Racism (from a moral standpoint)

[MangaD]

@Ansam I will have to disagree that IQ is less important because of computational devices. Even though IQ tests are mathematical, they are correlated with a person's overall intelligence and affect a person's behavior. Sure, you can have high IQ and be unsuccessful due to other factors and life choices. Or you can have low IQ and be successful because you got lucky, or have some other ability that society values (eg. famous sports players).

But, living a good life is not everything, and we cannot rely on machines to do everything for us and sit back on our couch scratching our balls like hedonist pigs with the intelligence of a chicken. If blacks do have lower IQ, then history is proof of how having a low IQ is undesirable. You become more brute.

---

As for the points of view, well, it is true that people can speak out their opinions (unless you're in a country that throws you into jail for denying the holocaust, or you get fired from your job for speaking out, or get beaten by an alienated mob...).

I personally favor a semi-democratic system, where only educated people (in politics, history and philosophy) can contribute to the government of a nation. But this is a sensitive topic which is not so linear to be put in simple words.

[Ansam]

It's still encouraged to educate yourself and learn appropriate behavior. Especially for reasons mentioned in your second half. As for luck and other abilities of value, especially in the case of sports, that is a lot of time and effort spent developing oneself into a competitor. What would be lucky is to not suffer injuries during that career, so that afterward they can live a different life. And of course, there is always the chance to be born in a starving village, a country in economic collapse, etc.

I wasn't suggesting machines do anything for us outside of math. Brute is an awfully strong word to describe anyone. The first group that comes to mind by that word is the KKK. Nazis. And the Caribs I'd say. Romans alienating others, Alexander the Great. Atila the Hun. African warlords. Brute is a personality born of power. Yes it takes consideration to avoid such things, but the same wit can just as well be a larger problem, clearly irrelevant of race.

I agree on the second half, if voters were more knowledgeable or restricted to said individuals, things would be better.

[Uri]

@LutiChris You say a lot in your post, I will answer to it when I have more time.

---

@limi

1. Why does it bother you that """a lot""" of "free countries" nowadays are too "miser" with accepting a certain amount of people from 3rd world countries?

2. What scientific source do you have that absolutely asserts that there is no difference in IQ among races, as you claim? Because I know of a few studies that show otherwise (such as the bell curve by Charles A. Murray and Richard Herrnstein that Luti shared here), although there is not enough proof to blame it on race as I understand it. Still, looking at history, we can see that black people are largely unsuccessful everywhere, including the 1st world countries they emigrate to and live in for decades or centuries.

3. As Ian said, it is not a separate issue at all to be pro-immigration in vast numbers or in few numbers. Asia has 4.4 billion people, Europe has 741 million. If you'd want to better distribute population around the planet, you could very well send a billion of Asians into Europe, which would result in the end of the white race.

But, why is this a bad thing? Suppose we take in the most intelligent Asian people who value democracy, liberalism, etc. We'd still be destroying the white race as in few years their numbers would shrink drastically due to low birth rates and miscegenation. If you oppose this, then you're a "racist" (not really but you'll be branded that way).

But I don't see why we're even discussing numbers. France, as of 2014, before the refugee crisis, only had 70% population whose parents are both French. This is a disgrace for the various European indigenous people, who are slowly but surely disappearing from this world.

(Sorry about the quotes but the picture has black text on transparent background)

1.because than more people stay poor and poorly educated while migrating to the developed world would integrate them into the world economy. I am in favor of slowly accepting immigrants from impoverished countries. In the long term, unless those countries manage to develope meanwhile, it does mean that "white genes" will became a minority.
2.As you said, that is not race-related (nature), but poor education (nurture). integrating the immigrants into society will eliminate those gaps. Of course blacks are still not as successful as whites: in the USA they have been emancipated only half-century ago, and they are migrants in Europe. Rich people can invest in the education of their children, while the poor are trapped in a cycle. That's why there's a gap, not inferior IQ genes.

[LutiChris]

it does mean that "white genes" will became a minority.

oh yeah? and this isn't a reason to be concerned?

boop (Click to View)

it's very unlikely we'll be able to stay a majority in the USA in a few decades according to future trends given white people's inclination to race mix, not have kids, or adopt other races and more importantly even if all of this stuff i mentioned didn't matter what will greatly affect it is demographics by accepting refugees and immigrants.

so whats optimal the solution?

integrating the immigrants into society will eliminate those gaps.

Muslim immigrants won't integrate specifically because of their religion unless they say it in name only which i doubt is the case when we are talking about the ones in 3rd world countries.

Even if it wasn't the case that IQ is important, there are still differences in group values. We can't uphold the republic as most of these immigrants are going to heavily rely on government aid and thus more taxes. This works alright for homogeneous people not one that is mixed racially and with different cultures you'll only end up with more tensions and bitter resentment.

[MangaD]

@Ansam I don't have much to disagree with what you've said now, except:

brute

noun

1. a savagely violent man or animal.
"he was a cold-blooded brute"
synonyms: savage, beast, monster, animal, sadist, barbarian, devil, demon, fiend, ogre; More

2.an animal as opposed to a human being.
"we, unlike dumb brutes, can reflect upon our impulses"
synonyms: animal, beast, wild animal, wild beast, creature; informal critter
"the Alsatian, a vicious-looking brute, strained at the leash"

adjective

1. unreasoning and animal-like.
"a brute struggle for social superiority"

Was considering more the 2nd definition. If < IQ Then > Brute. Imho.

---

1.because than more people stay poor and poorly educated while migrating to the developed world would integrate them into the world economy. I am in favor of slowly accepting immigrants from impoverished countries. In the long term, unless those countries manage to develope meanwhile, it does mean that "white genes" will became a minority.
2.As you said, that is not race-related (nature), but poor education (nurture). integrating the immigrants into society will eliminate those gaps. Of course blacks are still not as successful as whites: in the USA they have been emancipated only half-century ago, and they are migrants in Europe. Rich people can invest in the education of their children, while the poor are trapped in a cycle. That's why there's a gap, not inferior IQ genes.

1. This is a backward "solution". Imagine if when the Europeans discovered Africa they had imported savage people into Europe in order to take them out of their misery (with Europe paying the price ofc) instead of dominating and developing Africa. Today Africa would still be an absolute jungle, in pre-historic times, and Europe a more poor civilization, dragged down by this burden of uplifting and supporting savages.

Here's the bottom line: Immigration won't solve Africa's problems. Millions will still suffer. Saving a few won't save the whole. And these countries will never develop because their best people will flee from an oppressive regime and brutish society, instead of revolting and fighting for their country's best interest. If you wish to help Africans the best way is to exercise control over them. Not necessarily by colonizing them but by forcing their politicians to bend the knee. (eg. North Korea)

But back to race. Your "solution" does mean that white people will become a minority in their own land (they already are a minority in the world). Do you believe this to be not at all important? I see that you are from Israel. Think of Israel instead of Europe. Would it be fine if Israel got millions of African immigrants into its territory? If it did, it would no longer be Israel and the whole purpose of the birth of this country would have been defeated.

2. I said that? I don't discard the hypothesis of it being race/genetic-related. But I do consider that education plays a big role. The word "integration" is a complicated subject, it touches culture and identity overall, race included. You are misleading about the blacks in Western countries. Being emancipated or not, the truth is that black people have been in contact with western civilization for a long period of time. Africa was a continent of western colonies and it was highly developed before these colonies turned independent. Many blacks came into Europe waaaaay before the refugee crisis, they are still more unsuccessful compared to indo-europeans. Portugal has a lot of black people who came into the country after we lost the colonial war in 1974. Portugal is very tolerant with immigrants and hates racism. I know black people who are decent people. But despite being in contact with a reasonable amount of black people, I don't know ANY black person who is a top student. The elementary schools around here are full of them, but at my university seeing a black person is like seeing a shark at the top of a mountain. I know black people who are good artists though. I am not saying that there aren't any good black students, but they are very few percentage.

Moreover, economics don't play that big of a role as you claim. Many white people who are poor end up being great students. I myself come from an economically humble family, my parents are middle class, divorced, definitely not above average in terms of income, possibly lower even, and I still find myself studying master's degree in Computer Science. I have friends with more poor parents than mine who also got far in their studies.

---

@LutiChris Oh yeah, one thing. Hispania is the name given by the Romans to the Iberian peninsula (Portugal and Spain today). Latino is a person from a Latin speaking country, so from the Roman Empire. Hispanics and Latinos should refer to these people, who happen to be white. But the term is now used to the miscegenation of South Europeans with indigenous people from America, something I find not accurate when referring to ethnicity, but accurate when referring to language or ethnical ancestry.

[Uri]

@LutiChris You say a lot in your post, I will answer to it when I have more time.

---

@limi

1. Why does it bother you that """a lot""" of "free countries" nowadays are too "miser" with accepting a certain amount of people from 3rd world countries?

2. What scientific source do you have that absolutely asserts that there is no difference in IQ among races, as you claim? Because I know of a few studies that show otherwise (such as the bell curve by Charles A. Murray and Richard Herrnstein that Luti shared here), although there is not enough proof to blame it on race as I understand it. Still, looking at history, we can see that black people are largely unsuccessful everywhere, including the 1st world countries they emigrate to and live in for decades or centuries.

3. As Ian said, it is not a separate issue at all to be pro-immigration in vast numbers or in few numbers. Asia has 4.4 billion people, Europe has 741 million. If you'd want to better distribute population around the planet, you could very well send a billion of Asians into Europe, which would result in the end of the white race.

But, why is this a bad thing? Suppose we take in the most intelligent Asian people who value democracy, liberalism, etc. We'd still be destroying the white race as in few years their numbers would shrink drastically due to low birth rates and miscegenation. If you oppose this, then you're a "racist" (not really but you'll be branded that way).

But I don't see why we're even discussing numbers. France, as of 2014, before the refugee crisis, only had 70% population whose parents are both French. This is a disgrace for the various European indigenous people, who are slowly but surely disappearing from this world.

(Sorry about the quotes but the picture has black text on transparent background)

1.because than more people stay poor and poorly educated while migrating to the developed world would integrate them into the world economy. I am in favor of slowly accepting immigrants from impoverished countries. In the long term, unless those countries manage to develope meanwhile, it does mean that "white genes" will became a minority.
2.As you said, that is not race-related (nature), but poor education (nurture). integrating the immigrants into society will eliminate those gaps. Of course blacks are still not as successful as whites: in the USA they have been emancipated only half-century ago, and they are migrants in Europe. Rich people can invest in the education of their children, while the poor are trapped in a cycle. That's why there's a gap, not inferior IQ genes.

I argue that genes does not matter. No, the group values will become one as the groups integrate. And those values will be the Liberal-Democratic values, as they what makes sense.

@Ansam I don't have much to disagree with what you've said now, except:

brute

noun

1. a savagely violent man or animal.
"he was a cold-blooded brute"
synonyms: savage, beast, monster, animal, sadist, barbarian, devil, demon, fiend, ogre; More

2.an animal as opposed to a human being.
"we, unlike dumb brutes, can reflect upon our impulses"
synonyms: animal, beast, wild animal, wild beast, creature; informal critter
"the Alsatian, a vicious-looking brute, strained at the leash"

adjective

1. unreasoning and animal-like.
"a brute struggle for social superiority"

Was considering more the 2nd definition. If < IQ Then > Brute. Imho.

---

1.because than more people stay poor and poorly educated while migrating to the developed world would integrate them into the world economy. I am in favor of slowly accepting immigrants from impoverished countries. In the long term, unless those countries manage to develope meanwhile, it does mean that "white genes" will became a minority.
2.As you said, that is not race-related (nature), but poor education (nurture). integrating the immigrants into society will eliminate those gaps. Of course blacks are still not as successful as whites: in the USA they have been emancipated only half-century ago, and they are migrants in Europe. Rich people can invest in the education of their children, while the poor are trapped in a cycle. That's why there's a gap, not inferior IQ genes.

1. This is a backward "solution". Imagine if when the Europeans discovered Africa they had imported savage people into Europe in order to take them out of their misery (with Europe paying the price ofc) instead of dominating and developing Africa. Today Africa would still be an absolute jungle, in pre-historic times, and Europe a more poor civilization, dragged down by this burden of uplifting and supporting savages.

Here's the bottom line: Immigration won't solve Africa's problems. Millions will still suffer. Saving a few won't save the whole. And these countries will never develop because their best people will flee from an oppressive regime and brutish society, instead of revolting and fighting for their country's best interest. If you wish to help Africans the best way is to exercise control over them. Not necessarily by colonizing them but by forcing their politicians to bend the knee. (eg. North Korea)

But back to race. Your "solution" does mean that white people will become a minority in their own land (they already are a minority in the world). Do you believe this to be not at all important? I see that you are from Israel. Think of Israel instead of Europe. Would it be fine if Israel got millions of African immigrants into its territory? If it did, it would no longer be Israel and the whole purpose of the birth of this country would have been defeated.

2. I said that? I don't discard the hypothesis of it being race/genetic-related. But I do consider that education plays a big role. The word "integration" is a complicated subject, it touches culture and identity overall, race included. You are misleading about the blacks in Western countries. Being emancipated or not, the truth is that black people have been in contact with western civilization for a long period of time. Africa was a continent of western colonies and it was highly developed before these colonies turned independent. Many blacks came into Europe waaaaay before the refugee crisis, they are still more unsuccessful compared to indo-europeans. Portugal has a lot of black people who came into the country after we lost the colonial war in 1974. Portugal is very tolerant with immigrants and hates racism. I know black people who are decent people. But despite being in contact with a reasonable amount of black people, I don't know ANY black person who is a top student. The elementary schools around here are full of them, but at my university seeing a black person is like seeing a shark at the top of a mountain. I know black people who are good artists though. I am not saying that there aren't any good black students, but they are very few percentage.

Moreover, economics don't play that big of a role as you claim. Many white people who are poor end up being great students. I myself come from an economically humble family, my parents are middle class, divorced, definitely not above average in terms of income, possibly lower even, and I still find myself studying master's degree in Computer Science. I have friends with more poor parents than mine who also got far in their studies.

---

@LutiChris Oh yeah, one thing. Hispania is the name given by the Romans to the Iberian peninsula (Portugal and Spain today). Latino is a person from a Latin speaking country, so from the Roman Empire. Hispanics and Latinos should refer to these people, who happen to be white. But the term is now used to the miscegenation of South Europeans with indigenous people from America, something I find not accurate when referring to ethnicity, but accurate when referring to language or ethnical ancestry.

1.You are right that Liberal-Democratic governments should overthrown cruel and corrupted dictators rather than attempt to give shelter to all of their countries' citizents. Israel? yea should accept Syrian refugees in vast numbers, they are neighbours. That's top priority, after that bloody war is finally over we can accept a steady flow of Eritreans, yes. Better through away the dictator though.
2.If you will manage to give here some statistics about the gaps you describe it would be good, though Portugal is a rather small country, so better be it from all the EU or something similar. I saw that you mentioned some statistics that were brought here already, but I didn't manage to find it with all the discussion here.

[MangaD]

@limi

You know you don't have to quote my entire posts...

1. I understood that you are arguing that genes do not matter. And I question you, what evidence do you have to make this claim?

2. There are no "group values", there is only individualism where everyone does whatever they want, so long it is lawful. It is lawful to be Muslim. It is lawful to build mosques. It is lawful to be of the opinion that democracy and liberalism suck. These people are not integrated into society because there is nothing compelling them to change their ideals and behavior. And they create ghettos where they act as a group with specific values. This creates nations within nations.

3. As for foreign intervention, I am not a fan of military action as it is being done in the Middle East. Iraq was better before foreigners intervened. Libya was better, and so forth.

4. If Israel doesn't keep its Jewish identity then the creation of this country would have lost its purpose and Jews would be oppressed again, in their own land. What's even the purpose of taking in vast numbers of 3rd world immigrants? Does Israel defend its people or other countries' peoples? When WW2 was over, did other countries take in vast numbers of German refugees or they were forced to rebuild their own country?

5. I don't have statistics because I don't know of any studies made in Europe about this. Race is a taboo subject and it is even illegal to make these studies in some countries (the reason why I ask if it is wise to ban racism from the political, social and scientific discourse).

As for the US studies you have this:

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-averag...-come-from

[Uri]

@limi

You know you don't have to quote my entire posts...

1. I understood that you are arguing that genes do not matter. And I question you, what evidence do you have to make this claim?

2. There are no "group values", there is only individualism where everyone does whatever they want, so long it is lawful. It is lawful to be Muslim. It is lawful to build mosques. It is lawful to be of the opinion that democracy and liberalism suck. These people are not integrated into society because there is nothing compelling them to change their ideals and behavior. And they create ghettos where they act as a group with specific values. This creates nations within nations.

3. As for foreign intervention, I am not a fan of military action as it is being done in the Middle East. Iraq was better before foreigners intervened. Libya was better, and so forth.

4. If Israel doesn't keep its Jewish identity then the creation of this country would have lost its purpose and Jews would be oppressed again, in their own land. What's even the purpose of taking in vast numbers of 3rd world immigrants? Does Israel defend its people or other countries' peoples? When WW2 was over, did other countries take in vast numbers of German refugees or they were forced to rebuild their own country?

5. I don't have statistics because I don't know of any studies made in Europe about this. Race is a taboo subject and it is even illegal to make these studies in some countries (the reason why I ask if it is wise to ban racism from the political, social and scientific discourse).

As for the US studies you have this:

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-averag...-come-from

1.That the gap is caused by nutritio-environmental factors
2.This phenomenon is bad and should be fought be Recieving national departments as well as non-Go's.
3.Because what the US do is not in favor of the poor Arabs but as a result of anger on terrorist activity. Foreign intervention can be done in the right way. By the way you don't start by military intervention, you 1st make a serious effort to make the dictator step down by convincing him with money and threatening to overthrow him.
4.we should accept back the poor Palestinian we have
5.the last of these studies was made in 1987, barely a generation after Blakcs has been allowed in universities. These things take more time than that.

[MangaD]

@LutiChris

The problem is that you are assuming things based on researches that do not represent the absolute truth.

one does not need to know every little factor before making a decision (...) is an example when pressed for time and limited information

You are right. But the question is whether the lower IQ is biological derived or not. And if it is biological derived, how much is it influenced by biology in comparison to culture, wealth, etc.

he says at the beginning that it is possible to dumb down a person with potential by not educating them. How do you know that this is not the case for black people?

Because we've been propping them up like no other race for well over a century now in almost everything including job opportunities because of diversity agenda and the general isnt interested

But this is not entirely true. Blacks have been enslaved, and during this time they were forced to do physical labor as opposed to intellectual labor. And when they were emancipated they were not given guidance in terms of mentality and culture, which led them to be adrift, not knowing what to do with their new found liberties. On the other hand, whites were running society and inherited their education and wealth from their parents. A poor black person with dumb / problematic parents who doesn't know what to do with their life is of no competition to the average white person. And this is somewhat of a vicious cycle, but eventually blacks should improve. I don't know if there is any study made on the evolution of blacks' IQ and academic success, it would be interesting to see it.

it seems that 40% of whites are picking hispanics as my dad has with my mom.

Check out the end of my comment to Uri (limi), 2 of my comments above.

I'm sure a higher standard can be applied for those who work hard and benefit the country and want to provide for their kids but just giving them welfare and allowing them to have kids when the majority of single black mothers can not or in some cases WILL not adequately take care of the child is precisely the reason for them not to be breeding until they have their lives in order.

But you're applying this to black people only, why not apply it to white people? Are black people intrinsically inferior to white people? Nevermind I read your answer to this afterwards and I reply below.

Why take away their ability to reproduce? Why not abort in case of accident? And what the heck does "adequately" take care of the child mean? Any black child born in America today will have more conditions than any child born 500, 1000, 10000, 100000 years ago. If conditions were a factor to decide whether a child can exist or not, then none of us would exist.

Men have no rights to life, liberty or happiness. These circumstances may be purchased by oneself, by ones family, by ones tribe or by ones ancestors, but they are nonetheless purchases and are not rights.

This idea does not remotely represent the foundation of any civilized world. Sure many people survived through fight and conquest, but they did this when they had no other choice. And our civilization is not one that is known for eradicating everyone else from this world, rather it integrates them (eg. Roman Empire, colonies), even if it means conquering. The idea that no one has intrinsic value is very harmful to everyone, it will throw society into chaos. By that logic, you can very well kill off the weak just because you can, without any moral rules to consider. I don't think this is the kind of society that you want to live in, where your life means nothing unless you provide services to others. When you stop being able to provide services (illness, age, disability, or simply machine replacement...), you can be disposed.

Sure, if we were not intelligent beings then we would abide by the law of the jungle and what you say would be the norm. This is not the case though.

also neat little fact: Israel does forced sterilization on black jews and there is no criticism of them preserving their ethnostate. clicke

Thanks. This is very interesting indeed.

I do not like the idea of the gov forcing them to work if they don't want to work they shouldn't be given the benefits that they currently have. Would it be better for a man to lose his freedom and keep his sperm or be given the choice to opt out of societal/parental responsibility by taking his seed? I would say giving them more responsibility increases the chances of them increasing meaning in their life which is much more gratifying and lasts longer than our animal instincts to indulge ourselves for momentary happiness. I don't know about forcing them to do it you'd have to convince me of the factors involved as i'm open to the idea but hesitant about the consequences that may follow.

The problem I have with your solution is that finding jobs may not be so easy or possible given the person's and society's conditions. It's not fair to take people out of welfare and offer them nothing in return. One thing is taking them out of welfare because they refused any jobs that the government proposed to them, another thing is simply taking them out of welfare and leave them with nothing.

You are just assuming that they don't want to work, but if this is true you should offer them jobs first and only if they refuse you take them out of welfare. Another problem I see is cheap labor, where you'd demand a lot of work from them and pay them a misery, which would justify their unwillingness to work.

I don't understand what you mean with giving them more responsibility being more gratifying. Isn't that a good thing?

Because we are in competition with minority groups who produce more children and will out breed us. Why should they control the nation and turn the united states into another 3rd world country?

Ok, I get it now. So basically you want to make their life hellish so that they stop reproducing and eventually the US becomes a white-only country. I am against this as I find it immoral. But let me ask you a few questions, from a logical perspective.

1. What makes you think that an oppressed people won't fight back? History has shown us that slavery usually ends with oppressed slaves fighting for their freedom, and usually succeeding. This results in life losses for both sides. Still, considering that whites are greater in number and hold the resources, in the event of a mutiny they could easily get it under control, and would have to execute the rebels. So why not just kill all the black people if that's what you're aiming for? Do you think an oppressed people will lick your boots if you aim for their destruction?
   
2. What makes you think that such tyrannical government would be accepted by the rest of the world and its own population? You may be that cruel of a person, but surely most people in the country would find this unacceptable regardless of the reasons. And the world would not stay silent. The US is powerful but not that powerful.
   
3. Wouldn't it be better to negotiate with African countries some way to deport those people?
   

even if i was a different race i'd still advocate for america to continue to be white.

If you were black would you advocate for your own destruction?

Keeping America white is one thing, oppressing black people is another thing. And trust me, if you oppress them it will be the end for whites in America. Why? Because people would eventually revolt and the multicultural agenda would be much more powerful and would seek to miscegenate people as quick as possible with the intent to make America a brown race. This kind of backfire happens all the time with the left. The more they oppress the right the more hate they seed, which is why we're seeing a rise of the "far-right".

Going back to your other justifications to go to war:

Is this the kind of world you wish to live in?

As for jobs there are plenty of stores/industries that would hire low educated people to do simple tasks such as food/retail. They can also specialize in practical work as i have mentioned like plumbing, mechanical engineering or electric work which only requires 1 or 2 years of exp of training. Another thing I should mention is as we are accelerating exponentially with technology the promise of stability comes more and more unglued. When we increase the wage some demographics will not be picked due to their lack of ability even with all the training and knowledge they'll receive by comparison they won't be able to compete so something akin to apartheid. Look up The Gini coefficient and how that relates to crime.

And does no one want those jobs? Are the employers running out of business because no one will work? Are those jobs paying enough to make a living and not kill the worker to death?

Another thing with the acceleration of technology is that physical jobs become scarce.

What do you want to do about Gini coefficient and crime, and how does race correlate?

I used to think more libertarian lines and get rid of such a wage altogether

If you remove the minimum wage you'll end up having slaves basically.

You think its because it was a lack of education and the contention i put forward is mostly one of biological significance.

I think it has to do with several factors. Race could be one of them. But you haven't presented any proof of that, only theories and assumptions.

The thing is the more acceptable the culture is with certain words the dictionary will change it due time. So far it is ambiguitous i would say the purpose of the words is probably more important than the word itself such as feminism wanting equality for everyone but really the proponents of the ideology want men to step down from their positions not really for equality but because they want to control the policies. Anyone who isn't a feminist they deem a misogynist even those who are proponents of egalitarianism advocate for gender equality but because the won't opt for the feminism label they are also cast in a similar light

Well, the definition of the words doesn't change, but due to their misuse new definitions can be added. Feminism is still about wanting equality, but there are many forms of feminism, and you got the 1st, 2nd and 3rd waves. Just as there are many forms of racism. I can defend that all races have a right to exist or that only my race has a right to exist. What makes a person racist is if they believe in racial superiority.

---

@Uri

1. Source?

2. "2.This phenomenon is bad and should be fought be Recieving national departments as well as non-Go's."

???

3. I disagree with why the US is doing it, but let's drop this topic.

4. You didn't answer my question.

5. Good point! I wonder what @LutiChris has to say about this.

[Uri]

2.the European societies should fight the formation of these gettos and integrate the immigrants into the society
4.OK. the amount of the people recieved should be limited so they won't exceed 40% of the population. once this number is reached, the given state should close its doors.