(untitled)

Why does the left keep touting about "diversity" and "multiculturalism" when they just explicitly push for globalism and "one human race" and their dream of having one mixed race of people? It seems pathetically clear that, if they really wanted diversity and multiculturalism, they would push for nationalistic form of socialism. Not allowing these massive immigrations of non-whites into Europe and US in waves to make whites extinct and make everyone into one bland blend of brown color. I VALUE and CELEBRATE TRUE diversity and multiculturalism, not like those fakers leftists. What are your thoughts on whole "diversity and multiculturalism" debate?

Go away. This is the same nonsense that ruined the last site.

This completely open and pervasive anti-white push, the mass immigration ONLY in white countries and this mantra of "only white people can be racist, only white men can be sexist" comes from one certain group that has their hands in all of politics, finance and media. The group that funds feminism and anarchism groups. The group that lives like a parasite off of other countries.

Corporations, business and bankrolled social think-tanks don't care about you, they're in it for only the money. They rob from you your own identity with the politics of division and then sell it back to you with the business of inclusion. You shouldn't want or need things external to you to be able to confirm if you exist based on your demographic - all of this is divide and conquer. There is no political group or school of thought that can offer you anything except division from others. All complex problems resolve only with complex, multifaceted solutions that would come only from applying the working components to the times from all different ideologies, simultaneously. tl;dr divide and conquer, take from you your own self and sell it back to you.

>>1667 No, what ruined the last site was overly political themes of technology that lainchan had. I were against all political talk on lainchan, yet anarchists and feminists continue to use lainchan as their propaganda tool. When I got a green light from kalyx to make a discussion on my topic, my ideas were "shut down" by same type of responses like yours. Mindless, emotion filled, no argument nonsense. That was what killed the site. Not me.

This thread is a stream of copy pasta. Thought the community should know.

>>1673 >continue to use lainchan as their propaganda tool. ...which is what you're doing. Part of the problem.

>>1671 sklavenmorale Another way of saying "I give up". I assume you voted Bernie, no? How do you feel about inevitable collapse of EU?

>>1673 Is it really this hard to accept that we don't want you here? Go and soykafpost on some other side, you are not welcome here.

>>1674 Nice way of trying to discredit any type of discussion ITT. Admirable, but mistaken. >>1675 >part of problem I tried having a politics free chan for once in a while. Anarchists and feminists don't seem to want that. >baww feminists beat me up and stole my lunch money I just want to have a politics free technology discussion and not every /sec/ and /tech/ thread have anti-corporate, anti-government political propaganda as a baggage. I understand you guys love to encroach on little niche communities because big venues are your weakness, but why not try having an open dialogue? >>1677 >we don't want you here you speak for lainchan? oh okay, lol

I see no value in these 4chan-tier threads on lainchan. But these are the rules and they have the right to use /r/. If you don't agree with these threads, don't reply and they will die. Either that or give suggestions on /q/ to remove politics entirely, or at least such weak, biased threads with very little room for discussion, and a whole lot of room of circle jerking/derailing.

>>1680 >don't reply and they will die Unfortunately, that is not the case with insider trading 3 or 4 people on lainchan that keep pushing their politics down people throats. I am just using this crack in allowing politics to push my politics. Free market of ideas, no? And all rebuttals I heard was "go away". >Either that or give suggestions on /q/ to remove politics entirely My starting assumptions were confirmed last time when I assumed that moderators were directly involved with these threads. Talking to them will be fruitless. They have to see the soykaffest they are creating to understand that politics talk has no place on lainchan.

This whole diversity thing is just another one of those things where people group up to gain an advantage. Idiots who spout this stuff are just more deluded fools who like to spout bullcrap.

>>1673 >Mindless, emotion filled, no argument nonsense. Here are your arguments and statements. >push for globalism and "one human race" and their dream of having one mixed race of people You make a statement as if "left" or "right" was an organization with one goal in mind, not only that but you claim to know it's goals. Please provide proof of for this statement, otherwise it has as much value as the idea that the earth is flat. Also worth mentioning that your definition of diversity is flawed, either intentionally or due to simply having no knowledge of what you're tlaking about. >they would push for nationalistic form of socialism. Not allowing these massive immigrations of non-whites into Europe and US in waves to make whites extinct and make everyone into one bland blend of brown color. You don't understand the idea behind diversity in the first place. Why are you making arguments against something you so clearly didn't try to understand? Here is some reading material: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chad-williams/what-is-diversity_b_7477564.html >I VALUE and CELEBRATE TRUE diversity and multiculturalism, not like those fakers leftists. Please define what is true diversity and multiculturalism, all of your previous definitions were inherently flawed, thus i cannot trust that you understand what these mean either.

So, to finish my main idea. Pushing all these different cultures, haplogroups, races and people on this one small patch of land will become catastrophic. We are already seeing how much Jews are running away from France because Muslims have committed hate crimes daily against them in France. It creates unstable country, ready for statism.

>>1678 You post FN graphics and then say you don't want politics? DOIN IT RONG

>>1686 >Please provide proof of for this statement I talked from a lot of liberals and left leaning people. All of them claim that "if we have only one race, there would be no more racism", and when further questioned they say that they would dream of a world where there would be only one race. After questioned about how they feel on the average 2050 American (source: https://mic.com/articles/87359/national-geographic-determined-what-americans-will-look-like-in-2050-and-it-s-beautiful#.VkwHqGdMA) They either are happy that we are going to become one bland blend of brown or that they are indiffirent. >Also worth mentioning that your definition of diversity is flawed Diversity, as in dictionary definition, or "diversity" as in idea pushed by liberals and leftists? What is then the true definition of diversity, oh all knowledgeable? >You don't understand the idea behind diversity in the first place. Why are you making arguments against something you so clearly didn't try to understand? nice counter argument >Here is some reading material: >le "teach yourself soykaflord" Did you read Mein Kampf? Hitler talked about how chipmunk stays with chimpunks, deer with the deer, lion with the lion, and they don't intermingle. And those that intermingle produce a half breed that is on genetics between the two parents (example, zebra and horse or lion and tiger.... or for example blacks and whites). You should really have some reading material: http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/424268.Ride_the_Tiger >Please define what is true diversity and multiculturalism dictionary definition, I suggest you look it up

>>1689 You obviously don't understand the point of this thread

>>1692 Your lack of ability to understand what a discussion is and what statements and arguments are is baffling. Good luck, anon.

>>1694 I coppied your comment to a T. I might not accurately understand what an argument or discussion is, but I don't think it is any of the following: >"read this" >"you didn't use the right term" <-- not elaborating on what right terminology is >"please provide proof about common knowledge of how different political parties tackle the issue of ever changing racial demographics" those all sound like you're pushing for some kind of slip up where I would say something where you could do your reaching. Again, no counter arguments in either post (yours or mine), but since I had my eyes on copying you, I never expected something better from me Present Day, Present Time! AHAHAHAHAHA! Now, you could easily start by counter arguing any of pictures posted, but nah, those would be too hard to counter, now wouldn't they?

>>1681 >>1693 Don't make intentionally bad threads. If you want political discussion derezzed, start a thread in /q/. Don't attempt to force our hand with an outpouring of low-quality posting.