White ethno-nationalist falling for dark skinned Mauritian beauty - mixed kids, NWO
02-14-2019, 10:14 PM
Getting back to what Atlanta Man said, at what age does a man become "old" --- at least as far as one who is considering to have a family?
Quote: (02-14-2019 10:14 PM)Kid Twist Wrote:
Getting back to what Atlanta Man said, at what age does a man become "old" --- at least as far as one who is considering to have a family?
Quote: (02-14-2019 09:37 PM)RawGod Wrote:
Waqqle, I stopped reading when I skimmed "Hungarians are 70% non-white" or somesuch. At this point I'm putting you down as a Slovak whose grandparents had bad memories of Magyarisation in the 1910s.
Quote: (02-14-2019 09:37 PM)RawGod Wrote:
Edit: so you deserve a bit more of a response. You seem to be going on a false premise that only a couple of haplogroups are "white" or "European". i.e. that lineages from Central Asia, the Levant or Siberia are "non-white" and breaking up the "purity" of R1a and R1b. I'm saying that all the blends of the various lineages in Europe make up the "white race" which is you guessed it...a social construct. Greeks aren't "less white" because they have a greater amount of Middle Eastern DNA than do Lombards. Greeks are white because they are Europeans, historically Christian, and that Middle Eastern DNA is part of the diversity of the white race.
Quote: (02-14-2019 09:37 PM)RawGod Wrote:
With regard to Hungarians, a few decades after the Magyar tribes entered Pannonia in the 9th and 10th centuries, they decided to become "more European than Europeans". They became Christian and adopted Latin as the tongue of law and learning. Essentially, they voluntarily joined the European family. That is why we don't speak of Hungary like we do Turks (many of whom are descended from Homer-quoting Greeks). Of course, genetics is another thing. But as we have seen, Hungarian genetics is complex. Clearly though, those original invaders left no more than traces, and over the centuries, "Slavs", "Germans" and so on have all moved into the region of Hungary, mixed, and started to speak Hungarian. The diversity of European peoples includes all sorts of DNA, and they are all "white" Europeans.
Quote: (02-14-2019 06:09 PM)TheMost Wrote:
Waqqle seems rather triggered. Red pill as you are, you are blind in this area, Waqqle. What say you, Leonard?
Quote: (02-14-2019 07:32 PM)Ouroboros Wrote:
Quote: (02-14-2019 03:45 PM)Waqqle Wrote:
Family > Tribe (Dunbar's Number) > Cultural Community > Nation > Race
I think this is accurate if you're defining 'race' as something as amorphous as 'White', 'Asian', 'Black' etc. However, if you define it more precisely as someone's ethnicity (English, Japanese, etc) then 'race' becomes largely synonymous with 'cultural community'.
Quote: (02-14-2019 07:32 PM)Ouroboros Wrote:
I suspect that many people who talk about 'race' are really thinking about 'ethnicity', which is not merely cultural (e.g. if you picture a Japanese person you would imagine certain phenotypic characteristics, not a disembodied set of cultural traits).
Quote: (02-14-2019 07:32 PM)Ouroboros Wrote:
Furthermore, the examples you gave of individuals who had successfully integrated into another 'cultural community' had, I think, two things in common: (1) they were isolated from their original community, so that they were forced to integrate with and take on the customs of their new community due to overwhelming social pressure; and (2) - a related point - they were not accompanied by large numbers of their former kinsmen, so they did not noticeably affect the genetic and cultural characteristics of their new home (which would have also stoked the resentment of their new community, inhibiting their ability to assimilate).
Quote: (02-14-2019 07:32 PM)Ouroboros Wrote:
It's true that Hungarians and Englishmen have a genetically diverse ancestry - but you can be sure that the means by which they became diverse (from the invasion and rape of foreign men) were even less welcome to their predecessors than modern large-scale immigration is to contemporary Englishmen and Hungarians. Fast and large-scale genetic/cultural change never was and never will be welcomed (except with self-hating white people with misplaced historical guilt).
Quote: (02-14-2019 07:32 PM)Ouroboros Wrote:
I'm not necessarily refuting anything you've said, and I'm certainly not suggesting that someone of a different race cannot assimilate into a new community or that interracial marriage is wrong (I'd happily impregnate a Habesha or two). There is also no contradiction in supporting individual mating preferences while opposing large-scale migration or the replacement of national identity with multiculturalism as matters of public policy.
Quote: (02-14-2019 07:32 PM)Ouroboros Wrote:
But I do think it's a slight misnomer to place genetics right at the end of the ranking along with the vaguely defined 'race', as though one's cultural community is unrelated to ethnicity.
Quote: (02-15-2019 12:06 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:
OP can still choose to marry white for a lot of good reasons or decline for other good reasons. Or he can do a 23+me test and "go home".
None of these choices are morally wrong. The end.
Quote: (02-15-2019 12:25 AM)Waqqle Wrote:
This is a reasonable point and I do agree with you that the factors you mentioned most likely made it far easier for the individuals in question to assimilate than it might have been for them if they had grown up in a Parisian no-go zone. In my view, it is down to the individual and how much they either do or do not want to assimilate into the culture that surrounds them.
…
It comes down to choice and effort.
Quote: (02-15-2019 12:25 AM)Waqqle Wrote:
It was often but was not always (and probably usually was not) rape. Plenty of people (probably most in many areas) surely joined the Romans and other empires and kingdoms willingly for their own reasons in the same way that the majority of Puerto Ricans voted a few years ago to not upgrade to state status or become their own country but instead remain a territory of the USA for their own reasons.
Quote: (02-15-2019 12:25 AM)Waqqle Wrote:
I think that most of why large scale genetic change has been so strongly resisted in the past as it is now in many places, is because it has historically been accompanied by large scale cultural change. The two have historically been linked (mostly because people could not usually move alone as far and freely we do now and so mass movements of people tended to be military in nature) but are two separate things in their own right and do not necessarily always have to be as closely related as they may have been historically, if they continue to be related at all, going forward into the future which will undoubtedly, for better or worse, be home to an even more inter-connected human species than currently exists and in which it may be even easier to physically move around the planet than it is now.
Quote: (02-15-2019 02:22 AM)Ouroboros Wrote:
Well, it would be interesting to do a global study on this topic to identify the causes of major genetic and cultural change. I did say rape and invasion; it's possible (actually, depressingly likely) that women willingly chose to procreate with invaders enough of the time that rape wasn't as necessary. In the case of England, at least, I'm confident that the male Celts did not welcome the Romans or Anglo-Saxons, that the male Anglo-Saxons did not welcome the Normans, and that almost no-one was thrilled about the Viking incursions. But maybe in other countries migration played a larger role than invasion in sudden and large-scale genetic/cultural changes...
Quote: (02-15-2019 02:22 AM)Ouroboros Wrote:
It technically is a matter of choice and effort, but since most people are rather lazy and unmotivated, I'm not optimistic that most people will choose to make the effort to assimilate if there is a choice not to. It's analogous to language learners who, even if they genuinely want to learn a foreign language, will usually fail unless placed in an immersive environment in which they have no choice but to utilise the language.
Quote: (02-15-2019 02:22 AM)Ouroboros Wrote:
Well, it would be interesting to do a global study on this topic to identify the causes of major genetic and cultural change. I did say rape and invasion; it's possible (actually, depressingly likely) that women willingly chose to procreate with invaders enough of the time that rape wasn't as necessary. In the case of England, at least, I'm confident that the male Celts did not welcome the Romans or Anglo-Saxons, that the male Anglo-Saxons did not welcome the Normans, and that almost no-one was thrilled about the Viking incursions. But maybe in other countries migration played a larger role than invasion in sudden and large-scale genetic/cultural changes...
Quote: (02-15-2019 02:22 AM)Ouroboros Wrote:
Partially disagree with this one. I do agree that one reason genetic change is resisted is because it is usually a proxy for cultural change, and that the two will not necessarily correlate. However, I think there is another major factor why genetic change is resisted (and here I may inadvertently sound like a feminist): men tend to view women as their property, at least subconsciously, and resent men of other races 'taking' what they believe to be their birthright. I suspect that much of the hostility to interracial mating that you can see all over the world is not due to racism but rather due to this tribalistic view. The result is that a large-scale and sudden change in the genetics of a population would probably still be perceived as an invasion even if it somehow did not result in cultural change (and we are a long way off from genetics being a poor predictor of culture).
Quote: (02-14-2019 10:14 PM)Kid Twist Wrote:Do the math-I am 43 , If I have a kid today I will be 63 when he is 20. I am in excellent physical shape and I intend to be 75-80 when I die, I would like my children to be 30 or close to it when I kick my air addiction. I will not be in a secure financial position until 2 more years where I can legitimately pursue my plan to find a suitable bride-I have a plan in place-it is unorthodox but when planning to build a life with a woman you must be ruthless in your evaluation of a mate for childbirth.
Getting back to what Atlanta Man said, at what age does a man become "old" --- at least as far as one who is considering to have a family?
Quote: (02-14-2019 11:30 PM)Waqqle Wrote:
That being said, your logical fallacy with the Slovak jab is "ad hominem" (attacking your opponent's character or personal traits in an attempt to undermine their argument). I am not saying this to be mean but only responding and explaining why it is irrelevant.
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem
Quote: (02-14-2019 04:47 AM)PixelFree Wrote:
Hey guys, just FYI I do log in a read this from my phone at work. If my work caught me even reading this thread, I'd be out the door within a week. It's that bad here. It's moving quicker than I can read and digest, but let me just add a few things.
I number closed a hot blonde/blue eyed 21 year old Australian chick last night. She mentioned multiple times how she 'never wants kids' and how they would be a 'hassle', and how she wants to 'live life' and doesn't want to get married. Obviously she's young, but still, this girl has been full on programmed.
Quote:Quote:
I don't really care about 'race purity'. Previous girlfriends have been all kinds of colours and people, never cared about this ever before in the past.
These thoughts simply come from the fact that I can see the obvious attempt to program me to procreate with a woman of another very different race. I see many of these posters every day and on TV - you can't miss them.
Add to this the programming that I'm bad because I'm white, and my country sucks, and my flag is racist, and I should feel sorry and give all my money away to everyone that I have apparently 'wronged'.
Now, the reaction I would expect *anybody* to have to this - no matter if you're white, black, or whatever, is to say 'fuck you!' and push back against this agenda. That's it.
Quote:Quote:
If I did proceed with this women, we'd have very good looking kids. My sons would be lady killers for sure. My daughters, little princesses. This women is tall and has a kind of suave / swagger / soul I can't describe. She's really cool.
Also, on her mothering abilities, she currently works in childcare - today (and every working day) she's looking after 4x 5 year olds, playing nice with them, changing their pants when they wet themselves, calming them down when they are upset, etc. These kids are in love with her and have bonded with her more than they have their actual parents. It's like she's a professional mother.
Quote:Quote:
I think it's natural for me to have these thoughts - nobody likes to be told what to do, especially when it comes to what type of partner or family to have. I don't want to grow up with kids who 'hate' me because *I*, the white guy, 'stole' the wealth of their country or some other bullshit. Nor to do I want them to have identity issues. I had mild identity issues myself as a kid being from 2 very different white countries, growing up in one and living in another, and all the while I look like I'd fit into any of them.
Quote:Quote:
Just the other day I was walking behind a dark African looking guy who was pissed because some lady asked if he was from Africa (he is American with a strong American accent). This lady didn't mean any malice, it was a genuine / normal question, but perhaps it uncovered an insecurity (or at least a constantly annoying thing in this persons life), as displayed by some responses to this thread as well.
Closer to home, I have four mixed race first cousins who primarily identify with their non-white ethnicities (as if the white side is 'bad'), yet are rejected by some of their friends in that other ethnic group 'you're not a real xyz'. Maybe it's a big deal for them, maybe it's not, I don't really know. Maybe they consider themselves just as 'human' and it's all good. One of my best mates (white guy) married a Sri Lankan lady, and her father had a huge problem with it. It's been tough for him.
But yeah, mainly it's because I want to fuck the globalists and tell them to shove it.
Will keep reading and processing - thank you all again for your input.
Quote: (02-11-2019 03:39 PM)Atlanta Man Wrote:
^^^He is right. All you dudes who are 33-it is all good now, but ten years will fly by like nothing-Trust me.
Quote: (02-21-2019 03:05 PM)TheKongoEmpire Wrote:
Say what was the name of that gov. official you vehemently opposed integration but knocked-up his black maid? I believe in VA if I'm not mistaken.
Quote: (02-21-2019 05:03 PM)PixelFree Wrote:
It’s not cognitive dissonance or hypocrisy.
It is possible to believe that nations should have a dominant ethnicity, character and culture, and at the same time like/fornicate/have kids with someone from a different race, or be a minitory in another country.
I simply don’t like the idea of a country losing its cohesion or dominant culture and in its place being fractured / self-segregated along multiple ethnic lines.
e.g. do you think people like going to London to experience ‘British culture’ yet get there and find out its now some bizzare combination of Pakistan, Somalia and who knows what else (native British are a minority in their own homelands capital and the next two largest cities Birmingham and Manchester - so much for ‘going home to Europe’).
I don’t think so, just as I wouldn’t want that to happen to any other country or culture. I like enjoying diverse cultures and preserving them.