Estonia

[westwall]

Rhodesia was great till socialists took it over. The same go's for South Africa, and Nigeria as well. Face it, it ain't the color of the person running it, it's how corrupt they are, and how socialist the government is that takes over after the colonization.

Somalia is a Libertarian country, certainly not in better shape.

Run by corrupt politicians who likewise don't want smart people to challenge their rule. That is the one over arching matter that you constantly ignore.

Why is Africa so corrupt?

Why is Europe so corrupt? Why is the USA so corrupt? Why is Canada so corrupt?

Well, Western European based countries are corrupt in a different way, of supporting multiculturalism at the expense of the masses.

Guess again. Any country that is globalist or socialist is by definition corrupt.

 

[cnelsen]

Most of your posts are "blacks are bad, whites are good" which is a subtle form of white separatism, you may be dumb, but we're not. We understand your code.

I asked you to cite a single example of me claiming blacks are inferior, as you allege I do "in most of my posts". . You have been unable to produce a single example. So you switch to alleging I use a secret code to express these thoughts because, I guess, I don't want anyone to figure out what I'm "really" saying? I'd rather just spend my time typing in code to say what I don't want to ACTUALLY say? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Be a man and admit you misspoke, twat.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Rhodesia was great till socialists took it over. The same go's for South Africa, and Nigeria as well. Face it, it ain't the color of the person running it, it's how corrupt they are, and how socialist the government is that takes over after the colonization.

Right, it's the socialism, LOL. Which is easily shown by pointing to the counter-examples that abound of well run non-socialist majority black countries and, conversely, the utter dearth of well run socialist white run countries.

Of course, this explains why so many Swedes are risking their lives in rickety boats just for a chance at a better life in Ghana.

Westwall is the worst kind of racist. His opinion of blacks is so low he has to force himself to hold opposing positions simultaneously. People who respect others are honest about them. Westwall is the benevolent white parent protecting the black children from the truth.

Hey Westwall, blacks can't run shit. They can't run countries. They can't run cities, counties, or school districts. A few can run car washes. That said, they kick everyone's ass running backyard bar-b-cues. Not only that, blacks punch way above their weight culturally--they dominate the world, in fact. You never see commercials showing Asians sprinkled around to lend a product sex appeal, do you? I've lived in Beijing, and I've lived in the deepest darkest neighborhood in Baltimore. Guess what. Beijing dances to Baltimore's beat. Do you understand what that means you dishonest sap? President Xi isn't going to shoot his own children, and his children are under the power of West North Ave. West North Ave doesn't give a shit about Beijing.

Rhodesia was great until the socialists took over? Haha, yeah, if only Mugabe were a Republican, Zimbabwe would be Finland. Haha. What a maroon.

BTW, you said I considered blacks inferior and wanted a separation between blacks and whites. I said I would make a donation to this board if you could come up with a single example of me posting anything of the kind. I'm still waiting for your answer.

And yes, it is socialism that is the enemy. !

Extreme Socialism like Communism is most certainly the enemy.

But, bits, and pieces of Socialism to micromanage companies for national interest, and national healthcare and other safety networks are actually good things.

In the Libertarian World people would die from lack of healthcare, and poverty, and it would end like we have now where the Capitalists sell us down the road to multiculturalism.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Obviously all kids can't succeed if they just study, such a view is in fact hilariously ignorant.

Genes in fact are proven to account for the majority of education achievement. (Not to deny environment, or culture

Chinese have more of these genes, apparently.

So, why is it surprising that they succeed better in education?

It could be because they have a billion people to draw from too. Amazingly enough these tests don't test everyone. You DO know that, right?

The IQ of Chinese Americans is also a sturdy 108, and Hong Kong which is ethnically Chinese has a similar IQ as that.

Hong Kong was a British colony and as such education was very important. A good friend of mine owns a block of downtown Hong Kong. IQ is a product of genes, environment, and nutrition. Genes will only get you so far, my daughter is a genius, we actually had her tested properly. It ain't cheap to do that. 500 bucks here in Reno Nevada. Would you care to bet how many of those IQ tests you are actually as robust as the one my daughter took?

You claim that being a British colony pushed education, but what about British former colonies like Nigeria, South Africa, Zimbabwe etc.?
What happened there?
Why don't they have this British colony exceptionalism that you're apparently "Claiming"?

Rhodesia was great till socialists took it over. The same go's for South Africa, and Nigeria as well. Face it, it ain't the color of the person running it, it's how corrupt they are, and how socialist the government is that takes over after the colonization.

China was more Socialist than Africa being Communist, and China in 1973 was poorer than the whole of Africa.
Today China's still more Socialist than most of Africa having many state run businesses.

Of course, now China is much richer than the whole of Africa.'

So, no, your argument doesn't fit.

Chinese just seem to be better at producing wealth than Africans.

 

[cnelsen]

Rhodesia was great till socialists took it over. The same go's for South Africa, and Nigeria as well. Face it, it ain't the color of the person running it, it's how corrupt they are, and how socialist the government is that takes over after the colonization.

Right, it's the socialism, LOL. Which is easily shown by pointing to the counter-examples that abound of well run non-socialist majority black countries and, conversely, the utter dearth of well run socialist white run countries.

Of course, this explains why so many Swedes are risking their lives in rickety boats just for a chance at a better life in Ghana.

Westwall is the worst kind of racist. His opinion of blacks is so low he has to force himself to hold opposing positions simultaneously. People who respect others are honest about them. Westwall is the benevolent white parent protecting the black children from the truth.

Hey Westwall, blacks can't run shit. They can't run countries. They can't run cities, counties, or school districts. A few can run car washes. That said, they kick everyone's ass running backyard bar-b-cues. Not only that, blacks punch way above their weight culturally--they dominate the world, in fact. You never see commercials showing Asians sprinkled around to lend a product sex appeal, do you? I've lived in Beijing, and I've lived in the deepest darkest neighborhood in Baltimore. Guess what. Beijing dances to Baltimore's beat. Do you understand what that means you dishonest sap? President Xi isn't going to shoot his own children, and his children are under the power of West North Ave. West North Ave doesn't give a shit about Beijing.

Rhodesia was great until the socialists took over? Haha, yeah, if only Mugabe were a Republican, Zimbabwe would be Finland. Haha. What a maroon.

BTW, you said I considered blacks inferior and wanted a separation between blacks and whites. I said I would make a donation to this board if you could come up with a single example of me posting anything of the kind. I'm still waiting for your answer.

Most of your posts are "blacks are bad, whites are good" which is a subtle form of white separatism, you may be dumb, but we're not. We understand your code. And yes, it is socialism that is the enemy. Kenya is a mainly decent country. The problem is their leader is a Amherst graduate. Not exactly a bastion of conservatism there eh. Botswana, is a wonderful country, rich is diamonds, and a stable democracy. And, holy shit................ IT'S RUN BY BLACK PEOPLE!

I thought you claimed that wasn't possible!

So, I looked at Botswana. It is considered one of the the best run countries in Africa. The same party has ruled since independence. Many of its youths leave to find work in next-door South Africa. The corruption isn't bad by African standards. One third of the two million people or so have no electricity. There is a problem with young girls being forced into prostitution, and the country has the second highest AID infections per capita in the world. The country is named after the dominant ethnic group, the Tswanas, which, in rural areas, enslaves members of the San minority.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Botswana is poorer than Poland, though.

Poland obviously had much worse circumstances, having been brutalized by Nazis, before being occupied by Soviets until 1989.

Furthermore Poland has far less resources at it's disposal to cash in on.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Rhodesia was great till socialists took it over. The same go's for South Africa, and Nigeria as well. Face it, it ain't the color of the person running it, it's how corrupt they are, and how socialist the government is that takes over after the colonization.

Right, it's the socialism, LOL. Which is easily shown by pointing to the counter-examples that abound of well run non-socialist majority black countries and, conversely, the utter dearth of well run socialist white run countries.

Of course, this explains why so many Swedes are risking their lives in rickety boats just for a chance at a better life in Ghana.
.

His "Socialism" being the sole cause of the African condition is ludicrous.

By his logic China, Vietnam, and Eastern Europe should be poorer than Africa.

Not only did these countries adopt a higher degree of Socialism than Africa, but were more readily brutalized in the 20th century.

 

[westwall]

Rhodesia was great till socialists took it over. The same go's for South Africa, and Nigeria as well. Face it, it ain't the color of the person running it, it's how corrupt they are, and how socialist the government is that takes over after the colonization.

Right, it's the socialism, LOL. Which is easily shown by pointing to the counter-examples that abound of well run non-socialist majority black countries and, conversely, the utter dearth of well run socialist white run countries.

Of course, this explains why so many Swedes are risking their lives in rickety boats just for a chance at a better life in Ghana.
.

His "Socialism" being the sole cause of the African condition is ludicrous.

By his logic China, Vietnam, and Eastern Europe should be poorer than Africa.

Not only did these countries adopt a higher degree of Socialism than Africa, but were more readily brutalized in the 20th century.

Indeed they did and their IQ's were lowered as a result of it. Poor people don't eat well. And I never claimed that socialism is the sole cause, but it is a major cause, unlike your claim that blacks are genetically backward. So, you claim a singular cause, and it is I who am saying it is multiple causes.

 

[westwall]

Botswana is poorer than Poland, though.

Poland obviously had much worse circumstances, having been brutalized by Nazis, before being occupied by Soviets until 1989.

Furthermore Poland has far less resources at it's disposal to cash in on.

Botswana had to start from NOTHING, and that within the last 30 years! Poland has a history going back CENTURIES! I think you don't have the IQ to carry on a educated discussion!

 

[westwall]

Rhodesia was great till socialists took it over. The same go's for South Africa, and Nigeria as well. Face it, it ain't the color of the person running it, it's how corrupt they are, and how socialist the government is that takes over after the colonization.

Right, it's the socialism, LOL. Which is easily shown by pointing to the counter-examples that abound of well run non-socialist majority black countries and, conversely, the utter dearth of well run socialist white run countries.

Of course, this explains why so many Swedes are risking their lives in rickety boats just for a chance at a better life in Ghana.

Westwall is the worst kind of racist. His opinion of blacks is so low he has to force himself to hold opposing positions simultaneously. People who respect others are honest about them. Westwall is the benevolent white parent protecting the black children from the truth.

Hey Westwall, blacks can't run shit. They can't run countries. They can't run cities, counties, or school districts. A few can run car washes. That said, they kick everyone's ass running backyard bar-b-cues. Not only that, blacks punch way above their weight culturally--they dominate the world, in fact. You never see commercials showing Asians sprinkled around to lend a product sex appeal, do you? I've lived in Beijing, and I've lived in the deepest darkest neighborhood in Baltimore. Guess what. Beijing dances to Baltimore's beat. Do you understand what that means you dishonest sap? President Xi isn't going to shoot his own children, and his children are under the power of West North Ave. West North Ave doesn't give a shit about Beijing.

Rhodesia was great until the socialists took over? Haha, yeah, if only Mugabe were a Republican, Zimbabwe would be Finland. Haha. What a maroon.

BTW, you said I considered blacks inferior and wanted a separation between blacks and whites. I said I would make a donation to this board if you could come up with a single example of me posting anything of the kind. I'm still waiting for your answer.

Most of your posts are "blacks are bad, whites are good" which is a subtle form of white separatism, you may be dumb, but we're not. We understand your code. And yes, it is socialism that is the enemy. Kenya is a mainly decent country. The problem is their leader is a Amherst graduate. Not exactly a bastion of conservatism there eh. Botswana, is a wonderful country, rich is diamonds, and a stable democracy. And, holy shit................ IT'S RUN BY BLACK PEOPLE!

I thought you claimed that wasn't possible!

So, I looked at Botswana. It is considered one of the the best run countries in Africa. The same party has ruled since independence. Many of its youths leave to find work in next-door South Africa. The corruption isn't bad by African standards. One third of the two million people or so have no electricity. There is a problem with young girls being forced into prostitution, and the country has the second highest AID infections per capita in the world. The country is named after the dominant ethnic group, the Tswanas, which, in rural areas, enslaves members of the San minority.

Yes? Continue.......

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Botswana is poorer than Poland, though.

Poland obviously had much worse circumstances, having been brutalized by Nazis, before being occupied by Soviets until 1989.

Furthermore Poland has far less resources at it's disposal to cash in on.

Botswana had to start from NOTHING, and that within the last 30 years! Poland has a history going back CENTURIES! I think you don't have the IQ to carry on a educated discussion!

Poland had it's nation stripped from it quite a few times, and did so with quite the brutality.
So, such a statement is ridiculous on your part.
Poles also had to rebuild their nation from scratch.

Poland had nearly half the Per Capita Income GDP of Botswana in 1990, now Poland has nearly double the Per Capita Income GDP as Botswana.

This isn't surprising because of the damages done to Poland by Nazis, and Soviets.

GDP per capita (current US$) | Data

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Rhodesia was great till socialists took it over. The same go's for South Africa, and Nigeria as well. Face it, it ain't the color of the person running it, it's how corrupt they are, and how socialist the government is that takes over after the colonization.

Right, it's the socialism, LOL. Which is easily shown by pointing to the counter-examples that abound of well run non-socialist majority black countries and, conversely, the utter dearth of well run socialist white run countries.

Of course, this explains why so many Swedes are risking their lives in rickety boats just for a chance at a better life in Ghana.
.

His "Socialism" being the sole cause of the African condition is ludicrous.

By his logic China, Vietnam, and Eastern Europe should be poorer than Africa.

Not only did these countries adopt a higher degree of Socialism than Africa, but were more readily brutalized in the 20th century.

Indeed they did and their IQ's were lowered as a result of it. Poor people don't eat well. And I never claimed that socialism is the sole cause, but it is a major cause, unlike your claim that blacks are genetically backward. So, you claim a singular cause, and it is I who am saying it is multiple causes.

Yes, Communism did seem to lower the IQ of nations.
Why is that surprising?
It caused malnutrition.

But, on a side note, from the Communist era, these nations scored higher IQ's than African Americans, Poland recorded a 99 IQ, China a 100 IQ, East Germany a 95 IQ, Russia a 97 IQ, Czech Republic a 97 IQ, and Hungary a 99 IQ.

These all beat the 85 IQ of African Americans.

What next?
Are you going to argue those who suffered from Communism, somehow had it better than African Americans?

 

[westwall]

Rhodesia was great till socialists took it over. The same go's for South Africa, and Nigeria as well. Face it, it ain't the color of the person running it, it's how corrupt they are, and how socialist the government is that takes over after the colonization.

Right, it's the socialism, LOL. Which is easily shown by pointing to the counter-examples that abound of well run non-socialist majority black countries and, conversely, the utter dearth of well run socialist white run countries.

Of course, this explains why so many Swedes are risking their lives in rickety boats just for a chance at a better life in Ghana.
.

His "Socialism" being the sole cause of the African condition is ludicrous.

By his logic China, Vietnam, and Eastern Europe should be poorer than Africa.

Not only did these countries adopt a higher degree of Socialism than Africa, but were more readily brutalized in the 20th century.

Indeed they did and their IQ's were lowered as a result of it. Poor people don't eat well. And I never claimed that socialism is the sole cause, but it is a major cause, unlike your claim that blacks are genetically backward. So, you claim a singular cause, and it is I who am saying it is multiple causes.

Yes, Communism did seem to lower the IQ of nations.
Why is that surprising?
It caused malnutrition.

But, on a side note, from the Communist era, these nations scored higher IQ's than African Americans, Poland recorded a 99 IQ, China a 100 IQ, East Germany a 95 IQ, Russia a 97 IQ, Czech Republic a 97 IQ, and Hungary a 99 IQ.

These all beat the 85 IQ of African Americans.

What next?
Are you going to argue those who suffered from Communism, somehow had it better than African Americans?

And they STARTED with higher IQ's because they had a better history of nutrition for their people going back hundreds of years! Don't you get it!

 

[westwall]

Botswana is poorer than Poland, though.

Poland obviously had much worse circumstances, having been brutalized by Nazis, before being occupied by Soviets until 1989.

Furthermore Poland has far less resources at it's disposal to cash in on.

Botswana had to start from NOTHING, and that within the last 30 years! Poland has a history going back CENTURIES! I think you don't have the IQ to carry on a educated discussion!

Poland had it's nation stripped from it quite a few times, and did so with quite the brutality.
So, such a statement is ridiculous on your part.
Poles also had to rebuild their nation from scratch.

Poland had nearly half the Per Capita Income GDP of Botswana in 1990, now Poland has nearly double the Per Capita Income GDP as Botswana.

This isn't surprising because of the damages done to Poland by Nazis, and Soviets.

GDP per capita (current US$) | Data

Yes, and it has a history going back centuries. Catch up "genius". You are trying to compare a nation that has been around for less than 40 years with a nation that has been around in some guise or other for HUNDREDS of years. That has a national identity going back longer than that! You aren't helping your argument in the slightest!

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Rhodesia was great till socialists took it over. The same go's for South Africa, and Nigeria as well. Face it, it ain't the color of the person running it, it's how corrupt they are, and how socialist the government is that takes over after the colonization.

Right, it's the socialism, LOL. Which is easily shown by pointing to the counter-examples that abound of well run non-socialist majority black countries and, conversely, the utter dearth of well run socialist white run countries.

Of course, this explains why so many Swedes are risking their lives in rickety boats just for a chance at a better life in Ghana.
.

His "Socialism" being the sole cause of the African condition is ludicrous.

By his logic China, Vietnam, and Eastern Europe should be poorer than Africa.

Not only did these countries adopt a higher degree of Socialism than Africa, but were more readily brutalized in the 20th century.

Indeed they did and their IQ's were lowered as a result of it. Poor people don't eat well. And I never claimed that socialism is the sole cause, but it is a major cause, unlike your claim that blacks are genetically backward. So, you claim a singular cause, and it is I who am saying it is multiple causes.

Yes, Communism did seem to lower the IQ of nations.
Why is that surprising?
It caused malnutrition.

But, on a side note, from the Communist era, these nations scored higher IQ's than African Americans, Poland recorded a 99 IQ, China a 100 IQ, East Germany a 95 IQ, Russia a 97 IQ, Czech Republic a 97 IQ, and Hungary a 99 IQ.

These all beat the 85 IQ of African Americans.

What next?
Are you going to argue those who suffered from Communism, somehow had it better than African Americans?

And they STARTED with higher IQ's because they had a better history of nutrition for their people going back hundreds of years! Don't you get it!

But, Estonia a new nation only really formed in 1992 has the highest PISA scores in Europe as of 2015.

You're getting really desperate to support notions of Black equality.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Botswana is poorer than Poland, though.

Poland obviously had much worse circumstances, having been brutalized by Nazis, before being occupied by Soviets until 1989.

Furthermore Poland has far less resources at it's disposal to cash in on.

Botswana had to start from NOTHING, and that within the last 30 years! Poland has a history going back CENTURIES! I think you don't have the IQ to carry on a educated discussion!

Poland had it's nation stripped from it quite a few times, and did so with quite the brutality.
So, such a statement is ridiculous on your part.
Poles also had to rebuild their nation from scratch.

Poland had nearly half the Per Capita Income GDP of Botswana in 1990, now Poland has nearly double the Per Capita Income GDP as Botswana.

This isn't surprising because of the damages done to Poland by Nazis, and Soviets.

GDP per capita (current US$) | Data

Yes, and it has a history going back centuries. Catch up "genius". You are trying to compare a nation that has been around for less than 40 years with a nation that has been around in some guise or other for HUNDREDS of years. That has a national identity going back longer than that! You aren't helping your argument in the slightest!

I'd refer to Estonia once again, like in the previous comment.

By your logic, Estonia should be way behind in intellectual factors, due to being a new nation that was colonized by the Socialist Soviet Union until 1992.

But, that's not the case.

 

[westwall]

Botswana is poorer than Poland, though.

Poland obviously had much worse circumstances, having been brutalized by Nazis, before being occupied by Soviets until 1989.

Furthermore Poland has far less resources at it's disposal to cash in on.

Botswana had to start from NOTHING, and that within the last 30 years! Poland has a history going back CENTURIES! I think you don't have the IQ to carry on a educated discussion!

Poland had it's nation stripped from it quite a few times, and did so with quite the brutality.
So, such a statement is ridiculous on your part.
Poles also had to rebuild their nation from scratch.

Poland had nearly half the Per Capita Income GDP of Botswana in 1990, now Poland has nearly double the Per Capita Income GDP as Botswana.

This isn't surprising because of the damages done to Poland by Nazis, and Soviets.

GDP per capita (current US$) | Data

Yes, and it has a history going back centuries. Catch up "genius". You are trying to compare a nation that has been around for less than 40 years with a nation that has been around in some guise or other for HUNDREDS of years. That has a national identity going back longer than that! You aren't helping your argument in the slightest!

I'd refer to Estonia once again, like in the previous comment.

By your logic, Estonia should be way behind in intellectual factors, due to being a new nation that was colonized by the Socialist Soviet Union until 1992.

But, that's not the case.

Once again Estonia had its own way of doing things, it has a long ethnic history going back centuries and even though the Soviets tried to eradicate it they failed.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Botswana is poorer than Poland, though.

Poland obviously had much worse circumstances, having been brutalized by Nazis, before being occupied by Soviets until 1989.

Furthermore Poland has far less resources at it's disposal to cash in on.

Botswana had to start from NOTHING, and that within the last 30 years! Poland has a history going back CENTURIES! I think you don't have the IQ to carry on a educated discussion!

Poland had it's nation stripped from it quite a few times, and did so with quite the brutality.
So, such a statement is ridiculous on your part.
Poles also had to rebuild their nation from scratch.

Poland had nearly half the Per Capita Income GDP of Botswana in 1990, now Poland has nearly double the Per Capita Income GDP as Botswana.

This isn't surprising because of the damages done to Poland by Nazis, and Soviets.

GDP per capita (current US$) | Data

Yes, and it has a history going back centuries. Catch up "genius". You are trying to compare a nation that has been around for less than 40 years with a nation that has been around in some guise or other for HUNDREDS of years. That has a national identity going back longer than that! You aren't helping your argument in the slightest!

I'd refer to Estonia once again, like in the previous comment.

By your logic, Estonia should be way behind in intellectual factors, due to being a new nation that was colonized by the Socialist Soviet Union until 1992.

But, that's not the case.

Once again Estonia had its own way of doing things, it has a long ethnic history going back centuries and even though the Soviets tried to eradicate it they failed.

By your own logic Estonia should be behind in intellectual factors, being oppressed, under Communist rule, and only gaining independence in 1992?

Estonia's PISA scores are now #1 in Europe.

How could anything but ethnicity explain this away?
The fact that similar Finland was long been #1 in Europe in PISA scores is very telling.
In spite of the fact of Finland, and Estonia having different nations, and histories, they seem to be similar in intelligence.
Could ethnic heritage have something to do with it?

It can't be education funding either, because Estonia having a more modest income than Western Europe, means less education funding.

 

[westwall]

Here we can continue talking about European racism....

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Estonia scores higher PISA scores by a huge margin than Trinidad, and Tobago, even though Trinidad, and Tobago is richer, has had less oppression in the 20th century, and has had independence longer.

Explanation, please?