doublegunshop.com - home Forums Now Here's a Couple of True Racists

Quote from Ken:
"Primitive cultures tended to develop behaviors and values in ways to take full advantage of the resources of their ecosystems. It is still not indicative of any real intelligence differences within Humanity."

If you subscribe to the main line regarding evolution we were all primitave cultures at one time. So how is it that some of these cultures such as Whites and Asians made such headway scientifically in the last couple of hundred years and others would probably still be living a primative lifestyle if they hadn't been influenced by exposure to more advanced cultures?
For example: Are you maintaining that because Blacks evolved in Africa the ecosystem there somehow inhibited there advancement? Since South Africa at one time was a highly advanced culture this fact belies that theory.
Jim

You are correct that the San Bushmen were natives of Africa, not Australia as I had erroneously recalled. But many peoples spent eons isolated from the rest of humanity and their average intelligence became genetically altered as a result. Those alterations tend to follow their offspring even when the isolated and environmental conditions are taken out of the equation. It appears that it was not just a brutally challenging environment that caused these changes to increase inherited intelligence, but more likely a changing and diverse environment. This could explain why Eskimos who live and die in one climate extreme have a lower average intelligence that that of Northern Asians who lived in extremes of heat and cold and needed to find and develop food sources in a number of widely differing conditions. It's probably more than mere coincidence that they also have the highest average I.Q.'s in the world despite also living in somewhat isolated conditions.

I quickly skimmed over your link and like what I see so far because it seems to support a lot of my contentions which are not so much personal opinion as they are opinion formed from observations and reading other sources. I'll read it in detail when I get home tonight.

But, Jim is quite correct that we have gotten off topic and allowed the Libtards to get away with dancing away from the original topic and original question.

I'm glad Jim plans to persist in asking the question. I think he knows deep down that he'll never get an honest answer from the Leftist Socialists who support Hillary but don't have the courage or convictions to admit it. I hope you keep hammering them with this Jim... Right up to November 2016 if necessary. The best way to prove what we've been saying here about Liberals and Liberalism is to let them prove it to us with their own words and actions.

In this case, their silence about Hillary's admiration for Margaret Sanger speaks volumes!

There are many reasons for scientific advancement. "Primitive" is a subjective word, that needs to be qualified. In this case, we're talking about science, while in other instances such as social development, cultures that are considered primitive can actually be highly developed. As far as Western Civilization, great leaps were made at the end of the Dark Ages after the Fall of Rome, beginning with the Renaissance. Scientific advancement really didn't get going until the development of the Scientific Method, a standard still in use today. Unless you happen to believe in Man-Made Climate Change. Quite a bit of scientific development depends on how the information is disseminated. Mathematics was certainly highly developed in India, Sanitation and Health in Japan, and numerous other disciplines were well developed in China. Medical Science in the Islamic World was superior to Europe during the Dark Ages, but there's evidence that it was in part due to the existence of the Alexandria Library which preserved Galen's works, up until it was destroyed by Christian fanatics.

Which South African culture are you referring to? The Zimbabwe civilization? Or, the highly developed herding cultures of the Bantu ethnic group like the Xhosa, Matabele, or the Zulu?

Quote:
"Which South African culture are you referring to? The Zimbabwe civilization? Or, the highly developed herding cultures of the Bantu ethnic group like the Xhosa, Matabele, or the Zulu?"

None of the above. I am referring specifically to the Boers, those Dutch-Germans that colonized that Country and turned it into an economic power. South Africa,which is still economically ahead of every other African nation, is no where as advanced as it used to be.
Even under "White Rule" the non-whites in South Africa had the highest standard of living of any Black group in Africa. Whether the Blacks gaining control under the Communist Mandela will have positive long term effect remains to be seen. This is something the true "racists", who are in reality appologists like those that remain silent on Clinton, would just as soon forget.
Additionally the Whites who remained in South Africa continue to be assaulted and murdered at an appalling rate.

Cripes�am I the libertarian libtard that�s supposed to denounce Hillary so this thread can die? The thought that anyone here will vote for Hillary is absurd. Any man who votes for Hillary should have his nuts cut off and thrown into a wood chipper.

I don�t understand the obsession with Planned Parenthood and Margaret Sanger. There so many better reasons to denounce Hillary. I�ll denounce Hillary for being an ugly old hag and an anti-gun drunk.

I�ve got no real issue with Sanger. She didn�t much care for breeding habits of Africans, immigrants, and poor people. I feel the same way in 2015. Making more babies than you can feed is stupid.

Judge Sanger by the standards of her day. Eugenics was widely accepted, and if you called someone a racist before WW2 they wouldn�t of had a clue what you were saying. The word �racism� didn�t exist before the late 1930�s. Literally wasn�t in the dictionary.

On the other hand, comparing blacks to baboons is definitely considered racist in 2015. Sanger�s may be on firmer ground than some people here�

I couldn't say if Jimbo is a racist but, he sure has a fragile ego. (Evidenced by the infamous ignore list. An Italian thing?) Weeks later, he's still fuming for being called a racist -after he said the comparison would probably be considered racist when he posted it. If you�re going to get all butt hurt over being called a racist, then don�t post stuff you know will be considered offensive. At least jOe owns his posts.

Hey Ryan:
With all "due" respect:
Why don't you take a hike. If you don't want to read what's on this thread just what the Hell are you doing here? At any given time there are multiple threads on this forum I don't care about but I do respect the interests of others and shut the Hell up about it.
I started this thread and I'LL decide when its run its course. If I want to tweak Libtards on their hypocracy up until election night next year it's my perogative to do so.
And another point; as we know that, with some certainty. "members" here voted for the Kenyan twice. If they're dumb enough to do that they'll probably vote for Clinton in 2016 IF she gets the nomination which is becoming less certain day by day.
Jim

Hi Ryan:

I don't think that liberals are retarded.

Eugenics was controversial even at the peak of its acceptance. And as a movement was never in the majority here. When WWII was over and it was discovered that the Nazis had euthanized millions of people they deemed unworthy of life eugenics fell into disfavor. The Nazis had decided that Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, the mentally retarded, the mentally ill, homosexuals and others needed to be excised from the gene pool. The Nazis were on the leading edge of eugenics until the Red army rolled into Berlin.

The German American Bund and its leader, Herr Kuhn, were contemporary movements to Ms. Sanger's eugenics campaign. Of course they were Nazis, but don't throw the bath water out with the aborted baby. After all, as stated previously, Ms. Sanger used the pages of her organization's magazine to reprint an article by the German Nazi (Ernst Rudin) in charge of the Eugenics program of Herr Hitler (before Herr Hitler had advanced the practice of eugenics to its apex in Dachau, Auschwitz, Bergen-Belzen, Sobibor and many other mass production murder eugenics facilities).

Now suppose we get up in the morning and read that Jeb Bush said "I admire Fritz Kuhn enormously, his courage, his tenacity, his vision..." while accepting an award from the American Nazi Party.

Mike I think Ed torched your brain.

Well jOe, I am glad you have followed Caitlyn Jenner's example and have come out of the closet and decided to show your true liberal self. "To thine own self be true."

The pressure of posing as a conservative all those decades must have been exhausting. At least that is what your soul mate Caitlyn wrote.

Editorial From the June 10 Baltimore Sun. I'd highly recommend you ALL read it in it's entirely:

From the Baltimore Sun newspaper, an editorial perspective of "The Black Dilemma"


The Black Dilemma
�For almost 150 years the United States has been conducting an interesting experiment. The subjects of the experiment: black people and working-class whites.

The hypothesis to be tested: Can a people taken from the jungles of Africa and forced into slavery be fully integrated as citizens in a majority white population?
The whites were descendants of Europeans who had created a majestic civilization. The former slaves had been tribal peoples with no written language and virtually no intellectual achievements. Acting on a policy that was not fair to either group, the government released newly freed black people into a white society that saw them as inferiors. America has struggled with racial discord ever since. Decade after decade the problems persisted but the experimenters never gave up. They insisted that if they could find the right formula the experiment would work, and concocted program after program to get the result they wanted. They created the Freedmans Bureau, passed civil rights laws, tried to build the Great Society, declared War on Poverty, ordered race preferences, built housing projects, and tried midnight basketball.
Their new laws intruded into peoples lives in ways that would have been otherwise unthinkable. They called in National Guard troops to enforce school integration. They outlawed freedom of association. Over the protests of parents, they put white children on buses and sent them to black schools and vice versa. They tried with money, special programs, relaxed standards, and endless hand wringing to close the achievement gap. To keep white backlash in check they began punishing public and even private statements on race. They hung up Orwellian public banners that commanded whites to Celebrate Diversity! and Say No to Racism. Nothing was off limits if it might salvage the experiment.

Some thought that what W.E.B. DuBois called the Talented Tenth would lead the way for black people. A group of elite, educated blacks would knock down doors of opportunity and show the world what blacks were capable of. There is a Talented Tenth. They are the black Americans who have become entrepreneurs, lawyers, doctors and scientists. But ten percent is not enough. For the experiment to work, the ten percent has to be followed by a critical mass of people who can hold middle-class jobs and promote social stability. That is what is missing. Through the years, too many black people continue to show an inability to function and prosper in a culture unsuited to them. Detroit is bankrupt, the south side of Chicago is a war zone, and the vast majority of black cities all over America are beset by degeneracy and violence. And blacks never take responsibility for their failures. Instead, they lash out in anger and resentment. Across the generations and across the country, as we have seen in Detroit, Watts, Newark, Los Angeles, Cincinnati, and now Ferguson, rioting and looting are just one racial incident away. The white elite would tell us that this doesn�t mean the experiment has failed. We just have to try harder. We need more money, more time, more understanding, more programs, and more opportunities. But nothing changes no matter how much money is spent, no matter how many laws are passed, no matter how many black geniuses are portrayed on TV, and no matter who is president. Some argue its a problem of culture, as if culture creates people�s behavior instead of the other way around. Others blame white privilege. But since 1965, when the elites opened Americas doors to the Third World, immigrants from Asia and India, people who are not white, not rich, and not connected have quietly succeeded.While the children of these people are winning spelling bees and getting top scores on the SAT, black youths are committing half the country�s violent crime, which includes viciously punching random white people on the street for the thrill of it that has nothing to do with poverty.
The experiment has failed. Not because of white culture, or white privilege, or white racism. The fundamental problem is that American black culture has evolved into an unfixable and crime ridden mess. They do not want to change their culture or society, and expect others to tolerate their violence and amoral behavior. They have become socially incompatible with other races by their own design, not because of the racism of others - but by their own hatred of non-blacks. Our rulers don't seem to understand just how tired their white subjects are with this experiment. They don�t understand that white people aren�t out to get black people; they are just exhausted with them. They are exhausted by the social pathologies, the violence, the endless complaints, and the blind racial solidarity, the bottomless pit of grievances, the excuses, and the reflexive animosity. The elites explain everything with racism, and refuse to believe that white frustration could soon reach the boiling point."---

"You can't legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government can't give to anybody anything that the government doesn't first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they don't have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it."

Baltimore Sun