Opinion Jake Shields is now a wanna be far right political activist

I had a brain fart, I meant to tag @Scerpi , sorry.

Wow, Your troll game fucking sucks

Who gives a fuck what Jake Shields thinks?

Yay... He's a fucking racist. Fuck him

Why are you following a washed up ex-UFC fighter?

Do you get your talking points from the dumb bitches on View? You a Sunny Hostin fan? Joy Reed?

lol... Go get your shine box boy
 
Anyone been keeping up with this guy? How much is he being paid to grift far right political talking points on Twitter? Is he being paid better now doing this than when he was fighting in the UFC?
Wannabe? He obviously is one, just like how anyone that has a brain, just saying what they see, is a maga or far right. Plus, those labels are placed by leftists and libs, so...fuck it then, he is one. Let the world beware.
 
I couldn't fight with you even if I wanted to, you run from every single topic that makes you uncomfortable, fucking snowflake.

You haven't even got the nuts to follow up on Daniel Penny case or the Oliver Anthony song. How the fuck you gonna take stance on Jake Shields?

Run back to the trans mega thread you pussy.

Ok, fucknugget. When there is news on Daniel Penny, there will be something to discuss. And what more is there to discuss on the song? You’re a fucking nutjob and I am here if you need to talk, or fight
 
I havent defended any of Shields tweets
In fact I said that the first post had language a racist would use.

Dude is fucking losing it. I haven’t commented on shields either-I don’t care what he says, I never liked him or the scrap pack. He is bringing up old threads years old when there is nothing to add atm. Not long now, a new account will spring up. Reminds me of kong how he holds such a grudge and I don’t know who he even is and he just pops up
 
Who gives a fuck what Jake Shields thinks?

Yay... He's a fucking racist. Fuck him

Oh fuck off you lying shit. You put less effort into being dishonest than your idol @nhbear

You're coming up with every excuse under the sun to say he's NOT a racist in this very thread.

But go ahead and say I never post proof.

 
For example when i think of France and its Frenchness i don't suddenly believe that Alexander Dumas and all its works don't count because he wasn't white.


This is a strawman

At which point did i invalidated white identity? white identity of course exists, the disagreement is on whether white identity is inherently racist or not.


Race as an identity is very unnatural though, while differences in how people look are part of how people form identities, these tend to be meaningless in the medium to long term as opposed to things like language, religion or cultural values.

The very fact that white identity required pretty draconian laws to be kept alive is only proof of how unnatural it is and how inherently racist they were.

And yes, black identity is definitively racist too.
Okay I can see what you are saying more clearly now. You are saying that identities which contain racial elements are racist when compared to more abstract identities which do not contain racial elements (correct me if I am wrong). This basically makes sense but I think you run into an issue of precision where a typical person will assume you are saying more than you actually are - that such identities generate bigotry/discrimination/hate etc. at a degree to which it becomes a fundamental part of the identity.

On the Alexander Dumas point I would not say his works do not count as French as he is overwhelmingly French, though I acknowledge purists exist and some will see him as somewhat foreign.

I agree its unnatural for an identity to be purely based on phenotype, but its pretty rare that I will see people actually think of it that way. Race is almost always wrapped up in cultural elements and even if we ignore that I'm sure other elements would still be present such as descent from a common ancestor, immunity to diseases, innate ability to digest weird thing from their diet, etc. Notice though that this only reinforces the fact of just how French someone like Dumas is. It is a means of bonding people together in kinship just as much as it is a tool for the haters.
 
It’s actually funny because anyone in the entertainment industry, music or influencers get paid and deals to be super left wing. The industry is owned by far left and Jews. Taylor Swift went woke and is now the biggest artist in the world even though most of her music is mediocre.

It's meant ideologically to cause the fall of our society completely by causing infighting and moral decay. Genius really.
 
Again. Don’t think I posted in this thread and certainly didn’t defend anything he said, but he does have a right to say his thoughts just like anyone else. Ya fucking whack job
He indicted me of defending him too. Homeboys retarded.
 
You do realize that what you wrote doesn't contradicts anything i said.

Eunuchs can't bear children and female slaves off-spring were legitimate children, not slaves.

There was no intergenerational slavery compontent.
IIRC in theory if you owned two slaves and they had children the child was also a slave. But for whatever reason this never really caught on in the sense that we don't see quite that many intergenerational slave castes in the Islamic world, as you point out slaves tended to be assimilated into their households with freshly enslaved persons replenishing the ranks of the enslaved. Many household slaves were also freed by their masters, not so much out of generosity but rather because freed slaves often continued to be followers of their former masters and could better contribute to his household as a freeman than a slave at some point. In fact it wasn't uncommon for masters to free a concubine and a mamluk to marry them to each other. Talk about sloppy seconds.

Off the top of my head there are two exceptions where you do see something like US style slavery centered around a plantation economy in Islamic history, in the Sultanate of Zanzibar which only abolished slavery in like 1909 and for a period in the Abbasid Caliphate which ultimately lead to a massive slave uprising called the Zanj Rebellion. Its not clear to me whether in either case there was an intergenerational slave caste or if the ranks of slaves were instead continually replenished by imported slaves but aside from that detail when you read accounts from those periods, especially from Zanzibar, they bear a striking similarity to what you'd read from the Antebellum South.
 
I agree its unnatural for an identity to be purely based on phenotype, but its pretty rare that I will see people actually think of it that way. Race is almost always wrapped up in cultural elements and even if we ignore that I'm sure other elements would still be present such as descent from a common ancestor, immunity to diseases, innate ability to digest weird thing from their diet, etc. Notice though that this only reinforces the fact of just how French someone like Dumas is. It is a means of bonding people together in kinship just as much as it is a tool for the haters.

Phenotype does has a factor in self-identification, but its very limited and only happens for short periods of time when there is new contact until the normality of the differences is seen as a regular variation.

In order to create a white identity there had to be laws enforced on people to create such identity and even so, a lot of these laws outright failed, except in places where racialism was followed in a very zealot way, like in America.

For example in Mexico or Brasil where race laws failed, people don't see a blonde guy and a brown guy as different people, but they will see Asians and pure Africans as such.

Race relation to identity is correlative, not causative, people associate phenotype with identity because most people of a particular identity are expected to look a particular way, not because somehow the race is the generator of the identity.

Ill give a particular example of mine.

Im part Basque on my mother's side i look "white" enough to look like your average Spanish guy, I have international friends and i feel a much stronger connection to people from France or Spain than i do with Americans because the cultures are way more similar, most people i meet from these places don't feel foreign.

Ironically the only Spanish people i felt were foreign, were actually Basques, because Basques are a relatively different culture and they tend to be more introverted, ironically the same people that i probably share the closest genetic ancestry out of my international friends.

White and Black identity were created via slavery then segregation, if there had not been such segregation then America would be more like Brasil, where race would probably be an indicator of your social and economic class but not your identity.
 
Oh fuck off you lying shit. You put less effort into being dishonest than your idol @nhbear

You're coming up with every excuse under the sun to say he's NOT a racist in this very thread.

But go ahead and say I never post proof.

he tells minorities not to have a victim complex while complaining about how being white is the hardest thing in the world....don't bother with him
 
Phenotype does has a factor in self-identification, but its very limited and only happens for short periods of time when there is new contact until the normality of the differences is seen as a regular variation.

In order to create a white identity there had to be laws enforced on people to create such identity and even so, a lot of these laws outright failed, except in places where racialism was followed in a very zealot way, like in America.

For example in Mexico or Brasil where race laws failed, people don't see a blonde guy and a brown guy as different people, but they will see Asians and pure Africans as such.

Race relation to identity is correlative, not causative, people associate phenotype with identity because most people of a particular identity are expected to look a particular way, not because somehow the race is the generator of the identity.

Ill give a particular example of mine.

Im part Basque on my mother's side i look "white" enough to look like your average Spanish guy, I have international friends and i feel a much stronger connection to people from France or Spain than i do with Americans because the cultures are way more similar, most people i meet from these places don't feel foreign.

Ironically the only Spanish people i felt were foreign, were actually Basques, because Basques are a relatively different culture and they tend to be more introverted, ironically the same people that i probably share the closest genetic ancestry out of my international friends.

White and Black identity were created via slavery then segregation, if there had not been such segregation then America would be more like Brasil, where race would probably be an indicator of your social and economic class but not your identity.
I agree its correlative and not causative. The many elements of identity have a natural interplay until an identity emerges as a sort of consensus. The Mexico/Brazil example seems to show this clearly. Racial laws failed to override the process and dictate a fiat identity as humans are not robots, but for the same reason race was never going to be absent from the interplay either and played a role in shaping identity.

I find it hard to imagine that Brazilians do not consider race as part of their identity. Simply by being a marker of class and wealth it ought to be somewhat meaningful to them. On top of that Brazil has a pretty cool story and that story has key players of very different origin forging a new society of their own. If I was part of that I would be thinking about what were my family doing at the time, what was their role in our great story? But I get what you mean about it being a bigger deal in The US because segregating and whatnot. Elements of identity can be important to people in different ways.
 
Simply by being a marker of class and wealth it ought to be somewhat meaningful to them.
It does means something, just not enough of a difference to indicate a different identity, more like a prejudice to be connected with other patterns.

The human brain is very good at recognizing patterns and said patterns are based on previous experiences within the individual which of course varies with the context of said individual, which is why objectively is very hard to really point out a system of classification of what makes an identity or not.

Another example of mine, i live in Mexico in an area that saw a lot more European migration than other areas, so in my area its common to see "poor whites" as there are tons of European descendants who were poor migrants from Europe, so "whiteness" is less of an indication of wealth here, than it is in other parts of Mexico where most white people are descendants of societal elite.

Brain works in a pretty weird way in that regard, like your brain is very good at noticing things that seem off based on previous experiences, for example in my city "cowboy" style clothing is pretty common, so i wouldn't bat an eye to some caucasian using that attire i wouldn't either bat an eye if someone really indigenous did, but if i saw a Chinese or an African guy wear them i would definitively notice because it would be unusual, even though Chinese and African Mexicans exist, i don't really think i have seen any of them in cowboy attire or maybe i did but the whole clothing would probably make me notice their phenotypical features for more Mexican ones.

That also leads to a second point the whole thinking people close to you are part of your identity despite them looking foreign, for example one of my dad's best high school friends is a Mexican born Japanese guy, but was raised in Mexico, so even though he does looks Asian due to the way he speaks, his mannerisms, his clothing and overall his culture my brain probably associated him as a Mexican, because it fits all the patterns that my brain associates with locals rather than foreigners.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,248,274
Messages
56,249,467
Members
175,128
Latest member
Adventureseeker64
Back
Top