💬 Off-Topic Louis Theroux's Forbidden America

[r3tardedk1tty]

Okay so you agree that things aren't freely and openly discussed. Why didn't you just hit agree? I struggle to see the value and relevance of what you pointed out.

I edited my post...

But I think the edit should point out the massive difference in what I mean by things being freely discussed and not being able to be discussed at all.

Also, I don't really understand why you're arguing with me lol. I think I've made it pretty clear I think we should be able to discuss everything, however because of that, we will always have race issues.

 

[byuu]

The founding fathers saw enough of a similarity to create the country for free White men of good moral character.

So what racial reasons made America distinct from other less successful countries?

 

[Lemmingwise]

How am I not challenging my ideas? I'm asking questions of a group of people that almost uniformly disagree with me.

You're right I don't understand what you people are saying though. It's incoherent retard speak. I ask null what makes a white american "pink nipples" You people either refuse to genuinely answer questions (hurr durr everyone asking is asking in bad faith) or straight up don't have an answer because you don't think you need one

When I read your posts I don't see someone asking questions with the intent to challenge their own thinking. I see someone asking questions to grill a side for weaknesses.

I don't think it's wrong to try and hold people's feet to the fire.
But don't sit there and pretend like you are challenging your ideas. Don't demand something from others that you're unwilling to do yourself. Just duke it out without those disingenuous appeals.

Feel free. Prove me wrong. Which of your questions in the last 5 pages did you ask to challenge your own thinking?

In regards to the question who is white, the fact that there is some fuzzy logic around the edges, doesn't mean anyone has trouble identifying either the core or 95% of people on visual cues alone. It's a dishonest question.

 

[Yautja]

When I read your posts I don't see someone asking questions with the intent to challenge their own thinking. I see someone asking questions to grill a side for weaknesses.

I don't think it's wrong to try and hold people's feet to the fire.
But don't sit there and pretend like you are challenging your ideas. Don't demand something from others that you're unwilling to do yourself. Just duke it out without those disingenuous appeals.

Feel free. Prove me wrong. Which of your questions in the last 5 pages did yiu ask to challenge your own thinking?

What do I stand to gain from looking for a weakness in an anonymous forum? If I were speaking publicly with normies it would be one thing, and fine.

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.

This was a genuine question, a hostile one, but a genuine one. I even admitted I didn't understand the position. I'm not trying to Gotcha null, he's just straight up brainless IMO, but I think that you can make a genuine argument that America's success is due to "White Americans". So I genuinely would like to know how he defines white American.

A lot of his arguments hinge on "cultural differences" and how even Europeans wage war over ethnicity and that's why non homogeneous society doesn't work. So what makes white American culture? Most of our immigrants, European included, have huddled together over their shared previous culture not American culture.

I don't have my own definition of American Culture, I don't think we really have one, so I want to understand another way of looking at it. Maybe Null's conclusions are wrong but he has a better vision of "american culture" than I do.

 

[DemonicMustache]

You can claim any human culture is superior or unique based on appearance or nationality or state or tribe, or however else human beings want to organize themselves. At the end of the day it's the lazy man's way of rationalizing his pointless existence. It's like when a lady, who has been a fuck up her whole life, has a baby and claims that the baby is the best thing she has ever created in her life. It's a bullshit cope. Deep in your heart, you know it doesn't matter. It's comforting, but meaningless. UNLESS, you want power.

 

[Lemmingwise]

This was a genuine question, a hostile one, but a genuine one. I even admitted I didn't understand the position. I'm not trying to Gotcha null, he's just straight up brainless IMO, but I think that you can make a genuine argument that America's success is due to "White Americans". So I genuinely would like to know how he defines white American.

He actually gave a very simple test that covers 99.99% of cases. If someone has pink nipples they're white. Just because it sounds funny and absurd, doesn't mean it doesn't work. It is a kind of engineer's answer that some people find hard to parse.

As for his position, I don't exactly know it and won't speak for him. I think one of the things that helped america do better than european countries was having huge resource deposits.
And what made it do better than say brazil, who also have huge resource deposits, was the stock of its people.

But how does trying to understand who is white, a grade school level question, help challenge your beliefs? Why do you have the belief that non homogenous societies will do well, when studies show that even non homogenous neighborhoods don't manage to do well (putnam and others)? Why do you believe race is only skin deep? Why do you not know about the differences in big 5 averages for different genetic groups?

How does knowing the exact cutoff challenge your beliefs at all? I don't think you are really yet trying to see things from another perspective, but I'll help you if you want to understand.

So what racial reasons made America distinct from other less successful countries?

What reasons distinct from racial ones made the united states more succesful than other american colonized countries?

 

[byuu]

What reasons distinct from racial ones made the united states more succesful than other american colonized countries?

Like Canada?

 

[Yautja]

He actually gave a very simple test that covers 99.99% of cases. If someone has pink nipples they're white. Just because it sounds funny and absurd, doesn't mean it doesn't work. It is a kind of engineer's answer that some people find hard to parse.

As for his position, I don't exactly know it and won't speak for him. I think one of the things that helped america do better than european countries was having huge resource deposits.
And what made it do better than say brazil, who also have huge resource deposits, was the stock of its people.

But how does trying to understand who is white, a grade school level question, help challenge your beliefs? Why do you have the belief that non homogenous societies will do well, when studies show that even non homogenous neighborhoods don't manage to do well (putnam and others)? Why do you believe race is only skin deep? Why do you not know about the differences in big 5 averages for different genetic groups?

How does knowing the exact cutoff challenge your beliefs at all? I don't think you are really yet trying to see things from another perspective, but I'll help you if you want to understand.

It's not me asking who is white. It's me asking when does Straight up, off the boat, European culture transition into "White American" culture.

And, assuming you're being genuine, it helps me understand because the biggest claim here is that black and white culture does not mix. So if I can understand what he means by white American culture I can understand which parts black people don't fit into. But again to understand his perspective on that I need to know when European culture morphs into American.

 

[UCantCCPMe]

Unironically this is all that needs to be said. Our greatest champions are always our least valuable by their own metrics.

It's not going to backfire you retard. He's an Englishman reporting to other Englishmen. They're just going to laugh at the retarded spectacle or "reflect" on how "dangerous" the American right is the one time they see the episode and then move on. Normies don't really give a shit about politics. It goes in one ear, out the other, and they move on.

How exactly is that not backfiring? Britbong is making this doc to expose AF to a mainstream audience for some kind of "shock factor" that might have gotten over in the 90s, but like you admitted in your response... "Normies don't really give a shit about politics. It goes in one ear and out the other, and they move on". So basically he'll make himself look like a hack tabloid faggot as opposed to a legitimate hardcore journalist. On top of that, AF will be able to use this to say "hey look at this libtard journo, he's trying to bring us down with his fake news documentary" and the dumb fucks will buy it hook, line and sinker. They'll take the rebel position and dig in even further.

This is like Louis made a doc about the world's most dangerous dog, then shows some retarded puppy with no teeth. Now take a Xanax and chill

 

[MaxPayne]

So what racial reasons made America distinct from other less successful countries?

If youre asking how much we can attribute Americas success to race vs ideology I obviously cant quantify that. What I can tell you is that the nation was made for free White men of good character, and that population is responsible for its success.

 

[byuu]

was made for free White men of good character, and that population is responsible for its success.

And responsible for bringing in niggers and causing its supposed decline.

 

[Lemmingwise]

Like Canada?

By all accounts, comparable genetically, comparable successwise. Biggest difference is the size of the population as a result of the difference in climate. Ignoring the more recent history, that is.

And, assuming you're being genuine, it helps me understand because the biggest claim here is that black and white culture does not mix. So if I can understand what he means by white American culture I can understand which parts black people don't fit into. But again to understand his perspective on that I need to know when European culture morphs into American.

Have you read putnam's studies? Bowling alone? You should. A liberal's perspective of someone who was trying to prove mixed neighborhood's were better and discovered it was the opposite.

It isn't as simple as "black and white culture does not mix". It's disparate genetic groups do not mix. Africans don't mix with arabs. Arabs don't mix with eastern asian. And so on.
It can work in very affluent sites, like singapore, but it always ends in a kind of stratified society where these groups form their own power blocs and essentially vie for power. The affluence helps to put up with it, but affluence is never eternal. Every place on earth meets a time where markets crash, and social capital is more important than other capital (because it isn't there) and mixed groups, whichever mix you pick (africa has the same problems with black not mixing with black because a bantu is not a pigmy and so on).

it's not so simple as black vs. white, because there are more groups, and none of them mix well, contrary to what we might desire.

 

[byuu]

By all accounts, comparable genetically, comparable successwise.

Leafy hands wrote this.

 

[JoshPlz]

No. What am I saying is that you credit the success of America by being ruled by white men.
But importing and freeing black slaves also happened while being ruled by white men.

So did the decline of the British Empire. So did the humble existence of other countries.

Why is the success of some white men because they're white and the failure of other white men because of other reasons?

Allowing the jews to import nigger slaves to America was absolutely the fault of white people. Freeing and giving them equal rights was an even bigger mistake.

White people make mistakes and can be tricked. What are you on about?

 

[Lemmingwise]

Leafy hands wrote this.

So you can't give a single example of a non-racial reason why the US did better than say, brazil or mexico?

 

[UCantCCPMe]

So you can't give a single example of a non-racial reason why the US did better than say, brazil or mexico?

Slightly less corruption, more balanced legal system. I gave you two, his turn.

 

[byuu]

White people make mistakes and can be tricked. What are you on about?

Some white people do something good - It's clearly because they're white. Whites are the best.
White people do something bad - It's clearly not because they're white.

That's just nigger logic:
White people had a big war and oppressed niggers - It's clearly because they're white. Whites are evil.
White people invented some cool shit - It's clearly because some non-white influence.

So you can't give a single example of a non-racial reason why the US did better than say, brazil or mexico?

Yes Mexico had a lot less niggers than the USA. Clearly that's why they aren't as successful.

 

[KonradCruise]

Ethnostate full of retarded white Appalachians when?

methhead appalachians contribute more to our society and have violent crimerates lower than other ethnic groups despite being the constant punching bag for every leftwing individual.

 

[frap]

As much as I mostly agree with null in this thread, I'm not him, nor do I speak for him.

Fair. Apologies.

 

[Spud]

And responsible for bringing in niggers and causing its supposed decline.

We all know who actually owned those slave ships