Why are racists such whiners? - MOD WARNING

"Alternative hypothesis". Read the "about" section where on one hand they are stating that they only want to put forth facts and on the other admitting to using non-peer reviewed material

In other words - stormfront front

- - - Updated - - -

Define "black"

 

Do you believe that any random person who is poor has a human right to immigrate? Irrespective of any war or political persecution special case. Just your average poor Botswanan or Albanian.

 

Is it any consolation that South Africa has a lot of diverse language and ethnic groups when one of these groups routinely takes charge of the government and enacts piles of racist policy against the other groups?

It's not difficult to be diverse. It is difficult to be egalitarian on ethnicity. The two are not the same.

 

Context, culture, history, other demographics, religion, employment, economy, political issues, environment and a lot make a difference.

 

You're using one definition of racist. There's another. Disliking someone based on the color of their skin, is also racist. Quit sticking up for bigots.

 

LOL.
A racist website is your proof?

Bye bye. No credibility.

- - - Updated - - -

Disliking someone based on skin color is disliking or hate. Not racist. There's only 1 definition of racism. Some confuse hate with racism.
It's why there's so much misuse of the word flying around.
Superiority is the only definition, as of now.

- - - Updated - - -

Whatever the whites took? So it's ok for whites to go anywhere in the world and take?

 

Look up "hybrid dynamism". It is a real thing.

 

You are false, and I can't believe you didn't google this before posting your comment.
rac·ist


/ˈrāsəst/


noun

noun: racist; plural noun: racists



1.


a person who shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or who believes that a particular race is superior to another.
"the comments have led to her being called a racist"


synonyms: racial bigot, racialist, xenophobe, chauvinist, supremacist More

"he was exposed as a racist"


•(racially) discriminatory, racialist, prejudiced, bigoted

"a racist society"




adjective

noun: racist; plural noun: racists; adjective: racist



1.


showing or feeling discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or believing that a particular race is superior to another.

I literally just proved you wrong.

 

Yes. Words still have meanings. Dictionaries are the inconvenient truth for what passes for a "progressive" movement these days.

 

OK, I had, guess not careful enough.
But that doesn't mean hating. But of course one probably wouldn't discriminate someone they don't hate, but they certainly could.
And prejudice isn't based on facts, but preconceived notions.

 

The fact is that no side is any more racist than the other. Most of the world is probably racist in some fashion.

 

I suppose going to an official website like Census.gov or an economic bureau was too challenging, so a backwoods blog which could be seen as Alt-Right was what you saw fit to use instead.

 

In an anonymous forum, how do you know? What race am I? What gender? What ethnicity? What age? What is my education level? Where do I live?

 

Liberals distort definitions to allow them to attack anyone that disagrees with them and label them as a racist, all while justifying their open racism.

 

What has passed for a "progressive" movement has always been racist to the core.

“Staffers have been buzzing about Andy Lack’s decision to replace “Today’s” first black female anchor with Kelly.

“Tamron doesn’t know Megyn, but of course it’s insulting. Her show was beating Kelly Ripa and ‘Nightly News’ would rate well when she would fill in for Lester Holt. It was a very tense few days for everyone. There was a lot of crying,” the source added. “Tamron never wanted this fight, but she was ready for it. No deal would stop her from standing up after Roker posted their successful ratings [on Twitter].” Tamron Hall walks away from ‘Today’ over Megyn(*)Kelly, By Carlos Greer, February 1, 2017.

http://pagesix.com/2017/02/01/tamro...-kelly/?_ga=1.137094832.1403802683.1485892376

 

I'm not saying immigration is a human right; just that White people don't have a right to determine who can and cannot immigrate to a continent that is not theirs, a continent they themselves came to illegally since 1492

 

And what of the average poor Trinidadian who has no extenuating circumstances like political persecution? Do nations have a right to refuse entry to these people?


And what about black or diverse nations? Most nations on the planet today were formed through violent invasion. Do they have a right to refuse entry to whites or anyone else above and beyond predominantly white nations?

 

What's incorrect with the linked article?

Blacks are sub-saharan Africans - those people with high crime rates and low IQ in every region of the world they inhabit

- - - Updated - - -

So please explain why low IQ and crime follow blacks around the world? Show all these variables explain why blacks are universally violent and poor.

 

So you have no argument against the article?

Blacks benefitted from whites in South Africa unlike the presence of blacks in white majority nations.

- - - Updated - - -

So what? The opposite exists, too. Wolf/coyote is dysgenic.

What does that have to do with how do blacks benefit white majority societies?

- - - Updated - - -

Do you have an argument against the facts in the article?

 

I believe I just answered that right there.

You could've cited the actual sources on that page instead, that wouldn't have made me question your rather poor choice of conservative blogs as primary sources.

 

Nevertheless, hybrid dynamism is real. The benefits are often very obvious, as I am sure you have noticed.

 

Please give us some examples of Black or even Hispanic racists---People or groups.

Or can only White people be capable of racism?

 

I did. Here it is again.

We do not advocate genocide, slavery, or any other kind of “supremacist” action. So, if that is what you mean by “racist” then we are not it. On the other hand, we do endorse the factual statements, supported by a wealth of scientific evidence, that human populations differ in socially important ways for genetic reasons and that racial diversity does a great deal of societal harm. We also defend the prescriptive statement that White nations have just as much of a right as Asian or African nations to defend themselves from demographic displacement. If you think that is “racist” then fine, we are racist. Now explain why we are wrong.

From your linked website. Prove it's genetics.

 

Why are liberals such snowflakes?

 

What does their FAQ page have to do with the article on Hispanics and blacks being net fiscal deficits?