Read Stupid White Men!

Oh, I'm not saying for you Stupid White People to read the book... Stupid White People is the NAME of the book. Sorry.

I am going to get that one right after I get done with Pat Buchanan's "Death Of The West".

This is a disturbing book.

Basic premise.

Europe and America are being taken over by non-white hoards thru illegal immigration and high birthrates, which will in time turn America and Europe into third world nations run by mud people.

Then the backlash against their historically white oppressor will begin... if it hasnt already begun. Pat Buchanan, visionary or loon? Only time will tell.

Interesting post, LaBret. It seems Buchanan is exhibiting the same fear Romans had about "barbarian hordes." But aren't these barbarian hordes the ancestors of the modern "civilized" West?

Buchanan and other racialist [big difference btwn this and the more familiar racist] pundits all operate from the presumption that genetics [physical traits] carry and predict certain social values and culture. Ask any transracial adoptive family and they will tell you [assuming they adopted their kids when they were babies] that culture is LEARNED--it is not hardwired in the genes.

Thomas Sowell points out in "Ethnic America" that Jews who arrived in the turn of the 20th century ranked lowest on standard IQ tests for the military. Come the 20's and 30's Jewish students were becoming nationally famous for their intelligence and caused a lot of "WASPs" to worry about their hitherto easy access to Ivy League schools. Indeed, Jewish students, save for Asians, as a group, tend to be the highest achieving population of any university. This is due to many non genetic factors, primarily the high value placed by Jewish culture on learning. Same with Asian emphasis on schooling.

Culture is LEARNED--an amalgam of economics, history, and geography....NOT GENETICS. If Genetics were the true carrier of achievement, we wouldn't see the flux of historical fortunes--the rise and fall of Rome, the Rise of Christianity, etc. There were massive empires in Africa that rose and fall...the Mali, the Songhai, Great Zanzibar...

[labret]..agent provocatuer..chief stick pokerer...

I agree with you 100%. An interesting read nonetheless.

ahahah nah, thats not my point. Just what I am reading this week.

Also going through "Fast Food Nation"... amazing. You have no idea the influence the giant fast food corporations have on this country at all levels of government. VERY disturbing.

I really want to read Stupid White Men, its definitely going to be next. Big fan of Michael Moore.

Also got my DVD set of Joseph Campbells "Power Of Myth" with Moyer. Fuck, too much information too little time. Joseph Campbell... what can you say. Genius.

Frank, good post.

It's *ALL* culture and attitude. Right now, I'm sorry. Go to any american inner city and see what the predominant color(s) are that just seemingly exist to cause problems. That's not because they are a certain color, it's because they have boughten into the certain cultural "heritage" bullshit or whatever. It makes me fucking sick.

That said, those that elevate themselves from that can be just as successful and productive as anyone else, and I applaud them greatly for what they have done. No matter what anyone says, it IS harder to go from inner city normal ghetto family to actually being able to provide for yourself a comfortable living.

I grew up in the inner city, and went to school there. I can tell you without a doubt, color played no fucking role in who was going to be successful and who was not. It was all "culture" and attitude. There were plenty of little white boys who thought they were hardass thugs, who will never amount to a damn thing. Just as there are plenty of the same in any other color.

I'm not racist, I'm culturalist. Be a productive member of society that has a basic respect for other humans, and I'll call you my friend and help you out when in need no matter if you're pink with yellow poka dots. But be a little gangsta' thug, and I'll spit on you like the rest of productive society should.

-Phil

I think it's interesting that you can go from Buchanan to Moore like that... totally opposite ends of the political spectrum. Buchanan left the republicans because they weren't conservative enough, and Moore deserted the Democrats because they aren't liberal enough. But they both agree on one thing: the current political system has GOT to change.

I'm reading Nader's new book now... Crashing the Party.

As a white man and a lover of Latina and Asian women, I say bring em on!

Nader is a hypocrite. He criticizes the "rich evil" corporations and calls for more government regs, yet he himself is a multimillionaire and owns stock/mutual funds in many large U.S. corporations.

mate you have to read ALL sides.. not just the one you totally agree with... plus if you go far enough right you start going left and vice versa..

.. yeah but poking sticks is fun too .. Michael Moore rocks.. ina a similar vein on the opposite political flavour, i dig PJ O'Rourke too.. i've got "downsize this".. and "eat the rich", "parliament of whores" it's all good..it's amazing what goes on behind the scenes with something as banal as sweetened food.. have you seen "the cola wars"?..

You can believe what the Democrats want you to believe, but the fact is that Naders millions have gone right back into his causes. Yes, you're right that he has made millions... that's what happens when universities pay you a lot of money to do speeches, and you write best selling books.

But it's a FACT that Nader doesn't own a nice car, doesn't live in a nice place... doesn't live a "rich" lifestyle. He lives moderately, and uses his money to fight the good fight. To call him a hypocrite is ridiculous.

I agree... notice I did say that it's important to know where the enemy is coming from. You can't rightfully argue against them if you don't know what it is they really stand for, and why. I just thought it was interesting that you were going right from one extreme to the other.... it's a good thing that you have an open mind. Most people don't.

WHAT THE FUCK ARE PEOPLE LIKE YOU DOING IN THE PORN BUSINESS???

Is there anything that Nader or Moore like about capitalism??? Give them enough time and they'll gladly tell you porn should be free on the internet... oh yea.. and high speed access should be free also.... maybe we can get MicroSoft to pay for broadband service to every home... not just ion America.. but every home in the world.. after all.. they do have plenty of money!!

It's a good thing you guys are humorous!!!

it was labret that went from buchanan to moore.. besides don't you find it intriguing anyway to read stuff that you don't like?

format brain :

Are you saying a person can't be in the porn business AND have principles? If I make extra money, I use it to help others. I don't try to cheat the system. I pay my taxes. And if I made a billion dollars, every bit of money that I don't need to live a moderate, comfortable lifestyle would be used to promote things I believe in. You won't see me in a Ferrari, or living in a mansion, or wearing designer clothes, or golfing, or even oppressing minorities.

I'm not sure if people realize this, but the U.S. economy is SOCIALIST! Just when you think we're past McCarthyism, you hear comments like that. Socialism is not completely contradictory to Capitalism. You can have a somewhat free market while still helping the disadvantaged. We're not AS Socialist as other countries, but we do have a welfare system (though it could be better). We do have lower-income health aid (though it could be better). We do give money to the disabled (though we could give more). We do have unemployment benefits (though they could be better). Here's your big revelation: That's socialism! ... though perhaps to a smaller degree.

Nader's not trying to keep people from being rich. He's trying to keep the rich from abusing and oppressing the poor. There's a big difference. He's fighting for the minorities to have equal opportunities in our society. He's fighting for companies like Enron to pay their damn taxes (which they don't... Enron hasn't paid a penny in taxes in years, and GM has juggled their book so well that the IRS has owed THEM money). This isn't just good business on the part of Enron, GM, and other large corporations, it's corruption of our entire political system, and it needs to stop.

Bhutocracy: Sorry about mixing up posts. I meant to agree with you, and to commend Labret for examining both sides... though I hope he sides with the left.

It's definitely intriguing to read about both sides... in fact, I find myself reading Creationist arguments all the time online. But typically I find myself reading the stuff I disagree with for free online, and I put money in the pockets of those I agree with by buying books. I'm not saying my way is better, it's just that I have a hard time knowing that a portion of what I'm paying to buy a book will end up in the pocket of a nutcase like Buchanan. Of course, keeping him funded and in the spotlight could be a good thing by scaring the shit out of the liberals.

Labret? he's the biggest lefty i've seen around here! he's always talking about how he wished more of his tax dollars went to underprivileged ghetto kids..







LOL

Great Interview, and I agree, Campbell defenitely was.

Shit, I dont want nobody to get their hands on my tax dollars.

Poor people can kiss my ass, the government can kiss my ass. You all can kiss my ass. White, brown, yellow, crippled... dont care.

People often confuse my deep hatred of people in general with some sort of bigoted attitude towards a particular group. Sorry to disappoint... I just hate people. I hate your average Joe American as much as I hate the average European.

Often times I argue points on here I dont even believe in because I read someone make an obviously ignorant statement and I feel this unbelievable compulsion to call someone an ignorant asshole. I make bigoted comments about the ignorant black people that surround me, I am a racist. I call a Jew a dirty Jew, I am an anti-Semite. I call a woman a ignorant slut, I hate women. I call someone a camel fucking sand ******, I again am a racist. I call Canadians out for being the bland generic uneducated American knockoff wannabes that they really are, I am an American imperialist pig fucker. I talk smack to other white people all day long usually but nobody calls me anti-white... well, I guess if you consider those trollish people north of the border white.

So does that make me right or left?

I dont know, and I cant say I much care. Because peoples opinions matter about as much to me as a jewish black female tgp kiddies plan to make a million dollars in this industry.

I have a serious problem with getting high and rambling on this board at 3am.

I think I'm the same as a lot of webmasters...I have some leftist leanings and some more conservative...

I think Rush Limbaugh is a big fat cocksucker...I think Gretta Van Sustren in a fucking pinhead and I think Rosie O'Donnell needs to be smacked in the face with a garden hose...

I hate conservatives because they are too close to the religious right and I feel religion is evil (not to be confused with spirituality). I think liberals only "do good" to make themselves feel better about themselves, while religious people only do it for that proverbial better seat in heaven...

I'm a personal socialist...if I can help someone in need knowing their kid may actually turn out to be a productive human being and not start killing midget hookers for crack money, I'll give the smelly guy a quarter..it's a fucking quarter, what do I care if he's going to use it for booze? I don't believe government should mandate humanity, but find it funny how some people go out of their way to be cold hearted cocksuckers...compassion is NOT a weakness...wearing a white hood because all your fellow uneducated right wing minions of god do so is being a sheep is a weakness...

my right leanings want to abolish the term "hate crime"...because if I pick up a brick and smash someone it's becausse I hate them...not because they are black or gay...so therefor, all crimes are hate crimes...when was the last time you took a brick to the head of someone you loved? ([Labret], take a big step back ;)))

abortion issue really fucks me up...I feel it's a woman's choice, but feel it's a bad choice...us fucking fence sitters will keep you pro-choice/pro-life people tied up in courts for years ;))

and my point? I can ramble on aimlessly without benefit of herbal enhancement....

oh, and I too am looking forward to reading Micheal Moore's new book ;)))

I agree on all counts!!

You know, I'm liberal to the extreme... I'm so far left that I HATE Democrats. Most "liberals" don't know this (I think because they WANT to stay ignorant, and they WANT to believe their elected officials believe as they do), but Clinton did more harm for liberal causes than both Reagan and Bush. He cut welfare, he made it harder for women to get abortions, he was the first of several presidents not to increase standards for gas-milage (something both Reagan and Bush DID do), he DOUBLED the amount of people in prison - almost entirely targetting minorities, and mostly on drug possession charges (hypocrite?). Basically, he was terrible on liberties, he was terrible on the environment, he was terrible on women's right to choose, he was terrible on racial equality... what did the man really do to create any positive social change? The thing he did well was to give the illusion of liberal progress. He was a great speaker, and made us feel like everything was going well. Meanwhile, behind the scenes, he was sucking no less corporate cock than George W is now.

Another little known fact is that most Democratic Congressmen vote WITH the Republicans on almost every issue. Sure, they get hung up on certain issues that are made political, but if you look at the percentages, there's really no difference between the parties. The problem is that conservatives are mean, shrewd, and aggressive. Democrats and spineless, cowardly, and corrupted by corporate interests.

The information is out there... but you're not going to get it from the evening news.

Anyway, the point I'm taking too long to get to is that liberals like Rosie O'Donnel don't even really count, in my book. Most Hollywood liberals are just there to give liberals a bad name... with a few exceptions. Most have no real principles, are hypocrites, and speak to the public without really knowing shit about what's going on the U.S., or how their own Congressmen are actually voting.

I try not to categorize myself, other than to say I vote Green... I won't call myself a Socialist because of the McCarthy residue in our society... the moment you use that "bad" word Socialism, most people instantly stop taking you seriously. Apparently today's Socialists are all kids who just don't know any better yet, and have some growing up to do. (I had a recent conversation on another board where, without even calling myself a Socialist, I used the WORD Socialism, and was assumed to be a kid, and was no longer taken seriously)

heheh.. Bill Hicks would be proud

i vote green.. mainly because they're small enough not to be corrupt yet.. (yet ) and they actually believe in what they preach

I am reading "Green Eggs and Ham" right now ...

I vote libertarian for exactly the same reason

this is exactly why we *don't* have to worry about you making a billion dollars.

Unfortunately, the further away from "survival of the fittest" a society moves, the more rapid it's decline.

when a liberal gets comfortable, he gets guilty. when a conservative gets comfortable, he understands that his hard work got him there and is disdainful of those not willing to work hard.

Here, here! I've watched this before and it was fascinating..

Rapid decline? There are a lot of myths out there. Here's the most extreme of these myths:

The Soviet Union. They were Communist (a somewhat twisted form of communism, but still basically communism). People think, because they fell, that communism is a failed economic system. Here's what really happened:

They were doing well economically, but then the U.S. built 125 nuclear warheads. Finally, the Soviets got scared, and started building some nukes for themselves. When the U.S. got to 25,000 nukes, the Soviets were about 12k. So the U.S. stopped building new nukes so that the people could have some money to live on... but the Soviets used most of their funds to build MORE and MORE nukes, until they had 39,000! Meanwhile, their people were struggling to survive. Eventually, the cold war caused their collapse.

So communism isn't a failed system, yet. It was the cold war and the arms race that ruined their economic system.

I'm not advocating communism, by any means... but Socialism is a good middle ground. There are plenty of Socialist countries who are doing well. They may not have anyone as rich as Bill Gates, but they also don't have anybody as poor as this homeless guy outside my apartment washing windows for quarters.

Anyway, it's all irrelevant. Whether you agree or not, read the book. It's good.

That's inaccurate.

The Soviet flavor of Socialism failed because it did not incentivize people to produce beyond their quota. Would you work hard if you knew that at the end of the day you'd get paid the same as the guy who didn't try at all? This results in problems of both production and distribution. There was no incentive to distribute. There were no incentives to be more efficient. The most visible impact of this is that people have to WAIT in line for services, for products, for everything ...since everything is rationed out.

The most lasting and crippling legacy of the Soviet experiment is that it trained people to "cheat the system" -- long lines produces "line jumpers" people who find ways to get ahead of everyone else. You don't have to be a member of the apparatchik to get materials before everyone else, you just have to bribe someone.

This mentality is part of what's causing problems in Russia today. Why work when you can beat the system? Why pay taxes when you can buy someone off? Why play under the rule of law when you can buy someone off or ally with a "power broker" to fix your competition? So, now, instead of capitalism working for everyone creating a fluid market, it is an oligarchic capitalist economy along the lines of South America.

This is not the fault of the Russian people. It is a problem of "transitioning" from socialism [and the coping mechanisms it engendered] to another form. What that form will take totally depends on Putin, Berezovsky, and others.

Capitalism really thrives when there is a strong network of ENFORCED law and citizens abide by the law. Systems where the law only works for some people and disregarded when it comes to the majority result in uneven development. This has always been the scourge for Latin America.

I think you're missing my point, which is not that they had a great economic system, or that it would have worked otherwise. But it's a FACT that more money was going into building nukes than into the places it was really needed.

Like I said, I just meant to show an extreme example of how the system really hasn't been rightfully tested. But what about those Socialists over in the Netherlands? Socialism has been tested there, and the results have been positive. They still have competition. They have a strong economy. They have no problem with homlessness, either.

Well done, Frank