Race does not exist

Just a reminder that the concept of race was invented to justify colonialisation, to de-humanise the colonialised populations so that Europeans could slaughter them without feeling guilty, and to divide the working class/serfs/slaves.

'White' is not a race, because a 'white' Dutch person is different than a 'white' Ukrainian person. Same way 'black' is a ridiculous label because 'black' people from Kenya are different than the 'black' people from Morocco. When you laugh at Zig Forumsyps and tell them "you're not white haha" you are conceding their argument and admitting they're right. We need to outright reject the concept of 'race'.

I know critiques of this don't have to come from the right, but can come from liberals and from the left. I'm sure they would argue that even though 'race' may be a construct, it has been used to oppress certain racial groups and that makes it real and worthy of tackling. To that I'd say that while problems with 'race' need to be tackled, and I do not want to minimise or diminish what has happened in the past, we have to tackle these issues within a different framework, not the framework given to us by the racists/colonisers. We can admit that 'African-Americans' in the US are generally worse of than the 'Whites' in the US, but that has to do with their historical position in the US society, giving them a shittier 'start' in post-1960s America. Some point to 'Asians' as being successful in the US. Again, it has to do with the material conditions they left at home and to which they arrived. 'African-Americans' were brought as slaves and had nothing, while 'Asian' immigrants came as workers and were able to afford to pay for their way to the US (as far as I know even the Chinese workers that were worked to death on the US's railroads weren't slaves, were paid and could own things as well as travel, someone correct this if I am wrong).

Those who wish to argue that 'race' is actually a real, observable feature in nature have to answer a few questions:
1) How do we decide who belongs to which 'race'?
2) How do you account for variations within 'races'?
2a) If you have variations within 'races', then how can you make conclusions and generalisations about the 'race'?
3) What insight and information can we gain through racial analysis, that we can't get from cultural/material/sociological analysis?

Please don't fall for linguistic traps and don't get into silly arguments about race. We need to be adamant about class and material analysis. Let them call us 'class reductionists' for not wanting to perpetuate racism.

Attached: bele_lokai.jpg (700x530, 92.43K)

Other urls found in this thread:


I post the topic, go to Zig Forums and this on the top: >>>Zig Forums132995

These false-flags keep getting more wordy and creative don't they?

What are you talking about? Besides, mods can look at my post history. If you have nothing to contribute, don't post.

stalin in 'marxism and the national question', chapter 1

if races do not exist, how is it that stalin has referenced them?
he, unfortunatley, does not define what a race is here, maybe he does elsewhere, but surely they exist

Colours do not exist.
I do not exist.
Existence is a lie.

Attached: 13.jpg (293x420, 28.9K)

Silly argument.

Attached: Screenshot_2019-03-20 Your logical fallacy is appeal to authority.png (782x608, 170.29K)

Who needs to be reminded of this?

No we don't. The idea is that you reduce their terms into absurdity. It's crazy effective.
To the contrary. Make the arguments as silly as you possibly can. Fall for all the linguistic traps and double down on them. Right-wing ideology relies on it that people don't take the logic to its end. So that's what you do.

he's clearly talking about ethnicities

>>>Zig Forums132995
I know it's not the same board, but I see the same type of things on this board, too. That one just happened to be current.

Yes, the master logicians and debaters at Zig Forums will definitely see the error of their ways when you spring reductio ad absurdum on them. They'd probably think it's a spell from Harry Potter. Good argumentation doesn't work. If it did, you could go to any right-wing community and use 'facts and logic' and convert them all.

People don't become fascists because of reason and logic, so you cannot use reason and logic to dissuade them of their beliefs. All they see is you talking about race, which gives them the required grounding to say "ok, we all agree race is real, therefore there is some merit to race-based arguments and racial analysis". The idea is to outright reject the concept of 'race' so as to reject any argument based on it.

E.g.: (R right, L left)

R: White people are better than Black people because we have Western civilisation, Africans didn't even invent the wheel, Aborigines didn't invent agriculture, etc.
L: That's not true! Black people are that way because of these different factors that have nothing to do with them being Black, read 'Guns, Germs and Steel'


R: White people are better than Black people because we have Western civilisation, Africans didn't even invent the wheel, Aborigines didn't invent agriculture, etc.
L: What is a 'White' person? What is a 'Black' person? Are we talking about the dark skinned black people, or are we talking about light skinned black people? Why are some 'White' people pasty white, while others have skin that gets darker in the sun?

See the difference? In the first example you've accepted their premise that 'race' is something real, to be discussed and used for analysis and conclusions. In the second example you don't even listen to their conclusions, you attack the premise. That is one of the best ways to win an argument, because if the premise is wrong, then the conclusion is definitely wrong.

And to add to my list of questions:
4) When two people of two different 'races' have offspring, what 'race' is the offspring? What about a mix between two 'races' has a child with someone of a third 'race'? How do we categorise these people into 'races'?

Yes, it does!

Attached: 44182e930fa94c01c586a9c76bffb46faae7e6b07be6f54f9bbd0fc6bcf65e2d.jpeg (750x822, 113.07K)

Wtf happend to this board


What does it feel like to have brain damage? Kinda curious.

Don't respond to right-wingers trying to derail threads and ruin discussion, please.

I'm not talking about a dumb debate-club reductio ad absurdum. I mean some real visceral shit. Use advanced race realist science to prove that whites are genetically inferior to blacks. Explain why

Both your proposed dialogues are equally pathetic liberal bullshit. It should be
R: White people are better than Black people because we have Western civilisation, Africans didn't even invent the wheel, Aborigines didn't invent agriculture, etc.
L: LMAO. Shitty neanderthal barbarian cumskins didn't invent shit. While Africans were practicing advanced agriculture on the Nile, Europeans were still throwing sticks at mammoths. Africans and aboriginals were doing just fine until white people came along, and fucked everything up. The pale milk-drinkers ruin everything in their quest to compensate for their utter lack of redeeming qualities.
The truth is simple: Blacks have superior virility and physical strength and Asians have superior brain power. Both are morally superior. There is no reason for white subhumans to continue existing. Make way for the superior mixed race of the future. Cross breeding produces healthy and beautiful offspring. That's scientific fact.
All the intelligent white people already understand this. That's why women bless them with the opportunity to pass their genes into the future super-race. It's only pathetic worm-like creatures like yourself and your spastic martyr SHITler that refuse to acknowledge the truth.

Then watch them scramble to come up with a response. They can't do it!


Do you think you can beat them at their own game? It's futile to even attempt. To an outside observer you'd look just like them and wouldn't achieve anything.

If you engage in a back and forth with them on their terms, using their language, you have admitted to yourself, them and anyone else who might see it that they are right about the general idea of 'race'; now you're just arguing 'who is better'. Again, we must outright reject their hierarchical categorisation of 'races'.

Attached: twain.jpg (720x720, 141.89K)

If races don't exist, then can you explain this ?

Attached: aworldmapofn.jpg (800x342, 38.54K)

Attached: round 2.png (1783x1525, 657.67K)

White people's quality is that they are essentially a mix of black and asian people. Get fucked.

If you have variations within genders, then how can you make conclusions and generalisations about the gender?

You should look at this:

It disproves your dumbass point that "whites are inferior"

Let's also add that, on an artistic note(I will use music for my example), black people for e.g. seem to be really trash at some music genres, for example.

If race exists there is only one race the human race.
Also Macro Evolution is a lie.

all race science instantly gets abandoned by the right as soon as somebody dares to say what was known forever - that middle easterners are white

Their game is exactly to say outrageous shit others can't follow them in. You're falling for it.

Wow I'm impressed.

This is also a good one. Also stress that European Jews are basically the whitest people you can find.

I guess that's why they like Assad so much?

Why is the OP image Zetsu? But in all honesty race is indeed a social construct. It would be better to find a different name for the various phenotypical differences, but race doesn't function as that name, simply because a Race is usually applied to a (self-aware and 'civilized') species as a whole, I.E. the HUMAN race, the X Race, the Y Race whatever.

The American left drove out people with enough integrity to point out its errors, and then Michigan flipped red because they’d been making tons of them.

if race doesn't real what race is Samuel L Jackson

lel middle easterners were NEVER considered white, never ever ever, just because they ticked "white" on us census forms when they were a tiny insignificant minority is absolutely meaningless.

brainlet tier take, this ain't it chief. yikes my dude.

I agree. "Race" is conditioned by weather factors. Maybe the term "ethnic" is more accurate.

He meant race in an older sense. One could have called Romans a "race" even though today they wouldn't be considered one.

This. Arguing with idiots makes you an idiot.

If that map is your criterion for race then Yemenis are white. Do you believe that?

Ethnicity and race are two seperate things. Ethnicity is a phenotype, whereas race is a social construct based loosely on those phenotypes.
For example, ethnic Irish people have a certain look, but historically were classed as "black" or "mediterranean" and in modern nomenclature are classed as "white"

it's funny because when we say white we refer to europeans right? But just look a swedish and italian, that's because the term ethnic is more accurate

Two quick general notes:


Attached: aborigine 'humans'.jpg (2000x1333, 1.73M)

anti-racism is idealist

What are you talking about, this is exactly what you mongrels look like
Keep wishing that you were white

But we don't?

those are 95 year old women

They are not “women”. They are apes

And you? You are an evolved ape?

lol what do you think YOU will look like when you're 95?
don't answer. you'll probably die of heart failure in your 60s mr master race. you'll just look like a worm eaten corpse

It's important to clarify that genetic markers and haplogroups exist without question. What we mean when we say "race does not exist" is that the generalized phenotype based constuct of race does not exist. As in, X group of people occupying some shared societal category based on appearance alone, generally skin tone. The problem is that Zig Forumsyps will conflate the two, which makes the statement "race does not exist" sound ridiculous when put into such context. When someone says "race does not exist" without clarifying what they mean by "race", it gives Zig Forums-types the opportunity to inject a completely different meaning to what we are saying, that is "genetic markers and haplogroups don't exist", a belief which we do not hold.

It's only the race threads that draw out the Zig Forumstards in droves. The only thing they can comprehend is WHITE BLACK WHITE BLACK WHITE BLACK.

Attached: 3b8f759fba1ce6110eee917cfd14a96580c720fe1ce20bb735d0444454cc6c6f.webm (540x360, 4.44M)

Well put, comrade.

Well sorry bro, but they still show capacities.

This is a slide thread, in fact I wouldn't be surprised if OP posted this because he knows how on edge Zig Forums is atm and wants to argue with retards.

First of all, can you tell me what 'slide thread' means? I've seen the expression a lot on 4/pol/ but I still don't know what it means. Serious question.

Second, I don't wish to argue with retards. I wish for us on Zig Forums to stop engaging in race-related discussions. Judging by some responses there is room for comrades to learn and grow.

Many anons jumped in to define themselves as 'white', when 'white' is a useless category and description.

Besides, we're not doing much else on this board other than talking/arguing/etc. And if we can talk about video games, anime, a Zig Forums senate, then why not this? If you don't like it, no one is forcing you to read/respond.

Not that guy, but a slide-thread is a thread you make to contain a certain narrative or discussion. Meaning that the thread exists to make sure the rest of the threads aren't spammed to hell by Zig Forumstroon

on Zig Forums the term refers to a distraction/junk thread meant to 'slide' important threads off the board/front page so people dont see/discuss them. Given how slow this board is i cant imagine its possible to slide here effectively, but i suppose its secondary meaning of a junk thread meant to distract discussion away from other threads (similar to bait in this context) might still apply.

Important to note is the distinction that sliding on Zig Forums is imagined as a coordinated attack on the board from outside forces/shills, but which is hidden. So while sometimes you might see mass spamming of images or phrases in new threads designed to push legitimate threads off the board, sliding implies that all the slide threads are unique and intended to be actively engaged with by unwitting users so the 'attack' is done in secret and people caught up arguing in one of the slide threads dont even notice the important events or happening that are attempting to be slid.

Why are anarchists always the gayest leftists. Also race is useful as a shorthand for groups of people; It's only a problem if race is used as justification for mistreating people.

Thats just WE WUZ trolling and also aimed at some imaginary Churchill tier imperialist/colonist who wants to purge kaffir for being in the way of Greater Rhodesia.

But against a modern race realist who argues with adaption to different bioms (basically telling everybody to stay where their bodys are made for) this only results in beating up strawman

Thanks. Well, that would make sense on a much faster board, but I think Zig Forums is too slow for that sort of thing.

Your post appeared as I was typing mine.

I don't think of myself as starting junk threads, at least I try not to. I just see a lot of discussion about race around here and Zig Forums and I wanted to remind that we should not engage in that type of stuff because it doesn't advance our interests at all.

Stuff like:

That is not how language works. You can't say "this is how we want what we say to be used, you can't use it any other way". It's a very small gap between using it for shorthand to refer to people in a neutral way and to refer to people in a negative way.

1) Just fucking ask people what race they are.The answers are at least 99% accuracte.
2) Life is a bell curve
2a) By observing their behaivious on a broad scale, then deduce averages. While doing that you take into account how diffrent their environment and genome is (roughly speaking). At the end you just compare these averages.
3) user ffs. We are biological creatures whos ancestory reaches back millions of years. Capitalism and cultural/material/sociological analysis exists for not even a fraction of that time. Evolution is fucking real. Evolutionary psychology is more accurate than inaccurate most of the time. If you ignore our history, then literally what in the actual fuck are you doing other than just sniffing your shitlib ideology?

Yes, but that dosent mean you throw proven theories like evolution under the bus because they hurt your feelings.

"White" generally to refers to broadly European Americans.

Polish American culture and Italian American culture are closer to eavh other than they are to their respective proper European nations, and yet are widely distinct from african american culture, history, fuck even language.

Do you use the same method when it comes to gender?


You're just talking nonsense at this point.

The idea of there being a "black" and "white" race is an American delusional that will die with the country's empire. I am a bit apprehensive about the EU attempting to adopt it though.

No: race is a continium, sex is binary.

All humans are apes by definition, retard

Are we going by categories like "white, black, etc." or actual specific haplogroups and ethnicities like pic related?

Attached: 600px-Major_Y-DNA_and_mtDNA_Haplogroups-1.jpg (600x426, 69.8K)

Ah yes, very science.

Attached: 1552109493332.jpg (367x346, 20.12K)

We can go by pretty much whatever classification you use, as long as people have a veigue intuitive understanding on what these classifications are. So "white, black, etc." is good enough.

But fuck postmodernism, amirite?

Literally how. All of those classifications go by appearance alone, which is a very shallow outlook on genetics.

Both the PLINK and STRUCTURE procedures assume that the individuals in the analysis have originated from K populations. K is was chosen for each analysis run, but it can be varied across different runs. Because our panel of AIMs was designed to differentiate continental populations of Europeans, Africans, and East Asians, we set K = 3. However, to test the robustness of our results to choice of K, we performed analyses assuming K = 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7.
[pic related] presents results from PLINK cluster analysis, showing both the percentage and case distribution of self-reported race by PLINK-estimated genetic cluster or bio-ancestry. These PLINK estimates (as well as other estimates based on genetic data) are placed in quotation marks to differentiate them from self-reports. The samples were assumed to have derived from three ancestral populations (K = 3). We repeated the analysis, assuming K = 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, and using a fuller range of self-reported racial classification groupings. The findings from these additional analyses are substantively identical to those in Table 2 and are also available upon request.
In ROOM, of those who self-reported as white, 99.5 % were assigned into the “white” category by the cluster analysis. Of those who self-reported as black, 99.3 % were classified as “black.” We separated South Asians from non–South Asians; previous work suggests that South Asians share substantial bio-ancestry with Europeans (e.g., Rosenberg et al. 2002). Of those self-classifying as non–South Asians (including Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, Filipinos, and Vietnamese), 97.7 % were assigned as “non–South Asians.” Three of the four self-reported American Indians were classified as “white.” The bootstrapping 95% confidence intervals for the three key groups of whites, blacks, and non–South Asians were [99.0, 99.9], [94.7, 100], and [89.5, 100], respectively, indicating that the correspondence between bio-ancestry and self-reports for the three main racial groups is estimated with precision."

TL;DR people know what their race is
I know people here love reddit-tier science where everything must be 100% correctly defined or else it dosent exist, but in the real world 99% is good enough.

Attached: imaginemyshock.PNG (1110x664, 39.68K)

Continuum fallacy. There are an arbitrary number of distinguishable shades between red and orange, yet they can be recognized as distinct.

You know, I've been thinking. Since different human populations are not quite clear-cut, but there is a gradual shift in between them, isn't every test, from something as simple as a brown-bag test to high-tech genetic analysis, more or less always based on opinion? After all, someone has to decide where to draw a line between "close enough" and "not quite close enough". And what if you must make exceptions, or, heaven forbid, adjust these values due to them? You would be openly admitting that "white" was not "white" at all.
I could imagine a 'pure-Aryan nation', assuming it allows some immigration of "fellow whites", to spiral into some kind of purity-zealotry. After all, such radical conditions being the norm, much ado can be expected from more radical elements if the borders are kept "clean", but the interior is '"'impure with unwanted elements"''. And if you go on that path, removing naturalized and multi-generational parts of your society to adhere to the same standards, at which gradient of "white" would it ever stop? Considering what we've seen in the past about Italians and Irishmen not being "white", I cannot imagine some nutjob to ever stop complaining about the corrupting and vile influence of totally non-white group X. Or, at worst, using this state of affairs to get rid of his political opponent, or annoying neighbour, or that faggy guy at the bar, or…

Attached: f95.jpg_large.jpg (1000x660, 82.52K)

You shouldn't turn it into we wuz trolling. Stay within the parameters they set up.
Obviously you invent a different narrative then. Talk about how global warming implies that Muslims taking over Europe is the only way for humanity to progress.

That's bullshit. The same dichotomy was used in European imperialism into Africa.

>Self-reported race is generally considered the basis for racial classification in social surveys, including the U.S. census. Drawing on recent advances in human molecular genetics and social science perspectives of socially constructed race, our study takes into account both genetic bioancestry and social context in understanding racial classification. This article accomplishes two objectives. First, our research establishes geographic genetic bio-ancestry as a component of racial classification. Second, it shows how social forces trump biology in racial classification and/or how social context interacts with bio-ancestry in shaping racial classification. The findings were replicated in two racially and ethnically diverse data sets: the College Roommate Study (N = 2,065) and the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (N = 2,281).
Also, you completely dodged my point which was that the categories themselves (white, black, asian, etc.) are extremely broad and end up grouping differing populations and haplogroups, sometimes far differing populations and haplogroups. You then respond to this by posting a study observing how people's self-identification usually matches up most of the time (save for Native Americans) with these extremely broadly drawn social categories that combine differing haplogroups. I literally stated that the categories are broad, then your response is "Look at this study in which people insert themselves into these broad groups". It's like if I said "Look at how close the Norwegians are to the Saami who themselves are quite close to the Russians and bear relation to the Nenets, with both the RU and NE sharing ancestry with the Kazan Tatars who are very close to other eastern groups, but when looking at what society would define as "white" both the Kazan people and their close eastern groups would not be categorized as such. The amount of R1b in the Scottish haplogroup and other western European haplogroups also shows how much they differ from other "white" European groups that have far less R1b. It seems white exists as a category that is extremely arbitrarily drawn by society" and then you responded with "But look at how many people identify as white and fit in it. Checkmate." You missed the point. Some things that I find humorous though

Attached: CjcQBE6_d.jpg (362x346, 12.66K)

The point that user was trying to make was that at what point is the red-orange more red than orange or more orange than red, especially in regards to how society catagorizes them. If a "red" has a child with an "orange" and have two children with one of them being strikingly red and the other strkingly orange, are they regarded as red-orange or is each just grouped up with what they are closer with? Best real world example is the situation with mixed children where they can be anywhere in between their two parents in regards to skin color and appearance (they can look very close to just one of them, or appear with a mix of features).

Attached: main-qimg-8847d7ddfbd648a6fdaf55729649cddb.gif (800x544, 48K)

Race has been proven scientifically. Each race deserves its own ethnostate with its own economic system.



A black German Shepherd and white German Shepherd and short German Shepherd and squinty eye German Shepherd and polka dot German Shepherd are all the same suspecies. AKA German Shepherds


Yeah I remember that Zig Forums meme from 2014 as well. Get new material.

Indians were actually considered Caucasian by race science.

a lot of gene studies show that gene variation between two races is the same of the variation of a one race. don't forget the melanin levels and nose size are a very small factor when comparing genes.
that's speaking on the objective inside but when speaking of the visual appearance things get more complicated. first you need to get rid of height and skeletal build because that's mostly environmental factors. now we are left with only the face, looking at ai generated photos of a lot people of a country shows that the gene studies are correct but also shows that africans do look different from asians, those differences are very insignificant when comparing genes thus giving the result that there is no race.
no one knows why, maybe because of breeding with different type of homo, maybe some random dominant features that developed in early human history when people were very far from each other that they started getting more varied, gene adaptation? who knows.
the mainstream understanding of race is incorrect speaking scientifically

Attached: Haplogroup_R1b_World.png (663x768 109.38 KB, 118.7K)

as far as I know, this is where people talk past each other. Yes, there is more variation within than between, but this is like saying that because there's more kinds of cars than trucks, there's no reason to separate the two.

To my understanding, each individual loci varies more within a population group than between. However, when you correlate them population structures arise.

How you divide these will probably never be solved, however my belief is that people socially and sexually select for peers within a certain threshold of genetic distance. Studies on marriage and friendships seem to suggest this.

Finally, I'd suggest this kind of essentialism is compatible with Marxism since biology is essentially a material condition that is shaped by and expressed within other matierlal conditions.

In other words, there's little reason to separate genes and environment, and this fact creates particularities which in turn directly relate to Marxist theories of the national question, uneven and combined development of capitalism, and so on.

No, literally black and white people are about as racially and genetically different than black and white German Shepherds. They are the exact same species. The reason black communities have a high crime rate is because they are most often poverty ridden. Go to white poverty ridden communities in Moscow or Sweden, and you're likely to get jacked or killed. The reason minority communities are poverty ridden is they are minorities in vote and representation. They get fucked over. Hell the CIA has pumped crack and heroin into those communities more than once. Also, people who are only politically motivated by race preservation, abortion, bootlicking police / military forces and wanting to keep the current economic system which is basically rich people don't pay taxes but use middle-class paid taxes as a slush fund are fucking useless. They are literally doing nothing of value or productive for working class livelihood and conditions. In fact they're just the oligarchs deranged and violent bitch that end up attacking whoever conservative media tells them too.

There's more than just pigmentation differences.

Just because Zig Forumsyps will latch on to this, it's more of like if you observed the German Shepards raised exclusively in one area vs another (even though this isn't really the best example because humans populations move and intermingle all the time throughout history). The German shepards in one area might have different heights, coloration, and maybe even snout shape then the other German shepards in the other area/town, but when observed and compared to other breeds like say Labradors they still show themselves to be largely similar and when tested still share largely the same genome. Dogs are bad example anyway because they have had immense outside pressure applied to them which leads to very little varience within it's own populations (as in, for the most part they were actively prevented from taking in other internal population variations as breeders selected dogs with only certain set qualities and discarded/gelded the rest). Mutt groupings and maybe common pitbulls would be a better example if anything.

Here's a better question to ask than "does race exist" –
who gives a shit if race exists? Why give a shit about race at all?

A lot of libs play this game that if you ignore someone's race, then you're a racist. To me a racist is someone who is keen to always point out racial identity and racial differences. Instead of getting caught in the racist game (whites are better than blacks) or the inverse-racist game (whites are worse than blacks) play the non-racist game (people are people).

Ethnicity is a huge spook. Nationalism is a huge spook. Ancestors are a huge spook. You are not your ancestors. You are not your country. You are you and you alone. The color of your skin is never a justification for moral weakness or vices.

You can be anti-racial identity (idpol critical) and still be anti-racist btw.

Laughing at everyone taking the bait in this thread.

I've got a master's in engineering. I've met black people and arabics in both the workforce and graduate school that are kind brilliant people and make your Zig Forumsyp look like they're violent troglodyte mongoloids. I mean 95% of the boomers in Zig Forums couldn't solve for the derivative of x^2 let alone breakdown hamiltonian adaptive control theory on an RTOS to safety critical systems regulation standards. Hell they make up 90% of their statistics on the spot. The whole identatarian white culture is bullshit that conservatives feed them, because they realize their economic policies don't appeal to them and their social contracts are strengthening a strict ruling class heirarchy as opposed to tools of liberty. Right wing ideologies do not benefit white people in any way shape or form. All it amounts to is opportunists dog whistling while they loot their countries treasury and profit off of throwing them in prison for mind your own fucking business laws. Race is just a scapegoat oligarchs use to distract plainhearted dupes while they plunder and fuck them over.

Also, if a boomer loses a job to an illegal immigrant that doesn't speak English they are so unskilled and worthless it makes me think eugenics on them would be good for our species survival.

This didn't need to be added. It's a silicon valley argument and is something which can easily rebutted.

If you lose your job to an illegal immigrant who doesn't speak the language then that basically means you can be trained for your job in pantomime. I mean if you're worried about losing your job mowing lawns or washing dishes then you need to reconsider your life choices. Shit reconsider raising the minimum wage. I would be embarrassed if I was so unskilled an illegal immigrant who couldn't speak English took my job.

Then to think someone so unskilled they are scared of losing their job to someone without papers or able to communicate in English wants to give lectures on scientific racism, political hegemonies, capitalism or statistics. It's like having someone that can't do simple arithmetic decide they're superior to Feynman at quantum mechanics.

Most minimum wage occupations are like this. It's inevitable.
Again, this is a Silicon valley argument. It ignores that the majority of jobs for people in the economy will be this kind of easily trained for but low paying labour. If you make this argument to someone they will simply refute it by stating the benefits of cheaper labour at some point outweigh the hiring of a more expensive employee with training in regards to short term profit goals.

This is even less of an arguement. They would just point out that your not actually addressing the validity of their claim, just trying to make reference to their occupation to discredit it. A true fact stated by a homeless man doesn't become false because a homeless man is stating them. Either something is true, or it's not true.

I'm just telling you this because they are both bad arguments that if said outside will easily get shot down. If they're meant to just get reactionaries angry, then there are better things than an argument that literally gives them a freebie to use against you.


Lol different breeds of dogs aren’t subspecies. And a subspecies is more than “looks way different than each other”.

No it doesn’t. It’s simply pointing out the glaring self destructiveness of most Nazis. That the ideology they follow is so blood thirsty it usually calls for the death of most of the people advocating for it if you even do a cursory reading of it.
This goes all the way back to Hitler himself. I’ll be damned if even as a kid I thought he looked Jewish. Regardless he was physically deformed only one testicle, and would have been euthanized if he lived as a child under his own Nazi regime.
This “you’re not white” really seems to have gotten under Nazis skin because this is like the 10th time I’ve seen a Zig Forumsyp complain about it in less than month. But you Nazis could litterally not have been asking for it more though.

Making up hullshit for bullshits sake is not my cup of tea, it serves no purpose in the long run.

„All I ever wanted was the truth.“ as Space Mussolini here said

Attached: 698863F8-DA0D-497E-BCE3-F9BD6EC04F11.jpeg (625x559, 136.78K)

Those loci doesn’t relate to phenotypes and they sure as hell don’t correlate to phenotypes we’d associate to race. This is all bullshit out of the “Trouble Inheritance” book Zig Forumsyps like to cite from.


Illegal immigration simply isn't a threat to a person who wants a shitty job. It's not a silicon valley argument as the illegal immigrants will produce value with their labor which creates economic capital. There are service industry jobs, sales, management, medical, and plenty of work that requires English. The type of jobs illegal immigrants are likely to take are generally speaking hard rote labor. As far as being lectured by a right wing homeless man versus a landscaper I would think the homeless man was smarter. A landscaper who still believed in capitalist meritocracy seems delusional.

Also, I would not lecture a string theorist on math if I didn't know algebra. Scientific racism is based on opinions and faulty axioms. Climate change denial ignores 1st year chemistry. Dissecting capitalism beyond it rules or sucks requires competency in math, and complex derivative relationships. Even arguing politics with academic leftists without having the capability to read advanced political theory is an act of narcissism or contrarianism. They can't know their positions fundamental proofs and rationale. A person who is unqualified for jobs that require critical thinking, math, teaching or valuable trade skills and finds themselves in a position where illegal immigration threatens their ability to find work lack the scientific and technical maturity required to glean more than superficial aspects of concepts in science. Like bragging about how good you are at quantum physics if you can't do math. This makes a person highly susceptible to incorrect information, irrational fears and propaganda. I find nearly all right wingers in a category of having superficial pseudoscientific political arguments drowned in plutocratic propaganda. Invariably they consider themselves dark web intellectuals, but are scared of not being able to compete with non English illegals, societies skin pigmentation darkening and their white burger culture which is clearly bottom shelf.

Why should I care about the feeling of people that want to slaughter millions? Telling them they’re not white doesn’t make me accept their bullshit theories on race.
It’s like telling an edgy teenager that’s always encouraging others to commit suicide to do it first.

If you’re feeling are hurt by the “you’re not white” meme. You’re either a Nazi, or a dumb latent racist. If you read any theory these types of things wouldn’t bother you.