Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

I'm not a racist, but I am...

Name: Anonymous 2005-12-06 1:18

This forum is full of it, but it's all true. The facts are there. Maybe there is a little hyperbole, sure black people can become doctors, fly planes etc... I'm a reasonable human being, I was raised in a liberal environment. I have bullied before, but never been racist and I see bigotry as immature, however I can't escape the fact that they are indeed very unusual looking.

http://unicast.org/forums/forum.php?forum_id=1

"golly, niggers are hideous with their buck teeth, black skin and brillo heads. Egads."

Just do a google search for skull shapes of different races and albino black people... CAucasian and mongoloid skulls are about the same and both these races have obviously exceeded negrito races in culture and civilisation. Even the obscure native americans constructed early civilisations. Their hunter gatherers tribes only existed due to their isolation, deprived of the circumstnaces that allow for agrarian civilisation. Given another 1000 years after the SPanish arrived, and the Gulf of Mexico would be like the Mediteranean circa 1000 B.C..

Though I can't say the same for black civilisations, they were not isolated, theywere exposed to the Egyptians, who were arabic, im not one of these nuts who thinks they are white. I really am not a racist or even a far right conservative...

I can't contain what i think anymore and I shouldn't be afraid of expressing my thoughts. They do look so animal like, it is as if they are a relic from evolution before human civilisation. In fact that's what they are, the only tribal systems outside of sub-saharran africa left by around 1300 were in areas which didn't have much food. Yet in the rich jungles of africa they still lived in the stone age, never utilising the wide range of plants there.

I think the out of africa theory is correct and that blacks haven't evolved much whilst caucasians and mongoloids have had to deal with the ice age.

How should I approach these facts rationally? Liberals say I should just ignore them, conservatives say I should become a whtie supremacist nut. Surely there is another way? Surely there is a way to get society to accept these facts without sinking into depths of paranoia and stupidity.

Name: Anonymous 2006-03-23 20:16

Our friend here is standard of liberalism (or in fact, any idealogy that relies heavily on non-truths).  What he does is use vague connections and convenient accusations to assert what he believes to be true.  Look at how his argument has evolved from the beginning: at first, he said he didn't believe in race.  Then he said that he did believe that genes were transmitted between generations, but that it didn't account for intelligence.  Now, (I'm not sure if he's been reading what he himself has been writing) he seems to think that genes don't even control traits visilby expressed.

What's happening is he comes to an argument with a belief, and then he changes his arguments to reinforce that belief as new information is introduced.  He believes that by expressing his belief strongly enough, coming out half-cocked with illogical "evidence" he can somehow make his beleifs true.

I don't know whether to call cognitive dissonance or just plain stupidity on this. 

Newer Posts