Charles Stucker
Senior Member
- Oct 13, 2009
- 2,071
- 226
- 48
I thought the problem was we already have too many moronsHow do we end racism in the world?
Make everybody mormans.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I thought the problem was we already have too many moronsHow do we end racism in the world?
Make everybody mormans.
Today, on Earth, and in the US in paricular, there are few "Isolated Breeding Pools"
Incorrect, a vast majority of people in the United States prefer to mate within their own race. Check the census.
Considering that for at least 50 years our culture has been saturated with pro-miscegenation propaganda... it is quite obvious that it isn't a "cultural phenominon" but rather a natural one.
Still waiting for you to explain why genocide is such a good thing.
Why are you waiting for me to advocate genocide?
Race Mixing = No race is around.
And most parents want their children to be like them. Funny how evolution works that way isn't it?Frankly, its much easier for me to make the assumption that children simply want to be like their parents.
there is no reason to believe that the mixing of genetics between races would produce anything but a stronger species
Why are you waiting for me to advocate genocide?
You already have advocated genocide, I am waiting for you to apply some sort of logic to it.
Race Mixing = No race is around.
When someone goes around saying they only want there to be one or no 'races' around... how the hell are they advocating anything but genocide?
There's so much that is ridiculous about your last post, that I'm going to take one stupid comment at a time.
If all races have been mixed into all people, then no one person will be of any race, and there will be "no race around."
no one was killed in the making of this message.
Frankly, its much easier for me to make the assumption that children simply want to be like their parents.
And most parents want their children to be like them. Funny how evolution works that way isn't it?
Regardless of whatever previous comments you have made this statement below indicates that you are probably a racist. So I see why this has been a difficult conversation for you.
there is no reason to believe that the mixing of genetics between races would produce anything but a stronger species
Just because you believe that a person of mixed 'race' is inherently "stronger" does not make you any less of a racist than someone who believes that someone of any particular 'race' is inherently "stronger".
Race-linked genetic dieases (like Sickle Cell Anemia) would be less frequent among a group of mixed race people.
Whether or not this makes me a racist is immaterial.
Article 2
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
the obvious answer would be to kill the white people but then there's Rawanda.. hhhhmmmmm!
What bout the Right's use of racism and xenophobia?The left abolishing the practice of using racism for political and monetary gain would be a big step toward ending racism in this country .........
☭proletarian☭;2168489 said:What bout the Right's use of racism and xenophobia?The left abolishing the practice of using racism for political and monetary gain would be a big step toward ending racism in this country .........
Yes, you are clearly a racist. Recognition of a problem is the first step to solving it.
Ahem, regarding your lack of understanding of what genocide is, I'm going to be nice and provide your with the legal definition. No need to thank me.
Convention on Genocide
Article 2
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
You wish to prevent births of persons who would be of a single race... fits squarely into the legal definition of "genocide".
acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group
So this is what you've been leading up to?
Now, back to your genocidal fantasies...
At least you realize that miscegenation isn't what most people would prefer. That is just the way nature or "nurturing" (as you would put it) is. So it's obvious that your "solution" to the phantom racism problem would involve some pretty drastic measures. How far do you think the government should go? How many liberties? How much propaganda? How many dollars? All in the name of your human-cattle breeding program?
So this is what you've been leading up to?
I've only asked you repeatedly to explain your genocidal position throughout this thread. You seem afraid to actually explain what measures you would support to achieve your genocidal fantasy of a one 'race' world.
Does this repeated question ring a bell?
Now, back to your genocidal fantasies...
At least you realize that miscegenation isn't what most people would prefer. That is just the way nature or "nurturing" (as you would put it) is. So it's obvious that your "solution" to the phantom racism problem would involve some pretty drastic measures. How far do you think the government should go? How many liberties? How much propaganda? How many dollars? All in the name of your human-cattle breeding program?
Are you actually going to answer the question, or do you have a few more red herrings to throw out there?
Government needn't do anything.
Contrary to whatever you may think, procreation between races will happen regardless of policy or law.
Government needn't do anything.
Good, it appears we agree on something. So you oppose government race-hustlers extorting our resources and liberties in the name of "racial integration"? Not to mention the funds that are spent on crackpot assimilation theorists conniving ways to increase "the most intimate form of integration"?
Contrary to whatever you may think, procreation between races will happen regardless of policy or law.
No kidding?
Contrary to what you fantasize about, most people will continue to mate within their respective 'races'.
I hope you understand that your genocidal vision of a world only populated by super hybrids is a pure fantasy.
It is a shame that so much is wasted because of racists who hold the same opinion as yourself.
It is safe to conclude that you are illogical
How is genetic diversity possible in "isolated breeding pools?"
I think he's right in the sense that different races are slightly different genetically.
We see this outcome in various diseases, do we not?
Of course there's plenty of diversity even within each "race" but he does have a point.
Not that that's a justification for separation of the races, but the logic of his point isn't flawed.
Genetic "Diversity" is necessary for the survival of the species.
No one suggested that it was.
"Isolated Breeding Pools" inhibit genetic diversity, and weaken the species (E.g. Sickle Cell anemia, and other diseases that prevail along racial lines).
Do they?
Or is Sickle Cell ALSO a genetic benefit if you happen to live in a place where malaria is common?
I think you're guessing here, sport. I think your understanding of genetics is rather thin.
Today, on Earth, and in the US in paricular, there are few "Isolated Breeding Pools" and there is no reason to believe that the mixing of genetics between races would produce anything but a stronger species.
But there IS good reason to assume that if you want uniquely different genetic pools to draw from in the future, you need to keep the gene pools unique.
I'm not arguing for William Joyces POV.
He's an overt NAZI and proud of it, too. Let's just say, I'm not, okay?
I'm merely pointing out that what he said actually does make sense.
YOu might find the reason for him advocating that repungnant, that doesn't invalidate his point.
Jesus Christ on a crutch, here I am having to defend resident NAZI's opines from people with whom I agree with in principle.
But RIGHT is RIGHT, damn it, now matter who says it.