[Samseau]

Would anyone bang any of the girls in these photos:



I would bang only one out of the chicks in the above.

If this is post-racial America, I'm moving to Russia asap.

[Yatagan]

The only lizards I find bangable in that group shot are the bottom left most one and the middle one from the second to bottom row.

[Samseau]

Just another quick thought: These photos were obviously hand-selected to represent post-racial America. So most likely they picked the most attractive people they could find (none of whom were completely white, of course, even though plenty of pure-white skinned mixed races exist) and photoshopped it afterwards, yet it looks ugly as hell.

This article basically has done more for anti-mixing than any white nationalist could hope to dream for. Talk about a left-wing backfire.

[Giovonny]

(04-11-2014 06:00 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

post-racial America

"Post-racial America"???

What does that mean?

(04-11-2014 06:13 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

likely they picked the most attractive people they could find

Actually, I think they picked average looking mixed girls because they know their reading audience is mostly scientific types.

They couldn't go overly glamorous and show the hottest mixed girls like Irina Shayk, Olivia Munn or Beyonce. (Or, any hot Latina)

They are not Cosmo. They appeal to a different crowd.

I love Marketing!

[kaotic]

No one knows if it's a good or bad thing....but I'm sensing a lot of negativity geared towards the word "multiculturalism"

[Sourcecode]

race trolls slowly emerge?

[Yatagan]

(04-11-2014 06:40 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  

(04-11-2014 06:00 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

post-racial America

"Post-racial America"???

What does that mean?

(04-11-2014 06:13 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

likely they picked the most attractive people they could find

Actually, I think they picked average looking mixed girls because they know their reading audience is mostly scientific types.

They couldn't go overly glamorous and show the hottest mixed girls like Irina Shayk, Olivia Munn or Beyonce. (Or, any hot Latina)

They are not Cosmo. They appeal to a different crowd.

I love Marketing!

"Post-racial America" is the liberal wet dream where there aren't racial identities anymore.

[eradicator]

(04-11-2014 04:00 PM)JJ Roberts Wrote:  

They missed out the obesity part.

Yeah, i don't really think it will look all that different than now, but we will be a lot fatter.

[Veloce]

(04-11-2014 06:58 PM)eradicator Wrote:  

(04-11-2014 04:00 PM)JJ Roberts Wrote:  

They missed out the obesity part.

Yeah, i don't really think it will look all that different than now, but we will be a lot fatter.

Yeah when I first read the thread title I thought of this:

[soup]

I'm not into that chick from the Nat Geo cover..

[BruceCreatine]

I think you guys are over thinking this. Wherever people have lived side by side they have mixed. Although you may not have seen it because you are considering certain isolated places (such as scandinavia).

If you look at places like the middle east you can see different mixes between races around this region. In the south they're darker and towards the north lighter.


At this point racial mixing in the US is a foregone conclusion. Although an unintended consequence that nat geo doesn't consider is that people will probably end up looking mroe like a mix between white and mexican people and not so much black.

The reason for this is genetic probabilty and frankly there is a lot more white people and the 'spanish' population is rising. This is compounded by the likelihood black people mix with other races and a high prison population (where the key breeding years are limited). The probability stems from the allelles that are passed from the father and mother each passes one to a child; that child will then only pass one to their child. If the population is skewed in one direction probability suggests their genes will dominate the others.

I am mixed race, I am half Middle eastern and half white. My children are likely to look just white (considering my gf is white russian).



Also mixed people tend to be more beautiful because they have greater genetic diversity. Although it seems many people highly favour the Nordic look and so will be biased towards that look. I'd be interested if you could find a nordic girl more beautiful than Irina Shayk (prob if i made a baby with my gf would look like shayk ha).


Scorpion is normally one of my favourite posters but i think he's off mark here.

[TonySandos]

(04-11-2014 07:50 PM)BruceCreatine Wrote:  

I think you guys are over thinking this. Wherever people have lived side by side they have mixed. Although you may not have seen it because you are considering certain isolated places (such as scandinavia).

Yes. The cromagnon and Neanderthal are represented in some populations genetically because of mixing. Distinct groups have been swallowed up by integration since humans organized, so there's no avoiding it. Multiculturalism is debatable when the location isn't already diverse. When you have a nation already in the process it's pointless.

[speakeasy]

(04-11-2014 04:21 PM)scorpion Wrote:  

Can someone explain to me why this is supposed to be a good thing? Is there something wrong with being Black, White, Hispanic or Asian? Do we all have to permanently sever our genetic ties with our ancestors just because it's supposed to be cool or something?

Where did the article say it's a good thing? Or even insinuate it? Not that I'm calling you a white nationalist(I have no idea if you're one or not), but what I often notice from that clique is that any article that takes so much as a neutral stance on mixed marriages and bi-racial people is supposedly in favor of it. All media I guess should take an anti stance as its default position.

To me none of this even matters. My mother and sister are about are lighter than Halle Berry, my dad is the color of Harry Belefonte, I'm darker than both of them. My grandfather "passed" for white. I have very dark family members as well as very light. All of them identify as black, but we live with these widely different skin shades and hair textures in my family and nobody thinks a thing of it. So all this shit that's to come to pass in 2050 already describes my family. It's a big "meh" to me. So America will basically look like Brazil over the next century. Is this some great surprise? You put any two population groups in the same country for long enough and they will mix unless there are laws or extreme social taboos against it. Japanese are basically a mix of two difference races, Koreans and Ainu(the indigenous tribes of Japan), now they just see themselves as "pure" Japanese, even though there's no such thing. The world evolves, populations migrate, they mix, they mutate they become new things and genetic diversity gets spread around the world. There will be new races and old ones will die off. Nobody misses Neanderthals. It is what it is.

(04-11-2014 06:00 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Would anyone bang any of the girls in these photos:



I would bang only one out of the chicks in the above.

If this is post-racial America, I'm moving to Russia asap.

Lol. Man, you say some funny shit for a guy that's admittedly mixed race himself. So you don't like the look of a mixed race America, so you'd rather move to a non-mixed race country and then re-create the same thing there that you are leaving here? If you respected the looks of pure race people then you should stay away from Russia and not mix with them since you aren't full white. Right?

[YossariansRight]

Looks like Warren Beatty predicted this in "Bulworth": http://youtu.be/LD9cCpCcaos

[Screwston]

[scorpion]

It's unfathomable to me that multiple posters in this thread (including speakeasy, who I know is a very intelligent guy) are apparently blind to the fact that this is clearly a piece of pro-miscegenation/race mixing propaganda. I didn't think it could be any more obvious. I will quote the article and highlight phrases that clearly show this.

Quote:

It's no secret that interracial relationships are trending upward, and in a matter of years we'll have Tindered, OKCupid-ed and otherwise sexed ourselves into one giant amalgamated mega-race.

But what will we look like? National Geographic built its 125th anniversary issue around this very question last October, commissioning Martin Schoeller, a renowned photographer and portrait artist, to capture the lovely faces of our nation's multiracial future.

Here's how the "average American" will look by the year 2050:

[pics]

Wow. These are obviously not Photoshopped projections, but real people, meaning tomorrow's America lives among us now in every "Blackanese," "Filatino," "Chicanese" and "Korgentinian" you meet at the DMV, grocery store or wherever it is you hang out.

Their numbers will only grow. The U.S. Census Bureau let respondents check more than one race for the first time in 2000, and 6.8 million people did so. By 2010 that figure had increased to nearly 9 million, a spike of about 32%.

This is certainly encouraging, but there are obvious flaws with tracking racial population growth through a survey that lets people self-identify, especially since so many familial, cultural and even geographical factors influence your decision to claim one or multiple races. Complicating things further is the definition of race itself: It has no basis in biology, yet its constructions, functions and mythologies irrevocably shape the world as we know it.

So is an end approaching? Will increased racial mixing finally and permanently redefine how we imagine our racial identities? The latest figures suggest we're getting more comfortable with the idea, or perhaps that we simply give fewer shits than ever before. Either would be a step in the right direction.

The Wall Street Journal reported a few years back that 15% of new marriages in 2010 were between individuals of different races. It's unclear whether they've included same-sex unions in the count, but as currently stated, this number is more than double what it was 25 years ago. The proportion of intermarriages also varied by race, with "9% of whites, 17% of blacks, 26% of Hispanics and 28% of Asians [marrying] outside their ethnic or racial group." Interracial unions now account for 8.4% of all marriages in the U.S.

In addition, more than 7% of the 3.5 million children born in 2009, the year before the 2010 census, were of two or more races.

The future: As for how this looks moving forward, studies have repeatedly shown that young people, especially those under 30, are significantly more amenable to interracial relationships than older adults, while college grads are more likely to have positive attitudes toward them than those with only a high school diploma. What does this mean for Millennials? As a population composed largely of over-educated 20-somethings, our generation is primed and expected to play a major role in populating this projected future America. That goes double if you live in a Western state, where people intermarry at higher rates; Hawaii is winning at the moment, with 4 of 10 new marriages identifying as interracial.

This doesn't mean it's all sunshine, rainbows and butterflies, however. Stark segregation still plagues many parts of the country. Poverty remains a barrier to social mobility and its consequent opportunities to interact with a diverse range of people. Sadly, the inequalities that shape American society as a whole are equally present in interracial relationship patterns. Time will tell if this holds for the long term.

But in the meantime, let us applaud these growing rates of intermixing for what they are: An encouraging symbol of a rapidly changing America. 2050 remains decades away, but if these images are any preview, it's definitely a year worth waiting for.

I mean, unless the author wrote, "You there, young reader, get out of your chair and go fuck someone of another race right now!" he could have been any more clear. The message is that miscegenation/race mixing is the new coolest thing and the wave of the future, and that young Millenials should jump on board because they're sooo enlightened and educated.

Imagine a future where social pressure is such that to date or marry a person from your own race is seen as bigotry (if you are white, at least). Sound crazy? But is it? I bet a lot of people reading this right now think I'm bigoted just because I'm voicing my disagreement with the idea of race mixing. I'm simply supporting the continued existence of distinct races and I guarantee you that half the people reading this think I'm a bigot. Among the SWPL crowd we're already at the point where saying, "I would not date or marry anyone outside my own race," is liable to get you dirty looks and social ostracization. Give it another 30 years, and the line for being looked at as bigot will have moved from voicing your displeasure to refusing to partake. We're already seeing that shift with homosexual marriage: toleration is no longer enough, you must be an active cheerleader for the crusade or face persecution. And that shift has occurred in under a decade.

With an equally strong media push and propaganda campaign behind a pro-miscegenation agenda I could easily see mono-racial couples being stigmatized as bigots within a generation. Normal people can get away with voicing support for homosexuals without being one themselves, but if the social winds shift sharply in favor of mixed race couplings, there's really no excuse. "Not being attracted" to people of other races won't cut it anymore than "Not wanting to be around homosexuals" does today. Nope. You'll be a bigot. I mean, if you weren't a racist you would be dating someone outside your own race, right? You wouldn't want to continue the oppressive existence of white privilege by having white children, right? Of course not!

The progressive agenda rolls on unabated, one article like this at a time, most effective when people don't even realize they are consuming propaganda at all.

And by the way, anyone who thinks I'm a racist for objecting to this can go fuck themselves. This article is basically celebrating the fact that white people will be on the way to extinction (which is a good thing in the author's estimation) by the year 2050. I won't apologize for refusing to cheerlead for the demographic genocide of my people.

[speakeasy]

^^^

Quote:

With an equally strong media push and propaganda campaign behind a pro-miscegenation agenda

What exactly are you referring to? I don't see this big media push and propaganda campaign you are talking about. I just don't see it. How many major movies for example have romances between people of difference race? What 1%? If anything interracial couples are shown LESS in major roles than their actual occurrence in the population. That isn't even deniable. I think for some, the mere act of even showing an interracial couple is considered anti-white propaganda. I remember recently when that Cherrios ad came out showing a white wife and black husband and their mixed daughter. It got all this hate mail and racist comments on youtube. I mean goddamned, the fucking president is half black and half white and people act like they aren't even used to this shit by now. I guess it's propaganda to show a kid that has the same exact racial makeup as the president of the country.



I'm asking a serious question here because this is what I hear often from WNs. About how much racial mixing is pushed by the media, but I just don't see it all around me. If anything I think it's the opposite, that they are extremely cautious about it. And it's far and few between that any major movie marketed to the general audience shows interracial couples in romances.

Quote:

This article is basically celebrating the fact that white people will be on the way to extinction (which is a good thing in the author's estimation) by the year 2050.

If white people are headed to extinction that would mean black people and Asian people are as well. So then why is this article supposedly celebrating the extinction of whites if mixing has the same effect on every race that's involved. I think you are seeing some "anti-white" agenda where there really is none.


And genocide is when you MURDER someone of another ethnicity. If people of that ethnicity voluntarily choose to marry out of their group, that is NOT genocide. And to call it such trivializes people who actually have died from genocide campaigns. Giving Native Americans small pox infected blankets in hope of wiping them out is an example of genocide, my friend. Obama's parents marrying is not.

[The Lizard of Oz]

You mean I'm always going to stay this color?

[All or Nothing]

(04-11-2014 10:54 PM)scorpion Wrote:  

And by the way, anyone who thinks I'm a racist for objecting to this can go fuck themselves. This article is basically celebrating the fact that white people will be on the way to extinction (which is a good thing in the author's estimation) by the year 2050. I won't apologize for refusing to cheerlead for the demographic genocide of my people.

Let's tie this in with the thread about the Jewish community.

Policymic is the website that ran this article promoting a multicultural stance.

Policymic is found and run by two Jewish men: Jake Horowitz and Christopher Altchek.

This is exactly what was being talked about. The Jewish community promoting a multicultural agenda in order to dilute the power of the Christian community.

I realize this is extremely non-PC to say. I just wanted to point this out.

[Samseau]

Ultimately, though, I am very skeptical of America going hybrid races by 2050. The simple reason is that white women overwhelmingly prefer white men. Speakeasy, you've done the experiments yourself in the tinder thread (page 46 or 45 I believe). You yourself was shocked at how much more attention white women gave to your white man profile.

If preferences among white women stay the same, and there is no reason to believe it will change, then the uglification of America may never happen.

EDIT:

On the other hand, if whites continue to decline from the rampant careerism/spinsterism, then mixed races will be all that is left.

[scorpion]

speakeasy: I'm not saying it's that bad now, I said I could see it becoming that way in the future at this rate. But it definitely already exists at a lower level today. That Cheerios ad was a good example. Sure, it got nasty YouTube comments. Any mainstream media objections though? Nary a peep. It's already becoming unacceptable to object. And I pointed out white people mostly because I am white (and also because whites are most mercilessly tarred with the racist label in the media). I don't see why someone who was Black, Asian, etc... would feel any different though. There's nothing wrong with maintaining the the existence of your race. As for genocide, whether you incinerated 10 million people instantly with a nuclear bomb or bred them out of existence with race mixing, the ultimate result is the same after a hundred years: they don't exist anymore as a distinct people.

All or Nothing: Why am I not surprised? Par for the course.

[All or Nothing]

(04-11-2014 11:16 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  

I'm asking a serious question here because this is what I hear often from WNs. About how much racial mixing is pushed by the media, but I just don't see it all around me. If anything I think it's the opposite, that they are extremely cautious about it. And it's far and few between that any major movie marketed to the general audience shows interracial couples in romances.

And genocide is when you MURDER someone of another ethnicity. If people of that ethnicity voluntarily choose to marry out of their group, that is NOT genocide. And to call it such trivializes people who actually have died from genocide campaigns. Giving Native Americans small pox infected blankets in hope of wiping them out is an example of genocide, my friend. Obama's parents marrying is not.

This is the last point I want to make and then I will take a break from these kinds of threads for awhile just for the sake of my mental health.

If people do not think Christian men can handle insults look at the points made in the quote above.

For not having a pro-multicultural stance, scorpion is indirectly called a white supremacist/racist.

Then there is a second insult, where Christian men are indirectly referred to as having genocidal tendencies.

This is nothing personal against you speakeasy. I just want to point out the arguments that are used liberally to rail against Christians.

[speakeasy]

(04-11-2014 11:43 PM)scorpion Wrote:  

There's nothing wrong with maintaining the the existence of your race. As for genocide, whether you incinerated 10 million people instantly with a nuclear bomb or bred them out of existence with race mixing, the ultimate result is the same after a hundred years: they don't exist anymore as a distinct people.

Sorry man that is just ridiculous. If whites binged on twinkies and all had heart attacks, you might as well call that an act of genocide as well by your standard. It's NOT genocide if it's voluntary. It's just that simple. The suffix -cide means to kill. And kill has a very specific meaning.

You might as well also accuse most whites of genocide for having a fertility rate below replacement level. So I guess whites are committing genocide against themselves?

And here's what I don't understand. Why are white nationalists and pro-white people on game sites? I've never understood that. Sites like this one, and Heartiste promote a promiscuous lifestyle. If you are concerned with white survival, shouldn't you be against this stuff? I would think someone of this ideological persuasion would be encouraging whites to marry young and start large families to reverse their low fertility rates. Do you plan on having 3 or more kids? If not, then you are committing genocide against whites too I guess since the end result means your group will disapear.

(04-11-2014 11:59 PM)All or Nothing Wrote:  

For not having a pro-multicultural stance, scorpion is indirectly called a white supremacist/racist.

I didn't call Scorpion a white supremacist. Nor did I accuse him of being a racist. He may or may not be a racist in his personal life, I don't know the guy. But I didn't say here that he was a racist. Don't put words in my mouth. I mentioned the word white nationalist in an indirect way and based on the positions he is taking in this thread and what I've seen him say in other threads, I strongly suspect he is a white nationalist. Maybe not even an extreme one, there's moderate white nationalists just like there's moderate black nationalists.

[kerouac]

So the future American Female is Janeane Garofalo?

[speakeasy]

I gotta admit, they did choose some really poor examples of mixed people. They could've just as easily posted these below. So I'll be chilling here with these girls while Samseau is freezing his nuts off in Siberia chasing the last few blondes left