Conversation

Notices

1. huwyte lash (slrock@noagendasocial.com)'s status on Wednesday, 11-Oct-2017 15:01:09 EDT huwyte lash

   LoL
   >intellectuals are unable to grok the prowhite mindset with their rational brains, (((right)))?

   1. Sir Shawn Poulson ⚔️ ✅ (knightofthefirststate@noagendasocial.com)'s status on Wednesday, 11-Oct-2017 15:05:25 EDT Sir Shawn Poulson ⚔️ ✅

      in reply to

      @SLRock You say that like it's a bad thing.

      1. huwyte lash (slrock@noagendasocial.com)'s status on Wednesday, 11-Oct-2017 15:19:23 EDT huwyte lash

         in reply to

         @Knight_of_the_First_State No. I say it like it's yet another outstanding example of the cognitive dissonance required of racial-egalitarianism. I say it like, "How naive can one fake being in pretending not to see the rules, but only their exceptions."

         1. dachte kriminell (temporarydouchebag@noagendasocial.com)'s status on Wednesday, 11-Oct-2017 15:37:01 EDT dachte kriminell

            in reply to

            @SLRock @Knight_of_the_First_State Gentlemen like
            Thomas Sowell, Ben Carson and Allen West are outliers BECAUSE they made the choice of leaving the Democrat plantation.

            Identitarians of all stripes are racists. Epigenetics would allow for an expression of generational "well-ness" if a stable and morally grounded environment were nurtured and fostered.

            The Great Society and "liberal" government programs were designed to destroy the strength of black (and immigrant) communities. #opioids4All!

         2. Sir Shawn Poulson ⚔️ ✅ (knightofthefirststate@noagendasocial.com)'s status on Wednesday, 11-Oct-2017 16:39:36 EDT Sir Shawn Poulson ⚔️ ✅

            in reply to

            @SLRock Egalitarianism or equality in general is a nebulous term. Equal in what way? Certainly not EVERY way. Do we draw the line at equal human rights? Equal enforcement of law?
            Sounds reasonable so far.

            1. huwyte lash (slrock@noagendasocial.com)'s status on Wednesday, 11-Oct-2017 20:47:06 EDT huwyte lash

               in reply to

               @Knight_of_the_First_State I am not arguing for or from a worldview where anything in the material world is equal. AFAIK mathematics is the only field in which that term is used accurately.

         3. Sir Shawn Poulson ⚔️ ✅ (knightofthefirststate@noagendasocial.com)'s status on Wednesday, 11-Oct-2017 16:40:24 EDT Sir Shawn Poulson ⚔️ ✅

            in reply to

            @SLRock But, I argue we should apply equality to behaviors of society. As soon as we apply equality to traits and behaviors of the person it goes haywire. e.g. We can't openly discuss statistical IQ differences by race. It can then be spun in any direction to benefit the loudest voice. The outcome is anything but utopian equality.

            1. huwyte lash (slrock@noagendasocial.com)'s status on Wednesday, 11-Oct-2017 21:06:10 EDT huwyte lash

               in reply to

               @Knight_of_the_First_State I need another example.. I really don't comprehend what this means.

               By 'applying equality', do you mean holding all persons in a given society (effectively, nation-state) to one standard, not different standards for different demographic 'people groups'? Is what I just described applying equality to society (good) or to persons (bad)?

               1. Sir Shawn Poulson ⚔️ ✅ (knightofthefirststate@noagendasocial.com)'s status on Thursday, 12-Oct-2017 20:20:20 EDT Sir Shawn Poulson ⚔️ ✅

                  in reply to

                  @SLRock Your wording is ambiguous and I suspect we're talking about different things. My point is that it's entirely possible that whites are predisposed to be better or worse at some trait or behavior and likewise for other racial groups.

                  This is not the same as saying equality is all racial groups deserving access to all the same human rights and government protections.

                  Even though these are two different things, there's still plenty of outrage when someone brings up The Bell Curve.

                  1. huwyte lash (slrock@noagendasocial.com)'s status on Thursday, 12-Oct-2017 20:57:31 EDT huwyte lash

                     in reply to

                     @Knight_of_the_First_State My initial sarcastic point was intended to be: only dishonesty, a bad thing, leads an "intellectual" to claim that he or she doesn't understand the motivations behind ProWhite identity politics.

                     They seem to understand it perfectly well when they're weeping and wailing about Tibet, for example.

                     1. Sir Shawn Poulson ⚔️ ✅ (knightofthefirststate@noagendasocial.com)'s status on Friday, 13-Oct-2017 09:16:51 EDT Sir Shawn Poulson ⚔️ ✅

                        in reply to

                        @SLRock Well, "Fuck Whites" is on the regressive agenda. If you're white, you ought to be self-loathing and repent for society's ills. That can't be healthy behavior.

                        1. Sir Chris Wilson 3️⃣3️⃣ (chriswilson@noagendasocial.com)'s status on Friday, 13-Oct-2017 09:42:23 EDT Sir Chris Wilson 3️⃣3️⃣

                           in reply to

                           @Knight_of_the_First_State @SLRock
                           I just stated "I'm white: deal with it"

                           Then they started throwing beer bottles!

                  2. huwyte lash (slrock@noagendasocial.com)'s status on Thursday, 12-Oct-2017 20:59:14 EDT huwyte lash

                     in reply to

                     @Knight_of_the_First_State And I agree mostly I think with the sentiment behind your second stanza there, but I think Christopher Cantwell's case constituted a pretty solid anomaly in people of all ethnic groups being treated equally under "The Law".

               2. Sir Shawn Poulson ⚔️ ✅ (knightofthefirststate@noagendasocial.com)'s status on Thursday, 12-Oct-2017 20:21:17 EDT Sir Shawn Poulson ⚔️ ✅

                  in reply to

                  @SLRock So, when you say "racial egalitarianism", are you referring to how society treats the person or how society quantifies the person?