NBA 22% White
- Thread starter OC football
- Start date
StaleyWasScrewd said:
I didn't. I wrote that Kidd and Gadzuric aren't white, and then I wrote that I'm not sure how to categorize the Turks and Brazilians.
If we consider Turkey to be European, please someone tell that to all of the White Nationalists who oppose Turkey entering the European Union.
What I wrote was this: "Anyone who's European or who is from a non-European country that has a white population who looks and acts white should be considered white unlessit's known for sure that they aren't in fact white."
JD, I think you're taking my meaning out of context. Iwrote that I don't like the "nitpicking" about so many athletes. If we don't know that they're not white, it doesn't serve any useful purpose that I can see to speculate that they're mixed. I'm not recommending rooting for non-white athletes,but if someone likes Kevin Kaesviharn it isn't a big deal. I root for him to do well. Does that make me some kind of race traitor?Does it mean I don't root for white athletes?
I don't like seeing the nitpicking about some guy's roots any more than I like some pro-white boards that have posters constantly decrying Southern Europeans as non-white. There have been publications and organizations that did the same thing. Wilmot Robertson's books and his Instauration magazine argued that southern and eastern Europeans were "non-assimilable" and that Irish were "partly assimilable." Is it really practical in America, when Europeans are so mixed with each other, to have such a viewpoint? To me it's the same thing when it comes to athletes. There are whites in Turkey. There are whites in many Latin and South American countries. Do we know with certainty whether or not Manu Ginobili is white? No. Tony Gonzalez? No. So what do we do then, refuse to root for them because they may possibly have some non-white blood?
We have to cut each other slack. There's no foolproof way to determine with finality whether someone is white or not. There's gradations and shades of grey on a continuum. If you want to root only for the most pure-blooded white athletes, that's fine. If someone else roots for white athletes but also is happy when somebody like Tedy Bruschi does well, that's fine too. It doesn't mean they aren't pro-white or aren't opposed to the Caste System as much as anyone else.
JD, I think you're taking my meaning out of context. Iwrote that I don't like the "nitpicking" about so many athletes. If we don't know that they're not white, it doesn't serve any useful purpose that I can see to speculate that they're mixed. I'm not recommending rooting for non-white athletes,but if someone likes Kevin Kaesviharn it isn't a big deal. I root for him to do well. Does that make me some kind of race traitor?Does it mean I don't root for white athletes?
I don't like seeing the nitpicking about some guy's roots any more than I like some pro-white boards that have posters constantly decrying Southern Europeans as non-white. There have been publications and organizations that did the same thing. Wilmot Robertson's books and his Instauration magazine argued that southern and eastern Europeans were "non-assimilable" and that Irish were "partly assimilable." Is it really practical in America, when Europeans are so mixed with each other, to have such a viewpoint? To me it's the same thing when it comes to athletes. There are whites in Turkey. There are whites in many Latin and South American countries. Do we know with certainty whether or not Manu Ginobili is white? No. Tony Gonzalez? No. So what do we do then, refuse to root for them because they may possibly have some non-white blood?
We have to cut each other slack. There's no foolproof way to determine with finality whether someone is white or not. There's gradations and shades of grey on a continuum. If you want to root only for the most pure-blooded white athletes, that's fine. If someone else roots for white athletes but also is happy when somebody like Tedy Bruschi does well, that's fine too. It doesn't mean they aren't pro-white or aren't opposed to the Caste System as much as anyone else.
Jimmy Chitwood
Hall of Famer
Don wrote:
i realized that on my way home the other day, and i've just now gotten back to addressing it. yes, Don's number are correct... almost 9% of the NBA players are white Americans. that's up from about 6% last year. well, i guess small improvement is better than no improvement.
as for JD's comments i agree with him, but Don and Colonel Reb aren't necessarily disagreeing either, i don't think. if a guy looks white and acts white, then the black players treat him as white, and we should see him as white. until the NBA (as well as the other sports) changes their racial dynamics, we have to stick together or we'll all disappear into the multi-cultural morass that the rest of this country is rapidly sinking into.
peace.
i realized that on my way home the other day, and i've just now gotten back to addressing it. yes, Don's number are correct... almost 9% of the NBA players are white Americans. that's up from about 6% last year. well, i guess small improvement is better than no improvement.
as for JD's comments i agree with him, but Don and Colonel Reb aren't necessarily disagreeing either, i don't think. if a guy looks white and acts white, then the black players treat him as white, and we should see him as white. until the NBA (as well as the other sports) changes their racial dynamics, we have to stick together or we'll all disappear into the multi-cultural morass that the rest of this country is rapidly sinking into.
peace.
white is right
Hall of Famer
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2006
- Messages
- 10,179
It's as much religious as racial and cultural bent. Turkey is really backwards by Western European rule of law. They still have honor killing and out and out discriminate against women. As for the racial angle you might as well include Russia as many Russians have obvious Tatar/Mongolian ancestry. I know both Turks aren't regarded as non white by their donkish street teammates. They probably think Turkey was named after the Thanksgiving bird.......JD074 said:
OC football
Guru
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2006
- Messages
- 349
I have been to Turkey and MOST Turks are not white. Once again I will consider Okur white because he has European facial features. But I do understand anyones subtraction reguarding Okur's ethnicity.
Turkoglu, however, isn't white to me and I shouldn't have listed him. He's part white.
Yah many Russians are part Tatar and I'm sure that you could say similar things about individuals from all European countries. Thats why I said we should take this on a case by case basis.
Turkoglu, however, isn't white to me and I shouldn't have listed him. He's part white.
Yah many Russians are part Tatar and I'm sure that you could say similar things about individuals from all European countries. Thats why I said we should take this on a case by case basis.
white is right
Hall of Famer
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2006
- Messages
- 10,179
Bruschi is of obvious native American/Mexican ancestry on his mothers side, but I have seen his kids they are whiter than many posters on this board. If Teddy junior makes the NFL are you against him? This is real slippery slope...JD074 said:
im 1/16 indian, does that mean im not white?!?!?!?! for christ's sake man!!! i can see why you would be upset about jason kidd being called white but cmon...mehmet Okur??? If you didnt know what country he was from theres no question you would think he was white...by the way....how many "black athletes" are 100% black???
Don Wassall said:
That's not all you wrote.
But is it so offensive to raise the question about Turks and Brazilians in particular? I didn't even say they were non-white. I said that I didn't know how to categorize them! I'm highly skeptical of their ethnic background. You can sell me on a guy like Nocioni (fair skin, light brown hair, and white facial features,) but not so much a guy like Varejao.
I'm not accusing anyone of being a race traitor. I just thought the point of this site was to celebrate white athletes. Personally, if I like a player like Kaesviharn, and then find out that he's not white, I can't help but to change my mind about him. That's just the way it is with me. And I also brought up the issue of our gene pool, which I think is very, very important.
That's not a fair analogy. There's a difference between Turks/ Brazilians and Italians/ Spaniards. I have no problem with Pau Gasol, Andrea Bargnani, the Italian soccer team, or the Italian man who won the marathon in the '04 Olympics. (Off the top of my head!)
I just don't have the same enthusiasm for an athlete when there's a question mark about their ethnicity. The whole "Hispanic" thing is a gray area, and that's very unforunate. But those are the cards we've been dealt. I do prefer "non-Hispanic" whites over "Hispanic" whites (and they do consider themselves "Hispanic" or "Latin," let's not kid ourselves about that.) Would I root for Ginobili and Gonzalez over black players? Hell yeah! But I would not root for them over players who I know are white beyond any reasonable doubt.
OC football
Guru
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2006
- Messages
- 349
Well the term "Hispanic" is nothing more then a cultural classification to me. I have nothing aginst Latin culture as the Roman Empire and the Renissance was predicated upon it.
If anglo culture is all that you find acceptable, or is simple what you perfer. This probable being because it was the basis for the industrial revolution and (or) because it is what the United States has always adheared to, then this is understandable.
I personally do not believe that one kind of culture is more beneficial then the other. Without the Roman Empire there would be no Christianity in Europe, without the Renissance, Europe would be without its fantastic architecture, and without the Industrial Revolution..... well..... the obvious.
So I will cheer for both white hispanic and white anglo athletes as I respect both cultures. Edited by: OC football
If anglo culture is all that you find acceptable, or is simple what you perfer. This probable being because it was the basis for the industrial revolution and (or) because it is what the United States has always adheared to, then this is understandable.
I personally do not believe that one kind of culture is more beneficial then the other. Without the Roman Empire there would be no Christianity in Europe, without the Renissance, Europe would be without its fantastic architecture, and without the Industrial Revolution..... well..... the obvious.
So I will cheer for both white hispanic and white anglo athletes as I respect both cultures. Edited by: OC football
JD074 said:
I don't see how anyone can look at this site and not think that's the point of it, whether they like Caste Football or not.
Discussing whether someone is white or not is often part and parcel of the discussion board. But the athletes one chooses to root for is a personal preference with no right or wrong answer.
I follow the Jackie Robinson rule, if they could have played MLB pre 1947 then they are white, but they also have to straighten their hair and anglicize their names. Skin lightening is also recommended.
I'm joking (mostly).
Just trying to lighten the mood, I'm like a nervous kid watching his parents fight when a couple of stalwarts on the site clash on an issue.
I'm joking (mostly).
Just trying to lighten the mood, I'm like a nervous kid watching his parents fight when a couple of stalwarts on the site clash on an issue.
G
Guest
Guest
It seems there's more concern here with the minutiae of preserving the architecture of Nordic gene-sets than preserving the architecture of your meritocracy. Until you guys root out the would-be Eugenecist diatribes, your position is murky at best.
So what's the point here, guys? Deconstructing the myths that deny kids scholarships or ensuring that similar phenotypes breed?
As to Iranians:
The Origins of Aryan People
Zoroastrian Origins
1935 name "change"
Linguistic relationship to Serbo-Croats
Simple, but basically fair article on Wikipedia
I know more than a handful of Iranians who would literally come to blows if it were implied that they were anything other than Caucasian (they're notoriously ethnocentric) which is what OC football seems to imply. So, I suppose you went to a market while vacationing in Tehran one time and saw a few moderately Asiatic-looking Uzbeks?
Hmmmm....It's one of those astonishing coincidences of geography that your government is rattling sabres outside the very birthplace of Western Civilization. Must be about oil, I suppose...
So what's the point here, guys? Deconstructing the myths that deny kids scholarships or ensuring that similar phenotypes breed?
As to Iranians:
The Origins of Aryan People
Zoroastrian Origins
1935 name "change"
Linguistic relationship to Serbo-Croats
Simple, but basically fair article on Wikipedia
I know more than a handful of Iranians who would literally come to blows if it were implied that they were anything other than Caucasian (they're notoriously ethnocentric) which is what OC football seems to imply. So, I suppose you went to a market while vacationing in Tehran one time and saw a few moderately Asiatic-looking Uzbeks?
Hmmmm....It's one of those astonishing coincidences of geography that your government is rattling sabres outside the very birthplace of Western Civilization. Must be about oil, I suppose...
White Shogun
Hall of Famer
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2005
- Messages
- 6,285
jaxvid said:
I follow the 'South Central rule:' what race do the blacks think you are when you walk down the street in South Central? It's a fairly unequivocal and sure-fire method to determine if Turks and Uzbeks are considered white.
OC football
Guru
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2006
- Messages
- 349
In response to JerveyGotGypped... People dont realize this but there is a big divide among ethnic "Persians" (Iranians) within the country of Iran. The few light haired/light eyed/oval faced/ "white looking" people feel that they are the "true Persians." The others contend that they are indeed Persians as well.
There are no statistics to measure how many people in Iran truely can be considered white because as of right now... The term "persian" is more of a cultural term then a racial term. In other words it has become much like the term "Hispanic" in the American context.
People in Southern European, Latin American and Middle Eastern nations are becomeing more aware of who they truely are. Those that are truely white may indeed demand to be recognized as a distinct group of people.
Already, in Spain, darker people are beginning to be considered "old Moorish" rather then just "Mediteranian" like all other Spaniards. This being the result of immigration from North Africa; if you look Morish then you must be Morish. In Spain the secret is now out; they all know what a true North African looks like.
In Greece; we are beginning to see the same thing. If you look Turkish then you are Turkish; it doesnt matter how long you have been in Greece.
Bottom line, we have to take this on a case by case basis. Go Okur.
There are no statistics to measure how many people in Iran truely can be considered white because as of right now... The term "persian" is more of a cultural term then a racial term. In other words it has become much like the term "Hispanic" in the American context.
People in Southern European, Latin American and Middle Eastern nations are becomeing more aware of who they truely are. Those that are truely white may indeed demand to be recognized as a distinct group of people.
Already, in Spain, darker people are beginning to be considered "old Moorish" rather then just "Mediteranian" like all other Spaniards. This being the result of immigration from North Africa; if you look Morish then you must be Morish. In Spain the secret is now out; they all know what a true North African looks like.
In Greece; we are beginning to see the same thing. If you look Turkish then you are Turkish; it doesnt matter how long you have been in Greece.
Bottom line, we have to take this on a case by case basis. Go Okur.
JerveyGotGypped said:
How can an elitist snob like you not support eugenics? Where do you think your verbal ability came from, a chidren's book that someone read to you at the right age? Maybe all the Ethiopians need is someone to read to them. Blood is more important than any meritocracy or scholarships. If our people perish there will be no scholarships, no meritocracy, on this continent.
G
Guest
Guest
Elitist snobs with any sort of functional command of history know that Eugenics is alot like Communism: It's a great idea on paper, but a logistical nightmare in practice. Besides, people sort those things out in real-time. That's what psychosexual selection is all about.
So, it's the old "they're making us White men out to look like effete twerps!" meme again? Now all the good White Women will be psychosexually selecting for the Darkies, right? That one has a way of creeping into alot of these threads.
That sh*t is best left on Nationalism boards, so liberal fence-sitters like myself can say "Jesse Lumsden got the shaft because he's not Black!" without being lumped in with the Eugenicist Skadi-prop.
Here's a pic of what some of you in here might call a 'mongoloid' ethnic Tajik Iranian. I suspect even the most virulent Nordicist in here might make an exception to 'psychosexually select' for this babe.
So, it's the old "they're making us White men out to look like effete twerps!" meme again? Now all the good White Women will be psychosexually selecting for the Darkies, right? That one has a way of creeping into alot of these threads.
That sh*t is best left on Nationalism boards, so liberal fence-sitters like myself can say "Jesse Lumsden got the shaft because he's not Black!" without being lumped in with the Eugenicist Skadi-prop.
Here's a pic of what some of you in here might call a 'mongoloid' ethnic Tajik Iranian. I suspect even the most virulent Nordicist in here might make an exception to 'psychosexually select' for this babe.
white is right
Hall of Famer
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2006
- Messages
- 10,179
Alexander the Great had his pick of fine women like this....
Can we call this Natural Selection? I want to give credit to the man! I think that psychosexual selection is Jervey-speak for fit organism seeking desirable traits. Culture and religion can be introduced to progeny. Here are two examples of Mongoloid whites...JerveyGotGypped said:
Only one problem with your observation, Jervey. If AA is factored into the
equation, a lot of unfit minority types will look an awful lot more "fit" as
mates than they really are. I suspect that's one of many reasons why
minorities are for it. Women are more valued because of looks, males for
accomplishment and the ability to garner resources. We all know this.
Looks, you can't fake. But if the brothers actually had to compete on the
merits of their miniscule brainpower without the help of AA, we wouldn't
see much interracial dating with them at all, because they wouldn't be
able to compete with whites, nor any other minority for that matter. I
won't even mention how lazy most of them are. Also, their favorable
misrepresentation in the media is truly sickening. Many naive kids fall for
it. Why shouldn't white men be concerned about the all-out assault on
their women by blacks? Every single civilization in the history of the
world has been concerned with preserving itself. That's what a war is--
the assault by young men trying to steal property, kill and displace, and
to steal the other men's women. What is really odd and aberrant is to
NOT be concerned about it. That is truly bizarre. All blacks try to do is
steal--jobs, property, money, women, and they try to tear down our
culture as well. And put what in its place? The ghetto? And this is okay?
What a joke. I know an attack when I see one, and so do many others.
You do too, or you wouldn't be sitting on the fence. All you have to do to
get off it is to simply admit what your eyes see. Forget the propaganda.
Just understand human nature, history, and look around. I will proudly
say that I am a racist. I am also a friendist, family-ist, neighborhood-ist,
etc. That means I am normal. Being a racist doesn't mean that I go
around hunting down people and stringing them up from trees. I
generally treat people well, no matter the color. But my first loyalties are
to my own. To protect and preserve. That is natural and honorable. The
real problem is that blacks can't take care of themselves. You know this,
and that's why you hesitate.You want to be good person. But the
alternative, taking care of them, just results in an attack. That is your
thanks. Let it go and let them take care of themselves. Give me my
rights back to associalte with and help my own. They will fail anyway.
That is their problem. Helping them is suicidal for whites. Better a bad
fate for them than us (really, all of us).
BTW, the lady you posted looks quite white to me (and probably to many
others here too). Maybe you should try someone a lot darker to make
your point. But then again, that might undermine your argument.
Also, I came to this site a doubter, but now I have been convinced that AA
is a big part of professional athletics. I am also glad that many great
white athletes are starting to eliminate the non-athletic white male
stereotypes. Without this site, I would have never learned about any of
this and just assumed that blacks were faster, better athletes. You are
changing minds slowly, Mr. Wassall and Co., but changing them you are.
equation, a lot of unfit minority types will look an awful lot more "fit" as
mates than they really are. I suspect that's one of many reasons why
minorities are for it. Women are more valued because of looks, males for
accomplishment and the ability to garner resources. We all know this.
Looks, you can't fake. But if the brothers actually had to compete on the
merits of their miniscule brainpower without the help of AA, we wouldn't
see much interracial dating with them at all, because they wouldn't be
able to compete with whites, nor any other minority for that matter. I
won't even mention how lazy most of them are. Also, their favorable
misrepresentation in the media is truly sickening. Many naive kids fall for
it. Why shouldn't white men be concerned about the all-out assault on
their women by blacks? Every single civilization in the history of the
world has been concerned with preserving itself. That's what a war is--
the assault by young men trying to steal property, kill and displace, and
to steal the other men's women. What is really odd and aberrant is to
NOT be concerned about it. That is truly bizarre. All blacks try to do is
steal--jobs, property, money, women, and they try to tear down our
culture as well. And put what in its place? The ghetto? And this is okay?
What a joke. I know an attack when I see one, and so do many others.
You do too, or you wouldn't be sitting on the fence. All you have to do to
get off it is to simply admit what your eyes see. Forget the propaganda.
Just understand human nature, history, and look around. I will proudly
say that I am a racist. I am also a friendist, family-ist, neighborhood-ist,
etc. That means I am normal. Being a racist doesn't mean that I go
around hunting down people and stringing them up from trees. I
generally treat people well, no matter the color. But my first loyalties are
to my own. To protect and preserve. That is natural and honorable. The
real problem is that blacks can't take care of themselves. You know this,
and that's why you hesitate.You want to be good person. But the
alternative, taking care of them, just results in an attack. That is your
thanks. Let it go and let them take care of themselves. Give me my
rights back to associalte with and help my own. They will fail anyway.
That is their problem. Helping them is suicidal for whites. Better a bad
fate for them than us (really, all of us).
BTW, the lady you posted looks quite white to me (and probably to many
others here too). Maybe you should try someone a lot darker to make
your point. But then again, that might undermine your argument.
Also, I came to this site a doubter, but now I have been convinced that AA
is a big part of professional athletics. I am also glad that many great
white athletes are starting to eliminate the non-athletic white male
stereotypes. Without this site, I would have never learned about any of
this and just assumed that blacks were faster, better athletes. You are
changing minds slowly, Mr. Wassall and Co., but changing them you are.
Great post, PitBull, welcome aboard, I agree that Caste Football is slowly beginning to change minds.
It's really pretty simple. With all of the migration to the Western world, driven by the attraction of non whites to its prosperity, whites will no longer exist in our current form if widespread miscengenation occurs. That's no big deal if you believe in biological equality and that culture is transmissable. I think the concept of equality is modern mythology. But I don't think eugenics is necessary. It may disrupt the balance of classes that has always made the Western world so successful. It's odd to me that people believe that different breeds of dogs have differing innate abilities and temperaments when they don't believe that human populations differ in similar ways. If you had a pitt bull and bred her with a lap dog would you not have offspring with wholly different personalities than the parents? Would you trust the offspring around your small children the way you did the lap dog? How could the almalgation of an intelligent human population with a less intelligent population be advantageous to the the brighter group? Besides, who wants everyone to have brown skin, eyes, and hair? That look is fine, but it would be a bit boring and ugly if everyone looked like that. And as far as women's "phsychosexual selection". I don't really care what they select. Ultimately, it's our choice what we want to allow to happen.
Rethinking a bit what I said, I should note that I jumped the gun and only
responded to just a piece of Jervey's post. I operate from the premise
that a "level playing field" is fiction--that some benefits accrue to the
group in charge, no matter how fair you try to be. Its just human nature.
I see it all the time and I'm sure others do too. Better it happens the
other group than mine, better to him than me. I don't see why I should
put up with discrimination if I am part of the majority. We all know how
other groups discriminate against the minority (look at South Africa and
Zimbabwe where whites are in the minority, for example). Am I supposed
to wait around until I am a minority and can't do anything about it? Tell
me, why do you vote for your favorite political candidate, Jervey? So that
when you are in the majority, you sit on the sidelines and are ignored,
and the opposition runs all over you? And then does it again when they
capture the majority? So you lose in all situations? No, I didn't think so.
I doubt seriously any liberal would be convinced by an objective
argument. Every liberal I've met (and I used to be one) has a religious
faith in liberalism. Some (many?) lose their religion because they see how
it doesn't jibe with what they need to do in order to be happy and thrive.
Until that happens, until it hits them squarely, they rarely give up the
faith. Even Jervey admits to sitting on the fence, when the evidence
stares him in the face. The fact is that AA has been practiced in all levels
of society, including sports, to my detriment and the detriment of my
group, and I hate it. That makes me normal.
Questions about who is white enough or not may be helpful in cheering
for those to toss out the black athletic superiority myth, but from what
you guys post about the NFL, that doesn't seem to mattter much come
draft time or playing time on the field. Nobody knows how good you are
if they don't let you play or pass you the ball.
What the Jervey types need to understand is that there is no equilibrium,
no such thing as a true meritocracy in all this. We argue for a meritocracy
because we all know if we get one, whites will win. That's why we are for
it, and blacks and other minorities against it. Its simply a game for
domination, a very serious game, from the ability to aquire resources and
pursue happiness to even the ability to propagate ourselves through
future generations. I don't call that eugenics, Jervey. I call it survival.
I deem myself a realist. And I want a country where I and my group are in
control so we can thrive. The elites and the desires of many minorites
stand in opposition to this. We don't have a multicultural society. What
we have is the illusion of one, propped up by a massive wealth transfer
and propaganda machine to hide the truth. There has never been a truly
successful multicutural and multiracial society that I know of. And when
the money and patience runs out, there won't be the illusion of one here
either. AA and the propaganda of the elites is a tool for my destruction
and the destruction of the smiling Jervey's of the world as well, no matter
how much they capitulate. Pick a side. I have. I had to eliminate my
fears of being labelled a hater or bigot to do so. But I guess self-
preservation is a bit inherently bigoted, isn't it? There is no such thing as
an ideal world. So I'll settle for an imperfect one that I can do well in.
I hope that's not too white for you and your liberal friends, Jervey. Just
my two cents.
responded to just a piece of Jervey's post. I operate from the premise
that a "level playing field" is fiction--that some benefits accrue to the
group in charge, no matter how fair you try to be. Its just human nature.
I see it all the time and I'm sure others do too. Better it happens the
other group than mine, better to him than me. I don't see why I should
put up with discrimination if I am part of the majority. We all know how
other groups discriminate against the minority (look at South Africa and
Zimbabwe where whites are in the minority, for example). Am I supposed
to wait around until I am a minority and can't do anything about it? Tell
me, why do you vote for your favorite political candidate, Jervey? So that
when you are in the majority, you sit on the sidelines and are ignored,
and the opposition runs all over you? And then does it again when they
capture the majority? So you lose in all situations? No, I didn't think so.
I doubt seriously any liberal would be convinced by an objective
argument. Every liberal I've met (and I used to be one) has a religious
faith in liberalism. Some (many?) lose their religion because they see how
it doesn't jibe with what they need to do in order to be happy and thrive.
Until that happens, until it hits them squarely, they rarely give up the
faith. Even Jervey admits to sitting on the fence, when the evidence
stares him in the face. The fact is that AA has been practiced in all levels
of society, including sports, to my detriment and the detriment of my
group, and I hate it. That makes me normal.
Questions about who is white enough or not may be helpful in cheering
for those to toss out the black athletic superiority myth, but from what
you guys post about the NFL, that doesn't seem to mattter much come
draft time or playing time on the field. Nobody knows how good you are
if they don't let you play or pass you the ball.
What the Jervey types need to understand is that there is no equilibrium,
no such thing as a true meritocracy in all this. We argue for a meritocracy
because we all know if we get one, whites will win. That's why we are for
it, and blacks and other minorities against it. Its simply a game for
domination, a very serious game, from the ability to aquire resources and
pursue happiness to even the ability to propagate ourselves through
future generations. I don't call that eugenics, Jervey. I call it survival.
I deem myself a realist. And I want a country where I and my group are in
control so we can thrive. The elites and the desires of many minorites
stand in opposition to this. We don't have a multicultural society. What
we have is the illusion of one, propped up by a massive wealth transfer
and propaganda machine to hide the truth. There has never been a truly
successful multicutural and multiracial society that I know of. And when
the money and patience runs out, there won't be the illusion of one here
either. AA and the propaganda of the elites is a tool for my destruction
and the destruction of the smiling Jervey's of the world as well, no matter
how much they capitulate. Pick a side. I have. I had to eliminate my
fears of being labelled a hater or bigot to do so. But I guess self-
preservation is a bit inherently bigoted, isn't it? There is no such thing as
an ideal world. So I'll settle for an imperfect one that I can do well in.
I hope that's not too white for you and your liberal friends, Jervey. Just
my two cents.