Gunman in New Zealand loose shooting up mosque and others

Nov 1, 2017
756
1,090
220
Erdogan really went vile.

He told the Australia Government that they should be careful not to end up like Australian and Newzelland Soldiers who back then were brutally murdered by the Otoman Empire. Also he said if the terrorists do not get a Death sentence they take care of it with "other" ways to kill them.

https://www.focus.de/politik/ausland/nach-anschlag-in-neuseeland-australiens-premier-reagiert-empoert-auf-erdogan-aussage_id_10477670.html
There is no death sentence in New Zealand.
 

AuraFeliz

Neo Member
Jul 15, 2018
25
22
100
OKay I missed several from the last couple pages because I've been busy and don't have the time to respond to literally everything but here I go again.

To start: So sad to hear about the kids being thrown in jail just for viewing the livestream, I hope there lives don't get ruined. And fuck the shooter in the Netherlands Tran incident. (I heard it was supposed to be an honor killing, with him and some mates trying to harass a woman for being a "whore" and he started shooting.

Hahahaha. Your anti-White is showing. The only countries multiculturalism is forced on are White countries. You’re saying every White country is racist. Andrew Yang also said something else very truthful. He said he went somewhere in Iowa that was 93 percent White, and everyone was friendly, and he didn’t experience any hatred. Homogeneous societies are always friendlier and more trusting places. “Diversity” leads to distrust and hatred.
Nice strawman. I love how all of your arguments are essentially projecting your own racism on other posters. I'm not anti-white nor do I feel any white guilt. The whole world has a nasty history of tribalism and hatred of the others. I'm merely pointing out European ex-colonist powers and the United States have a specific context to their chapter of racism and tribalism that involves specifically dragging people from other continents and cultures to do slave labor and force them and the natives to abandon and erase parts of their cultures, language, and histories if they want to survive.

That's not saying white people are devils, or that African tribes didn't sell other African people because that's dumb the people who sold other people are obviously culpable for their part in the slave trade, or any other random "anti-white" position you assign to me because everyone who disagrees with you must have the same thoughts.

If you had to pick though, which world would be the lesser evil? All nations fusing into one with no separate languages, cultures and tastes, or the world where individual nations exists with tight restrictions on who can enter and who doesn't?

Me speaking, I think forcing all humans to live together and merge into one blob where no unique identity exists anymore is terrible. Despite their proximity to one and other, I think Canada and the U.S should always remain different. Same goes with France & Germany or Israel & Palestine.

Why destroy what for thousands of years lead to unique cultures propping up all over the earth? It can't be any supremacy or nazi belief that I want to see all races and ethnic groups flourish. Yet what bigger crime is out there when I am being told Canada or America will soon lose both their culture and become just another Islamic blob unless some serious legislation is passed?
Who wants America and Canada to be an "Islamic blob" other than ISIS terrorists, whom everyone on the planet hates? Who is pushing for no separate languages or cultures? The only people I see doing that are hardline conservatives who don't like when people speak spanish around them.

I really don't see how a world where tight borders leads to mistrust is a bad thing. Are there not 200 countries on earth? Maybe more? Which human has time to live in all of them? I would rather see all 200 do their best to improve their nations, not destroy them through uncontrolled immigration that will lead to a borderless, cultureless world.
I'm unclear on what you mean. Are you saying tight borders lead to mistrust but that's not a bad thing, or that tight borders don't lead to mistrust?

How do you know that borders ceasing to exist would take culture with it? Cultures have existed for millennium before the we had any formalized borders. Culture even exists in other great ape species, such as the orangutan, and they don't have the human concept of borders, because they're apes that live on tropical rainforest islands.

In Western countries, the same thing will happen to us. There will always be an elite group who demand more than everyone else. They can even use multiculturalism as a way to distract people as they rob the nation of its resources.
Like how the US and other nations have used war as a way to rob various other nations of their resources just for some cheap fuel that's ruining our air quality and environment?

Japan has their own issues but after WW2, they keep their shit to their own island. They're not running around trying to fetch muslims and make them their slaves. They're not gunning Muslims down in the streets. Once again, if muslims were invited to Japan, they would still have a better life than what their own home countries in the middle east offers. Yet the Japanese are not radicals for refusing to turn their island into something Islamic.

And despite Japan's problem, they're still a first world miracle. Shouldn't we try to learn from that instead of copying other multicutural societies that clearly are underperforming (i.e Brazil or South Africa)?
Japan isn't refusing anything because they are not very deeply involved in this. Japan is much further and out of the way, it isn't like China where it has a western border with Muslim-majority territories.

Islam is progressive? No, I want my freedom of speech. That is exactly what I'm not willing to compromise when it comes to this push for diversity.
That's not what they said. Culture progression, as in changes happening, not progressive as in the sociopolitical ideology.

I don't want European demographics to shift towards Islam.
There's a place called the Middle East, why are they leaving it?

What are these people bringing that other Europeans can't do? Again, I am very weirded out by this idea that all of sudden "Europe needs Islam!" when it's been trying to keep Islam out for thousands of years.
That's not a coincidence. What changed to make it acceptable?
Why are they leaving?
-Religious persecution, ISIS terrorism, fascist government, endless US-backed oil wars, poverty, crime, family members dying, disease. And so on and so forth.

Not all refugees in this are muslims, many of them are coptic Christians and similar sects and minorities. Europe doesn't need Islam per se but it should protect individual muslims who are being hunted by terrorists.

I see that your main point is that things change. Well suck it up buttercup, shit is always changing. Some things for the better and others for the worse. But you always have to keep in mind that it's always changing.

So the entire Middle East is inhospitable? How come Israel still exists and people flock to it instead of leaving?
And who made these countries inhospitable to begin with? It's not Europe's fault what other countries do. Let them fix it instead of jumping ship and repeating the exact same scenario but now the Natives are going to pay for it.
Possibly far-right anti-semitic attacks perpetrated against Jews making them want to go migrate to a place, say with a large number of fellow Jews, where they would feel safer? It also depends on WHERE in Israel-Palestine you're talking about.

The Gaza strip is an impoverished shithole that gets bombed every few months and so many people are leaving it specifically because conditions have gotten so bad.

It's not a belief, it's wanting to protect my culture.
Islam is not and will never be Western Civilization. We existed fine without Islam for thousands of years.
Islam, Christianity., and Judaism were all birthed in the middle east region known as the Levant. Why are two of the three western culture but the third is not? You could also say something like "we existed fine without Christianity for thousands of years" if you were a European pagan.

Wanting to protect Western Civilization is not hateful.
Japan does it fine and you never hear of any massacres taking place. How is that possible if being against Islam is suppose to make you "radical"?
Is Japan a terrorist nation in your eyes? Can you even name me a single terrorist attack involving Japan and Islam?

No? Oh ok.
What is this obsession with Japan about? Nobody on here is saying any country are terrorists for tougher immigration laws. People are saying that viewing immigrants as these villainous invaders is the same exact opinion that several terrorists in the last decade have held that served as the main motivator in their crimes against humanity.

JordanN is more convincing than the typical "feels" arguments by the usual suspects. Who believe fully, that they are on the right side of history.. like that never goes wrong.
I don't know how you can be convinced by this. It strikes me as the opposite end of the same kind of over-emotional drivel that is historically and politically illiterate.

I think Culture is a manifestation of race, and race is a manifestation genetics
Alright let me ask you this: if culture is race manifesting, then why is culture always changing and shifting? Why has culture over the years led to different contexts that led to new religions and ideologies like: Wiccan Paganism, Christianity, Capitalism, Anarchism, Feminism, Marxism, Environmentalism, The Men's Rights Movement, Fascism and Naziism, and all variations of those I just now listed?

Why do people of the same races always argue with each other over things like above religions and ideologies?

Your idea makes very little sense from a historical and anthropological standpoint. Because if that was the case culture would be a lot less fluid. So maybe your race ideas are just pseudoscience?

I know correlation is not causation. It doesn’t mean it’s wrong though. The very definition of culture is tied to race. It’s the full expression of a people on there environment. I want no part of Muslim culture, African culture, Black American culture, Japanese culture. I have no issues with any of them. As long as I am not subjected to them.

Andrew Yang is not really proof though. East Asians have a very high average IQ. The bigger the difference in genetics. The harder it seems to adapt to a culture. Also, I already mentioned there are individuals of every race that are well suited for other people’s culture.
Studies have shown that the African continent has the highest level of genetic diversity. So if you believe as you said, do you think that they have the largest differences and diversity of cultures between nations on there? Just checking to see if you're consistent on that front.

I just saw Chelsea Clinton is now being blamed for the attack.... all because she condemned Ilhan Omar's comments?

What the fuck? What does condemning anti-Semitic attacks have anything to do with a deranged 8chan conspiracy nut going in and shooting a bunch of innocent people? People really have lost their minds if they're going to use Omar's Islamic faith as an excuse for the reason the attacks happened, instead of being able to condemn someone who made comments that clearly expressed hatred against Jews.
It's ridiculous, Chelsea Clinton is an idiot, but has nothing to do with this other idiot. However I object because criticism of Israel isn't anti-semitism. I don't think she hates Jews.
 

PKM

Gold Member
Oct 11, 2017
868
969
370
Just stopping in to say..










When will white people stop!?

4chan/8chan/Pewdiepie!! The true faces of evil in this world!! /s
 
Last edited:

Shmunter

Member
Aug 25, 2018
956
1,307
235
It’s been mentioned, Turkey prime minister essentially just called jihad on Australians, this will incite Islam at large. What sort of culture has a leader of the country riling up his people against other nations citizens? Because a single psychopath killed NZ muslims.

Apparently the state tv in Turkey is posing it as an AU attack against Islam. The president was cheered on by thousands when he made the speech and played the livestream and read the manifesto.

This is what AU Prime Minister had to say...

 

JordanN

Junior Member
Apr 21, 2012
17,230
3,340
540
Brampton, Ontario
Who wants America and Canada to be an "Islamic blob" other than ISIS terrorists, whom everyone on the planet hates? Who is pushing for no separate languages or cultures? The only people I see doing that are hardline conservatives who don't like when people speak spanish around them.
Context is important dude. What is the end game of immigration? Last I check, "multiculturalism" hasn't given us a limit. If immigration continues to go on forever, then of course the final result will be countries that no longer resemble their original populations.

The proof is out there that non-stop immigration will lead to erasure of culture unless legislative action is taken. I don't want to turn this topic into a language debate but you can google for yourself "language laws" and "British Colombia".
https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/richmond-b-c-considers-banning-chinese-only-signs-amid-uproar-over-citys-un-canadian-advertisements

The above is not a coincidence that Canada taking in too much Chinese immigration has lead to them now fighting in certain areas to try and preserve English.


AuraFeliz said:
How do you know that borders ceasing to exist would take culture with it? Cultures have existed for millennium before the we had any formalized borders.
Terrible argument. Many cultures also existed in complete isolation from one an other too.
There was no threat of China conquering the Native American culture unless they physically arrived there on boats and settled next to them.

We need borders today to protect culture or any huge mass migration of people from around the world can move inside and begin to impose their cultures on native populations.

AuraFeliz said:
Like how the US and other nations have used war as a way to rob various other nations of their resources just for some cheap fuel that's ruining our air quality and environment?
I am not an interventionist. I support isolationist policies.
That's said, I'm not sure why you support doing the same thing against us? Are you saying you WANT the Islamic world to declare war and rob my country of its resources, even though plenty of European countries or even Canada, never even went to war with the Middle East?


AuraFeliz said:
Japan isn't refusing anything because they are not very deeply involved in this. Japan is much further and out of the way, it isn't like China where it has a western border with Muslim-majority territories.
You're misunderstanding my argument. I don't want Western countries to be deeply involved in this either. Japan doesn't care because they DON'T want to care.
I want the exact same thing for my countries.

AuraFeliz said:
That's not what they said. Culture progression, as in changes happening, not progressive as in the sociopolitical ideology.
And what if I don't want my culture to become Islam? Just as how Japan's tight immigration policies prevent it from becoming Muslim?
You use the word "progressive" to imply there is no other way out from this. I'm saying, I want to stop this before it's too late.

AuraFeliz said:
Why are they leaving?
-Religious persecution, ISIS terrorism, fascist government, endless US-backed oil wars, poverty, crime, family members dying, disease. And so on and so forth.

Not all refugees in this are muslims, many of them are coptic Christians and similar sects and minorities. Europe doesn't need Islam per se but it should protect individual muslims who are being hunted by terrorists.
Europe suffered through two world wars but most Europeans still manage to stay where they are.
What makes the Middle East so special that they demand complete access to other people's countries?

We could take in refugees, but only as temporary asylum. We do not need to naturalize and permanently settle these people into European lands or else we will see the demographics change.


AuraFeliz said:
I see that your main point is that things change. Well suck it up buttercup, shit is always changing. Some things for the better and others for the worse. But you always have to keep in mind that it's always changing.
Western Civilization changing towards Islam is for the worst. Once again, Europeans fought to keep it out for 1000 years. Why stop now?


AuraFeliz said:
Possibly far-right anti-semitic attacks perpetrated against Jews making them want to go migrate to a place, say with a large number of fellow Jews, where they would feel safer? It also depends on WHERE in Israel-Palestine you're talking about.

The Gaza strip is an impoverished shithole that gets bombed every few months and so many people are leaving it specifically because conditions have gotten so bad.
Actually that's incorrect.
The Gaza population has been growing, even under the threat of bombs.



Also funny how in your Israel example, you mention Jews moving in with other Jews after being persecuted.

So why aren't Muslim moving to other Middle Eastern countries instead? Why go straight to Europe which is NOT Islamic?

The Middle East is big, you didn't answer my question when I asked you what makes the entire area inhospital, yet Israel somehow thrives there?


AuraFeliz said:
Islam, Christianity., and Judaism were all birthed in the middle east region known as the Levant. Why are two of the three western culture but the third is not? You could also say something like "we existed fine without Christianity for thousands of years" if you were a European pagan.
If Europeans wanted to go back to Paganism, they could, and honestly I would rather support such tradition.
Judaism has always been a minority in Europe.
Islam has tried to conquer Europe before and they got pushed out.



AuraFeliz said:
What is this obsession with Japan about? Nobody on here is saying any country are terrorists for tougher immigration laws. People are saying that viewing immigrants as these villainous invaders is the same exact opinion that several terrorists in the last decade have held that served as the main motivator in their crimes against humanity.
I'm not saying immigrants are villainous, I'm saying countries should have a right to refuse them if they don't want them to come over and become the new demographic majority.
I use Japan because people were insisting in this thread being against Muslim immigrations means you're a radical or share radical thoughts. But Japan manages to be against both Islamic immigration while also being friendly/peaceful towards them.

I want the same for the Western world. I do hate Muslims. I am not racist. I am not a supremacist.

I only love Western civilization and want to see what is continued best for them. Forcing Islamic immigration on them with no care for the native population demographics is a betrayal of this.
 
Last edited:

JordanN

Junior Member
Apr 21, 2012
17,230
3,340
540
Brampton, Ontario
Islam, Christianity., and Judaism were all birthed in the middle east region known as the Levant. Why are two of the three western culture but the third is not? You could also say something like "we existed fine without Christianity for thousands of years" if you were a European pagan.
I know I already responded to this point but there's one important thing I left out.

When Europe did adopt Christianity it had severe consequences. It did lead to Europeans going to war with one an another as well as it helped suppressed scientific knowledge.

It took hundreds of years before Europeans finally woke up and pushed for secularism or "freedom" from religious dogma.
So yes, I do wish all 3 Abrahamic beliefs had stayed in the Levant and if anything, we should be promoting more agnosticism, and not more religion.

Having said that, if Islam were to become the new dominant religion of Europe, it would further destroy all progress Europeans ever made. All the effort into promoting secularism and free speech would be made useless because everyone is afraid of making fun of Muhammad or criticizing Islamic fundamentalism.

We could never escape from this.
 
Last edited:

MrTickles

Gold Member
Feb 22, 2018
2,666
3,458
460
I know I already responded to this point but there's one important thing I left out.

When Europe did adopt Christianity it had severe consequences. It did lead to Europeans going to war with one an another as well as it helped suppressed scientific knowledge.

It took hundreds of years before Europeans finally woke up and pushed for secularism or "freedom" from religious dogma.
So yes, I do wish all 3 Abrahamic beliefs had stayed in the Levant and if anything, we should be promoting more agnosticism, and not more religion.

Having said that, if Islam were to become the new dominant religion of Europe, it would further destroy all progress Europeans ever made. All the effort into promoting secularism and free speech would be made useless because everyone is afraid of making fun of Muhammad or criticizing Islamic fundamentalism.

We could never escape from this.
The dark age (of western Europe) is more fairly attributed to the fall of the western roman empire. Christianity in the eastern Roman empire did not inhibit scientific thought and progress. It did not lead to crazed zealots pillaging fellow European towns. Recall it was the western Crusaders who sacked Constantinople. Recall that only with the loss of territory and power at the hands of the Seljuk Turks did Byzantine Greeks fall into mediocrity. Only then did the northern Italian city states with their emphasis on mercantilism and trade manage to surpass Byzantine science and learning.

As for Islam, it had its enlightenment/secularization all the way in the ~13th century, it was set to take over the world. Then the hardline Sunni factions defeated the moderates and Islam has been mired in a dark age up to this very day. Yet despite this, even dark age islam is proving resilient and expansive enough to conquer the feeble, declining west. Very sad.
 
Last edited:

JordanN

Junior Member
Apr 21, 2012
17,230
3,340
540
Brampton, Ontario
Muslims bomb the Boston Marathon? #NotAllMuslims
White guy kills some blacks? FUCK YOU WHITE AMERICA REEEEEEE!
It's a divide and conquer tactic by the media.

They're deliberately trying to stroke up emotions and anger to keep people distracted from the real issues in the world.

Imagine both Whites, Blacks and Muslims uniting against Globalism. The media knows they would lose in a fight.

 
Last edited:

MrTickles

Gold Member
Feb 22, 2018
2,666
3,458
460
No surprise there. New Zealanders like most Australians are full time virtue signalers. They think showing weakness is going to score them life points.

I just voted today in the state election here in NSW. One of the choices was 'Animal Justice Party'. Our Possums already have more protections than Aborigines. But they keep going.
 
Last edited:

Breakage

Member
Mar 3, 2014
5,594
1,664
410
Yeah, seeing the pictures of Jacinda Ardern in Islamic costume and hearing about the call to prayer among all the various other images, I couldn't help but think that Islamists must have loved the spectacle of it all. They were probably thinking that's what victory in the Western world will look like.
 

Shmunter

Member
Aug 25, 2018
956
1,307
235
Not sure what is deemed as evidence. But there is no lack of videos on YouTube of no go zones in western countries. These zones seemingly operate on sharia law with police not welcome. Completely isolated with no integration to the nation.

Legitimate crews like Australian 60 minutes in Sweden, or RT. Look it up yourself, eyebrow raising to be sure.
 

AfricanKing

Gold Member
Jul 16, 2017
1,400
1,098
350
Not sure what is deemed as evidence. But there is no lack of videos on YouTube of no go zones in western countries. These zones seemingly operate on sharia law with police not welcome. Completely isolated with no integration to the nation.

Legitimate crews like Australian 60 minutes in Sweden, or RT. Look it up yourself, eyebrow raising to be sure.
Watched the video then did actual research, it's been debunked by multiple sources including police officers . No area in the West has sharia law operating as its main form of governance outside civil courts which again have no legal bearing.
 

DrLobster

Neo Member
Mar 10, 2019
34
38
110
Watched the video then did actual research, it's been debunked by multiple sources including police officers . No area in the West has sharia law operating as its main form of governance outside civil courts which again have no legal bearing.
Yea right...

Statement by "Mutti" on the subject at hand: Source

Angela Merkel admits that "no-go zones" exist in Germany.

Despite evidence of the existence of areas in Western countries, European leaders and left-wing media commentators have long denied, and sometimes even mocked, those who claim that no-go zones exist.

But Merkel, who won Time Magazine's "Person of the Year" in 2015 in part because of her open-borders stance, mentioned their existence in an interview this week with German broadcaster n-tv as she called for a zero-tolerance policy on crime.

She said that people have a right to feel safe when they meet in public places. When asked to clarify, she specified that she was talking about no-go zones.

“It means for example that there cannot be any no-go areas, that there cannot be areas where no-one dares to go but there are such places,” she said. “One has to call them by name and do something about it.”
According to police estimates, close to 20 large Arab family clans live in Berlin. They each have up to 500 members. Twelve clans are causing serious problems for the police as they repeatedly commit organised crimes, Berliner Zeitung reports.

The clans, which consist of Arabs, Turks and Africans operate primarily in the west of the city. Some Arab clans live in Berlin’s Neukölln suburb and have divided certain streets amongst themselves.
The problem is not limited to Berlin. The clans are also active in the Ruhr area, in Lower Saxony and Bremen.
 

DocONally

Member
Oct 21, 2014
1,208
694
335
InfoWars? No thanks.
That is your prerogative. But you're missing a good news source. It has videos of regular shopping centres stopping to sing Allah Akbar, you know, the same phrase Muslims shout when suicide bombing the public.

lol my phone had Bomberman as a predictive entry. Muslim bomberman PBUH.

Sorry for being unbiased!

ALLAHU AKBAR INNIT MATE.
 
Last edited:

Shmunter

Member
Aug 25, 2018
956
1,307
235
Watched the video then did actual research, it's been debunked by multiple sources including police officers . No area in the West has sharia law operating as its main form of governance outside civil courts which again have no legal bearing.
I would argue you have it in reverse. Of course no government or police would ever admit having no control. It is the video evidence that is calling into question or debunking the legitimacy of these expected statements. Believing such statements at face value is naive.

However I fully understand that the video reports themselves could be deliberately misleading, out of context, which is all too common in media.
 

Shmunter

Member
Aug 25, 2018
956
1,307
235
You've failed in showing me where sharia law is the main form of governance which is what I wrote .

Try again
If people that are not Muslim, e.g. A blond woman without a hijab cannot traverse a street safely, or the policy do not enter in fear of causing an uprest, what is going on? This is not customary in the west.
 

AfricanKing

Gold Member
Jul 16, 2017
1,400
1,098
350
If people that are not Muslim, e.g. A blond woman without a hijab cannot traverse a street safely, or the policy do not enter in fear of causing an uprest, what is going on? This is not customary in the west.
Another lie unless you have proof that people are not allowed to go into these areas then your just regurgitating YouTube videos that have been made to fear mongering people against a religion.
 

JordanN

Junior Member
Apr 21, 2012
17,230
3,340
540
Brampton, Ontario
The fear and suspicion of Muslims in this thread is just mind boggling
Do I fear someone for being muslim? Lol, not a chance, nor does it ever cross my mind.

Do I fear uncontrolled immigration and birthrates of those belonging to the Islamic faith becoming the majority in Western countries which for most of Western history, is unprecedented? Yes, for good reason.

I want free speech to be around forever. I also want to see European countries maintain their unique heritage.
 

AfricanKing

Gold Member
Jul 16, 2017
1,400
1,098
350
Do I fear someone for being muslim? Lol, not a chance, nor does it ever cross my mind.

Do I fear uncontrolled immigration and birthrates of those belonging to the Islamic faith becoming the majority in Western countries which for most of Western history, is unprecedented? Yes, for good reason.

I want free speech to be around forever. I also want to see European countries maintain their unique heritage.
Lol Muslims becoming a majority in the west will never happen , its statistically impossible. This great replacement fear you have will never come true.
 

DrLobster

Neo Member
Mar 10, 2019
34
38
110
You've failed in showing me where sharia law is the main form of governance which is what I wrote .

Try again
I won't try again. These streets are operating under sharia law, which makes them no-go-zones. It doesn't have to be the "main form of governance".
On July 4, the Berlin newspaper Tagesspiegel reported that several other women and men have been assaulted by the Sharia gang in recent weeks, and that the Berlin Criminal Police Office has now launched an investigation. A police spokesperson said that the investigation is being hampered by the fact that so far no victim has publicly dared to bring formal accusations against the gang. The victims are all, apparently, afraid of retribution.
 

wutnau

Member
Sep 18, 2017
2,054
2,144
260
It's a cute modern take, but look at the purpose of governments through a Darwinian Len. Nations all throughout history, were made up of primarily one genetic stock until conquered. [...] The evolutionary purpose of a government is to protect its in-group's genetic stock and allow it to flourish.
So I'm late to the "party" (usually avoid other than the gaming forums), but was bored and have been going through this thread with morbid curiosity. But I have to ask - do you really think you know how genetics work?

I'm a Finn, and for the most part of history that we've inhabited Finland, we've been about as white and homogenous as you can get. Sure, there were those pesky Sami people in prehistoric times, but we quickly drove them up to Lapland and some Swedish and later Russian breeding stock was added to the gene pool from 13th century onwards (and rural areas likely didn't get either). Still, up until some decades ago, we've been about as genetically pure nation as you can get.

Great, right? Well, no. There are many genetic diseases that are extremely rare worldwide, but much more prevalent here. We have several that are unique to us Finns. But on the upside, at least we're quite a paradise for genetic researchers.

I'm not going to argue about cultural invasion or white shaming or whatnot - nope, not going to go there. But eugenics doesn't work. If you're opposed to having a diverse gene pool, you either don't know much biology or believe that some ethnicities are genetically inferior. It's the latter, right? Here's the thing though: even if that were true (and the burden of proof is on you), mixing up some genes, even in small amounts, is good for the population. If the end result is getting slightly more tanned, I think it's a worthy trade-off compared to debilitating and often untreatable diseases.
 

JordanN

Junior Member
Apr 21, 2012
17,230
3,340
540
Brampton, Ontario
Lol Muslims becoming a majority in the west will never happen , its statistically impossible. This great replacement fear you have will never come true.
Lebanon went from being a 51% Christian majority country to just 36% in half a decade.
Native European birth rates do not match the higher fertility muslims one. In 50 years, the same fate of Lebanon can easily happen to several Western countries. Maybe even faster because immigration does not favor Europeans but those from Asia and Africa.
 

Shmunter

Member
Aug 25, 2018
956
1,307
235
Another lie unless you have proof that people are not allowed to go into these areas then your just regurgitating YouTube videos that have been made to fear mongering people against a religion.
You clamouring for proof. Videos, and quite a few written media extracts presented here is direct evidence no? Where is your proof to dismiss these as some trumped up fake conspiracies? I mean “feelings” aren’t your proof are they?

As I said, high profile investigative outlets have produced some of these reports, not some internet nut jobs.

But beyond that, I have met Swedes in business dealings. Let me tell you the sentiment of the actual people is not what the media or government narrative is pushing off “all is well, nothing to see here”.
 
Last edited:

AfricanKing

Gold Member
Jul 16, 2017
1,400
1,098
350
Lebanon went from being a 51% Christian majority country to just 36% in half a decade.
Native European birth rates do not match the higher fertility muslims one. In 50 years, the same fate of Lebanon can easily happen to several Western countries. Maybe even faster because immigration does not favor Europeans but those from Asia and Africa.
Wrong , on the Lebanon stats it currently sits between 40-45% and they are in the Middle East, how can you compare that the Europe ?? That's just a very bad analysis at best .

By 2050 around 10% of Europe will be Muslim. An incremental increase nothing to worry about or fear monger
 

DocONally

Member
Oct 21, 2014
1,208
694
335
The fear and suspicion of Muslims in this thread is just mind boggling
Welcome to the jihad we've got fatwa games
We got everything you want, just don't call us names
We are the people that can find heaven in suicide
If you got your hijab, honey we got you, dhimmi

Jihad, welcome to the jihaaaad!
Decapitate you on your n-n-n-n-n-n-n-n-knees!
 
Last edited:

Ke0

Member
Aug 10, 2012
2,155
540
430
Reading, Berkshire
Do you feel there's something wrong with the assertion that White countries should remain majority white?
Should any country's founders and historical majority have a right to their homelands and self-determination?
You'd think all these countries would band together and tell the US and UK to stop bombing and aiding in the bombing of these countries these people then have to emigrate from…
 
Last edited:

JordanN

Junior Member
Apr 21, 2012
17,230
3,340
540
Brampton, Ontario
Wrong , on the Lebanon stats it currently sits between 40-45% and they are in the Middle East, how can you compare that the Europe ??
So I was off by 4%. That's still not good that it went from Christian majority country to now a minority.
Israel is also in the Middle East but Islam is only 17% of the population. Why is that?

Also, Lebanon use to be called the "Paris of the East". Funny how we never hear that anymore...

AfricanKing said:
By 2050 around 10% of Europe will be Muslim. An incremental increase nothing to worry about or fear monger
From your same article.

Although the Muslim population represents a tiny fraction of Americans – about 1% – it is set to grow rapidly over the next four decades. The report predicts Muslim will surpass Jews to become the second-largest religious group in the US by 2050 – while still only representing 2.1% of the whole country.
Europe’s Muslim population, boosted by large families and immigration, will nearly double, from less than 6% (43 million people) in 2010 to more than 10% (71 million people) in 2050, the forecast estimates.
Europe, the only region whose total population is projected to shrink, will see its Christian population diminish by 100 million people to about 65%, according to the report.
In summary, why must we stand by and take the chances with Islam taking over Europe? Especially when Islam's population is expected to grow all across the world whereas the Christians continue to diminish, how do you think this will affect immigration?
 
Last edited:
Aug 22, 2018
255
274
180
I'm not going to argue about cultural invasion or white shaming or whatnot - nope, not going to go there. But eugenics doesn't work. If you're opposed to having a diverse gene pool, you either don't know much biology or believe that some ethnicities are genetically inferior. It's the latter, right? Here's the thing though: even if that were true (and the burden of proof is on you), mixing up some genes, even in small amounts, is good for the population. If the end result is getting slightly more tanned, I think it's a worthy trade-off compared to debilitating and often untreatable diseases.
Lots of projection here.
We know Eugenics works, we have been practicing it on dogs for thousands of years, it works quickly too.
The reason people suggest that having a wider genetic pool is in better health is due to the lesser chance of having double expressed recessive alleles which aren't under selective pressure and can have some nasty side effects.
You could just as easily eliminate this by mating with other Europeans and you're more likely to keep more of the traits that make Ethnic Finns, Finnish.
There are several problems with this conception of growing the gene pool as it's popularly presented.
Mating with someone more genetically distant than you can cause a breakdown of Co-adaptive Gene Complexes, since genes don't evolve in isolation and many traits humans express are poly genic and require certain genes to be present and others not, it means that a sort of synergy between the genes that relied on one another is broken, this is true for both genetically distant parents.
Another, Europe was under intense Darwinian Selection for intelligence up until the 20th century when the upper classes replaced the lower classes every few generations. The Industrial Revolution changed what's selected for. The variance in Intelligence attributed to Heritable Factors is around .76. We are actually becoming less intelligent on our own today, even without immigration and outgroup mating accelerating this. This is because the poor have so many more children than the upper and middle classes. The poor tend to be the least intelligent in society and with the Industrial Revolution, the child mortality rate is such that the poor's children actually survive.
This is well and humanitarian, but in modern society we need high intelligence to function and maintain it. Basic thought experiment, if our computer engineers(128.5IQ average) along with designs all disappeared tomorrow, how would we build a new computer? What about when current ones stop working?
It's a scary thought that we could reach an Intelligence threshold where no one is capable of innovating.

You're not benefitting that much from the wider gene pool. It's a shame about the genetic diseases, but I believe a better course of action would be the elimination of these diseases through gene editing. With that said, while I fesr the genetic brain drain, I equally am worried that artificially selecting for super intelligent humans could result in an unintended consequence(like a prevalent psychological disorder)
If none of that speaks to you, then perhaps the emotional family argument will. According to the CDC, marriage partners being of two differnt races is the second greatest predictive factor for divorce, only beaten out by one partner having an anxiety disorder.

Have a good one mate, project away.
 

wutnau

Member
Sep 18, 2017
2,054
2,144
260
We know Eugenics works, we have been practicing it on dogs for thousands of years, it works quickly too.
That is indeed a good example how it works. Take a dog of any very selective breed (not sure what the proper in English term is, but one that has been bred for a long time for very specific features - you get what I'm after) and compare it to your average mutt. Very likely the mutt will be more healthy.

There's a thing called "Flynn effect", quoting from Wikipedia:
Test score increases have been continuous and approximately linear from the earliest years of testing to the present. For the Raven's Progressive Matrices test, a study published in the year 2009 found that British children's average scores rose by 14 IQ points from 1942 to 2008. Similar gains have been observed in many other countries in which IQ testing has long been widely used, including other Western European countries, Japan, and South Korea.
...but not all is so rosy:
Research suggests that there is an ongoing reversed Flynn effect, i.e. a decline in IQ scores, in Norway, Denmark, Australia, Britain, the Netherlands, Sweden, Finland, France and German-speaking countries, a development which appears to have started in the 1990s.
It may be tempting to blame this on immigrants and/or "Idiocracy", but at least in my experience/watching my now 12-yo daughter go to school, there is another quite valid explanation.

What IQ tests (the proper ones, not something you click through on the web in a couple of minutes) really measure is the ability to solve certain kinds of problems. I don't think it is an absolute measure of intelligence. I once took the official Mensa test and could be a member if I wanted - I'm not trying to brag about this and fell free not to believe me, just that while I have some personal qualities that make me fit for my profession (programming), I can be an absolute numbnut in other areas.

But let's say IQ test scores are all that matter, how to ace that test? While there certainly can be some genetic component to it, I think there are two other major factors. First, upbringing. If parents or whoever are raising a child encourage him/her to study and learn about the world, this can have a very dramatic impact. It doesn't matter if they are at the left side of the bell curve, it's more important just to encourage curiosity and learning. Sadly, even if that would be in order, "it takes a village to raise a child". There seems to be a growing anti-intellectual sentiment at least in Western countries, across all of the political spectrum. What's the ultimate cause, I'm not going to speculate, but there used to be a time when scientists were respected as highly trained professionals and their opinions were valued. Nowadays if their opinion doesn't match someone's confirmation bias, they're just perpetual grant seekers with an obvious axe or two to grind. Who would want to do something where the best appreciation (outside academia) you're going to get for your work is muted approval?

And another thing, education. I can speak only for Finland here, but we used to be consistently at/near the top in PISA tests. Lately, the trend has been downwards. But having observed closely what/how my daughter has been taught, I blame the curriculum. There have been many revisions/updates to it (schools/individual teachers have some say, naturally, but the general content of the curriculum is set on a national level), with the goal being to prepare pupils for a more modern world/workplace. Just the implementation can be very lacking. For example, using technology only for technology's sake (at least from my perspective - seems often more a distraction than an asset) and lot of focus on independent work/setting own goals and meeting them from very early age (this may suit some, but others definitely less so). I get what they're trying with the curriculum, but I think they're doing it at the expense of some fundamentals, including things that will help with those IQ tests.

As to the emotional family argument, doesn't work for me. To me marriage is just a social contract (one I've tried and didn't enjoy), my daughter was born out of wedlock and I don't think that's an issue of any kind. (Also continuing with the genetics topic, I've made my contribution to the gene pool and will get a vasectomy, been meaning to for several years, just that since it's not the most important thing in life to me I haven't yet got around to it).

Anyway. I admit being too snarky, apologies - I wanted you to elaborate your position, which you did. We probably won't agree on this subject, but that's fine. I'll return my full attention to the local hockey playoffs - just a cross-check to the throat, this game is heating up.
 
Aug 22, 2018
255
274
180
There's a distinction to be made between inbreeding(as it pertains to dogs) and having a close genetic family.
Spend some time researching how we get heritability estimates from twin studies, perhaps consider not using anecdotes for supporting evidence.

The idea of g and validity of IQ as a proxy for g has been reaffirmed so many times even by systems that attempt to replace "General Intelligence" like Multiple Intelligence Theory end up reinforcing g, because when a person does well in one category, they tend to do well in all of then.
It makes sense to consider intelligence as a measure of pattern recognition, the ability to create correlations between seemingly unrelated information, quickly, is beneficial in every aspect of life.