More great articles from guywhite.wordpress.com

Were the Vikings Black or just Ancient Egyptians?

More great articles from guywhite.wordpress.com

The most dishonest argument in favor of the ancient Egyptians’ blackness is the idea of African genetic diversity. No matter what you say, it is the response of some Afrocentrists.

- So-and-so was blond as evidenced by the mummy.
- Who cares, Africans can be blond, as if this is the usual hair color for Africans, rather than a genetic abnormality.

(I’ve made this point before: it is no more normal for Africans to have blond hair than it would be for a woman to have facial hair. What is normal for one race/gender, may be a disease for another.)

Even DNA evidence is responded to the same way: no matter what haplogroups the DNA may be, the answer is always: “Africans are diverse, so DNA means nothing and that proves that the Egyptians were black.”

But why does it prove that they were black? Why doesn’t it prove that they were Caucasian, Oriental or Polynesian?

If the fact that blacks have genetic diversity proves that Egyptians were black, why doesn’t it prove that the Vikings were black? Why not the Slavs? Why not the Indians? Why isn’t everyone black?!

Because Africa could not have any non-black population? Why? One can easily walk from Israel in Asia to Egypt in Africa. In fact, there are much longer treks beings made at the time, so there’s no reason to believe that people would magically stop at the place arbitrarily marked as Africa by geographers living thousands of years later. The Rome and Hannibal (alleged by Afrocentrists to be black despite contemporary art and coins showing him to be distinctly white) fought wars showing that the Mediterranean was easily crossed by the Europeans and North Africans.

The natural barrier that would keep people mostly separate at the was the Sahara desert, which would be far too treacherous for most people to cross.

It was done, but usually from the north to the south, not the reverse – which explains the great black genetic diversity.

The Afrocentrists claim of genetic diversity means nothing when you understand how things work. Caucasian haplogroups occur in Caucasians only.

If one sees a Caucasian haplogroup, that means that the person is Caucasian, regardless of the fact that blacks may have more haplogroups than whites.

Consider this: Women’s breasts show much greater diversity of size and shape than men’s. That does not, however, mean that looking at this picture, we can conclude that it is a woman just because women tend to have great diversity of shape and size. We know that is it a man, diversity or not. Even when clothed, we can tell with near-100% precision if this is a man or a woman.

This is true even when a man has “man boobs” or a woman is flat.

The same applies to race. Greeks are genetically diverse from Swedes, and yet both are very clearly white and very distinct from blacks, whether dark-skinned or light.

DNA evidence reflects what we can see even more clearly. Just as DNA can identify with near-100% certainty who’s the father of a child, so too can it identify the person’s race.

Whatever genetic diversity exists, it does not mean that blacks have a “universal DNA” and therefore can claim everyone as one of their own.

Blacks, like all others, have their own haplogroups. It is very simple to identify blacks as blacks, whites as whites, Orientals as Orientals.

But if blacks really want to claim someone due to their genetic diversity, let us compromise: from now on, we’ll agree that Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin were black. Genetic diversity and all.

Posted in Ancient Egypt | Tagged racism, race, blacks, whites, racialism, race realism, egypt, Ancient Egypt, egyptians, ancient egyptians | No Comments »

One Year of Making Sense

A year ago today I started this blog.

In that time, I’ve written 524 posts and received 3,091 comments (about 6 per) to them. But let’s start with readers first. After all, it is the biggest issue one faces when deciding to start a blog: will I reach anyone or will this be, like most blogs, an internet-published diary.

First of, just about every the blog’s traffic grew. According to Quantcast, this blog has more than 1,600 regular readers and a total of 4,700 readers per month who come here about 10,000 times per month for a total of 22,000 page views.

These aren’t huge numbers, but they are more than my original expectations. I was looking at Quantcast statistics of other race realist blogs and this one is near the top of one-man blogs. I won’t name names because it’s not a competition, but let’s just say that I was very surprised to have higher numbers than blogs by a couple superstars/aka established journalists who publish other than on their own blogs.

Usually, this subject attracts fewer women than a men’s room in a gay bar, so I was pleasantly surprised that 43% of the readers are women.

About two thirds of the readers have a college degree, as compared to only about a quarter of all Americans. You are 250% more likely to have a graduate degree (8% vs. 20% of the readers).

The more you make, the more likely you are to read this blog:

30% make over $100,000.
26% over $60,000.
25% over $30,000.
And only 19% make under $30,000.

The biggest age group is 35-49 (35%), followed by 18-35 (27%).

But what about the content? My goal was to create an intellectual discussion. More than anything, what keeps me writing are the highly intelligent comments left by the regulars.

I don’t think that most of you needed education statistics to know the high quality of the comments left by the readers.

It is rare that one can discuss controversial topics both openly and intelligently. Usually the debate degenerates into politically correct platitudes or outright fighting, complete with name calling and someone storming out of the room.

To avoid such hostilities, I set certain rules for myself. I would not get in the mud and I would not speak about the particularly controversial subject of IQ. Almost immediately, I broke both rules. One must address IQ as an explanation because in the absence of it, we cannot discuss why blacks always fall behind. Other than IQ, the only other explanation is white hate and racism. (Who caused the defects of black culture? Who caused black society to be destroyed by welfare? Racism and the legacy of slavery? Or IQ? What other answers are even possible?)

And I had to respond by dropping the gloves and slugging it out in a less-than-genteel fashion with leftists who come here to re-post the same propaganda they write everywhere.

Originally, I considered starting a blog about Islamic imperialism (takeover of EU, terror), especially in the wake of 9-11 and European terror, but there are already plenty of blogs, major blogs with millions of hits, dealing with that. It is also not as taboo as race.

Another potential topic was feminism, but it is not as much of a problem as racial PC because the vast majority of women aren’t out to destroy the whole society so that they could get something for themselves. Ultimately a woman cares about her husband’s job and her son’s grades far more than that of a stranger who also happens to be female.

I’ve touched on both subjects, but the bulk of my writing is on race. It is the defining issue of the last 50 years and the next. It is what is turning out country from the land of the free into a country of cowards, from a meritocracy where college admissions and hiring depends on intelligence and experience to the land of affirmative action, from a Western democracy to a Third World cesspool, one neighborhood at a time.

The liberals are right in one sense: this is not our fathers’ America!

And in every way possible, it will not be our children’s American either.

The average person on this blog is about 40 years ago. When he retires in 30 years, whites will no longer be a majority (I expect the census to revise their projects of a non-white majority from the year 2042 to something in the early 30s).

He will have spent all his life paying taxes that go to sponsor Minority Welfare Queens. Over and over, and more as time goes on, he and his family will be victims of minority set-asides and affirmative action. And when all is said and done, the mostly young minorities will likely refuse to pay for his old age, seeing as it will be mostly whites receiving Social Security and mostly minorities in the working-age groups.

It will be a country that he won’t recognize. In his old age, his English will be seen as outdated and improper as compared to the new and improved Ebonics. His will be the English of dead white guys and Ebonics will be the new wave, making a comeback, stronger than ever. Or if he’s like the frequent commenter “Californian”, he will just have to learn Spanish.

Neighborhood by neighborhood, this country is changing. The destruction of public schools and even a formerly elite universities such as CUNY was only the beginning.

Some neighborhoods look like a plague just swept through them, with only the homeless and the drug dealers making use of former condos and government-built high-rises. But rather than thanking whitey for paying for them, we are told that tall buildings are responsible for crime and that the residents are just innocent victims to whom drugs and violence just happens, like a hurricane.

We are blamed for fleeing from crime whose name we dare not speak. Not even the bravest souls are willing to say that there is more black-on-white crime than black-on-black. If the topic of black crime is ever brought up, we are supposed to lie that blacks themselves are its greatest victims.

We are just blamed for being racist as we are feeling from the neighborhoods where the new residents are driving us out through sheer terror.

Nor are we wanted if we come back to live with minorities despite black-on-white crime. When they move into our neighborhoods, they bless us with their magic ‘diversity’ that makes everything from business to friendships better. But when the white plague, I mean a white family, moves into a minority neighborhood, we are ‘gentrification’ that is destroying their culture.

• Being an illegal immigrant is a culture.
• Chopping off your penis to become a transvestite prostitute is a culture.
• Ebonics and running around the classroom during a lesson is a culture.

But English, Dutch or Italian cultures … aren’t.

Sometimes I think I am crazy. Could it really be?

• Could it be that people really do argue that tall buildings cause crime?
• Could it be that people really do argue that white people don’t have a culture, but transsexuals do?
• Could it be that people really do argue that it is racist to have a national language or to check who gets to immigrate to this country?

Could it really be? How could it be?

In the Soviet Union, people who understood the danger and the inevitable failure of Communism were placed in mental institutions. They were crazy.

Listening to people discuss the crime caused by the height of the buildings, I feel like this whole country is one big Soviet-style mental ward. And so I wanted to be the crazy one to stand and shout, “wake up!”, to tell the truth, to finally be honest with myself.

I wanted to stop being an intellectual coward and tell the truths that Eric Holder doesn’t want to hear.

More than anything, I wanted to say that this is our country and we are a good people with an advanced civilization that deserves to be protected.

And so, a year ago today, I started this blog by writing the following:

With millions of blogs out there, why start yet another one? What else can be said? When it comes to race, diversity and multiculturalism, turns out it’s a lot! Opinions expressed fall into two basic categories: politically correct and racist.

The racists, the real racists, a tiny minority of those speaking publicly, hate and vilify each and every member of a group. To the KKK types, no blacks (or Jews) have any redeeming qualities and they will frequently use sweeping statements such as, “blacks are all criminals”.

The politically correct multi-cultists – they are the dominant majority that destroys anyone who dares to disagree with them – believe the opposite absolute: only whites may be blamed and stating that any “person of color” is at fault for his actions as an individual is “racist”. Even more “racist” in the PC mind is the idea of averages, such as citing government statistics that show that blacks are several times more likely to commit violent crime.

Both views are wrong. There is no reason to hate blacks and other minorities, but I am tired of being told that white men are the epitome of all things evil, to blame for all the problems of the world. It is time that someone stoop up to defend the white race from libel.

The West is a society of emasculated liars. A people lacking the will to stand up and say the truth. Whites usually know that multiculturalism and the race card tricks are based on a lie, but cooperate in the cultural and demographic destruction of their nations nonetheless for the fear of being called “racist”.

So powerful is the claim of racism that more than 95% of people will immediately back down if you only accuse them of being racist. It does not matter what you discuss – immigration, taxation, favorite athlete, music, anything – try calling your opponent a racist and you will immediately put him on the defensive. His facial expression will change. He will no longer be concerned with explaining why he enjoys golf or classical music and will instead try to rehabilitate himself as anything other than a racist.

The primary dogma of today’s multiculturalism is the belief that White people have never done anything positive, nor has anyone else has done anything negative. The idea is hard to maintain when so much evidence is available to the contrary. A woman who was raped by a young Black male may not admit that Blacks commit more crime than Whites, but it would be hard to force a crime victim to lie about the race of her attacker. So while we can blame a black criminal in a particular case, as a society we must excuse the behavior of black rapists as acting out against the so-called “institutional racism”. It is ultimately not the criminal who’s at fault, but the society created by white people.

The violent black criminal is just a victim of racist society. Discrimination and persecution, such as the evil standardized tests to gain admission to a university, made him angry. He did not rape the White woman because he’s a vicious criminal. No, he raped her because he was tired of the White society dominating Blacks, and responded by imposing dominance on a White person the only way he knew how.

Why did the rapist rob his victim? Very simple – he’s poor and white racism caused his poverty. Why did he drop out of school? Because he’s heard that he will face job discrimination and won’t succeed anyway. Why did he get a low score on aptitude tests? Because tests are racist, or because whites had been guilty of the “soft bigotry of low expectations”. Why is he using illegal drugs? Because his community is filled with narcotics. Why is his community filled with drugs? Whites caused poverty and destroyed Black desire to succeed.

Whites also placed the Black criminal in a neighborhood full of crime, illiteracy and drugs. But is crime, illiteracy and drugs a natural occurrence? Does crime grow on trees in certain neighborhoods? Do drugs rain on Black projects? When we are told that Blacks “bring the street” with them to class, does it mean they bring a piece of pavement with them, or are they bringing their own culture and traditions?

Why are American Blacks poor? Racism. Why are African Blacks poor? Colonialism. Why do African nations get only poorer with years of independence? Global “post-colonialism” is even worse than colonialism.

Why does a neighborhood become more poor and dangerous when Whites are replaced by Blacks? Because Whites take the jobs with them as they move to the suburbs. Does that mean that an accountant puts his job in a suitcase and moves it out of the community? Or is it simply that when professionals and businessmen are replaced with illiterate criminals, jobs disappear and crime rises?

Of course not all Blacks are illiterate criminals, nor are all Whites professionals and businessmen, and many Blacks are smart and caring human beings. However, even a casual observer knows that Blacks do not put the same value on education as Whites, while committing more crime.

The Cult of Multiculturalism forced the White race, and the ethnic groups within it, to become sheep going to their slaughter without putting up a fight. Everyone blames them. Their countries are over-run by foreigners – foreigners in every sense of the word because they come from cultures that are shockingly different from that of the West.

These foreigners will permanently destroy the Western civilization and yet we hear that there is no such thing as a culture common to White people. Hardly any White person is brave enough to stand up and say, “This is our culture. This is our land. This is our civilization. You may or may not like our civilization, but we do. We think we have created a good culture and decent countries, and we believe it is our right to protect our civilization from a budding foreign majority.”

Somebody needs to stand up and say that we are a good and decent people. We aren’t perfect, we’ve done bad things and no doubt will make moral mistakes in the future again. But all people have done wrong; we don’t have a monopoly on evil and nor are we bereft of any positive qualities. We are no worse than other races, and we aren’t to blame for their failure.

And that’s why I started this blog!

Posted in Dialogue on Race | Tagged race, race realism, racialism, racism | 8 Comments »

Through Lies, They Shall Destroy Us

Definitely worth a read. Gets better as the article goes on.

There are two types of people on earth. Those willing to accept the verdict of truth, regardless of how it reflects on them personally, or their pet causes, or how uncomfortable it might be; and those who don’t.

If you adopt only those truths which suit you, while denying those truths which you find distasteful, like some sort of chinese menu, you are a coward, a hypocrite, and a cur.

Race realism has a wonderful purpose. Its purpose is to shatter people’s illusions and force people to accept the truth through continuous presenting of evidence, science, genetics, history, geography, the news, whatever reveals the essence of racial differences that so invalidate the fantasy world of equalitarians. But race realism does not exist to serve whites, it exists to serve truth. If Jews are found to be smarter than whites, then race realism requires we accept that. If East Asians are found to be less criminal, have fewer illegitimate children, or a lower divorce rate, race realism requires we accept that. If blacks have bigger dicks and can sprint fast, race realism requires we accept that.

Race realism is a tiny subset of the truth that exists about this world. There is plenty of truth out there. Evolution is real, religion is false, gender matters, homosexuals are mentally ill, HIV causes AIDS, the free market is the best generator of wealth, democracy is fundamentally flawed, divorce causes lasting harm to kids, and star trek sucks compared to star wars.

People who wrap themselves in their pet causes and start clamoring on about how offended they are, how insufferable those who question their delusions are, how everyone on earth has to cater to them and never speak ill of anything they want, are no better than blacks insisting they’re equal and they built the pyramids or invented the refrigerator. Either people cleave to the truth or wrap themselves up in a lie that becomes the basis of their self-worth, and rise or fall on the basis of how many people are forced to acknowledge this lie. The problem with this is, for every person who gets the glowy satisfaction of having some self-satisfying lie told to him or her, there is another person humiliated and killed inside for having to speak a lie.

Solzhenitsyn lived through the gulag archipelago and came out the other side with this fundamental lesson: Live not by lies.

The cold could not break a person, starvation could not break a person, sleeplessness could not break a person, but once you could get them to tell a lie, they were lost. From there on, they could take no pride in themselves, they could not stand up for anything, they knew in their hearts they would buckle next time too. There is nothing more harmful to the human heart than knowing something is a lie, but having to say it’s true. And yet every day people heedlessly, selfishly, callously, demand dozens of lies be told about them, about their group, about their pet cause, to soothe their ego. Unthinkingly, these soul harvesters go around humiliating and defiling everyone they meet, demanding no one notice the Emperor Has No Clothes. You don’t deserve such tribute, no one does. No one deserves to be told lies just so they can feel good. Requiring others to lie about you, or your group, or your pet cause, is a slavery deeper than any whip or collar. It is enslaving even the inner conscience of man. It is making a man acknowledge he is a dog, which no amount of treating someone like a dog could do!

The Soviet Union was largely an all-white nation, but it was still hell on earth. Why? Because everyone was forced to mouth lies. You could not even speak your heart amidst friends or family. Any of them could be spies, informers, traitors. You could never, ever know. The furnace of your true mind and feelings circulated round and round your soul like a pressurised volcano, but it could never come forth! It could never be expressed! You could never be yourself! Exist! Live!

Ayn Rand aptly described the Soviet Union in We the Living: “In a totalitarian world, you can either kill yourself, kill your mind, or leave.” Enduring the hell of lies is impossible. One or another part of you is lost forever. Nor was she grandstanding, look at Russia today! The majority of children are aborted, alcoholism has taken the men to third world life expectancy, despair and depopulation hangs over people like the ghost of christmas past. What horrible tragedy must occur to make people kill their babies, kill themselves, kill their mental faculties with alcohol and drugs, abandon all hope and all wish to live? Simple–communism required people to say nothing but lies for the last 70 years. God help such a nation! God help such a soul!

So no, we can not accept ’some’ lies for the sake of civility, or machiavellan policy, or any other excuse. Life without truth is worthless. Never ask that of anyone.

http://www.zasucks.com/?p=1733

Posted in Dialogue on Race | Tagged race, race realism, racialism, racism | 1 Comment »

Blacks See Leprechauns

You can’t make this stuff up. If it wasn’t a news report from a legitimate TV station, I’d have thought it was Onion-TV.

The funny thing is that we are so used to Mexicans seeing Virgin Mary in their potatoes that we no longer pay any attention to that.

Posted in News Commentary | Tagged leprechaun, race, race realism, racialism, racism | No Comments »

Should I allow these types of comments?

Should I allow this kind of crap on this blog? These are just statements made without any proof or logical reasoning done for the purpose of posting propaganda in as many places as possible so that they could later say, “everyone knows that…”

It is not as if this adds any value, seeing as we’ve all seen these arguments in many other places.

I really have a problem with this stuff, but I’ll let the readers decide if you want to see it.

————>

With all do respect for your historical investigation, your way off on this one. Let’s look at some basic facts here. Facts anyone can look up, so when your done, please look it up.

[I did that by posting Carthaginian art and coins showing Hannibal and others as light skinned whites. He fails to address it. Also look at the DNA of North Africans.]

First off, Hannibal is of a North African heritage of over 2,000 years ago. Evidence shows that most of Africa during that time was Black or Negroid as the scientist used to say.

[No citation of what evidence. He just ignored my evidence of DNA, art and coins.]

They have done enough digging in that area to record this. By basic American standards, what makes one Black or Negroid in appearance? Simple, if you boarded a bus in the south during jim crow you would have been asked to go to the back. That’s one method of how America made that distinction. White Guy, I have news for you. All the Carthaginians of that era would have been ask to move it to the back.

[What is this assertion based on? Nothing. It is done so that liberals can later claim "everyone knows that..."]

Secondly, Mediterranean people aren’t really white.

[DNA evidence shows otherwise.]

They already have a cultural and genetic term and it’s call Mediterranean not Caucasoid.

[What an idiot!]

Have you seen how dark many of them get.

[Hair, yes. Skin, not so much.]

Can you imagine how dark they were before the sacking of Rome?

[Yes, I do know. Their Y-DNA haplogroup is known to have been J-2.]

Third, the Caucasoid was coined a barbarian by the Romans.

[That would be Germanic people.]

If Hannibal were of this stock, the Romans would have said so.

[So if the French call their neighbors "Dutch", does that mean that Netherlands isn't white? Or is it France that's Negroid?]

But they didn’t called the Carthaginians of Africa Barbarians, they called them Carthaginians!

[And the Norwegians call their neighbors Swedes. One of them must be black based on this logic!]

Forth, Hannibal employed fighting men out of Nubian via Africa South.

[So? All empires used local fighters. Saint Paul was a Jew who was an officer in the Roman army. Does that mean that all the Romans were Jewish?]

Up to that point not one Roman or Greek was able to penetrate Nubia with any real length of success.

[Ummm... that's because neither Rome nor Greece was an Empire at the height of Ancient Egypt's power. That's like saying that America wasn't able to defeat the mighty Polish army in 1780 and therefore the Poles are now having a more dominant effect on world affairs than does the United States.]

Even Alexander, when given the option to go into Nubia, turned his troops around at the boarder when faced by a Kandake from the area of Kush.

[And the Mongol hordes refused to go to the mountains of Caucasus. That hardly proves that the little nations there were great fighters. But in fact the Nubians were defeated by Europeans at the fall of Egypt. They briefly conquered a small territory in southern Egypt, but got their rear-end handed to them by those non-white Mediterranean races who came from the other direction.]

Fifth, It’s not very likely that any Nubian warriors of that period would have followed a European into battle because they shared the same concept about the Northern Europeans (Barbarians) that the Romans did. It was the other way around, they followed him once he stated his trip across the Alps.

[No clue what he means here.]

Furthermore we know that the Gods that Hannibal and the Carthaginians prayed to were Gods of the East.

[So did a lot of religions because the sun rises in the East.]

He didn’t pray to Thor or any other White Gods.

[The Chinese and the Japanese also prayed to different Gods. Were they different races? Ukrainians could be Catholic and Orthodox Christian. Does that make mean that there are two separate Ukrainian races? Religions span different races. For example, Islam is popular in black Nigeria, Asian Malaysia and white Albania.]

He and his people paid homage to the Gods of that area.

[Yes, in North Africa, which was white. See Libyans, for example.]

And speaking of Gods, the oldest statues of Buddha shows him with nappy hair, thick lips and dark skin

[No doubt Asians prayed to a black man.]

Christ had the same hair type (wool) with skin of burnt brass and St Augustine is the Black Saint.

[In fact, there are no early depictions of Christ and all the modern drawings have no basis in history. Jesus is thought to be a descendant of King David or else he could not possibly be the Messiah of the Old Testament. Two New Testament books count out his ancestry to King David. It is a known fact from both religious and secular sources that King David was a pale-skinned red head. It was so common for Jews - at least the upper classes - to have red hair that they believe that Adam (husband of Eve) was also a red head.]

The Egyptians stated: “We come from the beginning of the Nile where the God Hapi dwells at the foothills of the mountain of the moon” … That’s Kiliminjaro my friend. These things are written, like it or not.

[Not even sure what they meant here. They may be written, but DNA is DNA.]

This kind of crap appears in my mail box daily. It has no academic value. It is just lies without any proof or logic. I see no value in it.

Posted in Ancient Egypt | Tagged Ancient Egypt, carthage, hannibal, north africa, race, race realism, racialism, racism | 17 Comments »

Targeting Koreans in LA riots

I was just watching a National Geographic show on the LA riots. At the end they discussed why Koreans were targeted. They blabbered something about Korean culture such as not looking customers in the face.

But one point, though very vague and not clear to most viewers, came fairly close to the real reason: Blacks felt that Koreans were taking over.

Notice how whites are never allowed to feel that way. If whites ever rioted because they felt that a smaller racial group was taking over, it would be an example of evil in the hearts of whites cited to school children for centuries. Just think of how much we still have to hear about violence during the Reconstruction.

But why were the Koreans taking over? One reason is immigration, of course, but that doesn’t explain why they owned over 800 small businesses (according to the show) in South Central alone.

They didn’t benefit from white racism, slave-ownership or imperialism. In fact, they largely came to the US penniless from the often colonized country, speaking no English and knowing nothing about American or even Western culture. These people don’t know how to get on the bus when they first arrive in this country.

But they work hard, they support their family, and they have a high IQ.

Instead of wasting money and then claiming that banks tricked them into taking out loans they couldn’t pay back, these people save and when they get a mortgage they are fooled so rarely that they default less than whites.

Somehow immigrants who speak no English and need to be explained how to get on the bus are more “sophisticated” about mortgages than blacks who have been in this country for 400 years, who went to school here, who have jobs here, who have friends here, and who get help and advice from community activists and others.

If this is not proof that innate IQ and not background is what really matters, I don’t know what is.

Maybe Koreans were taking over because they are actually largely capable of saving for, investing in and running a business, while blacks largely aren’t.

If blacks wanted to run laundromats and grocery stores, they were only encouraged to do so. (For example, through government-sponsored low interest loans and the “buy black” campaigns.)

But they did not want to “waste” their money on laundry machines. Are you freakin’ kidding me here? What use is there in owning that!? Tyrone needs new rims!

What blacks wanted was to get the benefit of running a business, not actually to run one. They wanted to have the things that a successful business owner might have.

And so they came and took whatever they wanted. Nobody thought of a Korean family that scrapped a couple thousand dollars from each family member to open that laundromat.

No, instead blacks complained that Koreans hired their own family members (a.k.a. worked themselves in the businesses in which they all invested), rather than hiring blacks. Did blacks want to work in laundromats? Probably not, it’s a “dead-end job”. But they wanted to get paid so that they could get the stuff they wanted.

No doubt that if blacks were hired, they would complain why they aren’t management or owners. But even as a manager of a laundromat, it’s really a “dead-end job” and few blacks would’ve been satisfied.

So yes, the Koreans were taking over the ‘hood. But who should take over other than the people who are competent and studious enough to actually manage things successfully?

Posted in Race and Crime | Tagged blacks, koreans, LA riots, race, race realism, racialism, racism | 2 Comments »

Debate-Winning Techniques for Liberals

Being the humanitarian that I am, I’ve previously created a guide to help people understand if they think and reason like true liberals. In my never-ending quest to help the fellow man, I am now publishing tried and true liberal methods to win all arguments. Once you master these techniques, you will become a true liberal intellectual.

Start by calling your opponent a racist

Suppose someone advocates for lower taxes. Respond with, “That is so racist. Our government is subjugating minorities with unfair tax policies.” If your opponent tries to defend himself by saying something like, “my support for lower taxes has nothing to do with minorities and I don’t see how the issue is related to racism”, look shocked and outraged and declare, “You really shouldn’t be talking anymore. You are embarrassing yourself. I never knew that you were such a bigot.” There’s no need to explain how lower taxes equal to racism.

Call your opponent ’sad’

Normally you will win the argument after step one, but if you opponent doesn’t back down and proceeds to make a reasoned argument with facts and logic, respond with: “It is sad that you really believe that. You should get a life. The fact that you are arguing that lower taxes isn’t a form of genocidal racism is proof that you are a racist who never had a girlfriend except the sister that you screw in your trailer park.”

Always cite your education and that boot-leg 5-minute IQ test you took online

Remember, there’s never a need to argue with facts. Nobody who disagrees with you has any brains. They are all rednecks who didn’t finish high school and never traveled anywhere. Demand that they be impressed with your phenomenal credentials. In response to the argument about tax policy, just say that you majored in Sociology. That will make everything they say invalid. If the illiterate redneck will surprise you by claiming to be a doctor or a lawyer, laugh in his face and deny that someone so stupid could ever finish high school, much less a professional grad school. Respond that your IQ score is 140+ (or in some cases 180+) and that if you never went to grad school, there’s no way that your opponent did.

Do not doubt yourself. Anyone who disagrees with you is a moron and you must call him on it.

Make things up

Suppose you meet an American who invests in Peru. Now, you don’t know any cities in Peru, nor how much people there make. But you must take a strong position against this bigot.

Arguing that Peruvians are underpaid makes you morally superior to the person employing them, so obnoxiously ambushing him in the middle of a July 4 barbecue is perfectly acceptable and should be encouraged. Try to get a friend or two to yell at this businessman together.

DO NOT say: “I think Peruvians are underpaid.” Think means you aren’t sure. Say instead: “The average salary in Peru in 1981 dollars adjusted for the revised tax base is $1,452.81 per annum, which is $836.07 before the mean gross poverty level.”

If the person you are ambushing knows the real statistics, use all the above techniques: “It’s so sad that you have no life and have to stand here and defend your racist capitalist imperialist actions when I was just trying to eat.”

NOTE: Always make up exact figures.

This is done in case your opponent also knows exact statistics. If you give a round number and he cites an exact number, the uninformed might realize that he’s right. But when both of you have “weird” statistics, you can immediately switch to calling him names if he knows something you don’t.

If an opponent asks you where you got your information, make THAT up too. Make sure to do it with a self-righteous flair: “Everyone knows that this information comes from Dr. Hovel T. Moon’s study for the Buford Commission published on May 9, 1982. Didn’t you read it? Maybe you should not have dropped out of high school to screw your sister in the trailer park.”

Say this in the same tone of voice you would use to say, “You left your soiled underwear in my bathroom.”

Use the most difficult words you’ve ever heard, even if you don’t know what they mean

Smart people use big words. You don’t quite understand the meaning of those words, but neither does anyone else. After all, if someone as smart as you with your 184 IQ doesn’t understand it, how could this dumb redneck? It is not true that professionals and academics use those words only because they are actually necessary in some settings. No, these words are for smart people and you are a smart person!

If you are asked why is it that you feel the need to use a thesaurus for every word, respond with a look of disgust followed by, “These aren’t hard words, lol. It is just that you aren’t educated like I am, so you can’t understand what I am saying.” Once again cite your spectacular IQ score from that 5-minute test you took on some blog.

Always remember: there’s no room for facts and logic in any debate. You must defeat your opponent by showing how brilliant you are and that he’s just not as smart as you are, so he might as well just accept your opinion as fact.

If your opponent realizes that you are using the words improperly, respond with, “I don’t have the time to play these games.” Make sure to use all the following words in the next sentence (yes, all of them in the same sentence): sad, greedy, racist, imperialist, uneducated and incest.

Use meaningless but weighty-sounding phrases

Memorize this list and use each phrase in every sentence. It will further impress your opponent and scare him away from arguing with you.

Let me put it this way

In terms of

Vis-a-vis

Per se

As it were

Qua

Ipso facto

Ergo

So to speak

You should also memorize some Latin abbreviations such as “Q.E.D.”, “e.g.”, and “i.e.” These are all short for “I speak Latin, and you don’t.” Here’s how to use these words and phrases. Suppose you want to say, “Peruvians would like to order appetizers more often, but they don’t have enough money.”

You never win arguments talking like that. But you WILL win if you say, “Let me put it this way. In terms of appetizers vis-a-vis Peruvians qua Peruvians, they would like to order them more often, so to speak, but they do not have enough money per se, as it were. Ergo, ipso facto, case closed. Q.E.D.”

A person with your IQ and education must always speak that way to let everyone know that you are the genius who majored in Sociology.

Only a fool would challenge that statement or the person making it.

Use snappy and irrelevant comebacks

You need an arsenal of all-purpose irrelevant phrases to fire back at your opponents when they make valid points. The best are:

You’re begging the question.

You’re being defensive.

Don’t compare apples to oranges.

What are your parameters?

This last one is especially valuable. Nobody (other than engineers and policy wonks) has the vaguest idea what “parameters” are.

If it is really impossible to argue with your opponents logic, respond with, “you are so linear.”

Here’s how to use your comebacks:

You say: As Abraham Lincoln said in 1873…

Your opponent says: Lincoln died in 1865.

You say: You’re begging the question.

You say: Liberians, like most Asians…

Your opponent says: Liberia is in Africa.

You say: You’re being defensive.

You say: Since the discovery of the incandescent light bulb…

Your opponent says: The light bulb is an invention.

You say: Well DUH!

Compare your opponent to Adolf Hitler

This is your heavy artillery, for when your opponent is obviously right and you are spectacularly wrong. Bring Hitler up subtly. Say, “That sounds suspiciously like something Adolf Hitler might say,” or “You certainly do remind me of Adolf Hitler.”

Posted in Dialogue on Race | Tagged left, liberal, leftist, debate, dialogue | 3 Comments »

Who are the immigrants?

Mangan has an entry on a Business Week article, which he quotes (and criticizes):

immigrants are critical to the country’s long-term economic health. Despite the fact that they constitute only 12% of the U.S. population, immigrants have started 52% of Silicon Valley’s technology companies and contributed to more than 25% of our global patents. They make up 24% of the U.S. science and engineering workforce holding bachelor’s degrees and 47% of science and engineering workers who have PhDs. Immigrants have co-founded firms such as Google (GOOG), Intel (INTC), eBay (EBAY), and Yahoo! (YHOO).

And how many of those are Mexicans? Guatenmalans? Somalians?

That list of 4 major corporations that were founded of co-founded by immigrants reads like this: Jew, Jew, Persian, Chinese.

All of them came from educated, high-class families. They weren’t illiterate Mexicans who could not write in English or Spanish.

I don’t know this for sure, but let me take a guess here: all those highly educated immigrants are East European Jews and Chinese, as well as Indians among computer programmers. I would bet you that the number of highly educated, entrepreneurial Mexicans in this group is far less than the margin of error.

When was the last time you met an immigrant from Mexico was was an engineer, either in the US or in Mexico? A doctor? A lawyer? A professor? A web developer? A biologist? A mathematician? Who are we kidding here?!

Some immigration potentially could be valuable to the country. This would be particularly true for highly-educated white immigrants. It would help preserve the white character of this nation, while also help it grow.

But let’s not confuse the issue here: the problem is the pouring of the Third World illiterates into this country.

If Third World illiterates were prevented from coming here, I doubt immigration would be an issue for anyone. The flow of immigrants would be relatively small, and educated people would not be the same drain on the economy and the welfare state that illiterates are.

Posted in Third World Immigration | Tagged immigration | 4 Comments »

Who’s an American?

Vanishing American has written several times on the subject of who’s an American.

Here’s an interesting thought that I’ve had.

If any Third World person shows up in any white nation, he instantly becomes an American, a Frenchman, a Swede.

But nobody can ever become an Arab, an African, a Japanese.

The Boers have been living in African for 400 years. They aren’t African. But American Blacks who haven’t been to Africa for the same 400 years are “African-Americans”.

Third World people have a monopoly on their native land with nobody ever being able to become one of them. At the same time, as soon as they land on white man’s land, even illegally, they are Americans.

Of the 45 million “Americans” who don’t have health insurance, about a third are illegal immigrants who have no business being here. We can take a bite out of our “uninsured Americans” problem just by kicking them out.

But why is it that white people can never be African, but Nigerians who just landed in Britain are all of a sudden British?

Who made these rules?