The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Love of country

Love of country

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 26
  7. 27
  8. 28
  9. All
I think it is unreasonable to love any country. One can love certain people, nature, mathematics, delicatessen meat, Bach's music or anything else that makes our life a joy. However, any country is a political entity ruled by an unrepresentative subset of the population. The subset consists of those individuals who want and have the skills to get political power. Support any country when you think it is right, and oppose it when you think it is wrong. In my view a country is wrong if it places any religious belief/non-belief or any ethnicity as being more worthwhile than any other religious belief/non-belief or ethnicity.

IMHO if all nations were merely convenient administrative divisions we would be better off.
Posted by david f, Tuesday, 6 May 2014 11:25:42 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
<<IM[F]O if all nations were merely convenient administrative divisions [under the dictates of some UN like body no doubt] we would be better off.>>

And in case you haven't guessed ...DavidF is a Green!
Posted by SPQR, Tuesday, 6 May 2014 5:20:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
SPQR, I notice you distorted David's statement by adding *YOUR* words to his quote. Thus 100% misrepresenting what David wrote. By doing that silly misrepresentation, you clearly "think" you can successfully use that lie against him.

SPQR, your reply was one big, silly -- *FAIL*.
Posted by Nhoj, Tuesday, 6 May 2014 6:00:08 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Oh Nhoj, no Nhoj, no Njoh...

I know DavidF's thinking very well
Posted by SPQR, Tuesday, 6 May 2014 6:05:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
SPQR, so where in his post does he say all countries should be under the "dictate of some UN like body"? That's right, he DOESN'T. From reading his post I suggest he's saying the OPPOSITE of what you are implying he said.

So, let's ask him --- SPQR are you suggesting that all countries should be under the "dictate of some UN type body?
Posted by Nhoj, Tuesday, 6 May 2014 7:11:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Oops. I meant So let's ask him -- "David" are you suggesting.......
Posted by Nhoj, Tuesday, 6 May 2014 7:15:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
NO
Posted by david f, Tuesday, 6 May 2014 7:20:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There ya go SPQR, that answers your false accusation. The answer is "NO".
Posted by Nhoj, Tuesday, 6 May 2014 8:49:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Nhoj,

You’re a newbie on the playing fields of OLO. And, judging by your ready acceptance of David's one word "no". I'd hazard a guess you're something of a newbie in most fields of life.

David is an avowed Green. And Bob Brown --the Oz Greens Moses, St Paul and Mother Teresa all in one -- is on record as saying that he would dearly love to see a world which was ruled over by a one person, one vote parliament.

Now, stop and think for a moment where that would leave poor old Oz with a measly voting block of 23 million?

Further, the Greens have a track record of seeking to undermine Oz sovereignty at every opportunity -- even your own Julia didn't trust them.

And if that wasn't enough, have a look at David's wording: “nations [would be] MERELY convenient administrative divisions”

"MERELY convenient administrative divisions”
Posted by SPQR, Wednesday, 7 May 2014 7:54:52 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The UN is a deeply flawed institution. It represents nations, some of which are undemocratic and tyrannical, rather than people. I would not replace it by a similar organisation. A democratic organisation genuinely representing people would be a different matter. However, it is not possible in the foreseeable future. As things are now I much prefer the government of Australia to the UN although the UN sometimes gets it right. Although I am a Green I do not have to have the same opinions as Bob Brown.

When I wrote ‘merely’ I meant merely. Administrative divisions do not go to war with each other.

However, problems such as pollution, loss of biodiversity, exploitation of labour, crime etc. extend over national borders.
Australia is fortunate in being an Island state. Even so our activities pollute the ocean and air. Refugees of various kind seek to come here. Like other countries we are part of the world. What we do affects the rest of the world. What the rest of the world does affects us.

Problems which extend over national borders cannot be solved by nations on their own.
Posted by david f, Wednesday, 7 May 2014 10:29:43 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi David,

A question from the floor re:
<<I would not replace [the UN] by a similar organisation. A democratic organisation genuinely representing people would be a different matter.>>

Would your *democratic * organisation be grounded on the principle *one person one vote*?
Posted by SPQR, Wednesday, 7 May 2014 10:42:56 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
david f, you like many of your type, are bad-mouthing "country" (i.e. "nation", "nationalism"), when you actually mean the government.

There is nothing "reasonable" about loving anything.
Love has nothing to do with reason.

"or anything else that makes our life a joy."

And a love of "country" is just a bird's eye/big picture view of all the little things we love wrapped up in one concept.

If you love Vegemite, Ned Kelly, the Nullarbor Plain, surfing/surfers, dingoes, the Big Pineapple, AC/DC (Bon Scott years), Peter Weir, Sydney Opera House, Countdown, the multicoloured strip fly screen on the corner shop, Golden Gaytime, Prisoner, the smell of onions on the BBQ, the jokey pseudo-mockery, Stubbies shorts, etc, why can't you sum all that up as "loving Australia", rather than just the individual components?

"IMHO if all nations were merely convenient administrative divisions we would be better off."

And if only our parents had just been guards/carers, without all that emotional love/hate stuff.
Keep Australia bureaucratic.

"Administrative divisions do not go to war with each other."

Kosovo, Bougainville, Kurdistan, Abkhazia, Crimea, Northern Ireland, Khalistan, Chechnya, Darfur, Kashmir...

Many of the world's current "countries" are the result of the dissolution of a country into its former administrative divisions (Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Soviet Union, Ireland) usually following conflict.

Most of the world's conflicts are attempts by ethnic groups to establish their own separate territory.
They are never going to express a bland, bureaucratic distance to their "country".

Nhoj, go back to English For Beginners class and ask the teacher what [this] means.
Posted by Shockadelic, Wednesday, 7 May 2014 11:40:29 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I support neither nations nor a planetary nation - democratic or otherwise.

Yes, there needs to be some minimal administration to protect people from violence and fraud, but it should be kept on a small/local scale while participation in all other bodies/societies, however big or small, should be voluntary.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Wednesday, 7 May 2014 11:41:12 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I guess you often don't appreciate your country
fully until you travel overseas. I remember clearly
the nostalgia I felt when in New York I came across
a copy of The Australian Woman's Weekly. I almost cried.
Do I love my country? You betcha!
I couldn't live anywhere else.
Posted by Foxy, Wednesday, 7 May 2014 12:54:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy,
I haven't moved in 13 years and I yet I live in a different country, when I moved here it was a multicultural community,now it's a Chinese community. Chinese shops, Chinese people walking the main street, five new Chinese brothels in the last two years, Chinese nightclubs, pool halls, doctors, dentists. We now have a Chinese festival instead of a community festival, funny thing is Preston was more multicultural before "multiculturalism".
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Wednesday, 7 May 2014 9:40:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jay Of Melbourne wrote of Preston, "Now it's a Chinese community". Read his post folks, OMG the Chinese have taken over Preston (Jay's "white" Aussie Preston is no more).

Hmmmm, now let's ditch the paranoiac racism and fear of anyone "not" white and ...... EXAMINE THE *FACTS*.

Here is a link that shows the 2011 census results for Preston...

http://www.censusdata.abs.gov.au/census_services/getproduct/census/2011/quickstat/SSC211113?opendocument&navpos=220

The total population of Preston is 29,975 with just 1,179 people of Chinese ancestry. There's 4,000 people in Preston of Italian, Greek, Indian and Vietnamese ancestry, FOUR TIMES larger than Chinese ancestry. And 17,360 Preston people were AUSTRALIAN born, 14.72 times LARGER than those of Chinese ancestry.

I've just proven, with the census *FACTS*, that Jay Of Melbourne is a typical forum bigot, who like other forum bigots, lives in fear of and loathing towards people who are not "white" Australians. Just another paranoid, far right wing forum racist.
Posted by Nhoj, Wednesday, 7 May 2014 11:05:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Nhoj, Jay already mentioned Preston's multiethnic history (Italians, Greeks, etc.)

What he lament is the *increase* in Chinese over others.

The question with 1,179 responses was not ancestry but country of birth.

That's mainland China only (does not include Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan or Singapore, so the total ethnic Chinese immigrants would be even higher).

That 3.9% of Chinese mainland immigrants is more than *double* the national percentage (1.5%).

Include the native-born (country of birth: Australia) ethnic Chinese descendents and other sources mentioned above and the figure probably doubles.

Hardly surprising then for Jay to notice an overabundance of Chinese in the neighbourhood.
Posted by Shockadelic, Thursday, 8 May 2014 5:11:28 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Highly significantly --it appears that David has declined to answer my question:

"Would your *democratic* (world) organisation be grounded on the principle *one person one vote*"
Posted by SPQR, Thursday, 8 May 2014 6:41:03 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I have concerns when some of the ism's come to the fore and are used to manipulate, dictate and ultimately control the thinking of the general populace. Through nationalism, and under the guise of patriotism, horrendous crimes have been perpetrated against mankind, not the least world wars and mass genocide. Nationalism has been used by imperialists as the mechanism to allow exploitation and the domination of weaker peoples and states.
The fear of some Australians is that their "cultural identity" will be swamped by others, who will impose their "cultural identity" in its place, thus destroying something they see as worthwhile preserving, not unique to Australia. Often it is easy for a power seeking demagog, a Hitler type, to manipulate all these uneasy feelings to their advantage. The demagog exploits the fears and prejudices of people, often invoking an unreal idealised version of "cultural identity" that must be preserved at all cost, from those that would destroy that 'which must be preserved at all cost'. The best way of course to guarantee preservation from the "inferior destroyers" is a preemptive strike, get them before they get you, do what is necessary! In that way, so much barbarism has been totally justified.
Posted by Paul1405, Thursday, 8 May 2014 7:46:42 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul

The most potent, and most often exploited ISM in current day Oz is the (FALSE) cry of RACISM.

Party’s like the GREEN have used it to the max to divide the community and garner votes from the non-thinkers.

And if you want to further your career drop a few hints that you feel you have been discriminated against --it works wonders
Posted by SPQR, Thursday, 8 May 2014 8:55:01 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
SPQR,

What are you saying? Racism and discrimination is some modern '"Urban Myth" perpetuated and fostered by lefty Greens with a secret agenda, such people as myself. Are you saying if R and D exists in the World, Australia is in some unique way devoid of such shamefulness.

<<And if you want to further your career drop a few hints that you feel you have been discriminated against --it works wonders>>

Did it work for you?
Posted by Paul1405, Thursday, 8 May 2014 11:04:22 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,

<<What are you saying? Racism and discrimination is some modern '"Urban Myth">>

Racism no doubt exists --but at no where near the level(s) in Oz some (like the scurrilous Greens!) are wont to put about.

[Now take a seat before you read the next line I’d hate to be responsible for you injuring yourself –when you faint in disbelief & horror]
IT EVEN EXISTS IN NON-WHITE COMMUNITIES/GROUP!

But I have seen heaps of “racism” claims in my time and most were fabrications or exaggerations concocted to score political or career advantage.

<<Did it work for you?>>
No Paul. Regrettably I have the wrong ancestry I had to work to anything I accrued.

However, I was witness to an incident where one individual of south Asian extraction held a large govt dept to ransom on a *FALSE* claim of racism --and got her way --because the dept didn't want to wear mud that would stick even if it won.
Posted by SPQR, Thursday, 8 May 2014 12:03:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Shockadelic,
Yes, exactly, the census doesn't count the students and the Chinese people who live elsewhere but congregate in High St Preston.
I'm not particularly bothered by it as Nhoj suggests because even if the bars, shops and restaurants were all White owned I still wouldn't be patronising them.
I'm merely pointing out that retail space and cultural life in Preston hasn't been so concentrated in the hands of one ethnic group for a long time and I doubt it's been 90% dominated by one ethnic group since the end of WW2. (Yes Nhoj I've actually walked from Wood St down to Bell St and counted the Chinese owned businesses)
Multiculturalists always love to brag about the expanded range of dining options that immigration has brought but the residents of Preston have actually seen theirs diminish, the Indian restaurant is gone, the Thai restaurant is gone, the Turkish takeaway closed and almost all the fish and chip shops, lunch bars and takeaways are run by Chinese...other than that at dinner time if you don't feel like Asian food or Pizza you have to drive to Coburg or Thomastown which are still pretty multicultural, ie there's a variety of options.
What has to be said too is that in Melbourne we had one "Chinatown" until the 2000's, now we have at least seven as far as I know, even the Vietnamese are being edged out of Springvale and Footscray.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Thursday, 8 May 2014 12:56:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I forgot to add, for sure monocultural towns are boring, I grew up in one, then at 21 I moved to a vibrant multicultural metropolis but now once again I'm back in a monocultural suburb, the fact that this one is ethnically different from the first is immaterial, it's still just as monotonous.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Thursday, 8 May 2014 1:00:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I've lived in the Western suburbs of Sydney.
And in the Eastern suburbs of Melbourne.
I've also lived in Kempsey, and Byron.
And overseas from the US, Germany, Mexico, and
Canada.

I have never been bored in any of them.
Posted by Foxy, Thursday, 8 May 2014 1:38:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear SPQR,

I don't believe at this time it is possible to have a democratic world organisation as most people in the world do not live in democratic societies. People would vote as blocs so one person - one vote would be meaningless. A democratic world society would only be possible in a world where almost all people accept democratic values so I don't know if it would ever be possible.
Posted by david f, Thursday, 8 May 2014 2:26:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jay Of Melbourne, and a handful of other rightie racists here, just utterly HATE seeing "one" race dominate..... EXCEPT.... when the race is, yep you guessed it, WHITE.

They are more than happy to see WHITE domination. They are paranoid and in desperate fear and loathing of their "perceived" Chinese invasion of Preston (when only a tiny, tiny miniscule percentage of the population there is actually Chinese)

Several of these racists replied to my previous post (which 100% proved that Chinese are a very, very, very tiny minority in Preston) that it only applies to Chinese born in China. They said that these hated Chinese have Aussie born children, therefore that proves the Chinese are dominating Preston. Preston has just a mere 3.9% of it's population that were born in China. Now, in my post I pointed out there are FOUR times more people from Preston born in Italy, Greece, India and Vietnam than born in China. Do these forum anti Chinese racists not think that these people from Italy, Greece, India and Vietnam ALSO have children born here? The forum racists ignore that, and imply that there's ONLY children of "Chinese people" born here, and therefore they dominate the numbers (OMG they're breeding like rabbits and Preston's end is nigh).

The forum racists here are pretty stupid, as I've just shown. They'll do anything to inflate the number of Chinese people in Preston, and pretend that their cherished "whites" are being driven out and dominated by Chinese people. Typical far right wing racist paranoia and fear.

These racist old men on this forum belong in a long past era.
Posted by Nhoj, Thursday, 8 May 2014 2:41:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Davidf

Thanks! There may be hope for you yet
Posted by SPQR, Thursday, 8 May 2014 2:45:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear SPQR,

Do you know anything about David F's
background? If you're impressed with
the fact that Tony Abbott is a Roads Scholar,
ooops sorry, Freudian slip here, I meant a
Rhodes Scholar. Then you should also be made
aware that David is an Oxford University
graduate, and much, much, much, more.
Posted by Foxy, Thursday, 8 May 2014 3:26:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It all depends on definitions, david f...

"I think it is unreasonable to love any country."

I think it can be reasonable to [be in] love [with] a country. Just as parents can love all their children. Even the ones they don't like.

Unconditional love should be reserved for between humans... or with pets. Love for institutions should always be conditional.

That's why I think the 'My Country, Right or Wrong!" brigade are wrong; because if a country is being wrong two wrongs don't make it right.

The George Santayana aphorism sums it up: "To me, it seems a dreadful indignity to have a soul controlled by geography."
Posted by WmTrevor, Thursday, 8 May 2014 4:16:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
WMTrevor, what you write is so true.
Posted by Nhoj, Thursday, 8 May 2014 4:26:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy,
Yeah well I've never had the money to do anything interesting and I never will so I'm stuck with boring monoculturalism, when I was a kid in country Victoria the Chinese restaurant was where working class people would go for a really special night out, nowadays it's not so special. Cramers, The Rose Shamrock or Zagames, the pokie pubs are the special night out these days, Parmagiana, Grazier's beef pie, Garlic Prawns, roast of the day...now theres something you can't get down High Street! Noice ;)
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Thursday, 8 May 2014 4:51:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Wmtrevor,
So in contrast to nationalism rootless cosmopolitanism is a dignified existence?
Nhoj,
Yeah well the past eras of Preston still in living memory were multicultural so maybe I do belong there, now that it's reverted to a monoculture I'm a fish out of water. We had a big outdoor Diwali festival a few years ago, with kabaddi,cricket, music, food stalls and all but the event didn't take off, which is ironic because on paper there are about four times as many Indians here as Chinese. Now we just have the Chinese Lantern Festival or the Kite Festival or whatever the hell they're calling it now,I'm not sure even the mosques bother with an Eid carnival anymore.
So the evidence is clear by your figures, 1,000 Chinese in a community constitutes an economic and cultural takeover.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Thursday, 8 May 2014 5:13:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I love my country
Give me a gun and I'll show you how much.
I love dinki dye Aussies too.
Give me a gun and I'll show you how much
Posted by chrisgaff1000, Thursday, 8 May 2014 6:30:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Foxy,

I am not an Oxford graduate. However, a number of years ago I was at Cambridge University attending a conference and saw a beautiful woman who was attending the same conference. At the time she was living in Norway, and I was living in the United States. We are now living together in Australia where she was born.
Posted by david f, Thursday, 8 May 2014 6:38:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul1405 "I have concerns when some of the ism's come to the fore and are used to manipulate, dictate and ultimately control the thinking of the general populace"

Isms, eh? Does that include multiculturalism?

This is being used to weaken the strong.

Much easier to "exploit and dominate" White people when they become a minority in their own lands, are prohibited from objecting to their obliteration, and made to feel eternal shame over events that occurred long before they were even born.

Get ready for the anti-racist demagog, the Anti-Hitler.
He will be just as ruthless to his enemies, the "nationalists" who threaten his promised utopia.

Jay, the irony of a "non-discriminatory" immigration policy is that it ends up extremely biased, simply because some ethnic groups already have such large populations (Chinese being the largest of all).

Is it a "fair go" for all, when there are 1.3 billion Chinese?

Even compared to other large groups, it's overwhelming: 10 times the Russians, 10 times the Japanese, 15 times the Vietnamese, 9 times the Italians.
A supposedly "unbiased" policy will, in fact, always be biased: to the Chinese.

david f "so I don't know if it would ever be possible."

Well then, how is your global authority, of which we are but an "administrative division" going to work?

Nhoj "They are more than happy to see WHITE domination."

In a country whose founding and history is primarily White, that's a perfectly reasonable expectation.

It's also perfectly reasonable to expect Chinese domination.
In CHINA!

"Now, in my post I pointed out there are FOUR times more people from Preston born in Italy, Greece, India and Vietnam than born in China"

When *combined* together! Well, golly!
Can you teach me how to do that trick?

WmTrevor "because if a country is being wrong two wrongs don't make it right."

So displacing Whites because they displaced Blacks would be "wrong"?

chrisgaff1000 "Give me a gun and I'll show you how much"

Finally, an anti-racist shows their true colours.
But their violence and hatred is okay.
They're the "good guys".
Posted by Shockadelic, Thursday, 8 May 2014 7:31:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The violent hatred of Shockadelic towards non white people is there for all to see in his above post.

He's part of a radical, tiny minority culture of mostly old men and skinheads in Australia who fear and hate cultures that are not "white". It's a trip back to pre WW2 Australia. Racists like Shockadelic happily exist in a long bygone era. They are old fashioned, old and in the way. Look at the post by Chrisgaff1000 .. he shows he's more than happy to murder his hated "darkies" with guns, in order to preserve his "white" Australia.
Posted by Nhoj, Thursday, 8 May 2014 7:47:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Nhoj,
You're either a 15 year old boy or a 65 year old woman, it's hard to tell which.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Thursday, 8 May 2014 8:20:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
<<Now take a seat before you read the next line I’d hate to be responsible for you injuring yourself –when you faint in disbelief & horror]
IT EVEN EXISTS IN NON-WHITE COMMUNITIES/GROUP!>>

SPQR, When have I ever claimed racism is purely a white mans disease. What fosters racism is often unrealistic fears brought on by ignorance, which in turn is a product of a poor education, which resulted in lack of opportunity and social disadvantage. A well educated person might be a racists for opportunistic reason, using racism as a vehicle to further their own ambitions, or simply to exploit a particular group.
It is difficult say, for a poor white person to lash out at other poor whites who are in competition with him for jobs, housing, etc, they are to much alike, so he can't find a discernible difference to justify aggressive behavior towards those who are like himself. On the other hand he can easily identify those that are in some way different to himself, be it the colour of their skin, religion, whatever and then latch onto that, and use it to vent frustration and anger, for what is essentially his own failure.
Posted by Paul1405, Thursday, 8 May 2014 9:49:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul, please don't confuse them with logic. They will be very upset and will likely increase their racially/culturally based tantrums.

They're almost all very old men, and won't be with us for much longer. The younger generations are far more educated and knowledgeable than these poor geriatrics. Australia has a great and diverse future ahead.
Posted by Nhoj, Thursday, 8 May 2014 10:19:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,
Nope, intra group violence is far more prevalent than inter group violence, "Racist" violence is almost unheard of in Australia and even in the U.S.A violent crime is a one way street, Black on Black, White on White, Mexican on Mexican.
What happens in multi racial communities is that trust within ethnic groups breaks down while trust between ethnic groups is strengthened, so poor Whites living in the most diverse areas tend to have generally positive perceptions of other ethnic groups because they have day to day contact with them. For example we might view Non Whites as more trustworthy in some respects, they might be seen as "solid" when it comes to, shall we say unorthodox business transactions and the cash economy. When I do business with middle class Asians things always go smoothly from my point of view because they tend to have a more laissez faire attitude toward rules and regulations but at the same time they want an "Aussie" tradesman as they don't trust their own because they'll rip them off, some have actually said that straight up. It's the same mentality as the White people who prefer Asian doctors or the many Aussie tradesmen who only hire Asian labourers and subbies, it's because they're seen as hard working, discrete and trustworthy while Whites are thought more likely to take liberties. You could say that everyone is on their best behaviour when dealing with people of different groups and the bitchiness and sledging is reserved for those with whom we have the most in common, and as Tommy Sotomayor pointed out during the Donald Stirling fiasco, it's just business, you don't have to like the people you work with, you don't have to trust them but during business hours you're nice to them all the same.
Paul I don't know where your side gets its ideas about racism because your activists and scientists consistently find that multiculturalism works, your posts make you sound like a doubting Thomas
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Thursday, 8 May 2014 11:09:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"So in contrast to nationalism rootless cosmopolitanism is a dignified existence?"

If you were reflecting back my opinion, Jay of Melbourne, it would have been more accurate to ask, "So in contrast to unconditional nationalism rootless cosmopolitanism is a dignified existence?"

To which I would have said that it could be but it isn't an axiomatic dichotomy and depends on the validity, form and expression of the nationalism...

But as for 'rootless cosmopolitanism' I can send you a list of bars, clubs and parlours guaranteed to solve that problem. Though the issue of maintaining dignity under the circumstances would be entirely up to you. Not every interpersonal experience has a happy ending.
Posted by WmTrevor, Friday, 9 May 2014 9:27:16 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
<<in the U.S.A violent crime is a one way street, Black on Black, White on White, Mexican on Mexican.>>
Are you talking today. as past history certainly does not support that. But don't confuse the criminal who will perpetrate violent acts against anyone for criminal gain.
An example of racism in Australia's history; Chinese on the goldfields.
European miners had many reasons for disliking the Chinese but an anti Chinese sentiment existed in Australia and Europe long before the gold rush. It was borne of a European belief in superiority over other races and a fear that cheap Chinese laborers were taking European jobs.
In the US after the civil war, the south was decimated and this gave rise to extreme acts of racism as poor blacks competed with poor whites for what little there was.
Racism existed in Australia in the past just as it does today. After WWII when large numbers of Southern Europeans migrated, they were viewed with a degree of hostility from some. This hostility never spilled over into extreme violence as times were relatively good with full employment etc, so there was no severe competition for jobs, houses and so on.
There is always the bigoted racists around, and no matter what, they 'hate' and it can't be avoided. Look at the policies of a racists political party like Australia First, you will see in those policies the elements that create unjustified fear. they talk of the need to "Protect sovereignty" through "defense", the fortress Australia mentality. They refer to "social cohesion", migration and employment the need to dismantle "multiculturalism". Their policies are geared to a totally homogenous society and to what ends they would go to in achieving that is unclear,
Posted by Paul1405, Friday, 9 May 2014 9:54:00 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Nhoj, I don't "hate" anyone or "fear" other cultures.

I question the sensibleness and claimed "necessity" of an all-inclusive perpetually-numerous policy.

What I "fear" is the social instability/confusion that future generations will have to deal with.

It's all very easy to profess an acceptance of "Chinese", "Turkish", "Tongan" and "Mexican" people and culture.

Nice neat comprehensible little pigeonholes.

That's what you've got *now*, because immigrants bring their established lifestyles and identities with them.

But what of the *children* of Chinese-Turkish parents who marry and have kids with the children of Tongan-Mexican parents.

And then those children grow up and marry Zulu-Tamil-Korean-Tahitians.

Who the hell are those people going to "be"?
What kind of identity is even possible for such poor sods?

"Human"? That means NOTHING!
Humans don't live as humans.
They live as Chinese, Turks, Tongans, Mexicans, etc.

"It's a trip back to pre WW2 Australia."

I hope not.
No surfers, no rock n roll, no bad taste horror-comedy Nazi zombie movies.

"Look at the post by Chrisgaff1000"

I believe his violent intentions were directed at "dinky di Aussies" not the "darkies". Read it again.
Perhaps Chris can clarify.

"poor geriatrics"

I thought ageism was a no-no.

Paul1405 "A well educated person might be a racists for opportunistic reason"

A well-educated person might be aware of the Human Development Index, GDP-per-capita, the genetic, historical and cultural/linguistic relationships (or lack thereof) of the many peoples of the world.

Only an uninformed person would accept a superficial, simplistic utopian fairytale as political policy, just because "we're all humans".

"It is difficult say, for a poor white person to lash out at other poor whites"

Que? Every bloody weekend! (not me personally)

"to what ends they would go to in achieving that is unclear"

Of course, the implied mass murder/massacres.
Because we all know every "nationalist" is really a Nazi at heart.
Yawn!

The only good Nazi is a living dead Nazi.
Posted by Shockadelic, Friday, 9 May 2014 12:27:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear davidf,

Thank you for the topic. Hopefully I can provide a lucid response.

Permit me to couch my argument in terms of empathy. When we are newborn our 'love and affection' is primarily directed toward our mother after all she is the one who most often feeds us and attends to our other needs. Bonds are laid down that normally last for life. Fathers and siblings are the next in line followed perhaps by pets then grandparents. As the infant develops so does their empathy for other humans and creatures. It becomes distressing for them to see others in pain or to be parted from them.

Through childhood this circle of empathy extends into the community often through mother's groups, play groups, child care, and preschool. As the child gets older developing a sense of belonging to extended groups becomes important. Some may fill this need through sporting teams or other clubs, through broad friendship groups, and later perhaps through membership of subculture cliques etc.

Often it is only through the security offered by knowledge one's of place in an inner ring that facilitates a preparedness to empathise with those further removed. This is a journey that in most people continues their entire life, sometimes retarded for a time and sometimes accelerated but none the less always moving outward. Love of country is just a way point of that journey, though perhaps it might be regarded by some as a detour.

Eventually people get to the stage you have davidf, able to empathise with humanity in its entirety and extend that to the natural world.

Insecurity however stymies that perfectly natural development. For some the journey is arrested by racism or bigotry, for others by war, for many by unscrupulous media or politicians, but in the end fear and lack of empathy play a large part.

So to love of country. A stated I think it is part of the natural, though by no means essential, part of a developing sense of empathy, combined with fear and insecurity it becomes nationalism reinforcing the sense of 'us' and 'them'.
Posted by SteeleRedux, Friday, 9 May 2014 1:16:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear SteeleRedux,

Empathy for all sentient beings is admirable.

Identification is not.

It is sad when empathy for others is misplaced or misdirected towards inanimate objects, including imaginary mental constructs such as "nation".
Posted by Yuyutsu, Friday, 9 May 2014 1:28:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Good post SteeleRedux. However, it will go way over the heads of the handful of fear filled people on this forum.

They just won't comprehend what you wrote. They insist that Australia be as "white" as possible, they fear other cultures, and they are intellectually incapable (via a lifetime's dogma training) of empathy towards people who are not just like "them". They won't change, their "beliefs" are ingrained and nothing you or anyone else says will change their "beliefs".
Posted by Nhoj, Friday, 9 May 2014 1:37:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Wm Trevor,
LOL, I see what you did there, very good, very good indeed.
No my rootless existence is well in hand thanks.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Friday, 9 May 2014 2:28:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It is no surprise that those pushing the line: patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel (or a close approximation of it) are from the left of the spectrum. The parties they support --even though they themselves may not have woken up to it-- aspire to corral the world inhabitants into one giant commune.

Steelwools point about nationalism having unique qualities which instills a << (hateful)sense of 'us' and 'them'>> is bogus.

There a couple of famous psychological experiments wherein school boys (bosom buddy classmates) were divided into different groups and their separateness was nurtured --even with something as innocuous as different coloured socks & group stories. They quickly developed a deep intergroup antipathy. All it took was conditioning in a separate identity. State sponsored Multiculturalism does it every day, but no one of the left wants to notice it.

The two major offshoots of Judaism,Christianity and Islam, couldn't be any further from nationalism, they both discount national identities and proffer a greater human-wide identity --but they have been responsible for some of the most horrendous hate crimes.

Paul says: yes I know that racism in not endemic to whites... then slips straight back to his partys-line ...with these examples:
1) << [The treatment of] Chinese on the [Oz] goldfields…
2) <<extreme acts of racism [on] poor blacks [post-US civil war]
3) <<[The treatment of] Southern Europeans [immigrants post-WWII in Oz]

How many examples of non-white racism do you count in Paul’s “examples”eh?

And this is THE PROBLEM with groups like the Greens --when it comes to outing “racism” they are all one-eyed.

And as for this (from the same Paul): << middle class Asians …they want an "Aussie" tradesman as they don't trust their own because they'll rip them off,>>
It's total and utter BS!
I have never experienced that & I have very close relationship with the Chinese community. I think he is generalizing from his dealings with two or three individuals at most!
Posted by SPQR, Friday, 9 May 2014 4:22:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
SteeleRedux, your ripples of empathy though get weaker, not stronger, the more distant you get from the starting point.

One's feelings for one's family are not going to "equal" those toward a stranger from an unrelated people, on the other side of the planet, whom you never even meet.

You're also presuming there is a universal goal and we have some obligation to keep going further until we reach it.
If we don't, there's something wrong with us.

This reflects the "Christianity without Christ" at the heart of multiculturalism/anti-racism.

It's a religious perspective, not a pragmatic political one.
It's a "sin" (and now made a crime: discrimination, vilification) to not be universally loving.

I don't have to love all beings, all humans or even my mother.
If this is the new religion, I am a heretic and blasphemer and proud of it.

If I weigh the same as a duck, I'm made of wood, and therefore... a Nazi!

Yuyutsu "Empathy for all sentient beings is admirable.
Identification is not."

Speaking of identification, why should I consider an immigrant (whose psychosocial self developed in an alien context for many years, including the critically important early childhood) "Australian" (a common identity) just because they live here, in the same geographical location?

Nhoj, just keep repeating "fear, hate, Nazi, fear, hate, Nazi".

If you think that's what you're dealing with *now* with me, you're going to get a big shock in the socially/economically dysfunctional future, Boy Who Cried Adolf.

Brains! Brains!
Must eat Hitler's brain!
Posted by Shockadelic, Friday, 9 May 2014 7:22:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
When anyone brings up Hitler and the Nazis in their defense, we *KNOW* they've totally lost the debate.

Example = Shockadelic just wrote that I "repeated Nazi, Nazi" in my posts. Ok son, tell us which in post I used the "Nazi" term. That's right son, I DIDN'T.

We all know Toneliar Abbott is a liar. Now Shockaliar has just been outed as a liar too.

Poor little Shockaliar. He tries so hard. Ha ha ha.
Posted by Nhoj, Friday, 9 May 2014 9:13:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"But what of the *children* of Chinese-Turkish parents who marry and have kids with the children of Tongan-Mexican parents.

And then those children grow up and marry Zulu-Tamil-Korean-Tahitians.

Who the hell are those people going to "be"?
What kind of identity is even possible for such poor sods?"

That's easy, Shockaholic, they will be AUSTRALIANS.

Somewhere along the way they will have also intermarried with people of English, Irish, Scottish, German and Italian descent (being the larger ethnic groups). They will speak English, play Aussie rules and cricket and soccer, surf, eat tacos, put kimchi on their yuros and BBQ snags, wear their hair in corn-rows, sing in Christian choirs, go to Gallipoli, do a gap year in London or Beijing (where they will burst into tears when they smell gumleaves - China had big eucalypt forests) and love all the things about Australia mentioned in previous posts.

What else could they be but Australians with that background combined with that culture?
Posted by Cossomby, Friday, 9 May 2014 11:31:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
In 1988 an historian characterised Australian history in four 50 years phases.

1788-1838 An Aboriginal country with a minority of Europeans in a handful of places on the coast. 1788 Indigenous pop. est. 3/4-1 million. 1838 Non-indigenous pop. ca 150,000. (Probably overall pop. lower than in 1788)

1838-1888 A predominantly immigrant country courtesy of the gold rushes, mostly British, but with people from a remarkably wide range of places - other European especially Italian and German, Chinese, Afghan, Indian, South American, etc. Majority Aboriginal in 1838, but well outnumbered by 1888. 1888 Non-indigenous pop. 3 million. (x20)

1888-1938 'Australian'-born (with intermarriage between all above) begin to predominate. 'Australian' culture crystallises (Gallipoli etc.) 1888 3 million - 1938 7 million. (x2)

1938-1988 The second major immigration, post WW2. Initially European, but substantial Asian (Vietnamese) after 1970. Popn. more than doubles, from ca 7 million to 16.5 million. (x2.4)

1988-2038 We are half way through continuing major immigration with the range of sources now world-wide. By 2038 Australia will be as different from 1988, as 1988 was from 1938, as 1938 was from 1888, as etc. Popn. 2011 was 21.5million. (x1.3)

So what is Australia? Continual change - continual invigoration. If it didn't change it wouldn't be Australia. No need for angst.
Posted by Cossomby, Saturday, 10 May 2014 12:07:31 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A final note.

About 20 odd years ago I visited the Sovereign Hill reconstructed gold mining village at Ballarat. I chatted to one of the managers about the nature of tourism there. He told me of Vietnamese family who had recently visited. Following their naturalisation ceremony in Melbourne, they had celebrated by visiting Sovereign Hill to learn about what was now 'their' history.

Anyone can, everyone has, become Australian. Love it or hate it, they just have to see it as their own.
Posted by Cossomby, Saturday, 10 May 2014 12:17:26 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Cossomby, three highly intelligent posts from you. *YOU* are a typical Aussie, part of the great majority, who understands the "factual" ramifications of migration.

Australia has always been in change, it's currently in change, and will always be in change into the future. We are not a "white" mono culture, never have been, and never will be ... a tiny minority of Australians don't comprehend this fact.
Posted by Nhoj, Saturday, 10 May 2014 12:33:51 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
How many examples of non-white racism do you count in Paul’s “examples”eh?
SPUD how about The Rwandan Genocide was a genocidal mass slaughter of Tutsi in Rwanda by members of the Hutu majority.

as for; <<And as for this (from the same Paul): << middle class Asians …they want an "Aussie" tradesman as they don't trust their own because they'll rip them off,>>

Sorry SPUD, I didn't post that I think it was Jay.
Posted by Paul1405, Saturday, 10 May 2014 7:45:25 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Cossomby "That's easy, Shockaholic, they will be AUSTRALIANS."

A poodle/alsation/dingo/terrier/hound is not a "chihuahua".

No they won't be "Australians", because "Australians" (the ethnic group) are not of Chinese-Turkish-Tongan-Mexican-Zulu-Tamil-Korean-Tahitian ancestry.

Were any of the Anzacs of Chinese-Turkish-Tongan-Mexican-Zulu-Tamil-Korean-Tahitian ancestry?

Have any of our Olympic champions been of Chinese-Turkish-Tongan-Mexican-Zulu-Tamil-Korean-Tahitian ancestry?

Did you go to school with anyone of Chinese-Turkish-Tongan-Mexican-Zulu-Tamil-Korean-Tahitian ancestry?

Do any of our greatest films star an actor of Chinese-Turkish-Tongan-Mexican-Zulu-Tamil-Korean-Tahitian ancestry?

Name one famous "Australian" who has Chinese-Turkish-Tongan-Mexican-Zulu-Tamil-Korean-Tahitian ancestry.

If people of Chinese-Turkish-Tongan-Mexican-Zulu-Tamil-Korean-Tahitian ancestry are "Australians" the term/concept/identity has lost any meaning it ever had.

In our past and present it *meant* something.
Something particular, distinct, recognisable.
Not anything and everything.

Ask anyone in a foreign country what an "Australian" is, and the image that pops into their head will bear no resemblance to someone of Chinese-Turkish-Tongan-Mexican-Zulu-Tamil-Korean-Tahitian ancestry.

The Chinese are not anything and everything.
Turks are not anything and everything.
Tongans are not anything and everything.

If they were, they wouldn't be Chinese, Turks or Tongans.

There is *no* ethnic identity that can be anything and everything.

Ethnicity, by definition, is what is *common/shared*.
*Including* ancestry.

"No need for angst."

Yes, just ignore that in the first four phases you mention, the majority of all immigrants were *related* peoples.
Probably close to 99% were Whites/Europeans.

Now, in the fifth phase, 80% of immigrants are unrelated/dissimilar to the descendents of those earlier phases.

But this is just business as usual? Same old same old?

Nhoj, people like you bring up the Nazis all the time.
Whether you personally referred to them in this thread is beside the point.

I've heard "Nazi, Nazi, Nazi" from your kind on this forum for years.
If you haven't yet done so, you will.
Sooner or later.
Posted by Shockadelic, Saturday, 10 May 2014 1:25:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Shockadelic,
The opposing view to political correctness isn't "political incorrectness" it's logic,integrity and honesty, the other side are at best dishonest, at worst insane and there's no point engaging with them at all.
Here's a video which shows exactly the type of people we're dealing with:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIj6kPoi4ow
I suggest we post what we want and don't respond to people who bait us, they don't have a point, we do.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Saturday, 10 May 2014 1:51:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Shockadelic wrote -- "Australians (the ethnic group)".

Shockadelic believes Australians are an "ethnic group", and that this "ethnic group" is ... wait for it ... only "white" people. Sometimes you just can't cure ignorance, when it's as deep as that.

Shockadelic will go to the grave with this backward, factually ignorant and 1800s era attitude. He is a man of the past, and most certainly not a typical Australian. He is part of a tiny minority of "white Australia" Australians.
Posted by Nhoj, Saturday, 10 May 2014 1:59:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Schokaholic asks: Were any of the Anzacs/Olympic/go to school with/ film stars/famous Australians of Chinese-Turkish-Tongan-Mexican-Zulu-Tamil-Korean-Tahitian ancestry?

In the past, obviously not that varied a combination, but in the future, definitely yes, at least to an equivalent mixture. (I wonder if there really is anyone with that exact ancestry?)

Australia / Australians have/are and will continue to change. In 500 years the momentary 99% proportion of British will be a historic phase, just as the 100% Aboriginal was, but British culture set the basis for Australian (non-Aboriginal) culture and it will continue to be the basis - for the simple reason that this stability is exactly what attracts people to come here.

I went to school with (a while ago now) Chinese-Australians and a mix of Russians, Estonians, Poles etc. reflecting the post war migration. By now their grandchildren have any number of ancestries. I am English/Irish/Scottish by descent but have part Philippino and part Italian grandchildren.

Right now, I personally know many individuals of multiple descent (the most complex I can think of is Aboriginal-Afghan-Maori-Chinese-Scottish). Even though I live in a rural area, I would find it hard not to interact with Australians of multiple descent - and they all regard themselves as Australians.

Schocaholic: "Now, in the fifth phase, 80% of immigrants are unrelated/dissimilar to the descendants of those earlier phases."

That may be so on a year-to-year basis but in the long run ie. last decade, British and New Zealanders have been the dominant groups. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Australia.
Posted by Cossomby, Saturday, 10 May 2014 2:15:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
PS Thinking about friends and colleagues of mixed descent, eg people with Chinese ancestry ca 1890s, or Indian a few generations back, intermingled with a few other lineages on the way, mostly you would never guess from their appearance, accent, or behaviour. Even Shocakdelic meeting them would assume they were 'ordinary' Australians, because that's exactly what they are.

Indeed the point I was making earlier is that in another 100 plus years Australians descended from multiple ancestries will not identify with any of those lines - they will just be 'Australian'.

We can help by not demonising any current ethic group and making them feel that they have to stick together for safety.
Posted by Cossomby, Saturday, 10 May 2014 2:29:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Cossomby,
So what, do we need to ask anyone's permission to call ourselves White?
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Saturday, 10 May 2014 3:13:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Cossomby, So what, do we need to ask anyone's permission to call ourselves White?

Jay, You can call yourself whatever you want. Where I would object is when by calling yourself 'White' you claim some sort of special status and use that to put down other people.

I personally have no desire to call myself 'White'. I am happy to call myself Australian, British by descent (Irish, Scottish, English with more than one Viking/Scandinavian line). I keep meaning to get my DNA tested to see if the Irish etc line comes from those Iberian peninsula prehistoric lineages or some recent African input. My skin's kind of pink, but I'm not an albino so it's not actually 'white'.

I think the Westminster system of government is the best we've come up with so far, but only because the alternatives are so dismal. I'm happy with a background of British culture, while recognising it's had bad as well as good points. But I'd be equally proud to have been of Greek descent (they started the whole democratic thing), or Chinese or any number of others. I'd also be proud to be of Aboriginal descent, if only for their decency (at Sydney Cove they were appalled at the cruelty of flogging and hanging, and they have generally refrained from terrorist / freedom fighter activities even though sorely provoked. (Please don't go off on a tangent about current social problems, which result from a history of poverty and exclusion.)

But call myself 'White' in a political sense? Why on earth would I do that....? Identify (or be seen as identifying) with the National Front, the Ku Klux Klan and so on....? Why would anyone?
Posted by Cossomby, Saturday, 10 May 2014 4:21:29 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
@Crossomby,

<<But call myself 'White' in a political sense? Why on earth would I do that....? Identify (or be seen as identifying) with the National Front, the Ku Klux Klan and so on....? Why would anyone?>>

Hmmmm quite interesting --AND TELLING!

So Crossomby, do you make similar extensions/associations re anyone who calls themselves black --or yellow --or red *in a political sense*?

Or, do you reserve your disparagement ONLY for those who identify as white *in a political sense*?
Posted by SPQR, Saturday, 10 May 2014 4:36:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes (to the first question). I think politically identifying by any 'colour' is not useful.

I can see why 'Black' became an identity - in reaction to 'White'. 'Whites' labelled Africans, Aborigines etc. as 'Blacks' as a negative, and the latter then adopted the term as a badge of pride.

I'd like to see all these terms dumped. They are a hangover from an antiquated racial typology that attributed moral character and intelligence to skin colour. A similar claim was that criminality was expressed in the bumps on the skull.

Clearly human beings are varied in physical attributes - but the use of the colour terms was a political tool to justify slavery and other forms of discrimination.
Posted by Cossomby, Saturday, 10 May 2014 5:03:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Cossomby, the problem is that the people you're swapping posts with will NEVER stop thinking of themselves as "white". They feel persecuted, discriminated against and under severe threat. A good example of the crimes committed against their "whiteness" is the fact that there's more than 2 Chinese restaurants in Preston. Obviously (to them) this means the Chinese are taking over Preston and forcing all the "white" people out. Goodness me, it's almost a war crime. How dare those Chinese illegals do that.

Yep Cossomby, THAT'S the way they think. To them, it will ALWAYS be a race war, and they are happy to see it only as "whites threatened by those horrid black and yellow skinned illegals".

Rational discussion with ingrained and brainwashed racists like them is impossible. To them, the whites are the good guys, and the black and yellow skinned people are the threatening foe.

You won't change their minds Cossomby. They will go to the grave that way.
Posted by Nhoj, Saturday, 10 May 2014 5:31:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Cossomby,
So what's the difference between people who would claim "no race" in order to, as you say "put others down" and people who would claim to be of one race in order to do so?
People seeking to "put others down" will always claim that race doesn't matter or doesn't exist because they need some element of the diverse groups to co-operate with them in order to "put the others down".
Here's another video, which you won't watch but should, at least skip to about half way because that's when he really gets into the meat of his argument:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15iuq9OTTsE
See that's the thing, I can sit here posting examples of identical views to my own expressed by people of other ethnic groups and you'll still claim that it's a "Race problem" rather than a conflict between two different worldviews.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Saturday, 10 May 2014 5:43:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Not sure how to answer that slight non-sequitor.

I did watch some of the video. But not clear what that had to do with my last comments about the political use of 'White' as a hangover from past simplistic racial categories designed to show that 'Whites' were superior to other races.

MGTOW seems to indicate that (some) male views about women seem to be universal, regardless of race, colour or creed.

(No more tonight).
Posted by Cossomby, Saturday, 10 May 2014 6:00:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Cossomby,

Generally I think your posts are great. However, you stated the Greeks 'started the whole democratic thing.'

From John Keane’s “The Life and Death of Democracy”: pp. 106-7 “…it reveals clues to the existence of a functioning form of self-government a full five hundred years before the Athenian experiment with democracy. At the time of Wen-Amon’s expedition, Byblos – later called Gebal and today known as Jbail in the republic of Lebanon – was a small but thriving maritime city-state. Its reputation ran high in the ancient world of the Mediterranean not only for its wood and paper – some treasured words like book, bible and bibliography are named after it – but also for its system of government by ‘assembly’. It even gets a mention in the Bible, where the region is described as a zone of free trade and commerce. ‘Thy borders are in the midst of the seas’ runs a well-known passage, which mentions as well not only the prized wheat, honey, oil and balm from the Land of Israel and fine-quality ship masts hewed from the ancient cedars of Lebanon, but also an assembly comprising ‘the elders of Gebal and her wise men’ (Ezekiel 27:91)
Posted by david f, Saturday, 10 May 2014 6:36:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The video explains how beginning with the Nixon administration in the U.S Black women were turned against Black men to cripple and put down the whole ethnic group,the speaker isn't as articulate as he is perceptive and thoughtful so he takes a while to get to the point.
In the last half of the video he builds on that foundation and goes into detail on the way White America has also been destroyed using the same methods and concludes that "Racism" was only a stepping stone. He suggests that those seeking to subjugate others never really give a damn about race and that minority communities are just the guinea pigs for experiments in social change, whatever techniques are perfected on them are sure to be rolled out onto the White majority.
One example he gives is the way crack Cocaine seemed to arrive in Black America just at the "right" time and how Methamphetamine has arrived just at the "right" time in White America, the "right" time obviously being when the community is already on it's knees.
Whatever they do to them, they do to us, it's a point that low caste White people all over the world need to take to heart.
NT intervention? Shepparton intervention, then Broadmeadows intervention, Woy Woy intervention, Frankston intervention, Elizabeth intervention...
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Saturday, 10 May 2014 6:46:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
For some people, "Australianism" is personified by the picture of the rugged individual, idealised in the ANZAC, and the Olypian, an individual not far removed from Banjo Patterson or his 'Man From Snowy River', or a real life Kingsford Smith! These people are indeed Australians, and to some degree represent a part of the Australian character, be it a rather romanticised, stylised image of what it is to be an Australian, but neverless they conjure a certain romantic image which is hard to deny. Are these romanticised, stylised images of Australia a true reflection of what Australianism is, I very much doubt that was ever the case, and it certainly is not the case today. If the Australian is the ANZAC, he is also the bloke driving the cab, or the kid with skate board or the fella who cuts your hair, or sell you petrol late at night. He is also the bloke driving cattle in the territory or fishing in Bass Straight, the Australian is the grandmother born here 70 years ago, or a man who arrived from Iraq just last year. The Australian is young and old , man and woman, white and black. Australian are one, Australians are many. No matter what we want, or what we believe, Australia is a 'melting pot' of people and cultures, and has been for over 200 years, ever developing, ever changing. So if you enjoy a chop suey, don't feel bad, it is as Australian as meat pies and tomato sauce!
Posted by Paul1405, Saturday, 10 May 2014 6:52:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sorry I neglected to point out that the Black middle class was basically destroyed by the 1980's and Black business ownership, home ownership and entrepreneurship has rapidly collapsed since 2008.
That's the future.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Saturday, 10 May 2014 6:54:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Notice the difference between the 2 last posts from Jay of Melbourme, full of fear, paranoia and brainwashing --- and the last post from Paul1405, full of factual reality.
Posted by Nhoj, Saturday, 10 May 2014 7:41:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Yuyutsu,

You wrote;

“Empathy for all sentient beings is admirable. Identification is not. It is sad when empathy for others is misplaced or misdirected towards inanimate objects, including imaginary mental constructs such as "nation".”

Isn't identification was just a part of being human? One might identify as a man or a woman, a gay person, an indigenous person, or a sporting club supporter. Life be a far more bland existence without that trait.

Life is full of imaginary constructs, in its most basic form that might describe a 'family'. A collection of individuals, often with a broad range of differing characteristics and personalities inhabiting the same space and time. As Cossomby has so eloquently illustrated the Australia we are enjoying now is markedly different to the Australia of 100 years ago, even in some respects its size. My earlier post was attempting to make the point that nation is really just an extension of those we are prepared to more deeply care about.

We are usually more forgiving of the sins of our kin, more prepared to come to their defense, to side with them, to see their point of view. We don't subpoena mother's to testify against their son's, not because we think mothers are inherently dishonest but because we understand that the court will get rather selective and biased evidence from them. Society does not condemn mothers for not being impartial why should we condemn others who might defend the county they call their own?

There are obviously some who have slithered past embracing those in their wider community and shot straight to a nationalistic stance. That it has produced a narrow or 'imaginary' construct of what their country really represents, a product of who they deem to be excluded rather than any sense of inclusiveness, is obvious.

As a slight aside I find it interesting that the words 'In God we trust' replaced 'E pluribus unum' or 'One out of many' as the motto of the United States of America only relatively recently, 1956 to be precise.
Posted by SteeleRedux, Saturday, 10 May 2014 8:06:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Shockadelic,

<<Speaking of identification, why should I consider an immigrant (whose psychosocial self developed in an alien context for many years, including the critically important early childhood) "Australian" (a common identity) just because they live here, in the same geographical location?>>

Indeed, I really don't know why, but that's what they printed on my passport - perhaps it is for bureaucratic convenience. My own preference is to be able to travel around the world without a passport.

Dear SteeleRedux,

<<Isn't identification was just a part of being human?>>

Yes, except that we are not human. Becoming human is akin to playing a computer game where we identify with a character on the screen. Then when that character is about to get killed, one feels that they are going to die themselves, which isn't true of course. Have you had the experience of playing a computer game and when your character is attacked and about to lose its life you cannot help but instinctively kicking your feet in the air (as if it's going to make a difference)?

<<One might identify as a man or a woman, a gay person, an indigenous person, or a sporting club supporter.>>

Yes, but it is a weakness, a bad habit that is very hard to beat. While I don't condemn anyone for that, it is not something to be proud of.

<<Life be a far more bland existence without that trait.>>

Yes, that's why people go bungee-jumping despite the risk of retinal detachment.

<<We are usually more forgiving of the sins of our kin, more prepared to come to their defense>>

Yes, humans are hard-wired this way through their genes. Humans are not as hard-wired to prefer a whole nation of people who live 100's or 1000's of kilometres away, most of which they never saw. Until about 200 years ago, one was not even likely to ever meet people who live that far.

Overcoming our identification with our genes is even harder than overcoming psychologically-acquired traits. It takes many years of concentrated effort.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Saturday, 10 May 2014 11:25:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yuyutsu,
You've answered your own questions.
People need a tribe and identity, it's why the U.N recognises the rights of the person right up to the rights of the nation, hence the name...UNITED Nations.
People like Nhoj and Paul are the ones engaged in online role playing, Paul recognises the strong ethnic bonds in his wife's people, he just pretends not to recognise them in his own. Anti Racism in itself is an identitarian construct, Anti Racists organise into tribes and collectives just like anyone else, it's about belonging, about setting oneself apart from others. You'll notice that Anti Racists always claim to speak for the majority, how they disparage the "racist" minority and are only too willing to form a consensus upon who's in and who's part of the out groups? That's Nationalism my friend.
Sure identity is a construct, but it's a valuable and necessary construct and competition between groups so constructed is healthy, normal human behaviour.
Identity in 2014 is more fluid than it used to be in that it can contain many identitarian components to make a whole but if anything it's become more entrenched because in a globalised, multicultural society people need a centre of gravity, or an anchor so to speak.

We can't forget that to be European is to be a nationalist, nationalism is what kept Europe from destroying itself in the 17th century, it's what ended the wars of religion and kept people like
Napoleon,Hitler and Stalin in check, it's no wonder we're attached to it.
"White" is a concept born in the European diaspora, it's not a concept which has much currency in Europe itself, it's a complex, intricately constructed and fluid identity as I've described above.
The position of White Nationalists on "Who's White?" is perfectly clear, in response to the question, "Who's White?" we answer:
"Non-Jewish people of wholly European descent. No exceptions." And if you tell us you're not, we will believe you.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Sunday, 11 May 2014 8:11:41 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
<<Identity in 2014 is more fluid than it used to be in that it can contain many identitarian components to make a whole but if anything it's become more entrenched because in a globalised, multicultural society people need a centre of gravity, or an anchor so to speak.>>

Jay you seem here to be by default supporting multiculturalism. or at least recognising its existence as a legitimate form of culture. I don't disagree with any of that. You spoke of my partner who is "Maori", she and her people are not the Maori of 200 years ago, or even 50 years ago, although retaining some of the past culture, traditions, customs and language, inevitably they have come under European and other influences as their society progressed from what it was, to what it is today. No matter how much you hanker to retain the past, social change is inevitable and with an influx of migrants and ideas, that change in Australia will be more rapid than in many other parts of the world. Robinson Crusoe lived in a monoculture until Man Friday washed up on the shore, then he was living in a multicultural society.
Whilst the movement of peoples is fluid throughout the world, there is going to be that mixing of cultures, its not new, it has been taking place since the year dot. The ancient Britain's once conquered by the Romans, came under Roman influence and over time adopted many of the Roman customs, not by force but by choice.
If you want to retain "Australianism" as at today's date, can't go backwards, you will have stop all migration, stop all outside influences, drive out recent arrivals, and indeed build 'Fortress Australia', something like the Amish people in the US try to do.
Posted by Paul1405, Sunday, 11 May 2014 9:30:04 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul nobody is talking about going backwards, even the fanatical neo Nazis talk about the future, their motto is "We must secure the existence of our people and a future for White children".
The idea that Nationalism is backwards is complete nonsense, by definition a nation must be concerned with the future, the idea that we're stupid or primitive is simply Anti Racist in group-out group posturing.
Reactionaries in 2014 talk about what could be achieved if the spirit of 1848 could be harnessed to 21st century technology, that's not going backward. Would Garibaldi have accepted Gay marriage, unlimited African migration to Europe and Feminism? No, the idea is ludicrous but it doesn't negate his other ideas and it doesn't render them "primitive" in comparison to the oafishness and barbarity of self styled "progressives" like Barrack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Sunday, 11 May 2014 10:17:40 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jay, given the parameters Australian society operates in, the outcome is inevitable. To the "We must secure the existence of our people and a future for White children". I simply say why! Is it that important that the children are white not gray, and I'm not just talking about the outward appearance, which may remain the same, but inwardly their values, customs, beliefs will be different. Are not your values, customs, beliefs, different from your grandfathers, even though physically you may be his spit image, right down to the big bushy beard. I don't believe any culture is superior to any other, only different, if two cultures integrate the new culture is not superior or inferior to either of the parent cultures, but different. In fact it may be enriched by taking more of the good aspects of the two parent cultures and combining them into one. Unless of course you believe one culture is superior to another then you would believe any combining of the two must lead to a lessening of your superior culture. I find Neo-Nazis do believe in the superiority of 'White' culture over all others, and therefore it must be retained at all cost.

You are still not explaining what you want.
Posted by Paul1405, Sunday, 11 May 2014 11:09:38 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Paul1405,

In general I agree with you. However, we try to impress certain concepts from our culture on other people with different cultures. Implicitly we feel our culture is superior in those respects. Two examples are freedom of expression and the banning of female genital mutilation. I feel that cultures which promote freedom of expression and ban female genital mutilation are superior to those that don't.
Posted by david f, Sunday, 11 May 2014 11:35:39 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
David f, you have no objection to male genital mutilation?
Posted by Nhoj, Sunday, 11 May 2014 11:56:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul, it's not about what we want it's about how we think.
Things like racial assimilation, gay rights, feminism etc have never been a part of advanced or futuristic schools of thought, they're just dumb ideas promoted by uncouth people.
I get it, you're not promoting race mixing per se, just asking why it's such a big deal for nationalists and the answer is that it really isn't, it's an insignificant issue since even in the U.S mixed race relationships make up less than one per cent of all pairings.
Race mixing doesn't even dent the slight, 2% disparity in the genders but we latch onto it as just another example of the grandiose, unrealistic nature of the "progressive" narrative.
Race mixing wasn't part of our past, that's been confirmed by DNA anaylsis, there's little genetic diversity in Western Europe compared to other parts of the world, it's not playing a significant part in our present and it won't be a major factor in shaping our our future. See from a philosophical standpoint that argument is the correct response to the question "Why White?" because it's the truth, why pursue or support something which is pointless?
We have to prepare our children for a future in a multi-racial society, not a mixed race or mono-racial one,the future is a mosaic of identitarian groupings, not a "great big melting pot", White is merely one identity among a host of others. Whiteness is a choice, it's a social construct, we promote it because to do otherwise would be the same as saying to our kids "give up, don't compete, don't try to get your share, don't act as a bloc or use ethnic ties to your advantage like the other groups do, just resign yourself to mediocrity and life as a second class citizen".
As I said to Shockadelic the antidote to the uncouth, oafish "progressive" isn't political incorrectness it's logic, patience, honesty and objectivity.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Sunday, 11 May 2014 12:07:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jay, by your many posts on this and other similar topics, you show that you "believe" in the superiority of the "white" race.

No amount of "explanations" or "excuses" or "reasoning" can hide the FACT that you believe in the superiority of the "white" race.

It's a "belief system" you have.
Posted by Nhoj, Sunday, 11 May 2014 12:21:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Jay,

<<That's Nationalism my friend.>>

Are you a medical doctor?

For you give an excellent diagnosis: do you have a cure as well?

<<Sure identity is a construct, but it's a valuable and necessary construct and competition between groups so constructed is healthy, normal human behaviour.>>

Normal - for sure, but healthy?

That folder which most label the "'too-hard' basket", the medical profession labels as "normal". This basket includes the frailty of old age, the weight of pregnancy, the suffering from physical and emotional pain, competitiveness to the detriment of others, and one of the recent additions - homosexuality, although sexuality in general was already in that basket for centuries.

The medical profession has lowered its standards, settling for "normal" while completely forgetting our quest for super-normality.

<<People need a tribe and identity, it's why the U.N recognises the rights of the person right up to the rights of the nation, hence the name...UNITED Nations.>>

But surely the U.N is a corrupt body - in this example it caters for people's weaknesses and cravings instead of supporting them to lift themselves to new heights.

<<nationalism is what kept Europe from destroying itself in the 17th century, it's what ended the wars of religion and kept people like
Napoleon,Hitler and Stalin in check, it's no wonder we're attached to it.>>

There were times when doctors treated syphilis with mercury and sometimes it even seemed to work. Surely we know better today!
Posted by Yuyutsu, Sunday, 11 May 2014 1:41:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Nhoj,

<<David f, you have no objection to male genital mutilation?>>

I'm impressed!

My own response: yes, I believe that male genital mutilation is wrong, just as female genital mutilation is.

However, I believe that using the force of the law to ban either and incarcerate those who so practice, is even more wrong.

How could we possibly assume that a secular, involuntary, opportunistic and corrupt body such as the state has a capacity to distinguish between right and wrong?

If we use the power of state to hit others for doing those things which we happen to believe are wrong, then we should not be surprised when that same blind state hits us over the most moral activities that we perform with complete conscientious conviction.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Sunday, 11 May 2014 2:03:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dearest Yuyutsu,

So, you believe banning FGM is even more wrong than the practise of FMG.

Do you not even understand what FGM actually is, as opposed to MGM? Let me educate you....

In FGM the ENTIRE CLITORIS is totally removed, making it impossible for females to orgasm. It's a sexual control method used against women, in order to better "control" women when they become adults.

In MGM, only a little bit of skin covering is removed, and the anatomical parts responsible for orgasm are left 100% in tact.

Now that I've educated you on the difference, do you STILL think that banning FGM is more wrong than the practice of FGM?
Posted by Nhoj, Sunday, 11 May 2014 3:08:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I don't think circumcision of males equates to female genital mutilation. It arguably has certain benefits such as lowering the possibility of getting or transferring sexually transmitted diseases. It may even increase sexual enjoyment for males. Whether or not it is allowed it is a much less serious business than FGM.

Excision of the clitoris removes the centre of the female orgasm and can have many other harmful after effects such as fistula.

However, the point of my comment was not whether or not one favours circumcision. The point is that I do not equate the mores and customs of all societies as of equal worth.
Posted by david f, Sunday, 11 May 2014 3:13:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jay,

This article below from Britain would seem to debunk your argument that people simply tend to stick to their own.

As for <<Things like racial assimilation, gay rights, feminism etc have never been a part of advanced or futuristic schools of thought, they're just dumb ideas promoted by uncouth people.>> that is simply (your) opinion.

You present numbers like <<even in the U.S mixed race relationships make up less than one per cent of all pairings.>> Can you supply data that substantiates that figure of less than 1%.

<<Race mixing wasn't part of our past, that's been confirmed by DNA anaylsis>> I would expect you to point to some genuine material that supports that claim. Something more than Hitlers scientists proving the existence of the Aryan race.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2245406/Jessica-Ennis-hailed-face-todays-Britain-census-figures-reveal-mixed-race-rise.html
Posted by Paul1405, Sunday, 11 May 2014 7:31:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Yuyutsu,

You wrote:

"How could we possibly assume that a secular, involuntary, opportunistic and corrupt body such as the state has a capacity to distinguish between right and wrong?"

The state does not decide what is right and wrong. It decides what is permissible and non-permissible. That is a very different thing. Driving on the wrong side of the road and robbing a bank are both non-permissible. Driving on the wrong of the road is not wrong in a moral sense. However, it puts others in danger. Therefore the state has a right to ban it. FGM causes great harm to women. Those subjected to it do not have an opportunity to reject it. The state has a right to ban it. If you are an adult of sound mind who consciously wishes to harm yourself or commit suicide I think you have a right to do so. However, I think it reasonable that the state prevents people from harming others.

The democratic state is an imperfect body as are all other governments. However, I think it preferable to a monarch, dictator or religious leader. It is right that the state is secular. A person's religious beliefs or the absence of such beliefs should not be the business of the government. The secular state and the elimination of monarchy are great advances.
Posted by david f, Sunday, 11 May 2014 8:02:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Nhoj,

Of course there is a difference between MGM and FGM, the latter being more disgusting than the former.

As a result, I may perhaps still befriend or maintain social/professional/business relations with someone who conducted MGM on their boys, but not with someone who conducted FGM on their girls.

Boycotting perpetrators is legitimate, so is naming-and-shaming and denying them privileges, including for example welfare, health-care, aged-care, citizenship, perhaps even the protection of police and the legal recourse should someone do the same to them.

Criminal prosecution, however, is a different matter. The state may not legitimately prosecute anyone unless there is a victim who sought, or at least consented, to come under state protection. It is for example illegitimate to criminialise voluntary euthanasia because there is no such victim; or if Packer and Gyngell wish to break each other's teeth, then it should not be criminal to do so (but obviously, the state should not foot their medical bills); or if two rivals mutually agree to conduct a duel, consensually and without any pressure, then the survivor should not be charged with murder.

Naturally, if the girl that had undergone FGM sought the state's protection prior to the act, or if it is deemed on the balance of probabilities that she would have done so had she been given a chance, then it's a whole different story.

In summary, the state's roll is to protect its citizens who seek its protection, not to be their moral guardian.

All that I write has been carefully weighed and is based on one simple principle - non-violence.

Non-violence doesn't mean that others should not be allowed to be violent: it means that I should not be violent - but as the state claims to do violence in my name, it becomes my duty not to allow it.

Forcing one's ideas of morality on others without their consent, is a form of violence. Denying privileges, however, is not.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Sunday, 11 May 2014 8:06:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear David,

<<The state does not decide what is right and wrong. It decides what is permissible and non-permissible.>>

Yes, and it may not legitimately do so unless it is for the protection of others who accept its protection.

<<Driving on the wrong side of the road and robbing a bank are both non-permissible.>>

I have no problem with that because it is reasonable to expect that other road-users and bank-users/employees, who wish to be protected by the state, are likely to be hurt otherwise.

<<I think it reasonable that the state prevents people from harming others.>>

Yes, but I qualify it by the (explicit or implicit) consent of those others to receive the state's protection).

<<The democratic state is an imperfect body as are all other governments.>>

Any ---cratic is a monstrous construct. What under the heavens gives anybody a right to rule over another?!

<<A person's religious beliefs or the absence of such beliefs should not be the business of the government.>>

I Agree, but I must qualify it with the word 'human': ... should not be the business of a human government.

<<The secular state and the elimination of monarchy are great advances.>>

A truly religious state would be much better (and a truly religious state would not force itself on unwilling others), but knowing our history, since history was written, not a single religious organisation was not corrupted over time to one degree or another. Hence for the age we live in, I also prefer the secular.

Now if we had a monarch who acted immorally, then I could say "alas, what can I do". Of course I should have tried to overthrow him/her if I could. Democracy, however, presents a new problematic dimension because those immoral and unacceptable acts are now done, supposedly in my name, hence it becomes my duty to fight it, ensuring that it is not my hands that spilt that innocent blood.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Sunday, 11 May 2014 8:36:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul
European Population Genetic Substructure: Further Definition of Ancestry Informative Markers for Distinguishing among Diverse European Ethnic Groups
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2730349/
Basically there's a North-South gradient in European population genetics which is more pronounced than the East West gradient, so draw a line through the Pyrenees to Belgrade then run that line up to Helsinki, north and west of that line there's little variation compared to the populations outside it. As for "Hitler's scientists" they were assuming a lot in the 1930's but it seems that they were spot on about all Europeans being descended from a distinctive "Master Race", if you take the word "Master" to mean "base" or "blueprint".
We are not literally "Aryans" in the politicised sense suggested by the Nazis but at it's most basic expression we are descendants of a single wave or group of ancient Africa to Europe migrants, albeit one unrelated to the ancestors of the modern Africans, of whose genetic history little is known at present.

The intermarriage figures for the U.S.A are usually fudged by Liberal media, they take the percentage of newlyweds in interracial relationships as being something like 14% of the 2 million or so marriages per year and tout that as being indicative of the whole married population. Not so, only about 0.4% of White Americans have a stable, long term non White partner, as I said, it's not a feature of our past, present or future, as for the Daily Mail article I grant you I could unpick that as well and find that the figures are fudged or skewed in some way.
What's interesting is that interracial marriages in the U.S.A fail more often than they succeed and it's all highly variable by race, gender, age and even geographic location. For example White male/Black Female marriages are actually more stable than the national average whereas Black Male/White Female marriages have upwards of an 80% failure rate.
The Pew Institute publish regular surveys of U.S census data and you can also look at the U.S government data if you need further reading.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Sunday, 11 May 2014 9:41:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Yuyutsu,

All governments are human governments regardless of where they claim their authority comes from. There is no such thing as a non-human government.

As far as asking for protection, if you were attacked and neither wanted to protect yourself nor ask for protection, I would protect you by violence if necessary whether you wanted me to or not.

I would not want to be the subject of any religious state whether it thought itself truly religious or not.

You wrote: "Democracy, however, presents a new problematic dimension because those immoral and unacceptable acts are now done, supposedly in my name, hence it becomes my duty to fight it, ensuring that it is not my hands that spilt that innocent blood."

I agree with that. So does Henry Thoreau.

http://thoreau.eserver.org/civil.html contains his essay on the subject.
Posted by david f, Sunday, 11 May 2014 10:18:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jay Of Melbourne "they don't have a point, we do."

It's not them I'm really trying to communicate with.
It's the unseen/unheard readers, who may be unsure or undecided.

They will see a defensible argument from me and fluff-and-bluff from my opponents.

Nhoj "Shockadelic believes Australians are an "ethnic group""

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_group

"An ethnicity, or ethnic group, is a social *group* of people who *identify* with each other based on *common* *ancestral*, social, cultural, or national experience.

Membership of an ethnic group tends to be associated with *shared* cultural heritage, *ancestry*, history, homeland, language (dialect), or ideology, and with symbolic systems such as religion, mythology and ritual, cuisine, dressing style, *physical appearance*, etc."

Ethnicity is what is "shared/common".
Including ancestry.

For two centuries, "Australians" shared a British/European ancestry, the English language (Australian dialect, no other language "spoken at home"), Christianity or irreligion, a modern/Western Anglospheric culture/cuisine/dress adapted to the climate/circumstances of our homeland's environment.

"Australians" did not celebrate Chinese New Year, Ramadan or sacrifice babies to the volcano god.

New ethnicities develop.
It's called ethnogenesis.

Australians did not evolve from *all* the peoples/cultures of the world.
They have particular origins and therefore particular "shared/common" characteristics.

Cossomby "Chinese-Turkish-Tongan-Mexican-Zulu-Tamil-Korean-Tahitian ancestry...
In the past, obviously not that varied a combination, but in the future, definitely yes"

Sorry to break it to you, but the *past* is where our ethnogenesis occurred.

"but in the future, definitely yes, at least to an equivalent mixture"

Oh, it won't end there.
That's just 3 generations.

Every generation after adds *exponentially* to the number of possible combinations.
The only limit is the *total* number of all ethnicities in the world (around 6000).

"British culture set the basis for Australian (non-Aboriginal) culture and it will continue to be the basis"

And the *people*?
Would "Tibetans" still be "Tibetans" if everyone spoke Tibetan, ate Tibetan, etc., but slowly because of mass immigration, beared *no resemblance* to "Tibetans" of past centuries?

"this stability is exactly what attracts people to come here."

And they're coming here undermines that stability!
You can't have continuity and stability *and* radical transformation simultaneously.
Posted by Shockadelic, Sunday, 11 May 2014 10:45:08 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Cossomby "but in the long run ie. last decade, British and New Zealanders have been the dominant groups"

Wrong.
http://www.immi.gov.au/settlement/srf/

Settlers By Cntry of birth (world region)
Arrival Dates: from 04-May-2004 to 03-May-2014

Cntry of birth (world region)
Southern Asia 395287
Northeast Asia 319536
Southeast Asia 284591
The United Kingdom and Ireland 272339 [15%]
Southern and East Africa 129144
The Middle East 95183
Northern America 42734
Western Europe 39544
North Africa 30295
South America 28862
Australia 26056 [1%]
Southern Europe 24140
The Former USSR and the Baltic States 20360
Central and West Africa 19675
Polynesia (excluding Hawaii) 17315
Eastern Europe 15822
New Zealand 9825 [half a percent]
Northern Europe 7789
Melanesia 4769
Central America 3520
The Caribbean 1464
Micronesia 259
Africa (So Stated) 47
Australian External Territories 7
Antarctica 2
AT SEA 1
Oceania 1

Total 1788567
Invalid/Unknown 3255

Total Arrivals 1791822

Total for UK/Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, Australian External Territories: 308227 [17%]
Add in North America and Europe: 426687 [24%]

24% White.
That's the last decade.
Last year (and presumably future years), even less.

It is a myth that most immigrants are still White/European.
The fact that this myth is perpetuated implicitly acknowledges that "White/European" is what people *expect*!

Yet a simultaneous "we've always been mixed" myth is also perpetuated by the same people!
Posted by Shockadelic, Sunday, 11 May 2014 11:00:08 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear David,

<<All governments are human governments regardless of where they claim their authority comes from. There is no such thing as a non-human government.>>

It is humbling and sobering to see the bigger picture, that no matter how tyrannical human governments can be, human control is but a tiny and feeble fragment.

What for example about the laws of physics - are we not governed by them?

What about the rule of Death? All kings and all prime-ministers succumbed to it so far, soon will Mugabe as well - Do you think any can escape?

Incidentally, 'government' can mean other than human, as in Genesis 1:16 - "God made two great lights — the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night."

- You may consider it nonsense, but what human government shall stand once the sun turns into a red giant?

<<if you were attacked and neither wanted to protect yourself nor ask for protection, I would protect you by violence if necessary whether you wanted me to or not.>>

Perhaps you are saying this because you assume that I would implicitly like you to protect me, which makes you play God - otherwise, why do you wish me harm? do you hate me?

Can you see how this can lead to an 1984 situation, where Big Brother knows best what's good for you better than yourself? Does it not scare you?

<<I would not want to be the subject of any religious state whether it thought itself truly religious or not.>>

Have you seen a religious organisation which does not think itself truly religious?

I for instance would love to be subject to a state that is truly religious, but that's not on the cards for millennia to come, so why bother?
Posted by Yuyutsu, Sunday, 11 May 2014 11:13:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Cossomby "My skin's kind of pink, but I'm not an albino so it's not actually 'white'."

Duh. White people aren't "white" (ala British Paints).

"be it a rather romanticised, stylised image of what it is to be an Australian"

And a Chinese restaurant and New Year dragon parade is a romanticised image of what "Chinese" is.
And doubly phoney since it's not even in China.

"or a man who arrived from Iraq just last year."

Australian? No, he's most likely an Arab.
Possibly Kurd, Turkmen or Assyrian.

There is no way a man who "arrived last year" (even from Britain!) would identify as "Australian".

Paul1405 "If you want to retain "Australianism" as at today's date, can't go backwards, you will have stop all migration, stop all outside influences, drive out recent arrivals"

No need to stop *all* immigration, only the contracultural variety.

External influences?
Australians adopted jazz, surfing, Latin American dance and rock n roll *during* the White Australia era.
These influences were voluntarily *chosen* by us.
We were never as insular as some claim.

The current non-White population would decrease to about a third of its present size, if there were no further arrivals.

About a quarter of immigrants leave the country.
And about half of those left are too old to have children, so will leave no permanent impact.

That leaves 1-2% of the population.
Whoop-de-doo!

"Are not your values, customs, beliefs, different from your grandfathers, even though physically you may be his spit image"

The internal voluntary evolution of a people/culture is quite different to an imposed alien transformation.
Posted by Shockadelic, Sunday, 11 May 2014 11:16:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear davidf,

I'm afraid on the topic of male genital mutilation I am going to side with Christopher Hitchens' strong stance. This is despite the fact he was giving my favourite Rabbi a roasting to make his point.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZTS6iVpSPI

There is absolutely no denying that male circumcision diminishes, not increases as you claim, the enjoyment of the sexual act. What is an incredibly sensitive part of the body toughens in circumcised males and becomes desensitised as a result. The true purpose of the act of male circumcision perhaps has been lost in the mists of time. As with FGM it may well have been an effort to curb sexual behaviour that gained cultural and religious significance.

The 12th century Jewish rabbi Maimonides who was a “preeminent medieval Spanish, Sephardic Jewish philosopher, astronomer and one of the most prolific and influential Torah scholars and physicians of the Middle Ages.” (Wikepidea) offered these thoughts on circumcision;

“Similarly with regard to circumcision, one of the reasons for it is, in my opinion, the wish to bring about a decrease in sexual intercourse and a weakening of the organ in question, so that this activity be diminished and the organ be in as quiet a state as possible.”

“The fact that circumcision weakens the faculty of sexual excitement and sometimes perhaps diminishes the pleasure is indubitable.”

“According to me circumcision has another very important meaning, namely, that all people professing this opinion-that is, those who believe in the unity of God-should have a bodily sign uniting them so that one who does not belong to them should not be able to claim that he was one of them, while being a stranger. For he would do this in order to profit by them or to deceive the people who profess this religion. Now a man does not perform this act upon himself or upon a son of his unless it be in consequence of a genuine belief. For it is not like an incision in the leg or a burn in the arm, but is a very, very hard thing.”

Cont...
Posted by SteeleRedux, Sunday, 11 May 2014 11:30:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Cont...

For me however this was his most insightful paragraph;

“The perfection and perpetuation of this Law can only be achieved if circumcision is performed in childhood. For this there are three wise reasons. The first is that if the child were let alone until he grew up, he would sometimes not perform it. The second is that a child does not suffer as much pain as a grown-up man because his membrane is still soft and his imagination weak; for a grown-up man would regard the thing, which he would imagine before it occurred, as terrible and hard. The third is that the parents of a child that is just born take lightly matters concerning it, for up to that time the imaginative form that compels the parents to love it is not yet consolidated. For this imaginative form increases through habitual contact and grows with the growth of the child. Then it begins to decrease and to disappear, I refer to this imaginative form. For the love of the father and of the mother for the child when it has just been born is not like their love for it when it is one year old, and their love for it when it is one year old is not like their love when it is six years old. Consequently if it were left uncircumcised for two or three years, this would necessitate the abandonment of circumcision because of the father's love and affection for it. At the time of its birth, on the other hand, this imaginative form is very weak, especially as far as concerns the father upon whom this commandment is imposed.”

I lived for a while in the Philippines where males were circumcised in their early to mid teens. It was regarded a rite of passage toward becoming a man, often accompanied with a visit to a prostitute once healing had taken place. A favourite past time at my school was following suffering victims with pictures of nude women attempting to bring discomfort as teenagers have wont to do.

Cont...
Posted by SteeleRedux, Sunday, 11 May 2014 11:32:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Cont...

But there was another group of males, generally expat Westerners who underwent circumcisions before marrying Filipino brides. For many of their parners to be this was a prerequisite. There is also ample evidence of those who undergo the procedure later in adulthood mourning the loss of feeling and sexual pleasure.

But these were adults making these choices, not infants under the protection of their parents. Male genital mutilation is a procedure that should have any thinking person appalled. Intentionally harming a defenceless newborn just so he can be viewed 'right in God's eyes' is to me an utter abomination.

And you claim for circumcision “It arguably has certain benefits such as lowering the possibility of getting or transferring sexually transmitted diseases.”

Tell that to the parents of the infants who died from herpes as a result of infections gained from Rabbis sucking the penis after circumcision.

“Two more infants have contracted the herpes virus after undergoing an ultra-Orthodox Jewish type of circumcision, which has been linked to the spread of the potentially deadly virus to newborn boys, according to the New York City Health Department. In the ritual, known as metzitzah b'peh, after removing the foreskin of the penis the person performing the procedure places his mouth briefly over the wound, sucking a small amount of blood out, which is discarded.”...”Since 2000, there have been 13 reports in New York City of infants contracting HSV-1, two of whom died from the virus.”
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/04/07/health/new-york-neonatal-herpes/

I am normally sensitive to the cultural and religious rituals of others but the mutilation of the genitals of infants or young girls should be against what any normal modern person finds acceptable. They are archaic practices that should be consigned to history's waste chute.
Posted by SteeleRedux, Sunday, 11 May 2014 11:33:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Guys, I was going to respond to several of the points raised, but I've been immersing myself over the last two nights in that pinnacle of 'White' culture - Eurovision.

And I have to say, that I may have to withdraw my previous qualifications. The competition was won by Conchita from Austria, a beautiful long-haired, bearded drag queen in a stunning dress and the voice of an angel. Maybe I've been underestimating the value of 'White' culture.

He/she is well an truly upholding our traditional cultural values - just google images of James 1, James 2 and other kings of England.
Posted by Cossomby, Monday, 12 May 2014 12:06:18 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Cossomby,

Forget the James' what about this;

http://tinyurl.com/kd7ewmm

It was a hell of a winning song. Loved it. Classy stuff.

A link for the lazy;

http://youtu.be/SaolVEJEjV4

Ahh Eurovision. To think just 60 years ago most of these countries were at each other's throats. There does seem to be a formula – more diversity – less war.
Posted by SteeleRedux, Monday, 12 May 2014 12:47:36 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The picture in the first link has to be photoshopped!
Posted by Cossomby, Monday, 12 May 2014 12:50:14 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Cossomby,

Oh ye of little faith.

Are you not aware that the holy land is famous for its transgender singing stars? In fact the first transgender ever to win Eurovision was Sharon Cohen born Yaron Cohen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dana_International

Polling done by Ynet show Israelis regarded her in the top 50 Greatest Israelis.

Cross dressing even extends to Israel's prime ministers. Ehud Barak, in the spring of youth, frocked up with deadly intent.

The list goes on.
Posted by SteeleRedux, Monday, 12 May 2014 1:08:55 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jay,

Your link is more a case of BS baffles brains than any conclusive proof that <<Race mixing wasn't part of our past, that's been confirmed by DNA anaylsis>> Take Britain which over the past 2,000 years has been occupied by a number of different races, from the ancient Britains to Romans, Vikings, Anglo Saxons, Normans. These groups eventually assimilated into the one homogenous group, with a common language and culture, not being particular of any one of the sub groups, the modern English are not Normans, but are not totally not Norman. or Anglo Saxon. The French are not the Gauls or the Italian are not the Romans, they are a mix of various races. they are in their own way the result of multiculturalism. I believe when two races come together, rather than remain aloof the natural propensity is for the races to infuse (Cook's men in Tahiti). In South America where Spanish colonialism took over, the Spanish culture didn't complete transcend the indigenous culture but the two fused to form a hybrid unique South American culture, which today exhibits elements of both Spanish and indigenous culture, that has taken place over only a few hundred years.
Do you agree with the common ancestry theory? Where it is believed all humans on the plant originate from a "common ancestor" with our origins in Africa more than 100,000 years ago.
As for when sats don't agree with you, then you simply dismiss them as being unreliable or "fudged by Liberal media".
Hitlers "scientists" were so far off the plant in their attempts to please the Fuhrer they would say anything. Totally unreliable.
Posted by Paul1405, Monday, 12 May 2014 7:47:43 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
SteeleRedux "There does seem to be a formula – more diversity – less war."

Tell that to all the countries racked by interethnic conflict.

The European diversity represented in Eurovision is the much the same as it was half a century ago, a century ago, a millennia ago.

Dutch, French, Italian, Swedish, etc.
Ethnic groups that go back centuries.

Eurovision represents the diversity *between*, not within, nations.

When has there been a Swedish contestant singing in French?
Or a French one singing in Russian?

Many sing in English, only because it's the international lingua franca, and they want to get as many votes as possible.

That natural diversity of Europe, or the world as a whole, is not the same as the phoney artificially introduced diversity of multicultural mass immigration.

Paul1405 "Take Britain which over the past 2,000 years has been occupied by a number of different races, from the ancient Britains to Romans, Vikings, Anglo Saxons, Normans"

Those are ethnicities or nationalities, not "races".
All of them are what would be called "White" today.

"all humans on the plant originate from a "common ancestor" with our origins in Africa more than 100,000 years ago."

A lot's happened in 100,000 years.

All that diversity you claim to love would not exist without relative isolation, separation.

You acknowledge Latin American culture developed in only a few centuries.
Whether a culture/people had a modern or ancient ethnogenesis, it is what it is.

There is no people/culture in the world that is a synthesis of *everything*, nor does there have to be.

"Australia" and "Australians" didn't evolve from everything and anything, nor do we need to become such a synthesis.
Posted by Shockadelic, Monday, 12 May 2014 11:42:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Shocker,

Sorry mate but that is ludicrous.

Black singers have been part of Eurovision since the early days of the contest.

Here is Milly Scott singing for the Netherlands in 1966

http://youtu.be/mVHqkE5Qx18

And Eduardo Nascimento singing for Portugal in 1967

http://youtu.be/5E-mYJeNpfI

A black singer was even part of a duo who won the contest for Estonia in 2001

http://youtu.be/Ies77jcZ5s4

Acceptance of what was once regarded as 'the other' tempers race based nationalism. Eurovision shows that national pride can be celebrated without recourse identification by skin colour. They get it why can't you. The world is moving on without you mate.
Posted by SteeleRedux, Monday, 12 May 2014 12:31:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,
The people who emigrated to England in prehistoric and distant historic times were all closely related, that's what repeated surveys over the last 10 years have proven. The idea that Europeans are a "mongrel" race is completely false, the difference between an Irishman and a Swede across Y,MtDNA and Autosomal measures is insignificant compared to, say a German and a Greek or a Frenchman and a Jew.
What we always knew about race has been proven correct due to the advances in science over the last 20 years, if a person says "I'm of wholly Russian ancestry" that claim can be checked by a DNA test.
Paul what do you think they test for in Israel when someone takes a test to confirm their Jewish roots?
You're going to have to accept that Richard Lewontin, Stephen Jay Matthews, Jared Diamond and all the other Jewish pop scientists and sociobiologists were blatantly lying about race and did so for ideological reasons or because it was "Good for the Jews".
Besides anything else if you want to rely on 45 year old information about race and ethnicity in preference to the latest findings then I can't really help you anymore. If you had cancer would you say to the doctors "Hey! How about you dig out some old textbooks and treat me in exactly the way they did in 1970!"?
So now you can save yourself some time and join in slinging the insults with the others because there's no reasonable, scientifically valid rebuttal to the statement "Race is real and it matters"
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Monday, 12 May 2014 1:35:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,
Nobody relies on 80 year old Ahnenerbe research, we don't have to because we have studies done over the last ten years by reliable institutes all over the world, I merely pointed out that folklore and conventional wisdom has always told us that we Europeans are descended from one group of people and it's been proven right. The Nazis were trying to reconcile folklore with 20th century science, I notice you mock them but don't laugh at the Israelis trying to reconcile science and the old testament or the Han Chinese trying to do the same with their culture.
Sucks to have your worldview collapse before your eyes I suppose since both science and folklore come down on the side of nationalism, but that's the way the cookie crumbles, as John Maynard Keynes reportedly wrote : "When my information changes, I alter my conclusions". What's your conclusion Paul?
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Monday, 12 May 2014 1:46:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jay, I'm not going to "join in slinging the insults" You say "Race is real and it matters". If race was the sole determinate in selecting a mate then there would be no inter-breeding between the races. I would say there is a bias in selecting a mate, that bias is for selecting someone of the same race, as people will tend to get along and have more in common with someone of the same race than not. However given all things being equal, other than being of the same race, there is a good chance that a person of one race will take up with a person of another race.
Here is something of interest about unusual circumstance and intermingling of races.
Mutiny on the Bounty and Pitcairn Islanders.
http://library.puc.edu/pitcairn/pitcairn/history.shtml

I hold that although the mutineers (European) and indigenous (Polynesian) were of two different races there was enough in common for the two groups to intermingle. If race was the sole determining factor then the Europeans should have been repulsed by the Polynesians and vise-versa. Not so, just the opposite, since there was virtually no constraints there was a ready acceptance of each other. Jay please explain that one.

A friend of mine, Australian, fell in love with a Greek girl many years ago, and she with him. The pressure on her from the Greek parents and family was so intense it destroyed their relationship. That may explain why Europeans didn't intermarry. As a Greek fella said to me once, not only am i expected to marry a 'good' Greek girl, but a 'good' Greek girl from the right village.
Posted by Paul1405, Monday, 12 May 2014 8:30:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,
What's your point mate?
Men away from hearth and home often take "campaign wives" and sire children, those children have always suffered stigma and often retribution, even in European societies.
Example:
Anni-frid Lyngstad isn't Swedish by birth, her father was a German soldier and her mother Norwegian, they fled to Sweden to escape the "collaborator" stigma. In Norway after the end of the war the resistance rounded up all the little three and four year old "war babies" and paraded them through the streets where they were jeered, spat upon and pelted with garbage.

By the way, how are those mixed race Pitcairners faring on socio-ecomic indices as compared to Whites and Polynesians? Their society has all but collapsed has it not?
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Monday, 12 May 2014 9:13:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Jay,

Norfolk Island is mainly populated by the mixed-race descendents of the Polynesians and English sailors. I spent a week there, and they appeared to be doing fine.

http://www.norfolkisland.com.au/ tells about it. It's a great place to go. One famous descendent is Errol Flynn who was a fine physical specimen. They are a good looking people and appear quite intelligent. Possibly a bit of hybrid vigour.
Posted by david f, Monday, 12 May 2014 9:29:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"The people who emigrated to England in prehistoric and distant historic times were all closely related ....the idea that Europeans are a "mongrel" race is completely false ... we Europeans are descended from one group of people and it's been proven right."

So what on earth are we Europeans doing in Australia, where the people who lived here could argue exactly the same case? And what are we doing in the Americas etc and that few hundred years trying to run India and Africa and the Middle East ?

As soon as Europeans left the homeland and moved in on other people's homelands, and started interbreeding with other people, all bets were off. Asian and middle eastern population movement to Europe is just is chickens coming home to roost. We charge round the world announcing that our system is the best, and we're surprised that other people refuse to stay in their place - that they want to charge round the world too, and have some of what we have. Is naiveity part of the 'White' cultural tradition?
Posted by Cossomby, Monday, 12 May 2014 9:40:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This debate is nothing new.

James Grassie 1861: The meaning of the word patriotism is zeal for one's country, but the sense is only accepted according to circumstances. When connected with the Swiss and Scotch, Tell and Wallace, the word is allowed its full weight; and when prefixed to the word Washington it has also some force. Toussaint L Overture, although a 'black fellow,' has not made it obsolete, and Sir Sydney Smith engraved it in characters of blood.

But when you arrive in the sunny islands of the south, you find that the word has changed its meaning for that which would be patriotism in Britain, is rebellion in New Zealand, notwithstanding the incredible amount of oppression that many have goaded the exasperated patriots into action, and oh ! monstrous ! monstrous! who ever dreamed of patriotism in the breast of a poor broken hearted aboriginal of Australia. His heritage may have wrung him by the iron hand of despotism, his lubra (the wife of his bosom) torn screaming from his embrace, his happy hunting grounds desolated; and the game which was his by every right, human and divine, exterminated. His race may have been doomed and devoted to extinction, and himself hunted down like a wild 'dingo' in his own primeval forests, that world of woods, which is his birthright, his heritage, and his home.

He may have suffered all, or nearly all, that man can inflict upon man; and his wrong, like the sacrificing Able's cries, may bellow from the ground with a hundred tongues and yet there is no patriotism for him. If he was to put forth his spear in defence of his rights, the pale-faced patriots of Europe would hang him on the next tree like a dog
Posted by Cossomby, Monday, 12 May 2014 9:45:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This is just getting silly now, since when has Errol Flynn been a Pitcairner and not a White Tasmanian? Flynn CLAIMED to be a descendant of the mutineers to bolster his "Captain Blood" on screen persona, it wasn't true.
I was formulating a longer reply but I'll close for the evening with the thought that Anti Racists and advocates of human equality were conned by people who were playing a racialist game all along. Sorry folks, you've been had, Lewontin and Gould and all the other Jewish pseudo scientists were playing to win by the rules of their ethnic group and they lied to you, they did it strategically and without shame and for thirty five years you fell for it.
It's no slight on them, well played Jewish "equality" advocates, you did the right thing by your people in trying to protect your diaspora after the Pogroms and the Final Solution and from a racialist point of view that's to be respected and applauded.
The end justifies the means, that's something I can definitely relate to.
It's over Paul, the human race is dead, long live the human races!
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Monday, 12 May 2014 11:12:21 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
david f,

Thanks for that, Norfolk Island is where the Mutineers did indeed end up. To this day I do believe the name Christian is still a prominent name there, and yes lovly people and despite a "rough" start they have done remarkably well for themseleves.
Far from simply landing on the Islands and in some lustful fit of barbarism raping the Polynesian women, the European men (uneducated rough sailors) quickly established loving and lasting relationships with the Islanders, and when they moved the whole family moved.
I find in my own relationship, my partner is extremely proud of her Maori heritage and has only 2 non Maori people in her genealogy, both from the 19th century, one a Chinese man and the other an American sailor, two people she is proud to recognise as part of her ancestry. Often referring to the 'Hainamana' people who settled in the north after failing on the gold fields and not returning to China, as extremely kind to her people.

Cossomby, a couple of very nice posts.

Jay, two people, males, both 3rd or 4th generation living in Australia, one of British ancestry, and the other of Chinese ancestry. In fact in other respects very simmilar indeed. Next door neighbors, live in similar houses, around the same ages, drive similar cars, both have two kids even going to the same schools. The Fist bloke of British ancestry is married to a Philippino woman, the second to an Australian. All are great mates, socilise together, wives are great pals. The blokes are mates, about the only thing they disagree on is which footy team to support.
If you will, please answer this question. Which of the two men is the "Most Australian"? In your view.
Posted by Paul1405, Tuesday, 13 May 2014 6:47:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul.
Shockadelic and Individual have strong opinions on "Australianism" but it's not something I spend a great deal of time thinking about, at this time I'm only interested in questions of race and identity in multi-racial societies.
The theoretical "Melting Pot" obviously isn't relevant to my ethnic group, it's an aspiration of the upper middle strata in an evolving caste system in this country , the racial questions I pursue are about dynamics within the lower and bottom categories of that caste system, Whites, Men generally, people over 50, those of the Muslim faith, Aborigines, Africans etc.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Tuesday, 13 May 2014 11:26:40 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Jay,

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001224/

Errol Flynn was born to parents Theodore Flynn, a respected biologist, and Marrelle Young, an adventurous young woman and descendant of a midshipman of HMS Bounty fame.

Errol's mother was descended from one of the midshipmen who went with the mutineers and married a Polynesian woman.

Einstein, a Jew, is possibly the greatest scientific genius. There is no reason to suspect that the Nobel prize committee is biased towards Jews, but Jews have won an inordinate amount of Nobel awards. That may be due to a culture that prizes intellectual achievement rather than the genetic complement. Nevertheless it is a fact.

Hopefully, most people will consider it most important about a person what kind of a person an individual is rather than worrying about the race of that person.
Posted by david f, Tuesday, 13 May 2014 3:52:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
David F
http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Errol_Flynn.html
"Despite Flynn's claims, the evidence indicates that he was not descended from any of the Bounty mutineers". The closest Flynn came to the real Bounty mutineers was playing one in a film.

The Nobel committee unbiased? That's such a silly statement it's hardly worth responding to, the Nobel committee is a laughingstock among all thinking people, you're nominally a Leftist, you should know that already.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Tuesday, 13 May 2014 5:18:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jay to say; <<but it's not something I spend a great deal of time thinking about, at this time I'm only interested in questions of race and identity>>

Sounds like a side step to me. I would have though the answer was obvious. They are both Australian as each other. To say anything else would have one branded a racists. Would it not? It should not take a great deal of time thinking about it. The question once more; Which of the two men is the "Most Australian"?

So...your call.
Posted by Paul1405, Tuesday, 13 May 2014 6:20:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This is timely: tonight on Insight SBS 8.30pm.

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2014/05/13/cross-cultural-dating-why-are-some-people-only-attracted-one-ethnicity
Posted by Cossomby, Tuesday, 13 May 2014 6:53:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul, Cossomby, Davidf, you might find this interesting, I watch so many videos and read so many articles sometimes one or two slip my mind and I neglect to include them as supporting material in my arguments.
Rabbi James Kennard discusses the challenges in keeping his people engaged with Judaism through education, he also lays out in stark terms the implications for the future when a significant proportion of Jews in a diaspora community abandon their roots:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4Qf3_EVC_I
Keeping and perpetuating one's heritage is important, it's fulfilling, it's a worthwhile endeavour and as the Rabbi says it's "beautiful".
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Tuesday, 13 May 2014 7:13:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Oh great Cossomby, a program all about some people's weird, sexist and dare I say it "racist" views on members of other ethnic groups.
You do realise that we're talking about some of the most chauvinistic, sexist,bigoted people in the community when we talk about interracial dating?
This prudish young woman likes "girly" men, this slob wants a Filipino wife who won't answer back and who'll fetch his pipe and slippers on command..third world gold diggers, sex tourists, hebephiles and a psychologist whose field of expertise is aging but who nonetheless peddling the same, long disproven BS about "hybrid vigour", wow this is going to be some show!
http://sociobiologicalmusings.blogspot.com.au/2011/10/problems-with-mixed-race-marriages-and.html
http://therightstuff.biz/2014/04/29/correcting-the-anti-racialist-qa/
Interracial dating has nothing to do with genetic fitness and it's demonstrably true that mixed race children suffer more physical, emotional and intellectual problems than those identifying as of a single race heritage. Due to ideological taboos in the scientific community there's just been no real enquiry into why this is so but this blog gives us a few hints, I can post links to the musings of sick, unhappy mixed race people all night if you'd like but this might suffice for now:
http://stuffeurasianslike.wordpress.com/2011/07/29/white-moms-love-their-children-asian-moms-hate-their-kids/
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Tuesday, 13 May 2014 7:47:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
SteeleRedux, did I say no Black or other minorities ever performed on Eurovision?

If they're citizens of those countries, then they can be contestants.

I note you can find only 3 examples from the show's entire history.

Now find me 3 persons not singing in English or their national language.
If minorities are just as representative of their nations, why no Swedish contestant singing in Tagalog or a French one singing in Arabic?

Paul1405 "the Europeans should have been repulsed by the Polynesians and vise-versa."

Recognition of difference = repulsion?

The mutineers were on an island far from home, what other choice did they have? Abstinence? Turn gay?

Cossomby "Asian and middle eastern population movement to Europe is just chickens coming home to roost."

The old two-wrongs-make-a-right morality, eh?

Britain, France, Spain, etc. created those "chickens", Australia didn't.

*Australians* didn't invade and colonise India, the Americas, or the Middle East.

Mainland China, the *largest* source of immigrants, was never conquered by any European empire.
So where's the Chinese "chickens"?

"Which of the two men is the "Most Australian"?"

The one with British ancestry.
He's the one living in a culture/people *derived* from his ancestry.

The Chinese man is mimicking, adopting, the ways of aliens.
He has betrayed his ancestors.

Your real question should be "Which of the two *families* is most Australian".
Neither are.

You could call them "Modern Semi-Westerners" or some other label, but not "Australian".

People in most Western countries engage in much the same cultural/social phenomena.

But there are still "Dutch" people and "Swedish" families.
And these are defined by common *ancestry*, not adopted or mimicked factors.
Posted by Shockadelic, Tuesday, 13 May 2014 8:57:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jay, I didn't condone the program, the people in it or their views. I hadn't seen it so I couldn't make any judgement. I just said it was timely given this thread.

And from the time of your post you hadn't seen it either when you posted your judgemental comment.

Another article, also noted neutrally, last week's New Scientist:'World Without God. What if everyone stopped believing tomorrow?'
Posted by Cossomby, Tuesday, 13 May 2014 11:15:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"The Chinese man is mimicking, adopting, the ways of aliens. He has betrayed his ancestors."

So, shockadelic, the Aborigines we took over from and one way and another forced to adopt European ways and to assimilate, are also mimicking, adopting the ways of aliens, and have betrayed their ancestors.

This would mean that evangelical Christianity, from the Conquistadors in South America, to the missionaries in Australia, has comprehensively facilitated the betrayal of ancestors on a global scale. Any African, Asian, Oceanic or American Indian who adopted Christianity was mimicking, adopting the ways of aliens and betraying their ancestors.

And logically, Europeans also mimicked, adopted the ways of aliens, and betrayed their ancestors when they adopted Christianity from the Middle East. (Still we managed to keep Yulefest (renamed Christmas) and Easter - the spring festival)
Posted by Cossomby, Tuesday, 13 May 2014 11:31:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A new racial theory based on the "Betrayal of the Ancestors". This is a variation on the concept of separate development. Where the purity of race must be maintained at all cost. For the purist any racial mixing is evil, and can only lead to the total destruction of their pure race. .

Here is a YouTube put out by these racial purists. I like the note at the end "This video is promoting RACIAL AWARENESS not racism PRESERVATION not hate" Sure it is!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qYRJpgAUtQ
Posted by Paul1405, Wednesday, 14 May 2014 6:13:15 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Jay,

Our heritage? One thing that is true about our heritage is that it consists of something that other people have done. It is something to be recognised but to be neither ashamed nor proud of. However, what is my heritage? Since I am a human being my heritage is whatever other human beings have done. We don’t know who first thought of the wheel or tamed fire, but they are part of my heritage.

Great mathematicians such as Euclid, Gauss, Euler, Aryabhata((476–550 CE) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryabhata he may be the greatest of all mathematicians, but since he comes from a non-western culture most people in our society have never heard of him), Cantor and others are part of my heritage. My heritage is in the great literature produced by Shakespeare, Tolstoy, Cervantes, Dante and Goethe. Since I am a product of western society I don’t know about the great literature of other societies, but that is also part of my heritage. Great scientists like Einstein, Newton and Darwin are part of my heritage.

Of course my heritage also contains dirty dogs who were talented at organising people to slaughter other people and accumulate great swathes of territory like Alexander, Julius Caesar, Genghis Kahn, Napoleon, Hitler and all those who served to create the great empires. My heritage also consists of the founders of the great religions who supplied great quantities of nonsense and set human beings who had different brands of nonsense to be at odds with one another. IMHO missionary religions are some of the great evils in my heritage. My heritage also consists of nationalist, Marxist, racist and other ideologues who also set humans at odds with each other.

My heritage also consists of doubters such as Protagoras, Diogenes, Descartes, Hume, Spinoza, Montaigne and all the others who questioned authority and wondered if what they had been told was so. That is the part of my heritage that most fascinates me.

My heritage also consists of those billions of men and women who have lived and died without being known by anyone outside of their immediate circle.
Posted by david f, Wednesday, 14 May 2014 9:51:18 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
david f, your heritage is exactly the same as mine! We must be related!
Posted by Paul1405, Wednesday, 14 May 2014 12:13:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,
Anyone who uses Tom Metzger as a reference or re-posts his cartoons is definitely Anti White, that video was most probably made by Anti Racists.
I don't use the White Genocide meme anymore precisely for that reason, it's a rhetorical tool which was intended to be used in arguments against people such as yourself, it points out a contradiction, if it's used to try and prove that an actual genocide is occurring it's useless, that's why I'm calling BS on the video, no real White Nationalist uses those words in that way.

DavidF
You're from a different ethnic group to the one I call my own and that's OK by me, heaven forbid that we all looked and thought the same way.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Wednesday, 14 May 2014 3:31:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So is the video a fake to make "White" nationalists look bad or has it been produced by a 'White' Nationalist? I don't know - but look at the company it keeps (on that website) - I don't think they are all fakes.

What it does include are two views associated with 'White' supremacy/nationalism that have been around for a very long time and crop up in many genuine white nationalism documents.

1. That interracial relationships will eliminate the 'white' race. The road signs show black + white = black. It could just as easily be thought of as = white, or = black/white. There is an interesting contradiction in the white supremacy/nationalism line: whites are superior, responsible for all the modern human advances etc. but at the same time 'whiteness' is frail and vulnerable - it can be wiped out by blackness. How come the strong 'White' genes don't overpower the black ones? [The root of this idea may be in the concept of 'contamination' - see any anthropological textbook; contamination doesn't just work black/white but also female/male].

2. That people of mixed descent are ugly, weak, degenerate. Actually the reverse is true - they exhibit hybrid vigour. Breeding with close relatives over generations concentrates genetic weaknesses. Humans have long recognised this and deliberate exogamy was common in the past (again, see basic anthropology texts). There are many illnesses today in close-related ethnic groups. Interracial exogamy provides the most radical way to avoid this and so mixed race people tend to be healthier and to be seen as more 'attractive' [This was mentioned in the SBS program.} The children of the first British arrivals in Australia were notably taller and healthier than their parents generation. Part of this was due to improved food etc., but hybrid vigour is part of the story. the migrant generation came from all over Britain (including Ireland/Scotland). Most individually were the product of generations of close breeding in small villages. In Australia they married people that they would never have met back home, who were genetically distant from them, and their children benefited.
Posted by Cossomby, Wednesday, 14 May 2014 4:46:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Cossomby, an Anti Racist, a moron or a teenager, or all three.
Sorry I stopped watching when the Metzger cartoon appeared,that told me all I needed to know.
You're pretty much spot on with the rest of your observations but most of them apply to the U.S brand of White Nationalism, in Europe it's different, in Russia it's different again and there's no original, southern hemisphere specific school of thought as yet.
As with most things American their take on White pride is loud, obnoxious and abrasive, there are a considerable number of us who don't agree with their tactics and resent the fact of this creeping "Americanism" or "Atlanticism". To my mind wholesale adoption by non Americans of the views of David Duke, Tom Metzger,Alex Linder or any of the other U.S based pundits is no different to taking up the Obama/Democrat platform and trying to implement it in another cultural setting, it won't work and you look like a loser wannabe.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Wednesday, 14 May 2014 5:52:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Cossomby,
The physical "superiority" of the White Australian ethnic group is debatable and it's intellectual and emotional makeup could even be seen as inferior to native born White Europeans. That aside I don't accept "hybrid vigour" as an explanation,theres no such thing as an Irish-English hybrid or a British-German hybrid because we're all genetically so similar.
As I demonstrated earlier, draw a line through the Pyrenees and extend it to Belgrade then up to Helsinki, north and west of that line there's very little genetic variation across Ydna, Mtdna and autsomal DNA.
Europeans and Asians are also more closely related to each other than they are to Australoids and Africans so the only "Hybrids" would be European-Australoid, European African, Asian-African, Asian Australoid or African Australoid and the evidence goes way back the other way in those matings, it seems human hybridisation in that sense has dramatic effects on the health and fitness of the offspring.
Have you ever wondered why Jesse Owens or Usain Bolt turned out to be such physically impressive individuals or why Jews test well above other ethnic groups in academic areas? Hint: It's got something to do with inbreeding within a small gene pool, not hybridisation and outbreeding, it makes sense that that's why Africa which has the greatest genetic diversity among it's populations and a pre disposition to promiscuity and polygyny has so many people with sub 70 IQ's and severe physical handicaps.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Wednesday, 14 May 2014 6:16:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Cossomby, "the Aborigines we took over from and one way and another forced to adopt European ways and to assimilate, are also mimicking, adopting the ways of aliens, and have betrayed their ancestors."

Yes.

Many Aborigines needed no "forcing".
Our society was far more pleasant than their survive-one-more-day hunter-gatherer life.

Even now, there are places they can go and live traditional ways.
Most choose not to.

We made Christianity our own.
Middle Eastern culture didn't absorb us (like the Chinese man), we absorbed some of it (including the Hindu–Arabic numeral system).

The Arabs didn't impose these things, or introduce them in a way that transformed our genetic nature.

We made those things "European".
We were still living amongst our own kind, and our kind en masse supported this.

The Chinese man in adopting/mimicking our ways is not making those things "Chinese".

He is not living amongst his kind or part of any broad movement.

No longer Chinese, yet not Australian either.
He is a free radical, a cancerous cell.

"Breeding with close relatives over generations concentrates genetic weaknesses. Humans have long recognised this and deliberate exogamy was common in the past"

"Racism/xenophobia" was also "common in the past".

And for a similar reason: genetic defects (outbreeding depression) caused by too-distant strains.

Too-close *and* too-distant both cause problems.
But you dismiss the latter as an irrelevant concern.

"came from all over Britain (including Ireland/Scotland)"

White, White, White.

"In Australia they married people that they would never have met back home, who were genetically distant from them"

But still White.
Posted by Shockadelic, Wednesday, 14 May 2014 7:25:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul1405 "This is a variation on the concept of separate development."

Oh, so Koreans didn't develop "separately" to Swedes?
Zulus didn't develop "separately" to Turks?

"purity of race must be maintained at all cost."

"At all cost" implies a willingness to do the most extreme or unethical acts.
Not applicable to myself.

"For the purist any racial mixing is evil"

"Evil"? Again, not applicable to me.
Undesirable, preferably avoided, but hardly "evil".

Considering the minute amount of mixing that actually occurs, it's largely irrelevant.
It's mass immigration by MILLIONS that is the threat to our people's survival, not the tiny fraction who mix.

davidf "We don’t know who first thought of the wheel or tamed fire,"

But we do know the origin of many other things, from ancient times to the modern era.

If we *know* Norwegians invented something, it's not merely "human" heritage, it's Norwegian heritage foremost.

Koreans and Turks could make use of this invention, but they could hardly claim it's "their" heritage.

"great literature produced by Shakespeare, Tolstoy, Cervantes, Dante and Goethe"

White, White, White, White, White.

"Great scientists like Einstein, Newton and Darwin"

White (yes, there are virtually no truly Semitic "Jews"), White, White.

"doubters such as Protagoras, Diogenes, Descartes, Hume, Spinoza, Montaigne"

White, White, White, White, White, White.

Doubter? You're the conformist to orthodoxy.
I'm the doubter.
The heretic on your rack.

"set humans at odds with each other."

If political ideology, racial/ethnic identity and religion didn't do it, something else would.
Jellybeans Vs. Freckles.

We created these concepts perhaps precisely because we cannot be everything and anything all at once.

We *need* boundaries, definitions, dichotomies.
We cannot live in a neutral vacuum.
Posted by Shockadelic, Wednesday, 14 May 2014 7:39:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Shockadelic,

The following list of inventions by the non-white Chinese is interesting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Chinese_inventions

China has been the source of many inventions, including the Four Great Inventions: papermaking, the compass, gunpowder and printing (both woodblock and movable type). The list below contains these and other inventions in China attested by archaeology or history.

The historical region now known as China experienced a history involving mechanics, hydraulics and mathematics applied to horology, metallurgy, astronomy, agriculture, engineering, music theory, craftsmanship, naval architecture and warfare. By the Warring States period (403–221 BC), inhabitants of the Warring States had advanced metallurgic technology, including the blast furnace and cupola furnace, while the finery forge and puddling process were known by the Han Dynasty (202 BC–AD 220). A sophisticated economic system in imperial China gave birth to inventions such as paper money during the Song Dynasty (960–1279). The invention of gunpowder by the 10th century led to an array of inventions such as the fire lance, land mine, naval mine, hand cannon, exploding cannonballs, multistage rocket and rocket bombs with aerodynamic wings and explosive payloads. With the navigational aid of the 11th century compass and ability to steer at high sea with the 1st century sternpost rudder, premodern Chinese sailors sailed as far as East Africa. In water-powered clockworks, the premodern Chinese had used the escapement mechanism since the 8th century and the endless power-transmitting chain drive in the 11th century. They also made large mechanical puppet theatres driven by waterwheels and carriage wheels and wine-serving automatons driven by paddle wheel boats.

Go to the url for more.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Eastern_Origins_of_Western_Civilisation

The Eastern Origins of Western Civilisation, written by John M. Hobson in 2004, is a book that argues against the historical theory of the rise of the West after 1492 as a "virgin birth", but rather as a product of Western interactions with more technically and socially advanced Eastern civilization.

Go to the url for more.
Posted by david f, Wednesday, 14 May 2014 8:12:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
David F,
All those inventions and no industrial revolution until the 1970's eh?
Hobson's 1492 book is BS, Anti Racist "history" is as credible and valuable to society as "Feminist Mathematics":
"John Hall of McGill University, writing in the English Historical Review, claims that Hobson's work is prone to wild exaggerations and "tends to cite only those parts of an author’s work that agree with his argument, and misses out whole realms of scholarship". Hobson, Hall continues, "tends to give us bad sociology," and his construct of Eurocentrism is "often a straw man." Generally, Hall remarks that Hobson makes "odd claims," such as asserting that "Adam Smith depended upon Chinese intellectual discoveries". Hall claims that Hobson's "general picture seems to fail".[3]
This bogus narrative of Chinese technical prowess and adventuring has earned it's status as an urban myth:
http://www.1421exposed.com/
Yeah, Zheng He went out with his fleets, then they came back home, dismantled their armada and never established an empire outside their historical borders.
Chinese technology advanced in line with the rest of the world via interaction with European missionaries and traders until the rise of Islam. The Jihadis destroyed the trade routes, massacred the Nestorian Christians, burned the all the libraries, schools and monasteries and put a blockade of ignorant,illiterate, sword wielding slobs between West and East.
If not for Islam China would have been a prosperous, Christian, European styled society in 1,000 AD. Peking would have been the Constantinople of the East, Macau it's Venice and they would have had a Renaissance, an enlightenment and an industrial revolution just as in the west.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Wednesday, 14 May 2014 9:45:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Found an interesting article an on a robotic arm catching objects thrown at it. It is the accompanying video that made it topical for this dicussion.

http://youtu.be/M413lLWvrbI

The three researchers were in turn Asian, Indian, and Caucasian, or in Shocker's vernacular yellow, brown and white. All collaborating at the cutting edge of technology.

It is the modern world fellas, move on.
Posted by SteeleRedux, Wednesday, 14 May 2014 10:06:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Jay,

1421 has a lot of crap.

However, the Chinese inventiveness is real. There are two main reasons for the lack of an industrial revolution in China. One was the Chinese class structure, and the other was the lack of capitalism.

The Chinese class structure had the mandarins on top, the peasants next, the merchants third and the artisans at the bottom. The artisans were possibly more clever than the corresponding class in the west. However, it was the mandarins who decided the applications of the inventions. If a Chinese James Watt invented an engine he could not get financing, and it would end up as a toy for the rich. Printing developed in China centuries before it developed in the west. However, the first printings were Buddhist tracts and government regulations. In the west when printing came along printers were able to print anything that people were interested in so printing sparked a lot of other things. The Chinese inventiveness was no myth. Until 1760 they were the most advanced nation in the world. Then the European industrial revolutions propelled them to the top.

China is now freeing itself from Marxism and the traditional class structure. If you live long enough you will see them at the top again.
Posted by david f, Wednesday, 14 May 2014 10:08:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I have had no time tonight to respond to some of the silly comments.

But for a bit of light relief...http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/05/09/amazon_granted_patent_for_taking_photos_against_a_white_background/.

Somebody's probably already tried to patent genes for 'whiteness' so you won't be able to call yourself 'White' without paying a licence fee. (Thank goodness).
Posted by Cossomby, Wednesday, 14 May 2014 11:08:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Steele,
The Asian and Indian engineers in that video say straight away that they worked on programming and on developing the software, the arm, control system and cameras would be off the shelf equipmnet meaning they didn't "invent" anything. All computer technology goes West to East, be it by cultural exchange, trade or most commonly espionage, Asians don't "invent" anything now and they didn't "invent" anything in the past either.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Thursday, 15 May 2014 6:36:52 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
David,
China was never the most advanced nation on earth and it's not going to be "on top" in anyone's lifetime. China in 1492 couldn't defend itself, it couldn't feed itself and it's political organisation was a shambles.
Anti Racists love to bring up the most obscure and difficult to verify aspects of history to back their arguments, there are still parts of China closed to Westerners today and the authorities still don't give out truthful information about Chinese social and economic conditions.
As we see with the 1492 and 1421 scandals Anti Racists take an absence of evidence or a gap in the historical record and fill it in with nonsense and speculation, they do it all the time.
Websites like Google also modify their search software so that on certain topics only anti Racist literature comes up on the first few pages of any search:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_by_Google
Most people also fail to understand that websites tailor search results to the pattern of prior searches entered by the user, if you search for anti racist literature on a regular basis then when you enter certain keywords you'll always get links to Anti Racist material any other ideas on a particular subject will be tens if not hundreds of pages down in the list.
The internet is biased and distorted by Google at the behest of lobbyists, this is why when you search for "holocaust" you get only pro extermination propaganda and why the old lies about Jews being turned into soap, leather and fertliser and Buchenwald's "Bear and Eagle" story are once again current, this is despite the fact that they are not accepted by mainstream holocaust scholars.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Thursday, 15 May 2014 7:17:01 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Let this be the final word on "White Nationalism", I use the term myself but it's more due to a lack of other accurate descriptive terms for how I think and what I like than an expression of solidarity with Anti Whites, morons and internet trolls:

White Nationalism – Weaboos for Western Remnants
http://therightstuff.biz/2013/08/12/white-nationalism-weaboos-for-western-remnants/
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Thursday, 15 May 2014 7:35:14 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I have followed this discussion with a degree of interest. I must say no matter what argument is put forward that people of non white ancestry have contributed to the progression of human society the 'extreme right' will not accept that such people are worthwhile, or a beneficial part of the human race. Although the "intelligencer" amongst them are above the level of the normal right wing hateful lunatic, they can mount a somewhat creditable, if not misguided, argument in support of their way of thinking. However like the knuckle dragers and bully boys of Fascism, they cannot accept that peoples not of their race could have made an equal, and in some cases, a superior contribution to the advancement of civilization.
Posted by Paul1405, Thursday, 15 May 2014 7:49:44 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jay, what are you saying? You have moved on from the goose stepping, and zig heiling of a past group of fanatical believers in white supremacy. Your reading has now extended beyond the work of de Fuhrer himself and his "fascinating" literary masterpiece, Mein Kampf. The outward appearance may have changed, but the message is still the same.
Posted by Paul1405, Thursday, 15 May 2014 8:12:11 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul we can't accept it because it isn't true, only the truth matters, if we're bully boys we're pummeling people with honesty and objectivity.
What Dynastic China didn't leach from India and Japan it imported from the classical European world, it's religion, philosophy, political and economic systems are all imported from other societies, the Chinese contribution to our understanding of ourselves, our world and the universe is precisely zero, even Indians have made more of a contribution..
To your second post, the answer is yes but I must correct you on one point, Hitler wasn't a White Nationalist, he would have laughed at the idea and dismissed us as cowards.We already live in multiracial societies and we have no other option but to deal with the world as it is,Hitler had the opportunity to move away from multicultural Austria to a relatively more homogenous nation but that option is not open to any White person today.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Thursday, 15 May 2014 9:33:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
None of the early centres of civilisation were in Europe. The land between the Tigris and Euphrates developed a hydraulic civilisation first. The first civilisations were based on controlling the rivers. Other early centres were in Egypt in Africa, the Indus valley and China in Asia. Joseph Needham has generated monumental studies on Chinese technology. The Chinese were first in many areas. They had the blast furnace 1,700 years before it came to Europe. There were later civilised areas in Greece and the Americas.

However, civilisations can advance and decline. In the Indus valley literacy disappeared for 1,000 years apparently as a result of nomadic invaders. The Greek and Roman civilisations disappeared into the depths of the Dark Ages – possibly due to the advent of Christianity. Some scholars date the Dark Ages from the murder of Hypatia in 415 CE, a pagan female mathematician, astronomer and teacher, by a Christian mob. During the European Dark Ages Islamic civilisation flourished. Cordova and Baghdad were great centres of culture and learning. The great universities of Islam were open to Christian, Buddhist, Jewish and other non-Muslim scholars. Apparently the Islamic Dark Ages had the same cause as the European Dark Ages. The Islamic clerics took over in the fourteenth century, and the great Islamic universities were turned into centres of theology. Ijtihad or the spirit of inquiry became limited into investigations and study of the Muslim religion. As Europe came out of their Dark Ages with the Renaissance and Enlightenment the Islamic world entered into their Dark Ages.

Civilisation is restricted to no race, religion or ethnicity. Where the conditions are ripe for it, it arises. It can also decline. Timbuktu was once a great centre of culture. Now it is an African backwater. When Greece was glorying in its Golden Age the British were painting themselves blue and worshipping trees.

Mahatma Gandhi, on being asked, “What do you think of Western civilization?,” was reported to have answered, “I think it would be a good idea”.

In my view faith breeds ignorance, and doubt encourages knowledge.
Posted by david f, Thursday, 15 May 2014 9:36:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Last night Jay called me "an Anti Racist, a moron or a teenager or all three". I take name-calling as sign that the name-caller is losing the argument, but thought I might respond this time.

Anti-racist, yes! I am anti-stereotyping people by race.

Moron - I checked through my post: grammar OK, no spelling mistakes, logical argument based on evidence, mm, maybe a well-educated moron? Or maybe the definition of moron here is 'disagrees with Jay."

Teenager: Ditto, good grammar, no spelling mistakes, familiarity with anthropological and biological concepts. A high-achieving teenager? Maybe a young genius? Thank you Jay, at my age, I'll take that as a complement
Posted by Cossomby, Thursday, 15 May 2014 11:03:33 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Re hybrid vigour and exogamy. I would usually avoid claiming scientific expertise. In this forum you are likely to be shot down as an elitist know-it-all or someone will bring up the global warming debate and claim that all scientists are frauds (well, at least the ones on the other side).

But this is an area I know something about. As a biologist, I am using 'hybrid vigor' in its biological sense not a racial "European-Australoid, European African, Asian-African".

Any population of organisms that reproduces within a limited gene pool is likely to concentrate deleterious genes - we see this in breeding pedigree dogs. There are some well-known examples in humans - Ashkenasy Jews for example, a small group which has intermarried for a long time and exhibits a range of diseases linked to gene mutations concentrated by intermarriage. Another example is haemophilia in the royal lineages of Europe. (Recent exogamy in Royal families will minimise this in future - Kate, Mary).

But even without extreme consequences, there will be a concentration of faulty genes in any small group that tends to intermarry. If you look at family trees for small rural areas say in England, they tend to 'collapse' - that is, the number of unique ancestors doesn't increase exponentially back (2,4,8,16,32,64 etc). Rather a few generations back the same ancestors will appear in multiple lines, and people who marry will have several (sometimes many) of the same great-great-grandparents in common. Recessive genes causing illness or other issues would be more likely to appear in both partners with serious results for their children.

When, in Australia, someone from Scotland married someone from Kent, and their offspring's spouse was the child of an Irishman and a Yorkshire woman, that was much less likely to happen. The subsequent generations, out-marrying further (ie to children of say Italian-German background), would be even less likely to have genetic illnesses. Taking it, further, exogamy between European and Chinese/Indian etc. people diminishes the risk of concentrating deleterious genes. (Of course until recently, there wasn't a lot of opportunity for exogamy at that level)
Posted by Cossomby, Thursday, 15 May 2014 11:32:26 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Continued.
Jay's examples: "Have you ever wondered why Jesse Owens or Usain Bolt turned out to be such physically impressive individuals. Hint: It's got something to do with inbreeding within a small gene pool, not hybridisation and outbreeding, it makes sense that that's why Africa which has the greatest genetic diversity among it's populations and a pre disposition to promiscuity and polygyny has so many people with sub 70 IQ's and severe physical handicaps."

That is contradictory. 'Inbreeding within a small gene pool' does not equal 'greatest genetic diversity' does not equal 'pre-disposition to promiscuity and polygyny'. Inbreeding leads to less genetic diversity. Polygyny is cultural not genetic. Promiscuity is within the eye of the beholder, and anyway seems to be common to all humans (are not men of religion who prey on children 'promiscuous'?) Sub-70 IQ - evidence please. Severe physical handicaps - poor medical facilities?

Africans do exhibit a range of physical attributes that make them good at certain sports - these are the result of longer-scale evolutionary adaptation to environment. I didn't need to 'wonder' it's been widely researched in biology/sports medicine.

"Why Jews test well above other ethnic groups in academic areas?" This is cultural, due to long-term high regard for intellectual skills. It is partly due to the nature of Judaism (the religion of the book) but also to the historic exclusion of Jews in Europe from many professions and activities. Any ethnic group can do the same if they value learning and have access to education. (My family has managed this change in 1-2 generations).
Posted by Cossomby, Thursday, 15 May 2014 11:58:14 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I once watched a doco on prehistoric man, and it was argued that if you took a baby of prehistory parents and transported that baby to the present time. If that baby was given a fully rounded modern education by modern day parents then when that child grew up it would not be a 'grunting caveman', but just as likely as anyone else in this modern world to be a doctor, lawyer or astrophysicists. All to do with environment and previous learned experiences and not genealogy. Also seems the Neanderthal man was not as dumb as we once thought he was.
Posted by Paul1405, Thursday, 15 May 2014 12:16:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Cossomby,

Possibly, another factor in Jewish intellectual predominance is selective breeding. In many Christian communities the brightest boys would be encouraged to become celibate priests, In general they remained celibate and were removed from the gene pool. In Jewish communities the brightest boys would be encouraged to become rabbis. They were provided for by the community or a prominent man who was proud to have such an individual for a son-in-law. The bright, young rabbi was encouraged to marry young and have many children.

One can swim in the gene pool or the secretarial pool.
Posted by david f, Thursday, 15 May 2014 12:50:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
David, that's an interesting observation.

Of course, the 'celibate' catholics weren't all that celibate in practice, from place to place and time to time.

But the Jewish practice simultaneously culturally encouraged intellectual pursuits and selectively bred for intellectual abilities.
Posted by Cossomby, Thursday, 15 May 2014 1:40:29 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
david f, thanks for the superfluous "lesson" in Chinese history.

I'm well aware that the Chinese had an advanced civilisation.
I never claimed otherwise.

But that is *their* civilisation.
We may have borrowed this or that from them.
They borrowed this or that from us.

But our distinct peoples and cultures remained largely unchanged, certainly our genetics did.

Using gunpowder, Arabic numerals or believing in Jehovah doesn't change your genetics.

"None of the early centres of civilisation were in Europe"

And where are they now?
Rubble or slums.

"civilisations can advance and decline"

And if you fill ours with people who couldn't sustain their own, what do think will happen to ours?

"In my view faith breeds ignorance"

Yet you have faith in a utopian fantasy, hoping that if you chaotically mix everything together, somehow you'll end up with better results than any of the existing flawed but self-consistent cultures/civilisations.

SteeleRedux "It is the modern world fellas, move on."

Modern = Western = White.

Yes it is the modern world, so what's with the peasant romanticism of multiculturalism?
Party like it's 1399?

If you're just "modern", like Australians, you are deemed to not have a culture!

"or in Shocker's vernacular yellow, brown and white"

That's not my vernacular, honey.
When have I ever referred to a Yellow or Brown race?

"White" [with at capital] is a term commonly used by myself and others as a descriptor.
Not so with the other two terms.

I would call them technicians.

And guess where all that technology began?
With the work of European scientists going back centuries.

While the Asians were eating monkey brains and killing their newborn daughters.
Posted by Shockadelic, Thursday, 15 May 2014 5:11:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul1405 "the 'extreme right' will not accept that such people are worthwhile, or a beneficial part of the human race."

Being part of the human race does not require them to be part of *our* population/society.

They can make their "equal, and in some cases, a superior contribution" from their own homelands.
Far, far away.

Cossomby "I would usually avoid claiming scientific expertise."

Then don't.

If you're really so learned, you would know that the more distant the genetic strain, the more likely you will create *outbreeding depression*.

If an Irish-English man mates with an Italian-German woman, their children will still be within a common ancestral lineage (going back to the Indo-Europeans).

An Irish-English man breeding with a Zulu or Korean woman has no recent precedent, only some prehistoric ancestry from 100,000+ years ago.

You don't know what deleterious combinations you might produce.

And you are utterly ignoring the social/psychological turmoil such mixed people experience.

It only takes 13 generations to have 6000 different ancestries.
Imagine being that kid.
What the *&$# am I?

No, don't answer "human". That isn't a definition/identity with any meaning or context.
"Humans" must have a context. They can't live in a vacuum.
Posted by Shockadelic, Thursday, 15 May 2014 5:17:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Shockaholic wrote: " Cossomby "I would usually avoid claiming scientific expertise." Then don't.

Thank you for confirming my scientific prediction about posting behaviour! (But in fact I do have some scientific expertise, which enables me to analyse inexpert scientific claims.)

For example, 'outbreeding depression'. A controversial theory that seems to be an example of confirmation bias by racists ie set up a theory, cherry-pick data that seems to support it and ignore data that contradicts it
Posted by Cossomby, Thursday, 15 May 2014 5:36:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Cossomby,
Go back and read the posts again, heck you quote me directly and you still don't bother to proof read your own posts so that's two levels of intellectual QA failed.
Where did Jesse Owens and Usain Bolt grow up? I wasn't Africa was it? How many top sprinters has Africa produced over the span of the lives of those two men? None.
I didn't call you any demeaning names, you asked a question, I replied.
Blast furnaces?
Here again we see the lies of the Anti Whites, they find a gap in the European historical record and fill it in with a lie.
British Archaeologists have found bronze and tin mines dating to 2300 BC, they have the metal artifacts, they can identify different types of ancient bronze alloy and they have found slag, small assaying furnaces and smithing tools, they have not however discovered an intact, larger scale furnace. Now to a sensible person it's obvious that metalworking developed at the same pace all over the world, to the anti White the absence of a single piece of evidence is proof of Occidental inferiority and Oriental superiority.
Chinese maritime prowess?
Really? Their vessels were crude in comparison to European models across the ages and they never mastered the art of oceanic navigation despite their possession of the magnetic compass. The Chinese hugged the coast of Asia and followed it on to Africa while the Europeans could navigate by the stars and dead reckoning and cross the Atlantic ocean. The Junk was developed during the Song dynasty while the Viking longship had existed for five hundred years prior to that era.
Yeah, of course Brunel and Bentham had developed the idea of watertight hull compartments on their own and what's more came up with a better design than the Chinese but because one of them had travelled to China prior to the widespread adoption of his designs the whole development process must be attributed to the Chinese.
You guys don't know how crazy your posts look to an outsider.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Thursday, 15 May 2014 6:35:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jay's orginal comment: "Have you ever wondered why Jesse Owens or Usain Bolt turned out to be such physically impressive individuals. Hint: It's got something to do with inbreeding within a small gene pool, not hybridisation and outbreeding".

No specification here that they were sprinters.

Jay's latter comment: "Where did Jesse Owens and Usain Bolt grow up? I wasn't Africa was it? How many top sprinters has Africa produced over the span of the lives of those two men? None." Now they're sprinters, presumably because the fact that the top distance runners are Kenyans doesn't fit the argument. (For the Kenyans it seems to be down to adaptation to high altitudes and hard work).

Jesse Owens grandparents were slaves (1830s) - so he is 3rd generation in America. The available on-line information including his biography doesn't say where in Africa his four slave grandparents came from, but it's unlikely to be the same village. Therefore he parallels the example I gave earlier of British migrant exogamy in Australia. So he isn't the result of inbreeding in a small population but outbreeding in America between Africans from different places who would have been unlikely to meet in Africa.

PS I deliberately left the typos in to see if anyone would bite. I may have misread Jay's early post, though on rereading it seems a bit ambiguous.
Posted by Cossomby, Friday, 16 May 2014 12:00:32 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I'll spell it out for you cossomby so you don't have to use the Anti Racist tactic of reading between the lines.
Jamaica, a former slave colony consistently produces superior Black athletes.
The USA a former slave colony consistently produces superior Black athletes.
Kenya's record is patchy, at different times it's distance runners have been outstripped by Arabs and Whites.

Folks, we see once again the way the Anti Racist looks at a page of text.
The objective reader reads the words and understands their meaning, the anti Racist looks at the spaces between the words and uses their imagination to come up with a story about the page of text.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Friday, 16 May 2014 8:29:47 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Cossomby "my scientific prediction about posting behaviour"

What "scientific" prediction?

There's no mention on Wiki that outbreeding depression is a "controversial" theory.
Cite your reference for this claim.

Strange how you accept the "theory" of inbreeding depression so readily.

Who's cherry-picking?
Whenever you're told about something that undermines your utopian optimism, you claim it's "invalid", "controversial", "only an opinion", "subjective", "not relevant to humans" or some other flippant dismissal.

Is the Human Development Index a controversial theory?
Is GDP-per-capita a controversial theory?
Is the grouping of languages into families and branches (thus showing the relationships, or lack thereof, of the inventors of those languages) a controversial theory?

You know what's a controversial theory?: Pancultural utopianism.

It is solely a matter of subjective *preference* with no scientific/objective basis whatsoever.

Because we are a "species" in no way makes a shared social/economic environment compulsory.
We haven't lived as a unitary species since prehistoric times.

We live in "cultures", as "peoples", in "homelands".
Not as a "species".

If there were only a handful of cultures/peoples and they were all incredibly similar and related, there'd be little justification for separation.
But that's not the case.

There are *thousands* of cultures/peoples in dozens of unrelated "families".
Playing mix-and-match with them is superficial, dangerous and disrespectful.
Posted by Shockadelic, Friday, 16 May 2014 6:37:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Just read some of the posts here ...... Wikipedia and Google search have a *LOT* to answer for.
Posted by Nhoj, Friday, 16 May 2014 8:57:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Watched the 'History Channel' a program on 'Auschwitz Concentration Camp' and I'm not accusing anyone on this forum of being a Nazi. The program was a reminder to me why I could never be a supporter of all this 'racial theory'. For it was people who feel in with a madman and his 'racial theory' that lead to the destruction of millions of people, becauses of hatred of some, by others. As far as I'm concerned I'll never be worried about the color of a persons skin, or where they come from, or who their ancestors were, I simply take people as they come, warts and all!
One thing that no amount of theorising will change, for better, for worse, we are all on this Earth together, we all laugh, we all cry, sometimes happy, sometimes sad, we all can love, we all can hate, we all human beings, if we are nothing else!
Posted by Paul1405, Saturday, 17 May 2014 8:28:05 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Nhoj, "Wikipedia and Google search have a *LOT* to answer for."

Yes, educating people.

Perhaps you could try reading some of those articles one day.
Try these for starters:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outbreeding_depression
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Indo-Europeans
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_rejection
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_active_separatist_movements
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal%29_per_capita
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_development_index

They could all be summarised on a new page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humans_are_not_interchangeable_units

Paul1405 "The program was a reminder to me why I could never be a supporter of all this 'racial theory'."

Your ideology is also based on a utopian "racial theory": that you *must* be neutral, that you can superficially mix and match 6000 different ethnicities and there'll be no detrimental consequences.

So when pancultural utopianism produces its first megatragedy, you'll stop supporting it?

Like hell you will!

You're a "believer". It's your new religion.

"That was just an isolated incident".

"That was in France, Australia is different."

"You can't judge all minorities by a few thousand mass murderers, rampaging through the streets killing any White person, even ambulance personnel, destroying half of Paris."

Blah blah blah.
Posted by Shockadelic, Saturday, 17 May 2014 3:53:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thought this was worth leaving here;

"Nigerians make up less than 1 percent of the black population in the United States, yet in 2013 nearly one-quarter of the black students at Harvard Business School were of Nigerian ancestry; over a fourth of Nigerian-Americans have a graduate or professional degree, as compared with only about 11 percent of whites."
NYTimes
Posted by SteeleRedux, Monday, 19 May 2014 2:14:31 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Shocker, yours and others ideas on an 'Aryan' race and how you were all going to migrate to 'Lebensraum' and live happily ever after, how <<Your ideology is also based on a utopian "racial theory": that you *must* be neutral>> Are you 6 foot tall with blond hair and blue eyes? If you are not, then you are not of the pure race, your not Aryan and no way your going to Lebensraum!
Posted by Paul1405, Monday, 19 May 2014 6:12:30 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
SteeleRedux, what you say can't be true. According to some on here black people are only good for pick'n cotton, and sing'n en' dance'n.
Reminds me of the American hypocrisy. Take Tiger Woods for instance, the Yanks lord him (rightly) as one of golfs greats. Born 50 years earlier you wouldn't have heard of Tiger Woods, for he would not have got through the front door down at the Alabama Country Club, little own be hitting a golf ball around their hallowed greens.
Likewise your Nigerians would not be attending the prestigious Harvard Business School, they would know 'their place' and most likely they would be there with Tiger pickn' cotton!
Posted by Paul1405, Monday, 19 May 2014 6:26:39 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
SteeleRedux, so why aren't American-born Blacks represented as well as Nigerians?

Could it be the Nigerians are a biased sample?
Their families' wealth enabling foreign study/resettlement?
There's a "1%" in Nigeria too.

Rich people (even Black ones!) have more opportunities.

You should well know that small statistical samples can produce results wildly divergent from larger samples.

Paul1405 "Shocker, yours and others ideas on an 'Aryan' race and how you were all going to migrate to 'Lebensraum'"

I have never professed such pompous "ideas".
It's time to leave the house.... Paul.

"Tiger Woods... Born 50 years earlier"

If there were still Black Americans "pick'n cotton" in 1925, they did so of their own free will.
Posted by Shockadelic, Monday, 19 May 2014 1:14:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 26
  7. 27
  8. 28
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy