Name me a single example of a double standard from White identatarians (people who are called "White supremacists") with regards to race. I can name you about a dozen examples of double standards the left has with regards to race.
another epic post, want to be a part of history.
share>Data about Chinese and Syrian immigration patterns please. Also the claim is also for Chinese and Syrians as a whole, not just those in the UK. How come China has an IQ of above 100 while Arab countries are so low if the education is not the cause since Chinese education is not much better than Arab? Not to mention oil rich Arab countries are much richer than China
Are you genuinely claiming, or suggesting that most people coming to the UK from China happen to be poor people fleeing a conflict, or economic migrants like in Syria? As far as I am aware, most Chinese immigrants to the UK are student immigrants.
>How does "culture" depress your IQ? I get that it might make you score worse on a math or physics test if you don't learn as much math of physics, but how does it depress your ability to recognize patterns in geometric shapes?
IQ tests challenge the brain in various ways that require some level of education to do well. It's not all just common sense.
>Yes it takes time, but on long term it might pay off in stopping our counties to eventually become filled with Islamic fundamentalists and not increase crime. Government incentives aren't a draconian policy. So it's the media encouraging large families.
Every western country, including the UK tries to encourage birth rates via incentives. This already happens. And again, the media is free. You cannot tell the media what to do. I already replied to this. Do you not understand this?
>They have been coming so far. And they would probably come even in larger numbers if the quota/jobs wasn't already filled with Africans and Muslims.
Got any data for this? The numbers coming from Europe have dropped post-Brexit, if I recall.
>But they haven't collapsed. It's a slow process. We could increase births during that time.
With what magic wand?
>Completely irrelevant to my point about minorities voting their ethnic interest. Their votes didn't go to reform or nationalist parties.
>According to the left when minorities vote their interest the left thinks it's legit, but when Whites vote theirs (Reform) it's racism
No, there was a lot of criticism in the press, or social media-at-large regarding people who voted purely because of anger over Gaza. It was considered stupid.
>Why are you changing the topic to Hamas or directly inciting violence? We are talking weather or not Ash Sakar would be charged if the posted "Bangladeshi pride" or "We will soon become the majority"
If he went on a sticker campaign, I think its possible he would.
>I have very good arguments Western societies are unfair to Whites. I don't' demand automatic acceptance of my views, but I demand free speech and end to cancel culture to people who are explicitly pro White just as there is no censorship and cancel culture to people who are explicitly pro Black and pro minority.
How do you "demand" an end to what you see as cancel culture without infringing on the right to assembly, and free association?
>And why are Blacks poorer?
Because they're born into poverty more commonly than white people. Poverty tends to breed poverty.
>The IQ/genetics hypothesis can explain it very well, while yours requires mental gymnastics and excuses. Also we have data from US that poverty is not the cause of crime. Rich Black kids commit more crime than poor White kids.
How does genetics have anything to do with the family you are born into?
Also, this study from you here is dated from 1999 it seems. It's 24 years old.
>Nope that's a straw man of the nationalist position. We only demand equal treatment of Whites as non Whites. If they get to have identity/nativism/safe spaces/intergroup preference so should we.
What does this mean directly in terms of policy?
>More ad hominem. We are talking about political principles. That's not why they are outraged. The left would be outraged over Mark Collet even if he didn't made un PC jokes. They are outraged because he dares to be explicitly pro White, while explicitly pro Black is not only allowed but encouraged. Also they are outraged over Anne Marie Waters and Tommy Robinson and they are far from Neo Nazis. Also leftist Wokey-pedia is not an objective source.
Can you tell me the lies told about them on "wokeypedia" there please?
And my point regarding Anne is that she hasn't, to my knowledge, ever said anything racist - and Tommy Robinson has garnered a ton of contempt for his history of violent thuggery, harassment, stalking and other criminal activities - and riling up riots, not just in his viewpoints.
>If the main indigenous ethnic group are not allowed to raise their grievances, then the UK is not a democratic society.
There's no right in any society to have any grievance "raised effectively". You don't get to just demand media presence and political representation. Also, people do very much talk about the plight of white working-class men, or sometimes men in general in the UK - and issues with mass migration. It's not framed in the way you want i
Now, I've had enough of this. How the hell did you manage to write such a long post? I always have a very narrow limit of characters. I DEMAND to know. Do you have special privileges on this board?
"Are you genuinely claiming, or suggesting that most people coming to the UK from China happen to be poor people fleeing a conflict, or economic migrants like in Syria? As far as I am aware, most Chinese immigrants to the UK are student immigrants."
Why are you again derailing the argument to only those in the UK? I was talking about China and Arab countries as a whole. And who's talking about Syria? Syria is only one Arab country. Most other Arab countries aren't at war.
"IQ tests challenge the brain in various ways that require some level of education to do well."
Not really. IQ tests are deliberately designed to be simple so you don't require any education. Just ability to distinguish squares and triangles.
"Every western country, including the UK tries to encourage birth rates via incentives. This already happens. And again, the media is free. You cannot tell the media what to do"
Those policies didn't go nearly far enough. There is much more room for birth rate incentives if there was only political will.
It's not asking anything of the media that to do it's job. If the future of the country depends on weather or not immigrants will integrate and become Successful, then it's the medias duty to objectively inform the public weather or not that is happening and weather or not this is likely to happen. (And to investigate all science which could affect this including racial IQ differences). The media doesn't do its job. It prioritizes things like "fighting stereotypes" and fighting so called "racism" (which is not the telos of the media, but a biased leftist value) over the future of country and civilization. The media is just treasonous to their own countries.
"The numbers coming from Europe have dropped post-Brexit, if I recall."
Yes that's because of Brexit made it harder for them to come. Since Europeans do better and assimilate better, there should be easier for them to come. Brexit was a mistake. If it really cared about it's future, UK should limit Muslims and Blacks, not Europeans.
"With what magic wand?"
Government incentives and culture shift.
"It was considered stupid."
But it wasn't considered racist
"If he went on a sticker campaign, I think its possible he would."
It's she not, he. And no she wouldn't and you know it. Minority ethnic identity is not considered racist. Stop lying.
"How do you "demand" an end to what you see as cancel culture without infringing on the right to assembly, and free association?"
Free association right to censor people who you disagree with while at the same time claiming to be a democracy and complaining how the right is anti democratic? The left doesn't have a right to get to decide which ideas get to spread in society and which don't. If you think some ideas are wrong, debunk them and address them. Don't cheat
"Because they're born into poverty more commonly than white people."
Ever heard of social mobility? Also why are they born into poverty?
"How does genetics have anything to do with the family you are born into?"
Genetics affects behavior. We know this from twin studies.
"What does this mean directly in terms of policy?"
That White safe spaces shouldn't be illegal or demonized just like Blacks aren't. That immigration restriction based on ethnicity shouldn't be illegal and labelled inherently immoral just like it isn't for non White countries.
Can you tell me the lies told about them on "wokeypedia" there please?
I said it's not objective source. You don't have to say falsehoods in order to deceive. Just choosing how to frame the sentence and what to include/exclude is enough.
"And my point regarding Anne is that she hasn't, to my knowledge, ever said anything racist"
Yet she's still called a fascist, Islamophobe and far right.
"There's no right in any society to have any grievance "raised effectively""
Yes there is. In a democratic and fair country, every ethnic group should be allowed to be on their own side and explicitly argue for their interest. Whites are not allowed to be explicitly pro White, while others are. You have never addressed how this double standard isn't unfair.
"Also, people do very much talk about the plight of white working-class men, or sometimes men in general in the UK - and issues with mass migration. It's not framed in the way you want it"
Yes, the most effective arguments (IQ, crime, racial differences) are not allowed because they are the most effective. What you're saying is you're allowed to play football as long as you play poorly.
Any rational and fair society would examine differences between racial groups if it was truly concerned about it's future. The British and other Western societies are deliberately willfully ignorant on this issue.
>Yes that's because of Brexit made it harder for them to come. Since Europeans do better and assimilate better, there should be easier for them to come. Brexit was a mistake. If it really cared about it's future, UK should limit Muslims and Blacks, not Europeans.
Which notably is an argument sometimes used /against/ Brexit. This is a rather unusual position for someone of your persuasion to hold.
>Government incentives and culture shift.
Governments all over the world are offering incentives for people to start families. How does government just magic wand a cultural shift?
>But it wasn't considered racist
In certain cases, it was: anti-semitism tendencies. But I don't see the comparison here. People upset over the mass bombing of Palestinians in Gaza doesn't really equate to voting on the basis of wanting an ethnostate in your own country.
>It's she not, he. And no she wouldn't and you know it. Minority ethnic identity is not considered racist. Stop lying.
I know of no such thing. It's never been tested and you are just spouting baseless conjecture.
>Free association right to censor people who you disagree with while at the same time claiming to be a democracy and complaining how the right is anti democratic?
Sorry, are we talking about private companies censoring here or the government? The press may be an ass, individuals may be an ass, private companies may be an ass - but they aren't examples of government censorship. I'll ask again: How do you "demand" an end to what you see as cancel culture without infringing on the right to assembly, and free association?
>The left doesn't have a right to get to decide which ideas get to spread in society and which don't.
They aren't. The right, or the 'racial right' (for want of a better term) are free to set up their own parallel media ecosphere. You don't have the right to demand a media outfit air your views.
>Ever heard of social mobility? Also why are they born into poverty?
Because their parents tend to be poorer. And on the cycle goes.
>Now, I've had enough of this. How the hell did you manage to write such a long post? I always have a very narrow limit of characters. I DEMAND to know. Do you have special privileges on this board?
Edit your posts after posting them. There's no limit after the edit.
>Why are you again derailing the argument to only those in the UK? I was talking about China and Arab countries as a whole. And who's talking about Syria? Syria is only one Arab country. Most other Arab countries aren't at war.
How many Arabs are coming into the Uk from Qatar, Saudi Arabia, U.A.E?
Most, to my knowledge are coming from Syria and Iraq.
>Those policies didn't go nearly far enough.
How should they go further?
> There is much more room for birth rate incentives if there was only political will. It's not telling the media what to do, it's simply demanding of the media to do it's job about properly informing the public about important issues facing the country.
How is that not "telling the media what to do"? And the media /DOES/ cover birth rate declines. They do show statistics regarding race-based outcomes of groups.
"Governments all over the world are offering incentives for people to start families. How does government just magic wand a cultural shift? "
Incentives could go further if there was political will. And there is no political will because the media doesn't do it's job of informing public about the huge likelihood of racial differences and it's danger to the future of the country.
" People upset over the mass bombing of Palestinians in Gaza doesn't really equate to voting on the basis of wanting an ethno state in your own country".
Palestinians desire to have an ethno state is OK, but for native British people it's not. Nationalism for brown people, multiculturalism for Whites
"you are just spouting baseless conjecture."
What are you talking about?
"are we talking about private companies censoring here or the government"
Right now social media companies can act as both publishers as well as a platform. They have to chose one or the other. Preserving democracy and free speech which is the basis of Western civilization (and potentially even a decline of our countries into third world) is more important than letting people fire others due to their politics. Funny how leftists were the first to want laws against firing someone because they were gay, but now suddenly are worried about free association.
"They aren't. The right, or the 'racial right' (for want of a better term) are free to set up their own parallel media ecosphere. You don't have the right to demand a media outfit air your views."
Ever heard of monopolies? Funny how liberals support government breaking them, but when those monopolies are on their side, suddenly corporations have rights. Free speech which is the basis of democracy is more important than the right of corporations to free association. And they aren't forced to endorse views expressed the content they host. They can easily put disclaimers.
"Because their parents tend to be poorer. And on the cycle goes. "
And why were their parents born in poverty? How come Chinese and Indians were able to escape poverty, but Blacks weren't?
"How many Arabs are coming into the Uk from Qatar, Saudi Arabia, U.A.E?"
Data please? Also again ignoring the IQs of those counties as a whole. They are rich, have good education index, but their IQs are between 79 and 84. But environment, eh?
"How is that not "telling the media what to do"? And the media /DOES/ cover birth rate declines. They do show statistics regarding race-based outcomes of groups."
So the media shouldn't do it's job? They don't properly investigate the cause s of racial differences.
"Incentives could go further if there was political will. And there is no political will because the media doesn't do it's job of informing public about the huge likelihood of racial differences and it's danger to the future of the country.
What incentives to have kids could be offered that are not being offered? Name them.
>Palestinians desire to have an ethno state is OK, but for native British people it's not. Nationalism for brown people, multiculturalism for Whites
You are assuming here that pro-palestinian voters in the west view the concept of a Palestinian nationstate in terms of becoming an ethnostate. They don't necessarily. They have an idealised view regarding Hamas. Their objection is heavily influenced by considering Israel an ethnostate.
>What are you talking about?
You are assuming that someone like that would not get arrested. People supporting Hamas in the UK are, by the way, arrested. It's a proscribed organisation.
>Right now social media companies can act as both publishers as well as a platform.
Depends on the social media company.
>They have to chose one or the other.
What does this mean in practice? Does a company removing posts that throw racial slurs constitute functioning as a publisher? Does a company removing spam and porn constitute functioning as a publisher?
Also define "social media".
>Preserving democracy and free speech which is the basis of Western civilization (and potentially even a decline of our countries into third world) is more important than letting people fire others due to their politics.
We're not talking about firing, but social media websites - or even just any community website having a terms of service for usage.
>Funny how leftists were the first to want laws against firing someone because they were gay, but now suddenly are worried about free association.
We're not talking about when it might be acceptable to fire someone.
>Ever heard of monopolies? Funny how liberals support government breaking them, but when those monopolies are on their side, suddenly corporations have rights.
There's plenty of social media or community websites online. Many of them are closer to moviechat. You are sourcing your data on racial science from many of these websites.
>Free speech which is the basis of democracy is more important than the right of corporations to free association. And they aren't forced to endorse views expressed the content they host. They can easily put disclaimers.
How do you police this? Every single social media website will have a terms of service. Most will ban abuse, insults, slurs, harassment, pornographic content, spam etc. Should they be allowed to do that? Does that constitute functioning as a publisher?
>And why were their parents born in poverty? How come Chinese and Indians were able to escape poverty, but Blacks weren't?
In the UK? Have Indians escaped poverty in the UK relative to the wider population?
https://ifs.org.uk/inequality/press-release/uk-ethnic-minorities-seeing-sharp-progress-in-education-but-wages-and-wealth-lag-behind/
Also this isn't completely true.
>Data please? Also again ignoring the IQs of those counties as a whole. They are rich, have good education index, but their IQs are between 79 and 84. But environment, eh?
I'm asking because I don't know. I believe most of the asylum seekers and general economic migrants coming into the UK from the region are from troubled and wartorn countries from Syria and Iraq.
>So the media shouldn't do it's job? They don't properly investigate the cause s of racial differences.
What in the actual fuck does different outcomes of criminality based on race have to do with birth rate decline?
>I never said it's "at will". Tell the truth to the public about 1. Current racial differences in behavior and 2. The fact racial equality has never been proven and that it's very likely to be false. It will be a floodgate from that.
All of the data on crime you refer to is publicly shared by the metropolitan police and present on gov.uk. You speak as if it's somehow concealed and the public aren't allowed to look at this data.
>So the leftist press does things that prevent the very same culture change needed to increase birth rates while at the same time using low births to convince people to take immigrants. If you are creating a problem, you don't get to complain about it and use it to your advantage.
The media does not say "feel free to have less kids as we'll just import young people from abroad to make up the numbers". It says "birth rates seem to be unsustainable without top-up from migrants". You are fundamentally misreading the reporting.
>I's not just one article. It's a pattern that the media is leftist and tends to not encourage high births. If low births are a threat to a country, the media should encourage it.
A pattern you still haven't demonstrated that exists. The media does not encourage childlessness and /does/ report on a decline of birth rates and does not frame it as a positive thing.
>So you are saying the media objectively reports about minority crime, welfare use and other negative behavior like grooming gangs? That is fairly reports on the possibility that some racial groups could be inherently prone to worse behavior? This is just pure BS and you know it.
It does not go down the "racial groups inherently prone to worse behaviour" narrative that you're demanding be platformed, but it does talk about and report criminality that you describe.
>Supply of houses is lower because of environmental regulation and demand is higher because of immigration. Both leftist policies.
I'll await evidence that environmental regulation is a direct cause of housing stock decline in the UK. It's mostly rampant nimbyism, which is NOT a left-wing policy.
>That White safe spaces shouldn't be illegal or demonized just like Blacks aren't. That immigration restriction based on ethnicity shouldn't be illegal and labelled inherently immoral just like it isn't for non White countries.
What are you calling a white safe space for the purposes of this complaint? And for that matter, what are examples of black safe spaces?
>I said it's not objective source. You don't have to say falsehoods in order to deceive. Just choosing how to frame the sentence and what to include/exclude is enough.
So how are they deceiving?
What are they excluding? What inclusions about them somehow deceive?
>Yes there is. In a democratic and fair country, every ethnic group should be allowed to be on their own side and explicitly argue for their interest. Whites are not allowed to be explicitly pro White, while others are. You have never addressed how this double standard isn't unfair.
No, there's not. You don't have the right to demand independent organisations, individuals or platforms host and even amplify (as you seem to want) your grievances. You have the right to make your own platform and present your position if you can't get it hosted elsewhere, but you don't have the right to force yourself on others. Freedom of assembly goes both ways.
>Yes, the most effective arguments (IQ, crime, racial differences) are not allowed because they are the most effective. What you're saying is you're allowed to play football as long as you play poorly.
I don't see how these issues are directly relevant when talking about the rise of NEETs in younger white men at all.
I find it funny how the reply posts got so numerous that the sentences and paragraphs aren't even formed anymore. It's just a straight down couple of words per line. 720+ post in only 2 pages, hahaha.
share