Meme Thread for Both Posting and Discussing Memes

The only thing a guy like me wants, when things like this come up? People to admit that there are actual differences between ethnic groups, because they are.

I'm not advocating doing anything about it. I really don't know what, if anything, should. I'm not against any group, or anything like that.

I'm just really tired of yet another truth being ignored, because people don't want to see what's real.
 
Oh, there certainly are differences, but they are differences in degree, not kind, and at the individual level are relatively meaningless. Not completely meaningless, but relatively.

That is why, ideally, you should always act based on the individual, not the group, and those who want to classify people exclusively according to their group identity are, to be blunt, up to something.

A while back I linked a video in the Philosophy board called Don't Be A Sucker that went into this very thing. Those who want to divide and rule based on group identities rarely have the interests of anybody but themselves in mind, certainly not their 'group'.
 
8d4b9c573a22ba3f.jpeg
 
Oh, there certainly are differences, but they are differences in degree, not kind, and at the individual level are relatively meaningless. Not completely meaningless, but relatively.
To my understanding, there is a proven magnitude, but it vanishes into pretty much unavoidable environmental factors. Some people just turn out to be bad parents, or someone gets stuck with a particularly poor teacher, or a friend turns out to be a bad influence, or any number of person-to-person developmental differences, that all add up to more than one's bloodline.

This makes a lot of sense with how ridiculously flexible the human central nervous system is, and there's a lot of other well known factors involved in cultural development. Sub-Saharan Africa is predominantly a short-sighted shithole because the climate makes food storage a nightmare and there's fuck-all to start with.

Seriously, can anyone point to a place that could have reasonably been the Indus of sub-Saharan Africa? Or how, exactly, they'd have made the jump to iron? Place is livable, but really only that, which is a bit ironic given it's the native environment of humanity. Though such does fit with the usual trend of invasive species being more successful in the new environment...
 
To my understanding, there is a proven magnitude, but it vanishes into pretty much unavoidable environmental factors. Some people just turn out to be bad parents, or someone gets stuck with a particularly poor teacher, or a friend turns out to be a bad influence, or any number of person-to-person developmental differences, that all add up to more than one's bloodline.

This makes a lot of sense with how ridiculously flexible the human central nervous system is, and there's a lot of other well known factors involved in cultural development. Sub-Saharan Africa is predominantly a short-sighted shithole because the climate makes food storage a nightmare and there's fuck-all to start with.

Seriously, can anyone point to a place that could have reasonably been the Indus of sub-Saharan Africa? Or how, exactly, they'd have made the jump to iron? Place is livable, but really only that, which is a bit ironic given it's the native environment of humanity. Though such does fit with the usual trend of invasive species being more successful in the new environment...

They did "make the jump" to iron.
The Zulus had iron blades on their spears, as did most of the other Bantu tribes.
5ccf2a60876dbd078828a82831535fd5.jpg


They didn't have any system of writing though, and they never figured out how to use cattle to pull plows or anything like that.
 
This makes a lot of sense with how ridiculously flexible the human central nervous system is, and there's a lot of other well known factors involved in cultural development. Sub-Saharan Africa is predominantly a short-sighted shithole because the climate makes food storage a nightmare and there's fuck-all to start with.
Actually it is because communism came in when colonialism became a bad word. Africa would not be experiencing continual famines if it were not for mismanagement and corruption.
 
To my understanding, there is a proven magnitude, but it vanishes into pretty much unavoidable environmental factors. Some people just turn out to be bad parents, or someone gets stuck with a particularly poor teacher, or a friend turns out to be a bad influence, or any number of person-to-person developmental differences, that all add up to more than one's bloodline.

This makes a lot of sense with how ridiculously flexible the human central nervous system is, and there's a lot of other well known factors involved in cultural development. Sub-Saharan Africa is predominantly a short-sighted shithole because the climate makes food storage a nightmare and there's fuck-all to start with.

Seriously, can anyone point to a place that could have reasonably been the Indus of sub-Saharan Africa? Or how, exactly, they'd have made the jump to iron? Place is livable, but really only that, which is a bit ironic given it's the native environment of humanity. Though such does fit with the usual trend of invasive species being more successful in the new environment...
They did "make the jump" to iron.
The Zulus had iron blades on their spears, as did most of the other Bantu tribes.
5ccf2a60876dbd078828a82831535fd5.jpg


They didn't have any system of writing though, and they never figured out how to use cattle to pull plows or anything like that.
Humanity evolved in east Africa around the Great Rift Valley, which has its southern end on the northern border of South Africa.

Sub-Saharan Africa as we see it today is fucked mostly because it's horrible for food storage, has man killing animals in relative abundance, and has been run roughshod on by countless powers going back to antiquity, so it rarely could create power blocks comparable to the MidEast or Indus Valley. Lack of writing didn't help either.

This however does nothing to support the racists bullshit, because East Africa was fairly civilized for a long, long time, even before the Pharaohs and Axum came around. And West Africa has been interacting with Mediterranean trade and powers since people first set sail.

Modern Sub-Saharan Africa is a shithole mostly because of how colonial powers exploited tribe vs tribe factionalism to create thier colonies, and only put in infrastructure to specific exploitable resources, not for general use by the population. And when the colonial empires collapsed/retreated, all the old grudges and bad blood that colonial powers kept a lid on, while also exploiting it make control easier, came back in full force.

That's before you add in the new resource issues with rare earth's, diamonds, and petro deposits in Africa causing renewed foreign interest/interference in local affairs.

There is a reason racists like Whitestrake hate the book 'Guns, Germs, and Steel'; it lays bare that luck and geography, not racial superiority, are behind most differences in how cultures grow, advance, and interact with the world around them.
 
One issue Africa has, and always will have, is a relative lack of suitable rivers. Compared to the US with its dense web of many rivers crossing the entire midwest, Africa simply doesn't have the free easy shipping a good river network provides, and that makes trade and all the many benefits of trade less doable. It's no coincidence that the nation that actually does have a huge, navigable river was one of the world's first superpowers and dominated everything for centuries, and even today is one of the more important African nations, and the other major rivers tend to pass through the big names in Africa, like the Congo.
 
Also note that the climate and terrain in much of Africa is very congenial for hunter-gatherers, but very hostile to agriculture. The carrying capacity of the land in, especially, sub-Saharan Africa is phenomenal, so hunter-gatherers had no real need to settle down into a more agrarian lifestyle until much later as populations rose and the ability to simply migrate out faded away.

Throw in the after effects of colonialism? Like many African thinkers keep on saying, the very best thing that the rest of us could do to help Africa is to stop trying to help Africa, just leave them alone and they'll handle it themselves.
 
Modern Sub-Saharan Africa is a shithole mostly because of how colonial powers exploited tribe vs tribe factionalism to create thier colonies, and only put in infrastructure to specific exploitable resources, not for general use by the population. And when the colonial empires collapsed/retreated, all the old grudges and bad blood that colonial powers kept a lid on, while also exploiting it make control easier, came back in full force.

This is every bit as much a bit of leftist bullshit, as colonial apologist monarchists who claim colonialism did nothing wrong.

Much of sub-saharan Africa is a shithole for a variety of reasons, but colonialism is no longer a valid reason to blame for it. It's been ~70 years since colonialism ended, and three generations is more than long enough for a nation and people to get their shit together from messes other people made. There was harm done, but it's not the reason for things being a mess now.

There are still some criticisms that can be laid for post-colonial treatment of Africa contributing to the current mess as well, largely in foreign aid sabotaging the local economy, especially agriculture, in many areas, but more than anything else, marxism/socialism taking a very ugly root in many places.

'Africa is permanently broken because of colonialism' is just another round of leftist condescending bigotry, a paternalistic 'you can't possibly be expected to act like a real adult, let us take care of you.'

Stop buying into leftist narrative lies.
 
Throw in the after effects of colonialism? Like many African thinkers keep on saying, the very best thing that the rest of us could do to help Africa is to stop trying to help Africa, just leave them alone and they'll handle it themselves.
Yeah, until disaster hits the african nations, and then you will hear the leftoids cry about the poor innocent victims that need "our" help to save them from whatever and how dare you refuse to send money and food there and you are racist for blahblahblah.
 
This is every bit as much a bit of leftist bullshit, as colonial apologist monarchists who claim colonialism did nothing wrong.

Much of sub-saharan Africa is a shithole for a variety of reasons, but colonialism is no longer a valid reason to blame for it. It's been ~70 years since colonialism ended, and three generations is more than long enough for a nation and people to get their shit together from messes other people made. There was harm done, but it's not the reason for things being a mess now.

There are still some criticisms that can be laid for post-colonial treatment of Africa contributing to the current mess as well, largely in foreign aid sabotaging the local economy, especially agriculture, in many areas, but more than anything else, marxism/socialism taking a very ugly root in many places.

'Africa is permanently broken because of colonialism' is just another round of leftist condescending bigotry, a paternalistic 'you can't possibly be expected to act like a real adult, let us take care of you.'

Stop buying into leftist narrative lies.
Did I say colonialism is the *only* reason that area is a shithole? No, that is you putting words in my mouth, and ignoring the rest of my post because you want to berate me some more after I decided I was done with your shit in the other thread last night.

So fuck off.
 
This is every bit as much a bit of leftist bullshit, as colonial apologist monarchists who claim colonialism did nothing wrong.

Much of sub-saharan Africa is a shithole for a variety of reasons, but colonialism is no longer a valid reason to blame for it. It's been ~70 years since colonialism ended, and three generations is more than long enough for a nation and people to get their shit together from messes other people made. There was harm done, but it's not the reason for things being a mess now.

There are still some criticisms that can be laid for post-colonial treatment of Africa contributing to the current mess as well, largely in foreign aid sabotaging the local economy, especially agriculture, in many areas, but more than anything else, marxism/socialism taking a very ugly root in many places.

'Africa is permanently broken because of colonialism' is just another round of leftist condescending bigotry, a paternalistic 'you can't possibly be expected to act like a real adult, let us take care of you.'

Stop buying into leftist narrative lies.

Pretty sure africa is shit because of its crap geographic hand, the lack of navigable rivers is a really shit deal.
 
Did I say colonialism is the *only* reason that area is a shithole? No, that is you putting words in my mouth, and ignoring the rest of my post because you want to berate me some more after I decided I was done with your shit in the other thread last night.

So fuck off.

You said 'mostly.' That's a qualifier that doesn't change the fact that the statement as a whole is wrong, because colonialism is neither mostly nor totally to blame. At this point, it is at the most a very small minority share of blame.

My point stands, no putting words in your mouth necessary.

And no, I don't feel a need to berate you. I just don't feel a need to ignore it when you're stating blatant falsehoods.
 
You said 'mostly.' That's a qualifier that doesn't change the fact that the statement as a whole is wrong, because colonialism is neither mostly nor totally to blame. At this point, it is at the most a very small minority share of blame.

My point stands, no putting words in your mouth necessary.

And no, I don't feel a need to berate you. I just don't feel a need to ignore it when you're stating blatant falsehoods.
You want to play word games; fine.

What part of 'Fuck Off' did you not understand?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top