ScottSA

Something Dan Simmons said once, and I paraphrase..."There are crowds of would be writers out there, all writing bad, poor, or passable prose, and the one thing their works seem to share is an overwhelming focus on "me". Could have been Stephen King, but I doubt it...he lives in too glass a house to throw those rocks...

Have you ever walked through a third world slum? If material conditions, and the intellectual stunting that results, is the measure by which we are to determine the worthiness of races, I daresay we'd best break out the zyclon B and the crop dusters and start flying toward Asia and Africa. I don't think there is anything intrinsically better about one over the other, but I don't think that's the question. The question is not the relative worth of races, because I don't think there is much difference, if any, in the inherent worthiness of races. I think there are many reasons why caucasians bolted ahead in every field of endeavor in the last 500 years, but I sincerely doubt that whiteness was one of them. But that doesn't mean I think it makes no difference if caucasians fade away or are done away with either. It makes a great deal of difference to me.

Right. So did the NSDAP when it suited their purpose. One doesn't start a party by and for Chinese, separate them out in the mission statement, and then backpedal and claim the party and the mission statement were just a typo and oops, we love everyone.

Civilians are supposed to put their hats over their hearts with their right hand. In the absence of a hat, the left foot should be wound around the... the right hand will do.

Damn. I was just getting ready to claim credit for Shakespeare's entire first folio. Can't I at least post Romeo and Juliet and claim it's one of my more trivial works?

We need everyone to stand up and say that. The left has created a climate of McCarthyite fear so enervating that no-one will say anything lest they be called a racist. The only difference between being called a 'racist' and being called an 'anti-American' is 5 decades.

KO2 is potentially one of our best posters. He's eloquent, well-reasoned and to the point. I actually agree. He is a good writer, and I say that with only one caveat. I find his style slightly annoying at times. Cloying, maybe, with far too much and too pronounced alliteration. It reminds me of someone else, a far worse writer than him, who takes alliteration to new heights, and then pushes it off a cliff. His name is 'goat', and he treats alliteration like a Mother Goose rhyme or a jackbooted drumbeat, and KO2 is not him, not by a longshot, but here and there he reminds me of goat. If one is going to use alliteration, it ought to glide by, rarely seen and barely felt like a whispered subtext. The following example is just a little too...too...I dunno...maybe it's not even the alliteration. Maybe it's the imagery. Mind you at least he doesn't mix metaphors like I do. Having said all that, I agree with him. Not because of the specious argument that the law makes criminals, so we ought to abolish the law so as to not have criminals, because if we legalized bank robbery, we'd have fewer criminals too, but that's hardly a good argument in favor of legalizing bank robbery. Nor do I buy the notion that illegal marijuana creates criminals, because the minute marijuana is decriminalized, the bad guys will move on to hard drugs and quite possibly make that problem worse from the supply side if nothing else...gangs don't become gangs over marijuana, they become gangs because they are predisposed toward criminality. I won't even talk about "medical marijuana," because I just start laughing...it's like global warming in reverse, complete with the bad or non-existent science, foolish claims, and general air of hysteria. I agree with him because smoking pot is no big deal. Insofar as it's a "gateway drug," it is because the folks who smoke dope are seeking a new experience, and if anything they move on because pot isn't enough of one...here I speak from personal experience, because in my youth I tried just about everything. Some lots. I can drive as well or better stoned on pot, I used to find it easier to write when stoned, and...well...it's just not a huge deal.

I was just wondering, because one of the new posters, on top of being a highly annoying spammer and jammer, also appears to be a plagiarist. http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....15entry237065

http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/sci_cult/psyc...frattaroli.html Plagiarize much? How Wizzonian...... Excellent work my good man. Hopefully this gets him suspended.

Do you realize how sophomoric this is? Why are you posting it in every thread? It destroys the thread, puts your stupidity on display, and acheives nothing good. You're like a two year old who just discovered the spam button.

Why are you destroying threads with these spammed inanities?

I take it you think attempted genocides are acceptable if they're not completely successful then? It's possible a lot of elderly Israelis would beg to differ, but hey, what do I know? What an odd morality you have.

Jefferiah, I do appreciate the defense, but the fact of the matter is that I couldn't care less if someone wants to call me a racist. No, I don't believe in white superiority; I think it's silly. No, I don't believe in genocide against others; I think it's atrocious. No, I'm not a Nazi, because I hate totalitarianism, and I especially hate socialism, whether it's directed toward the state as with the Nazis, or toward the masses, as with hard and soft "socialist" systems. But frankly none of that matters, because people like Xman and MM really don't want to hear it anyway, prefering instead to trill trite bumper sticker slogans like MM's "Race is a subject created so racists can worry about it." I mean really...who cares what people like that think? I brought up a question I think is important, and a question that should have been addressed decades ago. If people want to stand on the sidelines and throw manure, it's no concern of mine. In fact, I think our society has to break out of this ridiculous coccoon of fear that any mention of race is a no no. Christ, Blacks hold "million man marches," an event we can all be sure has to do directly with race, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton has made careers out of whining loudly about race, Indians of all stripes bellow about race all day long and well into the night...the Chinese even have a political party based on race, but Caucasians can't possibly talk about it or else it suddenly means concentration camps, gas chambers, and ovens? What utter hogwash.

It's hardly a profound statement. In fact, it's rather old hat relativism at its most basic level. Clearly you suffer from multiple disorders, two of which; moderate to low intelligence, and the belief that you are quite clever; make for a highly annoying poster. I can only hope that you are a noisy undergrad in some half-rate university trying out your philosophical wings, because if you are representative of what degree programs are turning out these days, we're all in trouble. The tendency to shout down ideas you don't agree with is a worrisome trend in today's world...no matter what its aims are, it's totalitarian at its core. In terms of your arguments, you really have none, and hiding behind Morris is hardly going to help you prove any points. And please stop spamming.

Poor Xman...

Nor do I care. I just wish you'd stop jamming these threads with inanities.

Well, I would argue that a pan-caucasian negative birthrate is indeed indicative of a self-desire to destroy caucasians as a race. Couple this with a pan-caucasian decision to allow floodgate immigration of non-caucasians into all caucasian countries, along with an expressed desire for genetic intermingling, and I would present to you that you are wrong, and obviously wrong. I'm sure it all began with the best intentions, and indeed I know it did, because I'm quite familiar with the subject. The idea was that the first world will produce the first racially harmonious set of nations; either by co-habitating races, or by genetic intermingling. In this utopic vision, race will cease to matter and everyone will live happily ever after. The trouble of course is that the first world, which also happens to be the caucasian world, are the only ones who did it, so it takes on many of the same characteristics of unilateral disarmament. If this grand experiment disintegrates into regional balkanization along racial lines, and it is already showing signs of strain, everyone else has someplace to go home to. Except Caucasians.

Most of those people don't repeatedly mis-spell 'hegemony.' Some of them even know what they're talking about.

:lol: Chomsky? Some people have an unresolved inability to see the difference between a linguist pretending to be a political scientist, and a psychologist.

The proof is in the pudding. What an inane post. Two birds in the bush are worth eight in the tree.

What is wrong with you? Why are you so afraid? One might almost think, from your attacks and mocking of whites, your pidgin English grammatical constructs, and your near hysterical jamming, that you are an ESL who would love to see white society descend into the muck of third world culture.

Disagree. Workers need protections. Agree. Disagree. Profit-making does not save money. The mission becomes maximizing profits. Instaed, put the monwy toward more public delivery of service. Ensure a high level of care for less. Agree. Agree. Is there a point to this post? Do you imagine that anyone cares whether you agree or not?

Why are you so afraid of this topic? Obviously a number of people are racialdiscussionphobic, and need to be re-educated. Preferably in camps in the far northwoods, teeming with black flies, mosquitos and no-see-ums. And bears of all races and colors.

You either didn't read it or you're ignoring the gene marker. How come you always get so weird when this topic comes up? Oh, and btw, I do remember my faux pas on the Peloponesian war.

Not quite. The line obviously has to be subjective, but hardly arbitrary. Drinking and driving is an entirely controllable action that carries a significantly higher risk of injury than simply getting in a car. Smoking is clearly an unhealthy lifestyle choice, and while I strongly support smoker's rights, I think they should pay their own medical bills if they're still smoking when they have smoking-related illnesses. Nothing arbitrary about that either.