Hello

I'm Jared Taylor, with American Renaissance.
Today, let's break a taboo.
youtube.com/watch?v=c8Xj_r5QG-s

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=TWU0nnAv0ZY
youtube.com/watch?v=PBxtu2jD2zU
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

What a Spartan

Made me gay

There is no reason to reject anything he said.
Lets face it, the people who are against eugenics are against it because they know their weak inferior genes would be rendered irrelevant and flushed out of existence were eugenics to become more widely practiced.

i love listening to his voice desu

Here's a good boy.

This 2bh

Veritable silver fox

There's something magical about this hu-white man.

Love it

>no mention of Israel owning America
and DROPPED

pure finno urgic phenotype 100 percent.

the lighting they used is nice

Is there anyone on Sup Forums who doesn't like Jared Taylor? Such a great guy.

Once the Jews get wind of the fact that this guy has nearly unanimous support from racist white boys they'll start accusing of him being a controlled opp fed under the guise of being concerned white nationalists or lolberts 'sick of all of this nazi shit on Sup Forums'

This man is the hero we need, but not the hero we deserve!

Taylor seems to be the only public figure who has unanimous support. Maybe Lana for Red Ice too, I don't think I've seen anyone speak ill of her

Imagine a scenenrio where "If you talk more shit to white men, more genocides and mass-shothings are going to happen".

How's your Jewish wife doing, Jared?
Evelyn Rich, the former ADL employee.

I want Jared to read me a bedtime story.

huwhite

Plenty of people shill against Taylor on Sup Forums. It's probably just a few but they spam their schitzo shit everywhere. They're the
>everyone who is in the public eye is CIA
types. I hate them with a passion, like this faggot

even if true, that would just make him more based and alpha.

she toke a bullet in the face due to some islam chimp shit and then she's back saying basically "muslims are good people just don't anger them or they will move war on your nation"

Who would win in a fight to the death with nunchucks, Jared or Charlie rose

What if SJWs were in charge of eugenics?

well it obviously took some brain with it on the way out.

>implying they arent currently enacting their version of eugenics

...

The taboo of eugenics is an illusion. No one is against eugenics. The second gene selection or even embryo selection determined by valuable traits like high intelligence is created, everybody will use it. However, this will totally destroy the ideology of race, and with it, the significance of whiteness. Sup Forums fags wont be able to scare white man who prefer nigger woman with claims of low IQ children because the parents will be able to go to the lab and produce like 1000 embryos than run them thru a computer and select the smartest embryo to give birth to.

But again, if this technology is made, the importance of whiteness becomes irrelevant and to alot of whites that's all they have. I know a lot of ppl in the white identitarian movement who don't want to ever be equal to niggers and want this technology to be prevented at all cost until racial separation occurs. It sad how pathetic some whites are.

Jared's the man. Hope he debates more skeptics. That interview with Sargon was great.

>All we have to do is Le HaXX0r the genome stupid Sup Forums
>white men definitely want to fuck sheboons, trust me

You're a goddamn idiot, you know that?

...

Race is a multi-faceted issue and you are approaching it one-dimensionally like the brainlet you are. What if History? Attractiveness? Your children looking like you and fowarding your unique genetic traits. In group preference would also prevent it, the white race will survive because whites subconsciously know that it must.

...

I get Taylor's points here but thing about eugenics I dislike is its close relation to transhumanism. How can you be a traditionalist, a nationalist, and a racialist if you want to manipulate those things you identify with is beyond me.

>Tfw I'm for eugenics but don't think my genes will make the cut.

>How can you be a traditionalist, a nationalist, and a racialist
You're the one painting people into boxes. Eugenics was common through the 19th and early 20th centuries. Were these people not traditionalists? Were the NSDAP not nationalists? Was the segregation government of the USA not racialist?

You're not arguing in good faith. People always try to improve the things they love.

Nice pic

You're talking about science fiction. None of this trans-humanism shit exists.

...

He's based

>How can you be a traditionalist, a nationalist, and a racialist
These three are synonymous with each other, and "eugenics" fits right in with them. The Spartans are the oldest example I can think of where eugenics were as vital in their state as tradition, race, and nation.

Huite

Eugenics has almost entirely been about removing negative traits from the gene pool.

>Implying that black couples wouldn't be bleaching their kids with this tech.

>Implying the common man will ever have access to said technology.

All gene manipulation will accomplish is them winning and greatly widen the divide of have and have not, with no recourse.

Yeah but its a different context in the 21st century of genetics and technology. At best they just used breeding back then and sterilization. Now they can literally just go straight to the dna with shit like CRSPR.

I just shy away from the word eugenics, but use dysgenic a lot, to describe social/tax policies. It's not overly orwellian for a government to devise policy that yields smarter, fitter citizens. As long as it's sufficiently indirect, with incentives instead of laws etc

Reward the niggers with welfare if they don't have kids, and in one generation or two you've solved the problem.

Jared says some good things but I'll never forget that he's a Zionist shill and has been subverted.

I agree 100% and I find this very normal talk.

Does that make me extreme? Nope, it makes the people who think otherwise extremely stupid.

Spoken like someone isnt aware they have a genetic condition that would be deemed undesireable.

he looks very much like mel gibson

I'm a sperm donor. Just you have a little think about that.

I love how people who advocate for eugenics assume their are in the too 10% genetics and yet are shitposting about minorities stealing their women in a chinese tapestry forum

Arent we all...

Maybe when your balls drop you can follow after me, son.

>I love how people who advocate for eugenics
I love how the video posted in the OP clearly explains what eugenics is, but you decide to erect your strawman about 90% of the population being sterilized/euthanized just so you can oppose anything the ebil white nationalists say.

Farmers and animal breeders use selective breeding all the time.

Who is talking about about sterilization, dumbass? Women already choose the best genes, saying there isn't natural selection anymore is a falacy.
Why don't you go create another mgtow, women hate or immigration thread?
If you aren't drowning in pussy already I have bad news for you

>saying there isn't natural selection anymore is a falacy
The selection pressures of today are heavily artificial you stupid fucking shitskin. What, do you think modern medicine is "natural"? Niggers were literally starving to death before LBJ ushered in the welfare state to propagate the black "community". Do you think mailbox money is a part of "natural selection"? The traits and behaviors that are being selected for these days are for an environment that is exceptional in almost all manners and is bound to collapse at some point. How well are these people going to fare when truly natural pressures are applied to them?
>mgtow
>women hate
>muh dik
>u virgin
More strawmen from the nigger, who could've seen that coming?
>immigration
>IF U DON LIKE MY SHITSKIN FAMILY COMING 2 UR COUNTRY UR A VIRGIN!!:(

His argument is weak and uninteresting. Putting commonly accepted modes of gene selection under the umbrella of 'eugenics' (a deeply unpopular idea) isn't going to make people more accepting of the tyrannical and often genocidal programs which traditionally come to mind when we think of 'eugenics'. It's just going to make the word 'eugenics' meaningless.

Example:

Taylor: A woman choosing her sexual partner is a form of eugenics!
Person: If you say so.
Taylor: Do you support that?
Person: Of course.
Taylor: Ah, well a government sterilization program which targets blacks is also eugenics, so do you see why it isn't such a bad idea after all?!
Person: I don't care if its what we call it, that is a terrible idea

Based huwhite male

The first thing that niggs will do is bleach their children.

They will justify it with muh white oppression.

How can you be all of that and still tuna blind eye on the millions of sub 90iq whites. Or on the shit aging genes of white women. Or on the manlet whites

You are the reasons why we need this. Retards like you need to be cleansed but in a morally acceptable way.

Raised by missionaries. Intonation and expository style redolent of Baptist pulpit oratory but you already knew that so now I'm just boring you. Fuck. I'm such a loser.

You are making the kind if a strawman that an afraid mongrell would make.

>His argument is weak and uninteresting
lel are you saying that the practicing eugenics won't produce the desired results?
> modes of gene selection under the umbrella of 'eugenics' (a deeply unpopular idea) isn't going to make people more accepting
Accepting of what? No program or methods were mentioned in the video, anything you have in you're mind is a fabrication of your own implications.
>tyrannical and genocidal programs
Good thing if such a policy is adopted, it will surely be one of compulsory sterilization in exchange for governmental/financial aid that will be prohibited from explicitly racial in nature. It would merely affect those who need handouts to survive, if that affects 90% of niggers and 70% of spics, so be it. It is what it is.
>it's going to make the word meaninless
No, it's going to remove decades of negative connotation from it

How is choosing agressive and ape like behavior genes the best in the modern society ?

>Speeded up the pace

Dropped

youtube.com/watch?v=TWU0nnAv0ZY

youtube.com/watch?v=PBxtu2jD2zU

Rather than a government sterilization program, how about promoting a culture of eugenics. That we all apply social pressure towards eugenic practices.

Point taken. Was just having some fun I like Taylor.

My issue is that transhumanism,eugenics,and socialism all have overlapping commonalities and they really fly in the face of the idea of preserving the past. Its a trojan horse for control freaks not as a way to better people but as a way to control them. If we were just talking about selective breeding it would be different but we live in a time where we are on the threshold of nanotech and other stuff that transhumanism hinges on.

>we are on the threshold of nanotech and other stuff that transhumanism hinges on
quit this fucking meme

> lel are you saying that the practicing eugenics won't produce the desired results?
No, read the post which follows my thesis statement to see what I'm saying, dumbass.

> Accepting of what? No program or methods were mentioned in the video, anything you have in you're mind is a fabrication of your own implications.
You're right that no programs or methods were mentioned in the video, I'm criticizing the rhetorical strategy Taylor is employing. I'm saying that changing people's perception of the word 'eugenics' by grouping uncontroversial accepted types of 'eugenics' with more controversial ones will not make people more accepting of of the controversial ones, it will just make eugenics a watered down and useless term.

> Good thing if such a policy is adopted, it will surely be one of compulsory sterilization in exchange for governmental/financial aid that will be prohibited from explicitly racial in nature.
A policy which does not institute a selection mechanism based off race or biology would not be a gene-based program, and hence not a eugenics program. It's not what Taylor is talking about, or anyone in this thread for that matter.

> No, it's going to remove decades of negative connotation from it
This is not an argument, merely a statement of your belief. I hold the opposite view and you failed to respond to any of my arguments in support of that view.

I liked your post friendo

...

I think this would be a sound political strategy, for better or for worse. That being said I doubt sincerely a eugenics culture would take hold in America, given the necessary confrontation over the race issue. Likely the only way a eugenics culture would be instituted in America is via a minority of individuals making their views the law of the land by force -- state coercion.

from left:
>on a very bad night
>unfuckable
>unfuckable
>twice unfuckable
>wouldn't tell anyone
>thrice unfuckable
>unfuckable
>mischling, would bang
>unfuckable
>fuckable, likely mischling
>fuckable by a hair, and not for long

>by grouping uncontroversial accepted types of 'eugenics' with more controversial ones will not make people more accepting of of the controversial ones
Pointless speculation until you know what the "controversial" methods are. We're living in a time where the common person believes selective breeding is pseudo-science. This video is necessary to, 1. explain the concept of heritability and 2. explain that eugenics /= genocide and euthanization
>A policy which does not institute a selection mechanism based off race or biology would not be a gene-based program
A policy solely based on compulsory sterilization in exchange for government assistance would prove to act as a proxy for racial targeting without explicitly carrying the baggage of ethnic targeting. This makes it a possible sell to the public. Some 90% of blacks and 75% of Mexicans would be affected, I thought I already laid this out.
>you failed to respond to any of my arguments
No, you just seem to be a dumb fuck

It's not about incest. It's about eugenics.

The issue is, if we implemented this, then you'd have Nigs and spics chimping out since most of them have double digit IQs in the 80s and they'd all be chemically castrated . And because the '(((tribe)) have pretty much brainwashed a whole generation of shitskins into believing they're only unsuccessful because of whitey and not because they're uttermensch, you'll probably have a civil war in enriched nations . This could only working Homogeneous societies.

Been a JT fan for years, but after watching that video
>god
>damn
he just keeps getting better.

Huwite Chadvocates are getting confident after the Trumpening. This is fantastic. What a timeline, Anons, what a timeline!

When it comes to increasing IQ, Embryo selection is a relatively slow process. Not to mention there's a still a significant IQ gap between niggers and whites and until we get accurate gene scanning technologies and we can accurately predict an IQ of a baby born from these techniques, then you wouldn't see IQ parity, not for another hundred years. Everyone's IQ would rise, but there would still be a significant gap. Not to mention most niggers wouldnt be able to afford this technology.

The question is begged though why do we need a bunch of high IQ people. I will use Brave New World as an example but they kept the gammas (niggers) around for menial task. They would even engineer them to be dumber than they are by adding shit to their clone bath or whatever the fuck. A high IQ janitor will be a commie revolutionary. Bertrand Russel (Fabian socialist)used to write about this type of shit in papers like "The Scientific Outlook".

Disgusting desu

found the hu'white boi

Some of the biggest eugenics proponents were NWO technocrats. People like the Huxleys (funny we are pulling out of UNESCO which was the brain child of Julian Huxley) and Russell and other Fabians.

We need high IQ people because low IQ people are currently out breeding high IQ people throughout much of the west for atleast 80 years nos. We are also experiencing shitskin invasion, which is furthering dysgenics.

Pic related.

The only problem with shitskins are the people bringing them in. Shitskins dont have the tech, infrastructure, or group cohesion to ever be a threat without (((someone))) leading them. The Brits ruled over hundreds of millions of Indians with very few men and basic rifles.

>Today, let's break a taboo.

Is he finally going to name the Jew?

Interesting side note. When I got B& from posting on AMREN it was for discussing freemasons and secret societies. You were allowed to use veiled references to the tribe there, but when you connect the dots to how they infiltrate and undermine our civilizations through their various good-goy clubs, you get banned from a lot of (((alt right))) sites.

Freemasonry and related secret societies is the missing piece of the puzzle that "It's the Jews" alone never seems to explain. Jesuits, Skull and Bones, Knights of Malta, Bohemian Club, CFR, RIIA, TLC, Bilderberg Group, Mormons, etc. etc. etc. All one in the same.

the far right is the only one fuckable. RRRRAAAARGH I just want to get my fingers tangled in that frizz and ride

Got a single fact to back that up faggot?

Dude, no one is talking about today, but you're a fucking idiot if you think this tech wont be here by 2030-2050. Read up on some Stephen Hsu. Alot of ppl in the field are already predict that within the next 5-10 years that they will find a good set of gene states that positively correlate with high IQ. Once that happenings embryo selection based on these genes states won't be too far away. Also, why would a gap still persist? For blacks, all it would mean is that a bigger pool of embryos would have to be created for selection. It just seems you're downplaying this because the idea of no IQ gap existing between niggers means that whiteness becomes irrelevant.

Just like I said. There is alot of stormfags, alt righters, and white identitarians who adamantly do not want the IQ of niggers to be manipulated so it would be on par with whites because they know that would make racial ideology obsolete. Whiteness is the only self-esteem boost that many people in these movements have and they're not going to give it up without a fight.

> Pointless speculation until you know what the "controversial" methods are. We're living in a time where the common person believes selective breeding is pseudo-science. This video is necessary to, 1. explain the concept of heritability and 2. explain that eugenics /= genocide and euthanization

It's not pointless speculation, its a simple logical argument. People aren't sour about eugenics because the concept of selective breeding is distasteful, its because things like racial genocide, euthanization , or sterilization programs fall under the category of eugenics. They don't dislike genocide because it is eugenics. They dislike genocide for other reasons. They find eugenics distasteful because one type of eugenics program, is genocide, which they dislike. Telling people that some uncontroversial things can be thought of eugenics won't make them like the idea of a genocide or any other controversial type of eugenics. It will just make them think eugenics is a very weak type of categorization, which groups things that are very dissimilar.

> A policy solely based on compulsory sterilization in exchange for government assistance would prove to act as a proxy for racial targeting without explicitly carrying the baggage of ethnic targeting. This makes it a possible sell to the public.

This is a completely different train of thought than what I was criticizing about Taylor's rhetorical strategy, and he never suggests anything concrete like this in the video (as you yourself have pointed out). I'm not interested in this new point you are raising, but I will say this is a stupid political strategy, because in order for the strategy to succeed you are relying on your opponent to make a gigantic and obvious mistake. You are relying on them to fail to notice the true effects and intent of the policy, a poor gamble considering that many of your ideological opponents are already aware of this possible avenue of attack.

That doesnt really make much sense user. The objection is that we are about in group self interest and preservation and not about advantaging out groups. Go ask for your hand outs somewhere else.

>The more you speak against white males, the more nazis it will create.

Now that I've said it, it's actually true. Divide and Conquer really does work, huh.