I just created this new meme based on recent “no kings” protests. I’m not sure it’s a good one. Please let me know. Feel free to share it if you like it:
Bookmarks
- 4racism.org
- Alternative Hypothesis
- American Renaissance
- Amerika.org
- Black Pigeon Speaks
- CanSpeccy
- Countenance
- Counter Currents
- Dan from Squirrel Hill
- Diversity Chronicle
- Europa Unitas
- fleuchtling (refugees)
- Government and Corporate Anti-White Discrimination
- Hail to You
- HBD Chick
- Human stupidity
- It's Okay to be White
- John Derbyshire
- La Griffe du Lion
- Lion of the Blogosphere
- Luke Ford
- Madspace
- Muunyayo
- Nicholas Stix Uncensored
- Nimshal
- Nodhimmitude
- Occidental Dissent
- Reluctant Apostate
- Sincerity
- Soviet Men
- Steve Sailer's blog
- Taki's Magazine
- The Atheist Jew
- The Last Ditch
- The Mad Jewess
- The National Conservative
- The Politically Incorrect Australian
- The slitty eye
- The Unz Review (Steve Sailer)
- Those who can see
- Thuletide
- Utter Contempt
- VDare
Buy Your Coffee From These Patriots
No Kangz?
Could you respond to this left wing midwit https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gCJB-POH4bE
Yeah. The guy is either not very bright, or he’s pretending to be not very bright. Issues with his video:
1. He had only exposed himself to a very tiny amount of race-realism, and bases his “critique” on that. He hasn’t read any race-realist books, read many race-realist articles or view in-depth race-realist videos.
2. He claims that the science is inadequate to “prove” race-realism, completely ignoring the fact that a) institutions won’t allow such science and b) by his standards, we can’t “prove” evolution either; they’re both only theories.
3. Characterizing Sailer’s analogies of height, and other superficial traits, as a “diversion” is misleading and unfair. It’s an analogy, not a diversion.
4. He claims that race-realists have “expanding the definition of race-realism to include ANY genetic contribution to racial IQ disparities.” In fact, it’s race-denialists who do this. There have always been discussions and disagreements, among race-realists, about how much of the IQ gaps are genetic versus environmental.
5. He claims that there’s growing evidence against race-realism. The opposite is true.
6. He falsely claims that Sailer’s view is that height/BMI differences are ENTIRELY due to genetics. Sailer never claimed this; it would be laughable. He completely misunderstands the point of Sailer’s video; it obviously was not intended to present scientific arguments in favor of race-realism. It’s intended to present the most basic, simple, explanation of what race-realism (vis a vis IQ) is. It’s not designed to be a scientific, in depth, analysis.
7. His comparison between Argentina and Mexico is simplistic. Most of the White population of Argentina is from SOUTHERN Europe, which has a lower average IQ than Northern Europe. Furthermore, nobody’s claiming that environment has NO impact on IQ. Even so, From Grok:
“Based on available data, the average IQ of Argentina is estimated at 98.67, while Mexico’s average IQ is estimated at 88.00. These figures come from studies aggregating international IQ test results, such as the 2025 International IQ Test, which included 1,691,740 participants globally.”
8. He says that the “far-right” claims that race-realism is censured, and that we believe it’s true based on that. In fact, it’s more that RESEARCH into race-realism is de-facto prohibited that leads some to suspect it’s true. Otherwise, why not allow the research?
9. His objection that we compare intragroup differences to intergroup differences is off the mark. He claims that genetics plays more of a role between individuals than between groups, and that, therefore, genetic group differences are suspect. This is just a glorified Lewontin’s Fallacy. Groups lived in wildly disparate environments for hundreds of generations. Obviously, this will impact averages – and averages is what race is all about.
10. He misses Sailer’s point in the Q&A. When Sailer points out that the people who deny biological race also deny biological sex, his point is that there’s a political/ideological bias, not that the two are actually the same in every way.
11. He claims that any admission that environment plays a role in IQ differences is a “trap” for race-realists because then we’d have to admit that we can never tell how much of it is genetic and how much is environmental. Let’s flip that: Any admission that it’s partially genetic is a trap for race-denialists, because then they’d have to admit that an unknown amount of the disparities is NOT a result of “systemic racism,” the “legacy of slavery” or “unconscious bias.”
12. He expresses shock that Sailer doesn’t present evidence of biological racial differences in average IQ in the video – without realizing that that’s not the point of the video. If he’s interested in actual evidence, he’ll delve deeper. He won’t base his entire view of race-realism upon one introductory video.
Thanks, but I have a question.Has southern europe become less Due to invasions by barbarians and immigration because historically More advanced technologically and civilizationally being the birthplace of italy and greece While the north tended to be tribal confederations
That’s probably anybody’s guess. My guess is that it’s a combination of factors.
I have a question Jews will still be left wing in the future Or will they become more right wing as they realize The people they imported really hate them and want them dead for the crime of existing
Of course some Jews will become right-wing. Left-wing Jews will not remain Jews; their religion is leftism, and they marry non-Jews, so they’ll simply assimilate into oblivion.