A question to the racialist hatemongers and intolerant bigots-

[Billy Score]

What is your(the white nationalist/racialist) stance on a white person mixing with a half asian person or something to that nature? I am thinking something along the lines of your daughter bringing home Keanu Reeves or Brandon Lee. Could they be called "white"? Where do they fit in your model?

I know the stance on mulattos, but no one here is too quick to speak for or against eurasians and we've even got one of them lurking among us here.

[Janus]

It is unacceptable, but I would hardly describe myself as a "white nationalist/racialist" nor a "racialist hatemonger... [nor] intolerant bigot...". :D

[Jim West]

I find the very idea abhorrent, at least in regard to my own daughters. Again, personally, I simply find the average white person more physically attractive than the average Asian. As for negroes, well, I find the majority of them unspeakably ugly. In sum, it's a matter of aesthetics to me.

[Billy Score]

I am not talking about the average asian, friends. I am talking about a keanu reeves mongrelized half white half asian.

[Starr]

Love the thread title.:D
Of course I would not consider a Eurasian to be white and I would not want my non-existant child bringing one home.

[Billy Score]

Maybe i am just a halfwit, but i can't even tell sometimes. I didn't know keanu reeves was half asian until someone told me. Am i just incompetant or is there more to it?

[Starr]

Maybe i am just a halfwit, but i can't even tell sometimes. I didn't know keanu reeves was half asian until someone told me. Am i just incompetant or is there more to it?


Yeah, that can be a bit of a problem. I had the same problem with Dean Cain, who I thought was really hot.(just thought I would bring it up before Anima or anyone else does:p) Of course, now that I know he is half-japanese, or whatever he is, I can see what I couldn't see before. Which doesn't make much sense.

Keanu is a different story, can't you tell by those eyes, for one?

[Janus]

Maybe i am just a halfwit, but i can't even tell sometimes. I didn't know keanu reeves was half asian until someone told me. Am i just incompetant or is there more to it?
He isn't:Keanu Reeves was born in Lebanon. He is one-quarter Chinese, one-quarter Hawaiian, half-English, and a Canadian citizen. (Link (http://www.nndb.com/people/041/000022972/))

[Anima Eternae]

Keanu Reeves was born in Lebanon. He is one-quarter Chinese, one-quarter Hawaiian, half-English, and a Canadian citizen.

Quarter Hawaiin + Quarter Chinese = half "asian". Hawaiians are mongoloids.

[Billy Score]

He isn't: (Link (http://www.nndb.com/people/041/000022972/))
Newsflash: 25% chinese + 25% hawaiian= 50% Asiatic.

And i mean, now that i know he is half asian i can tell, same with jennifer tilly, but to me they could easily pull the wool over my eyes.

[Anima Eternae]

I know enough 25% asian 75% white folks who are virtually indistinguishable from full whites. There was this Nordic ROTC guy in one of my classes who was 1/4 jap, but I'll be damned if I could tell.

[Janus]

Quarter Hawaiin + Quarter Chinese = half "asian". Hawaiians are mongoloids. Hawaiians = "Polynesoids" Hawaiians are genotypically and phenotypically distinct from "Mongoloids". ;)

[Anima Eternae]

Hawaiians are indeed mongloids. There's no such thing as a "polynesoid", except maybe in kooky WN anthro circles.

[Starr]

I am curious now as to what you would do, Mazdak if your son brought home the trashiest, drug addicted stripping super-slut he could find?

[Sulla the Dictator]

I don't have a problem with anyone having children with anyone. :p

[Starr]

Sulla had to look at this thread because underneath it all he is a racialist hatemonger and intolerant bigot. I thought so.

Glenn miller needs to answer this question.

[Janus]

Hawaiians are indeed mongloids. The antiquated "three-race theory" does not accurately reflect human variation. Do you believe that the Aboriginese are "Mongoloid"?There's no such thing as a "polynesoid", except maybe in kooky WN anthro circles. There is no such classification as the "Mongoloid" in the majority of established anthropological-circles though; unless, that is, it is made in reference to one of these individuals: http://www.mega.bz/rotfl/images/argue091204.jpg On that note, I shall retire. :)

[Anima Eternae]

Google results for polynesoid?


2.


lol :p

[Péter]

Each ethnicity should keep to their own kind.

This race=color notion is really diseased.

[Billy Score]

I am curious now as to what you would do, Mazdak if your son brought home the trashiest, drug addicted stripping super-slut he could find?

I would throw a shitfit. If he insisted upon bringing home this kind of garbage, i would disinherit him. I'll be damned if my money is going to feed someone's coke addiction.

And sulla wouldn't care because sulla... well, Wehrmacht could better address this.

[Kodos]

http://battlestar.ugo.com/images/girls//grace_park/large/grace_park_13.jpg

Those unattractive asians...

[Kodos]

I believe that people should "stick to their own", but ultimately a father can't impose his will on who his daughter marries.

You can just teach her that if he doesn't have money you are going to have to work, and working sucks.

[Sulla the Dictator]

I would throw a shitfit. If he insisted upon bringing home this kind of garbage, i would disinherit him. I'll be damned if my money is going to feed someone's coke addiction.


Why would you be upset? Its not as though any children of yours would be biologically related to you, considering how icky you find girls.


And sulla wouldn't care because sulla... well, Wehrmacht could better address this.

LMAO I remember Mazdak's picture. Its cute that he's playing a Nordic viking now.

[sugartits]

Hard to say. I would have to consult my geneticist first to find out how slanted my grandchildren's eyes would be. A tall Eurasian would also be preferable to a short one. Apparently Keanu Reeves is 6'1. He will do.

[Donny the Punk]

A right sick lot you bunch are, discussing disowning your daughters and sons because they might fall in love with someone with nary a thought for their skin colour. Fathers forgive, it's tyrants who damn, and should you ever a) breed, b) work up the nerve to let your diseased spite out, they'll know it.


LMAO I remember Mazdak's picture. Its cute that he's playing a Nordic viking now.
Indeed. :rofl:

[Anima Eternae]

Who gives a fuck about skin color? We're talking race.

[Donny the Punk]

Who gives a fuck about skin color?
Internet racists, apparently.

We're talking race.
I see, so when you're walking down the street and identify someone as being Indian, you do so on some other basis than skin colour? Praytell, what tests do you administer?

[Kodos]

A right sick lot you bunch are, discussing disowning your daughters and sons because they might fall in love with someone with nary a thought for their skin colour. Fathers forgive, it's tyrants who damn, and should you ever a) breed, b) work up the nerve to let your diseased spite out, they'll know it.

She'd have to become something really horrible like a muslim for me to disown, I would make it clear that it is in her own interest to marry money... and to remember that love shit is a temporary biological thing that doesn't last.

[Starr]

Internet racists, apparently.

I see, so when you're walking down the street and identify someone as being Indian, you do so on some other basis than skin colour? Praytell, what tests do you administer?


Uh, even when just getting a quick glance at somebody there is a lot more ways their race is identifiable besides just skin color.

She'd have to become something really horrible like a muslim for me to disown,
Would you rather she brings home some white goofball who found Islam or a nigger?
I would make it clear that it is in her own interest to marry money... and to remember that love shit is a temporary biological thing that doesn't last.
So you would teach your daughter that relationships are meaningless and to just take what she will. Aren't you among the ones that are always bitching about women taking guys to the cleaners? What are you telling your daughter to do here?:nono:

[Helios Panoptes]

Potyondi, skin color is usually indicative of race.

[Donny the Punk]

Uh, even when just getting a quick glance at somebody there is a lot more ways their race is identifiable besides just skin color.
Is that so? Since Indians have caucasian bone structure, I find that impossible to believe.

Potyondi, skin color is usually indicative of race.
An honest answer. :p

[Blaphbee]

Culture is another big factor.

Ethnicity is just as much tied to skin colour as it is to culture.

This is a lounge topic. Why are you trying to make it into a war about race?

[sugartits]

What is the colour of Eurasian skin? Not very different from white skin. Asians are more identifiable by the shape of their eyes then skin colour. This thread is concerning the aforementioned races. Not redskins.

[Blaphbee]

Is that so? Since Indians have caucasian bone structure, I find that impossible to believe.
What is "causcasian bone structure", and how does it differ from negroid or asian bone structure?

[Donny the Punk]

Culture is another big factor.

Ethnicity is just as much tied to skin colour as it is to culture.

This is a lounge topic. Why are you trying to make it into a war about race?
Because the notion that a thread devoted to despising people for falling in love without concern or care for racial divides should be discussed casually is offensive in and of itself.
What is the colour of Eurasian skin? Not very different from white skin. Asians are more identifiable by the shape of their eyes then skin colour. This thread is concerning the aforementioned races. Not redskins.
Although I'm sure the deep philosophising you do next to the popcorn machine all day makes you imagine you're 'above it all,' Aboriginals have never been called "redskins" in this country. I was, however, referring to subcontinental Indians. As for the shapes of eyes, I could post pictures of a dozen whites with epicanthic folds, sorry.

[Starr]

Because the notion that a thread devoted to despising people for falling in love without concern or care for racial divides should be discussed casually is offensive in and of itself.

If this is an important issue to you, isn't it better to discuss it casually and rationally? It makes for a better flow of discussion after all.

[Blaphbee]

Because the notion that a thread devoted to despising people for falling in love without concern or care for racial divides should be discussed casually is offensive in and of itself.
Exactly why is this offensive?

This isn't a thread devoted to "despising people" based on skin colour - it's asking a simple question: what are your thoughts on your offspring dating someone not of their own subspecies? Nowhere within the thread's initial question is there the explicit words of "despising people" for "racial divides" - you're putting words in Mazdak's mouth. Why, exactly? You can whine all you like about these sentiments being "implicit" if you wish, but until you ask Mazdak what his own implications were, you're being awfully presumptuous, and seem to be making a mountain out of a molehill.

EDIT: Sorry Starr, you beat me to it. :)

[Helios Panoptes]

Because the notion that a thread devoted to despising people for falling in love without concern or care for racial divides should be discussed casually is offensive in and of itself.

The notion that people should mate with others on the basis of something so fleeting and trivial as infatuation is offensive to me. The most important function of any sexual relationship betwixt a male and female is the production of good offspring.

[il ragno]

A right sick lot you bunch are, discussing disowning your daughters and sons because they might fall in love with someone with nary a thought for their skin colour. Fathers forgive, it's tyrants who damn, and should you ever a) breed, b) work up the nerve to let your diseased spite out, they'll know it.

Forget it, Jake...it's Chinatown. I mean, uh, the Lounge.

[Donny the Punk]

If this is an important issue to you, isn't it better to discuss it casually and rationally? It makes for a better flow of discussion after all.
Lounge topics are by definition not serious, which is the issue at stake.
The notion that people should mate with others on the basis of something so fleeting and trivial as infatuation is offensive to me. The most important function of any sexual relationship betwixt a male and female is the production of good offspring.
Infatuation is not the same thing as love; it seems you've never experienced either, so why you consider yourself fit to comment on them is beyond us all. What, pray, is supposed to keep couples with children together, if not love? Your bizarro notions of "racial duty," perhaps? Good offspring are well-adjusted and moral, both of which tend to be the fruits of a stable and loving household.
Forget it, Jake...it's Chinatown. I mean, uh, the Lounge.
:p

However, if my daughter brought home one of your people, poty, i'd shotgun her for downbreeding. I'd prefer she marry a half hmong half ethiopian jew to a pollak.
Yawn. Sometimes it's offensive, and sometimes it's just parody.

[sugartits]

Aboriginals have never been called "redskins" in this country. I was, however, referring to subcontinental Indians.

Some of which have red skin.

As for the shapes of eyes, I could post pictures of a dozen whites with epicanthic folds, sorry.

Go ahead :p I never said anything about whites not having them, or that it distinguishes whites from Asians specifically. Post pictures of Africans with epicanthic eye folds as well while you're at it.

[Hannibal]

what happened to you mazdak? you use to be so cool.

[Billy Score]

I was making a simple inquiry and Agent Potyondi and his goons railroad it. I have nothing against blacks. I simply don't want my grandchildren to be black. It is an issue of biological success. The purpose of life is to triumph on this level. if you do not, you failed. Why would i desire to be a failure on account of my daughter's selfish individualism? We both know she has absolutely nothing in common with her boyfriend tyrone and he is only sticking around to get a piece of that "tight white bitch". But he is not to blame, she is, for selling herself and her people. She is spitting at her father, her grandparents and her ancestors and betraying her people. Why should this be tolerated? If i am a good parent, this won't happen, but the problem is the environment is against me. The environment begs her to lose her virginity at the age of 12 with a coke addicted transexual from Detroit.

those who preach diversity and multiculturalism are quite humorous. Miscegeny ultimately leads to the extinction of caucasoids by the fact that white genes are recessive and negroid genes own them. I don't personally care about "pure this" or that, but at least maintain some standards of decency. Miscegeny is not one of these. But you are an ultra liberal if i recall and thus this won't make any sense to your "we are the world" neo sodom wet dreams.

what happened to you mazdak? you use to be so cool.


I still am, "dude". Che shirterism is so last year, you have to reinvent to stay on top, you know?

[Anima Eternae]

So what's your take on those of the eurasian persuasion, Maz? :p

[The Retard]

What is your(the white nationalist/racialist) stance on a white person mixing with a half asian person or something to that nature? I am thinking something along the lines of your daughter bringing home Keanu Reeves or Brandon Lee. Could they be called "white"? Where do they fit in your model?

I know the stance on mulattos, but no one here is too quick to speak for or against eurasians and we've even got one of them lurking among us here.

No, because you end up with kids like Anima.

[Starr]

Good offspring are well-adjusted and moral, both of which tend to be the fruits of a stable and loving household

This is true enough. There is a little more to the idea of two people getting together than just the quality of offspring they can produce. If not than I should just go have a one night stand with some big, tall, Intelligent Aryan "superman" and bear his child. Why bother will silly notions such as love, commitment, marriage or anything else?:rolleyes:

[Anima Eternae]

No, because you end up with kids like Anima

Why is this bad? :D

[Billy Score]

So what's your take on those of the eurasian persuasion, Maz? :p

Depends. If jennifer tilly proposed to me i'd probably put her in a burlap sack and kick her to death because she is a degenerate. However if someone who looked like her and had a less annoying voice and virtue, i'm down. If anything, i might end up with children who are less semitic looking than myself, and that is a plus. When you've got hair like ghadafi and lips like kobe byrant, anything is better than what you are.

If my daughter brought home a keanu reeves type i don't think i'd care unless the guy was a degenerate. A white guy with no decency is not preferable, as far as i am concerned, to a eurasian with decency.

[Sulla the Dictator]

Depends. If jennifer tilly proposed to me i'd probably put her in a burlap sack and kick her to death because she is a degenerate. However if someone who looked like her and had a less annoying voice and virtue, i'm down. If anything, i might end up with children who are less semitic looking than myself, and that is a plus. When you've got hair like ghadafi and lips like kobe byrant, anything is better than what you are.


Where does this sense of self loathing come from? Its completely unnecessary.

[Starr]

If anything, i might end up with children who are less semitic looking than myself, and that is a plus. When you've got hair like ghadafi and lips like kobe byrant, anything is better than what you are.

this calls for a picture.:222:

[Blaphbee]

Your children don't ask for your parentage. They're lives are not tied to whatever funeral pyre you're trying to make of your existance.
They are the product of a coupling between the parents. The children never had a choice to begin with. The child never existed before the parents created it.

[Billy Score]

You've spent too much time surrounded by racism. This is like watching an online version of Stockholm syndrome.

You certainly didn't look very nordic in the pictures you posted a year or two ago. And you didn't look like you were in your 20s, either.

I've posted my picture recently and received much acclaim for my George Clooneyesque appearance.


Your children don't ask for your parentage. They're lives are not tied to whatever funeral pyre you're trying to make of your existance.

You are right. Unfortunately, I am tied to the funeral pyre THEY make of their existance, and so are all their ancestors before them.

[Billy Score]

Where does this sense of self loathing come from? Its completely unnecessary.

It is not self loathing, i accept who i am. However, i also am realistic enough to understand that the birds nest i have for hair and my own features are hardly what anyone could consider desirable.

The physical features of jennifer tilly on the other hand would be preferable for offspring. She actually looks very much like the ideal woman as far as i am concerned, except less so. I consider Jennifer Connoly to be the ideal woman physically, or someone with the same appearance. Dark hair, pale skin, blue eyes. etc. Wait what the hell? this is the phora, not a personals site X(

Sorry starr, no photographs of me posted here. I can show photographs to only those in private who i am relatively sure are not rapists, cannibals, federal agents, or cultists.

[Anima Eternae]

Dark hair, pale skin, blue eyes. etc

http://i2.tinypic.com/osve37.jpg

Amen. Just like the lass I'm pursuing. The perfect phenotype, imo.

+rep

[Helios Panoptes]

Infatuation is not the same thing as love; it seems you've never experienced either, so why you consider yourself fit to comment on them is beyond us all.

Interesting, if love is different than infatuation, which do you think it is that shapes westerners' mating habits? If there is a permanent, more substantial infatuation(love), hardly anyone is experiencing it. I used "infatuation" for the purpose of belittling love, as the two are almost always conflated; that is, if the latter has distinct existence at all.

If marriages are expected to be pillars of virtue, it is social responsibility that will make them so, nothing else. People should select mates who are suited to raising and providing for children. I'm not suggesting arranged marriage here(I'm not opposed to the idea, I just haven't figured out a way to make it work), but changing the way we look for mates. As it is now, other people are commodities("if I can attract so-and-so, I'll be happy"), but our attitude should be utilitarian and collectivist("how can I better my community through my decisions?"). The good thing is that this will also leads to greater individual happiness.

What, pray, is supposed to keep couples with children together, if not love? Your bizarro notions of "racial duty," perhaps?

Social responsibility(collectivist ethos), which no longer exists.

Good offspring are well-adjusted and moral, both of which tend to be the fruits of a stable and loving household.

That's true. I am not arguing that one should mate with an unpleasant person simply because he is physically healthy and intelligent. The sort of people who are good mates are also stable and amiable. My argument is that it is a terrible idea to mate with a person just because he's phsysically attractive and/or rich. Western marriages are often founded on these frivolous attributes.

[Starr]

[QUOTE]Sorry starr, no photographs of me posted here. I can show photographs to only those in private who i am relatively sure are not rapists, cannibals, federal agents, or cultists.

So my taste for blood and human flesh leaves me out of this equation, then? You discriminate.:(

I thought I remember someone saying you looked Italian, once.

[Generator]

[QUOTE]

So my taste for blood and human flesh leaves me out of this equation, then? You discriminate.:(

I thought I remember someone saying you looked Italian, once.
He actually looks a bit like me, I have been making of that what I will.

Italian, definitely Italian looking.

[Sulla the Dictator]

I was making a simple inquiry and Agent Potyondi and his goons railroad it. I have nothing against blacks. I simply don't want my grandchildren to be black.


I thought this was about your children being 1/4th Asian.


It is an issue of biological success.


Individuals cannot work towards 'biological success' in the way you're describing. We aren't ants. Individuals who succeed procreate well. Individuals who fail breed with people of equivalent status. Your individual breeding is all you need to concern yourself with: mating with an attractive, successful woman. Your daughter's 'biological success' is similarly up to her.


The purpose of life is to triumph on this level.


No, the purpose of life is to live it. Its the only one you're going to get, and its over after you're dead. Its too short to worry about how blonde your great grandchildren are going to be.


Why would i desire to be a failure on account of my daughter's selfish individualism?


She's not wood for your funeral pyre.


We both know she has absolutely nothing in common with her boyfriend tyrone and he is only sticking around to get a piece of that "tight white bitch".


LOL We can tell you have nothing against black people. :rofl:


But he is not to blame, she is, for selling herself and her people. She is spitting at her father, her grandparents and her ancestors and betraying her people. Why should this be tolerated?


Because its none of your business. Obvious YOUR parents didn't care about this type of shite.


those who preach diversity and multiculturalism are quite humorous.


More humerous than the heavily panting from white supremacists while they rant about Tyrone getting a piece of 'tight white ass'?

Everytime I hear this mantra, I'm reminded of the Nazi in Falling Down. "Disgust" masking interest and arousal. :p


Miscegeny ultimately leads to the extinction of caucasoids by the fact that white genes are recessive and negroid genes own them.


Nonsense. The only thing driving sexual activity is attractiveness. The human race isn't a zoo. There isn't any 'welfare breeding'. Attract women or don't. Don't expect LAWS demanding you get Brittney Spears in your bed. Thats one of the most ridiculous parts of white supremacy.


I don't personally care about "pure this" or that


You sure SOUND like you care. And it sounds like you care a lot.


I still am, "dude". Che shirterism is so last year, you have to reinvent to stay on top, you know?

Ontop of what?

[Sulla the Dictator]

You are right. Unfortunately, I am tied to the funeral pyre THEY make of their existance, and so are all their ancestors before them.

Yeah. They're dead. You would have your children live to honor dead people you never knew?

[Helios Panoptes]

This is the lounge, so I'll rebut Sulla by pointing out that Britney Spears is ugly and has a terrible complexion.

[Sulla the Dictator]

This is the lounge, so I'll rebut Sulla by pointing out that Britney Spears is ugly and has a terrible complexion.

Pick a bombshell then. :p

My tax dollars aren't going to fund anyone banging her, that I promise. The single's scene is survival of the fittest. A purely private sector affair. :p

[Billy Score]

I thought this was about your children being 1/4th Asian.



I was asking the WNs what their thoughts on the subject were. Not stating my own (which are quite "race traitoresque" by their standards). My curiousity was based on that i can't see anythreads or anything discussing the issue of brandon lee or keanu reeves getting white women and movies or in real life while someone like seal has everyone on the verge of a stroke (and rightfully so. the guy's got some good songs but he should date black women.)


No, the purpose of life is to live it. Its the only one you're going to get, and its over after you're dead. Its too short to worry about how blonde your great grandchildren are going to be.


Spare me the existentialism, Sartre :rolleyes:

Life means leaving a mark. But there is, as vlad said, collective duty. Selfish individualism on this level undermines collective duty, the collective spirit. this "i can do what i want and it doesn't matter" attitude is harmful to society. what are you anyway, a neo con? A libertarian? even neocons try to mask their degeneracy with some kind of pro family stance/moral stance.

Also, i don't care how "blonde" my child is going to be, i simply want children who are part of my biological grouping, my "subspecies." I may joke at times, but i am not going to obsess over "omg your grandfather was 1/64th japanese GO HOME CHINK WHITE POWER 14/88". Infact the only female i tolerate is a goddamned pakistani at my college. (and by tolerate i mean i do not block/ use colorful oaths against if she says "hello")

Btw- i do not even find blondes attractive. I have yet to meet a blonde with any level of virtue or morals, all are whores that i have known.


She's not wood for your funeral pyre.


I shouldn't be dragged down for her either. and neither should my parents and theirs.


Because its none of your business. Obvious YOUR parents didn't care about this type of shite.


Yes, and what has their glorious generation produced?:rolleyes:


Ontop of what?

On top, you know. Like metallica. you have to reinvent yourself to stay on top and keep your fanbase.

[Donny the Punk]

Interesting, if love is different than infatuation, which do you think it is that shapes westerners' mating habits?
If you mean sex, then infatuation and physical attraction. If you mean long-term relationships with kids, then love.

If there is a permanent, more substantial infatuation(love), hardly anyone is experiencing it.
I beg to differ. The only people over the age of 25 who'd say they've never experienced love are Dungeons and Dragons nerds and internet Nazis. :p

I used "infatuation" for the purpose of belittling love, as the two are almost always conflated; that is, if the latter has distinct existence at all.
Quite possible, but conflation in the public mind hardly discredits the reality of the situation.

If marriages are expected to be pillars of virtue, it is social responsibility that will make them so, nothing else.
No, it is personal responsibility. Virtue is a personal quality held by men and women, not anonymous collectives.

People should select mates who are suited to raising and providing for children. I'm not suggesting arranged marriage here(I'm not opposed to the idea, I just haven't figured out a way to make it work), but changing the way we look for mates.
Are you really suggesting that when they get married, most women aren't considering their spouses as potential fathers? You're a little disconnected from reality - and the opposite sex, it seems.

As it is now, other people are commodities("if I can attract so-and-so, I'll be happy"), but our attitude should be utilitarian and collectivist("how can I better my community through my decisions?"). The good thing is that this will also leads to greater individual happiness.
Individual happiness is not found by cutting oneself off from world of potential joy because some people can't stand to see non-white faces in a crowd.

Social responsibility(collectivist ethos), which no longer exists.
Which never existed. At best, it was Christianity which kept couples together against all odds, a 'collective ethos' having little in common with racism.

That's true. I am not arguing that one should mate with an unpleasant person simply because he is physically healthy and intelligent. The sort of people who are good mates are also stable and amiable. My argument is that it is a terrible idea to mate with a person just because he's phsysically attractive and/or rich. Western marriages are often founded on these frivolous attributes.
No argument here, but Western marriages are hardly the same thing as interracial marriages in all cases. You're equivocating the two.

[il ragno]

They're lives are not tied to whatever funeral pyre you're trying to make of your existance.........She's not wood for your funeral pyre.

The password is "funeral pyre".

Pass or play, Dick van Patten?

No, the purpose of life is to live it. Its the only one you're going to get, and its over after you're dead. Its too short to worry about how blonde your great grandchildren are going to be

It's too short to worry about anything else. Your problem is you're old enough to lecture teenagers about stuff they're lectured on every day through school and the media, but not old enough to have confronted your own mortality except on a theoretical basis - as a metaphysical sting in the tail. Once you know with absolute certainty that you've got less time in front of you than behind you, all these horrible awful fascist reactionary notions neither you nor the Polack can countenance anyone being allowed to embrace make perfect sense. And what becomes horrible and awful and beyond countenance is not embracing them.

[Sulla the Dictator]

It's too short to worry about anything else.


I disagree. Its utterly irrelevant.


Your problem is you're old enough to lecture teenagers about stuff they're lectured on every day through school and the media, but not old enough to have confronted your own mortality except on a theoretical basis - as a metaphysical sting in the tail.


Well, I have to disagree with you. My personal experiences with death have been unpleasant and not few. Yet with none of them comes the understanding that my child's mating habits are of pressing concern.


Once you know with absolute certainty that you've got less time in front of you than behind you, all these horrible awful fascist reactionary notions neither you nor the Polack can countenance anyone being allowed to embrace make perfect sense. And what becomes horrible and awful and beyond countenance is not embracing them.

So you say. But I don't see these levels of racism in my parents, my grandparents, their friends, my teachers, older folks I encounter in my travels, etc.

In fact, they're pretty rare. Localized in the AARP membership of this board. :p

[Helios Panoptes]

If you mean sex, then infatuation and physical attraction. If you mean long-term relationships with kids, then love.

So, you are agreeing with me that love is dependent upon fleeting whim? You'd be hardpressed to dispute this, considering the divorce rate. If all of these couples were entering LTR because of a permanent love, what's happening?

I beg to differ. The only people over the age of 25 who'd say they've never experienced love are Dungeons and Dragons nerds and internet Nazis.

Were I wrong, stable long-term relationships would be much more prevalent. They are a rarity.

Quite possible, but conflation in the public mind hardly discredits the reality of the situation.

Reality of what situation?

No, it is personal responsibility. Virtue is a personal quality held by men and women, not anonymous collectives.

Virtue is held both by communities and the people comprising them. The micro and macro correspond(virtuous communities are composed of virtuous people).

Are you really suggesting that when they get married, most women aren't considering their spouses as potential fathers?

I'm not only saying women. I hold men at fault for reproducing with "trophy wives," who make terrible mothers and usually aren't very bright. Women also choose the wrong mates because their decisions are myopic. Many women in our society get married for dumb reasons, whether you want to admit it or not.

You're a little disconnected from reality - and the opposite sex, it seems.

Enough of that. :nono:

Individual happiness is not found by cutting oneself off from world of potential joy because some people can't stand to see non-white faces in a crowd.

Individual happiness is found by devoting oneself to something beyond the self, by seeing the self reflected in the world. Individual happiness is not found in morbid self-attention to the atomized self.

Which never existed. At best, it was Christianity which kept couples together against all odds, a 'collective ethos' having little in common with racism.

I disagree. There have been Asian societies which considered the community to be primary in the fairly recent past.

No argument here, but Western marriages are hardly the same thing as interracial marriages in all cases. You're equivocating the two.

No, I'm not. I've neglected to into a part of my argument vis-a-vis a ethnically homogonous communities being superior to ethnically fractured ones. I will do so below, however.

We are, to put it crudely, lost if we cannot identify ourselves with some part of an objective social reality: a nation, though not necessarily a state, with its distinctive traditions. What we find in people — and as deeply embedded as the need to develop their talents — is the need not only to be able to say what they can do but to say who they are. This is found, not created, and is found in the identification with others in a shared culture based on nationality or race or religion or some slice or amalgam thereof. ... Under modern conditions, this securing and nourishing of a national consciousness can only be achieved with a nation-state that corresponds to that national consciousness

That is the case in a nutshell. A unified identity based on ethnicity/nation is essential for avoiding the selfish, destructive individualism found in societies with a fractured identity. Humans are fond of sameness. They value a man sharing in their way of life more than a random person on the other side of the globe. Nation(ethnocultural community) provides an ethical foundation. The issue of interracial marriage is an effect of disharmonious social organization and shouldn't be addressed in itself.

[Sulla the Dictator]

I can't be bothered answering all the boilerplate anti-racist same-old-same-old on this thread, but I do feel that one argument is worth addressing: that a preference for partners of one's own race is somehow "shallow" or "superficial". This argument is usually made by reducing race to nothing more than "skin colour", as if it is a trivial, meaningless physical attribute that is irrelevent to who someone is "as a person".


Thats a straw man. We're not arguing that you can't be attracted to one's own race. We're talking about how much you care about who OTHERS breed with.

[il ragno]

I have to disagree with you. My personal experiences with death have been unpleasant and not few.

Not what I'm saying. I don't doubt your near-death experiences, or that you've had people die around you, but I'm speaking of the shifting realization of your own mortality from something that will happen one day to something that will happen period. When you realize you can no longer run as fast, climb as high, swim as far....when the cut on your finger that used to heal overnight is still closing five days later, when you start involuntarily assigning a number value to the rest of your life in a best-case scenario, you start to realize the ephemeral nature of the individual much more acutely.

[Sulla the Dictator]

Life means leaving a mark. But there is, as vlad said, collective duty.


Making a mark means doing things. Acheiving something. Not impregnating a woman of the proper skin pigment. And no, there is no collective duty to do that. Mating is a matter of whats attractive, as I said. If a blonde bombshell finds a black man attractive, thats none of your business. And it isn't 'wrong'.

You know nothing about the fellow, you know nothing about the girl, and its laughable to suggest she's somehow flawed for being attracted to the fellow.


Selfish individualism on this level undermines collective duty


Unless, of course, there is no such collective duty. :rolleyes:

You've accepted a white supremacist premise.


this "i can do what i want and it doesn't matter" attitude is harmful to society.


Yes. So goes the mantra. But who people breed with is none of your business. Who YOU breed with is your own affair. Let your daughter live her life. And the girl down the street too, while we're at it.


what are you anyway, a neo con? A libertarian? even neocons try to mask their degeneracy with some kind of pro family stance/moral stance.


Its often lost in the talk that goes on here in this board, but I suppose I need to remind you that your way of viewing the world is shared by a tiny fraction of one percent of the population.

No one of substance shares these views.


Also, i don't care how "blonde" my child is going to be, i simply want children who are part of my biological grouping, my "subspecies." I may joke at times, but i am not going to obsess over "omg your grandfather was 1/64th japanese GO HOME CHINK WHITE POWER 14/88". Infact the only female i tolerate is a goddamned pakistani at my college. (and by tolerate i mean i do not block/ use colorful oaths against if she says "hello")

Btw- i do not even find blondes attractive. I have yet to meet a blonde with any level of virtue or morals, all are whores that i have known.


You have some bizarre views of women.


I shouldn't be dragged down for her either. and neither should my parents and theirs.


Dragged DOWN, you say? I thought you wern't making judgement calls about superiority or inferiority?


Yes, and what has their glorious generation produced?


The most scientifically and technologically advanced civilization in the history of Earth......big deal though, right? Their kids aren't white enoug.

[Helios Panoptes]

Not what I'm saying. I don't doubt your near-death experiences, or that you've had people die around you, but I'm speaking of the shifting realization of your own mortality from something that will happen one day to something that will happen period.

Often, people think of death not even in relation to the self, but as something that "happens." Then they are confronted with it not happening in general, but to themselves. This is very Heideggerian. :p

[Sulla the Dictator]

Not what I'm saying. I don't doubt your near-death experiences, or that you've had people die around you, but I'm speaking of the shifting realization of your own mortality from something that will happen one day to something that will happen period. When you realize you can no longer run as fast, climb as high, swim as far....when the cut on your finger that used to heal overnight is still closing five days later, when you start involuntarily assigning a number value to the rest of your life in a best-case scenario, you start to realize the ephemeral nature of the individual much more acutely.

That you lose faith in individualism does not automatically alter your views on race. A belief in the common nature and decency of man hasn't been repudiated by my surviving Grandfather, or my parents, or any older person I've been in contact with.

[Donny the Punk]

So, you are agreeing with me that love is dependent upon fleeting whim? You'd be hardpressed to dispute this, considering the divorce rate. If all of these couples were entering LTR because of a permanent love, what's happening?
Woah, no one ever claimed love was some a priori permanent state of being which never changed. Love is as much a process as a condition. It needs to be forged, to be reciprocated, and to be constantly maintained through thoughts and feelings, actions and behaviours, and moral dedication. All of this is contigent on the individual responsibility of both parties involved.

Were I wrong, stable long-term relationships would be much more prevalent. They are a rarity.
People are getting divorced because they enter into marriage contracts without wholeheartedly subscribing to their conditions. Because not only is infidelity eroticised in the media, but its sheer prevalence makes it seem acceptable. Because selfishness has overrided the need for compromise and sacrifice comcomitant in any relationship, whether romantic or not.

None of these has anything to do with race.

Reality of what situation?
That people marry and have kids out of love.

Virtue is held both by communities and the people comprising them. The micro and macro correspond(virtuous communities are composed of virtuous people).
The two are not equivocable. A society is only as 'virtuous' as its citizens, whereas it's impossible for a state to be 'virtuous' without any virtuous citizens.

I'm not only saying women. I hold men at fault for reproducing with "trophy wives," who make terrible mothers and usually aren't very bright. Women also choose the wrong mates because their decisions are myopic. Many women in our society get married for dumb reasons, whether you want to admit it or not.
None of which has anything to do with race.

Individual happiness is found by devoting oneself to something beyond the self, by seeing the self reflected in the world.
You mean a spouse and children?

Individual happiness is not found in morbid self-attention to the atomized self.
A necessary precondition of a relationship is extinguishing of this sentiment, although that it exists at all to the hyperbolic extent you imply is doubtful. Hence, this is a non-argument.

I disagree. There have been Asian societies which considered the community to be primary in the fairly recent past.
Is it Asian societies you're saying have degenerated? No, it's white ones, so stick to the salient facts.

No, I'm not. I've neglected to into a part of my argument vis-a-vis a ethnically homogonous communities being superior to ethnically fractured ones. I will do so below, however.

That is the case in a nutshell. A unified identity based on ethnicity/nation is essential for avoiding the selfish, destructive individualism found in societies with a fractured identity. Humans are fond of sameness. They value a man sharing in their way of life more than a random person on the other side of the globe. Nation(ethnocultural community) provides an ethical foundation. The issue of interracial marriage is an effect of disharmonious social organization and shouldn't be addressed in itself.
People feel more in common with someone they know intimately and who shares their values and habits than with a random stranger on the other side of the country with the same colour skin. Group identification is an invented abstraction; if not a city of one million, why not the whole world of 6 billion? It's equally meaningless. The criteria are so subjective that they can't possibly hope to encompass more than a fraction of the population in question, in any event. Your view of collectivity is skewed by your inordinate and perverse obsession with race; the average person doesn't care about a national racial identity as part of his individual makeup. Nor should he.

[Billy Score]

Unless, of course, there is no such collective duty.

You've accepted a white supremacist premise.

socialists/marxists don't acknowledge collective duty??



The most scientifically and technologically advanced civilization in the history of Earth......big deal though, right? Their kids aren't white enoug.
That has become more adept at making drugs that give old men hardons and making fake breasts feel more real than actually coming up with something worthwhile. Technology doesn't by itself define a society. The egyptians were viewed as backwards by some of their neighbors and were relatively isolated for their history yet we view them as a great civilization. Technology is only part of the equation.

[Sulla the Dictator]

socialists/marxists don't acknowledge collective duty??


The only socialists who believe in collective RACIAL duties are the National ones. Are you a National Socialist?


That has become more adept at making drugs that give old men hardons and making fake breasts feel more real than actually coming up with something worthwhile.


Worthwhile like a cure for polio? Wiping out small pox? Creating the internet? Life expectancies to 120 years old?

Stupid progress. Nigger loving science.


Technology doesn't by itself define a society.


Our society is greater than just a technological society. But I'd like for you to name an advanced technological civilization that you find 'irrelevant' or less than great.


The egyptians were viewed as backwards by some of their neighbors


Which of Egypt's neighbors was it backwards compared to?


and were relatively isolated for their history yet we view them as a great civilization.


Desert and terrain does that for a nation. The Egyptians still managed to settle and interbreed with the Medjay, so this example certainly doesn't hold.

[Billy Score]

Funfacts: the DPRK does not permit intermarriage between foreigners and natives.
The Turkmen government requires a 50,000 dollar payment for marrying a turkmen.

Neither of these governments are "National socialist" in the Hiterlite sense.

Worthwhile like a cure for polio? Wiping out small pox? Creating the internet?
Wrong generation X(

[Anima Eternae]

Funfacts: the DPRK does not permit intermarriage between foreigners and natives.


cuz thats the best country ever

[Helios Panoptes]

Woah, no one ever claimed love was some a priori permanent state of being which never changed. Love is as much a process as a condition. It needs to be forged, to be reciprocated, and to be constantly maintained through thoughts and feelings, actions and behaviours, and moral dedication. All of this is contigent on the individual responsibility of both parties involved.

What is love and how does it differ from mere infatuation?

People are getting divorced because they enter into marriage contracts without wholeheartedly subscribing to their conditions.

Do you mean that they are getting married without being in love? To which conditions do they not subscribe?

Because not only is infidelity eroticised in the media, but its sheer prevalence makes it seem acceptable. Because selfishness has overrided the need for compromise and sacrifice comcomitant in any relationship, whether romantic or not.

There's nothing I dispute above. Actually, it ties in rather nicely with my case, which is that society glorifies the fleeting pleasure of the individual over the good of the community. Selifishness, indeed.

None of these has anything to do with race.

I don't think you understand my position. It is that the collective is primary and that an ethnically homogonous community is superior to a heterogeneous one.

That people marry and have kids out of love.

People marry and have kids because of transitory emotions and greed. Perhaps, some do marry out of love(I'll wait for you to say what that is). My argument is not universalistic. I do not hold that every, single, last marital relationship is problematic. That is absurd.

The two are not equivocable. A society is only as 'virtuous' as its citizens, whereas it's impossible for a state to be 'virtuous' without any virtuous citizens.

You fail to appreciate the symbiotic nature of the relationship. Virtuous citizens will only be developed within a virtuous society, with rare exceptions occurring. Society shapes its members and its members sustain it. People fall in line with the ethos of their society. Once it is in place, virtue(or vice) trickles down from above.

None of which has anything to do with race.

Once again, it's an example of the shortsighted decisions made by many individuals at the expense of their community. The most functional, harmonious community is a unified nation.

You mean a spouse and children?

I mean one's community. Certainly, producing virtuous children qualifies.

A necessary precondition of a relationship is extinguishing of this sentiment, although that it exists at all to the hyperbolic extent you imply is doubtful. Hence, this is a non-argument.

Not at all. People enter relationships because of this sentiment. They enter relationships for personal convenience, greed, social status, etc. You, yourself, acknowledge their destructive selfishness.

Is it Asian societies you're saying have degenerated? No, it's white ones, so stick to the salient facts.

Your reply is completely non-responsive. I am telling you what is ideal. Where or whether it is manifest is irrelevant. The fact is that there have been societies which have more closely approximated it than our own and these are favorable.

People feel more in common with someone they know intimately and who shares their values and habits than with a random stranger on the other side of the country with the same colour skin.

:rolleyes: I do not appreciate this mendacious misinterpretation. My argument is based on people sharing the same ethnicity. A man with white skin born in sub-saharan africa and raised by native peoples(if such a person exists) obviously has little in common with a European. Ethnicity is more than skin color.

Group identification is an invented abstraction; if not a city of one million, why not the whole world of 6 billion?

Because people are of different ethnicities. These people have different cultures and divergent values.

The criteria are so subjective that they can't possibly hope to encompass more than a fraction of the population in question, in any event.

Incorrect. The criteria will encompass people of the same nation or ethnocultural community.

Your view of collectivity is skewed by your inordinate and perverse obsession with race; the average person doesn't care about a national racial identity as part of his individual makeup. Nor should he.

LOL, I have no inordinate and perverse obsession. On a more serious note, the problem is that we inhabit states, but not nations. We live within the same sovereign political entity, but have little in common. America, for instance, is united only on the most superficial level. With that said, though, you are kidding yourself if you think that the average "white" does not identify himself as different than the average "black." Even with governmental forced integration, people segregate themselves and are well aware of this fact. No offense, but it seems like you're looking at the world through a thick pair of monochromatic glasses.

I'm going to sleep, so I won't be responding anymore.

[Ambrosio Spinola]

Personally I would be utterly disgusted and heartbroken at failing to make my child see and respect our heritage. Further demonstrations can only be seen in real life and to boast here X or Y would be pure What-if chestbeating.

For sure that my reaction would be worse if it would be a subsaharian or a Jew.

[Anima Eternae]

It's really hard finding pictures of 1/4 asians. The best I can do are some photos I already posted on VNN. Other people lfeel free to submit some. :-/

http://tinypic.com/99qqsw.jpg
http://tinypic.com/99qqt3.jpg

http://tinypic.com/9a04xv.jpghttp://tinypic.com/99zygh.jpg http://tinypic.com/9a00i9.jpg

Last one is Brandon Lee he's technically 38% asian, closer to me than a quarter asian.

[il ragno]

That you lose faith in individualism does not automatically alter your views on race.

Sigh.

It's not "losing faith", it's recognizing that it's finite - recognizing that without race, there is no individualism.

You were preceded, and you will be succeeded. Your appointed hour on the stage is briefer than you think. And as you are a product of those who came before you, similarly you owe a debt to those who'll come after you. You can kid yourself that your debt is to all mankind - that you, unlike all the blinkered and pig-ignorant past generations, have the keenness of mind and clarity of vision to see past their myopic prejudices and divisive, pointless subcategories - but you don't. Otherwise three kings of Orient would've followed a star to your bassinet on your first birthday.

It's not about relinquishing your individuality, but resizing your idea of the Big Picture to actual scale, with you being very very small.

How common would intermarriage be right now were it not celebrated and encouraged by that confluence of media that we now call "society"? After all, we take kids at their most idealistic point and pump them full of knowledge that we know is wrong - race is a construct, racism is morally (and soon legally) worse tham murder, ethnocentrism is 'hate' if you succeed but 'self-esteem' if you fail - for the higher purpose of putting moral band-aids on the past; and then we stand back and mislabel the inevitable result "individualism", as in the individual decision to fall in love with the person of your choice regardless of skin color, as though individualism had anything to do with it, and you hadn't been taught all that race dogma for a reason.

Frankly, I have more respect for a mixed-race couple who knocked boots back in the Bad Old Days, when such things were taboo and there was a heavy price to bear for it. That's individualism - arriving somewhere you've been told from the cradle never to go; making a conscious decision you know is going to cost you dearly.

Gittin' jiggy wit' Jamaal? That's just eating what you're fed and going where you're led. And it's smothering future generations in their crib, which you never had the right to do. Race-mixing might be your "choice", but it's one your half-breed progeny won't have - and if tomorrow is anything like today, they'll have no choice about their dual heritage either, only the lesser of which they'll be encouraged to identify as, take pride in and perpetuate. My name is Lafonzo Gunnersen; I'm half African-American, half cancer of the human race. And two plus two is now five - the new four!

[angrywhiteboy]

A right sick lot you bunch are, discussing disowning your daughters and sons because they might fall in love with someone with nary a thought for their skin colour. Fathers forgive, it's tyrants who damn, and should you ever a) breed, b) work up the nerve to let your diseased spite out, they'll know it.

Fuck you and the horse you rode in on. It's a known fact that England once ruled the world, including Hawaii and most asian countries. My daughter marrying a barefoot, native half-hawaiian english speaking lad is a credit to my heritage and my race.

[Pablo Escobar]

huh? ??? ?