Welcome to Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate Forum

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

Aryan/Wypipo are the Main Characters of Real Life

Source: my ass
Lol. Look who's asking for source now. The one who hasn't provided one source for arab superiority.
Arab IQ is still higher than Indian IQ. Even pakis have higher IQ than indians. And Chinese may have higher IQ but they're ugly as fuck compared to Arabs.
And yet arabs are lacking in all intellectual fields in comparison.
Not an Arab or Asian Turk. Needles to say you're wrong anyways since Turk Asians came to Mena thanks to seljuks
In antiquity were nomads, when less whiter cultures had already developed civilisation. Contemporarily they are ruled over by other races. Not the shining beacons of "white superiority" if you ask me.
Not an Arab or Asian Turk. Needles to say you're wrong anyways since Turk Asians came to Mena thanks to seljuks
Being factually incorrect doesn't look good on your part. Not that you don't provide proof for your own ridiculious claims. You deny the straight up facts about Turks being brought over as slaves to Arabia and Persia during tha caliphates.


Appearance factors into superiority.
No it doesn't. The only reason YOU believe so is because YOU and YOUR race having NOTHING to show for yourselves except appearance. This whole thread is just one big inferiority complex spurge on your part.
Chinese being more relevant than them due tp geopolitical factors does not change that Turk genes are more desirae than Chink genes. This is like saying China being more geopolitically relevant than Estonia means Estonians are inferior to them
That still doesn't prove that Turks are superior to chinese. Only their looks are desirable. Again your point is hollow.

And btw. Chinese ARE superior to Estonians. That's the reality of the situation. You can cry like an autistic baby about "white skin" all you want but it wouldn't change the OBJECTIVE REALITY OF CHINESE SUPERIORITY.
Evidence has been provided. Not my problem yo7 have your head up your ads.
Lmao how can you even prove that Curryland would've been more prosperous if Turks lived their? What proof?

You have not just provided 0 evidence for your claim but you have are now blatantly lying about it. 0. Evidence. Provided.
Yes other factors matter, but despite how much of a coping curry you are, even I can tell you don't believe that about Africans and Australian abos, so I'm not entertaining a troll argument.
If you can claim that curryland would be more prosperous under turks then I am well within my rights to genuinely claim that Arabia would be more prosperous under Africans.
Saudi is safer and cleaner and more advanced than India.
I've already covered relatively recent(last 70 years) Arab success based on their geography/luck etc.
Kel stop trying to lump fucking curries who have Australian abo blood with Chinese. It just makes you look embarassing.
Why not? If I'm going to destroy your thesis I might as well use all the examples I can get.

Chinese are gooker than the more caucosoid looking turks/arabs.

Curries are darker than the white looking turks/arabs

And people of both these races have achievements superior to arabs. So I'm gonna use both examples.

Its not like I'm using Somalis as an example because I know their success is not as great as arabs. But curries/gooks ARE superior and using them perfectly proves my point.
at is Petra?
What is Mecca?
Kek Arabs all lived near the west and south parts beacsue that's where the fertile land was. Like @Undervalued said the fact that people who lived on a subcontinent that has 5% Arabable/fertile land managed to accomplish all that they did speaks volumes about their abilities. Meanwhile India has far more rain fair more fertile land yet is still shit compared to Saudi
Petra? I don't know. Maybe some sand shithole nobody ever cared about? I like how you are not even contesting that arabs were a shithole before they hit oil. You talk of accomplishments but all I see are poor desert dwellers who were ruled by turks and ottomans for most of medieval history. Before striking oil and becoming western stooges.

Are these the "white skin gods" that are supposed to be superior to japs/chinks/curries?
Stop the oil cope, curry nigger. Nigeria and venuzula also have oil yet don't have the intell3ctual capability to create a stable country.
They are both relatively stable countries. They don't have the relative advantages besides oil that Arabs do. And currently I would choose to live in either of those than live in Iraq or Syria.
Yep again I don't deny that geopolitics plays a role. Moroccans managed to conquer iberians for 700 years due to ideological and geographical advantages. Still doesn't change that Spanish are genetically more desirable than Moroccans.
Yes. But that doesn't help your hypothesis that peoples with lighter skins have superior cultures. Infact all this talk of geopolitics weakens your arguments.
Don't act like curryland is any different when it comes to their servitude to America and israel:feelskek:
Last I checked China, India and Iran had independent foreign policies. As compared to Japan or South Korea or most of the Arab world which are under western thumb. There's a reason most Arab countries are dictatorships.
Beacsue the closer you are Aryans in terms of genetics the better off you generally tend to be
I was asking what geopolitical advantages got to do with racial superiority. So according to you arabs struck oil because they were aryans?
:feelstastyman::feelstastyman::feelstastyman::feelstastyman::feelstastyman:

If that was the case Arabs wouldn't have conquered people from Spain to China. Arabs from saudi also almost never leave their country, so you will naturally see less of them in the west being influential compared to othe Mena who are more commonly found in the west
Arabs conquered china? What? Is this another one of your delusional fantasies. They barely made it to curryland. Conquest of Persia, an empire in decline, was their biggest success. And that was when Arabs peaked. Nothing to show since then.
Curries are 1 billion. No shit a few of them are gonna have high enough IQ to escape their shitholes. Still doesn't change that Saudi has higher IQ than India no matter how much it makes you seethe and squirm
Oh, don't get me wrong. I wasn't taking about curries/rice living in the west. If I did that it wouldn't even be a competition lol. Arabs would lose even harder than they already are.

I am talking strictly about things people from China, India, Iran, Japan etc managed to achieve within their own countries. In fileds like science,technology,military,space exploration etc. Which mog anything any arabs have done in their countries. All of the former strictly less white, less caucosoid than arabs.
And Turks and mongols look whiter than chinese:feelskek::feelskek::feelskek:
And? What's your point? Chinese still are a superior people with far more success than turks.

So what if they want to look white? What if turks are white? That doesn't prove your hypothesis that turks are superior

Only in your deluded mind would turkish white skin make them objectively superior to chinese. Because turkish people are so brutally inferior that they have nothing going for them except white skin.
Turkic genes are more desirable than Chinese genes

Just like how Arab genes are more desirable than Indian genes. Hence why many Arab men marry white women while Indian and Asian men ARE pretty much synonyms for turbo incels
The only thing desirable are the looks. Nothing else. Thus your thesis that white skin brings cultural superiority stands unproven. Infact:
The very existence of Arabs as a people proves without any doubt that white skin doesn't make a race superior. Otherwise arabs would be superior to Chinese or Japanese or Indians.
Put geopolitics aside and that is 100% the case.
Its funny how you ascribe chinese success to geopolitics rather than racial superiority when in fact modern Arab financial success is 100% owed to geography and not to anything that actual arab people did. The irony.
Ask any person if they would want a Turk wife or a Chinese wife and they will pick Turk wife

And any person if they would want an Arab husband or an Indian husband and they will pick Arab husband
Marriage is based on looks. People would go for the better looking sample whatever their race.

Still doesn't prove that arabs have any kind of cultural success or superiority over curries or gooks. Actually:
The very existence of Arabs as a people proves without any doubt that white skin doesn't make a race superior. Otherwise arabs would be superior to Chinese or Japanese or Indians.
 
Last edited:
And btw. Chinese ARE superior to Estonians. That's the reality of the situation.
:feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek:

1600753272-5f698e783a6ce.jpg


kek, yep I think we're done here.

Listen, listen, get this through your head:

Every human on earth would prefer to be an Estonia over a Chink
Every human on earth would prefer to be a Turk over a Chink
Every human on earth would prefer to be an Arab over a Street Shitter

Saudi10
 
kek, yep I think we're done here.
Actually we were already done the moment I mentioned "Arabs":feelsgah:. This debate was already done and over. My point proven. Its all just fun and games since then.

But let me correct what YOU should get through your head.
Every human on earth would prefer to LOOK LIKE an Estonia over a Chink
Every human on earth would prefer to LOOK LIKE a Turk over a Chink
Every human on earth would prefer to LOOK LIKE an Arab over a Street Shitter

View attachment 529857
And even here the "every" part is hugely debatable. Still doesn't prove the "le most aryan looking always win" Bs that came out of yo ass.

Btw, you know what you remind me of OP? This meme:feelshaha:


This is really emblemic of the situation here. While the rest of the world is making huge strides in all the modern fields, these niggers are here busy debating who has "white skin", "blonde hair" And which one is blessed by the "sTrOnG SpErM":feelskek::feelskek:
 
Last edited:
And even here the "every" part is hugely debatable.
It actually isn't debatable.

Curries always cast light-skinned, Arab-looking actors for a reason. Many bollywood people tend to look like or be from Kashmiri/Afghan/Paki.

Currylife


Asian women would all choose Estonian men over Chink manlets. Hence why Asian men are the symbol of inceldom.

1637231489539


Chinese women constantly get surgeries for their eyes to resemble Turkic women.

7e8f95afbcabfaecb964106d56105367--olivier-beautiful-people.jpg


Still doesn't prove the "le most aryan looking always win" Bs that came out of yo ass.
I never said this. Let me repeat that again so it gets through to you: I never said this. The fact that your dumbass came up with this argument out of nowhere shows how assblasted you are:feelsdevil: Go back and read my OP and learn reading comprehension

While the rest of the world is making huge strides in all the modern fields
Who cares? Genuinley, how does "muh strides" benefit the average Indian male, the average Chink male, the average Jap male? They're all marriagless, shut-in nobodies who are still genetically inferior to their Arab/Turkic equaivalents who live in societies where marriage is viable for them.
these niggers are here busy debating who has "white skin", "blonde hair" And which one is blessed by the "sTrOnG SpErM"
Notice how no one ever argues about who is browner or yellower? Everyone always argues who is whiter.

Genetics > muh tech, muh land. Greeks and Turks are indeed better than Indians and Chinks no matter how much technology they cope with.:feelsokman: No amount of techmaxxxing is changing gook women and curry women from preferring white men and arab men over their own. Beauty is true superiority, everything else is secondary. As an incel, you should be aware of that. A chink women will choose a broke Estonian man over a rich, manlet chinese man.

e76.jpeg
86f94pvanij71.png
4lWXp3I
 
It actually isn't debatable.

Curries always cast light-skinned, Arab-looking actors for a reason. Many bollywood people tend to look like or be from Kashmiri/Afghan/Paki.

View attachment 530407

Asian women would all choose Estonian men over Chink manlets. Hence why Asian men are the symbol of inceldom.

View attachment 530406

Chinese women constantly get surgeries for their eyes to resemble Turkic women.

7e8f95afbcabfaecb964106d56105367--olivier-beautiful-people.jpg



I never said this. Let me repeat that again so it gets through to you: I never said this. The fact that your dumbass came up with this argument out of nowhere shows how assblasted you are:feelsdevil: Go back and read my OP and learn reading comprehension


Who cares? Genuinley, how does "muh strides" benefit the average Indian male, the average Chink male, the average Jap male? They're all marriagless, shut-in nobodies who are still genetically inferior to their Arab/Turkic equaivalents who live in societies where marriage is viable for them.

Notice how no one ever argues about who is browner or yellower? Everyone always argues who is whiter.

Genetics > muh tech, muh land. Greeks and Turks are indeed better than Indians and Chinks no matter how much technology they cope with.:feelsokman: No amount of techmaxxxing is changing gook women and curry women from preferring white men and arab men over their own. Beauty is true superiority, everything else is secondary. As an incel, you should be aware of that. A chink women will choose a broke Estonian man over a rich, manlet chinese man.

e76.jpeg
86f94pvanij71.png
View attachment 530412
I love how you've shifted the goalposts now. I guess even you don't want to argue against the glaring disadvantages arabs/turks have compared to darker and gooker asian races. my job here is done. Proven without doubt that inherent racial superiority has nothing to do with color of skin.

Its actually very telling that you consider skin color/lookism as the one and only factor since that's literally the only thing arabs/turks have going for themselves. Its circular logic.

In that regard even a jamaican nigger can claim that that the ability to run fast is the only factor that determines racial superiority, thus making africans racially superior to arabs/turks/chinks/curries and even europeans.

Even a jamaican nigger can argue that nobody wants to be the slower race. Lol. This is EXACTLY what you sound like when talking about turks and their lack of melanin
 
Last edited:
Lol. Look who's asking for source now. The one who hasn't provided one source for arab superiority.
Islam
And yet arabs are lacking in all intellectual fields in comparison.
Still higher IQ than Indians
In antiquity were nomads, when less whiter cultures had already developed civilisation. Contemporarily they are ruled over by other races. Not the shining beacons of "white superiority" if you ask me.
Their nomadic lifestyle and geography is the reason Central Asia is underdeveloped, no different than Mongolia. Has nothing to do with their genetics.
Being factually incorrect doesn't look good on your part. Not that you don't provide proof for your own ridiculious claims. You deny the straight up facts about Turks being brought over as slaves to Arabia and Persia during tha caliphates.
Obviously some did, considering they lived on the Silk Road, but the bulk of Central Asian genes in MENA came from Seljuks
No it doesn't.
It actually does, hence why a chinese women would choose an Estonian man over a Chink man regardless of money/tech coping.
The only reason YOU believe so is because YOU and YOUR race having NOTHING to show for yourselves except appearance. This whole thread is just one big inferiority complex spurge on your part.
My people conquered Balkans, Caucasus, North Africa and Middle East for 600+ years lol. Meanwhile, your curry race has nothing to show aside from constantly being conquered.
That still doesn't prove that Turks are superior to chinese. Only their looks are desirable. Again your point is hollow.
It does, because genetics > technology
Lmao how can you even prove that Curryland would've been more prosperous if Turks lived their? What proof?
Turks have higher IQ than street shitters and are more attractive than street shitters:smonk: Plus history already shows this: Look at india under Turkic rule (Mughals) VS now.
If you can claim that curryland would be more prosperous under turks then I am well within my rights to genuinely claim that Arabia would be more prosperous under Africans.
No, because Negros are lower IQ than Arbas while Turks are higher IQ than Indians:feelsdevil:
I've already covered relatively recent(last 70 years) Arab success based on their geography/luck etc.
georgraphy/luck has nothing to do with saudi being cleaner/safer/less criminal than India. It has to do with the morals of the people that live their (they're not cow worshipping poos)
Why not? If I'm going to destroy your thesis I might as well use all the examples I can get.

Chinese are gooker than the more caucosoid looking turks/arabs.

Curries are darker than the white looking turks/arabs

And people of both these races have achievements superior to arabs. So I'm gonna use both examples.

Its not like I'm using Somalis as an example because I know their success is not as great as arabs. But curries/gooks ARE superior and using them perfectly proves my point.
Curries will never be superior to Arabs no matter how much you cope
Chinks will never be superior to Turks no matter how much you cope

by your logic, Irish are inferior to Indians because they are less relevant/have less achievments than Indians. Do you believe this?

Redhead 2

Petra? I don't know. Maybe some sand shithole nobody ever cared about?
coping this bad:feelskek: petra is a very famous site
I like how you are not even contesting that arabs were a shithole before they hit oil. You talk of accomplishments but all I see are poor desert dwellers who were ruled by turks and ottomans for most of medieval history. Before striking oil and becoming western stooges.
living in a harsh enviroment unsuited for human life =/=living in a shithole. I get your feelings are hurt, but let's not start being disingenious here. Arabia was underdeveloped for the same reason places lik Siberia and Northern Canada are still relatively underdeveloped. Or how Scandinavia was underdeveloped compared to Med Europe during medevil times
They are both relatively stable countries.
Yeah, if my relative you mean relative to the other Negro and Latino countries around them, but they're still inferior to Arabia.
They don't have the relative advantages besides oil that Arabs do. And currently I would choose to live in either of those than live in Iraq or Syria.
Yeah, countries destroyed by war by Jewmericans. Iraqi/Syrian genetics would still be superior to Nigerian/Venuzualn genetics.
Yes. But that doesn't help your hypothesis that peoples with lighter skins have superior cultures. Infact all this talk of geopolitics weakens your arguments.
I never said that. I said people with more Aryan features end up with more success as a result of their genetics being supeiror. I did not deny that geopolitics play a role. If you put a much of Swedes on an island with no resources and you put Somalis on an island with ALL the resources they would need, the Somalis would end up more successful than the Swedes. That is geopolitics. It still would not change the genetics of Swedes being more desirable/supeiror to Somalis.
Last I checked China, India and Iran had independent foreign policies. As compared to Japan or South Korea or most of the Arab world which are under western thumb. There's a reason most Arab countries are dictatorships.
Iran is being sanctions by most of the world while its people starve. India is America's main and pretty much only ally in Asia. And China is currently a powerhouse.
I was asking what geopolitical advantages got to do with racial superiority. So according to you arabs struck oil because they were aryans?
:feelstastyman::feelstastyman::feelstastyman::feelstastyman::feelstastyman:
No, but genes still play a role in their ability to make use of that oil.
Arabs conquered china? What? Is this another one of your delusional fantasies. They barely made it to curryland. Conquest of Persia, an empire in decline, was their biggest success. And that was when Arabs peaked. Nothing to show since then.
By china I mean the modern borders of china. "real" china is along the eastern coastlines.
Oh, don't get me wrong. I wasn't taking about curries/rice living in the west. If I did that it wouldn't even be a competition lol. Arabs would lose even harder than they already are.
Rice/curries in the west are the biggest fucking losers wtf are you on about? the leading cause of death of Asian males in america is suicide because all their fucking women are gobbling white cock:feelsEhh: probably the same goes for curry women with whole love jihad going on.

And like I said, saudis barely every leave saudi. Most other Arabs in the west are iraqi,syria, egyptian, etc.
I am talking strictly about things people from China, India, Iran, Japan etc managed to achieve within their own countries. In fileds like science,technology,military,space exploration etc.
If we are talking about gulfies within gulf countries they also excel at these things.
Which mog anything any arabs have done in their countries. All of the former strictly less white, less caucosoid than arabs.
Look at dubai and Qatar and compare them to India:feelsLSD:
And? What's your point? Chinese still are a superior people
Not genetically.
with far more success than turks.
Define success. Because the average chink male suffers all throughout his life both as a wagecuck and as a cucked incel.

Turks have more success than Chinese as a whole in pretty much all fronts where it matters
So what if they want to look white? What if turks are white? That doesn't prove your hypothesis that turks are superior
Why do chinks want to resemble Turks if by your logic chinks are superior to Turks? Why would anyone want to make themselves resemble a race that is inferior to them?
Only in your deluded mind would turkish white skin make them objectively superior to chinese.
And in the minds of Chinese women too.

They bleach their skin white and get eyelid surgery to look like turks:feelsohh:
Because turkish people are so brutally inferior that they have nothing going for them except white skin.
Again, this is not due to genetics. It was due to geography
The only thing desirable are the looks. Nothing else. Thus your thesis that white skin brings cultural superiority stands unproven. Infact:
I never said white skin brings cultural superiority. Again stop arguing of you can't even understand my premise
Its funny how you ascribe chinese success to geopolitics
Because it is partially due to that + their IQ + their bug-like nature to work without regard for safety, hence all the liveleak vids
rather than racial superiority
To who? Arabs? Chinks may have higher IQ than Arabs, but they're buttugly, and the latter matters more. I don't deny Chinese are genetically higher IQ than Arabs but that does not decide racial superiority.
when in fact modern Arab financial success is 100% owed to geography and not to anything that actual arab people did.
How do Arabs benefit from their geography when Arabia is literally the most barren land to live in?
Marriage is based on looks. People would go for the better looking sample whatever their race.
And Arabs > Curries, and Turks > Chinks :feelshaha:
Still doesn't prove that arabs have any kind of cultural success or superiority over curries or gooks. Actually:
Islam is cultural success. Deny it all you want though.
 
Last edited:
Islam

Still higher IQ than Indians

Their nomadic lifestyle and geography is the reason Central Asia is underdeveloped, no different than Mongolia. Has nothing to do with their genetics.

Obviously some did, considering they lived on the Silk Road, but the bulk of Central Asian genes in MENA came from Seljuks

It actually does, hence why a chinese women would choose an Estonian man over a Chink man regardless of money/tech coping.

My people conquered Balkans, Caucasus, North Africa and Middle East for 600+ years lol. Meanwhile, your curry race has nothing to show aside from constantly being conquered.

It does, because genetics > technology

Turks have higher IQ than street shitters and are more attractive than street shitters:smonk: Plus history already shows this: Look at india under Turkic rule (Mughals) VS now.

No, because Negros are lower IQ than Arbas while Turks are higher IQ than Indians:feelsdevil:

georgraphy/luck has nothing to do with saudi being cleaner/safer/less criminal than India. It has to do with the morals of the people that live their (they're not cow worshipping poos)

Curries will never be superior to Arabs no matter how much you cope
Chinks will never be superior to Turks no matter how much you cope

My your logic, Irish are inferior to Indians because they are less relevant/have less achievments than Indians. Do you believe this?

View attachment 530418

coping this bad:feelskek: petra is a very famous site

living in a harsh enviroment unsuited for human life =/=living in a shithole. I get your feelings are hurt, but let's not start being disingenious here. Arabia was underdeveloped for the same reason places lik Siberia and Northern Canada are still relatively underdeveloped. Or how Scandinavia was underdeveloped compared to Med Europe during medevil times

Yeah, if my relative you mean relative to the other Negro and Latino countries around them, but they're still inferior to Arabia.

Yeah, countries destroyed by war by Jewmericans. Iraqi/Syrian genetics would still be superior to Nigerian/Venuzualn genetics.

I never said that. I said people with more Aryan features end up with more success as a result of their genetics being supeiror. I did not deny that geopolitics play a role. If you put a much of Swedes on an island with no resources and you put Somalis on an island with ALL the resources they would need, the Somalis would end up more successful than the Swedes. That is geopolitics. It still would not change the genetics of Swedes being more desirable/supeiror to Somalis.

Iran is being sanctions by most of the world while its people starve. India is America's main and pretty much only ally in Asia. And China is currently a powerhouse.

No, but genes still play a role in their ability to make use of that oil.

By china I mean the modern borders of china. "real" china is along the eastern coastlines.

Rice/curries in the west are the biggest fucking losers wtf are you on about? the leading cause of death of Asian males in america is suicide because all their fucking women are gobbling white cock:feelsEhh: probably the same goes for curry women with whole love jihad going on.

And like I said, saudis barely every leave saudi. Most other Arabs in the west are iraqi,syria, egyptian, etc.

If we are talking about gulfies within gulf countries they also excel at these things.

Look at dubai and Qatar and compare them to India:feelsLSD:

Not genetically.

Define success. Because the average chink male suffers all throughout his life both as a wagecuck and as a cucked incwl.

Turks have more success than Chinese as a whole in pretty much all fronts whee it matters

Why do chinks want to resemble Turks if by your logic chinks are superior to Turks? Why would anyone want to make themselves resume a race that is inferior to them?

And in the minds of Chinese women too.

They bleach their skin white and get eyelid surgery to look like turks:feelsohh:

Again, this is not due to genetics. It was die to geography

I never said white skin brings cultural superiority. Again stop arguing of you can't even understand my premise

Because it is partially due to that + their IQ + their bug-like nature to work without regard for safety, hence all the liveleak vids

To who? Arabs? Chinks may have higher IQ than Arabs, but they're buttugly, and the latter matters more. I don't deny Chinese are genetically higher IQ than Arabs but that does not decide racial superiority.

How do Arabs benefit from their geography when Arabia is literally the most barren land to live in?

And Arabs > Curries, and Turks > Chinks :feelshaha:

Islam is cultural success. Deny it all you want though.
It's over for you
 
Ethnicels here have such a cuck fetish for whites I miss braincels
 
I love how you've shifted the goalposts now. I guess even you don't want to argue against the glaring disadvantages arabs/turks have compared to darker and gooker asian races. my job here is done. Proven without doubt that inherent racial superiority has nothing to do with color of skin.
I never shifted goalposts. Again read my OP and learn reading comprehension
Its actually very telling that you consider skin color/lookism as the one and only factor
I don't. Again learn reading comprehension
since that's literally the only thing arabs/turks have going for themselves. Its circular logic.
It isn't but keep coping. Even if this as the only things Arabs and Turks had going for them that itself is enough to make Indians and chinks wish to be like them:feelsokman:
In that regard even a jamaican nigger can claim that that the ability to run fast is the only factor that determines racial superiority, thus making africans racially superior to arabs/turks/chinks/curries and even europeans.
In speed Africans are indeed superior. Yes.
Even a jamaican nigger can argue that nobody wants to be the slower race. Lol. This is EXACTLY what you sound like when talking about turks and their lack of melanin
No body wants to be slow. I agree. I too would rather be a tall fast Jamaican over a short slow Asian who copes with muh IQ. Especially since even black men are seen as more masculine than Asian men:feelskek:
It's over for you
Wdym
Ethnicels here have such a cuck fetish for whites I miss braincels
Elaborate
 
I will never forgive this world for making me a quadroon. To be so close, yet so far
 
I will never forgive this world for making me a quadroon. To be so close, yet so far
Are you American? And quadroons are not bad. I know a 50%/mulatto switz Somali and she legit looks like this Sicilian woman

8d680f95bd3103e37b7ff514708b7971

You're not white and it's completely irrelevant who mogs who or how white some ethnics can look. It's over for you
Whiteness is a social construct to be blunt. Depending on who you ask, someone may or may not be white.

And looking white is very much relevant since it is usually and indication of how white one is. Lol so idk what you mean

How is it over for me?
 
Are you American? And quadroons are not bad. I know a 50%/mulatto switz Somali and she legit looks like this Sicilian woman

View attachment 530439

Whiteness is a social construct to be blunt. Depending on who you ask, someone may or may not be white.

And looking white is very much relevant since it is usually and indication of how white one is. Lol so idk what you mean

How is it over for me?
It's not a social construct. It's beyond over for you. Stop obsessing with this topic
 
Never denied the small window of Arab success during Caliphat era. Its still less compared to curries/persians/chinks thousands of years of ancient cultural history but I guess its something.
Their nomadic lifestyle and geography is the reason Central Asia is underdeveloped, no different than Mongolia. Has nothing to do with their genetics.
And the geography and lifestyle of niggers is the reason they did not develop, otherwise they are racially superior to arabs:feelsEhh:
Still higher IQ than Indians
Well atleast you have conceded that Arab achievements are lacking. We might be getting somewhere in the quest to open your eyes to reality.
Obviously some did, considering they lived on the Silk Road, but the bulk of Central Asian genes in MENA came from Seljuks
That's categorically not true. Seljuk's started turkish dominance in middle east but that's not how turkish people arrived. Migrations have been going on for a long time before that, including Arab slavery of turkish nomads.
It actually does, hence why a chinese women would choose an Estonian man over a Chink man regardless of money/tech coping.
So according to you the sole determinant of racial superiority is what women like? Retarded theory. Maybe it is to YOU because YOU have nothing to show for yourself except lighter skin.
My people conquered Balkans, Caucasus, North Africa and Middle East for 600+ years lol. Meanwhile, your curry race has nothing to show aside from constantly being conquered.
At this point I may ask what do you mean by "your" race. Arabs or turks? Because Arabs did nothing but get ruled by turks for the last 1000 years or so. And turks got decimated by mongols and arabs before that. Tho I never denied turk success in the field of conquest (in medieval era only) . Even if they lack to curries/rice in all other fields.

Why would curries feel the need to conquer if their lands had enough abundance? Holding an empire over all of curryland(or china) is hard enough already. These are not exactly desert wastelands you know.
It does, because genetics > technology
Maybe to YOU, because the lack of melanin in YOUR skin is the only thing you have going on for YOU. That is not a good look if you want to be considered "superior" Lol
Turks have higher IQ than street shitters and are more attractive than street shitters:smonk: Plus history already shows this: Look at india under Turkic rule (Mughals) VS now.
So you have conceded that you have No real proof that curryland would be more successful if it was populated by turks? Does that mean anything you say from now on has no weight? Since you've shown you make hollow claims without any basis.

In terms of wealth curryland has always been more successful than middle east, no matter the race or religion of the ruler sitting at top. (Until very recent 70 years history when arabs struck oil). So your other point is mute. And you've shown you cannot support your claims.

Until you prove, without a second doubt, that if all 1.4 billion curries became turks tomorrow then curryland would become far more successful than it is now, I will consider this line of debate ended.
No, because Negros are lower IQ than Arbas while Turks are higher IQ than Indians:feelsdevil:
So are you claiming that prosperity of a region or race is causally linked to their iq? Can you quote a study on that(I don't want correlation, I want causation).

Remember your claim that curryland would be more prosperous if it was populated by turks is a pretty big one. Your paltry diversions won't do. Either prove it with authority or leave it
georgraphy/luck has nothing to do with saudi being cleaner/safer/less criminal than India. It has to do with the morals of the people that live their (they're not cow worshipping poos)
Saudi's were sand hut dwellers before they hit oil and west started to invest in them. Case closed. Geography has literally everything to do with their success, which is ironic considering you ascribe Chinese success to geopolitics.
Curries will never be superior to Arabs no matter how much you cope
Chinks will never be superior to Turks no matter how much you cope
All the proof presented says otherwise. But you'll ignore it. You'll ignore technological advancements, you'll ignore military, you'll ignore rich cultural history.

But you'll talk about light skin, because:

Arabs/Turks are so low on the totempole that they've got nothing besides the lack of melanin going for them.

, Irish are inferior to Indians because they are less relevant/have less achievments than Indians. Do you believe this?
I didn't say that, you did. Where did you get the idea that Irish people have less achievements than Indians? I don't know about that. Maybe if you can prove this claim then we'll talk. Racially speaking I consider Irish people under the monolith of European whites anyway.
coping this bad:feelskek: petra is a very famous site
Lmao. You are proving my point for me.
living in a harsh enviroment unsuited for human life =/=living in a shithole. I get your feelings are hurt, but let's not start being disingenious here. Arabia was underdeveloped for the same reason places lik Siberia and Northern Canada are still relatively underdeveloped. Or how Scandinavia was underdeveloped compared to Med Europe during medevil times
All I hear are excuses for the fact that Arab was a relative shithole compared to rest of the world until they hit oil. I'm not even sure what you're trying to prove here. This has nothing to do with racial superiority or inferiority.
Yeah, if my relative you mean relative to the other Negro and Latino countries around them, but they're still inferior to Arabia.
By relative I mean more stable than war torn Yemen, Iraq and Syria.

They had oil but none of the other advantages that Arabs did. Their countries are still more liveable than certain Arab countries. You tried to use them as an example that recent Arab success is not owed to oil, but considering these factors you failed.
Yeah, countries destroyed by war by Jewmericans. Iraqi/Syrian genetics would still be superior to Nigerian/Venuzualn genetics.
You did not quote Nigerian/Venenzuelans to point out their genetic inferiority. You quoted them to show that Arab success is not owed to oil. And you failed in that regard noting the factors I mentioned above.
I never said that. I said people with more Aryan features end up with more success as a result of their genetics being supeiror. I did not deny that geopolitics play a role. If you put a much of Swedes on an island with no resources and you put Somalis on an island with ALL the resources they would need, the Somalis would end up more successful than the Swedes. That is geopolitics. It still would not change the genetics of Swedes being more desirable/supeiror to Somalis.
Shifting your goalposts again. I'd advice you to re read the title of your thread and its content. Its actually obvious that you needed to do this under the weight of utter success Chinese/Indians/Persians have over Arabs. (All less white races)
Iran is being sanctions by most of the world while its people starve. India is America's main and pretty much only ally in Asia. And China is currently a powerhouse.
So you concede that Arabia is under western thumb and Iran has apolicy relatively independent foriegn policy. That was the original discussion. Do you really think that India is an American ally in the same vein as, say, Saudi Arabia? Well atleast you recognise Chinese independence.

The above 3 are still nowhere close to how Arab/Turkish politics is controlled bu foreign powers
No, but genes still play a role in their ability to make use of that oil.
I love how convoluted one can get when faced against cold hard facts.
By china I mean the modern borders of china. "real" china is along the eastern coastlines.
That's still bullshit lol. Either you are deliberately lying or you are deluded. I would go with the latter. Arabs never reached China.
Rice/curries in the west are the biggest fucking losers wtf are you on about? the leading cause of death of Asian males in america is suicide because all their fucking women are gobbling white cock:feelsEhh: probably the same goes for curry women with whole love jihad going on.

I pointed to you the success in various fields that gooks/curries have over Arabs

Your argued that if certain high iq curries/gooks among the 1 billion leave for the west and achieve things, doesn't mean curries/gooks are overall superior to arabs

I counter argued that I am not even comparing western curry/gook achievements to Arabs because if I did that Arabs wouldn't even have a leg to stand on. I am actually referring to things curry/gooks achieved in their own countries in various fields that still mog Arabs.

But now you go on a TANGENT about curry/gooks commiting suicide or having less success in dating in the west

YOU ARE SHIFTING GOALPOSTS AGAIN AND AGAIN. WHICH IS A SIGN THAT YOU ARE LOSING.

I guess you have conceded that in terms of achievements curries/gooks do mog Arabs. Moving on.
If we are talking about gulfies within gulf countries they also excel at these things.
But not as much as curries/gooks. Thus weakening the premise of this thread
Look at dubai and Qatar and compare them to India:feelsLSD:
I've already covered the relatively recent Arab financial success(last 70 years) owing to oil/geography. You can re read my old posts to see them.

Thus my point about chinks and curries having achievements in other, more genetically linked fields, over Arabs still stands.

Not genetically.

Define success. Because the average chink male suffers all throughout his life both as a wagecuck and as a cucked incel.

Turks have more success than Chinese as a whole in pretty much all fronts where it matters

Why do chinks want to resemble Turks if by your logic chinks are superior to Turks? Why would anyone want to make themselves resemble a race that is inferior to them?

And in the minds of Chinese women too.

They bleach their skin white and get eyelid surgery to look like turks:feelsohh:

Again, this is not due to genetics. It was due to geography

I never said white skin brings cultural superiority. Again stop arguing of you can't even understand my premise

Because it is partially due to that + their IQ + their bug-like nature to work without regard for safety, hence all the liveleak vids

To who? Arabs? Chinks may have higher IQ than Arabs, but they're buttugly, and the latter matters more. I don't deny Chinese are genetically higher IQ than Arabs but that does not decide racial superiority.
All this translates to: "Chinese/Indian people brutally mog Arabs/Turks in literally every field and this makes me angry. So I am going to make looks/pale skin the only criteria of competition where the latter may have a fleeting chance"

I've said this before already but since you can't read I'll repeat it again:

It is UTTERLY IRONIC that you ascribe Chinese success to Geography, and not genetics, when INFACT ARAB success is literally FULLY owed to GEOGRAPHY/OIL
And Arabs > Curries, and Turks > Chinks 
Objective reality says otherwise.
Islam is cultural success. Deny it all you want though.
And christianity is Italian cultural success:feelskek::feelskek::feelskek:. Full proof argument. When your race has nothing, this is how far one can go just to get a crumb.




I think these points end all this nonsense pretty well:
Arabs flourish where geography/resources/luck are involved (oil, routes, western bankrolling etc) MEANWHILE curry/rice people flourish where actual race genetics are involved(service industry, IQ, technology, space exploration, military, culture etc)


The only reason OP believes pale skin is the only factor determining racial superiority is because HIM and HIS race having NOTHING to show for themselves except appearance(relatively in comparison to other Asian races). This whole thread is just one big inferiority complex spurge on his part.

And to put the final nail in the coffin

The very existence of Arabs as a people proves without any doubt that white skin doesn't make a race superior. Otherwise arabs would be superior to Chinese or Japanese or Indians.
 
Last edited:
STOP WORSHIPPING THE Whites, also stop bragging that you have a white skin. Every race has good and bad looking people so I don't see why are you making this thread and there are black persons who also made history, Indians too, Arabs (real Arabs, not the arabized ones like you), Asians too.
 
The blonde egyptian woman is a very famous actress
I could mention a lot of non white looking persons in the middle east that were successful and famous even tho they weren't white or looked white. Oum kalthoum for example (THE GOAT) , Gamal Abdelnasser (one of the most popular Arab politicians). Being white have nothing to do with success
 
I seeked this thread, and it demolished me. It was a good time while it lasted though, my brown fists will be clenched eternally.
 
arabs got steamrolled by the mongols. multiple rounds of genocides carried out. the civilization was gone :feelsdevil:

Iraq went from an urban civilization, to tribal society. urbaners died en-masse (Hulago bragged to king of France that he massacred 200,000 people in Baghdad alone, mongols tend to count the dead bodies after major massacres for "achievement" purposes, as if its a video game :feelsdevil:), the sand niggers in the shit deserts survived, and the new population became predominetly low IQ sand niggers

Central Asia was hit even worse. northern Iran or modern day stan countries like Kazahstan were mostly white, as white as Russians. 99% wiped out, some places 99.999%. i shit you not. it was really that bad. read a contemporary history book.

Neither China nor Japan had anything close to the propseirity and supeiority of Arab and Persian civilization.

And Chinese civilization and Jap were influenec by indians , iranians, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND. Buddhism alone was invented in India by indo europeans, thrived under Iranians in Central Asia and red haired white people / TOCHARIANS who lived in China :feelsree:
Fall pf Baghdad was pretty brutal ngl. That's why I never fell for the le supreme evil Nazi meme. Nazis are a footnote in history compared to these events which leveled entire civilisations.
 
If I'm a protagonist how come I haven't gotten laid yet or even touched a female at all?

Oh wait... :feelsrope:
 
Looks matter a lot. We already know this. Your height, skin color, eye color, etc all determine how people view you. This is why, in fictional media, especially anime, the main characters always have some unique eye color or hair color to make them standout against the IRRELEVANT SOULESS NPC nobodies.

9fc5ca793b6ea1c0ce12f1b9940b775128fc8277_hq.jpg
tumblr_opkikiq5pe1w1wt7vo1_1280.jpg
View attachment 527250

In real life, the only people with any unique hair colors (yellow, red, brown) are Aryans/Wypipo.
In real life, the only people with any unique eye colors (blue, green, hazel) are Aryans/Wypipo
EVEN in terms of skin color, the only people with pink-white skin (rarest skin color) are Aryans/Wypipo

In other words, they (Aryans/Wypipo) are the main characters of this world.

Throughout all of human history, throughout every corner of this bitch of an Earth, no matter where and when you look, the whitest, most caucasoid, most aryan people in any given land are always, ALWAYS, A-L-W-A-Y-S the winners. They are always the rulers. Always the most relevant. Always the ruling class. Always the cream of the crop. This phenomena is MOST apparent in Latin American & Middle Eastern countries, where the politicians, actors, scholars, leaders, etc are often either the descendants of Portugese/Spanish Europeans or white-passing indigenious sand niggers. Since I'm a sand nigger, I'll focus on that.

Iraqi Minister + Iraqi military leader + Iraqi president

View attachment 527253View attachment 527251View attachment 527254

Syrian scholar + Syrian president + Syrian scholar

View attachment 527255
bashar-al-assad-medium.jpg
shaykh-muhammad-al-yaqoubi.jpg


Iranian politician + Iranian actor + Iranian politican

View attachment 527257View attachment 527258View attachment 527259

Egyptian actress + Egyptian politician + Egyptian busniessman

View attachment 527260View attachment 527261View attachment 527262

Everywhere you look, it's evident that the succes & attractivness of a race/nation is directly correlated to how white the skin is, how high the percentage of colored eyes are, how high the percentage of light hair is, and how close they are to Caucasoid skull shape. Sure, ideology, geography, resources, religion, etc also do play a part, but let's not kid outselves, genetics also matter. It's no coincidence that the ONLY people in human history to ever pose a threat to Europeans has been Menas, since they are the only ones who can genetically compete with Europeans & the only ones who have had significant conquest of European lands. It's no coincidence the strongest Muslim empire just so happened to be the Whitest Muslim empire as well (the Ottomans). And speaking of which, even Turks pick the whitest actors to display on TV shows

View attachment 527263
Nice job analyzing the cartoons and how NPCs look plain and normie as fuck :lul::lul::lul:
 
So are you arguing that Arabs did not do much beyond Caliphate era because they had rough terrain? Well, then you can also acknowledge that if it was not for the same geography(oil), Arabs would still be riding camels in sand dunes. (which makes your point about how some gulf countries are cleaner/safer than curryland reduntant)

And maybe Haiti would fare even worse than now if it was populated by Arabs. :feelsEhh:

Results matter. Curries/rice have results. Arabs don't. That's the final reality of the situation.

Maybe to you because:


Complete tangent from your original theory that the whiter a people are the more they win. Which is clearly not the case for Arabs. But just to entertain your diversion, Arab men are a symbol of NOTHING in the west. They are not even brought up.

Its also interesting that you rely on diversions to make your arguments.

1. You originally claimed that "Chinese are less superior to Estonians despite having more relevance/achievements"

2. I counter argued that's bs, How can they be more superior if they don't have achievements?

3. To which you claimed some bs about Chinese women prefering Estonian men, AS IF THAT IS THE ONLY FACTOR DECIDING RACIAL SUPERIOTITY.

4. Then I pointed out your hypocrisy in making whiteness the only factor since that benefits your thesis.

5. Now you're like "its a very important factor". While 2 posts ago you were claiming that Estonians are fully superior to Chinese just because of white skin. And go on a complete unrelated tangent about how chinese are percieved in the west

YOU CHANGE YOUR OWN ARGUMENTS WHEN YOU START LOSING

Either whiteness itself is the sole determinant of superiority or it isn't. If it is to you, then you come across as a low iq schmuck. If it isn't, then Arabs are on all other accounts inferior to curries/rice.


I didn't really ask for your delusions mah man. Maybe go and read a newspaper or something. I'm not here to educate you on the obvious. (or to see you cope with muh geography, muh geopolitics when the reality of lack of turkish achievements compare to curries/rice is brought up)

Chinese conquests never went beyond their immediate neighbours. Same goes for curryland. Both large places. Greeces are not that large so when push came to shove they expanded.

Yes because its 10000 BC and bronze smelting hasn't been invented yet:lul::lul:
This is the level of delusion and cope we are dealing with here.


1. Platitudes
2. Falsehoods
3. Diversions

Its like I'm wasting my time making structured arguments here if all you are gonna throw at me are mind farts like this one which don't prove anything and don't go anywhere. Don't be a coward. Address my points directly.

Let me lay it down, I COMMAND YOU TO,

GIVE ME ONE GOOD REASON WHY I SHOULD IGNORE THE TECHNOLOGICAL SUCCESS THAT CURRIES/RICE HAVE OVER ARABS

GIVE ME ONE BULLET PROOF REASON WHY I SHOULD IGNORE THE RICHER CULTURAL AND CIVILISATIONAL HERITAGE OF CURRIES/GOOKS OVER ARABS

GIVE ME ONE SOLID REASON WHY I SHOULD CONSIDER THE OPINION OF LOW IQ FOIDS TO BE THE ONLY CRITERIA FOR RACIAL SUPERIORITY

GIVE ME ONE LEGITIMATE REASON WHY I SHOULD NOT CONSIDER THIS

The only reason OP believes pale skin is the only factor determining racial superiority is because HIM and HIS race having NOTHING to show for themselves except appearance(relatively in comparison to other Asian races). This whole thread is just one big inferiority complex spurge on his part.

TO BE THE SOLE MOTIVATOR OF YOUR THREAD

I do not want your weak platitudes about a few chinks roping in the west. I want good solid reasoning for why I should only consider your criteria and ignore all the others.

You have conceded that you have no real proof for this. To not prove your claims means exactly that. In that vein Africans would fair better than Arabs if they move to Arabia:)

Your typical hypocrisy is at full display here. When obvious advantages that curries/gooks have over Arabs are pointed out to you, all you do is ascribe them to their rich resources. But then you go on to claim modern Arab financial superiority over other races(based on cleaner safer cities etc), which itself is based on resources that arabs lucked out on.

You have shown that not just you cannot prove your claims but you are also a hypocrite.

Care to prove your claims? You can't? Am I surprised?
You see the difference here is that I only call you deluded when you deny straight up historical/modern facts. But I am not deluded for rejecting your bullshit theories that you cannot prove.

And btw , Africans would fair better than Arabs if they move to Arabia:)

here I could go on about the factors that influence IQ test scores if I was talking to a more sensible intelligent person. But from all my interactions with race realists, especially those who bring up iq, I've learned that they have little appetite for nuances. I mean, I am talking to a person who believes that people with less melanin will be able to exploit natural resources better just because they are paler. So I won't be wasting time with such schizo tier delusionals. Instead I'll leave this nugget here.

Arabs flourish where geography/resources/luck are involved (oil, routes, western bankrolling etc) MEANWHILE curry/rice people flourish where actual race genetics are involved(service industry, IQ, technology, space exploration, military, culture etc)


Literally no one would deny this? More like literally no one would claim this bs because nobody is this deluded lol.

Its not really a "gotcha". From the very beginning my point was that whiteness does not grant superiority or does not make a race "winner" as you claimed in your thread, because if it were so Arabs wouldn't be so behind curries/gooks for most of human history. Now you want to put all the blame on Geography. But I've already pointed out your hypocrisy of ignoring geography when it suits you.

This is what is happening here

1. I tell you with evidence how Arabs don't match up.

2. You blame arab failures on geography/resources meanwhile propping arab successes(but ignore geography's role there) and want me to only consider 'attractiveness' as a criteria

3. I point out your hypocrisy and ask why I should ignore everything else and only consider attractiveness.

4. You fail to give one good reason. Which leads me to believe:


The only reason OP believes pale skin is the only factor determining racial superiority is because HIM and HIS race having NOTHING to show for themselves except appearance(relatively in comparison to other Asian races). This whole thread is just one big inferiority complex spurge on his part.


Why? It does put a big fucking dent on the ridiculous false claims made in this thread.

Africans would fair better than Arabs if they move to Arabia:)

1. Ancient civilisations do not care about modern borders.

2. A majority of Indus valley sites are located in modern India(not that this has any relevance to this discussion)

3. Ancient curry culture is endemic to mainland India.

Never claimed arabs don't have a history. But that they get civilisation mogged by curries/gooks. Which again breaks the premise of this thread

Another diversion. Instead of directly addressing what I've said you resort to these. Here's what I said:

"""But you'll talk about light skin, because:

Arabs/Turks are so low on the totempole that they've got nothing besides the lack of melanin going for them.""""

Whether some asians use skin bleach or not has nothing to do with my claim that you want skin to be the only criteria... since that's the ONLY thing YOU think is good about YOU and YOUR RACE. Because you fail elsewhere. LEARN TO ADDRESS MY POINTS DIRECTLY. AND IF YOU CAN'T, SHUT UP. Its like you are too pussy to directly tackle my arguments.

Though I'm noticing that you keep calling me "nigger", "currynigger", "shitskin", assuming that I'm darker skinned than you, assuming my race. Because you cannot counter my arguments with rationality and facts. And hence when faced with losing against my solid points you need to feign fake superiority based on your skin color, for which you have to assume mine. Which is just a microcosm for how you need to point out Arab skin color when faced with their objective inferiority to curry/gooks. I've got your entire psyche down to the T.:feelsLSD:

And the way you spam that weed emoji is also beautifully symbolic of how one has to be high af to even consider that Arabs might be superior to curries/gooks/persians/japs etc.:smonk:

I need to see your sources on that. You've amply shown that your claims cannot be trusted. I know about military, but other factors? I'm not sure.

Because I consider Irish success to be part of the greater European success. And unlike Arabs/Turks, White Europeans as a race do mog curries/gooks/japs etc on various factors.

Your hypocrisy regarding geographical advantages/disadvantages has already been addressed above.

Not as much of a shithole as Arabia or Central Asia. Which again proves my point. But you can go on about how poor ol Arabs with their white skin would've invented time travel if not for that evil evil terrain:fuk::feelshaha:

This is not the first time you'd be saying something this delusional, so I'm not surprised.

That's irrelevent. You said that these countries are inferior to Arabia and you wanted to ascribe their failures, despite oil, to their race. I pointed out how these countries do not have advantages that arabs have and are still doing better than some arab countries, which are war torn shitholes. You want to blame all venenzuelan failure on their race but want to absolve arabs of the same.

NO

ARAB FAILURE IS COMPLETELY OWED TO ARABS. IT IS A FAILURE OF THEIR RACE THAT THEY ARE NOT ABLE TO DEFEND THEMSELVES AGAINST FOREIGN INVADERS AND FOREIGN INTERESTS. ANOTHER CRITERIA WHERE THEY GET MOGGED BY MANY CURRIES/GOOKS/PERSIANS


You've been doing that a lot actually. Many times I have to remind you of the line of argument. If you addressed my arguments directly instead of pussyfooting around with diversions this wouldn't happen.

Your bullshit race semantics are irrelevant to me. They are lighter skinned than other more successful Asian races. That's all I care about.

And yet they are not unlivable war torn shitholes whose citizens are desperately running off to Europe.

These are some nuggets of verbal diarrohea straight from your thread

"Throughout all of human history, throughout every corner of this bitch of an Earth, no matter where and when you look, the whitest, most caucasoid, most aryan people in any given land are always, ALWAYS, A-L-W-A-Y-S the winners. They are always the rulers. Always the most relevant. Always the ruling class. Always the cream of the crop. "

"Everywhere you look, it's evident that the succes of a race/nation is directly correlated to how white the skin is, how high the percentage of colored eyes are, how high the percentage of light hair is, and how close they are to Caucasoid skull shape."

All of these claims are destroyed by one simple fact:
The very existence of Arabs as a people proves without any doubt that white skin doesn't make a race superior. Otherwise arabs would be superior to Chinese or Japanese or Indians.


Do you even know what independent foreign policy means lol (why am i even asking, of course you don't) . It means that these countries can pursue their own goals without being armtwisted. Iran refuses to be arm twisted like arabs and that's the very reason why they are sanctioned. China or India? Well I shouldn't even have to spell it out.

Compare that to Iraq which was invaded the moment it decided to go rogue and invade Kuwait. Or Syria and Yemen which are subject to proxy wars. Or the gulf which is firmly into western pockets.


arabs use oil better because they have less melaninn in skin:feelstastyman::feelstastyman::feelstastyman::feelstastyman::feelstastyman::feelstastyman:

Give me a whiff of whatever you are smoking

First off, ANOTHER DIVERSION. I pointed out how you are either constantly changing goalposts or forgetting what we were arguing about. You have failed to directly address that.

Secondly, to your current point. I thought, going in this thread I wouldn't have to point this out since anyone who has an education beyond 10th grade and access to internet knows this. But seeing your knowledge(or lack thereof) in these topics, let me educate.

Curries have:
1. Larger military core and more indigenously built military infrastructure compared to Arabs

2. Far more successful self made Space Exploration programme.

3. An ancient and rich culture far more urbanised and civilised than Arabs for most eras in history.

4. Thriving Tech/IT-sector

5. Nuclear weapons

6. Indigenously built ICMBs.
.
.
and the list goes on and on.

All this besides a lack of oil, which is the oxygen for any modern Industrial economy. Of course, Chinese,Japs etc too mog arabs, even curries in all of these regards. Persians mogs Arabs in many of them.

ALL THESE RACES LESS WHITE LESS CAUCOSOID THAN ARABS.

Yes but you can go on about how some asians want to look paler or want paler partners and then weakly and pathetically link it with your percieved arab superiority:feelshaha:. And when asked why that should even be a criteria or the only criteria, you have nothing to say.

Or you can pathetically point out to a few gooks who roped in the west. In the hopes that it would somehow help you to deflect the objective Arab inferiority across multiple fields.

The recent financial success of Arabs(last 70 years) owed to their geography/oil has already been covered. Your complete HYPOCRISY regarding this topic has been covered too.

This is nothing more than a weak pathetic excuse and diversion. I give you the big successes other races have over arabs. And all you give me is a few gooks who roped

Blatantly false, factually untrue, not supported by evidence and borderline schizo tier delusional

You saying so doesn't change objective reality

Arabs flourish where geography/resources/luck are involved (oil, routes, western bankrolling etc) MEANWHILE curry/rice people flourish where actual race genetics are involved(service industry, IQ, technology, space exploration, military, culture etc)


The recent financial success of Arabs(last 70 years) owed to their geography/oil has already been covered. Your complete HYPOCRISY regarding this topic has been covered too.

So my point regarding curry/gook success across all field linked with personal achievements still stands strong

And now you have resorted to blatantly lying. Tch:feelsugh:. Sad. Do I even need to point the multiple instances where your completely deluded mind ascribed chinese success to geographical or other non race related factors.?


Now this is VERY VERY interesting. The only reason you barely acknowledge chinese success over arabs (besides the fact that Chinese are literal global demi-power and you'd be schizo tier delusional to even compare them to arabs, which you did anyway until I knocked some sense into you) is because in your twisted little retarded mind Chinese are WHITER than Arabs so it is ok for them to be more successful.

And it is for this very reason; you not just fail to acknowledge factual curry success over arabs, but cope, seethe, cum and dilate about it. because curries are darker skinned, so, in your whiteness obsessed mind, its not ok for them to have more racial success.

This is how much your BRAIN IS OBSESSED WITH WHITE SKIN(inb4 some lookism bs diversion which has nothing to do with this line of argument about racial success and iq) . People usually link white skin with beauty but your mind is so overtly obsessed with it that you link it to everything. I don't know what kind of bullying, trauma, ptsd or whatever can incite such a strong inferiority complex over something so superficial. Your psyche is really something to behold.

Well here's a newsflash:

CHINESE PEOPLE ARE NOT WHITE. THE IDEA THAT THEY HAVE LIGHTER SKIN THAN ARABS/TURKS IS DEBATABLE BUT THEIR FEATURES ARE DEFINETELY LESS CAUCASOID. AND YET THEY ARE MORE SUCCESSFUL ACROSS MOST IF NOT ALL FIELDS.


Still no reason as to why we should ignore everything else. Some Indians and Chinese wish to look whiter. Turks or Arabs just happen to be whiter ON AVERAGE. That doesn't mean they want to become arabs/turks lol. It just means they just want to look whiter, that's all. Which is also true for arabs/turks. How does this paltry pathetic weak superficial bit of trivia prove your outrageous claims such as:

"Everywhere you look, it's evident that the succes of a race/nation is directly correlated to how white the skin is, how high the percentage of colored eyes are, how high the percentage of light hair is, and how close they are to Caucasoid skull shape."

I'm now starting to realize just how paltry most of your arguments are.

I give you definite proof of superior gook/curry personal achievements, compared to arabs, across multiple fields

All you give me is:
"ugh ugh some curry woman uses skin brightening cream:feelstastyman:"
"uhm uhm I few gooks roped in USA:feelstastyman:"

Utterly pathetic. I'm frankly dissappointed in how weak and beta these arguments are. How much you have to squint your eyes and do mental gymnastics to link any of this to absolute Arab/Turk racial superiority.

And yet another diversion. My original point about how neither modern christianity can be considered Italian cultural success nor Islam can be considered Arab cultural success still stands. Also your point about christianity being jewish success is interesting considering how much of Islam is plagiarized from christianity.

Never denied that arabs were sand hut dwellers before they hit oil and got colonised by the west.

Again discussing iq scores, their factors and what they mean with a race realist is an exercise in futility.

Though its worth noting that you did not really directly address my arguments because you know its true. curries and gooks and japs do mog arabs/turks across all intellect related fields. Either you could've argued how arabs are better in some of these or how gooks/curries are not as good. But you didn't, which means you've conceded that:

Arabs flourish where geography/resources/luck are involved (oil, routes, western bankrolling etc) MEANWHILE curry/rice people flourish where actual race genetics are involved(service industry, IQ, technology, space exploration, military, culture etc)

I'm glad to know that you agree:feelsYall:

Well you ignore all other factors where arabs/turks get brutally mogged by curries/gooks/persians. Unless you acknowledge those, the only conclusion is that you deliberately want white skin to be the only criteria since in your mind that makes Arabs/Turks win.

Its not a cope, unless you recognize that other factors can be used to compare races/nations( in which curries/gooks/persians brutally mog arabs) I'm forced to assume that is the case.

But go ahead and call me "nigger", maybe imagining yourself to have lighter skin than me would help your white skin obsessed mind to cope with the utter intellectual beatdown I'm laying down on you.:feelskek::feelskek::feelskek:

At this rate, by the end of this you'll be lying on a psyche hospital bed with diagnosed schizophrenia

What curries seethe over is not my concern. My concern is your psyche and inferiority complexes. Exactly what personal occurrence made you so obsessed with white skin. And how you came to think so low of yourself as a person that the only way you think you can mog other people is the color of your skin. That you have to associate everything, from financial success to intellect with skin color, not just on an individual level but on the level of races and nations. Maybe because you find yourself lacking in these regards and think that having white skin will grant you that magic elixir of life that'll fix everything.

Look I understand. Pale skin is your only sense of security in this cruel world. Something you can brag about to others. You fear that I may take away your security by popping the little bubble of this thread you created to feel good about your yourself.

They are whiter on average than persians/curries/gooks. That's all it takes to prove my point.

Ah... another one of those very very interesting instances where your white skin obsessed mind barely acknowledges East Asian superiority, not because you are convinced of their obvious achievements, but because you've convinced yourself that they have white skin so in your twisted little mind its now ok for them to mog Arabs. But not curries, even though their superiority is supported by similar evidence but they're still dark skinned so your mind doesn't accept

Newsflash repeat:
EAST ASIANS ARE NOT WHITE. THEY NEVER WERE WHITE, THEY NEVER WILL BE WHITE. THEY HAVE GOOK FEATURES WHICH ARE OBJECTIVELY LESS CAUCASOID THAN ARABS/TURKS. YET THEY MOG ACROSS ALL FIELDS.

Just 3-4 posts ago you were so sure about absolute arab superiority over chinese solely based on caucosoid features. Now, in face of overwhelming evidence you cope with bs that chinese are "whiter" lol. Your psyche is truly something to behold:feelsLSD:

Also, I'm not lumping curries with east asians. I don't think these races have much in common. The only thing common between these two races, in the context of this debate, is that both are less caucosoid/white than arabs/turks yet mog them across most fields of personal achievements. And that's all I need to prove your thread wrong.




And with this defence, my word on why this thread is objectively false still stands:

Arabs flourish where geography/resources/luck are involved (oil, routes, western bankrolling etc) MEANWHILE curry/rice people flourish where actual race genetics are involved(service industry, IQ, technology, space exploration, military, culture etc)


The only reason OP believes pale skin is the only factor determining racial superiority is because HIM and HIS race having NOTHING to show for themselves except appearance(relatively in comparison to other Asian races). This whole thread is just one big inferiority complex spurge on his part.


The very existence of Arabs as a people proves without any doubt that white skin doesn't make a race superior. Otherwise arabs would be superior to Chinese or Japanese or Indians.
Didn't read. Chinks wish they looked like Turks and Indians wish they looked Arabs. That alone shows who is superior on a genetic level. Everything else involves factors not related to genetics.
Pet's be honest here: caucasian features are universally worshipped and no amount of coping would change that,the best looking aryan will always mog the "tyrone" or anything like that... And even without the jewmedia depicting the MAJORITY of heroes and main characters as good looking whites, the result would still be the same since that shit has been going on for ages: blacks were being looked down on and enslaved for a long ass time, even some islamic texts have some of that white worshipping in them... Some asians like japs and Koreans WANT to look like whites at all fucking costs etc etc... It's simply how it is, some nations and races mog others in appearance and intellect...or both even.
The fact that Japs and Koreans want to look white despite their success in technology/science goes to show that looks/appearance are more important than IQ coping. It's the main reason noodlewhores are hungry for white cock

And yes, blacks have been hated for all of human history by pretty much anyone who came into contact with them, including Arabs prior to Europeans.
STOP WORSHIPPING THE Whites, also stop bragging that you have a white skin. Every race has good and bad looking people so I don't see why are you making this thread and there are black persons who also made history, Indians too, Arabs (real Arabs, not the arabized ones like you), Asians too.
I'm not Arab.

And my point still stands. Caucasoid skull, colore eyed, fair skin, and tall height are all desirable traits. and generally, the closer you are to Aryans, the more of these traits you will tend to have, and thus the more desirable your genetics will be.

Persian1
 
Last edited:
Didn't read.
Of course because I'm right. This thread was based on bullshit from the get go.
Chinks wish they looked like Turks and Indians wish they looked Arabs. That alone shows who is superior on a genetic level. Everything else involves factors not related to genetics.
This is already addressed here:
Its also interesting that you rely on diversions to make your arguments.

1. You originally claimed that "Chinese are less superior to Estonians despite having more relevance/achievements"

2. I counter argued that's bs, How can they be more superior if they don't have achievements?

3. To which you claimed some bs about Chinese women prefering Estonian men, AS IF THAT IS THE ONLY FACTOR DECIDING RACIAL SUPERIOTITY.

4. Then I pointed out your hypocrisy in making whiteness the only factor since that benefits your thesis.

5. Now you're like "its a very important factor". While 2 posts ago you were claiming that Estonians are fully superior to Chinese just because of white skin. And go on a complete unrelated tangent about how chinese are percieved in the west

YOU CHANGE YOUR OWN ARGUMENTS WHEN YOU START LOSING

Either whiteness itself is the sole determinant of superiority or it isn't. If it is to you, then you come across as a low iq schmuck. If it isn't, then Arabs are on all other accounts inferior to curries/rice.
Especially Here:
Let me lay it down, I COMMAND YOU TO,

GIVE ME ONE GOOD REASON WHY I SHOULD IGNORE THE TECHNOLOGICAL SUCCESS THAT CURRIES/RICE HAVE OVER ARABS

GIVE ME ONE BULLET PROOF REASON WHY I SHOULD IGNORE THE RICHER CULTURAL AND CIVILISATIONAL HERITAGE OF CURRIES/GOOKS OVER ARABS

GIVE ME ONE SOLID REASON WHY I SHOULD CONSIDER THE OPINION OF LOW IQ FOIDS TO BE THE ONLY CRITERIA FOR RACIAL SUPERIORITY

GIVE ME ONE LEGITIMATE REASON WHY I SHOULD NOT CONSIDER THIS

The only reason OP believes pale skin is the only factor determining racial superiority is because HIM and HIS race having NOTHING to show for themselves except appearance(relatively in comparison to other Asian races). This whole thread is just one big inferiority complex spurge on his part.

TO BE THE SOLE MOTIVATOR OF YOUR THREAD

I do not want your weak platitudes about a few chinks roping in the west. I want good solid reasoning for why I should only consider your criteria and ignore all the others.
Here:
Another diversion. Instead of directly addressing what I've said you resort to these. Here's what I said:

"""But you'll talk about light skin, because:

Arabs/Turks are so low on the totempole that they've got nothing besides the lack of melanin going for them.""""

Whether some asians use skin bleach or not has nothing to do with my claim that you want skin to be the only criteria... since that's the ONLY thing YOU think is good about YOU and YOUR RACE. Because you fail elsewhere. LEARN TO ADDRESS MY POINTS DIRECTLY. AND IF YOU CAN'T, SHUT UP. Its like you are too pussy to directly tackle my arguments.
Here:
Yes but you can go on about how some asians want to look paler or want paler partners and then weakly and pathetically link it with your percieved arab superiority:feelshaha:. And when asked why that should even be a criteria or the only criteria, you have nothing to say.

Or you can pathetically point out to a few gooks who roped in the west. In the hopes that it would somehow help you to deflect the objective Arab inferiority across multiple fields.
And Very very especially Here:
Now this is VERY VERY interesting. The only reason you barely acknowledge chinese success over arabs (besides the fact that Chinese are literal global demi-power and you'd be schizo tier delusional to even compare them to arabs, which you did anyway until I knocked some sense into you) is because in your twisted little retarded mind Chinese are WHITER than Arabs so it is ok for them to be more successful.

And it is for this very reason; you not just fail to acknowledge factual curry success over arabs, but cope, seethe, cum and dilate about it. because curries are darker skinned, so, in your whiteness obsessed mind, its not ok for them to have more racial success.

This is how much your BRAIN IS OBSESSED WITH WHITE SKIN(inb4 some lookism bs diversion which has nothing to do with this line of argument about racial success and iq) . People usually link white skin with beauty but your mind is so overtly obsessed with it that you link it to everything. I don't know what kind of bullying, trauma, ptsd or whatever can incite such a strong inferiority complex over something so superficial. Your psyche is really something to behold.

Well here's a newsflash:

CHINESE PEOPLE ARE NOT WHITE. THE IDEA THAT THEY HAVE LIGHTER SKIN THAN ARABS/TURKS IS DEBATABLE BUT THEIR FEATURES ARE DEFINETELY LESS CAUCASOID. AND YET THEY ARE MORE SUCCESSFUL ACROSS MOST IF NOT ALL FIELDS.


Still no reason as to why we should ignore everything else. Some Indians and Chinese wish to look whiter. Turks or Arabs just happen to be whiter ON AVERAGE. That doesn't mean they want to become arabs/turks lol. It just means they just want to look whiter, that's all. Which is also true for arabs/turks. How does this paltry pathetic weak superficial bit of trivia prove your outrageous claims such as:

"Everywhere you look, it's evident that the succes of a race/nation is directly correlated to how white the skin is, how high the percentage of colored eyes are, how high the percentage of light hair is, and how close they are to Caucasoid skull shape."

I'm now starting to realize just how paltry most of your arguments are.

I give you definite proof of superior gook/curry personal achievements, compared to arabs, across multiple fields

All you give me is:
"ugh ugh some curry woman uses skin brightening cream:feelstastyman:"
"uhm uhm I few gooks roped in USA:feelstastyman:"

Utterly pathetic. I'm frankly dissappointed in how weak and beta these arguments are. How much you have to squint your eyes and do mental gymnastics to link any of this to absolute Arab/Turk racial superiority.

..........................

Didn't read. Chinks wish they looked like Turks and Indians wish they looked Arabs. That alone shows who is superior on a genetic level. Everything else involves factors not related to genetics.

The fact that Japs and Koreans want to look white despite their success in technology/science goes to show that looks/appearance are more important than IQ coping. It's the main reason noodlewhores are hungry for white cock
These points are already addressed above I've cut them out for you to see specifically.

You couldn't offer me one good reason why I should consider whiteness above tech/sci/iq then. You don't offer a logical sound non bullshit factual reason now. Which leads me to my default position:

The only reason OP believes pale skin is the only factor determining racial superiority is because HIM and HIS race having NOTHING to show for themselves except appearance(relatively in comparison to other Asian races). This whole thread is just one big inferiority complex spurge on his part.

And yes, blacks have been hated for all of human history by pretty much anyone who came into contact with them, including Arabs prior to Europeans.
Irrelevant
.

I'm not Arab.
I don't really care what you are. Your skin color is not as important to me as your psyche and what makes you believe the bullshit that you do.
And my point still stands. Caucasoid skull, colore eyed, fair skin, and tall height are all desirable traits. and generally, the closer you are to Aryans, the more of these traits you will tend to have, and thus the more desirable your genetics will be.
That was not you point. Stop lying. Here I'll repeat some of the verbal diarrhoea you've spewed even tho I already told you that in my last post.

"Throughout all of human history, throughout every corner of this bitch of an Earth, no matter where and when you look, the whitest, most caucasoid, most aryan people in any given land are always, ALWAYS, A-L-W-A-Y-S the winners. They are always the rulers. Always the most relevant. Always the ruling class. Always the cream of the crop. "

"Everywhere you look, it's evident that the succes of a race/nation is directly correlated to how white the skin is, how high the percentage of colored eyes are, how high the percentage of light hair is, and how close they are to Caucasoid skull shape."

All of which has been refuted in my last post with detailed arguments whose crux comes down to

Arabs flourish where geography/resources/luck are involved (oil, routes, western bankrolling etc) MEANWHILE curry/rice people flourish where actual race genetics are involved(service industry, IQ, technology, space exploration, military, culture etc)


The only reason OP believes pale skin is the only factor determining racial superiority is because HIM and HIS race having NOTHING to show for themselves except appearance(relatively in comparison to other Asian races). This whole thread is just one big inferiority complex spurge on his part.


The very existence of Arabs as a people proves without any doubt that white skin doesn't make a race superior. Otherwise arabs would be superior to Chinese or Japanese or Indians.

I accept your agreement to all my other arguments which you've failed to address.

But I would still bring to your notice these nuggets about your psychology in my previous post



What curries seethe over is not my concern. My concern is your psyche and inferiority complexes. Exactly what personal occurrence made you so obsessed with white skin. And how you came to think so low of yourself as a person that the only way you think you can mog other people is the color of your skin. That you have to associate everything, from financial success to intellect with skin color, not just on an individual level but on the level of races and nations. Maybe because you find yourself lacking in these regards and think that having white skin will grant you that magic elixir of life that'll fix everything.

Look I understand. Pale skin is your only sense of security in this cruel world. Something you can brag about to others. You fear that I may take away your security by popping the little bubble of this thread you created to feel good about your yourself.


Now this is VERY VERY interesting. The only reason you barely acknowledge chinese success over arabs (besides the fact that Chinese are literal global demi-power and you'd be schizo tier delusional to even compare them to arabs, which you did anyway until I knocked some sense into you) is because in your twisted little retarded mind Chinese are WHITER than Arabs so it is ok for them to be more successful.

And it is for this very reason; you not just fail to acknowledge factual curry success over arabs, but cope, seethe, cum and dilate about it. because curries are darker skinned, so, in your whiteness obsessed mind, its not ok for them to have more racial success.

This is how much your
BRAIN IS OBSESSED WITH WHITE SKIN(inb4 some lookism bs diversion which has nothing to do with this line of argument about racial success and iq) . People usually link white skin with beauty but your mind is so overtly obsessed with it that you link it to everything. I don't know what kind of bullying, trauma, ptsd or whatever can incite such a strong inferiority complex over something so superficial. Your psyche is really something to behold.

As Ive already said in my last post, your psyche is something to behold. :feelsLSD:
 
Autism the thread
 
Of course because I'm right. This thread was based on bullshit from the get go.

This is already addressed here:

Especially Here:

Here:

Here:

And Very very especially Here:


..........................


These points are already addressed above I've cut them out for you to see specifically.

You couldn't offer me one good reason why I should consider whiteness above tech/sci/iq then. You don't offer a logical sound non bullshit factual reason now. Which leads me to my default position:

The only reason OP believes pale skin is the only factor determining racial superiority is because HIM and HIS race having NOTHING to show for themselves except appearance(relatively in comparison to other Asian races). This whole thread is just one big inferiority complex spurge on his part.


Irrelevant

I don't really care what you are. Your skin color is not as important to me as your psyche and what makes you believe the bullshit that you do.

That was not you point. Stop lying. Here I'll repeat some of the verbal diarrhoea you've spewed even tho I already told you that in my last post.

"Throughout all of human history, throughout every corner of this bitch of an Earth, no matter where and when you look, the whitest, most caucasoid, most aryan people in any given land are always, ALWAYS, A-L-W-A-Y-S the winners. They are always the rulers. Always the most relevant. Always the ruling class. Always the cream of the crop. "

"Everywhere you look, it's evident that the succes of a race/nation is directly correlated to how white the skin is, how high the percentage of colored eyes are, how high the percentage of light hair is, and how close they are to Caucasoid skull shape."

All of which has been refuted in my last post with detailed arguments whose crux comes down to

Arabs flourish where geography/resources/luck are involved (oil, routes, western bankrolling etc) MEANWHILE curry/rice people flourish where actual race genetics are involved(service industry, IQ, technology, space exploration, military, culture etc)


The only reason OP believes pale skin is the only factor determining racial superiority is because HIM and HIS race having NOTHING to show for themselves except appearance(relatively in comparison to other Asian races). This whole thread is just one big inferiority complex spurge on his part.


The very existence of Arabs as a people proves without any doubt that white skin doesn't make a race superior. Otherwise arabs would be superior to Chinese or Japanese or Indians.

I accept your agreement to all my other arguments which you've failed to address.

But I would still bring to your notice these nuggets about your psychology in my previous post



What curries seethe over is not my concern. My concern is your psyche and inferiority complexes. Exactly what personal occurrence made you so obsessed with white skin. And how you came to think so low of yourself as a person that the only way you think you can mog other people is the color of your skin. That you have to associate everything, from financial success to intellect with skin color, not just on an individual level but on the level of races and nations. Maybe because you find yourself lacking in these regards and think that having white skin will grant you that magic elixir of life that'll fix everything.

Look I understand. Pale skin is your only sense of security in this cruel world. Something you can brag about to others. You fear that I may take away your security by popping the little bubble of this thread you created to feel good about your yourself.


Now this is VERY VERY interesting. The only reason you barely acknowledge chinese success over arabs (besides the fact that Chinese are literal global demi-power and you'd be schizo tier delusional to even compare them to arabs, which you did anyway until I knocked some sense into you) is because in your twisted little retarded mind Chinese are WHITER than Arabs so it is ok for them to be more successful.

And it is for this very reason; you not just fail to acknowledge factual curry success over arabs, but cope, seethe, cum and dilate about it. because curries are darker skinned, so, in your whiteness obsessed mind, its not ok for them to have more racial success.

This is how much your
BRAIN IS OBSESSED WITH WHITE SKIN(inb4 some lookism bs diversion which has nothing to do with this line of argument about racial success and iq) . People usually link white skin with beauty but your mind is so overtly obsessed with it that you link it to everything. I don't know what kind of bullying, trauma, ptsd or whatever can incite such a strong inferiority complex over something so superficial. Your psyche is really something to behold.

As Ive already said in my last post, your psyche is something to behold. :feelsLSD:
Still didn't read. Indian and Asian men will forever be the bottom of the barrel

1627804225779


Meanwhile...

8
 
So I'll accept that you agree that this thread is bullshit
It isn't.

No one but you is delusional enough to think being tall, white skinned, color eyed, light haired, caucasoid are all desirable traits, and the people that have these traits are primarily Aryans, and the more Aryan you are and your country is, the better off you are and your nation is. That's why no amount of muh tech muh IQ muh science peepeepoopoo coping will ever make Asians genetically superior to Europeans.

1637231489539


Technology won't give gooks this appearance.

9cb0fd3c3fb24c13ecd7591f72ffd4d9
 
It isn't.

No one but you is delusional enough to think being tall, white skinned, color eyed, light haired, caucasoid are all desirable traits, and the people that have these traits are primarily Aryans, and the more Aryan you are and your country is, the better off you are and your nation is. That's why no amount of muh tech muh IQ muh science peepeepoopoo coping will ever make Asians genetically superior to Europeans.

View attachment 533135

Technology won't give gooks this appearance.

View attachment 533137
Bruh everything you say from this point on are empty words. Since you can't support it ir make counter arguments, I may as well consider all this the delusional ramblings of a madman
 
Bruh everything you say from this point on are empty words. Since you can't support it ir make counter arguments, I may as well consider all this the delusional ramblings of a madman
Okay? So stop replying.

Funny how gooks look more attractive when they mix with Anatolians, Iranians, and Syrians.
1625520920403
C095547cc22c12ce075b9078b54fc1ca


Korean turk
Iranian hapa


Meanwhile, pre-surgery gooks look like this:feelskek::feelskek::feelskek:
Fong mei
 
Bla blah blah empty meaningless schizo words. Already addressed in what u dnr. Either support you assertions by addressing my arguments...

Till then this thread stands disproven
If I'm a schitzo then stop replying:feelshaha:

No one but you denies reality. Even HALF PAKI gooks look better than full gooks thanks to their caucasoid/iranian mixture


maxresdefault.jpg
maxresdefault.jpg
sungmin.jpg
 
If I'm a schitzo then stop replying:feelshaha:

No one but you denies reality. Even HALF PAKI gooks look better than full gooks thanks to their caucasoid/iranian mixture


maxresdefault.jpg
maxresdefault.jpg
sungmin.jpg
Bla blah blah empty meaningless schizo words. Already addressed in what u dnr. Either support you assertions by addressing my arguments...

Till then this thread stands disproven
Tho its interesting how you don't even want to face the proven inferiority of arabs in my posts. Comes down to your schizo personality really



What curries seethe over is not my concern. My concern is your psyche and inferiority complexes. Exactly what personal occurrence made you so obsessed with white skin. And how you came to think so low of yourself as a person that the only way you think you can mog other people is the color of your skin. That you have to associate everything, from financial success to intellect with skin color, not just on an individual level but on the level of races and nations. Maybe because you find yourself lacking in these regards and think that having white skin will grant you that magic elixir of life that'll fix everything.

Look I understand. Pale skin is your only sense of security in this cruel world. Something you can brag about to others. You fear that I may take away your security by popping the little bubble of this thread you created to feel good about your yourself. Your psyche is something to behold:feelsLSD:
 
Last edited:
Bla blah blah empty meaningless schizo words. Already addressed in what u dnr. Either support you assertions by addressing my arguments...

Till then this thread stands disproven
Tho its interesting how you don't even want to face the proven inferiority of arabs in my posts. Comes down to your schizo personality really



What curries seethe over is not my concern. My concern is your psyche and inferiority complexes. Exactly what personal occurrence made you so obsessed with white skin. And how you came to think so low of yourself as a person that the only way you think you can mog other people is the color of your skin. That you have to associate everything, from financial success to intellect with skin color, not just on an individual level but on the level of races and nations. Maybe because you find yourself lacking in these regards and think that having white skin will grant you that magic elixir of life that'll fix everything.

Look I understand. Pale skin is your only sense of security in this cruel world. Something you can brag about to others. You fear that I may take away your security by popping the little bubble of this thread you created to feel good about your yourself. Your psyche is something to behold:feelsLSD:
>he's still replying to someone he claims to be a schitzo:feelskek::feelskek:

Nmnm
 
>he's still replying to someone he claims to be a schitzo:feelskek::feelskek:

View attachment 533156
Why not? I've actually made someone concede defeat. I'm going to wring all the dopamine I can get from this.
I do get that you wouldn't understand when you've never won at anything. How do I know? The obsession with skin color is a dead give away:feelshmm:
 
Last edited:
Why not? I've actually made someone concede defeat. I'm going to wring all the dopamine I can get from this.
I do get that you wouldn't understand when you've never won at anything. How do I know? The obsession with skin color is a dead give away:feelshmm:
If you feel like you made me "concede defeat" then go away, stop replying, take a hike.

Indians sure do love bleaching their skin though. Hmmm, curious!:society: It seems like the average Indian is obsessed with with not being a shit skin.:feelsdevil: Can't really blame them though, imagine walking around looking like a sentiant pice of fecal matter:feelskek: Even Gooks are obsessed with bleaching their skin, but since you're a curry, I'll post vids about that







This is the true reason why Indians HATE Pakis. Because Chad Pakis are whiter than Shitty Dravidian monkeys. This is also why Indians dont give a fuck about Bengalis despite them ALSO being Muslims


Paki3
Paki18
Paki10
Paki7
 
Last edited:
If you feel like you made me "concede defeat" then go away, stop replying, take a hike.

Indians sure do love bleaching their skin though. Hmmm, curious!:society: It seems like the average Indian is obsessed with with not being a shit skin.:feelsdevil: Can't really blame them though, imagine walking around looking like a sentiant pice of fecal matter:feelskek: Even Gooks are obsessed with bleaching their skin, but since you're a curry, I'll post vids about that





This is the true reason why Indians HATE Pakis. Because Chad Pakis are whiter than Shitty Dravidian monkeys

View attachment 534630View attachment 534631View attachment 534632

Idc about pajeets lol. All I care about is proving this thread wrong which I did when you threw in the white flag

1637618780594
 
Good luck with that. Never gonna happen, curryboi
It has already happened. You can keep coping otherwise. Its the only thing you are good at anyway.
 
those are a lot of words :shock:
 
Higher average IQ and being part of some insular/nepotistic religious cult (judaism, mormonism, etc) make them disproportionately represented at the top. They might also have wealthy western ancestors that moved there.

Also have to wonder if there's a portion of ethnics that prefer to vote for the blue eyes light skinned guy cause of rarity/halo.
 
True post shitskins get no respect it is ALWAYS better to be white than not-white but some copers here still deny the racepill :feelskek:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top