/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

there can't be any "race realism" because race isn't real.
>but muh genetikkks, muh haplogroups, muh clades
not race, just inheritance.

>>2931097
Race is a feeling

>>2931114
the feeling a reactionary gets when he has no class consciousness

>>2931114
ᴉuᴉlossnW: Race? It is a feeling, not a reality.
Hitler:

>>2931139
How many times did you get raped as a kid?

>>2931139
Has the CIA ever overthrown your government?

>>2931144
Ah, a fellow gentleman of mixed ancestry. Tell me, why do you hate yourself so?

>>2931144
Joachim Peiper owns you
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malmedy_massacre(USER WAS WARNED FOR THIS POST)

>>2931139
>the White race
Nobody is white. I declare whiteness abolished. The curse of Franklin is hereby lifted.

>>2931150
>100% European
no such thing

>>2931144
>I'm from United States.
nice grammar. how's the weather in hyderabad?

>>2931157
>>2931155
I can smell you through the screen fatass

>>2931078
The word "atheist" is a difficult to use term. Poke most atheists and you will actually find a pantheist because they do in fact believe in a natural order of things. When I hear the word "atheist" I imagine a world in which logical paradoxes and weird lovecraftian stuff happens sometimes.

>>2931241
>Poke most atheists and you will actually find a pantheist because they do in fact believe in a natural order of things

1. Complete conjecture
   
2. even if true, that's not what pantheism means. pantheism is the belief that the universe as a whole is God, meaning there is no God separate from the combined substance, forces, and laws of the existing universe. do you have any proof most atheists believe in a "natural order of things" let alone this specific theological framing?
   

>When I hear the word "atheist" I imagine a world in which logical paradoxes and weird lovecraftian stuff happens sometimes.
There's a difference between logical paradoxes and "lovecraftian stuff"

>>2931244
god is a word. look it up in a dictionary: "the supreme and ultimate reality." if you use this as a definition, atheists believe in god because they don't think the laws of physics (a sort of divine law) can be broken.

ironically, someone who believes in something like nyarlathotep or cthulhu is a lot closer to an atheist in the way i understand the terms

>>2931244
for example, fascism tends toward a sort of pantheism in which "natural laws" such as social darwinism, the domination of the strong over the weak, predation, etc, are taken as just the way things are. the behavior of animals is taken to be the primary indicator of this, which is why top kek dude hitler loooooooved animals so much.

likewise, anarcho-communism is the opposite of fascism in some regard because they too believe in a sort of natural order, except it is one in which people are naturally cooperative and shit

i'm not going to run bat for homophobes or transphobes though. fuck 'em

>>2931244
to continue, basically, my understanding of the definition of a deity is:

1. is an aspect of nature or otherwise controlling it on a grand, universe-scale level
   
   

AND

1. is considered worthy of reverence or admiration.
   
   

SO, in order to be an atheist, one has to either (1) think that reality is intrinsically unpredictable and illogical (few atheists do this), OR (2) think that the universe and nature is unworthy of reverence or admiration (such as thinking that it's cruel how wild animals have to struggle to survive in such a way)

I suspect that a lot of atheists actually DO think (2) outside of maybe, fascists. So that puts a serious qualification on my argument. Meaning me saying that atheists are actually pantheists is not true because most atheists do not look at nature and go, wow this thing rocks my socks, i should revere it.

however if an atheists looks at the way the universe works and goes "yes this should be a template for human society, we should look up to this," i would call them a pantheist rather than an atheist

i hope that made sense, i put a lot of thinking into it.

>>2931251
No one cares about the way you use the term.

>>2931270
i care about the truth, sweaty

i'm just one perspective among many, deal with it

OP here, I thought about it some more and there actually is more than enough content out there to easily debunk this stuff even without any prior research. Any person who understands how google works can figure this stuff out in less than 10 mins. The main problem isn't a lack of professionals fighting against it but more so the promotion of this pseudo-science on social media platforms. It's especially bad on instagram reels and tiktok which is where they are grooming our youth.
>>2931268 Thanks for the vid I'll check it out
I also found a decent vid here youtu.be/FxzwUtLmdEk?list=LL
>>2931163
Lol I missed what the frogposter said but I'm sure it was something comically stupid

>>2931275
also an "atheist" who believes in shit like race realism is performing a reification that can and should be questioned. the burden of proof for the existence of races is on them, not the other way around, just in the way it is for purported supernatural phenomena

it is religion. the abstract becomes the real. the word someone writes to describe a thing becomes the thing itself, the model of understanding that sought to conform to the world becomes the immutable doctrine that demands the world conform to it. they are just a new generation of priests, younger and edgier and repackaging religion in a more relevant format. they are hip priests.

because in order to fall for this shit you need to be heavily indoctrinated by disc.ord stormfags, such as this moron : >>2931313

are there any scientists working to disprove flat earth? why would they even do that?

My nikkuh the racial autism score gap is probably THE most reproducible result in modern psychology if not THE reproducible result

Nighas be dumb cope seethe and dialate

>>2931361
I regret to inform you that being right about anything means you need to be all the things you despise as "soy"

>>2931373
wignats don't pretend to have the highest I.Q. anyway

>>2931251
>god is a word. look it up in a dictionary: "the supreme and ultimate reality."
anon the vast majority of dictionaries (I only bring this up because you have) define God as an entity or being, not as a reality, and believers in God tend to anthropomorphize God rather than abstracting God to a mere "reality" without a body or mind. Furthermore, to transform Atheism into Pantheism you would have to add the unfounded assumption that Atheists are not merely rejecting the common anthropomorphism of God by theists, but affirming a "Pantheistic" understanding of God which is much less common. A rejection of the common does not necessarily imply an acceptance of the esoteric. Most Atheists simply lack a belief in "God" in general, regardless of whether "God" is framed as a Supreme Entity or as a Supreme Reality.
>for example, fascism tends toward a sort of pantheism in which "natural laws" such as social darwinism, the domination of the strong over the weak, predation, etc, are taken as just the way things are.
Pantheists deify reality but fascists don't necessarily deify natural laws. You have gone from trying to associate Atheism and Pantheism to a completely different subject matter of trying to associate fascism with pantheism. I actually don't appreciate the confusion you introduce. I find this is more and more the case lately on here, someone makes a really short post that is a nonsequitur and introduces confusion. It then requires more effort to "untangle" the confusion they have introduced than it took to introduce that confusion in the first place.

>intelligent discussion
Unfortunately, my earlier post was deleted by mods despite being entirely inoffensive – this is not the platform for sensible discussions.

I will try one more time to provide clarity to your own question.
What exactly are you asking? If one delves into "race", one is met with a taxonomical concept with particular boundaries (e.g. even "species" is a complicated taxonomy – biology is not as firm as people think). Let's abandon this term "race", then, and focus on the contention. Is there a genetic difference between homosapiens identifiable by their phenotypes? Yes. Is this difference massive? No. But that's not the point. Once we accept difference we must then come to terms with it.

What is the cause of different phenotypical characteristics? Clearly, evolutionary adaptation – as well as inter-breeding with subspecies. We see Neanderthal DNA as a remnant in non-Africans; Denisovan DNA in Asians, and West Africans carry "ghost DNA" of ancient but undiscovered hominins, not present in other humans – the "races" are then understood as partly driven by hybridisation. Read this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interbreeding_between_archaic_and_modern_humans
For skin, pale skin is often thought of as a feature of climate, but its actually from low vitamin D diet. We have thus found dark-skinned but bright-eyed DNA in Europe around 8,000 years ago, before the mass transition to pale skin. This is why pigmentation is so varied across different climates: Inuit people living in snow, but having darker skin than Europeans – because they never invented agriculture, so retained proper nutrition. For the rest, you speak on "hatred" and "superiority", but difference is not something to be inherently compared. Not all "race realists" are people who want to oppress others. Differences can be overstated, but can also be understated – what matters is intention.

>>2931373
Nazoids never shutting up about biology while ignoring epigenetics and neuroplasticity is kino every time

>>2931078
>Real scientists seem to not care about this topic whatsoever.
consider: politics pays for science and race science is not very political right now

>>2931485
How do you measure superiority?

>>2931487
XD

>>2931487
>attractive
This is subjective
>successful
Depends on what you mean.
It is really only after 1945 that the West had a "middle class", which has already been evaporated through capitalist class struggle. You are thinking short-term.
>best societies
If you mean the most lawful, this is historically relative
English children used to be publicly hanged for crimes
If by culture, culture was always local until recently, where it became cosmopolitan – mass culture is also a global phenomenon, even if influenced by the West. Pop music and Hollywood would be examples.
>replaced by white people
This is like saying you would like to replace every chimpanzee with an orangutan; every species has its place in nature. Your instrumentality deems nature to be used to some end which is not in its own design. Would Africa be better if it looked like New York? I don't think so.

>>2931495
They have no place in this world.

They're useless and unattractive.

>>2931498
Natural selection decides if a creature is attractive or not.
If they reproduce, they have a stake in the world.

>>2931503
Wrong.

Unattractive people reproduce all the time.

>>2931507
Biologically, natural selection (e.g. mating) occurs by inherited traits being passed on from sexual partners. What you think is "unnattractive" is actually attractive, because it has been adapted to reproduce itself. The point then is, the mental retard will not have children, but the black person will, because someone thinks that is attractive.

>>2931510

Wrong.

People who are objectively unattractive and who have objectively bad DNA traits reproduce all the time.

>>2931386
pantheism a la spinoza etc is almost indistinguishable from atheism.

i know there are hippies that call themselves pantheists and believe in some weird shit, but trust me, this shit is borderline atheism.

>>2931386
again, this is the game you atheists like to play. the word "god" is denied a clear definition, dictionary definitions are ignored, because the word "god" hurts your fee fees. this variety of atheist is not interested in accurately describing reality, they just don't want the WORD "god" associated with their belief system, regardless of anything else

>>2931601
NTA but I’ve seen theists pull the same shit, and you kind of were loading the definition of the term in bad faith

>>2931608
not sure about the bad faith thing, but like this is one of those words that nobody can agree on the definition of, and trying to impose a universal definition would piss people off on all sides. i really shouldn't have brought it up —- I just thought it might have some explanatory power as to why some atheists might be anti-gay or anti-trans or pro-racism. this is leftypol so i can't pull the postmodernism card either, even though i don't think pomo is incompatible with truth claims. i apologize for derailing the thread and pissing everyone off.

>>2931688
Your take away from when the last time this shit was deleted should have been that nobody here is interested and that this certainly isn't the place for your spooky faggotry.
A good portion of this website already have a stronger understanding of your retarded ideology than you doubtless will.

>>2931691
Someone might be interested. Ya never know.

>>2931694
It took me 2 seconds to google "Israel Cohen Communist" and I found out:

-This purported quote was originally claimed as sourced from a work titled "A Racial Program for the Twentieth Century"
-Israel Cohen has never written any work titled "A Racial Program for the Twentieth Century", nor can any such publication be found in any library anywhere in the world, nor has he written any work related to Communism, or American race relations
-The quote was tracked down in its first appearance to come from an aide to Senator Joseph McCarthy named Eustace Mullins, who claimed to have copied it from a publication in the Library of Congress
-When asked to produce the publication in question, he claimed he could not locate his files. When The Washington Star offered to help him track down the "files", he evaded the question and said that he was too busy with other matters to help
-A subsequent search of the Library of Congress showed that no publication titled "A Racial Program for the Twentieth Century" was known to either the Library of Congress or the National Union Catalogue (which indexed holdings across 800 principal U.S. libraries)

>>2931766
right wingers always lie. debunking their claims doesn't work on them because their ideology is based on pure id. never forget this

>>2931774
I know, but it's not for his sake, I just like making spooks vanish.

>>2931777
haha, spook'd

>>2931766
Google searching random right wing charts and finding that 99% of them are just flat out lies is unironically what made me go from apolitical to leftist. It's genuinely baffling, you can just do like 2 mins of research on any rw meme and it's always a lie.