[Foolsgo1d]

I would laugh but I live in a country which allows a bunch of known Muslim terrorist sympathizers and in many cases actual terrorists to scream insults and wave banners with such lovely terms as "UK is Sharia now", "behead British soldiers".

I hope France does not fail the shit test like we have.

[CactusCat589]

(06-18-2015 04:18 AM)Huxley Badkin Wrote:  

(06-18-2015 12:53 AM)mikado Wrote:  

(06-17-2015 02:02 PM)Galahad Wrote:  

Generation identitaire

*video*

Make no mistake: these guys are pushing for "France is for whites", not "France is for French".

Maybe their ancesters should have applied the same to Africa, instead of colonizing it and iplementing the French way of life there.

Spoken exactly like a true SJW.

It's mikado, he picks the Arab or black side against caucasians if it's about race, Islam over Christianity if it's religion, liberalism over conservatism if it's politics, etc.

[Cyr]

(06-18-2015 12:53 AM)mikado Wrote:  

(06-17-2015 02:02 PM)Galahad Wrote:  

Generation identitaire

Make no mistake: these guys are pushing for "France is for whites", not "France is for French".

Maybe their ancesters should have applied the same to Africa, instead of colonizing it and iplementing the French way of life there.

Mikado, I normally enjoy your contrarian opinions, but your argument makes no sense. Do you believe in collective guilt? That because this women's ancestors colonized Africa, (or not, she just happens to be of the same race), it makes sense to 'colonize' her country and 'implement the African way of life'?
That doesn't seem very just. Is it ok to kill Germans because of WW2? Or implement a genocide on Rwandans?

[lskdfjldsf]

[mikado]

(06-18-2015 04:54 AM)CactusCat589 Wrote:  

(06-18-2015 04:18 AM)Huxley Badkin Wrote:  

(06-18-2015 12:53 AM)mikado Wrote:  

(06-17-2015 02:02 PM)Galahad Wrote:  

Generation identitaire

*video*

Make no mistake: these guys are pushing for "France is for whites", not "France is for French".

Maybe their ancesters should have applied the same to Africa, instead of colonizing it and iplementing the French way of life there.

Spoken exactly like a true SJW.

It's mikado, he picks the Arab or black side against caucasians if it's about race, Islam over Christianity if it's religion, liberalism over conservatism if it's politics, etc.

Even if it was the case, Samseau, Blick mang, and countless other names on the forum do the same.
And I have been repped by forum members PRECISELY because I still try to associate red pill with my personal religious and social beliefs, even if they are widely different than the majority of the forum, so your point is blatantly false.
I wonder why no one highlights this when the people I mentionned above post.
Seems like a case of cherry picking again. A phenomenon on this forum that I already denounced at least one year ago.

(06-18-2015 05:03 AM)Cyr Wrote:  

(06-18-2015 12:53 AM)mikado Wrote:  

(06-17-2015 02:02 PM)Galahad Wrote:  

Generation identitaire

Make no mistake: these guys are pushing for "France is for whites", not "France is for French".

Maybe their ancesters should have applied the same to Africa, instead of colonizing it and iplementing the French way of life there.

Mikado, I normally enjoy your contrarian opinions, but your argument makes no sense. Do you believe in collective guilt? That because this women's ancestors colonized Africa, (or not, she just happens to be of the same race), it makes sense to 'colonize' her country and 'implement the African way of life'?
That doesn't seem very just. Is it ok to kill Germans because of WW2? Or implement a genocide on Rwandans?

I don't need to direct you to my countless posts on the forum where I precise that I DISAGREE with imposing your culture to a majority.

The fact that Europe colonized Africa does not imply Africans should "take over" Europe. Just that Europe opened the Pandora box, and that the French culture has been so heavily mixed with the one of immigrants that by claiming "France to whites" you run the risk of ruining the lives of millions of people from 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th generation of immigrants who fully identify with the current French culture, but are still facially non-white.

Even posters like Zelcorpion, Teedub or Samseau whom I regularly disagree with agree that I am among the rare guys who can be considered red pill, even though I have a background far different from theirs.

I find it ironic how some people are quick to call me a SJW when I have precisely advocated for conforming to the culture of the host country when you immigrate, and voiced opinions that could even get me fired from my job either on the forum, or in real life.
Maybe I should start learning about how the ignore function works.

[CactusCat589]

I never pidgeonhole people based on one example. It seems that every time you weigh in on these threads, you do align yourself in the way I've outlined. And you didn't deny my charge, which is good because at least you're honest. There's nothing wrong with it in and of itself, since most everyone supports their in-group.

And I think it's good for the community to have people who'll keep us honest. I even agree with the post you wrote on racism in the manosphere and hypocrisy a while back. But what you wrote crosses the line, is all I'm saying.

(06-18-2015 12:53 AM)mikado Wrote:  

Make no mistake: these guys are pushing for "France is for whites", not "France is for French".

Maybe their ancesters should have applied the same to Africa, instead of colonizing it and iplementing the French way of life there.

Just classless. Say that again after someone writes a message in whichever Arabic or Muslim country you have ties to, saying "Arab women for white men!" - and with your political leaders protecting it, and people will respect it or give it serious consideration a little more.

[mikado]

I have edited my post where I explained why, and how I said that.
I will quote it again.

The fact that Europe colonized Africa does not imply Africans should "take over" Europe. Just that Europe opened the Pandora box, and that the French culture has been so heavily mixed with the one of immigrants that by claiming "France to whites" you run the risk of ruining the lives of millions of people from 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th generation of immigrants who fully identify with the current French culture, but are still facially non-white.

Even posters like Zelcorpion, Teedub or Samseau whom I regularly disagree with agree that I am among the rare guys who can be considered red pill, even though I have a background far different from theirs.

I find it ironic how some people are quick to call me a SJW when I have precisely advocated for conforming to the culture of the host country when you immigrate, and voiced opinions that could even get me fired from my job either on the forum, or in real life.

[Ziltoid]

Quote:

The fact that Europe colonized Africa does not imply Africans should "take over" Europe. Just that Europe opened the Pandora box, and that the French culture has been so heavily mixed with the one of immigrants that by claiming "France to whites" you run the risk of ruining the lives of millions of people from 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th generation of immigrants who fully identify with the current French culture, but are still facially non-white.

Good thing nobody claimed that, then. It's always a convincing debate tactic to completely make up something what the other side is supposedly saying, then argue against that instead of what they actually said.

This was about an obviously racist mural saying "French women for Africans" being vandalized, and you're trying to hamster this into being about white supremacy. And you WONDER why people think of you as reminiscent of SJWs... WTF dude.

And for the record I see guys like Scorpion, Samseau, and a few others routinely called out for their proclivities.

[mikado]

(06-18-2015 05:43 AM)Ziltoid Wrote:  

Quote:

The fact that Europe colonized Africa does not imply Africans should "take over" Europe. Just that Europe opened the Pandora box, and that the French culture has been so heavily mixed with the one of immigrants that by claiming "France to whites" you run the risk of ruining the lives of millions of people from 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th generation of immigrants who fully identify with the current French culture, but are still facially non-white.

Good thing nobody claimed that, then. It's always a convincing debate tactic to completely make up something that the other side is supposedly saying, then argue against that instead of what they actually said.

This was about an obviously racist mural saying "French women for Africans" being vandalized, and you're trying to hamster this into being about white supremacy. And you WONDER why people think of you as reminiscent of SJWs... WTF dude.

I am not talking about this mural. I never did, actually.

I am talking about the post on Generation Identitaire. Which was on this page.
Read again please before accusing people.
Thanks.

[Ziltoid]

In a thread, about the mural.

[mikado]

Then you should have told Galahad to create a new thread in which I would have posted.
If the mods do agree we can do it.

Anyway sorry to everyone for the thread derail.
I will stop posting for a while, because I am tired of all the baits I (successfully) fall into.

[CactusCat589]

That doesn't look remotely like what you posted. And I'd agree, except they wrote "France for the French", not "France for the whites". I get that you interpreted it that way. To me, that's a call to stop open immigration from other countries (i.e. not French), people who aren't 2nd, 3rd, 4rth, or 5th generation immigrants. They can apply for citizenship and the French can choose the best candidates from Africa: the skilled, the educated, the graduates from the universities of Egypt and Nigeria. That to me is entirely reasonable, and in my opinion, right.

Edit: Okay, it looks like there was a video posted halfway down the thread, that I missed and didn't see. I thought you were talking about the mural. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

[lskdfjldsf]

Quote:

Even if it was the case, Samseau, Blick mang, and countless other names on the forum do the same.

We're advocates for our own people and our own traditions. You are an advocate for the Senegalese people and Islamic traditions while living in a European country. We can respect each other as men and find common ground on a range of issues (as we have many times in the past), but we will never be playing for the same team. This is exactly why multiculturalism does not work and cannot work; it's not a source of enrichment or strength, it's a source of chronic conflict and tension.

I would be equally appalled by a mural in Dakar suggesting that Senegalese women belong to the French.

[mikado]

(06-18-2015 05:57 AM)Blick Mang Wrote:  

Quote:

Even if it was the case, Samseau, Blick mang, and countless other names on the forum do the same.

We're advocates for our own people and our own traditions. You are an advocate for the Senegalese people and Islamic traditions while living in a European country. We can respect each other and find common ground on a range of issues (as we have many times in the past), but we will never be playing for the same team. This is exactly why multiculturalism does not work and cannot work; it's not a source of enrichment or strength, it's a source of chronic conflict and tension.

I would be equally appalled by a mural in Dakar suggesting that Senegalese women belong to the French.

I will respond to this because it seems we are mistaken.

I was not responding to the mural per se (which the thread is about, and I should have focused on this first) but to the video posted by Galahad. Which is not the same.
My opinion is that French Women belong to French people. There are exceptions, with interracial or interreligious marriages, which I have no problem against (it will probably be the same for me anyway). However yes, in general, fellows of a country should get spouses from the same country. This is normal and natural. No questions asked.

[DavidTheGnome]

(06-17-2015 01:14 PM)Going strong Wrote:  

(06-17-2015 01:07 PM)Horus Wrote:  

What exactly is the purpose of the original message? Or is this supposed to be some kind of thought provoking art work?

The purpose is, I'd say: to have the Frenchmen slowly getting used to humiliation, castration, mockery and liberalism. Sowing despair and shame in our hearts. Showing us how defenseless we are against the system...

We have lots of offending messages like that in our public space. It is so that we get used to all kinds of insults, and to foster the liberal agenda against strong patriotic men.

Holy shit, nice breakdown. I will be paraphrasing your post in the future.

[Galahad]

(06-18-2015 05:49 AM)mikado Wrote:  

Then you should have told Galahad to create a new thread in which I would have posted.
If the mods do agree we can do it.

I add the video because it came into my mind. The Identitaire video was quite viral and popular when it came out first. We also have a Identitaire movement in Germany. There are often rumours if this groups are far right wing or just a counter moment against the mass immigration in Europe.

I'm not aware about how deep the identiaire groups in france go, just that there are some tension in society with immigrants. And they are far worse then in Germany.

[britchard]

Took 1 and a half pages to pretty much turn into a race thread. Oh well.

I think we should stick to the point of the OP here, you're going too far off topic. Basically, this woman did something good. I genuinely can't believe that "Frenchwomen for Africans" was allowed and even funded by the mayor? Surely this can't be right?

Mikado, you know why generation identitaire exist. They are also hugely outnumbered by the amount of 3rd world youth living in ghettos who also want to use violence. Generation identitaire are much more reasonable than the people who live in the ghettos.

[Sgt]

I did not fully understand the story, since everyone talks about

1. the original graffiti commissioned by the mayor of Paris
2. the changes that ElectreIsMore made
   

...but there seem to be -3- versions of the text in the painting:

1. in black: La France aux Francais
2. in red: Les Francaises aux Africains
3. in blue: Les Francaises aux Francais
   

What was it that the mayor of Paris ordered:

• the original painting including the black text "La France aux Francais" stricken through AND the red text "Les Francaises aux Africans" (thus creating a straw-man racist painting (1+2) OR
• just the revision of the original painting by placing "Les Francaises aux Africains" on it (2) ?
  

Also: Did the mayor of Paris pay for the graffiti (or revision of the graffiti)

• from her private pocket OR
• from the city's pocket?
  

Sorry if I missed the part where my questions are answered, I read through the whole thread but couldn't find it.

[General Stalin]

I'm still honestly confused as to what the hell this all means. Why are French women supposed to be given to African people? Maybe it's the cultural/language barrier or something but I'm just not getting the premise of this.

What is the message the original painting is saying and, if commissioned by the government, what is it trying to promote for the betterment of the City/country?

[The Beast1]

@britchard,

The mural was racial to begin with. There was never any hope for this thread.

[Edelweiss]

(06-18-2015 08:27 AM)Sgt Wrote:  

I did not fully understand the story, since everyone talks about

1. the original graffiti commissioned by the mayor of Paris
2. the changes that ElectreIsMore made
   

...but there seem to be -3- versions of the text in the painting:

1. in black: La France aux Francais
2. in red: Les Francaises aux Africains
3. in blue: Les Francaises aux Francais
   

What was it that the mayor of Paris ordered:

• the original painting including the black text "La France aux Francais" stricken through AND the red text "Les Francaises aux Africans" (thus creating a straw-man racist painting (1+2) OR
• just the revision of the original painting by placing "Les Francaises aux Africains" on it (2) ?
  

Also: Did the mayor of Paris pay for the graffiti (or revision of the graffiti)

• from her private pocket OR
• from the city's pocket?
  

Sorry if I missed the part where my questions are answered, I read through the whole thread but couldn't find it.

The original painting includes: the black text "La France aux Francais" stricken through AND the red text "Les Francaises aux Africans"

Electre erased Africains and added Français. (plus other writings - check my post on the first page of this thread which explains the details).

The mayor used taxpyers' money to fund this...Unbelievable as it may sound

[Edelweiss]

(06-18-2015 08:43 AM)General Stalin Wrote:  

I'm still honestly confused as to what the hell this all means. Why are French women supposed to be given to African people? Maybe it's the cultural/language barrier or something but I'm just not getting the premise of this.

What is the message the original painting is saying and, if commissioned by the government, what is it trying to promote for the betterment of the City/country?

The aim of the message to to humiliate the native French and embrace multiculturalism.

I think it's trying to say that we should help the poor africans coming here but I don't buy it.

However I try to spin it, it still so blatantly racist and offensive and I'm not easily offended.

It's like these subliminal messages you see on ads promoting gay marriage or adoption.
Like the last google ad where they show two men and their child.

It's all propaganda for the masses. The more you see a message, you will eventually accept it as reality and fact.

[TheWastelander]

This wasn't a subliminal message, though. This was a bold out and out "fuck you" to Frenchmen by cultural marxist shitbags trying to start a race war.

They are the ultimate race trolls.

[Phoenix]

(06-17-2015 08:17 PM)Going strong Wrote:  

Fixed it:

Would bang and discuss politics with.

[lskdfjldsf]

Quote:

However I try to spin it, it still so blatantly racist and offensive and I'm not easily offended.

It's not standard offensive speech, it's cuckolding and strikes a very different nerve.

No race, tribe, or nation on earth wants to see it's women plundered by foreigners; it's a source of tremendous humiliation and shame, stemming from our natural biological instincts to protect women of the same tribe from external threats. The Russians raped every woman aged 11-75 in Berlin, typically in front of fathers and brothers, to inflict psychological trauma. This is also why stories of sex slavery by ISIS and Boko Haram garner more public attention and sympathy than embassy bombings. To capture the women of a population is to conquer them.