Writer for NBC, Amazon and Cartoon Network is publicly advocating for white genocide.

She didn't talk about wiping out a race, joke or not. She was referencing an article which most people on this thread never bothered to read. Additionally, the premise of "white genocide" is a White Supremacist/Neo-Nazi fear-mongering meme that's been around for decades. It's based on the idea of miscegenation; what used to be a crime under Jim Crow.

 

So was the article "White Supremacism" or is she?

 

Well I hope even the "culture deniers" can appreciate the dedication and skill!

 

Neither. She's not a racist either. The idea is the extinction of racism through miscegenation...something that scares the crap out of White Supremacists. Do you think miscegenation should be banned or do you care?

Try these links: https://reason.com/blog/2018/06/26/stoking-white-ethnic-fears-about-immigra
We Are in the Midst of the Third Bogus 'White Extinction' Panic in Just as Many Centuries
Anti-immigrant fearmongers of demographic doom proved wrong in the 19th and 20th centuries, and today's will be no different.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_genocide_conspiracy_theory
The white genocide conspiracy theory is a Neo-Nazi, white nationalist, and supremacist conspiracy theory[1] that mass immigration, racial integration, miscegenation, low fertility rates, and abortion are being promoted in predominantly white countries to deliberately turn them minority-white and hence cause white people to become extinct through forced assimilation.[2] The phrase "Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white", coined by high-profile white nationalist Robert Whitaker, is commonly associated with the topic of white genocide.[3][4] It has appeared on billboards in the United States near Birmingham, Alabama[5] and in Harrison, Arkansas.[6] The conspiracy theory had already been purported in Nazi Germany by a pamphlet written for the "Research Department for the Jewish question" of Walter Frank's "Reich Institute" with the title "Are the White Nations Dying? The Future of the White and the Colored Nations in the Light of Biological Statistics".[7]


https://www.adl.org/resources/glossary-terms/white-genocide
“White Genocide” is a term coined by white supremacists for propaganda purposes as shorthand for one of the most deeply held modern white supremacist convictions: that the white race is “dying” due to growing non-white populations and “forced assimilation,” all of which are deliberately engineered and controlled by a Jewish conspiracy to destroy the white race. This same conviction can be seen in the so-called “14 Words” slogan, the most popular white supremacist slogan around the globe: “We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children.” White supremacists commonly claim that they must take action, even violent action, or the “white race” will “perish from the Earth.”

 

Banned? I think those who promote it like La RAZA do it for racist reasons as they want to out breed or breed out whites.. I can comment on that that does not make it fearmongering nor "supremacy".. Nor do i care what the ADL says.

She brought the topic up i am just commenting on it.

 

The joke is that absolute morons think that white people having less kids by choice constitutes a genocide. It has nothing to do with people actually dying. It's just a laugh at the human zoo that is the american far right.

 

When did i ever mention choice in parenting?


Nice smear at the end.. Only way you can feel good about yourself i suppose.

 

And they did it with obsidian knives - until they dropped from exhaustion.
This was their favorite song:

 

And it is a very contrived racism.
Most members of La Raza are virtually as "white" as most Americans.

 

You are quite right. It is not a genocide, it is white suicide. But advertising it as a genocide may energize white people and thus reverse the trend.

You might laugh, but he who laughs last laughs best.

 

So here's my name for this exhibit in the human zoo: The Cum Warrior, Exhorting The Whites to Raw Dog It More Often. I feel that it adequately captures how serious this conflict is

 

Sounds like an enjoyable sort of warfare. Surely you don't object?

 

I'm just saying, you have to be aware on some level of how ridiculous you're being over birthrates.

 

Not at all aware. Why wouldn't I be concerned about the extinction of White people given the very low fertility? I like White people. I like the music they've made, the literature they've produced, the art they've created.

Will there be Shakespeare in Central Park if NYC becomes 80% Spanish speaking?

 

It WOULD actually be a good thing if more and more and more interracial marriages took place. I'm not against white people, but if more and more and more people had other additional races in their make up then they would of course, on average, be less racist.
The Bible is, however, AGAINST miscegenation, so God/Jesus has been one thing in keeping that great thing from happening. Religion yet again retards our growth as humans.

 

Yep - she went there.

Since this moonbat is wishing for white extinction I hope she leads by example and gets her tubes tied...

 

Dems only have FOUR out of fifty states with a Dem governor and Dem legislature, so they've ALREADY hit rock bottom!
And if THESE two clowns are now the face of the Dem party, then that once-great party is doomed in November. They will soon be as popular as the Whig Party. Maybe Maxine will form her own party....wait....wait....wait for it....The Wig Party.

 

Can't see why not. Culture isn't genetic. I don't particularly care about preserving a genetic phenotype. The deep south was majority black as far back as the 1800s and southern culture isn't endangered in the slightest.

And anyway, white isn't a culture. Europe is incredibly diverse. "I love white people" is a bullshit phrase that exists to cover up a fear of nonwhite people.

 

Of course culture is genetic. Culture is the environment. Those genes which thrive in the environment get selected. Culture gets written in our genes.

More importantly people who speak Spanish aren't going to go to a play in English. And Spanish speaking politicians aren't going to cater to a linguistic minority. So Shakespeare in the Park is endangered.

Europe isn't all that diverse. Half of its languages derive from Latin. They are all (or were) some flavor of Christian. The musicians use a diatonic scale. The artists have been influencing each other for many generations. European philosophers all acknowledge their debt to Plato, and nobody else.

White culture is diverse enough to provide variety and cross-fertilization. It is unified enough that each part can understand the other.

 

Pseudoscientific bullshit. I can't roll my eyes hard enough.

Did you know that you can take writing in one language and turn it into a different language? It's true, there's a whole industry centered around doing that.

Furthermore, I don't see what politicians have to do with this.

Similar things could be said about East Asia, but if you told a Korean, a Japanese man, and a Chinese man that their cultures were more than superficially similar they would probably kick your ass.

 

Eye rolls are not a refutation. It is quite scientific.

Poetry doesn't translate well. NYC subsidizes Shakespeare in the park.

Would a European? I don't think so. In any case I, being an American, am in a better position to appreciate the similarities of European cultures. There is a reason that "Western Civilization" is a well known category and your attempt to deconstruct it are pretty silly.

 

I don't feel a need to refute your nonsense any more than I feel the need to refute scientology. Interacting with pseudoscience at any level except mockery eventually falls prey to the fact that it's a an order of magnitude harder to refute bullshit than it is to spew it. The gish gallop, as it is often called.

Shakespeare is already illegible to most modern audiences without a good deal of knowledge about archaic english. It essentially already demands either a translation or learning half a language even for native english speakers. I'm not that worried about it being tainted by a community that speaks only slightly less english on average.

Western civ is a known category because wealthy reactionary aristocrats love to cream themselves while looking at Greeks and Romans without taking a very close look at the history of the ideas they're espousing.

 

Well, it is not exactly my nonsense. It is pretty widely accepted.

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20140410-can-we-drive-our-own-evolution

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...05/genes-affect-culture-culture-affects-genes

https://academic.oup.com/scan/article/5/2-3/203/1664339

Not at all. It is hardly archaic. When I listen to Shakespeare it is difficult for about 5 minutes and then seems perfectly intelligible, even natural. Chaucer is published in modern English; Shakespeare, never.

"Full fathom five thy father lies;
Of his bones are coral made;
Those are pearls that were his eyes:
Nothing of him that doth fade
But doth suffer a sea-change
Into something rich and strange.
Sea-nymphs hourly ring his knell"

--

"Good name in man and woman, dear my lord,
Is the immediate jewel of their souls.
Who steals my purse steals trash; 'tis something, nothing;
'Twas mine, 'tis his, and has been slave to thousands;
But he that filches from me my good name
Robs me of that which not enriches him,
And makes me poor indeed."

---

What is so difficult about this? Have you ever seen any Shakespeare?

Not only wealthy reactionary aristocrats but serious historians and scholars.

I am starting to suspect your scorn is hiding a very superficial understanding of science, literature and history.

Seriously, I had some respect for your opinions before, but that is being called into question by your posts here.

 

None of these studies have anything go do with preference in the arts, the examples they give are linked to a much different aspect of culture than we were discussing.

Shakespeare isn't completely foreign, yes, but if you aren't already versed enough in historical literature to have a feel for the syntax and some of the archaic turns of phrase it's a good deal more difficult. Keep in mind that the majority of people aren't as interested in the topic as you or I are.

Yeah, maybe scholars and historians from 1920.

 

The GOP is full of dinosaurs and dodos.