Join John Adams, world renowned Intl Matchmaker, Monday nights 8:30 EST for Live Webcasts!
And check out Five Reasons why you should attend a FREE AFA Seminar! See locations and dates here.
View Active Topics View Your Posts Latest 100 Topics FAQ Topics Mobile Friendly Theme
Discuss and talk about any general topic.
While I have no use for racism, I disagree with a few points here. First of all, I hate the phrase "too extreme". I disagree with racism, not extremism. I mean, what would be it mean to too extremely right about something? And second, just because race isn't the right way to group people doesn't mean that other ways of grouping people are invalid. I group people by culture, not race. And I do strongly believe that some cultures are far superior to others.
Well but that's the whole point... see, we both were born in a culture that was thoroughly rotten, but unlike the majority of those living in this culture we had a sense of decency and common sense allowing us to see it for what it was. This is an entire website and movement centered around the central thought that the countries in which we were born, and their cultures, are detrimental to our quality of life and that it is best to leave them for countries with a better culture. Our forum is racially diverse but this is the central point that ties us together.
You are a white man yourself (I assume?) but having read your website CoAlpha it appears that you hold some cultures that aren't exactly 'white' in high regard, such as Old Testament Jews and Islam, who are both more traditional then our own and protect the idea of female pre-marital chastity and such. Faith as something that ties a group together is the main point of your ideology, your survival strategy. And faith does not have white origins as the patriarch Abraham hailed from Iraq himself and thus we can safely conclude he looked a lot more Arab and a lot less Charlton Heston, Hollywood depictions aside. It's ultimately the ideas that matter, not from which place they originate.
It's perfectly fine to group people by cultures, as the culture in which one is born has a much more profound impact on their development then their ethnic background.
Because all continents and nations go through similar processes of barbarity and civility, of rising and collapsing civilizations, of growth and decay. Because the barbarity of the African continent, not too long ago, was seen in many traditionally white countries as well.
Because man is a beast sometimes, an animal, a primal creature often driven by raw passion and desires. This not a 'race' thing, it is a human thing. The behaviour you see and disapprove of in black men, throughout history we have seen with white men as well and continue to see. Your view is very strongly predetermined and without any form of nuance when it comes to individual differences.
I think ethnic background can play a role, however. People in warmer countries are often 'lazier' for example, whether they be Mexican, African or Mediterranean European. Perhaps lazy is the wrong word... the high temperatures make their lifestyle and pace different. The 'manana, manana' mentality of not worrying for the day of tomorrow. When I go to the Philippines I find myself becoming less active as well. In a continent as hot as Africa to be too active physically would make a man die of dehydration. Take a man from such a culture to the colder West, where culture is different, and after a few years people's mentalities change. Over the course of the second generation, the one born into the 'superior' culture, you will see their mindset and behaviorism resembling more closely the one of their new homeland, rather then the place of origin of their parents.
Environment plays a role, sure. And race may play a role too, to a lesser extent. I do feel however the differences are largely of a cultural nature, the result of nurture rather then nature.
Loved this post, Marcos. It looks like you packed a lot of quality life experience in just the few years that separate you from the end of adolescence. And when I say "quality" I means both positive and negative experiences, in fact any significant event that made you who you are today.
I think it's typical of the late teen/early twenties age window, to try and reduce the world around us in a few simple theories. You found yourself in a neighbourhood where blacks and immigrants were being stigmatised as underachievers, troublemakers or worse. I remember reading about the change in Dutch public opinion after the death of Pim Fortuyn in 2002, considering him a martyr of sorts. Many people read that assassination as the proof that Holland's legendary openness towards a multicultural society had gone too far. As many kids fresh out of school, you simply did two plus two and resonated with some of the ideas or ideologies en vogue.
It might have been that coffee-skinned babe giving you intense feelings, or you simply growing up and defining your own view of the world, rather than been spoon-fed one by selected people, that opened your eyes to a more balanced and veritable version of reality. Whatever it was, I am glad you concluded that racism, any form of racism, is not only socially harmful but negates the essence of human nature, which is fundamentally identical across the board. Regardless of skin colour, religious and political affiliation, we all want the same things, we are driven by the same dreams, desires, instincts, greed, and evil.
Perhaps, around the same time, you also realised how alienating and draining some aspects of modern, first-world life can be, and set out to look for more of those out-of-the-box answers. You scoured websites and forums like many of us. Yet, unlike so many of us, you also mustered the resolve to start travelling and interacting with communities way beyond your home turf, to test those answers on your skin.
Like Danielle and some others, I applaud your candour in sharing this story with us. I don't think there's anything to be ashamed of. When I was your age I was a hardcore Communist, for two years in a row I was even president of the youth chapter for my region. I was profoundly convinced that Socialism was the panacea for all of the world's problems, because only an enlightened State could fully protect every citizen's interest and allocate productive resources wisely and fairly, as opposed to the rotting capitalistic system. Growing up, discovering other realities and other permutations of socialism and capitalism (London and the UK, for example), I would naturally drift towards a middle ground, albeit maintaining leftwing/liberal roots. I don't regret having espoused extreme or extremist positions in my youth, because that experience made me who I am now and still defines much of my stance on the society, especially its less privileged members.
I don't know who you are, really, Marcos. Your posts are always insightful, terse and balanced, as well as extremely well written (by the standard of a 23-yo whose first language isn't English, at least). So much that I am starting to suspect you're a young sociology student in disguise, probing fringe online communities on hot topics. Maybe you're not, and you're saying what you're saying simply because you know you who are, and who you want to be. Which, believe me, is a state of mind many have yet to experience in their late 40s, let alone in their 20s.
You know that famous etching by Goya, titled "the sleep of reason produces monsters". Besides all the scholarly interpretations it had over the years, the original meaning intended by the Painter was to signify that "fantasy divorced from reason produces impossible monsters; when united to it, generates beautiful art".
What monsters the impossible fantasies of Cornfed, Tsar and some others produce, it's for all to see. When intuition, creativity and optimism are leveraged by a rational, balanced view of the world, they yield lives that are living works of art, no matter how young and seemingly inexperienced the artist.
An injury from spouting off to your DADDY the black man?
Time to Hide!
I believe culture's a better way to group people as well, but culture is very much tied to race and it'll be a long time before globalization really changes that. It's typical for humans to make easy groupings because that's simply how the mind works and tying certain cultures to certain races makes sense. We can allow exceptions, but that doesn't change things fundamentally. So that is why I consider myself a race realist. No to mention what Cornfed also said, that biology can limit cultural development. Other factors such as environment shape culture too, but race can't be discounted. So I guess my views are similar to yours Marcos, but I believe race is more a factor than environment. Race is internal and environment external. If you think heat makes people lazy, how do you figure Shaka Zulu or Arab warriors like...well Mohammad for one. And let's take your example in reverse. You're saying that if people from warm countries are taken to cold countries they become less lazy? I've heard it before. Why can't that new civility be attributed to closer contact with White people or culture produced by Whites? Are you saying you're more influenced by the climate in the Philippines than the actual Filipinos? Of course it's harder for you to think in warmer climates. You're not physically adapted to it. That's biology and if race can explain physical differences, why in the world wouldn't it explain mental ones?
I'm not against race mixing, but I don't think it should be promoted. You're an exception Marcos. If you're not careful it's very easy for you to come across as a cultural imperialist. A White man trying to rape an Eastern country. So you'd be wise to do everything you can to adapt to your new culture. That's especially for your children's sake. Anything else and you'd just be a racist of a different kind. You wanted a personal and emotional response; I just gave it to you.
I get most of my views from www.therightstuff.biz . I don't follow it as much anymore though, because I've read enough that I've subsumed their ideas and it's become redundant. But I'm pretty sure the top post right now is one disagreeing with White Nationalisma albeit from a sympathetic point of view...actually now it's second on the front page. Called Analyzing Skyrimism.
abcdavid, the problem with your thinking is that race is a product of culture, not the other way around. Great races were produced by great cultures that had high ideals and allowed race mixing. In other words, all great races were the result of race mixing. Those cultures/races that become racist tend to stagnate and die because they no longer have access to the best genes in other races, and so they drift to oblivion. Also, people who take pride in their race instead of in their accomplishments tend not to accomplish very much.
Well what we see here is the opposite. White genocide is being promoted by Whites themselves. And if you had to compare my genes it'd be hard to say which side is better or worse because they're both the top two races for average IQ and also for different areas of functioning. Not that I consider myself exceptionally smart, but reasonably so. But my point is, Whites aren't helping lesser races by mixing with them nor are they mixing to give their own children better features. They're race mixing because they hate themselves and that's totally unhealthy on both a personal and societal level. And saying race is a product of culture is a bit like saying an object is the product of its description. Of course biology comes first and while race may just be a description (as words describe objects) that doesn't mean what it describes didn't come first. Man must exist for culture to be produced and man must belong to a certain race, as is biology. Race is a social construct because all words are. That doesn't mean words can't describe real objects.
Women tend to race-mix due to "self-hate"; men due to opportunity. This generally seems to be the case, with exceptions, of course.
Grand Admiral Game taught me how to improve my mindset in order to achieve the success that I wanted in life!
You are missing my point. Let's take the British as a example. In early history, a tribe was genetically distinct enough to be considered a race. So the Anglos and the Saxons were races. They combined to form the Anglo-Saxons who then conquered England to make the English. Then there was all kinds of race mixing as England declined and various other European races attacked and mixed in racially. Then England recovered culturally and grew while continuing to allow other people to mix with them. They grew into an empire. Rome had a similar story to create the Roman race which no longer exists as a distinct race. Races form and disappear all the time. If American hadn't decayed so rapidly culturally, an American race would have formed which would have been a good race. I don't know Chinese history, but I bet the Han Chinese are the product of plenty of mixing.
Calling Whites a race is almost pathetic because it is too big a group to be very meaningful. Anyone who really cares about race should be working on forming the next great race out of the best genes of humanity. Let's form a great culture and set it up to encourage the best genes to come into the culture. This great culture would eventually become a great race.
Okay, and we can talk about all the proto Germanic tribes and the Franks, etc. But that's antiquated even if the idea isn't. Race mixing in modern terms, in the West and in America generally refers to a negative process. Is there a way for racemixing to become positive in this age or is America's failure to produce a distinct race an omen?
The real negative process is homogenization. This is indiscriminate mixing with no criteria at all, and this the result of cultural decay. I don't think the Amish or traditional Mennonites are racist, but they don't have a problem with racial decay because they maintain their culture. Orthodox Jews are racist and pay the price with declining genetics. When Ashkenazi Jews were rising, they had plenty of race mixing though they hid it.
So basically what I keep saying is focus on culture. Form a great culture and race will take care of itself. A great culture would certainly be small and very much self-selected based on character rather than race.
When I ran engineering at a company, I hired programmers based on talent. I wound up with every race represented. The only group that I didn't hire for lack of talent was women. If these programmers had formed a new race, it would have been a more intelligent race than any exiting today.
Okay, I'll say this first. If we want an Eastern example, the one that stands out in my mind is the Aryans mixing with the Mohenjo Daro culture and forming Indians. And certainly China has examples with the Mongols and the Qing.
But anyway, if you really want to represent every race that would take a long time indeed. Globalization means it wouldn't just be the tribes of Europe interbreeding. The kind of diversity you're describing Mr. Schmidt is almost too extreme because it doesn't balance long term benefits with short terms problems. There won't be a real culture associated with my race for probably centuries if ever. I was outcast from both sides of my own family. As a dutiful son, I tried following my father as a child. He doesn't really have family because my grandfather died and my grandmother lives in Israel. He's civil with his brothers, but if they weren't family they'd have nothing to do with each other. He tried raising me reform Jew, but I grew up in an Italian Catholic town like Jersey Shore.
My mother's family speak Hakka Chinese, but she never taught me the language. Plus following my father also meant I was estranged from them since my mother's parents didn't want her to marry a White man. They sent my uncle to talk her out of it.
So even though the race mixing was eugenic in a sense, considering my parents' divorce, I think my mother was a lousy rebel who should have listened to her family. My father did get on better terms with his in laws while he was still married to my mom, but they were never close. Anyway, I was estranged from my mom's family too and I remember crying as a seven year old because I didn't have grandparents like everyone else in school. I had these strange people called pau and gung, whatever the hell that means. I've gotten closer to my mom's family the past few years, but being isolated as a child makes things pretty hard and I'll never get that extremely important time back.
Globalization means race mixing doesn't strike the right balance because even eugenic mixes like myself are extremely outcast. I was outcast from my whole family and everyone in the town I was raised in. That's because in the short term, there don't exist cultures for odd mixes like myself. I'd probably be willing to trade some of this eugenic intelligence just to be able to fit in for once. It's hard to say just how eugenic my mix is anyway. I'm probably less smart in some respects than the average Chinese or Jew. My mix makes me more broadly intelligent, but probably not as sharply intelligent in certain areas as is characteristic of pure Chinese or pure Jew.
I read a review of Fight Club on a White Nationalist site once that said the club started out diverse, but became increasingly White as time went on. I don't know how true that is regarding the film, but it's kind of a similar process. New singular races are formed from mixing old ones over time. But there will never be a culture associated with my mix, at least not in my lifetime. In the short term, but so outcast is horrible. So horrible that even I'd say to hell with eugenics up to a certain point. It's not everything.
Marcos, I hope you can learn something from this. I want you to be a good exception and it does seem like you have the right intentions. I'd just hate for anyone to have to go through what I did with regards to race mixing. It's not even personal insecurity or an illusion all in my head. I really was outcast from everyone.