Sweeslamistan

/shudder
I've just realised you're the enemy.

He's the enemy because he doesn't share your paranoid, xenophobic views on Muslims?
 
Prisoners in Norway live better than free people in vast majority of Muslim countries.

No doubt why Muslims in Norway commit crimes when they can't find a job. To get a warm cell.

We should make Hudud legally binding for Muslims only. Muslims that steal should lose their hands. Its their law anyway! Ideally, Hudud should be administered by Muslims as well.
 
Most (~75%) of Singapore's population are Chinese people, yes. But they are not Muslims:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Singapore#Ethnic_groups

Lee Kuan Yew has had essentially different views on issues like multiculturalism than Swedish governments.

And he was building Singapore according to these opposite principles than these on which Sweden is building itself.

Whatever you think you're talking about, you probably don't really have any idea. No, don't even try to make some BS up. I think you'd be better off sticking to talking about the subjects that you know, i.e. Polish stuff and racialist theories.

And I'd have thought the only kind of immigration policies Poles can complain about is strict immigration policies. Oh wait, that's right - you'd turn around and kick the less popular guys in the face right after being beaten up by the bullies, just like you did with the Jews.
 
I don't particularly feel like contributing to this thread. So before I go enjoy some sweet tea elsewhere, this thread is brilliantly disguised satire right? Kudos Domen, head scratching is one of the most misunderstood forms of comedy after all.
 
aelf said:
Domen said:
Most (~75%) of Singapore's population are Chinese people, yes. (...)

Lee Kuan Yew has had essentially different views on issues like multiculturalism than Swedish governments.

(...)

Singapore's former prime minister - Lee Kuan Yew - is known as a "race realist".

Whatever you think you're talking about, you probably don't really have any idea.

Really ??? So you claim that I was wrong about Lee Kuan Yew's worldview ???

Let's see:

Lee Kuan Yew on the differences between the Chinese and the Malays, March 24 1965 (the year when Singapore separated from Malaysia):

"One people [the Chinese] is the product of a civilization which has gone through all its ups and downs, of floods and famine and pestilence, breeding a people with very intense culture, with a belief in high performance in sustained effort, in thrift and industry. And the other people [the Malays] - more fortunately endowed by nature, with warm sunshine and bananas and coconuts, and therefore not with the same need to strive so hard. Now, these two societies really move at two different speeds. It's like a difference between a high-revolution engine and a low-revolution engine."

Lee Kuan Yew, "The Search for Talent", 1982:

"Let us not deceive ourselves: our talent profile is nowhere near that of, say, the Jews or the Japanese in America. The exceptional number of Nobel Prize winners who are Jews is no accident. It is also no accident that a high percentage, sometimes 50%, of faculty members in the top American universities on both the east and west coasts are Jews. And the number of high caliber Japanese academics, professionals and business executives is out of all proportion to the percentage of Japanese in the total American population."

Lee Kuan Yew, "The Man and His Ideas", 1998:

"I started off believing all men were equal. I now know that's the most unlikely thing ever to have been, because millions of years have passed over evolution. People have scattered across the face of this earth, been isolated from each other, developed independently, had different intermixtures between races, peoples, climates and soils. I didn't start off with that knowledge. But by observation, reading, watching, arguing, asking, that is the conclusion I've come to. When we were faced with the reality that, in fact, equal opportunities did not bring about more equal results, we were faced with an ideological dilemma. In other words, this bell curve, which Murray and Herrnstein wrote about, became obvious to us by the late '60s. The bell curve is a fact of life. The blacks on average score 85 points on IQ and it is accurate, nothing to do with culture. The whites score on average 100. Asians score more. 'The Bell Curve' authors put it at least 10 points higher. These are realities that, if you do not accept, will lead to frustration because you will be spending money on wrong assumptions and the results cannot follow. Many of the bright young men became Catholic priests and did not marry. Bright priests, celibate, produce no children. And the result of several generations of bright Fathers producing no children? Less bright children in the Catholic world. You read 'A Dream of the Red Chamber' by Hong Lou Meng or you read Jin Ping Mei, and you'll find Chinese society in the 16th, 17th centuries described. The successful Chinese merchant or the mandarin, he gets the pick of all the rich men's daughters and the prettiest village girls and has probably five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten different wives and concubines and many children. And the poor Chinese laborer who's dumb and slow, he's neutered. It's like the lion or the stag that's outside the flock. He has no harems, so he does not pass his genes down. So, in that way, a smarter population emerges."
 
Indeed some scholars explain modern IQ differences between ethnicities and races by eugenic effects of civilization.

Check: G. Cochran, H. Harpending - "The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution", 2009.

Authors explain high IQ of Ashkenazi Jews by fact that dumb Ashkenazi Jews simply did not survive centuries of persecutions.

Persecution has eugenic effects as it kills off people who are dumber, while smarter ones usually find a way to get out alive.

One exception would be when persecution is specifically targeted at intellectual elites of a particular ethnic group.

But pogroms of Jews were never targeted at specific individuals - they were always against Jewish communities as a whole.
 
I suppose it's possible. Smart parents do seem to have smart children. (Though not inevitably so.) It's just that intelligence is such an elusive thing to pin down.
 
Really ??? So you claim that I was wrong about Lee Kuan Yew's worldview ???

What does that have to do with multiculturalism? Try not to wiggle out of it by adding something else from another post of yours that I didn't quote in mine. It's dishonest and kinda cheap.
 
Yes, smart parents indeed not always have smart children and dumb parents not always have dumb children, and sometimes have smart children.

It is just the statistical probability to have smart children is higher for smart parents, because intelligence is partially heritable (not entirely).

In less civilized societies, intelligence is not as important as in highly civilized societies.

In primitive tribes physical strength, large penis, etc., are more important than capable brain in competition for women to have a lot of offspring.

Which explains why societies which until recently lived in primitive tribes are - on average - less intelligent than long civilized societies.
 
Which explains why societies which until recently lived in primitive tribes are - on average - less intelligent.
Seriously?
I mean, seriously?
I've studied developmental economics and one of the focuses is examining the sources of growth in human capital (more or less the intelligence/skill of the population) and not one model includes "primitive tribes" or any other such nonsense as a significant variable for determining intelligence.
 
I've studied developmental economics

Have you seen "Intelligence: A Unifying Construct for the Social Sciences" ??? Check:

https://lesacreduprintemps19.files....l-sciences-richard-lynn-and-tatu-vanhanen.pdf

not one model includes "primitive tribes" or any other such nonsense

At least one model does - that of G. Cochran and H. Harpending.

They explain modern differences in IQ not by innate racial differences, but by effects of civilization during the last 10,000 years.

Which does not really change anything, but at least it is not so racist - it gives hope that after next 10,000 years Blacks will catch up with Whites.

Hopefully much sooner.

Moderator Action: Whether the comment is serious or not, it is trolling, and it is unacceptable.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
 
You know, the more I read this thread, the more I get the feeling that Domen is failing to make the distinction between Islam the religion and the ethnicities he is complaining about. If fifty percent of Swedes will be Muslim by 2050 does that mean by conversion? Does he assume everyone born into Muslim families will become Muslim, and finally-why preserve European culture from immigrants, considering they contribute to the culture of the countries they emigrate to. Pizza, widely considered part of American culture was first produced by an Italian immigrant. Is he saying that immigrants shouldn't be allowed to affect the cultures of countries they call their homes? Essentially a know your place stranger, there is nothing of value you could contribute.

Don't get me wrong, there are perfectly legitimate reasons to oppose immigration, I just feel that the fearmongering on the thread of a Muslim takeover is not one of them.
 
Domen is either trolling or is one of the most unpleasantly ignorant donkeys on this message board.
 
Back
Top Bottom