You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
2
TallestSkil on scored.co
11 days ago2 points(+0/-0/+2Score on mirror)1 child
>Another word would be "egalitarian", but that's possibly too little known.
I hesitate to use that myself because they don’t *actually* support it. Their goal is anything that puts whites at the bottom of the caste system, and they demonstrably exalt nonwhites above whites (Civil Rights Act), so they don’t support (civil) equality. Hell, they’ve even abandoned that messaging themselves–they only talk about ‘equity’ now.
11 days ago1 point(+0/-0/+1Score on mirror)1 child
> so they don’t support (civil) equality
Well, maybe the jewiest of jews think this way, but actually their problem is that we are so far and beyond all other races (and species), that they feel like they need to take us down, or elevate others to meet levels.
The latter is impossible - you can put on a suit on a nigger, and teach it to behave like a functional person, but it doesn't work. And because closing the gap is impossible, they will never stop causing harm and destruction to us. Their goal of "equality" will only end with our extinction.
The problem goes way deeper than that as well - intelligence, appearance, facial structure, work ethics, culture, aesthetics, art, creativity - it's impossible. They can't close the gap in even ONE of these aspects. IF it were possible to achieve equality, they'd probably be content with it, but even in their most favorable situation reality will still stand in their way. And of course they blame the failures of their endeavor (which is also impossible) on us because muh' systematic racism or whatever, just to keep on going viciously.
> they only talk about ‘equity’ now.
But wasn't that the goal anyway? They were naive to think they just had to "equalize" things to naturally achieve equity, but that never worked. So equality wasn't enough, they had to fiddle with the "outcomes", which is even more blatant.
11 days ago3 points(+0/-0/+3Score on mirror)1 child
>But wasn't that the goal anyway?
‘Equality,’ in the white sense, is to ensure the government treats everyone with equal measure, with the outcome dependent on the person. ‘Equity,’ in the communist sense, is using guns to make sure no one possesses any more than anyone else.
11 days ago1 point(+0/-0/+1Score on mirror)1 child
Equality was pursued by Bolsheviks, basically pushing government agendas which sought to "equate" the playing field, putting idiots into positions of power and forcing smart people to walk on eggshells as to not get put into gulags. The idea was that forcing equal opportunities would nullify these basic conditions like "being born rich/poor." As a human you were all equally worthless unless you were part of the system, then you were *the* higher class.
The actual outcome was extreme corruption everywhere, and that whoever was a cogwheel of the regime benefited from it greatly (status, power, money). Bribing the police who stopped you was standard procedure. Bribing bureaucrats, nurses and doctors was standard procedure.
The equality you speak of was indeed different... it was an American ideal from its founding time, and it was about treating people with dignity and provide fair voting rights (unlike what was common in Europe). Here "equity" was an idea that was easy to imagine given what already happened, if not even openly stated goals.
>Equality was pursued by Bolsheviks, basically pushing government agendas which sought to "equate" the playing field
Right, because it was applied to *everyone.* The equality of white societies is equality *for* whites. Up to 1866, it was completely unfathomable to conceive of a nigger citizen in the US. Dozens of legal rulings up to the SCOTUS itself explicitly said no such thing could exist. As such, the law applied differently to them, but equally among whites.
I hesitate to use that myself because they don’t *actually* support it. Their goal is anything that puts whites at the bottom of the caste system, and they demonstrably exalt nonwhites above whites (Civil Rights Act), so they don’t support (civil) equality. Hell, they’ve even abandoned that messaging themselves–they only talk about ‘equity’ now.
Well, maybe the jewiest of jews think this way, but actually their problem is that we are so far and beyond all other races (and species), that they feel like they need to take us down, or elevate others to meet levels.
The latter is impossible - you can put on a suit on a nigger, and teach it to behave like a functional person, but it doesn't work. And because closing the gap is impossible, they will never stop causing harm and destruction to us. Their goal of "equality" will only end with our extinction.
The problem goes way deeper than that as well - intelligence, appearance, facial structure, work ethics, culture, aesthetics, art, creativity - it's impossible. They can't close the gap in even ONE of these aspects. IF it were possible to achieve equality, they'd probably be content with it, but even in their most favorable situation reality will still stand in their way. And of course they blame the failures of their endeavor (which is also impossible) on us because muh' systematic racism or whatever, just to keep on going viciously.
> they only talk about ‘equity’ now.
But wasn't that the goal anyway? They were naive to think they just had to "equalize" things to naturally achieve equity, but that never worked. So equality wasn't enough, they had to fiddle with the "outcomes", which is even more blatant.
‘Equality,’ in the white sense, is to ensure the government treats everyone with equal measure, with the outcome dependent on the person. ‘Equity,’ in the communist sense, is using guns to make sure no one possesses any more than anyone else.
The actual outcome was extreme corruption everywhere, and that whoever was a cogwheel of the regime benefited from it greatly (status, power, money). Bribing the police who stopped you was standard procedure. Bribing bureaucrats, nurses and doctors was standard procedure.
The equality you speak of was indeed different... it was an American ideal from its founding time, and it was about treating people with dignity and provide fair voting rights (unlike what was common in Europe). Here "equity" was an idea that was easy to imagine given what already happened, if not even openly stated goals.
Right, because it was applied to *everyone.* The equality of white societies is equality *for* whites. Up to 1866, it was completely unfathomable to conceive of a nigger citizen in the US. Dozens of legal rulings up to the SCOTUS itself explicitly said no such thing could exist. As such, the law applied differently to them, but equally among whites.