ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2014 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Monday, May 06, 2013

The blessings of diversity

In a previous post, the Responsible Puppet commented that one area where he agrees with John Piper and disagrees with me is on the subject of "Race: is Diversity good?"

I find the idea that diversity of race is considered a positive attribute for a society to be a fascinating argument, considering that it more or less flies in the face of the entire written history of humanity.  Regardless of whether one considers the relatively small Italian immigration into Constantinople, the larger scale Mongolian immigration into Russia and Eastern Europe, the European colonization of the Americas, or the much more recent immigration of the third world into Great Britain, the results are inevitably bad for the native population.

As this example from Brooklyn demonstrates, one can't even count on the most rudimentary aspects of civilized society to be preserved once the demographic makeup of that society shifts beyond a certain point.  The mail was reliably delivered across a Wild and homogenous West when the technology was limited to horses, and yet this is nevertheless more than diverse 21st century Brooklyn can manage.
Snow, rain and gloom of night might not slow Brownsville mailmen down — but gangbangers sure will. Postmen are too scared to deliver letters and packages to one of Brooklyn’s most crime-ravaged neighborhoods, a US Postal Service worker told The Post yesterday....

“The postal workers have a right to fear for their life,” said Quantanya White, 38, a home health-care worker. “It doesn’t give them the right not to deliver the mail. Just because this place is bad, you’re not going to deliver the mail?
I should be very interested to hear the Puppet - or, for that matter, John Piper's - explanation for why there is such a reliable correlation between the way in which a society functions and its demographic patterns.  Equality in Jesus Christ should not be confused with equality in anything else.  This should not be a difficult concept for anyone who isn't willing to swap his heart surgeon for a fry cook with Down's Syndrome on the basis of their mutual Christianity.

Labels:

343 Comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 343 of 343
Blogger Markku May 06, 2013 7:26 PM  

"Diversity is code for anti-white."

I know this is a meme that Alt-right is very consciously trying to get out there. But I'm not sure this is the right approach. Our natural target audience is those with an affinity for truth, whereas the left's is for lies. Our target audience will respond worse if they feel they are being manipulated.

Anonymous VD May 06, 2013 7:27 PM  

Watch your mouth, Telluride, or your comments won't remain. And you're still wrong. The fact that the Brooklyn situation is not yet rampant everywhere doesn't support your point. It merely means that the vibrancy is, as yet, insufficient in those neighborhoods. One does not have the same services in Detroit or in Washington DC that one does in less diverse cities.

In Paris, there are entire districts where even the police no longer go thanks to the extreme vibrancy there. There are nights where the numbers of burned cars are in the hundreds. You are a parochial who simply has no idea what he's talking about.

Blogger Markku May 06, 2013 7:28 PM  

Phony clearly didn't like his new nickname.

Anonymous Anonymous May 06, 2013 7:30 PM  

And Crude, I've been to some absolutely poverty stricken areas in Asia and South America. Never felt threatened as I felt threatened in black areas of cities here in the US. Not even close. Of course, I wasn't looking for trouble, but trouble wasn't looking for me either. I went to school in Philadelphia. Here's a little experiment. If you have a bike and an Ipod or MP3 player or whatever, go ahead and stick the earphones in your ears but don't turn the music on. Then ride through a crowded black area or through a black event and hear what's said about you (I'm guessing you're white). I've done it and what I heard made my blood run cold.

- Foofoo Jones

Anonymous Anonymous May 06, 2013 7:33 PM  

RE: Detroit

The Ruins of Detroit. Mr. Day, you may do as you wish with this link:

http://www.marchandmeffre.com/detroit/index.html

- Foofoo Jones

Anonymous Cajun May 06, 2013 7:34 PM  

Markku, honest question - where is the manipulation in the meme? And where is it not truthful?

Anonymous Crude May 06, 2013 7:37 PM  

Foofoo,

And Crude, I've been to some absolutely poverty stricken areas in Asia and South America. Never felt threatened as I felt threatened in black areas of cities here in the US. Not even close. Of course, I wasn't looking for trouble, but trouble wasn't looking for me either. I went to school in Philadelphia.

Same problem. That's the issue - you never get race independent of culture or vice versa. Any experience you can tell me about dealing with race X is also going to involve telling me about your experiences with culture X at the same time. It's not like I'd have a problem admitting to racial differences apart from culture if I saw the evidence - what the hell do I care, especially insofar as I'm some anonymous guy online? But I need that evidence (compelling arguments, etc), and I need more than observations about how shitty such and such a given black-dominated city is.

Anonymous VD May 06, 2013 7:41 PM  

So a Christian white man has a Christian son who brings home a Christian black girl and wants to marry her.

You believe that if he does it will cause the family to be dragged down (short term) and that this will add to the possibility that our nation will be bred out of existence (long term).


You really need to stop thinking in binary terms. It's just stupid, Jamsco. First, it doesn't work that way. A multiracial marriage is 2.3x more likely a black man and a white girl. Second, he's more likely to impregnate her and not marry her than to marry her. Third, if he does marry her, he's more likely to cheat on her or simply leave her; black male/white female marriages have 2x the divorce rate of white/white marriages.

So, yes. You're stacking the odds against your children by encouraging multiracial relationships. If you wouldn't encourage them to marry a product of divorce or a drug addict, you shouldn't encourage them to marry diversely.

You believe that if he does it will make it more likely that violence will be done in that family (short term) and that it will cause more "daughters raped and sons butchered" in the neighborhood or city (long term)

Yes. No question about this.

You also believe that God is against this specific marriage because "God repeatedly warned the Israelite not to intermarry".

No, that's taking it too far. I think there is sufficient Biblical evidence to make it obvious that God cannot possibly be described as generally favoring intermarriages.

Anonymous cheddarman May 06, 2013 7:42 PM  

However, I was mugged in an all white neighborhood once by a 17 year old white kid with a gun and a knife who could not speak decent english. - "Telluride"

Was that right after you propositioned him, "Telluride" I mean "A. man" I mean "Tad?"

sincerely

Cheddarman

Anonymous Anonymous May 06, 2013 7:44 PM  

"But I need that evidence (compelling arguments, etc), and I need more than observations about how shitty such and such a given black-dominated city is."

Like what? Finances, crime rates, educational issues, welfare usage...

- Foofoo Jones

Anonymous Red May 06, 2013 7:45 PM  

"My amateur understanding is that Haiti, despite being some little island, actually had multiple tribes living on it at the time of colonization. "

You're quite wrong. Haiti is entirely populated by African slaves brought over after natives where worked to death by the french. They gained total independence by winning a war against France.


"Meanwhile I've heard - I think possibly from Vox himself - that in the US, the very outnumbered blacks were becoming more 'white' in terms of culture for decades, until around the 1950s or 1960s. And then calamity struck."

The south was running a old school eugenics/breeding program with blacks. They gave affirmative action jobs to middle class blacks and encouraging them to live up to the standard daughters don't pump out kids unless married to a land owning man. This resulted in the more civilized reproducing at a good clip while the feral lower black classes where oppressed by the state and had produced fewer children. Btw, is the standard protestant eugenics program that Europe ran since the start of the reformation on it's own population.

Blacks were given freedom in the 1960s and begin acting just like the Haitians did. They returned to breeding program of rewarding the most violent males with lots of off spring and began to prey on the very white groups that gave them freedom. This is normal behavior for blacks were violent domination of other groups or complete subservience is the norm. Giving them freedom triggered the violent dominance pattern of behavior. Oppression triggers the subservience pattern of behavior. It's in the genes and it's frankly a binary equation with the feral elements of the population.

There are civilized black groups. The Tutsi and Ashanti civilized themselves though centuries of good culture(I.E. good breeding) and killing anyone who didn't tow the line. When Europeans showed up in areas inhabited by either of these groups they were greatly impressed by how much like themselves they found both groups to be. It was the progressive anti slavery movement that resulted in the destruction and enslavement of both of theirs groups by the feral African groups around them.

Anonymous DonReynolds May 06, 2013 7:53 PM  

To answer your question, Foofoo Jones, I have the answer on authority of a History professor, when I was a freshman in college. I asked four questions in American History during my first class before being the first person kicked out of class and forevermore banned from taking any history classes. (Silly me. I thought it was OK to ask questions in college classes.)

1. Having explored all of the achievements of the Indian empires in Mexico and South America, such as a working calendar, money, religion, government, agriculture, mathematics and astronomy, we also say they were primitive savages. What was it that made them primitive and the Spanish considered civilized? To which, the professor said, the difference was gunpowder. (I am serious and he was an old prof.)

2. So when the primitive savages acquired gunpowder and the weapons that used gunpowder, then they became civilized? The professor (and department head) of history said he had read 53 books on the subject, which made him a walking authority on the subject. (I had just got out the Army the month before so I had no way of knowing.)

3. So I asked the man politely, did all 53 books agree with each other on this subject? He assured me that was absolutely true. (I already knew no two history books agreed on much at all.)

4. So I said, then you could have just read ONE book and got the same amount of information? His immediate response was to order me OUT OF HIS CLASS, do not come back, and NEVER sign up for another history class at this college! (This had never happened before.)

So I went down to the Dean of Students office and asked the dean what this means and he said it means I will take the advanced placement exam in American History. When? Right now, of course. Well wait a minute, let me go home and read the text over the weekend and come back on Monday. He said, NO.....you are such a smart ass, you get to take the test right now. So I took out my new pencil and took the test. I did not hear anything about my score until the next year when I noticed that my transcript showed 9 quarter hours of American History with a grade of A.

So now you know what civilization is.

Anonymous Crude May 06, 2013 7:55 PM  

Red,

You're quite wrong. Haiti is entirely populated by African slaves brought over after natives where worked to death by the french. They gained total independence by winning a war against France.

Like I said: at the time of colonization. It's not like Haiti was initially uninhabited was it? I'm sure after that point things get more cloudy.

Foofoo,

Like what? Finances, crime rates, educational issues, welfare usage...

Finding the Welfare Gene in blacks. Really, what I'm asking for is probably impractical to get. The problem is, when relevant data is impractical to acquire, I don't believe in full-bore committing myself to a good guess. I stay skeptical, even if I lean one way or another on intuition.

Anonymous Eric May 06, 2013 8:03 PM  

Crude,

I think I'm kind of in the same boat as you, but leaning more to the Voxian position.

However, how much evidence do you require to make up your mind? Preponderance? Reasonable doubt? Shadow of a doubt?

Just curious.

Anonymous Anonagain May 06, 2013 8:05 PM  

Hey, Crude, do you think it's just a cultural thing that all professional basketball teams are composed of a majority of blacks? If not, then why not?

Anonymous Telluride May 06, 2013 8:08 PM  

"It doesn't matter how intelligent or violent or good a diverse community is. The fact is that it is genocidal and disruptive to the host population."

Genocidal???

Drama much???

Blogger Markku May 06, 2013 8:08 PM  

Markku, honest question - where is the manipulation in the meme? And where is it not truthful?

It is true. The manipulation is not in the message but the method. At least personally if someone gives me a slogan, and doesn't identify it as a slogan, I'm going to feel as if he thinks me some lay figure that can only understand rhetoric.

Anonymous Porky May 06, 2013 8:10 PM  

Don Reynolds: So now you know what civilization is.

No, we really don't. Vox says it's "advancement" but that can't be true can it? I mean - RU486 is pretty advanced. Abortion techniques of today are way more advanced than the coathangers of the 1950's.

Doesn't it seem disingenuous to fault blacks for being violent and dangerous, only to demand that they be more like the "civilized" Europeans who happily butchered each other endlessly for century after century? Seems to me they are doing exactly what European "advanced civilization" taught them to do - expand and guard your territory, and find better and more brutal ways to kill.

That is civilization. That is history.

Anonymous Telluride May 06, 2013 8:13 PM  

"One does not have the same services in Detroit or in Washington DC that one does in less diverse cities."

You have no idea what you are talking about. When was the last time you were in DC? I guarantee I've been there more often and more recently than you. Furthermore I can guarantee I've spent more time in Paris than you ever will. So, stop talking out your ass.

Your argument boils down to "It may not yet be as I say it is, but that's only because it isn't as I say it is yet."

Again, go back to your elf fantasies. It's where your ideas flourish.

Anonymous Anonagain May 06, 2013 8:13 PM  

Crude, it is just a cultural thing that even with all the Affirmative Action, the majority of Nobel Laureates are all white people? Or is science just SWPL? Wait. Is SWPL a cultural thing too?

Anonymous realmatt May 06, 2013 8:15 PM  

Don Reynolds: So now you know what civilization is.

No, we really don't. Vox says it's "advancement" but that can't be true can it? I mean - RU486 is pretty advanced. Abortion techniques of today are way more advanced than the coathangers of the 1950's.

Doesn't it seem disingenuous to fault blacks for being violent and dangerous, only to demand that they be more like the "civilized" Europeans who happily butchered each other endlessly for century after century? Seems to me they are doing exactly what European "advanced civilization" taught them to do - expand and guard your territory, and find better and more brutal ways to kill.

That is civilization. That is history.


Civilized humans regard violence as an aspect of life, and usually use it, or attempt to use it, as a last resort.

The savage lives and breathes violence day in and day out. The civilized man compartmentalizes it.

Violence is never going to go away. No one is suggesting that.

Anonymous Telluride May 06, 2013 8:15 PM  

"No, that's taking it too far. I think there is sufficient Biblical evidence to make it obvious that God cannot possibly be described as generally favoring intermarriages."

Behold....the lunatic speaks!!

Anonymous Anonagain May 06, 2013 8:19 PM  

Why is there no SBBL? Rape, food stamps, welfare, retarded hand gestures, pants falling down, robbing convenience stores, monkey music, frad chickun, chitlins...

Oh.

Blogger Markku May 06, 2013 8:23 PM  

You really need to stop thinking in binary terms. It's just stupid, Jamsco.

I think what he wants to find out is if your point of view is absolute or not. As in, should we do anything in our power to stop the marriage, even if it is between two Christians of opposite races, both of which we know from our church. After all, if intermarriage is sinful in itself, then there can be no exceptions.

Or if it is merely a default starting point to take a negative view on the prospective marriage, unless we have specific reasons to think otherwise.

Anonymous Shut up, Tad May 06, 2013 8:26 PM  

Shut up, Tad.

Anonymous Anonymous May 06, 2013 8:35 PM  

"You have no idea what you are talking about. When was the last time you were in DC? I guarantee I've been there more often and more recently than you. Furthermore I can guarantee I've spent more time in Paris than you ever will. So, stop talking out your ass."

Spend some time in the cities I have mentioned: Detroit, East St. Louis, Camden...Then you will know about how the negro lives.

- Foofoo Jones

Anonymous Porky May 06, 2013 8:35 PM  

realmatt: Civilized humans regard violence as an aspect of life, and usually use it, or attempt to use it, as a last resort.

Lol! Caesar started the Gallic Wars because he needed cash. The history of europe is one war after another by one bloodthirsty civilization after another.

WTF are you talking about?

Violence is never going to go away. No one is suggesting that.

If anything, advanced violence is the sign of an advanced society.

Anonymous Anonagain May 06, 2013 8:35 PM  

Why is the apoplectic tard allowed to comment? A banned anklebiter by any other name is still as banned.

Markku, in the absence of the host, don't you have the nuking powers?

Anonymous TWS May 06, 2013 8:36 PM  

Telluride = Luscinia

Just the way to bet. Although Luscinia does make more sense.

Anonymous Matthew May 06, 2013 8:39 PM  

So a Christian white man has a Christian son who brings home a Christian black girl and wants to marry her.

Use of this example, as opposed to the far more common and far more disruptive BM/WF mating, strongly suggests disingenuousness.

Anonymous VD May 06, 2013 8:40 PM  

Furthermore I can guarantee I've spent more time in Paris than you ever will. So, stop talking out your ass.

Sure you have, Telluride. I can tell you're so very Euro. Spent a lot of time in the banlieus looking for young Algerians, I'm sure.

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia May 06, 2013 8:43 PM  

So a Christian white man has a Christian son who brings home a Christian black girl and wants to marry her.

And Jamsco, please see Lawrence Auster (Trad Con Christian) site on white women and whites in general, the Eloi.

http://www.google.com/cse?cx=001570561176820765327%3Aalym_hnorag&ie=UTF-8&q=eloi&sa=Search#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=eloi&gsc.page=1


original site:

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/

reams and reams of it.

I tend to agree that you are probably a decent type, but take off the blinders.


Anonymous wcu May 06, 2013 8:44 PM  

No, in fact they encourage their fellow brothers and sisters to live a life worthy of the calling of christ: stay married, raise your children to love and fear the lord, love your neighbors, mind your own fuckibg business and live a quiet life...ican typing...amen and amen

Anonymous Anonymous May 06, 2013 8:45 PM  

RE: Black Males/White Females

Almost as if black females are the least attractive of females...

- Foofoo Jones

Anonymous Matthew May 06, 2013 8:47 PM  

I take that back. It could also indicate an honest attempt at reductio ad absurdum.

Anonymous TWS May 06, 2013 8:47 PM  

@ Vox,
Sure you have, Telluride. I can tell you're so very Euro. Spent a lot of time in the banlieus looking for young Algerians, I'm sure.

I am betting he's seen all the District 13 movies.

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia May 06, 2013 8:51 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Anonymous Anonymous May 06, 2013 8:54 PM  

Wichser. Du blöder WIchser. Ich hör dich bis hierhin Lachen. Und jetzt verpiss dich oder komm als Gast auf die Party. Diskret!

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia May 06, 2013 8:55 PM  

A good summation of Auster's view ofblck dysfunction

Why do I focus so relentlessly on these endlessly repeated stories of the massive cover-up, followed by the massive exposure, of black criminality and black failure—which is, we should point out, failure by white standards? Beyond its immediate interest and obvious importance, the truthful communication about black dysfunction and violence also serves the larger purpose of this website, which is nothing less than to save the American nation.

In my view, the greatest single factor driving whites to national suicide is their false guilt over black inferiority. Because whites believe—as modern liberalism has taught them to believe—that all groups have equal inherent abilities, they also believe that the actual inferiority of blacks in almost every area of accomplishment and behavior must be caused by something bad that the whites are invidiously doing to blacks, or by something good that whites are selfishly refusing to do for blacks. However expressed, it all comes down to the idea that black failure is caused by white racism—the transcendent sin of the modern world. And because black inferiority continues, and is even getting worse, the conclusion is that white racism is continuing, and is even getting worse.

The final result of this woefully mistaken thought process is the paralyzing racial guilt which makes whites feel that they have no right to defend and preserve their civilization, no right to defend and preserve themselves, but that they must instead self-sacrificially open themselves to and empower, not only blacks, but all nonwhites. This self-sacrifice takes numerous forms, including denial of the truth of black anti-white violence, denial of the tyrannical and murderous reality of Islam, and unquestioning acceptance of the mass Third-World immigration that is steadily turning America into a non-European country in which whites and their civilization will be steadily weakened, dispossessed, and destroyed. Therefore, as I began saying in the mid 1990s, if whites could see the truth that blacks’ lesser intelligence and other lesser civilizational abilities are not whites’ fault but are inherent in blacks themselves, it could literally save the country, by freeing whites from their suicidal guilt.

Blogger Markku May 06, 2013 9:03 PM  

"Markku, in the absence of the host, don't you have the nuking powers?"

I do, but I knew the host wasn't absent yet. As a principle, I don't make such decisions myself, in order to not affect the dynamic here. I just delete further, when Vox starts deleting.

Anonymous Anonagain May 06, 2013 9:04 PM  

Anonymous, Sie sind einen poopy Kopf. Und Sie haben eine kleine Wienershnizel.

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia May 06, 2013 9:05 PM  

I just delete further, when Vox starts deleting

so, just sniping with the Sako.

Anonymous Crude May 06, 2013 9:08 PM  

Eric,

I think I'm kind of in the same boat as you, but leaning more to the Voxian position.

However, how much evidence do you require to make up your mind? Preponderance? Reasonable doubt? Shadow of a doubt?

Just curious.


I'm not totally sure what the Voxian position even is. Whenever I read Vox on this, he speaks in terms of culture. I could have missed something.

Also, I don't know how to quantify it, precisely because I'm skeptical adequate evidence - untainted by the very thing we're trying to divorce race from (culture) - is even practical to expect. Honest to God, I have trouble even knowing what the totally unlikely experiment would look like. Do we take infants of various races, drop millions of them into identical but isolated areas, then sit back and watch for a thousand years and see who develops what? If any patterns emerge?

Anonagain,

Hey, Crude, do you think it's just a cultural thing that all professional basketball teams are composed of a majority of blacks? If not, then why not?

Do you deny culture plays a role, even a major role, in interest in sports to begin with?

But you do hit on an interesting question. I have zero doubt *physical traits* of various races can be measured, quantified, recorded, analyzed. What's the average height of a black man? How does it compare to the average height of a white man? Etc, etc. And you can pull some data from there.

But we're not talking about mere physical differences. We're talking mental. In fact, not just mental aptitude, but proclivities and interests and likes and dislikes and a million other things that are a nightmare to control and account for.

[...]

Crude, it is just a cultural thing that even with all the Affirmative Action, the majority of Nobel Laureates are all white people? Or is science just SWPL? Wait. Is SWPL a cultural thing too?

Last I heard, jews were radically overrepresented in Nobel awards. Also, are Nobel prizes even a good standard anymore? Are you honestly going to tell me culture - and corruption - are not massively in play with Nobel?

Of course, you can come at me with a million more statistics. How many black engineers are there versus whites? Hell, how many black felons? But in each case culture is not only there, it is omnipresent. This shit is not easy to account for.

Are you trying to get me to admit that blacks and others are underperforming whites in various fields, statistically? That part is easy to admit (anonymously, online). Now, trying to prove it's due to genetics rather than culture is a goddamn nightmare.

Blogger Markku May 06, 2013 9:10 PM  

Use of this example, as opposed to the far more common and far more disruptive BM/WF mating, strongly suggests disingenuousness.

In order to find out if a principle is absolute or relative, you obviously ask about the most harmless example first. If it is forbidden too, you know it to be absolute. If it isn't, then you start finding out where the boundary is. And I'm not necessarily talking about a binary boundary.

More like "if these circumstances apply, it is statistically about 50% likely that it will turn out on the forbidden side when you learn all relevant information." Only less Asher.

Anonymous wcu May 06, 2013 9:11 PM  

Yes, this same "wise" bunch legalized babies being slaughtered by the bushel...wisdom of the world...earthly, soulish, demonic...wonder where we is?

Anonymous Anonagain May 06, 2013 9:15 PM  

Now, trying to prove it's due to genetics rather than culture is a goddamn nightmare.

Only for a retard. Genetics are easy to spot. I look exactly like my mother, because of genetics. I can also tell a black from a white or an Indian or a Japanese. Or are genetics only skin deep? Babies are born with their personalities, intelligence, talents, proclivities, predisposition to diseases, etc. That's all genetics. That means it's inherited from their parents, in case you don't get it.

From the remainder of your comment, it is obvious you are being obtuse.

Anonymous wcu May 06, 2013 9:15 PM  

Yea, we are civilized because we waNt to take crushed up baby pieces and make them into cosmetics and magical medicine potions.

Anonymous wcu May 06, 2013 9:21 PM  

Righto- mcveigh was already goose-steppin to the scientific beat...the left and its media moar whores are practically trippin and slavering over each other to discoveer the next evilwhiteamericanchristianterrorist...did I detect a note of sadness form the media when it was moooslums who attacked beantown?

Anonymous Anonagain May 06, 2013 9:23 PM  

Do you deny culture plays a role, even a major role, in interest in sports to begin with?

You really think nobody noticed your attempt to weasel out of answering my question?

Don't even bother, Crude. You are intellectually dishonest. I'm not going to waste another second with you.

Anonymous Crude May 06, 2013 9:24 PM  

Only for a retard. Genetics are easy to spot.

Did you miss the part where I said that physical attributes are absolutely things which can be tested, measured, accounted for, averaged apart from culture? Culture does a whole lot of things, but it can't make a 6 foot tall 20 year old man lose or gain 5 inches of height. Not unless you consider hacksaws and strange medical experiments part of culture.

Give me evidence, arguments, studies if you want to convince me. But if you give me nothing but observations about individuals, even groups, all of whom are utterly awash in various cultures, you're not giving me much that's decisive or even informative. Nor are you giving me anything I'll dispute, or really, probably find all that surprising. There's a lot of black athletes? Holy shit, what a revelation.

When you're a goddamn moron, everything is simple. Even complicated subjects. You're having trouble figuring this out, so I'll just assume you're a black man from Detroit. By the way, the library's closing soon - time to shimmy out of there and get yourself some Ripple. It's a cold night on those streets.

Anonymous Anonagain May 06, 2013 9:31 PM  

Did you miss the part where I said that physical attributes are absolutely things which can be tested, measured, accounted for, averaged apart from culture?

Did you miss the part where I noted that genetics account for personality, talents, abilities - the stuff from which music, art, literature, every discipline, science, architecture, lawfulness all arise - you know, all the things that comprise the freaking culture of a people.

Anonymous Anonagain May 06, 2013 9:37 PM  

The extent of Crude's capacity for pattern recognition is recognizing himself in the mirror. And I'm sure he sometimes startles himself at that.

Anonymous Crude May 06, 2013 9:43 PM  

Did you miss the part where I noted that genetics account for personality, talents, abilities - the stuff from which music, art, literature, every discipline, science, architecture, lawfulness all arise - you know, all the things that comprise the freaking culture of a people.

Well, all you need to do is quantify that adequately and demonstrate that not only do genetics play an overriding and decisive role in such things, but do so in a way that gets drawn along largely racial lines. You have your work cut out for you to say the least.

Seriously, why are you getting so bent out of shape here? Because I'm skeptical given a lack of data and its inability to be overcome in practical, quite possibly in principle? Like it or not, you are making a claim that is absolutely anchored deep, deep in the social sciences waters - fucking No-Man's Land as far as real science goes, to say nothing of philosophy and reason. Are your genetics at work in your pursuing this conversation? Is it your culture? Hell, is your will playing any major role?

It's not like I'm particularly fearful of admitting that such and such race is by and large genetically suspect and has a proclivity towards whatever behaviors, in principle. What do I care, as some anonymous nobody on the internet? But I need the data. Pointing out population traits and insisting that anyone who disagrees with you is a retard ain't gonna cut it.

Anonymous Crude May 06, 2013 9:47 PM  

The extent of Crude's capacity for pattern recognition is recognizing himself in the mirror. And I'm sure he sometimes startles himself at that.

Crude disagree! Crude give reasons! FEAR CRUDE! LASH OUT! LASH OUT!

I'll wait until you give me actual data to back up your claims here. Good arguments, or experiments that go beyond 'mere pattern recognition', because in case you haven't noticed - humans are absolutely fan-fucking-tastic at noticing patterns that ultimately are illusory and drawing conclusions that turn out not just wrong, but poorly considered. Once again: everything is simple when you're a retard. Even things that are actually complicated.

The moment I see good evidence that race is the decisive factor, over and above culture, in how a population behaves, is the moment I reduce my skepticism and endorse the position more fully. Until then, I'm skeptical. Terrifying, I know - a stranger disagreeing with you on the internet. The stuff that fuels cattle's nightmares.

Anonymous Anonagain May 06, 2013 9:48 PM  

Africa is Africa because Africans inhabit it. If Whites inhabited Africa, it would be completely different than it is today. Same deal with Latin America, India, China, Iran, etc.

Culture is not separate from race, it is the expression of it. If you really can't see that, that's your problem. And like I said, I'm done with you, Crude. Prattle all you like, I won't be responding to you any further.


Blogger IM2L844 May 06, 2013 9:53 PM  

How and why do different cultures develop and persist? Why are some cultures more refined, with advanced organization of religions, legal systems, politics, technology, art and so forth, than others? Is it just a matter of geography and available resources?

Anonymous E. PERLINE May 06, 2013 10:05 PM  

Brooklyn is one of the 5 boroughs of New York. It has 4 million people and many churches and its various neighborhoods are still a repository of historic foreign groups. They were able to commute to their jobs in "industrial" Manhattan via the subway. And they still do.

When I think of it now, Brooklyn is a whole other universe. It has none of the glitzy media phonies, shoo-fly gangstas, or contrived cultural posers of Manhattan. If you think, as I do, that Manhattan Broadway shows are childish, it's good for the soul to explore Brooklyn for a few weeks. But the borough is so wide you can get lost in it. To be as safe as would be anywhere else, here is all you have to do: Treat all people on their level, not yours. And Walk through a neighborhood with self[assurance, as if you belong there.

Behave this way and you will be
Brooklyn It's houses maybe 4 million people. It's divided into neighborhoods that were Since it's area is so wide,

Anonymous Porky May 06, 2013 10:10 PM  

Anonagain:"Culture is not separate from race, it is the expression of it."

And Brawndo's got electrolytes!

Anonymous fnn May 06, 2013 10:27 PM  

Which observable reality is that?

The one in which white Americans are arming.>


Stockpiling guns is what passes for politics in the US today. The US is without politics today since the welfare-warfare-bankster state is without any opposition that amounts to anything. Of course the economic collapse will change that.

Anonymous DonReynolds May 06, 2013 10:41 PM  

Crude..."Are you trying to get me to admit that blacks and others are underperforming whites in various fields, statistically? That part is easy to admit (anonymously, online). Now, trying to prove it's due to genetics rather than culture is a goddamn nightmare."

(Pours Crude another glass of scotch whiskey.)

My fine fellow. It does not matter whether it is genetics or culture, the fact is.....it is true, and you agree.

One of my better friends in Memphis was Larry Schwitzer, who was a mechanical engineer. Bright, personable, intelligent, sociable...very much the kind of person you would be glad to associate with...either as a coworker or as a neighbor. As American as Apple Pie, in speech and manner and interest. But genetically, Larry was 100 percent Chinese. He was adopted by a German couple as an infant because he was a war orphan. He had a German last name. There is a sizable German community in Memphis that goes back many generations. And if you never saw Larry, you would never imagine he was in any way Chinese. Larry is a good example of why it is not genetic. It is culture and that is why I get so impatient.....because a culture can be adopted. Assimilation is possible and we have plenty of examples to prove that it has already happened in the past. That means the savages have no excuses. They prefer to be what they are, nobody keeps them that way, and they gain nothing by it.

Anonymous Anonagain May 06, 2013 11:09 PM  

I wonder if Vox turned into a Japanese while he was living in their culture. And if he didn't, just how long does he think it would take for him to live there before he'd forget he's white and begin to appreciate tentacle porn.

I don't recall having the slightest decrease in my whiteness when I lived in the Middle East - never felt any desire to don a burkha.

I'm wondering at what point my personality and inherent tendencies would be shifted to that of the foreign culture in which I was living. I'm thinking never.

Anonymous Anonagain May 06, 2013 11:21 PM  

That means the savages have no excuses. They prefer to be what they are

Then it isn't cultural. They were born savages - that's what they are.

Anybody can adapt to pretty much anything, more or less. That does not mean it's what they'd choose on their own if they had the choice without pressure from the culture or their immediate environment.

And a Chinese engineer is not exactly a genetic stretch.

Anonymous Anonagain May 06, 2013 11:25 PM  

BTW, one cannot adopt an IQ, natural abilities or talent.

Anonymous Telluride May 06, 2013 11:32 PM  

"Sure you have, Telluride. I can tell you're so very Euro. Spent a lot of time in the banlieus looking for young Algerians, I'm sure."

Are you sure you aren't really a 3rd grader using VD's name?

I suspect you couldn't even find the banlieus if your life depended on it. So please, enough with the "I'm so cosmopolitan". You're the kind of expat that gives Americans a bad name. I knew many of your type.

Anonymous DonReynolds May 06, 2013 11:50 PM  

In Europe they had an expression....

A Russian is a perfectly delightful person until he tucks his shirt in.

The traditional dress is for the Russian to wear his shirt outside his pants. When he tucks his shirt in his pants, he is attempting to be more "European". He is acceptable as a loud and obnoxious Rooski, but when he tries to become a European....he comes off like a boorish Borak or the Czechoslovakian brothers on SNL.

In the Army, we had guys who assimilated into the local landscape, learned the language and customs, married one of the local girls, and tried to become part of the community. We would say he had "gone native". Special Forces troopers seemed to be prone to this sort of thing. They claimed after they learned the local lingo well enough, they would begin to think in terms of their new language, instead of in English. Assimilation is not an easy process, but it does happen on occasion.

Anonagain....."And a Chinese engineer is not exactly a genetic stretch."

He He. You have not met very many Chinese.

Anonymous Anonagain May 06, 2013 11:57 PM  

The same people who would agree that there are genetic differences between men and women cannot see that genetic differences in races are responsible for the different cultures these races create for themselves.

As we are all very aware, a feminist culture is quite obviously different from a patriarchal culture. According to some here, men and women are really the same genetically but only behave differently because of the cultures in which they live. Or are men and women inherently different, accounting for the extreme difference in these two cultures?

Anonymous Anonagain May 07, 2013 12:08 AM  

He He. You have not met very many Chinese.

The big honcho Program Manager on my DOD project was a Chinese engineer. I also went out with him. Never worked with any black engineers, nor have I dated any. I've had engineering and CS classes with Chinese students. There were more of them than blacks, if any that I can recall.

The evidence suggests Chinese are more genetically fit for engineering than some other races, like blacks, for example.

Blogger Jack Hanson May 07, 2013 12:18 AM  

I left my old church after the priest started with pro-immigration nonsense for a SPPX parish.

Seems a little weird how people demand 'genetic' proof and will create this insanely long 'theories' in order to secure hojillions in funding instead of pointing out the truth in front of their face. Instead of admitting that most blacks are prone to savagery by looking at Philly, Baltimore, Norfolk, Atlanta, Birmingham, Selma, New Orleans, Chicago, Portland, Gary, etc, the ivory tower 'elites' will construct elaborate social theorems that are untestable but will get them a fat writer gig at The Slate.

I mean seriously, what kind of shitty world do we live in when most of the alt-right is silenced, but people take that hi yella fool Toure seriously?

Anonymous Anonagain May 07, 2013 12:18 AM  

The traditional dress is for the Russian to wear his shirt outside his pants. When he tucks his shirt in his pants, he is attempting to be more "European". He is acceptable as a loud and obnoxious Rooski, but when he tries to become a European....he comes off like a boorish Borak or the Czechoslovakian brothers on SNL.

I believe it. Any Russian worth a damn was executed by the bloodthirsty communists during the revolution. Those genes have been exterminated, forever.

Anonymous Noah B. May 07, 2013 12:29 AM  

"Or are men and women inherently different, accounting for the extreme difference in these two cultures?"

Men and women are literally different at the cellular level. Men have more genetic diversity, women are more fault tolerant (defective genes on one X chromosome can be compensated for by fully functional genes on the other).

Anonymous Noah B. May 07, 2013 12:52 AM  

Telluride, not a lot of credence is given to claims of personal authority around here. You'll be much more entertaining if you avoid the usual pitfalls.

Blogger Scott May 07, 2013 12:52 AM  

Diversity is a powrtool of the left. Like so many other words transmogrified by the socialist media (as if there's some other kind of media) it's new meaning is the polar opposite of its original definition. Effectively diversity of a western country is now a measure of the displacement of whites. The public school system my daughter no longer attends claims to be "the most diverse" system in the SF bay area (Cupertino) where our elementary, middle, and high school are over 80% Asian, most of them transplants direct from red china or more recently India.

Blogger Scott May 07, 2013 12:53 AM  

Diversity is a powrtool of the left. Like so many other words transmogrified by the socialist media (as if there's some other kind of media) it's new meaning is the polar opposite of its original definition. Effectively diversity of a western country is now a measure of the displacement of whites. The public school system my daughter no longer attends claims to be "the most diverse" system in the SF bay area (Cupertino) where our elementary, middle, and high school are over 80% Asian, most of them transplants direct from red china or more recently India.

Anonymous Anonagain May 07, 2013 1:09 AM  

Men and women are literally different at the cellular level.

How can men and women be different when we're all human beings? Take that hateful talk somewhere else, buddy.

Any given white Jewish male is no more intelligent than any given brown Mestizo female. I mean, if you closed your eyes, you'd never know the difference. Only mere circumstance and location determined who discovered nuclear technology. It could so easily have been a brown Mestizo female if she had been at the right place at the right time! And there's no proving it otherwise so don't even try.

Anonymous The other skeptic May 07, 2013 1:09 AM  

Men and women are literally different at the cellular level. Men have more genetic diversity, women are more fault tolerant (defective genes on one X chromosome can be compensated for by fully functional genes on the other).

Not to mention, women who have had children often end up with genetic material from the fathers of their children taking up residence in their bodies.

Blogger Jehu May 07, 2013 1:25 AM  

Crude,
Were differences between blacks and whites mostly cultural, what would the world look like?
Well, for one, you wouldn't see massive and brutal regression towards the mean in the children of upper middle class black professionals.
However, you DO see this in the US, where the children of that group have an inordinate difficulty competing with the children of even the poorest whites.
That piece of evidence argues strongly for a more genetic explanation of the difference.
Also, for God knows how long---at least the 1950s, society has obsessed about 'The Gap', but nobody has ever found a scaleable way of closing it. Were 'The Gap' mostly cultural, you'd expect SOMEBODY to have a scaleable success. Occam's razor says it's mostly genetic.

Anonymous kh123 May 07, 2013 1:53 AM  

"However, I was mugged in an all white neighborhood once by a 17 year old white kid with a gun and a knife who could not speak decent english."

And what flavor of English was he speaking.

Better yet, what brand of clothes was he wearing.

Anonymous Noah B. May 07, 2013 2:01 AM  

Crude, you're right that Hispaniola was populated by about 250,000 natives when the Spaniards landed there. As I remember it, virtually all of them were either killed outright, died of various ailments they were exposed to, or were enslaved in the sugar farms and died not long thereafter. Virtually all of the native population was killed. Some of their lineage may remain in those who called themselves either Spanish or slaves.

This is toward the extreme end of what happens to native populations when their lands are invaded, but there are many examples in history that are far more brutal than this one.

Anonymous Noah B. May 07, 2013 2:04 AM  

"However, you DO see this in the US, where the children of that group have an inordinate difficulty competing with the children of even the poorest whites."

Got a source? Never seen documentation on this one way or the other.

Blogger IM2L844 May 07, 2013 2:17 AM  

The moment I see good evidence that race is the decisive factor, over and above culture, in how a population behaves, is the moment I reduce my skepticism and endorse the position more fully.

Studies have shown that certain temperaments, psychological predispositions and character traits are inherited. Cultures arose from minds that resulted from historically concentrated gene pools. It's not some looney stretch of the imagination to suggest that particular races exhibit particular behavioral tendencies to a greater degree than would be expected from a random sample ultimately due to genetics. Objections to this usually only occur when the implications can be interpreted as negative.

Blogger Jehu May 07, 2013 2:25 AM  

Noah,
Go here http://lagriffedulion.f2s.com/testing.htm
These are from the 1995 SAT and a number of other tests. There are breakdowns by parental education and race as well as by parental income and race.

Anonymous Noah B. May 07, 2013 3:23 AM  

Jehu, whether it happens to be correct or not, this source does not seem to be generally credible. There are no references or citations that would allow us to determine that the source interpreted academic test results consistently and accurately. How did you find this site?

Anonymous VD May 07, 2013 3:32 AM  

You are simply lying about things you clearly know nothing about. Not only are you wrong, you are spectacularly wrong. Not only am I not that sort of American expat - I know the type too - no one here ever imagines I could possibly be an American.

Too slender, no white shoes, too many languages. Among other things.

Now, either you can retract your claims and admit that you know absolutely nothing about my life or you are history here.

Anonymous BoxCarWilly May 07, 2013 3:47 AM  

It's a ceaseless have and have nots thing. The haves will be diluted by the have nots. Say you live in Texas and rich Californians move to your small town. They want what you have and so you just got diluted. Sure the sellers got more but the place is just not the same. It's now more like California.

I remember seeing road signs in Utah in the 60's stating Green River Laws Enforced Here (no I was not riding the rails) where you (blacks?) were not allowed to stay 24 hours in their town if you looked like trouble. Or was that about Okies... or hippies?

If you got it, why dilute it? Mine is not yours. Even the Bible promotes aparthide/says so... so why yoke your town unequally?

The Huns and Vandals never rode east and the Mexicans will never ride south. On the other hand, nowdays I'm not so sure them fascist Canadians would even dilute the town even worse even in Juneau.

Anonymous Carl Rove May 07, 2013 3:49 AM  

test...

Anonymous Freddy May 07, 2013 4:23 AM  

All you Arminians who mischaracterize Calvinists with your philosophical / theological ignorance.....well, may the Lord have mercy on your autonomous idolotrous mind. You worship yourself, your fucking fallen reason. This is why William L. Craig is mentioned here...cause "he's so darn Arminian smart" in a bromance way.

Anonymous Toby Temple May 07, 2013 5:27 AM  

So... what blew up Porky's fuse?

Anonymous Toby Temple May 07, 2013 6:12 AM  

All you Arminians who mischaracterize Calvinists with your philosophical / theological ignorance.....well, may the Lord have mercy on your autonomous idolotrous mind.

Oh, Freddy. How the hell did we Arminians mischaracterize Calvinists?

Blogger IM2L844 May 07, 2013 7:31 AM  

You worship yourself, your fucking fallen reason.

Just keep on thinking you're special and empowering the wicked. After all, it's not their fault they haven't received the irresistible inward call. Right? They were condemned to burn in Hell for eternity since before they were even born. How is that a misrepresentation of your precious little TULIP?

Anonymous PeterW. May 07, 2013 7:38 AM  

http://www.quadrant.org.au/blogs/bennelong-papers/2013/05/the-long-bloody-history-of-aboriginal-violence

Anonymous paradox May 07, 2013 8:58 AM  

mjb

I'm not convinced race is ever a problem. Culture, however, really can be one - and race is a predictor of culture to a degree.

I agree with this. However, I then look at the inbred folks in the Appalachian region and wonder, is it there culture or their "race" that has caused them to be the way they are. Sure, they have been inbred over many generations, but they also seem to hang onto the white trash moniker.


That same old tiresome bullshit stereotype Yankees have spout about Appalachia for years. When a lot of us hillbillies are computer techs, chemist, and doctors.

I'll take hillbilly culture over some damn yankee fagot worshiping that passes for a culture any day.

Anonymous jay c May 07, 2013 9:31 AM  

By your logic no one should have a gun to defend themselves since they will just make the thugs get guns. If we would all just turn in our weapons, then the thugs will turn in theirs, or at least not obtain more.

Spot-on liberal logic right there.


You completely missed my point, Bob.

Anonymous jay c May 07, 2013 9:33 AM  

I've lived in a variety of "diverse" neighborhoods. Never been robbed, raped or murdered.

Yeah, I've lived there too. Except I did get robbed and beaten more than once. Thankfully I was never raped, although a good (male!) friend was.

Anonymous Clay May 07, 2013 9:34 AM  

Show me a website similar to this, except where whites are the perps, and not the victims.

Anonymous jay c May 07, 2013 9:38 AM  

And if the odds of me getting robbed, raped or murdered are less than 1/4 of 1%, what's your point???

If that number was correct, then I'd say .25% chance of being robbed, raped, or murdered is still less desirable than .036%.

Unfortunately, it isn't correct. If you live in a black neighborhood or spend a lot of time in a black neighborhood, I'd put the odds of being a victim of violent crime much, much higher than .25%. If you are black, the odds are higher still.

Anonymous fnn May 07, 2013 11:11 AM  

Jehu, whether it happens to be correct or not, this source does not seem to be generally credible. There are no references or citations that would allow us to determine that the source interpreted academic test results consistently and accurately. How did you find this site?

the Zorro of statisticians

Blogger Jehu May 07, 2013 11:55 AM  

Noah,
If you're looking for Le Griffe's original source documents, I suggest you ask him--I believe his email is on the site. I imagine you could get them from the SAT folks directly as well. But his observation is hardly an unfamiliar or even controversial one to psychometrics. Something similar is in the Bell Curve chapter on race also if memory serves.

Blogger Jehu May 07, 2013 12:04 PM  

If you're looking for similar results, consult table 2 of
http://www.tcrecord.org/content.asp?contentid=16925

(this chart uses data from different years than Le Griffe's, but the takeaway is basically the same).

Anonymous Luke May 07, 2013 12:32 PM  

Never forget what the term "diversity" means in practice, when used by anyone in government, academia, mass media, or the corporate world:

A moving away from people (and their values) who are Northern European, Christian (as it was understood ~pre-1965), male, heterosexual, able-bodied, intelligent, honest, productive, logic-based, and Constitutionalist/conservative. Reduction in their numbers and any following of their values (both ideally to the point of zero)is the goal. So, to the extent you are one or more of the above (the more you are those, the more they want this) when someone tells you they are in favor of increasing "diversity", they've told you that they effectively favor putting you and your family in a Zyklon-B gas chamber, after burning everything you've ever written.

Anonymous Freddy May 07, 2013 1:48 PM  

Frank Norman, I could say the same about Arminian preachers and the cult of personality that surrounds them. This is merely your subjective opinion and has nothing to do with objective reality.

Blogger jamsco May 07, 2013 2:03 PM  

"I think there is sufficient Biblical evidence to make it obvious that God cannot possibly be described as generally favoring intermarriages."

Again, I'm saddened to see these statements. Wouldn't you agree that God's commands to not marry foreigners were for religious reasons - to keep the people from being drawn into idolatry? All of that is nullified if both people are Christians.

And all of it nullified if both people are non-Christians.

Anonymous Anonagain May 07, 2013 3:01 PM  

Wouldn't you agree that God's commands to not marry foreigners were for religious reasons - to keep the people from being drawn into idolatry?

The vast majority of black Christians idolize Obama and his Marxist dogma. You're just asking for trouble. And your mixed-race grandchildren would very likely be big government socialists.

Do you really believe Christianity is the only influence in people's lives today where politics infiltrates everything, and religion is increasingly marginalized? Worldly influences that supersede Christianity are as destructive and evil as idolatry, if not exactly the same thing.

Get real, Jamsco. Your unicorns are really mutant goats.

Blogger jamsco May 07, 2013 3:05 PM  

"Worldly influences that supersede Christianity are as destructive and evil as idolatry, if not exactly the same thing."

Yes, and I will instruct my kids to look for Christian spouses that aren't overly influenced by the world, no matter what race they are.

Anonymous Stilicho May 07, 2013 3:44 PM  

Your unicorns are really mutant goats.

Apt. No amount of instruction can remove the dangers of playing mudshark roulette.

Anonymous Anonymous May 07, 2013 3:53 PM  

Yes, and I will instruct my kids to look for Christian spouses that aren't overly influenced by the world, no matter what race they are.

Unless those potential spouses come from families who are special snowflakes who have isolated themselves from the worldly influences of their own racial culture, you can be sure there will be unwanted influences that out of your and your children's control.

Again, you're just asking for trouble. And it will be your grandchildren who will suffer most. You are being stiff-necked and delusional - not a good Christian.

Anonymous VD May 07, 2013 4:09 PM  

Again, I'm saddened to see these statements. Wouldn't you agree that God's commands to not marry foreigners were for religious reasons - to keep the people from being drawn into idolatry? All of that is nullified if both people are Christians.

No. You are certainly quick to try to find reasons to excuse not following God's instructions... and to claim God wants the opposite.

I think God's instructions on fornication are obviously just for religious reasons too. That's why I only commit adultery with Christians. Your reasoning is incredibly specious. You might be saddened, but I'm embarrassed for you.

Next you'll be justifying female preachers because Paul was being "sarcastic" and it all ends up with denying the Resurrection. You're on a slippery slope, Jamsco. And I know it because you've been evading the truth from the start.

"Gee, um, I don't know?"

Don't be such an intellectual child.

Blogger jamsco May 07, 2013 4:10 PM  

Yes, Anonymous, I hope and pray that my kids' spouses will be people "who have isolated themselves from worldly influences."

That's the plan, again, no matter what the spouse's race is.

Blogger Jehu May 07, 2013 4:15 PM  

Christian tradition has always allowed for INFREQUENT exceptions for the TRULY exceptional---like Ruth and Boaz, or Deborah as a judge/prophetess if you're looking for OT examples. The problem is, especially for Americans, that there are a LOT more people who think they're exceptional than there are justified exceptions. Look at annulment inflation in the US Catholic Church for example.
Interracial marriage is most of the time a bad idea. It typically deforms the self-image and identity of the children. I know quite a few children of such marriages and to a one, they all agree with the previous statement. This isn't to say that there aren't special snowflakes or circumstances where its the least bad decision available to both partners, but such circumstances are rare. The sanest policy would be what Christians have done throughout most of history---raised eyebrows, a small to medium status hit, and moderate social pressure against the practice with no formal legal sanction applied. The worst policy is what we've got now---treating it like a huge anti-racist merit badge.

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia May 07, 2013 4:20 PM  

Interracial marriage is most of the time a bad idea. It typically deforms the self-image and identity of the children. I know quite a few children of such marriages and to a one, they all agree with the previous statement. This isn't to say that there aren't special snowflakes or circumstances where its the least bad decision available to both partners, but such circumstances are rare. The sanest policy would be what Christians have done throughout most of history---raised eyebrows, a small to medium status hit, and moderate social pressure against the practice with no formal legal sanction applied. The worst policy is what we've got now---treating it like a huge anti-racist merit badge.

That is well written.

I would apply this to interracial adoption as well.
It can be better than other (bad) choices, but it causes problems.

Now are there those that make it work and are happy? Yes. But there are issues that have to be dealt with even then.

Blogger Markku May 07, 2013 4:25 PM  

I think it's like marrying a Christian when both have a family history of schizophrenia. You could construct a scenario where it wouldn't be a sin but....

Blogger Jehu May 07, 2013 4:27 PM  

Conan,
I'd agree with you on interracial adoption, and in most cases foreign adoption as well. In order of preference:
Provide the needed help that the biological parents can keep and support their children,
Provide the needed help to allow the close relatives of the parents to keep and support the children,
Provide the needed help to allow for someone of the same culture to keep and support the children (foster care),
Foreign or interracial adoption,
Group homes or orphanage in an area where the children's race and culture actually has demographic hegemony
It's a vanity thing for most interracial or international adoptions. Not all, but the overwhelming majority.

Blogger jamsco May 07, 2013 4:32 PM  

"I think God's instructions on fornication are obviously just for religious reasons too. That's why I only commit adultery with Christians. Your reasoning is incredibly specious."

I'll say it again - it takes a certain amount of genius to do what you do. That paragraph is virtually impenetrable by logic. Of course, that won't stop me from trying.

All of the commands not to intermarry - either they apply now and to the issue of race, or they don't.

I say they don't. I say all of the OT laws about not intermarrying do not apply to a Christian black man marrying a Christian white woman.

Whereas you say that it's "taking it too far" to say that "God is against this specific marriage", but that "there is sufficient Biblical evidence to make it obvious that God cannot possibly be described as generally favoring intermarriages"

Could you elaborate? Is this kind of marriage going against God's law or not.

If so, fine (still bad, but fine).

If not, then why are you saying that I am quick to "find reasons to excuse not following God's instructions"?

Anonymous Stilicho May 07, 2013 4:33 PM  

I think it's like marrying a Christian when both have a family history of schizophrenia. You could construct a scenario where it wouldn't be a sin but....

Nor does it have to be a sin to be a really bad idea.

Anonymous Anonagain May 07, 2013 4:56 PM  

Yes, Anonymous, I hope and pray that my kids' spouses will be people "who have isolated themselves from worldly influences."

That's the plan, again, no matter what the spouse's race is.


You are being downright disingenuous now, Jamsco. Unless you're a complete idiot, you must realize that worldly influences include genes, family, close friends, acquaintances, community, and culture. Nobody lives in a bubble, Jamsco. And for this reason, it really does matter what the spouse's race is.

Yours is not a plan, it is a gamble that is statistically not in your children's nor grand-children's favor. Ironically, it is precisely the worldly influence you claim to be so intent on avoiding that is directly responsible for your blindness to the plain truth. You've succumbed to the most pernicious of worldly influences and swallowed the political correctness of the godless, immoral Leftists.

Justify yourself all you want, Jamsco. It is all self-delusion. The fact is, you are too weak to stand up to the world. Worst of all, you are covering your spinelessness with the cloak of Christianity. But you are more pathetic than bad. The road to hell is paved with good intentions...

Blogger Markku May 07, 2013 5:31 PM  

As for God not being against intermarriages, my first inclination would be to side with Jamsco to the degree that there is no evidence for God being against an intermarriage simply for the reason that it is an intermarriage between races.

The Old Testament words against it are perfectly explained just by the fact that at the time, an intermarriage involving a Jew would have necessarily been an intermarriage between a person of true religion and a person of false religion. If that factor is removed, then we are in a situation where it could be either way. It must be judged by other factors. It's just like the Jehovah's Witness arguments for total pacifism due to first century Christians not joining the Roman army don't hold water, since that is already explained by the fact that they would have been forced to engage in idolatry in the army.

So, it would seem like a wisdom issue to me. The marriage would have a lot of baggage in the current situation, and much of that baggage wouldn't just affect yourselves, but your children. So all other things being equal I would advise against it.

But like I said, we could construct scenarios where it would make sense.

Anonymous Anonagain May 07, 2013 5:42 PM  

As for God not being against intermarriages, my first inclination would be to side with Jamsco to the degree that there is no evidence for God being against an intermarriage simply for the reason that it is an intermarriage between races.


Where there are no clear Biblical guidelines, I would say that God expects Christians to use their fucking common sense.

Anonymous Freddy May 07, 2013 5:43 PM  

Adiaphora

Blogger Markku May 07, 2013 5:50 PM  

Where there are no clear Biblical guidelines, I would say that God expects Christians to use their fucking common sense.

Yes. But on the other hand, there is an important difference to when there is a Biblical guideline against something; then you don't go with what your common sense says, you just categorically don't do it. This would have been the situation in Old Testament times.

Blogger jamsco May 07, 2013 6:07 PM  

Well, I'm glad to see that at the very least some of you (Markku, Anonagain, Stilicho...) don't think I'm being "quick to try to find reasons to excuse not following God's instructions", since you don't in fact think I'm advocating not following God's instructions.

Anonymous VD May 07, 2013 6:11 PM  

All of the commands not to intermarry - either they apply now and to the issue of race, or they don't. I say they don't. I say all of the OT laws about not intermarrying do not apply to a Christian black man marrying a Christian white woman.

Some say all the commands not to fornicate don't. Some say all the OT laws about not fornicating do not apply to the Christian man fornicating with the the Christian woman.

Do you agree with that too?

"I hope and pray that my kids' spouses will be people "who have isolated themselves from worldly influences." That's the plan, again, no matter what the spouse's race is.

Anonagain already beat me to it. You and Piper are preaching the secular world's gospel. The wonders of diversity is not a Christian concept. Jesus clearly distinguished between Jew and Samaritan.

As for God not being against intermarriages, my first inclination would be to side with Jamsco to the degree that there is no evidence for God being against an intermarriage simply for the reason that it is an intermarriage between races.

My argument has been limited to asserting, contra Piper, that God is not pro-intermarriage. It is clearly not the Divine plan. Quite the contrary. I personally view it as a wisdom issue myself.

Could you elaborate?

Not until you answer the questions you keep evading. Are Africans, on average or collectively, the civilizational equals of Europeans? Are Africans more violent or less violent than Europeans?

If you genuinely don't know, you're either too stupid or too dishonest to participate in this discussion.

Anonymous Anonagain May 07, 2013 6:20 PM  

But on the other hand, there is an important difference to when there is a Biblical guideline against something; then you don't go with what your common sense says, you just categorically don't do it.

To me, that goes without saying, Markku, which is why I only commented on the case where there are no clear guidelines. Biblical wisdom trumps human common sense every time.

There is an appalling lack of common sense today. People like Jamsco have had their common sense brainwashed right out of them. Instead, they regurgitate emotional rhetoric in the form of Political Correctness.

In Jamsco's case, his only justification is that GOD has NOT specifically said not to intermarry. Jamsco has given no good reason for it. Instead of erring on the side of caution, reason, statistics and reality, he prefers to sacrifice his children and grandchildren on the altar of political correctness.

Anonymous Anonagain May 07, 2013 6:33 PM  

Well, I'm glad to see that at the very least some of you (Markku, Anonagain, Stilicho...) don't think I'm being "quick to try to find reasons to excuse not following God's instructions", since you don't in fact think I'm advocating not following God's instructions.

You obviously have issues with Vox, Jamsco. Don't use my lack of chastisement on Biblical grounds as any indication that I believe you are following God's will on this matter. I have not delved into the Biblical aspects because your position is so egregious from the perspective of simple common sense that it does not require citation of Scripture.

As I said, God expects us to use our common sense. You clearly are not. You are siding with the world. Ergo, your position is not Biblical.

Blogger jamsco May 07, 2013 6:38 PM  

"Some say all the commands not to fornicate don't. Some say all the OT laws about not fornicating do not apply to the Christian man fornicating with the the Christian woman. Do you agree with that too?"

Who says that? And no.

"Jesus clearly distinguished between Jew and Samaritan."

Jesus sought to diminish the differences between the Jew and the Samaritan.

"Not until you answer the questions you keep evading. Are Africans, on average or collectively, the civilizational equals of Europeans? Are Africans more violent or less violent than Europeans?"

I've already agreed that Europe and North America are the highest civilizations yet.

And regarding violence, I'll use a quote to help me with my answer.

"The relevant question isn't why WOULD atheists possess a predilection for committing murder, but rather why DO avowed atheists commit mass murder at a much higher rate than agnostics, other non-believers and theists." - You.

It's my understanding that very few blacks are atheists. It's also my guess that Atheists in leadership have murdered more people that all blacks combined.

You can confirm both of these for me. In any case, no.

If you don't like my definition of Violent, perhaps you could provide another.

In any case, I suspect my answer will still be "I don't know and I wouldn't want to guess". The totality of the knowledge I have to answer the question is from this site, and I consider it's completeness to be suspect.

Anonymous Anonagain May 07, 2013 6:38 PM  

Hey, Jamsco, I don't believe that God specifically forbad cannibalism. I certainly expect that when it becomes a popular practice in this godless culture that you will encourage your children to try it, lest they be close-minded and meatist.

Blogger jamsco May 07, 2013 6:39 PM  

"Ergo, your position is not Biblical."

This statement can't be made without biblical evidence.

Anonymous Anonagain May 07, 2013 7:02 PM  

This statement can't be made without biblical evidence.

Coming from someone who has just made the most weasely BS statements regarding violence that I've heard, you are now bordering very close to being a vile little hypocrite. I'm done with you, Jamsco. I know a Leftist loser when I see one. They're all a waste of time and God does not will that we waste our time.

Blogger jamsco May 07, 2013 8:52 PM  

Glad to see I'm only bordering on being close.

Blogger Markku May 07, 2013 9:09 PM  

It's my understanding that very few blacks are atheists. It's also my guess that Atheists in leadership have murdered more people that all blacks combined.

Mean average isn't the most informative number for this decision. Rather, it's the probability that a random black person, or a random atheist, will commit at least one murder.

Because just one teensy little murder is already a huge problem in a marriage.

Blogger jamsco May 07, 2013 9:14 PM  

Dang, Markku. You have to make Vox think of these things himself.

Blogger Markku May 07, 2013 9:18 PM  

Just remember, just one murder can ruin your whole day.

Blogger WATYF May 07, 2013 10:41 PM  

Man... this is getting ridiculous.

I have to say, Vox's "Christian fornication vs Christian interracial marriage" argument is probably the worst one I've seen him present. Unless there's some unspoken aspect of it that he has yet to clarify, I'd say that he's missing the point (yes, yes... it's "foolish" to assume that, considering his intellect... blah blah blah).

Fornication is inherently wrong. There is no moral way to do it. There is no additional criteria on fornication that makes it right or wrong. It's always wrong. Marriage, on the other hand, isn't inherently wrong. It is only certain types of marriage that were forbidden in the OT. So, your status as a person is irrelevant to fornication, but it IS relevant to marriage (in the OT). Therefore, questions about the status of a person ARE relevant to whether or not the OT principle against out-group marriage could be applied to modern Christians while questions about the status of a person are NOT relevant to whether or not the OT principle against fornication could be applied today.

Jamsco's point is that the OT forbade marriage outside of Israel for a REASON. And that reason was that the other nations worshiped false gods (NOT that they were less civilized, or more violent, or lived in grass huts, or any other criteria). And I agree with him, btw. This reason is spelled out numerous times, in detail, when out-group marriage is addressed. So, since marriage ISN'T inherently always wrong (like fornication is) and since marriage was ONLY said to be wrong when it involved marrying someone who was from a group that worshiped other gods, the OT laws about out-group marriage aren't relevant to a situation, even in "principle", where two Christians of different races marry, especially if both of those races are about as likely to be Christian.

I do agree, however, that Jamsco (and Piper... whom I loathe, btw :^D), are being naive and foolish. As I mentioned earlier, we are told to spread the gospel by going OUT into the world, not by trying to bring the world to us. There is precisely ZERO biblical imperative to "integrate" or "diversify", and the risks posed (to people who aren't voluntarily choosing to expose themselves to risk) make it obvious that the most prudent course of action is to evangelize by GOING to foreign places and making converts there who can then infiltrate their own culture with the gospel. This is something that I am quite familiar with, as my parents are missionaries in East Africa and have been for almost 20 years now.

I think the most logical argument against "diversity" is found in Paul's admonishment in Romans 12 where he says, "As far as it depends on you, live at peace with all men". He tells us that we should act in such a way that would promote peace. Well, we know from several studies that "diversity" leads to a LACK of peace amongst men. We know that it leads to less trust, more animosity, and in many cases of very high levels of diversity, outright violence. If we truly want to live at peace "as far as it concerns us", we would seek to promote peace between us and others, and that would be by preferring a homogenous society.

T real question is, "Why should we promote diversity?" According to what Biblical standard should it be pursued? If we can't come up with one (which, as far as I know, there isn't one in scripture), then we should consider just accepting the simple facts of the matter and doing what's prudent.

WATYF

Blogger IM2L844 May 08, 2013 12:02 AM  

God certainly could have qualified His admonitions with a conversion caveat if He so chose, but, as far as I know, He didn't. That's a significant point. Would anyone suggest that Galatians 3:28 (There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.) can be interpreted to mean that God would sanction the marriage of two men or two women? There are many progressives that would say yes, but I wouldn't.

Blogger Markku May 08, 2013 12:08 AM  

Diversify... Hadn't heard that one before, but that's so evil that I just KNOW they have to be using it. In times of economic uncertainty you must diversify.

Hence, more vibrancy.

Anonymous kh123 May 08, 2013 1:16 AM  

"I'm done with you, Jamsco."

That was a few hundred comments back.

Anonymous Freddy May 08, 2013 5:30 AM  

Pathetic...this whole thread, pathetic...steeped in
a ego-centric mind fuck of Vox's paradigm, a Procrustian bed if there ever was one. Mr Day will make all contrarians fit nicely....isn't that special. What about factoring in what the gospel has been told and what it promises to accomplish in the here and now? Dispies, go drink your emasculated hopeless kool-aid, cause it is all down hill from here, and your faithless leader hasn't a clue how to incorporate the objective atonement that Christ accomplished into present history. Read and right more SF is just another Rabbit trail.

Anonymous FrankNorman May 08, 2013 8:33 AM  

Freddy May 08, 2013 5:30 AM

Pathetic...this whole thread, pathetic...steeped in
a ego-centric mind fuck of Vox's paradigm, a Procrustian bed if there ever was one. Mr Day will make all contrarians fit nicely....isn't that special. What about factoring in what the gospel has been told and what it promises to accomplish in the here and now? Dispies, go drink your emasculated hopeless kool-aid, cause it is all down hill from here, and your faithless leader hasn't a clue how to incorporate the objective atonement that Christ accomplished into present history. Read and right more SF is just another Rabbit trail.


Another similarity between American Calvinists and American Secular Leftists there. When they can't give a sensible response to something, their fall-back option is a version of "Oh you're a bad person! And you're stupid!".

Freddy, I take it you consider yourself a very clever and enlightened person on account of your belief in Calvinism. But I have yet to see you make any intelligent contribution to the discussions here.

Anonymous FrankNorman May 08, 2013 8:47 AM  

Another similarity is the belief in inevitable "progress" towards some future state of society, in this current world.

And open contempt for Christians who are more concerned with the fate of individual human souls in Eternity.

Anonymous VD May 08, 2013 10:11 AM  

I have to say, Vox's "Christian fornication vs Christian interracial marriage" argument is probably the worst one I've seen him present.

It's not an argument, it is simply open mocking. It makes it clear the flaw in Jamsco's logic.

Anonymous Stilicho May 08, 2013 10:17 AM  

In any case, I suspect my answer will still be "I don't know and I wouldn't want to guess". The totality of the knowledge I have to answer the question is from this site, and I consider it's completeness to be suspect.

That is a singularly weaselish response, Jamsco. Look at the FBI stats that have been cited here (but look up the original FBI report), look at a history book re: the history of Africa, look at recent news re: Africa. You claim ignorance prevents you from answering. Cure your problem; ignorance of the facts is no excuse. If you have a contrary argument, by all means, make it, but you cannot make that argument with your head in the sand.

Blogger Markku May 08, 2013 12:01 PM  

I wouldn't say it is weaselish unless he also objects to our exploring the matter with the Vibrancy Is Our Strength posts. It is actually a good reason to do more of them, if there are people out there who are still unsure on the matter.

Anonymous Stilicho May 08, 2013 1:02 PM  

In any case, I suspect my answer will still be "I don't know and I wouldn't want to guess". The totality of the knowledge I have to answer the question is from this site, and I consider it's completeness to be suspect.

Given the fact that you admittedly cannot answer Vox's question re: violence, why would you consider yourself qualified to instruct your children regarding marrying a member of that group?

Anonymous Anonagain May 08, 2013 1:52 PM  

I wouldn't say it is weaselish unless he also objects to our exploring the matter with the Vibrancy Is Our Strength posts.


An earlier comment of his suggests he does object: But I think the main difference between him and you is that almost all of your posts about black people are negative. I don't know for a fact, but I'm pretty sure that he would find most of your raced based posts to be divisive, destructive and harmful to the cause of Christ.

Jamsco wants to hear only fairy tales where the strong black prince and the golden haired princess live happily ever after in their Christian fortress, isolated from all reality.

Otherwise, how can he weasel out and claim ignorance on race-based violence?








Anonymous Toby Temple May 09, 2013 2:27 AM  

Freddy, I take it you consider yourself a very clever and enlightened person on account of your belief in Calvinism. But I have yet to see you make any intelligent contribution to the discussions here.

If Calvinism is correct, then what Freddy is posting is what God is making him post.

We are just playing roles and actions as willed by the almighty puppet master.

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 343 of 343

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts