Forgive me if this was already posted elsewhere, but it's too funny not to post. In this two hour clip, Tariq Nasheed attempts to prove to Jared Taylor (intellectual contributor to the Alt-right) that America is a white supremacist nation.

The Blair White versus Red Pill Black debate was notoriously terrible in a way that angered many people -
and this debate comes dangerously close if you take the discussion too seriously. But if you watch it from a humorous "What Will He Say Next?" perspective, it's comedy gold.

Quote: (02-14-2018 01:27 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

Forgive me if this was already posted elsewhere, but it's too funny not to post. In this two hour clip, Tariq Nasheed attempts to prove to Jared Taylor (intellectual contributor to the Alt-right) that America is a white supremacist nation.

The Blair White versus Red Pill Black debate was notoriously terrible in a way that angered many people -
and this debate comes dangerously close if you take the discussion too seriously. But if you watch it from a humorous "What Will He Say Next?" perspective, it's comedy gold.

I heard that a few black guys had commented on it being more embarrassed about Tariq Nasheed. If it was trolling, then it was badly done and if the arguments were real by him, then it made him look like an idiot.

Also many black Youtubers seem to call Jared Taylor a white supremacist.

I wonder if they ever think about what this really means. Taylor is more a white advocate - there is very few of those left and they are sorely needed, because all the White nation states seem to be up for grabs and destruction while Japan, Nigeria, India and Thailand are allowed to keep their ethnic makeup as they want. And this is not called Thai supremacism.

Random thought of the day.

I relocated to one of those big, coastal, liberal metro areas a few months ago.

The thing is, some of the shit they believe is TRUE.....about the areas they live in. Their worldview about how white own everything and keep minorities down? These cities consist of an uber-wealthy (mostly) jewish elite, a larger but still proportionately small number of white collar white people making six figure salaries, and then most of the rest of the city is poor minorities who get paid shit to run the sops and infrastructure that support these white people.

Sexual Assault? I think the whole "famous men allegations" thread shows where rape culture actually exists. Let's just say middle class white people with conservative values aren't the ones who have "rape buttons" that lock their office doors.

Violent crime with guns? We all know the stats on those.


Most of what they're doing is taking the problems of NYC/SanFran/Chicago and projecting it onto the rest of the country. Doing that feels good because it means you now get to blame something other than your own herd-following beliefs for that outcome.

This is entertaining.

Quote: (02-17-2018 10:39 PM)Suits Wrote:  

This is entertaining.

The Israelis have enough data to back up the reasons for this:

+ it's not only the obvious physical differences
+ in addition men have an instinctive desire to protect women - even their female comrades in arms
+ when wounded then they behave utterly different than if a male buddy gets wounded - they suddenly prioritize that woman and are more likely to fail at their task (no leaving behind until mission is done - they sometimes abandon the mission to help that woman)
+ the women are behaving far worse in combat - PTSD is x-times higher, reaction to loud noises etc - all of that is on average far worse

Thus the only way to balance that is to utterly genetically change the entire human species into a slug-uniq. And who wants to live in a world like that?

Quote: (02-17-2018 10:39 PM)Suits Wrote:  

This is entertaining.

I'll give them this, aside from a bit of rationalizing, excuse making, and some white knighting ("women don't freak out like men do!" CRINGE) that was actually a pretty reasonable discussion for a group of leftists. Even Ana was reasonable about it.

Quote: (02-18-2018 08:16 AM)Raylan Givens Wrote:  

Quote: (02-17-2018 10:39 PM)Suits Wrote:  

This is entertaining.

I'll give them this, aside from a bit of rationalizing, excuse making, and some white knighting ("women don't freak out like men do!" CRINGE) that was actually a pretty reasonable discussion for a group of leftists. Even Ana was reasonable about it.

With Cenk you have to realize that he is still Muslim at heart - also certainly still partly shitlord.

So of course he is not having any of that. No matter what he says about his atheist thinking - Cenk and his Young Turks are pushing constantly the agenda that there is nothing wrong with Islam, that Muslims are not motivated by anything, which explains why he is pushing the narrative each time some Italian or White boy does some crime:






Here Cenk and his idea of "Radical Italian terror" motivated by Italian thinking.






And here White Terror after the recent Florida school shooting because the shooter was motivated by some mystical white ideology.

Of course he spins the facts and says that Italian terror and White terror is not a thing and thus Muslim terror is not a thing. Because there is nothing in the books, the ideology, the Hadiths and the biography of Mohammed which might even remotely point to that.

So yes - Cenk will be advocating for sharia light as his form of progressive thinking.

[/quote]And here White Terror after the recent Florida school shooting because the shooter was motivated by some mystical white ideology.[/quote]

Most of the victims were white so this shooting was very privileged.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powe...14d8461b7c

Is this something to be concerned about? another democrat wins a Republican spot.

Former Pro-Wrestler Billy Jack Haynes details his work as cocaine smuggler and drug enforcer for the Clinton Cartel, and admits to witnessing the murder of 2 local boys by corrupt police at the direction of a "high level politician in Arkansas". He does everything but name the Clintons

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...rders.html

War is fought on many fronts - among it the WE-WAZ-KANGZ hypothesis that all Europeans were black:















Of course in reality it's bullshit again where the group of scientists did not wait for peer-reviews, but went straight to the media who would take it up. When the contrary results came in and proved the results to be propaganda, then the media would not correct it.

They do this in order to convince all Europeans that acceptance of 400 mio. blacks and Arabs is wonderful, because Europeans were all black anyway.

The funny part is that there are bone remains going back 60.000 years in Britain and there is little said about them.






They really outdid themselves by making that ancient Briton darker than most Subsaharans. What makes it more funny is that we know that Homo Sapiens had been living and mingling with the Neanderthals some 40.000 years ago - also living high up in the North for thousands of years.

The most important is that the serfs swallow that shit and accept the annihilation of their culture and the descent into shitholeistan.

White people are stupid if thats true. How can whites (blacks) be racist to other blacks? How can be appropriate their culture when it is ours as well?

Black Panther spoke to me in a certain way.

British ancestor in the 1990s before mass migration push:


Cheddar Man in the 1990s vs current year.



Discussion behind closed doors:

"Do you think that the morons believed our latest "discovery"?"

"Who cares? By the time those idiots wake up, then most of them will look like our new Cheddar Man anyway and they will be too few and too dumbed down to do anything against us."

Quote: (02-21-2018 05:31 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

War is fought on many fronts - among it the WE-WAZ-KANGZ hypothesis that all Europeans were black:

Of course in reality it's bullshit again where the group of scientists did not wait for peer-reviews, but went straight to the media who would take it up. When the contrary results came in and proved the results to be propaganda, then the media would not correct it.

They do this in order to convince all Europeans that acceptance of 400 mio. blacks and Arabs is wonderful, because Europeans were all black anyway.

The funny part is that there are bone remains going back 60.000 years in Britain and there is little said about them.

They really outdid themselves by making that ancient Briton darker than most Subsaharans. What makes it more funny is that we know that Homo Sapiens had been living and mingling with the Neanderthals some 40.000 years ago - also living high up in the North for thousands of years.

The most important is that the serfs swallow that shit and accept the annihilation of their culture and the descent into shitholeistan.

The fact that the following hasn't been brought up is mind boggling, but its the 1st thing I thought of when seeing this news

If he was actually native to Britain, wouldn't his skin be light or white from thousands of years of evolution at the high latitudes of the UK and Ireland, in order to absorb more of the sun's rays, the melanin would have slowly dropped way down
over countless generations?

Couldn't he have just been a visitor in the long timespan?

Interestingly enough African migrants are more prone to SAD in the Scandinavia countries, their skin and biology is literally not adapted to the climate. So where are all those bones? if some stray African pirate was killed in a random battle in Norway sans 40,000BC does not mean that Norway all kangz and always was?

Here's something I've thought about for a little while and something that I've come to a conclusion and needed to get off my chest:

Diversity is a sham because in the eyes of the SJWs, true diversity comes from people who look different and not including other things like diversity of thought and interests. Why are we singling out people and praising them for being different instead of praising them for not being douchebags? It's essentially reverse discrimination.

It's also a sham in American politics because it's only diversity when only the Democratic Party has it. The Democrats constantly dehumanize any Republican efforts or historical firsts that are Republicans as tokenism but when Democrats do it it's diversity, give me a break. They constantly put Republicans in a no-win scenario by saying the token rhetoric, why would you bother to become diverse if you're going to be seen as bigoted and your crew as tokens. As a result, Republicans don't bother to become inclusive and double down on candidates who are a part of the Religious Right.

These are also the same Democrats who ask "Why is the GOP so white?"? Well Democrats, you made this vile mess! Republicans did the half other of this mess too. What they did think was going to happen by constantly berating them and their efforts to be diverse? I've also hear Democrats say Freudian slips on how it's better as a white party and it shouldn't expand.

Apparently, it's still the 1960's in some minds of the Democrats and their activists.

This video is listed at 2 hours, 30 minutes - but you can skip the first 15 minutes and the last 15 minutes, leaving you with a 2 hour video.

The combatants are Ethnic Nationalist Nick Fuentes versus Civic Nationalist RC Maxwell. And the question is whether Ethnic Nationalism or Civic Nationalism is better.

My recommendation number for the Tariq Nasheed versus Jared Taylor video was an 8 out of 10, because Tariq's arguments are funny as hell, creating a very high entertainment value score. My recommendation number for this debate is a 5 out of 10 for general audiences, and a 9 out of 10 for those highly interested in the debate question.

PROS: (1) You get to watch two twenty-something individuals debate a highly important political question. (2) The debate has a clear winner. (3) The debate can be used to generalize about the relative strength of the Civic Nationalists versus the Ethnic Nationalists.

CONS: (1) The "World War One" question takes the first 45 minutes - and is arguably uninteresting and unimportant, given that neither is a historian, and the audience doesn't care about history. (2) The bickering between them easily doubled the time of the debate, which should've taken about an hour.

---------

Background:

I've heard a lot of people say, "If Conservatives find a way to amass 15% of the Black and Latino vote, we'll be fucking invincible! But RC Maxwell's performance should disabuse you of that idea.

There are two ways to win a debate: Making a great argument OR forcing your opponent to make phenomenally stupid ones. Nick Fuentes won the debate 85%-15% using the second tactic.


-----------

Ultra brief summary:

RC Maxwell begins by mentioning (more than once) his background as a professional college debater.

He then opens with a series of assertions and implications, essentially reducible to: (1) World War 1 was caused by Ethnic Nationalism, (2) Ethnic Nationalism is violent and genocidal, while Civic Nationalism is peaceful and just, and (3) There's no realistic nor practical way to partition the United States into ethnic enclaves without creating a Civil War, so Civic Nationalism is the better and cheaper solution. (4) Arguing in favor of Ethnic Nationalism alienates Conservative Latinos and Blacks.

As I said earlier, the World War 1 question is boring and unimportant, because neither is a historian, and the audience isn't historically informed, either.

The debate only starts to get really good about one hour in, when Nick Fuentes performs the following three move combo, which takes about 30 minutes: (1) He psychologizes RC Maxwell by stating, "I understand how an Ethnic Nationalist United States threatens your existence within America, so I can understand where your biases come from." (2) He asks RC Maxwell to "name a single Black settlement that, when left to its own devices, produced a thriving society". This question highly triggers RC Maxwell, because it launches a sub-discussion of whether Blacks have assimilated relative to native Whites AND immigrant Jews and Asians. RC Maxwell asserts that Blacks have assimilated, and Chicago's misery is caused by Blacks adopting "a Democratic mindset" and having children out of wedlock". (3) Nick Fuentes then gets RC Maxwell to admit that Blacks and Latinos are voting along ethnic lines, and asks RC Maxwell whether this is a problem.

This is when RC Maxwell destroys himself by responding, at timestamp 1:53:XX, that Blacks voting at 92% or higher for Barack Obama has nothing to do with whether Blacks have assimilated, because assimilation "is all about cultures, coming into different cultures, and uniting under a system of beliefs, values, ethics, and so on". "When Blacks go to the polls and vote for people registered under Democrats, that's NOT breaking assimilation; that's LITERALLY participating in the American Democratic System."










RC Maxwell loses the debate, because Civic Nationalists told immigrants (both legal and illegal) that they're welcome to America in unlimited numbers, and they're just as American as everyone else. And when these immigrants fail to assimilate, they've millions of excuses that place the blame on Ethnic Nationalists, rather than on the Civic Nationalists and/or the immigrants they welcomed.

There has been enough discussion about Civic Nationalism, Ethnic Nationalism, and the Alt-Right on RVF, along with predictions of who will achieve more. To those who you who oppose Ethnic Nationalists and the Alt-Right, your greatest YouTube champions are losing - and they're losing decisively. They present very few arguments, which are easily defeated, and then launch into ad hominem and other signs of utter defeat. Maybe you'll help them; maybe you won't. But right now you're losing.

I like most of what Sargon of Akkad says, but seriously he is too liberal for his own good with claiming that his grandfather was black because he came from St. Helena and had straight black hair and had a strong tan going on:






He initially claimed that his grandfather was 100% black. Seriously I know that Sicilians can look dark, but they are not. Italians can have jet-black hair and skin that is as white as snow. St. Helena was certainly somewhat diverse, but mostly mixed for sure with a strong white dominant population.

Here by the way Sargon's "half-black" father:






Jeez - Sargon - you are on the wrong path there. Even if your grandfather had some slight black genes - that does not make you black. Added black genetic input can even strengthen White genome since it adds variety, but you are as white as they come. I have also a butt and dick that might point to some slight black ancestry, but that is certainly ridiculously low.

Speaking of ass - get a grip of yourself Sargon: NSFW -



Sargon Sargon - what are you doing?



This may even work for you, but if most of humanity thought that way, then all hell would break loose.

Pretty sure that's some other fat beardo. Sargon doesn't have a greybeard.

Quote: (02-23-2018 07:21 AM)Malone Wrote:  

Pretty sure that's some other fat beardo. Sargon doesn't have a greybeard.

He does now, but no idea whether that tweet has been doctored or he put someone else's ass in it.






But Sargon is really putting out strange stuff as he claims that Italians, Spaniards and Greeks were not white according to his definition.

Also that some Syrians are whiter than Greeks.

No shit Sargon - North Africans were originally far whiter than today and plenty of white slaves went there.

Carthage was a good example and even ancient DNA tests on Egyptian mummies showed a far whiter ruling class 1000-2000 years BC.







Carthage does not look very black to me - and back then Carthage was on the civilization level of Rome.

But according to Sargon Romans were not white either, because he uses the metric of some North-European White advocates who claim that only Aryans, Anglo-Saxons and Scandinavians are white and Irish, Romans, Spaniards, Greeks, French and Slavs are non-White.

Jeez - Sargon - what are you doing?

In simple scientific terms the ethno-nationalists are always going to make the civic-nationalists look like idiots.

In nut-and-bolts "how are you planning to get there" terms the civic nationalists are always going to make the ethno nationalists look like idiots.

Sadly the only question white ethno-nationalists and fence-sitters need to ask civic nationalists is "why are you preaching to predominantly right leaning white people when we're the ones that have been pulling 90% of the weight on civic nationalism since the birth of our nations?"

The quickest way to gut the civic nationalists is simply to ask "how did you go preaching this message to left leaning minorities, or didn't you bother to try because you knew what the response would be?"

The dumb thing is that neither the alt-right or the alt-light have any sway over national or western politics whatsoever. They're debating each other for the hearts and minds of political equivalent of the high school chess club.

The debate itself is nothing but meaningless LARPing. It's a pseudo-political circle-jerk. In regards to ethno-nationalism the weight and momentum of history will enforce itself unless powers a million times greater than the alt-right and the alt-light are able to sway it.

What does an ethno-nationalist really need to say except, "we will not choose ethno-nationalism, biology will make the choice for us, it will lead us there through a sea of blood and bodies, and there's not a damn thing anyone in this room is capable of doing to stop it."

Sargon got himself into trouble with the Progressives for this racist rant, too.






The most accurate summary, in my opinion, is that Sargon became very self-confident through his battles against feminists and progressives. And he thought he would be able to mow down the Alt-right with similar ease. When that didn't happen, the trolling aspect of the Alt-right angered him into that rant.

Right now, Sargon is the leader of a movement called the Liberalists, which suffers due to some highly pedantic definitions, such as being NOT individualistic, but rather "Individualist - (I swear to God that I'm not making that up.) Its core is to make all people in Britain, i.e. the dark-skinned immigrants, have enough pride in British culture that they won't want to bring in so many more dark-skinned immigrants. I think this is stupid, but Sargon most needs to devote himself to this movement, in isolation from the Alt-right, just to see whether it will work.

Sargon has previously semi-joined the so-called "Skeptics" which turned out to be one clusterfuck after another.

When the Youtuber Kraut&Tea went on collision course with the likes of Jared Taylor, then he was obliterated and made fun of until he resorted to SJW-tactics like doxxing and name-calling.

Seems like Sargon is doing that again and even using partly SJW-tactics of blackening his grand-father and father like Rachel Dolezal. Then he claims with a straight face that Italians and Greeks are not White and never were.

Look - you don't have to adhere to all the beliefs of all the Alt-Righters or even straight out Neo-Nazis to acknowledge that races actually exist and have developed over tens of millennia for a reason. That is like saying that a wolf, a border collie, a poodle and a chihuaha are all social constructs. Races do exist and have huge differences in IQs and skills that have developed over time including huge physiological differences being mirrored in behavior.

One could argue whether in the future the races will be more equalized, the IQs will become more similar and humanity will manage to live in a true peaceful utopian diverse super-world-state. But we are not anywhere near that and the gaps between tribes are sometimes 112 to 60 in terms of IQ and the variation in looks are so outrageously different that no one would ever want to have his blonde blue-eyed daughter pop out looking like an Aboriginal one and claim that it is all the same to him.



A lot of what the Alt-Right is saying was just common sense in the past and biology still has many of their tenets. We just have to understand that a lot now is political.

Jeez - and I am not even Alt-Right or anything because so many of them are really retarded, but I acknowledge the reasonable approach of the likes of Jared Taylor. You cannot really prove him wrong on anything - debating him is like debating Jordan Peterson - good luck with that.

Had heard something about how Sargon and Thunderfoot threw our own Aurini under the bus on that gamergate thing...

Eric Greitens, the governor of missouri, got indicted over taking naked pictures of the pretty ladies.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-...08a30.html

Today he resigned as president of the republican governors association.

He was being groomed by Steve Bannon for a presidential run later on down the road. They already caught Greitens funnelling all types of bannon sponsored dark money to his campaign.

This is too bad because this Eric dude in a cool guy. Navy Seal, Rhodes Scholar, best selling author, boxer, etc.

Aloha!

Quote: (02-23-2018 06:20 PM)Kona Wrote:  

Eric Greitens, the governor of missouri, got indicted over taking naked pictures of the pretty ladies.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-...08a30.html

Today he resigned as president of the republican governors association.

He was being groomed by Steve Bannon for a presidential run later on down the road. They already caught Greitens funnelling all types of bannon sponsored dark money to his campaign.

This is too bad because this Eric dude in a cool guy. Navy Seal, Rhodes Scholar, best selling author, boxer, etc.

Aloha!

He took a picture of a girl that he bound and gagged. Told her later that he erased it.

One year in prison for that.

But other candidates can rape children and probably do snaff-films sodomizing them or worse.

Guess that they wanted to nip a potential future candidate in the butt, because they could not control him anyway. So what better way but to lynch him over some idiotic charge?