← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Marcus Porcius Cato
Thread ID: 7785 | Posts: 28 | Started: 2003-07-02
2003-07-02 13:42 | User Profile
As many of you have already noted, the "High IQ" Shysteritzim are clearly our intellectual superiors. How did we ever get along before they imperiously took us in hand and seized hegemonic control over ALL our institutions?
[url=http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=313538&sw=skills]Who needs the stupid, brutish Goyim, anyway?[/url]
2003-07-02 14:32 | User Profile
The evidence that Ashkenazim Jews have a higher average IQ then white gentiles is pretty strong. However, talk of intellectual superiority is way off base. First, the standard deviation is much smaller among such Jews. White gentiles are thus more likely to be 'geniuses.' Second, IQ is only one measure of intellectual accomplishment, albeit an important one.
2003-07-02 14:50 | User Profile
117, 105, 100, 85.
IQ's.
We, at 100, are looked down by the Jews, 117, as we look down on the blacks, 85.
It's that simple.
However, in real numbers, I'm quite sure there are a far greater number of whites in the over 117 bracket, than there are Ashkenezai Jews.
Has anyone seen any real population figures concerning this?
Another thing is the Asians with their billions, and a 105 IQ. There are certainly more of them in the 117 plus that whites and Jews combined.
It's all in the organization, it seems to me.
2003-07-02 16:10 | User Profile
Like The_Skunk says, Jews are back alley swindlers, that's all.
2003-07-02 16:56 | User Profile
The Jews, though guileful and cunning grifters non pareil , are LOW IQ MORONS!"
This generalization isn't particularly enlightening. I think overestimating your enemy is safer than underestimating him. Along similar lines, if I was in one of those high noon shootouts made famous in film, I would pump all five rounds into my opponent, rather than be satisfied that my single shot was fatal.
The Ashkenazi Jews running the USA into the ground are qualitatively different from the Arab Jews in Israel, as well the Arabs who were no doubt included in the survey.
I agree with you that the comparisons between Ashkenazis and Whites are probably stacked in a similar fashion. I forget where I read that Episcopalians, for example, compare much more favorably with the Ashkenazim than do members of the general White population. I myself look down on the average Ashkenazi, being more than a mean deviation higher than he on the IQ ladder, as he looks down on the "average White" who is in turn looking down on the average "African-American."
;)
2003-07-02 17:10 | User Profile
It's easy to claim superior IQ when you take no part in converting the world or civilizing humanity. Christianity, however, has orders to "go forth and convert all nations." Jews have no such responsibility, or ability for that matter. If you content yourself to being a parasite class, 3-4 per cent of a population, living by wits and guile and conspiracy, and leave it to others to take in the rest of world, the outcome is inevitable. Gentiles will recruit from the lesser talent pools as well as the higher because they are ordered to. In other words, Jews are a closed club, and historically encourage their lessers to leave, and their betters to multiply. But they have never provided the moral basis of a stable civilization, as the Zionist experience vividly demonstrates. As such, they are rightly subordinated to the superior moral character and even temperment of Christianity.
2003-07-02 18:39 | User Profile
There are too many racial epithets being used in this thread; if we want to convince all the guests and not give them the impression that we are all "haters," we need to be objective and professional. I like to think of OD as the only internet forum where one can discuss politically incorrect ideas without the conversations dropping to the level of "you are a kke, Niger, Sp*c, etc." Let's keep this forum professional.
Aside from that, regarding Jewish high IQ, it is specifically the Ashkenazi Jews who have the IQ average of 117. But Israel is not only Ashkenazi, but also has the lesser intelligent Shephardic Jews, as well as Black Jews and Arabs. Also, I am assuming that the brain drain effect plays a part in Israel: all the higher IQ ones leave and get jobs in the White nations, while the less intelligent ones stay in Israel.
Now, the reason why Whites produce more geniuses is because they have an individualist personality that allow them to use their IQs in unconventional ways which leads to new ideas, while East Asians and Jews have a more collectivist personality and can only use their high IQs in conventional ways.
Regards,
Ares
2003-07-02 18:47 | User Profile
*Originally posted by Ares@Jul 2 2003, 13:39 * ** Let's keep this forum professional. **
Thank you, Ares. This is specifically addressed in the Board Guidelines.
2003-07-02 19:31 | User Profile
Ares, you completely misunderstand the relation of white gentile to Ashkenazim IQ. It is not about 'individualism' v. 'collectivism.' It is about the fact that we have to look at more than the mean IQ, but also at the standard deviation. The mean among white gentiles is lower, but the standard deviation is much greater.
2003-07-02 19:36 | User Profile
*Originally posted by iwannabeanarchy@Jul 2 2003, 13:31 * ** It is not about 'individualism' v. 'collectivism.' **
Yes, it is. Professor Kevin Macdonald has explained how Whites are individualist at the genetic level, While East Asians and Jews are more collectivist, see [url=http://www.csulb.edu/~kmacd/]http://www.csulb.edu/~kmacd/[/url] But, yes, I do understand that White IQ has a higher standard deviation. But, creativity is the combination of a high IQ and the individualist personality trait.
Regards,
Ares
2003-07-03 01:41 | User Profile
Ares, while it is true that white gentiles has a genetic pre-disposition to individualism, this does not change the fact that you completely overlooked the overriding issue of the differing standard deviations in IQ scores, when you compared white gentile and AN Jew intelligence.
2003-07-03 01:57 | User Profile
There is a stupid fixation on IQ tests amongst too many. Who writes these IQ tests? Who invented psychotherapy in the first place? Think for yourselves and don't believe everything you're told. IQ tests are an artificial means of testing potential intelligence, and by no means do they test actual intelligence.
Intelligence besides is no guarantee of success. Witness the humble cockroach: it was here before us, it'll be here after us, it has spread across the globe and lives in almost every environment.
Who is going to argue that this is because the cockroach is more intelligent?
Think about what you are saying.
2003-07-03 05:06 | User Profile
The SD for jews and E. Asians is less than 9 points. It's 15 points for Caucasians. I remember Prodigal had some info that credited E. Asians with an SD of 12 or so, but I've never seen that anywhere else - and I suspect whoever put that out was probably factoring in the lower IQ's of SE Asians - and leaving the overall average for E. Asians where it is. Of course the tests don't measure everything, we know that. E. Asians and jews are very ... uncreative is a nice way to put it. They can learn and understand things, jews are good at putting some ideas together, and really good at stealing credit for the work of others and burying any complaints and/or lawsuits under cries of "anti-semitism" and a jew run court system, never mind the endless publicity and praise the jewish run "info" industries push day after day praising their own, keeping the myths going. Jews and E. Asians - in fact non-whites in general, are usually awful at divergent and lateral thinking. Jews and E. Asian, on average, put in much more work academically, challenge themselves more, make their kids work harder in school, and thus more of them reach their cognitive potential than whites. Of course, much of the "slack" perfermance by whites has been by design, in the conscious destruction of white society, white institutions, by the jews.
Interesting side note; whites are the only group who average the same on both "halves" of IQ tests, meaning they tend to score evenly between verbal and visuospatial. E. Asians tend to score higher than whites on the visuospatial portion of most IQ tests and lousy to average on the verbal reasoning portions. The lopsided performance holds true for blacks and mestizos, etc., non-white groups seem to score a bit better on the visuospatial portion of the tests than they do on the verbal - but only E. Asians average higher than whites on the visuospatial. As of yet, most psychometricians don't know why non-whites perferm more strongly on visuospatial tests than verbal, but I and I'm sure most of you have your own ideas, and some of them probably aren't all that flattering B). Jews have a very high average on the verbal, but stink on the visuospatial. Jewish academics and white academics trying to curry favor with their "masters" have been trying to pump up the visuospatial averages for jews over the last decade, trying to make it the same, or higher, than the average for whites. They've also been fudging the overall average for jews. It's jumped from about 110 to 117 in ten years. Pure crap. The same bunch has also been jockeying results to push the averages DOWN for whites on results by using dubious criteria in "norming" the tests. Even Rushton has been guilty of using some of this less than honest info that pushes the averages for white Europeans below 100, in order to somehow give the E. Asians a larger bulge in average.
AntiYuppie hits the nail on the head with his statements. If you picture E. Asians or jews without contact, without exposure to the ingenuity, the inventiveness, the creativeness of European whites, both groups would be several centuries behind their current situations. People may want to argue this till the cows come home, but all one has to do is point at most of the innovations in science, engineering, medicine, IT, etc. They don't come from Asians or jews, just those dumb ol' white males.
2003-07-04 01:06 | User Profile
*Originally posted by Alka@Jul 2 2003, 19:57 * ** Witness the humble cockroach: it was here before us, it'll be here after us, it has spread across the globe and lives in almost every environment.
Who is going to argue that this is because the cockroach is more intelligent?
Think about what you are saying. **
IQ testing is different from psychotherapy.
How does thinking about who invented IQ tests debunk the validity of the tests? Does thinking about who invented the tests for cancer debunk the cancer tests?
IQ tests give a ball park figure of one's innate potential, all the evidence is at [url=http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php?showtopic=7567&hl=]http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php...wtopic=7567&hl=[/url] and [url=http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php?showtopic=7569&hl=]http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php...wtopic=7569&hl=[/url]
Before talking about success, you need to define it. If reproduction prolificacy was what we limited the definition of "sucess" to, then yes, cochroaches would be superior to Whites, as well as Blacks and Mexicans. But, my definition of success includes the ability to create technologically advanced civilizations, and for this, you need high IQs.
Regards,
Ares
2003-07-04 14:39 | User Profile
How does thinking about who invented IQ tests debunk the validity of the tests? Does thinking about who invented the tests for cancer debunk the cancer tests?
Think about it some more, then.
IQ tests give a ball park figure of one's innate potential
You said it right there. Potential intelligence does not equal actual intelligence.
Before talking about success, you need to define it. If reproduction prolificacy was what we limited the definition of "sucess" to, then yes, cochroaches would be superior to Whites, as well as Blacks and Mexicans.
I wasn't talking about numerical superiority. Cockroaches have colonized almost every environment on earth (as has mankind), and it is their adaptibility I was referring to. 'Primitive' or lesser evolved species are more able to adapt; highly-evolved creatures (such as anteaters, for instance) are specialized and tend not to adapt well at all to change in their environment. Whereas us humans - and cockroaches - seem to thrive on change. We humans are successfully primarily because of our adaptability.
But, my definition of success includes the ability to create technologically advanced civilizations, and for this, you need high IQs.
I didn't know the ancients tested themselves to define their collective IQ before they set out to build the pyramids and write the classics of philosophy. lol
If that's your definition of success, then it is obvious that the Jews are the least intelligent people on the planet, because they parasitize the civillizations of others and, like parasites, cannot survive on their own. Parasites are the lowest form of life.
I have more respect for the cockroaches.
Draw your own conclusions further.
2003-07-04 20:16 | User Profile
Potential intelligence does not equal intelligence.
So how does this comment debunk the validity of IQ tests? Potential IQ is what is coded in the genes, while actual intelligence is just the phenotypical expression of the genetic potential. So, actual phenotypical intelligence equals the genetic potential.
Cockroaches have colonized almost every environment on earth (as has mankind), and it is their adaptibility I was referring to.
You can also find ants in almost every environment. But this just means that these insects' bodies are biologically built to be able to withstand variations in temperature and that they can digest a large variety of energy sources. I agree that these are good traits, and I would like to see the genetic engineering of a new human species that has the ability to use a great variety of energy sources, like solar energy and nuclear energy. I would also like to see this new human species have a more robust body so that they can tollerate a much wider range of temperatures, like the atmosphere on Mercury or Pluto.
**We humans are successfully primarily because of our adaptability. **
The adaptation ability of humans has to do with having higher IQs than non-human species. We can study the different environments like that on the Moon, in Alaska, and under the ocean. We then study the human biology and see how our bodies would be affected by these extreme environments. Finally, we build technology to protect our bodies from these environments: we build space suits for the moon, submarines for the ocean, and proper equipment to prepare us for Alaska. All this is can be done because of our higher IQs. Thus, the higher our IQs, the more adaptable we become, which again proves my original point.
I didn't know the ancients tested themselves to define their collective IQ before they set out to build the pyramids and write the classics of philosophy.
They didn't. What was your point in making this statement?
**If that's your definition of success, then it is obvious that the Jews are the least intelligent people on the planet, because they parasitize the civillizations of others and, like parasites, cannot survive on their own. **
Jews have the IQ to sustain technologically advanced civilizations, the only problem is that out of all races, they have the least number of members. But aside from that, every race parasitizes other ones. Whites were parasites on Blacks when they enslaved them. And consider all the wars Whites started in the past just to take over other people's resources. And today, White nations overthrow the governments of other nations in order to change their government to one that would facilitate the inclusive fitness of Whites.
Regards,
Ares
2003-07-04 21:48 | User Profile
So how does this comment debunk the validity of IQ tests?
My comments do no such thing and were not intended to. I recommended you think about it for yourself, which obviously you haven't done. I'm not here to hold your hand.
Think.
So, actual phenotypical intelligence equals the genetic potential.
Sociobiology is grossly over-rated and questionable. I should know, I wasted far too many years studying it. Human beings - even animals - are not machines. DNA is by no means understood, nor is the human mind, not even the miniscule mind of a flatworm is understood... The arrogance of assuming you can prove anything with your blunt little tools is simply laughable. Only the scientifically ignorant would believe in your absolutes.
You can also find ants in almost every environment. But this just means that these insects' bodies are biologically built to be able to withstand variations in temperature and that they can digest a large variety of energy sources.
No this is not so. Ants, bees (collective insects in general including spiders) modify their environment to shelter themselves from the variations in temperature etc., and even regulate the internal temperatures of these artificial shelters. It is not the ants' physical suitability which dictates their success: it is the cooperative nature of the insect which does.
On a larger scale, there are human beings who have cooperative associations, and for that fact alone, do they enjoy success. If humans did not cooperate or modify their environments we would not even rate the level of hunter-gatherers.
Intelligence rarely has any connection with success (financial, reproductive, whatever), however, cunning and social skills/cooperation do - this is what the Jews have, and that's all. One does not have to be intelligent to be successful.
What was your point in making this statement?
That Intelligence Quotients were not necessary for the ancients to do whatever. Your fixation on an artificial and in my opinion flawed and inaccurate means of testing potential intelligence is rather amusing in this light.
Whites were parasites on Blacks when they enslaved them.
Really. Interesting perspective. Are you sure you're a pro-White racialist? I'm increasingly convinced you're not.
** And consider all the wars Whites started in the past just to take over other people's resources. And today, White nations overthrow the governments of other nations in order to change their government to one that would facilitate the inclusive fitness of Whites. **
Don't be vague. Which wars are you talking about? Which people were deprived of what by Whites? Which 'White' nations are you talking about in today's terms?
Wars are not instances of parasitization: if you must make a naturalistic analogy, war is like a lion capturing an antelope. Lions are not parasites, they are predators, significant difference.
Also you are assuming you believe I (or Whites) recognized "other people's" right to these resources, or that these "people" (whoever you have in mind) used the resources Whites have taken, and were deprived of them forcibly.
2003-07-04 22:11 | User Profile
Sociobiology is grossly over-rated and questionable.
You are not reading the latest research. Check out the following books: [url=http://home.comcast.net/~neoeugenics/bib.htm]http://home.comcast.net/~neoeugenics/bib.htm[/url]
I should know, I wasted far too many years studying it.
You studied the wrong research. See the above list of books.
Human beings - even animals - are not machines.
Yes we are, we are organic machines, all functioning on the laws of physics.
**DNA is by no means understood, nor is the human mind, **
Yes, we do understand a lot about the brain, see the above list of books.
** The arrogance of assuming you can prove anything with your blunt little tools is simply laughable. Only the scientifically ignorant would believe in your absolutes.**
You are reading the wrong books. See the list of books above.
Intelligence rarely has any connection with success (financial, reproductive, whatever)
Yes it does, read the above list of books. But based on your arguments, since you say intelligence has no meaning, Blacks would be no different from Whites then with respect to intelligence.
That Intelligence Quotients were not necessary for the ancients to do whatever.
I never said the ancient Whites used IQ tests. So what was your point of suggesting it?
Don't be vague. Which wars are you talking about? Which people were deprived of what by Whites? Which 'White' nations are you talking about in today's terms?
Black slaves, for one. Then the American Indians, they were slaughtered by Whites for their land. Then English Whites took over India for their land and resources. And Napoleon, Alexander the Great, Ceasar, they all created empires, that is, stealing other people's resources. And the current Iraqi war, the economic sanctions on various nations, etc. are done because these nations were not willing to facilitate the inclusive fitness of Whites. Thus, Whites have been major racial parasites as well.
Wars are not instances of parasitization: if you must make a naturalistic analogy, war is like a lion capturing an antelope. Lions are not parasites, they are predators, significant difference.
Merriam-Webster dictionary definition of "parasitism": an intimate association between organisms of two or more kinds; especially : one in which a parasite obtains benefits from a host which it usually injures.
Thus, in wars, one group may benefit, while other group loses. Same as lions: they benefit by killing antelopes, while the antelope loses. Same with Jews, they are the "predators/parasites" upon Whites.
Regards,
Ares
2003-07-04 23:19 | User Profile
Regarding "you're not reading the latest research and you're reading the wrong books" BULLSHIT - I studied sociobiology for YEARS and spent a lot of time and money on it: I worked in a related field for about five years and several close relatives of mine are physicians (we talk). I've probably willfully forced myself to forget more than you'll ever figure out about anthropology and sociobiology.
Save your puerile admonishments for those who don't know enough to be fooled!
Yes we are, we are organic machines, all functioning on the laws of physics.
Do you believe in free will? If you do, then you don't believe in sociobiology. Simple.
Yes, we do understand a lot about the brain
Your arrogance is only overwhelmed by your ignorance. No, we do not, refer to any up-to-date reputable physican for simple confirmation, or read this short and exceptionally simple [url=http://www.alternativescience.com/no_brainer.htm]article[/url] for starters.
Black slaves, for one.
Blacks didn't benefit from slavery? You're forgetting that blacks sold other blacks to Whites. And the descendants of the blacks that were sold to Whites - in what was a perfectly legal transaction accepted and practiced worldwide at the time - wound up very well-off indeed. If you're looking for the parasite in this equation, it's not the Whites.
Then the American Indians, they were slaughtered by Whites for their land.
That's war for you: but it isn't parasitization.
Then English Whites took over India for their land and resources.
The English Whites took over India? How many Whites are there in India today? Are the Whites in power in India? The English Empire defeated the Indians in warfare and economically and the Indians became part of their Empire. Since you evidently don't know your history, this was the beginning of the British policy of multiculturalism: the Indians were not crushed under heel, but welcomed as British subjects. There was a name for this: the British Raj. Definintely not an instance of parasitization. Revealing.
And Napoleon, Alexander the Great, Ceasar, they all created empires, that is, stealing other people's resources.
:rolleyes: And from who did these shining innocents receive those resources from in the first place? Did these people steal them? Or are everyone but Whites innocent in your eyes? You are as much a White Nationalist as Oprah is.
**And the current Iraqi war, the economic sanctions on various nations, etc. are done because these nations were not willing to facilitate the inclusive fitness of Whites. **
The current Iraqi war has nothing to do with the White race - it's a war fought for Israel, and the Jews. And the fact that you characterize Iraq in the manner in which you do identifies you as anti-White.
You are the enemy.
**[url=http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=parasite]Parasite[/url] :
Lions are not parasites, you idiot. You are.
2003-07-04 23:42 | User Profile
**I studied sociobiology for YEARS and spent a lot of time and money on it: I worked in a related field for about five years and several close relatives of mine are physicians (we talk). **
As I said, you studied the wrong research. Read the books at [url=http://home.comcast.net/~neoeugenics/bib.htm]http://home.comcast.net/~neoeugenics/bib.htm[/url] And the fact that you may have doctors in your family is irrelevant; most doctors today believe that all races are equally intelligent - this shows they have studied the wrong research. For the record, virtually everyone in my family are from the elite class: physicians, engineers, scientists, lawyers, accountants, wealthy entrepreneurs. They are all either Republicans or Democrats, they all love Jews/Blacks and oppose White Nationalism; they all think Blacks are no different from Whites. So what? None of them have taken the time to read any of the books at [url=http://home.comcast.net/~neoeugenics/bib.htm]http://home.comcast.net/~neoeugenics/bib.htm[/url]
Do you believe in free will?
Nope. All our behaviors are the result of synaptic programming in the brain. There is no free will, we all just carry out the behaviors programmed into our brains.
**Your arrogance is only overwhelmed by your ignorance. No, we do not, refer to any up-to-date reputable physican for simple confirmation, or read this short and exceptionally simple **
Yes, we do, read the books at [url=http://home.comcast.net/~neoeugenics/bib.htm]http://home.comcast.net/~neoeugenics/bib.htm[/url]
Blacks didn't benefit from slavery? You're forgetting that blacks sold other blacks to Whites. And the descendants of the blacks that were sold to Whites - in what was a perfectly legal transaction accepted and practiced worldwide at the time - wound up very well-off indeed. If you're looking for the parasite in this equation, it's not the Whites.
It is irrelevant if other races practiced slavery as well. I am not debating whether other races have been parasites, I am discussing White parasitism. And I have shown that Whites too have been major racial parasites. You irrationally believe that it is okey for Whites to harm other races, but when other races harm Whites, like Jews, then it is considered parasiticism and morally wrong.
**You are as much a White Nationalist as Oprah is. **
I am a White Nationalist, but a different version than you. Your version believes in radical environmental determinism and believes that it is okey for Whites to slaughter non-Whites world wide. But my version of White nationalism supports biological determinism and respects the sovereinty of other racial groups.
The current Iraqi war has nothing to do with the White race - it's a war fought for Israel, and the Jews.
But it benefits Whites as well; now that Saddam is gone, we have ended economic sanctions and as such, we will increase our GDP by doing business with them. Also, the puppet government in Iraq will sell abundant oil to Whites and for a lower price.
Lions are not parasites
Lions are parasites upon many animals.
Regards,
Ares
2003-07-05 00:42 | User Profile
Are you jewish, Ares?
2003-07-05 01:48 | User Profile
*Originally posted by ÃÅbeltäter@Jul 4 2003, 18:42 * ** Are you jewish, Ares? **
If he isn't, he might as well be. <_<
2003-07-05 03:35 | User Profile
*Originally posted by Ares@Jul 4 2003, 17:42 * ** But it benefits Whites as well; now that Saddam is gone, we have ended economic sanctions and as such, we will increase our GDP by doing business with them. Also, the puppet government in Iraq will sell abundant oil to Whites and for a lower price. **
You have plenty of natural fuels in your own country. You don't have the balls to drill on your own land. So you must Occupy a sovereign country (for a false reason) and "free up" their natural resources. Oh and took out an enemy of the chosen people.
2003-07-05 23:09 | User Profile
Everyone gets too caught up in the IQ stuff. In the end, whites have a much wider SD, hence more geniuses, inventors, innovators, artists, etc. While jews have a higher AVERAGE, it's unbalanced. They have high verbal, yet their visuospatial scores are miserable, and maybe this lack of balance is behind their lack of creativity, and extraordinarily high rate of intellectual theft, industrial espionage, etc. This holds true for E. Asians as well.
Much of jewish "dominance" is simply due to their working together as an incredibly cohesive group. Period. Whites are atomized. Hence, it's easy for a bright, predatory, self-centered malevolent group of survivalist jew parasites to enter White societies and move into dominance in many areas.
BTW, Ares comes off like Polichinello, even signs his posts the same way (... regards,). Is that you under a new name, "P"?
2003-07-05 23:49 | User Profile
**As I said, you studied the wrong research. Read the **
I've been indoctrinated enough. Quit repeating yourself. You bore me.
And the fact that you may have doctors in your family is irrelevant; most doctors today
Most doctors aren't like my family members, and many doctors don't share your perceptions, despite what you seem to think. You have a tendency to make a lot of assumptions about what others think and feel when you have no foundation to make such silly allegations on.
All our behaviors are the result of synaptic programming in the brain. There is no free will, we all just carry out the behaviors programmed into our brains.
That explains you, and your kind, and the instinctual jerks of an amoeba perhaps, but not humans. This statement says a lot about you and your perverse ideologies.
**I have shown that Whites too have been **
You've proven nothing other than what your twisted perspective is.
**You irrationally believe that it is okey for Whites to harm other races, but when other races harm Whites, like Jews, then it is considered parasiticism and morally wrong. **
Whites do not parasitize other races - they conquer them. This is survival of the fittest. There is nothing parasitory about predator and prey, it is a honest straightforward relationship which keeps both predator and prey fit.
The Jew, however, has won no wars, but infiltrates every society, siphoning off the wealth and living off the labour of others, while oppressing and terrorizing the non-Jew in order to weaken them so as to keep their grip around their victims' throats fast...
This is much like the relationship the tapeworm has with its victim: it lives on the host, and feeds off the host, and relies upon the host for its life cycle to the detriment of the host, which it does not kill so as to keep its food source alive. The parasite lives off a living victim; its prolonged agonies provide it and its offspring with nourishment and shelter. The parasites weaken the victims and leads to an increasingly lesser fitness of the victims.
There is a clear difference. Your inability to see this difference speaks volumes. You know little about biology and probably even less about everything else.
**Your version believes in radical environmental determinism **
You're a liar. I never said I believed in any such thing.
But my version of White nationalism supports biological determinism and respects the sovereinty of other racial groups.
There are many remains and artifacts of Whites across the Asian/European/African continents which lend credence to the theory that Whites were dominant across these regions millenia ago. So what is the sovereignty of other racial groups? And why should we respect their sovereignty when they do not respect ours? You are arguing for diversity. Once again, a flag goes up.
Parasite : 1. Biology. An organism that grows, feeds, and is sheltered on or in a different organism while contributing nothing to the survival of its host.
Your transparency is amusing.
2003-07-05 23:57 | User Profile
The latest kosher scam: posters posing as white nationalists or pro-white, while all the while spouting anti-white agenda and bashing whites. What makes it kosher is the amazing brazenness with which these posters insist that according to some definition of what white nationalism, with which only they agree and that doesn't make any sense, they are white nationalists too. This sleigh-of-hand term manipulation, self-delusion and brazenness are very characteristic of a certain tribe.
2003-07-06 00:00 | User Profile
*Originally posted by Alka@Jul 5 2003, 17:49 * **
**
That explains you, and your kind, and the instinctual jerks of an amoeba perhaps, but not humans. This statement says a lot about you and your perverse ideologies.
Hello alka,
If our physical behaviors are not the result of programmings in the brain, then the only other alternative would be outside forces controlling our thoughts. Perhaps you believe a deity actually controls our brains and that we are only puppets.
**Whites do not parasitize other races **
Yes, Whites parasitize other races. You lack understanding of biology and lack the ability to be rational and objective.
If you do not respect the sovereignty of non-Whites, then you would be as parasitical as the Jews, since they don't respect the sovereignty of Gentiles.
Regards,
Ares
2003-07-06 02:10 | User Profile
The jews (and others) are puppets to their biology. Their group behavior is evidence of inborn tendencies reinforced by eugencis masquerading as religion. Inborn tendencies coupled with cultural reinforcement have the greatest control over a group's behavior, and jews make sure behavior is molded amongst their own from the first breath outside the womb, Polichinello.
Group strategy, something whites are slowly being forced into, again. ;)