Thread: The White Race

Originally Posted by DrB0b

the greatest cavalry the world has ever seen

Oy, wot about the charge of the light brigade?


When I look at the distinctly mediocre performance of the modern superior white male at our own (white) universities, compared to east Asians, south Asians, Jews and women, it is abundantly clear to me that the dominance of the white man is so inherent it does not need to be demonstrated.

Originally Posted by sabang

Oy

I knew it. You is a Joo!

Originally Posted by Koojo

New Zealand is a good example of a superiour culture conquering a lesser culture.
And there can't be any arguement.

What about the whole Treaty of Waitangi thing? Or the fact that Maori culture is very much a part of NZ culture?

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

Originally Posted by Koojo

New Zealand is a good example of a superiour culture conquering a lesser culture.
And there can't be any arguement.

What about the whole Treaty of Waitangi thing? Or the fact that Maori culture is very much a part of NZ culture?

What about it?

The English signed the Treaty because completely subjugating the Maori was financially and militarily beyond them at the time. Maori culture is as much a part of Kiwi culture that some of the language is in the vernacular / common usage.

So how does that equate to an indisputable example of a 'superior' culture conquering a 'lesser' culture?

Here's shrewdpunter then:



Blue must be one of the two lumps behind him.

good OP if you ask me.

Whites are far superior to the SEA monkey men - in all regards

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

So how does that equate to an indisputable example of a 'superior' culture conquering a 'lesser' culture?

How about a disgraceful Maori culture that not only practices cannibalism but does it when there's plenty of other food , being civilising one that does not ?

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

Originally Posted by Koojo

New Zealand is a good example of a superiour culture conquering a lesser culture.
And there can't be any arguement.

What about the whole Treaty of Waitangi thing? Or the fact that Maori culture is very much a part of NZ culture?

....or, very much apart of the very-white dominated culture.

Even though The Land of the Great White Cloud is being over-run by Pacific-Asian hordes, it still remains "quite white".

Diversity and harmony for appearance sake.

Kia Ora.

Don't try to talk about things which you don't know anything about Jeff, you just end up looking silly.

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

Don't try to talk about things which you don't know anything about Jeff, you just end up looking silly.

But I might, though.

It might possible that I know NZ better than a you....a ginger native.

Don't pretend to know me or my background, ok?

You [et al] haven't a clue about me.

Originally Posted by Rural Surin

But I might, though.

Might, but don't.

Originally Posted by Rural Surin

Don't pretend to know me or my background, ok?

You [et al] haven't a clue about me.

Says the guy who just repeats as fact something he's read on an internet forum about another poster.

*Ring-ring* Hello? Jeff, it's the clue phone for you.

[QUOTE="DrB0b"]Race, as applied to Humans, is a political word these days, the idea of it having a scientific meaning died out along with using leeches to cure polio and diagnosing criminality by the shape of the bumps on your head. It's a convenient word to use in everyday speech when referring to large populations or large cultures but don't kid yourself that it has any scientific or biological meaning when applied to humans, it doesn't

Originally Posted by DrB0b

Quote:

Originally Posted by blue

Not true , because Europeans have Neanderthal DNA , Asians some other humanoid DNA, while Africans have no extra, so on that basis you could argue for race.

On that basis you could argue that you're an ignorant twat that knows bugger all about genetics. Actually there would be no argument, it's patently obvious you're an ignorant twat.

,

No Bob but you are wrong, scientists classify living beings into sub groups, chimpanzees and Humans are in the same group -Apes
if you wish you could stop there and say that as those two share over 98.8% DNA no need to sub classify any further.
But scientists do , and keep doing and humans are divided into 3 main groups or families ,European Asian and African , commonly called races .
they probably share 99%+DNA , but not near enough to 100 % to say there no such thing as race .
Just like the Polar bear and Brown bear split ,and evolved separately ; no good scientist would not divide the two .

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

The English signed the Treaty because completely subjugating the Maori was financially and militarily beyond them at the time. Maori culture is as much a part of Kiwi culture that some of the language is in the vernacular / common usage.

So how does that equate to an indisputable example of a 'superior' culture conquering a 'lesser' culture?

And as you claim to be 63/64ths white I'm sure the cuzzie bro's down at the Marae will welcome your skinny pakeha arse home.

Originally Posted by blue

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

So how does that equate to an indisputable example of a 'superior' culture conquering a 'lesser' culture?

How about a disgraceful Maori culture that not only practices cannibalism but does it when there's plenty of other food , being civilising one that does not ?

British royalty dined on human flesh (but don't worry it was 300 years ago) | Mail Online

"Even as they denounced the barbaric cannibals of the New World, they applied, drank, or wore powdered Egyptian mummy, human fat, flesh, bone, blood, brains and skin."

Sick fucks these European royals.

Unfortunately, as monotheism has done for centuries, libtard dogma inhibits proper and thorough study and debate on the crucial issues, in this case racial differences. Something which could actually move us closer to interracial peace than liberal attempts to create reality out of wishful thinking, the ultimate consequence of which will be greater interracial friction. Simply because their fantasy is patently irreconcilable with reality.

It is such an explosive issue that few dare touch it objectively.

There are distinct differences, as the few studies done have already alluded to. It'll take some backbone to do it properly. Something that, along with critical intelligence, is sorely lacking in today's world.

As DrBob, so ably demonstrates.

^ I think you may be confused with what DrBob is saying.

Regardless of the physical differences that are apparent we are all specimens of Homo sapien. We meet this criteria because we are reproductively compatible...we can mate with each other and produce viable offspring.

I thought the analogy that DrBob made with Canis lupus familiaris was enough to explain it to all.

Humans adapt to their surroundings and education. This can change the way we act and behave but it doesn't make us fundamentally different. Certainly not different enough to warrant sub-grouping the species.

Invention and development could well be the result of elitism in western culture rather than anything else. However, that is just as contentious amongst many....