You Have Awoken A Sleeping Giant

[Correll]

One could be tired of being treated like shit by libs, ie "awakened" without being a White Supremacist.

The two options really are miles apart.

YOur negative opinion of Trump is relevant only in that is shows your bias.

The op said white people were awakened. Why no others if it wasn't meant to be racist?

The obvious answer is because other ethnic groups are already "awake" in that their are allowed and even encouraged to actively pursue their interests and to celebrate their heritage.

For Whites, that is still TABOO.

For example, do you know what NAACP stands for?

For example, do you know what NAACP stands for?

Sure. Now why was it necessary to establish such an organization?

That they are allowed and even encouraged to actively pursue their interests was the whole of my point.

Thanks for agreeing.

As to why, blacks, back then in 1909, faced real discrimination, both legal and informal.

Why do you ask?

I ask because you seem to draw a parallel between your "struggle" and that of blacks.
Do you believe whites are now marginalized in the way blacks were to the point of needing a similar advocacy organization? That's what you seem to be saying.

Well, don't get lost in the details.

My point is that Whites, as a group, have interests and do not actively pursue them, and indeed, the normal response is any white even suggest doing so, they are generally shouted down as "racist".

I do not think that a National Association for the Advancement of White People is so much needed, as simply a breaking of the Taboo of speaking of Whites as a Group like every other, that has interests and is expected to protect and pursue them.

 

[Faun]

You mean awaken the weak midgets aka white supremacists.

67% of Americans are white.

The non-stop hatred of white people that comes from the left, particularly the democratic - socialist party, might not be the wisest move.

I'm just sayin...

yeah all Dems hate white people lol. you fucking partisan idiot. And all republicans are bible thumping closet gays if we are going to generalize

A significant number of libs and dems hate white people, (see guno in this thread or Asceipias) and the rest of the dems are happy to have them as part of the team and work with them.

And pander to them.

And craft policy to screw white people for them.

"Generalizing" is called for in this case.

And a number of racists support trump and you are more than happy to have them as part of the team and work with them. Hence why you op is meant to be racist you klan head

White Racist are such a small part of America and especially the GOP that they are irrelevant.

The vast majority of white "racist" are just people who don't agree with liberals.

On the rare occasions that ACTUAL racists or racism rears it's ugly head, it does NOT get welcomed in the GOP.

Do you know what David Duke got vote wise when he ran for the office of the President in the GOP primary?

I'm surprised you would mention Duke, since he ran as a Republican after Democrats kicked him to the curb. The only election he ever won was as a Republican.

 

[Correll]

Correll argues that whites are discriminated against but does not show how with objective evidence. I think what he wants is a White Man's Civilization in the United States and is desperately unhappy that we don't.

I have repeatedly discussed the specifics with you in the past.

I will be happy to do so again.

Here is a one good example of the forces in play. Think of this as the tip of the Iceberg.

The Power of Race


"Advantages by Race and Class on the SAT and ACT at Selective Colleges, Fall 1997

Group Public Institutions (on ACT scale of 36) Private Institutions (on SAT scale of 1,600)
Race
--White -- --
--Black +3.8 +310
--Hispanic +0.3 +130
--Asian -3.4 -140"


As you can see, BLacks get a 310 point SAT bonus for having Blacks skin.

Browns get only 130 points.

This discrimination for limited numbers of admission slots means discrimination AGAINST whites who are competing for the same slots.

The push for diversity, and the desire to help "traditionally disadvantage" groups, AND the fear of lawsuits if their study body doesn't exactly match the demographics of the nation, is UNIVERSAL in our society.

The difference with University admissions is not that the motives for discrimination is greater, but that the documentation of how much discrimination is taking place is better.


It is odd that you have forgotten all the other times I have explained this.

Are you really that blind to information you don't like or were you being dishonest.

 

[Correll]

Correll argues that whites are discriminated against but does not show how with objective evidence. I think what he wants is a White Man's Civilization in the United States and is desperately unhappy that we don't.

He will not adjust to his new role as a minority


EDIA]

Few whites will, once they realize how much they will be fucked.

 

[bullwinkle]

White people!

Go Trump

You mean awaken the weak midgets aka white supremacists.

Mmm, he didn't say that.

What do you base your assumption on?

What "white people" would be awakened if not white supremacists? I'm white and I'm not "awakened"
By trump in fact he is full of hot air.

Hey, Disgruntled, I'm white and I AM awakened...and by Trump too. He is so disgusting to me I am voting for Hillary, a choice I'd prefer not to have to make.

Yeah, vote for a killer. Interesting you'd want to vote for a murderer and someone who can't state all lives matter, and since in office the income inequality increased under her watch. Yeah great choice.

jc456, where do you get your information about Hillary? Her watch? Can't state all lives matter? Murderer?

 

[Correll]

67% of Americans are white.

The non-stop hatred of white people that comes from the left, particularly the democratic - socialist party, might not be the wisest move.

I'm just sayin...

yeah all Dems hate white people lol. you fucking partisan idiot. And all republicans are bible thumping closet gays if we are going to generalize

A significant number of libs and dems hate white people, (see guno in this thread or Asceipias) and the rest of the dems are happy to have them as part of the team and work with them.

And pander to them.

And craft policy to screw white people for them.

"Generalizing" is called for in this case.

And a number of racists support trump and you are more than happy to have them as part of the team and work with them. Hence why you op is meant to be racist you klan head

White Racist are such a small part of America and especially the GOP that they are irrelevant.

The vast majority of white "racist" are just people who don't agree with liberals.

On the rare occasions that ACTUAL racists or racism rears it's ugly head, it does NOT get welcomed in the GOP.

Do you know what David Duke got vote wise when he ran for the office of the President in the GOP primary?

I'm surprised you would mention Duke, since he ran as a Republican after Democrats kicked him to the curb. The only election he ever won was as a Republican.

The reason I mentioned him is in the answer to my question.

Do you know what David Duke got vote wise when he ran for the office of the President in the GOP primary?

 

[IsaacNewton]

White people!

Go Trump

That giant was asleep in the bed of his El Camino parked on his front lawn and is sleeping off a MeisterBrau hangover.

 

[Faun]

yeah all Dems hate white people lol. you fucking partisan idiot. And all republicans are bible thumping closet gays if we are going to generalize

A significant number of libs and dems hate white people, (see guno in this thread or Asceipias) and the rest of the dems are happy to have them as part of the team and work with them.

And pander to them.

And craft policy to screw white people for them.

"Generalizing" is called for in this case.

And a number of racists support trump and you are more than happy to have them as part of the team and work with them. Hence why you op is meant to be racist you klan head

White Racist are such a small part of America and especially the GOP that they are irrelevant.

The vast majority of white "racist" are just people who don't agree with liberals.

On the rare occasions that ACTUAL racists or racism rears it's ugly head, it does NOT get welcomed in the GOP.

Do you know what David Duke got vote wise when he ran for the office of the President in the GOP primary?

I'm surprised you would mention Duke, since he ran as a Republican after Democrats kicked him to the curb. The only election he ever won was as a Republican.

The reason I mentioned him is in the answer to my question.

Do you know what David Duke got vote wise when he ran for the office of the President in the GOP primary?

More than he got by running as a Democrat -- which is why he switched his party affiliation. And despite losing that election, he carried his political carrier as a Republican to victory a short time later.

Again, the only time Duke ever won an election was when he ran as a Republican.

 

[Correll]

A significant number of libs and dems hate white people, (see guno in this thread or Asceipias) and the rest of the dems are happy to have them as part of the team and work with them.

And pander to them.

And craft policy to screw white people for them.

"Generalizing" is called for in this case.

And a number of racists support trump and you are more than happy to have them as part of the team and work with them. Hence why you op is meant to be racist you klan head

White Racist are such a small part of America and especially the GOP that they are irrelevant.

The vast majority of white "racist" are just people who don't agree with liberals.

On the rare occasions that ACTUAL racists or racism rears it's ugly head, it does NOT get welcomed in the GOP.

Do you know what David Duke got vote wise when he ran for the office of the President in the GOP primary?

I'm surprised you would mention Duke, since he ran as a Republican after Democrats kicked him to the curb. The only election he ever won was as a Republican.

The reason I mentioned him is in the answer to my question.

Do you know what David Duke got vote wise when he ran for the office of the President in the GOP primary?

More than he got by running as a Democrat -- which is why he switched his party affiliation. And despite losing that election, he carried his political carrier as a Republican to victory a short time later.

Again, the only time Duke ever won an election was when he ran as a Republican.

I take it you don't know how much he got.

He got less than one percent of the vote. IMO, at that level you really have to wonder what percent of THAT was errors by people to drunk to vote.

He was crushed like a bug.

That is the power of White Racism in the GOP. Which is the lion's share of White People in this country.

White Racists are irrelevant in this country and the GOP.

 

[Faun]

And a number of racists support trump and you are more than happy to have them as part of the team and work with them. Hence why you op is meant to be racist you klan head

White Racist are such a small part of America and especially the GOP that they are irrelevant.

The vast majority of white "racist" are just people who don't agree with liberals.

On the rare occasions that ACTUAL racists or racism rears it's ugly head, it does NOT get welcomed in the GOP.

Do you know what David Duke got vote wise when he ran for the office of the President in the GOP primary?

I'm surprised you would mention Duke, since he ran as a Republican after Democrats kicked him to the curb. The only election he ever won was as a Republican.

The reason I mentioned him is in the answer to my question.

Do you know what David Duke got vote wise when he ran for the office of the President in the GOP primary?

More than he got by running as a Democrat -- which is why he switched his party affiliation. And despite losing that election, he carried his political carrier as a Republican to victory a short time later.

Again, the only time Duke ever won an election was when he ran as a Republican.

I take it you don't know how much he got.

He got less than one percent of the vote. IMO, at that level you really have to wonder what percent of THAT was errors by people to drunk to vote.

He was crushed like a bug.

That is the power of White Racism in the GOP. Which is the lion's share of White People in this country.

White Racists are irrelevant in this country and the GOP.

Which was more than he got running as a Democrat which is why he switched to the Republican party which is what I said.

And again, Republicans elected him in the next election he ran in. He ran as a Republican because Democrats wanted no part of him.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Correll argues that whites are discriminated against but does not show how with objective evidence. I think what he wants is a White Man's Civilization in the United States and is desperately unhappy that we don't.

I have repeatedly discussed the specifics with you in the past.

I will be happy to do so again.

Here is a one good example of the forces in play. Think of this as the tip of the Iceberg.

The Power of Race


"Advantages by Race and Class on the SAT and ACT at Selective Colleges, Fall 1997

Group Public Institutions (on ACT scale of 36) Private Institutions (on SAT scale of 1,600)
Race
--White -- --
--Black +3.8 +310
--Hispanic +0.3 +130
--Asian -3.4 -140"


As you can see, BLacks get a 310 point SAT bonus for having Blacks skin.

Browns get only 130 points.

This discrimination for limited numbers of admission slots means discrimination AGAINST whites who are competing for the same slots.

The push for diversity, and the desire to help "traditionally disadvantage" groups, AND the fear of lawsuits if their study body doesn't exactly match the demographics of the nation, is UNIVERSAL in our society.

The difference with University admissions is not that the motives for discrimination is greater, but that the documentation of how much discrimination is taking place is better.

It is odd that you have forgotten all the other times I have explained this.

Are you really that blind to information you don't like or were you being dishonest.

And in your dishonesty you fail to point out, from the link, that your conclusion is not sound because it reads "While Espenshade and Radford -- in the book and in interviews -- avoid broad conclusions over whether affirmative action is working or should continue, their findings almost certainly will be used both by supporters and critics of affirmative action to advance their arguments. (In fact, a talk Espenshade gave at a meeting earlier this year about some of the findings is already being cited by affirmative action critics, although in ways that he says don't exactly reflect his thinking.)

Is he describing you, Correll?

Duke could win as a Republican, yes, when he could not win as a Democrat, yes?

 

[Asclepias]

Correll argues that whites are discriminated against but does not show how with objective evidence. I think what he wants is a White Man's Civilization in the United States and is desperately unhappy that we don't.

I have repeatedly discussed the specifics with you in the past.

I will be happy to do so again.

Here is a one good example of the forces in play. Think of this as the tip of the Iceberg.

The Power of Race


"Advantages by Race and Class on the SAT and ACT at Selective Colleges, Fall 1997

Group Public Institutions (on ACT scale of 36) Private Institutions (on SAT scale of 1,600)
Race
--White -- --
--Black +3.8 +310
--Hispanic +0.3 +130
--Asian -3.4 -140"


As you can see, BLacks get a 310 point SAT bonus for having Blacks skin.

Browns get only 130 points.

This discrimination for limited numbers of admission slots means discrimination AGAINST whites who are competing for the same slots.

The push for diversity, and the desire to help "traditionally disadvantage" groups, AND the fear of lawsuits if their study body doesn't exactly match the demographics of the nation, is UNIVERSAL in our society.

The difference with University admissions is not that the motives for discrimination is greater, but that the documentation of how much discrimination is taking place is better.

It is odd that you have forgotten all the other times I have explained this.

Are you really that blind to information you don't like or were you being dishonest.

And in your dishonesty you fail to point out, from the link, that your conclusion is not sound because it reads "While Espenshade and Radford -- in the book and in interviews -- avoid broad conclusions over whether affirmative action is working or should continue, their findings almost certainly will be used both by supporters and critics of affirmative action to advance their arguments. (In fact, a talk Espenshade gave at a meeting earlier this year about some of the findings is already being cited by affirmative action critics, although in ways that he says don't exactly reflect his thinking.)

Is he describing you, Correll?

Duke could win as a Republican, yes, when he could not win as a Democrat, yes?

Corral is not a serious interlocutor. He will lie, stall, deflect, and double down on stupidity to pretend he is correct. Its like talking to an autistic monkey. Thats why I dont bother to entertain his stupidity for very long. I just figure out the gist of his argument, debunk it and watch as he fills the thread with pages and pages of bullshit.

 

[Correll]

White Racist are such a small part of America and especially the GOP that they are irrelevant.

The vast majority of white "racist" are just people who don't agree with liberals.

On the rare occasions that ACTUAL racists or racism rears it's ugly head, it does NOT get welcomed in the GOP.

Do you know what David Duke got vote wise when he ran for the office of the President in the GOP primary?

I'm surprised you would mention Duke, since he ran as a Republican after Democrats kicked him to the curb. The only election he ever won was as a Republican.

The reason I mentioned him is in the answer to my question.

Do you know what David Duke got vote wise when he ran for the office of the President in the GOP primary?

More than he got by running as a Democrat -- which is why he switched his party affiliation. And despite losing that election, he carried his political carrier as a Republican to victory a short time later.

Again, the only time Duke ever won an election was when he ran as a Republican.

I take it you don't know how much he got.

He got less than one percent of the vote. IMO, at that level you really have to wonder what percent of THAT was errors by people to drunk to vote.

He was crushed like a bug.

That is the power of White Racism in the GOP. Which is the lion's share of White People in this country.

White Racists are irrelevant in this country and the GOP.

Which was more than he got running as a Democrat which is why he switched to the Republican party which is what I said.

And again, Republicans elected him in the next election he ran in. He ran as a Republican because Democrats wanted no part of him.

You think less than one percent is "wanting a part of him"?

 

[Uncensored2008]

That would be your quote.

I wasn't quoting you directly, just your essence.

You're a typical democrat, heart filled with hate, head filled with shit.

 

[Correll]

Correll argues that whites are discriminated against but does not show how with objective evidence. I think what he wants is a White Man's Civilization in the United States and is desperately unhappy that we don't.

I have repeatedly discussed the specifics with you in the past.

I will be happy to do so again.

Here is a one good example of the forces in play. Think of this as the tip of the Iceberg.

The Power of Race


"Advantages by Race and Class on the SAT and ACT at Selective Colleges, Fall 1997

Group Public Institutions (on ACT scale of 36) Private Institutions (on SAT scale of 1,600)
Race
--White -- --
--Black +3.8 +310
--Hispanic +0.3 +130
--Asian -3.4 -140"


As you can see, BLacks get a 310 point SAT bonus for having Blacks skin.

Browns get only 130 points.

This discrimination for limited numbers of admission slots means discrimination AGAINST whites who are competing for the same slots.

The push for diversity, and the desire to help "traditionally disadvantage" groups, AND the fear of lawsuits if their study body doesn't exactly match the demographics of the nation, is UNIVERSAL in our society.

The difference with University admissions is not that the motives for discrimination is greater, but that the documentation of how much discrimination is taking place is better.

It is odd that you have forgotten all the other times I have explained this.

Are you really that blind to information you don't like or were you being dishonest.

And in your dishonesty you fail to point out, from the link, that your conclusion is not sound because it reads "While Espenshade and Radford -- in the book and in interviews -- avoid broad conclusions over whether affirmative action is working or should continue, their findings almost certainly will be used both by supporters and critics of affirmative action to advance their arguments. (In fact, a talk Espenshade gave at a meeting earlier this year about some of the findings is already being cited by affirmative action critics, although in ways that he says don't exactly reflect his thinking.)

Is he describing you, Correll?

Yes, very much so.

HIs data shows the Affirmative Action is, as I said, anti-white discrimination.

His personal views are irrelevant, except as it is impressive that he did not allow his personal political views to prevent him from presenting his data and findings honestly.

And getting back to the point, his findings show the "objective evidence" you requested, especially as I pointed out, the motives for this discrimination is universal in our society.

Duke could win as a Republican, yes, when he could not win as a Democrat, yes?

Once his background in the Klan was well known and he tried running again he was humiliated.

Less than one percent.

That is what happens to actual real racists in the GOP.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Homes, why are you going to lie?...lol.

Hell, there aren't 1,500 countries in Africa...LMAO

If it wasn't for white folks, America wouldn't exist.

You clown, people lived in the Americas long before our ancestors showed up and raped their civilizations then carted in slaves to build new ones..

And, what was here? Nothing.

No. There were vibrant NA civilizations here. So that lie they taught you in school about Columbus discovering america was just a lie to make you feel good about being white.

Vibrant? Hell, they massacred each other more than white people; enslaved other.

The Chippewa slaughtered the Sioux. The Sioux slaughtered the Pawnee.

Really?

"The total number of military and civilian casualties in World War I was over 38 million: there were over 17 million deaths and 20 million wounded, ranking it among thedeadliest conflicts in human history."

World War I casualties - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


"World War II was the deadliest military conflict in history in absolute terms of total dead.[Over 60 million people were killed, which was about 3% of the 1940 world population (est. 2.3 billion). The tables below give a detailed country-by-country count of human losses. World War II fatality statistics vary, with estimates of total dead ranging from 50 million to more than 80 million."

World War II casualties - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



I would bet that whites are responsible for the most killing in this planet's history.

It's true that stone age people with stone age weapons wage war on a smaller scale. The plains Indians particularly were basically street gangs, in a state of perpetual war over turf. Since they were mostly foragers, this makes sense. If you pick my berries I'll tie to you an anthill because my tribe only survives by scrounging what grows wild.

Always on the verge of starvation, wracked by disease, viciously fighting the animals and other stone age people for the few wild resources. Yeah, Indian life was idyllic just like you shit for brains Communists fantasize it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Correll argues that whites are discriminated against but does not show how with objective evidence. I think what he wants is a White Man's Civilization in the United States and is desperately unhappy that we don't.

I have repeatedly discussed the specifics with you in the past.

I will be happy to do so again.

Here is a one good example of the forces in play. Think of this as the tip of the Iceberg.

The Power of Race


"Advantages by Race and Class on the SAT and ACT at Selective Colleges, Fall 1997

Group Public Institutions (on ACT scale of 36) Private Institutions (on SAT scale of 1,600)
Race
--White -- --
--Black +3.8 +310
--Hispanic +0.3 +130
--Asian -3.4 -140"


As you can see, BLacks get a 310 point SAT bonus for having Blacks skin.

Browns get only 130 points.

This discrimination for limited numbers of admission slots means discrimination AGAINST whites who are competing for the same slots.

The push for diversity, and the desire to help "traditionally disadvantage" groups, AND the fear of lawsuits if their study body doesn't exactly match the demographics of the nation, is UNIVERSAL in our society.

The difference with University admissions is not that the motives for discrimination is greater, but that the documentation of how much discrimination is taking place is better.

It is odd that you have forgotten all the other times I have explained this.

Are you really that blind to information you don't like or were you being dishonest.

And in your dishonesty you fail to point out, from the link, that your conclusion is not sound because it reads "While Espenshade and Radford -- in the book and in interviews -- avoid broad conclusions over whether affirmative action is working or should continue, their findings almost certainly will be used both by supporters and critics of affirmative action to advance their arguments. (In fact, a talk Espenshade gave at a meeting earlier this year about some of the findings is already being cited by affirmative action critics, although in ways that he says don't exactly reflect his thinking.)

Is he describing you, Correll?

Yes, very much so.

HIs data shows the Affirmative Action is, as I said, anti-white discrimination.

His personal views are irrelevant, except as it is impressive that he did not allow his personal political views to prevent him from presenting his data and findings honestly.

And getting back to the point, his findings show the "objective evidence" you requested, especially as I pointed out, the motives for this discrimination is universal in our society.

Duke could win as a Republican, yes, when he could not win as a Democrat, yes?

Once his background in the Klan was well known and he tried running again he was humiliated. Less than one percent. That is what happens to actual real racists in the GOP.

Only in your opinion.

And your comments about AA are not in line with the link you posted: "In fact, a talk Espenshade gave at a meeting earlier this year about some of the findings is already being cited by affirmative action critics, although in ways that he says don't exactly reflect his thinking." Yet that is what you are doing.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You clown, people lived in the Americas long before our ancestors showed up and raped their civilizations then carted in slaves to build new ones..

And, what was here? Nothing.

No. There were vibrant NA civilizations here. So that lie they taught you in school about Columbus discovering america was just a lie to make you feel good about being white.

Vibrant? Hell, they massacred each other more than white people; enslaved other.

The Chippewa slaughtered the Sioux. The Sioux slaughtered the Pawnee.

Really?

"The total number of military and civilian casualties in World War I was over 38 million: there were over 17 million deaths and 20 million wounded, ranking it among thedeadliest conflicts in human history."

World War I casualties - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


"World War II was the deadliest military conflict in history in absolute terms of total dead.[Over 60 million people were killed, which was about 3% of the 1940 world population (est. 2.3 billion). The tables below give a detailed country-by-country count of human losses. World War II fatality statistics vary, with estimates of total dead ranging from 50 million to more than 80 million."

World War II casualties - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



I would bet that whites are responsible for the most killing in this planet's history.

It's true that stone age people with stone age weapons wage war on a smaller scale. The plains Indians particularly were basically street gangs, in a state of perpetual war over turf. Since they were mostly foragers, this makes sense. If you pick my berries I'll tie to you an anthill because my tribe only survives by scrounging what grows wild.

Always on the verge of starvation, wracked by disease, viciously fighting the animals and other stone age people for the few wild resources. Yeah, Indian life was idyllic just like you shit for brains Communists fantasize it.

We were not talking about the plains natives in particular at all. The Aztec civilization's main city was larger, cleaner, and better built than any in Europe at the time.

 

[Asclepias]

You clown, people lived in the Americas long before our ancestors showed up and raped their civilizations then carted in slaves to build new ones..

And, what was here? Nothing.

No. There were vibrant NA civilizations here. So that lie they taught you in school about Columbus discovering america was just a lie to make you feel good about being white.

Vibrant? Hell, they massacred each other more than white people; enslaved other.

The Chippewa slaughtered the Sioux. The Sioux slaughtered the Pawnee.

Really?

"The total number of military and civilian casualties in World War I was over 38 million: there were over 17 million deaths and 20 million wounded, ranking it among thedeadliest conflicts in human history."

World War I casualties - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


"World War II was the deadliest military conflict in history in absolute terms of total dead.[Over 60 million people were killed, which was about 3% of the 1940 world population (est. 2.3 billion). The tables below give a detailed country-by-country count of human losses. World War II fatality statistics vary, with estimates of total dead ranging from 50 million to more than 80 million."

World War II casualties - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



I would bet that whites are responsible for the most killing in this planet's history.

It's true that stone age people with stone age weapons wage war on a smaller scale. The plains Indians particularly were basically street gangs, in a state of perpetual war over turf. Since they were mostly foragers, this makes sense. If you pick my berries I'll tie to you an anthill because my tribe only survives by scrounging what grows wild.

Always on the verge of starvation, wracked by disease, viciously fighting the animals and other stone age people for the few wild resources. Yeah, Indian life was idyllic just like you shit for brains Communists fantasize it.

You keep retreating from your position a step at a time. Whites are the most bellicose race on the face of the planet and whats sad is that they actually consider it an advancement.

 

[WildBillKelsoe]

And, what was here? Nothing.

No. There were vibrant NA civilizations here. So that lie they taught you in school about Columbus discovering america was just a lie to make you feel good about being white.

Vibrant? Hell, they massacred each other more than white people; enslaved other.

The Chippewa slaughtered the Sioux. The Sioux slaughtered the Pawnee.

Really?

"The total number of military and civilian casualties in World War I was over 38 million: there were over 17 million deaths and 20 million wounded, ranking it among thedeadliest conflicts in human history."

World War I casualties - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


"World War II was the deadliest military conflict in history in absolute terms of total dead.[Over 60 million people were killed, which was about 3% of the 1940 world population (est. 2.3 billion). The tables below give a detailed country-by-country count of human losses. World War II fatality statistics vary, with estimates of total dead ranging from 50 million to more than 80 million."

World War II casualties - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



I would bet that whites are responsible for the most killing in this planet's history.

It's true that stone age people with stone age weapons wage war on a smaller scale. The plains Indians particularly were basically street gangs, in a state of perpetual war over turf. Since they were mostly foragers, this makes sense. If you pick my berries I'll tie to you an anthill because my tribe only survives by scrounging what grows wild.

Always on the verge of starvation, wracked by disease, viciously fighting the animals and other stone age people for the few wild resources. Yeah, Indian life was idyllic just like you shit for brains Communists fantasize it.

We were not talking about the plains natives in particular at all. The Aztec civilization's main city was larger, cleaner, and better built than any in Europe at the time.

Even a blind hog finds an acorn.