Re: Paki gets his turban in a spin
Gareth Jones (gareth@ibis.demon.co.uk)
Thu, 21 Nov 1996 22:00:04 GMT
Duncan@drmac.demon.co.uk ("Duncan R. MacMillan") wrote:
> In article <bimkyQ9zBIJO089yn@mantra.com> jai@eskimo.com "Dr. Jai
>Maharaj" writes:
>
>> The thieves and their descendants must return the
>> Koh-i-noor diamond and other stolen riches to Bharat
>> before they vanish.
>
> I can do better than that, O Esteeming One/matey. I can do you a very
>nice Enlightenment take-away. Get a fresh banana leaf around this:
> Democracy (like almost everything else) is "a White thing" and,
>contrary to what Libruls would have us believe, most Whites don't want it
>destroyed (like everything else) by hordes of Brown immigrants, who have no
>history and even less understanding of it.
When you say a white thing, do you mean whites invented it, or only
whites can ever do it? I don't deny the former, but I would love to
hear your arguments about why democracy cannot become thoroughly
established in non-white populations. Democracy has only been
widespread for a couple of centuries, it is still spreading.
Also, you suggest that almost everything else is a "white thing" -
does this include civilization, cities, agriculture, irrigation,
building with stone, building with brick, writing, mathematics, horse
riding, naval warfare etc. Most of these things were invented at a
time when the white folk of europe were still banging rocks together.
> The neurochemical basis for Whites' unique ability to sustain the
>ongoing revolution of "progress", both social and technological, over several
>millennia, is, I believe, due to just the right amount of testosterone.
Ah testosterone. I used to think you were just nasty - I didn't
realise you were funny too.
> Empirical evidence, from three continents and 6,000 years of recorded
>history, shows the Negro incapable of sustaining a technological society under
>the rule of law, because of too little intelligence and too much testosterone.
Which bit of the 6000 years of recorded history mentions testosterone
as the cause of all this?
> Asiatics, with their superior intelligence, have been building
>technological civilisations for almost as long as Whites, but too little
>testosterone means that they lack the oomph to establish the notion of the
>individual, leading to despotism, stagnation and no professional footballers
>in the White lands. (In addition, Asiatics' impoverished sensory system
>brutalises their behaviour and limits their intelligence largely to the nerdy
>and uncreative sort, but that's another post).
What was the problem of the classical greeks - why did they sit around
thinking about maths and philosophy like the asiatics like to do? Did
they have an impovershed sensory system? When was it fixed?
Also, how does the testosterone level fluctuate within a race?
Seriously, I'm curious as to how the arabs (too little testosterone
now - that is why they don't have any decent empires) came to be the
way they are - when in the medieval period they obviously had just the
right testosterone levels - which is why their empires were so big.
> So, there you have why Whites must not shirk their genetic
>responsibilities and why wogs must funky on back to their roots.
I am genuinely impressed by your most scientific hypothesis - the
evidence you have placed before me is truly convincing, and both the
breadth and depth of your grasp of human history staggers me. The ease
with which you leapt from statements of "fact" to a moral injunction
is truly couragous.
Gareth
|