Re: The Ethnostate Thread!
Posted: Sat Jun 30, 2018 1:09 pm
I would say yes he is wrong. Identity politics is hardly just a left-wing / SJW thing.
Exposing the stupidity, lies, and hypocrisy of Social Justice Warriors since July 2012
http://slymepit.com/phpbb/
I would say yes he is wrong. Identity politics is hardly just a left-wing / SJW thing.
It is, but casting aside individuality had largely disappeared until the SJWs made it a thing again, The far-right identitarians had dwindled to a tiny, fringe minority before the reaction to the SJW sphere caused a huge uptick in white identitarianism. You could argue that it's always been an element, but the SJWs really put the stamp on it and were directly responsible for its current popularity.
My point was the missing middle ground.
I agree. The move of SJWism to the western culture / race space, global economic policy plus non existent border policy in both USA and Europe were the drivers for current popularism. Which is massive, when you stop focusing on the mad right.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑It is, but casting aside individuality had largely disappeared until the SJWs made it a thing again, The far-right identitarians had dwindled to a tiny, fringe minority before the reaction to the SJW sphere caused a huge uptick in white identitarianism. You could argue that it's always been an element, but the SJWs really put the stamp on it and were directly responsible for its current popularity.
You could also define the tendancy of fundamentalist christian groups to vote right-wing in America, and latina / black groups to vote left-wing, as identity politics.Brive1987 wrote: ↑
My point was the missing middle ground.
And no one has yet demonstrated that politics isn’t entirely centred on collective identities. It appears some indentity politics (collectives of oppression) are based on a retarded group identity. Other politics, say nationalism or defence of western culture is simply forbidden but the rest is A-Ok.
By what definition is “classical-liberal-humanist” not an “identity”? New Atheism was a particularly virulent form of ID. As was A+.
I think most conservatives fall into a spectrum, with the true believers on one side and the lip-service to trad values, economic conservatives on the other. The former strongly believe god will work it out, the latter just make enough noise to keep the believers happy. Besides, rich conservatives can always find an abortion provider should daddy's princess prove indescrete, and more poor blacks means cheaper labor costs. Same thing with immigration, legal and otherwise. I know some mighty conservative folk who yell about illegals, but don't really check who happens to be doing their landscaping.free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑ What happens when they outlaw abortion? Presently, black women have more abortions than white women. Will conservatives think twice when they see the black population, especially the poorer ones out breed the white folk?
Who is creativity73?CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ Still curious about how you would deal with extant populations in nominally white cities that may continue to out-reproduce the white population for some time. Creativity73 had a non-novel but effective approach, to give her undeserved credit.
What sort of demonstration do you require? Some sort of massive multi-ethnic metropolis heaving with diversity and thriving both culturally and financially despite mass-murderous attacks from regressive jihadists?
Like those atheists who won't stop going on about discriminiation against their children?
Not forbidden, obviously.
In order to affirm liberal humaninst principles, one need not belong to a specific group based on age, religion, social class, culture, dialect, disability, education, ethnicity, language, nationality, sex, gender identity, generation, occupation, profession, race, political party, sexual orientation, settlement, habitation, or veteran status.
Might I suggest massive "population transfers"? ;-)Brive1987 wrote: ↑Who is creativity73?CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ Still curious about how you would deal with extant populations in nominally white cities that may continue to out-reproduce the white population for some time. Creativity73 had a non-novel but effective approach, to give her undeserved credit.
To be honest, I can’t see how demographic change in Sydney or Melbourne could be reversed.
The (New York) times, they are a-changin' ...Brive1987 wrote: ↑However. The ridiculous inflow of culturally unaligned migrants has to stop. Even that is an economic and social policy decision that I suspect is beyond the urban elites. But once people are here the chain reaction is lit and simple solutions evaporate.
Assuming that’s sorted. :) We need policies to at least equalise birth rates.
I’d attempt to align migration where possible to culturally aligned nations, functional commonwealth ones.
I’d disincentive people attracted to social relief programs by removing said programs.
I’d encourage voluntary (assisted) return to country for any who lost interest in the OZ dream.
I’d tax ESL households who failed to meet language and culture tests per child to offset the introduced dysfunction.
I’d reward functional social units (families) with baby assistance packages, assuming they were both naturally born here (ie life long tax payers), married for two years and one partner in stable work.
And I’d implement the equivalent of a strong civics program at school that also stressed positive cultural embrace of “settlers” “explorers” ANZACs, painters/poets and storytellers. Heritage stuff. While resisting the tendency to celebrate cultural equivalency.
No magic bullet :rimshot:
Yeah, that is definitely a "problematic" identity - far too many "atheists" make a "religion" out of their rather self-righteous and intolerant "faith" that there are NO gods. Rather doubt they've ever ennumerated all the possibilities, much less proven that they couldn't possibly "exist".
Indeed.[Harris] undermines his war on unreasoning faith with the admission that "we cannot live by reason alone", and he looks to psychology and neuroscience to demonstrate that "we need not be unreasonable to suffuse our lives with love, compassion, ecstasy, and awe; nor must we renounce all forms of spirituality or mysticism to be on good terms with reason". Such sections seem to come from another book, perhaps reflecting Harris's current interest in neuroscience. They sit strangely with the deadly rationalism which would exterminate what he insists on calling 'faith'.
For this is the problem with The End of Faith: we all have faith of one sort or another. In a world which seems incapable of shaking off belief in real gods and devils, it takes a lot of faith to be a humanist. ....
Kind of begging the question, asserting - an ipse dixit - that "classical-liberal-humanist" can simply never be an "identity". Certainly seems plausible to argue or suggest that some of that group are overly narrow-minded and dogmatic, arguably the sine qua non of an "identity".d4m10n wrote: ↑ <snip>
In order to affirm liberal humaninst principles, one need not belong to a specific group based on age, religion, social class, culture, dialect, disability, education, ethnicity, language, nationality, sex, gender identity, generation, occupation, profession, race, political party, sexual orientation, settlement, habitation, or veteran status.
She lacked nuance and measure. Commonsense must prevail, not zealousness.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ Creativity73, Brive, surely you remember-
memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=1459
Hmm, had a post dissapear on me. Anyway, this is Creativity73, she who bore seven children to shore up the white race and advocated for ethnostates. While I detest her ideology, one has to admire her commitment.
Amazing how the same deliverables espoused by Lauren Southern et al cease to be hard right alter ight literal nazism when it becomes govt policy.Steersman wrote: ↑
The (New York) times, they are a-changin' ...
And even Merkel is belatedly reading the writing on the wall:
Merkel, to Survive, Agrees to Border Camps for Migrants
1. Show me politics waged by a party or group which is a non self identifying collective and which possesses no specific world view with which to attract adherents.d4m10n wrote: ↑What sort of demonstration do you require? Some sort of massive multi-ethnic metropolis heaving with diversity and thriving both culturally and financially despite mass-murderous attacks from regressive jihadists?
Like those atheists who won't stop going on about discriminiation against their children?
Not forbidden, obviously.
In order to affirm liberal humaninst principles, one need not belong to a specific group based on age, religion, social class, culture, dialect, disability, education, ethnicity, language, nationality, sex, gender identity, generation, occupation, profession, race, political party, sexual orientation, settlement, habitation, or veteran status.
It was a moment of weakness. After having just visited Melbourne, I’m prepared to offer that city up in compromise.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ So, after the talk of ethnostate you're ceeding Sydney and Melbourne? Hmmm. I suspect Faith & Co would not approve.
The always-reasonable Steersman is advocating for ethnically cleansing citizens in the supposedly tolerant west of 2018? What population are you going to exchange in this case, Steersbot? That event was ultimately done to save the Christians of Anatolia whose situation after the abortive attempts to carve up the remaining Ottoman empire was pretty precarious. What's your own scenario and pretext, dumberino?Steersman wrote: ↑Tue Jul 03, 2018 10:53 amMight I suggest massive "population transfers"? ;-)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populatio ... and_Greece
It is almost tautologically true that groups of people who advocate for social causes will incorporate those causes into their ethics and worldview. Don't pretend this is the same thing as politics based on attributes which are (mostly) assigned at birth.
It may be well be lazy, but that doesn't make it untrue. Would you say that ethnic and religious identity movements have done more good than harm, on the whole?
Not quite sure that you're getting at here. Which ideologies are competing for dominance in the post-Cold war world?
Please create an account and sign in - so that your posts can be distinguished from any other anon drive-by poster. If you are going to post here, you might as well get down in the muck with the rest of us.Guest_73eaf8de wrote: ↑ The journey of some middle-aged men from attacking liberal identity politics "from a liberal standpoint" and then "turning" into right-wing ubernationalists on this site was a joy to behold. :popcorn:
Brive for admin. :twisted:
With a Grandfather in the Light Horse who served at Gallipoli (for all of six weeks before enteric fever) ...Guest_73eaf8de wrote: ↑ The journey of some middle-aged men from attacking liberal identity politics "from a liberal standpoint" and then "turning" into right-wing ubernationalists on this site was a joy to behold. :popcorn:
Brive for admin. :twisted:
I'm standing up for something that defines me: Enlightenment principles. I'm standing up to anti-Enlightenment SJWs, reactionary/conservative religious leaders, AND fascists and their apologists, from Dugin to Southern.Brive1987 wrote: ↑With a Grandfather in the Light Horse who served at Gallipoli (for all of six weeks before enteric fever) ...Guest_73eaf8de wrote: ↑ The journey of some middle-aged men from attacking liberal identity politics "from a liberal standpoint" and then "turning" into right-wing ubernationalists on this site was a joy to behold. :popcorn:
Brive for admin. :twisted:
A regular ANZAC Day attendee ...
A keen proponent of the family tradition of gathering around the Xmas Queens message ....
Parents from non-Brisbane Queensland who, as europhiles, took their kids OS in the 1970s before it was cool ...
Ex long term member of the Army Reserve
Keen student of (esp military) history
Church married in the early twenties and still married ...
Married into a South African family ....
Regular visitor to Europe who hasn’t been to Asia since the 1970s ...
Owner of a genuine MAGA hat
Father to a specially chosen pure white Siberian Samoyed....
Who the fuck do you think you are talking to? :lol:
Now son. The reason I detest PZ and his mob and SJWs in general is their pomo worldview which rejects tradition. Rejects established social order. Rejects western culture. Redefines key words and concepts to self abased ideological ends.
Sure. It started off with shit flinging within the skeptic club house. Extended to gender and then the full kit of patriarchy and privilege. Now SJWism is going full racist against the white man and all vestiges of his existence.
You haven’t seen me change. I’m as mad and insane as ever. What’s changed is the breadth of the battlefield and the scope of conflict. Not the enemy.
What has also changed is that the left and left-middle of the so called “liberals” has been trump deranged into virtual SJWs. They are so scared of actually standing for something that then defines them that they are pushing back against the energised right. Regardless of this fulfilling the role of fifth columnist. Kirb. Is a case in point.
We saw this with the lack of defenders for Radford. We saw it with a failure to push back against doxing. And we are seeing it now on a more important stage.
Also. Get a fucking nym.
You seem to have lost your 'Pyt Admin status but on the other hand have been promoted to Lauren Southern's bette noire (and leader of the Kirb-ites). So it all evens out.Kirbmarc wrote: ↑ I'm standing up for something that defines me: Enlightenment principles. I'm standing up to anti-Enlightenment SJWs, reactionary/conservative religious leaders, AND fascists and their apologists, from Dugin to Southern.
I define myself by my ideals and principles, not my ancestry, language, or culture.
I'm also a dangerous fifth column.MarcusAu wrote: ↑You seem to have lost your 'Pyt Admin status but on the other hand have been promoted to Lauren Southern's bette noire (and leader of the Kirb-ites). So it all evens out.Kirbmarc wrote: ↑ I'm standing up for something that defines me: Enlightenment principles. I'm standing up to anti-Enlightenment SJWs, reactionary/conservative religious leaders, AND fascists and their apologists, from Dugin to Southern.
I define myself by my ideals and principles, not my ancestry, language, or culture.
nb I know that the stuff here is only the half (or less) of what you do - ie you also exist on facebook and have a real life - so I'm not really getting the full picture.
And yet here you are. Have you even taken a political compass test to prove your bona fides?Guest_73eaf8de wrote: ↑ This gives credence to the idea floated about that part of the slymepit's reason of existence wasn't at all solely to correct the SJW left within still left-liberal principles but rather to aid the online culture war against the left and promote the nationalist/reactionary right in the long-run instead. I hadn't paid much attention to it in the past but I find it more and more interesting, especially since the site seems to be boiling off its more left of center/moderate members over time. Very interesting.
Do not talk to me that way. Ok? Apologize now or else :nin:
I don't think it was a deliberate plan.Guest_73eaf8de wrote: ↑ This gives credence to the idea floated about that part of the slymepit's reason of existence wasn't at all solely to correct the SJW left within still left-liberal principles but rather to aid the online culture war against the left and promote the nationalist/reactionary right in the long-run instead. I hadn't paid much attention to it in the past but I find it more and more interesting, especially since the site seems to be boiling off its more left of center/moderate members over time. Very interesting.
This is not the correct protocol. :nin: is used when someone else sneaks in their response first. (cf 'Snap').Guest_73eaf8de wrote: ↑
Do not talk to me that way. Ok? Apologize now or else :nin:
I don't fully trust the political compass. It seems to shift even very right-wing communities much to the left, but their relative position seems accurate. It's better used that way rather than in isolation.
A lot of people are talking about the pyt. From God to Jordan to the pyt, as the higher-ups say.
I wasn't being that serious obviously but you have always been the resident autist after Steersbot. :geek: It shifted pretty organically but there's a perception of change in character to a relative outsider like me. It might be because the focus has also expanded/changed and the actual range of views came to the fore. And trust me :eusa-whistle: , I like identity politics or the poisonous communities formed around places like pharyngula (a similar but less organic, from a certain perspective, change for the worse over time) probably even less than you do, Kirb, don't have to tell me akhi.
They made the claims often enough that it became a fact in spite of reality. The Republican strategy has been "define your opponent". Just keep saying bad things about them and accurate or not often enough and enough people will believe it.The general perception that the Republicans, something often simply borne out of their rhetoric towards Democrats, are better on the economy probably had the biggest role to play in the election as far as I'm concerned.
The Pit's purpose is a self-organising emergent property of providing a venue and forum (initially) for malcontents, conforming nonconformists, nonconforming conformists, and various stripes of flotsam and jetsam that (probably illegally) emigrated from Pharyngula to ERV's house for a party, and then needed more space.Guest_73eaf8de wrote: ↑ This gives credence to the idea floated about that part of the slymepit's reason of existence wasn't at all solely to correct the SJW left within still left-liberal principles but rather to aid the online culture war against the left and promote the nationalist/reactionary right in the long-run instead. I hadn't paid much attention to it in the past but I find it more and more interesting, especially since the site seems to be boiling off its more left of center/moderate members over time. Very interesting.
:-) ERV's - and now the FT's - irregulars.KiwiInOz wrote: ↑The Pit's purpose is a self-organising emergent property of providing a venue and forum (initially) for malcontents, conforming nonconformists, nonconforming conformists, and various stripes of flotsam and jetsam that (probably illegally) emigrated from Pharyngula to ERV's house for a party, and then needed more space.Guest_73eaf8de wrote: ↑ This gives credence to the idea floated about that part of the slymepit's reason of existence wasn't at all solely to correct the SJW left within still left-liberal principles but rather to aid the online culture war against the left and promote the nationalist/reactionary right in the long-run instead. I hadn't paid much attention to it in the past but I find it more and more interesting, especially since the site seems to be boiling off its more left of center/moderate members over time. Very interesting.
As George Patton is reported to have said, on surveying some battlefield carnage, "God forgive, but I love it so" ... ;-)
A discussion that is bound to be of seminal importance, so to speak ...
Glad that you appreciate that I'm always reasonable, even if you're not able to follow the threads. And tolerance isn't always a virtue:Guest_6371b3c0 wrote: ↑The always-reasonable Steersman is advocating for ethnically cleansing citizens in the supposedly tolerant west of 2018? What population are you going to exchange in this case, Steersbot?Steersman wrote: ↑Tue Jul 03, 2018 10:53 amMight I suggest massive "population transfers"? ;-)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populatio ... and_Greece
Maybe you could register so I could return the insults? Tit for tat and all that.Guest_6371b3c0 wrote: ↑<snip> What's your own scenario and pretext, dumberino?
You might check out the Islam & Islamist thread where I've done precisely that in exhaustive if not exhausting detail:Guest_6371b3c0 wrote: ↑You've posted that supposed parallel a million times but never gave an argument over it.
"Population transfers" may be a rather "blunt" instrument of social policy, but absent some real changes in Islam - the chances of which are somewheres between vanishingly slim and none - I'd like to know what other solution you think is viable and has a chance of resolving the problem. That is, apart from Kirbmarc's predilection for Nero's solution - i.e., fiddling while Rome burns ... ;-)#272 Post by Steersman » Sat Aug 19, 2017 1:33 pm
Apropos of another ("yes, another - quite your kvetching ...") wayward "truck of peace" and their equally demented drivers, Jerry Coyne has an interesting post up on the topic - In light of Barcelona, what, if anything, do we do about immigration? - which quotes extensively a post at Areo by one Ar Devine. Some relevant quotes from the former:Coyne wrote: I don’t think there’s any number of Islamist terrorist attacks that will make people stop and think about the issue of immigration, which allows the entry of some people likely (or sworn) to commit such attacks. ...
Here Devine expresses the dilemma that many of us face, as our progressive liberalism conflicts with the knowledge that a regressive religion has an extremist wing that kills innocent people and is “hostile to liberal ideas”:....Devine wrote: The Jeremy Corbyns, Ken Livingstones, Cenk Uygurs, and Sally Kohns of this world and many of their supporters will grasp at anything but admit the truth that the Islamic faith has a problem with both violent and nonviolent extremism. When you want to talk about Islamic extremism they will bring up the fact that all religions have their extremists. This is undoubtedly true, but there is a qualitative difference between an extreme Mormon and his strange underwear collection and a Wahhabi hate preacher who believes Western women are whores who should be driven over and maimed beneath the axles of a speeding van. ...
Devine doesn’t offer a solution but does make two observations: that European politicians are largely ignoring the problem, and at their peril; and that there’s a general failure among liberals to discuss frankly the terrorism that’s plaguing Europe ....
Guest_6371b3c0 wrote: ↑I wasn't being that serious obviously but you have always been the resident autist after Steersbot. :geek: It shifted pretty organically but there's a perception of change in character to a relative outsider like me. It might be because the focus has also expanded/changed and the actual range of views came to the fore. And trust me :eusa-whistle: , I like identity politics or the poisonous communities formed around places like pharyngula (a similar but less organic, from a certain perspective, change for the worse over time) probably even less than you do, Kirb, don't have to tell me akhi.
I think you're overrating how "SocJus" the average centrist Democrat libtard is most of the time though. The general perception that the Republicans, something often simply borne out of their rhetoric towards Democrats, are better on the economy probably had the biggest role to play in the election as far as I'm concerned. I haven't seen anything to the contrary so far, but not to fully dismiss what you mentioned as factors. That's also why you need a strong non identity politics left as you mentioned.
Good post.
Yeah. That’s clearly how I defined Pomo. For a chap clever in some areas, you can sure underperform spectacularly on occasion.
Quoted verbatim:
What exactly is the tradition, established social order and Western culture you're talking about is left undefined. You make no mention of Enlightenment principles, liberal democracy, human rights. You don't cite any examples about the values you want to defend.The reason I detest PZvand his mob and SJWs in general is their pomo worldview which rejects tradition. Rejects the established social order. Rejects western culture.
Yes, quite true there Kirbsnark .... ;) Birds of a feather and all that. Though expected you to have a bit more substance than trivial insults.Kirbmarc wrote: ↑Guest_6371b3c0 wrote: ↑ <snip>
I think you're overrating how "SocJus" the average centrist Democrat libtard is most of the time though. The general perception that the Republicans, something often simply borne out of their rhetoric towards Democrats, are better on the economy probably had the biggest role to play in the election as far as I'm concerned. I haven't seen anything to the contrary so far, but not to fully dismiss what you mentioned as factors. That's also why you need a strong non identity politics left as you mentioned.
Good post.
You know what they say...it takes an autist to catch an autist, and that's why I'm the one who replied now much to Steerzo. :bjarte:
Generally some sound arguments there. However, while I too certainly question much of postmodernism - at least as many see it; have even written a published article about it ;-) - I kind of get the impression that, as with the sex and gender "debate", far too many don't really understand or are aware of the "principles" behind it, some of which may actually have some justification. As with much of feminism, some of the principles may be sound but many of the consequential arguments can be badly flawed. But, more particularly:Kirbmarc wrote: ↑<snip>
So what exactly do you want to defend? You don't have a clear answer, and neither does the alt-right. Indeed it's a hodgepodge of neoreactionaries, anti-democracy and anti-Enlightenment figures, English and American conservatives (who are different from each other), nostalgics, paranoids conspiracy nuts, and fascists.
The lack of a common political philosophy based on Enlightenment principles is a HUGE issue for the right AND the left. Anti-Enlightenment philosophers like Heidegger, Nietzche, Evola, Guenon are just as against liberal democracy and in favor of authoritarianism as Salafi clerics.
Indeed both the PoMo and the NeoRex are inspired by Heidegger. Derrida and Mencius Moldbug share the same criticisms of Enlightenment principles. The SocJus and the Alt-Right are both tied to anti-Enlightenment identity politics.
Some "flies" in the ointment of "reason and language and social progress", but that doesn't mean that they're entirely invalid, or not worth putting some weight on. As you probably know, Søren Kierkegaard wrote Either/Or - and for which he was apparently tormented by street urchins - but, while such *binary* weighting has its value, it frequently degenerates into false dichotomies which tend to be "problematic". A case in point:While encompassing a wide variety of approaches, postmodernism is generally defined by an attitude of skepticism, irony, or rejection toward the meta-narratives and ideologies of modernism, often calling into question various assumptions of Enlightenment rationality.[5] Consequently, common targets of postmodern critique include universalist notions of objective reality, morality, truth, human nature, reason, language, and social progress.[5] Postmodern thinkers frequently call attention to the contingent or socially-conditioned nature of knowledge claims and value systems, situating them as products of particular political, historical, or cultural discourses and hierarchies.[5] Accordingly, postmodern thought is broadly characterized by tendencies to self-referentiality, epistemological and moral relativism, pluralism, subjectivism, and irreverence.[5]
Don’t be a cunt. You somehow “forgot” to include something didn’t you. I wonder how often you perform this is trick in less obvious circumstance.Kirbmarc wrote: ↑Quoted verbatim:
The reason I detest PZvand his mob and SJWs in general is their pomo worldview which rejects tradition. Rejects the established social order. Rejects western culture.
Now son. The reason I detest PZ and his mob and SJWs in general is their pomo worldview which rejects tradition. Rejects established social order. Rejects western culture. Redefines key words and concepts to self abased ideological ends.
Is the part I didn't quote relevant to the arguments I made?Brive1987 wrote: ↑Don’t be a cunt. You somehow “forgot” to include something didn’t you. I wonder how often you perform this is trick in less obvious circumstance.Kirbmarc wrote: ↑Quoted verbatim:
The reason I detest PZvand his mob and SJWs in general is their pomo worldview which rejects tradition. Rejects the established social order. Rejects western culture.
Now son. The reason I detest PZ and his mob and SJWs in general is their pomo worldview which rejects tradition. Rejects established social order. Rejects western culture. Redefines key words and concepts to self abased ideological ends.
Though, of course, not at all like redefining "genocide" for "self abased ideological ends" (?) ... ;-)Brive1987 wrote: ↑ <snip>
Don’t be a cunt. You somehow “forgot” to include something didn’t you. I wonder how often you perform this is trick in less obvious circumstance.
Now son. The reason I detest PZ and his mob and SJWs in general is their pomo worldview which rejects tradition. Rejects established social order. Rejects western culture. Redefines key words and concepts to self abased ideological ends.
Wouldn't that likely be bona fide evidence of willingness to integrate?CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ So, seriously Brive, what are you going to do if your kids bring home a nice muslim boy or Chinese gal? Will you be defending white Australia?
The definitional issue is neither mine nor, for that matter, the alt rights.Steersman wrote: ↑Though, of course, not at all like redefining "genocide" for "self abased ideological ends" (?) ... ;-)Brive1987 wrote: ↑ <snip>
Don’t be a cunt. You somehow “forgot” to include something didn’t you. I wonder how often you perform this is trick in less obvious circumstance.
Now son. The reason I detest PZ and his mob and SJWs in general is their pomo worldview which rejects tradition. Rejects established social order. Rejects western culture. Redefines key words and concepts to self abased ideological ends.
“When did you stop beating your wife”CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ So, seriously Brive, what are you going to do if your kids bring home a nice muslim boy or Chinese gal? Will you be defending white Australia?
On a personal level, yes. It would (perhaps) indicate a willingness to find accommodation between the cultures of two families.Lsuoma wrote: ↑Wouldn't that likely be bona fide evidence of willingness to integrate?CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ So, seriously Brive, what are you going to do if your kids bring home a nice muslim boy or Chinese gal? Will you be defending white Australia?