💬 Off-Topic Louis Theroux's Forbidden America

I don't even necessarily think you're wrong, per se. Just lacking nuance. I can tell you from experience though that if you go into every conversation expecting the other party to be complete cocks about everything then eventually that's all you ever get.
People writing with nuance is the most boring and annoying shit there is. It's productive in a corporate atmosphere or when trying to run a distinguished political image, but that's about it.
 
Nobody gives a fuck what I have to say. None of these people talking to me even care. It's just to annoy me.
I'm genuinely trying to follow your logic. But it simply isn't apparent for me from what you write.

You want your personal freedom. I get that. What I don't understand is how a racially homogeneous government provides more of that, or aligns with your interest better. America seems to provide you the most. Much more than some really white country like Poland that stifles free speech with things like blasphemy laws.
And while you have and should have the personal freedom to move to the whitest city available, niggers also have that personal freedom to move right next door to you.
 
I'm genuinely trying to follow your logic. But it simply isn't apparent for me from what you write.

You want your personal freedom. I get that. What I don't understand is how a racially homogeneous government provides more of that, or aligns with your interest better. America seems to provide you the most. Much more than some really white country like Poland that stifles free speech with things like blasphemy laws.
And while you have and should have the personal freedom to move to the whitest city available, niggers also have that personal freedom to move right next door to you.

Why is it that hard to understand he wants to live around people that are kinda like him, that don't accept the dominant culture being genocidally minded toward him?

He'a not looking for the neoliberalist goal that you're describing, that has the freedom of who you live near for the richest, but not for the middle class.

Fact is if all *human* races could get along, things would be better. But that won't happen, because history and politics (which is only worse because of the internet, and everyone having an opinion that can be echoed across the internet). So this will probably always be an issue... That will probably get worse.
It's just like if everyone did away with weapons, or if everyone stopped lying. Yes, things would be better. But it only takea one individual or in the case of races, one group to not do away with it. Most effectively when it's done secretly. The amount of advantage that group would have over others would be tremendous.

....hypothetically speaking.

6232abuqdud41.jpg
 
People writing with nuance is the most boring and annoying shit there is. It's productive in a corporate atmosphere or when trying to run a distinguished political image, but that's about it.
I respect the honesty behind admitting that critical thinking isn't beneficial to your beliefs. That's why you people are always the losers. Critically thinking about your positon is more than PR you brainless retard.
 
Nobody ever changes their opinion because of a discussion online and I don't know why people ask me to explain things. This dude's literally trying to have me explain the last 2000 years of european history to him to explain the point that I shouldn't expect a black person in government to represent my interests. I fucking hate cuckold whites.
I've changed my opinions on several things based upon arguments I've first heard articulated online.
 
All of what you're saying sounds nice, but everyone who isn't completley delusional knows that importing a bunch of hatians into your neighborhood will make it shittier. Half your neighbors becoming hatians results in your neighborhood looking more like Haiti. They have an average IQ of around 70, which means a lot of them aren't even fit to stand trial. There is no scenario where the mass importing of these people results in anything but a filthier and more violent place. I don't say that to be mean, I say that because it's exactly what will happen.

It sounds like you're aware there are group differences but think we should ignore it.




Here's a good article about some of the detriments that arise with racial diversity. I don't think these divisions are easily replicated in a homogeneous population.

Because they have a lot of problems, don't know the culture and they normally have fucked up values because they only have one way for survival, it isn't based around an autism mind game, even more when you cannot measure it perfectly, even more when the IQ was taken by a shitty study of 100 people (aka. Lynn, there isn't any new studies around IQ in africa and the ones which didn't picked retarded children or kids who didn't speak english with english tests are very scarce) and they have all of the problems of malnourishment and many other things, a good example in africa is a place like gambia, there's white people, but there are more blacks by a long mile and they help eachother, which makes a good economy.
My problem isn't differences, but trying to explain them on a retarded way and trying to do a lot of retarded assumptions or studies with specific values you can have.

Even then, that study was made in the US, where i explained the cultural aspect and why everyone there uses their race, when you have no culture you will pick the next best thing, even if it's retarded.
That's the reason you shouldn't see everything with an US perspective, it will fuck you up on the long run
 
What I don't understand is how a racially homogeneous government provides more of that, or aligns with your interest better.
The United States was founded, and its constitution was written, by locking some of the most educated and affluent white men in the world in a building and not letting them out until they figured it out. This created the document which has guided 13 English colonies into being the most successful empire the world has ever seen. Our hard power is only outmatched by out soft power, which has dominated the entire world. We beat off the British empire, bankrupted and bought out the French, broke the back of the Holy Roman Empire and Austro-Hungarian empire twice, split the atom to capitulate an indomitable island foe without setting food on their shore, and then put McDonalds in Red Square without a single battle.

White Americans did this.

We've continually, since the 1950s, weakened our country. We have irreversibly changed the nature of our country. The immigrants we've let in are not American and do not adhere to the same culture that we succeeded by, and this is not their fault. They are just different. They want different things. They behave differently. They have different values. And now that they're in our representative democracy, we will never get rid of them because our government represents their interests and must pander to them to get elected at all.

If you don't understand the connection between the success of our country, the people in it, and its decline, and the people who have become enfranchised during its decline, then I don't know what to tell you. We'll never be an empire again and that's okay. I don't want to be in an empire. I just want to be left alone and I want people who look like me and who care about my interests (because we are the same people and the futures of our families are the same) to represent me.

I repeat this again for you a fourth time. Stop deliberately trying to aggravate me.
 
It's just like if everyone did away with weapons, or if everyone stopped lying. Yes, things would be better. But it only takea one individual or in the case of races, one group to not do away with it. Most effectively when it's done secretly. The amount of advantage that group would have over others would be tremendous.

....hypothetically speaking.

Ver archivo adjunto 2993622

Exactly. And every group, in their point of view, has reasons as to why they're right - and as long as those reasons are freely discussed and supported, it will always be the same.

The only 'solution', really, is to limit and/or suppress free thought. So until then, and as information & the average joes thoughts become more accessible, it will only get worse imo.
 
America seems to provide you the most. Much more than some really white country like Poland that stifles free speech with things like blasphemy laws.
The few remaining liberties of the US are riches from long gone times, when the country was still overwhelmingly white. Do you really think the laws would be written the same way now?
 
I respect the honesty behind admitting that critical thinking isn't beneficial to your beliefs. That's why you people are always the losers. Critically thinking about your positon is more than PR you brainless retard.
You can have nuanced thoughts but when you start putting every last one into a forum post it quickly turns into autistic drivel that no one can be fucked to pick through.

Being concise gets the argument/point across much more effectively. Sometimes that means losing some of the nuance. Trade off.
 
as long as those reasons are freely discussed and supported, it will always be the same.
Considering we're in the thread of a documentary about someone who has their travel restricted, assets frozen and social media censored, these things are not freely discussed.
 
The United States was founded, and its constitution was written, by locking some of the most educated and affluent white men in the world in a building and not letting them out until they figured out what the constitution was going to be. This created the document which has guided 13 English colonies into being the most successful empire the world has ever seen. Our hard power is only outmatched by out soft power, which has dominated the entire world. We beat off the British empire, bankrupted and bought out the French, broke the back of the Holy Roman Empire and Austro-Hungarian empire twice, split the atom to capitulate an indomitable island foe without setting food on their shore, and then put McDonalds in Red Square without a single battle.
Many countries were founded by white men. So where does the racial component come in?

Do you see 18th century Americans as a distinct race from Britsh and other European people?

The few remaining liberties of the US are riches from long gone times, when the country was still overwhelmingly white. Do you really think the laws would be written the same way now?
And many overwhelmingly white countries made much shittier consitutions. So what does that say about race?
 
White Americans did this.
Genuinely delusional if you think all of these things were accomplished solely by "white Americans" But I'm sure you'll twist meaning some way to indicate Oppenheimer and Einstein were Americans
You can have nuanced thoughts but when you start putting every last one into a forum post it quickly turns into autistic drivel that no one can be fucked to pick through.

Being concise gets the argument/point across much more effectively. Sometimes that means losing some of the nuance. Trade off.
This is fair, but not what that dude was saying.
 
Many countries were founded by white men. So where does the racial component come in?
Aside from Japan not a single non-white empire is worth mentioning. We fought off Indians and Mexicans I guess? What are you trying to have me say?

When the US was a white country: Freedom, liberty, prosperty.
When the US became a mixed race country: Economic enslavement, worthless money, hate speech and hate crime legislation, dystopian ZOG government.

What are you trying to get me to explain to you???

Genuinely delusional if you think all of these things were accomplished solely by "white Americans" But I'm sure you'll twist meaning some way to indicate Oppenheimer and Einstein were Americans
Genuinely delusional if you think that the Manhattan Project was just Oppenheimer and Einstein. Genuinely delusional if you think Ashkenazi Jews are more like Arabs or Africans.
 
I mean...it kind of is:
No, it isn't.
Being concise gets the argument/point across much more effectively. Sometimes that means losing some of the nuance. Trade off.
is not the same as
People writing with nuance is the most boring and annoying shit there is. It's productive in a corporate atmosphere or when trying to run a distinguished political image, but that's about it.
What you said indicates there is a time and place for nuance and an internet forum full of retards that get off feeling better than even bigger retards isn't it. I agree with that mostly.
What he said is that nuance is boring and only useful in a corporate atmosphere or when you're trying to maintain an image. Which is absolutely not the same meaning
Genuinely delusional if you think that the Manhattan Project was just Oppenheimer and Einstein. Genuinely delusional if you think Ashkenazi Jews are more like Arabs or Africans.
I didn't say either of those things but whatever. What is your cutoff for White American? Do naturalized Europeans count? First gen Euro immigrants? First gen immigrants that came before 1930? Because there's a lot of first gen immigrants with non American culture that have been at the forefront of the US' success as a nation, but I don't understand where your line is.
 
Aside from Japan not a single non-white empire is worth mentioning. We fought off Indians and Mexicans I guess? What are you trying to have me say?
No. I'm talking other white empires and countries. America isn't distinct because it was founded by white men. Many countries were.
And many of them had pretty shitty laws. For example, Germany still has a law against plain insults that dates back from the Prussian Empire.
Things that don't seem to align with your interests. I'm not talking general success or prosperity.

When the US was a white country: Freedom, liberty, prosperty.
And letting in niggers in the first place.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo