Category Archives: Whites

WB Jim Crow, LTNS

Here.

Thank you, Donald Trump. Thanks for this. I had nearly forgotten what it was like back in the good old days of Bull Conner, etc. Appreciate the reminder, Donald.

It’s not back to the future. More like back to the 1950’s. Here we are in the pre-Civil Rights Era again. How long before the Supreme Court guts the Housing Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act the same way they gutted the Voting Rights Act? Anyone taking bets?

Boy, when we White people think our backs are against the wall, we sure turn into vicious racist shits, don’t we?

God forbid when we turn into a minority. When Whites are a minority, it’s time for Apartheid, fascist dictatorships, vast, fetid Brown and Black slums on the mountains with raw sewage running down the streets, and of course don’t forget the death squads. Logically, the reaction is an armed Left. What sort of reaction would you expect?

White civilization, White decency, White manners, and stable and prosperous White societies are largely illusory. Whites only play that game when they’re a big majority and the non-Whites are a small minority. 

White people really can’t get along with other races, nor can we live in peace with them. We can only be decent to non-Whites if they are small minorities. Whites can only be decent at all when they are a majority and a solid one at that. Barring that, we are basically a race of ratfucks.

The Chinese are mostly the same. Chinese people are only decent at all when they  are in a majority Chinese country like Taiwan or China. When Chinese are a tiny minority as in Malaysia, Indonesia and especially the Philippines, they turn into a race of monsters.

There must be some larger pattern here. High achieving races can only act decent when they are the vast majority of the population. As minorities, they are thorough scumbags.

This is so constant that it must nearly be a rule of Sociology and Political Economics.

408 Comments

Filed under Asians, Blacks, Chinese (Ethnic), Civil Rights, Crime, Law, Left, Politics, Race Relations, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Sociology, South, USA, White Racism, Whites

Down with Colin Flaherty

I did not even bother to watch much of this video because his videos and articles make me so sick. The problem is that this guy’s whole shtick is that he is not racist at all in any way whatsoever! No really. That’s exactly what he says. And that’s how he comes across, endlessly, in article after article and video after video. And that is exactly why this man is so dangerous.

Mr. Flaherty is a journalist, and a good one at that. But in his middle age, he has decided to branch out into the area of Black crime, except that his focus has a twist – it’s all about Black crime against Whites. The subtext of every Flaherty article or video is that Black people are deliberately singling out Whites to attack as hunters single out prey. Nothing could be more nonsensical. Blacks do not preferentially prey on Whites. It’s nonsense. 89% of Black homicides are of other Black people. Most Black crime is Black on Black crime. Much is made of Black men raping White women, but Black men rape Black women at 5X the rate that they rape White women. There are all sorts of nutty arguments that try to deal with these uncomfortable truths while keeping the lousy theory alive.

The principal one was symbolized by the noted theory of Le Griffe du Lion, a very racist White professor of…get this…sociology! He did some fancy mathematics showing that Black people mostly see other Black people all day long and don’t see many White people. So of course they prey mostly on their own kind. That’s who they are around all the time! If Blacks were around Whites just as much as they were around Blacks, their propensity to hunt Whites preferentially as a predator hunts its prey (Le Griffe’s exact words) would come out.

But the other side can play that game too. There are 6X more Whites than Blacks. If Blacks displayed no preference at all in victims, they would kill 6X more Whites than Blacks, right? This argument spouts the rejoinder of “But they are only around their own kind all day…” which is probably a tautology and is certainly not falsifiable, so it fails as theory on its face.

Flaherty wrote a book called, White Girl Bleed a Lot. It’s all about Black crime against Whites. Yes Blacks commit some very bad crimes against Whites. But they commit just as bad or worse crimes against their own kind. So only writing about Black crime against Whites is lying in a sense, and worse, you are selling a form of poison to the masses. Racist poison. A really nasty racist poison.

Because nothing drives Whites up the wall more than the idea that Blacks preferentially prey on them as victims. Some of these theorists even go as far as to say that Blacks are waging a low level guerrilla war against Whites. Oh what nonsense.

But if you study ethnic conflicts all over the world, one of the things that sets off massacres and ethnic cleansings is the notion that Group B, the outgroup, is trying to kill us, Group A.

Hitler set off the genocide by saying the Jews were trying to exterminate Germans.

The Rwandan genocide was set off in the same way.

The Sunni-Shia wars start off in exactly the same way. ISIS propaganda goes to great lengths to show how the Shia are preferentially singling out and slaughtering the Sunni. “They’re trying to kill us all,” is the message.

This was the line that the Young Turks used to kill 1.7 million Armenians. “The Armenians were starting a war against the Turks and they were trying to kill all the Turks.”

The genocide against Muslims in Bosnia was set off Serbian lies that, “The Muslims were trying to kill the Serbs.”

Even the anti-Communist slaughters of the last century which the US fully participated in, each and every one of them, were predicated on the idea that the Communist killers were going to seize power and kill lots of people.

Hitler justified his genocide against the Jews by saying that they were Communists and that the Communists were mass murderers who were “killing millions of Christians” in the Ukraine. Yes, the fake Holodomor, the terror famine that never even happened, was used as a pretext for the Holocaust. Remember that the next time any of you wants to rant about “Stalin’s terror famine.” Every time you say that, you are repeating Nazi propaganda. Does it make you feel good to parrot Hitler?

Many of the massacres of Indians were predicated on the notion that the Indians “were coming to kill us all.” In the original wording of the Declaration of Independence, there is language about how savage the Indians fought, knowing none of the rules of decency in wartime. “They’re savages, so we need to kill them all.” See how that works?

In Indonesia in 1965, there was supposedly a Communist coup to take over the government. All the world’s media reported it exactly that way. Except that it never happened. There was a fake Communist coup to take over the government. “The Communists tried to take over and they are going to kill millions of people” lie was then used as an excuse to kill 1 million Communists all over Indonesia in only a few months. Most were hacked to death with machetes. Islamic fundamentalists were used by the US and Indonesia in this slaughter.

The CIA was on the scene immediately and they supplied the new government with lists of known Communists. These lists were then used to single out people for killing. The US media then lied about the whole affair, with the execrable New York Times leading the charge. Later there was an attempt to bury this mass slaughter as “unfortunate but necessary and a good idea in the long run.” It was only years or even decades that we learned the truth about the fake coup and the mass slaughter. The Left was devastated in Indonesia and has remained in a meager state to this day. Obviously people in Indonesia have gotten the message about what happens to Leftists.

Hence it follows that once White people get it in their heads that “the Blacks are trying to kill us” we can set ourselves up for some serious persecutions of Blacks based on that narrative. I doubt if we will start massacring Blacks, but “the Blacks are trying to rape and kill Whites” was always the excuse for lynchings and Jim Crow.

It’s an ugly narrative, and it’s a lie.

I could write articles about this sort of thing too. I see articles all the time about Black people acting terrible, killing each other, killing White people, you name it. 98% of the time, I choose not to write about it. Why write about it? Yes, we know Black people commit tons of crime, including violent crime. Yes, we know Black men have a high homicide rate.

Yes, we know that Black men kill many White people – but they kill far more Black people and by and large, they prey mostly on their own kind.

Looking at the larger picture, Black criminals simply prey on other humans. They rob, rape and kill Hispanics, Asians, Whites and Blacks. They attack everyone. They are not real particular. And the evidence shows that if anything, they by far preferentially select their own kind for violence and they preferentially select against White victims. So if anything, Blacks prefer to prey on their own kind and it looks like Blacks actively avoid preying on Whites. If that’s the reality, then it’s quite a poisonous stew to cook up to sell the lie that Blacks preferentially attack Whites. “They’re coming to kill us! The Blacks are trying to kill us White people!” It’s not only a lie, but it’s a very dangerous lie, a mental poison with grave effects.

Just to see what sort of vibes Flaherty is churning up, look at the commenters. Looks like Niggermania, Chimpout, American Renaissance and Stormfront. There are all sorts of very vicious and ugly remarks against Black people as a race on there. So even if Flaherty really is a non-racist as he insists, look at all the wild racism that his irresponsible (or worse) videos and articles sprout. He’s fertilizing the land with poison, watching the weeds he watered grow and take over the land and choke out all the good and  decent crops, all the while protesting that he had nothing to do with it, he was just some innocent farmer trying to grow crops. Yeah. Crops of weeds.

Whenever I see that language, I think, “This person is promoting hatred against Phil, Tulio and Alpha.” I think that’s unacceptable. None of these Black people do much of anything wrong, they all live like good, law abiding citizens, and in short, they are good people. Selling hate propaganda against good people just because they are Black is just wrong.

And that is why you, Mr. Flaherty, are wrong.

And that is why you, Mr. Flaherty, are promoting a very dangerous lie.

156 Comments

Filed under Amerindians, Armenians, Asia, Blacks, Christianity, Crime, Europe, History, Indonesia, Islam, Jews, Journalism, Left, Marxism, Modern, Near Easterners, Race Relations, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Religion, SE Asia, Serbians, Shiism, Social Problems, Sociology, Sunnism, Turks, USA, USSR, White Racism, Whites

IQ and Racial Background of Latin American Indians

Granted, they are primitive Austronesian Asian people with an IQ of 70 and it takes all sorts of social programs to keep them fed and clothed and away from the alcohol but you Gallegos Basque do not even pretend to give a single rat’s ass.

First of all, Amerindians are not Austronesians. Austronesians are Malays, Filipinos, Indonesians and Taiwanese Aborigines. Other people  speaking Austronesian languages such as Polynesians, Melanesians and Micronesians are only part Austronesian.

Polynesians are 1/2 Melanesian and 1/2 Austronesian.

Melanesians vary, but the some of the Austronesian speakers in the Papuan coast and eastern Indonesia are 20% Austronesian and 80% Papuan. Austronesians only settled the coast of Papua, so the interior remained Papuan. The Austronesians brought language but few genes.

I believe Micronesians are 1/2 Polynesian and 1/2 Papuan.

Amerindians are simply Northeast Asians, the same folks as Chinese, Japanese, Mongolians and Siberians, but they are closest to Siberians. The main difference is that the Amerindians are from a more primitive and archaic type of Northeast Asian that may not have gone though the high IQ mutations. I would call them Paleomongoloids, whereas the others are generally Neomongoloids. So Amerindians are just an early version of the highly functional Northeast Asians.

Some relation to the Northeast Asians can be seen in their features and sparse, Northeast Asian like body hair. The hair on their heads looks very Northeast Asian too. Whereas a Northeast Asian baby is calm, cool and collected, an Amerindian baby is silent but very aware and watchful, like an Indian hunter hiding in the woods waiting for a deer. They are so deathly quiet that observers often wonder if they are dead. On the other hand, Black babies are precocious physically, very fast in development and tend to be very active physically and even boisterous. They are quite extroverted.

These racial differences in babies are present from the very earliest stages of life and I am convinced that they are biological in nature. I also believe that this shows that there are obvious differences between the races at least in personality. If those differences are showing up that  early and that uniformly, they cannot possibly be due to culture. Babies are not effected tremendously by culture anyway.

Amerindian IQ is absolutely not 70. They are not that dumb. Scores vary, but a figure of 87 for the whole continent seems pretty good. Some are lower. I believe that Indians in Mexico are 83 and in Guatemala is the same.

87 IQ is not a bad score. Your average human has an IQ of 89. Certainly 87 IQ folks or even 83 IQ folks do not need all sorts of social programs to keep them clothed and fed. Keeping them away from the booze is much easier. These people lived life without social programs for 12,000 years. They did just fine. They don’t need welfare to survive.

Although the 87 IQ is close to the 85 US Black IQ, Amerindians have only 2X the White crime rate, whereas for Blacks it is 7-8X the White crime rate. This shows that attempt to put White-Black crime differences all down to IQ is a fool’s errand, but that is what so many HBD types, usually racists, do. There is more driving Black aggression, crime, violence and antisocial behavior than just IQ.

I am thinking that extroversion and associated problems with impulse control and delayed gratification along with higher testosterone in both males and females may have something to do with it. Also some genetic mutations that elevate the risk of violence and criminality in Whites are present at much higher levels in Blacks. It is seen in only .1% of White men, but I believe the rate is  ~5% in Black men.

We need to stop IQ fetishization and trying to reduce all racial issues to IQ. There’s a hell of a lot more going on with humans than just IQ, and it doesn’t take a genius IQ to figure that out.

47 Comments

Filed under Americas, Amerindians, Anthropology, Asia, Asians, Blacks, Central America, Crime, Filipinos, Guatemala, Indonesia, Indonesians, Intelligence, Latin America, Malays, Melanesians, Mexico, Micronesians, Northeast Asians, Oceanians, Physical, Polynesians, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, SE Asia, SE Asians, Taiwanese Aborigines, Whites

In America, White Workers Think They Are Aristocrats

What boggles the mind is that how many of the American people (conservatives) accept aristocratic rule over rule by the people. This is a standard tenet of conservatism, so if you are a conservative, that means that you think that aristocrats should rule society, not the people as democracy demands. Conservatism by its very nature is anti-democratic because aristocratic rule can never be a democracy.

It is almost as if your average working class American thinks he is some sort of an aristocrat. Is that it? We Whites are all little rich people, little Trumps lording it over the inferior darkies? And it follows that US Whites connect popular rule or rule by the people with “Nigger and Beaner Rule.” Once again, this is exactly like Latin America, where Brown Rule automatically means Communism and is never democratic or legitimate while White rule is always democratic and just. The Latin American Whites follow the Straussian rule: the strong must rule the weak.

These White fools just don’t get the depth of their own folly. Their enemies are not the Blacks and the Mexicans and the immigrants and the Muslims like these tards think. Their enemies first and foremost are the White rich, their class enemies. So in order to form a common front against their racial enemies, White workers have lined up with their own class enemies who have proceeded to wage ferocious class war against the White workers while the workers stand up and cheer for how hard they are getting reamed. White workers are not only little aristocrats, they are masochists to boot!

73 Comments

Filed under Capitalism, Conservatism, Economics, Government, Labor, Latin America, Political Science, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, USA, Whites

Maryland, Washington DC Sue Trump for Violating the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution

46r5j7J7

This Presidency is so bad it is like some sort of a sick joke.

No kidding he has been violating the Emoluments Clause!

No standing <potus< has ever acted w/such disregard for the constitution’s guard against corruption and improper influence

Exactly. In other words, this is by far the most corrupt president in US history by orders of magnitude. It almost boggles the mind how bad this president is. He’s so bad you wonder if it’s even real. It seems more like a bad movie. The President simply put is not allowed to use his office to enrich himself in any way, shape or form. It’s worse than illegal. It is actually unconstitutional. And this joker has been violating the clause since Day One.

DCIJqSCWsAAK5is

Well, it looks like the GSA got corrupted too. This country is turning into a Goddamned banana republic and it’s heading towards a tinpot dictatorship. What is interesting about this is that every time Whites become a minority over non-Whites, they become unbelievably corrupt, murderous and dictatorial. Such has been the case with Latin America and the Philippines and to some extent South Africa. White people are only modern, democratic and progressive when they are a majority. This Latin Americanization of the US has been going on ever since that abomination Reagan came in. The Reagan Administration was unbelievably corrupt. Almost all conservative governments are corrupt because they are so pro-capitalist. The more pro-capitalist a government is, the more corrupt it is. It is nearly a law of political science.

All other presidents have always divested of everything they own and then put it all in a blind trust. It’s standard procedure. Bush Sr. did it, Clinton did it, Hell even the frightening bad Bush Jr. did it, and of course Obama did it. You have to sell off all your business interests and then put the money in a blind trust. Everyone does this. Everyone.

DCIPCmOXYAAezGR

But rules are for other people, not this clown. Which rules and laws apply to him? None of them. He’s ruling by the Divine Right of Kings. This is a man who believes that the aristocrats must rule the people, which is standard conservative ideology.

What is the remedy for violation of the Emoluments Clause? The Constitution states that violations of the Emoluments Clause should be punished by impeachment. It’s an impeachable offense without a doubt. So this Congress is refusing to do their Constitutional duty as the Constitution demands and impeach a President flagrantly violating the Constitution and committing impeachable offenses every day he is in offense. One wonders who is more corrupt, Congress or the President. Really the whole Republican Party is corrupt to the core. And the rot set in with Reagan. Even Nixon wasn’t this corrupt, and certainly neither Eisenhower nor Ford were.

What is pitiful about this is that his idiot followers elected him due to their outrage at “corrupt Hillary.” Now I like Hillary Clinton about as much as I like hemorrhoids, but she was hardly corrupt at all. Even if she was a bit corrupt like most corporate politicians, she had nothing on Trump, whose corruption was orders of magnitude greater. If you want to know what Trump is thinking or is going to do, look at who he is pointing fingers at. Because this president is so psychologically ill, he resorts to primitive defenses such as projection on a regular basis. I expect corrupt backwaters like India, Saudi Arabia and Turkey to project away like this because they have taken lying to a fine art form. But we were supposed to be the city on the hill, the exception to the Machiavellian rules of dirty politics.

Notice that Trump was pointing fingers at Hillary the whole campaign, calling her “corrupt Hillary?” He’s projecting! By constantly pointing a finger at Hillary and calling her corrupt, he is calling himself corrupt. Deep down inside he knows he is corrupt and he does not feel real good about that so he has to project the blame and guilt away onto some innocent person. Problem is that projection as a defense does not work very well, and as soon as  you get up the next morning, there’s that old black dog of blame and guilt again. So as the new day dawns, this person must start pointing fingers again all the time. These defenses are always temporary fixes, psychological jerry-rigging. They never really fix the problem and the issue always comes rearing up from behind no matter how many times you band-aid it over.

DCH2LisXUAIu9zO

 

7 Comments

Filed under Africa, Americas, Asia, Conservatism, Corruption, Democrats, Government, Latin America, Law, Obama, Philippines, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Republicans, SE Asia, South Africa, US Politics, USA, Whites

A Lot of Liberals and Leftists Hate Criminals Too You Know

Carol: Hey, “retards” is word of the week here! I can take credit for that by mentioning “Trumptard” just prior to all the retard posts. Fun fact: many Snapchat Murder websleuths happen to be Trumptards. Why is that do you think, Robert?

In part it is because they are from that Godforsaken hillbilly red state. The whole state seems to have been hit by a Retard Virus if you ask me. The people in that state are not very educated. Their college graduation rate I believe is only 11%, and that is on the low end of US states. They seem to cultivate ignorance in that place and most people seem to be aggressively or even belligerently ignorant. They are actually arrogant and defiant about their ignorance.

I do not know what we are going to do about states like that. I want to say they are beyond hope, but that is probably not true. My Mom said that state has been conservative forever somehow, but that is probably not true. However, the state has been conservative for a very long time. 50-60 years ago, they commonly elected Democrats, but that’s not the case anymore. I imagine the Reagan Democrats were very big here as they were throughout the Rust Belt. All of this may be because this state was heavily populated by White Southerners, especially people from Appalachia moving north maybe for jobs and such a the same time many Blacks were moving north from for the same reason in the mid 20th Century. There were a lot of industrial jobs up there that attracted Southerners looking for work.

Web sleuths tend to be rightwingers. That is because they have the Cop Personality and they really hate criminals.It’s too bad and I think it shows how we on the Left have screwed up. If you hate criminals so much you want to be a detective, you cannot possibly be a liberal or on the Left. Because you know the Left is soft on crime, they are bleeding hearts and they want to set all the criminals free and let them all out early. It’s sad. I hate criminals and I actually think like a cop (more like a detective) and I am on the Left.

These people don’t get it. Go back to Stalin’s USSR, Mao’s China, Ho’s Vietnam, or Castro’s Cuba and try to commit some common crime. I mean like theft. God forbid burglary. Or God help you some violent crime.

The Commie regimes were absolutely vicious in their treatment of street criminals, and even worse towards violent criminals. Were they anti-cop? Hell, they were damned Police STATES for Chrissakes. They were practically run by cops.

True some liberals are bleeding hearts and have been associated with some sentence reduction, but actually that has been much exaggerated. A lot so-called bleeding heart-ism was just common sense like opposition to the death penalty.

I think we need to bring back the idea that a lot of us liberals really hate criminals too, violent ones especially. Or that it would be OK to be a detective or even a street cop and vote Democrat. Cops used to vote Democrat back East at least until 1980 or so. Or maybe it started in the 1960’s. They were often White ethnics who saw themselves properly as members of the working class so they voted for the party of the working class White ethnics, the Democrats.

10 Comments

Filed under Blacks, Conservatism, Crime, Democrats, Education, Idiots, Law enforcement, Left, Liberalism, Marxism, Midwest, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Republicans, South, US Politics, USA, Whites

My Reaction to the BBC Show “Three Girls,” by Magneto

My Reaction to the BBC Show Three Girls

by Magneto

I was very surprised when I saw the three-episode drama series “Three Girls” on BBC. It is a drama about the true events of Pakistani men grooming and raping young White British school girls. The reason I was surprised was because I never expected such a Cultural Marxist, pro-multiculturalism channel like the BBC to ever show anything which might give a negative impression on immigrants.
The first reaction most people will get after watching that is to feel anger and hate towards Pakistani men and to want to expel them from the UK. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Three Girls show caused the membership in White Supremacist organizations to double or triple. It’s a very disturbing show that is guaranteed to get an emotional reaction out of people.
But on thinking a bit deeper I realized that why should I feel angry? After all, these are the same White western women who have been shitting on White men for decades now and treating White men like shit in the name of feminism. Why should I care if they get raped? White women have treated White men like shit for decades, and now all of a sudden White men are supposed to jump to their defense? After years of White women screaming they are independent and don’t need a man’s help?
White women have effectively betrayed their own race by accepting feminism. Men do not have a duty to help people who have betrayed them. White women disrespect nice, normal White men as “nice guy Beta males,” go jump on the cock of the first Pakistani man they can find, and when things go wrong, expect the same nice guy Beta male White men to come to their defense and rescue them?
Sorry ladies, but you made your bed and now you have to lie in it. How many tens of millions of White men’s lives have been destroyed by White women in divorce? How many hundreds of thousands of White men have been driven to suicide after having their kids kidnapped by their ex-wives in divorce court and denied custody or visitation rights? And where was the White female outcry about this? There was none. White women have effectively stated that they could care less if the divorce system is so unfair to men that it drives men to suicide.
White women have raped tens of millions of White men in divorce court but now expect White men to feel an obligation to “save them” from the invading barbarian hordes who rape them? I don’t think so.
To make matters even worse, if a White male dares to even verbally protest against the anti-male feminist legal system, he is a “misogynist”. That’s like saying Jews who verbally protest against Nazis murdering them are being “racist against Nazis”. This is how badly feminism has infected the West. If a man so much as dares to suggest that men should be treated like human beings with human rights, he is a misogynist. As a result, tens of millions of younger men have become alienated from society, and this has led to the rise of ultra-conservative politicians beginning to win elections.
There is also somewhat of a generational divide in terms of this issue. Baby Boomer and Generation X men, basically any man over the age of 40, did not grow up in a man-hating feminist society. Women were still somewhat feminine and good during the youth of the Boomers and Gen Xers. But Millennial men and Generation Z men have grown up from birth in an anti-male feminist society, and that is why the majority of younger men are anti-feminist. Older men simply can’t comprehend this because they didn’t grow up in such a society.
The message that younger men have gotten from society and women in general is very clear- you hate us and don’t need us. Therefore do not be surprised when men do not come to the defense of women when women are in very real trouble.

96 Comments

Filed under Britain, Conservatism, Crime, Europe, Feminism, Gender Studies, Guest Posts, Law, Man World, Pakistanis, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Social Problems, Sociology, South Asians, Whites

“Are Brown Women the Answer for White Men?” by Magneto

Are Brown Women the Answer for White Men?

by Magneto

You don’t have to be a sociologist to figure out that feminism has hit White women the hardest. Feminism has influenced and affected all races of women, of course. But it seems that White women have become the most toxic women on the planet due to it. Is there some racial or cultural reason for this? I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about this and here are some of my ideas.

White women have never been an oppressed race of women. Throughout history, White women have been the most privileged and spoiled race of women on earth. White women were treated like queens and never had to do manual labor outdoors in the hot sun like Black slave women or Brown women working in hot kitchens to cook meals for their families. White women never even had to learn to cook because they would just hire a Brown woman to do the cooking for them.

So you have this category of extremely privileged women who have developed a massive ego superiority complex over hundreds of years, and then you brainwash them with the idea that they are oppressed? Of course they will swallow such nonsense. It’s like a spoiled child. If you tell a spoiled child that they are a victim and are suffering from oppression, the spoiled child will believe you. Not because they are oppressed, but because they have become such extremely selfish people due to years of being spoiled.

Therefore the root cause seems to be selfishness. I think it’s safe to say that White women are the most selfish race of women on this planet. Of course there are some rare exceptions, but for the most part, do you see White women sacrificing their own happiness to serve their families the way that Brown and Black women do? Can you imagine a White woman voluntarily staying home to lovingly raise her children the same way that Brown women do?

Nope. White women are brainwashed that they need to live and experience the world and they can settle down later on in life. So while Brown and Black women are at home raising children and taking care of their families, White women are travelling all over the world and getting pumped and dumped like trashy whores.

I remember that I briefly dated a Mexican woman after I had just had a pretty bad experience with a White American woman. I was talking to the Mexican girl and telling her about the White girl, and the Mexican girl said, “She sounds like a very selfish person”. It really hit me at that point how different White women and Brown women are. Looking at that sexy Mexican girl with her dark brown skin, dark eyes, and black hair, I felt so attracted to and connected with her. I had never really had that kind of connection with a White woman, ever.

To summarize what I am trying to express in an overly simplistic way. If you marry a White woman, expect to get treated like shit by her, and there is a very real possibility she will divorce you, kidnap your kids from you, destroy you financially and emotionally in divorce, and then use the kids and custody as a weapon of extortion against you to try to literally drive you to suicide. White women are the embodiment of extreme selfishness. Now, on the other hand, if you marry a Brown or Black woman? You can expect to come home every day to a loving wife who will treat you with respect, who will lovingly raise your children, and who will be supportive of you and be a partner with you instead of a competitor.

White women have simply lost the ability to be good wives and mothers. I sometimes doubt if White women were ever good wives and mothers at any time in human history or if they have always been such extremely selfish creatures. Brown women are natural and are the embodiment of feminine grace and beauty. I think many White men realize all of this on a subconscious level, and that is why so many White guys marry Asian or Brown women.

White women are truly the Achilles heel of the White race. The Western world is in a state of total collapse right now, and it is directly the result of White women’s selfish life choices. I would advise all sane White males to turn towards Brown, Asian, or Black women and live a peaceful and happy life with them. Leave trashy White women behind and let them get pumped and dumped by White Trash trailer park garbage. Already it is happening. White men who are married to Asian, Brown, or Black women make $10K more dollars per year on average than White men who are married to White women. So that’s just more proof that if you’re a White male and want to have a successful life, the best option for you is to marry an Asian, Brown, or Black woman. Marrying a White woman is the quickest way to financial and emotional ruin.

74 Comments

Filed under Asians, Blacks, Feminism, Gender Studies, Guest Posts, Hispanics, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity, Romantic Relationships, Social Problems, Sociology, Whites, Women

New Interview with Me Up

Conversation between me, Pilleater and The Adventure Kid. I really like both of these two younger guys. Pilleater is an Amerasian man who is promoting something called Asian Aryanism, which promotes the idea that Whites and Asians (NE? SE?) are superior races and they should get together to form a new mixed race.

I think he is also a separatist in that he wants to split off his own state, but instead of a white state like everyone else wants, he wants to have a site for Whites and Asians (and nobody elses). That of course is a racist vision, but it’s one that I can almost stomach, although it will never come to pass anyway.

I have always said that if you are going to be a racist anyway, you might as well hate as few people as possible. Which is why Pan-Aryanism is better than standard White nationalism. While White nationalism is bizarre in insisting that the only White people are from Europe. They conveniently leave out folks like Turks, who are excluded simply on the basis of their religion, and sometimes Armenians, who I guess are just a bit too swarthy, eh? And of course, they insist Jews are not White, but it’s obvious to anyone that Jews are White people. The WN’s just arbitrarily make this distinction because they hate Jews and wish to exclude them.

However, on Stormfront, I believe that they have been bending the rules somewhat. There was a furor a while back when 300 Armenian members were thrown off the site. But after some discussion, Don Black allowed them back on on the basis that Armenians are Whites. Iranians were supposed to be banned as non-Whites, but a number sneaked on anyway and started posting openly as Iranians. Black didn’t do anything, which seems to imply that he thinks Iranians are White.

The conversation covers all sorts of topics. It was supposed to be about the Alt Left, but we ranged all over the place like the free range humans that we are. A lot of psychological discussion, talk about SJW’s; Identity Politics; socialist and capitalist economic systems; China; Japan; socialism, nationalism and national socialism; Marie Le Pen; race and IQ; intelligence, morality and crime; guilt in sociopathy and OCD; gay male culture, behavior and psychopathology; the nature of guilt and its relation to morality and intelligence; the psychological status of modern college students; selfishness; narcissism; the Internet; the marriage of the Cultural Left with neoliberalism; intelligence and crime; Blacks and crime; and Black IQ, etc.

We talked about everything under the sun and even a few nasty things growing in the dark.

Enjoy!

47 Comments

Filed under Armenians, Asians, Blacks, Capitalism, Crime, Economics, Europeans, Heterosexuality, Higher Education, Intelligence, Iranians, Jews, Left, Mental Illness, Narcissism, Near Easterners, Neoliberalism, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Sex, Socialism, Turks, Vanity, White Nationalism, Whites

Pan-Aryanism: White World Tour

Pan-Aryanism goes beyond the Stormfront criteria and says there are Whites in North Africa, the Arab World, Turks, Georgia, the Caucasus, and even in Afghanistan, Pakistan and India, although true Whites are few in the last few countries. Nevertheless, there are some very interesting people in those three countries who are clearly White. These seem to be the remains of the ancient Aryans who populated the region.

Pan-Aryanists refer to White North Africans, White Turks (35%) and White Arabs as White while stating nonetheless that many North Africans, Turks and Arabs who are not White. How do you tell the difference? Well, try looking at them. Determination of whether someone is White or not is generally just observational.

I would go further and class all Turks as White and even include quite a few of the odd Uighurs. The people of the Stans just seem too mixed to be White. Same with Tatars, Bashkirs, and a number of other Turkic groups in Russia. They just seem too mixed with Asians. A very interesting question in the case of people like the Khanty and the Mansi, who like the Uighurs are nearly 50-50 White/Asian. I suppose we would just go observationally here to determine who is White and who isn’t.

I would throw in all of the peoples of the Caucasus – Chechens, Ingush, Ossetians, Circassians, Dagestanis, Nogays, Cherkessiasns, Kabardians, Balkars, and Karachays as White because they just are. The Azeris are also clearly White, as are the Assyrians further to the south in the Middle East.

Most Arabs are White, but at some point, some of them just are not. Quite a few Gulf Arabs would probably not make the cut. Look at Prince Bandar. Not a White man. Most Yemenis would be thrown in. Many Egyptians especially in the north would be thrown in, but this would have to be done on a one to one basis. Many Egyptians, especially in the south, are too mulattized to be White. Same with Libya. Qaddafi was White, but many Libyans are either Black or too mulattized.

Most if not all Tunisians are White as are most Algerians, at least those in the north. Most Moroccans are White except for a number of Blacks in the south. Tuaregs are clearly not White, nor are the Beja, Ethiopians, Somalians, Djiboutians, etc. Eritreans are a tough call, but they are probably not White enough.

That’s it for Whites around the world.

90 Comments

Filed under Afghanistan, Africa, Algeria, Arabs, Assyrians, Azeris, Blacks, Caucasus, Chechens, Circassians, Dagestanis, East Africa, Egyptians, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Eurasia, Europeans, Georgia, India, Ingushetia, Libya, Middle East, Morocco, Near East, Near Easterners, North Africa, North Africans, Pakistan, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Russia, Somalia, Somalis, South Asia, Tunisia, Turks, Uighurs, White Nationalism, Whites, Yemenis