PDA

View Full Version : Is Racial Pride Irrational?



Adalheid Friunt
Wednesday, April 27th, 2011, 10:41 PM
This is the best and most concise argument I've ever seen regarding racial pride. Spread it far and wide! :thumbup

lORRrk5HcRQ

theiamania
Wednesday, April 27th, 2011, 10:48 PM
Yeah they usually end up straw manning. It is impossible to logically debate things with most people.

Autosomal Viking
Wednesday, April 27th, 2011, 11:28 PM
Thanks for sharing. The author of the video is very smart. Skadi would be an example of group egotism, as would any other forum where all the members have a similar mindset. The disliking offensive yet similar people phenomenon I did not realize, but it seems to be true. I think it's because we don't want to be associated with offensive yet similar people to ourselves otherwise by other people. The ending with the music was very nice.

Einstein was included as white people by both the creator of the video and the subject of the video. :|

OMG, he used my avatar at 24:10 in his video! :P

Ingvaeonic
Thursday, April 28th, 2011, 12:21 AM
Racial pride is not irrational. The video says it all.

NoClue
Wednesday, October 12th, 2011, 09:50 PM
This guy really nailed it. Glad to hear someone take the time to break it down for an anti, although it's more than likely that the anti didn't give his response video the time of day. Emotions will always prevail over logic in the brain of a less intelligent person.

Vintersorg
Saturday, October 29th, 2011, 11:07 AM
This video is a great, rational, concise response to the typical ignorant ramblings of most liberals. However, I disagree with the notion that racial pride can be or is logical or rational, despite the attempts to rationalize it. Racial pride, nationalism, religious belief, etc. are passions and fall outside the realm of logic and reason.

This is not a bad thing, however. Without passions, life would be meaningless. Those with the most fulfilling lives are, in my view, those who live their lives the most passionately.

At some point, you have to quit rationalizing everything and quit trying to explain everything through logic. You have to let the intangible and the mysterious sweep you away.

While I appreciate what groups like the National Policy Institute are doing, the trend to attempt to legitimatize racialist thought processes through facts and figures only serves to cheapen the experience for me. Being able to manipulate the emotions and passions of people will do more than charts and data tables ever will.

Žoreišar
Saturday, October 29th, 2011, 05:01 PM
Racial pride, nationalism, religious belief, etc. are passions and fall outside the realm of logic and reason.Nationalism is the only rational and reasonable model of civilization from a biological perspective.

Unity Mitford
Saturday, October 29th, 2011, 05:08 PM
is it irrational?

depends which race you belong to :P

Žoreišar
Saturday, October 29th, 2011, 05:17 PM
is it irrational?

depends which race you belong to :PNot really. All organisms that live on Earth today, do so because their predecessors propagated themselves in a manner that best served the preservation of their own being. Without such a practice, any organism will fail the test of time and cease to exist - which stands in direct opposition to the fundamental building blocks of our entire cosmos.

Méldmir
Saturday, October 29th, 2011, 05:21 PM
is it irrational?

depends which race you belong to :P

No, it's rational for all races. Many people will say they're pride to belong to a people because one of their kinsmen invented something, wrote a great novel, or becuase their people won great wars at some point. These are, in my opinion, only something that adds to the pride, but not its deepest foundation. The deepest pride comes from just being part of an organic tribe, because you have people that are like you and you share a history (whatever that may be). Cats have not accomplished alot in world history, but cats are still proud to be cats, not ashamed. That goes for all human tribes as well, they should naturally be proud.

I for one would be proud of my people even if we were much less developed than many other peoples. Our Germanic ancestors 2000 years ago couldn't boast of the same achievements as the Romans, but they were much prouder of themselves than most of us are today. :)

Renwein
Saturday, October 29th, 2011, 05:42 PM
it depends what 'rational' means I suppose

a lot of 'uneducated' people are 'irrationally' racist, because they are more 'instinctual' (and since our westerneducation system works against 'nationalism', that's why 'racism' has a 'ignorance' stereotype - plus it's good propaganda').

a more educated/well read person with 'racial pride' may have all sorts of complex social theories, calculated genetic FST & 'kinship coefficients' and so on, and so be more 'rational', but their motivating force would probably still be 'instinctive'.

ultimately, I think most 'rational'-ness is just complex justifications for 'irrational', i.e., subconcious, urges.
Especially when it comes to social and/or political 'thought'.

(this is kind of along the lines of what the Fascists thought too, well, they were right again! :P
"Mussolini with his pet lioness... Mussolini loved animals because they were motivated by instinct not reason. His favourite animal was the cat. - caption in a biog. i have ;))

Alfadur
Saturday, October 29th, 2011, 06:01 PM
Racial pride is completely normal, in my eyes. It's nature's way of ensuring that you'll value those closest to you, and by extension, ensuring you will preserve your genes. This is a deep instinctual urge, and often takes irrational forms.

Every organism is born with an instinct to racial preservation, because it's a part of nature. It can only be erased by socio-cultural influence - as has happened to most Europeans. In a natural state, all organisms would have this feeling. Maybe it's not rational, but it's completely normal for the most primitive Bantu tribe to believe they're the best people in the world.


a lot of 'uneducated' people are 'irrationally' racist, because they are more 'instinctual' (and since our westerneducation system works against 'nationalism', that's why 'racism' has a 'ignorance' stereotype - plus it's good propaganda').
Indeed. Educated people who are racially conscious, like Jared Taylor, are few and far in between. In the old days of Madison Grant, this type of "scientific racism" was much more accepted in educated circles. Nowadays, this healthy natural sense of ethnocentrism is mostly the province of semi-literate rednecks, who haven't been educated in PC or even educated at all.

Skadi's educated membership is the exception, not the norm. In my eyes, the Swedish mega-forum Flashback is much more representative of what "common racism" looks like.


a more educated/well read person with 'racial pride' may have all sorts of complex social theories, calculated genetic FST & 'kinship coefficients' and so on, and so be more 'rational', but their motivating force would probably still be 'instinctive'.
Most people are motivated by emotions and instinct, rather than pure logic. It's common that intelligent people force themselves to rationalize their urges. Or make excuses for it in hindsight.

Mussolini is a good example, which you brought up. Another example would be the entire NS ideology, which is a complex rationalization of a very primal urge.

Hamar Fox
Saturday, October 29th, 2011, 06:56 PM
it depends what 'rational' means I suppose

a lot of 'uneducated' people are 'irrationally' racist, because they are more 'instinctual' (and since our westerneducation system works against 'nationalism', that's why 'racism' has a 'ignorance' stereotype - plus it's good propaganda'). a more educated/well read person with 'racial pride' may have all sorts of complex social theories, calculated genetic FST & 'kinship coefficients' and so on, and so be more 'rational', but their motivating force would probably still be 'instinctive'.

Exactly. Rationality isn't a value system. It doesn't come close to touching on what should or shouldn't be embraced or rejected. No thought, belief, or decision can be truly rational, since reason lacks any trace of a stance on whether someone brushes his teeth or not, kicks a puppy or not, jumps off a cliff or not. Not wanting tartar, not wanting to hurt something fluffy, not wanting to die aren't rational reasons not to do any of the above, because all boil down to a 'want', either positive or negative -- which is to say, something instinctual: pursuit of pleasure, eschewal of pain or death etc. A fully rational entity would have no impulse to do, think, or believe anything. I wouldn't even say instinct is the fuel and reason the engine, since instinct can operate without reason just fine, but reason can't exist without instinct (keep in mind that even the coldest, most seemingly impartial scientific formulae stem from the irrational need to discover and understand, which itself stems from the irrational need to avoid danger and death, which takes us to the bedrock instinct of our fear of death).


ultimately, I think most 'rational'-ness is just complex justifications for 'irrational', i.e., subconcious, urges.
Especially when it comes to social and/or political 'thought'.


I agree. For the vast majority, reasons are just varnish for a foregone instinctual conclusion. When this isn't the case, when someone has an obvious disconnect between his gut configuration and his ideas, these ideas will inevitably collapse on themselves -- it's just a matter of time. This is why I'm always suspicious of 'preservationists' so desperate to prove how non-racist they are. I've seen time and again people vehemently denying any racial feeling, claiming to be from a deeply non-racist background, and stating that their objection to mixing is 'strictly rational' and for this or that flaky reason; and in every case it's a mere matter of time before that uncomfortable internal tension snaps, and they revert quite comfortably to their natural dispositional mould. I think OEN's admission that he was originally pro-mass immigration until he was 'convinced' in an argument that it was somehow 'bad' (probably for economic reasons, but I don't remember the details) explains his rather pathetic display in his final days as a member (at one point complaining about the offensive use of the word 'negro'). He's obviously not the only example, but he's a very good one.

This is why I never bother trying to 'convert' people, and also why I don't bother with preservationists who are so instinctually alien to me and every other natural preservationist that I know for a fact they won't still be preservationists in five years.

Frostbite
Sunday, October 30th, 2011, 02:49 AM
Racial pride itself is not irrational but like any passion it can make people do irrational things.

Primus
Sunday, October 30th, 2011, 03:44 AM
Not at all.

Neophyte
Sunday, October 30th, 2011, 03:52 AM
Cats have not accomplished alot in world history, but cats are still proud to be cats, not ashamed. That goes for all human tribes as well, they should naturally be proud.

And still swarthy Latinos are not ashamed about talking about mejorar la raza... ;) They are not stupid, they know that their own offspring will be better off if they dip into our gene pool rather than staying in their own.

The difference between cats and Latinos is that the latter are a bit smarter.

feisty goddess
Sunday, October 30th, 2011, 03:56 AM
This video is a great, rational, concise response to the typical ignorant ramblings of most liberals. However, I disagree with the notion that racial pride can be or is logical or rational, despite the attempts to rationalize it. Racial pride, nationalism, religious belief, etc. are passions and fall outside the realm of logic and reason.

This is not a bad thing, however. Without passions, life would be meaningless. Those with the most fulfilling lives are, in my view, those who live their lives the most passionately.

At some point, you have to quit rationalizing everything and quit trying to explain everything through logic. You have to let the intangible and the mysterious sweep you away.

While I appreciate what groups like the National Policy Institute are doing, the trend to attempt to legitimatize racialist thought processes through facts and figures only serves to cheapen the experience for me. Being able to manipulate the emotions and passions of people will do more than charts and data tables ever will.

Haha, what great advice that is, we should let the mysterious and intangible sweep us away? That would be the greatest argument for race mixing and multicultism there is if there ever was one, and that's pretty much what the media and some members of society are trying to push on other people. By following your philosophy (if you were being consistent), I should, on a whim have some "cute" mulatto babies with the jigaboo down the street because the media advertises it as good. Now you're going to say that isn't at all what you meant and I'm taking what you said out of context, but really, how can you use a morally correct way of thinking for one concept and not another?

Only people with psychological weaknesses let their passions fall outside the realm of rationality. The rationality of an individual is based on their value-judgements. Why do you think some people kill themselves? It's not just because they're sad and whatnot, it's because their value-judgements are a tangled unintelligable mess to themselves. It is usually one of the most extreme forms of irrationality, unless someone is killing themselves for a very specific reason, like they're caught in a disastrous situation and know they won't survive. What you are giving advice for is suicide of the mind.

Neophyte
Sunday, October 30th, 2011, 04:41 AM
Haha, what great advice that is, we should let the mysterious and intangible sweep us away? That would be the greatest argument for race mixing and multicultism there is if there ever was one...

Un honnźte homme peut źtre amoureux comme un fou, mais non pas comme un sot. — Franēois de La Rochefoucauld

;)

Vintersorg
Sunday, October 30th, 2011, 04:58 AM
Haha, what great advice that is, we should let the mysterious and intangible sweep us away? That would be the greatest argument for race mixing and multicultism there is if there ever was one, and that's pretty much what the media and some members of society are trying to push on other people. By following your philosophy (if you were being consistent), I should, on a whim have some "cute" mulatto babies with the jigaboo down the street because the media advertises it as good. Now you're going to say that isn't at all what you meant and I'm taking what you said out of context, but really, how can you use a morally correct way of thinking for one concept and not another?

Only people with psychological weaknesses let their passions fall outside the realm of rationality. The rationality of an individual is based on their value-judgements. Why do you think some people kill themselves? It's not just because they're sad and whatnot, it's because their value-judgements are a tangled unintelligable mess to themselves. It is usually one of the most extreme forms of irrationality, unless someone is killing themselves for a very specific reason, like they're caught in a disastrous situation and know they won't survive. What you are giving advice for is suicide of the mind.

Have you read much existentialist philosophy? My original post could serve as a textbook example of Nietzsche's concept of the Apollonian vs. the Dionysian. I doubt I need to go into details regarding the massive influence Friedrich Nietzche has had on the development of Western thought.

I'm not making an argument for any kind of ideological issue really, I am simply stating that emotions and passions are intangible and not subject rationality or logic. There is no formula for happiness, no theorem for rage, no scientific law for pride. These things simply exist and are aroused within us. We should experience them and evaluate them for what they are, otherwise we are just going through life as automatons. Interpret that how you like.

You give the example of miscegenation. Fair enough. First, suffice to say you are not going to be taking part in that given your presence here. No one with that strong of a conviction is going to have that kind of dramatic change of heart and if so then they should really evaluate their positions and beliefs. Your example states the media is telling you to do it. Those are external forces acting in a means to serve their own interests and goals. Not the feelings or intentions of individuals. But what if these feelings truly spring up in someone and they alter their life course? Well, I'm not in the ideology game; I don't go around recruiting or preaching to the overwhelmingly idiotic majority. I do not care what the bottom 90% of any race is doing at any given moment. This includes (shock) Europeans breeding with (gasp) non-Europeans. Most of them would have amounted to little more than office workers in the entire generation of their lifespan.

Ultimately, what this boils down to is you cannot fix idiots from being idiots and as such they are better left to remove themselves from the genepool and let the better individuals breed.

Have you taken my words out of context? Not particularly, you have just missed the point slightly and chosen to create a scenario that showcases your extreme distaste for what I am saying and, given the environment we are in, generate support by appealing to the...emotions of others. See a trend here? You could have used facts and figures, instead you used an anecdote.

I disagree wholeheartedly in your assessment that living a passionate and emotive existence is a sign of psychological weakness. Weak in what way? In maintaining this inhuman, stoic composure all the time? In falling in line with the other 90% of humanity that is similarly doing nothing with their lives? Great men have passions and they let these passions lead them into glory. Whether or not you agree with their path or destination is completely irrelevant.

It is also funny you bring up suicide. Soren Kierkegaard, another major existentialist thinker, wrote this little quip on suicide, more specifically on suicide in the modern age:

The present age is one of understanding, of reflection, devoid of passion, an age which flies into enthusiasm for a moment only to decline back into indolence.

Not even a suicide does away with himself out of desperation, he considers the act so long and so deliberately, that he kills himself with thinking--one could barely call it suicide since it is thinking which takes his life. He does not kill himself with deliberation but rather kills himself because of deliberation. Therefore, one can not really prosecute this generation, for its art, its understanding, its virtuosity and good sense lies in reaching a judgement or a decision, not in taking action.

Why does everything need a rationalization? Why does their need to be a logic behind everything? Even something as emotional and personal as taking ones own life. It is this kind of obsessive, cultish adherence to logic and rationality that brought about the Enlightenment in Europe and helped to destroy our aristocratic, meritocratic, and monarchic way of life.

There is no reason discourse has to be unpleasant or uncivil. The sarcasm isn't necessary nor are the implications that I'm going around propagating miscegenation.

I have some very good lectures from the Teaching Company on Existentialism, Nietzsche, and Kierkegaard if you are interested in learning more. I'd be happy to send you some copies of the lectures in MP3.

feisty goddess
Monday, October 31st, 2011, 05:47 AM
Have you read much existentialist philosophy? My original post could serve as a textbook example of Nietzsche's concept of the Apollonian vs. the Dionysian. I doubt I need to go into details regarding the massive influence Friedrich Nietzche has had on the development of Western thought.

I'm not making an argument for any kind of ideological issue really, I am simply stating that emotions and passions are intangible and not subject rationality or logic. There is no formula for happiness, no theorem for rage, no scientific law for pride. These things simply exist and are aroused within us. We should experience them and evaluate them for what they are, otherwise we are just going through life as automatons. Interpret that how you like.

You give the example of miscegenation. Fair enough. First, suffice to say you are not going to be taking part in that given your presence here. No one with that strong of a conviction is going to have that kind of dramatic change of heart and if so then they should really evaluate their positions and beliefs. Your example states the media is telling you to do it. Those are external forces acting in a means to serve their own interests and goals. Not the feelings or intentions of individuals. But what if these feelings truly spring up in someone and they alter their life course? Well, I'm not in the ideology game; I don't go around recruiting or preaching to the overwhelmingly idiotic majority. I do not care what the bottom 90% of any race is doing at any given moment. This includes (shock) Europeans breeding with (gasp) non-Europeans. Most of them would have amounted to little more than office workers in the entire generation of their lifespan.

Ultimately, what this boils down to is you cannot fix idiots from being idiots and as such they are better left to remove themselves from the genepool and let the better individuals breed.

Have you taken my words out of context? Not particularly, you have just missed the point slightly and chosen to create a scenario that showcases your extreme distaste for what I am saying and, given the environment we are in, generate support by appealing to the...emotions of others. See a trend here? You could have used facts and figures, instead you used an anecdote.

I disagree wholeheartedly in your assessment that living a passionate and emotive existence is a sign of psychological weakness. Weak in what way? In maintaining this inhuman, stoic composure all the time? In falling in line with the other 90% of humanity that is similarly doing nothing with their lives? Great men have passions and they let these passions lead them into glory. Whether or not you agree with their path or destination is completely irrelevant.

It is also funny you bring up suicide. Soren Kierkegaard, another major existentialist thinker, wrote this little quip on suicide, more specifically on suicide in the modern age:

The present age is one of understanding, of reflection, devoid of passion, an age which flies into enthusiasm for a moment only to decline back into indolence.

Not even a suicide does away with himself out of desperation, he considers the act so long and so deliberately, that he kills himself with thinking--one could barely call it suicide since it is thinking which takes his life. He does not kill himself with deliberation but rather kills himself because of deliberation. Therefore, one can not really prosecute this generation, for its art, its understanding, its virtuosity and good sense lies in reaching a judgement or a decision, not in taking action.

Why does everything need a rationalization? Why does their need to be a logic behind everything? Even something as emotional and personal as taking ones own life. It is this kind of obsessive, cultish adherence to logic and rationality that brought about the Enlightenment in Europe and helped to destroy our aristocratic, meritocratic, and monarchic way of life.

There is no reason discourse has to be unpleasant or uncivil. The sarcasm isn't necessary nor are the implications that I'm going around propagating miscegenation.

I have some very good lectures from the Teaching Company on Existentialism, Nietzsche, and Kierkegaard if you are interested in learning more. I'd be happy to send you some copies of the lectures in MP3.

My point is that human beings need philosophy for every facet of their life (this is why early humans created religion) and strict rationality is one component of a proper one. I was only demonstrating why human beings need a rational philosophy for every facet of their life, but that was kind of a dumb example. I meant that someone could have an emotional whim to go out and have mulatto babies because they want to be like someone in hollywood or whatever. There are intelligent people who make irrational mistakes as well, but it's not as obvious as the example I've given.

Most immorality gets started by people who are irrational or a little bit irrational in subtle ways. One break with rationality is a break with morality altogether. Wanting the kind of emotional gratification or satisfaction you get from an intellectual work of art or masterpiece but not enjoying the mental process that goes into thinking about it is a psychological weakness for example. People like that usually constantly watch garbage, low humor movies trying to fill the hole in their mind that won't stay full.