Crazier than shit-house rats, the lot of them. Somewhat apropos of which:Suet Cardigan wrote: ↑ Black men: please stfu because intersectionality:
[tweet]https: ... twitter.com/IDWDaily/status/1010273096954236928[/tweet]
Instead of looking up white ethnostate or ethnocracy on wikipedia you have to do deep research to understand the true nuance of the terms. I recommend you take a course in Intersectional White Genocide. Perhaps you could study scholars like Faith Goldy or Lauren Southern too.Shatterface wrote: ↑ I'm going out on a limb and suggesting an ethnostate is a state and that it's culture is defined by ethnicity but no doubt the SJW Right will play their bait and switch games on both 'state' and 'ethnicity' so that ethnostate will mean whatever they need it to mean in a particular utterance and then something else in the next.
You can only really understand the nuances of the word in the original Straylian. It loses the beauty and poetry of the original when translated into English.free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑Instead of looking up white ethnostate or ethnocracy on wikipedia you have to do deep research to understand the true nuance of the terms. I recommend you take a course in Intersectional White Genocide. Perhaps you could study scholars like Faith Goldy or Lauren Southern too.Shatterface wrote: ↑ I'm going out on a limb and suggesting an ethnostate is a state and that it's culture is defined by ethnicity but no doubt the SJW Right will play their bait and switch games on both 'state' and 'ethnicity' so that ethnostate will mean whatever they need it to mean in a particular utterance and then something else in the next.
Well indeed. Just imagine if the retard squad had tried that approach and attempted to soberly pick apart his arguments, instead of firing off air horns in his face. Maybe Peterson wouldn't have become quite so infamous and not made so much money on his book.InfraRedBucket wrote: ↑ I nearly posted that. Notice Peterson giving forthright answer, then backing off when made to think it through.
You could say he's commendable for being willing to admit he's wrong, or hasn't thought answer through but in most cases
his intellectual shooting from the hip doesn't get challenged enough.
Ah, but SJWs believe in the magical power of incantations. Just saying *br*c*d*br* ... err, n*gger, invokes the magic and literally is violence.Shatterface wrote: ↑ If I have to write up an incident report I have to use the precise words that someone used. I can't say 'He called a member of staff a ******' or 'He used the N-word'. That statement might be used as evidence in court if the situation escalated.
There's a use-mention distinction. Using the word 'nigger' is not the same as mentioning it. When you are using the word you are referring to a person; when you are mentioning it you are referring to the word.
You can't offend a word.
In my day only the C Class was allowed to use the word they were defining in their definition.Shatterface wrote: ↑ I'm going out on a limb and suggesting an ethnostate is a state and that it's culture is defined by ethnicity but no doubt the SJW Right will play their bait and switch games on both 'state' and 'ethnicity' so that ethnostate will mean whatever they need it to mean in a particular utterance and then something else in the next.
" *br*c*d*br* "??Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑Ah, but SJWs believe in the magical power of incantations. Just saying *br*c*d*br* ... err, n*gger, invokes the magic and literally is violence.Shatterface wrote: ↑ If I have to write up an incident report I have to use the precise words that someone used. I can't say 'He called a member of staff a ******' or 'He used the N-word'. That statement might be used as evidence in court if the situation escalated.
There's a use-mention distinction. Using the word 'nigger' is not the same as mentioning it. When you are using the word you are referring to a person; when you are mentioning it you are referring to the word.
You can't offend a word.
So, "psychological harm" is on par with "(physical) injury" or "death"? That's the WHO for you; your tax dollars at work. But far too much tendency for all and sundry, even by those who should know better ... ;-) , to be redefining words willy nilly with virtually no acknowledgement of different contexts; equivocation at best.Violence is defined by the World Health Organization as "the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, which either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment, or deprivation" ...
Yeah. Particularly in the "Humanities".
Kiwi Farms is taking a lot of stick for it. TBH, I think this poor unfortunate had so many issues - and with so many people - no-one's ever really gonna know what drove her over the edge. In any case, it's made it to some major news outlets: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -fire.htmljg64 wrote: ↑ Apparently Chloe Sagal has committed suicide.
https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/ind ... re_in.html
Apparently ethnonationalism is like communism. It's advocates think it can cure everything but it's so vaguely defined that when presented with an actual example of the hell that is an existing ethnostate they can say 'No, that's not what we meant, and you are going to have to define an ethnostate for me, because you have to tell me what it is before you can tell me it won't work.'Brive1987 wrote: ↑In my day only the C Class was allowed to use the word they were defining in their definition.Shatterface wrote: ↑ I'm going out on a limb and suggesting an ethnostate is a state and that it's culture is defined by ethnicity but no doubt the SJW Right will play their bait and switch games on both 'state' and 'ethnicity' so that ethnostate will mean whatever they need it to mean in a particular utterance and then something else in the next.
I’m looking for the specific characteristics that Kirb is alluding to when he throws that word around. Especially when trying to leverage it against my concerns.
But thanks for putting in the effort.
Her self immolation wasn't her fault. She was so, so mentally stable and didn't possess any of the obvious markers of the mental illnesses that cause people to set themselves on fire. This is all GamerGate's fault. She doesn't at all fit the markers of the common mental illnesses of the crazies. There are no keywords that prove she was crazy as shit.Tigzy wrote: ↑Sat Jun 23, 2018 4:44 pmKiwi Farms is taking a lot of stick for it. TBH, I think this poor unfortunate had so many issues - and with so many people - no-one's ever really gonna know what drove her over the edge. In any case, it's made it to some major news outlets: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -fire.htmljg64 wrote: ↑ Apparently Chloe Sagal has committed suicide.
https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/ind ... re_in.html
It's looking pretty precarious for Kiwi Farms at the moment - it seems it's become the scapegoat of choice in this whole sorry affair.
We welcome people seeking asylum, doesn't mean you get it, natch.
But all I said was: "That piece of halibut was good enough for Jehovah!"Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑Sat Jun 23, 2018 12:27 pmAh, but SJWs believe in the magical power of incantations. Just saying *br*c*d*br* ... err, n*gger, invokes the magic and literally is violence.Shatterface wrote: ↑ You can't offend a word.
Once again, thanks for the zingers. Ouch. :lol:Shatterface wrote: ↑
Apparently ethnonationalism is like communism. It's advocates think it can cure everything but it's so vaguely defined that when presented with an actual example of the hell that is an existing ethnostate they can say 'No, that's not what we meant, and you are going to have to define an ethnostate for me, because you have to tell me what it is before you can tell me it won't work.'
:-)feathers wrote: ↑But all I said was: "That piece of halibut was good enough for Jehovah!"Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑Sat Jun 23, 2018 12:27 pmAh, but SJWs believe in the magical power of incantations. Just saying *br*c*d*br* ... err, n*gger, invokes the magic and literally is violence.Shatterface wrote: ↑ You can't offend a word.
Wear a cowboy suit - or a cowgirl suit - and you can be one too. Entirely of a piece with "cargo-cult science".Laverne Cox Is Not a Woman
... we in the 21st century have regressed to a very primitive understanding of reality, namely the sympathetic magic described by James George Frazer in The Golden Bough. ...
According to most definitions ethno-state is a country where citizenship is based on ethnicity. So neither Australia 1977 or Switzerland or Poland now are "ethno-states". Nazi Germany (post-Nuremberg laws) and the future hypothetical Spencer-land fit the bill.Brive1987 wrote: ↑Once again, thanks for the zingers. Ouch. :lol:Shatterface wrote: ↑
Apparently ethnonationalism is like communism. It's advocates think it can cure everything but it's so vaguely defined that when presented with an actual example of the hell that is an existing ethnostate they can say 'No, that's not what we meant, and you are going to have to define an ethnostate for me, because you have to tell me what it is before you can tell me it won't work.'
It’s still not clear, whether Australia 1977 was an ethnostate, whether Switzerland is one or whether Poland is. Or do we look back to Nazism or forward to Spencer-land? Do we howl “ethnostate” at any measure designed to readdress the new demographic initiatives?
Feel free to actually address this question at any time.
Something to add to your related collection, an archive of a post that had been linked in a Cheong tweet in that series but which seems to have been deleted by its author, transwoman Katherine Cross (though she apparently insists otherwise):
Myers is a joke. He's trying to express his own self-hatred through Woke Politics to look for sympathy points. In the end it's all about him and how he's One of The Good Guys even if he has no Woke credentials in terms of identity. He doesn't really care about anything but looking better than others.ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote: ↑ https://i.imgur.com/aTjnA8W.png
1) Why are you suggesting that only white people can like Beatles songs?
2) Even your own Herd are starting to call you out on your endless bullshit, you prick:
https://i.imgur.com/xKPOW0s.png
A direct correlation between citizenship and race eh? Or ethnicity I should say, but you do always end up quoting race so the terms are interchangeable in your posts.
Oh look. We have the magically morphing race and ancestry.Kirbmarc wrote: ↑ Basically the whole problem with the alt-right is that they're far too obsessed with ancestry or "race", when actually ancestry/race is NOT THAT IMPORTANT. The SocJus is similarly obsessed with ancestry and race to an insane degree.
The best way to defuse some of the issues we have about ancestry is to stop focusing so much on ancestry, and instead address issues according to the common damage they cause, and address ancestry only to de-emphasize its role.
For example the problems of police killings or of lack of access to good healthcare are common problems, experienced by people of all ancestries, even if to different degrees. Lowering the amount of people killed by the police, or increasing access to good healthcare, are good solutions for everyone who can find themselves facing the police, or who needs good healthcare and can't already afford to pay for it, regardless of their ancestry.
Similarly protecting separation of church and state and secularism, striking down religiously inspired laws, criticizing religiously inspired violence or authoritarianism, and reducing the authoritarian powers of religions over society in general, are goals for humanist/atheist organizations, regardless of whether a religion is made up by people of one ancestry or another.
The obsessive focus on ancestry, rather than on institutions, services, rights, laws and their consequences, income, etc., is only dividing people and alienating them from one another. Nothing good comes out of focusing on "ethnicity".
There is no clear border between "ethnicity" and "race". Judaism, technically speaking, isn't a "race", but the Nazis deliberately discriminated against Jews since 1935 in explicitly racialized term. That there are no ethno-states now is a very good thing.Brive1987 wrote: ↑A direct correlation between citizenship and race eh? Or ethnicity I should say, but you do always end up quoting race so the terms are interchangeable in your posts.
You sure you want to run with that? It’s incredibly narrow, basically there are no ethnostates anywhere right now ....
Given I’ve never argued for this link (and in fact argued for 10-15% diversity and/or 70K immigration a year), well I’ll accept your apology for your past juxtapositioning of ethnostates and “Brive”.
Personally I would have gone with the far broader “A political unit that is populated by and run in the interest of an ethnic group".
But then. You know.
Switzerland.
Isn't race based on your ancestry? Barring mutations, it's your parents that give you the genes that you express in your body, and it's their parents who gave them their genes, etc. etc. If your ancestry is predominantly of a certain area you'll end up expressing a certain cluster of genes which give you an appearance (skin color, facial features, hair, eye color, etc.) that is identified as "race". Of course you could have social definitions, like in the US, when one ancestor of non-European origin would make you "non-white", even if you're "visibly white", but this is still related to your ancestry.
Shared culture is not dependent on ancestry. Culture is taught, it's not innate within your genes. If you want to create a better model of shared culture focus on improving integration within shared institutions rather than on defining ancestry-based quotas.And the blanket assertion that “actually ancestry/race is NOT THAT IMPORTANT.” Thank you for that.
Here is a stinging retort. “actually shared culture is IMPORTANT”
There's no "utopia" I'm promising, I'm not about creating a "perfect society", only gradually dealing with some issues we have now in our ACTUAL liberal democracies while respecting liberal democratic values. You're the one who's all about chasing a mythical past no matter what.And as a follow up, your last paragraph accurately describes the immigrant monoculture more so than the fragmented liberal West. The alt right, mad as some of them are, are the only players on our team in the game.
Tell me. What’s the story with the European Swiss in Turkey seeking to dismantle Ottoman privilege in favour of your liberal utopia. :lol: :lol:
Here's my definition of an ethnic state: the psychological condition of being a boring cunt continually waffling on about ethnonationalism being a panacea for society's ills but expecting other people to define it for you.Brive1987 wrote: ↑Once again, thanks for the zingers. Ouch. :lol:
It’s still not clear, whether Australia 1977 was an ethnostate, whether Switzerland is one or whether Poland is. Or do we look back to Nazism or forward to Spencer-land? Do we howl “ethnostate” at any measure designed to readdress the new demographic initiatives?
Feel free to actually address this question at any time.
They put a subtitle option on TV shows because they want to kill people who can hear.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/mini ... 056695238dMinisters put curbs on trans rights
Groups that exclude self-identifying women from female-only sites are to be protected
Ministers have vowed to defend women’s rights to exclude transgender people from female-only spaces such as changing rooms, lavatories and swimming sessions.
In a significant victory for campaigners, the government has promised not to put the rights of those who identify as women ahead of those who are biologically female. Its intervention comes in the wake of a series of clashes that have come to light in the year since the government floated proposals to allow adults to change their gender legally without a doctor’s diagnosis.
Men identifying as women were permitted to swim in the ladies’ pond on Hampstead Heath in north London; a woman who requested a female nurse to perform her cervical smear was called in by a person with stubble; and a woman with a fear of men was locked in an NHS women’s psychiatric ward with a burly 6ft transgender patient.
Now the government has faced down pressure from Labour and influential backbenchers to tilt the balance further in the direction of transgender rights, as it prepares to announce a consultation on the Gender Recognition Act. This is expected to coincide with the Pride in London parade on July 7.
A statement from the Government Equalities Office, overseen by Penny Mordaunt, the women and equalities minister, promises that “advancing the rights of trans people does not have to compromise women’s rights”.
It said: “We are clear we have no intention of amending the Equality Act 2010, the legislation that allows for single-sex spaces. Any Gender Recognition Act reform will not change the protected characteristics in the Equality Act nor the exemptions under the Equality Act that allow for single and separate-sex spaces.”
It pledges: “Providers of women-only services [can choose not to] provide services to trans individuals, provided it is objectively justified on a case-by-case basis. The same can be said about toilets, changing rooms or single-sex activities. Providers may exclude trans people from facilities of the sex they identify with, provided it is a proportionate means of meeting a legitimate aim.”
The government statement came in response to a petition launched by Amy Desir of Man Friday, a feminist group that seeks to ridicule the notion that people should be allowed to self-identify with a particular gender.
They “identify” as men on Fridays by indulging in behaviour such as mansplaining (explaining something to a woman in a condescending or patronising manner), manspreading (sitting with legs wide apart) on public transport and using the men’s changing rooms at shops that allow self-identification. A group of women, assured they were welcome to swim in Hampstead men’s pond as self-identifying men, arrived in mankinis but were escorted away by the police.
Mordaunt has signalled she is not yet persuaded that people should be allowed to select their gender without requiring a formal medical diagnosis of “gender dysphoria,” in a big shift from the language of Justine Greening, who trailed the proposals a year ago when she was women and equalities minister.
The statement says the current process for gaining a gender recognition certificate “is not working well for the people it is designed for”, with only 4,850 certificates issued since the Gender Recognition Act came into force in 2004. But the statement adds: “That does not necessarily mean we are proposing self-declaration of gender.”
It also emphasised that the July consultation will not change the age from which trans people can receive cross-sex hormones — currently 16 — nor the minimum age for surgery, which is 18.
The group Man Friday welcomed the commitment to defend single-sex spaces, but cautioned that it would be unworkable if people were allowed to change their gender without a formal diagnosis.
Desir said: “Handing out gender recognition certificates on demand removes safeguarding checks. You can’t tell the difference between someone with a need to live in their preferred gender and someone who’s there to prey on women.”
Stonewall, which campaigns for gay and trans rights, said: “Trans people are subject to appalling levels of abuse in daily life and dehumanised by the way the current debate questions their very right to exist. This is unacceptable in Britain in 2018 and it demonstrates just why the Gender Recognition Act needs urgent reform.”
A government source said: “An exemption clause on a case-by-case basis is a commonsense solution to some of the objections raised to the government’s plans to make it easier for adults to change their gender legally without a doctor’s certificate.”
Exactly :lol:
I don't think it's "whataboutism". Note that none of this support, I think everybody involved is horribly wrong, blah blah blah.Kirbmarc wrote: ↑ In order to sell ethnic identitarianism, the alt-right uses three strategies: the first is to basically just point at the SocJus and at their equally dogmatic and inflexible system based on ethnic/ancestry identification, and use the existence of SocJus identity politics as a justification for the alt-right identity politics. This is very effective on those who have been exposed to a lot of SocJus rhetoric, but it's basically only "whataboutism".
I’d hate to be the one pesronibal for buging that code."She created enchanting video games … she taught herself to read despite severe dyslexia."
https://encyclopediadramatica.rs/Chloe_SagalThe art looks like it was made with Click&Play in the mid 90s, the sound effects are taken from a free site, the music is taken from Youtube...
You can add 'historical inevitability' to the elements ethnonationalism shares with communism.
More Sophistry. By that measure if you "manifest necessary faith" (whatever that means) in money/sex/art etc etc
I think he's said before that your highest value is god. So he is using a definition that is not what most Christians would use. I'm reading Maps of Meaning, and he seems to be saying that you have the "is" realm that science deals with and the "ought" realm that mythology/religion deals with. And religion is one way to describe the "ought" realm. It does not have to be supernatural, just symbolic and dealing with how you "ought" to act. It is not something you reason to because it is too complicated and always changing as the environment changes. Or at least that is what I take from what I have read/heard from him so far.InfraRedBucket wrote: ↑More Sophistry. By that measure if you "manifest necessary faith" (whatever that means) in money/sex/art etc etc
that is your God.
Nope not convincing at all.
Your argument breaks down with your first points strained framing.Shatterface wrote: ↑ SJW: Society is breaking down because of individualism. We need communism to give us a sense of shared identity.
Between this and the liberal call to the inevitability of global cultural mixing, well there are just so many trains on these tracks. ..Shatterface wrote: ↑You can add 'historical inevitability' to the elements ethnonationalism shares with communism.
It’s hilarious that the key definition Kirb deployed for “ethnostate” (direct citizen-racial/ethnic construct) is the one thing that Communism isn’t.Shatterface wrote: ↑You can add 'historical inevitability' to the elements ethnonationalism shares with communism.
Brive1987 wrote: ↑Between this and the liberal call to the inevitability of global cultural mixing, well there are just so many trains on these tracks. ..Shatterface wrote: ↑You can add 'historical inevitability' to the elements ethnonationalism shares with communism.
