Page 4 of 14 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 339

Thread: Stormfront Hate

  1. #76
    Fuq Haters Contributor Nu Kua's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Free
    Posts
    11,367
    Disable These Ads!
    Quote Originally Posted by Lyca
    What I am saying is that irrational behavior is a price we pay for intelligence.

    "Other Big Brained Animals" may have tendencies we consider violent but to them are simply an accepted fact of life, but as humans we are supposed to have that "little something extra" that allows us to reason beyond sheer instinctual responses.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lyca
    We afteral rarely see a mentally handicapped retarded child rise up to be a cold blooded killer.
    I have worked extensively with developmentally disabled adults (and some teens) and I can tell you, you are wrong on that point. Not that they were cold blooded killers- they all had their own personalities and strengths and weaknesses- but the biggest challenge we had when working to help them integrate them either into society a bit, or at least move them into being a self sufficient as possible, was in the fact that they did have a harder time mastering their instincts.

    I do not mean to speak indelicately here and am not trying to promote ridicule, but it was a real problem with some of them when they reached puberty, especially the guys, because they'd become physically aroused in the way it happens to young men- right out of the blue, and they would sometimes grab a woman or a chair or anything they could find and start humping it. there were more than a few who could not be left alone with children or other DDA's unsupervised, because they would just do that. Instinct- without reasoning ability.
    Last edited by Nu Kua; Aug 3rd, 2011 at 11:10 AM. Reason: correct

  2. #77
    Iam puppy, hear me yap. Global Moderator lycanox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Nutzi Netherlands.
    Age
    29
    Posts
    12,064
    Quote Originally Posted by Nu Kua View Post
    "Other Big Brained Animals" may have tendencies we consider violent but to them are simply an accepted fact of life, but as humans we are supposed to have that "little something extra" that allows us to reason beyond sheer instinctual responses.
    I doubt that we are better on this than animals are.

    After all, we have build our entire society around those instincts.
    We hold sports competitions to feed our superiority complex. We live in hierachial political constructions. Our TVs are filled with violence.
    And the rest with pornography. Not to mention we wage wars, beat up people and sexual affairs like there is no tomorrow.

    At best we have pushed it in a certain position. But we never operate beyond them.



    I have worked extensively with developmentally disabled adults and I can tell you, you are wrong on that point. Not that they were cold blooded killers- they all had their own personalities and strengths and weaknesses- but the biggest challenge we had when working to help them integrate them either into society a bit, or at least move them into being a self sufficient as possible, was in the fact that they did have a harder time mastering their instincts.
    True, but would you expect them to sooner commit a horrible crime. Or a mentally healthy person.

    I do not mean to speak indelicately here and am not trying to promote ridicule, but it was a real problem with some of them when they reached puberty, especially the guys, because they'd become physically aroused in the way it happens to young men- right out of the blue, and they would sometimes grab a woman or a chair or anything they could find and start humping it. there were more than a few who could not be left alone with children or other DDA's unsupervised, because they would just do that. Instinct- without reasoning ability.
    That is just an instinct taking over. Nobody would blame him for the attack as he could not help better.

    That is a complete difference from a person that willingly goes out to prepare, stalk and then torture a person to death.
    http://fc01.deviantart.com/fs27/f/2008/139/8/a/logo_by_lycanox.png

  3. #78
    Fuq Haters Contributor Nu Kua's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Free
    Posts
    11,367
    Quote Originally Posted by lycanox View Post
    I doubt that we are better on this than animals are.

    After all, we have build our entire society around those instincts.
    We hold sports competitions to feed our superiority complex. We live in hierachial political constructions. Our TVs are filled with violence.
    And the rest with pornography. Not to mention we wage wars, beat up people and sexual affairs like there is no tomorrow.

    At best we have pushed it in a certain position. But we never operate beyond them.



    True, but would you expect them to sooner commit a horrible crime. Or a mentally healthy person.


    That is just an instinct taking over. Nobody would blame him for the attack as he could not help better.

    That is a complete difference from a person that willingly goes out to prepare, stalk and then torture a person to death.
    After all, we have build our entire society around those instincts.
    We hold sports competitions to feed our superiority complex. We live in hierachial political constructions. Our TVs are filled with violence.
    And the rest with pornography. Not to mention we wage wars, beat up people and sexual affairs like there is no tomorrow.



    I definitely think that overall, we are devolving as a species in many ways, and our current apparent lust for violence has been triggered by a number of factors.

    That is just an instinct taking over. Nobody would blame him for the attack as he could not help better.

    That is a complete difference from a person that willingly goes out to prepare, stalk and then torture a person to death.


    Yes it is, and that was my point- a developmentally disabled person "has an excuse" in that there is something they are lacking, at certain levels of reasoning, not being able to work with social skills, whatever. And lets face it, random frenzied fully clothed humping, while distasteful and pretty much guaranteed not to get you a date, is relatively harmless in the long run.

    However if you or I would do it, we'd wind up in jail- or having our asses kicked- because we know better than to act on our urges.

    but yeah, I think we are devolving, more rapidly in some societies than others. But I do not think this is the pinnacle of our human potential.

    And I don't think everyone is devolving... there are many of us who are keeping it real and who do not stay plugged into the machine. That tends to dull people's minds and harden their hearts over time. But overall and generally speaking, there is a decline, a sharp and steady decline in intelligence and the where-with-all people need to "make it".

    Stormfront, while creating great emotional conversation, in and of itself is considered a marginal outside group and is an embarrassment and a thorn in the side of many White Nationalists.

    Actually, it was just a few years ago that Stormfront showed up at a White Pride rally somewhere and the White Pride people told them to leave. That's because of the fact that Stormfront is so extreme and like nearly all extreme groups, tends to attract stupid people with flat, one-track minds. Stormfront glorifies violence and hatred, and smart people understand on a higher level that violence and hatred is not the way to address their concerns, and on a more mundane level, understand that violence makes them look bad; thus they want nothing to do with that.

    Extremists in general ruin the conversation in lots of ways. Not only do they get most of the attention, but their actions and words tend to become tied into other groups who are nothing like them, tied by falsely promoted associations above all else. (Kind of like 9-11 and Iraq)

  4. #79
    Iam puppy, hear me yap. Global Moderator lycanox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Nutzi Netherlands.
    Age
    29
    Posts
    12,064
    Quote Originally Posted by Nu Kua View Post
    After all, we have build our entire society around those instincts.
    We hold sports competitions to feed our superiority complex. We live in hierachial political constructions. Our TVs are filled with violence.
    And the rest with pornography. Not to mention we wage wars, beat up people and sexual affairs like there is no tomorrow.



    I definitely think that overall, we are devolving as a species in many ways, and our current apparent lust for violence has been triggered by a number of factors.
    Not really, we used to execute people in public or force people to fight to the death for our entertainment. Some even went voluntary.

    Infact, hallow fields, where the corpses of hanged criminals were left to rot as a warning, were considered the perfect place for romance. And paintings of cut open copses were an welcome addition for the diner room.

    We are still far from that.



    That is just an instinct taking over. Nobody would blame him for the attack as he could not help better.

    That is a complete difference from a person that willingly goes out to prepare, stalk and then torture a person to death.


    Yes it is, and that was my point- a developmentally disabled person "has an excuse" in that there is something they are lacking, at certain levels of reasoning, not being able to work with social skills, whatever. And lets face it, random frenzied fully clothed humping, while distasteful and pretty much guaranteed not to get you a date, is relatively harmless in the long run.

    However if you or I would do it, we'd wind up in jail- or having our asses kicked- because we know better than to act on our urges.

    but yeah, I think we are devolving, more rapidly in some societies than others. But I do not think this is the pinnacle of our human potential.

    And I don't think everyone is devolving... there are many of us who are keeping it real and who do not stay plugged into the machine. That tends to dull people's minds and harden their hearts over time. But overall and generally speaking, there is a decline, a sharp and steady decline in intelligence and the where-with-all people need to "make it".
    Being peaceful, if there is an end goal of our evolution. Is not it.

    Besides, being a complete pacifist also has its ways to be evil. As occasionally you have to colden up and slit that mans throat. If you want to protect the people he is attacking.
    There are very few acts of what is today considered evil. That do not have special circumstances where they are considered good.

    Stormfront, while creating great emotional conversation, in and of itself is considered a marginal outside group and is an embarrassment and a thorn in the side of many White Nationalists.

    Actually, it was just a few years ago that Stormfront showed up at a White Pride rally somewhere and the White Pride people told them to leave. That's because of the fact that Stormfront is so extreme and like nearly all extreme groups, tends to attract stupid people with flat, one-track minds. Stormfront glorifies violence and hatred, and smart people understand on a higher level that violence and hatred is not the way to address their concerns, and on a more mundane level, understand that violence makes them look bad; thus they want nothing to do with that.

    Extremists in general ruin the conversation in lots of ways. Not only do they get most of the attention, but their actions and words tend to become tied into other groups who are nothing like them, tied by falsely promoted associations above all else. (Kind of like 9-11 and Iraq)
    You are however forgetting that people tend to claim different things in public than in private. Would they really mind if a black person was beaten up. Or would they only mind their reputation.
    http://fc01.deviantart.com/fs27/f/2008/139/8/a/logo_by_lycanox.png

  5. #80
    Starseed Contributor calliope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,635
    A very thoughtful and interesting look at the extremism inherent in white nationalism ~

    Understanding Extremism: The Roots of White Nationalism


    A recent article over at the BBC says that Barack Obama's election is bolstering white nationalist hate groups in the US. With the attempted bombing of a civil rights march in Spokane, Washington last year, which Rachel Maddow reported, and the fact that KKK Leader David Duke is running for the Republican nomination, I think that the BBC is right to be worried.

    One of my constant laments is that no one understands Nazism and White Nationalism. If we want to defeat it, we need to understand it...

    To begin with, we need to understand who white nationalists are. If you were to round a corner and see these gentlemen:



    You would be right to think "HOLY CRAP! SKINHEADS!" and then run away. They're not nice people. But these guys are the kind of skinhead that looks for people wearing swastikas, and when they find them, they hit them with those bats they're holding.

    The music of counter culture contains multiple examples of violently anti-nazi music.

    They're not nice people, but don't assume they're Nazis unless you see swastikas. These two (ahem) gentlemen would step in if you were being accosted by White Nationalists. They've formed organizations to fight what they perceive as the growth of fascism. One of the organizations is SHARP, or SkinHeads Against Racial Prejudice. Another group that includes plenty of skinheads is anti-racist action.

    ARA is active in direct, violent resistance to white nationalism. "We go where they go" is their creed. This leads to street battles whenever white nationalist groups like the National Socialist Movement meet. When Nazis march, ARA and other Anti-Fascist groups show up, and this happens:

    That image was from a clash involving about 100 people in Pemberton, New Jersey, on April 15th. This is happening all over this country, right now. This sort of clash makes the problem much, much worse. While I don't really feel any sympathy for a skinhead in full Nazi regalia, this bothers me. Violence to my fellow man, no matter how misguided and harmful his path is to others bothers me. It bothers me to a greater extent here because it reinforces the foundation for white nationalism.

    White nationalism is based on actual victimization, but it targets fellow victims rather than those institutions, persons, and ideas which create victims.

    In order to understand how white nationalism develops, it's important to look at the place it grows: our schools.

    Demographics in the US will always be in flux. White Flight and the attempts of whites to coalesce in certain neighborhoods and keep everyone else out leads to skewed demographics in the rest of the schools. White populations drop so low in some areas that whites become an almost insignificant minority group. Racial demographics aren't a problem, but poverty can be.

    When you have typical teenagers who are part of a minority at their schools, they are a minority whose identity isn't really based on history, culture, or heritage. Remember all that commentary about how many Americans don't know who we fought in 1776? The identity of many whites in schools has become largely one of generic blandness. They have no real culture to hang on to. Britney Spears and Burger King doesn't offer much in the way of culture. What does it even mean to be white? It was a question I we asked ourselves.

    White isn't a nation. There is no single language of the white people. There is no "white" music. White people aren't a single group with a single history. White identity in the US is based largely on transient ideas, and fictional history. Scottish identity is real. Colonial American identity is real. New England identity is real. Irish, German, Swiss, Norweigian, Italian identities are real. White-Bread american identity is essentially based on generic blankness. This isn't some huge and horrific problem as long as it is handled well. But right now, it isn't handled at all.

    White students at my high school were a people without a history. Many of my school's whites were third and fourth generation Americans. The history of the pilgrims (Jamestown was ignored) largely didn't apply to them. Many of them were second generation Americans, whose parents spoke Polish, German, French, or Russian. The children adopted the local culture, and their parents were busy abandoning their own. We were told, repeatedly, that because of the color of our skin, we are incredibly privileged. For me, this was true. For most poor and lower-middle class students whose parents were struggling to survive, that privilege is invisible.

    White privilege for the poor and lower-middle class means not that there are visible benefits, but that less white people are starving and struggling than any other group. That doesn't mean that white privilege doesn't exist, it does. As a well educated white male, I know that privilege exists for me. I'm going to go farther than many other people in my position would be able to go, simply because of the color of my skin, because of my gender, and because I had the privilege of a good education. But for poor, poorly educated whites, the fact that less whites are starving than Blacks or Latinos is meaningless and incomprehensible.
    ...

    Personally, I loved my time in high school, especially my senior year. I got along with everyone and discovered that in general, people were willing to live and let live. There were times of racial tension. Such as the incident where a white officer shot a black student who was trying to run down other students. I understood that the anger expressed by the black community had less to do with the incident in question, and more to do with all of the preceding small incidents. When your cup of suffering is already full, it takes only a drop to make it spill over. There were incidents of gang violence, such as the time guns were pulled at the gas station across the street from our school.

    I'm not telling this story because I want people to feel bad for me. Don't. I learned a lot. In addition history and chemistry, I learned how to defend myself physically and how to use body language and my voice to be intimidating. I learned helpful things as well. I learned positive things, too. I leaned how to bridge gaps in community. I learned about the affects that culture, language, and religion have on society. I learned that almost everyone wants to live and let live, and the few idiots who don't are generally despised by the balance of the people, all of them, regardless of race, culture, or creed. I'm telling this story so that people can see where the roots of White Nationalism begin.

    The difference between my experience and those kids who joined hate groups may have been as simple as the fact that I got bused home to an affluent neighborhood every day, while they headed home to neighborhoods being torn apart by gang violence and poverty. I could ride my bike for miles in every direction after dark, while they hunkered down in their homes fearful of being caught up in a gunfight. The Fort Lauderdale Police Department would respond to a call in my neighborhood within two minutes. The Broward Sherriffs office would take up to an hour to show up to a call in their neighborhoods, if the underfunded and undermanned BSO was able to make it out at all.

    The kids who joined the Klan or Nazi gangs at my High School joined because they were victims of poverty. Like me, they dealt with racial strife. Unlike me, they never had the opportunity to worship at a black church, and work together with Blacks, Latinos, Asians, and Haitians to fight poverty. Like me, they had been involved with violent altercations with persons of color based on nothing other than childish stupidity. Unlike me, they couldn't escape that environment of strife when they went home. Like me, they studied in a highschool dominated by other races, and that domination included the teachers and administrators. Unlike me, they've never lived in an affluent neighborhood where there was little to no racial strife because of the privilege and unity of class.

    The race issues are caused, by and large, by poverty issues. People hate because they are the victims of poverty. They hate because they reject the blame they perceive is placed on their shoulders by large and powerful minority groups. I don't know any serious leaders who think that poor whites are the problem, but that's what many racist poor whites think the problem is. They hate because they cannot see that the real enemy, the cause of the strife, is the political and economic system which makes people into things, which defines workers as a commodity, an ingredient in a money-producing equation.

    If I was forced into a life where I, as an impoverished person, were fighting a specific group of people every day of my life, I would easily have developed hatred. Any of us would. I'm glad I wasn't born in Crete, Glasgow, Israel/Palestine, or Northern Ireland. I can see white privilege, but I'm gladder to have the privilege of class.
    ...

    There's an active KKK in my area. These people have never experienced people of color. They've never met them. When latino groups are victimized, and conversations begin about white privilege, the response is generally "what privilege?" People around here cant see it. I can, but then again I'm one of those liberal intellectuals the south likes to complain about. Try explaining white privilege to a retired coal miner with Coal workers' pneumoconiosis whose only child died in a mine collapse. Just try it.

    The Klan tells people that if they just get rid of anyone who isn't white, all of the social and economic ills they feel will go away. They're told they're not poor because of the economic system, the bosses, the criminal misconduct on the part of corporations, and the inhuman wages they're paid, they're told they're poor because all the money is going to illegal immigrants and welfare queens (read: Black People.) It's easy to hate someone you've never met. That's how the hate begins out here. And if you explain that the problem is the banks, then it's not about writing laws or getting rid of deregulation, it turns into a conversation about the Jews.

    It starts with victimization, and ends up with someone accepting the ideology of vicious racists 100 and crazy per cent. When the country Klansmen meet the city Nazis, they confirm each others suspicions about what the problem is.

    In their minds, any attack on the Klan or the Nazis proves their victimhood. It sharpens their resolve. That's why the violent anti-fascism is making the problem worse. That's why pithy and derogatory comments about hillbillies make the problem worse. That's why refusing to recognize the actual victimization working class whites feel in this economy makes the problem worse. That's why discussions of white privilege - which is real - need to involve the reality of poverty.

    So how do we beat them?

    I have a few suggestions.

    1. We have to destroy white privilege where it exists within left-wing organizations.

    I hear some of you talking "Wait, I'm not racist. There's no white privilege within my organization."

    If you're thinking that, then you need to read hepshiba's excellent diary about white privilege within feminist groups. Her experiences match my experience within a number of liberal organizations. If you think the Democratic party isn't a party of white privilege, I would ask you how many black democrats sit in the senate.

    Until we can look to other victims, poor people of every race, and call them our brothers and sisters, we will not get the kind of momentum we need. If we do this, we can then move on to the next step.

    2. We need to recognize the victimization of poor whites. Poor whites vote against their own interests every election day. Poor whites vote overwhelmingly for the republican party. Poor whites feel victimized, which is the reason that Sarah Palin and Fox News, and their culture of crybaby victimhood are so popular.

    Poor whites are victims. This is a fact. We need to fight for poor whites, too.

    The republicans are stroking their sense of victimhood, but pointing the finger at immigrants, "entitlements," and welfare queens again. Unless we can move in and start pointing the finger at the people who caused this mess, we're not going to get the massive votes we'll need to overcome the blue dogs and the DINOs. The republicans will build another generation of ignorant racists, and we'll have to wait even longer for the current batch of permanently indoctrinated racists to die before we can work with their children.
    ...
    I have condensed this essay quite a bit. Read here for full article: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/0...te-Nationalism
    absit invidia

  6. #81
    Fuq Haters Contributor Nu Kua's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Free
    Posts
    11,367
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycanox
    Besides, being a complete pacifist also has its ways to be evil. As occasionally you have to colden up and slit that mans throat. If you want to protect the people he is attacking.
    Silence
    Something about silence makes me sick
    'Cause silence can be violence
    Sorta like a slit wrist


    I agree that non-action can also encourage violence.
    The key is in knowing when to act, how much to act, and then in acting discriminately. An union of gut and mind, propelled by the heart, but wouldn't that be instinct? Isn't it instinctual as well, that urge to protect your young, or other innocents? I think it is, and when people who roam the earth do the exact opposite of that- be cruel for no reason like that, there is something terribly wrong with how they are put together. Maybe it's genetic, maybe it's organic in cause, maybe their own psyche was scarred in such a way as to permanently halt those chemicals and pheromones and whatever else is involved when instincts trigger protective action. Whatever, it's not normal, to be so cruel.

    This has rolled around in my head for awhile.
    Considering the mindset of a person who is willing to kill and be killed in order to protect what he sees as his people and his land being taken over by invading immigrants- immigrants he sees as a threat. He does not wish to see his children influenced by this outside culture, either from reasons of fear, dislike, or perhaps even simply a strong need to see a continuity of his culture continue over time, as it has in the past. He sees something different coming in, he begins to feel threatened and because he wishes to protect what he sees is his, his family's, and his country's birthright. Maybe even the leaders and politicians of his land use language and media and such that reinforce a mistrust of these people.

    He does have a strong dislike and even sometimes a hatred for the people from the outside, because he sees them as a real threat to the things he loves the most and of which he is proud of- his land, his heritage. And, twisted cases of aberrations aside, it is instinctual to want to protect what makes you secure and what you feel vested in. So this person becomes active in ways to avoid an occupation of his country. He attends meetings and rallies of others who would also like to see the flow of invaders gone. Maybe he speaks about it publicly, writes essays too. It becomes important enough to him that he is willing to fight physically for what he believes in, because he believes it so strongly.

    Some people might call this person a White Supremacist, and they would be right.

    But if this person is Arab or African or Asian or Brazilian or Whateverian, what is he called when the invader is Western- aka White, culture and dominance?

    (or, to be fair, just "another culture")
    Last edited by Nu Kua; Oct 31st, 2011 at 3:14 PM.
    "The Alice-in-Wonderland nature of this pronouncement is not lost on me..."

  7. #82
    Launchin' Nukes at Noobs Contributor palerider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    United Kingdom [England]
    Age
    46
    Posts
    1,211
    Instinct........can we rely on this? Is instinct a useful measure? What really forms 'instinct'....

    Many contradictions using 'instinct'....are we still a primitive tribe...seeking out food and shelter? Have we misunderstood the 'fight/flight response'?

    Sorry just curious......erm back to the argument...oh and go Nu ...good stuff!
    "Two things are infinite: the Universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the Universe." -Albert Einstein [1879-1955]

  8. #83
    Survivalist! Kiehlroy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Centripetal
    Age
    37
    Posts
    3,745
    Self-control. As an intelligent species we have an intellect(ego) that often overrides many instincts and emotions out of fear. The ego has evolved as a response to the demands of survival. It is there to protect the human organism and give him/her an edge to compete for scarce natural resources in whatever environment he is currently in.

    The demands of life on Planet Earth have been tough. So since the intellect's primary function is to see to the survival of it's host first, it's offspring second, kin third, etc. it tends to override the emotions/instincts(that it has learned from it's cultural programming and it's own learning algorithm) that do not support immediate vicinity bonding. The further you travel from those core bonds the mind slowly switches to threat identification and shuts down certain emotions.

    Basically we still operate on tribal software and this is often reinforced and exploited by many(not all) marketers, governments, press, ministers, etc. This software allows for family and even some amount of national emotions(some stronger than others). But one of the most firmly rooted is the racial recognition package. That and the language recognition package(vernacular, dialect, etc.). These are the primary motivators in the human animal's evolutionary/cultural software package.

    This is evident all over Planet Earth. White Supremacists are not the only ones and you can't just pick one group to analyze without proper comparative research if your goal is to actually understand the motives and causes. Judgement of some form or another often blinds people to this simple truth. If we are to minimize "hate" and save ourselves and the planet we have to learn how to be objective and exercise self-control. Learn how to neutralize negative and destructive forces in oneself and in the world.

    That is the next step. We have to take control of our programming. We have to learn to identify why we do what we do and why we feel what we feel. What do we like? Why? What do we not like? Why? Animals can tell you much about yourself and so can other people. Observation of the self in the world is what leads to the development of self-control.

    And what the world(and the people in it) needs more than anything right now are cool heads that can teach self-control.

    After that it's all details and that's exactly what computers are good for.
    Last edited by Kiehlroy; Aug 3rd, 2011 at 2:27 AM.
    http://remyvanruiten.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/logo1.jpg

    "...some parts of his work are half-finished, while other parts make a strange medley."...;)...

  9. #84
    הלראות Contributor Beatnik Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Between a Bullet and a Target
    Posts
    5,487
    Quote Originally Posted by calliope View Post
    A very thoughtful and interesting look at the extremism inherent in white nationalism ~



    I have condensed this essay quite a bit. Read here for full article: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/0...te-Nationalism
    I especially liked the point of view and fresh standpoint of this article.
    Very thoughtful, informative, and interesting post!

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiel
    As an intelligent species we have an intellect(ego) that often overrides many instincts and emotions out of fear.
    Yet fear itself is an emotion of the limbic system.
    Poetry is superior to history -Aristotle
    True time is four dimensional -Heidegger
    All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players -Shakespeare

  10. #85
    Survivalist! Kiehlroy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Centripetal
    Age
    37
    Posts
    3,745
    Quote Originally Posted by Beatnik Bob View Post
    Yet fear itself is an emotion of the limbic system.
    Amygdala, to be precise. And that's Neuroscience anyway, not Behavioral Psychology or Sociology. So what's your point? If you had also mentioned a behavioral phenomena such as an "Amygdala hijack" then that would've been more helpful.

    In reference to the fight or flight response in humans Professor of Neuroscience Joseph E. LeDoux states...

    "Some emotional reactions and emotional responses can be formed without any conscious, cognitive participation...because the shortcut from thalamus to amygdyla completely bypasses the neocortex"

    I always liked MacLean's Triune Brain theory as it can actually be used as a nice overlay for many behavioral studies. It may not be perfect structurally and is a bit simplified but I think it is a good start towards combining Psychology, Evolutionary Biology, and Neuroscience. Add a little Ramachandran, a few other books I read once upon a time, and plenty of observation of modern humans in their current natural environmentS and a new and more substantial theory might just be born, Hmmm... Have to fight through the APA "force-choke" first.

    I've been following the development of the relatively new(1950's but just now really picking up) "Cognitive Sciences" field over the years and I think that would be a good field to study for newer and more detailed theories on the subject, check it out if you haven't already. When I get some time I'll prolly take another dip myself.

    Btw, have you ever spent time with iguanas?
    + YouTube Video
    ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.

    Reminds me of some neighbors I've had. Just add some really loud music

    IIRC, the basic evolutionary psychological model places fear, lust and aggression as being the earliest of emotions as these would be the most basic impulses needed to promote survival and procreation. Mammals developed a increasingly more complex limbic system(nuturing, love, loyalty, etc) alongside increasingly more complex social structures in order to motivate social bonding which, in turn, allowed for higher and more intelligent beings to develop.

    I don't want to hear about how "alligators nurture their young" and "ants are social too", Bob. I'm not here to split hairs over every little detail ad nauseam, ad infinitum. Go read the entire works of Shakespeare and you really don't need hundreds of theories to understand the human condition. Theories just round out some of the the rough edges of experience. Humans are not computers. Sociopaths are often very intelligent and very cruel because they cannot quite reach that damned fear in order to deprogram it. No matter how smart they get. On the other hand a healthy mother will protect her young with a loving ferociousness that makes fear look like a pale speck of nothing in comparison.

    Don't miss the forest for the trees.
    Last edited by Kiehlroy; Aug 2nd, 2011 at 6:00 AM.
    http://remyvanruiten.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/logo1.jpg

    "...some parts of his work are half-finished, while other parts make a strange medley."...;)...

  11. #86
    Iam puppy, hear me yap. Global Moderator lycanox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Nutzi Netherlands.
    Age
    29
    Posts
    12,064
    Quote Originally Posted by Nu Kua View Post
    Silence
    Something about silence makes me sick
    'Cause silence can be violent
    Sorta like a slit wrist


    I agree that non-action can also encourages violence.
    The key is in knowing when to act, how much to act, and then in acting discriminately. An union of gut and mind, propelled by the heart, but wouldn't that be instinct? Isn't it instinctual as well, that urge to protect your young, or other innocents?
    Pretty much.

    Like I said, we are still driven by instinct. And shaped our societies around such instincts.

    I think it is, and when people who roam the earth do the exact opposite of that- be cruel for no reason like that, there is something terribly wrong with how they are put together. Maybe it's genetic, maybe it's organic in cause, maybe their own psyche was scarred in such a way as to permanently halt those chemicals and pheromones and whatever else is involved when instincts trigger protective action. Whatever, it's not normal, to be so cruel.
    Not necessary.

    Take for instance Hitler. He saw an evil powerful religious organization out to take over the world. And he acted to protect the world from that with all force necessary.
    Today we see the holocaust as an absolute act of evil. But we know by now that Jews are not out to take over the word. But Hitler simply did not know any better. As he has been thought that Jews are evil his entire life.

    The act of the holocaust was however still not one intended to bring evil and harm to the world. But was judged to be one eventually afterwards by those that suffered the consequences.
    The holocaust was thus not an act of evil. But corrupted kindness.
    And I think the same counts for most of the atrocities we see today.

    The problem is that with corrupted kindness. You don't have to be an madman or insane to Carrie them out. Just misinformed. This means that every human in this planet is capable to carry out acts like the holocaust.


    This has rolled around in my head for awhile.
    Considering the mindset of a person who is willing to kill and be killed in order to protect what he sees as his people and his land being taken over by invading immigrants- immigrants he sees as a threat. He does not wish to see his children influenced by this outside culture, either from reasons of fear, dislike, or perhaps even simply a strong need to see a continuity of his culture continue over time, as it has in the past. He sees something different coming in, he begins to feel threatened and because he wishes to protect what he sees is his, his family's, and his country's birthright. Maybe even the leaders and politicians of his land use language and media and such that reinforce a mistrust of these people.

    He does have a strong dislike and even sometimes a hatred for the people from the outside, because he sees them as a real threat to the things he loves the most and of which he is proud of- his land, his heritage. And, twisted cases of aberrations aside, it is instinctual to want to protect what makes you secure and what you feel vested in. So this person becomes active in ways to avoid an occupation of his country. He attends meetings and rallies of others who would also like to see the flow of invaders gone. Maybe he speaks about it publicly, writes essays too. It becomes important enough to him that he is willing to fight physically for what he believes in, because he believes it so strongly.

    Some people might call this person a White Supremacist, and they would be right.

    But if this person is Arab or African or Asian or Brazilian or Whateverian, what is he called when the invader is Western- aka White, culture and dominance?

    (or, to be fair, just "another culture")
    Probably something similar. Like Black supremacist.
    Al through the historical position in those nations would be different.
    So you probably get names like ultranationalist. Or old colonial insults the west made up during their occupation.

    Quote Originally Posted by palerider View Post
    Instinct........can we rely on this? Is instinct a useful measure? What really forms 'instinct'....
    Mostly urges. The urge to have sex. The urge to be appriciated and fit in the group. The urge to protect those near to you. The urge to fear those that is strange.

    Many contradictions using 'instinct'....are we still a primitive tribe...seeking out food and shelter? Have we misunderstood the 'fight/flight response'?

    Sorry just curious......erm back to the argument...oh and go Nu ...good stuff!
    Pretty much. We only use them differently now. So instead of the urge to enact revenge. We now use empathy or other social instincts more in our juridical system. And have learned that working for money is a better way to earn food and respect than hunting down an big animal.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kiehlroy View Post
    Self-control. As an intelligent species we have an intellect(ego) that often overrides many instincts and emotions out of fear. The ego has evolved as a response to the demands of survival. It is their to protect the human organism and give him/her an edge to compete for scarce natural resources in whatever environment he is currently in.
    Unlikely, we may have started to prefer to use different instincts.
    Or that certain methods are better to please an instinct. But we still use our instincts to a huge degree.

    Everything we have still after all exist to fulfill instincts like self protection, eating, drinking, have sex etc. Even our trip to the moon is nothing more than an expression of instincts like curiosity.
    http://fc01.deviantart.com/fs27/f/2008/139/8/a/logo_by_lycanox.png

  12. #87
    Survivalist! Kiehlroy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Centripetal
    Age
    37
    Posts
    3,745
    Here's a great article that that is kind of off-topic but still a valuable piece concerning human behavior and relations under certain conditions. For those of you who can read and have a thirst for knowledge...

    http://www.city-journal.org/html/12_...arbarians.html

    That was written by Theodore Dalrymple. He received the Freedom Prize from the Flemish think-tank Libera! this year. He's no slouch.

    From other research I've done it looks as if parts of Paris are worse than shitty old Newark or Detroit. Well... that's the French for you. Too busy with their Film Fests and their little half-assed anti-establishment protests to notice the ticking time bomb looming outside the city.

    "the simulacrum of an enemy lends purpose to actions whose nihilism would otherwise be self-evident."
    Last edited by Kiehlroy; Aug 3rd, 2011 at 2:13 AM.
    http://remyvanruiten.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/logo1.jpg

    "...some parts of his work are half-finished, while other parts make a strange medley."...;)...

  13. #88
    Launchin' Nukes at Noobs Contributor palerider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    United Kingdom [England]
    Age
    46
    Posts
    1,211
    Psychologist Abraham Maslow argued that humans no longer have instincts because we have the ability to override them in certain situations. He felt that what is called instinct is often imprecisely defined, and really amounts to strong drives. For Maslow, an instinct is something which cannot be overridden, and therefore while it may have applied to humans in the past it no longer does.

    Taken from Wiki as a quick ref. May be useful in either excluding or including 'instinct'.

    For me Lyc has good points surrounding instinct here, but I'm not altogether convinced that in these times instinct can be used as a way of describing these behaviours.

    I think its a poor cop, the reality is that no one can seemingly admit that humans can intentionally be so cruel/wicked unless the action is against them directly. Its almost as if different factions [tribes] share in some relational way a sentiment...some more active than others. I'm not saying this is unique to one particular race either. Even within third world states [less evolved social/political systems] there is inherent this culture label it what you may. Perhaps as Nu Kua suggests were are socially/politically and culturally devolving as opposed to evolving?
    "Two things are infinite: the Universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the Universe." -Albert Einstein [1879-1955]

  14. #89
    Iam puppy, hear me yap. Global Moderator lycanox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Nutzi Netherlands.
    Age
    29
    Posts
    12,064
    Psychologist Abraham Maslow argued that humans no longer have instincts because we have the ability to override them in certain situations. He felt that what is called instinct is often imprecisely defined, and really amounts to strong drives. For Maslow, an instinct is something which cannot be overridden, and therefore while it may have applied to humans in the past it no longer does.

    Taken from Wiki as a quick ref. May be useful in either excluding or including 'instinct'.
    If we indeed would have no instincts. We would for example also not have parental instincts. Meaning that we would have zero problems with executing our own children for logical yet trivial reasons.
    Yet there is no sane person I know of. That would be capable of pulling the trigger without severe inner conflict. Or without acting under another instinct like for example, self preservation.

    Naturally people usually bring forth things like mothers abandoning their own children and child abuse as evidence for a lack of parental instinct. But those things happen with animals as well.
    http://fc01.deviantart.com/fs27/f/2008/139/8/a/logo_by_lycanox.png

  15. #90
    Starseed Contributor calliope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,635
    One Tribe

    + YouTube Video
    ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.
    absit invidia

  16. #91
    LOOSE CANNON Contributor Waymarker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    England
    Posts
    1,646
    Why didn't humans die out at the caveman stage?
    I mean, if food was short, surely the biggest most aggressive member of a tribe would follow his instincts to grab the food off the others and let them starve?
    Eventually he'd be the only one left, and when he died it'd be 'adios human race'.
    But we know humans didn't die out, so obviously they over-rode their baser instincts and must have shared the food around the tribe and generally looked after each other.

  17. #92
    Starseed Contributor calliope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,635
    Quote Originally Posted by Waymarker View Post
    Why didn't humans die out at the caveman stage?
    I mean, if food was short, surely the biggest most aggressive member of a tribe would follow his instincts to grab the food off the others and let them starve?
    Eventually he'd be the only one left, and when he died it'd be 'adios human race'.
    But we know humans didn't die out, so obviously they over-rode their baser instincts and must have shared the food around the tribe and generally looked after each other.
    Indeed! There is something more.

    + YouTube Video
    ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.
    absit invidia

  18. #93
    Iam puppy, hear me yap. Global Moderator lycanox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Nutzi Netherlands.
    Age
    29
    Posts
    12,064
    Quote Originally Posted by Waymarker View Post
    Why didn't humans die out at the caveman stage?
    I mean, if food was short, surely the biggest most aggressive member of a tribe would follow his instincts to grab the food off the others and let them starve?
    Eventually he'd be the only one left, and when he died it'd be 'adios human race'.
    But we know humans didn't die out, so obviously they over-rode their baser instincts and must have shared the food around the tribe and generally looked after each other.
    Nope.

    First off all your argument would require a massive global food shortage. Which simply might have never happened. Even the Toba event did not decrease food to such level.

    And second.
    Humans have always worked together. As that was the only way to take out the big prey and protect against big predators. This would especially counted during harsher times, so betrayal was more a death sentence than an smart move.

    And third. Social instinct are also instinct. So the instincts of self preservation by running off. (Even do chances would be lower by doing that). Were likely overridden by the instinct to remain part of a community. Stay with friends and loved ones. Or the basic need for human interaction.
    http://fc01.deviantart.com/fs27/f/2008/139/8/a/logo_by_lycanox.png

  19. #94
    הלראות Contributor Beatnik Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Between a Bullet and a Target
    Posts
    5,487
    Quote Originally Posted by WayM
    Why didn't humans die out at the caveman stage?
    I mean, if food was short, surely the biggest most aggressive member of a tribe would follow his instincts to grab the food off the others and let them starve?
    Eventually he'd be the only one left, and when he died it'd be 'adios human race'.
    But we know humans didn't die out, so obviously they over-rode their baser instincts and must have shared the food around the tribe and generally looked after each other.
    Assuming there was only one tribe of humans, there was significant resource scarcity, and assuming humans don't breed like rabbits.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kiehlroy View Post
    Amygdala, to be precise.
    ....The amygdala is apart of the limbic system....

    And that's Neuroscience anyway, not Behavioral Psychology or Sociology.
    It's behavioral psychology as it is, quite literally, the anatomy of behavior in terms of psychology.

    It's considered apart of psychology. Among other things.

    So what's your point? If you had also mentioned a behavioral phenomena such as an "Amygdala hijack" then that would've been more helpful.
    No point. I was just pointing out that emotion and intellect are separate functions of the brain. The "fight or flight" system isn't based off of ego or intellect.

    In reference to the fight or flight response in humans Professor of Neuroscience Joseph E. LeDoux states...

    "Some emotional reactions and emotional responses can be formed without any conscious, cognitive participation...because the shortcut from thalamus to amygdyla completely bypasses the neocortex"

    I always liked MacLean's Triune Brain theory as it can actually be used as a nice overlay for many behavioral studies. It may not be perfect structurally and is a bit simplified but I think it is a good start towards combining Psychology, Evolutionary Biology, and Neuroscience. Add a little Ramachandran, a few other books I read once upon a time, and plenty of observation of modern humans in their current natural environmentS and a new and more substantial theory might just be born, Hmmm... Have to fight through the APA "force-choke" first.
    Wikipedia isn't a real authority.

    But what are you pointing out?

    Btw, have you ever spent time with iguanas?
    Not really, I think they're pretty cool looking though.

    IIRC, the basic evolutionary psychological model places fear, lust and aggression as being the earliest of emotions as these would be the most basic impulses needed to promote survival and procreation.
    Fear, yes.
    But lust and aggression (somewhat) are related to the sex-drive. Hormones like testosterone.

    Mammals developed a increasingly more complex limbic system(nuturing, love, loyalty, etc)
    Just curious what you think love is.
    In the case of most mammals, it's rather ephemeral.

    I don't want to hear about how "alligators nurture their young" and "ants are social too", Bob.
    Ants are pretty social. It's just a different definition of social.

    However, in their case, it's more like a truncated society, and slightly less complex. Studies have shown that an ant can actually detect the death of their queen even if they're separated.

    I'm not here to split hairs over every little detail ad nauseam, ad infinitum.
    Good.
    It's interesting you found so much to talk about from one sentence.
    Poetry is superior to history -Aristotle
    True time is four dimensional -Heidegger
    All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players -Shakespeare

  20. #95
    Survivalist! Kiehlroy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Centripetal
    Age
    37
    Posts
    3,745
    Quote Originally Posted by lycanox View Post
    If we indeed would have no instincts. We would for example also not have parental instincts. Meaning that we would have zero problems with executing our own children for logical yet trivial reasons.
    Yet there is no sane person I know of. That would be capable of pulling the trigger without severe inner conflict. Or without acting under another instinct like for example, self preservation.

    Naturally people usually bring forth things like mothers abandoning their own children and child abuse as evidence for a lack of parental instinct. But those things happen with animals as well.
    We should probably start by distinguishing between instincts and emotions. I have a feeling they overlap but are two separate levels of impulse. Emotion over instinct. Where emotions are a higher expression of basic instincts that serve higher SOCIAL animals that need more than just simple eat, sleep, shit, fuck, fight, or flee programming. I think many here are confusing the two.

    A lizard has instincts. It knows when to mate, when to fight, when to run, etc...

    The lizard does not really need to form even the most rudimentary of social bonds.

    A mother and child = social bond bound by emotions which are higher expressions of base instincts like survival. In the case of mammals including us, our survival instinct is amplified with emotions like love. Humans are highly social animals so the needs of the many often support the needs of the few. Of course, the inverse is sometimes true.

    We have to learn to understand our emotions so as to allow us to consciously direct them and so as to recognize them in others. This will allow us to become more aware of the realities facing us so we can make more fully conscious and practical decisions when dealing with those realities.
    To be an actor or to be a reactor?

    This does not mean shutting own(repressing) emotions either. That is exactly what many people do when they find certain emotions too overwhelming to deal with. This causes a twisting of the psyche which often expresses itself in destructive ways such as random emotional outbursts(vandalism, incivility), myriad neurosis, and even psychosis.

    I'm not suggesting that all psychological disorders are emotionally based, I just think that many are and that real human-based comprehensive therapy trumps pharmaceuticals that do nothing more than shut down or neutralize emotion while doing nothing in the way of assisting the removal of the emotional blocks and compartmentalization's the ego has constructed in order to protect itself and are the likely causes of many disorders.

    Psychological integration of emotion with intellect is what is needed for a human to become "actualized" and whole. It's not a one vs the other game. Both survive to become "something wonderful" and new.

    It's all about those emotional walls.

    But, they can't hold back that flood forever.
    http://remyvanruiten.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/logo1.jpg

    "...some parts of his work are half-finished, while other parts make a strange medley."...;)...

  21. #96
    Dead Meat
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Oz
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Waymarker View Post
    Why didn't humans die out at the caveman stage?
    I mean, if food was short, surely the biggest most aggressive member of a tribe would follow his instincts to grab the food off the others and let them starve?
    Eventually he'd be the only one left, and when he died it'd be 'adios human race'.
    But we know humans didn't die out, so obviously they over-rode their baser instincts and must have shared the food around the tribe and generally looked after each other.
    Or... Maybe he did follow his instincts to take all the food but he also followed his instincts to reproduce and also took the most attractive woman aswell... And we are his descendants.

    Survival is the most important objective a human has.

    Racism to me is just another form of self preservation.

    I choose me over you if I have to make that choice.

    Nazis feel they had to make that choice.

    Are they racists or merely survivalists???

  22. #97
    Starseed Contributor calliope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,635
    Quote Originally Posted by cirrusmagicpaws View Post
    Or... Maybe he did follow his instincts to take all the food but he also followed his instincts to reproduce and also took the most attractive woman aswell... And we are his descendants.

    Survival is the most important objective a human has.

    Racism to me is just another form of self preservation.

    I choose me over you if I have to make that choice.

    Nazis feel they had to make that choice.

    Are they racists or merely survivalists???
    Nazis believe in the ultimate superiority of the white race, isn't that right?

    The couple in this pic though, are both strong, healthy, beautiful, talented humans. They grew up in the same western culture, with the same values, and have made a number of strong, beautiful, healthy children.

    It would appear that they have fulfilled their humanity code of bonding and reproduction. I'm sure that they are very protective of the livelihood of their children. Their survival as a family surely is utmost in their continued efforts to be well and prosper, don't you think?



    And yet, Nazis disapprove of this example of race-mixing. In fact the consequences were severe for such couples, esp if they reproduce. They still are, when you read the creed and beliefs of white supremacists and white nationalists everywhere today.

    So how is a couple, of the same culture and values, who procreates and strives for a prosperous life for their family, not an example of self-preservation??

    And how is the Nazi/white supremacist-nationalist notion of non-miscegenation a valid argument for "survival"? When esp the mixture of such different gene pools clearly results in stronger and healthier offspring?

    There is a strong Nazi and white supremacist/nationalist movement today that expresses a violent opposition to just this kind of couple. There is no valid argument that this is a notion of survival.

    A politician in New York very recently received a large percentage of the vote, who is avowedly against inter-racial marriage:

    James C. Russell, who has denounced interracial marriage, garnered 37 percent of the vote in his quest for the New York House of Representatives.

    Another self-proclaimed Nazi/white-supremacist is a mom who is running for a city office, and hopes to advance her career in politics:

    "No office is too small. The Neo-Nazi National Socialist Movement’s “Sergeant” Harriet Paletti in Wisconsin, a bubbly working mom with three kids, only takes off her swastika when she’s at work. She’ll be running for her district’s alderman position in 2012 and has just sent in her résumé to the mayor of New Berlin, hoping to fill a seat on either the Crime Prevention Committee, Police and Fire Commission, or the Parks and Recreation Board."


    Such instances, and the ongoing vitriolic hatred towards any and all who dilute the gene pool of the "white race" really isn't an argument for "survival," as Beatnik Bob has explained at the start of this thread. It's very simply flawed and non-existent psuedo-science.

    Here's a re-post of the article I mentioned, since it got buried way back a few thread pages ago.

    White Supremacist Stampede
    A startling number of white-power candidates are seeking public office.

    Add to the growing list of candidates considering a bid for the GOP presidential nomination in 2012 America’s most famous white-power advocate: David Duke.

    A former grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, member of the Louisiana House of Representatives and Republican executive-committee chairman in his district until 2000, Duke has a significant following online. His videos go viral. This month, he’s launching a tour of 25 states to explore how much support he can garner for a potential presidential bid. He hasn’t considered running for serious office since the early '90s, when he won nearly 40 percent of the vote in his bid for Louisiana governor. But like many “white civil rights advocates,” as he describes himself to The Daily Beast, 2012 is already shaping up to be a pivotal year.
    Click here to find out more!

    Former (and current) Neo Nazis, Ku Klux Klan members, neo-Confederates, and other representatives of the many wings of the “white nationalist” movement are starting to file paperwork and print campaign literature for offices large and small, pointing to rising unemployment, four years with an African-American president, and rampant illegal immigration as part of a growing mound of evidence that white people need to take a stand.

    Most aren’t winning—not yet. But they’re drawing levels of support that surprise and alarm groups that keep tabs on the white-power movement (members prefer the terms “racial realist” or “white nationalist”). In May, the National Socialist Movement’s Jeff Hall hit national headlines in a bizarre tragedy: his murder, allegedly at the hands of his 10-year-old son. But before his death, he had campaigned for a low-level water board position in Riverside, California. The swastika-wearing plumber who patrolled the U.S. border paramilitary-style walked away with almost 30 percent of his community’s vote. “That’s a sizable amount of the vote for a person running openly as a Neo Nazi,” says Marilyn Mayo, co-director of the Anti-Defamation League’s Center on Extremism. While Hall’s political future—and life—has been cut short, Mayo points out that we should expect more white supremacist hopefuls next year.
    ...

    Potok’s group tracked 23 candidates in 2010 with radical right-wing views, nine of whom they described as white supremacists or white nationalists. (The others had extreme immigration and world-conspiracy views but did not specifically have links to white organizations.) One candidate, the neo-Confederate Loy Mauch, won a seat in the Arkansas House of Representatives, and another,

    James C. Russell, who has denounced interracial marriage, garnered 37 percent of the vote in his quest for the New York House of Representatives.

    Some candidates benefited from a new umbrella organization—the A3P, or American Third Position—which was launched in 2010 by a handful of wonkish-looking professors and corporate lawyers to, as they wrote in their mission statement, “represent the political interests of White Americans.”
    ...

    Disappointed with Ron and Rand Paul and other leaders who they feel are close, but not close enough, to their views—the A3P has fielded candidates like Harry Bertram, who ran for the West Virginia board of education last fall, pulling down 14 percent of the vote. He’s now angling for governor. “My platform is conservative like the Tea Party but more racialist inclined,” Bertram says. Another A3P candidate won 11 percent of the vote in a recent run for a seat in the New Hampshire House of Representatives. Those numbers are small, but hardly laughable, especially for a new group explicitly running on a white-interest ticket. “We’re just beginning,” says board member Jamie Kelso, who says the group’s platform includes a complete moratorium on immigration. “But we’re filling a void.”

    Another self-described blue-collar, pro-white candidate is The Nationalist Party of America’s Billy Roper. After a long career in neo-Nazi organizations and failing spectacularly in his bid for Arkansas governor in 2010, Roper and a fellow “White Aryan” veep candidate are promising on their 2012 website to continue the fight “for the civil rights of Americans of European ancestry.” Now supported by the A3P, he ran as a write-in candidate for governor, he says, to learn the ropes for 2012.
    ...

    One key precinct for politically minded white-rights activists: Stormfront, the nation’s largest white-supremacist website, where thousands of “racial realists” talk about everything from homeschooling and the news to uniting into a single party. Stormfront founder and radio host Don Black tells The Daily Beast the strategy is to start from the ground up, “where we have a chance of winning. It’s impossible to get into the Senate or Congress but state legislatures or smaller offices can work.” Black says the Tea Party’s influence spurred hopes among his ideological soulmates—but that the initial excitement has given way to a realpolitik sense that the Stormfront crowd will have to go it alone. “Many of our people are involved in the Tea Party,” says Black. “But much of their leadership is skittish when it comes to talking about racial realities. The Tea Party is a healthy movement but many are too conditioned to run like scared rabbits when called racists.”

    No office is too small. The Neo-Nazi National Socialist Movement’s “Sergeant” Harriet Paletti in Wisconsin, a bubbly working mom with three kids, only takes off her swastika when she’s at work. She’ll be running for her district’s alderman position in 2012 and has just sent in her résumé to the mayor of New Berlin, hoping to fill a seat on either the Crime Prevention Committee, Police and Fire Commission, or the Parks and Recreation Board. “These are volunteer positions which of course will boost my political résumé when I begin my campaign in late 2012.” If and when elected, she says she’ll represent everyone in her mostly white district, regardless of color. She just doesn’t believe in intermingling in private life, part of what she calls a “natural law of self segregation.”

    Another NSM leader, Brian Culpepper, says his chapter in Tennessee may openly field a candidate for the state and U.S. House of Representatives. Culpepper describes himself as a “realist,” saying he prefers sneaking candidates into office under the radar rather than openly flouting the white-rights agenda.

    The same is true of the United Klans of Tennessee, which says it has several mayors and county commissioners serving who do not openly identify as Klan members. “We insert ourselves into the infrastructure of other established parties due to the bias against us and the difficulty of third parties getting ballot access,” says Culpepper. Unlike other Neo-Nazis in his group, these ones are not on NSM rosters and “have hair, no ink, no piercings, and increasingly are college-degreed” says Culpepper, who says he is also a “suit and tie” guy and does not favor bomber jackets. Some Neo-Nazis have also quietly been joining national campaigns and offices to start sharpening their political teeth, he claims. “We have people working with the most recent incoming class of freshmen in the House,” says Culpepper. “And they don’t even know it.”
    full article: http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...g-numbers.html
    absit invidia

  23. #98
    הלראות Contributor Beatnik Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Between a Bullet and a Target
    Posts
    5,487
    Quote Originally Posted by cirrusmagicpaws View Post
    Racism to me is just another form of self preservation.

    I choose me over you if I have to make that choice.

    Nazis feel they had to make that choice.

    Are they racists or merely survivalists???
    I've heard this argument before.

    Calli's post is better, but I'm just curious: How is it survival?

    The nazis believed in the survival of "aryans." In so doing, they killed millions of whites and "aryans." It may sound novel, but white nationalism has always been a pretty strong enemy of "white people."

    From a social perspective though, inter-ethnic sexual relationships promote peace and cultural exchange. Many tribes used to use a marriage as a way to have peace with another tribe. Civilization, likewise, owes much to the free-flow of ideas. Thanks to cultural exchange (to which sex is a large motivator) civilizations didn't have to start from scratch, as they could build off of the ideas of the older civilizations.
    This is why civilization in the Mediterranean and the Cradle of Civilization flourished.
    Sex has always been important for human progression. If ethnic purity had been enforced, a given culture (Greece, for example) wouldn't have progressed significantly.
    Humans, by nature, are pretty primal. Yes Greece still would have gotten its ideas from Phoenicia and Persia, but sex is a little more influential, as in the case of the coming of the Hellenes to Greece from the north.

    Nearly everything is a result of sexual selection.

    Ethnic purity has never really benefited any ethnicity. From the standpoint of cultural progression.
    Poetry is superior to history -Aristotle
    True time is four dimensional -Heidegger
    All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players -Shakespeare

  24. #99
    Dead Meat
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Oz
    Posts
    19
    Calliope, I understand entirely what your saying.

    I myself am not white and infact am the product of stormfronts so called inter racial beastiality.

    I do not condone nazis and racism in general however I do understand it is nothing personal.

    The nazi hate for other races stems from the preservation of their breed. They do not wish to mix blood because they understand that globally they are the minority.
    On a global scale whites are far outnumbered by coloured folk. They have understood that if they do not enforce white supremacy then soon there will be no whites left in the world literally. That is why they feel they must squash any forms of race blending. These feelings stem from their survival instincts.

    Not saying it is riteous or chivalrous. Life is harsh and cruel and sometimes genocide may seem like the only option. It is human nature. Survival of the fittest.

    What I will say is totally wrong is your comment on hybrids are better models than pure ones.

    I myself being mixed will tell you that I am in no way better than a pure bred. Everyone is equal and no science text book written by some fool can convince me that race mixing makes stronger babies. The proof is in the pudding. I have lived the life of a hybrid and I am in no way better off than any pure I have grown up with.

    Infact all the pure breds I grew up with are all healthier and more successful than I am, be they coloured or not.

  25. #100
    Starseed Contributor calliope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,635
    Quote Originally Posted by cirrusmagicpaws View Post
    Calliope, I understand entirely what your saying.

    I myself am not white and infact am the product of stormfronts so called inter racial beastiality.

    I do not condone nazis and racism in general however I do understand it is nothing personal.

    The nazi hate for other races stems from the preservation of their breed. They do not wish to mix blood because they understand that globally they are the minority.
    On a global scale whites are far outnumbered by coloured folk. They have understood that if they do not enforce white supremacy then soon there will be no whites left in the world literally. That is why they feel they must squash any forms of race blending. These feelings stem from their survival instincts.

    Not saying it is riteous or chivalrous. Life is harsh and cruel and sometimes genocide may seem like the only option. It is human nature. Survival of the fittest.

    What I will say is totally wrong is your comment on hybrids are better models than pure ones.

    I myself being mixed will tell you that I am in no way better than a pure bred. Everyone is equal and no science text book written by some fool can convince me that race mixing makes stronger babies. The proof is in the pudding. I have lived the life of a hybrid and I am in no way better off than any pure I have grown up with.

    Infact all the pure breds I grew up with are all healthier and more successful than I am, be they coloured or not.
    You speak in terms of livestock breeding. I can't grasp that concept as applied to human beings.

    Often times people of mixed heritage are treated with scorn and contempt. This by itself can lead to health issues and self-esteem issues, leading to a lower "success" rate perception.

    I have first-hand knowledge of the extreme toll that scorn and contempt have on a person's physical health.

    And I really don't believe that perceived "benefits", are the result, physically, of being "pure-bred".

    It's very sad to me that so many people of a range of varying ethnicities have been subjected to, and adhere to, the belief that "white" is superior.

    I can't tell you how strange it is in my personal life to encounter so many peeps of ethnic heritage, who are disdainful and contemptuous toward "non-white". It's just very odd. And example too, of the very pervasive and damaging poison of "white supremacy."
    absit invidia

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Site Meter