[TonySandos]

[solo]

(06-17-2014 01:02 PM)scorpion Wrote:  

There's nothing worse than someone who hates their own race (i.e. solo in this thread, a professed self-loathing white man).

You're even worse than a male feminist in my eyes. At least most of those guys are just misguided and trying to get pussy. Someone who hates his own race is literally defective in the worst way, right up there with homosexuals and transgender freaks who are incapable of reproduction. Self-hatred of one's own race is a similarly dead-end genetic proposition, and is maladaptive in every regard, an extremely toxic ideology. There is absolutely nothing to be gained from racial self-loathing by people of any race. No one should feel the need to hate their own race, and that goes for people of all colors.

Look at this thread and contrast the attitude of MidWest, a proud Hispanic/Latino, with that of solo, a self-loathing white. It's absolutely pathetic to watch solo write these essays that amount to little more than "My race sucks! We don't deserve anything we have." Meanwhile, MidWest is behaving in the normal and admirable human manner and is arguing strongly for his people to take everything they can get. Is it little wonder that Latinos are making such inroads in this country? How many self-loathing Mexicans do you know? I've never even heard of such a thing.

I would recommend all self-loathing whites just do themselves a favor and commit suicide if you really think that white people are the worst thing to ever happen to the world.

I have read your post twice and I don't detect a single piece of argument relating to the issue that is discussed in this thread. It is all a personal attack against me (based on a total misunderstanding at that). Depending on which tone you choose to read it in, it can be interpreted as a bit hateful too IMO. Yet you're the one accusing me of hating.

I do not hate my own race. On the contrary I am quite proud of my own ancestors and the history of my country. To the point of my own paranoid PC friends having suspected me to be somewhat of a white supremacist or things like that.

You can do better than this scorpion. I have read a lot of your posts and a lot of them are very valueble and spot on (with some exceptions). If I remember correctly, many of them are about the moral decay of present day-America. When I said I was anti-American, that's what I eluded to.

Also, to each their own, but I wouldn't urge anyone to commit suicide on an anonymous internet board. I would never commit suicide myself but there are a lot of guys coming to this board with personal problems looking for guidance/help. I hope RVF never gets a member like Elliot Rodger who decides to take out himself and a lot of other people because of something he read on the internet. Be careful what you wish for.

[solo]

(06-17-2014 12:12 PM)TonySandos Wrote:  

I won't fall for attempts and condescending tone, or claiming I misunderstood what was clearly stated. This isn't an argument, but I won't go easy when the topic is not trivial at all.

You're arguing on your merits, so present better examples in support of your angle.

Using the part of your post that I bolded, I'll compare the Guatemalan/Mexican border concerning Mexico's actions that toward Guatemalan immigration is parallel to the US response, except Mexico is actually harder on them.

It's also strange how you view yourself so removed from this situation. You're looking down on nose at the opposing viewpoint as if you're not equally affected by the consequences.

"If they won't offer todays immigrants the same opportunity their ancestors were given, at the very least recognize the disparity"

Ok, here's my take and some food for thought on why I can't even comprehend disparity and immorality as large points in your argument.

Ok, you've stated several times that history was immoral in your eyes. Morality differs from person to person and is subjective. Stop going on about it trying to press your view on others if you won't provide better refuting points.

An illegality can't occur when there isn't a legal mechanism in place concerning that situation. Read more American history.

Beyond that, it's critical to give recognition to the existence of efforts to preserve native American culture and people. There aren't many similar efforts by advancing cultures.

Believe me I was actually trying to NOT be condescending but looking at my post again (was pretty tired when I wrote it) I can see why you may have interpreted my "Cheers" as sarcastic or something. I put it there to avoid risk of coming across condescending but guess that backfired. But don't take my word for it. I apologize to you for not being clear if you think my post was condescending.

I disagree morality differs from person to person. It is mostly objective in my opinion.

There were legal mechanism in place though. Sometimes the Natives were promised (in a legal agreement) food and shelter at a reservation in exchange for giving up their land without resistance. This agreement was then breached, either because the government just didn't care, or because they were unable to carry out their part (often because they didn't care).

(06-17-2014 01:02 PM)scorpion Wrote:  

Look at this thread and contrast the attitude of MidWest, a proud Hispanic/Latino, with that of solo, a self-loathing white. It's absolutely pathetic to watch solo write these essays that amount to little more than "My race sucks! We don't deserve anything we have." Meanwhile, MidWest is behaving in the normal and admirable human manner and is arguing strongly for his people to take everything they can get. Is it little wonder that Latinos are making such inroads in this country? How many self-loathing Mexicans do you know? I've never even heard of such a thing.

^Classic divide and conquer detected. I won't speak for MidWest and am unsure as to the extent (if any) he agrees with me on my various points. But I think scorpion suspects that MidWest is probably one who is relatively closer to my views in this thread (without necessarily being close). So he identifies MidWest as someone standing in the middle (so to speak) and appeals to him in order to try to isolate me.

It's actually a smart move. We need people like that against the feminists

[Samseau]

(06-20-2014 02:10 PM)solo Wrote:  

You eliminate the main driving forces behind migration:

1. Feminism. This will reboot birth rates and decrease the demand for cheap labor.

2. Poverty. This will decrease the will of people in poor countries to emigrate.
The goal is for poor countries to have a Welfare State of their own, rather than dismantling your own Welfare State. One of the greatest men who has ever lived, Bill Gates, is making great strides towards this on his own. (Strange how I can call an American White man one of the greatest who has ever lived given how I allegedly hate Americans and White men).

3. Wars. Regular wars and invasions, war on drugs, war on terror, coup d'états, what have you. This will lead to less refugees.

You should also get rid of the PC culture surrounding immigrants. Affirmative action etc. This is all I can think of right now.

1. I agree Feminism kills birthrates, but to say this country doesn't have enough cheap labor is absurd. This country has record unemployment levels right now, wages are falling, and businesses aren't hiring. The USA has enough cheap labor to last another 30 years.

What makes labor expensive are the laws. And that is why illegals are attractive - you don't need to pay an illegal minimum wage. He'll work for slave wages as those wages are still greater than they are in his shithole country he comes from, like Mexico.

2. Welfare states were put in place in nearly every single country on the planet, and they've only succeeded in a few majority white ones.

Not being racist, but this is a fact. Welfare states have been tried in every single South American country under the various communist rulers there, and all of those countries went broke.

Same thing with communist China, Russia, Zimbabwe... all had welfare states. All failed.

You'll never get rid of poverty through welfare.

3. How are you supposed to stop wars without policing the world 24/7? Also cannot be done.

---

There really isn't any other solution except to shut down immigration.

[solo]

(06-17-2014 03:42 PM)Dusty Wrote:  

My ancestors came from Ireland and Sweden in the late 1800s and early 1900s. They came here legally.

Why am I and my ancestors held accountable for slavery of for taking the Indians land? That all occurred way before my ancestors left Europe. I think most Americans are similar.

Why am I told that my ancestors oppressed blacks or Indians, when that is simply not true?

Is it because I have a similar skin pigmentation as the people who did the oppressing?

That seems kind of stupid as well as racist. Blaming people solely on their skin pigmentation seems racist to me.

My point was that regardless of when your ancestors arrived in America, they could do so largely because the Natives were marginalized. If your ancestors came from Ireland and Sweden its quite possible that they would have starved to death if they hadn't emigrated and you would never have been born. (I think those two countries were hit by famine/poverty).

To be clear and to not offend anyone, I've never said such a stupid thing that any White should feel guilty over what a minority of Whites did over a century ago. That would be preposterous. All I am saying is it's possible to have a bit of sensibility about how US came about when crying out that White Americans are being marginalized because of immigration and instead reflect on the fact that what happened to the Natives was way, way worse. Furthermore, maybe US would have less of an immigration problem if they changed their foreign policy. It has been a reason for increased instability and migration movements around the world. This has come back to caused problems for your own country. Foreigners and Americans alike have been killed in wars for nothing but to perpetuate and benefit those in political and economic power. All in the name of patriotism and freedom.

No one should belittle or outright try to revise history like *some* in this thread have, which was the reason I started posting in the first place.

Neither should any member of a minority allow him- or herself to be fixated in a "victim mindset" since this will only hurt him/herself and prolong any bad situation that he or she may find him/herself in. It is always good to learn about the history of your people (and contrary what guys claim in this thread, I am doing so myself with great pride). Just don't get hung up on it.

(06-18-2014 12:14 PM)rekruler Wrote:  

Killed it. Racial self-hatred is a disease, a mental pathology that must be stamped out. People like Solo are not the real problem though. Him and others who have bought into cultural marxism are just the weak willed, not the evil. The real enemies, the roots of the problem, can be found in the national institutions like the media, the academia, and increasingly the government. Those are the people who consiously and unceasingly pump the poison of leftist, anti-white propanda into our societies, and to whom weak-links like Solo here fall victim.

It's easy to call someone weak when you don't have to back it up. I am one of the few who are aware of anti-white propaganda in my own country (as well as some immigrants being more prone to violence against whites than vice versa etc). Gets suspected of being a racist when I point it out, people have started to avoid me etc LOL.

When you point out facts about immigrants, you get called a racist.
When you point out facts about Whites, you get called a racist and someone who hates your own race.

(06-15-2014 12:58 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Quote:

About the whole Aryan ethno-race arguments people are making here, take that rubbish talk to Europe. Compared to countries like Germany and Chinese, where the Germans and Chinese people have inhabited the land through history, North America has been traditionally owned by Native Indians. I would have understood an All Aryan (White) or Han (Asian) arguments in Germany or China, but in the United States? Bleh.

One of the more overlooked facts in the history of "Whites vs. Indians" is that the whites won through pure accident. The Indians died off mostly to disease, and then the whites out-reproduced them because of agricultural practices the Indians did not like.

Most of the "warfare" myths surrounding Whites vs. Indians is just hype. There really wasn't much killing of the Indians. All that happened was the Whites could sustain much higher rates of reproduction. They had a superior way of life. On top of that, Indian women found White men attractive and Indian men found White women attractive. The fact that Whites had much higher birthrates and carried genes that are slightly more recessive which breeds out non-White genes, means the Indians basically disappeared through mostly non-violent means.

I don't think this post gives an accurate account of what happened.

I don't have a number of how many Natives were killed but I would look upon most such numbers with suspicion since there are more ways to kill someone than by firing a gun. The government realized that it was more cost-efficient to marginalize them and let nature do the rest. Cultural warfare, kill their buffalos, deport and disperse them, etc. Disease killed a lot as you say. But they became much more susceptible to disease when they were deported without adequate food or shelter. I suspect US government consciously or unconsciously wanted a predominantly white country (limiting immigration from Asian countries would be further proof of that). You bring up the white god factor. Others would probably say you have exaggerated this in the past and as a White guy who has lived in Latin America for over 2 years my personal opinion is that it leads to slightly more IOIs but actually makes it harder to bang girls than for a local guy.

Lastly, I'm sure you realize that the "superior" way of life of the White man is what has ultimately given us the dystopian society we live in today in both US and Europe:

Economic development leads to democracy, which leads to feminism is about as close to a social law as you'll get.

I don't know about you but sometimes I wonder if it wouldn't be better to live in another era, as a man. Sure, life was often brutal and short. But you hunted, fought and had your harem of women. No 8-hour work days in sterile offices or snarky feminists.

We're all going to die some day, anyway. Maybe it's better to go out on the prairie than in the rest-home. Just a thought.

[Sonsowey]

Native Americans are actually a great example of why you should not allow immigration. Look what happened to them.

The Lega Nord, and Italian anti-immigrant party, uses this ad. It says "They allowed immigration. Now they live on reservations."


The Japanese however, always resisted foreign incursion on their land. And look at them.

[scorpion]

(06-20-2014 02:26 PM)solo Wrote:  

I have read your post twice and I don't detect a single piece of argument relating to the issue that is discussed in this thread. It is all a personal attack against me (based on a total misunderstanding at that). Depending on which tone you choose to read it in, it can be interpreted as a bit hateful too IMO. Yet you're the one accusing me of hating.

I do not hate my own race. On the contrary I am quite proud of my own ancestors and the history of my country. To the point of my own paranoid PC friends having suspected me to be somewhat of a white supremacist or things like that.

You can do better than this scorpion. I have read a lot of your posts and a lot of them are very valueble and spot on (with some exceptions). If I remember correctly, many of them are about the moral decay of present day-America. When I said I was anti-American, that's what I eluded to.

Also, to each their own, but I wouldn't urge anyone to commit suicide on an anonymous internet board. I would never commit suicide myself but there are a lot of guys coming to this board with personal problems looking for guidance/help. I hope RVF never gets a member like Elliot Rodger who decides to take out himself and a lot of other people because of something he read on the internet. Be careful what you wish for.

I agree I was a bit harsh there. I wasn't trying to attack you personally however, or to debate you for that matter. I was simply expressing my disgust with the type of anti-white propaganda you were spouting. It sounds like material straight out of some cultural Marxist anthropology class.

The idea that white people are uniquely guilty of committing historical crimes is completely asinine. White people have proven to be, far and away, the most generous and magnanimous racial group on the entire planet, to the extent that we are now voluntarily destroying the stability and wealth of our own societies to accommodate foreign races and cultures. White people are responsible for modern Western civilization and the vast, vast majority of the technology available today. These cultural, scientific and technological advancements have been shared with the rest of the world. What do you think Africa would look like without the influence of whites? Some kind of jungle paradise? Of course not. It would be even more horrific than it is now. Without the beneficent aid of whites, blacks would probably be near extinction due to the disease, famine, tribal warfare and cannibalism that have plagued Africa from time immemorial.

As for Native Americans, they simply got conquered and displaced by a superior civilization. That's not a uniquely criminal offense by the white colonists, that's the entire fucking story of human history. Do you hear anyone vilifying Mexicans for the Aztec ritual human sacrifices that claimed millions of lives? Or vilifying Asians for the Mongol hordes that killed tens of millions? Nope. It's only those white people who have done evil things in history. Also, the most horrendous violence committed by whites has been largely committed against fellow whites (hundreds of years worth of European wars culminating in WWI & WWII, American Civil War, etc...).

Basically, people who spout anti-white nonsense like this are just as silly as feminists who spout anti-male nonsense. All of us here recognize how insane it is for women to pretend that the contributions of men toward advancing civilization don't vastly outweigh those of women. It's the same thing with whites. Like it or not, you're living in a modern world that was largely created by white people. If you want to hate and vilify white people, you should necessarily go back to sleeping in grass huts and living in semi-barbarism.

Have white people done a lot of fucked up things? Sure. We aren't without blood on our hands. But every group of people has through history. But Western Civilization, created by whites, has been an absolute blessing to the Earth, and no one who pretends otherwise can be taken seriously.

White people sometimes do bad things. They also do a lot of good things, things that benefit other races as well. Yet all you ever hear from the left is how awful white people are, and how guilty they should feel. It's just bullshit. Enough with the white guilt. Overall, white people have nothing to apologize for, and much to the contrary, they should take pride in the great achievements of their ancestors. Maybe if they did then modern Western civilization wouldn't be such a rapidly sinking shitpile. Maybe then they would realize that traditional white culture has accomplished amazing things, is a force for good that has enriched the entire world and is worth preserving for the benefit of future generations, both white and non-white alike.

[Glock]

(06-17-2014 09:51 AM)solo Wrote:  

I think the wording of your posts betray that you haven't understood my argument(s). Any capable country shouldn't have to accept immigrants regardless of number or costs. My argument is that I don't sympathize with descendants of people whose governments illegally and/or immorally took took the land they are now living in without any regard to the indigenous populations, when they complain about the same thing happening to them. (Actually it's not the same thing - todays inhabitants are not being treated even nearly as badly as the indigenous were).

If they won't offer todays immigrants the same opportunity their ancestors were given, at the very least recognize the disparity (which Pacesetter20 and Im sure others do from the start without me having to convince them of it).

You don't have to *agree* with my argument, at least understand it though. Cheers.

solo, your post is mistaken on many levels.

First, the Government you are talking about can only be the U.S. Government. That is the only Government that is authorized to restrict immigration into the U.S. today. By the time the U.S. Government had come into existence in 1789, the American Indians were not welcoming U.S. citizens into their lands. The American Indians did not open any recognized borders and allow U.S. citizens to participate in American Indian society. There is no equivalence between the American Indians' so-called immigration policy and what solo wants today.

Second, the incidents from early American colonization that solo appears to be relying on are isolated and few, and they occurred before the U.S. Government was ever formed. Some American Indians on a few occasions helped, or did not drive out, European settlers. While those acts of kindness were admirable, they cannot realistically be compared to any of the considerations of immigration policy today. For instance, the American Indians did not educate, feed, provide hospitals for, and give welfare benefits to European settlers.

Third, solo says that the European settlers acted illegally, but under what law? What happened in America has happened in every part of the world continuously for as long as history has been recorded. Different peoples fight for territory. The American Indian tribes warred against each other for territory, but solo treats as legitimate the borders their wars determined even as he criticizes the Europeans for doing the same thing.

In my view, although solo is well-intentioned, he is setting a double standard. Europeans cannot fight for territory or it is a crime. But the acquisition of territory by American Indians is legitimate and must be respected forever by Europeans. Eliminate the double standard and the basis for criticizing the Europeans for fighting for territory goes up in smoke.

[solo]

I appreciate your last post, scorpion. No hard feelings.

On my own part, I'll also admit I was very careless when calling myself anti-American. I am anti-America (what America stands for in practice today) and not anti-AmericaN. English is not my first (or even second) language and I just realized I probably made a serious linguistical error. So sorry for that.

We're probably never going to be in full agreement on some things since we approach them from different perspectives. However I fully agree that most of civilization was created by White men and that they have shared a lot of their wealth and inventions for the good of other races. Even before you came into this thread I said that the White man has done a lot of good things aside from the bad and that things are not all black and white, to give more balance to my earlier statements. I could probably have been clearer of that. You also make a great point that guilt is not productive.

(06-20-2014 03:18 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(06-20-2014 02:10 PM)solo Wrote:  

You eliminate the main driving forces behind migration:

1. Feminism. This will reboot birth rates and decrease the demand for cheap labor.

2. Poverty. This will decrease the will of people in poor countries to emigrate.
The goal is for poor countries to have a Welfare State of their own, rather than dismantling your own Welfare State. One of the greatest men who has ever lived, Bill Gates, is making great strides towards this on his own. (Strange how I can call an American White man one of the greatest who has ever lived given how I allegedly hate Americans and White men).

3. Wars. Regular wars and invasions, war on drugs, war on terror, coup d'états, what have you. This will lead to less refugees.

You should also get rid of the PC culture surrounding immigrants. Affirmative action etc. This is all I can think of right now.

1. I agree Feminism kills birthrates, but to say this country doesn't have enough cheap labor is absurd. This country has record unemployment levels right now, wages are falling, and businesses aren't hiring. The USA has enough cheap labor to last another 30 years.

What makes labor expensive are the laws. And that is why illegals are attractive - you don't need to pay an illegal minimum wage. He'll work for slave wages as those wages are still greater than they are in his shithole country he comes from, like Mexico.

I completely agree it's absurd to say America (or Europe) need more cheap labor considering their high unemployment rates especially among young people. It was sloppy writing on my part. Instead of saying eliminating feminism will "reboot birth rates and decrease the demand for cheap labor" I should have said that it will undermine the political elites of their (false) argument that we need immigrants to solve the demographic crisis.

(06-20-2014 03:18 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

2. Welfare states were put in place in nearly every single country on the planet, and they've only succeeded in a few majority white ones.

Not being racist, but this is a fact. Welfare states have been tried in every single South American country under the various communist rulers there, and all of those countries went broke.

Same thing with communist China, Russia, Zimbabwe... all had welfare states. All failed.

Correct but past failures don't necessarily mean future failures. In the future I think we'll start to see more and more formerly poor countries with welfare states if we are not seeing them already.

(06-20-2014 03:18 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

3. How are you supposed to stop wars without policing the world 24/7? Also cannot be done.

---

There really isn't any other solution except to shut down immigration.

The West should at least stop outright causing wars and instability like they did in Ukraine (EU) or Iran in 1953 (US), to name but a few of many examples.

My suggestions how to solve problems associated with migration are not easy to implement. But it's hard to implement a complete shut-down of immigration, too, given US demographics.