Leftists Say Blacks Are Not More Violent, Then Why Are African Countries #1-#57 of Murder Rates?

[Derec]

That's why I would never hire one of those lazy-ass white people. Never seen 'em hustling outside Home Depot. Lazy pricks won't work unless you bend over backwards to accommodate them.

If you import millions of 3rd world workers who will a) work in bad working conditions and b) work for little pay you are ruining all improvements in working conditions. The permissive immigration ideology of the Left is in opposition to the Left ostensibly being pro-worker rights.

 

[Derec]

I presume you mean that there have been major influxes of non-white people into Europe. And what you probably have seen is people claiming that this doesn't constitute genocide.

Because it doesn't.

It's a sort of cultural genocide. If current trends in immigration into Europe continue, the typical "German" couple will look like this by 2100.

Already Germany is forced to take back ISIS members (and their multitudinous offspring) because they were foolish giving Islamic immigrants German citizenships quickly and without doing any vetting for religious extremism.

Beer, pork dishes and women showing skin (topless women are commonplace at swimming lakes and even nude (or FKK as Germans call them) beaches are not uncommon) are all part of German culture that will be eliminated if Islam becomes dominant cultural force though immigration.

That second photo is MUCH better!

And it's not like that hasn't happened in recent European history. See Kosovo: that region became islamicized though mass influx of Shiptar Muslims from Albania.

 

[Derec]

So wait, if your child marries someone brown and has kids, has your family line “died out”?

Of course not. But with the "one drop doctrine" the white part of the heritage is being deliberately ignored and erased. That is also amazingly hateful, ain't it?

 

[Derec]

But never let facts get in your way.

We've discussed those kinds of studies before. Those supposed "facts" are very selectively chosen to make a predetermined politically motivated point.
For one, timeline is carefully chosen to avoid 911 instead. Second, it over-counts "right wing" violence by attributing many acts with unknown or non-political motives to "right wing".

 

[Derec]

That doesn't even make any sense.

You seriously need that explained to you?

Irony. Fun.

No explanation necessary. I understood that it doesn't make any sense all on my own.

 

[fromderinside]

Wow

Derec the pink skin lover. Get over it. It makes sense for more brown to be expressed in humans since scientists have proven we're in an unstoppable period of global warming where more resistance to over exposure to vitamin D via sun-skin interactions is demanded.

Brown is just as prettier, prettier to most I presume since most are not Sweden white.

That's only my reason and probably unlike you I'm of Swede-Dane-English heritage.

The reason Europeans are interested in more immigrants is they have need for more workers to keep their economies humming because advanced social development drops birthrates below replacement levels and national population numbers are declining in Europe the way they are in Japan.

So gitoverit!

There are issues with large scale immigration from places where cultures are radically different. What is needed are very robust acculturation efforts to bring those who want economic freedom and safety into the european cultural sphere and to get them to drop fear of of having to buffer their faith with dark age dogma.

Many of my best friends are and were Muslim, and are from where islamic fundamentalist notions are strong. To a person they all practice a much kinder gentler practice of faith than we are scared by in weekly fear-thy-brother television. Not one has ever been tempted to consider or perform honor killings or mutilation, or girl hiding and dumbing or other things may westerners consider highly likely among these people.

Actually it's us who need to lighten up. We need to actually befriend and interact in good will without streaming hate texts or speech.

 

[J842P]

They are all racist words for whites. Mexicans have "gringo" as a racist term for white people.

Gringo is not a racist term for white people, it is a term specifically for anyone from the USA. You can have a white person from Mexico (of which there are plenty) calling a black person from the USA a gringo. A white person from, say, Germany is not a gringo.

Gringo is actually an old Castillian Spanish term that was used to refer to any foreigner. In Latin America, it is specifically reserved for people from the United States (and maybe Canada?)

It isn't derogatory either. It is the equivalent of calling a person from Costa Rica a "Tico" or a Guatemalan a "chapín".

While what you are saying is true regarding the history and definition of the word, it is indeed being used by certain individuals with racist intentions.

Jingoist/xenophobic intentions maybe, but it certainly is not a term for *white* person, since many Mexicans / Central Americans identify as white.

This isn't to say that Mexicans/Central Americans aren't being racist, indeed, they come from extremely racist societies, much more racist than the USA.

I'm just saying, the word gringo isn't meant to refer to white people or even exclusively white Americans, but rather, just Americans.

 

[Derec]

Wow Derec the pink skin lover.

Huh? Where did I say that? I like all sorts of skin tones.
Yes, she is beautiful.

But so is she.


All I was saying was,

a) in the very unlikely case I have children with Memu, I would like both our heritages acknowledged, and that mine should not be erased because of the racist "one drop rule"
b) both look far better in a bikini than a burqa.

Get over it. It makes sense for more brown to be expressed in humans since scientists have proven we're in an unstoppable period of global warming where more resistance to over exposure to vitamin D via sun-skin interactions is demanded.

Global warming != the ozone hole. In fact, global warming would increase water evaporation thus increasing UV absorption in the atmosphere.

Brown is just as prettier, prettier to most I presume since most are not Sweden white.

Huh?

The reason Europeans are interested in more immigrants is they have need for more workers to keep their economies humming because advanced social development drops birthrates below replacement levels and national population numbers are declining in Europe the way they are in Japan.

Yes, European non-Muslim birth rates are abysmal. They would be better off increasing it rather than opening the floodgates for mass migration.
And even when you want to admit large number of migrants, countries need to be selective. They should only admit people who want to integrate into European societies, and not colonize it like these Islamic mass migrants want to do.

There are issues with large scale immigration from places where cultures are radically different.

Finally agreement! It simply does not make any sense for Europe (or US for that matter) to admit migrants, especially large numbers of them, simply because they show up at the border and demand admittance.

What is needed are very robust acculturation efforts to bring those who want economic freedom and safety into the european cultural sphere and to get them to drop fear of of having to buffer their faith with dark age dogma.

Those efforts do not seem to work for those who want to colonize Europe, not become part of European culture.
What is needed is to be more selective in the choice of immigrants. And of course, have more babies!

Many of my best friends are and were Muslim, and are from where islamic fundamentalist notions are strong. To a person they all practice a much kinder gentler practice of faith than we are scared by in weekly fear-thy-brother television. Not one has ever been tempted to consider or perform honor killings or mutilation, or girl hiding and dumbing or other things may westerners consider highly likely among these people.

You are right that not all Muslims are a problem. That's why I am for being selective, not for just banning everybody. That is as bad as blindly letting everybody in because actually acknowledging the threat of Islamism is seen as "bigoted".

Actually it's us who need to lighten up. We need to actually befriend and interact in good will without streaming hate texts or speech.

Do you think we can do that and still be selective re immigration? Or do you think we must blindly let in every Tariq, Daoud and Hassan that shows up at the border?

 

[Derec]

Jingoist/xenophobic intentions maybe, but it certainly is not a term for *white* person, since many Mexicans / Central Americans identify as white.

What do they check when they apply for colleges though?

I know they count as white if they shoot a black guy in self defense. *ducks*

 

[fromderinside]

Brown is just as prettier, prettier to most I presume since most are not Sweden white.

Huh?

The reason Europeans are interested in more immigrants is they have need for more workers to keep their economies humming because advanced social development drops birthrates below replacement levels and national population numbers are declining in Europe the way they are in Japan.

Yes, European non-Muslim birth rates are abysmal. They would be better off increasing it rather than opening the floodgates for mass migration.
And even when you want to admit large number of migrants, countries need to be selective. They should only admit people who want to integrate into European societies, and not colonize it like these Islamic mass migrants want to do.

There are issues with large scale immigration from places where cultures are radically different.

Finally agreement! It simply does not make any sense for Europe (or US for that matter) to admit migrants, especially large numbers of them, simply because they show up at the border and demand admittance.

What is needed are very robust acculturation efforts to bring those who want economic freedom and safety into the european cultural sphere and to get them to drop fear of of having to buffer their faith with dark age dogma.

Those efforts do not seem to work for those who want to colonize Europe, not become part of European culture.

Many of my best friends are and were Muslim, and are from where islamic fundamentalist notions are strong. To a person they all practice a much kinder gentler practice of faith than we are scared by in weekly fear-thy-brother television. Not one has ever been tempted to consider or perform honor killings or mutilation, or girl hiding and dumbing or other things may westerners consider highly likely among these people.

You are right that not all Muslims are a problem. That's why I am for being selective, not for just banning everybody. That is as bad as blindly letting everybody in because actually acknowledging the threat of Islamism is seen as "bigoted".

Actually it's us who need to lighten up. We need to actually befriend and interact in good will without streaming hate texts or speech.

Do you think we can do that and still be selective re immigration? Or do you think we must blindly let in every Tariq, Daoud and Hassan that shows up at the border?

You have a repeated and propagandistic theme in your reply. It comes in two parts. First we must be selective.

The second is that brown people want to colonize the white highly advanced industrial states is some sort of an underlying motive for people who want to get out of shitholes and parched areas.

The answer to the first is we are already very selective here in the states and in europe. Most of the issues with immigration arise from suspicion and greed by those who see color as profit and fear then presume evil intent to maintain advantage.

People have always tended to cluster with like people over the course of modern history. I presume it's a natural thing to do when confronted by inequity and suspicion by those who would be unfair. This view is very different from your let's not let them ever escape suspicion so we can keep them down approach you obviously trust.

Merkel had her intentions right but she failed to take in to account how many would act when they saw advantage in behaving poorly with respect to migrants. A large part of my approach would be school based teaching of cooperation and trust in schools rather than a deny acceptance, denigrate new members of your society.

This thing of after we've taken all we can from them for them to get in here that now we distrust them and keep them down because of some need for feeling superior to those different from us.

Believe me I know these things. I grew up in a small technical appended to traditional farm community in SE Washington where Catholics were rumored by children actually to have cloven feet as some might interpret for certain passages in the bible. Felt sorry for jews and blacks as well because of the open hostility extant about them. Fear has always been a easily deployed weapon against minorities throughout the US.

It's not about them. It's about us.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

So wait, if your child marries someone brown and has kids, has your family line “died out”?

Of course not. But with the "one drop doctrine" the white part of the heritage is being deliberately ignored and erased. That is also amazingly hateful, ain't it?

But who came up with the one drop doctrine???

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

But never let facts get in your way.

We've discussed those kinds of studies before.

And you've always been shown to be wrong in your analysis.

Those supposed "facts" are very selectively chosen to make a predetermined politically motivated point.

More irony.

For one, timeline is carefully chosen to avoid 911 instead.

The Global Terrorism Database, for example, goes back to 1970, but even if 9/11 is isolated, so what? It was, by all standards, an outlier in that the overwhelming majority of the deaths were caused by the collapse of the towers, which was something (allegedly) nobody could possibly have predicted would happen.

The best hope for the terrorists would have been a couple dozen deaths on isolated floors, not 3,000.

Here, just add in 3,000:

It doesn't really matter that guns have killed far more Americans than terrorism; the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that 153,144 people were killed by a gun between 2001 and 2013, while the Global Terrorism Database puts the number of people killed in terrorist attacks between 2001 and 2014 at around 3,046 6,046

153,144 vs 6,046.



And, of course, it doesn't change what has occurred since, nor the legitimate comparisons to the extent of terrorist attacks attributed to "right wing" terrorists.

Second, it over-counts "right wing" violence by attributing many acts with unknown or non-political motives to "right wing".

So only your boogeymen are real. Got it.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

That doesn't even make any sense.

You seriously need that explained to you?

Irony. Fun.

No explanation necessary.

Clearly not the case, since you couldn't make sense out of a very straightforward concept like direct experience removing your ignorance.

 

[Keith&Co.]

So wait, if your child marries someone brown and has kids, has your family line “died out”?

Of course not. But with the "one drop doctrine" the white part of the heritage is being deliberately ignored and erased. That is also amazingly hateful, ain't it?

But who came up with the one drop doctrine???

That's funny. The one-drop rule is ENTIRELY about the white heritage: either it's pure, 100%, or the person is worth less.

 

[Derec]

So wait, if your child marries someone brown and has kids, has your family line “died out”?

Of course not. But with the "one drop doctrine" the white part of the heritage is being deliberately ignored and erased. That is also amazingly hateful, ain't it?

But who came up with the one drop doctrine???

White racists came up with it, but black/POC racists are perpetuating it today.
Either way, it is racist. .

 

[Derec]

That's funny. The one-drop rule is ENTIRELY about the white heritage: either it's pure, 100%, or the person is worth less.

That was the origin. These days it's about the coveted and privileged "POC" status.

 

[Half-Life]

But who came up with the one drop doctrine???

That's funny. The one-drop rule is ENTIRELY about the white heritage: either it's pure, 100%, or the person is worth less.

Why does Obama identify as black? Sounds like he's diminishing himself by thinking he's black because of the one drop rule: "Since I am part-white, I can not identify as white because I am not pure. Therefore, I am black."

Obama has white supremacist mentality?!?!??!

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

But who came up with the one drop doctrine???

That's funny. The one-drop rule is ENTIRELY about the white heritage: either it's pure, 100%, or the person is worth less.

Why does Obama identify as black?

If it weren't for dickheads like some in this thread, he wouldn't. He would "identify" as a man. Unfortunately in this country there are still MILLIONS of ignorant fucking morons who can't seem to comprehend that and have infected our culture with this endless stupidity of separation based on skin pigmentation, so he is culturally forced to "identify as black" by those who think it actually matters.

 

[Half-Life]

Why does Obama identify as black?

If it weren't for dickheads like some in this thread, he wouldn't. He would "identify" as a man. Unfortunately in this country there are still MILLIONS of ignorant fucking morons who can't seem to comprehend that and have infected our culture with this endless stupidity of separation based on skin pigmentation, so he is culturally forced to "identify as black" by those who think it actually matters.

Are you saying light skinned mixed race people are bending to the whim of white supremacists?

 

[Keith&Co.]

But who came up with the one drop doctrine???

That's funny. The one-drop rule is ENTIRELY about the white heritage: either it's pure, 100%, or the person is worth less.

Why does Obama identify as black?

because according to many state governments, he IS black.

Sounds like he's diminishing himself

diminishing? That's fucking stupid.

Obama has white supremacist mentality?!?!??!

i don't think he thinks being black makes him an inferior, so, no. That's a big no.
All the no.