# Sperg about race realism here



## ProgKing of the North (Jul 16, 2019)

Since nothing here will likely count as a deep thought I’m posting it in general. The race realists thread is a needed community watch thread and it’s plagued all to hell, let’s move the debates here



ProgKing of the North said:


> The world’s too globalized for an ethnostate IMO, but if you wanna create one and fuck off to it I have no issue with that (same for black separatists or any other separatist movement). Just stop trying to turn the US into your ethnostate.
> 
> That’s massive hyperbole when applied to standardized tests, but is essentially true when applied to poll literacy tests (which whites of course were grandfathered out of)
> View attachment 844318


----------



## break these cuffs (Jul 16, 2019)

There has been a lot of controversy surrounding the study of melanin. Some scientist say that melanin is only responsible for the skin pigmentation while others claim that it is a lot more to than that. There are many theories associated with melanin by scholars, such as melanin allowing people of color to receive sound in its fullness, allowing them to see colors in its fullness, allowing them to develop spiritually at a much faster rate, and the claim that diamonds are a result of melanin and carbon fusing together just to name a few. 

There are also startling claims that suggest that people of color organs are being stolen from their graves to use the melanin in which they have. Its been said that people of color organs are in very high demand. Could this possibly be true? Many melanin scholars claim that melanin is a superconductor and that it absorbs all frequencies of the electromagnetic spectrum. They claim melanin can convert sound energy to light energy reversibly and that it can function as a minicomputer to process information.

We need to examine what melanin is, why is it so important to human existence, and why the science of melanin is being hidden from the general population.


----------



## KimCoppolaAficionado (Jul 16, 2019)

Posting here to not shit up the actual thread.


Flynt's Missing Pecker said:


> Up until the 1960’s the US was 90% white, sounds pretty *homogeneous* to me.


Are we counting the Polacks, Germs, Micks, Kikes, and Wops as "white" in those stats?  Goddamn, by the standards of the 17th century the _Scottish_ were considered "swarthy".


----------



## ES 148 (Jul 16, 2019)

I can't help being so much better than everyone else, but at least I know it's because I'm a chronic narcissist rather than my race


----------



## NIGGO KILLA (Jul 16, 2019)

NIGGOS LOL



Bottom text


----------



## Arcturus (Jul 16, 2019)

/thread


----------



## CatboyCumDump (Jul 16, 2019)




----------



## Bessie (Jul 16, 2019)

break these cuffs said:


> There are many theories associated with melanin by scholars, such as melanin allowing people of color to receive sound in its fullness, allowing them to see colors in its fullness, allowing them to develop spiritually at a much faster rate, and the claim that diamonds are a result of melanin and carbon fusing together just to name a few.


Truly, Yakub screwed the pooch when he invented white people. Stripped of melanin, they got no soul.


			
				Memory Holed Wikipedia Article said:
			
		

> Yakub is a figure in the beliefs of the Nation of Islam. According to their beliefs, Yakub was a black scientist who lived "6,600 years ago" and began the creation of the white race. He is said to have done this through a form of selective breeding referred to as "grafting", while living on the island of Patmos. Scientific consensus rejects the historicity of this figure.


This thread is like a cry for shitposting. But here. Have this.


----------



## NiggerFaggot1488 (Jul 16, 2019)

Thanks for making a thread I'm not threadbanned in by a butthurt janny.



Senior Lexmechanic said:


> Posting here to not shit up the actual thread.
> 
> Are we counting the Polacks, Germs, Micks, Kikes, and Wops as "white" in those stats?  Goddamn, by the standards of the 17th century the _Scottish_ were considered "swarthy".



Of course we are you exceptional fuck. Do you think you're clever by posting something so idiotic.


----------



## La Luz Extinguido (Jul 16, 2019)

Deep inside we all know niggers are slightly dumber and chinks are slightly more intelligent than average but it's relevancy is so insignificant on both, an individual degree as well as a geopolitical one that we get abominations like mainland China, the entire African continent, Gopniks and the american Goblino.

The only thing left of value for race sperging is a bunch of identity politics infested insecure nerds trying desperately to validate their ideologies. Which is hilarious.


----------



## NiggerFaggot1488 (Jul 16, 2019)

La Luz Extinguido said:


> Deep inside we all know niggers are slightly dumber and chinks are slightly more intelligent than average but it's relevancy is so insignificant on both, an individual degree as well as a geopolitical one that we get abominations like mainland China, the entire African continent, Gopniks and the american Goblino.
> 
> The only thing left of value for race sperging is a bunch of identity politics infested insecure nerds trying desperately to validate their ideologies. Which is hilarious.



Chinese are smart but deranged and Africans are just how you'd expect them to be. Its not insignificant.


----------



## MelloYello (Jul 16, 2019)

The problem with that discussion is that we live in an age of "equal-creationism".

A prevailing dogma that "all men are created equally", when that's evidently not the case. And just like the dogmatic belief system of a young-earth creationist, the dogma of equal-creationism persists not just in absence of  supporting evidence, but in spite of evidence to the contrary.

Notably, this bizarre dogma seems to be pushed primarily in western/white countries. I doubt you'll find many chinese or japanese people that believe random people from some african shithole country to be their equal, or somehow entitled to citizenship in Asia, much less to the fruits of an asian man's labor. 



La Luz Extinguido said:


> but it's relevancy is so insignificant on both



There are sub-saharan african countries that score two standard deviations below normal (=100) on average. That's what we used to call "functionally re-tarded".
And that's the funny thing about averages....half of them are even dumber than that, by definition.


----------



## La Luz Extinguido (Jul 16, 2019)

NiggerFaggot1488 said:


> Chinese are smart but deranged and Africans are just how you'd expect them to be. Its not insignificant.


You're actually talking about culture, which is much, much different.


MelloYello said:


> There are sub-saharan african countries that score two standard deviations below normal (=100) on average. That's what we used to call "functionally re-tarded".
> And that's the funny thing about averages....half of them are even dumber than that, by definition.


The average IQ for every single country is hilariously low








						World ranking of countries by their average IQ
					

Which country has the highest IQ? What is the average IQ of your country? Here is the average IQ of more than 80 countries updated in real time.




					brainstats.com
				



108 is top of the world and some countries have mentally retarded IQs according to this, I think shrugging this abomination off by just calling them retards is ignoring a lot of potentially fascinating factors.


----------



## Tetra (Jul 16, 2019)

Lol niggers am I rite


----------



## NiggerFaggot1488 (Jul 16, 2019)

La Luz Extinguido said:


> You're actually talking about culture, which is much, much different.



No I'm not. Culture does not magically coalesce out of thin air anyway. The aggregate personality traits of the individuals that make up the culture shape it as much as anything else.


----------



## La Luz Extinguido (Jul 16, 2019)

NiggerFaggot1488 said:


> No I'm not. Culture does not magically coalesce out of thin air anyway. The aggregate personality traits of the individuals that make up the culture shape it as much as anything else.


It is forged under several generations, and have much different outcomes from different societies regardless of race. In fact I'd say even climate is a more relevant factor.


----------



## NiggerFaggot1488 (Jul 16, 2019)

La Luz Extinguido said:


> It is forged under several generations, and have much different outcomes from different societies regardless of race. In fact I'd say even climate is a more relevant factor.



Societies with similar ethnic backgrounds operate in similar ways even when they are violently opposed to each other. The same can't be said when comparing East Asian vs Southeast Asian vs European vs African societies.


----------



## Emperor Julian (Jul 16, 2019)

Race realists are terrified of massive black dicks fucking white women but never realize nobody wants to fuck trailer park trash and  bitter nerds. Discussion over.


----------



## La Luz Extinguido (Jul 16, 2019)

NiggerFaggot1488 said:


> Societies with similar ethnic backgrounds operate in similar ways even when they are violently opposed to each other. The same can't be said when comparing East Asian vs Southeast Asian vs European vs African societies.


Maybe they operate similarly because they are branching from the same tree from quite a while now, oh let's ignore any other factor, only race matters because actual research is too hard.


----------



## NiggerFaggot1488 (Jul 16, 2019)

Emperor Julian said:


> Race realists are terrified of massive black dicks fucking white women but never realize nobody wants to fuck trailer park trash and  bitter nerds. Discussion over.



Funny that nonsense like this is allowed but when you call people like this autistic caremad faggots, you get threadbanned.


----------



## La Luz Extinguido (Jul 16, 2019)

NiggerFaggot1488 said:


> Funny that nonsense like this is allowed but when you call people like this autistic caremad faggots, you get threadbanned.


Yeah it is funny, that's why it's not punished by thread bans.
Take it with a grain of salt, not as a personal attack.


----------



## Shaved Kiwis (Jul 16, 2019)

Adolf Honkler said:


> View attachment 844389



That's not how you get rid of the nips. It's like you've never watched Popeye before.






TL;DW: First you eat the spinach then you slap a Jap. Repeat as necessary.


----------



## Emperor Julian (Jul 16, 2019)

NiggerFaggot1488 said:


> Funny that nonsense like this is allowed but when you call people like this autistic caremad faggots, you get threadbanned.



The fact I don't actually believe it or even care but  it personally bothered you validated it whereas the race realism is either done to death unfunny edglord shit or  you're talking to someone genuinly stupid enough to believe it.

Both of which are boring as fuck.
This is why blackfishing exists. She'd rather change her body than enter coitus with you.





Soon all the noble aryan women will be bootylicious. Her flesh and soul are clay Because she'd rather fuck Tyrone than nevil.


----------



## KimCoppolaAficionado (Jul 16, 2019)

La Luz Extinguido said:


> Yeah it is funny, that's why it's not punished by thread bans.
> Take it with a grain of salt, not as a personal attack.


You're suggesting he remove the stick from his ass.
For someone who uses a phrase like "caremad", he sure does get angry that his pet cause is being mocked.
EDIT: 


NiggerFaggot1488 said:


> Thanks for making a thread I'm not threadbanned in by a butthurt janny.


Dude, the mod told you to knock it off and you kept shitposting and trying to start internet fights with everyone else, including said mod.  I'm sorry that you're used to Hiroshimoot's cucked moderation, but that's not how things work elsewhere on the internet.


----------



## La Luz Extinguido (Jul 16, 2019)

Emperor Julian said:


> The fact I don't actually believe it or even care but  it personally bothered you validated it whereas the race realism is either done to death unfunny edglord shit or  you're talking to someone genuinly stupid enough to believe it.
> 
> Both of which are boring as fuck.
> This is why blackfishing exists. She'd rather change her body than enter coitus with you.
> ...


Also breeding through racial purity is for inbred jews.


----------



## SparklyFetuses (Jul 16, 2019)

Tryphaena said:


> View attachment 844386
> 
> /thread


> "She is protected by the Guardians of the Universe... The BLACK Men"

What the hell happened to the Gayniggers from Outer Space?


----------



## La Luz Extinguido (Jul 16, 2019)

SparklyFetuses said:


> What the hell happened to the Gayniggers from Outer Space?


They live, forever in our hearts.


----------



## ForgedBlades (Jul 16, 2019)




----------



## crocodilian (Jul 16, 2019)

Most human races are distant enough to be considered totally different sub-species. Blacks in particular are extremely distant from every other race. Blacks are predisposed to lower intelligence on account of various, specific genomes. Blacks under-perform on all testing, even when they are wealthy or whites are poor, and are genetically predisposed to violent activity. In fact, blacks are so violent they almost singlehandedly make the United States a dangerous place to live. What is considered "white" may be determined pretty reliably through genetic observation. A vast majority of human accomplishment in science & art made within the past several hundred years has been localized to a pocket of Europe. Mixed children most frequently inherit a majority of the black (read: negative) attributes, occupy an identical (read: poor) place in society and suffer from disorders far more than anybody else.

"Race realism" doesn't exist, science does. I'm not even white and I can accept that based purely on empirical data & study.


----------



## Ughubughughughughughghlug (Jul 16, 2019)

Common sense tells that there are racial components to behavior.

Behavior is known to be partially based in genetics.

Races simply refer to large groupings of people with similar genetics.

Thus, it is reasonable to suppose that behavior is partially based in racially-associated genes.

The only question is in what specific ways, and to what extent. I believe it to be to a minor extent, not worth basing public policy off of and not sufficient to explain things like the differences between civilizations.


----------



## NiggerFaggot1488 (Jul 16, 2019)

Emperor Julian said:


> Whiny gay shit "wahhhh you're stupid".



Shut up nerd.



Senior Lexmechanic said:


> You're suggesting he remove the stick from his ass.
> For someone who uses a phrase like "caremad", he sure does get angry that his pet cause is being mocked.
> EDIT:
> 
> Dude, the mod told you to knock it off and you kept shitposting and trying to start internet fights with everyone else, including said mod.  I'm sorry that you're used to Hiroshimoot's cucked moderation, but that's not how things work elsewhere on the internet.



Kiwifarms isn't a hugbox for libs to snark about racists either.


----------



## SparklyFetuses (Jul 16, 2019)

@NiggerFaggot1488 Not related to the topic, but you do know that there's the "Edit" option to add more stuff (and quote more than 1 message), right?


----------



## Autocrat (Jul 16, 2019)

I'm too lazy to make a good post on this, but check out this podcast.






At around 30 mins in Sam Harris makes a great point that even broaching the topic of genetic inclination leading to the rise of civilization in certain areas is considered a serious taboo. The guy he's interviewing does not think it has anything to do with race, and *still *deals with criticism for trying to figure out why Africa for example has never made technological advancements.

The worst part about it? He mainly gets flack from the people that are supposed to be studying it: anthropologists.
The topic is taboo among anthropologists. That's absolutely insane to me.



Emperor Julian said:


> The fact I don't actually believe it or even care but  it personally bothered you validated it whereas the race realism is either done to death unfunny edglord shit or  you're talking to someone genuinly stupid enough to believe it.
> 
> Both of which are boring as fuck.
> This is why blackfishing exists. She'd rather change her body than enter coitus with you.
> ...



Do you think it has anything to do with the fact that white people are not allowed to be proud to be white, yet black people are encouraged to be proud to be black. Or that the vast majority of popular male musicians are rappers / hiphop? Anything like that?


----------



## La Luz Extinguido (Jul 16, 2019)

Autocrat said:


> I'm too lazy to make a good post on this, but check out this podcast.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's why I love Sam Harris, there's not nor there should be any "taboo" while studying or researching anything, the issue is that this high profile "academics" are just PC fearful pussies.

And also there's a gigantic amount of actual racist manbabies that just want to validate their idea of other races as inferior to feel better about their small peepees because they need the group they are part of to carry them.


----------



## Bessie (Jul 17, 2019)

I see how you cracka-ass kiwis be treating NiggerFaggot1488. Ganging up all ready to string him up. Why you gotta do him like that? He a sweet boy with a bright future. He didn't do no wrong.


----------



## KimCoppolaAficionado (Jul 17, 2019)

Autocrat said:


> The topic is taboo among anthropologists. That's absolutely insane to me.


It's taboo out of (justifiable) fear that the public will hear the phrase "there are genetic components to intelligence, and certain races have genes that make them more intelligent than others" as "X race ubermensch, Y race untermensch", when in reality that would make about as much sense as splitting society along the lines of other genetic traits that correlate with intelligence (like depression or schizophrenia).


----------



## Rice Is Ready (Jul 17, 2019)

Emperor Julian said:


> The fact I don't actually believe it or even care but  it personally bothered you validated it whereas the race realism is either done to death unfunny edglord shit or  you're talking to someone genuinly stupid enough to believe it.
> 
> Both of which are boring as fuck.
> This is why blackfishing exists. She'd rather change her body than enter coitus with you.
> ...



That bitch looks like a potato with and without the nigger pay n spray.


----------



## betterbullocks (Jul 17, 2019)

Lance Armstrong did nothing that every other fucking cyclist doesn't do as well and you wont change my mind.


----------



## Fek (Jul 17, 2019)

Autocrat said:


> At around 30 mins in Sam Harris makes a great point that even broaching the topic of genetic inclination leading to the rise of civilization in certain areas is considered a serious taboo. The guy he's interviewing does not think it has anything to do with race, and *still *deals with criticism for trying to figure out why Africa for example has never made technological advancements.





La Luz Extinguido said:


> That's why I love Sam Harris, there's not nor there should be any "taboo" while studying or researching anything, the issue is that this high profile "academics" are just PC fearful pussies.



Pardon the mild digression:

Has Sam been able to move past his habitual contempt for Trump and go back to putting on podcasts like he used to prior to 2016? I typically appreciate his perspective (and he could have been sperging about Mary Poppins for all I care about the "who" involved), but I just couldn't handle that obsessive nonsense littering topics that (should have) had little or nothing to do with Trump at all. 

Has he calmed down enough to resume listening to him again, would you say?


----------



## Okami Green (Jul 17, 2019)

Tryphaena said:


> View attachment 844386
> 
> /thread





> She is NATURALLY psychic!



According to the Pokédex, she's Ice & Psychic type. Incredible!


----------



## Thought precriminal (Jul 18, 2019)

Popoto said:


> So I was gonna add a line about how white people are scientifically proven to stink (and also produce wet, alarmingly orangey-brown earwax). Now I don't even know which thread to throw this bait to anymore.


Caucasoids stink more than Mongoloids, but less than Congoids. This is not really controversial, I think. Interestingly, Asians/Mongoloids have significantly fewer sweat glands under their armpits; as a result deodorants aren't really a thing in much of East Asia. In China people didn't/don't wear any. They don't bathe much, either, and can get away with this because they smell less.

Then again there are significant drawbacks to being Asian (like having no soul), so I don't feel envious really.


----------



## Popoto (Jul 18, 2019)

ElAbominacion said:


> ... Except there's that part where it says Sub-Saharan Africans stink more? The problem with race realism is that while the concept of racial superiority has been around for awhile and based on what population has control on the cultural and societal trend shifts, racial supremacy and 'nationalism' hasn't. One dates back to the 19th century, to Zionist and Aryanist scholars, the other from the post-WW2 years. White nationalism is hilariously defective in that no one two persons can agree what's actually going to be the makeup of a 'white nation'.
> 
> Let me just spoil this for you: there are epigenetic, genetic and cultural differences between, say, the Basque and the Léonese. What makes people in the Americas think people who don't even speak the same language will see each other as the same WITHOUT a complete and utterly damaging breakdown of their cultural/in-group identities?


Oh please, my sides are already in orbit from someone upthread insisting races are sub-species. I just wanted to weave it into a shitpost to rile the idiots up more on how much they have in common with people they consider subhuman.

The idea that any individual "race" will "win" and get to therefore "dictate" the perceived traits is laughable. Even more so when it is proposed by prime examples of those who would be culled upon any purity delineation following said race war.


----------



## ElAbominacion (Jul 18, 2019)

Popoto said:


> Oh please, my sides are already in orbit from someone upthread insisting races are sub-species. I just wanted to weave it into a shitpost to rile the idiots up more on how much they have in common with people they consider subhuman.
> 
> The idea that any individual "race" will "win" and get to therefore "dictate" the perceived traits is laughable. Even more so when it is proposed by prime examples of those who would be culled upon any purity delineation following said race war.



You may have noticed I said culture. Race is transient. An Andalusian is not a Visigoth, but it descends from them.


----------



## Trappy (Jul 18, 2019)

Trying to enjoy a good pointless endless ideological debate but liberal smugposters can't stop posting their weird cringe fantasies about how everyone they disagree with is an inbred obese skinhead wignat loser with a swastika chest tattoo.


----------



## Shadfan666xxx000 (Jul 18, 2019)

Flynt's Missing Pecker said:


> Excuse me?


Back during the mid-20th century by the count of the army tests at that time, African American draftees had about an 80% rate of literacy appropriate for being sent to war during WW2. The scores themselves varied quite a bit and the overall population had a score of 94% which must be taken in context of the Jim crow era. It was during Korea when the rate went down to the 60s and the general populace went down to the 80s that you see the shift begin and it's notuntil Vietnan that you see scores around the 40 percentile range throughout the black community. This set of figures, alongside the marriage rate and originally prosperous neighborhoods you could find among the blacks suggests there was a distinct possibility of a vibrant community truly emerging but it was ultimately abortive.3





Autocrat said:


> Did the white man destroy all of their architecture, art, and written language?
> 
> View attachment 847526


The West African nations didn't have the Catholics and mud was easy to work with and downright practical where they were. No need for massive stonework and also no want.


----------



## ElAbominacion (Jul 18, 2019)

Shadfan666xxx000 said:


> Back during the mid-20th century by the count of the army tests at that time, African American draftees had about an 80% rate of literacy appropriate for being sent to war during WW2. The scores themselves varied quite a bit and the overall population had a score of 94% which must be taken in context of the Jim crow era. It was during Korea when the rate went down to the 60s and the general populace went down to the 80s that you see the shift begin and it's notuntil Vietnan that you see scores around the 40 percentile range throughout the black community. This set of figures, alongside the marriage rate and originally prosperous neighborhoods you could find among the blacks suggests there was a distinct possibility of a vibrant community truly emerging but it was ultimately abortive.3
> The West African nations didn't have the Catholics and mud was easy to work with and downright practical where they were. No need for massive stonework and also no want.



They did have fairly organized religions with common roots. The height of the Yoruba civilization had palaces,  some degree of stonework and metal weapons. It's only when they started to trade in their people for booze and guns in endless civil war that everything went to shit until colonists arrived.


----------



## DidYouJustSayThat (Jul 18, 2019)

It's pretty exceptional, that white people in white countries, who actively fight against white interests over obsolete farm equipment are not summarily executed as traitors. The mind boggles.


----------



## UQ 770 (Jul 18, 2019)

DidYouJustSayThat said:


> It's pretty exceptional, that white people in white countries, who actively fight against white interests over obsolete farm equipment are not summarily executed as traitors. The mind boggles.



Shut up nigger.


----------



## Popoto (Jul 18, 2019)

ElAbominacion said:


> You may have noticed I said culture. Race is transient. An Andalusian is not a Visigoth, but it descends from them.


Yes, in the same way the Cornish are not the Picts, and this stopped mattering even less when they became part of the kingdom of England, and became de facto English. Visigoth is no longer an applicable term for any grouping any more than a Pict is. 


Trappy said:


> Trying to enjoy a good pointless endless ideological debate but liberal smugposters can't stop posting their weird cringe fantasies about how everyone they disagree with is an inbred obese skinhead wignat loser with a swastika chest tattoo.


At least _inbreds_ are _bred_. 100% of anyone claiming to be "white" has zero idea of their actual genetic makeup. Do you think a Slav, Scandinavian or a Catalan prides themselves on merely being white, _next to all these other white races_? 



DidYouJustSayThat said:


> It's pretty exceptional, that white people in white countries, who actively fight against white interests over obsolete farm equipment are not summarily executed as traitors. The mind boggles.


Daily reminder that the Confederacy were traitors, lost the war, and the mind boggles as to why you haven't summarily executed yourself on your own fucking edge yet


----------



## Flynt's Missing Pecker (Jul 18, 2019)

Shadfan666xxx000 said:


> Back during the mid-20th century by the count of the army tests at that time, African American draftees had about an 80% rate of literacy appropriate for being sent to war during WW2. The scores themselves varied quite a bit and the overall population had a score of 94% which must be taken in context of the Jim crow era.


You realise that the testing has evolved over the years, from a basic literacy test to more heavily g-loaded psychometric testing. 

Wouldn’t a simpler explanation be that as the test became more cognitive ability focused average scores for African-American applicants also decreased.


----------



## Shadfan666xxx000 (Jul 18, 2019)

Flynt's Missing Pecker said:


> You realise that the testing has evolved over the years, from a basic literacy test to more heavily g-loaded psychometric testing.
> 
> Wouldn’t a simpler explanation be that as the test became more cognitive ability focused average scores for African-American applicants also decreased.


It was the same test. They didn't switch to the ASVAB until after or during Vietnam.


----------



## Flynt's Missing Pecker (Jul 18, 2019)

Shadfan666xxx000 said:


> It was the same test. They didn't switch to the ASVAB until after or during Vietnam.


Did blacks score significantly worse once they went to the ASVAB?


----------



## ZeCommissar (Jul 18, 2019)

MelloYello said:


> The problem with that discussion is that we live in an age of "equal-creationism".
> 
> A prevailing dogma that "all men are created equally", when that's evidently not the case. And just like the dogmatic belief system of a young-earth creationist, the dogma of equal-creationism persists not just in absence of  supporting evidence, but in spite of evidence to the contrary.
> 
> ...



Beware the man that claims to innately be superior to others. He will eventually believe it is his innate right to take away your freedoms and livelihood. 

Ah yes the good ol smug "I love being smarter than those dumb niggers in Africa! Obviously the low IQ scores come from niggerbrains and not low education infrastructure!" 

That is literally what every racial "realist" sounds like when they start throwing around IQ scores about sub-Sahara Africa. A place where the vast majority of the countries haven't had independence for over 100 years. 

Racial realists show a ignorance of culture and history. There are reasons why some places on Earth are far less developed than others, and it's not  the reasons they suggest. They then go to the problem that is uncontrolled immigration and claim they are "just trying to protect our home" as a cop out.


----------



## Flynt's Missing Pecker (Jul 18, 2019)

ZeCommissar said:


> Beware the man that claims to innately be superior to others. He will eventually believe it is his innate right to take away your freedoms and livelihood.
> 
> Ah yes the good ol smug "I love being smarter than those dumb niggers in Africa! Obviously the low IQ scores come from niggerbrains and not low education infrastructure!"



We need a counter for how many libtards have to come in and straw man the race realist position. 

You clearly have no understanding of how psychometric testing works, how levels of education, socioeconomic status, parental education etc can be controlled for when analysing the data and how even when that’s controlled for the white-black gap remains. 

Or even simpler, let’s break SAT scores down by both race and household income. 



Do you ever get tired of tying yourself in knots rather than accept Occam’s Razor.  It must be exhausting.


----------



## Trappy (Jul 18, 2019)

ZeCommissar said:


> Beware the man that claims to innately be superior to others. He will eventually believe it is his innate right to take away your freedoms and livelihood.


Nobody is talking about innate superiority, you're the one drawing that conclusion from blacks not performing well by Western standards. You're the ones forcing those Western standards on them.



Popoto said:


> At least _inbreds_ are _bred_. 100% of anyone claiming to be "white" has zero idea of their actual genetic makeup. Do you think a Slav, Scandinavian or a Catalan prides themselves on merely being white, _next to all these other white races_?


???
I'm white and know my genetic makeup and I'm pretty sure anyone who is into racial differences, heritage, etc would be more knowledgable about their own heritage than the average random on the street.

These brainlet "heh, racist nazi wypipo are probably ___" takes are embarrassing.


----------



## ZeCommissar (Jul 18, 2019)

Flynt's Missing Pecker said:


> We need a counter for how many libtards have to come in and straw man the race realist position.
> 
> You clearly have no understanding of how psychometric testing works, how levels of education, socioeconomic status, parental education etc can be controlled for when analysing the data and how even when that’s controlled for the white-black gap remains.
> 
> ...



Straw manning a position? You must have just got the internet if you have never seen a race "realist" advocate for the abolition of certain freedoms of other races just because of "low IQ", or people gloating about being born a certain way, It's not a straw man if it's true.

As for the SAT scores lets assume for a second that race realists are right. Looking at this data I want you to answer something, Who is a more valuable human being, a man with innate talent that doesn't use it, or a man that rises against the odds of his crappy birth?

Nevermind the fact that with better education, socioeconmic status, etc the gap significantly closes between whites and blacks.

Truly the Occam's Razor solution would be to just claim that people are more equal than claimed, instead of showing multiple statistics as to why that isn't the case.



Trappy said:


> Nobody is talking about innate superiority, you're the one drawing that conclusion from blacks not performing well by Western standards. You're the ones forcing those Western standards on them.



No i'm not. Look at the person I quoted again. The only one forcing Western standards on others are those drawing conclusions that the majority of Africans are "mentally retarded" by performing low.


----------



## Flynt's Missing Pecker (Jul 18, 2019)

ZeCommissar said:


> As for the SAT scores lets assume for a second that race realists are right.


 It’s not even a debate. The science was settled a long time ago. The fact some of you are trying to argue against it is embarrassing. 

 The real question is, how do we best use that knowledge ? Because pretending we’re all equal ain’t working out too well.


----------



## ZeCommissar (Jul 18, 2019)

Flynt's Missing Pecker said:


> It’s not even a debate. The science was settled a long time ago. The fact some of you are trying to argue against it is embarrassing.
> 
> The real question is, how do we best use that knowledge ? Because pretending we’re all equal ain’t working out too well.



Nice

Question avoidance and stating that the science was settled. If you know anything about science you would definitely know that there is no such thing as "settled science" especially in more complex subjects such as humanity. 

How is "pretending" everyone is equal "not working out too well"? It seems to me the most powerful period of human history was heralded by liberal enlightenment principles, and the destruction of the more aggressive nationalist societies. Not to mention the most powerful human societies to ever exist were heterogeneous and not homogeneous. (United States, Roman Empire, Mongols, etc)

As for the current problems with immigration all we need is tighter control and more rational polices besides "open borders" or "shut it down". Why? Because the immigrants suffer from a culture, and religion problem. Not a race problem. 

I am very adamant in the belief that if Africans and Native Americans had the same access to resources, agricultural livestock, and competition that Europeans and East Asians had then they would also be on par with those groups.


----------



## Trappy (Jul 18, 2019)

ZeCommissar said:


> I am very adamant in the belief that if Africans and Native Americans had the same access to resources, agricultural livestock, and competition that Europeans and East Asians had then they would also be on par with those groups.


Did you not see the chart posted above?

Blacks require 10x the resources to do as well on SATs as whites in poverty. It's not a resources issue.


----------



## ZeCommissar (Jul 18, 2019)

Trappy said:


> Did you not see the chart posted above?
> 
> Blacks require 10x the resources to do as well on SATs as whites in poverty. It's not a resources issue.



Because a test like the SAT truly shows how smart someone is. Nevermind the fact that apparently there are plenty of poor whites that are somehow smarter than the smartest blacks yet aren't above them in socioeconomic status because of.....uhhh....reasons.....something something affirmative action. Yeah that makes sense.

Please tell me what is the issue then?


----------



## Flynt's Missing Pecker (Jul 18, 2019)

ZeCommissar said:


> Nevermind the fact that apparently there are plenty of poor whites that are somehow smarter than the smartest blacks yet aren't above them in socioeconomic status


This is household income of the parents not the kids.


----------



## Autocrat (Jul 18, 2019)

Shadfan666xxx000 said:


> The West African nations didn't have the Catholics and mud was easy to work with and downright practical where they were. No need for massive stonework and also no want.



This is mind bogglingly stupid. 'Many countries in Africa were just as advanced as European countries in the 15th century, they just preferred to live in mud huts without a written language'.
I shouldn't have to point out how fucking stupid this is.


----------



## Shadfan666xxx000 (Jul 18, 2019)

Autocrat said:


> This is mind bogglingly stupid. 'Many countries in Africa were just as advanced as European countries in the 15th century, they just preferred to live in mud huts without a written language'.
> I shouldn't have to point out how fucking stupid this is.


They had Arabic in some parts and the Inca also went without a written language while still achieving impressive feats of organization and engineering.


----------



## Autocrat (Jul 18, 2019)

Shadfan666xxx000 said:


> They had Arabic in some parts and the Inca also went without a written language while still achieving impressive feats of organization and engineering.



What feats did Sub Saharan Africa achieve?


----------



## CheezzyMach (Jul 18, 2019)

Cosmos said:


> That's exactly it. White supremacists are lolcows. They constantly jerk themselves off about how superior whites are and how important and special they are for being white when they haven't actually accomplished much themselves. They act like the accomplishments and successes of other white people are their own just by virtue of also being white. Why bother trying to improve yourself and the world around you when you can just claim you're already better than most other people by virtue of your skin color?
> 
> If you feel the need to tell everyone you're inherently superior to everyone else just because you happened to be born in a certain group, you probably don't have much else going for you.


Anyone in the US who spergs about racial superiority is a moron. Doesn't matter if they're white,black,brown,red or yellow we're all crossbred mutts.


Shadfan666xxx000 said:


> S
> Sub saharan Africa had numerous regions almost on par with Europeans when first contact was made and the slave trade began. Mali, Songhai, Ghana, Sokoto and numerous other powers were active and well developed in the region and did well until the scramble for Africa. Even today the main issue of Africa is primarily structural and cultural in nature, not necessarily to do with any inherent disability amongst the people there. As proven by AGCT scores conducted on draftees, marriage rates among the native grown black population of the USA, and the current economic climate seen in Jamaica and throughout  the Caribbean besides Haiti people of African descent have potential for greater intellectual pursuit. The main issue is internal and external pressures which have yet to be corrected.


THIS! There is literally no difference between a white trash redneck and ghetto hoodrat.


----------



## Shadfan666xxx000 (Jul 18, 2019)

Autocrat said:


> What feats did Sub Saharan Africa achieve?


In and of themselves? Not that much. The developed places were basically a component of the Muslim world. They had universities and tradesmen themselves alongside their own social orders to keep as custom. Otherwise, you'd be hard pressed to really tell them apart in terms of development than what you'd see in Arab countries of the time which wasn't far behind in those days.


----------



## DidYouJustSayThat (Jul 19, 2019)

Flynt's Missing Pecker said:


> It’s not even a debate. The science was settled a long time ago. The fact some of you are trying to argue against it is embarrassing.


If we redefine "science has been settled" in this sentence as "everyone, who dared to oppose were branded as heretics and either  silenced or driven out on academia" then yes,


----------



## Autocrat (Jul 19, 2019)

Shadfan666xxx000 said:


> you'd be hard pressed to really tell them apart in terms of development than what you'd see in Arab countries.



_Huh_





So they achieved absolutely nothing and yet were somehow close to being as advanced as European societies. Makes sense..

Why are you doing these mental gymnastics?


----------



## Unog (Jul 19, 2019)

Intelligence is an inheritable trait, same as height. I don't get what the fuss is all about, this is simple shit.

And if you think aggression is an inheritable trait in dogs, such as the famous pitbull breed, I've got bad fucking news for you.


----------



## L'Homme de la Lune (Jul 19, 2019)

It's a not as much of an "intelligence" problem than it is of an identity one.



ZeCommissar said:


> [...]
> 
> I am very adamant in the belief that if Africans and Native Americans had the same access to resources, agricultural livestock, and competition that Europeans and East Asians had then they would also be on par with those groups.


You are one stupid nigger. Are you seriously implying that European and Asian soils were more favorable to growth than Africa? Never mind the need to fucking blanket your ass 8 months a year. I don't see how the African continent would have hindered the development of its locals in any way, coping nigger commie faggot.


----------



## MrTickles (Jul 19, 2019)

Shadfan666xxx000 said:


> S
> Sub saharan Africa had numerous regions almost on par with Europeans when first contact was made and the slave trade began. Mali, Songhai, Ghana, Sokoto and numerous other powers were active and well developed in the region and did well until the scramble for Africa. Even today the main issue of Africa is primarily structural and cultural in nature, not necessarily to do with any inherent disability amongst the people there. As proven by AGCT scores conducted on draftees, marriage rates among the native grown black population of the USA, and the current economic climate seen in Jamaica and throughout  the Caribbean besides Haiti people of African descent have potential for greater intellectual pursuit. The main issue is internal and external pressures which have yet to be corrected.



There is no latent infrastructure to account for your claims. No large road networks, no large scale fresh water irrigation projects...Central and south-western native Americans were far more urbanized than any sub-saharan society and even they were pre-classical age compared to Europeans in the 1500's.


----------



## Flynt's Missing Pecker (Jul 19, 2019)

DidYouJustSayThat said:


> If we redefine "science has been settled" in this sentence as "everyone, who dared to oppose were branded as heretics and either  silenced or driven out on academia" then yes,


In anthropology this began with Franz Boas. Where the search for objective truth become a secondary consideration to having a social impact.

If one was conspiratorially minded they might look at the disciples of Boasian anthropology and recognise a pattern.








						Boasian anthropology - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## DidYouJustSayThat (Jul 19, 2019)

Shadfan666xxx000 said:


> S
> Sub saharan Africa had numerous regions almost on par with Europeans when first contact was made and the slave trade began. Mali, Songhai, Ghana, Sokoto and numerous other powers were active and well developed in the region and did well until the scramble for Africa. Even today the main issue of Africa is primarily structural and cultural in nature, not necessarily to do with any inherent disability amongst the people there. As proven by AGCT scores conducted on draftees, marriage rates among the native grown black population of the USA, and the current economic climate seen in Jamaica and throughout  the Caribbean besides Haiti people of African descent have potential for greater intellectual pursuit. The main issue is internal and external pressures which have yet to be corrected.


>when contact was made and slave trade began
ROFL.
I am assuming, that you are referring to the Atlantic slave trade and you are insinuating, that slavery was new thing for Africa and brought about by whites. Newsflash, they had been enslaving each other for thousands of years and continued for long time after evil whitey banned it. It's still widespread in Africa today, where whitey can't meddle.
I also demand reparations for 1.25M europeans sold to slavery in Africa. Descendants of slaves in America should get nothing, since their fate there was objectively better than back home, where males were often killed out of hand, since they were justly considered too aggressive to keep in any significant number by locals, one would go even so far as to demand reparations from them for untold damage and destruction caused to date.


----------



## Shadfan666xxx000 (Jul 19, 2019)

DidYouJustSayThat said:


> >when contact was made and slave trade began
> ROFL.
> I am assuming, that you are referring to the Atlantic slave trade and you are insinuating, that slavery was new thing for Africa and brought about by whites. Newsflash, they had been enslaving each other for thousands of years and continued for long time after evil whitey banned it. It's still widespread in Africa today, where whitey can't meddle.
> I also demand reparations for 1.25M europeans sold to slavery in Africa. Descendants of slaves in America should get nothing, since their fate there was objectively better than back home, where males were often killed out of hand, since they were justly considered too aggressive to keep in any significant number by locals, one would go even so far as to demand reparations from them for untold damage and destruction caused to date.


If I know this much stuff about them then of course I know slavery was a thing beforehand. Anybody on this board knows slavery was huge with the arabians and they sold accordingly. I made that statement to provide the context by which I am speaking.


----------



## Flynt's Missing Pecker (Jul 19, 2019)

Shadfan666xxx000 said:


> If I know this much stuff about them then of course I know slavery was a thing beforehand


Press X to doubt.


----------



## Shadfan666xxx000 (Jul 19, 2019)

Autocrat said:


> _Huh_
> View attachment 848540
> 
> So they achieved absolutely nothing and yet were somehow close to being as advanced as European societies. Makes sense..
> ...





MrTickles said:


> There is no latent infrastructure to account for your claims. No large road networks, no large scale fresh water irrigation projects...Central and south-western native Americans were far more urbanized than any sub-saharan society and even they were pre-classical age compared to Europeans in the 1500's.


The great mosque of Djenne here is an example of exactly what I speak of as an example. It wasn't simply small mud huts and indignants in this area but there were numerous organized societies based in this area. The basic question you believe to be answered here is whether sub saharan Africans can work in organized society and it is answered here and elsewhere with attestation  from numerous written sources. We can shit talk and dick measure with every country in the world and some may win and some may lose but this race realist argument does not completely hold water.


----------



## Autocrat (Jul 19, 2019)

Shadfan666xxx000 said:


> The great mosque of Djenne here is an example of exactly what I speak of as an example. It wasn't simply small mud huts and indignants in this area but there were numerous organized societies based in this area. The basic question you believe to be answered here is whether sub saharan Africans can work in organized society and it is answered here and elsewhere with attestation  from numerous written sources. We can shit talk and dick measure with every country in the world and some may win and some may lose but this race realist argument does not completely hold water.



I'm not going to lie, I think that mosque is beautiful. But nothing they were doing was on par with what the more developed world is doing.

>The basic question you believe to be answered here is whether sub saharan Africans can work in organized society

Way to move goal posts lol. I'm saying Europe and Asia had fundamentally better societies than anything in sub saharan Africa. Evidence by what they achieved.
And, you are literally saying in some instances, _they just didn't need or want to achieve more. _That is a really odd and pathetic cope.

I don't know whether it is something ingrained in their race or if they simply got in a very large bad cultural loop that lead them to produce nothing of value (I lean toward the latter), but I am saying it is one of those. Because it's nearly an entire continent that produced fuckall in over 40 thousand years.



MrTickles said:


> There is no latent infrastructure to account for your claims. No large road networks, no large scale fresh water irrigation projects...Central and south-western native Americans were far more urbanized than any sub-saharan society and even they were pre-classical age compared to Europeans in the 1500's.



His posts make me feel like I'm taking crazy pills. That much denial is offputting.


----------



## Shadfan666xxx000 (Jul 19, 2019)

Autocrat said:


> I'm not going to lie, I think that mosque is beautiful. But nothing they were doing was on par with what the more developed world is doing.
> 
> >The basic question you believe to be answered here is whether sub saharan Africans can work in organized society
> 
> ...


The mud being easy to work with wasn't a cope and you just saw an example of something the continent has produced. I will admit it was unfair to shove objectives into this discussion however and I will concede to that point.


----------



## Flynt's Missing Pecker (Jul 19, 2019)

Shadfan666xxx000 said:


> The great mosque of Djenne here is an example of exactly what I speak of as an example. It wasn't simply small mud huts and indignants in this area but there were numerous organized societies based in this area. The basic question you believe to be answered here is whether sub saharan Africans can work in organized society and it is answered here and elsewhere with attestation  from numerous written sources. We can shit talk and dick measure with every country in the world and some may win and some may lose but this race realist argument does not completely hold water.


Interesting example.  I looked up this mosque. Turns out the French rebuilt it from ruins in 1906.  Which is the picture you presented.

A choice quote from Wikipedia:
_French ethnologist Michel Leiris, in his account of travelling through Mali in 1931, states that the new mosque is indeed the *work of Europeans*. He also says that local people were so unhappy with the new building that they refused to clean it, only doing so when threatened with prison.[12]_

Did you really think you could slip this one through?


----------



## MelloYello (Jul 19, 2019)

Shadfan666xxx000 said:


> The great mosque of Djenne here is an example of exactly what I speak of as an example. It wasn't simply small mud huts



Woah, it's a big mud hut, color me impressed. We wuz architects and shit!



Flynt's Missing Pecker said:


> Turns out the French rebuilt it from ruins in 1906.



How embarrassing!


----------



## Shadfan666xxx000 (Jul 19, 2019)

Flynt's Missing Pecker said:


> Interesting example.  I looked up this mosque. Turns out the French rebuilt it from ruins in 1906.  Which is the picture you presented.
> 
> A choice quote from Wikipedia:
> _French ethnologist Michel Leiris, in his account of travelling through Mali in 1931, states that the new mosque is indeed the *work of Europeans*. He also says that local people were so unhappy with the new building that they refused to clean it, only doing so when threatened with prison.[12]_
> ...


I didn't realize there was a revolt against that particular mosque being rebuilt. Numerous other examples of this style exist from which the French drew reference throughout the city so perhaps I was hasty in including that example.


----------



## Flynt's Missing Pecker (Jul 19, 2019)

Shadfan666xxx000 said:


> I didn't realize there was a revolt against that particular mosque being rebuilt. Numerous other examples of this style exist from which the French drew reference throughout the city so perhaps I was hasty in including that example.


Give it up my dude. 

This is just sad.


----------



## ZeCommissar (Jul 19, 2019)

L'Homme de la Lune said:


> It's a not as much of an "intelligence" problem than it is of an identity one.
> 
> 
> You are one stupid nigger. Are you seriously implying that European and Asian soils were more favorable to growth than Africa? Never mind the need to fucking blanket your ass 8 months a year. I don't see how the African continent would have hindered the development of its locals in any way, coping nigger commie faggot.



I don't know how low IQ you would have to be to not realize how Sub-Sahara Africa has no viable livestock due to the animals there being too unpredictable for human domestication. This is extremely evident when you see literally no one on this Earth, including Europeans using Zebras and African Buffalo on their farms. Not having a Horse equivalent immediately puts you on the downside when it comes to warfare and farming. Not having a cattle equivalent means you can't till soil as easily, which means you don't need to really use wheels.

Not to mention Fall and Winter only lasts for around 6 months. How are you going to make a valid point about seasons when you don't even know how long they last?

The case is similar in the Americas as well. While you can domesticate American Bison they are far larger and more aggressive than cattle. If they were a viable livestock option then the settlers would have used them instead of the cows they brought with them. Instead they were seen as a menace and slaughtered almost to extinction. South America only has llamas and alpacas as livestock, and they aren't nearly as good as cattle. But the crops in South America were good enough that some notable empires like the Inca were able to form in the region.

Without advanced agriculture you cannot have a advanced civilization, which means you are always in survival mode instead of settling down and being able to build more advanced buildings and societies.

You "don't see how the continent could have hindered development in any way" because you are ignorant.


----------



## L'Homme de la Lune (Jul 19, 2019)

ZeCommissar said:


> I don't know how low IQ you would have to be to not realize how Sub-Sahara Africa has no viable livestock due to the animals there being too unpredictable for human domestication. This is extremely evident when you see literally no one on this Earth, including Europeans using Zebras and African Buffalo on their farms. Not having a Horse equivalent immediately puts you on the downside when it comes to warfare and farming. Not having a cattle equivalent means you can't till soil as easily, which means you don't need to really use wheels.
> 
> Not to mention Fall and Winter only lasts for around 6 months. How are you going to make a valid point about seasons when you don't even know how long they last?
> 
> ...


So you can only grow food if you have cattle to operate near industrial-level machinery and no one in the world before has cultivated soil without animals to work with? Also, implying that tilling soil is the only use for the wheel is the most retarded shit I have read on this site.


----------



## Shadfan666xxx000 (Jul 19, 2019)

Flynt's Missing Pecker said:


> Give it up my dude.
> 
> This is just sad.


There's nothing to give up. Even if the great mosque were as much of a French invention as you insinuate, it was clearly based off of earlier works in the city enough to have the levels of foreign influence debated upon.


----------



## ZeCommissar (Jul 19, 2019)

L'Homme de la Lune said:


> So you can only grow food if you have cattle to operate near industrial-level machinery and no one in the world before has cultivated soil without animals to work with? Also, implying that tilling soil is the only use for the wheel is the most exceptional shit I have read on this site.



Yeah, because I totally said it was impossible to farm without livestock. Except if you know how agriculture worked throughout history you would know that livestock is extremely crucial for advanced agriculture beyond subsistence farming. If you can't get past subsistence farming you can't get time to actually build any sort of advanced civilization. Yeah they could farm, but not at the levels other civilizations could due to environmental limitations which also caused technological limitations. 

I didn't imply anything about the wheel except that it wasn't used in those areas due to a lack of a beast of burden. No shit you can use wheels for other things like water wheels, grinding grain etc. Do I have to also hold your hand and explain wheels are mostly used for transport? But to use transport you need a cart, and to power a large cart you need a BEAST OF BURDEN. How are you going to grind up excess grain when you don't have excess grain since you can only subsistence farm for you, your family, and _maybe _your village. 


You are literally trying to nitpick at the smallest detail thinking you have found something, when it just makes you look like a retard.


----------



## Flynt's Missing Pecker (Jul 19, 2019)

ZeCommissar said:


> The case is similar in the Americas as well. While you can domesticate American Bison they are far larger and more aggressive than cattle. If they were a viable livestock option then the settlers would have used them instead of the cows they brought with them. Instead they were seen as a menace and slaughtered almost to extinction.


Speaking of low-iq people.
Listen to what you're saying here -   European settlers should have gone through the trouble of domesticating Bison from scratch, rather than just bringing their own cattle over.


----------



## ZeCommissar (Jul 19, 2019)

Flynt's Missing Pecker said:


> Speaking of low-iq people.
> Listen to what you're saying here -   European settlers should have gone through the trouble of domesticating Bison from scratch, rather than just bringing their own cattle over.



Nice, instead of trying to refute the more important points this is the line you decide to go to. 

If Bison were as valid as cattle they would have been used just as much as cattle. If Bison were as docile as cattle then why wouldn't they? There were estimated to be 60 million of the damn things pre 1800, so its not like the effort wouldn't have been worth it.


----------



## Flynt's Missing Pecker (Jul 19, 2019)

ZeCommissar said:


> If Bison were as valid as cattle they would have been used just as much as cattle.



If Bison were in contact with humans that had the cognitive ability to attempt domestication then yes they would have been.
Can you show the recorded attempts of the Native Americans to domesticate the Bison?


----------



## Syaoran Li (Jul 19, 2019)

Flynt's Missing Pecker said:


> If Bison were in contact with humans that had the cognitive ability to attempt domestication then yes they would have been.
> Can you show the recorded attempts of the Native Americans to domesticate the Bison?



Considering it took until the latter half of the 20th Century for the American Bison to be widely domesticated and the fact that European settlers didn't domesticate the bison because they already had cattle and other livestock already brought over from Europe, so it wasn't really necessary.

The only reason why anyone even tried to domesticate bison was largely because of conservation efforts and trying to keep the species from going completely extinct.

Native Americans did domesticate the turkey, which is one of only three major domesticated animals originally from the Americas, the others being llamas and alpacas.

Things like advanced agriculture, the right kinds of livestock, and easier access to surface minerals such as iron, copper, and tin are crucial in the development of any worthwhile civilization. That's the primary reason why Europe, the Middle East, and East Asia succeeded while Sub-Saharan Africa largely floundered in terms of widespread technological and societal development.

Tellingly, the most developed and advanced parts of Sub-Saharan Africa prior to colonization were all near major trade routes, such as the Gold Coast or the Gulf of Aden.

Most of the problems with the African-American community are cultural due to a mix of poverty, political manipulation by major political parties, and the fact that mainstream society on both sides have deemed it completely verboten for anyone to actually question the toxic elements of Black culture (lest they be branded a racist or an Uncle Tom)

Tellingly, most Africans and Caribbean blacks (Jamaicans, Haitians, etc.) outright hate inner-city black Americans due to their uniquely toxic culture. And it's not just the "evil privileged whites" and East Asians (who are practically Honorary Whites in the eyes of SJW's) who have problems with the black community, a lot of Hispanics despise them and even many Native Americans tend to look down on blacks.

Seriously, I've visited a few reservations when I was on the road with my Dad, and apparently the locals hate black tourists a lot, but are fairly chill with white tourists (particularly older white tourists) since they tend to listen and be more respectful and actually spend money on the reservations, even if it's just to buy tacky souvenirs.

Race realism is utter bunk and anyone who actually believes in it is retarded. Culture is the real problem at hand and you can't judge entire countries and continents based on what their descendants in the United States are like.

Judging Africa because of what hood rats do is as dumb as judging Northern Ireland because of what hillbillies do.


----------



## MrTickles (Jul 19, 2019)

Shadfan666xxx000 said:


> The great mosque of Djenne here is an example of exactly what I speak of as an example. It wasn't simply small mud huts and indignants in this area but there were numerous organized societies based in this area. The basic question you believe to be answered here is whether sub saharan Africans can work in organized society and it is answered here and elsewhere with attestation  from numerous written sources. We can shit talk and dick measure with every country in the world and some may win and some may lose but this race realist argument does not completely hold water.



It pales in comparison to most other religious structures in terms of adornment and workmanship.


----------



## L'Homme de la Lune (Jul 19, 2019)

ZeCommissar said:


> Yeah, because I totally said it was impossible to farm without livestock. Except if you know how agriculture worked throughout history you would know that livestock is extremely crucial for advanced agriculture beyond subsistence farming. If you can't get past subsistence farming you can't get time to actually build any sort of advanced civilization. Yeah they could farm, but not at the levels other civilizations could due to environmental limitations which also caused technological limitations.
> 
> I didn't imply anything about the wheel except that it wasn't used in those areas due to a lack of a beast of burden. No shit you can use wheels for other things like water wheels, grinding grain etc. Do I have to also hold your hand and explain wheels are mostly used for transport? But to use transport you need a cart, and to power a large cart you need a BEAST OF BURDEN. How are you going to grind up excess grain when you don't have excess grain since you can only subsistence farm for you, your family, and _maybe _your village.
> 
> ...


You absolutely did imply that the reason why the negros didn't have the wheel was because they didn't have the need for it with agriculture. 





> Not having a cattle equivalent means you can't till soil as easily, which means you don't need to really use wheels.


Pretty sure the egyptians made use of the wheel with the slaves they had. But yeah, pretending that niggers are equal and it was merely a bad luck that they still, to this day, eat the shit of a cow fresh off its asshole, isn't an retarded position to hold. The amount of trannies, jews and niggers coping in this thread is insane.


----------



## ⠠⠠⠅⠑⠋⠋⠁⠇⠎ ⠠⠠⠊⠎ ⠠⠠⠁ ⠠⠠⠋⠁⠛ (Jul 19, 2019)

ZeCommissar said:


> I don't know how low IQ you would have to be to not realize how Sub-Sahara Africa has no viable livestock due to the animals there being too unpredictable for human domestication. This is extremely evident when you see literally no one on this Earth, including Europeans using Zebras and African Buffalo on their farms. Not having a Horse equivalent immediately puts you on the downside when it comes to warfare and farming.


And yet.. they can be.




Do you think that the native animals of Europe and Araby magically became amenable to following the human lead overnight?

No. It took generations of work by intelligent, long-term orientated people to select the best animals and break them to our will.

There are few of those people left in the domain of the Zebra.

Have you ever been outside the United States, my friend? Realism about the fact that the races differ, as do individuals, comes naturally to anyone who has lived a genuinely cosmopolitan life. It doesn't morally condemn anyone- only a filthy libertarian would think that a stupid white man is 'lazy' because he doesn't achieve at the level of his intellectual superiors. The same is true of race.


----------



## ZeCommissar (Jul 20, 2019)

L'Homme de la Lune said:


> You absolutely did imply that the reason why the negros didn't have the wheel was because they didn't have the need for it with agriculture.
> Pretty sure the egyptians made use of the wheel with the slaves they had. But yeah, pretending that niggers are equal and it was merely a bad luck that they still, to this day, eat the shit of a cow fresh off its asshole, isn't an exceptional position to hold. The amount of trannies, jews and niggers coping in this thread is insane.



Wew lad. What does Egypt have to do with this? Egypt didn't use the wheels because of slaves, they used it because they had cattle you fucking sped. It is RIGHT BESIDE the fertile crescent.

 Yes I did imply that the africans didn't invent the wheel due to poor agriculture, I just didn't imply agriculture is the only use for it like you said I did in your previous post. Agriculture and transport are the BASIC BLOCKS for the wheel to be first used in a ancient civilization, if you don't get past that rung then you remain stuck. 



3119967d0c said:


> And yet.. they can be.
> View attachment 849836
> Do you think that the native animals of Europe and Araby magically became amenable to following the human lead overnight?
> 
> ...



Oh my bad. I didn't realize isolated cases of singular animals being tamed automatically meant that the animal is fit for widespread human domestication. That's why zebras are rode around like horses everywhere and Europeans eventually broke them into widespread domestication. 

Oh wait they didn't. You know why they didn't? Because the point of the zebra being a unsuitable animal still stands. 

I don't dispute that the races are different. I dispute that the races are different to the point that it merits ethnostates and segregation, or that one race is leaps and bounds more superior than the other.

The end-goal for people that call themselves racial-realists is always the same: the regression of civil rights for those of other races.


----------



## ProgKing of the North (Jul 20, 2019)

L'Homme de la Lune said:


> So you can only grow food if you have cattle to operate near industrial-level machinery and no one in the world before has cultivated soil without animals to work with? *Also, implying that tilling soil is the only use for the wheel is the most exceptional shit I have read on this site*.


Shame you don't read your own posts


----------



## ⠠⠠⠅⠑⠋⠋⠁⠇⠎ ⠠⠠⠊⠎ ⠠⠠⠁ ⠠⠠⠋⠁⠛ (Jul 20, 2019)

ZeCommissar said:


> Oh my bad. I didn't realize isolated cases of singular animals being tamed automatically meant that the animal is fit for widespread human domestication. That's why zebras are rode around like horses everywhere and Europeans eventually broke them into widespread domestication.
> 
> Oh wait they didn't. You know why they didn't? Because the point of the zebra being a unsuitable animal still stands.


Are you incapable of following more than a single sentence at once? Here, I'll bullet point it for you:

Wild animals are wild
Wild animals outside Africa were wild when non-Africans broke those animals in
While non-Africans would be perfectly capable of breaking in zebras, etc, as well, and have done so with individual animals in many, many cases, there would be very little reason to do so as part of a breeding programme rather than a hobby, given there are other animals that already get the job done
You are aware of the basic facts in regards discussions about animal domestication like the successful Soviet program to domesticate those foxes, right? That only took a few generations to deliver serious improvements, admittedly with far higher tech levels than the people who domesticated modern farm animals had to work with.


----------



## ZeCommissar (Jul 20, 2019)

3119967d0c said:


> Are you incapable of following more than a single sentence at once? Here, I'll bullet point it for you:
> 
> Wild animals are wild
> Wild animals outside Africa were wild when non-Africans broke those animals in
> ...



When it comes to the very very earliest domestication about cattle from Aurochs it is very lucky that they were even domesticated at all. The earliest domestication of those beasts weren't even in Europe, but in Central Asia. Of course domestication had to start with wild animals with wild tendencies. It only needed to have happened once by chance for it to spread from a localized area to around a good portion of the world.

Its not that Africans don't have the mental capacity to domesticate animals (guinea fowl) it's just that the native African animals were harder to break past the "wild" to "domesticated" threshold than the other ones.

The non-african ones may have been hard too, but all it takes is one tiny chance of mutation or whatever you would call it for a population to be more docile for a human to exploit it. Such a docile population in Africa would quickly be killed due to the inhospitable enviroment. I'm not going to address the soviet fox program since you kinda debunked it yourself by saying they used modern technology and knowledge to do it.

Of course we could probably after a long period of time find a solution to fully domesticating a zebra population, but that would require modern solutions like the Russian foxes did. Modern solutions that no one in the past knew nevermind Africans. Also there WAS a need to domesticate zebras by European settlers in Africa. By your claims those settlers should have had the drive to domesticate them except they didn't.

Also taming individual animals or very small groups of said animal doesn't mean it's suitable for domestication. This makes the "many" cases of zebras being tamed invalid.


Sub-Sahara Africa was mostly isolated from the rest of the world, and the only real parts that had contact with the outside world were West Africa, Nubia, and The Horn/Ethiopia. It is telling that the most impressive African empires came from regions that had traded more advanced knowledge, crops, and animals from nearby neighbors, compared to the more isolated African populations. However by that time the other parts of the world already had a huge head start over Africa.


----------



## L'Homme de la Lune (Jul 20, 2019)

ZeCommissar said:


> Wew lad. What does Egypt have to do with this? Egypt didn't use the wheels because of slaves, they used it because they had cattle you fucking sped. It is RIGHT BESIDE the fertile crescent.
> 
> Yes I did imply that the africans didn't invent the wheel due to poor agriculture, I just didn't imply agriculture is the only use for it like you said I did in your previous post. Agriculture and transport are the BASIC BLOCKS for the wheel to be first used in a ancient civilization, if you don't get past that rung then you remain stuck.


Do you know how to read? You must really have that nigger dick deep in your throat to spew your garbage the way you do. Niggers didn't invent the wheel because they are inferior beings. Having beasts or not isn't necessary to use a wheel, the beast only does what a human can do but with more strength.



ProgKing of the North said:


> Shame you don't read your own posts


You sure told me.


----------



## ES 148 (Jul 20, 2019)

The best part about this thread is being reassured that 'race realists' are too dumb to ever enact any kind of segregatory legislation


----------



## Autocrat (Jul 20, 2019)

ZeCommissar said:


> Yeah, because I totally said it was impossible to farm without livestock. Except if you know how agriculture worked throughout history you would know that livestock is extremely crucial for advanced agriculture beyond subsistence farming. If you can't get past subsistence farming you can't get time to actually build any sort of advanced civilization. Yeah they could farm, but not at the levels other civilizations could due to environmental limitations which also caused technological limitations.
> 
> I didn't imply anything about the wheel except that it wasn't used in those areas due to a lack of a beast of burden. No shit you can use wheels for other things like water wheels, grinding grain etc. Do I have to also hold your hand and explain wheels are mostly used for transport? But to use transport you need a cart, and to power a large cart you need a BEAST OF BURDEN. How are you going to grind up excess grain when you don't have excess grain since you can only subsistence farm for you, your family, and _maybe _your village.
> 
> ...



Oh my god. Why are you coping so fucking hard?
You just admitted that the Inca's did it with human labor. If they could get to subsistence farming, (which they would do as a tribe, not as an individual or family unit) an industrious enough tribe could amass enough slave labor for advanced agriculture.
Let's be realistic. Egypt managed to build pyramids in ancient times. That was a monumental feat.
It is very likely they got their cattle from nearby Asia. Why couldn't sub Sahara in turn get their cattle from them, a few thousand years later?

I'm not even saying it's racial. But to say that it isn't cultural, and that they were just dealt a bad hand is naive.



ZeCommissar said:


> Its not that Africans don't have the mental capacity to domesticate animals (guinea fowl) it's just that the native African animals were harder to break past the "wild" to "domesticated" threshold than the other ones.



It is impossible to say how domesticated animals truly started out. We can breed domestication into existence. We do not know how many domesticated animals became the way they were through natural selection, or human selection. We know that chickens are essentially man made to be tiny food producers that wander aimlessly around a yard and would die if it weren't for humans. Obviously modern technology was not used to do that.

I'm not saying they didn't have the mental capacity for it.



ZeCommissar said:


> Not having a cattle equivalent means you can't till soil as easily, which means _you don't need to really use wheels_.





ZeCommissar said:


> Do I have to also hold your hand and explain wheels are mostly used for transport? But to use transport you need a cart, and to power a large cart you _need a BEAST OF BURDEN._



Transporting, like this?














Please tell me how that wouldn't be better done with a personal cart.
Rather than have your wife spend an entire day getting water every 3 days, she can carry at least double that with a cart. More if the women work together. 

Better yet, dig a well. Rather than wait thousands of years for a western NGO to show you how.


----------



## Trappy (Jul 20, 2019)

Vrakks said:


> The best part about this thread is being reassured that 'race realists' are too dumb to ever enact any kind of segregatory legislation


The race denier argument atm is "Africans do poorly in the modern day West because ancient Africans didn't want/need to invent wheels/architecture/animal domestication and also vague undefinable socioeconomic factors that don't apply to white people or asians for some reason" but it's the people laughing at that ridiculous mega cope that are the dumb ones

lol ok


----------



## ES 148 (Jul 20, 2019)

lol ok


----------



## ⠠⠠⠅⠑⠋⠋⠁⠇⠎ ⠠⠠⠊⠎ ⠠⠠⠁ ⠠⠠⠋⠁⠛ (Jul 20, 2019)

Trappy said:


> The race denier argument atm is "Africans do poorly in the modern day West because ancient Africans didn't want/need to invent wheels/architecture/animal domestication and also vague undefinable socioeconomic factors that don't apply to white people or asians for some reason"


It's largely irrelevant, and intended to tie honest people up in worthless arguments. Are Africans the way they are because of the curse of Ham, or because of different evolutionary pressures? Obviously the second, but whatever the explanation, it does not alter the fact that even blacks who are the children of the well-off, and the children of seemingly well-creditionalled blacks, grossly underperform very poor whites in tests of cognitive ability.




It's not an indication of individual value, or that whites are meant to rule over blacks. It's just a clear difference that disproves all this 'disparate impact' horseshit and suggests that different ethnies should be permitted to go their own way.


----------



## Cilleystring (Jul 20, 2019)

It doesn't matter what race you are, as long as we're all the same religion - Peter Griffin


----------



## Unog (Jul 20, 2019)

Syaoran Li said:


> Race realism is utter bunk and anyone who actually believes in it is exceptional. Culture is the real problem at hand and you can't judge entire countries and continents based on what their descendants in the United States are like.



I can believe that culture is the root problem of black america without denying both empirical evidence and common sense.



3119967d0c said:


> It's not an indication of individual value, or that whites are meant to rule over blacks.



No, you can't say that, because then that invalidates the attempts of people who feel all icky about the reality of the situation trying to heap their guilt over viewing people with lower I.Q.s as inherently inferior onto people who don't, and we can't have that!


----------



## TerribleIdeas™ (Jul 20, 2019)

Cilleystring said:


> It doesn't matter what race you are, as long as we're all the same religion - Peter Griffin



Bob Dobbs agrees.

I'm still waiting for the people carrying on about IQ differences to explain the relation to genetics, to clarify what their solutions are, and to confirm what the racial purity policies will define as human, subhuman, non-human, animal, etc.


----------



## tuscangarder (Jul 20, 2019)

3119967d0c said:


> Are you incapable of following more than a single sentence at once? Here, I'll bullet point it for you:
> 
> Wild animals are wild
> Wild animals outside Africa were wild when non-Africans broke those animals in
> ...



Europeans actually did attempt to domesticate Zebras because Zebras were immune to tropical diseases that would kill the domesticated horses that Europeans brought to Africa. They never succeeded in domesticating the Zebra. The Zebras were too uncontrollable.

Some animals are impossible to domesticate. There are some Zebras that have been raised around humans and might tolerate them, but they are nothing like a domesticated horse. They won't listen to you, are prone to aggression, and are not dependable on being any sort of work aid.


----------



## Ughubughughughughughghlug (Jul 20, 2019)

Popoto said:


> Daily reminder that the Confederacy were traitors, lost the war, and the mind boggles as to why you haven't summarily executed yourself on your own fucking edge yet



Traitors to whom? They were loyal to their states and their government (the CSA).



CheezzyMach said:


> Anyone in the US who spergs about racial superiority is a moron. Doesn't matter if they're white,black,brown,red or yellow we're all crossbred mutts.
> 
> THIS! There is literally no difference between a white trash redneck and ghetto hoodrat.



Speak for yourself, nigger. I’ve had genetic testing (it paired me to a relative, so I know it’s legitimate) and I came back 100% European, 99% Northern European.

The test also lets you see other people’s scores and most White Americans come back 95% European AT LEAST, often more like 98%. What remains is a coin toss between Indian and Black.

They tend to be, except for Yankeefilth, almost all British/Irish/German. Yankeefilth have notably more Italian and on rare occasions you can find somebody with more exotic strains of European.


----------



## Autocrat (Jul 20, 2019)

tuscangarder said:


> Some animals are impossible to domesticate. There are some Zebras that have been raised around humans and might tolerate them, but they are nothing like a domesticated horse. They won't listen to you, are prone to aggression, and are not dependable on being any sort of work aid.



All animals can eventually be domesticated. Kill the top 50% aggressive in every litter. Eventually, particularly if memories can get passed on in animals other than mice, they will be domesticated.

Think about it this way. You live 45 miles from the nearest water source and you know nothing of digging wells and your village elder wont let you move. You see zebra around.
An industrious tribesman would stalk zebra, wait a few months after one gives birth, and kill it. Take the babies. Raise the babies to pull tiny carts around the village. Hit it with a stick every time it veers off course and give it food when it doesn't. Kill those that wont learn. 
You now have at least one zebra that will pull your cart. This frees the time up for 20 village women, and their labor can be put elsewhere.

Obviously you can train zebras. Plenty of europeans have done it. The idea is to stick with it until the aggression is bred out.


----------



## DidYouJustSayThat (Jul 20, 2019)

>blah blah
>docile cattle white privilege

Cattle was bred over multitude of generations from mean 6ft high murder machines with 3ft horns, weighing in over a ton - aurochs.

Sauce: https://www.thoughtco.com/auroch-1093172

Wild horses weren't docile either, sebra domestication was just not cost effective and frankly necessary for whites to take further than proof of concept, but it would have been done if we had these beasts in our homelands.


----------



## tuscangarder (Jul 20, 2019)

Autocrat said:


> All animals can eventually be domesticated. Kill the top 50% aggressive in every litter. Eventually, particularly if memories can get passed on in animals other than mice, they will be domesticated.
> 
> Think about it this way. You live 45 miles from the nearest water source and you know nothing of digging wells and your village elder wont let you move. You see zebra around.
> An industrious tribesman would stalk zebra, wait a few months after one gives birth, and kill it. Take the babies. Raise the babies to pull tiny carts around the village. Hit it with a stick every time it veers off course and give it food when it doesn't. Kill those that wont learn.
> ...



All animals are not able to be domesticated. They have to be able to easily breed and survive in captivity. Pandas or Cheetahs have very low reproductive rate in human captivity. Possible even near 0 without moden human technology. This makes them impossible to domesticate. Cheetahs were actually attempted to be domesticated but failed due to this reason. A Great White Shark would never be able to be domesticated because they all die in human captivity and lack the type of brain required for domestication. A hippo cannot be domesticated because they are far too aggressive and territorial to be around. There are a myriad of other animals with other reasonings why some animals could never be and never will be domesticated.

No animals were domesticated by ancient humans in the format you are describing. Humans didn't go out and capture animals in hopes of domesticating them for work. They didn't have the concept of "domestication". Eurasian horses were originally hunted and then people started catching them for food. Domestication occurred by accident, a result of keeping wild horses for food. This is also how we got the domestic pig. The domestication process takes much longer than a few generations. Eurasian horses had a natural social structure making them far more likely to actually be domesticated. They have the genetic pre-deposition for "listening to a master".

You're making this seem like a 1, 2, 3, done type of scenario. You're also viewing a domestication process through the lens of a modern human with the concept of domestication.

Catching a wild Zebra without injuring it is incredibly difficult, and you'd have to catch more than one.

1. They are extremely aggressive.

2. They have a ducking reflex that makes them very hard to lasso.

3, They have no natural social structure. They will never think of you as a "master" because this social structure does not occur in Zebras like it did in wild horses or wolves. This makes them naturally prone to not listening to human commands. They have no concept of an "authority" figure.

If Zebras were able to be domesticated, the Europeans would have accomplished it. They couldn't do it. These are people that had the concept and financial motivation of domestication in mind.

And you can train a Zebra to the same extent you can train a lion. They are unpredictable and are dangerous to even be around. Their kick will fracture your skull, and they are prone to kicking and biting people, they injure a lot of people that work around them.



DidYouJustSayThat said:


> >blah blah
> >docile cattle white privilege
> 
> Cattle was bred over multitude of generations from mean 6ft high murder machines with 3ft horns, weighing in over a ton - aurochs.
> ...



No one knows the aggressiveness of wild horses, as they don't exist anymore. However, aggressiveness is not the main reason why Zebras were never domesticated. It is because they lack the concept of a social structure and will not listen to people. Aurochs had a natural social structure as do modern cattle.  Zebras being hyper aggressive on top of lacking the ability and willingness to reliably take commands is the reason. Whites tried and had a financial and practical reason to domesticate Zebras and they could not. Some animals are not compatible with domestication. Looking at this from a racial perspective is just retarded, this has nothing to even do with humans. It has to do with animal biology.


----------



## Flynt's Missing Pecker (Jul 20, 2019)

TerribleIdeas™ said:


> to clarify what their solutions are,


The answers the same no matter what. You can’t let blacks rule themselves.  It ends in disaster every single time.


----------



## Autocrat (Jul 20, 2019)

tuscangarder said:


> All animals are not able to be domesticated. They have to be able to easily breed and survive in captivity. Pandas or Cheetahs have very low reproductive rate in human captivity. Possible even near 0 without moden human technology. This makes them impossible to domesticate. Cheetahs were actually attempted to be domesticated but failed due to this reason. A Great White Shark would never be able to be domesticated because they all die in human captivity and lack the type of brain required for domestication. A hippo cannot be domesticated because they are far too aggressive and territorial to be around. There are a myriad of other animals with other reasonings why some animals could never be and never will be domesticated.
> 
> No animals were domesticated by ancient humans in the format you are describing. Humans didn't go out and capture animals in hopes of domesticating them for work. They didn't have the concept of "domestication". Eurasian horses were originally hunted and then people started catching them for food. Domestication occurred by accident, a result of keeping wild horses for food. This is also how we got the domestic pig. The domestication process takes much longer than a few generations. Eurasian horses had a natural social structure making them far more likely to actually be domesticated. They have the genetic pre-deposition for "listening to a master".
> 
> ...



Did you just watch that video and turn your brain off? Did you even read my post? Reasonably, you can stalk zebras and grab the babies. Even that video doesn't claim zebras are impossible to domesticate. It implies they haven't been domesticated because it's more trouble than it's worth, which I disagree with because it is obviously worth it. They failed to do so because they had an idiotic culture.

Europeans have tamed zebras. A tamed zebra would have absolutely been an asset to Africans. Domestication is a matter of breeding them as well. What's more likely? That breeding was somehow impossible for them to do, that zebras are some magic species that don't follow normal genetic patterns because God made them special, or the Europeans just said fuck it and went back to the horses they already domesticated?

Why are you coping so hard?

In 100 years, white man will have domesticated Zebras.




Much less if they get proactive selective with breeding and culling.



			Gilbert's Bar G Ranch - Watusi and Zebra
		



Even if they didn't have the foresight for what these animals could be used for, please tell me how a steady meat supply doesn't seem like a very obvious benefit. Over time they could've built up their heard. Then, if they ever got around to inventing a fucking wheel lol, they would've figured they could make a zebra pull the cart instead of their wives. Eventually they would've had large, domesticated horse variants.



DidYouJustSayThat said:


> >blah blah
> >docile cattle white privilege
> 
> Cattle was bred over multitude of generations from mean 6ft high murder machines with 3ft horns, weighing in over a ton - aurochs.
> ...



I just want to sperg for a second over my vast appreciation for the never-ending ingenuity of man. It is truly, fucking insane.


----------



## AF 802 (Jul 20, 2019)

lol imagine being this insecure about your own god damn race, blame zionist jews one more time


----------



## Autocrat (Jul 20, 2019)

P.S.
>a wheel is useless without a beast of burden




Let's just cope some more and pretend it's more efficient to have your wife carry things on her head.


----------



## ProgKing of the North (Jul 20, 2019)

Autocrat said:


> P.S.
> >a wheel is useless without a beast of burden
> View attachment 850961
> 
> Let's just cope some more and pretend it's more efficient to have your wife carry things on her head.


If she's busy carrying things on her head that means she ain't nagging you, amirite fellas?


----------



## tuscangarder (Jul 21, 2019)

Autocrat said:


> Did you just watch that video and turn your brain off? Did you even read my post? Reasonably, you can stalk zebras and grab the babies. Even that video doesn't claim zebras are impossible to domesticate. It implies they haven't been domesticated because it's more trouble than it's worth, which I disagree with because it is obviously worth it. They failed to do so because they had an idiotic culture.
> 
> Europeans have tamed zebras. A tamed zebra would have absolutely been an asset to Africans. Domestication is a matter of breeding them as well. What's more likely? That breeding was somehow impossible for them to do, that zebras are some magic species that don't follow normal genetic patterns because God made them special, or the Europeans just said fuck it and went back to the horses they already domesticated?
> 
> ...



I don't know if you are pretending to be dumb or just incapable of understanding domestication. Do you think that zebra farm is the first one to exist? Euros had those 100s of years ago, when they first attempted to domesticate the Zebra. It didn't work. According to you we should have already of had domesticated Zebras. Selective breeding does not change everything about an animal. The nature and biology of the animal has to be compatible. People see zebras and they equate it to a Eurasian domesticated horse. They act nothing alike. They aren't even that closesly related. Zebras are literally retarded. A tame zebra is as useful as a tame lion. A lion might jump if you train it it to, but for how long before it throws a deadly temper tantrum? Or decides to not listen. Why aren't lions domesticated? 

And I could care less about sperg racial IQ arguments.  My position is that it is gay to obsess about race and generally only weirdos do. That's about it. My argument is soley about animal biology, not a race measuring contest. However it is odd that you keep ignoring the fact that euros attempted to domesticate the zebra multiple times and failed.  Why are you ignoring this? You are the one that is coping. 

Just admit you are wrong. You have no clue what you are talking about. Your understanding of the topic is rather low, just a post ago you claimed that all animals could be domesticated.


----------



## Flynt's Missing Pecker (Jul 21, 2019)

tuscangarder said:


> And I could care less about sperg racial IQ arguments. My position is that it is gay to obsess about race and generally only weirdos do.


Types thousands of words about domesticating zebras on Kiwi Farms and then calls others spergs and weirdos. 

My sides.


----------



## Autocrat (Jul 21, 2019)

tuscangarder said:


> I don't know if you are pretending to be dumb or just incapable of understanding domestication. Do you think that zebra farm is the first one to exist? Euros had those 100s of years ago, when they first attempted to domesticate the Zebra. It didn't work. According to you we should have already of had domesticated Zebras. Selective breeding does not change everything about an animal. The nature and biology of the animal has to be compatible. People see zebras and they equate it to a Eurasian domesticated horse. They act nothing alike. They aren't even that closesly related. Zebras are literally exceptional. A tame zebra is as useful as a tame lion. A lion might jump if you train it it to, but for how long before it throws a deadly temper tantrum? Or decides to not listen. Why aren't lions domesticated?
> 
> And I could care less about sperg racial IQ arguments.  My position is that it is gay to obsess about race and generally only weirdos do. That's about it. My argument is soley about animal biology, not a race measuring contest. However it is odd that you keep ignoring the fact that euros attempted to domesticate the zebra multiple times and failed.  Why are you ignoring this? You are the one that is coping.
> 
> Just admit you are wrong. You have no clue what you are talking about. Your understanding of the topic is rather low, just a post ago you claimed that all animals could be domesticated.



First of all, a zebra is dramatically less dangerous than a lion. Please quit comparing the two.
Second, yes a creature's nature and physicality can be completely changed with breeding. Zebras haven't been bred for the past hundred years. Taming them was a fad in the 1800's. 

It blows my mind how you can say with conviction that zebra's would've been useless to africans. They can be kept in fucking enclosures you god damn moron. How is a steady supply of meat useless? 
Some people could gather grass with the massive amount of time saved from hunting. 
From there, you geld a docile baby zebra of your choosing and train it to obey. 









You can't say that a steady source of meat and a thing to move carts is a bad idea. Just like you can't say carts are a bad idea, when they can be pulled by people alone. 

And yes, I stand by the notion that any animal can be domesticated— and without editing their genes directly. Whether or not it's economically viable is another thing. But what do you think evolution is in the first place? Domestication is taking evolution into our hands

In the past 60 years, they've made a friendly fox in Russia. Friendliness is only one aspect of domestication, and I don't think an animal can be conventionally domesticated in an environment that isn't domestic. That people don't live in. Right now the foxes are raised in cages and closures which doesn't reflect the way we live.


----------



## lurk_moar (Jul 21, 2019)

Africans have lower IQs because the higher IQ humans left. 

Even though on average Africans and aboriginals have lower IQs and whites and Asians have higher IQs, I believe that intelligence has more to do with nurture, nutrition, parenting, personality, motivation, and culture. Part of the intelligence equation has to do with genetics.

On the other hand, there are dumbfuck Asians and genius Africans out there.


----------



## Sped Xing (Jul 21, 2019)

Imagine the best accomplishment in your life being having the same skin tone as some really accomplished people.

None of you niggers is smart enough to have come up with the idea of domesticating horses by yourselves.  The Kurgans are long dead.


----------



## Sīn the Moon Daddy (Jul 21, 2019)

Ped Xing said:


> Imagine the best accomplishment in your life being having the same skin tone as some really accomplished people.
> 
> None of you niggers is smart enough to have come up with the idea of domesticating horses by yourselves.  The Kurgans are long dead.


With the heart of the Indian and the brain of the white man I should be unstoppable


----------



## Sped Xing (Jul 21, 2019)

Just don't use the blood of the negro. That sickle cell ain't no joke


----------



## Autocrat (Jul 21, 2019)

Ped Xing said:


> Imagine the best accomplishment in your life being having the same skin tone as some really accomplished people.
> 
> None of you niggers is smart enough to have come up with the idea of domesticating horses by yourselves.  The Kurgans are long dead.



I guarantee I would've thought of it. Not necessarily horses, but I would've been a hunter and I would've thought of the idea of trapping baby animals, and keeping them in an enclosure as a steady meat source. The dangers of inbreeding would've been apparent in a tribe and the next logical step would've been to breed the animals. I'm sure inheritability would've been apparent as well, and the next step from there is selective breeding and culling.


----------



## La Luz Extinguido (Jul 21, 2019)

Ped Xing said:


> Imagine the best accomplishment in your life being having the same skin tone as some really accomplished people.


What did you invent?


----------



## DidYouJustSayThat (Jul 21, 2019)

tuscangarder said:


> I don't know if you are pretending to be dumb or just incapable of understanding domestication. Do you think that zebra farm is the first one to exist? Euros had those 100s of years ago, when they first attempted to domesticate the Zebra. It didn't work. According to you we should have already of had domesticated Zebras. Selective breeding does not change everything about an animal. The nature and biology of the animal has to be compatible. People see zebras and they equate it to a Eurasian domesticated horse. They act nothing alike. They aren't even that closesly related. Zebras are literally exceptional. A tame zebra is as useful as a tame lion. A lion might jump if you train it it to, but for how long before it throws a deadly temper tantrum? Or decides to not listen. Why aren't lions domesticated?
> 
> And I could care less about sperg racial IQ arguments.  My position is that it is gay to obsess about race and generally only weirdos do. That's about it. My argument is soley about animal biology, not a race measuring contest. However it is odd that you keep ignoring the fact that euros attempted to domesticate the zebra multiple times and failed.  Why are you ignoring this? You are the one that is coping.
> 
> Just admit you are wrong. You have no clue what you are talking about. Your understanding of the topic is rather low, just a post ago you claimed that all animals could be domesticated.


So, you be saying, that an african zebra is incapable of functioning in domesticated setting, but african human - negro, despite its aggressiveness and ornery nature, is? It could even be taught to speak, but how long, until it throws a deadly temper tantrum?


----------



## tuscangarder (Jul 21, 2019)

Flynt's Missing Pecker said:


> Types thousands of words about domesticating zebras on Kiwi Farms and then calls others spergs and weirdos.
> 
> My sides.



I guess they were too high IQ for you to manage. 



DidYouJustSayThat said:


> So, you be saying, that an african zebra is incapable of functioning in domesticated setting, but african human - negro, despite its aggressiveness and ornery nature, is? It could even be taught to speak, but how long, until it throws a deadly temper tantrum?



I'm not sure. I've never met an actual person from Africa.



Autocrat said:


> I guarantee I would've thought of it. Not necessarily horses, but I would've been a hunter and I would've thought of the idea of trapping baby animals, and keeping them in an enclosure as a steady meat source. The dangers of inbreeding would've been apparent in a tribe and the next logical step would've been to breed the animals. I'm sure inheritability would've been apparent as well, and the next step from there is selective breeding and culling.



No you wouldn't. You'd be stuck hitting a Zebra with a stick wondering why it won't listen to you.


----------



## Autocrat (Jul 21, 2019)

tuscangarder said:


> No you wouldn't. You'd be stuck hitting a Zebra with a stick wondering why it won't listen to you.



I never said I'd start with a Zebra, but I am nearly tempted to buy a baby Zeba and harshly train it on my grandpas ranch to pull a cart for me (back in the way day, as a cave dwelling jungle monkey, I would've of course trained them with - a sometimes stern - care, empathy, and love)


----------



## IAmNotAlpharius (Jul 21, 2019)

I heard that Zebras don’t have the temperament to be domesticated.

*edit*
I’m late...


----------



## Sped Xing (Jul 22, 2019)

Guys it's Zebra not Zedbra


----------



## Sīn the Moon Daddy (Jul 22, 2019)

Ped Xing said:


> Guys it's Zebra not Zedbra


I thought it was Zebdoo?


----------



## Black Waltz (Jul 22, 2019)

I've actually never seen a zebra before


----------



## ES 195 (Jul 22, 2019)

Negros are an invasive species in North America. Like many other pests they were released into the wild when their owners no longer wanted them, they got sick or grew too big and/or expensive to house. Like many other invasive species they've managed to grow and rapidly reproduce in the wild, causing damage to native flora and fauna. Much like the Seagull Preservation Act of 1867, it is dictated by law that the negro is a protected species. Although they have very large numbers and reproduce rapidly in all seasons their current conservation status is CR or critically endangered due to some strange belief that their melanin content makes them greater targets for predators, competitors and acts of God. Should you encounter a negro in the wild it is highly recommended to avoid any contact and not to feed them.


----------



## Black Waltz (Jul 22, 2019)

oh, so we aren't talking about zebras here..


----------



## AF 802 (Jul 24, 2019)

Slavery should've never been eliminated by that libtard Lincoln.


----------



## ProgKing of the North (Jul 24, 2019)

Give Her The D said:


> Slavery should've never been eliminated by that libtard Lincoln.


Broke: slavery never should’ve ended
Woke: slavery never should’ve started and then we wouldn’t have black people here in the first place


----------



## LatinasAreTheFuture (Jul 24, 2019)

All I have to say is that Americans, the White race, brought an era of peace and prosperity that the world has never seen before. No other race did it, it was us. 

I just want a little respect for that. You shitty brown third world countries get to exist and be independent because America has such a huge and powerful arsenal of nuclear weapons that forces everyone to play nice. You people fucking flood my country with zero respect. We have the full right to protect our borders from any outsiders. I’m not saying we have the right to shoot anyone trying to cross buuuuut....

America has earned its place at the top of the world and all you shitty other races are just trying to FUCK the whole thing up. You people think the Chinese are gonna treat you nice when they takeover? That’s why I don’t like Mexicans or Canadians, they are so fucking BLIND. They don’t realize how dangerous the world is, so America has to pay attention to protect all you idiots.


----------



## Corbin Dallas Multipass (Jul 24, 2019)

LatinasAreTheFuture said:


> All I have to say is that Americans, the White race, brought an era of peace and prosperity that the world has never seen before. No other race did it, it was us.
> 
> I just want a little respect for that. You shitty brown third world countries get to exist and be independent because America has such a huge and powerful arsenal of nuclear weapons that forces everyone to play nice. You people fucking flood my country with zero respect. We have the full right to protect our borders from any outsiders. I’m not saying we have the right to shoot anyone trying to cross buuuuut....
> 
> America has earned its place at the top of the world and all you shitty other races are just trying to FUCK the whole thing up. You people think the Chinese are gonna treat you nice when they takeover? That’s why I don’t like Mexicans or Canadians, they are so fucking BLIND. They don’t realize how dangerous the world is, so America has to pay attention to protect all you idiots.


You joined today to say this? Lurk moar or get better opinions.


----------



## ProgKing of the North (Jul 24, 2019)

LatinasAreTheFuture said:


> All I have to say is that Americans, the White race, brought an era of peace and prosperity that the world has never seen before. No other race did it, it was us.
> 
> I just want a little respect for that. You shitty brown third world countries get to exist and be independent because America has such a huge and powerful arsenal of nuclear weapons that forces everyone to play nice. You people fucking flood my country with zero respect. We have the full right to protect our borders from any outsiders. I’m not saying we have the right to shoot anyone trying to cross buuuuut....
> 
> America has earned its place at the top of the world and all you shitty other races are just trying to FUCK the whole thing up. You people think the Chinese are gonna treat you nice when they takeover? That’s why I don’t like Mexicans or Canadians, they are so fucking BLIND. They don’t realize how dangerous the world is, so America has to pay attention to protect all you idiots.


Hell of a post/username combo here


----------



## UQ 770 (Jul 24, 2019)

Autocrat said:


> I guarantee I would've thought of it. Not necessarily horses, but I would've been a hunter and I would've thought of the idea of trapping baby animals, and keeping them in an enclosure as a steady meat source. The dangers of inbreeding would've been apparent in a tribe and the next logical step would've been to breed the animals. I'm sure inheritability would've been apparent as well, and the next step from there is selective breeding and culling.



I find this rather unlikely. This is like listening to a boyscout saying they can go Rambo in the woods for the rest of their lives if they had to. A lot of what you know now has been relayed by society at large. Generally ancient people of any race didn't have a ton of time to sit around and think on things like this, nor did they have the ability to conceptualize it like we do. There was work to be done. Advances were made in increments.


----------



## Corbin Dallas Multipass (Jul 24, 2019)

Locomotive Derangement said:


> I find this rather unlikely. This is like listening to a boyscout saying they can go Rambo in the woods for the rest of their lives if they had to. A lot of what you know now has been relayed by society at large. Generally ancient people of any race didn't have a ton of time to sit around and think on things like this, nor did they have the ability to conceptualize it like we do. There was work to be done. Advances were made in increments.


If it wasn't for all the stupidity of the modern world holding me back, I'd already have invented zero point free energy and FTL travel...


----------



## Sīn the Moon Daddy (Jul 24, 2019)

LatinasAreTheFuture said:


> All I have to say is that Americans, the White race, brought an era of peace and prosperity that the world has never seen before. No other race did it, it was us.
> 
> I just want a little respect for that. You shitty brown third world countries get to exist and be independent because America has such a huge and powerful arsenal of nuclear weapons that forces everyone to play nice. You people fucking flood my country with zero respect. We have the full right to protect our borders from any outsiders. I’m not saying we have the right to shoot anyone trying to cross buuuuut....
> 
> America has earned its place at the top of the world and all you shitty other races are just trying to FUCK the whole thing up. You people think the Chinese are gonna treat you nice when they takeover? That’s why I don’t like Mexicans or Canadians, they are so fucking BLIND. They don’t realize how dangerous the world is, so America has to pay attention to protect all you idiots.





Corbin Dallas Multipass said:


> You joined today to say this? Lurk moar or get better opinions.



You're never going to guess who that is

Actually now that I think of it Alex occasionally said violent stuff too so I shouldn't have been so shocked


----------



## UQ 770 (Jul 24, 2019)

Sīn the Moon Daddy said:


> You're never going to guess who that is



Has AOC finally graced us with her schizophrenic presence?


----------



## Sīn the Moon Daddy (Jul 24, 2019)

Locomotive Derangement said:


> Has AOC finally graced us with her schizophrenic presence?


She's been here for a while


----------



## Autocrat (Jul 24, 2019)

Locomotive Derangement said:


> I find this rather unlikely. This is like listening to a boyscout saying they can go Rambo in the woods for the rest of their lives if they had to. A lot of what you know now has been relayed by society at large. Generally ancient people of any race didn't have a ton of time to sit around and think on things like this, nor did they have the ability to conceptualize it like we do. There was work to be done. Advances were made in increments.



None of us can say how they thought. I think of plenty of things that are not yet a reality as is. If I was hunting, I would've had the notion to trap the animal.
Whether or not I would've actually done it is a separate matter.
It shouldn't be that hard to believe. People have kept pets and livestock since deep into ancient times.
Sub Saharan Africans and American Indians were the exception.



Corbin Dallas Multipass said:


> If it wasn't for all the stupidity of the modern world holding me back, I'd already have invented zero point free energy and FTL travel...



The barrier to entry to capture animals is lower than you might think


----------



## AF 802 (Jul 27, 2019)

Autocrat said:


> The barrier to entry to capture animals is lower than you might think



that's how i captured my personal slave


----------

