Racism today is used like sex with the church in the last 1000 years:

Racism today is used like sex with the church in the last 1000 years:

Everyone knew he himself desired sex greatly (anyone must, for evolutionary reasons).
The church knew this; by making sexual desire a evil sin (= those in power define
what is good and evil, today by media) the church made everybody think they were wrong
for desiring sex, and therefore evil, and from that came social shame and guilt, and from that
came the power of social control of the church.

Today, we currently have the "racism" taboo.
Everyone, for himself, knows he is a racist - he must be, for evolutionary reasons, too (even
parenting, the relationship of mother+child is racist, because it is based on nothing else than
being genetically almost identical).
So, everyone likes genetically close people more, and is rather disgusted by genetically more
distant people.
So, everybody is, must be, a racist (otherwise there could be no parenting, no parental
investment, no families, not even "love").
But those in power gave out the order by media that racism is evil, and racists are evil.
This again puts society in the same situation like it was with sexual suppression and the
church in the middle ages: People think they are evil because they "secretly" harbor
emotions, desires and opinions, which those in power defined as being evil and wrong -
therefore, the same technique of social control is applied and people are again loaded
with guilt and shame, and those people are than exploited as marionettes by pulling
on the strings of guilt and shame.

Same dirty ruling tactics, different millennium/century.

Other urls found in this thread:

psychologytoday.com/blog/it-s-man-s-and-woman-s-world/201407/understanding-interracial-relationships
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_theology_of_sexuality#Lust
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Spot on, I'm going to use this in my real life arguments now.

I was never really a racist till recently when I realised shit skins were making political moves

Interesting

In my opinion sex isn't evil but there is still a definite observable value in restricting it to controlled environments and it's horribly destructive when unrestrained.

have you ever had sex?

did you not understand?
You ARE a racist,
otherwise you would be evolutionary defective.
Would you give your life for another man's child?
Would you pay all your life for a child that is not yours?
Why does you parents "love" you and invest their life power and energy in YOU, and not an other person?
If a accident comes up, and you have only resources to save the life of your parents or your child or your sibling - or another, genetically not close person - who will you save, who will you put to death?
Your decision is based on what? It is based
on nothing else than genetic distance, and discriminating people based on genetic distance is racism, therefore you are an racist.
Understood?

But what if you're attracted to females outside of your race, like virtually every other human is (concerning females of your race).

Only with long term partners in very stable monogamous relationships :3

>whites have reached 1950s nigger level of degeneracy

My stars...

so are we doing this thing where we make racist lose the negative impact and connotation? i think it'd go well with operation google, don't know if it's possible to run both at same time though

Is it worth reading thomas sowell books? Im thinking about his race and economics books.

Same goes for racism. It's perfectly acceptable, logical and necessary for to be racism in a rational and stable society. Doesn't mean society should tolerate randomly killing niggers that literally dindu nuffin.

Likewise, sexual depravity and excessive indulgence must be suppressed, but the desire for sex and recognition of it's usefulness to society must be recognized.

We can blame kikes and marxists all we want, but christ-cucks also contributed to the problem by causing the cognitive dissonance between sexual desire as an evil when it's one of the most important functions of life.

Sooner or later the cognitive dissonance was gonna cause a breakdown.

>But what if you're attracted to females outside of your race, like virtually every other human is (concerning females of your race).

This is not true:
People are attracted sexually to people who are genetically much like them (just look at marriage photos - same ears, nose etc.).
Race cannot be based on rather superficial single things like skin color, for example - if
your wife/children just would have to happen dark skin, and you would have white skin, that alone is only a single, minor difference;
all the other important traits and genetic makeup would still be the same.
For example, a Negro female, just by painting her skin white, is not making herself genetically appearing closer to you - she is still very recognizable in facial and bodily features as a Negro person, even if her skin would be perfectly white - as can be experienced, for example, in Negro albinos.

So, it is possible that a black-skinned person
is genetically closer to you in sum of all genes,
when she shares all other genes mostly with yours - only her skin is darker.
This is not necessarily off-putting - for example, you see a white girl you are very
drawn to instinctively - just paint her skin black, keeping her facial features etc.,
and you will still be attracted to her.

Negroes are not hated because of their skin, but for the sum of their inferior
mental abilities, which are closely connected with their outer appearance.
Would whites be the dumber, more ape-like race, and blacks would happen to have
evolved to make it to the moon and be mentally successful, then we would
have the same racism, only reversed - whites would be the Negroes, negroes would be the Whites.
So, it is not about skin color, but skin color is just ONE (of many) signals that
make us recognize the inferior individual (on average, of course, there is some White trash, basically white Negroes, and some Black people, who are even much better than most of the Whites).

Look again Leaf, 1970s level.

Yep. The answer lies in the middle, not the extremes. Which why dem skypes act like the extremes are the only options, and a middle doesn't exist...

Well put, kraut. Religion and the media are both cucking free thinkers to conform to "good" thinking. I may be racist when a black thug gets killed but I don't feel shame because I would be glad if any color thug was killed. Therefore, race doesn't matter to me so you're evolutionary arguement is somewhat biased and wrong.

ketchup can be put on anything and demanding evidence makes you ketchup

It's definitely better than reading pseudo-economical books like Freak Economics, or anything by Ayn Rand; I'd suggest Economics In One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt or The Economics of Race in the United States by Brendan O'Flaherty.

"One strain of research argues that interracial marriages represent a form of “race-status exchange” in which the white partner leverages his or her “higher” racial status to attract a minority partner with higher education or income (as compared to the white partner’s education and income: Feliciano, Robnett, and Komaie 2009; Fu 2001; Gullickson 2006; Gullickson and Fu 2010; Hou and Myles 2013; Kalmijn 1993; Kalmijn 2010; Qian 1997). This is generally conceived of as a gendered exchange in which white women achieve upward mobility by marrying socioeconomically-advantaged minority men."

psychologytoday.com/blog/it-s-man-s-and-woman-s-world/201407/understanding-interracial-relationships

>partners
>not partner

You're a disgrace, man. You shouldn't be having sex with people in the first place if you aren't absolutely sure it's going to work out for life.

Nicely said. This is the next step. I saw buzzfeed article by a black woman recently about how we are all racist, and there was an entire section dedicated to how it's okay to admit you're racist, how it doesn't make you a bad person to be racist. It even had a mantra thing like >I'm a racist and that's okay.
>I'm a racist and that's okay.
It was truly bizarre.

They have replaces religion with liberalism and multiculturalism.

Its a new religion. A social religion. It has no depth whatsoever. It is the shallowest form of posturing and virtue signaling.

Cultural marxism is the new religion. Full of the same cultish characteristics that organized religion often exhibited.

kikes have replaced christianity with some kind of bastardized hackneyed left wing spirituality.

Cool. Thanks Jews.

The problem isn't that racism has lost its meaning, but that many people do not such a simple term and are unable to apply it to real life.
Insteand they write a wall of bullshit like utterly misunderstanding what racism is.

tl:dr

I like your argument. But did the church really say sex=sin? I thought sex within marriage was always ok. Sure, Catholic clergy weren't allow to have sex at all, but that wasn't because sex was a sin in general, was it?

Things were much better when the Church had control. Keeping man's lower tendencies suppressed made him look upward. Thus the achievements of Western civilizations.

But no Ahmed, now that 'your' country is free from the oppression that is Western greatness, you're free to express your urges inside any Germanic female ;)

Yes, they said sex was a sin outside of marriage, doing it in any position besides MISSIONARY, when using protection against pregnancy, and anal.

You don't get it. You REALLY don't get it. Your perspective on sex is complete bullshit. Probably because you're still a kid.

Yeah, but you're just pointing to regulation of sex within marriage, not to a blanket doctrine that should make people feel guilty about sex in general. There might have been some blanket doctrine like that, especially among Catholics, but I'm not familiar enough with the details of church doctrine to know the details.

Maybe another analogy is that the Church never really seriously enforced the edict that you should love thy neighbor as you love yourself. But the SJWs seem to take that literally when it comes to whites, while giving brownies a pass.

This is tied to the idea that modern SJWs trace their ideological roots to a certain strand of Unitarian protestantism, and that their ideology is actually grounded in Christianity. I forgot who wrote about this stuff (SJW as quasi-religion).

Lol Oh, goy. They said those acts were sins which would lead us to hell... That's how they make you feel guilt and shame because we are supposed to love the Creator. That applies to most religions.

Ok, you're right. I found what I was looking for: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_theology_of_sexuality#Lust
But note that Protestants and Orthodox Christians seem to be more relaxed about sex. OP is German, and I would guess Catholic.