah you can SAY IT. But it doesn’t make it true. Literally the whole world can believe that all men are created equal and it will be as great a lie as if not one person did.

Research confirms that despite the law, despite the protestations that all deserve equal treatment under the law in employment and so on that in reality, we are all subconsciously betrayed by our instincts. We all observe each other, our body language, facial features and expressions, physical strength, overall health, likely hormone profile, racial markers, height, body weight... the list goes on, and make fast but usually accurate judgements about one another in matters small and large from employment to sex to reaching a verdict on the jury...

... and there is NOTHING anyone will ever really be able do about it. Because we have evolved to do this to ensure our individual and collective survival.

Nobody talked about equality. We do not fucking care dipshit.
We want to live without low iqsavages around.

No one 'deserves' anything beyond the value of what they create themselves.

Of course 'separate but equal' is impossible, everyone is going to be unequal from the get go. Some people are smarter, faster, or stronger than others. It is impossible to legislate equality, the only thing you CAN legislate is the lack of barriers.
If every race has their own ethno-state then they will have no barriers, at least no barriers placed upon them by the other races. If whites are in their own state, then they will not be burdened by the black man's crime, low IQ, and welfare dependency. On the same coin, if the black people have their own state, they cannot be burdened by the white police, the white laws, or the white's racism.
We have seen throughout history that if you give the black man a country of his own, even one that has already been built, it will fail. That is why you do not want the ethnostate, because you believe that they are not smart enough or capable enough to run it.
If both races are given a separate country to run things as they see fit, then there is nothing to stop either country from progressing or succeeding but themselves. They are given the equality of opportunity. The equality of outcomes however, is impossible and immoral.

>Equality is moral because it is equal and therefore moral
Circular logic.

doryeshorim.org/

Get yourself tested thick cunt, I think your cousin is your mother

>Literally the whole world can believe that all men are created equal and it will be as great a lie as if not one person did.
being created equal has nothing to do with it. Giving people equal rights has nothing to do with anything you said. People are not rights and their being different doesnt preculde rights being applied equally to all people.

I want equal rights, not for people to be forced to be equal.

so funny how I accounted for this immoral response in my OP and yet people are compelled to post it in droves.

I never used circular logic, I asserted a believe based on a reasonable moral value to hold. No moral point is objectively provable you dumbass.

>They are given the equality of opportunity.
they are not given equal opportunity if they are only allowed to be in their designated ethnostate.

>They are not given equal opportunity if they are only allowed to be in their designated ethnostate
What? If everybody is required to remain in their ethnostate, then everybody is equal under the proposed international law. Therefore, they have equal rights.

shut the fuck up nigger!

Attached: dead nog.jpg (650x829, 188K)

>jews and christcucks forced everyone to de-segregate at literal gunpoint
>hurr this was natural!
dumb faggot, never post here again.

you seem to think that moral reasoning is what put you above everyone else, but it's just an artificial concept in countless versions. where are your morals from? are you religious, do you reflect on your own behaviour and are driven by juvenile narcissism to draw the conclusions that suit you right now. i have no idea, but the feeling you just want to prance around a bit

Why is equality moral?

except that the ethnostates are unequal. You can legislate segregation and argue it is equal since it's applied to everybody but it doesn't change the fact the black school and the white school are different schools and therefore inherently unequal. This is what I mean, it's a subtle distinction to understand that many average people are too shockingly stupid to grasp. It reminds me of the people who equate 'survival of the fittest' with evolution = progress and survival of the strongest/best

You mean that you think blacks are to stupid and incapable of making a sustainable country without assistance from whites? That is pretty racist.

It seems like you are saying that because the white schools don't have blacks, they are better?

((this is the correct answer))
see: Liberia

>. where are your morals from?
common sense. unlike your dumbass I don't need the fallacy of an appeal to authority to derive my morals.

common sense. if you need more explanation look up 'the golden rule'

where did i say it was natural? why would it matter if it was natural? what kind of stupid juice are you chugging?

no. This is what i came here to laugh at, people who can't grasp this simple logical concept that separate is inherently unequal.

not at all lol see above

what makes a house by the oceanside more valuable than a house in the city? It doesn't matter if they are built from the same forest and concrete. They have differing qualities that make them unequal. The same is true about any different locations you colossal retards.

You're saying words and stringing them together into sentences, but you are not making a point.
Give us sustenance in your post and we can debate the facts. Otherwise "My morality is better than yours" means nothing. "separate is unequal" means nothing.
you're taking two abstract concepts, not identifying them or explaining them... then repeating it over and over.
Either give examples, definitions, and explanations, or get SAGED.

I felt bad so i tried to dumb it down for you here

OK, to use your example, You have two houses on different parts of the ocean. separate and equal. two houses inland. separate and equal.
Again, this is not logic you're using. This is a nonequivalent hyperbole.
Try again
SAGE

Attached: 1560185183635.gif (500x249, 1.9M)

this thread is by a nigger
everybody vacate

you forgot to sage

Attached: 1559586380454.jpg (772x1530, 280K)

no, the houses have differing proximity to stores, oceans, mountains, anything you can think of. They are still unequal.

they even have different ages making them unequal

>This is a nonequivalent hyperbole.
you're still not doing well. Either be able to defend your argument or try to learn something new.
your continued pushing of the same hyperbole is a blatant attempt to disguise the fact you do not understand the topic you are trying to discuss. Please educate yourself.
I would be willing to actually debate you if you had facts or a supporting argument.
you lack both.

Attached: 1560179141044.png (1024x896, 162K)

Your logic doesn't work here because Africa have the richest natural resources in the world yet people are poor. In other words, even in identical environment, some people are better than others.
In your logic, the houses are made of two types objects and so they have different values.

it's not hyperbole or an equivalency at all. different locations have different qualiteies making them inherently unequal. it's the logic behind the legal decision that ended segregation and you are too stupid to understand it lol. this is exactly what I came here to laugh at!

>abolish the NAACP
>abolish black only colleges
>cancel BET
>racial equity in all sports teams
I can agree with this..

>abolish affirmative action
You're on fire OP.

>even in identical environment, some people are better than others.
irrelevant. we aren't talking about equal people but equal rights

>ethnostates are unequal
True.
Africa, Asia, and South America should stop breeding and institute purges until they have their populations are proportionate to Europe.

common sense is an artificial concept, too. basically, you only rely on yourself. even if that is your thing it's foolish and equals a weak and boring position

>common sense is an artificial concept, too. basically, you only rely on yourself. even if that is your thing it's foolish and equals a weak and boring position
as opposed to what? your organic and strong objectively provable position? You appeal to authority now you appeal to nature? You are a special stupid

Inequality is beautiful, if we were all equal it would be a terrible world, wouldn't it? All of us forced to be in complete mediocrity in everything? Yes, people are unequal, this is a fundamental fact, they always have been and always will be and no amount of equality shilling is going to change that. It is best to embrace the truth and manipulate it for everyone's good, not ignore it and wish it not to be true, the same is true for the Left's attempted abolition of the hierarchy, you can never get rid of the hierarchy either.

so you're talking shit, but still better than me? i didn't think you could argue even worse

claiming something is moral is stupid because the base of morality is empathy and different races have different levels of empathy.
So different races have different morality and want to live under different rules.
Your claim that equality is moral is stupid because equality is moral only to you, there are many people who believe that liberty is moral.

people are not rights. I am not arguing for equal people but equal rights.

what is the point of arguing the moral point that equal rights are inherently good when there isn't a way to objectively prove either way? I already gave you you appeal to authority earlier when i mentioned the golden rule which is present in almost every religion. Even by your own metrics you are failing.

>morals are bad because we disagree about them
retard
who says empathy has anything to do with it? Justice doesn't require empathy to be just.

>Equal rights
Why should there be equal rights? I'm curious.

because equal right are moral.
why are they moral?
because sensible people agree they are.
does everybody agree?
no just the majority, dumbasses like you argue otherwise.

>because sensible people agree they are.
That's not an argument, that is just argumentum ad populum. You're not giving me a reason to why they're good? We do not even have equal rights. Does a fugitive have the same rights as me? I hope not. Or how about a grandma on social security or a 14 year old boy? They do not have the same rights as me, yet you seem to believe they should.

Nice non sequitur.

>By virtue of being separate things are inherently unequal.
But all things ARE inherently unequal. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Every ethnicity has the right to self-determination and a government that cares for its nation, that cannot happen when multiple nations exist within a state. Your own country is a perfect example of that. Whites and blacks have different interests that CANNOT be taken care of by the same government.

>you can have equal rights among populations
We had equal rights, and now we have to keep giving extra rights to minorities and women because equal rights aren't enough for them to be equally successful and contributory

>You're not giving me a reason to why they're good?
there is no reason that isnt going to be a non-sequitur at it's root because there is no objectively provableable morality. I've given you the appeals to authority and ad populum because they are all that's available and for moral people they are enough.

>Whites and blacks have different interests that CANNOT be taken care of by the same government.
how do they have different interests? Why can't they be taken care of by the same government?

some discriminations are moral and others aren't. a discrimination based on race is immoral.

>how do they have different interests?
At the most basic level, blacks want power and advancement of their people, whites want power and advance of their people. For that matter, hispanics want power and advancement of their people and asians want power and advancement of their people. The only way to advance one people is by undermining another, ala affirmative action.

>there is no reason that isnt going to be a non-sequitur at it's root because there is no objectively provableable morality. I've given you the appeals to authority and ad populum because they are all that's available and for moral people they are enough.
Ah hah! So you admit morality is in the eyes of the beholder, so why are you trying to force your own morality on others?

I also noticed you ignored the second half of my post, because it is probably something you want to ignore. We do not have equal rights. Equal rights would be making 85 year old women work at grocery stores to survive, but they do not because we gave them another right, the right to social security. On the other hand, we stripped children and teenagers of rights because we decided for them to have those rights would be a danger to themselves and others because they have inferior minds, they have less rights than them. Yet, some call for less rights for blacks on this same principle, since they way disproportionately commit far more crimes than the rest of us they should have some of their rights stripped from them for their own good and our own good. The only way to avoid this is either an "ethnostate" or illogically believing the equality mantra, but unfortunately the latter is not a lasting solution.

>some discriminations are moral and others aren't. discrimination based on race is immoral.
Why? Explain your logic.

Ethnostates do not need to be equal. What is wrong with you?

I'm on your side... but totally cringed at your
>Ah hah! gotcha!
statement
otherwise, good post

ok, the golden rule is fun: how do you treat yourself if you hate yourself. it is a common human trait to a certain degree after all. why do people look out for a lifestyle of social punishment. do they look for others to pay for their sins?

You have it completely the wrong way round. We have evolved to have differences. Forcing us all together only exacerbates that. African Americans have a lower average IQ. So when you put them together with whites they are destined to remain a permanent underclass. This inevitably breeds tension and resentment, but, if we all have our own space it is better for everyone. Blacks have to look after themselves, which is the only way they are ever going to grow and progress, and whites get to live in a richer, safer and cleaner environment. I really do get sick of non-whites blaming us for all of their problems, yet at the same time demanding to take our money and live in our spaces. You have a lot to learn user. Learn about race & IQ. It is true. There is nothing wrong with whites taking their own side.

>At the most basic level, blacks want power and advancement of their people, whites want power and advance of their people.
completely wrong. some people want the advancement of all moral people you racist shitbag.

Equality isn’t as important to me as agency. “Multiculturalism” has the same separate but equal mantra, but is jew-approved. I want to live and evolve with my people and not worry that low-IQ niggers aren’t getting as much. They can go forge their own path and not have to worry about white cops. “Equality” is just a jew supremacy meme.

>completely wrong.
Not at all, especially when it comes to non-white groups.
>some people want the advancement of all moral people you racist shitbag.
Naive white liberals do. Every other group acts in their own self interest. That's we have the NAACP, NACME, UNCF, and many other groups advocating specifically for the interests of blacks, hispanics, women, etc.

taxes are not moral when one race takes more than they pay in