Been here since 2013

>been here since 2013
>still disagree on most of the big issues that the Sup Forums hivemind agrees with (WN, 14, Race and IQ, christcuckery, ancap economics. muh natsoc)
>not a kike or a shitskin
explain yourselves, I thought you this place was a hurtbox and supposed to redpill even the most resilient? is Sup Forums unironically another bluepill that people swallow to hide from the truth?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

naw it as safe space for them since they will just circle jerk each other and insult and drive away any attempt at genuine conversation with pointless drivel and insults to the point that most people who would want to talk about shit that doesn't agree with their feelings it ends up with them just insulting others to the point of them chasing everyone else but their.

And hence Sup Forums has become a containment board that doesn't even follow their own boards rules and get all faggity and uppity when they are. So Sup Forums is mostly a containment board where nerds circle jerk each other in this safe space for them so that they don't spill over to other boards to much.


And well to be mostly fair id say that that assumption pretty much would apply to about 70 percent of Sup Forums users with they other 30 being people who agree or disagree with would be willing to have genuine discourse about shit.

so all things considered you've just been unlucky with who and what you see on here.

Easy. You're irrational, and probably don't read.

You can't "disagree" on factual issues, like the relationship between race and IQ.

Youre really, really stupid?

i don't think the majority of Sup Forums is stupid either. they just look at an infographic or meme on here that gets reposted and accept it at face value just like the normies they claim do with mainstream sources like CNN or Fox News.
case in point. ad hom and 0 self-reflection. back to the usual dosage of confirmation bias and selective attention to the echo chamber's flavor of the day.

>Leaves out information to promote agenda.
>Facts.
Pretty sure your the retarded one.

>>still disagree on most of the big issues that the Sup Forums hivemind agrees with (WN, 14, Race and IQ, christcuckery, ancap economics. muh natsoc)
Then what IS your opinion? What do you agree with and why?

Also, are you White? If you're not White, then obviously White Nationalism isn't for you. If you're retarded or Jewish, then NatSoc isn't for you. Are you a Muslim? Or a Pagan? Then christcuckery isn't for you.


I don't agree on some issues on Sup Forums, but remember: Sup Forums isn't one person. Only because there's a general thread for a certain topic, that doesn't mean we all post in it and agree with the people frequenting it.

>been here since
bait

Or you can read a book. The Bell Curve makes the incontrovertible case for the link between race and IQ. You're just lazy and irrational.

Many just go for the bantz and lulz as myself.

Nobump

...

>Also, are you White? If you're not White, then obviously White Nationalism isn't for you.
>If you're retarded or Jewish, then NatSoc isn't for you.
>Are you a Muslim? Or a Pagan? Then christcuckery isn't for you.
these are all just ad hominem though. A white person can disagree with the concept of "white" nationalism, especially a true ethno-nationalist. A Jew can agree with NatSoc and there are many that do. A pagan, a muslim, an atheist, can all have favorable views of christianity.
>Sup Forums isn't one person meme
no shit, but when there are 90 out of 100 people in a room echoing the same sentiment, you can generalize them. not only is this a logical fallacy, but it's hypocritical when Sup Forums looks at the group actions of Jews, Blacks, and Muslims yet consider themselves exempt from that form of analysis.

You're still here aren't you?

Although i call bullshit on that, because pol is always right

>Or you can read a book. The Bell Curve makes the incontrovertible case for the link between race and IQ. You're just lazy and irrational.
>It makes perfect sense when you read biased books written by eugenicists but don't read anything that debunks it or challenges it.
wew lad, I think you should read more. Eugenics has been debunked for years.

>Many just go for the bantz and lulz as myself.
This. The green square just wants to relax and watch the world burn while smoking a joint. True master race. We enjoy humor, whether it be libtards autistically screeching because Trump became president, laughing at dumb ass AnCaps or making fun of the queer Richard Spencer or getting punched in the face by an Anti-Fa(ggot)

...

>tfw to intelligent to pick a side

Lets assume this is true. So what? What practical policy are you going to enact on the basis of blacks having a lower IQ on average, and what will that change?

>these are all just ad hominem though
I don't see how these are ad hominems. I did not substitute an argument with an insult.

But identity matters. You're not an abstract being that is bound by universalism and objectivism, even if you wish you were. You are somebody, and you have certain properties that, to some extent, define who you are. And you cannot escape them.


So, what are you? A White male Christian Libertarian? A nigger on welfare? An illegal Mexican? A muslim immigrant?

Who are you?

Ad hominem an author because you don't like what the data says is not an argument.

Neither is asserting eugenics "has been debunked."

You really are ignorant, aren't you?

Both sides are ran by the Jews. The people who support either side are either useful idiots or Jew shills.

explain to me ancap economics

Well, it has loads of implications if you want it to. Alternatively you can ignore it and let things carry on as they are. I suppose the simplest thing about it is that it thoroughly debunks the claims of the political left for 60 years regarding systemic racism in things like high school graduation rates. It also deeply calls into question affirmative action policies for university admissions.

>Eugenics has been debunked for years.
In what way?

>The green square just wants to relax and watch the world burn while smoking a joint
You don't get to watch or smoke joints when the world burns. You will be dragged out of your house and shot so others can take your resources. It's join the gang or die. There's nothing funny about death and destruction once it actually affects your own life. And this day is drawing nearer as people grow more tribal and less tolerant of the foreign races within their perimeter.

>he says while being a libertarian socialist
okay Chomsky

Humans aren't animals and aren't subject to the same natural laws that govern every other species and therefore things that work in every other animal (like eugenics) don't work in people, duh

>Humans aren't animals and aren't subject to the same natural laws that govern every other species

see, this is what I mean. I have read hundreds of these screencaps. Almost all of them are stories or larps. There are no sources, there is no real substance, there is only second hand accounts and long-winded anecdotes. Stuff like this will never sway the opinion of someone who doesn't fall to appeal to emotion or confirmation bias. It's just another image in a circlejerk of Ben Garrison comics and dindu nuffin memes.

>What practical policy are you going to enact
REXCINDING POLICIES ARE NOT ENACTMENTS

At my college I have heard that argument. They got upset when I called a person an animal.

If you don't believe that Negroes are a destructive force for society, then you should look into history.

Rhodesia, Haiti, now South Africa.

Hell, look in your own country. Detroit, Atlanta, Baltimore.

>OP is a little insecure bitch explain yourself

Plenty are logical arguments, which I note you have yet to make.

haha wow really opened my eyes
south africa will turn around any second now

>eugenics has been debunked for years

Eugenics is not a theory to be debunked, it's a philosophy of promoting desired genetic traits and discouraging undesirable traits.

If you're arguing that the relation between race and IQ has been debunked, it absolutely hasn't. People have created apologist theories that explain away IQ as being a poor measure of innate intelligence, but even these explanations don't refute the incontrovertible difference in IQ test performance between ethnic groups. They also have the advantage of being difficult to falsify, even if continued research into IQ makes them increasingly implausible.

>someone who doesn't fall to appeal to emotion or confirmation bias
oh great unviased one, please explain, without emotion, what is happening in zimbabwe

>Ad hominem an author because you don't like what the data says is not an argument.
You never posted an author to ad hominem. Also if you just automatically assume something is true because some Jew wrote it down in a book without listening to both sides and coming up with a logical conclusion then you are fucking stupid and deserve all of the suffering that you are going to experience in your life for your stupidity.

>Neither is asserting eugenics "has been debunked."
Because it has. I didn't realize that you were 2 years old and I had to explain shit that is common logic to you before we start debating.
>InB4 we start debating and you have to use inaccurate research from the 40s and claim it as fact but all modern research is Jewish propaganda.

>You really are ignorant, aren't you?
Yes, I'm on an anime image board in a political thread who is arguing with a mental challenge 14 year old who believes in eugenics. I need to rethink my life and how I spend my free time.

so what are GMOs anyway

Sup Forums actually believes in (((jewgenics)))

It implies that a lot of the social ills related to the black and other low-scoring ethnic communities are linked to genetics rather than oppression. This obviously has a strong bearing on policies like affirmative action which seek to rectify perceived inequality of opportunity.

>You never posted an author to ad hominem.
>It makes perfect sense when you read biased books written by eugenicists
You are clearly calling Herrnstein and Murray eugenicists, which is a fairly common ad hominem criticism leveled against them by people who don't want to believe the evidence. But if you want to post another "side" that isn't "hurr, dey's be rayciss," then maybe I'll consider it. You won't, though.

>Because it has.
OHHHH. Oh, my mistake. It has, guys. user hath spoken. Guess I had better pack up and go home!

>I need to rethink my life and how I spend my free time.
Try reading books instead of burning them.

Bad leadership and forced removal of white farmers led to economic crisis. Would the outcome have changed had ONLY the races been switched? most likely not. Look at what happened in Communist countries, both "white" and asian who did similar and ended up with stagnant or collapsing economies.

the easy, bluepill, answer is "lol niggers can't do anything right"
the hard, redpill to swallow is that a lot of factors came into play.

I'm not sure what part of "race and IQ" you actually "disagree" with.

The 1 standard-deviation black-white IQ test score gap is well-established over time. Not even critics of IQ studies contest that particular result - it's just what the tests show.

To get around that, you either have to attack the validity of testing in general, or attack the usefulness of IQ/g-factor as a measurement.

The problem is that g-factor has established correlations with various statistical tendencies in life. At a policy level, it's difficult to ignore that. You can predict a lot about what kind of society you will have just based on those numbers, even if they don't tell you about any particular individual within a sub-group.

The problem for race/IQ denialists is that they have to come up with increasingly-elaborate means of explaining the observable condition of the world over time, while race/IQ-realists have a robust and reasonable explanation for a lot of that stuff.

>Would the outcome have changed had ONLY the races been switched?
You mean like, in the rest of the history of European colonization of Africa, where whites displaced blacks and built prosperous farms? You mean like that?

Race and iq is airtight and accepted, you can argue about the root cause but you can't dispute it in of itself.

well most of their flaws can be explained in that they don't know the two main flaws in their thinking

>they don't know about the is/ought distinction in philosophy
>they don't know about the correlation=/=causation destinction in science

everything else in their logic is born out of emotional irrational thinking

just like their counterparts the SJW

Care to bear that accusation out in a specific example?

Someone mentioned the bell curve book earlier in the thread. that's one of the books that almost always seems to come up in these discussions. my problem is the data they selected in the book, and the basis of the argument, contradicts not only the conclusions of the author, but the conclusions of people that use it to promote race realism on Sup Forums. They even mention the Flynn Effect in the book and if you take a look at the very same database the authors use to draw their conclusions, you can get evidence that contradicts what Sup Forums's top race and IQ experts spout on here daily. Sup Forums treats it like it's a settled science when it couldn't be further from that.

This is pretty good bait

>you can get evidence that contradicts what Sup Forums's top race and IQ experts spout on here daily.
lol you can get a pokemon go to the polls

everyone already accepts this. what a dumb strawman. The contentious issue is the debate is over how much environmental, cultural, and/or genetic influence there is. There are compelling arguments for both sides, even when they examine the exact same data.

I've been to a lot of countries because of my dad's work and to be frank all the non-white countries are fucking shitholes, usually in accordance to the racial majorities average IQ, the only two non-white countries I would be fine living in are South Korea and Japan, and those are two very high IQ populations that had their countries rebuilt by America after they bombed them to shit lmao. Oh and the worst countries with mostly white people in them I've been to are that way because they used to be communist so that's another redpill I had to learn first hand.

This place is nothing but retards that convince themselves they are enlightened because a Sup Forums board.

So now he's arguing like a jew. Before he was insisting he didn't believe in facts, now he's saying he did the whole time. Also note his use of social proof, when he says "everyone accepts this," not "I accept this."

>In what way?
Eugenics completely ignores nurture and puts focus completely on nature. Someone who has to spend all of their time trying to survive has less mental resources to spend on thinking about other things making them a lot more primalistic. If you take a primal person out of the wild and give them access to a better environment with advanced technology then they will have to dedicate less resources to survival and more to other things. American blacks are a lot more civilized and successful than African black because they live in a better environment.

>You don't get to watch or smoke joints when the world burns. You will be dragged out of your house and shot so others can take your resources. It's join the gang or die. There's nothing funny about death and destruction once it actually affects your own life. And this day is drawing nearer as people grow more tribal and less tolerant of the foreign races within their perimeter.
You do when you have a strong state that protects it's people and an economy that promotes private interest. The world has been on fire for the last 100 years but us Americans have been living pretty fucking comfy.

Wanting a economy that competes with government doesn't make me a socialist, I would actually be the opposite.

>south africa will turn around any second now
No it won't. Africa has been decentralized for far too long while the rest of the world has advanced way past them at rate they will never be able to catch up with. The only way they would ever become a world power is if some nation managed to colonize the whole continent of Africa. The environment is fucked so the individual will never be able to strive.

There is thus far no cure for retardation.

nice non-argument once again. I shouldn't have taken the bait. Read all your posts in this thread again and consider how you could have better expressed your views without looking like a mental midget. Go now.
another cool anecdote. Tell me user, if you go back 50, 100, 200, 500, 1000 years in any of the nice countries you visited, would the living standards remain fairly consistent or would there be periods of shittiness, periods of opulence, periods of war, periods of famine?

The fact that ethnic groups perform differently within the same society despite controlling for socioeconomic class and educational attainment cannot be explained away by the Flynn Effect. Falsifying the claim that there must be some other social factor at work is a tricky business because it's always possible to take refuge in the amorphous specter of racism.

But to me, the belief that the entire planet has conspired to give little to no evidence to bolster this theory, while continuing to provide plenty of evidence to weaken it speaks volumes to its foundation. The task of apologists has become a comically long and ever-increasing list of things that they must explain aren't actually what they obviously look to be.

There's more arguments here without getting shut down then any other platform. Autists here will reply to anything even if its a bait argument. Fuck off with this safe space shit. If you can't take being ridiculed or banter then go to kikebook or reddit and downvote/block people who argue with you.

> get scared this was an actual opinion
> checks flag
Phew it was just a shitpost

I bet you're just a meme stealing whore

>be white
>disagreeing with the 14 words

You're just a generic self-hating leftist pozcuckold, nothing special.

Sup Forums is a safe space for the weakest of the weak to find each other and pathetically suicide their minds with toxic ideology that appeals to those that are disappointed in themselves and need to shift the blame externally. This isn't something that's sinister; it's the only way they can survive.

Ultimately the typical Sup Forumsack is looking for a dominant figure so they could find freedom from choice. They know the decisions they've made has left them in a detrimental position so someone like that could either guide them or at least carry the blame.

Take the idea of "red pilling". It's portrayed as this sacrament where if you blindly accept this thought (or more accurately meme), you will see the truth.

How convenient it would be to just take a pill to make all your failures go away because the jews did it.

Post evidence that eugenics doesn't exist.
The fact that there are different races very well proves of eugenics.
Blacks are better suited for hotter climates but need vitamin D supplements to survive in this cold.

> Evolution is real untill you talk about humans, at that point it just magically stopped and everyone is of equal intelligence and ability.

this is a connect-4 level arugment.

The real argument is whether the genetic differences should be relevant to the society we live in.

What kind of backwards hard christian liberal college did you go to?

You can do a statistical analysis and find that some races are better at living in civilized society compared to other races. I'm not sayign that we should ban niggers, but trying to deny facts because of fee fees will hurt your argument more then help it.

you just posted that as a poster on Sup Forums so I didnt even have to call out that you are projecting

i can relate it to the flaws in IQ/race debate if you want to?

the truth is simple user

Sure.

why did you take up 3 posts with lots of reddit spacing implying you could

>safe space
>cannot downvote comments or hide them from others
>mods do not ban others based on political opinions

The lefty brain is an odd thing.

>Eugenics is not a theory to be debunked, it's a philosophy of promoting desired genetic traits and discouraging undesirable traits.
People with high IQs tend to have lower birth rates while people with low IQs tend to have higher birth rates. Both IQs and birth rates are equally important for the success of society. If you interbreed a controlled group of individuals with desired traits, the desired traits get stronger but so do their weakness like inheritable diseases. Also if the high IQ society continually shrinks because of low birth rates then they'll either have to rely on immigration where diversity will happen natural or they will get dominated by a large dumber population via attrition. Using eugenics to try to support the idea of a white master race is fucking retarded.

>If you're arguing that the relation between race and IQ has been debunked, it absolutely hasn't.
There is but not because of the race of the individual but the environment that they came up in. If you think supremacy is caused by skin color then you are fucking retarded.

>People have created apologist theories that explain away IQ as being a poor measure of innate intelligence, but even these explanations don't refute the incontrovertible difference in IQ test performance between ethnic groups. They also have the advantage of being difficult to falsify, even if continued research into IQ makes them increasingly implausible.
Not arguing against that. I'm just pointing out that "success" and "desirable traits" has more to do with the environment you're in not muh genetics.

>flag
speaks for itself. kek
>Falsifying the claim that there must be some other social factor at work is a tricky business because it's always possible to take refuge in the amorphous specter of racism.
I don't agree with people reading the book and just automatically assuming "RACISM" and dismissing it entirely, because it does make good points and has real data. My point is that the data/studies he uses can and do get dissected by the scientific community and conclusions that seem valid to some and pseudo-scientific to others vary wildly. and this is just within the scientific community. There is no de-facto conclusion that is ever drawn in the books, though. anyone claiming that hasn't read it.

"Because it has."
Shit, you really activated my almonds this time.

>Also if the high IQ society continually shrinks
That's a big if. And I'd love to know what the "optimal" population for a country is.
In many countries in the west there is still a job shortage AND automisation is going to be removing more jobs... so why do we need more people?

So long as there are people who reckon we must rectify inequality borne out of oppression through policy, it's imperative we understand to the best of our ability what difference is borne out of oppression and what is due to other factors.

>2013
Fuck off newfag

I only believe the Jews are really out to get the goyim. It makes sense and it's in their religious texts.

No m8 OP is smarter and more versed on the subject than multiple Nobel prize winners.

Unintelligent and brainwashed people ignore genetics playing an instrumental role in brain, behavior, and thus culture. Yet those same people acknowledge that the rest of a human body is a product of genetics. A brain and body as a platform can be molded based on environment but only to the extent its DNA/RNA allows, transhumanist bullshit notwithstanding.

You don't need to be a genetic researcher to see the repeating patterns in behavior on average in different ethnicities. The law of averages doesn't apply to individuals. But it does work in small degrees. Certain genetic traits for violence (MAOA-2R, for instance) only need to appear in smaller but disproportionately higher percentages to effect the entire bunch of apples statistically. I feel sorry for everyone in the long tail of upper intelligence who are statistically lumped in with the flip side. To address real-world problems we must first acknowledge realities. Covering up failures in stability and safety by blaming "the white devil" is a delusion not unlike a religious delusion blaming it on a "the devil." It's nearly a form of retardation.

mental gymnastics are always fun to watch

how many hoops does a person have to jump through until they're finally willing to admit maybe negros just are violent dullards on a genetic level?

Google it, moron. It is proven through large, large data samples.

notice how I never argued against the JQ in my OP
Sup Forums isn't wrong about everything

I'd agree that America has not reached an equilibrium of outcome between races, but to whatever degree some inter-group difference can be considered innate, the concept of enforcing equity should be discarded.

How can anyone object to the 14 words, really?

so firstly we have a claim which is true
>some races have higher IQ then others

from that we know something that IS
but we cannot jump from that to what ought to be done about it
the reason for this is simply that the qualities of all races aren't measured just by IQ, but physical diffrences which are equired by their adaption to that enviroment

therfor if we where to judge them by a diffrent standard, blacks might end up superior given their spesific experties
now, the other problem is the fact that creative solutions to problems isn't necessary equivlent to IQ, nor are IQ's relation to spesific tasks based intelegance, as IQ is general. So a person with 120 IQ isn't necessary better at fixing cars then a person with 100 IQ who is a car mechanic

the other true statement might be that IQ keeps stable despite positive influence of the community/enviroment
(adopted blacks ect.)
but that still does not mean we should threat them worse, as negative effects are still applied to high IQ people no matter the skin color,

whites or asians who have been abused won't reach their full potential for example
Which means that yes we shouldnt give them special threatment, but giving them worse threatment is the opposite of the supposed goal of achiving smart individuals

as for general information about statistical "correlation=/=causation"
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation

Same situation; I browse Sup Forums very regularly and I still haven't fallen for any of the hivemind propaganda. Why aren't your redpills working on me, is my brain just too big for you?

Nah. I'm here to propagandize against right-wing ideologies I am morally against. I'm taking a self-aggrandizing role as a savior. I truly love everyone here and I want the best for everyone.

The counter-argument is that civilized society isn't compatible with these differences. If you accept that these differences are irrelevant you are on your way to building a better world.

Human progress has always just been our victories in a fight against nature and perceived natural orders. We don't migrate between latitudes, we put on a coat when it gets cold.

"Scratch a liberal and you'll find a secret aristocrat, scratch a conservative and you'll find someone who can't imagine a better future" or whatever that quote from Dune is.

you must be new here. you speak like an redditor who thinks that going on Sup Forums is edgy

I personally believe the conditions we label as genetic differences are miniscule in the abstracted idea of a what a human is, but because humans are so trained and evolved to seperate these differences we begin forming social constructs that are toxic to progress or selfishly reinforce our views.

The Romans are a good example who understood this and created a number of a festivals which flipped the social order (Saturnalia particularly where the master/slave order is reversed, without any expectation of repucussion) explicitly to remind that the differences are constructed. Being the idealogic civic nationalists this was in itself a show of strength.

I've been here since before Sup Forums was /new/, a board you probably aren't even aware of.
By the way, feel free to explain how this is a safe space.

Nothing you said goes against the question about race and iq or white nationalism in general.

Why the fuck did you stay so long

>Nah. I'm here to propagandize against right-wing ideologies I am morally against.
Feels over reals as usual. Nothing to see here.

But if you don't believe in white nationalism or racial differences, then all the things Jews are accused of on Sup Forums aren't that damning even if true.

really? you're going to the warrior/agressive gene argument? there are way more compelling arguments and in those same studies, you have hispanics testing extremely low for these genes even though they have among the highest rates of murder in the world, and Asians testing high. off the top of my head that is just one of the many ways its been debunked. you clearly have not even begun to scratch the surface of any of your claims.

Nah, I read a book on the financial system and realized we are all living a lie just as big as when the church ruled the land.

Because I don't know why preservation of an arbitrarily selected human phenotype should be a worthy goal.

t. shlomo

>so what are GMOs anyway
Proof that environment places a larger role than genes. GMOs are artificial and don't occur naturally, meaning that the technology and innovation of the environment played a larger role in the success of your society then nature did.

>You are clearly calling Herrnstein and Murray eugenicists, which is a fairly common ad hominem criticism leveled against them by people who don't want to believe the evidence.

>Stein
Of fucking course.

There is a clear correlation between whites and higher IQs but again that has to do with environment a hell of a lot more than it has to does with skin pigmentation. I wasn't attacking the Bell Curve so much as your interruption of it.

>But if you want to post another "side" that isn't "hurr, dey's be rayciss," then maybe I'll consider it. You won't, though.
Wow, and you're accusing me of Ad Hominems, what a hypocrite.

>OHHHH. Oh, my mistake. It has, guys. user hath spoken. Guess I had better pack up and go home!
You were talking about genetics, I assumed you knew the basics of evolution. I apologize, I didn't realize that you were a mental challenged 14 year old.

>Try reading books instead of burning them.
I do read them but unlike you, I've read more than one.