War on white people?

[The Scientific States]

Explain why.

During ANC rule, AIDS and crime increase considerably.

You've gone on and on about how great colonialism is, and you haven't explained why.

The Europeans brought technology and stable governments spanning a large area, something that previously did not exist in South Africa.

Because apparently having around 90% of a country's population under an oligarchic heel treating them worse than shit is "benign".

The ANC led to worse outcomes, adjusted for technology.

Right. Conquering and enslaving peoples, forcefully extracting their countries resources, forced conversion, and genocide are known to be very stabilizing.

That's what they were doing to each other before the Europeans came.

So Blakk Metal, can I assume you've conceded that your claim that blacks are genetically predisposed to commit crime is racist bullshit and that they are, in fact, disproportionately incarcerated for crimes like marijuana possession because of racial bias? Because you've dodged this at least twice now.

I've already proven it, if can't understand that, then that's your fault.

You're correct about the ANC. Hell, I even wrote a factbook criticizing them. However, the failure of the ANC to lead South Africa doesn't mean that colonialism was somehow good for the nation.

And, you haven't proven it. It's your fault for not providing any evidence, facts, or sources. This is a debate forum, where we debate. Debating isn't repeating a claim over and over again without explaining the reasoning behind your claim.

[Distruzio]

Indeed, the institutionalized oppression of peoples based on their skin color is an entirely benign practice.

It's certainly more benign than other alternatives. That doesn't make it preferable, mind you. Just less offensive than other options.

[Zelitopia]

Whites and Hispanics have one thing in common: they don't exist. Neither constitutes a race and neither constitutes a distinct unified ethnic group though people like to pretend they do.

1. There is only one race. Hispanics, Blacks, Asians and whites are all members of the same race. The human race is the top of the hierarchy.

2. Below race there are two super groupings which we refer to as sub races: black and white. Black is everyone who traces ancestry to Africa and white is everyone who is not from Africa.

3. Below sub race you have the various ethnicities such as Chinese, Native American, Arabian, Celt, Aborigini etc.

4. Below ethnicity you have nationality which includes American, Mexican, British, Canadian, and Russian.

5. The lowest pier in the hierarchy is culture which includes Hispanics, non Hispanics, Gothics, automotive geeks, etc.

Note that Mexican is neither a race nor an ethnic group but is instead merely a nationality in which one holds citizenship.

I'm gonna take issue with a few things here.

2: Everyone's ancestry is from Africa.

4: Nationality isn't related to ethnicity. You could have numerous ethnicities of one nationality, or numerous nationalities of one ethnicity. It doesn't fit on your ladder. The same could be said for number 5.

In response to the points you raised.

It is true that all primates and indeed all hominids originated in Africa but they did not evolve in Africa. For example, when the ancestors of the Vhigurs were still living in Africa, they were not Chinese. It was only after they left and moved to east Asia that those ancestors evolved into the ethnicity we know Vighurs. The same is true of the Chinese. This is why both nationality and ethnicity are lower on the ladder. Now when you look at the black/white subdivision between race and ethnicity that what the geneticists have called it because the non black groups are more closely related to each other genetically than they are to blacks. That is why that first major division in the human race. Though I suppose you could replace white with brown. It does say that either is better than the other just that nature saw fit to give them different genes. Remember that in evolution is no such thing as superiority or being better than another being. There is only adaptation based on the environment your people live in for thousands of years.

Now you will notice that ethnicity is higher on the hierarchy than nationality. Why would that be? For one thing there are genes that determine ethnicity but there are no genes for nationality just as there are no genes that determine culture. Therefore nationality and culture are both at the very bottom while ethnicity is the lowest you can go as far as genes goes. You can many ethnicities within one country for example there are hundreds of ethnicities within the United States and members of each ethnicity can live in different countries.

Culture is bit more complicated. The most I can say is that it is not determined by genes and the role your parents play is not genetic but in the way they choose to raise and what lifestyle and part of the country you grow up in. You have the globalization and internet cultures which both transcend national boundaries and you have national cultures and the various subcultures that can impacted by nationality, ethnicity, location, income, religion etc. And each culture could in turn be divided further into sub cultures just as each of the world's major religions are divided into denominations none of which is based on DNA.

[The Land of Truth]

Right. Conquering and enslaving peoples, forcefully extracting their countries resources, forced conversion, and genocide are known to be very stabilizing.

.... leaving after engaging in such practices, however ill conceived they may have been, destabilizes regions. Had the colonial powers maintained the temerity to stick it out things might have, in a counter-factual and purely hypothetical consideration, been the better option.

For the post-imperialism governments to have succeeded under the circumstances left by the empires would've been almost impossible. The borders left behind were arbitrary and hastily thought out. They paid no mind to tribal affiliations, belief structures, cultures, etc.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Right. Conquering and enslaving peoples, forcefully extracting their countries resources, forced conversion, and genocide are known to be very stabilizing.

.... leaving after engaging in such practices, however ill conceived they may have been, destabilizes regions. Had the colonial powers maintained the temerity to stick it out things might have, in a counter-factual and purely hypothetical consideration, been the better option.

Well, if the colonial powers wouldn't have been a bunch of dicks and would have ruled with a fair and even hand it'd have been a better option.

As it happened it not only destabilized regions but also antagonized an entire continent against Europeans.

[The Land of Truth]

No it didn't, it improved them.

Right. Conquering and enslaving peoples, forcefully extracting their countries resources, forced conversion, and genocide are known to be very stabilizing.

That's what they were doing to each other before the Europeans came.

Not all of them. Regardless, so what? Two wrongs don't make a right.

[Distruzio]

No. We can't agree to that.... well... I can't. I don't agree that there is a "war on white people" but that doesn't mean that I'm prepared to disregard the critiques such fearmongering offers because it's unpleasant. Some of these folks are genuinely concerned. Genuine concern merits genuine consideration alongside reasonable solutions.

There's no reasonable solution for "Muh white majority is going to be gone if these damn immigrants keep reproducing!" or "White people are going to go extinct!" mostly because they are ignoring most things about social science and biology.

Of course there are reasonable solutions. Voluntary segregation is one. Restricting integration (by local communities) is another. These are both initiatives that enjoy significant support here in the US (although it's unpopular to acknowledge them as pro-segregation or anti-integration measures). The result is a relatively mitigated tendency towards social distortion that so typifies America's past.

Moreover, what's wrong with "the majority" fearing the loss of their influence and authority in a nation wherein they have traditionally wielded such authority and influence? Do you not like democracy?

[Primordial Luxa]

No. We can't agree to that.... well... I can't. I don't agree that there is a "war on white people" but that doesn't mean that I'm prepared to disregard the critiques such fearmongering offers because it's unpleasant. Some of these folks are genuinely concerned. Genuine concern merits genuine consideration alongside reasonable solutions.

There's no reasonable solution for "Muh white majority is going to be gone if these damn immigrants keep reproducing!" or "White people are going to go extinct!" mostly because they are ignoring most things about social science and biology.

Because I'm curious and unopinionated
What particular things about social science and biology?

[Distruzio]

.... leaving after engaging in such practices, however ill conceived they may have been, destabilizes regions. Had the colonial powers maintained the temerity to stick it out things might have, in a counter-factual and purely hypothetical consideration, been the better option.

For the post-imperialism governments to have succeeded under the circumstances left by the empires would've been almost impossible. The borders left behind were arbitrary and hastily thought out. They paid no mind to tribal affiliations, belief structures, cultures, etc.

You'll hear no argument from me in that regard. I agree entirely.

[Blakk Metal]

I've already proven it, if can't understand that, then that's your fault.

Where are your sources? Quote it instead of dodging it like you've dodged EVERY single thing.

Until then, your claims are bullshit.

I have proven your claims to be bullshit. The government is most likely fair, because if it wasn't, there wouldn't a state left.

[Saiwania]

There's no reasonable solution for "Muh white majority is going to be gone if these damn immigrants keep reproducing!" or "White people are going to go extinct!" mostly because they are ignoring most things about social science and biology.

Both of those projections are coming true, there probably won't be a White majority anywhere and while Whites won't immediately go extinct, they will perhaps shrink to a small enough size where they could be successfully genocided if non-Whites turned against them.

[Distruzio]

.... leaving after engaging in such practices, however ill conceived they may have been, destabilizes regions. Had the colonial powers maintained the temerity to stick it out things might have, in a counter-factual and purely hypothetical consideration, been the better option.

Well, if the colonial powers wouldn't have been a bunch of dicks and would have ruled with a fair and even hand it'd have been a better option.

As it happened it not only destabilized regions but also antagonized an entire continent against Europeans.

Absolutely true. Americans get to see the same damned thing happening to them in the Middle East right now. We didn't learn from history and we all know what has happened in Iraq and Afghanistan - worse governments and repression than before the US intervened.

[Roski]

Equality to a liberal is the oppressed becomes the oppressor
Equality to a sensible person is just that, equality.
Equality to Conservatives is a war on Whites and Christianity.

[Mavorpen]

Where are your sources? Quote it instead of dodging it like you've dodged EVERY single thing.

Until then, your claims are bullshit.

I have proven your claims to be bullshit..

WHEN? WHERE? Where are your sources? Do you know what an argument is? Do you know what EVIDENCE or SOURCE means?

[Neutraligon]

For the post-imperialism governments to have succeeded under the circumstances left by the empires would've been almost impossible. The borders left behind were arbitrary and hastily thought out. They paid no mind to tribal affiliations, belief structures, cultures, etc.

You'll hear no argument from me in that regard. I agree entirely.

Indeed, we are seeing the results of such disregard today in the middle east.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Equality to a liberal is the oppressed becomes the oppressor
Equality to a sensible person is just that, equality.
Equality to Conservatives is a war on Whites and Christianity.

Please explain your reasoning behind each of these claims. Use examples.

[The Land of Truth]

Where are your sources? Quote it instead of dodging it like you've dodged EVERY single thing.

Until then, your claims are bullshit.

I have proven your claims to be bullshit. The government is most likely fair, because if it wasn't, there wouldn't a state left.

...What? Just...what? Are you seriously arguing--and correct me if I'm wrong--that if the government weren't fair, they could just overthrow it?

[Neutraligon]

Equality to a liberal is the oppressed becomes the oppressor
Equality to a sensible person is just that, equality.
Equality to Conservatives is a war on Whites and Christianity.

Please explain your reasoning behind each of these claims. Use examples.

I'm more interested in the idea that neither a conservative nor a liberal can be sensible.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

There's no reasonable solution for "Muh white majority is going to be gone if these damn immigrants keep reproducing!" or "White people are going to go extinct!" mostly because they are ignoring most things about social science and biology.

Because I'm curious and unopinionated
What particular things about social science and biology?

For one that "white people" are not going extinct, mostly because white skin color is a trait that's pretty prevalent even if it is an intercultural marriage, hell, even if it is an interracial marriage you can end up with white kids.

And the other thing is that in America at least, yes Latinos are growing as a demographic, but we're so close to white skin color that all the U.S. government would have to do is tack us in as "whites" because we're really not that different (this is just applying to Latino immigrants mind you, not other races).

[Distruzio]

Equality to a liberal is the oppressed becomes the oppressor
Equality to a sensible person is just that, equality.
Equality to Conservatives is a war on Whites and Christianity.

Please explain your reasoning behind each of these claims. Use examples.

You're supposed to agree because.... something not involving reason.

[The Land of Truth]

There's no reasonable solution for "Muh white majority is going to be gone if these damn immigrants keep reproducing!" or "White people are going to go extinct!" mostly because they are ignoring most things about social science and biology.

Both of those projections are coming true, there probably won't be a White majority anywhere and while Whites won't immediately go extinct, they will perhaps shrink to a small enough size where they could be successfully genocided if non-Whites turned against them.

By the time all of that happened, the races would've probably merged into one, anyway.

[Mavorpen]

I have proven your claims to be bullshit. The government is most likely fair, because if it wasn't, there wouldn't a state left.

...What? Just...what? Are you seriously arguing--and correct me if I'm wrong--that if the government weren't fair, they could just overthrow it?

You heard him right. Don't you know how easy it is for a minority to overthrow an entity that both outnumbers them and outclasses them in firepower?

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Where are your sources? Quote it instead of dodging it like you've dodged EVERY single thing.

Until then, your claims are bullshit.

I have proven your claims to be bullshit. The government is most likely fair, because if it wasn't, there wouldn't a state left.

No, you haven't proven his claims to be bullshit. You just haven't. If you have, then it should be simple to link to where you proved him so completely wrong, or to at least provide a link to the original source that you used. Your inability to do so indicates that your claims to have done so are completely false.

[Neutraligon]

...What? Just...what? Are you seriously arguing--and correct me if I'm wrong--that if the government weren't fair, they could just overthrow it?

You heard him right. Don't you know how easy it is for a minority to overthrow an entity that both outnumbers them and outclasses them in firepower?

Don't forget a minority that has worse food, and little education.

[The Land of Truth]

...What? Just...what? Are you seriously arguing--and correct me if I'm wrong--that if the government weren't fair, they could just overthrow it?

You heard him right. Don't you know how easy it is for a minority to overthrow an entity that both outnumbers them and outclasses them in firepower?

Silly me. And here I thought it had something to do with it not being a wise idea. Turns out they were just lazy!