UPNetwork  

Go Back   UPNetwork > General Forums > Debate

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-24-2017, 10:03 PM   #3351
Shuckle
Problematic Fave
 
Shuckle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 3,199
See I feel like I have a ready counterexample in West Virginia, where, ironically, I have met the most people from the "alt-right" and the most Trump supporters. I have never met even one nonwhite person from West Virginia, and in parts of the state it can be assumed that minorities simply do not exist. West Virginia is also #49 when we sort states by average income level.

West Virginia is a flagrant fuck you to classical racism, I think, and that's why we can have people like Mozz who have racially motivated opinions and racially motivated data, but reject the notion that certain races give any kind of inherent biological advantage as well as the idea that it's okay to discriminate based on race. Because when white people were literally just handed a state, it basically became the joke of the Union. Even worse than KY! (KY is only 90% white though, so if you were a racist, you could point to that being why people don't think Kentucky is as inbred as West Virginia is.)

Mississippi, #50 on the list of per capita income and average income, turned out to be a sizeable fuck you to MODERN "racism" and the alt-right though, as despite its massive population of black people, it has a lower violent crime rate than the 95% white WV.

I think what we should be focusing on instead is the mass disenfranchisement of around a million black people under the Obama administration. That sounds like something that the anti-racism squad should pay a little more attention to. A bunch of guys who post frogs on Twitter and rally behind Trump because he's white seem somehow less important in context.
__________________
Shuckle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2017, 12:07 AM   #3352
Blastoise
We deny our creators.
 
Blastoise's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Reduces construction time
Posts: 3,070
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
If it's one thing the Internet has taught us over the past ten years, it's that labels can be culturally misappropriated and that you're fighting a losing battle in most instances to cling to a label which has already been appropriated by terrible people. Good guy feminists having to explain that man-hating "feminists" aren't real feminists ... Good guy journalistic integrity critics having to explain that not everyone associated with Gamergate is a misogynist ... Good guy BLM supporters clashing with bad guy BLM supporters over what the group's identity is and agenda should be ... And both good guy Democrats and Republicans having to explain that they don't like Clinton or Trump, respectively ...

I don't put much stock in nascent labels. Certainly not self-affixed ones. I judge you by your (other) words and your actions. Don't call yourself a ___ when ___'s identity is contested and some members of ___ are demonstrably wicked. (Right now the blank gets filled in with "Alt-Right", but "BLM" fit just as well several months back.) Better to just outline a few of your positions most relevant to your critics' concerns. I understand: labels are supposed to make things easy. Saying "I'm a Christian" is meant to save you hours of explanation. The problem is, Christianity has had 2,000 years to define itself and to be defined by others. We all have a pretty good grasp of the core concepts. Things like "feminism" or "Neo-conservativism" are still so fresh -- yes, even century-old feminism, I am very sorry to say -- as to be culturally misappropriable by individuals who misunderstand the group's original intent and who then popularize a new intent in the group's same name.
This is a nice sentiment, but ignores that:

1. The current alt-right term is credited to Richard "I got punched on live TV while talking about my dank Pepe meme pin" Spencer, known racist fucktard who advocates for, amongst other things, "peaceful" ethnic cleansing.

2. That I wasn't joking about the branding thing: guys like Spencer and Vox Day (who Mozz linked) bristle at being called Neo-Nazis despite walking like a Nazi duck, making noise like a etc. etc. etc. They know that when the average American hears the term "racist," their mind almost always drifts to either the KKK or the Nazis: the modern day Klan is an impotent punchline, and the Nazis in living memory committed crimes so heinous that pretty much everything semi-related to their ideology became radioactive by association. Like "race realism" or "human biodiversity", redefining themselves as simply another inoffensive interest bloc on the right is a ploy to parade around the same old shit with a new coat of paint and get their claws sunk into political legitimacy before anyone gets wise.

3. Not everyone on the alt-right is necessarily racist, because there's enough regressive/misogynistic bullshit in the overall worldview to ensure some overlap with the Gamergate/MRA crowd (the fact that the "feminists/progressives lecture you on your so-called privilege when you're a white/male/both nobody in Bumfuck County Flover State" narrative is basically interchangeable between the groups helps quite a bit). There's even some pushback from guys who want to be in the movement for the street cred, but realize that talking about how the white race is under siege from the foreign hordes is not good optics for selling juice recipe books in between Twitter rants about how the government is trying to hide the secrets of your super semen from the masses. Maybe this will eventually change, but I suspect that guys like Richard "I ran so fast from the guy that punched me that my Kenyan ancestors would be proud" Spencer are happy to indulge this for now because it gives them an additional fig leaf while they try to worm their way into normal discourse.

Until then, if someone brings up that they're alt-right your best case scenario is that they're going to give you some bizarre theory about how women are responsible for peak oil, and go down the rabbit hole from there.

Quote:
@UPN Don't jump down Mozz's throat just because he's chosen to label himself as "alt-right". Give the man a chance to express his personally held views before you write him off as something he very well might not be.
Uh, yeah, you might want to check the link he posted.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mozz View Post
Is it racist to think that it's good for America and Europe that white people maintain majorities? I guess it is? Do I believe that the USA would be objectively better (say, by using metrics such as per cap GDP, crime rates, and the like) if the US was majority white vs majority spanish/black? Yes.
Posting a manifesto (that, based on the context, you presumably endorse) that includes the Fourteen Words as one of its main bullet points does, in fact, make you kinda racist. Sorry to be the one to break it to you.

Quote:
There is an incredibly large canyon between alt-right beliefs and actual Nazis, so whether i believe in half or all of those tenets, I do feel that any nationalistic views are getting thrown in the "Nazi" dumpster. It's the same thing when anything to the left of Bill Clinton is labeled Communist as a means to discredit.
I don't think "I'm not a Neo-Nazi, I'm a white nationalist" is the sick own you're looking for here. I also don't believe "the races should be separate, but equal" garbage in that manifesto is anything but window dressing and deep down I think you know it too.
__________________
"It does not matter anymore. We cannot change the past. The future will have to do."
-Windham Khatib

Last edited by Blastoise; 01-25-2017 at 12:13 AM.
Blastoise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2017, 12:08 AM   #3353
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mozz View Post
Is it racist to think that it's good for America and Europe that white people maintain majorities?
Simply, yes. It is "racist," by definition, to ascribe any value or character to race (i.e. skin color, hair color, eye color, nose shape, and other physical traits characteristic of a "people").

Whether you are correct or incorrect to hold such views, that's the bitter debate. But by definition, you are racist if you believe there is a difference between a person who has life history / life characteristics A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, and K but also happens to be white and one who has A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, and K but also happens to be black. (For example, "my parents cloned me and then genetically engineered Clone Me in utero to have black skin and green eyes instead of my natural white skin and blue eyes. Consequently, Clone Me is slightly better than Me Me at basketball.")

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mozz View Post
Do I believe that the USA would be objectively better [...] if the US was majority white[...]? Yes.
Why?

For one, are you sure you're not confusing race with culture and ethnicity? I imagine your problem is with poor urban black Americans, not with rich suburban black Americans or mid-poor urban black Britons. Also, whatever problems you have with that demographic, I believe you'll rediscover them with quite Caucasian ghetto dwellers in Eastern European countries.

For a second, would you say that any country which is majority genetic hybrids (e.g. Mexico = Spain + Aztec, Iraq = Arabia + Persia, Japan = SinoKorea + Ainu) would objectively be better off today in the year 2017 had they never been hybridized genetically? (Ignoring the setbacks of conquest and of war, particularly since the invaders often bring with them a technological superiority that could be argued to advance the region as much as nation state destruction can be argued to set it back.)

For a third, what is your personally held view on children from mixed race pairings? For example, do you believe that a half-Japanese half-English child is a) superior to, b) inferior to, or c) possesses the same potential as a full English child?

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

UPN hasn't historically been kind to avowed racists. I personally am pretty deeply anti-racism, at least in theory if not always in practice. (I suspect I can be a little Sandra Bullock at times ...) But one of my best UPN friends is also famously (or I guess was famously ... most people here hardly know him besides a name now ...) someone who believes in intrinsic differences between the races, e.g. in the maximum achievable intelligence of different races. Does that make him a "racist"? Yes, absolutely. But is he hateful with it or does he want to kill, burn, maim, torture, or scare away people of races he holds to be genetically inferior to his own? I'm pretty fucking sure he doesn't. One of the nicest members we've had and is/was generally well-loved by the community. And so in that sense, he can hardly be called a "racist" at all.

"Racism" means different things to different people and in different contexts.
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2017, 12:29 AM   #3354
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastoise View Post
Reply beginning with "This is a nice sentiment"
Lot of text here. Just replying to confirm I did read it all and that ... two things:

1. I don't like to load so-called "watchlist websites" when I am not for their content. Can be neutral, can be against: so long as I'm not for it, don't like to load it. The moment you made it clear what sort of site that was, I opted not to click Mozz's link. This has the unfortunate consequence of keeping me in the dark, but that's where trust in people like you factors in.

2. When I said "judge him by what he says," I wasn't precluding the site he listed nor was I vetting him. I was just saying, "Guys, don't judge him for labeling himself as ___." (For the reasons outlined.) By all means, judge away if he links to any militant, cult, or otherwise extremist websites.

But even then, with No.2 I would say you should take a step back and examine the situation calmly and clearly. For example, if someone posts a link to The Young Turks on here, you might be inclined to judge them a certain way. But I think you'd agree there's a world of difference between:
  • MysticEmperor posts the link, and you know he's in his 30s, and you know he's a radical leftist, and there's no way that if he's posting a TYT link he doesn't know that he is going to be judged for it in a certain way
  • ChozoPrincess posts the link, and she just signed up a year or two ago, and you think she's a teen / early 20s poster, and you're not even sure how she discovered TYT or if she agrees with their views
Some examples from my very own experience ...
  • pretty sure I have linked to r/theredpill before, loooooooooooooooong before I even knew what it was or what sort of people posted there. There was just some thread I had found on the front page of Reddit one day while eating lunch that seemed interesting and so I shared it with somebody. It was a one-time thing. I'd obviously never link there again. Never visited the site regularly to begin with, don't visit it regularly now.
  • speak of the devil, I watched quite a bit of TYT a decade ago. But they got a little too preachy and self-aggrandizing for me, the spell got broken, I stopped watching ... Years later, it's kinda cringey for me to think back on. I still look on them a hell of a lot more favorably than I do, say, Rush Limbaugh; but they are undoubtedly the liberal equivalent of his awful show
  • there was a brief period where a semi-distant family member would watch Bill Maher's late-night TV show ... then he stopped less than a year into it when it became apparent what a douche Maher is
People are allowed, in my view, to link to odious sources like Maher or Limbaugh without being immediately cast into the pits of hell by critics like you or I. I think that both of us owe it to these people to take a step back and to assess: "Is this your first time dealing with this guy? Or have you been a long-time fan for years now?"

I'd extend the same courtesy to Mozz. I had never heard of that site before. When I saw your post, I felt like I had dodged a bullet and I chose not to click on it. Maybe Mozz felt similarly. Maybe Mozz felt like he'd gotten hit by a bullet. Maybe he didn't realize that what he'd linked to was a far-right outlet. Maybe he doesn't regularly visit the site. Maybe he bookmarked that specific article because ...

... Well, forget it. You already made it clear in several posts that the article in question contains some rather indefensible white supremacist remarks. Soo ... yeah. I dunno.
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2017, 12:36 AM   #3355
Blastoise
We deny our creators.
 
Blastoise's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Reduces construction time
Posts: 3,070
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
For a second, would you say that any country which is majority genetic hybrids (e.g. Mexico = Spain + Aztec, Iraq = Arabia + Persia, Japan = SinoKorea + Ainu) would objectively be better off today in the year 2017 had they never been hybridized genetically? (Ignoring the setbacks of conquest and of war, particularly since the invaders often bring with them a technological superiority that could be argued to advance the region as much as nation state destruction can be argued to set it back.)

For a third, what is your personally held view on children from mixed race pairings? For example, do you believe that a half-Japanese half-English child is a) superior to, b) inferior to, or c) possesses the same potential as a full English child?
Since advocating for racial supremacy is passe these days (and invites the inevitable posting of that "WHERE IS YOUR CHIN" panel from Preacher), the current racist canard is that every race is "equal" in the sense that they all have things they're good at, like, say, Greyhounds and German Shepherds. Of course, we need to make sure that the Greyhounds and German Shepherds are kept separate (to reduce conflict and between the two, you see) and to ensure that their cultures are kept pure and untainted by outside influences (especially the German Shepherd culture, which is not only equal to all other cultures, but more equal). And, if you really think about it, maybe the world doesn't really need Greyhounds.

If you recognize that this doesn't actually match any sort of observable, historical, or genetic reality, you're smarter than most of the posters on /pol/. It also--by what I must assume is merely complete and utter coincidence--allows its adherents to sidestep the awkward discovery that everyone outside of Africa carries some small amount of Neanderthal genes, meaning that Africans are the most "pure" humans by default.
__________________
"It does not matter anymore. We cannot change the past. The future will have to do."
-Windham Khatib

Last edited by Blastoise; 01-25-2017 at 12:54 AM.
Blastoise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2017, 01:22 AM   #3356
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastoise View Post
Since advocating for racial supremacy is passe these days (and invites the inevitable posting of that "WHERE IS YOUR CHIN" panel from Preacher), the current racist canard is that every race is "equal" in the sense that they all have things they're good at, like, say, Greyhounds and German Shepherds. Of course, we need to make sure that the Greyhounds and German Shepherds are kept separate (to reduce conflict and between the two, you see) and to ensure that their cultures are kept pure and untainted by outside influences (especially the German Shepherd culture, which is not only equal to all other cultures, but more equal). And, if you really think about it, maybe the world doesn't really need Greyhounds.

If you recognize that this doesn't actually match any sort of observable, historical, or genetic reality, you're smarter than most of the posters on /pol/.
That is dumber than traditional eugenics. At least with traditional eugenics you have the desire to create an Überman. "Pool the best from every race, weed out the weak stuff, create the best Homo sapiens sapiens we can be." With this, it's like ... "Yeah, we realize that every race has pluses and minuses. Guess what? YER FUCKIN' STUCK WITH 'EM!" Dumb.

If this is really the latest face of white supremacist groups, then it's pretty clear that it's the last cries of a dying beast. We're rapidly progressing towards a world state. We're also rapidly progressing towards something approximating the aforementioned Überman. (Maybe not crafted the way the Nazis intended, but there's no way in Hell that a humanity which makes it to the 22nd century is going to still be dealing with any simple genetic diseases. Gattaca is around the corner, whether people like it or not.) These people paying lip service to races they privately look down upon, and then saying, "But the important thing is that we keep our nations ethnically rich and pure, y'know?" ... lol yeah no, that's not gonna happen. This is neo-Nazis freaking out that Germany is becoming Turkified. This is neo-Nazis freaking out that Britain is becoming de-Anglicized. This is neo-Nazis freaking out at the prospect of American mutts no longer being able to simply say "Well I know I'm European " and being a true mix of European, African, and Asian races.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastoise View Post
the awkward discovery that everyone outside of Africa carries some small amount of Neanderthal genes, meaning that Africans are the most "pure" humans by default.
I haven't delved deep into the literature, but isn't this a little incorrect? My understanding was that they had found that continental Europeans had Neanderthal ancestry and that, in the same paragraph, Indonesians and other Asia-Pacific islanders had some pygmy ancestry. (I forget the Homo name for the pygmy, but it was a hominid averaging around 1 meter in height. Locals have apparently long mistaken the adult skeletons for those of Homo sapiens children.) That the Indonesians don't have any Neanderthal, not that Neanderthal is in literally every living civilization.
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2017, 02:00 AM   #3357
Blastoise
We deny our creators.
 
Blastoise's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Reduces construction time
Posts: 3,070
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
I haven't delved deep into the literature, but isn't this a little incorrect? My understanding was that they had found that continental Europeans had Neanderthal ancestry and that, in the same paragraph, Indonesians and other Asia-Pacific islanders had some pygmy ancestry. (I forget the Homo name for the pygmy, but it was a hominid averaging around 1 meter in height. Locals have apparently long mistaken the adult skeletons for those of Homo sapiens children.) That the Indonesians don't have any Neanderthal, not that Neanderthal is in literally every living civilization.
For the purposes of this discussion your average European carries 1-2% of Neanderthal DNA IIRC, but it's a blow to the classic idea of (white) racial superiority: if you believe that Africans are less than human because of their inferior genes but your genome carries the heritage of a human subspecies that couldn't hack it and died out (not to mention the race-mixing in the first place), what does that say about you? The obvious pivot is that the white people took the best part of the Neanderthal genome for themselves (and became homo sapiens sapiens++) while Africa missed out because they were too busy eating whatever the ancient equivalent of fried chicken and watermelon were.
__________________
"It does not matter anymore. We cannot change the past. The future will have to do."
-Windham Khatib
Blastoise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2017, 02:06 AM   #3358
Rangeet
Foot, meet mouth.
 
Rangeet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Beyond the Wall
Posts: 4,362
Send a message via MSN to Rangeet Send a message via Skype™ to Rangeet
I am exceedingly confused in what universe I would be giving Mozz the benefit of the doubt, given that approximately 90% of our discourse in this thread has been him popping in to say that I'm Indian and have no business commenting(see: dogwhistle politics), clearly ignoring sources I post, and baiting really, really hard. I am even more confused as to why you think anyone else would be giving Mozz the benefit of the doubt either because if you really think he's a respected pillar of this community I don't know what to tell you. Mozz is the complete other hemisphere from "seeming nice and being generally polite and articulate", and at this point this is barely a personal attack, these are just facts. He could be in real life. He does not appear so on this forum.

But anyway, I have nothing more to say to him, not after he posted that link as a "defence" of the alt-right community and admitted to being a white supremacist in consecutive posts. I invoke Racist Tree privileges on that one. On the other hand, I do want to say holy fucking thanks Blastoise.

Now, let's see what happened in the last few hours...

1) Trump threatened to "send in the feds" to Chicago.

2) Trump signed executive orders to continue the Dakota and Keystone XL pipelines.

3)Trump puts a gag order on the EPA and then orders them to delete their climate change page. Oh, and do remember...he most likely owns a shitton of stock in oil. Now look at the pipeline and then back at this.

4) He prepares to sign orders to prevent immigrants from "muslim countries" coming in.

5) He prepares to sign orders starting the wall.

...I think this very haunting 1922 article about Hitler by NYT should be read. History repeats itself.
__________________
Spoiler: show
Rangeet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2017, 07:09 AM   #3359
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Emina Isle
Posts: 14,198
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
In a change of topics (I'm sorry I missed the discussion above), Trump enacted the promised federal hiring freeze (good), left military recruitment intact (good) but reneged on his promise to let HHS go unfrozen (bad).

In the community I work in, I find it hard if not impossible to accept Talon's Gattaca claim. There's far more holding the horrific genetic diseases in place than merely genetics alone. Poverty, culture and logistics being the three big ones.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2017, 07:22 AM   #3360
Mozz
Golden Wang of Justice
 
Mozz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,936
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
For one, are you sure you're not confusing race with culture and ethnicity? I imagine your problem is with poor urban black Americans, not with rich suburban black Americans or mid-poor urban black Britons. Also, whatever problems you have with that demographic, I believe you'll rediscover them with quite Caucasian ghetto dwellers in Eastern European countries.

For a second, would you say that any country which is majority genetic hybrids (e.g. Mexico = Spain + Aztec, Iraq = Arabia + Persia, Japan = SinoKorea + Ainu) would objectively be better off today in the year 2017 had they never been hybridized genetically? (Ignoring the setbacks of conquest and of war, particularly since the invaders often bring with them a technological superiority that could be argued to advance the region as much as nation state destruction can be argued to set it back.)

For a third, what is your personally held view on children from mixed race pairings? For example, do you believe that a half-Japanese half-English child is a) superior to, b) inferior to, or c) possesses the same potential as a full English child?

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

UPN hasn't historically been kind to avowed racists. I personally am pretty deeply anti-racism, at least in theory if not always in practice. (I suspect I can be a little Sandra Bullock at times ...) But one of my best UPN friends is also famously (or I guess was famously ... most people here hardly know him besides a name now ...) someone who believes in intrinsic differences between the races, e.g. in the maximum achievable intelligence of different races. Does that make him a "racist"? Yes, absolutely. But is he hateful with it or does he want to kill, burn, maim, torture, or scare away people of races he holds to be genetically inferior to his own? I'm pretty fucking sure he doesn't. One of the nicest members we've had and is/was generally well-loved by the community. And so in that sense, he can hardly be called a "racist" at all.

"Racism" means different things to different people and in different contexts.
1) If we brought in more average (not the top) people from Mexico, Africa, what have you, the average IQ would go down, certainly, and crime would rise. I have no problem with cherry picking the best from these countries, but a general limit seems reasonable.

2) The Spanish blood certainly made the natives stock rise. Oddly enough, many, if not most Mexican elites look more like pale Europeans than natives. I do not know enough about the others.

3) Half Japanese/Half English would probably have a slightly higher mean intelligence than a full English child, maybe a few points, on average?

I believe in intrinsic differences, I do not wish anyone harm, I do believe countries work best when they are grouped by ancestry, and I subscribe to the notion that Diversity + Proximity = War.
__________________
Mozz's Van, named after Bulbagardens creditor, was a hidden forum section where staff members could share pictures of their tiny penises and engage in homosex. Sadly, HAVA media, Bulbagardens new corporate overlord, forced it's closure. Can't have porn on a children's website.
Mozz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2017, 07:47 AM   #3361
Shuckle
Problematic Fave
 
Shuckle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 3,199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mozz View Post
I believe in intrinsic differences, I do not wish anyone harm, I do believe countries work best when they are grouped by ancestry, and I subscribe to the notion that Diversity + Proximity = War.
While you're right about the bolded part (shock!), you're a little misguided.



One of the two races shown in the picture here tried to drive the other one to complete extinction.

After a little while you might have been able to puzzle out the Hutus from the Tutsis, especially if you knew that Tutsis were taller and paler than Hutus or that the Tutsis are the top 6 and the Hutus are the bottom 6. But the point remains that from the outside, it's hard to tell much difference at all.

And these people HATED each other. We're going way past what the KKK was all about, way past even what Hitler believed. Hutus and Tutsis spoke the same language with no distinctive differences, lived in the same places, and had only minor physical/racial differences (nose shape and skin shade? please). And yet, they hated each others' guts.

Before black people were considered people in America, WASPs were being dicks to Paddies. To Scots. To Germans. To Poles. To other WASPs (who were poorer and from poorer areas of England).

Technically, you need diversity and proximity for conflict. Technically. But really you just need proximity. Humans will come up with the diversity themselves if you give them a little time.

EDIT: Grouping countries by ancestry is a Too Late situation. I think Africa would be a lot more peaceful if white dudes hadn't drawn all over the continent in Sharpie, but I don't think there's anything we can do about it because the politics of the region have grown around the wounds that were inflicted on it. Also, the notion of sorting America by ancestry would involve a lot of complicated shuffling as native populations lay claim to various ancestral lands and the stuffing of 20 million white people into various sanctioned areas. You don't want that headache.
Shuckle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2017, 08:21 AM   #3362
Snorby
Snackin'
 
Snorby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,754
Shuckle makes an important point here. I didn't intend on jumping into this discussion, but I'm going to reiterate it because I know a handful of people have him blocked and therefore won't see it.

Quote:
Before black people were considered people in America, WASPs were being dicks to Paddies. To Scots. To Germans. To Poles. To other WASPs (who were poorer and from poorer areas of England).
Mozz, how do you reconcile your position on race with history? Race is, at its core, a social construct. It changes based on public opinion over the course of generations. Not even 150 years ago, people considered the likes of Italians, Poles, and Slavs to be non-whites who were taking our jobs and interfering with our culture and would bring about the end of America. They didn't. A few short decades before that, Irish and German people faced the same accusations and prejudices. They certainly didn't. In all likelihood, you're at least one (likely more) of those ethnicities. Are you telling me your very existence in America makes it a worse place because you aren't a full blooded Brit? (or, for that matter, a full blooded Cherokee?)
__________________

Click on Fawful for my ASB squad summary. Other links coming soon.
Snorby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2017, 08:29 AM   #3363
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Emina Isle
Posts: 14,198
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
From Mozz's post it seems pretty clear to me he's more concerned with culture than race per se. Which makes sense.

One of my old professors in college wrote a book about economic improvement in Britain. What happened was that the nobility would have multiple children, and only the first successor would inherit the estate. The second-third sons were forced into the lower classes but brought their high culture down with them, which bettered the community for peasants.

Incidentally, that book is this one so read it if you doubt my words.

The problem with "brain drain" like only selecting college-educated immigrants to enter the US is if you steal the smartest people from a community habitually, or steal all the young ones, the community that remains festers and becomes a problem.

Letting dumb, poor ones into your country might be better overall than letting the stupidity/poverty concentrate into an undesirable entity.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2017, 09:04 AM   #3364
Mozz
Golden Wang of Justice
 
Mozz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,936
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppleganger View Post
From Mozz's post it seems pretty clear to me he's more concerned with culture than race per se. Which makes sense.

One of my old professors in college wrote a book about economic improvement in Britain. What happened was that the nobility would have multiple children, and only the first successor would inherit the estate. The second-third sons were forced into the lower classes but brought their high culture down with them, which bettered the community for peasants.

Incidentally, that book is this one so read it if you doubt my words.

The problem with "brain drain" like only selecting college-educated immigrants to enter the US is if you steal the smartest people from a community habitually, or steal all the young ones, the community that remains festers and becomes a problem.

Letting dumb, poor ones into your country might be better overall than letting the stupidity/poverty concentrate into an undesirable entity.
"Better overall" for whom? The world? Certainly not better for the host nation.
__________________
Mozz's Van, named after Bulbagardens creditor, was a hidden forum section where staff members could share pictures of their tiny penises and engage in homosex. Sadly, HAVA media, Bulbagardens new corporate overlord, forced it's closure. Can't have porn on a children's website.
Mozz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2017, 09:23 AM   #3365
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Emina Isle
Posts: 14,198
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mozz View Post
"Better overall" for whom? The world? Certainly not better for the host nation.
Look at it internationally.

Let's say that the United States takes all the smart, educated, rich people out of Mexico and the only ones left are the poor and uneducated. Mexico then has to orient its economy toward exporting narcotics because they can't make anything else of value, and any smart person who does emerge from that pool immediately leaves for the United States.

Wouldn't you agree that this is a terrible country to be bordering? It's basically a giant parasite that you are geographically incapable of removing. Whatever benefits the US gets from brain draining Mexico has diminishing returns at a certain point, while the effect negatively compounds for Mexico when all their leadership and industry have fled the country.

While I don't care for illegal immigrants, the children of illegal immigrants are American citizens and are no longer capable of subverting the American economy in the same way their parents could. That wage-defying system collapses if there is no longer a free flow of illegal labour from Mexico, which can happen if you prevent that flow completely from Mexico or make Mexico a more desirable place to live.

I live near the Canadian border and there is no threat of illegal Canadians coming here to take away the garbage jobs from Minnesotans. Yet, the region reeks of 1950's era racism and especially xenophobia.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2017, 10:08 AM   #3366
Shuckle
Problematic Fave
 
Shuckle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 3,199
That's one of a few basic premises behind Trump sealing off the southern border.

Basically, it's in our nation's best interest to cut off a.) the undesirable things flowing from the southern border, like brown people if you want to be silly and drugs/weapons/crime if you want to be serious and b.) the desirable things flowing into Mexico, like jobs, money, and drugs/weapons.

Isolationism is both good and bad for Mexico, though, and in this case I would say that Trump is right. I think I've talked here about the sad state of Mexico? A few times?

The blunt truth, which Dopple touched on but did not fully illuminate, is that Mexico suffers from being attached to America's hip. I'm still a little shocked that Mexico hasn't taken the American offer to build a big ol' wall across the border, but that's probably because Trump promised to make Mexico pay for it and Mexico cannot afford it. When Trump backs down on that point and offers to have America pay for the wall, Mexico will readily agree and will probably take steps to assist.

In other, similar cases, (the most radical and obvious example being East Germany), it was not the "Americans" building a wall, it was the "Mexicans."

Mexico's government makes American corruption look like the show Recess! and Donald Trump look like someone who's never even heard of fascism, its gun crime rate is triple America's despite its gun control being a thousand times as strong, and its economy is bulimic in that everything that comes into Mexico goes right back out into America.

I just want to hold Mexico and give it a big hug and tell it that everything is okay But it has to get worse before it gets better. There are SO many basic infrastructure issues that need to be fixed, and Mexican government is not going to fix them anytime soon, and there is nothing America can do directly to pressure it into fixing them.

Sad!
__________________
Shuckle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2017, 10:21 AM   #3367
deoxys
Fog Badge
 
deoxys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,513
Quote:
Originally Posted by deoxys View Post
But when you compare a simple list of the building blocks of fascism to what Trump has so far proposed and/or started putting into action already, the similarities are alarming. And really, go down that list, point by point, read it - it's not difficult to almost immediately think of or draw on examples from the history of Trump's rhetoric (and actions) for almost every point there.
Quote:
14. Fraudulent Elections - Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/25/politi...aud/index.html
deoxys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2017, 10:41 AM   #3368
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Emina Isle
Posts: 14,198
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
VGM you should really pick up Youjo Senki this season so we can discuss if it's actually fascist or not.

What face would you make, I wonder?
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2017, 11:35 AM   #3369
deoxys
Fog Badge
 
deoxys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,513
Diet fascism with just the barebones principles intact and sans the fatty and unhealthy violent suppression and tyranny... is still a form of fascism

You don't just up and become a tyrannical authoritarian regime overnight, that would be ludicrous. It is the job of the citizens to act as watchdogs and call out the red flags when they are raised.


...regardless the aforementioned anime looks interesting enough to warrant an episode or two of my time, I suppose
deoxys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2017, 12:13 PM   #3370
deoxys
Fog Badge
 
deoxys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,513
"Depending on the results [of the investigation], we will strengthen up voting procedures!"

Come on... If Obama had said this 8 years ago, conservatives everywhere would be shitting their pants.
deoxys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2017, 01:04 PM   #3371
Mozz
Golden Wang of Justice
 
Mozz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,936
Quote:
Originally Posted by deoxys View Post
"Depending on the results [of the investigation], we will strengthen up voting procedures!"

Come on... If Obama had said this 8 years ago, conservatives everywhere would be shitting their pants.
Democrats typically want very loose voting standards.
__________________
Mozz's Van, named after Bulbagardens creditor, was a hidden forum section where staff members could share pictures of their tiny penises and engage in homosex. Sadly, HAVA media, Bulbagardens new corporate overlord, forced it's closure. Can't have porn on a children's website.
Mozz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2017, 01:30 PM   #3372
Emi
Barghest Barghest Barghe-
 
Emi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 12,068
Send a message via Skype™ to Emi
"Very loose standards" doesn't really apply to stuff like mandatory voting or what not.

I'm okay with some things on principle and paper only, like requiring a photo ID to vote, but its often done in tandem with other ridiculous dumb things, like closing down DMVs that make it much harder for people to go and get a Photo ID. If you want people to carry around a photo ID in order to vote, you, in fact, have to make it easy to get one! That way you aren't suppressing any voter populations.

EDIT: In other news, at least four journalists, possible six (two of them may have had different charges) have been charged for rioting after covering the protests and unrest at Trump's inauguration. (Source)
__________________

Last edited by Emi; 01-25-2017 at 01:37 PM.
Emi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2017, 02:13 PM   #3373
Jerichi
プラスチック♡ラブ
 
Jerichi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: 蒸気の波の中
Posts: 14,766
I seriously never thought I'd think Mike Pence would be an appealing alternative but it's starting to feel like it.
__________________


私のことを消して本気で愛さないで 恋なんてただのゲーム 楽しめばそれでいい
閉ざした心を飾る 派手なドレスも靴も 孤独の友達

asbwffb

[jerichi]
Jerichi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2017, 02:30 PM   #3374
deoxys
Fog Badge
 
deoxys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,513
http://www.newsweek.com/trump-emails...-server-548191

deoxys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2017, 02:57 PM   #3375
Concept
Archbishop of Banterbury
 
Concept's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Nipple-Hunting with Elsie and Kairne
Posts: 7,030
Send a message via Skype™ to Concept
I strongly disagree with Mozz on the idea of "intrinsic differences" (and variation on the individual level certainly outweighs any such differences in average between races or genders enough to make them negligible) but it does raise the question of why a predominantly white America is a substantially different idea from those of a two-state solution to Palestine/Israel or an independent Kurdistan made from Kurdish majority areas of Iraq/Syria/Turkey - proposals which routinely see support from liberal leaning activists. That too is national separation on the basis of ethnic and cultural groupings.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by PTerry
What can the harvest hope for, if not the care of the reaper man?
Concept is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   UPNetwork > General Forums > Debate


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 3 (0 members and 3 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:53 AM.


Design By: Miner Skinz.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.