Vander

Degrees awarded means nothing, affirmative action means that black women have the lowest standards for getting into college of anyone. The system is a total joke. I've seen black women with ivy league degrees that were dumber than a door knob. It's a laughable statistic.

quote:

---

What is going on here? Why are our inner city schools so plagued by unmet basic needs and services?

---

Because absolutely no one gives a shite about education in those areas. Those areas are plagued with violence and crime, why would any self-respecting teacher ever go there to teach? "Hey good job today, but sorry your car got broken into while you were in class, sorry! We hope you will be back tomorrow!"

quote:

---

i think another major issue is that all the different factions on the right completely understand what crazy progressives are like and how they think. crazy progressives aren't nearly as tuned in to how various groups on the right are like and how they think. hell most progs are probably ignorant of the differences themselves

---

This is exactly it. Almost everyone on the right understands the left really well, but almost everyone on the left thinks everyone to the right of Mao is a Nazi. They also actively avoid all places where the right congregates and rarely ever interact with them on their home turf except on /pol/ which is probably the single worst place for a liberal to go because almost everyone gets redpilled if they stay there too long.

quote:

---

It is. In his amazing biography of Pope John Paul II, Witness to Hope author George Weigel went into the Soviet and Polish archives. These forces were in play, in Poland, from 1946 onward. Make it to where BOTH parents have to work, and at different times meaning there's no family time; put the kids in school, and they'll never see one parent for long periods. Put them in summer camps, sexualize them, promote abortion, and before long, there nuclear family is no longer the norm, or the "authority" but instead, the State becomes the substitute.

Then, you have subservient little Statists who turn into subservient apparatchiks who value so little but whatever the State tells them to value.

Western society has followed suit, but instead of forcing it down their throats like the Communists, it's been one little "movement" after another, including feminism, no-fault divorce, "empowerment" "Having it all," and we've embraced all those things that the Eastern Europeans took sixty years to throw off. Western society is behind this curve, right now, and we are just now, really, feeling the effects so badly.

---

It actually began simultaneously with Antonio Gramsci in Italy and the Frankfurt School in the Weimar Republic. The Soviet or better yet, the KGB, were actually late to the game. The subversion of the West by communists and marxists began well before the Soviets got involved.

This garbage is one of the primary reasons why the Germans went reactionary and went so far to the right. They had been fighting communists since the moment WWI ended. The shear amount of degeneracy in the Weimar Republic being pushed by the communists in 1920s Germany was even more extensive than what we see now in large part because the Germans were starving as a result of the Treaty of Versaille that ended WWI whereas we don't have that problem. In otherwords, people were willing to do anything to provide food for their families and many of these communists and marxists were more than willing to use these desperate people for their own ends.

LINK

It's a hell of a lot more insidious than just "liberals". The entirety of the modern West has been subverted by cultural marxism, which originated from communists at the Frankfurt School in the Weimar Republic who later moved to Columbia University.

WWI is a perfect war for the villain of the story because it is literally just fighting and perpetual death without any real clear goals in mind. For the villain that I won't mention, it is exactly the kind of perpetual warfare that he would want so in this regard I actually the decision a lot.

quote:

---

Well, she is stronger than him in the comics. So they aren't straying too far from the comics by having her beat him in a slug out.

---

No she's not. She's roughly on par with Wonder Woman, who actually routinely wipes the floor with Supergirl. This was one author pushing an agenda, which has later been retconned explicitly with both Superman and Batman stating that she only beats him because he holds back and she doesn't.

Additionally, all you have to do in order to see the truth in the above statement is by looking at the top end feats of each character. The difference between the highest feats of each character is enormous. Superman has numerous feats of obliterating planets, physically defeating beings Supergirl always loses to, etc.

Regardless of what one specific author says, in DC canon Superman > Wonder Woman > Supergirl.

quote:

---

It's amazing how this one girl has almost this entire board in a "collective" rustle jerk.

---

And you wonder why the right has begun to not give a shite about its radical elements just like the left. This attitude is why.

quote:

---

he claims the label, but a lot of the message/ideals behind people claiming the "alt-right" wasn't white nationalism or anti-jew bullshite. now many who claim it do believe these things, which is why i am enjoying this distinction. it makes it more clear for all sides. people who mislabeled themselves "alt-right" can now correctly label themselves as "alt-lite", the current version of teh "alt-right" can hate on them like they do everyone else, and progs lose the "they're all racists" message for the "alt-lite". win win win

---

Counterpoint from the left: "You're a racist nazi."

Identifying as alt lite does nothing, literally nothing to convince the left that you aren't a Nazi fascist. You can scream it until you're blue in the face, but so long as you constantly act on the defensive and play the game by the left's rules in the "racist" debate, you're always going to lose.

If you allow the left to set the frame, which in the case is being able to define what is and isn't racist, then you will forever lose. There is not a damn thing you will ever do that will convince them that you are not the reincarnation of Hitler.

This is why your only choice at this point is to respond with the agree and amplify method in order to force them to respond and debate on YOUR terms. Force them to debate the facts and the issues by literally agreeing with and amplifying their premise. Because liberals never have any substance to their arguments, this always causes a nuclear meltdown in their brains as they struggle to come up with a response while their brain reboots. The entire liberal shtick is to shut you down with claims of racism. By flipping it around, you turn the tables and control the argument.

quote:

---

Define "major". I think it would be a pretty big deal at any Ivy League school, for example.

The problem at A&M was they allowed anybody to speak in their facilities. And the administration initially spoke up for First Amendment rights, which made no sense to me. The rule has been changed such that a speaker has to be sponsored by some university-recognized organization. Which won't help if A&M has a local white power club recognized by the school, but I don't see that happening.

---

You understand what that means right and why restricting it to student group sponsors is a bad idea right? This allow the university de facto control over who gets to speak because they can just disallow any group that they disagree with from being an official organization.

The fact that people actually think it's a good idea to ban any kind of speech from a university is mind-boggling to me. It's a public university and therefore the university cannot legally keep people from speaking provided they are not breaking the law or trying to incite violence. For instance, calling for the deaths of groups of people would be ban worthy, but saying you are an advocate for your race is not.

By calling for speech to be banned, you are inadvertently invoking the Streisand Effect wherein the more outcry there is for something to be banned, the more attention is drawn to it.