Race is a distraction, classical liberalism and enlightenment values "western" values are what made the west great...

Race is a distraction, classical liberalism and enlightenment values "western" values are what made the west great, and the thing that is really under attack.

Other urls found in this thread:

archive.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/
academic.oup.com/esr/article/32/1/54/2404332
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Race is a distraction, class is the real issue.

Okay

Classical liberalism is what destroyed Rhodesia and sent all those white people to death

Western values were possible only due to the western people
Western equals white
"Classical liberalism" is cancer
Kill yourself

Commie fuck. Ashamed to be a Dane now..

>i don't understand what classical liberalism is

why not both? multiple things can be 'real issues'
why do we have to reduce all problems to one thing?

How did you get the impression that I'm commie?
I believe in meritocracy, a fundamental part of classical liberalism

How about classical liberalism and enlightened western values for people that will actually share them. People that share a common history through their ancestors? Not recent barbaric migrants coming here to profit from our system, for the money and the best women.

There's a distinction between race and immigration. We should protect our values, but there's no point in reducing individual to groups like race. It's antithetical to the western egalitarian values that capitalism and meritocracy are based around. There's no value in making racial distinctions, or giving benefits to races, or anything at all in relation to race. Being a hypocrite is not the way to solve the real issues in relation to race.
Immigration can be a scourge to western values, but it's not directly tied to race.

How many times do people need to see this? Western culture is created by western peoples.

...

>russia is africa tier
>asians beat out many white countries on most metrics
hmmm

Hoppe writes "There would be little or no ‘tolerance’ and ‘openmindedness’ so dear to left-libertarians. Instead, one would be on the right path toward restoring the freedom of association and exclusion implied in the institution of private property". Hoppe writes that towns and villages could have warning signs saying "no beggars, bums, or homeless, but also no homosexuals, drug users, Jews, Moslems, Germans, or Zulus".[32][33]

Hoppe writes:

In a covenant concluded among proprietor and community tenants for the purpose of protecting their private property, no such thing as a right to free (unlimited) speech exists, not even to unlimited speech on one's own tenant-property. One may say innumerable things and promote almost any idea under the sun, but naturally no one is permitted to advocate ideas contrary to the very purpose of the covenant of preserving and protecting private property, such as democracy and communism. There can be no tolerance toward democrats and communists in a libertarian social order. They will have to be physically separated and expelled from society. Likewise, in a covenant founded for the purpose of protecting family and kin, there can be no tolerance toward those habitually promoting lifestyles incompatible with this goal. They – the advocates of alternative, non-family and kin-centered lifestyles such as, for instance, individual hedonism, parasitism, nature-environment worship, homosexuality, or communism – will have to be physically removed from society, too, if one is to maintain a libertarian order.[9]

You‘re on pol, we come here to larp as nazis for extra edgyness.

Race matters, look up the statistics

Did I say anything about liberalism? It's an useless system.
Swallow the classpill kammerat.
Neolibs are not commies and commies don't support idpol.

>classical liberalism and enlightenment values "western" values are what made the west great
also not having too many niggers and mudshits

>Did I say anything about liberalism?
nej, mente at linke

there's a lot of nuance there, you can't really make tests removed from environment.
That said, I never said that there is no distinction between races, it's just that it has no significance.

Even prominent enlightenment scholars understood natural differences between races. I don't have those founding father quotes and black sun portraits saved to my phone, but someone here will know what I mean. At the peak of the enlightenment, the USA was founded as an explicitly white ethnostate. More importantly, why do you deny evolution user?

Again, I don't deny there are differences with races. I'm just saying that meritocracy inherently judges on an individual level to work, sons of doctors are almost always smarter than sons of fast food managers, but we treat them the same and let the exceptions climb the ranks of society. The realization that most/some blacks are dumb changes nothing, it is a non-issue.

Actually, do this one next. Never heard an egalitarian stump this point. Instead, they claim that incident reports compiled by Loretta Lynch's Department of Justice are racist social constructs.

Classical liberalism and enlightenment values are based on the white race. Only if you secure the existence of white people and a future for white children you will see those ideas in practice.

the problem with blacks isn't wealth from my perspective, it's culture. Blacks insulate themselves with other blacks in black culture, which is aggressive, macho, homophobic and generally very tense. Parents are expected to be abusive and other issues, and crime is seen as a legitimate way of social mobility.
also, see

Meritocracy is not what we have now. For as long as the dogma of blank-slate egalitarianism has hold on public consciousness, equal opportunity will be conflated with equal outcome, and black failure will be met with further "leveling of the playing field" by offering unfair advantages. On top of this, the tendency of all peoples who aren't held back by institutional shame toward tribalism turns multiethnic democracy into a spoils system. On top of even that, diversity erodes trust and makes people unhappy. Give me a few minutes to provide evidence, I'm being a cancerous phoneposter.

I agree we don't have meritocracy, we should work on that. egalitarianism is not at fault for people conflating equal opportunity and equal outcome, communism is, and that communist agenda is given fuel every time some spastic screams about racial superiority and what have you, you're giving them recruiting material.

>if i ignore genetic science then it won't matter right guys?

archive.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/
>The downside of diversity: A Harvard political scientist finds that diversity hurts civic life. What happens when a liberal scholar unearths an inconvenient truth?
academic.oup.com/esr/article/32/1/54/2404332
>Does Ethnic Diversity Have a Negative Effect on Attitudes towards the Community? A Longitudinal Analysis of the Causal Claims within the Ethnic Diversity and Social Cohesion Debate

Well, you addressed a third of my points then called me a spastic. Even Aristotle understood that multiethnic societies were given to injustice and held together by force rather than fraternity, and our scholars are reawakening to that fact (when allowed to conduct research honestly, and even then only after apologizing and offering polite alternatives to their actual findings).

What did I fail to address?

>the problem with blacks isn't wealth from my perspective, it's culture
the problem is their genetics

The withering effect diversity has on social capital and trust, the fact that culture and race influence each other in a feedback loop (so attributing behavior either to nature or nurture alone is disingenuous), the fact that ethnic tribes make calculated political decisions in their own interests. Let's throw in MAO-A i.e. The "Warrior Gene" and its variants while we're at it.

>ethnic tribes make calculated political decisions in their own interests
unless you're niggers

what is your solution to this?

allow races to segregate themselves and don't force "diversity" in school/work

how would you segregate races?

True but it doesnt change the fact that most hated races are the ugly ones. Whats the point of trying to take down the patriarchy if if every person in the world cant stand to look at eachother.

We don't need to "do" anything, people naturally segregate. And whites are quite good at it because they have a lot more mobility than blacks do so they can just leave when the numbers turn unfavorable.

what is actually preventing this if it happens organically?

Eurocentric immigration policy, cut all affirmative action and gibd, dramatically relaxe self-defense laws to deal with the inevitable rioting from cutting gibs, relegalize freedom of association (private discrimination) so individuals can decide whom to hire and whom to provide goods and services without coercion. If you're a real individualist, you'll agree at least that forced association and wealth redistribution are barbaric from an enlightenment moral perspective.

I can't tell if you're being obtuse on purpose or actually don't know. Lawsuits and threat of prison time keep this from happening. Freedom of association was demolished here by the Civil Rights Act. Maybe Denmark still has free association, but I'd be shocked if that were the case.

i said "allow races to segregate themselves"

you know, how black people are saying they want their own dorms and stuff like that. white people want to get away from blacks so they move out into the suburbs when blacks move into their neighborhoods. muslims want their own sharia zones.

the government prevents this. there are laws and constitutional amendments that prevent any self-segregation like this. the laws against discrimination are being used outside of their original purview as you can see with the forced hiring of unqualified minorities and women into tech and stem jobs. you don't see anyone complain that blacks are over-represented in professional sports; you don't see anyone complain that men are over-represented in the oil drilling industry where you are required to manhandle equipment that can and will kill/maim you if you're not strong enough to control it.

what else prevents it? our government's policies. did you know that the obama administration specifically targeted white neighborhoods and white towns for section 8 and other income-assisted housing projects?

>you know, how black people are saying they want their own dorms and stuff like that. white people want to get away from blacks so they move out into the suburbs when blacks move into their neighborhoods. muslims want their own sharia zones.
none of this is illegal. except for sharia zones, which are a humans right violation

gj reading more than the first 3 lines of the post

>classical liberalism and enlightenment values "western" values are what made the west great

Enlightenment values gave us civic cuckoldism and started this fucking disaster of an experiment you absolute retard

Bring back monarchy and expel the Saracens already

Did you almost write judeo-christian?
I'm sure you did.

>prolonging the thread by only reading parts of detractors' posts at a time
Can or can't you decide to sell a house, serve a patron, or offer employment, for any reason, without legal repercussions?

Fuck off back to the British Isles with that talk. See what good the Queen does for the saracen problem.

Consider the following: You only think that because you live in a 95% white country. Race is extremely important and a biological construct.

there's a difference between allowing segregation and forbidding integration, people are allowed to segregate as long as everyone agrees to it.

"Yes" or "no" would have sufficed.
>as long as everyone agrees to it
Let's play this out:
>Jakob: Sorry, I don't want to sell my house to you- I want to preserve the ethnocultural homogeneity of the neighborhood
>Mehmet: WTF I don't agree to this! I'll see you in court racist kuffar!
So the answer is "no".

again, this is not about allowing segregation, it's about forbidding integration. You say that people naturally segregate, so why would mehmet want a house in a white neighborhood?

>again, this is not about allowing segregation, it's about forbidding integration.

>implying moving into a white neighborhood constitutes integration

bump. only issue should be ending degeneracy. any race issues will sort themselves out after that. race threads on here are 99% shills.

You Euros have no clue what non-whites are like. No fucking idea.

Americans have been dealing with the POX for centuries. They are a fucking plague.

THEY AREN'T CAPABLE OF BEHAVING LIKE WHITE PEOPLE!

Well as a non white I can say you are right however, most non whites don't respect wester and classical liberal values. Only white ppl do, so if you want to keep them, you need white people.

>supports class struggle
>also supports BLM and SJW
Choose one and only one faggot

...

This is true. Most race baiting is the left trying to make the right more unsympathetic.

...

lmao @ your life

Classical liberalism and the enlightenment is exactly what got us here you dumb fuck. Why do you think the French revolution was opposed by all the monarchies of Europe? It was a scheme by the Jews to install values of "equality" and "liberty" into people, which has resulted in the utter abomination that we have today.

(((Values))) are distraction race is what made west great.

Nah you shit, classical liberalism is what brought us in this position the first place.

Oh look, another tabula rasa retard

Nonwhites want the amenities and security of white neighborhoods, but those things disappear when the neighborhoods lose their white majority. Yes, it IS about allowing segregation. You asked me what solutions I had to problems you couldn't address, and I answered in good faith. You asked what barrier exists to free association, and I answered that the law stands in the way. Rather than acknowledge that barrier and oppose or even defend it, you shifted away and claimed free association is beside the point. It is not. It is a bedrock principle of liberal individualism, and its denial is communistic at its core.
Thank you, this is way more succinct. Stop doing this OP.

Thanks for proving my point.

BASED

this

>what is ideological subversion?

Classical liberalism is slow-mo fascism. I do appreciate it, but I don't want the state doing anything besides ensuring protection.

Capitalism and meritocracies are highly anti-egalitarian, competition is anti-egalitarian. Egalitarianism is a fictional straight-jacket, and a free market, of voluntary association or disassoiation is the largest force of specialization and inequality, both socially and economically. The market does a better job of weeding out the stupid and lazy than any government ever will, and as such, the stupid and lazy people and their stupid and lazy cultures.
The only way to maintain an egalitarian world-view is through sheer ignorance, and the only way to develop a egalitarian society is through forceful redistribution, which is anti-liberal.

Race is a distraction.
In fact, everything that has nothing to do with your own nation, is a distraction.
Syrians getting fucked over by USA's secret ops and doings? A distraction.
Africans fucking themselves over? A distraction.
Fuck everything else, but your own tribe/race/family/area.

Fuck all those cunts from third world countries. FUCK EM.

This is what matters

...

Oh look, he got called out for shifting the terms of the debate, and now he's gone without a trace. Disappointing, but not surprising. Nothing left to see here boys, pack it up.

What societies need, is not race, but caste, for it shows the mettle of bloodlines and their ability to be better than others.
Kings will be kings, paupers will be paupers. You can't change what your blood dictates.Save that shit for shonen manga.
If only progressive libtard faggots of my country understood, things would've been better. Low caste scum should stick to their respective jobs