CNBC commentator Marc Faber says "Thank God white people populated America, not black

[Bud Plug]

If he was just one racist wacko, his individual position wouldn't be very important, but because he tries to and does persuade others — many others — we have to consider implications and possibilities beyond his personal statements.

How has he proposed to stop or prevent more enthusiastic and less-principled[sic] exponents of his white superiority beliefs from extending his preservation concept to the forced migration he eschews, Or to limiting births, sterilization and forced abortions? Or outright extermination? All for the noble purpose of preserving the dominance the more important and valuable race, of course.

Not that you're defending his position, but without conjuring up a Supreme Being who has anointed that race, he and his defenders also owe an explanation of why that 'superior' race should be 'preserved' in North America or anywhere. For what purpose beside the selfish gratification of its members? After all, even the 'races' of inferior colouration have managed to survive for millennia, develop agriculture, art and science, exterminate animal populations and navigate the globe. Who says white-folks' massive global industrial pollution, littering of near-orbit space and obliteration of the ozone layer that once protected us from the sun and sunscreen is a good thing anyway? Whites?

What's wrong with just letting this stuff work out according to the same-old evolutionary crap-shoot as always? Who are white folks to tell us who they're gonna keep outta the country to stop my sister from marrying?

Sorry, of course I don't expect you to speak for him. Just consider that last to be more of my rhetorical excesses.

Second response because I didn't see the entirety of your post the first time I responded.

While I think Spencer has things wrong (and I suspect him of being a disingenuous provocateur), I have watched a number of his interviews (including the Kamau Bell interview). As I understand his argument, he approaches the issue from the simplistic perspective that "his people" were the ones to make the country into the place everyone wants to come to, so he thinks it would be ideal if the same people remained in charge and they perpetuated the same values in public policy. It's a selfish position from the perspective that he primarily cares about "people like him" (I guess with the rider that everybody else would be better off with his people in charge by extension).

It's a logically sound theory if you accept the premises that his people will always make the best decisions, or that they will be happier no matter how bad the results are of their bad decisions just as long as they get to make all of them, both of which I think are dubious propositions.

 

[oldjones]

Second response because I didn't see the entirety of your post the first time I responded.

While I think Spencer has things wrong (and I suspect him of being a disingenuous provocateur), I have watched a number of his interviews (including the Kamau Bell interview). As I understand his argument, he approaches the issue from the simplistic perspective that "his people" were the ones to make the country into the place everyone wants to come to, so he thinks it would be ideal if the same people remained in charge and they perpetuated the same values in public policy. It's a selfish position from the perspective that he primarily cares about "people like him" (I guess with the rider that everybody else would be better off with his people in charge by extension).

It's a logically sound theory if you accept the premises that his people will always make the best decisions, or that they will be happier no matter how bad the results are of their bad decisions just as long as they get to make all of them, both of which I think are dubious propositions.

That word 'accept' has to hold up under a massive weight, and I can't believe it is possible, not even for the superior 'white' race. I seem to recall a sub-race of 'whites' (well regarded in America, as a numerous 'white' immigrant group) getting carried away to depths of mad racial depravity within living memory. Which is why I abhor such views as his.

I appreciate what you describe as his 'distancing' but I don't think it's good enough that he doesn't propose horrors like extermination, when he effectively lays out the rationale others almost certainly would use to justify their proposal of it. If he wants to be listened to as a reasonable thoughtful person, knowledgeable about recent history and concerned that it isn't repeated, he should be putting at least as much effort into showing precisely and in detail how not to be a Master Race.

Without that balance anyone pushing such tripe is dangerously close to being just another, … you know, … . I'll be sure to tell him when I run into him next.

 

[Bud Plug]

That word 'accept' has to hold up under a massive weight, and I can't believe it is possible, not even for the superior 'white' race. I seem to recall a sub-race of 'whites' (well regarded in America, as a numerous 'white' immigrant group) getting carried away to depths of mad racial depravity within living memory. Which is why I abhor such views as his.

I appreciate what you describe as his 'distancing' but I don't think it's good enough that he doesn't propose horrors like extermination, when he effectively lays out the rationale others almost certainly would use to justify their proposal of it. If he wants to be listened to as a reasonable thoughtful person, knowledgeable about recent history and concerned that it isn't repeated, he should be putting at least as much effort into showing precisely and in detail how not to be just another Master Race.

Without that balance he's dangerously close to being just another, … you know, … . I'll be sure to tell him when I run into him next.

Of course the massive hole in his doctrine is that, assuming for the moment that there are key values that were essential to development of a successful America, and that those same values are still essential today, those values are neither common to ALL white cultures, nor exclusive to ONLY white cultures. To be more concrete, I don't think Spencer would agree that Russian white values concerning free enterprise, or government accountability, or democracy align with American white values. Nor could he argue that no black/latino/asian majority culture values hard work, entrepreneurial spirit, free markets, or national unity. Once you break his doctrine down this way, it's plain that he should be promoting specific American values, not the idea that whites are the only possible agents of those values.

 

[mandrill]

Nothing is gained by distorting the facts. Richard Spencer's repeatedly stated position on race is that he does not hold the view that whites are "superior". Rather his theory is that American values were established by white settlers/immigrants. He wants those values to remain paramount in America, and he wants white people to organize politically to control immigration in order to maintain those values. I think his theory is wrong, but it is not a theory of racial superiority. It is a theory based on his cultural value preferences. The KKK, by contrast, believe that blacks are racially inferior and therefore shouldn't enjoy the same civil rights. The Proud Boys don't ascribe to either view. If they have a cohesive philosophy, it could be fairly described as: a) pro conservative political policies, b) anti-political establishment, c) anti-activist left, and d) pro individual responsibility and anti-nanny state.

Uh-huh. That's obviously where Smallcock's argument is headed and I have no doubt that Smallcock didn't come up with this line of "logic" himself. He read it somewhere. Probably a lot of somewheres.

Let me help you. Jews are genetically superior in IQ to "White Americans". But "White Americans" have better cultural values - or at least cultural values which are precious enough to preserve against Jewish economic dominance. So we have to quota Jews so that the "White Americans" get the top jobs. And that's how we preserve our "precious cultural American heritage" from the higher IQ but culturally degenerate Jews.

Know where I read a version of that first, BP? - Mein Kampf! What goes around comes around in Naziland.

I appreciate your help with Spencer and the Proud Boys btw. How about those assholes who paraded around Charlotteville with tiki torches? What do they believe?

 

[Bud Plug]

Uh-huh. That's obviously where Smallcock's argument is headed and I have no doubt that Smallcock didn't come up with this line of "logic" himself. He read it somewhere. Probably a lot of somewheres.

Let me help you. Jews are genetically superior in IQ to "White Americans". But "White Americans" have better cultural values - or at least cultural values which are precious enough to preserve against Jewish economic dominance. So we have to quota Jews so that the "White Americans" get the top jobs. And that's how we preserve our "precious cultural American heritage" from the higher IQ but culturally degenerate Jews.

Know where I read a version of that first, BP? - Mein Kampf! What goes around comes around in Naziland.

I appreciate your help with Spencer and the Proud Boys btw. How about those assholes who paraded around Charlotteville with tiki torches? What do they believe?

That would be the KKK and some other white supremacist groups. They believe that whites are racially superior to blacks (I'm not sure what they think of Asians) and think they should have superior civil rights to blacks.

 

[mandrill]

That's not accurate. He's been questioned on this directly. He doesn't propose that any current US citizens be forced to leave the country. However, he proposes immigration policy that preserves whites as the racial majority. Again, I don't agree with Spencer's theories about how to make America the best it could be, but how about dealing with his actual position, instead of a made up one?

I don't think Frankfooter shares your enthusiasm for minutely analyzing small doctrinal differences among Far Right White Heritage splinter factions, Bud Plug.

 

[mandrill]

That would be the KKK and some other white supremacist groups. They believe that whites are racially superior to blacks (I'm not sure what they think of Asians) and think they should have superior civil rights to blacks.

Speaking about Jews, not Blacks.

I assume that some at least of these Far Right groups have a plan of action for ensuring that "Jews do not replace us!" ??

 

[mandrill]

Of course the massive hole in his doctrine is that, assuming for the moment that there are key values that were essential to development of a successful America, and that those same values are still essential today, those values are neither common to ALL white cultures, nor exclusive to ONLY white cultures. To be more concrete, I don't think Spencer would agree that Russian white values concerning free enterprise, or government accountability, or democracy align with American white values. Nor could he argue that no black/latino/asian majority culture values hard work, entrepreneurial spirit, free markets, or national unity. Once you break his doctrine down this way, it's plain that he should be promoting specific American values, not the idea that whites are the only possible agents of those values.

Unless of course, he considers that Russians - for genetic or environmental reasons - do not articulate their White Heritage in the best possible way. And unless he considers White American values to be superior to Black Anywhere values.

I assume he likely believes the latter and I refer you to Smallcock's earlier posts to the effect that average Black racial IQ is lower taken than average White IQ and also that Black majority countries are less developed economically and in terms of human rights that White majority USA.

Comment?

 

[Bud Plug]

Speaking about Jews, not Blacks.

I assume that some at least of these Far Right groups have a plan of action for ensuring that "Jews do not replace us!" ??

Yes, I think that's the position of the KKK and some other white supremacist groups.

However I think their numbers are pretty small. Probably fewer than those who believe they've been abducted by aliens.

 

[Bud Plug]

Unless of course, he considers that Russians - for genetic or environmental reasons - do not articulate their White Heritage in the best possible way. And unless he considers White American values to be superior to Black Anywhere values.

I assume he likely believes the latter and I refer you to Smallcock's earlier posts to the effect that average Black racial IQ is lower taken than average White IQ and also that Black majority countries are less developed economically and in terms of human rights that White majority USA.

Comment?

Well let's define what a black majority country is. Does Brazil count? And what should we compare it to? The bottom 2/3 of the United States? The central 2/3? And when should we make the comparison? Today? Project 100 years forward? At the time of the Pharoahs?

Without travelling down any of those paths, I'm pretty confident I'd end up where I started. I think there are some cultural values that have been, and will be critical to the success of America. However, those values are neither white nor black.

However, I do believe that Americans have the right to determine their own destiny as a sovereign nation, and to that end can select the cultural values that will be predominant, and oppose the introduction of influences that would undermine the execution of those values.

 

[oldjones]

Of course the massive hole in his doctrine is that, assuming for the moment that there are key values that were essential to development of a successful America, and that those same values are still essential today, those values are neither common to ALL white cultures, nor exclusive to ONLY white cultures. To be more concrete, I don't think Spencer would agree that Russian white values concerning free enterprise, or government accountability, or democracy align with American white values. Nor could he argue that no black/latino/asian majority culture values hard work, entrepreneurial spirit, free markets, or national unity. Once you break his doctrine down this way, it's plain that he should be promoting specific American values, not the idea that whites are the only possible agents of those values.

Indeed, and just what constitutes those 'American' values is hardly a matter of agreement, as that last election clearly demonstrated.

And then there's the matter of what and who is 'white' to say nothing of the contributions 'red', 'black', 'yellow' and 'brown' races made, and the impossibility of defining any of them. But they've all been here, working, contributing to, and building that American success in various numbers for as long and longer than his 'whites', who couldn't have managed without them.

Not to question that if unplanned, more or less unrestricted 'white' immigration, with commercially dictated but largely unregulated admixtures of forced imported slave labour and indentured asian workers accomplished all this wonder that is contemporary America, where's the logic in grossly distorting, upsetting and replacing what was so successful?

Because at long last a Man Wise Enough has been born?

 

[Bud Plug]

I don't think Frankfooter shares your enthusiasm for minutely analyzing small doctrinal differences among Far Right White Heritage splinter factions, Bud Plug.

A little accuracy never hurt anyone, and it often helps.

 

[mandrill]

Well let's define what a black majority country is. Does Brazil count? And what should we compare it to? The bottom 2/3 of the United States? The central 2/3? And when should we make the comparison? Today? Project 100 years forward? At the time of the Pharoahs?

Without travelling down any of those paths, I'm pretty confident I'd end up where I started. I think there are some cultural values that have been, and will be critical to the success of America. However, those values are neither white nor black.

However, I do believe that Americans have the right to determine their own destiny as a sovereign nation, and to that end can select the cultural values that will be predominant, and oppose the introduction of influences that would undermine the execution of those values.

I'm not sure you responded to my post. But anyway..

Americans are restricted from selecting the "cultural values" that will be predominant if that selection infringes the US Constitution - a document which - as drafted - holds all men equal. Now we know that interpreting that document has had its ups and downs - to say the least. But as currently interpreted, no judge will allow the Heritage Values of White America - whatever the fuck that is in a nation of 330,000,000 interbred immigrants from all countries of the globe - to trump those of brown America, yellow America, Black America or Jewish America.

So any proponent of racial division or exclusion has an almost impossible task doing anything other than blogging in his mom's basement.

 

[Smallcock]

You may not be, but it appears that you share some beliefs with them, namely that some people are genetically smarter (though you claim this doesn't make them superior).
Spencer says he wants to ethnically cleanse the US of all non-white folks, you don't back that one either do you?

I've advocated for equality of rights and equal opportunity for all in this very thread. How does that translate into ethnic cleansing?

I don't have anything in common with Spencer. I don't even like the guy.

 

[Smallcock]

Uh-huh. That's obviously where Smallcock's argument is headed and I have no doubt that Smallcock didn't come up with this line of "logic" himself. He read it somewhere. Probably a lot of somewheres.

Let me help you. Jews are genetically superior in IQ to "White Americans". But "White Americans" have better cultural values - or at least cultural values which are precious enough to preserve against Jewish economic dominance. So we have to quota Jews so that the "White Americans" get the top jobs. And that's how we preserve our "precious cultural American heritage" from the higher IQ but culturally degenerate Jews.

Know where I read a version of that first, BP? - Mein Kampf! What goes around comes around in Naziland.

I appreciate your help with Spencer and the Proud Boys btw. How about those assholes who paraded around Charlotteville with tiki torches? What do they believe?

Richard Spence doesn't care about anyone but Richard Spencer. You mentioned earlier that IQ was only an academic exercise which is incorrect, but Spencer's brand of white nationalism (this is different from supremacist) certainly is.

There is no such thing as a quota for Jews and I've not called for that. This was done in academia decades ago to Jews and Asians but no longer. It's immoral to penalize someone just because they're smarter than others. Jews and Asians will continue to dominate and prosper in this society which increasingly calls for high academic success. Some other groups will not, for the same reasons.

 

[Smallcock]

I'm not sure you responded to my post. But anyway..

Americans are restricted from selecting the "cultural values" that will be predominant if that selection infringes the US Constitution - a document which - as drafted - holds all men equal. Now we know that interpreting that document has had its ups and downs - to say the least. But as currently interpreted, no judge will allow the Heritage Values of White America - whatever the fuck that is in a nation of 330,000,000 interbred immigrants from all countries of the globe - to trump those of brown America, yellow America, Black America or Jewish America.

So any proponent of racial division or exclusion has an almost impossible task doing anything other than blogging in his mom's basement.

Frankfooter has set you all off on a tangent.

 

[Frankfooter]

That's not accurate. He's been questioned on this directly.

From the rationalwiki on Spencer, which is really funny.

Richard Bertrand Spencer (born 1978) is not a Nazi, just like Ted Haggard is not gay. He is president of the National Policy Institute (NPI), a white nationalist think tank in Arlington, and of Washington Summit Publishers (WSP), a "human biodiversity" outlet in Whitefish. Both institutions are "supporters of identity politics for White Americans",[2] which is not at all like Nazism. He says it over and over, because he's NOT A NAZI, okay?! He also hosts AltRight.com, where Spencer is joined with fellow white supremacists including Brittany A. Pettibone, Jared Taylor, and Lana Lokteff.


Richard Spencer has said many non-Nazi things, non-Nazily.

Today, in the public imagination, “ethnic-cleansing” has been associated with civil war and mass murder (understandably so). But this need not be the case. 1919 is a real example of successful ethnic redistribution—done by fiat, we should remember, but done peacefully.[7]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_B._Spencer

 

[mandrill]

Richard Spence doesn't care about anyone but Richard Spencer. You mentioned earlier that IQ was only an academic exercise which is incorrect, but Spencer's brand of white nationalism (this is different from supremacist) certainly is.

There is no such thing as a quota for Jews and I've not called for that. This was done in academia decades ago to Jews and Asians but no longer. It's immoral to penalize someone just because they're smarter than others. Jews and Asians will continue to dominate and prosper in this society which increasingly calls for high academic success. Some other groups will not, for the same reasons.

Thanks for clearing that up. I now realize that you are not a neo nazi, only an average guy who believes that different racial groups have evolved with different levels of intellectual capability.

 

[oldjones]

Thanks for clearing that up. I now realize that you are not a neo nazi, only an average guy who believes that different racial groups have evolved with different levels of intellectual capability.

Now if we could just sort out how to tell who belongs to which group we could get somewhere useful. But I don't see any practical way to determine IQ — or intellectual capability or … — of the people we must interact with in our daily doings. Which is why we do not use those objective standards, and thus need legislated ones like Bills and Charters that try at least to keep us from mis-judging.

Like when we look at a nose shape, or hair curl, or skin-tone and think we know something about intelligence, athleticism or peaceableness. We don't. We know only that there's an individual facing us, and whatever 'race' we may assign them to, they and their behaviour will be entirely unique.

The only useful aspect of any 'race' question is how to eliminate that concept from our serious thinking and significant behaviours as rapidly and completely as possible.

 

[Smallcock]

Thanks for clearing that up. I now realize that you are not a neo nazi, only an average guy who believes that different racial groups have evolved with different levels of intellectual capability.

All races have individuals that are geniuses and retards, however the distribution in each racial group differs.