PDA

View Full Version : I'm no longer racist


AussiePride
12-08-2006, 04:47 PM
i kno u think i disappeared sulla the dictacker. but im still lurking, always lurking. but i thought id let u know. ive moved beyond my little racialist phase. im still a western nationalist, but i know longer see the world in black and white. i hope one day all the races can exist as one, im doubtful it will happen soon, and i support it - i really do. hope u had a great night. im fucked! later

Helios Panoptes
12-08-2006, 04:52 PM
No one cares. No one even knows who you are.

AussiePride
12-08-2006, 04:55 PM
omg ur a sickcunt. im scared!

Carlos Danger
12-08-2006, 04:56 PM
Dic tacking sounds very painful

AussiePride
12-08-2006, 04:59 PM
Dic tacking sounds very painful

id imagine so! but my last girl said it wasnt. butt... i think she was a slut, so she was prolly used to it!

Sulla the Dictator
12-08-2006, 05:29 PM
Its good to hear that you're no longer a racist. I'm still not a racist. :)

il ragno
12-08-2006, 05:31 PM
I fel and hit mi hedd and now im not a racist animoer to.

Janus
12-08-2006, 05:32 PM
No one cares. No one even knows who you are.You have given out too much Reputation in the last 24 hours, try again later. LOL! :rofl:

[...]

Nyx
12-08-2006, 05:43 PM
im still a western nationalist, i know longer see the world in black and white. i hope one day all the races can exist as one,I am a Western nationalist, who doesn't see the world in black and white, and believes all the races can co-exist, and I still consider myself a racialist.

Lily
12-08-2006, 05:45 PM
I am a Western nationalist, who doesn't see the world in black and white, and believes all the races can co-exist, and I still consider myself a racialist.
Really? Well you learn something new everyday! Would you care to elaborate, especially on the bolded part? I think I may have mis-understood your meaning.

Aryan Imperium
12-08-2006, 06:04 PM
i kno u think i disappeared sulla the dictacker. but im still lurking, always lurking. but i thought id let u know. ive moved beyond my little racialist phase. im still a western nationalist, but i know longer see the world in black and white. i hope one day all the races can exist as one, im doubtful it will happen soon, and i support it - i really do. hope u had a great night. im fucked! later

Tell us about the details of your `conversion`! What are the reasons for your sudden change of perspective?

<flame deleted>
12-08-2006, 06:21 PM
, but i know longer see the world in black and white.

Me neither I see the world in jews and non-jews :rofl:

I don`t see the world in "Imperialism" against "Nationalism" Anyone who fights for his own people against Imperialism, western or not-western is a "friend" no matter what race, colour or etnicitie.

http://www.heathenworld.com/swastika/t_rainbow_swastika.jpg

What do mean with "western nationalist" western like Mcdonalds, Porno and democracy or for the preservation of the european cultures and people ?

Count Eustace II
12-08-2006, 07:01 PM
ive moved beyond my little racialist phase. im still a western nationalist, but i know longer see the world in black and white.

Really? Does it matter to you that non-whites see things in only black and white?

i hope one day all the races can exist as one, im doubtful it will happen soon, and i support it - i really do.

Non-whites hate whites with more passion than you can imagine so there'll be no kumbaya, let's live in peace, 'I have a dream' coexisting with them. Once whites are outnumbered, the only place for whites will be a huge boiling pot of water over a large fire with some herbs and spices.

MrAngry
12-08-2006, 07:06 PM
Really? Does it matter to you that non-whites see things in only black and white?



Non-whites hate whites with more passion than you can imagine so there'll be no kumbaya, let's live in peace, 'I have a dream' coexisting with them. Once whites are outnumbered, the only place for whites will be a huge boiling pot of water over a large fire with some herbs and spices.


And the evidence is? Where exactly? Another generalism perhaps?

Starr
12-08-2006, 07:41 PM
And the evidence is? Where exactly? Another generalism perhaps?


First off the races just being forced to live among one another creates a lot of animosity all on its own. since it is perfectly natural that they are going to be fighting for dominance. And it is not just whites vs. "oppressed" non-white, as so many people seem to like to portray. The black vs. Hispanic situation is also reaching a boiling point in many cities, in the U.S(it makes perfect sense, with hispanics moving in and even starting to outnumber blacks in areas that blacks may have once thought of as "theirs) And that is just one example. And you also have to know that non-whites have been constantly fed all of the bullshit about how "the white man" is responsible for all of their problems. Also when you have different races all forced together in the same society, there are going to be those who are, as a whole, at the very top and others who are at the very bottom, not always because one race is held back, but because the races are not the same and have different abilities and challenges. This also creates a lot of resentment and hostility in those races that are at the lower end of the pecking order.

Sulla the Dictator
12-08-2006, 07:44 PM
First off the races just being forced to live among one another creates a lot of animosity all on its own.


America seems to be a lot more peaceful than the Balkans, Africa, or the Middle East.

Care to explain?

kane123123/Eagle Eye/stumbler/iceman
12-08-2006, 08:17 PM
i hope one day all the races can exist as one
Are you advocating miscegenation. That is genocide.

VAMPIR
12-08-2006, 08:22 PM
No one cares. No one even knows who you are.
LOL :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Carlos Danger
12-08-2006, 08:23 PM
America seems to be a lot more peaceful than the Balkans, Africa, or the Middle East.

Care to explain?
Do you think the US could survive another 1929-33 without impoding?

Nyx
12-08-2006, 08:24 PM
I seem to recall someone named AussiePride posting long before Helios Panoptes was a member. But he didn't seem quite as illiterate as this individual.

Ahknaton
12-08-2006, 08:24 PM
Ever notice that it's the antis who actually see this issue in black and white? Either you're a complete race nihilist who doesn't believe that race means anything, and favours open borders, one-world globalism (like them), or else you must be some kind of genocidal hatebot who wants to exterminate all the non-Whites. They don't seem to grasp that someone can acknowledge that race exists, figure it worth preserving, give it some significance in a political context and in terms of their identity and have racial pride all without necessarily hating other races.

MrAngry
12-08-2006, 08:26 PM
Ever notice that it's the antis who actually see this issue in black and white? Either you're a complete race nihilist who doesn't believe that race means anything, and favours open borders, one-world globalism (like them), or else you must be some kind of genocidal hatebot who wants to exterminate all the non-Whites. They don't seem to grasp that someone can acknowledge that race exists, figure it worth preserving, give it some significance in a political context and in terms of their identity and have racial pride all without necessarily hating other races.


Why is it then that all racist believe that antis are anti white, liberal and favour open borders? The cap fits both sides when convenient.

Ahknaton
12-08-2006, 08:28 PM
America seems to be a lot more peaceful than the Balkans, Africa, or the Middle East.

Care to explain?
I think there are three reasons for that:

1) White Americans habitually bend over and take it up the ass to appease minority groups, which dispells some of the tension. Racial harmony is predicated on Whites not sticking up for themselves.
2) America is a rich country, so competition for scarce resources doesn't divide people along ethnic or tribal lines like in Africa.
3) American political institutions are capable of accomodating difference, which means that it will be longer before it reaches "breaking point", although I think that will happen eventually, since some groups are simply not compatible with secular democracy (e.g. radical Muslims).

Ahknaton
12-08-2006, 08:34 PM
Why is it then that all racist believe that antis are anti white, liberal and favour open borders?
Because for the most part they are, especially when it comes to "activist" anti-racists such as antifa. Groups like FDB in Australia/NZ are allied with groups such as One People's Project in the USA that are actively opposed to groups like the Minutemen and many of their members openly favour abolishing all national borders.

I wouldn't include your average "normal" person who would claim to be simply "not a racist" as opposed to "anti-racist" in that group, because these people are usually racist in practise (moving to White neighbourhoods etc) but will never own up to it because of the social stigma.

Arminius
12-08-2006, 08:58 PM
Ever notice that it's the antis who actually see this issue in black and white? Either you're a complete race nihilist who doesn't believe that race means anything, and favours open borders, one-world globalism (like them), or else you must be some kind of genocidal hatebot who wants to exterminate all the non-Whites. They don't seem to grasp that someone can acknowledge that race exists, figure it worth preserving, give it some significance in a political context and in terms of their identity and have racial pride all without necessarily hating other races.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Ahknaton again.

:(

Carlos Danger
12-08-2006, 09:05 PM
Borders are established by violence, almost by definition

People who live on the "wrong" side of a potential border are bound to feel slightly paranoid

Berianidze
12-08-2006, 09:20 PM
Ever notice that it's the antis who actually see this issue in black and white? Either you're a complete race nihilist who doesn't believe that race means anything, and favours open borders, one-world globalism (like them), or else you must be some kind of genocidal hatebot who wants to exterminate all the non-Whites. They don't seem to grasp that someone can acknowledge that race exists, figure it worth preserving, give it some significance in a political context and in terms of their identity and have racial pride all without necessarily hating other races.
I agree with this statement. Well said. This is precisely the reason IRL and online that I try to avoid issues of race altogether. I don't see myself fitting into either the vehement anti-racist camp nor the hardline racist or racialist camp. I acknowledge that it's not just a social construct, and that there are biological/physiological differences between the races (just read some of the articles of the Journal of the American Medical Association), but I don't think it should guide policy or the direction of a case, since class is still the more important issue.

Lily
12-08-2006, 09:26 PM
I agree with this statement. Well said. This is precisely the reason IRL and online that I try to avoid issues of race altogether. I don't see myself fitting into either the vehement anti-racist camp nor the hardline racist or racialist camp. I acknowledge that it's not just a social construct, and that there are biological/physiological differences between the races (just read some of the articles of the Journal of the American Medical Association), but I don't think it should guide policy or the direction of a case, since class is still the more important issue.
This is basically where I stand with the whole issue too.

You have given out too much Reputation in the last 24 hours, try again later.

Sulla the Dictator
12-08-2006, 09:34 PM
Ever notice that it's the antis who actually see this issue in black and white? Either you're a complete race nihilist who doesn't believe that race means anything, and favours open borders,


I'm not a racialist. I believe in open borders?


one-world globalism (like them)


I'm a capitalist. I don't see what this has to do with 'race'.

Pssst.....in the "Jewology" forum there is a thread where our racialist friends are posting pictures of people being hung.

You tell me, what are we making up?

LastResort56
12-08-2006, 09:51 PM
Originally Posted by AussiePride
i kno u think i disappeared sulla the dic tacker:rofl: . but im still lurking, always lurking. but i thought id let u know. ive moved beyond my little racialist phase. im still a western nationalist, but i know longer see the world in black and white. i hope one day all the races can exist as one, im doubtful it will happen soon, and i support it - i really do. hope u had a great night. im fucked! later

:confused: I'm not sure what you mean by races existing as one. Do you mean that you wish the races to mix? If you do then you're probably controdicting yourself when you say you are a nationalist.

The Retard
12-08-2006, 09:57 PM
AussiePride is the guy that runs the "garbage dump" forum?

Ahknaton
12-08-2006, 10:05 PM
I'm not a racialist. I believe in open borders?
Well, as I said it is generally the more activist anti-racists who favour "open borders" in the sense of minimal immigration restrictions, however even "non racists" such as yourself are usually against any racial criteria when determining who is eligible to immigrate. This essentially denies the racial or ethnic identity of a nation and predicates immigration on another basis, such as economic utility for example.
I'm a capitalist. I don't see what this has to do with 'race'.
Free movement of capital across borders in a globalised economy inevitably means free movement of labour across national borders to wherever it is needed, which erodes regional differences in racial/ethnic demographics and culture. In order to guarantee that people from third world countries have an economic future in their own countries some economic interventionism may be necessary if a globalised economy does not produce a demand for their labour where they are currently situated. It's a matter of tolerating some economic inefficiency for the sake of maintaining regional differences, in other words valuing certain things like culture and race over pure economics.
Pssst.....in the "Jewology" forum there is a thread where our racialist friends are posting pictures of people being hung.

You tell me, what are we making up?
Well, that's in the context of supporting one side in a war. People have also posted pictures of the fall of Berlin at the hands of Soviet troops. I haven't actually heard anyone here call for the extermination of (as opposed to separation from) any particular group, and if they have then I would certainly distance myself from that.

AussiePride
12-08-2006, 10:40 PM
Tell us about the details of your `conversion`! What are the reasons for your sudden change of perspective?

hmm, it's a long process for sure and I have a mix of a hang over and being drunk still but I'll try. Unlike a lot of guys on here I never changed my opinion weekly (I remember when everyone would change from week to week what political point of view they were - the little National Bolshevik phase, etc). I stuck to generally the same opinions from when I was 13 (21 now). It wasn't about being cool, it was just what I believed for the longest time. It's easy to see the world in races when you live in a cesspool multicultural area.

People tend to congregate together through high school and you start to believe it matters. In Australia it was the Lebanese, the Islanders the Aussie's, etc all in their little groups. So I thought it mattered, than I joined stormfront the day after 9/11 and I met a bunch of skinheads through there and made friends with a bunch too. So it went from being little schoolyard stuff to being my very serious perspective on the world.

But anyway, to get to the point it wasn't sudden at all. Took me years to get to this position - honestly it did. It happened more than anything because I had to question myself constantly. When you look at the point of view ultimately, there really is no justification for being a racist, or wanting to protect and separate the races - it's just stupid. I tried, and I went through various stages of justifying it, but I realized long before I accepted it that it was a stupid position to take. You can argue perhaps that White people need to remain the majority in Western nations or they will loose their substance and strength as a culture will not exist without the people and I'll understand that, but it doesn't stop there really does it?

At the end of the day when I visit stormfront and see some of the posts there it makes me embarrassed to know that I used to have the same point of view as most there - it's just mindless. Maybe I should contact the ADL and do a anti-nazi tour? lol, I won't go that far I guess. :)

Petyr Baelish
12-08-2006, 10:49 PM
I fel and hit mi hedd and now im not a racist animoer to.

ROFL!

filler, filler, filler, filler, filler, filler, filler, filler, filler, filler

AussiePride
12-08-2006, 10:49 PM
Really? Does it matter to you that non-whites see things in only black and white?



Non-whites hate whites with more passion than you can imagine so there'll be no kumbaya, let's live in peace, 'I have a dream' coexisting with them. Once whites are outnumbered, the only place for whites will be a huge boiling pot of water over a large fire with some herbs and spices.

See this is the thing I can still understand. Now, this is what drove me to be a 'White Nationalist'. I'd see an injustice against Whites and I'd think we have to stand up for ourselves. But let me ask you, would it not be ideal (and don't dance around the question) if we REALLY could exist as one? Would you support it or would you still argue we have to 'protect the races' for some mindless reason?

I do agree, that Western nations shouldn't succumb to a one way flow of immigration because at the end of the day it isn't going to result in the races existing as one - it's only going to result in the weakening of Western resolve. But at the end of the day, rather than looking at the bad and using that bad to justify my extremism I am more interested in discussing how we can overcome their racist attitudes as equally as we overcome white racism so we can move to something more positive. I'm not singing kumbaya yet, but one day I believe and hope we will be.

AussiePride
12-08-2006, 10:55 PM
AussiePride is the guy that runs the "garbage dump" forum?

Rubbish Dump, but actually that was my friend. A Norwegian guy I met through stormfront way back. I haven't spoken to him lately, but I did help him promote it for a while. Like 99 out of 100 forums it never took off though so he deleted it.

AussiePride
12-08-2006, 11:02 PM
I seem to recall someone named AussiePride posting long before Helios Panoptes was a member. But he didn't seem quite as illiterate as this individual.

Yeah I have been around for a long time on the phora, the lyceum, etc. I used to be quite active back in the day, but haven't posted regularly for a long time. Sorry if I am sounding illiterate now, I had a big night last night and I haven't been bothered to put any serious effort into my writing on here at the moment. But it's okay if Helios Panoptes doesn't know me or care what I have to say, I am sure I don't know the vast majority of the people on here currently. A few of the old timers should remember me however, like Sulla, Werhmact (don't know if he still posts?), Fade, Ken (or whatever his latest name is), etc.

Nyx
12-08-2006, 11:15 PM
Wehr doesn't post here anymore.

Donny the Punk
12-08-2006, 11:20 PM
Thank God for that.

I remember AussiePride.

Arminius
12-08-2006, 11:20 PM
Wehr doesn't post here anymore.

Why is he still a mod then?

Hlinkova Garda
12-08-2006, 11:21 PM
quote by lastresort56
I'm not sure what you mean by races existing as one. Do you mean that you wish the races to mix? If you do then you're probably controdicting yourself when you say you are a nationalist.

OK now Im coffused i thought you said there were only lingustic differences
not racial/genetic ones

Starr
12-08-2006, 11:24 PM
When you look at the point of view ultimately, there really is no justification for being a racist, or wanting to protect and separate the races - it's just stupid. I tried, and I went through various stages of justifying it, but I realized long before I accepted it that it was a stupid position to take. You can argue perhaps that White people need to remain the majority in Western nations or they will loose their substance and strength as a culture will not exist without the people and I'll understand that, but it doesn't stop there really does it?

The two statements in bold seem a bit contradictory. On one hand you seem to be saying that if whites become a minority in western nations that the character of the nations will greatly change and loose their strength and on the other hand you say preserving the race and cultures of those you must still see as playing a vital role in making these nations what they are, is stupid. I think you are merely in a confused stage. I see that you mentioned that comments you have seen have made you embarrassed. I am taking it you might be having a negative reaction to a few comments from stupid/immature people, probably "hollywood nazi" types. Don't let that turn you off.

And what do you mean exactly by it doesn't stop there?

shanemac
12-08-2006, 11:57 PM
I'm Shanemac,

You may remember me from such screen-names as smc, whitesabre or jozu.

I remember you from SF Aussiepride. You're only 21 so, you still have a lot to learn about the world.

You got into SF and you became a bit extreme. SF encourages a very idealised picture of the world. Everything "Aryan" is put up on a pedestal, and everything non-white is dismissed out of hand.

The idealism on SF encourages a certain extremism, which you may reject if you honestly reflect on your daily experience. For example, if you form the impression that all niggers are criminals, but then you meet a nice hard-working black person then that throws into question your whole belief system.

You need to figure all of this out, while taking everything in moderation. Not all whites are good, not all blacks are bad. There's 256 shades of grey in between. Don't look at the individual, look at the broad sweeping generalisation. Australia is going to shit because everybody looks at the individual these days, rather than the broad-sweeping generalisation.

AussiePride
12-09-2006, 12:06 AM
The two statements in bold seem a bit contradictory. On one hand you seem to be saying that if whites become a minority in western nations that the character of the nations will greatly change and loose their strength and on the other hand you say preserving the race and cultures of those you must still see as playing a vital role in making these nations what they are, is stupid. I think you are merely in a confused stage. I see that you mentioned that comments you have seen have made you embarrassed. I am taking it you might be having a negative reaction to a few comments from stupid/immature people, probably "hollywood nazi" types. Don't let that turn you off.

And what do you mean exactly by it doesn't stop there?

I am not going to lie and say that I wont contradict myself from time to time. I can honestly say I am still coming to terms with it, and I may still have some way to go yet no doubt - as I said this has been a gradual shift over years not something overnight. But I guess essentially what I am saying is that the notion of preserving the races is just a pointless one to me without any real long-term value. I am more interested in what is best for humankind, not what is best for the White race. I do honestly believe Western civilization has a lot to offer the world still, including sharing the gift of tolerance - something which isn't easy as I am aware. So in saying that, I am interested in understanding the best way to protect and spread that, and perhaps at this point ethnicity still plays some role in it. But than again I am open to argument that Western civilization and the freedom it offers is so universal that even if first or second generation immigrants don't accept or identify with it eventually if you allow them the opportunity their children or grand-children will be committed to it as perhaps you or I (I generally see this in a lot of young Asians who are Westernized, however Muslims tend to form the flip-side of this). I mean you can easily look at Sulla as an example of this, I believe he is mixed race no? But to me he still encourages many of the values that I would seek to protect (even if I don't follow many of his other beliefs).

Count Sudoku
12-09-2006, 12:06 AM
The powers that be are committing a slow gradual genocide of whites. You're a racist if you point it out or complain about it. Is it so bad to protest the genocide of your own race?

AussiePride
12-09-2006, 12:12 AM
I'm Shanemac,

You may remember me from such screen-names as smc, whitesabre or jozu.

I remember you from SF Aussiepride. You're only 21 so, you still have a lot to learn about the world.

You got into SF and you became a bit extreme. SF encourages a very idealised picture of the world. Everything "Aryan" is put up on a pedestal, and everything non-white is dismissed out of hand.

The idealism on SF encourages a certain extremism, which you may reject if you honestly reflect on your daily experience. For example, if you form the impression that all niggers are criminals, but then you meet a nice hard-working black person then that throws into question your whole belief system.

You need to figure all of this out, while taking everything in moderation. Not all whites are good, not all blacks are bad. There's 256 shades of grey in between. Don't look at the individual, look at the broad sweeping generalisation. Australia is going to shit because everybody looks at the individual these days, rather than the broad-sweeping generalisation.

SMC from Stormfront Downunder? Man of course I remember you, you were a train guard or something no? I don't remember if we ever met, but I met a lot of the guys from Stormfront that I believe you met also, Tony, Alex, etc. And actually I can really identify and understand what you are saying, I need to have a better think about it before I formulate a decent response though, but good to catch up nonetheless.

shanemac
12-09-2006, 12:27 AM
Yeah, that's me.... was never a train guard though.

So, how do you see Australia's future? What is the best way forward?

Sulla the Dictator
12-09-2006, 12:39 AM
The two statements in bold seem a bit contradictory. On one hand you seem to be saying that if whites become a minority in western nations that the character of the nations will greatly change and loose their strength and on the other hand you say preserving the race and cultures of those you must still see as playing a vital role in making these nations what they are, is stupid.


There's nothing contradictory about it. He said, quite clearly, that he sees a need for whites to keep their nations. He also said that MINORITIES within these nations are not the ridiculous charicature you try and make them out to be.

As you may or may not know, you can have non-whites in a nation without whites being a minority.

Starr
12-09-2006, 12:55 AM
As you may or may not know, you can have non-whites in a nation without whites being a minority.


The stupid idea of the day is that diversity(which by its very definition and the way people use it,= less whites)is a good thing to be celebrated and that if the racial makeup of the nation changes dramatically and whites do become a minority it will have no great affect on the nation(we are "all the same" after all:whip: ) and he seemed to be agreeing that this was incorrect by what he said. And then he said preserving race is stupid and basically does not matter. That was the contradiction I saw.

Sulla the Dictator
12-09-2006, 12:59 AM
The stupid idea of the day is that diversity(which always means less whites)is a good thing to be celebrated and that if the racial makeup of the nation changes dramatically and whites do become a minority it will have no great affect on the nation and he seemed to be agreeing that this was incorrect by what he said.


The stupid idea is that your skin is magic. The stupid idea is that the secret to past Western success lay in racial uniformity.

Ummmm....yeah, diversity DOES mean less whites. Less than all. If it didn't, Starr, then it wouldn't be diversity. It would be uniform. It would be all whites. So keen insight there.

But diversity doesn't mean 'no whites', and it doesn't mean 'less than 50% white'. The relative proportion of whites to nonwhites is YOUR personal responsibility. Where are your babies? You need to have three to grow your Aryan population. Where are they?


And then he said preserving race is stupid and basically does not matter. That was the contradiction I saw.

Thats not what he said. He said the character of nations are good things and should be preserved. He then said that having a black person living in a white country does not threaten that.

Starr
12-09-2006, 01:03 AM
The stupid idea is that your skin is magic

The stupid idea is that race does not matter and is only "skin deep." That is a fantasy believed by people who allow themselves to be fools.

Ummmm....yeah, diversity DOES mean less whites. Less than all. If it didn't, Starr, then it wouldn't be diversity. It would be uniform. It would be all whites. So keen insight there.

And yet diversity is grand whites will say as they celebrate their decline. Is there not something slightly insane in that? What other race celebrates drops in their numbers and the breakup of their dominance in their own lands? And why is this something that is expected of us and only of us?

Sulla the Dictator
12-09-2006, 01:05 AM
The stupid idea is that race does not matter and is only "skin deep." That is a fantasy believed by people who allow themselves to be fools.

Do you think its valid for someone who was born wealthy, and attended Ivy League Schools to suggest that they are genetically superior to you?

Anarch
12-09-2006, 01:22 AM
Damn, AussiePride. People do change. I happen to think your position is wrong.

See, I don't view the world through a racial lens either. This SF 'race above all' mentality is stupid, on that much we agree. I no longer consider myself a WN. I'm a patriot and a nativist - or, simplified, I'm a nationalist. Meaning: our ancestors came here, built this country, created it, it is ours, and we are the people of Australia, and it should remain ours.

Lily
12-09-2006, 01:29 AM
I am not going to lie and say that I wont contradict myself from time to time. I can honestly say I am still coming to terms with it, and I may still have some way to go yet no doubt - as I said this has been a gradual shift over years not something overnight. But I guess essentially what I am saying is that the notion of preserving the races is just a pointless one to me without any real long-term value. I am more interested in what is best for humankind, not what is best for the White race. I do honestly believe Western civilization has a lot to offer the world still, including sharing the gift of tolerance - something which isn't easy as I am aware. So in saying that, I am interested in understanding the best way to protect and spread that, and perhaps at this point ethnicity still plays some role in it. But than again I am open to argument that Western civilization and the freedom it offers is so universal that even if first or second generation immigrants don't accept or identify with it eventually if you allow them the opportunity their children or grand-children will be committed to it as perhaps you or I (I generally see this in a lot of young Asians who are Westernized, however Muslims tend to form the flip-side of this). I mean you can easily look at Sulla as an example of this, I believe he is mixed race no? But to me he still encourages many of the values that I would seek to protect (even if I don't follow many of his other beliefs).
:) Good post.

il ragno
12-09-2006, 01:38 AM
The stupid idea is that the secret to past Western success lay in racial uniformity.

Not stupid; true. But only in hindsight, in retrospect. It would have been difficult, if not absurd, for people, then, to have rallied around a concept as odd as 'shared whiteness' during a time and place when white hegemony was the only item on the menu; a fact of life one didn't question because there was no need to think about it.

But our polyglot world of Right Now is a different playing field, a road-map left out in the rain and presently undecipherable....the only true norths we've got for this Brave New World are that

a) white is the only skin color that may be universally disparaged (and boy is it ever) - yet instead of placating nonwhites, this has only increased their fury and their contempt for us; and

b) no multicultural society has ever done anything but simmer, boil to a fine froth, and eventually collapse into chaos

The stupid idea is that your skin is magic.

No, the stupid idea is the one you cling to - that in order to prevent any possible inequity, even of results, everybody's skin color will be henceforth declared "magic".

LastResort56
12-09-2006, 02:01 AM
Originally Posted by Hlinkova Garda
OK now Im coffused i thought you said there were only lingustic differences
not racial/genetic ones

Jesus Christ, you dumb motherfucker. I never said there were no biological races retard. ALL I SAID IS THAT SLAVIC IS A LINGUSTIC WORD THEREFORE IS NOT CORRECT TO WHEN REFERRING TO CLOSE GENETIC POPULATIONS. IF A NIGGER SPEAKS ENGLISH, DOES THAT MAKE HIM ENGLISH? NO THE FUCK IS DOES NOT. THAT IS WHAT I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO EXPLAIN TO YOU WITH THE WORD SLAVIC. ORIENTALS, JEWS, MUSLIMS ECT CAN MOVE TO A EUROPEAN NATION AND CAN ASSIMILATE TO THE CULTURE AND LEARN THE LANGUAGE AND WOULD BE CONSIDERED EUROPEAN, BUT DOES THAT MEAN THAT THEY ARE BIOLOGICALLY RELATED? NO. ALL I HAVE BEEN TELLING YOU IS THAT WORDS LIKE SLAVIC, EUROPEAN, ECT CAN BE TWISTED, GENETIC TERMS CAN NOT.

Had you been STALKING ME ONLINE long enough and read all of my posts on the phora, you would have known that I am not PC and thoroughly racist. You're assuming too much.

NEXT TIME WHEN YOU PULL APART MY POSTS AT LEAST HAVE THE FUCKING BRAINS TO READ THE ENTIRE DAME THING YOU.

Originally Posted by LastResort56
Slavic is more of a cultural term then a genetic term. The only genetic divide in Europe is between Northerners and Southerners.

See retard, I do adknowledge genetics.

From website:
In addition to future medical applications, the data are also of interest to anthropologists who study historical human migrations. The Southern grouping included individuals from Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain, as well as Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews. The Northern group included people with English, Irish, German, Swedish and Ukranian ancestry. These groups correspond to those historically divided by the Pyrenees and Alps mountain ranges.

http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/523543/?sc=dwhn


And I'd like a link for this so I know you didn't just pull it out of your ass.
The first known historic Slavic people (Venedi, Sklavene and Anti) did identify themselves by "common ancestors and common blood" according to the 6th century historian Jordanes, and that is also partly supported by modern bio-genetic comparisons The new genetic analyses of Y-chromosomes and mitochondria (mostly since 2000), iteratively offered interesting conclusions on the genetic similarity and probable collective origin of western and eastern Slavs; however they also demonstrated a considerable heterogeneity and controversies for the biological and historical development of South Slavic peoples.genetic researchers to conclude that R1a was a valid identifier of the Slav peoples

AussiePride
12-09-2006, 02:12 AM
Yeah, that's me.... was never a train guard though.

So, how do you see Australia's future? What is the best way forward?

I think we are tied to Asia, like it or not. It's a shame some of the Asian nations don't share the same benevolence that Western nations often try to show though, but I think it will come with time if we encourage it. Ultimately I am quite happy for immigration from Asian nations to continue provided it does so at a rate at which we can absorb them into the nation, and the culture. I do believe mass-immigration can be quite irresponsible at times, and I think we must accept it is generally harder to absorb certain types of Asians, for instance Muslims from Malaysia (though I have been to Malaysia and it is quite Westernized) or God forbid Indonesia.

I don't mean to single them out as the focus of my new hate, but my experiences have told me that the power of the religion of Mohamed should not be underestimated. Likewise, I think we should seriously look at the situation in Australia and have an immigration policy that reflects the situation. If we are seriously having a hard time integrating certain populations, or the scale of immigration from certain nations is causing adverse divisions than alterations should be made. I guess that is only on one area of Australia's future however, but to go through everything would take me all week, and I think that is the most relevant to this thread.

Are the public schools in Australia as bad as America?

I'd have to say generally no of course. I did happen to go to possibly the worst high school in all of Australia however. Anyone from Sydney would most likely know Granville South High School, it has a very bad reputation as a zoo (I believe it was the name it was given by the Daily Telegraph), students always breaking into it (I think the computers went missing just about every other week), abusing teachers and everything else under the sun, but even still it can't possibly be as some of the US high schools - I mean things like bringing weapons to school weren't common, as they seem to be in some US schools.

Damn, AussiePride. People do change. I happen to think your position is wrong.

See, I don't view the world through a racial lens either. This SF 'race above all' mentality is stupid, on that much we agree. I no longer consider myself a WN. I'm a patriot and a nativist - or, simplified, I'm a nationalist. Meaning: our ancestors came here, built this country, created it, it is ours, and we are the people of Australia, and it should remain ours.

Ken I know you man, you'll come around one day. I still understand and respect your point of view, and I am not arguing that you should become some flower power hippie, but I think you will generally see the world beyond the nation with time, and be prepared to openly look at what is best for humanity.

Anarch
12-09-2006, 02:19 AM
Ken I know you man, you'll come around one day. I still understand and respect your point of view, and I am not arguing that you should become some flower power hippie, but I think you will generally see the world beyond the nation with time, and be prepared to openly look at what is best for humanity.

Nativism doesn't imply imperialism and genocide, Stuart. I'm not advocating destroying the human race, or other races. I think nationalism is the only way to ensure anything resembling permanent peace. That is what is good for humanity, and it is good for us, too.

AussiePride
12-09-2006, 02:27 AM
Nativism doesn't imply imperialism and genocide, Stuart. I'm not advocating destroying the human race, or other races. I think nationalism is the only way to ensure anything resembling permanent peace. That is what is good for humanity, and it is good for us, too.

Well I respect that you have the best intentions in what you say. But how far nationalistic must we go? What do you advocate? Do we not have healthy nationalism now in Australia? A sense of community, a sense of belonging, friendly rivalry between nations with little animosity? I am not against that, I still love this nation and the opportunities and support it has given to me.

Sulla the Dictator
12-09-2006, 03:26 AM
Not stupid; true.


No, I was right the first time.


But only in hindsight, in retrospect. It would have been difficult, if not absurd, for people, then, to have rallied around a concept as odd as 'shared whiteness' during a time and place when white hegemony was the only item on the menu; a fact of life one didn't question because there was no need to think about it.


Well thats interesting. Because if we look at the United States as an example, focusing ONLY on 'the bad days' (IE, the past 40 years), we see four decades of UNPRECIDENTED scientific and intellectual achievements, matched by technological prowess the world hasn't seen in two thousand years. It doesn't seem that we need 500 il ragno's to change a lightbulb at all.

One competant person of any race will do.


But our polyglot world of Right Now is a different playing field, a road-map left out in the rain and presently undecipherable....the only true norths we've got for this Brave New World are that

a) white is the only skin color that may be universally disparaged (and boy is it ever) - yet instead of placating nonwhites, this has only increased their fury and their contempt for us; and

b) no multicultural society has ever done anything but simmer, boil to a fine froth, and eventually collapse into chaos


"Multicultural" has nothing to do with race. And the claim you just made in B relate to monoracial societies that happen to be multicultural.

As to A, because of your ideology you have a selective process of taking in information. I remember you saying once that "90% of crime is perpetrated by non-whites" which is utter nonsense. Anytime someone posts a crime where a white person is responsible you lose it, suggesting that the very posting of the incident is 'anti-white'.


No, the stupid idea is the one you cling to - that in order to prevent any possible inequity, even of results, everybody's skin color will be henceforth declared "magic".

No one has magic skin, actually. Magic isn't real. Da Vinci didn't paint because you're a good influence. The role of 'whites' or any other populace, as a whole, is to maintain the civilization that great men build. And as far as I'm concerned, ANYONE could have fixed Da Vinci's sink, or cooked his food, or sold him the notebook he doodled in.

That the person who did any of those things has a passing resemblance to you is meaningless to me. I do not approve of you claiming some portion of the man's work simply because you could share a possible sun burn.

Anarch
12-09-2006, 03:32 AM
Well I respect that you have the best intentions in what you say. But how far nationalistic must we go? What do you advocate? Do we not have healthy nationalism now in Australia? A sense of community, a sense of belonging, friendly rivalry between nations with little animosity? I am not against that, I still love this nation and the opportunities and support it has given to me.

You're a part of it, Stuart.

'How far must we go?' Let's start with deporting three-time criminals of non-European origin. And they can take their dependents with them. Deport those whose values contradict those that constitute Australia. Let's institute an ethnically proportionate immigration system combined with a skills selecting immigration system. This would preserve the demographic balance of the country, and still benefit the economy.

Desolation Angels
12-09-2006, 03:34 AM
I'm not a racist or a bigot. I'm equal opportunity baby. I spread the discrimination around equally.
I'm feeling much better these days.

Starr
12-09-2006, 03:34 AM
The role of 'whites' or any other populace, as a whole, is to maintain the civilization that great men build

the civilization we live in was built by great white men for whites, and you can take a look around at the condition of the more "diverse" cities to get a glimpse at how well our civilization will be maintained, or even at the third world slums these people come from. But I guess that is the kind of country that Sulla would not mind seeing his descendants living in.:deadhorse:

Ambrosio Spinola
12-09-2006, 04:07 AM
Amazing that after all this time people still describe racialism here in 101 terms. Shame on you Sulla for misrepresenting people´s positions after knowing better all this time. If after all, racism is skin deep , is the conclusion..well...the word "stupid" has been used several times already on this thread, its fitting to be used again.

I´m happy for you AP, sometimes I wish I also did not know any better. Good to see deprograming makes your life easier. Its better to taste the steak even if its not there, eh?

Count Sudoku
12-09-2006, 05:00 AM
Amazing that after all this time people still describe racialism here in 101 terms. Shame on you Sulla for misrepresenting people´s positions after knowing better all this time. If after all, racism is skin deep , is the conclusion..well...the word "stupid" has been used several times already on this thread, its fitting to be used again.

I´m happy for you AP, sometimes I wish I also did not know any better. Good to see deprograming makes your life easier. Its better to taste the steak even if its not there, eh?

Anyone know where I can get some of those blue pills?

Sulla the Dictator
12-09-2006, 05:26 AM
the civilization we live in was built by great white men for whites


Thats also false. Everyone's a 'nigger' to a Roman. The Romans didn't build civilization for YOU Starr. They built it for themselves. So too with every other person or group of people who advanced the world a little further. Great men haven't given a fig for the 'white race'.

No one invents a thing or develops a concept for 'the white race'. Or any other race, for that matter.

White supremacists have an insecurity that I find a little hard to understand in detail. The only people who come close to sharing it are Black Nationalists, but thats to be understood because they lack specific ethnic identity due to the methods with which they were brought here.

There are no "Asian supremacists". There are, in fact, no "Hispanic supremacists". These people have specific ETHNIC identities with which they identify and hold out to be superior.

You, having been RAISED in a nation which was dedicated from its inception to being multi-ethnic AND multi-cultural have no real ethnic identity.

And so you default to race. You yearn for a tribal identity, but lack for it so try to substitute race for it.

LOL You're like criminals in jail.




and you can take a look around at the condition of the more "diverse" cities to get a glimpse at how well our civilization will be maintained


Big cities have crime. Thats a historical fact of big cities. In many points throughout history, upper class Europeans never left their homes for urban areas without guards or a routine to protect them.

Why though? Maybe there were a lot of blacks or Mexicans in Renaissance Italy, or Republican Rome.


or even at the third world slums these people come from.


Hmmmm....there is more crime in poverty stricken regions than first world states....that IS odd.


But I guess that is the kind of country that Sulla would not mind seeing his descendants living in.

Is a rich, Ivy Leaguer your genetic superior?

Sulla the Dictator
12-09-2006, 05:30 AM
Amazing that after all this time people still describe racialism here in 101 terms. Shame on you Sulla for misrepresenting people´s positions after knowing better all this time. If after all, racism is skin deep , is the conclusion..well...the word "stupid" has been used several times already on this thread, its fitting to be used again.


After much research I think I've conclusively mapped out the historical premise of racialism, and I reject it.

Hispanics are a perfect example. Racialists regularly cry out against Hispanics. But pre-Columbian culture is a FASCINATING and impressive collection of civilizations which developed technologies independant of the early civilizations of the Middle East, let alone Classical states.

What is the legitimate racialist critique of these people?

Starr
12-09-2006, 05:35 AM
I was referring to the united states. was the united states intended to be a multi-racial, multi cultural country with non-stop brown third world immigration? Don't think so. The laws worked in favor of keeping those people out up until 1965.

Hispanics are a perfect example. Racialists regularly cry out against Hispanics. But pre-Columbian culture is a FASCINATING and impressive collection of civilizations which developed technologies independant of the early civilizations of the Middle East, let alone Classical states.

How "impressive" their cultures may or may not have been doesn't really have a whole hell of a lot to do with the fact that these people are pouring across the borders everyday, exploding in number and changing the racial makeup and character of OUR country. Should it have mattered to the native americans that their European conquerors had an impressive culture? they probably would have scalped you for trying to come at them with that.:rofl:

Hermetic
12-09-2006, 05:43 AM
That is the problem with ideology thinking that is too far swung in the extreme, it can burn a person out and they want to swing the other direction. Hence the need for a sane golden mean on the understanding of natures eternal order.

Sulla the Dictator
12-09-2006, 05:53 AM
I was referring to the united states. was the united states intended to be a multi-racial, multi cultural country with non-stop brown third world immigration? Don't think so.


Can you tell me if the Founders made a distinction between Italians, or Spaniards, and Mexicans?

I'll give you one guess.


The laws worked in favor of keeping those people out up until 1965.


Hispanic immigration didn't matter to anyone until the boom in the Southwest. So 1965 is really only ten or fifteen years after it matters to anyone.


How "impressive" their cultures may or may not have been doesn't really have a whole hell of a lot to do with the fact that these people are pouring across the borders everyday, exploding in number and changing the racial makeup and character of OUR country.


Oh, so then we can assume from this that there is NO racialist critique of these people.


Should it have mattered to the native americans that their European conquerors had an impressive culture?


It did matter to them. Many of them allied with the Europeans for that very reason. Of course, they were REAL peoples allying with REAL peoples. They wern't "Native Americans" allying with "WHITES (ROWARR)", the silly little RPG you play in yoru head.


they probably would have scalped you for trying to come at them with that.:

(Sigh)

Does it ever strike you as ironic that *I* am the civilized man, and you're the barbarian?

Starr
12-09-2006, 06:02 AM
It did matter to them. Many of them allied with the Europeans for that very reason. Of course, they were REAL peoples allying with REAL peoples. They wern't "Native Americans" allying with "WHITES (ROWARR)", the silly little RPG you play in yoru head.

and look at what it got them.

Does it ever strike you as ironic that *I* am the civilized man, and you're the barbarian?

A joke to illustrate a point.

Sulla the Dictator
12-09-2006, 06:03 AM
and look at what it got them.

Kind of undermines racialist claims of "Collective Race Honor", eh?

Sulla the Dictator
12-09-2006, 06:04 AM
Can you tell me if the Founders made a distinction between Italians, or Spaniards, and Mexicans?

I'll give you one guess.


C'mon Starr, take a stab at it.

Helios Panoptes
12-09-2006, 10:07 AM
i hope one day all the races can exist as one, im doubtful it will happen soon, and i support it - i really do.

What does that mean? Are you saying that you hope that they can coexist or that they are blended into a mono-race?

Arminius
12-09-2006, 10:10 AM
What does that mean? Are you saying that you hope that they can coexist or that they are blended into a mono-race?

I was wondering that. Either they coexist separately, or they eventually become one, which is actually not coexisting at all.

AussiePride
12-09-2006, 10:38 AM
What does that mean? Are you saying that you hope that they can coexist or that they are blended into a mono-race?

Man I wrote it after about 15 Jim Beams, but why do you care anyway? Do I know you?

Carlos Danger
12-09-2006, 10:42 AM
Hispanic immigration didn't matter to anyone until the boom in the Southwest. So 1965 is really only ten or fifteen years after it matters to anyone.
Why didn't Mexicans flood into California when gold was discovered in 1848?

AussiePride
12-09-2006, 10:43 AM
I was wondering that. Either they coexist separately, or they eventually become one, which is actually not coexisting at all.

I'll answer Ritter though. I hope they eventually become one. As I said, it's unlikely anytime soon, and there are many steps on the way there, but I believe it will occur. I am not of the opinion that we should just pump the third world into the West and think it's happening, but I am in favor of breaking down hate across the world and I hope and believe that one day, just as the tribes of Europe stopped fighting each other and formed nations, and than those nations stopped fighting each other and started working together, and no doubt increasingly breeding together that this can be replicated across the globe. Like I said, I am open to rational discussion on the matter, as to how we should get there, but really there is no reason we should not want it, at least in my opinion.

Hachiko
12-09-2006, 10:45 AM
Why didn't Mexicans flood into California when gold was discovered in 1848?
Because any of them that could use a pan was already a short-order cook back East.

Sulla the Dictator
12-09-2006, 10:49 AM
Why didn't Mexicans flood into California when gold was discovered in 1848?

Because Northern Mexico has historically been very sparsely populated. The rise of modern transportation systems within Mexico is largely responsible for the size of the immigration wave we face now.

Carlos Danger
12-09-2006, 11:01 AM
Surely the overland routes across North America were equally difficult - all those Indians and mountains etc.

Lots of Yankees actually preferred to sail around the Cape rather than make the difficult overland journey to California

Helios Panoptes
12-09-2006, 11:27 AM
Man I wrote it after about 15 Jim Beams, but why do you care anyway?

I don't. Disregard. It would be a waste of time to pursue the matter.

Do I know you?

No.

Hermetic
12-09-2006, 02:45 PM
I have no problem with world peace and cooperation in a healthy manner. But if that includes the death of my Race then I have to disagree as I put my own Peoples safety before their harm.

I think it becomes a question of what do you value in the end.


I'll answer Ritter though. I hope they eventually become one. As I said, it's unlikely anytime soon, and there are many steps on the way there, but I believe it will occur. I am not of the opinion that we should just pump the third world into the West and think it's happening, but I am in favor of breaking down hate across the world and I hope and believe that one day, just as the tribes of Europe stopped fighting each other and formed nations, and than those nations stopped fighting each other and started working together, and no doubt increasingly breeding together that this can be replicated across the globe. Like I said, I am open to rational discussion on the matter, as to how we should get there, but really there is no reason we should not want it, at least in my opinion.

shanemac
12-09-2006, 04:06 PM
Wow Aussiepride,

That's quite a transformation you've gone through!

Was there some specific event or relationship that made you change your mind on racial matters?

You say you're pro-Asian immigration, and you see Australia's future as part of Asia. Why? Of what benefit is Asian immigration to white Australians?

I'm currently living & working in Japan, and I can assure you, the Japanese do not see Australia as part of Asia. They don't even see themselves as part of Asia, and certainly being close to Asia does not mean they want to let in other Asian immigrants. Quite the opposite... they let almost no-one immigrate here.

The Japs make no qualms about telling anyone who cares to ask. They don't believe in immigration because it destroys nations. They see all the shit that happens in the west, because of multi-cultyism, and they have definitely decided they do not want that for Japan.

You know how bad Sydney has become over the last few years. You can not go into many areas, or even into the city on a friday or saturday night without worrying if you're going to get bashed, stabbed robbed whatever. Even just driving in traffic, you can't feel safe in Sydney these days... everyone is ready to get into a fight over nothing... you accidentally cut someone off at a left turn... what the fuck... "have you got a problem mate"... 6'6'' Tongan fucker jumps out of the ute threatening to tear your head off.

But in Japan, you can go anywhere... the poorest suburbs in the country, the home-turf of the Yakuza and feel completely safe. Nobody will bother you. Road-rage? Unheard of. Road rage here would be beeping your horn for half a second, at which the other driver would most likely put up their hand and bow as a sign of apology.

But you add in a few million Arabs, niggers, Indians, Philipinos, whities, Somali refugees, Hmong tribes-men, whatever other scum you've got around the world, and suddenly it'd be a chaotic free for all shit-heap, just like Sydney. I have no doubt.

Does multiculturalism benefit Australians? That's really the only question that matters; but a question that never was asked of the people before the politicians went ahead and did it anyway.

Winston
12-09-2006, 05:32 PM
Do you think its valid for someone who was born wealthy, and attended Ivy League Schools to suggest that they are genetically superior to you?

Nobody likes to think that they might be inferior, but if that question was to be asked of me, and I was to answer it honestly, I would have to say that yes, it is possible that they are genetically superior to me.

MrAngry
12-09-2006, 05:41 PM
Nobody likes to think that they might be inferior, but if that question was to be asked of me, and I was to answer it honestly, I would have to say that yes, it is possible that they are genetically superior to me.


Do you really think so!? And If the person described by Sulla was from Indian or African extraction?

il ragno
12-09-2006, 05:57 PM
Originally Posted by Sulla the Dictator
Do you think its valid for someone who was born wealthy, and attended Ivy League Schools to suggest that they are genetically superior to you?

No, that sort of 'superiority' is purely acquired, not inherent, particularly in a society full of the vulgar nouveau riche. Besides, the coming 'elite' - ie, the sons and daughters of nigger power forwards, Jew arbitrage swindlers and chink sweatshop owners - will constitute the first generation of ubermensch to classify themselves as Victims of Whitey from the interior of a stretch-limo.

Winston
12-09-2006, 06:14 PM
Do you really think so!? And If the person described by Sulla was from Indian or African extraction?


Well, it's complicated. As il ragno just said in his own inimitable style, plenty of those people who are born wealthy and attend Ivy League Schools are not at all superior in any way, but there is the possibility that some of them are. I based my answer on the fact that not all men are created equal, and that this fact has just as much importance within races. It is possible that the above category of person would be stating a fact when they suggest that they are genetically superior to me.
Superiority and inferiority are tricky things, though. Personally I don't consider higher intelligence alone as the mark of superiority.

Count Sudoku
12-09-2006, 06:21 PM
Thats also false. Everyone's a 'nigger' to a Roman. The Romans didn't build civilization for YOU Starr. They built it for themselves. So too with every other person or group of people who advanced the world a little further. Great men haven't given a fig for the 'white race'.

Speaking of the Romans, one of the reasons if not the main reason their empire collapsed was because they started giving citizenship to almost anybody.

You, having been RAISED in a nation which was dedicated from its inception to being multi-ethnic AND multi-cultural have no real ethnic identity.

That is pure bullshit. The USA was not founded as a multicultural country as we currently define the term.

Is a rich, Ivy Leaguer your genetic superior?

Maybe, possibly even probably unless we're talking about George Bush.

Leshrac
12-09-2006, 06:24 PM
Thats also false. Everyone's a 'nigger' to a Roman. The Romans didn't build civilization for YOU Starr. They built it for themselves...

And for the future generations. Do you think the romans built everything, waged war to every arab trying to invaded them and suddenly stopped and thought: "hey cool, in 1500 years people will sell our great civilizations out to the same people that try to destroy it now, because some idiot will push the idea that 'we're all equal' down their throats"

I think not.

:bbbat: :nopity:

Leshrac
12-09-2006, 06:31 PM
Also the idea that different races can live in the same place and get along is flawed to the core.

History proves this. White civilizations have always had a tech tree way more developped than other races; even when whites started sharing their knowledge to other races and taught them how to do this and that, they still managed to screw up and remained less capable at inventing/developping stuff.

Plus whites have separated religion and government long ago while people in africa and the third world are only starting to grasp concepts such as democracy and government; and i don't even mention mid-eastern countries where people can't understand shit past the idea that "god told me to [xxx]", that alone is incompatible with democracy and therefore with white people, be it racially or culturally.

AussiePride
12-10-2006, 01:04 AM
Wow Aussiepride,

That's quite a transformation you've gone through!

Was there some specific event or relationship that made you change your mind on racial matters?

You say you're pro-Asian immigration, and you see Australia's future as part of Asia. Why? Of what benefit is Asian immigration to white Australians?

I'm currently living & working in Japan, and I can assure you, the Japanese do not see Australia as part of Asia. They don't even see themselves as part of Asia, and certainly being close to Asia does not mean they want to let in other Asian immigrants. Quite the opposite... they let almost no-one immigrate here.

The Japs make no qualms about telling anyone who cares to ask. They don't believe in immigration because it destroys nations. They see all the shit that happens in the west, because of multi-cultyism, and they have definitely decided they do not want that for Japan.

You know how bad Sydney has become over the last few years. You can not go into many areas, or even into the city on a friday or saturday night without worrying if you're going to get bashed, stabbed robbed whatever. Even just driving in traffic, you can't feel safe in Sydney these days... everyone is ready to get into a fight over nothing... you accidentally cut someone off at a left turn... what the fuck... "have you got a problem mate"... 6'6'' Tongan fucker jumps out of the ute threatening to tear your head off.

But in Japan, you can go anywhere... the poorest suburbs in the country, the home-turf of the Yakuza and feel completely safe. Nobody will bother you. Road-rage? Unheard of. Road rage here would be beeping your horn for half a second, at which the other driver would most likely put up their hand and bow as a sign of apology.

But you add in a few million Arabs, niggers, Indians, Philipinos, whities, Somali refugees, Hmong tribes-men, whatever other scum you've got around the world, and suddenly it'd be a chaotic free for all shit-heap, just like Sydney. I have no doubt.

Does multiculturalism benefit Australians? That's really the only question that matters; but a question that never was asked of the people before the politicians went ahead and did it anyway.

Well my argument was based on the belief that as long as it is done at a rate that allows for their proper absorption into the nation I support it. I understand the Japanese take a very strong position on the matter, and I won't fault them, I won't really fault you because certainly if you look at the irresponsible programs we have now lead by the flower power mob and the disconnected political class than certainly it can make a person angry. But that said, ultimately I have renounced the fact that I see the White race, or indeed any race, worthy of indefinitely preserving, and because I may disapprove of the current approach to multiculturalism it doesn't mean I, or you, has to flip over to an extreme point of view on the flip side. It's fair to point out the problems, but if you come from a position which

As you say yourself, Japan is quite a nice country and their people quite educated and placid, so why than should we oppose an appropriate number of them moving to Australia under a skilled worker program? And in fact, on that note I really don't particularly support our refugee program. I think if our goal is to help these individuals, we should focus on the macro not the micro, the problem is much larger than any refugee program can solve. The cost it takes to integrate these people into our nation (and I have seen it first hand as I have worked with them) is indeed quite large (primarily on the side of the education system). The resources poured in this could help many more people in their homelands, and could be used to solve the core problems.

But multiculturalism isn't the cause of the worlds ills. Although I don't particularly like the term, as it encourages the separation of people into their little tribes within a nation, I have lived in such an area from my birth. I can very clearly say I have known plenty of White Anglo-Aussie's, and I have to say myself included, who have committed acts which people seem to attempt to limit to blacks, etc. Really, if people on here knew the stuff I used to get up to even while I was posting my racist rhetoric on the forum in the old days they wouldn't believe me. I am not going to post the stuff now, but as a mature individual now who can look back it sure as hell isn't stuff that I would consider a positive contribution to the nation. I've been cuffed, interviewed, locked up, chased numerous times, etc and unless there is a 'nigger in the woodpile' somewhere way back I am as White as they come.

So I am open to rational discussion on why this occurs, because I know it isn't just multiculturalism to be blame. It may be a contributing factor, but I think it has more to do with the degradation of family values, the increasing culture of alcoholism in Australia (hell I like to get drunk, but I do it responsibly and not every day), the fact that the poor are breeding at a rate much faster than the middle or the rich. The factors for it are vast, and I agree, Sydney is going to shit, and things need to change, but multiculturalism is only a small part of the picture. Sure creating some Fascist State would reduce crime, keep our streets clean, etc but it's not how I want to live. After all crime has dropped radically since the Islamists took control of most of Somali, but they are also now pushing in laws that will make it a crime (punishable by beheading/death) for those who do not pray during the 5 times a day they broadcast. Should we invite them here to clean up our streets? I think not.

Anarch
12-10-2006, 01:08 AM
I think we are tied to Asia, like it or not. It's a shame some of the Asian nations don't share the same benevolence that Western nations often try to show though, but I think it will come with time if we
encourage it.

Yeah, after over half of this country is Asian itself.

Ultimately I am quite happy for immigration from Asian nations to continue provided it does so at a rate at which we can absorb them into the nation, and the culture. I do believe mass-immigration can be quite irresponsible at times, and I think we must accept it is generally harder to absorb certain types of Asians, for instance Muslims from Malaysia (though I have been to Malaysia and it is quite Westernized) or God forbid Indonesia.

The Asians will never consider us one of them for two main reasons: A) we're descendents of the Brits who pwned them for quite some time, B) we're still doing what the Brits did, knocking down impotent governments and trying to improve the lives of the locals, preventing it from degenerating into anarchy. We're also white. Which makes us - you should know this - fourty thousand years biologically removed.

Here's an idea, Stuart. This country is more than a chunk of dirt, it's more than the flag and it's more than whatever lives in Canberra. It's the people and all of the above. And I mean it's the people who built this country. My ancestors have been here since 1830, Stuart. When my grandfather enlisted in the air force during world war two, he wasn't fighting for some shithole 'everyone can come and join' pussy-footing Liberal idea of what Australia is. You can go check the war posters. They wouldn't be too hard to find. A white, British Australia. I have no problems with the odd Maori or Abo. I'm perfectly capable of letting them enjoy what we've got. Cross the line and I'll be pissed off, just as I would anyone. But the second this becomes inimical to the continuation of the Australian nation - yes, Stuart, it means a hell of a lot more than a piece of paper - then I'll damn well oppose it, your "humanity" idea be damned. This country is - to the overwhelming majority of Australians - predominantly Anglo-Celtic, English speaking, and white. Stuart, a native is a man who's willing to die for his country. I think Maoris, Abo's, Kiwis, Brits, white Americans - all well capable of integrating and becoming Australians. But these gooks you advocate importing - would they fight to defend Australia against any and every other country on the planet, if it came to that? I don't think so. I knew a kid in high school, decent guy, he's Chinese - I had a discussion with him once in a club, we were talking about this. He said if it came to it, he would fight for China against us, but he'd still respect me for fighting for my own. And I'd respect him. Wouldn't stop me from trying to kill him if I ever met him on the front, but I'd respect him. And that 'respect' matters a hell of a lot more than the carpet bombing and mass starvation that UN leaders pull out of the sky to impose on some tribe or other because they've offended this mythical idea of 'humanity'.

Ken I know you man, you'll come around one day.

Obviously not. I'm about to enlist, Stuart. I have an odd feeling your concept of 'humanity' wouldn't be too comforting if artillery rounds were exploding overhead and your fellow 'humans' were trying to kill me.

I still understand and respect your point of view, and I am not arguing that you should become some flower power hippie, but I think you will generally see the world beyond the nation with time, and be prepared to openly look at what is best for humanity.

What's best for humanity is national self-determination and liberty for all. Some want more than that - they want to control others. Such people deserve destruction.

AussiePride
12-10-2006, 05:09 AM
Yeah, after over half of this country is Asian itself. The Asians will never consider us one of them for two main reasons: A) we're descendents of the Brits who pwned them for quite some time, B) we're still doing what the Brits did, knocking down impotent governments and trying to improve the lives of the locals, preventing it from degenerating into anarchy. We're also white. Which makes us - you should know this - fourty thousand years biologically removed.

In the history of this planet 40,000 years is not a lot. If we worked towards it rationally, in another thousand race won't even be a point of discussion really, just as the different tribes we all once stemmed from in Europe no longer matter (yet it still does in many parts of the world, who have socially evolved for a variety of reasons behind the West).

Here's an idea, Stuart. This country is more than a chunk of dirt, it's more than the flag and it's more than whatever lives in Canberra. It's the people and all of the above. And I mean it's the people who built this country. My ancestors have been here since 1830, Stuart. When my grandfather enlisted in the air force during world war two, he wasn't fighting for some shithole 'everyone can come and join' pussy-footing Liberal idea of what Australia is. You can go check the war posters. They wouldn't be too hard to find. A white, British Australia. I have no problems with the odd Maori or Abo. I'm perfectly capable of letting them enjoy what we've got. Cross the line and I'll be pissed off, just as I would anyone. But the second this becomes inimical to the continuation of the Australian nation - yes, Stuart, it means a hell of a lot more than a piece of paper - then I'll damn well oppose it, your "humanity" idea be damned. This country is - to the overwhelming majority of Australians - predominantly Anglo-Celtic, English speaking, and white. Stuart, a native is a man who's willing to die for his country. I think Maoris, Abo's, Kiwis, Brits, white Americans - all well capable of integrating and becoming Australians. But these gooks you advocate importing - would they fight to defend Australia against any and every other country on the planet, if it came to that? I don't think so. I knew a kid in high school, decent guy, he's Chinese - I had a discussion with him once in a club, we were talking about this. He said if it came to it, he would fight for China against us, but he'd still respect me for fighting for my own. And I'd respect him. Wouldn't stop me from trying to kill him if I ever met him on the front, but I'd respect him. And that 'respect' matters a hell of a lot more than the carpet bombing and mass starvation that UN leaders pull out of the sky to impose on some tribe or other because they've offended this mythical idea of 'humanity'.

The funny thing is we don't even disagree on all THAT much, but that is fine. In this time in history I do agree a nation-state is quite important, quite to the contrary of becoming less important a nation-state has taken on a significant role in representing the vastly different people of the globe in the international community. I do agree pumping any group of people into the country too fast, and promoting the division through a policy of multiculturalism doesn't have a positive effect. It of course isn't just Asians who are an example of this, how many White Croats don't consider themselves Australians? The vast majority of them still think they are in the old country, even though they've never seen the place. Contrary to you I have seen a lot of Asians who would be willing to fight and die for the ideals this nation believes in, even if it is against their own race, but I do understand race for many is still an important thing (black, white, yellow). That's why I support a sensible immigration policy, not what we have now (which I believe is irresponsible), and I believe in working globally to break these notions down, not purely in Western nations (as many leftists only do).

But at the end of the day, it is ideals I believe in not purely the nation-state. And yes, I truly do believe in the vast majority of ideals Australia fundamentally supports, especially in comparison with any nation that would threaten us (i.e. Indonesia, etc), so yes I'd fight and die for this nation if necessary (and I'll add on my mothers side of the family my background is similar to you with regards to military service, year of arrival, etc). But let me ask you, if you are German (born and raised) in WWII, yet you believe in what America was fighting for, should you still fight for your nation simply because they are your ethnic brothers? After all, a nation is more than a chunk of dirt isn't it? Actually, if your fighting for it for no other reason than the fact it is there, and you were born there, even if you don't believe in the cause, doesn't that mean you're fighting purely for a chunk of dirt? I don't know, I'm confused.

I'd say our biggest point of disagreement is purely on the perspective. You are coming from a perspective in which you want to maintain difference, I am now coming from one where I don't.

Obviously not. I'm about to enlist, Stuart. I have an odd feeling your concept of 'humanity' wouldn't be too comforting if artillery rounds were exploding overhead and your fellow 'humans' were trying to kill me.

You are probably pretty unlikely to see that in our army. Even ff you go serve in Iraq, I doubt you'll see all that many military rounds over your head doing what we are doing over there. The ironic thing is, you are much more likely to be sent on some humanitarian mission to some far off land, kind of funny actually. But at the end of the day, you can read my posts in this thread, I'm not a pacifist, if you're in a just war than you have my full support, just as a police officer does when he guns down someone who threatens to stab him.

What's best for humanity is national self-determination and liberty for all. Some want more than that - they want to control others. Such people deserve destruction.

The nation-state is still important no doubt, just as the local government member is important in reflecting the unique and specific needs of their community. But in reality it isn't a whole lot more than that. But Ken, the reason I stopped posting on this board is because I hated wasting so much time arguing to an audience of 5 people (all of whom are no doubt fiercly committed to their point of view already). That's why I mostly just lurk and read now days. But I'll try to keep up with ya.

Sulla the Dictator
12-10-2006, 05:37 AM
History proves this. White civilizations have always had a tech tree way more developped than other races;


That is absolutely false.

Sulla the Dictator
12-10-2006, 05:39 AM
And for the future generations.


Of ROMANS, only.


Do you think the romans built everything, waged war to every arab trying to invaded them and suddenly stopped and thought: "hey cool, in 1500 years people will sell our great civilizations out to the same people that try to destroy it now, because some idiot will push the idea that 'we're all equal' down their throats"


The Romans didn't fight "Arabs" too often. What you described is more like their attitude towards Germans. How embarassing.

Sulla the Dictator
12-10-2006, 05:50 AM
No, that sort of 'superiority' is purely acquired, not inherent, particularly in a society full of the vulgar nouveau riche. Besides, the coming 'elite' - ie, the sons and daughters of nigger power forwards, Jew arbitrage swindlers and chink sweatshop owners - will constitute the first generation of ubermensch to classify themselves as Victims of Whitey from the interior of a stretch-limo.

I could count on good ol il ragno to provide the correct, and hypocritical, response. Self appointed defender of the 'working man', and so on.

Now, il ragno, a question. Why is the posession of wealth, the superior IQ scores, and the lower crime rate of the elite I mentioned NOT a mark of genetic superiority?

:)

Anarch
12-10-2006, 09:28 AM
In the history of this planet 40,000 years is not a lot. If we worked towards it rationally, in another thousand race won't even be a point of discussion really, just as the different tribes we all once stemmed from in Europe no longer matter (yet it still does in many parts of the world, who have socially evolved for a variety of reasons behind the West).

Yes, and in the long run the entire human species will be extinct, so there goes 'humanity'. Let's dedicate our lives to preserving ameoba instead.

The funny thing is we don't even disagree on all THAT much, but that is fine. In this time in history I do agree a nation-state is quite important, quite to the contrary of becoming less important a nation-state has taken on a significant role in representing the vastly different people of the globe in the international community. I do agree pumping any group of people into the country too fast, and promoting the division through a policy of multiculturalism doesn't have a positive effect. It of course isn't just Asians who are an example of this, how many White Croats don't consider themselves Australians?

I'm not a white nationalist. I don't give a damn about the tribal squabbles of Croats, Serbs and Bosniaks. They can keep that shit back at home. This is my country.

The vast majority of them still think they are in the old country, even though they've never seen the place. Contrary to you I have seen a lot of Asians who would be willing to fight and die for the ideals this nation believes in, even if it is against their own race, but I do understand race for many is still an important thing (black, white, yellow). That's why I support a sensible immigration policy, not what we have now (which I believe is irresponsible), and I believe in working globally to break these notions down, not purely in Western nations (as many leftists only do).

Sure. I'm aware there are Asians who'd fight for this country against anyone. I'm ok with that. I still want this country to be overwhelmingly Australian. And I also happen to believe 'Australian' is a word that means something specifically.

But at the end of the day, it is ideals I believe in not purely the nation-state. And yes, I truly do believe in the vast majority of ideals Australia fundamentally supports, especially in comparison with any nation that would threaten us (i.e. Indonesia, etc), so yes I'd fight and die for this nation if necessary (and I'll add on my mothers side of the family my background is similar to you with regards to military service, year of arrival, etc). But let me ask you, if you are German (born and raised) in WWII, yet you believe in what America was fighting for, should you still fight for your nation simply because they are your ethnic brothers? After all, a nation is more than a chunk of dirt isn't it?

In the end, I don't fight for my mother's land or my father's land. I'm fighting for my children's land. That's not a chunk of dirt, or an institution, or a flag. It's something I love. This is it.

Actually, if your fighting for it for no other reason than the fact it is there, and you were born there, even if you don't believe in the cause, doesn't that mean you're fighting purely for a chunk of dirt? I don't know, I'm confused.

I'd fight - and live - for who I am. For me, if you can interpret that in a way that doesn't get me thrown in the same category as petty hedonists.

I'd say our biggest point of disagreement is purely on the perspective. You are coming from a perspective in which you want to maintain difference, I am now coming from one where I don't.

I agree, actually. I refuse to compromise on the fact of my existence. Call that a 'desire to maintain difference', if you want. I don't think it matters.

You are probably pretty unlikely to see that in our army. Even ff you go serve in Iraq, I doubt you'll see all that many military rounds over your head doing what we are doing over there. The ironic thing is, you are much more likely to be sent on some humanitarian mission to some far off land, kind of funny actually. But at the end of the day, you can read my posts in this thread, I'm not a pacifist, if you're in a just war than you have my full support, just as a police officer does when he guns down someone who threatens to stab him.

Sure, ok. This doesn't address my point about the utter vacuousness of this 'humanity' you speak of. Why should I give a damn about someone simply because it's biologically possible I could screw his sister or daughter and produce a kid?

The nation-state is still important no doubt, just as the local government member is important in reflecting the unique and specific needs of their community. But in reality it isn't a whole lot more than that.

Not to you, obviously.

But Ken, the reason I stopped posting on this board is because I hated wasting so much time arguing to an audience of 5 people (all of whom are no doubt fiercly committed to their point of view already). That's why I mostly just lurk and read now days. But I'll try to keep up with ya.

Ok.

shanemac
12-10-2006, 03:45 PM
Aussiepride, ye didnae answer ma post. Back tae tha kaeboard laddie. :whip:

http://www.thephora.net/forum/showthread.php?p=254057#post254057

Janus
12-10-2006, 03:50 PM
In the history of this planet 40,000 years is not a lot. You are right. You should miscegenate. :)