Message from @B[]
Discord ID: 624972634228129841
@B[] Quote me. Where did I make an argyment against having races breed with one another.
I know you find my opposition to your arguments frustrating, but I would ask that you tone down the projection and the strawmanning please
@Jym So, do you argue that my statement that the fastest runners are african to be a false statement? Are they not african?
Okay, i misspoke, your argument was about there being some tangible difference, but this was seemingly in defence of a statement made by somebody previously about not mingling inter-race
@Jym Feels a bit like you're just being nitpicky about how specified I was, more than having an actual disagreement
@Seven Proxies
Are people with red hair not European? And yet *most* Europeans do not have red hair.
We could use (for running) the category of Mediterranean (based on proximity to that body of water) and group southern Europeans and Northern Africa and call them a group. It would be more valid than saying it was an African trait.
@Seven Proxies Please cite me some tangible difference in behaviour that were caused by nature rather than nurture, I don't want you to map the human genome or do brain scans
@B[] Fair enough.
If you want me to give my own views though, then I'll do so. I think that for the most part, racial loyalty is only natural and mostly beneficial for the individual for psychological reasons.
People are limited by the confines of their own psychology and behaviour at the end of the day, and one such limitation is the fact that people of the same race have an easier time identifying with and empathizing with eachother than they have of people of different races. And this is scientifically proven in several studies.
The more harmonious and peaceful societies tend to be monoracial, whereas societies exhibiting the most instability and cultural strife tend to be multi-racial and multi-ethnic. Either by accident or by design.
So IN GENERAL, it's best to keep races and ethnicities separate, because the idea of trying to "promote" interbreeding will never work on a large scale. It is more likely to cause backlash and entrenched positions than promoting pro-social behaviour across racial and ethnic borders.
@Seven Proxies
> If you want me to give my own views though, then I'll do so. I think that for the most part, racial loyalty is only natural and mostly beneficial for the individual for psychological reasons.
You continue to make grand unsupported statements...
> People are limited by the confines of their own psychology and behaviour at the end of the day, and one such limitation is the fact that people of the same race have an easier time identifying with and empathizing with eachother than they have of people of different races. And this is scientifically proven in several studies.
In the same way most guys go for somebody who reminds them of their mothers, you tend to stick with what you know.
> The more harmonious and peaceful societies tend to be monoracial, whereas societies exhibiting the most instability and cultural strife tend to be multi-racial and multi-ethnic. Either by accident or by design.
Have you visited the Middle East?
> So IN GENERAL, it's best to keep races and ethnicities separate, because the idea of trying to "promote" interbreeding will never work on a large scale. It is more likely to cause backlash and entrenched positions than promoting pro-social behaviour across racial and ethnic borders.
I'm not promoting it, I'm just saying it's okay. We shouldn't push for it, but at the same time if it happens naturally, it's not inherently bad.
The middle east is very multi racial and multi ethnic. We can "thank" Islam for that.
"Racial loyalty" is a horribly bad take on how the Hamilton inequality works. Think this through for almost all of human evolution nobody ever met anyone of a different race. The adaptation to distrust other races would be useless.
Say you have two variants. Homo Sargonis and Homo Taylor. Both in primeval Europe. Homo Sargonis is positive toward people with the same cultural expressions (clothing, jewelry etc) and Homo Taylor is positive to those with the same skin color. Homo Sargonis treats those with the same cultural affinities in his tribe favorably and fears the tribe over the hill (which is phenotypically indiscernible from his own)
Homo Taylor dies tragically by being brained by a neighboring tribesman who has the same skin color while pensively searching for darkie invaders.
No I didn't mean to suggest you were promoting it. It was just a general caution against it.
I'm not arguing that it should be outright forbidden. However I do argue against having things like open borders and letting massed amounts of foreigners enter other countries unobstructed and being given full access to the host societies.
I also argue for keeping some tabs on the few biracial relationships that do happen to check for signs of strife or discord.
If you're a white man marrying a black woman from another country and all she really wants is to integrate in the native white society, conforming to their norms, laws and culture then that's all fine and dandy.
But if she's planning to introduce her idea of "Blackness" to society and act like some political firebrand, then there should be laws permitting her extradition even if it means breaking up the marriage.
"But if she's planning to introduce her idea of "Blackness" to society and act like some political firebrand, then there should be laws permitting her extradition even if it means breaking up the marriage."
This goes a bit far but I would agree that WNs should be banned from entering my country in the first place.....
They are low-IQ savages incapable of adapting to our civilization.
And yes before you ask I would also disallow ethnats of other ethnicities.
> However I do argue against having things like open borders
Of course, borders need to be controlled for many reasons.
> I also argue for keeping some tabs on the few biracial relationships that do happen to check for signs of strife or discord.
In what sense?
> If you're a white man marrying a black woman from another country and all she really wants is to integrate in the native white society, conforming to their norms, laws and culture then that's all fine and dandy.
Of course, that's integration.
> But if she's planning to introduce her idea of "Blackness" to society and act like some political firebrand, then there should be laws permitting her extradition even if it means breaking up the marriage.
There should just be better vetting in the first place.
As I said from the beginning, having a child with somebody who is culturally and ideologically inline with yourself isn't the problem
Hey it's been fun guys but I should get some sausage and eggs and a shower. Lost an hour bullshitting on Discord already today.
*lol
@B[] Yes but with vetting i'm not just suggesting vetting against potential criminals and such. The vetting should also prevent people with drastically different views and norms to the host country.
Even if I may live in a democracy with freedom of speech, I will not really benefit from inviting people of other races, raised through generations with views and opinions that basically seek to destroy or take away freedom of speech.
It's likely the will then only use such liberties to tribalize themselves against the wider host society.
> Even if I may live in a democracy with freedom of speech, I will not really benefit from inviting people of other races, raised through generations with views and opinions that basically seek to destroy or take away freedom of speech.
Agreed, but this must be done tactfully. There are many large left-wing groups within the western world that would happily fill the Country to the brim with these people.
The problem you really have is that the well is already poisoned with commies
Japan seems to be doing a pretty good job with this
Very restrictive with citizenships. The society is clearly monocultured. You will have a very hard time if you deviate from their norms or refuse to speak the language etc.
> You will have a very hard time if you deviate from their norms or refuse to speak the language etc.
Not really, every language is just English but louder
> Japan seems to be doing a pretty good job with this
They do have a massive issue with having an ageing population though, they bet everything on automation and lost. They're currently importing all the cheap labour they can get (China).
I noticed a guy above using two tribes as a example of ethno nationalism and civic nationalism but he got it wrong.
It was a honest mistake but basically, ethno nationalists want a common culture, language, religion, history, and heritage like civic nats
They just add on genetics as well
It’s just adding that last part in, not taking the other parts out
While it is true if you didn’t have genetic commonality adopting their culture would be useless, but my point is that you need both the genetic commonality and culturally commonality
Unless, maybe, I don't know the strongest most successful nation state in human history had little to no genetic commonality. Would kinda put a damper on that little theory. But we know that could never happen.....
🇺🇸
From 1790 to 1965 it actually did, considering that it only allowed whites to move into the country
And for half of that time period only whites could vote
Whites made up 85% of the population
Yet the "whites" were made up of a massive mixture of different ethnic groups
Yeah that’s true, but still there was genetic commonality, just not as restrictive as it was in Germany for example. It included race but not ethnicity
The Gilded Age say a mass influx of migrants. Original population was Anglo now the largest minority is German. But before that we always had a significant black population. There's also a large indigenous Hispanic population. We annexed it.