Low IQ yet again linked to conservative ideas and racism

Beefbisquit

Beefbisquit

Well-Known Member
Dr Kynes said:
that is french. i even double checked my grammar with google translate . my french is pretty bad, i mostly just know how to swear, order drinks and ask "is your daughter 18?" ( a sentiment i can express in 7 languages)

"vous êtes exemplaire est la québécoise?"
"Merde!"
"vous devez être en état d'ébriété"

Translation:your exemplar is the quebecers?
"Shit!" "You must be high!"
Click to expand...
Vous is used when addressing a group of people, not a singular person. Tu is used for a singular person.
 
Beefbisquit

Beefbisquit

Well-Known Member
Dr Kynes said:
and now you are a racist too. welcome to the club.
Click to expand...
Nah.

Admitting there are differences between people doesn't make someone racist. It's using the differences to put one group on a pedestol or to denegrate another group that makes someone racist.
 
Beefbisquit

Beefbisquit

Well-Known Member
twostrokenut said:
Ok I am starting to get it.....so a lawful culture is one that you personally as a Canadian, get to vote for or do yall simply rely on the powers that be to make that call for you?
Click to expand...
Do you not understand how laws work?

If your culture takes part in murder, it is not a protected part of your culture. If you culture takes part in stealing, it is not a protected part of your culture. If you culture takes part in child molestation, it is not a protected part of your culture. If your culture.....

Do I really need to list everything single law in order for you to understand what types of actions aren't protected?

At some point, yes, lawmakers, e.g. THE MAN has to decide what is protected.
 
twostrokenut

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
Beefbisquit said:
Do you not understand how laws work?

If your culture takes part in murder, it is not a protected part of your culture. If you culture takes part in stealing, it is not a protected part of your culture. If you culture takes part in child molestation, it is not a protected part of your culture. If your culture.....

Do I really need to list everything single law in order for you to understand what types of actions aren't protected?

At some point, yes, lawmakers, e.g. THE MAN has to decide what is protected.
Click to expand...
Yeah man I kinda understand how laws work...even statutory ones, like the ones you quoted believe it or not.

I also understand Canada is a corporation...http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0000230098&owner=include

As for your assertion the US does not protect culture, Spanish Emergence comes to mind.
 
see4

see4

Well-Known Member
I have a giant turtle erection at the moment, it has poked all the way through. To the other side, I've poked right on through, to the other side.
 
Beefbisquit

Beefbisquit

Well-Known Member
twostrokenut said:
Yeah man I kinda understand how laws work...even statutory ones, like the ones you quoted believe it or not.

I also understand Canada is a corporation...http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0000230098&owner=include

As for your assertion the US does not protect culture, Spanish Emergence comes to mind.
Click to expand...
OH MY GOD SO IS SWEDEN.

Someone please tell the poor Swedes...

http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?company=sweden&owner=exclude&action=getcompany

AND SO IS JAPAN

http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0000837056&owner=exclude&count=40&hidefilings=0

GOD HELP US ALL. THINK OF THE CHILDREN.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
Beefbisquit said:
Vous is used when addressing a group of people, not a singular person. Tu is used for a singular person.
Click to expand...
Actually, "vous" is used as polite address when talking to an individual. My issue with the quoted pseudoFrench is sentence structure. Which is the central verb?
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
Actually, "vous" is used as polite address when talking to an individual. My issue with the quoted pseudoFrench is sentence structure. Which is the central verb?
Click to expand...
french actually works a lot like english, especially with respect to idioms, at least more than other romance languages.

what kynes wanted to say:

your exemplar is the quebecers?
"Shit!" "You must be high!"

how he said it:

"vous êtes exemplaire est la québécoise?"
"Merde!"
"vous devez être en état d'ébriété"

how that translates:

you are examplar is the quebecois?
shit
you owe to be in state of drunk

how he should have said it:

votre exemple est la quebecois?
merde!
vous etes sobre?

 monoglots are barbarians when you give them translation machines.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
Invisible idiot.

This was the output of a paired set of English-Chinese translator apps (when they were called programs) fed the proverb "out of sight, out of mind".
 
Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
Actually, "vous" is used as polite address when talking to an individual. My issue with the quoted pseudoFrench is sentence structure. Which is the central verb?
Click to expand...
yeah my french sucks.

i guess it's because i'm racist against the gallic cheese sniffing surrender monkeys.
 
B

BigNBushy

Well-Known Member
Dr Kynes said:
ohh yes, we totally share the same beliefs...


ohh. no we dont.

societies can die, even Rome fell. Ur is lost to history, Troy was sacked, Machu Pichu has been reclaimed by the jungle, and the entire civilization of Persia has been consumed by mohammedanism, leaving only a steaming pile of scat in the place of one of the longest lasting and most influential cultures in history.

this does NOT mean those societies were populated with inferior peoples, it means they got their asses kicked by a more aggressive, technologically superior competitor.

FAILED societies are the ones which are moribund, bringing nothing of value to the endless march of civilization, and even those societies are not made up of inferior people, just inferior cultural imperatives.

sub saharan africa, and in fact all black african cultures are simply footnotes, quaint examples of backward social structures, retrograde technology, and ultimately, failure. when black african societies embrace modern science technology and societal norms, they advance, often at an alarming rate, until some shitheel asshole who longs for the ridiculous superstitions and magical thinking of the past throws a coup d' etat and reignites the tribal feuds and baby rape traditions of the not so distant past.

this does not imply that africa is the sole proprietor of shitheels or power hungry assholes, europe has had more than a few (Edward Longshanks, Napoleon, Mussolini, pretty much every Pope ever, etc) asia has had a bunch (Mao and Pol Pot spring to mind) and so has latin america (castro, guevara, peron, chavez etc).

the difference between success and failure in every society clearly lies with the reaction to technological change and progress at the heart of the society. new ideas, new technologies and even new religions were embraced by the persian empire, rome, the greeks, ancient china, and every other society that has ever actually left a positive influence on civilization, while failed societies are the ones which resist new ideas, technologies and advancement based solely on their mistaken belief that they are already the ideal, and thus any change will naturally be for the worse.

it is chauvinism, and a faulty assumption of perfection within a society that leads to stagnation and eventual ruin.

in these retrograde societies, every new idea is relentlessly repressed, all dissent is beaten down in favour of blind traditionalism and dogmatic religious beliefs, and yes this does include a number of american "conservative" groups.

real conservatism asks the proponent of a new idea "Show me how this is better, and convince me i should change", while moribund unthinking fools insist "Our shit is perfect already, by the grace of god, and anything new is an abomination!"

when a society becomes dominated by fools who believe they already has acheived the pinnacle of civilization and technology, thats when they stop advancing and start declining.

the only quicker road to disaster is embracing bullshit ideas that are proved to be failures, and insisting that it only failed because The Right People werent involved last time (which again demonstrates Chauvinism)


thus we can clearly see, i hold NO common ground with your racist ideals, since i KNOW a black man can be every bit as smart, successful and ethical as any european, asian or chicano, but instead find the flaw in african societies' tribalism, and chauvinism, the belief in one's own innate superiority, and the blind faith that this superiority will result in success, no matter how carelessly you play the game.

chauvinism is the flip-side of bigotry, since if one is simply superior, all those outside your group of presumably superior beings must necessarily be inferior, likewise if everyone else is inferior (the core of bigotry), this naturally leads to the assumption that you must be superior.

your bigotry is obvious, while your chauvinism is poorly concealed, and it all rides on the well worn rails of race, rather than the undeniable facts of culture and social imperative.

i got a little chauvinism myself, in that i believe european cultures and social norms are superior, but i am always out to PROVE it, not simply asserting it's superiority, and trusting in european culture to succeed without any help from it's constituent members.

thats how shit gets done, while you rest on the dubious laurels of your "genetic intellectual superiority", and assert that you are simply better than people of african heritage, because you had the good fortune to be born into a society that isnt tearing itself apart, and wallowing in it's own crapulence.

TLDR Version:

no, because im not a racist.
i think european society and culture is superior, not european people. anyone can embrace european culture, in whole or in part, regardless of their race or skin colour.
i am a cultural chauvinist, you are just a bigot.
Click to expand...
I got to give that one to ya Dr. K.

I oversimplified your point, which is probably more complex than I gave it credit for.

I believe something similar, however, I think that the more developed the society, the more developed the people are who created it. Most are pretty similar, however, one group of people keep repeating a pattern of failure.

I refuse to believe that their society is equal, as you do, but I go a step further and state that a people who cannot develop a society, and cannot implement one that has already proven to be successful for more than a relatively little while is also somehow inferior.
 
B

BigNBushy

Well-Known Member
Beefbisquit said:
You said;


[/B]
The Egyptians had a thriving society for thousands and thousands of years. Egyptian women donned ornate jewelry and wigs, the men boxed, fenced and wrestled for sport and the children played with board games, dolls and other toys.

They invented the calander, the plow, megastructures, and written language to name a few. No big deal though.

Do you propse anything be 'done' about the black/ethnic population that already exists in the USA?

Are you suggesting that white people be allowed to immigrate, but black people aren't?
Click to expand...
Do you understand the term "Sub-Saharan?" It refers to the part of Africa SOUTH of the Sahara. Egypt is North of and within the Saharan.

Now, in ancient times, Nubian peoples up river from Egypt flourished. That is probably the best a group of sub saharans has ever done.

As for your questions:

1) Nothing should be done about the population within the US, they are citizens and deserve all the rights and responsibilities that go along with it.

2) I'm suggesting that you let in what you need, to get what you want.

Are you advocating the next time there is a genocide in Rwanda that we let the million+ refuges into this country?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top