Sam: A possible explanation for Black behavior.
“…common understanding among blacks of what morality is: not something internalized but something others enforce from the outside…”
Tulio: Interesting article. But I’d like to examine multiple perspectives on this topic before I draw any conclusions. I’ve never been to Africa to observe her findings first hand, and given that the author writes for Amren, this individual has an obvious predisposition.
For example she speaks of cruelty and torture in Africa, but that has existed among whites as well. I’ve seen some of the torture devices used during Europe’s middle period. Even looking at them was unbearable. Even in this country witches were burned at the stake. Blacks were hung from trees on false accusations while whites stood around and cheered.
I don’t like her conclusion that blacks have some inherent flaw that makes them incapable of being moral or having any abstract thoughts. Google a list of African proverbs and they contradict everything she just said.
First of all, Gedalia Braun is a man, not a woman. No idea what that first name is all about.
I actually think he is onto something, especially as he lived in various African countries for many years. That was always one of my favorite articles on Amren. The odd thing about that article is that while is not real flattering towards Africans, the author doesn’t seem to hate Africans at all. In fact, it seems that he is rather fond of them despite it all.
I don’t think just writing for Amren should disqualify you as biased. One of the truly disturbing things about Amren that I learned from hanging out there a very long time is that so much of what those articles say is flat out true. That is hard to swallow. However, the site is dishonest and biased as it only reports the downside to Blacks and never says anything good about them, while I know some of you will be amazed, but there are actually quite a few good things you can say about US Blacks if you are looking to write good things about them.
The Black love of cruelty and sadism does seem to be a part of the race. Yes any culture can become extremely cruel and sadistic, even the “highest” races of all which can become downright genocidal under the right conditions of Organized Violence. Not long ago, two of the “highest” races of all, the Germans and Japanese, engaged in some spectacular cruelty, sadism, out and out evil and even horrific genocide. And yes, European White did use to be quite sadistic and cruel as the torture devices indicate. However, under normal peacetime conditions, most European Whites in Europe and the West demonstrate remarkably little sadism and cruelty, while with Blacks, even US Blacks, it just seems to go on unabated.
I should note that cruelty and sadism are not Black traits. They are human traits! Humans are naturally cruel, sadistic and downright evil, at least at times. Most human societies and most humans have it in them to be sadistic and cruel. I was a pretty vicious little boy, but all my friends were too, so I just figure that boys are just naturally rather evil. But you grow out of it. I still have cruelty and sadism in me of course, but I try to keep it locked up in a cage inside of me and hope it never comes out. My argument is going to be that Blacks are more susceptible to the normal human tendencies than say Whites or Northeast Asians are, not that Blacks are evil and sadistic and White people are real nice. Screw that.
Some of those things may not be race-dependent. For instance, even if Blacks are bad at abstract thinking as a race, if you push their IQ up, their capacity for abstract thinking ought to grow quite a bit. African Americans appear to be dramatically more intelligent that Africans for whatever reason. One standard deviation is nothing to shake your finger at. Hence, even if US Blacks are have some inherent issue with abstract thinking, pushing that IQ up to one SD is going to make US Blacks a Hell of a lot more abstract than Africans.
I should also note that a number of the other downsides to Africans that he writes about – childlikeness, love of cruelty and sadism, needing morality imposed from the outside rather than from within
A lot of that has been said before. Albert Schweitzer wrote much the same things after working for years as a do-gooder in Africa. The fact that he was such a do-gooder makes his remarks particularly potent, as I do not see how a man with that much of a kind heart would deliberately make up a bunch of evil things about Blacks. In fact, if you study so called racist literature down through the years, you will find many of these things that Braun talks about repeated many times. Much early anthropological writings on Blacks are now called racist because they were pretty blunt about the race, whereas now the field is very PC.
For instance, the thing about Blacks being “childlike.” Childlike is not the same thing as childish. Childlike is not a bad thing really. I would love to be childlike in some ways and I hope I am, actually.
Early American writings including I think Thomas Jefferson noted the same thing: they also said that Blacks were childlike.
The morality thing sort of makes sense. In situations where brute force enforces morality, Blacks do pretty well. I heard they do pretty well under Communism. Supposedly you could walk from one end to the other of Maputo in the middle of the night and no one would bother you. Maputo is the capital of Mozambique.
That was under the Communist like government of Samora Machel, who is actually one of my heroes. Havana is the safest large city in the Americas and it is very Black. Blacks also do well under Islam. Reporters have gone to the parts of West Africa that are under Islam and they say that things are a lot smoother, less chaotic and far less crime ridden than in the non-Muslim countries like Sierra Leone and Liberia to the south.
I hear there are also many Blacks in Yemen, maybe up to 40%. They are light-skinned, but there is a lot of discrimination against them. Racially they look like Ethiopians, which is maybe what they are. They commit almost zero crime, even property crime.
Under both Islam and Communism, morality is for sure imposed from the outside in a pretty heavy handed way. It was similar in the typical African village or villages that was ruled by a king. I have heard that pre-1960, Nigeria was mostly a country of small rural villages. There was almost no crime in these villages.
Not only was law enforcement pretty brutal, there was also a heavy shame factor involved similar to what we see with the Northeast Asians, who do not want to commit crimes or even do bad things in general because it will bring shame unto their families. Amazingly rural Africa was able to operate under the same shame-based morality as the Northeast Asians, yet the NE Asians are usually thought to be a “higher” race than Africans. So it looks like some of those things that make these “higher” races higher can actually be imported and be used by the “lower” races, which seems counterintuitive but is also hopeful.
The notion that Black genes make societies inherently unstable is belied by the fact that North Africa (13% Black by genes) and the Gulf (17-21% Black by genes) are remarkable stable places under normal peacetime conditions.
Also Ancient Egypt was 13% Black by genes and it was one of the greatest countries in the history of the world. So Caucasians having a certain amount of Black genes is not the end of the world.
75 thoughts on “Gedalia Braun's Piece on Africans”
Blacks are not lost, even if they have some problems caused by genes they still can act decent and civilized under a strong moral culture.
Out of curiosity, could you share just your general experiences.
Blacks are NOT genetically more cruel than others. When you nowadays compare Scandinavians with Congolese, to take most extremes of skin colours and other traits of racial differentiation, what makes your comparison most unfair is that you compare a people that has been conditioned from without to behave in a may most unnatural and most unlike all what they used to be for so many centuries (the Vikings, the civilisation of which used to be based on predatory activities only, and that from Neanderthal times onwards) a conditioned and programmed people to the utmost, I mean the Scandinavians, to another one that has undergone no such forcible mental programming from outside. That mental program the Scandinavians have been subject to could break down very fast. The Scandinavians accepted to be programmed like laboratory animals into submission to Lutheran and then French humanistic values under the threat of the alternative which was to be exterminated like dangerous parasitical animals by the European powers that had been subject to Viking incursions just two or three centuries before. The alternative was to undergo something worse than what the the Amerinds were subject, so these people accepted to be transformed into a most unnatural human product through the means of a process of internal colonization that was quite brutal towards the dissenters up to the fag end of the Victorian era. Colonization in Congo never bothered to subject the humans there to so costly and unnatural a transformation, the outer powers were rather content to use the native barbarity as it was to foster their own interests and even to favour the most barbarian groups in a counter-natural fashion by giving them more weapons and technology. Colonization in Congo never bothered to run so deep into each one’s intimate life. So comparing Scandinavian with Congolese is tantamount to comparing the behaviour of Rotweilers with that of African wild dogs, the former are not a natural product. When dog breeds such as Rotweilers are put back into the wild and without human supervision, they, if they survive, very rapidly revert to something far more dangerous to humans than wolves. The same thing happens when such dogs are improperly trained by the humans who buy them, like Detroit Blacks or Mexican gangsters. The humanistic mental program the present-day Scandinavian have been subject to could break down very fast : all it would take would be a big economic crunch removing the material rewards necessary for such a mental program to function (actually most Scandinavian Germanic peoples traditionally behave in a peaceful way under the condition they go on extorting material tributes from other peoples they dominate as thralls or negotiate with them as sponsors, under the pain they go really berserk as possessed by an entity seeking the destruction of the world if their demands were not to be met with : the Nazi episode was such one) or worse still, Islamic immigrants or others that might not only bully them as the pussies they are but also convert many others into their thing and thus reactivate in them the more natural Viking instinct that has been artificially suppressed. All it could take would be a few radical mosques entertaining a good opinion of what the Nazis used to be (there are many) and doing their best to teach the new Aryan recruits no longer to be ashamed of their barbarian past but rather to glorify it, just a few individuals so reverted to Nazism through radical Islam could act as a king of biological crystal like Sheldrake used to produce to teach new behavioural patterns to monkeys. It must betaken into account that one reason that motivated the incipient Western modern powers to devote so much resources to condition Scandinavians into most humane behavioural patterns rather than to attempt their extermination was that Viking marauders and Islamic invaders of Europe had been many times on the point of collaborating very actively, Viking Scandinavia nearly missed several times converting to warlike Islam rather than to crusading Christianity, European missionaries had to offer them very lavish gifts for such an outcome to be avoided that might have nipped in the bud European Christianity : imagine jihad coming from both North and South and also from the East. The danger, as proven by the fact that the Vikings used dinar as their main currency, and imported all their rare high-level technological appliances such as telescopes as well as their best wrought swords from Al Andalus, was very real and had to be prevented at all costs. Imagine what could have been a rabid Islamic Scandinavia fighting both for physical survival under the cold and for religious dominance over calmer Christians.
Very interesting perspective..
“…The Scandinavians accepted to be programmed like laboratory animals into submission to Lutheran and then French humanistic values under the threat of the alternative which was to be exterminated like dangerous parasitical animals by the European powers that had been subject to Viking incursions just two or three centuries before…”
I don’t believe this. What array of forces were joined against them? Where is this proclamation that they were going to be exterminated unless they reformed?
“…Colonization in Congo never bothered to run so deep into each one’s intimate life. So comparing Scandinavian with Congolese…”
What amount of time are we talking about? Notice the time that civilization, from the church which you don’t mention, and that of colonization is vastly different. Others say Civilization of the West is due to the constant killing off of murders and thieves leaving no children while the more prosperous and civilized had children.
“…they go really berserk as possessed by an entity seeking the destruction of the world if their demands were not to be met with : the Nazi episode was such one)…”
They never said anything about running the world. The Nazi program was to stop the crushing reparations and stop the endless parasitical Jews from destroying their country any further than they already had.
When the Nazis invaded places with like 3 f***ing Jews (the Balkans, the Baltic States, Sweden, etc), It was just to get to the Jews!?!?!
What about after France fell and they administered Sub-Saharan Africa?
or the alliance with the Japanese?
Jews were forcing reparations?
Clemeanceu, Lloyd George, Wilson, etc. were Jews, or controlled by them?
The Viking era was long over by the time telescopes were invented. The pig was too important to the Scandinavians of that time, and for long after, for them to subscribe to the strictures of Islam. Etc.
Robert,”… I know some of you will be amazed, but there are actually quite a few good things you can say about US Blacks if you are looking to write good things about them…”
Please don’t hold us in suspense!
My position is that even a decent Black fellow is no better than the average White good ole boy. The average Black person is more inclined to be a vicious thief, not all but the numbers don’t look good. So using muh “multiple-regressions” it’s better to have nothing to do with them.
Where can you point out the shining example of a Black person that so outshines Whites to prove me wrong. I submit for every Black person of note you could find dozens of Whites that no one fauns over but are better people overall.
Well may I be/ give an example? Basically the Blacks who are the “good ones” by some margin basically have a open charm from extroversion, being further from the extreme where the trait more savage. These people, though, aren’t without faults but are overall better than the typical.
But one question though…what actual traits would it be that makes the white subject better even if controlled for personality? Economically, socially, intellectually, what? I’m not saying you’re wrong, I just want a clearer picture.
I’m also confused as to why when Robert mentioned good things attached to blacks, you bring it to the situation regarding how much you interact with them? Robert doesn’t argue just because good traits and sub-sections exist that you should hang around them aimlessly, rather he does it as to prevent oversimplication that could lead to violence.
If I where to be honest, well, I see myself better than many white people. To add context to it, I see myself better than those who just attach themselves so much to the cultural left, those who are typically unattached I see equal or above depending on the individual. Granted, people like them aren’t necessarily smarter than me but still have traits that even thing out.
I see myself as intellectually endowed particularly in Verbal fields, such as communication and expression on top of problem solving. I’m not restrictive towards some progressive ideas but I’m against change for change’s sake. I’m also somewhat expansive with ideas regarding social philosophy/morality. Regardless, there’s probably a white that would match me in intellectual ability and circumstance but probably not exact, When you match Black to white By IQ, they are better at Digit Span, Coding, and Arithmetic . These Subjects are affected by anxiety, a traits blacks lack due extroversion.
But back to you though, where did Robert even say that these good traits outshines whites?
By all means, keep your opinion or explain it. Being more individualistic and hanging out with white more often we would likely agree due to experiences. Also if you’re curious as to traits that could “even out” blacks I could link some old books on the topic (Old meaning 19th and early 20th century). I, unlike Jason, I actually want to understand what you’re saying.
“…I, unlike Jason, I actually want to understand what you’re saying…”
HA! Me thinks you’re motivations are to set a trap.
Notice I said,”My position is that even a decent Black fellow is no better than the average White good ole boy.”
Where you said,”…what actual traits would it be that makes the white subject better even if controlled for personality? Economically, socially, intellectually, what?…”
I also said,”…Where can you point out the shining example of a Black person that so outshines Whites to prove me wrong…”
You said,”…If I where to be honest, well, I see myself better than many white people…”.
I have no problems with that and I assume you’re correct without any snarkiness what so ever. However take the total sum of Blacks, including you, and the total sum of Whites and I’ll bet I can find a White person with somewhat the same good temperament and behavioral traits. You ask what traits? Any you wish to emphasize. Any of them. Whatever you see as good. So you really haven’t answered my question of,
“…Where can you point out the shining example of a Black person that so outshines Whites to prove me wrong…”
Well I was thrown off by “good ole” given me an impression of that the average white was “decent” or “overall positive”. Thus when you used the adjective “decent” for black, it gave me the impression that in the case of black we are filtering for one that deviates somewhat for the average. If I had that wrong I apologize.
And, honestly, that quote you gave of me doesn’t exactly seem deceptive since it was actually referring to the “outshining” statement of your comment. I stated my position that I see myself better than many whites, the next sentence clarifying however I see myself better than those who mindless adhere to modern leftist trends, but with those who don’t I see myself equal or below depending on the individual.
However, I suppose I didn’t really understand your question in pointing out a black that “outshines” whites. The problem is, I don’t know if you are asking for an example of a black above the average white or one that can’t be matched with a white individual. In the case of the latter, I actually admitted that I could be matched with one overall, but not of the same psychology if it’s done by IQ alone, hint the IQ link I gave.
But then it goes back to one of my other questions,
“But back to you though, where did Robert even say that these good traits outshines whites?”
So if I seem inconsistent, leading you to believe I’m trying to deceive you, I apologize. I however, I did state that I was not seeing the connection between you question regarding Robert’s statements on positive Black traits.
Q:Why would it be necessary that they outshine traits of whites?
A:What that leads to is that if they outshined that of whites, then there’s a benefit to living with them.
Problem: But you state that they don’t outshine that of whites overall and that the odds aren’t in the favor of whites.
That’s fine but I was originally confused of why that’s relevant to Robert’s statement.
But overall if you’re asking for something UNIQUE on a Higher proportion that Whites, possibly it would be connected to positive extroverted traits. That only a theoretical example however based on the psychological evidence.
Psychological evidence being that Blacks, when matched for IQ, do better on tests that are affect by anxiety, this being due to extroversion.
Still, a white like this of course wouldn’t be impossible either, given that it’s bound that populations would overlap in traits, it’s just what’s different often is the distributions. So it’s nothing spectacular that you would find matches between populations of different averages.
“…when you used the adjective “decent” for black, it gave me the impression that in the case of black we are filtering for one that deviates somewhat for the average…”
“…But overall if you’re asking for something UNIQUE on a Higher proportion that Whites, possibly it would be connected to positive extroverted traits…”
You have the heart of the matter here. Maybe I didn’t explain myself so well. Some of the things I said are colloquialisms. “Good ole boy”, Southern US slang for well meaning, average, decent person. In many cases not of a high education level, nor stupid, but can generally be trusted to do the right thing.
Anyways is “positive extroverted traits” a good thing? In a lot of cases it’s not. A more humble person is much easier to get along with.
The bottom line is even if you exclude, and I’m going to be direct so they’ll be no mistake, Niggers, Blacks overall add no great advantage in a general statistical manner for friendship or close companionship. Others may disagree but from my perspective they’re wrong. And if you include the whole of Black population, which you must, you could be set up for a lot of trouble. There’s a large downside and very little upside. It’s betting on a horse rated 16 to 1 but only getting 1 to 1 if you actually win the bet. (made up statistics)
I’m sure you’re smarter than me. Probably a lot more successful. Maybe a better person. I don’t hate Blacks individually but as a group I want nothing to do with them. They cause a vast amount of bodily harm and death to Whites and I’m sick of it. I mean I’ve really fucking had it. If I had a big red button that when pushed would dump all the Blacks into the ocean I would push it. Why? Because it’s become us against them. If Black people are going to completely ignore or justify the harm they do to Whites, which they are presently doing, while all the time calling for more violence against Whites then it just becomes a straight us against them. There’s no room for compromise there.
Black people believe that more threats means more gimmedats and it does until…it doesn’t and White people become very determined and aggressive that they’re not going to take it anymore. Bad things will happen then. All these idiots that are pushing for mass immigration into the US are delusional. They think that these competing interest will just blindly vote for their munificent White liberal leadership. Ha! They’ve got a surprise coming. What they’re pushing with the continuing, Whites are evil, propaganda is an all out race war and then it won’t matter who you are, what your IQ is, etc. Nothing will matter but your race. It’s already that way in the inner cities where, not all but a very great number of, Blacks attack Whites every chance they get where they think they can get away with.
Don’t confuse me with the idiots who want a race war. They don’t realize how awful it would be. It will be terrible. I can see it being the most likely future if mass immigration proceeds. If it does with all the anti-White talk continuing then Whites will be pushed into a corner and we will either fight or die. I suspect we’ll fight. The only way we can have a multi-racial society is if you strike out all laws that force races to be together. This means if Whites want a White neighborhood they can have it. It would mean control over their own spaces. We don’t have that now and continuously move about to find some place “safe”. We’re running out of space and it’s bankrupting poorer Whites.
Thanks for the response.
Yeah, a humble person would be preferred over positive extroverted traits, but it was a trait that I did notice that could be in black’s favor in certain situations. E.I ambitious, expressive, enterprising with the right wit.
As for your beliefs regarding blacks and friendship I agree. While a nice experience could be possible, overall probability of risk defeats that purpose for white in particular. Never would I try to convince you otherwise because
A. my beliefs of freedom of association.
B. in all honesty, I think blacks need to work on living and liking each other before bonding en masse with whites would ever be a priority.
As for your feelings towards blacks, I must agree. As a matter of fact, while I talk about my intolerance to self hate, I came dangerously close because I was sick of the riots and the basic pity party of race politics. What made it worst for me was how so many believe that blacks hate whites so much, while I as a individual held no such Hatred.
Sure, I didn’t like actions of the past, but I didn’t think blaming whites now would do anything and that we were the only ones putting ourselves down. I once had a friend, a white one, tell me he was ashamed of his own skin because of that blame, that experience actually drawn my attention to self hate and my current stance on it.
Then, it’s when I looked back at my “Nigger” moments with my white friends and teachers. Often I find myself regretting them, thinking I put them through more than I should’ve despite these only being moments and not trends in my behavior.
I wouldn’t be worrying about blacks or anything had I not realized that I was escaping the impossible. When I made mistakes, big or small, or act a certain way or thought in a particular pattern I realized that I was kidding myself that I didn’t have the same flaws as many blacks. By the help of posts like yours and records from Africa and American slaves I knew what my issues were. At the same time I knew my solutions as well, and I try thinking, applying, and purposefully shooting down ideas for uplift. I didn’t simply want a thought to make feel better, I wanted something that I knew could work.
I have a plan in mind using historical references with blacks in particular for a future article. Primarily, it would be “inside help”, so in theory it would be good news for you.
Phil, I know you’re young and all, but you’re trying to be genteel and reasonable with a man that denies the Holocaust even happened. Pick your battles wisely and remember the Elvis factor — 8% of the country believes Elvis is still alive. That means you have to write off nearly a tenth of the nation as hopelessly irrational.
…not to mention a man who thinks posting a few pics of serial killer crime scenes tells him everything he needs to know black people.
Honestly neither of which in the context of our discussion is important. The latter we technically went through, if he feels that Blacks aren’t worth it through his perspective then so be it. From my point of view he’s minding himself.
In my opinion our exchange doesn’t prove him irrational. We could discuss biases in his politics but if we are to do so in efforts to change him it’s evident he won’t so it’s fruitless. On top of that, doing so would likely just create noise which would ruin any progress made.
Considering the state of things regarding my race/beliefs, I’m in no position to pull any move in making enemies over matters that can be narrowed down to as trivial.
“…denies the Holocaust even happened…”
That’s exactly right. There was no Holohoax. Yes I concede that lots of Jews died but lots of everyone died in WWII. They did put them in concentration camps and in some worked them to death. Although judging by the inaccuracies of other Jew statements “working them to death” may not be true also. There is lots and lots and lots of information on this and if you do even half hearted research on the Holohaox you will see the Jews are lying. They are liars. Just because they tell you something on TV over and over doesn’t make it true. Did you know the Red Cross inspected the labor camps as late as 1943? From the Red Cross report.
“…The Report states that “As many as 9,000 parcels were packed daily. >From the autumn of 1943 until May 1945, about 1,112,000 parcels with a total weight of 4,500 tons were sent off to the concentration camps” (Vol. III, p. 80). In addition to food, these contained clothing and pharmaceutical supplies. “Parcels were sent to Dachau, Buchenwald, Sangerhausen, Sachsenhausen, Oranienburg, Flossenburg, Landsberg-am-Lech, Flöha, Ravensbrück, Hamburg-Neuengamme, Mauthausen, Theresienstadt, Auschwitz, Bergen-Belsen, to camps near Vienna and in Central and Southern Germany. The principal recipients were Belgians, Dutch, French, Greeks, Italians, Norwegians, Poles and stateless Jews” (Vol. III, p. 83)…”
You think the Red Cross covered up death camps for the Nazis? How did they even dispose of so many people? The whole death camp business is a huge pack of lies. Some people just prop themselves in front of the TV and believe whatever lies the Jews are pumping out this week.
Here’s another prime example. On 9-11 building #7, not hit by a plane, fell the same speed as a rock dropped for roughly 108 feet. The only way this could happen is if the bottom portion, or at least 108 feet of it, was the same density as air. Well we know that isn’t true. No amount of fires can turn a building into air. It was demoed but what do they tell you on TV? Arabs, Muslims, lies, lies, lies.
Here’s a picture on 9-11 of the Pentagon after a 757 supposedly hit it.
Now here’s a 757.
See those big things on the wing. They’re called engines and they are made of a very heavy high nickel alloy steel. Similar to meteorites. So where’s the holes they made when they went into the building. There’s a hole for the nose of the plane. The nose is very weak compared to the heat resistant heavy engines. I doubt more than a 1/4 thick aluminum. Like sheet metal. Where’s the damn holes for those engines? We see an engine on the lawn in one photo. Where’s the hole where it gouged up the lawn? How do it get on the lawn if the plane was going over 500 mph? What about what the CNN reporter first reported?
As initially reported from the scene by CNN Correspondent Jamie McIntyre:
“From my close-up inspection, there’s no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon.
The only site, is the actual side of the building that’s crashed in. And as I said, the only pieces left that you can see are small enough that you pick up in your hand. There are no large tail sections, wing sections, fuselage, nothing like that anywhere around which would indicate that the entire plane crashed into the side of the Pentagon and then caused the side to collapse.
Even though if you look at the pictures of the Pentagon you see that the floors have all collapsed, that didn’t happen immediately. It wasn’t until almost about 45 minutes later that the structure was weakened enough that all of the floors collapsed.”
Look at what they are pushing Black people to do. The Jew, Soros, is funding Black Lives Matter and NOTICE they are taking some of the WEAKEST cases for police shooting people and pushing that narrative. The Brown case. Trayvon. Very weak. Yet there was the case in South Carolina?? where the cop shot the guy in the back and dropped a taser by him. The case where the cop shot the little kid with the BB gun. They move right over those. Good cases. The Jews are using you. They are trying to convince Whites that all Blacks are crazy. The Jews are setting you up for destruction.
The Jews are a bunch of liars. The Jews are a tribe of psychopaths. A little, slight research leads you to the unmistakable conclusion that we are being lied to big time and that they are the ones lying to us. The Jews have been kicked out of EVERY single country they’ve ever been to for thousands of years. What does that tell you? Every single one.
You can say I’m crazy all you want but unless you can explain building #7 then I know you’re just another TV bimbo who knows nothing but what they tell you.
Tulio doesn’t like the pictures of Whites attacked. How about this then.
Oh wow, he had to out himself as a 9/11 “truther” too, when 9/11 wasn’t even part of the discussion.
I found Sam’s photo:
“…Oh wow, he had to out himself as a 9/11 “truther”…”
As opposed to the “Spoofers” who propagate the lies that 9-11 was an attack by Muslim terrorist. Notice you can not refute in any way what I said about building #7. People have out up web sites to refute the idea that building #7 wasn’t demoed and I’ve destroyed their so called “facts” one by one. The let me comment for two or three comments then stop approving them. They look like such idiots it completely defeats their purpose of lying about 9-11. They even expanded to narrative to buildings #1 and #2 as Jews are wont to do to confuse the issue. I destroy them there also.
As for comments you make on 9-11 my response is,”children shouldn’t play with matches”.
“The bottom line is even if you exclude, and I’m going to be direct so they’ll be no mistake, Niggers, Blacks overall add no great advantage in a general statistical manner for friendship or close companionship.”
No. What benefit do you get from a friendship, per se?
Is this taken away with Blacks?
Nope, not always.
A nationalist, would say it’s inherently wrong to associate with Blacks, regardless of who they are, but why is that? Is there a reason for it?
As I’ve said before, and Phil has agreed with me, maybe personality traits are distributed on average, as well/separate from IQ.
So if I’m a White guy with a 120 IQ, 2% of Blacks are within a few points of my IQ, as compared to 20% of Whites. When adjusted for personality, maybe 20% of Whites share my personality, but once again, just 2% of Blacks?
So it’d be 0.04% of Blacks, versus 4% of Whites, which would mean, maybe 1/100 Blacks are just as good of friends/better friends than White based on such factors.
That’s where Nationalism falls apart, there are distributions within groups, even in non-intellectual traits, like personality (why would there be for IQ, but not for other things). It’s just reduced to shouts of “no nig-nogs, unequivocally”.
it’s the nonsense notion that there’s some secret sauce that makes all people of x race unequoivcally love all people of their race.
No such secret sauce has ever been discovered, except on ihatespicsandmuzzies.com
“…A nationalist, would say it’s inherently wrong to associate with Blacks…”
I’ve never said that nor have I ever heard a WN say that. You mischaracterize what I say and have a very poor understanding of muh “multiple-regressions”.
“…That’s where Nationalism falls apart, there are distributions within groups, even in non-intellectual traits, like personality…”
Only for some races like Whites and Blacks. It works very well for the Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese, etc. The Japanese in particular take care of everyone in the Japanese tribe. The smart ones put a great deal of effort into making sure the less smart ones have a decent standard of living. An average Japanese person has a better life than an average White person in the US. Not in terms of raw cash because of their limited living space but in having a safe , decent community to live in they are far wealthier.
Yes, it’s in the definition of a Nationalist.
It’s like saying heat doesn’t involve energy or something denying the great Jew-man’s science…..
John was a Jew, you know.
Ultimately, an Ethnoprovince wouldn’t be bad per se…………..
it may attract disp. low intellect people, and not just because they are racist, because they have a major reason to move there……..
AND, the ones victimized in the diverse provinces, are disp. low-IQ, via the “Latinization” of America, IQ based society. High-IQ, wealthier Whites are isolated while the lower-IQ Whites are victimized, a la living like Mestizo peasants.
So it will be like living in Brazil or Belarus?
Do Brazilian Whites want to flock to Belarus?
I shouldn’t have insinuated “All Nationalists” feel no association is in order…
but you’re being just as silly saying “No nationalists”…………..
and, guy, the “you have no understanding” line is ironic, I can view this with an external lense, you are a Nationalist and MAY not be able to.
In the interest of correcting the inherited narrative myths of liberalism:
No witch was ever burned at the stake in the US or the American colonies. Some were executed, but the stake burning is just false.
Most those so-called medieval torture devices were made in the 19th century and were not used and bear no resemblance to actual torture techniques of the middle ages.
Please fact check, you should know that the narrative line as adopted the liberal left was as fact free in many respects as that of the Christians, with their nonsense about lions in the Colosseum.
Okay, well substitute witch burnings for American revolutionaries tar and feathering traitors.
Yeah, Yankees drive out the Tories and leave the country to a bunch of left wingers and religious nuts. I’m not the biggest supporter of the Founding Generation.
“European White did use to be quite sadistic and cruel as the torture devices indicate”
There was no holohoax. It is all fabrications,jew smog and their crocodile tears to deceive white people
The Holohoax is completely stupid and doesn’t even make sense. Look at this picture of starving Jews. Now tell me…who took care of them? It takes months to starve to this level why didn’t they just kill them? Why wouldn’t they gas and burn them up? Could you get any work out these skin and bones? The answer is they didn’t gas them or burn them up. The whole thing is stupid psychopathic Jew stories.
so you admit the Nazis were starving Jews (to death)?
Or did the evil Jews starve themselves?
which is worse;
“starving to death”………..?
apparently forced labor is, and despite admitting Jews were basically starved, the holocaust is OKAY.
When will everyone just admit Sam is an SPLC shill?
No the Americans and British starved them to death by blowing up the railway system.
The Jews narrative is that 6 million Jews were gassed and burnt up in ovens, haven’t you heard, this is false. I say they’re lying.
William, you can hold your white guilt for another day and another time
for now you can enjoy this:
Also if you want to know what the real holocaust is, you must watch the below video
But you guys just admitted that they were “starved” and presumably died…
I see no reason to feel “guilt” for the Jewish pogroms- my ancestors were mostly English peasants- not in the cities, and hence had nothing to do with Pogroms, and I’m not my ancestors.
On my Med Side, it was always the church that did it, not villages or things. Once again, peasants anyway.
BUT, it’s not good…..
Official German Records of Prisoners in Auschwitz Concentration Camp from May 1940 to December 1944
I forgot to add that maybe all these micro-films and Red Cross records are wrong because…you didn’t see them on TV and if it’s not on the JewTube it can’t be true.
The allies starved to death the Jews by blowing up the railway system? What does RobertLindsay think of this idea? Actually, that whole thing is similar to the excuse North Koreans give for their camps.
I pretty much don’t believe in the Holocaust but I also think the NS were a ridiculously bad government full of half Stalinist, half Fascist lunatics.
TONY I’m beginning to wonder why “white” (Anglo-Celtic) people are so easily deceived and Asians or Jews are not so easily deceived.
Is it the same reason so many skinny blonde girls from the flyover are depicted with gaping anuses in free porn on the internet.
They came to Hollywood believing they could be an actress. Or a “model”.
I found a picture of Sam………
This violates the comments guidelines.
4 “Personal life off-limits to attacks…looks…”
Kike Hernandez is my favorite Jew.
My top 5 list;
K!ke Eisenhower (instead of Ike- he lied about the concentration camps)
Lyndon B. Jewson
Ehud Barack Obama
Doesn’t Fuckerberg run a huge social networking site called Faceberg?
Who runs Jewtube? You can tell by the name it’s probably run by kikes. I mean why else would they call it Jewtube, right?
Have you ever heard of Talmudvision? That’s the thing they call a TV for short. You know what I am talking about right? Most people think it is just called TV but really it is called Talmudvision. Also some people call TV The Electric Jew. I think that is pretty funny. Then there is the Jew York Times, Hymie Magazine and Jewsweek. Those are all very big publications. On TV, there is a huge news channel called ZNN, Zionist News Network.
John de Nugent (WN/ Soultrean) is now claiming not only is Jared Taylor, Jew wed (I think that’s actually true), but that he himself is half Jewish! 🙂
you play with fire long enough, you’re bound to get burned
All those so called Jewish media outlets like Faceberg or JewTube are giving white nationalism the most positive press in human history. The WNs are free to post what they want without fear it will be portrayed like on Jerry Springer. NONETHELESS, because the USA has freedom of the press, you will hear anti-racist views just as strongly.
Jews made that rule just to cover up for other Jews! I’m just calling out the K!kes…..!
I couldn’t resist
Django Unchained was fine, but I think it focused more psycho abusive owners. The vast majority of them probably just left the slaves a lone to make massive profit for them. However, the idea of getting whips with a lash for being lazy, WHILE YOUR PICKING THE COTTON, is a bit sadistic and cruel.
Wow maybe ur mad that Ashkenazi jews are the smartest and most successful group ever hater.
The most successful and the smartest group EVER….Oh, that is debatable.
That Jew picture looks like some old Bee Gees Disco photo.
The one posted by Barack Thatcher
Well, you were dicussing sadism and cruelty. Well, a lot of blacks like slasher movies like Friday the 13th, but so do whites and anyone else. What is that saying?
OK, yeah blacks are capable like Idi Amin on the movie Last King of Scotland of hanging someone with meat hooks until dead (The Scottish doctor got that for trying to kill him.) But then again, Hitler had people who tried to kill him tortured with piano wire until dead, and movies were made so he could watch them !!
F13’s Jason and Leatherface are taken more seriously by blacks as what they believe they will encounter in the country: a large silent immensely strong (though slow and clumsy) white man who lives off or in the land or even sort of in the water.
LOL! Which Blacks believe this?
Jason Voorhees and Leatherface embody what minorities fear: the white super-man who is large, immensely strong (But slow and clumsy), capable of living like an animal in the forest off tree bark or willing to consume human flesh.
TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE in particular is a film about fear of the white trash (Disadvantaged rural European-American).
Large, fearless, ruthless, silent or jabbering lunatics. These are the perceptions of whites by other minorities and why the riots will not sweep into the country.
So called white trash aren’t scary or gory. At the most, you would encounter incredibly bigoted, smart-ass, bully types. Note, you will encounter them if you go to certain areas and piss them off.
Normally these so called white trash are incredible pussies, normally picking on weak targets. Generally they hide behind jokes, big beards, the Confederate flag etc… One way to see how they are cowards is how they hit and run. You never know their name in order to track them down after their name-calling etc..
Minorities believe that the country is filled with dangerous whites and this has been somewhat reinforced by media portrayals in Texas Chainsaw Massacre or Hills Have Eyes.
There is this idea among Americans in general that once they get into some remote Southern “backwoods” area they’re going to find themselves living out scenes from Deliverance. I agree with you that the mass media in this country reinforces these stereotypes.
Yeah but those stereotypes are true to some extent, or maybe expressed in a different way than on Deliverance.
In other words, these backwoods are indeed filled with hot-headed, hateful, ignorant, homophobic, racist bastards. That’s not saying all of them are that way, but enough to notice something major.
The way to stir them up is do something they don’t like. For instance, say you don’t like the way they think, stick up for black people, or be a black person who wonders in, especially being married to a white woman.
Thanks for clarifying. I’ll take your word for it!
I still think that if you look at the Flynn effect, you realize that IQ is far from purely decided by genetics. It’s more about literacy than anything else. In fact, testing is mostly about literacy. people’s IQs (as a group) rose 20 points in decades!! that is not evolution–evolution doesn’t happen that fast. Looking at environment and epigenetics will be more helpful. Obviously, severe stress impairs cognition in the short term. There is no way around that. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/toxic-stress-poverty-hurt-developing-brain/
1) It’s not skin-determined, but IQ-determined.
The Gods of the “Native Americans” never forgot to request so many enemies as possible be captured at the end of their (countless, continuous) battles instead of killed.
Why? Because those Gods strongly desired to have them offered as sacrifices…
And then there are the Australian area natives, outstanding with respect to the issue at hand as they were.
2) Lindsay, you often surprise me for that rare objectivity and willingness to deal with not-widely-accepted truths, so why cite the German and the Japanese only?
Weren’t the Bolsheviks and the Chinese very high-IQ fellows too?
Didn’t they dispatch far more victims than Germans and Japaneses?
And what about the worst act of terrorism to date, the throwing of two (or one) atomic bombs on Japan?
Plus, we should avoid being specists, and deal with vivisection. It’s not like when the subjects of “experimentations” have IQs of 10 or 25 that makes it really different than when they had IQs of 60 or 70.
We should admit it.
Why pretend you don’t know the IQ of American blacks is higher in so far as a % of their DNA is “white”? The more white DNA they have, the higher their IQ, as it should be expected to be.
You know that, I know that you know.
But perhaps you are afraid someone will call the SLPC for real, lol. I’d understand that.
That’s ever so simple.
Each type of people ends up with the type of government and authority that work best for them. Naturally.
It follows that multi-racialism, the reality that goes by the deceptive name of “multiculturalism”, cannot be but a failure.
At best, namely without open inter-racial conflict, you still get ethnically homogeneous countries in the country, cities in the city.
I can already hear my friend writing for The Guardian who lives in the City, and another who works with a think thank in Manhattan: people of all flavours mix so well here, they <a href="http://www.city-journal.org/html/paul-krugmans-bubble-14661.html"cheerfully say.
Segregation by IQ is adding, and intersecting, with segregation by race.
Seeing how steadily it’s pursued, it must give a lot.
Perhaps the right question would be: whom it gives to?
The Romans were also blood thirsty, (Gladiator games) but this is ignored because by WNs because they were white.
blockquote>It follows that multi-racialism, the reality that goes by the deceptive name of “multiculturalism”, cannot be but a failure.
At best, namely without open inter-racial conflict, you still get ethnically homogeneous countries in the country, cities in the city.
I can already hear my friend writing for The Guardian who lives in the City, and another who works with a think thank in Manhattan: people of all flavours mix so well here, they <a href="http://www.city-journal.org/html/paul-krugmans-bubble-14661.html"cheerfully say.
Some cultures do well together, but some don’t. But you cannot say ALL multiculturalism cannot exist.
Keep in mind that the claim that ancient Egyptians had 13% black admixture doesn’t mean that all ancient Egyptians were mixed to the same degree. There were ancient Egyptians with no black admixture while other ancient Egyptian individuals had a black admixture of at least 20 – 30 % or more.
Gosh everyone so scared of black admixture. I see black admixture everywhere in East Tennessee, Appalachia, much less in the actual black belt near Atlanta. Oh my gosh @@@$@$ Where are we heading?
GIAN I’ve visited Egypt for 2 weeks once-I’m a seasoned world traveler-and Southern Egypt is 100% black while Northern Egypt is 40% Greek and Central Egypt on the Nile is Arab, Greek, Roman and black.
Country stretches from 400 miles South of Greece to the Horn of Africa.
Yeah I noticed the more numerous appearances of KFC restaurants as you head south of Cairo. 😆
That’s actually true, Jason. HARDEES, however, is the most popular restaurant in the Middle East (Burger Chef).