Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Why not genocide

Why not genocide
September 17, 2010, 11:45:15 AM
Why do sites like ANUS, Corrupt, and Amerika appear to be against exterminating all other (non-European) ethnic groups? To me "pan"-nationalism is similar to individualism, except we replace individuals with nations. Not all nations are equal nor do all nations (or any nation for that matter) have a right to exist. Some nations are weak and will be taken over and preferably exterminated so their genes never threaten humanity again. It would appear to me Europeans (and their descendents in the Americas and Australia) are the greatest strain of humanity with more genius than any other race and the history of Europeans dominating other races shows this quite clearly. The only other race to have given Europeans any true competition are Mongoloids (particularly Mongolians and to a lesser extent Japanese). I know many may write this off as me having an "emotional reaction" or whatever but I'm not and I'm certainly not a "White Nationalist" which is probably more or less anti-nationalist anyway. I'm just concerned with why even the remainder of noble Europeans seem to be reluctant to accept the seemingly obvious fact they are the greatest race of man, and that the Earth belongs to them.

Re: Why not genocide
September 17, 2010, 12:07:24 PM
I agree. The Master Race is so great it let's its nations be invaded by colored immigrants, muslims who commit crimes and then rebel when repressed, gay parades, extreme feminism in Sweden, prohibition of holocaust denial in Germany, etc.

It's also nice to see the master race, the original founders of america, letting blacks live on welfare while commiting a lot of crimes and being anti-white racist. Such brilliance. Another smart move was adopting a religion with jewish origins, Christianity.

And now some beautiful exemplars of the master race:





Re: Why not genocide
September 17, 2010, 12:12:26 PM
Isn't it seemingly obvious? Kill off other races if you wish, but 50% of the population would still remain with an IQ below  100.

Re: Why not genocide
September 17, 2010, 12:13:51 PM
I'm just concerned with why even the remainder of noble Europeans seem to be reluctant to accept the seemingly obvious fact they are the greatest race of man, and that the Earth belongs to them.

:facepalm:

You had me until this. As it has been mentioned ad nauseum on this board, you are not special because of the race or family or creed that you were born into; your actions determine what kind of person you will be.

I agree with what Hraesvalgr seems to imply - kill the stupid indiscriminate of race.

Re: Why not genocide
September 17, 2010, 12:15:51 PM
The anti-genocide stance is necessary.  At the moment, our focus must be more on correcting ourselves than on removing others.  When our race is strong, then, perhaps, we can turn an eye towards other lands.  At the moment, though, that would be incredibly pretentious, given our own position as the foremost promoters of materialism, me-ism, and "freedom".

The White Race is simply not good enough to do anything about others.

Also, damn you all for getting in there before me -.-

Re: Why not genocide
September 17, 2010, 12:17:50 PM
All races of humanity would appear very unintelligent when you reduce them to their lowest common denominator, including Europeans. Europeans however have produced disproportionate amounts of genius. I never said we should neglect eugenics for our own race. Trust me, if it were up to me no group would face as much scrutiny as Europeans of poor character, low IQ etc. because these people are in many ways a greater danger to European man than other races.

And Deadite, that was incredibly rude of you to put words in my mouth like that. I am not special and never even mentioned myself and I'm not entirely European hence why I refer to them in the third person.

Re: Why not genocide
September 17, 2010, 12:22:55 PM
Then you have your answer.  As I have said, we must focus on ourselves, if only for now.  Perhaps at the end of the purge, we'll have reached a general state of enlightenment at which we'll commit mass-suicide in order to reach the true God.  On the other hand, we may realise that the faults of other races can easily be corrected, if we just conquer their lands and submit them to rigorous genetic engineering.  Who knows?  The fact of the matter is that we are not strong enough to be able to call ourselves significantly "superior" at the moment.  Keywords: at the moment.

Re: Why not genocide
September 17, 2010, 12:53:49 PM
Then you have your answer.  As I have said, we must focus on ourselves, if only for now.  Perhaps at the end of the purge, we'll have reached a general state of enlightenment at which we'll commit mass-suicide in order to reach the true God.  On the other hand, we may realise that the faults of other races can easily be corrected, if we just conquer their lands and submit them to rigorous genetic engineering.  Who knows?  The fact of the matter is that we are not strong enough to be able to call ourselves significantly "superior" at the moment.  Keywords: at the moment.
My question is as follows: Why would Europeans want to make other human races better than they are (sounds dangerous, considering most races resent Europeans) instead of take their land for their own? Also, what do you mean by mass suicide? Wouldn't it be better described as mass homicide?

Re: Why not genocide
September 17, 2010, 01:14:52 PM
No, every enlightened European would kill him or herself in order to become one with the Universe.  It's merely a possibility.

You're looking at this from the perspective of somebody who is a modern man, whereas I am relatively sure that Europeans will have surpassed that sad state of being by the time they can truly claim superiority over other races.  It's something to look forward to, at least.

Re: Why not genocide
September 17, 2010, 01:20:13 PM
Define the "European" race. I could be wrong on this but doesn't Europe describe a region rather than a specific race?
It does but I'm using it as a term of convenience. It's more tasteful and descriptive than "white" but most people won't know off hand what I'm talking about if I say "unaltered caucasoids" (as opposed to Arabs, Jews, Armenians etc, who are morphologically more or less caucasoid but genetically mixed).

What do you mean by I'm looking at this issue like a modern man, Cargest?

Re: Why not genocide
September 17, 2010, 01:32:39 PM
Purely as regards what action we might take when we are "superior" (Ubermensch?) would I say that you're thinking like a modern man - our progeny's decisions and ways of being will probably seem as outlandish to the current "us" as ours seem to the less able apes of this day.  The amount of thought behind every action and decision would be wholly unquantifiable, and decisions which may be counter-intuitive and counter-intelligence to us may end up yielding better results for beings who can simply think more and better than we can.  My point is not to assume that our way(s) of doing things  are anything like the "best" ways of doing things, or even the right ways.  Perhaps there will come a time when we have advanced so much that no other race poses any threat to us whatsoever, and so we can feel free to tamper with them until the results are beneficial for life and this planet in general.

Re: Why not genocide
September 17, 2010, 02:26:57 PM
 don't believe in equality between individuals, neither do I believe in equality between races but I thought ANUS promoted conservationism; genocide would be antithetical to that. A different space for each race; where in Zimbabwe, Zimbabweans are the master race, and in Germany the Germans are the master race etc.

Also, north-east Asians and Ashkenazi Jews are superior to Europeans in terms of IQ. ;)

Re: Why not genocide
September 17, 2010, 03:45:54 PM
ANUS promoted conservationism; genocide would be antithetical to that. A different space for each race; where in Zimbabwe, Zimbabweans are the master race, and in Germany the Germans are the master race etc.

Yes, a thousand times yes.

Removing those who are mundanes, idiots, perverts, criminals, pedophiles, liars, passive aggressives, parasites, deceivers and whores? That's common sense.

Kill everyone under 100 IQ points? You have to be pathological to oppose it.

Kill everyone under 120 IQ points? How to make humanity evolve to the next level.

To me "pan"-nationalism is similar to individualism, except we replace individuals with nations. Not all nations are equal nor do all nations (or any nation for that matter) have a right to exist.

I can't disprove this and so maybe I am wrong. On a personal level, I'd rather just keep the good people and separate the ethnies. Truly blighted ethnic groups could be eliminated, but it makes more sense to force them out with better people. Aborigines (Aus) and Bantus are obviously suspect here.

Re: Why not genocide
September 17, 2010, 04:58:11 PM
Well I'm glad I didn't fall for that "Oh no we don't agree with trying to conquer more land for europeans we just want self determination and that's all", since I already asked that question before, I asked the exact same thing that people are saying here: Won't this race preservation ultimately lead to a desire to conquer more land for europeans? The answer was no, even cargést said that, he and Conservationist.

(PS: I know how stupid it sounds to talk about this since it is pure speculation and fantasy for the future, but we are talking about the ideas and intentions on people's minds).

Now it has already changed to: "We want to preserve and embetter ourselves and maybe wipe out the more fucked up tribes..." and "sure we can't think like that now because we degenerated, but who knows maybe in the future we can think about expanding and conquering for more land..."

Well, I guess I know now why there is a plot to weaken the race consciousness among white people. It's for the best for the rest of the races. The superiority complex is still there. Well, europeans haven't been superior for a long time, things change... I think the asians are the better ones now.

Anyway it's good to read that since now I think one of the most important things for latin american countries is to start building atomic bombs.

The jews would probably be allied with the whites so now I support Iran.

Re: Why not genocide
September 17, 2010, 06:05:58 PM
Genocide of entire races wouldn't be practical.  That feels, great ready for it : wrong to me in the same way eliminating a species of animal by over hunting or habitat destruction feels wrong to me. I'd just like to eliminate the lower 90% of all races. That somehow doesn't feel wrong. Rather, that feels humanitarian...


...shit am I a liberal now?