Cameroni

I must confess I have not read Sowell, he is a black marxist, or was a marxist, but of course so were Foucault and Adorno. No reason why politics should preclude interesting research. I will have a look, as it sounds interesting. Funnily enough I was just reading about Germans transplanted into the West, and apparently one of the points of friction was that Germans then would go out in the weekend for drinks ,making merry and going for walks. Something which the church going Anglo Saxons viewed with disdain then. How times have changed.

Excellent point. And with morality in particular the Asians provided Europeans with their blueprint, and developed many others of their own. Not to mention compassion with Buddhism. This is why I was saying we need to define not just who "White Culture" is, many disparate nations and races, but also in what exactly are they superior? In the development of morality and compassion, arguably the Asians were the leaders, and the Europeans followers. Even today. But I like this idea that a superior race would avoid to be involved in a fight. But the counter argument is that you are strong and superior if you can affect the world around you to your will. Is this true though? Maybe avoiding conflict is the superior marker. Hard to say.

The barbarity of the Aztecs, Mayans, Borneo Headhunters etc is undeniable, yet we see the exact the same thing in the early history of the Germanic tribes, the "sacrificial moors" tell their own stories. This extreme barbarity seems to be a phase of evolution, much like the Chimpanzee shows absolute cruelty..I quite agree that this depravity is part of human nature. There's plenty of fine achievements in European culture, like the ones you list. However, there are similar periods of cultural blossoming in a vast number of cultures, Japan, China, Indonesia, Iraq, even. To see our own European cultures as the only ones who go through such periods is not to see the full picture. However, the technological gap, the industrial revolution, this was arguably by far the most important. As we saw with Black Haw Down, only through the technological gap were the European/Americans able to defeat other people.

It took me a long time to understand why there are so many ladyboys in Thailand, Philippines etc. Turns out Asians have less testosterone, there are physiological reasons. It's pretty shocking. Looks interesting, I'll give it a shot.

There is some truth to this, one of the problems the Americans had with Black Hawk Down was that the general in charge insisted, once the rescue battalion was finally able to reach those stranded, that they all go pick up the dead body of the pilot. As the rules of engagement specified "no man left behind". As the pilot was wedged in the wreckage of the helicopter it took time to free his body from the twisted metal. This gave the Somalis time to once again reach the Americans trying to get out. They were almost out. But were then set upon again because they spent so long trying to free the body of the pilot they had to take with them. Hard to comprehend in the circumstances why the general in charge insisted on this. Since two other bodies were lost and then paraded by the Somalis through the street. In this mission the aim was to kidnap and extract two henchmen of a known criminal in Somalia. Nuking and shelling were therefore not an option. But you see what you're saying, only if the technological gap were fully exploited would the Americans have had a chance to win. In a fair fight, would they have lost therefore? And are they then superior or inferior?

Sounds very interesting, The most comprehensive attempt i have seen to rank cultures is Charles Murray's "Human Accomplishment". I don't agree with it, but like many things by Charles Murray worth a read. But in any event, looking at Black Hawk Down, where the US had a technological gap and still got beat by its Somali opponent, it does make you think, what if this culture did not have this technological gap and faced cultures like the Somalis. Could Americans prevail? Without the technological gap I mean.

Well, the helicopter was really a Chinese, Italian, German, Argentinian, French, American, Spanish affair. Somalis are more poetry and music people. They have several airlines of course, as well as technology companies, but the civil war hit them hard. However, if you accept, as I think you have to, that all nations are capable of building technology, while admittedly European nations have had for a long time a significant technological gap over other nations due to a large variety of factors clearly all nations today show aptitude for modern technology, then it comes down to the strategy, tactics and intelligent use of those weapons. Now in Somalia we had the US army, with Delta Force, supposedly the finest of the finest American infantry, their state of the art Black Hawk helicopters, sophisticated night vision, automatic rifles, etc etc, so a clear technological gap in favour of the Americans. And yet the Somalis were able to shoot down the Delta Force supermen like rabbits, shoot down the two Black Hawks and force the Americans ultimately to withdraw from Somalia. Now, if American culture were truly superior in intelligence or anything else, obviously it enjoyed a technological gap, however, the conduct of the US army and Delta Force in Somalia was far from impressive, if the American culture really were superior, surely they would have conducted themselves differently in Somalia. I think we can all agree. Begging Malaysian and Pakistani peace keepers to come and bail them out with tanks, I mean, it was just not a superior culture at work in any way.

Exactly. Which underlines that White Culture is no different and not superior to, say Somalis. I think the key thing is that Jews are a religion, not a race. There's jews from many races. Even the Nazis thought the Jews are an amalgam of many races in their day: "..for instance, in Rassenkunde des jüdischen Volkes ("Ethnology of the Jewish people"), Günther wrote that Jews predominantly belonged to the "Near Eastern race" (often known as the "Armenoid race").[270] He thought that Jews had become so racially mixed that they could possibly be regarded as a "race of the second-order".[270] He described Ashkenazi Jews as being a mixture of Near Easterners, Orientals, East Baltic peoples, Inner-Asians, Nordic peoples, Hamites and Negroes, and he described Sephardi Jews as being a mixture of Orientals, Near Easterners, Mediterranean peoples, Hamites, Nordic peoples, and Negroes." This was consistent with their view of most races, even the Germans were viewed this way: Dr. Ernst Brandis, a legal bureaucrat, who made an official comment about the Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honour and the Law for the Protection of the Hereditary Health of the German people on 18 October 1935, defined "German blood" as: The German people is no unitary race, rather it is composed of members of different races (of the Nordic, Phalian, Dinaric, Alpine, Mediterranean, East-Elbian race) and mixtures between these. The blood of all these races and their mixtures, which thus is found in the German people, represents 'German blood'. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_racial_theories In that sense the Nazis were significantly more sophisticated than the Smithsonian which talks of "White Culture". Really no such thing.

You know very well Walz lost and Vance won. Everybody who watched the debate knows it.

Your post first said 1920, then you put 1921, which is correct. So two Beryl Christies in the same small parish at around the same time. Hmmmmm I wouldn't put it past Candace she did it on purpose.

Well, it's just interesting she descended from a slave owner.

You changed it to 1921, well done. I did see that. But why is she calling the same woman in one photo her great grandmother and in another her grandmother?

Harris has Irish roots, the Irish say. https://irishheritagenews.ie/how-irish-is-kamala-harris-vice-presidents-irish-roots/

This is the death certificate for Beryl which says she died in 1960, before Harris was born. https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/272680650/beryl_christie-harris

I know Owens is not a great source. But she did produce the death certificate of the paternal grandmother of Harris. According to that doc she died in 1960. Before Harris was born. So how could the pic of Harris at 20 with her grandmother be genuine? And why does her grandmother look exactly like her great grandmother in the pic you posted? Owens is not saying that Harris has a white paternal grandmother, she's just calling out these strange inconsistencies in Harris book and asking why this inconsistency took place.

That's what Owens says, that this woman who Harris described as her great grandmother in one picture appears in another picture with the caption "grandmother", standing next to Kamala. But her grandmother died before she was born. According to the death certificate, which Owens obtained.

Kamala says in the book that is her great grandmother, not her grandmother, according to Candace Owens. But she described the same woman as her grandmother in another photo. Owens says.

Why would Kamala Harris lie about who her grandmother is though? If Candace Owen has a death certificate that proves her maternal grandmother died before she was born, why does she describe the same woman in one picture as grandmother and in another as great grandmother? It's just very strange.

Candace Owens fact checked her book. She claims the black woman woman in the photo she described as "grandmother" died before Kamala was born. She produced the death certificate to prove her point.

Don't tar the beautiful elegant Austrian dance with the Minnesotan nervous, bug eye, stary man. It's just wrong.

No they don't. That's not how 538 rank them.

No, the fact that the article starts by quoting almost verbatim NATO website propaganda actually made me suspicious about the source. But it's clear why the article is playing up the history angle, they want to make the argument that there is a grand Russian conspiracy to revive ancient Greater Russia and therefore it was not the West's fault. In this the article fails miserably. Contrary to your claim it does not explore the Western lies and deception regarding NATO expansion. Nor does it explain Russia's legitimate concerns about Seavastopol and the fleet. Because of course it's not a balanced article. It seeks to impute a historical basis for Russian foreign policy which the evidence does not support. Clearly Putin was guided by very modern developments in real life. The article actually repeatedly claims explicitly, but falsely, that Russia wanted all of Ukraine. Which, again the evidence does not support.

Yeah, I saw that. Apparently Kamala lied in a book and passed a black woman off as her grandmother, according to Candace Owens.

28 billion Soros paid his foundation. Iron Dome cost 1.6 billion. Soros could have built almost 20 iron domes. Lol.

But it was Vance who left the best impression with viewers, after a strong start against a nervy opponent and despite dodging a question on if Trump lost the 2020 election. According to the DailyMail.com/J.L Partners poll of 801 likely voters, 50 percent said Vance won the debate compared to just 43 percent who said Walz was the victor. In an unfortunate slip of the tongue he then said: 'I've become friends with school shooters'. It's unclear what he meant to say. Another viewer who was full of praise for Vance was the former president, who spent the night commentating on every development on the New York stage. 'JD crushed it! Walz was a Low IQ Disaster - Very much like Kamala,' Trump said in one of his many Truth Social posts during the evening. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13914759/Who-won-debate-J-D-Vance-Tim-Walz-poll.html