|
Post by executiona9 on May 15, 2004 11:56:23 GMT -5
Yeah I know. Thats why I put the word race in brackets, because hispanic is more a cultural term.
|
|
|
Post by whydah on May 16, 2004 19:32:46 GMT -5
here some interracial relation numbers for the USA regarding white people : white men : 95,9 % is married to a white woman 0,2 % to a black woman 0,8 % to an asian man 2,6 % to a hispanic man Thats more than just marrying outside your race.
|
|
|
Post by AWAR on May 16, 2004 20:01:15 GMT -5
Recently I saw a docummentary about race on TV. The whole tone of the programme was anti-racist, but in an entirely American way. They offered some half-assed explanations about why race doesn't exist, and how it's strictly a cultural phenomenon ( totally disregarding the real, visible and known differences between most members of different races ). After being submitted to a 20 minute expose on how we're all the same, they went on to show a black man who joined the KKK. The show also featured a totally caucasoid woman with white skin and a sort of North-Atlantid face who repeatedly exclaimed: I'm black, I'm black. This was all done in a way that insults one's intelligence. Sort of like you talk to someone who's lying to you, and you both know he's lying, but he really tries hard, so you listen to his lies... The white woman who says she's Black is one of the saddest examples of our modern culture, because instead of straight-out explaining that inter-racial hatred can turn into a bloody conflict and a chain of incidents that will ruin everyone's lives, and that's why it's bad, the authors of the show decide to bullshit every viewer and hypnotize them with constant repeating of 'the race doesn't exist' mantra. Good job, guys, next up: CNN reporting from the civil war in USA saying: IT AIN'T HAPPENING, we advise you not to believe your eyes.
|
|
|
Post by galvez on Jun 26, 2004 9:44:37 GMT -5
It seems a lot of the opposition to interracial relationships is coming from men who want to keep their women locked up and hidden from the rest of the world for fear that they might choose men or type of men other than themselves.
It shouldn't be surprising that this topic would create such a stir, because it is a powerful biological drive to replicate one's genes.
Racialist movements have a tendency to attract very insecure individuals who are paranoid that everyone is looking at "their" women. Even some hard-core racists will begin to assume that every attractive female of their race whose picture is posted in a forum is a race-mixer. This paranoia is usually expressed towards members of other races, but as we have seen it can get to the ridiculous point that members of a different subrace are held suspect.
As in other aspects of life, sexual selection is Darwinistic. For example, when the Moors invaded Spain the highest caste took fair-skinned Galician wives. It happened that back then they were the stronger and thus their taking of Galician women was their deserved prize. For Arthur Kemp to write a fourth-rate book lamenting this practice, along with his few readers, hundreds of years later, shows an immense amount of insecurity.
Similarly, when an Italian-American male gets a college education and has above-average looks and gets hounded by Nordic women in the workplace, there is no reason for anyone (especially on the internet) to get jealous: it's a basic fact of life that the stronger get a bigger piece of the pie, and the Italian-American male has proved his merit by beating 90%+ of the men (of all races and subraces) in society.
The same goes for women who are attracted to Black athletes: to compensate for feelings of inferiority many White racialists (largely of the "Nordish" variety) will portray Blacks as animals who are unable to function in the most basic ways in society.
If preservation is really the way to go, if it is the correct ideology, then it will have to be willed. By this I mean people have to want to preserve themselves, largely by instinct. The error engaged by racialists is that they believe preservation can take place by declaring that preservation is the way to go: thus, a "disconnect" between the way people actually behave and what is said takes place. The most ethnically cohesive groups probably mouth off the least about preservation and engage in the practice in an undeclared, implicit way. For them it's just the way you live and it does not have to be articulated.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Jun 26, 2004 10:07:19 GMT -5
I had a laugh at Awar's post about the caucasian woman saying repeatedly "I'm Black, I'm Black". In Australia there are quite a few people who are caucasian who insist that they are Australian Aborigines, people who are white enough for the SS. It reminded me of Crowwoman or something similar who wanted everyone to accept her Amerindian, Negroid... supposed parts of her otherwise caucasian phenotype. Actually most people classed as Aborigines are of mixed race: Caucasian, East Asian, Pacific Islander, Maori, Indian, Afghan - yes Afghans were imported into Australia in the late 1800s early 1900s to run Camel trains in the outback to service isolated farms.
If you read Skadi, I don't since I was banned, it is the Europeans of non "Nordish" phenotype who are the darkies interbreeding with the pure whites and bringing them down with their negro genes.
|
|
|
Post by captainusa1 on Jun 26, 2004 19:55:34 GMT -5
I don't discourage *or* encourage it. It doesn't matter to me if people date outside of their race. There are so many more important factors in relationships. Compatibility is the most important factor IMHO, and I'm not referring to ethnicity.
|
|
|
Post by xxx on Jun 27, 2004 14:56:04 GMT -5
I don't discourage *or* encourage it. It doesn't matter to me if people date outside of their race. There are so many more important factors in relationships. Compatibility is the most important factor IMHO, and I'm not referring to ethnicity. Typical Nord race mixing apologist. ;D
|
|