Alt-right. A terrorist movement in the making?

[Greater Malegron]

The Alt-Right only serve as the proof as to why whites are glorified barbarians. Change my mind.

[The Rich Port]

The Alt-Right only serve as the proof as to why whites are glorified barbarians. Change my mind.

Barbarians are cool, tho. They let women wear pants and overthrew the Roman Empire and they had GENGHIS MOTHERFUCKING KHAN.

[Greater Malegron]

The Alt-Right only serve as the proof as to why whites are glorified barbarians. Change my mind.

Barbarians are cool, tho. They let women wear pants and overthrew the Roman Empire and they had GENGHIS MOTHERFUCKING KHAN.

True, but that doesn't mean they aren't complete degenerates. Also, Khan wasn't a whitey. Do you honestly expect a white to create the most powerful empire at the time? No, because the Europeans were shitting in pots and couldn't even unite a small country.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

The Alt-Right only serve as the proof as to why whites are glorified barbarians. Change my mind.

I mean using the actions of a minority to generalize an entire group of people is rarely accurate or credible.

[Fedel]

The Alt-Right only serve as the proof as to why whites are glorified barbarians. Change my mind.

You serve as proof that some people should both not be seen AND not be heard. Change my mind.

[The Rich Port]

Barbarians are cool, tho. They let women wear pants and overthrew the Roman Empire and they had GENGHIS MOTHERFUCKING KHAN.

True, but that doesn't mean they aren't complete degenerates. Also, Khan wasn't a whitey. Do you honestly expect a white to create the most powerful empire at the time? No, because the Europeans were shitting in pots and couldn't even unite a small country.

Considering Mongolia has both a conservative party and a nationalist party, it's also quite possible they have an alt-right.

You don't know for a fact they don't consider themselves white.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

Barbarians are cool, tho. They let women wear pants and overthrew the Roman Empire and they had GENGHIS MOTHERFUCKING KHAN.

True, but that doesn't mean they aren't complete degenerates. Also, Khan wasn't a whitey. Do you honestly expect a white to create the most powerful empire at the time? No, because the Europeans were shitting in pots and couldn't even unite a small country.

Pot shitting was pretty universal regardless of geographical location for the time. Plus, not really seeing how the Mongols where that much more advanced than Europe in the 13th century. The advantage came from the style of rapid and mobile warfare not any sort of advanced technology or political system.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

True, but that doesn't mean they aren't complete degenerates. Also, Khan wasn't a whitey. Do you honestly expect a white to create the most powerful empire at the time? No, because the Europeans were shitting in pots and couldn't even unite a small country.

Considering Mongolia has both a conservative party and a nationalist party, it's also quite possible they have an alt-right.

Lo and Behold. Seems even more likely given that this is a thing.

[The Rich Port]

True, but that doesn't mean they aren't complete degenerates. Also, Khan wasn't a whitey. Do you honestly expect a white to create the most powerful empire at the time? No, because the Europeans were shitting in pots and couldn't even unite a small country.

Pot shitting was pretty universal regardless of geographical location for the time. Plus, not really seeing how the Mongols where that much more advanced than Europe in the 13th century. The advantage came from the style of rapid and mobile warfare not any sort of advanced technology or political system.

Are you kidding. The Mongolians revolutionized Asia by uniting it under their banner, brief and bloody as it was (I would hardly call it brief considering Mongolians ruled Asia up until the end of the Medieval Ages).

They were religiously and gender-tolerant, culturally heterogeneous, meritocratic, anti-oligarchic, facilitated and optimized the Silk Road which was notoriously safe under their rule (because you're going to raid and pillage the biggest raiders and pillagers in history only if you're a fucking moron) which in turn made trade in Mongolia amazing for everyone, deconstructed feudalism and founded proto-globalism. They were patrons of the arts, they encouraged educations and linguistics, they made rice a staple in Middle Eastern food.

Not to mention, while the Black Plague devastated Europe, it didn't devastate the Mongols or their territories. They subjected EUROPE to imperialism. Europe were the economically disadvantaged, out-gunned African tribes to the Mongols.

"Advancement", whatever that means, evidently means jack fucking shit.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

Pot shitting was pretty universal regardless of geographical location for the time. Plus, not really seeing how the Mongols where that much more advanced than Europe in the 13th century. The advantage came from the style of rapid and mobile warfare not any sort of advanced technology or political system.

Are you kidding. The Mongolians revolutionized Asia by uniting it under their banner, brief and bloody as it was (I would hardly call it brief considering Mongolians ruled Asia up until the end of the Medieval Ages).

They were religiously and gender-tolerant, culturally heterogeneous, meritocratic, anti-oligarchic, facilitated and optimized the Silk Road which was notoriously safe under their rule (because you're going to raid and pillage the biggest raiders and pillagers in history only if you're a fucking moron) which in turn made trade in Mongolia amazing for everyone, deconstructed feudalism and founded proto-globalism. They were patrons of the arts, they encouraged educations and linguistics, they made rice a staple in Middle Eastern food.

Not to mention, while the Black Plague devastated Europe, it didn't devastate the Mongols or their territories. They subjected EUROPE to imperialism. Europe were the economically disadvantaged, out-gunned African tribes to the Mongols.

"Advancement", whatever that means, evidently means jack fucking shit.

I largely meant before the unification of the Mongol Empire and while they were still disorganized nomads before Genghis Khan. Before that the Mongols as a people did not have any sort of clear advancement over Europeans as a people. However after consolidation and under Genghis Khan, everything you said is entirely correct.

[The Rich Port]

Are you kidding. The Mongolians revolutionized Asia by uniting it under their banner, brief and bloody as it was (I would hardly call it brief considering Mongolians ruled Asia up until the end of the Medieval Ages).

They were religiously and gender-tolerant, culturally heterogeneous, meritocratic, anti-oligarchic, facilitated and optimized the Silk Road which was notoriously safe under their rule (because you're going to raid and pillage the biggest raiders and pillagers in history only if you're a fucking moron) which in turn made trade in Mongolia amazing for everyone, deconstructed feudalism and founded proto-globalism. They were patrons of the arts, they encouraged educations and linguistics, they made rice a staple in Middle Eastern food.

Not to mention, while the Black Plague devastated Europe, it didn't devastate the Mongols or their territories. They subjected EUROPE to imperialism. Europe were the economically disadvantaged, out-gunned African tribes to the Mongols.

"Advancement", whatever that means, evidently means jack fucking shit.

I largely meant before the unification of the Mongol Empire and while they were still disorganized nomads before Genghis Khan. Before that the Mongols as a people did not have any sort of clear advancement over Europeans as a people. However after consolidation and under Genghis Khan, everything you said is entirely correct.

I mean, Genghis Khan was one of those Mongol tribesmen, so... I dunnoooooo.

But, fair enough, he was the one who also revolutionized Mongol society by banning the oligarch aristocrats and re-structuring the spoils system to benefit all Mongols, not just "the strongest".

[The South Falls]

The violent fringe of the already fringe alt-right should be considered a terrorist movement. You cannot tell if one movement is to be a terrorist movement in the making unless the mainstream of such a group's members has incited or attempted to incite violence.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

I largely meant before the unification of the Mongol Empire and while they were still disorganized nomads before Genghis Khan. Before that the Mongols as a people did not have any sort of clear advancement over Europeans as a people. However after consolidation and under Genghis Khan, everything you said is entirely correct.

I mean, Genghis Khan was one of those Mongol tribesmen, so... I dunnoooooo.

But, fair enough, he was the one who also revolutionized Mongol society by banning the oligarch aristocrats and re-structuring the spoils system to benefit all Mongols, not just "the strongest".

And clearly he was exceptional and revolutionized his people to become one of the greatest Empires the world had ever known, but before his rise Mongols were if anything far behind the political development of Europe. But this makes Genghis Khan all the more astounding, seeing as how he managed to turn scattered nomadic tribes with little if any unifying institutions or structures, that had changed little since the days of the Huns into the greatest Empire in the world in just a few short decades.

[The Rich Port]

The violent fringe of the already fringe alt-right should be considered a terrorist movement. You cannot tell if one movement is to be a terrorist movement in the making unless the mainstream of such a group's members has incited or attempted to incite violence.

Same thing with Muslim extremists Incels must be considered: how big is the fringe and how likely are those not in the fringe to become radicalized.

[Greater Malegron]

I mean, Genghis Khan was one of those Mongol tribesmen, so... I dunnoooooo.

But, fair enough, he was the one who also revolutionized Mongol society by banning the oligarch aristocrats and re-structuring the spoils system to benefit all Mongols, not just "the strongest".

And clearly he was exceptional and revolutionized his people to become one of the greatest Empires the world had ever known, but before his rise Mongols were if anything far behind the political development of Europe. But this makes Genghis Khan all the more astounding, seeing as how he managed to turn scattered nomadic tribes with little if any unifying institutions or structures, that had changed little since the days of the Huns into the greatest Empire in the world in just a few short decades.

Excatly. If Khan had were a whitey, I bet you he never would have created such a great empire. Its reasons like these that prove why whites are just generally less smart and less strong.

[Nakena]

The violent fringe of the already fringe alt-right should be considered a terrorist movement. You cannot tell if one movement is to be a terrorist movement in the making unless the mainstream of such a group's members has incited or attempted to incite violence.

Same thing with Muslim extremists Incels must be considered: how big is the fringe and how likely are those not in the fringe to become radicalized.

In all three cases the source is the same, young frustrated men...

[The Rich Port]

And clearly he was exceptional and revolutionized his people to become one of the greatest Empires the world had ever known, but before his rise Mongols were if anything far behind the political development of Europe. But this makes Genghis Khan all the more astounding, seeing as how he managed to turn scattered nomadic tribes with little if any unifying institutions or structures, that had changed little since the days of the Huns into the greatest Empire in the world in just a few short decades.

Excatly. If Khan had were a whitey, I bet you he never would have created such a great empire. Its reasons like these that prove why whites are just generally less smart and less strong.

... Asians are usually pretty white, though.

[Greater Malegron]

Same thing with Muslim extremists Incels must be considered: how big is the fringe and how likely are those not in the fringe to become radicalized.

In all three cases the source is the same, young frustrated men...

I mean, men are just more impulsive, and overall less smart. Its not discriminatory to say they are genetically inferior, its just fact.

[Greater Malegron]

Excatly. If Khan had were a whitey, I bet you he never would have created such a great empire. Its reasons like these that prove why whites are just generally less smart and less strong.

... Asians are usually pretty white, though.

I mean sure, but they are smarter and stronger. Don't get me wrong, most asians are traitors selling out to the whites, and if i were in charge i'd have them pay for their treaschery.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

And clearly he was exceptional and revolutionized his people to become one of the greatest Empires the world had ever known, but before his rise Mongols were if anything far behind the political development of Europe. But this makes Genghis Khan all the more astounding, seeing as how he managed to turn scattered nomadic tribes with little if any unifying institutions or structures, that had changed little since the days of the Huns into the greatest Empire in the world in just a few short decades.

Excatly. If Khan had were a whitey, I bet you he never would have created such a great empire. Its reasons like these that prove why whites are just generally less smart and less strong.

Sure....it isn't like "whitey" had already created the most advanced and arguably influential state in Western history with the Roman Empire or anything. Its not like the 16th century was the birth of even greater European empires that spanned oceans on multiple continents or anything. Not really seeing how what you are saying has any actual basis in fact when despite your claims, great European empires were not a rarity.

[The Rich Port]

In all three cases the source is the same, young frustrated men...

I mean, men are just more impulsive, and overall less smart. Its not discriminatory to say they are genetically inferior, its just fact.

... I don't think so.

I think it's more that the patriarchies that have ruled the world for millenia made men the disposable gender, and because they didn't have many prospects back in the day, societies are bound to overlook them, because men can do anything and everything, right?

They'll work themselves to the bone providing for the rest of society, including and especially the top strata, even though working-age men are only a small percentage of the population, working conditions are becoming less and less equal and optimized and there is now more competition in the form of women and older people who stay, not to mention die and fight if something happens, while women are forced to stay at home and take care of children and older people are forgotten about.

"It is right and beautiful for men to die for their country" and whatnot.

[Greater Malegron]

Excatly. If Khan had were a whitey, I bet you he never would have created such a great empire. Its reasons like these that prove why whites are just generally less smart and less strong.

Sure....it isn't like "whitey" had already created the most advanced and arguably influential state in Western history with the Roman Empire or anything. Its not like the 16th century was the birth of even greater European empires that spanned oceans on multiple continents or anything. Not really seeing how what you are saying has any actual basis in fact when despite your claims, great European empires were not a rarity.

Well sure, but they only got lucky and got powerful through conquest. Whites can't make anything on their own, and piggyback off of other races achievements. Rome was just a fluke, and advanced societies existed before Rome. I mean Egypt had a high standard of medicine and built giant pyramids, and China was a hotbed of technology and culture and wealth, and much of this was before the Romans. And of course, Rome was really the only advanced European society.

[The Rich Port]

Sure....it isn't like "whitey" had already created the most advanced and arguably influential state in Western history with the Roman Empire or anything. Its not like the 16th century was the birth of even greater European empires that spanned oceans on multiple continents or anything. Not really seeing how what you are saying has any actual basis in fact when despite your claims, great European empires were not a rarity.

Well sure, but they only got lucky and got powerful through conquest. Whites can't make anything on their own, and piggyback off of other races achievements. Rome was just a fluke, and advanced societies existed before Rome. I mean Egypt had a high standard of medicine and built giant pyramids, and China was a hotbed of technology and culture and wealth, and much of this was before the Romans. And of course, Rome was really the only advanced European society.

Considering that Rome more or less genocided entire cultures and completely changed the face of what Europe could have been, I disagree.

... Why are you so anti-white and pro-Asian. You're like, a Yellow Peril advocate's wet dream. It's not healthy. I'm white, but I'm Latino. Being white is only skin deep.

[Greater Malegron]

I mean, men are just more impulsive, and overall less smart. Its not discriminatory to say they are genetically inferior, its just fact.

... I don't think so.

I think it's more that the patriarchies that have ruled the world for millenia made men the disposable gender, and because they didn't have many prospects back in the day, societies are bound to overlook them, because men can do anything and everything, right?

They'll work themselves to the bone providing for the rest of society, including and especially the top strata, even though working-age men are only a small percentage of the population, working conditions are becoming less and less equal and optimized and there is now more competition in the form of women and older people who stay, not to mention die and fight if something happens, while women are forced to stay at home and take care of children and older people are forgotten about.

"It is right and beautiful for men to die for their country" and whatnot.

Men have been in control, and to be fair, most of mens problems are because of other men, so it could just be the men are inherently treacherous and disloyal. Whatever the case, they are a detriment to society, and have long outlived their usefulness to humanity.

[The Rich Port]

... I don't think so.

I think it's more that the patriarchies that have ruled the world for millenia made men the disposable gender, and because they didn't have many prospects back in the day, societies are bound to overlook them, because men can do anything and everything, right?

They'll work themselves to the bone providing for the rest of society, including and especially the top strata, even though working-age men are only a small percentage of the population, working conditions are becoming less and less equal and optimized and there is now more competition in the form of women and older people who stay, not to mention die and fight if something happens, while women are forced to stay at home and take care of children and older people are forgotten about.

"It is right and beautiful for men to die for their country" and whatnot.

Men have been in control, and to be fair, most of mens problems are because of other men, so it could just be the men are inherently treacherous and disloyal. Whatever the case, they are a detriment to society, and have long outlived their usefulness to humanity.

... Men are kind of a necessity, though... For the continuance of humanity.

Unless you've figured out how to create a master hermaphrodite race, you can't have humanity without men.