University Report: A Room Full of White People Is a Microaggression

[UWDude]

The term "SJW" is used by all critics of feminism. Anyone who thinks it comes from SF should be dismissed out of hand, because they have no desire to actually understand anything that's going on.

Oh, I understand perfectly.

There are a bunch of pimply, fat white virgin gamers, who when they turn off their games to eat cheetos and watch youtube videos, go around the internet looking for more rage. They troll around, seeking feminist and radicalist blogs and websites, and then congregate together on forums and chats and talk about how oppressed they are.

And I've met your opposite in person. Big fat white gamer chick, but instead of looking to feminist and radicalist blogs for outrage, she would go around looking for the outrage of the day from "pick up artists" and "men going their own way" and gamers.

You all are a bunch of worthless, pathetic skin bags.

You all deserve your little, puny tortured minds you have to live with.

Now go back to WoW, where you have the sensation of power. Here, you have none.

 

[UWDude]

They're not trolls.

Long before neoreaction arrived on the scene, there was this left-right split among libertarians: been around forever. Rothbard was dealing with it back when he and half a dozen other guys were practically the only libertarians in the country. It's still here. The left-libertarians (I'm prepared: let the neg-reps rain down upon me) tend to be the more shallow-thinking ones. They deal with Austrian economics and ethics, which are typically reduced to NAP, and that's pretty much it. Not bad of, of course, but not enough. There's a lack of interest in a number of important areas, primarily because (in my speculation) investigating those areas would yield uncomfortable conclusions about the viability of Rothbardian anarcho-capitalism, which they would rather not have to confront (there's a notable correlation between left:right::anarchist:minarchist). There are certain unstated assumptions (even unthought assumptions) which are required for that system to work, concerning how people behave, differences among people (or the lack thereof), etc. Basically, optimistic Enlightenment assumptions, as opposed to reality.

But as Paleo said, more libertarians will be making a rightward turn in coming years, as the gaping holes in the alternative become increasingly difficult to ignore.

Yeah, and anyway, I was looking over for where ThePaleoLibertarian was farting out of his mouth about how bad the Haitians Slave revolt was for Haitian... ...and there you were, backing him up, and his lame theories about "lower IQ and savagery".

"reality" you say. You don't have a fucking clue about "reality".

 

[r3volution 3.0]

Yeah, and anyway, I was looking over for where ThePaleoLibertarian was farting out of his mouth about how bad the Haitians Slave revolt was for Haitian... ...and there you were, backing him up, and his lame theories about "lower IQ and savagery".

My position does not offend me, it only offends you, so you restating it to me is not an effective argument.

"reality" you say. You don't have a fucking clue about "reality".

Oh

 

[UWDude]

The whole story about "microaggression" was a microaggression against white people...

I'm not worried about microagressions of any kind.

I am worried about real aggression. Real murder. Real wars.

Not insults and stupid people's blogs.

Get a grip, losers.

 

[UWDude]

My position does not offend me, it only offends you, so you restating it to me is not an effective argument.

IT is an effective argument to both how very anti-freedom you are, (opponent of the only successful mass slave revolt in history), and how uneducated and narrow minded your views on race are.

Try reading Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs and Steel", and when you are done with it, maybe you can write your own book, called "Guns, Germs, Steel and Race", and actually have a non-racist consider your opinion. But I assure you, to peg everything to one cause for the different historical progressions of different peoples, and to make that peg minor genetic differences between humans, is laughably puerile. It was stupid when it was considered "science" in the late 1800's and early 1900's, and it is stupid now.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

IT is an effective argument to both how very anti-freedom you are, (opponent of the only successful mass slave revolt in history), and how uneducated and narrow minded your views on race are.

I'm not convinced that you understand what my position on colonialism or race is, and I'm disinclined to argue against the strawman you've cooked up.

Try reading Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs and Steel",

Good book, read it years ago, have a copy in my library.

to peg everything to one cause for the different historical progressions of different peoples, and to make that peg minor genetic differences between humans, is laughably puerile.

I agree, and I certainly never took the position that colonialism was good because whites are smarter or otherwise superior to blacks.

You clearly did not understand what I was saying about colonialism, which was about state-stability, not race.

Reread the thread, I think I explained it quite clearly.

As for race, it is a fact that there are intelligence differences between the races. Sorry if this fact makes you sad.

But you need not jump to the conclusion that anyone pointing this out is advocating racial supremacy of some form.

Personally, I think the differences are not large enough to have much effect on societal outcomes or have any important political considerations.

Especially in a non-democratic state, I might add - in a democracy it becomes slightly more problematic.

 

[UWDude]

As for race, it is a fact that there are intelligence differences between the races. Sorry if this fact makes you sad.

Well, lets have a discussion, shall we, how black does one have to be, before he is designated as "black" in these studies?
How white does a person have to be, before being claimed as white in these studies of IQ?

Exactly what is the definition of "white" and "black"?

Are we going to go back to the "one drop rule"?

What about all the blacks and natives, who turned white? Over 10% a generation declare themselves white.

I read your opinions on the other thread, I know who you are. You can't fool me.

You clearly did not understand what I was saying about colonialism, which was about state-stability, not race.

What *you* don't understand, is you use terms like "state stability" and "working system", without defining who that "state stability" and "working system" is for. You would rather have a "stable state" with slavery, than unstable without slavery. You consider a system with slavery "working" because it gave the mere APPEARANCE of being civilized, regardless of the fact that the vast majority of the peoples in this "civilized" system, were literally being worked to death by age 35, all to build the veneer of "civlized life", which still, over 200 years later, STILL has you fooled to thinking it was stable and civilized. It only was for a tiny fraction of the people living their. For the rest, it was nothing but pure hell...

LITERALLY WORKED AND WHIPPED TO DEATH IN THE SUGAR CANE FIELDS. MILLIONS MURDERED SLOWLY AND PAINFULLY FOR THE GAIN OF THEIR MASTERS, AND YOU WANT TO TALK TO ME ABOUT IT WAS FOR THE BETTER BECAUSE OF QUOTE STATE STABILTY END QUOTE

IF SLAVERY BE THE CORNERSTONE OF STATE STABILITY, IT IS SUPERIOR TO FREEDOM, BECAUSE STATE STABILITY IS MORE IMPORTANT SAID NO LIBERTARIAN EVER.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

Well, lets have a discussion, shall we, how black does one have to be, before he is designated as "black" in these studies?
How white does a person have to be, before being claimed as white in these studies of IQ?

Exactly what is the definition of "white" and "black"?

Are we going to go back to the "one drop rule"?

What about all the blacks and natives, who turned white? Over 10% a generation declare themselves white.

A fallacious argument which I addressed here some weeks ago:

The idea that race does not exist because it cannot be precisely defined (in a non-arbitrary way) is absurd.

Consider:

"Strong people tend to be better at wrestling than weak people."

"Tall people tend to be better at basketball than short people."

"Smart people tend to have higher incomes than dumb people."

"Poor people tend to have higher rates of crime than rich people."

The properties "strong, tall, smart, and poor" cannot be defined precisely in a non-arbitrary way because, just like race, they exist on a spectrum. You have to either leave it loosely defined or arbitrarily pick some point on that spectrum. Does it therefore follow that all of these statements are meaningless? Of course not. Race can be meaningfully defined, and it has been for the purpose of various comparative studies, and these have in fact found significant non-cosmetic differences.

If non-cosmetic differences between the races are the product of genetics (just as are cosmetic differences), what's the theory to explain this? As some posters here have repeatedly pointed out, skin color itself doesn't seem likely to have an effect on behavior, intelligence, etc. The theory would, presumably, be that there is some (yet undiscovered) gene(s) which people with skin color X are more likely to have than people with skin color Y. It's not that there's any causal connection between skin color and behavior themselves.

People on planet A and B might, over the millennia, develop a variety of genetic differences due to different selection pressures in their respective habitats (both natural and social). Some of these might be visible - height, skin color, etc. Others might be invisible - resistance to some disease, intelligence, tendency for violence, etc. These visible and invisible traits are correlated, not because of any causal relation between them, but because the selection pressures which generate both traits happened (by historical accident) to coexist on the same planet - and thus the inhabitants get both traits, and tend to pass them along to their descendents, even though the traits in themselves have nothing to do with one another.

I read your opinions on the other thread, I know who you are. You can't fool me.

]What *you* don't understand, is you use terms like "state stability" and "working system", without defining who that "state stability" and "working system" is for. You would rather have a "stable state" with slavery, than unstable without slavery. You consider a system with slavery "working" because it gave the mere APPEARANCE of being civilized, regardless of the fact that the vast majority of the peoples in this "civilized" system, were literally being worked to death by age 35, all to build the veneer of "civlized life", which still, over 200 years later, STILL has you fooled to thinking it was stable and civilized. It only was for a tiny fraction of the people living their. For the rest, it was nothing but pure hell...

LITERALLY WORKED AND WHIPPED TO DEATH IN THE SUGAR CANE FIELDS. MILLIONS MURDERED SLOWLY AND PAINFULLY FOR THE GAIN OF THEIR MASTERS, AND YOU WANT TO TALK TO ME ABOUT IT WAS FOR THE BETTER BECAUSE OF QUOTE STATE STABILTY END QUOTE

IF SLAVERY BE THE CORNERSTONE OF STATE STABILITY, IT IS SUPERIOR TO FREEDOM, BECAUSE STATE STABILITY IS MORE IMPORTANT SAID NO LIBERTARIAN EVER.

Or, you could try to have some idea of what I'm talking about.

Here was what I said about Haiti.

Well, not that you were talking to me, but by way of intercession - Yes, the people of Haiti would have been better off under European colonial rule (as would virtually all of the peoples formerly ruled by the European colonial powers). This is not debatable. Just look at the trend in the prosperity metrics before and after independence. That said, I don't think it has much to do with race. It is true that Africans have a lower average IQ than Europeans (and East Asians have a higher average IQ than Europeans etc), but I think it's much more a problem of culture than genetics. In the countries in question, there was not much of a ingrained cultural respect for private property, unlike in the West (probably because the native peoples in question had, prior to colonization, been living at the tribal level, such that the kind of social pressures which led to respect for private property in the West simply had not existed to work their magic). Perhaps worst of all, though, is that the state in these post-colonial garbage heaps was highly artificial. It was drawn up by ideologues, both European anti-colonialists and natives, and did not develop organically - unlike the states in more developed parts of the world (Europe and Asia e.g.); and it turned out that the concept that looked so nice to leftists on paper did not work in practice. Instead of the 150 warring ethno-religious groups joining hands and singing Kumbaya, they promptly set about slaughtering one another on a scale never contemplated by their former European rulers.

Extremely tangential to the topic of this thread, but an interesting bit of revisionist history in its own right...

 

[europa arise]

double post - please delete

 

[europa arise]

I like Red Ice, don't know the others, RamzPaul is probably my favorite although anymore he seems to be getting too much into Jewspiracy territory, plus I'm just not all that big on this whole "IQ" studies stuff, I mean, not that I'm saying it's illogical that different races evolved in different ways, I guess I just don't care, I think as long as free association, the NAP and what not are respected, does it matter? If some races overall are better at this or that due to genetics that will all sort itself out once you no longer have laws trying to force association and guarantee certain outcomes.

Red Ice went from tin foil hats (well somewhat) to full on battle axe wielding Odinists. A few of their guests recently even made me cringe but Henrik is an awesome interviewer and his wife from radio 3fourteen used to be an AnCap and is now rocking out full on Valkyrie style and she's a cute little Russian to boot.

RamzPaul can be funny sometimes. I think it's odd when a Nazis skinhead is walking down the street and falls off the side walk and then screams " god damn Jews put that curb there to trip up the Whiteman". Jew over here, jew over there, jew jew jew everywhere. The Jewish elites are very powerful and hostile but so are the Anglo-American elites. A problem does occurs when you try to criticize any of them and then you are labeled an "anti-semitic goose steeping genocider". My opinion of all these elites is that they are straight up evil and have ill intent for everyone at the end but we will all have to grab a beer and put on our tin foil hats for that discussion.

IQ differentials does seem to be a reality but there are different types of intelligences (I forgot is it 8 or 12 types?) and there are other factors as well. In the current system Whites are blamed for every problem the world has ever known and that is rude. Isn't that also rude to tell people that all of your problems are because of those guys over there. It's dangerous and dishonest but the elites just love to divide the social space aka divide and conquer. I believe there are natural group difference and conflicts (both natural and historical) but these bastards are exploiting them to the max, hence the basic subject of this thread. In an open system things would work themselves out but everything now is about divide & rule, psychological warfare and physical force. This closed system is not healthy for anyone, well except the elites of course.

 

[jonhowe]

I don't think anyone is arguing that it's unheard of to feel uncomfortable to be in a room with all *insert ethnic/social/gender group here* when you are not one yourself.

I'm white living in Harlem/Washington Heights, so everywhere I go I'm the only white guy. I won't lie; at first I felt a lot of eyes on me, and I felt very uncomfortable sometimes. Now, after 3 years or so, I know a lot of my neighbors and feel more than comfortable (and the rent's still cheap!).



The problem with the article is that it ONLY applies to groups of white people. Unless NR is cherry picking the report, which they could very well be.

 

[Slave Mentality]

Well, lets have a discussion, shall we, how black does one have to be, before he is designated as "black" in these studies?
How white does a person have to be, before being claimed as white in these studies of IQ?

Exactly what is the definition of "white" and "black"?

Are we going to go back to the "one drop rule"?

What about all the blacks and natives, who turned white? Over 10% a generation declare themselves white.

I read your opinions on the other thread, I know who you are. You can't fool me.



What *you* don't understand, is you use terms like "state stability" and "working system", without defining who that "state stability" and "working system" is for. You would rather have a "stable state" with slavery, than unstable without slavery. You consider a system with slavery "working" because it gave the mere APPEARANCE of being civilized, regardless of the fact that the vast majority of the peoples in this "civilized" system, were literally being worked to death by age 35, all to build the veneer of "civlized life", which still, over 200 years later, STILL has you fooled to thinking it was stable and civilized. It only was for a tiny fraction of the people living their. For the rest, it was nothing but pure hell...

LITERALLY WORKED AND WHIPPED TO DEATH IN THE SUGAR CANE FIELDS. MILLIONS MURDERED SLOWLY AND PAINFULLY FOR THE GAIN OF THEIR MASTERS, AND YOU WANT TO TALK TO ME ABOUT IT WAS FOR THE BETTER BECAUSE OF QUOTE STATE STABILTY END QUOTE

IF SLAVERY BE THE CORNERSTONE OF STATE STABILITY, IT IS SUPERIOR TO FREEDOM, BECAUSE STATE STABILITY IS MORE IMPORTANT SAID NO LIBERTARIAN EVER.

The idiots that you have been clearly owning in this thread will never understand. Too damn warped with statism. I have enjoyed reading thier bullshit get called out. Good work man.

 

[jonhowe]

A paleolibertarian is a radical decentralist, pro-white, pro-tradition, anti-egalitarian, anti-feminist, reactionary libertarian.


I'm familiar with all of them, with the exception of Horus

I guess my hangup is over 'pro-white' and 'anti-feminist'. Is that pro-white, with the exclusion of others based on race? Or is it pro-white, as in a backlash to the 'reverse racism' (racism) we see today? Same with anti feminist; do you mean that men and women should no have equal rights and opportunities, or are you against the modern feminist movement, which in many respects has gone radical?

 

[HankRicther12]

Red Ice went from tin foil hats (well somewhat) to full on battle axe wielding Odinists. A few of their guests recently even made me cringe but Henrik is an awesome interviewer and his wife from radio 3fourteen used to be an AnCap and is now rocking out full on Valkyrie style and she's a cute little Russian to boot.

RamzPaul can be funny sometimes. I think it's odd when a Nazis skinhead is walking down the street and falls off the side walk and then screams " god damn Jews put that curb there to trip up the Whiteman". Jew over here, jew over there, jew jew jew everywhere. The Jewish elites are very powerful and hostile but so are the Anglo-American elites. A problem does occurs when you try to criticize any of them and then you are labeled an "anti-semitic goose steeping genocider". My opinion of all these elites is that they are straight up evil and have ill intent for everyone at the end but we will all have to grab a beer and put on our tin foil hats for that discussion.

IQ differentials does seem to be a reality but there are different types of intelligences (I forgot is it 8 or 12 types?) and there are other factors as well. In the current system Whites are blamed for every problem the world has ever known and that is rude. Isn't that also rude to tell people that all of your problems are because of those guys over there. It's dangerous and dishonest but the elites just love to divide the social space aka divide and conquer. I believe there are natural group difference and conflicts (both natural and historical) but these bastards are exploiting them to the max, hence the basic subject of this thread. In an open system things would work themselves out but everything now is about divide & rule, psychological warfare and physical force. This closed system is not healthy for anyone, well except the elites of course.

Yeah, I've just listened to Red Ice a few times, I don't know them through and through. I just hate the "blame the Jew" stuff, as you say, sure there are powerful Jews out there doing things I don't like but there are powerful whites doing the same thing, to me blaming Jews is just as bad as blacks blaming whites. It's pathetic, not to mention it sends people running in the other direction.

As for the IQ, as I say I don't deny it, I just don't care, most people of any race are not going to be rocket scientists, we are all for the most part just going to be blue collar and there's nothing wrong with that. I just hate when people get bogged down in these IQ arguments because it goes nowhere and people take it as an offense. Even if it's true intelligence is certainly not = to superiority and most of those put whites 3rd on the list anyhow so it cracks me up how critics say it's white supremacy to cite a study that puts whites 3rd.

I just try to advocate free association, it's simple, most sensible people can grasp it, and it's hard to argue against. The whacko lefty SJW's will never embrace itl of course but I'm not interested in appeasing them anyhow.

 

[HankRicther12]

I guess my hangup is over 'pro-white' and 'anti-feminist'. Is that pro-white, with the exclusion of others based on race? Or is it pro-white, as in a backlash to the 'reverse racism' (racism) we see today? Same with anti feminist; do you mean that men and women should no have equal rights and opportunities, or are you against the modern feminist movement, which in many respects has gone radical?

I would say you summed it up pretty well. I actually don't use the term "pro-white" myself, but I do think it's naive to say race is just imaginary and it doesn't impact people's actions and attitudes. Ignoring it is just crazy. I for one am never advocating violence, I will defend myself sure, tho I pray I never have to, but fact is many whites are just running around in this fantasy world believing that race doesn't matter and they are the only one's playing that game. Look around: NAACP, AIPAC, LaRaza, Cherokee Nation, Congressional Black Caucus, Congressional Hispanic Caucus, etc, etc.

 

[JK/SEA]

its a known fact all NATURAL redheads are the superiors on this rock, so there.

end thread./

 

[HankRicther12]

its a known fact all NATURAL redheads are the superiors on this rock, so there.

end thread./

GINGERS FTW!!!!!

Oh, I understand perfectly.

There are a bunch of pimply, fat white virgin gamers, who when they turn off their games to eat cheetos and watch youtube videos, go around the internet looking for more rage. They troll around, seeking feminist and radicalist blogs and websites, and then congregate together on forums and chats and talk about how oppressed they are.

And I've met your opposite in person. Big fat white gamer chick, but instead of looking to feminist and radicalist blogs for outrage, she would go around looking for the outrage of the day from "pick up artists" and "men going their own way" and gamers.

You all are a bunch of worthless, pathetic skin bags.

You all deserve your little, puny tortured minds you have to live with.

Now go back to WoW, where you have the sensation of power. Here, you have none.

I'm not fat.

 

[HankRicther12]

Duplicate Post Please delete

 

[JK/SEA]

GINGERS FTW!!!!!

finally some recognition. Now bend to one knee and kiss my ring mundane.

 

[rpfocus]

Anyways go ahead and attack the messenger (and accuse him of being a sock) instead of the message

Meh. Your "message" is the same regurgitated garbage your sock puppet predecessors have been spewing, and race-bait threads are your sole purpose for being here, judging by your collective activity. Apparently, a small group of racist (yes, racist) dipshit nincompoops have seemingly chosen RPF as a platform to advance their agenda. I propose that the mods create a "Race Bait" section of the forum so that "US Political News" doesn't become filled with your special brand of idiocy, as it's clear that's where we're headed.