patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,258,914 comments by 15,020 users - Blue, Misc online now
Whites will be slaughtered unless they give up all their land for free-says leading S Africa's politician
invite response
2017 Nov 1, 7:06am 13,975 views 62 comments
« First « Previous Comments 36 - 62 of 62 Search these comments
36
Rew
2017 Nov 1, 11:46pm
Rew
2017 Nov 1, 11:46pm
lostand confused says
Why did the US and allies put reconstruction of Germany and Japan as a primary goal post WWII? Why didn't we treat them like Germany post WWI?
What did we do to rebuild them? And how is their WWII occupation and reconstruction different from the dawn of post-colonial African nations from the 40s to 60s?
If you can answer those questions, you can understand how asinine it is to compare Japan's post WWII state, with African post colonial states.
Vietnam is a closer compare, but not by much.
Japan was bombed
Why did the US and allies put reconstruction of Germany and Japan as a primary goal post WWII? Why didn't we treat them like Germany post WWI?
What did we do to rebuild them? And how is their WWII occupation and reconstruction different from the dawn of post-colonial African nations from the 40s to 60s?
If you can answer those questions, you can understand how asinine it is to compare Japan's post WWII state, with African post colonial states.
Vietnam is a closer compare, but not by much.
38
lostand confused
2017 Nov 2, 4:45am
lostand confused
2017 Nov 2, 4:45am
Rew says
As usual you ignore evidence. Spain was ruled over by Arabs, they came out of it and kicked ass. india was ruled by the British, they are kicking ass. You are not helping these people. Rwanda was not being ruled by colonial powers when they had the genocide.
As a non white, I hate these patronizing. I believe everyone is equal-hold them accountable. Kumbayah, kumbayah, whit privileged blah, blah.
Rew says
You are so racist/whatever. You actually believe our little help is what helped them. Nobody helped India or China or Singapore or Malaysia-look at them now. As usual evidence, facts never help. Who helped Spain who got out of four centuries of Arab rule-they got out and kicked ass. It is asinine to keep countries in chains and blaming what someone did decades or even centuries ago-you are not treating them s equals-you are being racist and saying they are beneath others and incapable of doing things and being successful on their own even after decades. All because it makes you feel good and superior.
Have you even been to any big African city like Nairobi or Durban or Cape Town or Cairo??
When your culture is made to fail by external oppression, it takes a little bit of time to "get back on your feet" once that oppression is removed. The longer the oppression lasted, and the more brutal it was, the harder it is to recover.
I'd argue today that most African nations still have quite a ways to go in both removal of foreign interest, and their timelines of 'development' essentially being reset.
As usual you ignore evidence. Spain was ruled over by Arabs, they came out of it and kicked ass. india was ruled by the British, they are kicking ass. You are not helping these people. Rwanda was not being ruled by colonial powers when they had the genocide.
As a non white, I hate these patronizing. I believe everyone is equal-hold them accountable. Kumbayah, kumbayah, whit privileged blah, blah.
Rew says
Why did the US and allies put reconstruction of Germany and Japan as a primary goal post WWII? Why didn't we treat them like Germany post WWI?
What did we do to rebuild them? And how is their WWII occupation and reconstruction different from the dawn of post-colonial African nations from the 40s to 60s?
If you can answer those questions, you can understand how asinine it is to compare Japan's post WWII state, with African post colonial states.
You are so racist/whatever. You actually believe our little help is what helped them. Nobody helped India or China or Singapore or Malaysia-look at them now. As usual evidence, facts never help. Who helped Spain who got out of four centuries of Arab rule-they got out and kicked ass. It is asinine to keep countries in chains and blaming what someone did decades or even centuries ago-you are not treating them s equals-you are being racist and saying they are beneath others and incapable of doing things and being successful on their own even after decades. All because it makes you feel good and superior.
Have you even been to any big African city like Nairobi or Durban or Cape Town or Cairo??
39
anonymous
2017 Nov 2, 6:32am
Rew says
Something that always gets totally ignored. A fortunate combination of domesticable crops, domesticable animals, temperate climate, vast mineral resources, fertile land, and deciduous forests. that didn't exist anywhere except Europe until the discovery of America that allowed for sustained growth for 2 millennium. Only China is the only place that even began to approach Europe’s natural resources.
Europeans are not some gift to humanity or the world. We got lucky.
Something that always gets totally ignored. A fortunate combination of domesticable crops, domesticable animals, temperate climate, vast mineral resources, fertile land, and deciduous forests. that didn't exist anywhere except Europe until the discovery of America that allowed for sustained growth for 2 millennium. Only China is the only place that even began to approach Europe’s natural resources.
40
anonymous
2017 Nov 2, 6:35am
lostand confused says
Muslims were run out of Spain in the 12th and 13th century. Spanish conquest started in the 16th century. Shall we wait another 350 years and see how Africa does?
lostand confused says
I've been to Cape Town, 4 yeas ago. It is NOT a big city and it is not very black. What is your point?
Liberal logic as usual. Arabs invaded and occupied Spain for four centuries. Then theyw ere kicked out and Spain colonized alrge swaths of the world. A small country like Portugal colonied amny parts of the world.
Muslims were run out of Spain in the 12th and 13th century. Spanish conquest started in the 16th century. Shall we wait another 350 years and see how Africa does?
lostand confused says
Have you even been to any big African city like Nairobi or Durban or Cape Town or Cairo??
I've been to Cape Town, 4 yeas ago. It is NOT a big city and it is not very black. What is your point?
41
Shaman
2017 Nov 4, 10:26am
Shaman
2017 Nov 4, 10:26am
Rew says
Without the foreign influence, they’d still be chucking spears and sacrificing newborns to Kali while living in mud huts and putting bones in their noses.
If that’s progress, it’s too slow. They didn’t have the Luxury of being able to be tribals for another three thousand years. Throughout history, more competitive organisms displaced less competitive organisms. It’s Darwinian and harsh, but it’s Nature.
I’d argue that culture is the best predictor of progress. Theirs was adapted to their environment, but that very adaptive trait made it perfectly stagnant. No change means no progress means eventually the culture must die. The Europeans had a kick ass culture developed over hundreds of years that was the reason they overcame every other civilization they encountered. Advanced technology was a product of the culture, not an innate trait of Europeans themselves.
Culture is still the most defining trait of any civilization or ethnic group. It determines how successful its members will be. Not successful? Probably not because of oppressive Europeans. It’s because your culture SUCKS and can’t compete with a better one.
Multiculturalism is a naked attempt to say that all cultures are equal, but historical evidence CLEARLY shows that they are anything but equal.
I'd argue today that most African nations still have quite a ways to go in both removal of foreign interest, and their timelines of 'development' essentially being reset.
Without the foreign influence, they’d still be chucking spears and sacrificing newborns to Kali while living in mud huts and putting bones in their noses.
If that’s progress, it’s too slow. They didn’t have the Luxury of being able to be tribals for another three thousand years. Throughout history, more competitive organisms displaced less competitive organisms. It’s Darwinian and harsh, but it’s Nature.
I’d argue that culture is the best predictor of progress. Theirs was adapted to their environment, but that very adaptive trait made it perfectly stagnant. No change means no progress means eventually the culture must die. The Europeans had a kick ass culture developed over hundreds of years that was the reason they overcame every other civilization they encountered. Advanced technology was a product of the culture, not an innate trait of Europeans themselves.
Culture is still the most defining trait of any civilization or ethnic group. It determines how successful its members will be. Not successful? Probably not because of oppressive Europeans. It’s because your culture SUCKS and can’t compete with a better one.
Multiculturalism is a naked attempt to say that all cultures are equal, but historical evidence CLEARLY shows that they are anything but equal.
42
Shaman
2017 Nov 4, 10:29am
Shaman
2017 Nov 4, 10:29am
anon_2d50f says
And America was already inhabited! Millions of American Indians lived here and had their own civilization. They didn’t progress despite having ridiculous amounts of resources. Once again, you are wrong. CULTURE is the reason! It’s always the reason!
Something that always gets totally ignored. A fortunate combination of domesticable crops, domesticable animals, temperate climate, vast mineral resources, fertile land, and deciduous forests. that didn't exist anywhere except Europe until the discovery of America
And America was already inhabited! Millions of American Indians lived here and had their own civilization. They didn’t progress despite having ridiculous amounts of resources. Once again, you are wrong. CULTURE is the reason! It’s always the reason!
43
bob2356
2017 Nov 4, 12:21pm
Quigley says
What civilization didn't they have? There were quite a number of advanced civilizations in the Americas in the pre columbian era. Europe wasn't all that advanced in the 15th century either. European culture is 35,000 years old. The Americas is only 13,000 years old. How advanced was Europe 22,000 years ago despite having ridiculous amounts of resources?
And America was already inhabited! Millions of American Indians lived here and had their own civilization. They didn’t progress despite having ridiculous amounts of resources. Once again, you are wrong. CULTURE is the reason! It’s always the reason!
What civilization didn't they have? There were quite a number of advanced civilizations in the Americas in the pre columbian era. Europe wasn't all that advanced in the 15th century either. European culture is 35,000 years old. The Americas is only 13,000 years old. How advanced was Europe 22,000 years ago despite having ridiculous amounts of resources?
44
Shaman
2017 Nov 4, 1:36pm
Shaman
2017 Nov 4, 1:36pm
bob2356 says
Don’t confuse race with culture. The fact that you made this statement means you have no idea what culture even is.
European culture is 35,000 years old.
Don’t confuse race with culture. The fact that you made this statement means you have no idea what culture even is.
45
bob2356
2017 Nov 4, 2:20pm
Quigley says
Europe isn't a race. There were many races in europe dating back to Palaeolithic times. Races like nordic, alpine, dinaric, hither asiatic, east baltic were all part of middle Palaeolithic and subsequent cultures.
Want to tell me what culture is and why everyone except you calls it pre historic cultures then?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synoptic_table_of_the_principal_old_world_prehistoric_cultures
bob2356 saysEuropean culture is 35,000 years old.
Don’t confuse race with culture. The fact that you made this statement means you have no idea what culture even is.
Europe isn't a race. There were many races in europe dating back to Palaeolithic times. Races like nordic, alpine, dinaric, hither asiatic, east baltic were all part of middle Palaeolithic and subsequent cultures.
Want to tell me what culture is and why everyone except you calls it pre historic cultures then?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synoptic_table_of_the_principal_old_world_prehistoric_cultures
47
Shaman
2017 Nov 4, 6:00pm
Shaman
2017 Nov 4, 6:00pm
bob2356 says
Culture is the set of traditions and values a society uses to shape the preferred actions of its citizens. These are subject to change, and change occurs every generation to some extent. Religion usually plays a HUGE part in shaping culture, and European culture was greatly shaped by religion. Religion acts as a force for cultural stagnation, keeping culture from changing radically from generation to generation. Each time a new religion is adopted, it transforms a culture drastically. Clearly, the change of religion (to Christianity) in Europe shaped the various cultures of the region and served as the common denominator between the nations of Europe. So probably the traditions of that religion contain the elements of cultural transformation. It’s really the only thing they all had in common.
Clearly, the resultant European cultures had little to nothing to do with “ancient cultures from 35,000 years ago.” Sheesh!
Want to tell me what culture is and why everyone except you calls it pre historic cultures then?
Culture is the set of traditions and values a society uses to shape the preferred actions of its citizens. These are subject to change, and change occurs every generation to some extent. Religion usually plays a HUGE part in shaping culture, and European culture was greatly shaped by religion. Religion acts as a force for cultural stagnation, keeping culture from changing radically from generation to generation. Each time a new religion is adopted, it transforms a culture drastically. Clearly, the change of religion (to Christianity) in Europe shaped the various cultures of the region and served as the common denominator between the nations of Europe. So probably the traditions of that religion contain the elements of cultural transformation. It’s really the only thing they all had in common.
Clearly, the resultant European cultures had little to nothing to do with “ancient cultures from 35,000 years ago.” Sheesh!
48
Strategist
2017 Nov 4, 6:08pm
Strategist
2017 Nov 4, 6:08pm
Rew says
In the old days the loser would get plundered, pillaged, raped, and enslaved. We now have a better way....Remove the dictators, emperors, and kings, give them democracy, help them rebuild, and their will be peace and prosperity for all. Everyone benefits.
We tried that with Iraq, but did not work there, because of Islam.
lostand confused saysJapan was bombed
Why did the US and allies put reconstruction of Germany and Japan as a primary goal post WWII? Why didn't we treat them like Germany post WWI?
What did we do to rebuild them? And how is their WWII occupation and reconstruction different from the dawn of post-colonial African nations from the 40s to 60s?
If you can answer those questions, you can understand how asinine it is to compare Japan's post WWII state, with African post colonial states.
Vietnam is a closer compare, but not by much.
In the old days the loser would get plundered, pillaged, raped, and enslaved. We now have a better way....Remove the dictators, emperors, and kings, give them democracy, help them rebuild, and their will be peace and prosperity for all. Everyone benefits.
We tried that with Iraq, but did not work there, because of Islam.
49
MisdemeanorRebel
2017 Nov 4, 6:24pm
MisdemeanorRebel
2017 Nov 4, 6:24pm
How about the Chinese occupation of Vietnam over the ages?
The Islamic Conquest of India (and North Africa, and Syria, Israel, Lebanon...)
The Mongol Conquest of Siberia and Eastern Europe?
In any case, culture has real effects. If you believe that worship of agriculture is the epitome of a good society, you'll disassemble Zheng He's ships. You'll burn whatever is left of the Library of Alexandria because if it's in the Quran, it's superfluous; if it contradicts the Quran, heretical.
Ironically, the real boom in science 700-1000 was because the Greek speaking not-yet-converted Egyptians had the crushing burden of the Byzantine-Persian wars removed from them. As Turks and Mongols began invading the Muslim World, Islam turned on science and skepticism in favor of obscurantism and a re-devotion to hardcore religious belief, starting with a huge "crescent-sade" to Islamize the remaining Hellenized Eastern Med. A few centuries later, the Europeans would begin to privilege science and reason (which started with failing in love with Latin and Greek writings, ironically brought to Italy when the Orthodox Greeks fled intolerant Muslim Arab demanding conversion, and the fall of Byzantium by the Turks) over religion and superstition, and thus the superior European culture choice began to create dividends.
There was no reason China couldn't have conquered the world in 1400, it didn't do so not because Chinese are nice, but arrogant. They felt they lived in the middle country, the most central under heaven, and barbarians should come to them with presents. When the Europeans arrived in the 1700s and 1800s, the Chinese dealt with them the same way they dealt with Turkics... it didn't work, because the Europeans "came from the Southern Ocean" and didn't have to schlep through the arid plains of Xichang province.
A culture who believes Heavy Infantry should come to grips with the enemy as soon as possible, tends to win battles against Flower Warriors who are looking for prisoners to sacrifice, in order to gain promotion and reknown when the prisoners are sacrificed to the blood hungry sun.
The Islamic Conquest of India (and North Africa, and Syria, Israel, Lebanon...)
The Mongol Conquest of Siberia and Eastern Europe?
In any case, culture has real effects. If you believe that worship of agriculture is the epitome of a good society, you'll disassemble Zheng He's ships. You'll burn whatever is left of the Library of Alexandria because if it's in the Quran, it's superfluous; if it contradicts the Quran, heretical.
Ironically, the real boom in science 700-1000 was because the Greek speaking not-yet-converted Egyptians had the crushing burden of the Byzantine-Persian wars removed from them. As Turks and Mongols began invading the Muslim World, Islam turned on science and skepticism in favor of obscurantism and a re-devotion to hardcore religious belief, starting with a huge "crescent-sade" to Islamize the remaining Hellenized Eastern Med. A few centuries later, the Europeans would begin to privilege science and reason (which started with failing in love with Latin and Greek writings, ironically brought to Italy when the Orthodox Greeks fled intolerant Muslim Arab demanding conversion, and the fall of Byzantium by the Turks) over religion and superstition, and thus the superior European culture choice began to create dividends.
There was no reason China couldn't have conquered the world in 1400, it didn't do so not because Chinese are nice, but arrogant. They felt they lived in the middle country, the most central under heaven, and barbarians should come to them with presents. When the Europeans arrived in the 1700s and 1800s, the Chinese dealt with them the same way they dealt with Turkics... it didn't work, because the Europeans "came from the Southern Ocean" and didn't have to schlep through the arid plains of Xichang province.
A culture who believes Heavy Infantry should come to grips with the enemy as soon as possible, tends to win battles against Flower Warriors who are looking for prisoners to sacrifice, in order to gain promotion and reknown when the prisoners are sacrificed to the blood hungry sun.
50
anonymous
2017 Nov 4, 6:47pm
Quigley says
Then you are agreeing by your own definition that there were a number of advanced cultures in the america's pre columbus.
Quigley says
So you think the stone age (especially the neolithic period when agriculture, social, and technological development came about) leading to the copper age leading to the bronze age leading to the iron age leading to written records leading to classical antiquity had little or nothing to do with the development of modern European culture? What a bizarre thought.
Culture is the set of traditions and values a society uses to shape the preferred actions of its citizens.
Then you are agreeing by your own definition that there were a number of advanced cultures in the america's pre columbus.
Quigley says
Clearly, the resultant European cultures had little to nothing to do with “ancient cultures from 35,000 years ago.
So you think the stone age (especially the neolithic period when agriculture, social, and technological development came about) leading to the copper age leading to the bronze age leading to the iron age leading to written records leading to classical antiquity had little or nothing to do with the development of modern European culture? What a bizarre thought.
51
Shaman
2017 Nov 4, 8:54pm
Shaman
2017 Nov 4, 8:54pm
Little difference between that and what happened in Africa since we all came from African back then! Agriculture, flint knapping, bronze working and even iron working were all common to every continent (except the americas) long before colonial times. The Africans were like the townies who never left to see the wide world, and got stuck in the same rut their ancestors were in for countless centuries. Anyone who left a small town for the big city will relate. You come back “home” and everyone seems so quaint and backwards it’s almost laughable.
53
MisdemeanorRebel
2017 Nov 5, 9:44am
MisdemeanorRebel
2017 Nov 5, 9:44am
They could only work the softest metals, no Bronze or Iron. They didn't have sea going vessels, something the Old World had for 1000s of years already (taking a canoe to the beach != sea going vessel)
Aztec culture was violent and brutal and oppressive. The Triple Alliance fought "Flower Wars" to gather prisoners and rip out their still beating hearts to satisfy their Great Feathery Lizard. They demanded tribute from conquered people, which is how Cortez ended up with thousands of Aztec-oppressor hating Indians fighting by him.
They didn't even employ the wheel, FFS
Aztec culture was violent and brutal and oppressive. The Triple Alliance fought "Flower Wars" to gather prisoners and rip out their still beating hearts to satisfy their Great Feathery Lizard. They demanded tribute from conquered people, which is how Cortez ended up with thousands of Aztec-oppressor hating Indians fighting by him.
They didn't even employ the wheel, FFS
54
MisdemeanorRebel
2017 Nov 5, 9:50am
MisdemeanorRebel
2017 Nov 5, 9:50am
HEY YOU says
Learn from history. Restrict immigration.
LEFT : "Ha, ha, Middle America Bigots, you're afraid of millions of immigrant Aliens. Muh Juuuubbbbsss! LOL, dumbasses. Also, you should feel bad and personally responsible for dispossessing the Indians when millions of Whites immigrated to the continent." ?!?!?!?!
Also LEFT: "Fuckin' Israel, give the land back to the Palestinians. Fuckin' America and Fuckin' Europeans, you better invite Africans, Mid Easterners, and South Americans by the Millions!"
Shit you'll never hear Lefties say: "If Trump wins I'm moving to Venezuela or Angola" It's always Canada or Japan, homogenous countries with very little "Diversity".
Rhymes with White Eyes taking Native Americans' land.
Learn from history. Restrict immigration.
LEFT : "Ha, ha, Middle America Bigots, you're afraid of millions of immigrant Aliens. Muh Juuuubbbbsss! LOL, dumbasses. Also, you should feel bad and personally responsible for dispossessing the Indians when millions of Whites immigrated to the continent." ?!?!?!?!
Also LEFT: "Fuckin' Israel, give the land back to the Palestinians. Fuckin' America and Fuckin' Europeans, you better invite Africans, Mid Easterners, and South Americans by the Millions!"
Shit you'll never hear Lefties say: "If Trump wins I'm moving to Venezuela or Angola" It's always Canada or Japan, homogenous countries with very little "Diversity".
57
Strategist
2017 Nov 5, 7:07pm
Strategist
2017 Nov 5, 7:07pm
And Yes, there is a strategy of distributing the land when you take it from the white people:
You will have to first Fuck your way through all the Black people.
You will have to first Fuck your way through all the Black people.
« First « Previous Comments 36 - 62 of 62 Search these comments
Julius Malema, the leader of South Africa’s Economic Freedom Fighters (Communist and very anti-White), literally says that they won’t slaughter Whites — yet — as long as they give them what they want.
“The land must be expropriated without compensation.”
“We are not calling for the slaughter of White people, at least for now.”
“The rightful owners of the land are Black people. No White person is a rightful owner of the land here in SA and the whole of the African Continent.