[Please post all off-topic comments here. They will not be posted in the main articles]
Forbes just released their annual list of the 400 richest Americans. When they first started this list in 1982, you needed just $100 million to make the list and $2 billion to be #1 (Daniel Ludwig). Today, you need $2.1 billion just to make the list, and $160 billion to be #1 (Jeff Bezos). If you’re not a billionaire by age 60, you can consider yourself a loser.
If you go by SAT scores, at least three people of the 400 have IQs of around 170: Bill Gates, Paul Allen, and our very own Marsha Murphy (listed under her husband’s last name, the only listee to have made her fortune in prostitution, proving that IQ predicts success in even the most unlikely of professions).
Pumpkin Person 
If you understand how things work.
Then you can see the potential results of certain actions.
To get what you want you must understand all your options and the steps involved.
If something doesn’t work, change what you are doing.
Anticipate alternative solutions.
The more things involved with a system the more intelligence you need to keep track of it all. Billionaires keep many things in mind to make the right decisions needed for increase their monetary value.
You need to hold many things in mind to think at a high degree.
Thank you doctor Oz.
why so negative?
Sorry again, it was my education, my environment, my parents, my genes, never me, i’m nothing, and you*
SORRY
SORRY
SORRY
SORRY
SORRY
Its you.
2. doxxing, divulging military or commercial secrets, etc.
but then you have the example of wikileaks and snowden.
i don’t like gag orders.
[redacted by pp, oct 10, 2018] a claim like this.
Not a claim. Forbes had a video on their web site of lesser known people on the list & i recognized her, her husband, her twins & her manhatan penthouse. She looks like a super tall version of a famous actress she used to double for in movies.
Her husband’s not on the list though.
How is that evidence that the person is who they say they are?
Because the Marsha & family on the forbes website looked just like the Marsha & family i skyped with who inturn looks just like her gravitar which inturn looks just like the actress she doubled for. So she appears to have made the list at least one year. Of course maybe forbes made a mistake. Fortunes made in prostitution are harder to track
OK I’ll take your word for it.
What? If her husband isn’t on the list, she made the list in her own right. And there are about 10 women on the list, so its not rocket science to work out.
muggy and his so-called ‘authentic’ leftist are retarded
Dividing the working classes up into sub-groups according to race, ethnicity, and so on, and then pitting these sub-groups against each other, is extremely important to the ruling classes, who are, let’s remember, a tiny minority of intelligent but physically vulnerable parasites controlling the lives of the vast majority of human beings on the planet Earth, primarily by keeping them ignorant and confused…
let’s accept this as true…and indeed maybe it is.
there’s still the fact that in society people are divided in these ways and assigned a place in the social hierarchy based on these divisions.
unless one plans on becoming Jesus Christ and personally overcoming societal programming, comments like these about identity politics are farts in the wind.
the identities exist because they cause real harm in the social world.
in the ether they are fake…like race…but here and now, they are real. now isn’t forever, but we are still in the now.
a man who tries to beat the world by declaring himself free of identities is going to lose. smart money is always on the world.
so we’re back to square one. a basic tenet of common sense that muggy can’t own up to: words and labels hurt people.
of course, the above statement is true but it’s not something the “ruling” elite do at a conscious level.
the ruling elite are prisoners of the system as much as the non-elites are.
the ideas move on their own.
an alternative hypothesis is something brought up by Machiavelli and expanded on by Nietzsche: common men are lazy and given to sloth in matters both physical and intellectual.
the common man is his own warden. he keeps himself shackled to his identity and ruthlessly keeps others shackled to theirs.
so, perhaps the nouveau elite are the ones who are able to overcome societal programming and ignore all attempts at foisted identity — including ones involving common morality. and the reward of course is a permanent place at the top of heap for as many future generations will allow.
you know…
…merit in a twisted sense.
^^^BRAINWASHED LIBERAL^^^
read it and grok!
the various identity groups never end swank. once those identified today are treated fairly…or more than fairly…there will be others…and after those are dealt with still others.
this is GxEism.
no matter how fair, unbiased, etc. a society is most people will be screwed.
a society which is exactly the same as the US but with white and jewish men replaced by black lesbians is still a SHITTY society.
it’s just re-arranging deck chairs on the titanic.
MLK is on the list of those who get it.
MLK I Fear I May Have Integrated My People Into a Burning House.
Zizek
Thiel
Weinstein
C J Hopkins
Jeff Beals
Chomsky
Me
Kanye
etc.
how america works for “swank the red”:
https://www.thisamericanlife.org/649/its-my-party-and-ill-try-if-i-want-to
muggy tosses a book that is almost two centuries old at someone speaking in 2018.
toss The Wealth of Nations or something more extreme by Lysander Spooner while you’re at it.
bitching about identity politics = libertarian wanting completely free markets and free social arrangements without wanting to acknowledge crucial historical facts — the status quo has been ill-gotten; free choice/democracy/whatever set loose on a system that is rigged will only perpetuate the flawed system into perpetuity — people have been indoctrinated into it
i.e.
IT’S NOT THAT SIMPLE.
what’s the solution?
do away with identity politics? that isn’t going to happen if they’re such a boon to the elite.
for an individual to ‘go his own way’ and ‘make his own identity?’ that’d be nice if atomic individualism existed and humans were truly unaffected by the ideas, thoughts, and opinions of others. on earth, however, humans — THE social animal — are VERY MUCH affected by such things.
go read Being and Time again.
people are given a limited cultural space in which to move. part of that cultural space is composed of these identities you speak of.
grok facticity, infant.
part of the rules is that you can’t just…have no identity. and the other part is that most of your identity is pre-determined.
..
the last part of my comment was just a joke.
read the book. then get back to us all.
marx isn’t even understood by soi-disant marxists anymore.
have you considered that maybe i don’t share all of the views expressed in the book?
have you considered that your heroes are just fallible human beings?
no, of course not.
indoctrination is important for anglos. even when discussing texts that hint at the dangers and limitations of indoctrination.
if you have some counter-point…OUT WITH IT.
don’t refer people to dense books…it’s bad form. girly man style.
it’s not dense.
i’ll summarize it for you.
the base determines the superstructure…and it always has.
Mugabe has Marxism/communism/socialism ever been actually realized or are all of the so-called Marxist/socialist/communist “states” (for lack of a better term) not Marxism/communism/socialism?
UNSURPRISINGLY YOU SAY NOTHING I HAVEN’T ALREADY SAID.
UNTIL WE REACH A STATE WHERE NO ONE HAS TO WORK TO PRODUCE THAT WHICH IS NECESSARY TO SUPPORT THE SOCIETY, THE GINGER WILL HATE HIMSELF OUT OF THE NECESSITY OF MAINTAINING THE HIERARCHY OF WHO IS IN THE FIELD AND WHO GETS TO PLAY DRESS UP.
Mugabe has Marxism/communism/socialism ever been actually realized or are all of the so-called Marxist/socialist/communist “states” (for lack of a better term) not Marxism/communism/socialism?
the US and all other developed countries are (already) socialist just not consistently. 41% of US GDP is government spending, and this is at the very low end of developed countries. in the 1920s total government spending was 7.5% of GDP at most. worker’s have rights they did not have 100 years ago, and would not have if the USSR hadn’t been so intimidating. the bail out of banks was socialism for the rich. QE is socialism for the rich.
to go all the way requires a lot more. but in the end socialism does not have to be the worker’s control/own the means of production 100%.
marxism isn’t what anyone who hasn’t actually read and understood marx thinks it is.
slave: master –> serf, peasant: lord —> emplyee: employer
all of these are unhealthy, unnatural, inhuman, perverted relationships wherein the many are controlled by the few.
muggy continues repeating what swank has said, but when the words are not in perfect imitation of Karl “I hate niggers” Marx, muggy gets lost. must be an intension extension thing, amirite?
let me break it down for you…
the ginger WILL HATE HIMSELF until there is no more need of ideology and everyone within society can self-actualize.
self-hatred is how a hierarchy is assented to and complied with.
hierarchies are necessary so long as some portion of the populous must labor to sustain the populous.
slave: master —> serf, peasant: lord —> employee: employer are just different ways of saying slave:master but they represent differing ratios of slave:master.
in outright slave:master, perhaps only 5% of the populous is free in any meaningful (note, note complete) sense. in employee:employer, perhaps 20% is.
if the slave loves himself and is taught to love himself he will never accept slavery.
so muggy’s ‘sticks and stones’ rhetoric is just…
JIVE
because he’s a JIVE-ANGLO TURKEY.
if muggy understood Marx, he would realize that him actually believing “sticks and stones” is true is retarded.
no man is an island.
grow up, peter pan.
Mugabe has Marxism/communism/socialism ever been actually realized or are all of the so-called Marxist/socialist/communist “states” (for lack of a better term) not Marxism/communism/socialism?
muggy predictably states that we already have socialism because of how interventionist the government is in the economy and how large it is…
because he doesn’t understand marx.
government intervention in the economy is Capitalism as understood even by Marx.
for it to truly be socialism, interests that represent workers must have a predominant foothold in government and its laws.
they do not.
(1) socialism must be the dominant mode of production
(2) workers must have seized the machinery of the state
for it to count as socialism.
this has NOT come to pass.
at best, one could say we have what Marx called “bourgeoisie socialism,” but Marx thought that was bullshit and not real socialism anyway.
it’s not just a moral or philosophical question. despite the propaganda the most efficient economy is NOT a free market, laissez-faire, small government economy. if it were then the developing world would be much richer than the developed.
retarded people use the examples of singapore and hong kong. they forget about guatemala, bangladesh, etc..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending#As_a_percentage_of_GDP
it’s not just a moral or philosophical question. despite the propaganda the most efficient economy is NOT a free market, laissez-faire, small government economy. if it were then the developing world would be much richer than the developed.
of course. doy. even idyllic “capitalism” in medieval towns was tightly controlled by guilds.
more importantly, part of America’s prosperity is the American School of Economics, which is heavily interventionist and had a focus on domestic manufacture and high tariffs.
“free market” capitalism cum present day rhetoric is just an ideological justification for plunder.
we all know this.
government intervention in the economy is Capitalism as understood even by Marx.
for it to truly be socialism, interests that represent workers must have a predominant foothold in government and its laws.
i said all that and more in a longer comment which i knew rr wouldn’t read. so i made it simple for him.
you need to hate yourself more.
when 1% of the population owns TWICE as much wealth as the bottom 90% this is obviously NOT socialism. and even though incomes are much more equal in sweden, the wealth distribution is NOT.
when there are two classes, owners and workers this is NOT socialism.
the point was to avoid rr’s presumption that north korea and cuba suck because they’re supposedly socialist, when in reality n korea is basically feudal and cuba has flat wages and an embargo by what was its largest trading partner.
and to avoid having to claim that the whole of industry should be worker coops like mondragon.
revolutions always make things worse in the short term, just like any big and sudden economic change causes a recession.
but the USSR was and the PRC is a yuge economic success. the bourgeoisie lies about the soviet economy and lies about what “socialism with chinese characteristics” means. chanos has said this.
now one fact which swank does not understand is vangaurdism. because “all power to the soviets” never happened and the USSR was undemocratic in the usual sense swank assumes that it was “state capitalist” and that the leaders were corrupt and non ideological.
in reality a centrally planned economy where the planners at least claim some legitimacy from the people and NOT from the market and private property ARE socialist, just not democratic socialist in the sense of votes. there’s no need of it if the party believes it has the one final and true ideology, which the USSR claimed and which marx claimed for his own philosophy. why hold elections when all the candidates think in exactly the same way?
marx NEVER flushed out his idea of the “dictatorship of the proletariat”. he was an excellent critic of capitalism. he was NOT an excellent prophet.
now one fact which swank does not understand is vangaurdism
no, i know it by “[a]ll animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others,” jive.
The OINK-OINK Elite for Monsieur Anglo. Of course you’d buy into it!
in reality a centrally planned economy where the planners at least claim some legitimacy from the people and NOT from the market and private property ARE socialist
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Purge
private property ARE socialist,
if they do not represent the workers, then it is not socialism. I don’t care what the “planners” do.
all economies are “centrally planned.” all planners claim legitimacy from the people.
this is what happens when you focus too much on the form of a term rather than the content.
the “free market” is centrally planned.
feudalism is centrally planned.
the identity of the planners and what they represent, matters, which YET AGAIN is why your caterwauling about identity politics is STUPID.
marx NEVER flushed out his idea of the “dictatorship of the proletariat”. he was an excellent critic of capitalism. he was NOT an excellent prophet.
perhaps. but Russia never had a capitalistic era to begin with. it allegedly jumped from feudalism to “socialism.” this does not happen in Marx….so either the many inconsistencies with socialism we see in the Soviet regime are due to it not being socialism, or are due to “death by a thousand qualification” terms like ‘vanguard’ and whatever else.
the one point the soviet regime has in favor of it being true socialism is the rhetoric of socialism being used to cover up an inequity that does mirror inequities in all other systems. however, the soviet regime simply did not do as much for its citizens as capitalism does for its citizens, regardless of how shitty.
all economies are “centrally planned.” FALSE and the quote is inside the period for non-proles. all planners claim legitimacy from the people. FALSE
this is what happens when you focus too much on the form of a term rather than the content. which is exactly what you have done. project much?
the “free market” is centrally planned. FALSE. there is no such thing as “the free market”, but the market is regulated not planned. the US has no five year plan.
feudalism is centrally planned. FALSE
the identity of the planners and what they represent, matters, which YET AGAIN is why your caterwauling about identity politics is STUPID. PROJECTION. SAD!
marx NEVER flushed out his idea of the “dictatorship of the proletariat”. he was an excellent critic of capitalism. he was NOT an excellent prophet.
perhaps. but Russia never had a capitalistic era to begin with. as i have said multiple times. at the time of the october revolution maybe 2% of the russian empire could be described as proletariat. it allegedly jumped from feudalism to “socialism.” FALSE. the bolshies knew what i have said. they made the proletariat first. this does not happen in Marx thanks for repeating me. you need to be circumcised bad.….so either the many inconsistencies with socialism we see in the Soviet regime are due to it not being socialism, or are due to “death by a thousand qualification” terms like ‘vanguard’ and whatever else. FALSE. i explained what i meant by “vanguardism”, but you ignored it or didn’t understand it.
the one point the soviet regime has in favor of it being true socialism is the rhetoric of socialism being used to cover up an inequity that does mirror inequities in all other systems. however, the soviet regime simply did not do as much for its citizens as capitalism does for its citizens FALSE, regardless of how shitty.
ONCE AGAIN I THANK SWANK FOR BEING HONEST ABOUT HIS STUPIDITY AND BRAINWASHING BY THE BOURGEOISIE. TYPICAL. YOU’RE A FAKE GUIDO AND A PSEUDO-INTELLECTUAL. JUST STOP.
the various identity groups never end swank. once those identified today are treated fairly…or more than fairly…there will be others…and after those are dealt with still others.
if there were a change in how any of these groups were treated, the divisions between the groups would start to vanish.
identity politics only works with promises that are never delivered.
consider that this phenomenon of “PC policing” is actually good. if the number of identified groups continues to rise, out to infinity, everyone will have no choice but to (gasp) be considerate of (gasp) every other human being they come into contact with, rather than those groups designated by privilege as human or those designated by fiat as human.
no matter how fair, unbiased, etc. a society is most people will be screwed.
MORE ANGLO LYING.
hunter-gatherer societies are societies, last time I checked. most people aren’t ‘screwed’ in them.
but yes, civilization, i.e. slave-based, societies function as you say. but these societies are inherently unfair. inequity is at the heart.
”in the ether they are fake…like race…”
race is not fake because it’s can be off.
“the ruling elite are prisoners of the system as much as the non-elites are.
the ideas move on their own.”
Such an idiot. You must be the dumbest commenter thats ever been here. Even Afro said some thing which were correct about what women find attractive. I can’t remember anything you’ve ever said that made sense.
enlighten me phil…what choice does an elite have regarding this system?
if he tries to change it or depart from social expectation, what will happen to him?
i’ll give you a hint: he will become one of the exploited.
i don’t doubt that you can’t understand a lot of what I say.
and that’s just too damn bad…for you.
Its an feedback loop. So the model that perdicts behaviour best is the one thats accurate, since both are right in that they have some perdictive power.
By accurate i meant perdictive power. Meaning that the one that is the best is the one with the most perdictive power. I didnt mean that there was an accurate model as its impossible to untangle them outside of knowing all causial mechanisms. So one will have to determine wich modell is the best by sing imperically in each instance nescessary, and not just stick to one of the modells.
For example:
Which one is the most perdictive of people drowning? Ice cream consumption or the Sun of the day? Ice cream ofcourse. But it might be appropriate to assume ice cream consumption is the best modell in populations of poverty. One have to be eclectic as theres an important Qualitative aspect to the social sciences.
and let’s hone in on the fact that the only one with a worldview that is coherently ‘Marxist’ between me and muggy is me.
The function of government and its judiciary to a marxist would be first to uphold order and prevent the populous from rebelling. nothing more, nothing less.
to muggy, it’s ‘original intent,’ an ideological fart in the wind.
The function of identities is to assign people various points in a hierarchy; and it…WORKS.
to muggy, words can’t hurt a person.
then muggy wants to trot out Marx at me for the proposition that the base determines the superstructure.
if everyone has jesus christ-level abilities to resist indoctrination (i.e. words not hurting) the superstructure would not be able to function as it ought, i.e. to paper over and cover contradictions inherent in the system.
and if the function of any ideology, which is expressed via the superstructure, is to cover contradictions inherent in the system to get its denizens to ‘buy-in,’ then the only correct jurisprudence is the jurisprudence that does exactly that. there is no ONE jurisprudence that does it in all situations.
interestingly enough, there may be only ONE WAY to discuss jurisprudence in keeping with the ideological prerogatives (which is why muggy insists on characterizing a decision like Dredd Scott as NOT original intent), but this is not the same as what jurisprudence IN FACT is legitimate.
give it up mugs…you, me, and everyone else…are human after all.
stop lying.
You get an F for reading comprehension. And a ‘get the fuck out of here’ for marxist thought. So bad reading this.
yes i’m fully aware that you can’t follow along. stop crying about it. it’s bad form.
There was no idea that he had ever had, or could have, that Mugabe had not long ago known, examined, and rejected. His mind CONTAINED Swank’s mind. But in that case how could it be true that Mugabe was mad? It must be he, Swank, who was mad. Mugabe halted and looked down at him. His voice had grown stern again.
is my comment blocked?
Sadly it was, but 99.9% of your comments get published.
Despite these similarities, muggy knew he would never be able to suck his own dick, which is why he settled…constantly, for swank’s. Do not despair, muggy, it’s not gay, because you and swank are the same…he suckled to himself, gently; contain swank, indeed. mmmm
I give up!!
suppose there actually were these constant messages of hate for gingers…
gingers would have no reason to care if they were guaranteed a certain life which neo-liberalism/hillary would deny them…
if i can live without constantly worrying about my animal/material needs, then i shouldn’t be bothered if people hate me.
if i am still bothered, then i hate myself.
if gingers live as long as non-gingers then it’s all good.
btw, the oldest man in america is a black man, richard overton.
and he lives in texas, not vermont.
conclusion: swank is a girly man.
gingers would have no reason to care if they were guaranteed a certain life which neo-liberalism/hillary would deny them…
the entire POINT of ideologies and the identities that form part and parcel is to JUSTIFY inequity via a hierarchy.
so long as the system is what it is, the gingers will care.
stop farting in the wind.
conclusion: muggy’s gut bacteria is off and he wants the rest of the world to share his anglo afflictions.
glenn villeneuve claims he can live off one bull moose for 6 months.
tray again fake Cynic.
“tray” was not a typo…except it was.
what i meant was…
swank needs to be the lunch lady who makes sure the trays go into the machine right…instead of a lawyer.
this is sad!
MOVE BACK TO GUAM!
^^^RACIST^^^
my ancestry is only at least 75% british. and this includes irish and english. but i hope to God no scottish. i hate scottish people.
the other at most 25% is swiss, austrian, french, and basque. i’m so ashamed.
the wogs begin at calais!
HEAR ME NOW AND BELIEVE ME LATER…
THE BRITISH ARISTOCRACY IS STILL…
WHAT JEFF BEZOS WISHES HE WERE.
don’t worry, i follow a one drop rule for anglos…as in, one drop of manure spoils the man.
swank has no appreciation for the effect of the jewish media on white men.
white men are about 1 in every 3 americans yet they kill themselves at the highest rate.
could it be because fran lebowitz (jewish lesbain) et al send them the message that:
if you’re a white male gentile in the US and you don’t become president then you’re a failure.
ayn rand’s atlas/roark was just her lusting after gentile white men.
Just because white trash invaded entire world but this Basic history lessons we learn in the School.
i don’t understand…
…if words don’t hurt people how can the jewish media have any effect at all?
it’s interesting how linh dinh is a real person…super real…yet he’s alt-right.
https://www.unz.com/ldinh/blacks-jews-and-you/
I thought he was a vietnamite robbit.
Pumpkin please ban swanky. Hes even more annoying than Afro which is saying something.
No he’s one of the last people I’d ban
I disagree with him a lot but he’s smart, tough & socially savvy
😀
afro didn’t care, he just said stuff “because”. IQ is not real just because.
swank has a postmodernist view of politics.
PP does not see this as a problem because swank is smart about it.
RR is very inflexible.
He relies too much on logic as the only way to know anything.
afro was also very laid back, chill black guy kind of way about not caring. (ugh)
Swank, you’re a pomo?
“He relies too much on logic as the only way to know anything.”
Is empiricism the only way to acquire knowledge? Or can we acquire knowledge through sound, logical reasoning as well?
I also hate this such immaturity!!
lol modernist/post-modernist. the terms are so vague that i’m not even sure…which ironically would be a post-modernist thing to say.
“Is empiricism the only way to acquire knowledge? Or can we acquire knowledge through sound, logical reasoning as well?”
I don’t think he was implying the former, I think the disparity in explanatory power is highly apparent between using only priori knowledge or the scientific method. The former is usually discarded after it begins to conflict with the latter. It has it’s own field, called Mathematics.
RR thinks he has proven (with logic) that intelligence has no connection to the physical properties of the brain. Because is intelligence is mental and mental is not physical.
A deductive fallacy of the worst kind.
Real neuroscientist doesn’t think this way.
Intelligence has been most impacted by Cybernetics in understanding the physical brain connection.
“A deductive fallacy of the worst kind.”
To be fair, that is not RR’s reasoning behind the stupidity that he posts.
1. He misconstrues uncertainty with complete epistemic ignorance, within the Sciences of the mind.
2. He falls back on Philosophy of mind, because of this uncertainty. Which means his only tool for argumentation is logical.
This isn’t completely ridiculous, but he forgot one important thing: Posteriori>Priori. What justifies this assertion? Well progress speaks for itself. In the thousands of years humans have been philosophizing the only ones successful in actually producing results were that of science. In fact if something is considered unobservable it is left to the realm of Philosophy(mathematics). Science has contradicted everything RR has said.
Unfortunately for RR his criticisms and “arguments” will only be remembered as ad ignorantiams akin to the ones creationists threw at Evolutionary Biologists.
“Real neuroscientist doesn’t think this way. Intelligence has been most impacted by Cybernetics in understanding the physical brain connection.”
Indeed, even if we start with the assumption of dualism(like so many dualist do, such as Ross). It would literally have nothing to with whether intelligence was inherited or not. RR is so dishonest most of his arguments are copy and paste from the comment sections of Dualist blogs he reads, and then (because he doesn’t actually understand the argument) he creates non sequitur extrapolations, that come off sounding extremely stupid.
wiener was imprisoned for sending a picture of his junk to a “minor”.
really a high school gril who asked to see it.
wiener is pure evil, but he didn’t molest anyone.
and how old was the girl? 8? or 17?
the age of consent varies a lot from country to country.
ultimately what peepee wants is…
a law which declares that black women are sexy, and if men or lesbians don’t want to have sex with them…
they will be put in jail.
I got called a “racist” (whatever that is) a while back on here because I said I’m not attracted to black women.
If we use the definition on the basis of being discriminatory, without specification, then yeah it is race-ist.
Not being attracted to certain skin colors/physiognomies is “racist” (whatever that means)? News to me.
Saying “I’m not attracted to black girls” is racist by definition. If you don’t know what that word means, then I’d suggest researching it like any intellectually honest person would do. It’s not racist to say you don’t like black skin or some singular trait. So you wouldn’t bang Beyonce? Sad.
If not being attracted to certain skin colors and facial structures is “racist” (whatever that means) then I’m a “racist.”
Billy gets it!
“(whatever that means)”
So you’ll quit forgetting and rehashing that overused line:
prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior.
here’s the problem with “dating preferences.”
human beings will fuck anything (yes, women too) in the ether.
preferences are shaped by bias, and when your preferences happen to align with cultural bigotry and prejudice, they pretty much are that bigotry and prejudice.
per the definition of racism, which is the judgment that one race is superior to another based on race alone, dating preferences are racist. to judge one race as ‘attractive’ based on race alone = judgment of superior vs. inferior.
muggy will refer people to Karl Marx but ignore the fact that one’s preferences are not formed in a vacuum. they are conditioned, and in most cases, artificially and arbitrarily so.
in the present day, white patriarchal gender norms more or less dictate what is “attractive.”
but there’s nothing about the other person doing the attracting. it’s the ideas in your head that have been planted there. and they relate more to status within a tribe than what a woman can get wet for or what a man can get hard for.
so what’s the issue with racist/bigoted dating preferences?
well, the goal of any government beyond serving the elite is to preserve order and help the vast majority of people accept the system. if your society is composed of different ethnies…shutting large swaths of them out of social life (which, under patriarchy, male social value = what females a man can date) is not a good idea. Bad form.
SUPER bad form.
Evidence?
Uh hi….terrorist attacks occurring because men can’t get laid.
And let’s all observe the fact that Eliot Roger = HALF-ASIAN
Alek Minassian (guy who killed people in truck) = ARMENIAN
Chris Harper-Mercer = MIXED RACE
hmmm….
….hmmm…
notice that this dynamic wasn’t really talked about.
but it’s minority ethnics forced to live in a culture that glorifies and finds white “attractive,” which deprives them of social and dating opportunities…to the point of extreme isolation.
Let’s also observe that sizable amounts of non-white women are also conditioned to hate themselves and to prefer white men. which makes it even more difficult for their men in the dating world.
even men who are considered ‘white’ broadly (myself for example) will run into this problem as the groups one interacts with rise in “class.” because what people will accept as “one of us” does change.
so yes, dating preferences that deal with race are racist. why pretend otherwise? we live in a racist society. and most other dating preferences regarding white men are just gender norm (arbitrary) bingo.
does this mean that the law should intervene?
of course not.
does this mean I have a problem with heroes like Harvey Weinstein (:D) shoehorning diversity into movies? no, and I think it’s a GOOD idea.
PEOPLE ARE STUPID. GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEADS.
your ‘preferences’ are the result of classic racism/gender norms/and other cultural programming. you aren’t special. you’re running the same OS as everyone else.
so if the propaganda from the movie studios makes it easier for everyone within the country to find love/social value/etc., i’m all for it.
I find east asian sex culture interesting as its rather androginous. That creates the unique scenario of attractive people breeding attractive people, instead of having masculine men make wierd women or whatever.
Dont you think some racial phenotypes differences are too big to make them appreachiated by one culture? I see america going the Kim K and HAPA route with all of the european admixed non-whites (or people that look like that) within the states.
linh dinh’s article is awesome. must post again.
and i learned that one of my heroes, bruce lee, was actually part white.
so that leaves chow yun fat and toshiro mifune as sexiest chinaman ever.
https://www.unz.com/ldinh/blacks-jews-and-you/
it’s incredibly sad but true…
1. both jap women and jap men are the sexiest of the ne asians.
2. japan developed first and treated the koreans and chinks like niggers.
3. the japs have smaller heads supposedly.
anyway…
there are a very few jap women…oh my God!…they’re knock outs!
genuine, authentic, fucking knock outs!
i’ve seen them in person…
never on jap tv.
Aphantasia is not a feature of autism (Phill wrong again)
I have APHANTASIA (and you may too…without realising it!)
The more i think about it. The more im starting to come around to the tradcon view that poverty is genetic.
I mean there is a discrepancy for saying africa is poor because of certain intellectual traits and then saying white poverty in the west is because of Master. Maybe its true. But at least some part of poverty in the west is certain genetics. For example Im a terrible worker, due to more primitive aspects of my brain.
In my opinion, if you have a ‘170 IQ’ and talk like Bill about various topics, then IQ is a meaningless measure. They need to bin it and make a new one.
The other thing the pretend conservatives say is ‘dems r real racists’. Gingrich used to say that a lot on chris matthews show. “isnt it patronising to blah blah blah”. Then Chris would come out with “legacy of slavery” and that was the end of all logical conversation.
Even if you use logical arguments on an asperger person, he will stick to his programming no matter what. If you proved objectively the emperor was a barbarian, he would just ignore it and follow orders out of instinct.
I ve just read this very paedagogic article about trade of Mankiw against Trump policy. And it’s so obvious that it is a straw man argument. Because Mankiw takes prices as an external variable whereas Trump policies is all about negotiating prices.
To take Mankiw examples, it’s like you realize that all delivery businesses in area XYZ are making you pay 25% more when you are in a certain richer neighborhood USA and you decide to bargain the prices. You re not loosing if you succeed (the actual example is the reverse, they sale you at lower price and make you sell at higher price to capture production. So your bargaining on prices is for recapturing production).
If there were no tariffs anywhere nor any help to production asisimilable to it, then prices would be externalities and Mankiw would be true. But is has never been the case ever !
And the price of work is regulated (thanks god) in most western countries
” is all about negotiating prices.”
Naw, its also about bringin manufacturing at home. Which is pretty dumb. Still, with the corruption and intellectual theft, maybe replacing the welfare state with subsidized low wage work would be good for anti-corruption. With slowing demographics, the west needs to hunker down into protectionism.
I could see LATAM, NA, EU, Maybe the Eurasian union, Tunisia, the gulf states, Israel, Turkey, west africa, former british southern africa, central africa (ignoring Angola), south east asia, Bangladesh all be ruled by NATO. No? The different countries could be ruled by having ther resource needs be taken care of by eachoder and provide fair trade and military support. Though fair trade with africa, arabia and south east asia seems a little irrelevant today.
“make you sell at higher price to capture production. ”
This doesnt contradict what Mankiw says about tax cuts. And playing around with China might not be so good after 2008 and all of the middle eastern wars.
I wonder though, cant Trump just make manufacturing in many different small countries, so that each trade partner country has less bargaining power?
Why the fuck would the west try tro work with china about anything? I dont think it has to do with the Soviet union.
Chinas population and economic growth is fascinating though, Lee kuan yew said that it would take china 100 years to catch upp to the west. That might sound pessimistic, but once you think that its only like 4 generations, and at the end of that time China evols into modernity is breath taking. 1,4 billion people. Chinas military spending will soon be comparable to the soviet unions. The belt and road initiative seems kinda risky. Its a lot better than Iraq and Afghanistan though. I suspect it will take longer than 100 years, but with the stagnation of american real wages, maybe…
Is an 4 year turn really worth it? wouldnt more years be needed? IDK…
There might also be possitive externalities to making people work, like less depression and less power to big pharma. Maybe the substitution part of the labour could be an way to learn the poor americans to accept leftism. Though that didnt work last time with the military infranstructure subsidies in America.
Don’t see why RR doesn’t find black women attractive.
Look at this person.
She is Hot!
Why does this look like art and not something perverted? lmao
This is me at work keeping an eye on the gopher.
https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2018/10/11/a-memetic-killshot-the-npc-meme/#comment-1034760
Very amusing new meme.
“Dualists commonly argue that the distinction between the mind (or ‘ideas’) and matter can be proven by employing Leibniz’ principle of the identity of indiscernibles which states that if two things share exactly the same qualities, then they must be identical, as in indistinguishable from each other and therefore one and the same thing. Dualists then attempt to identify attributes of mind that are lacked by matter (such as privacy or intentionality) or vice versa (such as having a certain temperature or electrical charge).[12][13] One notable application of the identity of indiscernibles was by René Descartes in his Meditations on First Philosophy. Descartes concluded that he could not doubt the existence of himself (the famous cogito ergo sum argument), but that he could doubt the (separate) existence of his body. From this, he inferred that the person Descartes must not be identical to the Descartes body since one possessed a characteristic that the other did not: namely, it could be known to exist. Solipsism agrees with Descartes in this aspect.”
I’ve never really read descartes. But if he believes this is a good way to prove the existence of something this is sounds bad.
Without going into ‘the mind’ as a social construction argument (which it is), and just taking a more basic description of the mind as ‘consciousness’ and some basic level of intellectual functioning….(>>>>does this mean smarter people are ‘more alive?’))…..we know the body without the mind can exist, but not the other way around unless you truly don’t believe in empirical reality and you are a Total Skeptic.
long texts to conclude the same….
“Without going into ‘the mind’ as a social construction argument (which it is)”
Huh?
“(>>>>does this mean smarter people are ‘more alive?’))”
That is what he belives i think.
“unless you truly don’t believe in empirical reality and you are a Total Skeptic.”
Thats what he is.