White Genocide is Underway - Page 19 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Theories and happenings too odd for the main forums.
#14826123
Dave wrote:Rhodesia and South Africa were both induced into collapse by other white people who succumbed to insane negrophilia.

Did this dude just say negrophilia? :lol:

Bro, being white is not that serious. You realize when you're not gonna give a fuck that you were white in your limited time on the Earth, right? No matter what you believe. Unless, that is, you're one of those people that think that the world was created for the white man to hold dominion over all people, in which case that is stupid.
#14826221
Pants-of-dog wrote:The UK projection does not say whites will be a minority by 2066. It says that ethnic Britons will be a minority, but many of the immigrant populations that make up the majority will also,be white. In other words, if you count the white immigrant population as white, whites will still be a majority.


That is hardly an ideal scenario. The British nationalities should not be a minority in the lands in which they have resided for 2,000 years. You do not seem to understand that being an ethnic minority is not an ideal position. You are of the opinion that the racism experienced by minorities is the product of a unique historical context and that whites cannot experience this. In your view, racism only comes from one direction and whites can never be on the other end of it. Therefore you will naturally dismiss any demographic concerns as nothing but whinging about a loss of privilege. And it is irrelavent that whites are still forecasted to be still be a majority in 2066 when the British ethnities will still be a minority among those whites. Within Europe whiteness is a meaningless concept. If there was a mass immigration of Norwegians or Germans to the UK and the British were expected to be a minority among an overwhelmingly white, although not British, majority, this would still be a disaster.

Pants-of-dog wrote:I doubt you will enjoy much luck.


No I don't think Europe will have much luck either. I think that this is a historic inevitability. However I also think that a lot of the Europeans who dismiss this as unimportant or even positive in 2017 will have a very different opinion by the 2050s, 60s and 70s. Millenials will be old by this time, but they will have plenty of years to regret their youthful naivety.

Pants-of-dog wrote:As for the discussion about economic power and political power, neither one necessarily precedes the other. People tend to use power to get more power, so if a group has one, they will try to get the other, but other factors can interfere and often do.


Those who do not hold power eventually do take power once a systemic collapse happens. It's because they are often the ones who would benefit from systemic change. They form the new elite after the change has happened. The children of peasants and factory workers became the new elite in Russia after the revolution in 1917, replacing land owners, aristocrats and industrialists. It's very interesting that the elite in England is changing as well. Now London has a mayor with a Pakistani background. As the demography in England continues to shift we will start to see the British elite change in it's composition and background as well.
#14826259
@Political Interest

Please provide evidence that most European countries will have white ethnic minorities in the foreseeable future. Thank you.
#14826285
Pants-of-dog wrote:Please provide evidence that most European countries will have white ethnic minorities in the foreseeable future. Thank you.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... essor.html

According to a qualified expert people belonging to British ethnicities will be a minority in the UK by 2066.

Of course there is no absolute proof, demographic forecasting is like predicting the weather, but the possibility exists. And it is not a possibility any sane person should just leave to chance.

The maintenance of a demographic majority in a country is within the interest of every ethnicity.
#14826338
@Political Interest

That is only one country, and it has been dealing with immigration ever since it became an imperial power. Most of its immigration is a result of said imperialism. Please forgive me if I do not shed a tear.

Most European countries do not have the same projection.

Finally, since ethnic Brits will still enjoy a disproportionately large number of seats of power, they will,almost certainly not be subject to the same racism that other minorities deal with.
#14826342
In the study, “minorities” are defined as being non-white or people who class themselves in the census as Irish or another nationality.
Alongside migration, falling birth rates among white Britons were also said to account for Britain’s shifting demographic composition.
The report said that a quarter of babies in Britain had foreign-born mothers. The calculations of future demographic trends are based on the current net rates of immigration.
Andrew Green, from campaign group MigrationWatch, said the findings of the study were “important”. He said: “It brings out the consequences if the mass immigration triggered by Labour is not rapidly brought under control.”
Under European “freedom of movement” rules, 29 million Bulgarians and Romanians will gain the right to live and work unrestricted in Britain from next year.


If you look at the Oxford study closely, you would notice that “minorities” are non-white and Irish plus other nationalities such as Polish and Bulgarian. Before Brexit, EU migrants made up around a half of non-British immigrants coming to the country each year but the national referendum has reversed the demographic shift.
#14826362
Political Interest wrote:The white privilege theory does not have a solid basis. There is no empircal proof for it's existence and it is only because liberal Western countries allow such work to be published that this body of theory has managed to gain any influence.


Well, you have to define the term "Whites".
What Whites?
Are Ashkenazi Jews white? Some of them say that they are white, and many of them are indistinguishable from non-Jewish whites.

So you can interchange the terms "Ashkenazi Jew" and "White", and confuse the Normies.

It is OK to say that Hollywood, the FED, the Ivy League, the CNN, etc, are "too white", no problem with that.

But if you go a step further and ask "inappropriate" questions, most Dorks on any discussion board will call you a "racists" and an "anti-Semite", they will accuse you of being "obsessed" with the JQ, etc. etc.
So here are these non-PC questions:

Why are most of these Whites, that dominate and control the mentioned institutions, Jews?
Is this just a coincidence?
They are less than 2% of the population, why are they so hugely over-represented, and why are non-Jewish whites so severely underrepresented?

You will never hear any explanation to these questions, to ask these questions is just "anti-Semitic", but to say that Whites have some special privileges is neither "anti-White", nor "racist".

Some Dorks, who normally deny any inherited IQ-differences in the varieties of the Sub-Species Homo Sapiens make an exception for Jews and explain their dominance and over-representation in Western institutions with their higher IQ, and in this case they are not afraid of being called a pro-Jewish racist or supremacist.

:D
#14826364
Rich people always believe they got their money because they are smarter instead of the truth being they are just greedier. The smartest people do not normally have jobs that make a lot of money.
#14826418
ArtAllm wrote:They are less than 2% of the population, why are they so hugely over-represented, and why are non-Jewish whites so severely underrepresented?
Here we go again... Proof?

As a light-skinned Jew, I am not aware of any plans to take over the world. Can some light-skin Jewish comrade update me and get me back in the loop? /s
#14826857
When the Japanese wanted to open factories in S Africa they were granted honorary white status. Is this because they were able to overcome their pacifism and project their political power several thousand miles beyond their own borders or because they had economic power in the form of FDI?
User avatar
By Ter
#14826861
AFAIK wrote:When the Japanese wanted to open factories in S Africa they were granted honorary white status. Is this because they were able to overcome their pacifism and project their political power several thousand miles beyond their own borders or because they had economic power in the form of FDI?

They granted honorary white status to whoever they could not avoid to give it to.
In case of the Japanese, it was definitely for the FDI.
The FAO send an African to be Resident Representative in South Africa in the early eighties. He became an honorary white as well..
#14827172
On an unrelated note, CRISPR could be a game changer. European traits can be preseved without resorting to breeding wars and can even be transferred to non-European populations without miscegenation. Someone could make a buck out of the Indian skin lightening market.
#14827281
Political Interest wrote:The maintenance of a demographic majority in a country is within the interest of every ethnicity.


If a Western politicians said that, he would be called a "Nazi", and somebody would invoke the Holocaust, that cannot be questioned in "free" European countries.

On the other hand, western politicians who promote the demographic change in their own countries, support the "right" of Israel to become more and more Jewish.

Does that make any sense?

If destroying the ethnic states is such a big blessing, why not apply the same medicine to Israel?

Israel should institute policies that encourage a greater birthrate among secular Jews by providing appropriate subsidies, especially affordable housing. The divide between Israel’s religious and secular communities is often portrayed in the animosity driven by the significant subsidies offered to the rapidly-growing religious community.
...
The absurdity of linking peace with the Palestinians to their recognition of Israel as a Jewish state is glaringly clear because this will neither mitigate the challenging growth of the Israeli Arabs nor advance the peace process. Moreover, it will neither retain the democratic principle of the state nor will it ensure Israel’s Jewish national identity.

Therein lies the danger to Israel’s existence as a Jewish state, regardless of by what name Israel is recognized and by whom.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alon-benm ... 36695.html


As we see, Jews see the demographic shift in Israel as a danger, not as a blessing.
The Israeli government promotes policies that enlarge the Jewish population of Israel, and reduces its non-Jewish population. The Israeli migration, citizenship and even marital laws are clearly aimed at this goal: Israel must become more and more Jewish, mostly due to migration of Jews to Israel, who are replacing the Native Semitic population.

In all Western countries we have the opposite process, and they tell us that there is no danger, that this is a blessing!

The hypocrisy and the double standards are so right in your face!
#14827290
LV-GUCCI-PRADA-FLEX wrote:Otherwise it really doesn't make much sense to me how you can truly believe that five different species evolved to communicate with language and complicated syntax.


This statement does not make any sense to me. What are you talking about?

LV-GUCCI-PRADA-FLEX wrote:Also that these five species somehow share so much DNA while evolving completely seperately. It makes no sense, so I have to believe it's malicious rather than stupid.


We share a lot of DNA with a Gorilla.
Scientists could create a human-gorilla-hybrid, if they wanted, so this hybrid may not be able to re-create.

It seems to me that you do not have any basic knowledge regarding genetics.

A wolf and a Bishon Frise share more common genes, than Europeans and Sub-Saharan-Africans.

Does that mean that a wolf and a Bishon Frise are just "social constructs", and that you can teach a wolf to behave like a bishon, and teach a bishon to behave like a wolf?

:D

And yes, there were interbreeding of so called "Modern Humans" and the sub-species of Humans that separated from the Cro-Magnon man earlier.
They were still able to intermix and create viable posterity.

In previous research, DNA extracted from fossilized bones and teeth of Neanderthals and Denisovans has revealed that the ancestors of modern humans interbred with both of these groups.

https://www.livescience.com/59931-human ... neage.html


The scientists are talking here about Europeans and Asians, Sub Saharan Africans did not interbreed with Neanderthals and Denisovans, and these Homo Sapiens had a bigger brain than today Humans.

The Sub Saharan Africans were interbreeding with another sub-species of Homo.

Now, researchers suggest that a "ghost" lineage of ancient humans may have contributed the DNA for a protein called mucin-7 found in the saliva of modern humans living in sub-Saharan Africa today.
...
That this variant is so widespread across Africa suggests that it may have entered the modern human gene pool before the ancestors of modern humans separated into different regions across that continent, Gokcumen said. Given the usual rate at which genes mutate during the course of time, the researchers estimated the interbreeding event with this mystery lineage "may have happened about 200,000 years ago, but this lineage separated from the ancestors of modern humans maybe 500,000 years or 1 million years ago," Gokcumen added.
...

"About 5 to 7 percent of every population in sub-Saharan Africa has this divergent protein," said Omer Gokcumen, study co-senior author of the new study and an evolutionary genomicist at the University at Buffalo in New York.
...
Future research can explore when and where this interbreeding happened, "and if it happened just once or multiple times," Gokcumen said.

https://www.livescience.com/59931-human ... neage.html


As we see, Sub Saharan Africans were mixing with a sub-species of Homo that separated from modern Humans maybe 1 million years ago.

Do you understand what this means?

Image
#14827408
ArtAllm wrote:We share a lot of DNA with a Gorilla.Scientists could create a human-gorilla-hybrid, if they wanted, so this hybrid may not be able to re-create.
The soviets tried something like this this and hilariously failed at it. No we can't make human-gorilla hybrids or humanizes. Even our closest relatives, chimpanzees share 99%. Humans have 99.9% of their DNA in common.

I am going to get A LOT of hate for this, but this is something I posted some time ago (when a member of the alt right posted a video) and I feel it is relevant here:
...If the right truly cared about genetics, they would advocate for race mixing. Offspring of interracial couples as a rule are healthier because genetic defects tend to propagate in certain ethnic populations (for example, the gene for a non-functional connexin 26 is found in 1 out of 30 Jewish (by ethnicity) individuals but is rarer in say, Asian populations) and intraracial marriages increase the probability of genetic alleles common in a population to combine, forming such traits. The best solution, of course, is to avoid such marriages.
(yes I am promoting interracial marriage)
User avatar
By Ter
#14827421
MememyselfandIJK wrote:...If the right truly cared about genetics, they would advocate for race mixing. Offspring of interracial couples as a rule are healthier because genetic defects tend to propagate in certain ethnic populations (for example, the gene for a non-functional connexin 26 is found in 1 out of 30 Jewish (by ethnicity) individuals but is rarer in say, Asian populations) and intraracial marriages increase the probability of genetic alleles common in a population to combine, forming such traits. The best solution, of course, is to avoid such marriages.


The argument is valid but there are counter arguments:
For instance, the offspring of interracial marriages will have unique histocompatibility combinations, making organ donations almost impossible.
Mixed children of course have identity problems also.
#14827566
Pants-of-dog wrote:That is only one country, and it has been dealing with immigration ever since it became an imperial power.


While it did have higher rates of immigration than most other European countries it did not experience mass immigration until the mid 20th century.

And this is not only in one country. You will find it is the case in many other countries throughout Europe. Unfortunately I do not have studies or sources to justify this claim but if they were to exist, or if they do exist, I am sure they would no doubt support it.

Pants-of-dog wrote:Most of its immigration is a result of said imperialism. Please forgive me if I do not shed a tear.


Except the people living in it did not decide whether or not it became an imperial power and they have little control over what their political class does, even today.

It does not surprise me that someone with your beliefs would not shed a tear. But then you will not be effected by the changes. The British people will be, however.

Pants-of-dog wrote:Most European countries do not have the same projection.


False.

Pants-of-dog wrote:Finally, since ethnic Brits will still enjoy a disproportionately large number of seats of power, they will,almost certainly not be subject to the same racism that other minorities deal with.


Ah yes, the classic white privilege dogma. Unless the English decide to establish an apartheid state then most seats of power will be held by the vast majority of the population, which will not be ethnically British.

And furthermore, you hold the absurd idea that white privilege can exist even when whites are a minority in a country. Therefore you will call whites privileged no matter what they experience.

ArtAllm wrote:If a Western politicians said that, he would be called a "Nazi", and somebody would invoke the Holocaust, that cannot be questioned in "free" European countries.

On the other hand, western politicians who promote the demographic change in their own countries, support the "right" of Israel to become more and more Jewish.

Does that make any sense?

If destroying the ethnic states is such a big blessing, why not apply the same medicine to Israel?


Europeans are in an extremely awkward situation. They are ruled by political elites who make a lot of money off policies which are against the national interests of the countries they rule. This includes the insane immigration policies practiced by most European governments. European states use laws and their media to control their populations in order to ensure they keep voting for party number 1, party number 2 or sometimes party number 3. If anyone is too frank with their opinions on immigration they will be put in prison and called a nazi under the very nebulous hate speech laws.

The political elite do not worry about mass immigration because they will not be influenced by it. And they will just go whichever way the wind blows in order to adapt to the new societies they are creating. Afterall the future elite in these multicultural societies will include people of all backgrounds who will all hold the same interests.

The suport for Israel and the antagonisation of the Arab world is also against the interests of most Europeans.
#14827606
Political Interest wrote:While it did have higher rates of immigration than most other European countries it did not experience mass immigration until the mid 20th century.


Okay, but this does not contradict my claim that a lot of the immigration is due to its imperialist history.

And this is not only in one country. You will find it is the case in many other countries throughout Europe. Unfortunately I do not have studies or sources to justify this claim but if they were to exist, or if they do exist, I am sure they would no doubt support it.


As long as we are clear that your claim is not supported by evidence.

Except the people living in it did not decide whether or not it became an imperial power and they have little control over what their political class does, even today.


Sure. Since I am not blaming anyone or thinking anyone should be punished with immigration, this is not a relevant criticism of my claims.

It does not surprise me that someone with your beliefs would not shed a tear. But then you will not be effected by the changes. The British people will be, however.


Actually, my family is profoundly affected by UK imperialism, and I personally have been very affected by modern neo-imperialism and neo-colonialism by western powers. In fact, the effect these have had on the lives of me and my family are far, far more significant and problematic than the problems associated with immigration.

False.


A couple of paragraphs ago, you clarfied that you have no evidence to support your claim that is it true. Thus, you have no evidence to judge my claim false.

Ah yes, the classic white privilege dogma.


Ah yes, the classic red herring of dismissing arguments as dogma.

Regardless of my beliefs about privilege, it is a verifiable fact that most seats of power in Europe are held by ethnic Europeans.

It is also a fact that those groups,with power will use that power to maintain or strengthen their position. Thus, it is logical to assume that Europeans will use their disproportionate amount of power to maintain or strengthen their power.

Unless the English decide to establish an apartheid state then most seats of power will be held by the vast majority of the population, which will not be ethnically British.


This ignores history and current social conditions. It assumes (incorrectly) that all future elections and struggles for power will take place on a level playing field where no group has a historical advantage over another. This does not describe any political battleground ever. Therefore it makes no sense to pretend that this will somehow be an inescapable fact of future political struggles.

And furthermore, you hold the absurd idea that white privilege can exist even when whites are a minority in a country. Therefore you will call whites privileged no matter what they experience.


I am not discussing privilege at all. It is as if you trot out that word whenever you want to deflect from the actual discussion.
  • 1
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 23

Pretty clear France will be taking a leading role […]

He is even less coherent than Alex Jones. My gu[…]

Yes, and it did not order a ceasefire. Did you ev[…]

Israel-Palestinian War 2023

A new film has been released destroying the offici[…]