/lit/ - Literature

>>16419335
>How is one suppose to even have a dialogue on the topic?
You don't, you just have to be a good boy and feel guilty that you're a filthy racist.

>>16419335
"I'm not in this world
To live up to your expectations.
Neither are you here to live up to mine.
I don't owe no one
No obligations
No one owes me none
So everything is fine"-
Peter Tosh

>The mere suggestion that being white has meaning often triggers a range of defensive responses. These include emotions such as anger, fear, guilt, and behaviors such as argumentation, silence, and withdrawal from the stress-inducing situation.

Kafka trap.

Anything else?

>>16419335
>Don't argue with fools, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
These types of people are the real fragile ones. Their entire ideology is fuck whitey because they are insecure about their own race and its easier to shit on the winner instead of improving yourself. All the big fancy awards tha these writings receive are only because the system is mobilized against whites by seething jews and browns. They'll wrap it up in intellectual rhetoric but as you've demonstrated, their works actually make little sense.

>>16419335

Everyone has racial prejudice.
This doesn't mean you spit at ethnic minorities in the street.
It's not a particularly radical statement.

>>16419439
>This doesn't mean you spit at ethnic minorities in the street.
No shit?

>>16419453
Exactly.
Where's the controversy in saying that people hold racial prejudice?

>>16419461
There is no problem with racial prejudice. It is natural that all races will look out for their own kind first. Its time whites start realizing that again.

>>16419461
Define racial prejudice

>>16419491
"Dislike, hostility, or unjust behaviour deriving from preconceived and unfounded opinions" based on race.

>>16419504
Ok then the controversy exists in stating that all people hold racial prejudice

>>16419535
I think you're the minority in finding that controversial.

>>16419535
Prejudices exist in humans -- and race is not exempt from this thought.

It would be absolutely unrealistic to expect such things go away when humans look different.

if you aren't racist, then you deserve the consequences

>>16419335
>"There's nothing fragile about the powerful bursts of whiteness emitting from my manhood as I finish my daily onanism sessions focusing on juicy PoC bimboes on various social media apps."

>>16419335
The hilarious things about these theories (including Kendi in this because he doesn't get nearly enough ire for his rococo blatherings on "inequity") is that they are so focused on accounting for the obscure (the word they use is systemic or implicit) ways in which nice white liberals are actually racist that their structure has difficulty accounting for people who are explicitly white supremacist or racist. Like, actual white supremacists because they have some sort of "self-conscious" white identity end up standing against this whole structure of "whiteness" which relies on the lack of a self-conscious white identity.
The very least that anyone would expect from any theory of racism would be that it describes people who are uncontroversially (often times self-identified) racists, but a lot of these whiteness theories totally fall apart at this, and that should tell us something.

>>16419335
You can't, the book is one giant Kafka trap

>>16419335
Even folks really into CRT hate DiAngelo's book because it's essentially the manifesto for the corporate diversity/anti racism industry and because it's a Kafka trap.

the answer is to become racist

>>16419986
>they have some sort of "self-conscious" white identity end up standing against this whole structure of "whiteness" which relies on the lack of a self-conscious white identity.

that just makes them overtly racist and white supremacist. theory, by its own moveable boundaries, still fits.

>>16419335
This book is the equivalent of "do your parents know you're gay?"

>>16419571
Ok
And if I were to say I don’t have a racial prejudice

>>16420040
Right, but their only integration is via the white supremacist signifier. Everyone knows the overt racists are racists in every day life, but the theory is trying to describe the nature or workings of racism and gives us an essence that not only seems to ignore these obvious examples but actively seems to exclude them. Like, I can buy there being frustration at white being considered the default experience on the part of blacks and whatnot, but I cannot buy the sort of grounding that it is being given. The desire to describe this as a hegemonic system on top of the morally-charged signs that this description is attached to is the problem.

>>16419335
If you replace the word white in the book with male and racism with patriarchy/misogyny/sexism you get a feminist bestseller

>>16420143
Those delusional retards don't realise that everyone is racist by nature

>>16419335
Non-falsifiable claims can be dismissed out of hand.

This shit is already part of college curriculum btw. Work on a uni campus and saw some girl reading it and taking notes the other day.

>>16419986
>You're racist.
If you say so, Ibram.
>You need to do anti-racist work to promote racial equity.
Why?
>Because you're racist.
Why would I do equity work if I'm racist?
>Because we need equity.
Why?
>Because black people are harmed by racism.
So? I'm racist, as you already said.
>You're an evil person.
White evil or black evil?

The racializing of values ironically removes any framework through which whites in the US are to care about blacks, because blacks can't call anyone "immoral" in a coherent way (only within the framework of black values). What we have among most normies in the US is implicit paternalism - no one actually believes in equality except normie Evangelical Christians. But if "good" is shaped by racial experience and not some kind of universal, whites have no obligation to paternalistically care for blacks because black good =/= white good. Humorously, CRT is derived from, and upheld through, laws designed to make integration work, but straightforwardly leads to positions that go very much against the spirit of these laws, because the Protestant Christian values underlying them are treated as sacrosanct (even if actually being a Christian is considered Not Very Nice).

>>16419335
You literally can't. There is a certain group of people who will believe these narratives and grip them until their white knuckles turn black. Facts mean nothing to them. Its all a dogma that has replaced the role religion would have played.

>>16420189
should say
>however, the Protestant Christian values...
thus no one arrives at anti-integrationist positions.

>>16419335
Ok, let's say I do have a racial prejudice. So what?

>>16420189
It's inherently weasely, but it's also a total mess compared to anyone's actual intuitions regarding fairness or justice. Kendi's work is predicated on avoiding doing anything resembling social science research where race is concerned because racial inequality (or ""inequity"") can only be the evidence of racist policy. It is not just considered racist to say "no example of racial inequality is evidence of racist policy" but it is also racist for someone to say or believe "it is possible for there to be racial inequality in the absence of any racist policy." Any problem faced by black people can be (i) an actual problem or (ii) something for which black people themselves are primarily responsible. According to Kendi, if the fact of the matter is (ii) there is no (i), if it is (i) there is no (ii). I refuse to believe any reasonable person can believe this in good faith.

>>16420098
I would ask you if would genuinely no difference in comfort between walking into a room full of white people or black people or Italians or Jews or whatever your race is.

>>16419335
i'm racist and i've never read that book or your post for that matter

I am now hiring new racists. You must be extremely racist to work for me. I only accept the best, most racist people in this company.

>>16420321
If you believe blacks are children like white leftists who promote CRT do it makes perfect sense.

>>16419647
The non-racist whites of today will affect the racist or not whites of the future, undeserving as they may be

>>16419359
such a good song

Fuck off burgers with your cancer culture

>>16419362
>Kafka trap

Thanks for the concept. I'll definitely be using this one. I'm actually not a big fan of informal fallacies, but SJW types and the soi mainstream leftists are obsessed with that shit, so I always try to drop that shit into conversations with them.

It takes an entire book to prove white fragility but you can prove black fragility with one word.

>>16420829
kek

>>16420824
It's just another word for extreme guilt tripping

>>16420153
Their minds would be blown by studying tribal relations in Africa or the caste system in India

>>16419439
Saying that:
If you agree you are X that means you are X
If you disagree you are X that means you are X
If you neither agree or disagree you are X that means you are X

Should be considered a bad faith way to argue.

the point is to trick young women into agreeing with the contents. So that predatory professors can molest them when they're drunk

White supremacists are often accused of having baseless pride, I say these people seek a source for baseless shame.

>>16420062
Well do they?

>>16421102
based schizo

>>16420382
Blacks are children women are children, all minorities are children, even white men are children. People are just children forever and always looking for a way to not be held accountable for it via group identity.

>>16421102
It makes more sense the less you think about it

>>16420824
The majority of the time someone would do this irl they're speaking from a position of power(having the correct opinion gives them power, especially if the interaction is being filmed and could be posted online where the mob will 'do their thing' ie. ruin your life) and know it, so you can't do anything unless you don't care about the consequences. That's the purpose of this sort of thing, ritual humiliation of the plebs who won't play along with the racial atonement rite of the new state religion, by acting out you're not only blaspheming, you're basically a tramp spitting at nobility. Almost all socially adjusted whites intuitively understand this and play along despite the repressed shame and anger it causes, which emotions usually bottle up and spill out in excess against the acceptable target of contempt- you, the heretic, who ensures that they aren't the lowest status class, gives them something to kick too. This is why downwardly economically mobile middle class whites of the progressive variety have that particular mix of self-loathing weakness and venomous hatred in dissonance with residual superiority complexes(as opposed to the resentful feelings of inferiority and basic pride and anger of their conservative counterparts, ie. not repressed), and the general emotional instability and inability to think clearly about any of these topics. This trick of the mantra you repeat to gain social status explicitly shitting on your social status really does a number on them psychologically, only elite progressive whites, whose status is assured through other means, can comfortably go through the ritual, it even has a bit of a pleasant 'confessional' quality to them(the exception are public figures, whose status is tied to fame, which requires that they have the right opinions just like middle class, their status feels precarious unlike simply having wealth). You then see middle class whites imitating this ease that elite whites have in racial self-abasement(pretty much everything the middle class does is imitating the upper of course, with paper-thin pretense otherwise, apart from both upper and middle imitating the anarcho-tyrannically empowered violent lumpen), it becomes high status to (loudly) scoff at the idea that it affects you, because you must have so much status it couldn't. But elite whites dont lose their minds about heretics in the same way, because elites know what the real game is, whereas the middle class white's status is dependent on precarious adherence to this ever-shifting set of correct opinions. You'll notice that a middle class white who has some other status-assuring quality like being particularly attractive or likable will tend to care less about this stuff in either direction.

only question is who caused this new religion and why. the 'cathedral', upper class preventing communism, banking Jews ensuring debt slavery. likely some completely other shit I don't even know about, dumb serf that I am.

>>16421111
>You shouldn’t have pride in the achievements of your ancestors, you didn’t accomplish any of that yourself.
>You should pay reparations and feel ashamed for slavery.

>>16420829
white """genocide""" isn't real incel. You not being able to have sex isn't genocide

>>16419335
This book has been shredded by people from all over, from Ben Shapiro to Matt Taibbi to the shitlibs at the Atlantic. Only the most radical shitlib true believers still like it.

>>16422178
nobody mentioned that

>>16422178
isn't that the definition of genocide, making a particular genetic group incapable of propagating?

>>16422178
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with
intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as
such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its
physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

If we look at the UN convention on the prevention of genocide these are the criteria of definition. Mind you I don't believe white genocide is actually "real" but any argument would hinge on points c and d

>>16419335
Alexa, Show me "Early Life" section of Wikipedia.

>>16423264
DiAngelo was born Robin J. Taylor into a white working-class family in San Jose, California, the youngest of three daughters born to Robert Z. Taylor and Maryanne Jeanne DiAngelo.

the greatest hater hater of white people? is of course the 64 year old lifelong leftist white woman, forgotten waste of the hippie boomer generation. utterly irrelevant, childless as she reaches the grandmother years. There is obviously an aspect of bitterness here, as she knows deep down she's squandered something other women have manifested

>>16419335
It's a false dichotomy written by a jew

>>16423325
she appears to be half WASP half italian

>>16419335
Honestly, if the past few years haven't made you an explicit sexist, racist, and all-around bigot, you're behind the curve. I've literally learned to just ignore the views or opinions of women, minorities, or LGBT people on almost anything.

Do I have to have a dialogue about DiAngelo's racist diatribe? No, because I know from the fact that she is a woman that it is probably trash at best, subversive at worst.

>>16419439
>>16419453
>doesn’t spit at ethnic minorities on the street

ngmi

>>16421111
You shouldn't be proud or ashamed of being white, it means far less than you think it does.

>>16423372
half WASP half (((italian))))

>>16422523
>Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
an ethnic guy fucking a white woman is not "serious bodily or mental harm" dipshit

>>16420829
It doesn't even need to be a word:
>https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/10/us/usc-chinese-professor-racism-intl-hnk-scli/index.html
>A business professor at the University of Southern California became the center of an international academic controversy last weekend, after the school administration received a letter accusing him of using Chinese words that sounded like an English racial slur.

fucking 那个s

Is it pil-pul kino, /lit/?

>>16419986
This is true, I've always been racist, I just don't think racism is a bad thing. What now demonkikes.

>>16419335
White people literally can’t cope. It’s like asking a nigger to cope with Mein Kampf in the face of truth. Just as niggers are inferior and endure perpetual slavery, whiteoids are monstrous colonizers that should pay for their sins in blood. COPE

>>16423912
I'm sorry but the Canadian government has accused itself of actively genociding indigenous women, if the progressive canucks are capable of that and admit it then our governments are capable of anything.

>>16423995
Now you have to live in a place where you can express those views without getting fired from your job or beaten up by people around you. Like Texas or Alabama

>>16423912
>but any argument would hinge on points c and d

>>16422466
Who is making white people incapable of anything? Are you saying white people are nothing but low IQ sheep and cattle that do whatever we tell them to?

>>16424471
People in general will do things that society tells them to do.

>>16419335
Stop being so fragile and proving her point

>>16421546
kek

>>16419335
I just want to point out that the author is white, therefore it's safe to assume that anything she writes is coming from a place of white fragility.
She said herself that white people can't talk about race without being prejudice, so why should anyone entertain this racist's thoughts.

>>16419335
>How can you even have a dialogue about the contents of this book?
you don't, if you really have to you just sage your reply and report this thread

>>16425602
Why are you so afraid of a book?

>>16421066
Nah. I've spoken to adherents of this ideology and they generally manage to blame white supremacy for the behavior of african tribes and dismiss the caste system. If you describe behavior of african tribes pre-1400 (i.e. contact with whites) they will tell you that your knowledge of such was written by white men and the glorious civilizations and empires that were built there have been destroyed and erased from history.

OR, they'll go anprim on you and tell you that whites simply don't understand the 'circle of life' existence, perfectly balanced with nature that indigenous people were masters of.

Because guinea worm infections are perfect and beautiful.

>>16425596
Although she be whyte, she be a woman so she be gettin diversity points

>>16422178
He mentioned nothing about incels. Project harder faggot.

>>16425631
Wouldnt they have to admit that those civs and empires were destroyed by africans own doings if thats the case?

>>16421970
>elites know what the real game is
I think I follow you, but elaborate

>>16425651
in the case that they believe in empires (i.e. they're not 'circle-of-life'-ers), no they indicate that white colonialists flattened that evidence and kept it from history books. If you were to say "but whites didn't colonize the entire continent" they would indicate that, of course not, they only colonized the most beautiful and developed places so they could take anything of value back to europe, and they burned and smashed and buried any wealth they couldn't carry on boats.

>>16419335
this would suggest that the way forward would be to say yes you're a racist and what the fuck does she plan to do about it

>>16424470
holy snowflake
>Waaaaaaah an ethnic guy having sex with a white woman is trying to destroy my race!
dude grow up

>>16427190
>waaaaaah waaaaah blankets are genocide

>>16425809
Host corporate diversity trainings for fat paychecks

>>16424020
well because there's actual proof and policies of wanting to shrink the indigenous population and actual killings that occurred. However to /pol/turds like yourself "white genocide" is just you not being able to have sex because you're too shy or ugly

>>16427193
there are more white people than any time in history. But it's amazing how you have to reach so hard for something to "prove" you're oppressed.

No one is holding you back. You're only a failure of your own actions. No, "da jooz" aren't the reason you can't get laid, incel

>>16427196
>However to /pol/turds like yourself "white genocide" is just you not being able to have sex because you're too shy or ugly
how does immigration factor into this?

>>16427219
"There are more [x] people than any time in history" is proof that [x] people are not oppressed?

>>16427226
how are white people oppressed lmfao?

>>16427234
For one thing they're the only race I can think of which is explicitly discouraged from applying to jobs

>>16427221
Capitalism. Immigrants are willing to accept lower pay and worse working conditions

>>16427239
What does that have to do with not being able to have sex?

>>16427238
>explicitly discouraged from applying to jobs
Uh you mean blacks? Like the Laquisha and Jamal study shows?

>>16427244
It doesn't. You're absolutely right. /pol/turds will blame anything but themselves for the reason they can't have sex

>>16419335
People are angry because of the double standard of talking in generalising terms about white people as being fragile, while if you were to do the same about any other race you would be met with near universal condemnation as hateful, bigoted, stupid, or all of three. Negatively generalising white people has already become normalized in large left leaning spaces.

>>16427245
No I meant whites, unless you can find me a job posting saying something like "whites, latinos, asians and indigenous people are specifically encouraged to apply"

>>16427251
And yet "white genocide" theorists frequently bring up immigration. What point are they making?

>>16427254
the onus is on your to provide proof that they're being explicitly denied from jobs, dipshit

>>16427266
Probably some bullshit about how Jamal fucked their wife or something. Who knows dude

>>16427270
I didn't say explicitly denied, I said explicitly discouraged. Of course it's not phrased "white people discouraged", it's phrased "people of color encouraged" -- this is the exact same thing

>>16427276
Immigrants named Jamal? Where are they coming from?

This entire book is written by a racist boomette who projects her racism onto all white people. It's almost impressive she doesn't notice it either.

Imagine caring what a woman thinks.

>>16419362
Also logical rudeness https://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/writing/rudeness.htm

>>16419335
You're supposed to realise that since you're going to get called racist no matter what, you might as well earn the title.

>>16427278
nice so you still haven't provided evidence for anything. Sasuga, /pol/lutant
>"white people discouraged", it's phrased "people of color encouraged" -- this is the exact same thing
No it isn't, dipshit. Are regular baseball players discriminated against because they let the retard throw a ball around once in a while?

>>16427298
Without using an analogy can you explain the difference?

>>16419335
>You are advantaged because of the race you were born as so now we're having this conversation that everyone of your race should have to acknowledge that your race makes you different.
>We shouldn't treat people differently because of their race
Which?!

>>16427304
analogies are how you explain things to retards. That's literally what they're there for

>>16427314
I'll take it as a "no I can't".
How about this, if a job posting said "non-blacks encouraged to apply", would that be discriminatory against black people?

>>16427313
>You shouldn't judge people based on their wealth on an individual level but at the same time we should acknowledge that people born into wealth have received advantages to get where they are
do you get it now? Now just replace wealth with race

>>16427321
Yes because you're purposely excluding blacks in the sentence. "Everyone *but* blacks". Whereas POC encouraged to apply doesn't eliminate white people

Everyone is racist.

>>16427321
>NO BLACKS ALLOWED!
>POC should apply
/pol/turd:
"vgh these are totally the same thing!"

>>16427337
If it said "non-whites encouraged to apply", would it be discriminatory?

>>16427285
I dunno africa or something

>>16427345
I didn't say "no blacks allowed", I said "non-blacks encouraged to apply". And yet you interpret that as "no blacks allowed". Makes you think

>>16427266
I think it has to do with the fact that if countries keep importing third worlders into their countries then there will be more of them than the whites of that country and eventually their race will no longer exist. Which is true because they cannot outbreed them.

>>16427346
>but what if it said a thing that actually has never been said!
Please show me a company that specifically said "non-whites are encouraged to apply"

>>16427363
I can find plenty that say "people of color are encouraged to apply", what's the difference?

>>16427329
Not really... You can't lose your race.

>>16427353
Yes because it's specifically singling out blacks as undesirable and soley due to their race. If that makes you think then I'm sorry bro. You're not very bright

>>16427373
Is there a difference between "person of color" and "non-white"?

>>16427366
Please show me where whites are discouraged from applying. I'll wait. Instead of playing the semantic games why don't you answer the original question.

You keep harping about how whites are discriminated against but never provided any evidence

>>16423540
The fuck is that supposed to mean? In what world can you equate Italians and Jews?

>>16427245
Based Jew tells it like it is. Despite all the affirmative action, niggas stay trappin out da benz

>>16427392
>affirmative action
You mean the thing the benefits white women the most? I see.

>>16427390
>https://jobs.minnesotanonprofits.org/job/open-your-heart-board-member-volunteer-minneapolis-minnesota-44845
>https://jobsearcher.com/j/lower-school-learning-specialist-fulltime-coverage-for-yearlong-leave-202021-at-the-nueva-school-in-san-mateo-ca-kQg6aK
>https://jobs.minnesotanonprofits.org/job/open-your-heart-board-member-volunteer-minneapolis-minnesota-44845
here's three job postings from the last week with the phrase "people of color encouraged to apply". They were very easy to find.

>>16427366
are soup kitchens discriminating against rich people because they cater towards poor people?

>>16427412
and this shows white people are oppressed...how?

>>16427416
Is it an argument if I ask you a different question instead of answering yours?

>>16427245
>doesn't understand the difference between explicit and implicit
>>16427337

HOly shit you are a retard

>per·son of col·or
>noun

>a person who is not white or of European parentage.

Saying

"persons of color encouraged to apply"

IS THE EXACT SAME THING AS SAYING

"everyone but whites encouraged to apply"

You fucking soulless insectoid ignoramus goyim piece of shit.

>>16427424
Well I seem to be the only one answering the questions so I guess it'd be only fair if I ask a couple of my own. Am I being discriminated against?

btw still waiting for the answer

>>16427423
Givin that there is no difference between "people of color encouraged to apply" and "non-whites encouraged to apply", and given that the statement "non-blacks encouraged to apply" would be discriminatory against blacks, it follows that "people of color encouraged to apply" is discriminatory against whites

>>16427400
>t.

>>16427433
>>doesn't understand the difference between explicit and implicit
the laquisha and jamal study is pretty explicit

>>16427444
but the prejudice it purports to show against black people is not explicit in the job application process, it is implicit
cute word game though

>>16427453
>purposely refusing to hire people based on their black names
nah that's pretty explicit, champ

>>16427444
Why don't you google "implicit vs explicit"?

You might be the dumbest person on this board.

>>16427460
In what way?

>>16427468
He doesn't know what explicit means, just give up, he's retarded.

>>16427463
Oh you want me to google it so I can tell you the definition? Dude if you didn't know what explicit and implicit means you could've just asked. Dude, be more forthcoming with me. I don't bite.

>>16427438
Yes, for a soup kitchen to say "you should not eat here if you are wealthy" is discriminatory by definition.
I have answered your question, now please answer how "people of color encouraged to apply" and "non-whites encouraged to apply" are different (if they are)

>>16427482
lol this nigga actually thinks FWUH FWUH AHAHAHHAHA that soup kitchens are discriminatory towards rich people

This right here tells you everything you need to know about faggots who cry about white genocide

>Ctrl-F "consultant"
>No results
All you need to know is that Robin DiAngelo is a consultant for Silicon Valley companies.
You don't need to engage with her ideas. She rode the early wave of 2010s wokeness and became the perfect vessel to pacify the crumbling middle class, and made a shitload of money out of it.
There might have been some sincerity in her thought in the beginning, but she is ultimately a tool for capital.

>>16427489
Do soup kitchens discourage you from eating there if you are not visibly poor?

>>16427502
>NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO YOU HAVE TO CATER TO ME! Those people who live on the streets are oppressing me ahhhhhhh mommmmy!
please

>>16427480
>Explicit – clearly stated so there is no room for confusion or questions. Implicit – implied or suggested, but not clearly stated.

The Kanye and Laqueefa study showed an implicit bias against niggers. But it wasn't explicit - there were no signs saying "whites encouraged to apply".

Saying "non-whites encouraged to apply", or "persons of color encouraged to apply" is explicitly showing bias against people of European descent.

Do you understand? I get the feeling you're either 16 years old, or just a troll.

>>16427505
Yes or no questions are very hard to answer

>>16427510
"POC encouraged to apply" isn't EXPLICITLY saying "no whites. Like you just said explicit means it's CLEARLY STATED with no room for confusion or questions.

Where in POC encouraged to apply says "no white people"? Oh right.

>>16427520
Is "POC encouraged to apply" different from "non-whites encouraged to apply"?

>>16427510
>laqueefa
epic private parts joke fellow groyper xD. You sure showed the libs there! Based Nick Fuentes kekistan moment! America First!

>>16427524
where does "POC encouraged to apply" say "no white people"?

>>16427526
>I will demonstrate what a robot you are by acting like an even bigger robot

>>16427539
Robots? Huh? What?

>>16427490
>All you need to know is that Robin DiAngelo is a consultant for Silicon Valley companies.
The only color she sees is green.

>>16427537
Answer my yes or no question and then I'll answer yours
lack of answer will be taken as "no, they're the same"

>>16427520
Again you're wrong, idiot. Here it is again:

>per·son of col·or
>noun
>a person who is not white or of European parentage.

Did you see that?

>A PERSON WHO IS NOT WHITE OR OF EUROPEAN HERITAGE

Do you need more help understanding? We went over "explicit vs implicit" already. Is this enough?

>>16427548
yes person of colour usually means someone who doesn't look visibly northern european

>>16427556
and where does encouraging POC to apply say that white people aren't allowed to apply? Oh right.

Sounds like you're forgetting the definition of explicit here

>>16427570
I'm going to copy+paste an answer given earlier in the thread that you must have missed.


Given that there is no difference between "people of color encouraged to apply" and "non-whites encouraged to apply", and given that the statement "non-blacks encouraged to apply" would be discriminatory against blacks, it follows that "people of color encouraged to apply" is discriminatory against whites

>>16427564
White person usually means someone who looks visibly northern european

>>16427537
>>16427524
>>16427520
>>16427510
>>16427556
>>16427570
Who cares, IRL you are fucking underpaid executants at most, fighting for superfluous jobs. You are buying wholesale this culture war shit because you have no culture besides the spectacle. Pathetic.
You should be fighting for the mastery of the means of production that are endlessly making your jobs obsolete instead.

>>16427547
Exactly.

>>16427570
Saying non-blacks encouraged to apply would be an explicit bias against blacks.

explicit.

not implicit.

>>16427589
>You should be fighting for the mastery of the means of production that are endlessly making your jobs obsolete instead.
I already have a personal computer

>>16427583
so where does "POC encouraged" say no white people? I'm still confused on that part

>>16427583
No whites =/= poc encouraged to reply

gosh it's like you don't understand your own language

>>16427601
POC means non-white. I copied the definition of "person of color" twice already.

saying non-whites encouraged to apply is explicitly biased against whites

saying non-blacks encouraged to apply is explicitly biased against blacks


.


The most disturbing part of this conversation is that you don't seem to have the ability to think. Unless I'm being trolled, which is likely.

>>16427600
No personal computer I have heard of can grow food or manufacture x86_64 microprocessors.

>>16419335
I miss Hitler bros....

>>16427613
refer here, you retarded nigger
>>16427616

The fact that someone has posted this same thread for months straight kind of proves it's premise doesn't it?

>>16427616
>saying non-whites encouraged to apply is explicitly biased against whites
"B-but if a thing was said that never had been said then *IMAGINE*!"
wow...incredible. really makes you think

>>16427649
Being outraged =/= fragile

Complacency reflects fragility more than outrage does.

>>16427616
>poor people encouraged to get free soup at the soup kitchen
>UGH WHY ARE THEY DISCRIMINATING AGAINST RICH PEOPLE????

>>16427655
You are either a 10/10 troll, or a mentally handicapped shitskin.

>>16427219
>>16427226
Why is this a talking point? I've seen it before but it's so ridiculous. There are more Jews now so the holocaust never happened? There are more Cambodians so Pol Pot never existed?

>>16427245
That study shows classism, higher class names were not discriminated against. Which is the case with a lot of classic "examples of racism".

>>16427671
You still haven't answered the question after all this time. So where in "POC are encouraged to apply" does it say no white people?

>>16427669
I'm a millionaire, and I eat at soup kitchens every day for lunch.

>>16427678
What is a "higher class" name? A a white english name? lmfao.

You're proving my point

Why are you retards still talking about his?

>>16427678
so where is white genocide happening in the west? I believe that post apartheid in South Africa they were targetting white farmers. I've never disputed that.

But /pol/-types claim that there's some large white genocide scheming going on in the west and I just don't see it

>>16427686
I'm arguing with trolls. Fuck I'm stupid.

>>16427659
Having a victim complex and sperging out over a book called "white fragility" is pretty weak, let's be honest. I know in your head you probably see yourself as some defender of the white race warrior, but you're honestly just a unhinged soimale

>>16427715
nice so you still can't answer the question. Incredible mind there, Mr. Aryan Man

>>16427722
I'm asian.

>>16427735
cool

>>16427735
Ok Uncle Tong

>>16427737
Thanks.
>>16427719
Go fuck yourself.

>>16427712
/pol/niggers believe that everything is white genocide short of lining up minorities against a wall. Some /pol/tards you can argue with and "save", but the majority of them have shattered minds and have become biological waste until death and the energy of their corpse is recycled by the earth

>>16427745
triggered

I dont really get what the end goal of pointing out white peoples fragility. What is it supposed to accomplish really? White nepotism (like any other) will most likely continue to be a thing

>>16427770
There isn't a an endgame. It's just a little gotcha just like /pol/ with black fragility and saying niggers to own the niggers. There's nothing beyond it.

The book is just fuel for non whites on /int/ to trigger /pol/ raiders

>>16427762
It's not "genocide", because it's not a deliberate killing. It's more like genetic suicide.
Imagine millions of Eskimos moving to Japan and outbreeding the Japanese. In a few generations, ethnic Japanese will be a thing of the past.

>>16422178
It’s ethnocide not genocide, use that pea brain of yours a little harder next time

>>16423408
Whites are the minority for ages 20 and under in the US now, seen it coming for years and it’s only going to get worse if nothing changes

>>16427838
>>16427782
Ethnocide is a silly term, because the nature of an ethnicity is not a static thing at all. Everything changes, on a group level, on an individual level, on a cultural level nothing stays the same. Japan is an example of a culture that has undergone dramatic changes in the past 100 years, but you wouldn't know that because you're a weeb who watches garbage like black pigeon speaks

>>16420243
This. Everyone does, but only white liberals have an outgroup bias

>>16427855
Why has japan been so successful at adapting to western capitalism?

>>16427855
Hey if you want to erase your own culture and genetic make up go by all means go for it, I’m not going to be a dumb nigger about it and tell you that you can’t

But you are not going to replace mine

>>16427866
I'm pretty sure asians and pajeets actually prefer and worship white people though compared to their own race. Even in south america which people fear is what america will turn into, the elite class is mostly whites and so are the actors especially comparing them to the average in those countries

>>16427782
The Japs already did that by diluting the blood of the Ainu (the ruling caste) with the Yayui (immigrants from China/Korea circa 300 BC).

>>16427876
Because the united states played a large part in rebuilding japan after ww2 as well rewriting part of the Constitution of Japan in 1946

>>16427888
>diluting the blood of the Ainu (the ruling caste)
u wat? The ainu were aboriginals who were genocided by the yayoi who arrived and established japanese civilization.

>>16427619
What would it mean for me to own the means of production for x86_64 microprocessors?

>>16427904
And in regards to populations assimilating with another, historically only 10-20% actually assimilate

This is why many populations that have been conquered still exist with their own unique language culture identity etc (polish people are one example)

>>16427904
https://visiontimes.com/2019/01/27/japans-famed-samurai-class-might-be-descendants-of-the-neglected-ainu.html

Read up on some modern anthropology, specifically by Dr. Brace.

>>16427719
Do you consider it weak to be outraged and sperg out over somebody using the n word?

>>16427855
Genes also change, the nature of genes is also not a static thing, therefore genocide is also a silly term

>>16427944
Are you Armenian or Jewish?

>>16427954
Since the nature of an ethnicity is not a static thing at all, those are both silly terms

>>16427954
The attempted genocides against them were REALLY silly

>>16427944
>therefore genocide is also a silly term
When I think of genocide it typically involves violence and brutality against real people, I don't think phenotypes need to have protected rights

>>16427962
Organic change is not the same as one that is forced

>>16427877
Time doesn't respect identity, you're trying to grasp on to something that's by it's very nature temporal. There will always be culture, and there will always be an identity, but it won't be you as you see yourself right now but that's ok.

>>16419335

>>16427975
tribes migrating and enforcing themselves on others is a pretty natural human thing. Unless you don't think the English subjugating and purposely trying to breed out the native aboriginals is "unnatural"

>>16427967
You're saying that just because genes aren't static it doesn't mean "genocide" is a silly term? That's actually a good point, I agree

>>16427983
Do you think it's important to preserve indigenous cultures?

>>16427990
As you say it’s natural, so you shouldn’t be upset when the stronger tribe says no and resists, as that is only natural

>>16427994
I don't care about semantics

>>16428008
>I don't care about the meanings of words

>>16428000
No

>>16428019
It’s only natural that whites, as a majority in their own nations, eradicate the weaker tribes through use of silly techniques like genocide and mass deportations

It’s the natural order of things

>>16428019
Good on you for being honest. I'm a /pol/tard and even I recognize that it's a good thing have a diversity of cultures in the world

>>16428036
No, I don't like violence against actual people. I don't care about anyone's culture disappearing or changing over time, that's all sentimental bullshit that's used as an excuse for real violence

>>16423912
>White genocide isn't real because shut up virgin , take your UN definitions elsewhere
Idk, promoting in state funded media the concept that white people are 2 dimensional cartoon villains and are responsible for all "systemic racism" in any given system while violently promoting the concept that whiteness is a social construct kind of counts. Yes, there are people actively trying to dismantle "whiteness" as a concept and reality as the topic of the OP makes perfectly clear. To the point of total dehumanization of people who are proud to be white.

Also stop being so obsessed with people's sexuality, its unhealthy. Also,
>Inb4 memes
Not white, it's just hilarious to me that people can't rant and rave about muh evil wypipo all the time then claim they aren't trying to attack white people

>>16428048
Violence is the natural order of things though. Nature does not respect nonviolence, you're trying to grasp onto an ideal

>>16428040
>it's a good thing have a diversity of cultures in the world
There will always be a diversity of culture in the world, it's just that it will always be different. You want to preserve things the way they are now or were a few decades ago, but things change because we're temporal beings living in a reality where energy migrates

>>16428060
>touching a hot stovetop is nature, nature doesn't respect using common sense, return to monkey

>>16428064
False. As the world becomes more connected and globalized and groups intermingle, there will be fewer and fewer distinct cultures

>>16427276
Are you really this stupid?

>>16428070
did you mean to reply to >>16427990?

>>16427352
Wow. Can't believe you played yourself this hard. Fucks sake

>>16428072
Define culture

>>16428093
>the customs, arts, social institutions, and achievements of a particular nation, people, or other social group.
would you like me to tell you my secret for how I found this esoteric definition?

>>16428072
What will become homogenized are human rights, so you'll have less states rights and more rights for actual people according to a global standard. It's impossible to completely homogenize human culture, things will always develop uniquely according to geography.

>>16428118
I agree it won't be completely homogenized, it will just be more homogenized -- a bad thing, in my opinion

>>16428124
It's bad if you're a small dictator state who wants to genocide your neighbors, but it's good for everyone else

I know I wouldn’t care about culture if my people were low iq and never created their own, spoke someone else’s language, used their inventions daily, wore their clothes, listened to their music, enjoyed the peace their society/law afforded me, etc

Luckily I don’t have that issue and am grateful to those who made the world a better place for me

>>16428108
Cool, you know how to copy paste. But how then do groups of people intermingling delete all culture? You realize groups of people have been intermingling for as long as humans have walked the Earth right?

>>16428129
It will also be bad if you think that a bunch of different cultures existing is an inherently good thing.
Left really fucked that one up. They want local multiculturalism instead of global multiculturalism.

>>16428140
I never said that intermingling would "delete all culture", I said that it would result in fewer and fewer distinct cultures. If I had said delete all culture then you are correct and would have won that imaginary argument.

>>16428134
>spoke someone else’s language
You do know that every language is inherited right? Nobody on this planet is responsible for the languages they speak, almost all our languages have developed for thousands of years, in which many foreign influences have played a part in this development.

>>16428158
White cultures will be going nowhere lest Europeans as a whole are gone

>>16428146
>It will also be bad if you think that a bunch of different cultures existing is an inherently good thing.
What? All that matters is that a culture isn't violent and backwards, I don't care if people dress a certain way or have a weird accent

>>16428158
>it would result in fewer and fewer distinct cultures
There is absolutely no evidence that this would be the case.

>>16428162
there are some ethnic groups which evolved with a language, there are other ethnic groups who had a language thrust upon them abruptly

>>16428182
Do you think a language like French, Spanish, or English hasn't been influenced by other languages and dialects?

>>16428172
https://languageconservancy.org/language-loss/

>>16428196
>some things are black, other things are white
>Don't you realize some things are grey? I am very smart

>>16428204
You interpret reality as if it's a cartoon, you're the one with the problem

>>16428171
It's a personal preference thing, I suppose. You are on board with a global monoculture, just as long as it's not violent and "backwards". I don't want a global monoculture, I think it's cool that we live on a planet with a bunch of weirdass exotic languages, foods, music, etc

>>16428197
Ironically enough, language is not included in "your" definition of culture. Besides, you ignore the notion of new languages being created just as you ignore the idea of new cultures being created. You are afraid of the past becoming the past, but it's unavoidable.

>>16428162
Mexicans don’t speak Spain’s tongue because they inherited it

Non Europeans don’t speak the Kings English because they inherited it

>>16428206
damn you really got a lock on my psychological problems from two anonymous posts

>>16428211
Why does this matter? It's not like the English even speak the way their ancestors did

>>16428210
Language is both a custom and a social institution
Would you say that languages are being created at a similar or higher rate than they are disappearing?

>>16428210
Where are new languages currently being created or forming?

>>16428221
Anon claimed it’s inherited by foreigners except it’s not, it is not their language

Simple as

>>16428001
yes exactly. Therefore if whites are being "conquered" like /pol/ insists, why even care when it's natural right?

>>16428237
The Jewish people reinvented their own language

There’s no excuse using someone else’s unless your people lack the intelligence and will power (or in the case of European people, no need to)

>>16428052
so things that never happened? Adding a black guy into capeshit and having a white super villain isn't "genocide".

>>16428293
So you can't name any language which has been created or formed recently, the closest example you can think of is when Hebrew went from being a priest language to a common language 150 years ago?

>>16428291
It was never about not caring, it’s that you can’t fault someone if it’s natural

Fifth column people and second/third generation immigrants want to attack whites? Ok, don’t hold a double standard when they fight back

>>16428237
English is unrecognizable from what it was 100 years ago.

>>16428319
>English is unrecognizable from what it was 100 years ago.

Imagine being this retarded.

>>16428300
>letting somebody ride a train isn't genocide

>>16428308
Do you think 150 years ago is a long time in the scheme of linguistics/culture? Because it’s not, that’s pretty recent

>>16428323
Calling someone a retard to insult their intellect is less than 50 years old.

>>16428319
not an example of a language being created or formed

>>16428323
The word racist didn’t exist then

>>16428340
Language isn't created in a vacuum. It's a gradual process, just like culture.

>>16428329
What point are you attempting to make?

>>16428300
/pol/ literally believes that blacks being included in mainstream media is a form of brainwashing so that white women will find them attractive. Their entire ideology can be compressed down to a fear of black male virility.

>>16428357
I’m answering anons question

>>16428361
To be fair people on the academic left like to argue that blacks being portrayed as criminals brainwashes real life blacks into becoming real life criminals

>>16428363
You're not though, the question was "Where are new languages currently being created or forming?". The context of that question was that cultures are disappearing -- one anon said that there is "absolutely no" evidence for this, another anon linked to language loss statistics, and then a third anon chimes in with "new languages are being created". Surely you don't think that a similar number of languages are being created as are being lost

>>16428368
Except almost no one does except some retarded buzzfeed shit? The argument is always about systemic poverty keeping people impoverished

>>16428377
You officially can't win an academy award if your movie doesn't have the right representation.
I should have said even more directly, people make the argument that the "white = beautiful" standard is perpetuated by society and culture instead of being inherently true.

>>16428333
It was an observation, not an insult. And you're wrong about it being less than 50 years old, btw.

English writing from 1920, with the exception of some neologisms, is virtually indistinguishable from English today. If you read books you would know that.

>>16428375
>I don't like this answer therefore it does not count
ok

>>16428368
even black israelites inb4 WE WUZ claim that modern rap is a ploy to teach their young men and women to be degens. cant say they are wrong

>>16428402
150 years ago is not "current" even in linguistic terms

>>16428395
>1909: Retard used as term to describe medical or mental conditions
>1971: Retard is used as a derogatory term for someone perceived to be stupid
Maybe you are the one who should read.

>>16428361
Minorities used to cry about the same thing

>you invented film but it’s all white actors or black face

They wanted equal representation in media, they got it and then some

Now they are over represented not just in media but also in politics

It’s not equality, it’s equity

>>16428430
Why is it bad to have positive role models for all kinds of people though? America is a multiracial country it only makes sense that our media would reflect this

>>16428406
No they're absolutely right
The left is correct in general on this, what we see in media influences us on all levels.

>>16428393
>You officially can't win an academy award if your movie doesn't have the right representation.
>I should have said even more directly, people make the argument that the "white = beautiful" standard is perpetuated by society and culture instead of being inherently true

inherently true to what? Chinese people used to think faces with forward growth were evil. Of course beauty standards are subject to change

>>16428428
1968 for that usage. (I guess you don't have OED access?) Still older than 50 years, retard.

>>16428430
which minorities are overrepresented? You keep using that blanket term. Blacks and indians have almost nothing in common despite both being minorities

300 replies every time. Just filter the OP image

>>16428475
>52 years rather than 50
Oh no! My entire argument foiled by 2 years of difference! Keep grasping at straws kid.

>>16428393
>You officially can't win an academy award if your movie doesn't have the right representation.
lol then why has almost every single academy award winner for best actor just been a white/white-passing jewish male?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy_Award_for_Best_Actor

>>16428463
There are certainly things that humans find attractive across many cultures -- are there any cultures where an asymmetrical face is perceived as more attractive than a symmetrical one?
You're not wrong though, beauty standards are socially constructed. And it's definitely true that the old "white is beautiful" standard was perpetuated by art and media.

>>16428442
>positive role models
>the people who drain the economy, not contribute to it
>the people who commit the majority of the crime
>the people wanting to get rid of police

Kek

>>16427855
>ethnicity is not static so it's all relative
Okay so let's gas the Jews
>you wouldn't know because you're a weeb who watches some shit I've never heard of
If I were a weab, don't you think I'd know about the history of japan? You're a real cunt.

>>16428510
all minority groups cause more crime? I thought groups like indians or asians commit less crime than the average population?

>>16428512
Weebs don't actually know anything about Japanese culture, especially conservative weebs

>>16428430
in 2019, black people won 7 out of 24 oscar awards, approximately 30%

>>16428482
It’s obvious which groups are over represented, if you have to ask you’re being facetious or not up to par for the conversation, no need to derail with semantics

>>16428516
>all minority groups cause more crime?
All lumped together as a single statistical group, yes

>>16428523
I'm genuinely curious, which ones?

>>16428523
Blacks aren't over represented, the problem is that you're hyper fixated on any black representation because you live in some flyover shithole

>>16428520
meant for >>16428482

>>16428529
good thing the census or really anyone besides you doesn't lump all non-whites as a single group then

>>16428539
I'm not the person asking "all minority groups cause more crime?" I was just answering the question

>>16428516
In their home countries where whites are a minority they do commit the majority of crime

India, China, Africa, you name it

And in US where whites are the majority that same pattern doesn’t reciprocate, it’s almost like being civilized is a tough concept for non Europeans

>>16428517
conservative weabs? lol
>i married my body pillow because we were living in sin

These treads are always boring circlejerks, this board needs more leftists to argue the other side. When I shit on the right I always get a lot of responses, but when I shit on the left there is close to zero push back.

>>16428535
Yes they are, it’s not like it’s by a little either, it’s massive

>>16428544
???? except in white majority countries white people do commit most crimes.

Wow, what an incredible observation you've made. That the group that makes up majority of the population does majority of the stuff? Groundbreaking.

>>16428551
leftists don't like to argue their points with the other side, I assume out of fear of being converted

>>16428559
There are plenty of leftists who like arguing, but you rarely find them on 4chan

>>16428553
>Yes they are, it’s not like it’s by a little either, it’s massive
That's because you're a hysterical faggot

>>16428558
No, in China whites are a minority, they commit less crime

In Africa whites are the minority, they commit less crime

In India whites are a minority, they commit less crime

In US whites are the majority and they still commit less crime

So? Do you see the pattern yet?

>>16428535
They're over-represented compared to their share of the population.
>>16428558
>majority of the population does the majority of the stuff
Except in the US, where 13% of the population commits 60% of the rape, 50% of the violent crime in general. Can you guess which "social construct" they belong to?

>>16428300
>Adding a black guy into capeshit and having a white super villain isn't "genocide".
Yeah, because that's not what we're talking about , idiot. Critical Race Theory, the concept of white fragility, and the legitimate hostility towards white people exists. If you think otherwise it's because you're a sheltered little manchild, which makes sense hence you obsession with /co/ shit.

>>16428579
Or another way of wording it, blacks are the minority in us they commit the most crime

Blacks are the majority in Africa, they commit the most crime

>>16428495
>Oh no! My entire argument foiled by 2 years of difference! Keep grasping at straws kid.

You're the one who's postulating that English in 1920 was drastically different than contemporary English just because I used a slang insult from the 1960s.

If I identify as anti racist but do nothing to show that I am, am I just a free rider? Do I get the benefits of anti racism by simply making the claim that I am an anti racist and taking no further action nor making any changes to my actions and behaviors?

Also, if I identify as neither a racist nor an anti racist, and am labeled as a racist due to this school of thought that silence = violence, am I not being oppressed? Isn't it the same as deadnaming or refusing to use preferred pronouns?

>>16428361
>/pol/ literally believes that blacks being included in mainstream media is a form of brainwashing so that white women will find them attractive
No
> entire ideology can be compressed down to a fear of black male virility.
Again, no. What is your guys obsession with black dicks. Miscegenation is not just an issue with white women, in fact, they're one of the most ethnocentric dating demographics on Earth. Biological determinism has nothing to do with your weird obsession with black dicks and idiotic strawmen

>>16428579
Except that minorities don't commit most of the crime in america. Per capita asians and indians commit less crime than whites and blacks are overrepresented in violent crime but thye don't make up majority of the crime. Not even /pol/tards or 13/50 memers believe that

You don't even know your own basic talking points

>>16428535
>Blacks aren't over represented,
Yes , anon, they are. They have massive political organizations in order to require racial quotas in films and television.
>Flyover shithole
Of course you're a bougie lmao, why would I think otherwise

>>16428584
Maybe in rural flyover America, but these movies are made in Hollywood California

>>16427698
Higher class black names. I apologize for assuming anyone on 4channel could follow an implication.

>>16427712
I'm not saying it is occurring. I just find that particular argument, which I've seen before, ridiculous. Please avoid being ridiculous.

>>16428608
Globally they commit more than whites because they are the majority, not minority

In US whites are also minority ages 20 and younger and they do commit less crime than blacks (less violent crime IE MURDER, RAPE, KIDNAPPING etc)

>>16428579
>In US whites are the majority and they still commit less crime
except whites do commit majority of the crime in the US?

>>16428622
Anon, your statement implies rural Americans are under-represented in mainstream media. I wholeheartedly agree.

>>16428624
and what's a "high class" black name?

>>16428595
No, I made the claim that English has changed dramatically over even just 100 years because it has. I just used your post as an example.

>>16428642
>Proves blacks commit more violent crime than a population that outnumbers them by over 150+ million

What did he mean by this?

>>16428647
Rural America is underrepresented because nothing happens in rural America, people don't network, subcultures don't develop, literally nothing happens.

>>16428651
Inb4 European catholic names

>>16428673
Non of which are requirements for representation in your own country

>>16428673
These people are growing your food, and you can't make them a few movies? How selfish. I guess we'd better make more Kimbo Unchained pulp niggercore, so Jaykwon doesn't burn your house down.

>>16428672
>>Proves blacks commit more violent crime than a population that outnumbers them by over 150+ million
Except they don't?
>White Violent crime total: 241.063
>Black Violent crime total; 153.341
in addition >>16428579
was saying that "US whites are the majority and they still commit less crime" as in all crime which is a blatant lie

>>16428664
It's hasn't changed that much in a century. You've read books from ~1900 right?

>>16428700
Nobody wants to watch movies about agriculture, kek you're so delusional

>>16428708
Yes, but how many books written today are written in that style?

>>16428712
No one wants to watch movies about negroes, either, yet here we are.

>>16428733
>No one wants to watch movies about negroes, either
Apparently they do because it sells

>>16428703
Your violent crime cherry picked aggravated assault (which some cases are genuinely bad but not all) instead of doing only the ones where there’s no splitting hairs on its severity like murder rape kidnapping which they DO make up the majority

And it is intellectual cowardice to pretend if they equaled population as whites that they would be as civilized as whites, Asians, Indians etc because it’s just not true

>>16428753
>cherrypicked
It's the fbi crime statistics that /pol/ uses to "prove" how bad blacks are or something.

>>16428762
I didn’t say the source was bad, that whoever made the info graphic (it’s no an SS from the fbi website) intentionally did that

>>16428753
>No no no, that doesn't count
Nice argument.

>>16428739
the masses will watch almost anything you put in front of them

anyway, rural people deserve representation just as much as niggers do. it's not about about agriculture itself, it's about being able to see a movie featuring your own culture and people

>>16428779
The info graphic literally proves they commit more murder and rape

And the same can be proven in countries where they are the majority

>>16428778
it's made by /pol/ it says on the left. It's the same as the crime stats on the fbi website

>>16428789
And that’s taking into account they do so despite being a small percentage of the population

This doesn’t apply to just whites, in fact I think they commit more than any other race

>>16428789
>The info graphic literally proves they commit more murder and rape
except they don't? Why can't you even regurgitate your own memes properly?

>>16428803
Murder per 100000

Whites 1,69
Blacks 11,48

Rape

Whites 5,06
Blacks 12,59

From your source

>>16428828
They are OVER twice as likely to rape and six times more likely to murder

The numbers don’t lie

>>16428828
????
lmfao you mixed up the black and white statistics for rape. Look again:
>Whites 12.571
>Blacks 4.412

>>16428848
While only being x% of the population

White fragility is having high enough iq to recognize patterns

>>16428849
mistype
5,412* not 4,412

>>16428828
>Interchanges percentages and total number whenever the truth gets a little too inconvenient
Now here is that legendary /pol/ intellect I've heard so much about.

>>16428651
Anon, I'm not the one who did the follow up research. Go read the relevant literature if you find this so unbelievable.

>>16428871
ok so you don't have an answer. Got it.

>>16428849
No I didn’t, look at per capita again

You can scale their population to match white population and the numbers get disgustingly worse, I’m talking beyond third world worse

>>16428863
You’re the one in denial about black crime and percentage or whole number they murder more despite only being 13%

You are in mass denial which is a form of coping

>>16428888
>You are in mass denial
If only that were an argument, maybe the statistics would magically change to fit your narrative.

>>16428762
There is no way /pol/ made that. It keeps Hispanic and non- Hispanic whites in the same category.

>>16428878
Why do you keep changing the goalposts? Btw I've never denied per capita/blacks being overrepresented look here: >>16428608
But you guys were claiming that minorities (specifically blacks) commit most crime, as in all crime in general like here:>>16428579 and >>16428590

When you got utterly BTFOed you then changed it to "they commit most violent crime" >>16428672
which is also untrue looking at the fbi crime stats

>>16428901
http://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/142889372

>>16428874
The answer is out there if you weren't a disingenuous troll. I'm not getting paid enough to be your nurse maid.

>>16428901
Yes, white hispanics exist

>>16428911
>/pol/ is one person
No, the far right part of /pol/ doesn't consider Hispanics white, so they obviously didn't make that.

>>16428895
Statistics back up what I’m saying

You’re in denial still and have no argument

You literally can’t prove blacks are more civilized than whites or that they commit less crime

You have to compare a few million of them to over a hundred million to even come close and even then it’s egregious at best (because they still kill more people)

>>16428934
>/pol/ isn't one person but /pol/ didn't make it!
Then who is /pol/? Whoever you want?

These are the fbi crime stats they always meme about. That chart was made by a /pol/ poster

>>16428934
>/pol/ isn't one person but this /pol/ person doesn't count as part of /pol/!

>>16428906
>they murder more people in all metrics used Including your fib stats, it’s right there for all to see
>that doesn’t count you said all crimes

The point of it all flew over your head many comments ago

>>16428948
And it proves how they are more violent than whites, congrats

>>16428968
>they murder more people in all metrics used Including your fib stats
murder, yes. Post murder is due to black on black gang violence. As for violent crime and all crime in general which many anons were claiming that blacks commit more crime in general is what I was disputing

>>16428921
Yet that % white includes all the dark ones too.

>>16428948
>>16428960
Your semantics are delightful. Which yeshiva did you learn them? The point is obvious, 76% white America includes every kind of Hispanic as white. Stormfront/pol/ is the part you are arguing over, so you should use their actual arguments.

>>16428981
people in gangs are more violent
yeah that's usually the case. Never disputed this

>>16429004
so do you have an argument or are you just going to call me a jooooo boogeyman?

>>16428994
If you scale that 13% to match whites

So it were 1 white man per 1 black the numbers show they beyond disproportionately do

It’s not even rocket science

This 20+ whites per 1 black to make them seem less violent is obvious, I can’t be the only one who knows how to read percentages

>>16429006
Right so it’s gangs fault? Not the blacks who pull the trigger or join them in the first place? Sounds like someone doesn’t like responsibility

>>16428935
>Statistics are directly against your claims
>"Statistics back up what I’m saying"
Ok kid, stick to /pol/ where this kind of shit floats

>>16429011
That part was fun. Also not using "jew" is a push on the old Bayesian priors.

Anyhow if you cut out the higher crime rate of Hispanics, along with the reduction in total white population, out makes the white crime rate numbered even lower.

>>16429045
yeah well impoverished areas are more likely to have gangs and young people are going to be pressured to join the gangs and the cycle of violence and poverty continues

Do you not think people are influenced by their environment and their parents and siblings?

>>16429041
>If you just multiply the number you get a bigger number
>I can’t be the only one who knows how to read percentages
LMAO

>>16429051
>Anyhow if you cut out the higher crime rate of Hispanics, along with the reduction in total white population, out makes the white crime rate numbered even lower.
k do you have any proof of that?

>>16429041
I've never disputed per capita for violent crimes, dipshit. I disputed retards in this thread saying blacks commit more crimes in general overall and more violent crimes overall.

>>16429050
It literally proves as a race they commit more crime, white vs black the fairest metric for such a comparison being per capita shows it to be true

Even non per cap they number 1 for murder in that chart even though theyRe 13%!of pop

That is astounding, that is balls deep nuts slapping the cheeks eye opening to anyone who isn’t milk warm iq

>>16429059
Aside from the recent fbi stats proving they are more likely to be criminal the stats not shown is how low their iq is, which I would argue correlated with their financial positions in life

Do you think being stupid is a path to financial success?

>>16429079
>Aside from the recent fbi stats proving they are more likely to be criminal
yeah people in impoverished areas are more likely to turn towards criminality and blacks are one of the most impoverished demographics in america per capita

>>16429069
Well, the chart does show they are more likely to commit all crime, but due to disproportionate numbers in population that whites do

But that really doesn’t hold a candle to the whites va black, that’s what per capita is for so that it is 100000 vs 100000

Instead of 200000000 vs 30000000(I’m just guessing at pop numbers here, haven’t looked it up but you get the gist)

>>16429075
But whites commit more total crimes than any other race on that chart.

>>16429065
Yeah on stormfront/pol/ memes that I don't save because I'm not actually stormfront. Go ask on /pol/. But the second part is just logic, if you remove Hispanics then the white population is less.

>>16429094
Except for murder it doesn’t

>>16429103
>Whites beat blacks by .7
Chalk up another victory for the white man

>>16429098
k so no proof

>>16429119
Well, it should be obvious that if a white person commits a crime they are actually hispanic and don't count toward white statistics.

>>16429114
Your so intellectually weak you can’t acknowledge per capita

I’m starting to think you are incapable of even understanding what that means

>>16429134
Statistics aren't some voodoo that you can switch interchangeably between percentage and total number. Stick to one or the other if you have difficulty understanding this.

>>16429114
Wow, over two hundred million people murder less than thirty million do

Yup, that’s a victory for the blacks for sure!

>>16429148
>Gangs living in deprecated ghettos and slums commit more violent crimes than middle-class suburbanites
Who'da thunk?

>>16429143
If the debate is shite vs black then logically you give minority some equity by equaling their population with the majority

Aka per capita

Oh but that’s just convenient because we all know blacks are more violent

Okay then pick any country in Africa and do the same thing to the minority whites

Oh you get similar results?

Maybe someone’s just got some blinders on

>>16429172
>This is how you are supposed to use statistics!
>Look at number! We all know what that means
Come back with an argument kid.

>>16429163
Blacks create ghettos oh wow it’s the white mans fault, it’s the Jews fault, no it’s those Hispanics

No, it’s the blacks

>>16429177
Ad hominem isn’t an argument you got btfo and have nothing to add

>>16429192
Lol Ok

>>16429192
And lol@ crying over the statistics his own nigger lover posted in the first place

Does he think per capita is used for no reason? They just put it up there because? KEK

>>16429119
>someone don't save a bunch of racist junk to their phone so the information doesn't exist anywhere.
Do you understand how persuasion works? That's not a good come back. Well I guess it works for trolls, so here's your (you).

Look ma! I’m denying reality to virtue signal on a diy fishing lure forum!

>my niggerinos don’t commit the most crime!
>posts stat showing the majority of them do break the law
>same stat shows no matter how you read it, muh per capita or not they commit the most murder

What did he mean by this? Lmao

“The mere suggestion that being Jewish has meaning often triggers a range of defensive responses. These include emotions such as anger, fear, guilt, and behaviors such as argumentation, silence, and withdrawal from the stress-inducing situation. These responses work to reinstate jewish equilibrium as they repel the challenge, return our racial comfort, and maintain our dominance within the racial hierarchy. I conceptualize this process as jewish fragility. Though jewish fragility is triggered by discomfort and anxiety, it is born of superiority and entitlement.”

If you were to post this on twitter or other social media you'd get banned ASAP.

>>16419335
https://youtu.be/1zi2wMKh8f4

>>16427219
>there are more white people than any time in history
Not true. Whites are below the replacement fertility since the late 1970's. Probably peaked around 1990.

>>16428319
Yet anyone can read Shakespeare without much hindrance. Brainlet take, anon.

>>16428502
>been
You should really read some news, anon-san.