/lit/ - Literature

>>22288057
>you make the label white as open to include every founder of "The West". but then you close the same lable to exclude them when it benefits you.
not that fucking anon you moron. adapt to the site already you filthy tourist.

>you do know irish people, italians, greeks, they were not considered white for a long time
cool. In what context? also, who cares.

>but to americans all of those people were white, and they all founded a thing called "The West" together
lmao that's not what happened

>why make this arbitrary distinction? why do you cut specifically those groups out but not the italians or the greeks or the slavs or anyone else. what are your reasons?
there's nothing wrong with arbitrary distinctions. white is a fuzzy label, welcome to living in reality. white is a fine label and if your conversation requires more precision, then you adopt it then. welcome to wittgenstein

you can look at some genetic data if you want for a scientific basis of race. personally, i don't really care, and actually it's not relevant to this conversation in any meaningful way. Niggers are subhumans homo-erectus hybrids who never founded ANY kind of civilization EVER and the IQ data supports this. For me, the two races and blacks, and non-blacks. And then, among the non-blacks, europeans are just the most attractive.