I really like the idea of a culturally homogeneous state. A state that works to make that best out of each of it's citizens. Hell, even National-Socialism has some qualities that sound appealing to me.
But one thing that I will NEVER be on board with is the idea of "racial purity". This seems so ridiculous to me. Is there anyone else on here that agrees with me or is Sup Forums entirely racist?
If the concept a ''culturally homogeneous'' state would work it would have here with all the patriotarding. The only way for their to be a cultural homogeneity would be to make the United States white again. Culture is an extension of DNA.
>even National-Socialism has some qualities that sound appealing to me.
You say this as if it's surprising. National socialism is the best form of government that's been tried so far.
>Culture is an extension of DNA.
I completely disagree. Do you have any proof of this?
>National socialism is the best form of government that's been tried so far.
No not really.
BRAAAAAAAAAPPPPP
Anarcho-capitalism is the dumbest fantasy ever and is never going to happen.
time to start sterilising. How else we gonna be Aryan superstate?
Yeah it actually is the best form of government that's been tried so far. Are you confused?
no one wants to debate you
They do want to live with their own people
Fuck off race mixing faggot
Yeah here's your proof:
>race is DNA
>Blacks vote liberal 95% of the time
>voting preference equals culture
>culture is related to DNA
Yeah I'm sure it was paradise on earth for those that starved in the Dutch winter.
Not to mention the holocaust. But I won't go into that because it's probably a set-in-stone issue for you.
Are you retarded? That's not proof, you just gave me a correlated statistic.
just look at cultures that have the same resources but have different cultures
>
>>Culture is an extension of DNA.
>I completely disagree. Do you have any proof of this?
>As Rutter (2002) noted, ‘Any dispassionate reading of the evidence leads to the inescapable conclusion that genetic factors play a substantial role in the origins of individual differences with respect to all psychological traits, both normal and abnormal’ (p. 2). Put concisely, all psychological traits are heritable.”
i strongly suggest you read this article
I gave you a proof you dumbass. Correlation is absolutely causation in this case.
I don't know man. That article as well as the 2010 paper by Way and Lieberman seem to be based on correlative studies of individuals from different cultural regions. I also have some strong skepticisms about any neuro-analytical study that throws the term "collectivism" around like it's this one singly defined medical term that we can directly link to chemical imbalances in the brain. Seems kind of silly to me.
>in this case.
No, not in any case ever. They are separate words because they have separate meanings.
>
>Yeah I'm sure it was paradise on earth for those that starved in the Dutch winter.
>Not to mention the holocaust. But I won't go into that because it's probably a set-in-stone issue for you.
>muh gulags
>muh holocaust
>muh starving poor
literally all systems have anecdotes like this. the common thread between them is grand narrative. when rationalizing something that seems terrible its a lot easier if your goal is nebulous, distant and huge.
after all, what's so bad about 10 or 20 million dead in the name of the international proletariat, global freedom, global equality or a thousand year reich?
i personally believe any of the major systems can be successful if they keep themselves local, internally-oriented and with their feet on the ground talking of tangible, concrete things
Voting patterns and political leanings seem to be split pretty evenly along racial lines.
Also read these
Pt. 2
How we got here
Moar
>yeah it was bad, what about all those things that didn't happen
You have to think before you respond bud.
Philospohical shit
Aaand just like any other piece of "evidence" presented in this thread, this is yet another example of a correlative statistic.
Except there was no dead as a result of natsoc.
If I were to post the voting trends of shitskins in every white country would you accept that as proof and admit you are wrong or are you just going to keep deflecting?
>But one thing that I will NEVER be on board with is the idea of "racial purity".
That is idiotic.
You need ethnic purity, that is the fundamental groundwork of culture.
If your state isn't ethnically, or racially homogeneous, then you can't even dream of having a culturally homogeneous state.
>Hell, even National-Socialism has some qualities that sound appealing
Everything bad in national socialism comes from disregarding nationalism in favor of Imperialism and "multi-nationalism".
The Idea of a "Reich" is fundamentally disgusting, as it implies a "multi-nation"-state.
Here's a redpill for you:
There can only be cultural homogeneity IF there is not a racial battle for political power.
If there are two distinct races, with distinct interests there will be two distinct cultures that develop around that division. If there's a war to be won, people have to subjugate their individuality to increase the odds of winning the war.
>this is yet another example of a correlative statistic.
Exactly.
But this is not a counter argument, culture differs on racial and ethnic lines.
From the most determined environmentalist to the most hardcore race realist you will find no counter evidence.
"racist" is a fake word. It's not just normal but desirable to prefer your own kind. If you don't like your own kind more than other kinds, there's something severely wrong with you. Interracial relationships should only occur between exceptional members of different races who are so special that they overcome the differences between the bloodlines.
how did you become s a Trotskyite?
What drove you to this sad fate?
No because it would not be proving that the cognitive abilities of these voters are a causation of their genetics.
Yep, just need more poos to not be racist
Did you miss all of this?
Genetic in-groups seem to be very relevant for primates. It is not ideal to be a racial minority and I wouldn't want my offspring reduced to one. Having literally zero sovereign states in the world that are majority white, which is a possibility, seems very reckless and dangerous. I don't think that's really a matter of "racial purity", just a matter of having some baseline ethnic homogeneity that can preserve a clear majority. Eventually the age of gene editing may make these concerns irrelevant, but that could be centuries away.
The end-goal state of a "culturally homogeneous" nation will always be racial purity, seeing how keeping a multi-racial state culturally homogeneous is basically impossible.
OP is a kike or shitskin
>But one thing that I will NEVER be on board with is the idea of "racial purity".
Cue the mutt posting.
>homogenous state
>No racial purity
Are you retarded? They are mutually exclusive.
Not that this necessarily says anything about voting patterns, but we do know that IQ is at least 70% heritable.
>No because it would not be proving that the cognitive abilities of these voters are a causation of their genetics.
It is irrelevant.
Again, everyone between the most hardcore environmentalist to the most hardcore race realist will tell you that culture differs by race.
A cultural homogeneous state IS THE SAME as an ethnically homogeneous state, up to like 99% or so.
I'd say it is. Cultures are not seperate from race. Try find a single example of different races with the same culture. Even newer cultures, like how African Americans have developed their own sort of culture, is developed from their racial experiences, seperate from everyone else.
I don't care if it happens naturally. I just don't want ethnic cleansing, mass encampment and/or deportation, and genocide.
Fuck off chink
>I just don't want ethnic cleansing, mass encampment and/or deportation, and genocide.
But none of that is necessary for an ethnically pure state.
There are a billion ways to change ethnic purity, without any violence.
> (You)
>I don't know man. That article as well as the 2010 paper by Way and Lieberman seem to be based on correlative studies of individuals from different cultural regions. I also have some strong skepticisms about any neuro-analytical study that throws the term "collectivism" around like it's this one singly defined medical term that we can directly link to chemical imbalances in the brain. Seems kind of silly to me.
if you're capable of that level of critique, then i woukd recommend that you pursue your own investigations.
there's also quantitative data that shows new world settlers have very similar political proclivities as their country of origin. i forget the author but minnesota (swedes) and wisconsin (polish germans) were the subject. that shouldn't be too hard to find, and it should address your first point.
i'm unaware of any psychological traits at all that have since been shown to be more environmentally influenced. its important to know that quantitative genetics infers. its totally fine that they talk about behaviors as such, because they're just trying to be predictive, which they are. the brain structure behind it is unimportant. once environment is controlled for, a genetic correlation can start explaining things. you can infer d from ab without c if you know that abcd is the order that it goes in
youtube.com
checked and true
If it happens naturally, then I don't care. But knowing human behavior and human history, dehumanizing entire demographics of people leads to some very ugly things. There can never be any peaceful ethnic cleansing. It can only be natural over time or it will be a bloodbath.
>I just don't want ethnic cleansing, mass encampment and/or deportation, and genocide.
None of which would have to happen if they'd just fuck off peacefully by themselves, but they won't.
I'm all for telling the minorities to get lost peacefully.
If they don't leave, there's going to be a bloodbath one way or another. You see the problem.... In the future it will get worse. White people will get more and more desperate.
Everybody can see the train heading for the wall.... And when we do, all the good intentions in the world aren't going to be enough to stop the violence.
>If it happens naturally, then I don't care.
Well, those ugly things happen naturally too, so why do you care?
>If it happens naturally, then I don't care.
Of course it won't happen naturally.
But you can do it just by enforcing certain laws:
Most obvious ban all Immigration from the outside ethnic-groups.
Fund parents from your ethnic group and other ways to increase the birth rate of your population.
Pay people to leave.
Help create ethno states for other demographics.
None of that is violent and within a couple of generations you probably can get to 99% purity.
If you want to be mean you can also:
Stop giving citizenship to children of the ethnic group.
Enact laws to prevent other ethnic groups from working in your country.
But this isn't even necessary.
>There can never be any peaceful ethnic cleansing. It can only be natural over time or it will be a bloodbath.
Yes, in the past migration and war were synonymous, so obviously immigration was an act of war, thus bloody.
>The Reich Food Estate, the state-controlled corporation responsible for agricultural production, regularly failed to feed its people. Agricultural output rarely surpassed 1913 levels, in spite of 20 years of technological advancement. Demand outstripped supply by 30 percent in basic foodstuffs like pork, fruit, and fats. That meant that for every ten German workers who stood in line to buy meat from the state-owned supply depots, three went home hungry.
Now fuckoff
>culturally homo-
Stopped Reading There
Racial purity is a bit austistic imo.
I really don't care what your background is or what colour your eyes are, as long as your background is 100% European then i don't care.
The absolute STATE of civic ‘nationalists’
This isn't accurate, there have been many peaceful population movements throughout history. Coolidge ethnically cleansed many mestizos from the US in the 1920s. Operation Wetback had peaceful mass-deportations. When Austria-Hungary broke up there were certainly tensions, but most of the population shifts were overwhelmingly peaceful.
What is your definition of natural? The fact is, when you import tens of millions of people from foreign ethnic groups into a country, you're going to have radical ethnic shifts and replacements one way or another. Is "white flight" natural? Isn't is basically the ethnic cleansing of whites from major urban centers? Is it okay because whites weren't literally forced to move, but moved in response to the importation of black populations (often through government programs) that causes crime rates to skyrocket and made much of the cities unliveable? Wouldn't it be possible for a government to use economic and cultural invectives like this to cause people to relocate?
>Racial purity is autistic
>but this more specific category is not autistic
I can get on board with this. As long as you’re white I don’t care. Real eye opener is when I worked with some guy and I would have sworn hands down he was 100% English but turns out his grandad was Estonian and he had a Estonian last name. But if his grandad was otumbungu Muhammad oliwaka then how would I ever accept him as my own?
>I really like the idea of a culturally homogeneous state. A state that works to make that best out of each of it's citizens. Hell, even National-Socialism has some qualities that sound appealing to me.
>But one thing that I will NEVER be on board with is the idea of "racial purity". This seems so ridiculous to me. Is there anyone else on here that agrees with me or is Sup Forums entirely racist?
so you're down with civic national socialism. you should look into fascism. they were much more flexible on the ethnic question. the idea was to maintain cohesion with a group myth, involving the past and future, in the practice of collective action (building a nation together)
i think, however, that you're severely underestimating biology. 'racism' is nonsense made up to deny in-group preference. this is demonstrable in all human sub-species, their infants all the way down the evolutionary ladder to fish. combating racism will never be a reasonable task, combating excessive conflict that may result from it is. once you eliminate ethnic imperialism, its hard to say how racism is reasonably thought of as a problem.
that said, if that's what you want, fine. look into fascism.
The faggot won't respond to me, he's a shill.
>as long as your background is 100% European then i don't care.
This "romanian" """person""" comes up to you and tells you he's 100% European, how do you determine whether or not he's saying the truth right on the spot?
...
When the greeks and italians starting to immigrate to Australia in the 50s and 60s a lot of the whites here pretty much didn't like them and treated them as out cast, how ever eventually we warmed up to them because we realised they come here and don't cause any problems and helped build the country, because they are European.
I remember i saw this cunt post on here once saying he wanted to start an ethno state for blue eyed people.
Meaning he would rather take an asian,black or hispanic with blue eyes (i know it would be rare) over a white person with green eyes.
He's not Romanian. Yeah he might of been born there but you can tell his ancestors immigrated from somewhere outside of Europe.
Yes, but how can you tell?
>Eventually the age of gene editing may make these concerns irrelevant, but that could be centuries away.
not gene-editing but almost as good. they can select for iq at least
If you aren't sure do a genetic test.
Because you can tell just by looking at him.
Notice how i said you background must be 100% european? Not fucking 56%.
I agree completely, but some racial exclusion and incredibly selective immigration systems will be necessary.
In order to stay culturally homogenous you need to keep people from feeling like they belong to a subculture due to their ancestry or skin. (Think blacks in America) you also need to prevent immigration from culturally incompatible peoples (Think the middle East and Islam). The eventual result is that the only culturally homogenous society is a racially homogenous one.
i see it same way
Where's my fucking civic nationalism meme!!!!!
>Notice how i said you background must be 100% european? Not fucking 56%.
But I thought racial purity is autistic?
Mutt
I don't really care what people's race is, I'm more concerned with intelligence. I wish we could deport/exterminate anyone with an IQ under 95, unless they can demonstrate an exceptional level of other intelligence (creativity, labour/mechanical). If that means 99% of niggers and latino mutts, then so be it. They can take the dumb whites too because I'm not importing trailer trash into an ethnostate.
>Subjects our basic heritability claims that already have tons of evidence to even deeper levels of rigor
>Spews this garbage without even attempting to justify the necessary causal connection between the two
Try to be less of a joke my man
Its so obvious though... IQ is highly heritable so are psychological traits, and the genetic expression of genetics increasing as one gets older meaning that one becomes more as one is genetically.
Everything you are now is because of genetics, environment plays a factor, but how one reacts to environment is still the work of your genes so it could be said that its 100% genetic.
Your personality cannot be something which was created outside of material existence, religious people believe this, but if we go on what we know then we clearly see that the universe is causal, everything that exists now is the cause of something previous, that goes for biology, psychology and even culture, everything, nothing comes into existence out of nothing except at the beginning of existence.
Place person A and B in hostile environment C and you WILL NOT see the same adaptation, A might be predisposed to reacting differently than C, why this reaction is different can ONLY be explained by genetics.
Isn't hat OP is implying that he is agaisnt full purity as in, an ethno state for anglos and for celts and then one for blonde hair blue eyes ?
What i'm saying is it doesn't matter if you are 50% slav and 50% anglo or 50% italian and 50% nordic.
I fucked up many things in this text pls forgive.
> everything that exists now is the result of a previous cause
> A might be predisposed to reacting differently than B
OP you can't have cultural homogeneity without racial/ethnic purity, I know that sucks to say but it's a simple fact.
Niggers will always nig.
Chinks will always chink.
Crackers will always cracker.
Spics will always spic.
It's not the truth I want to hear, but it is the one that we all know lies at the bottom of our hearts.
The best you can hope for is kind of like what we tried to do in the States, but even in our experiment it seems that has failed. Niggers and spics and chinks feel no real connection to USA's history or celebrations because a vast majority of them are in honor of white people and the cultural norms of Europe. And you can't blame them for that. Sure, the blacks got MLK, the spics Dia de Los Muertos, the chinks Chinese New Year, but how do YOU feel about those events? Sure, they can be fun and all, but I will never ever feel the same way about those events as I do Halloween, Christmas or Veterans Day. Those events are for "those" people. Pure cultural homogeneity is just an idealistic dream. People, after all, make the culture.
...
FUCK those CAKES!!!!!! mmmm... i want me some greek daddy ass >>:DD