Abolish the White Race - By Any Means Necessary

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Abolish the White Race - By Any Means Necessary

Postby DrEvil » Fri Mar 31, 2017 8:05 pm

American Dream » Fri Mar 31, 2017 3:50 am wrote:Quickly:

1. There is no monolithic, absolute form of Intelligence as Murray and Herrnstein propose, calling it "G". That is a construct more than anything.


Maybe not, but IQ as a measure has strong correlations with various factors in people's lives, so there's something to it. If you have a high IQ score your chances of leading a successful and healthy life goes up correspondingly.

2. There are no "races" as such. If so, what is the absolute/verifiable biological marker by which we can define each one- and the borders between?


We're all the same species, but we are divided into distinct groups. Whether you want to call that race or ethnicity or breed is up to you, but your skin color is determined by your parent's genes. There's tons of variations within the human species that are determined by genetics.

3. There have been no good studies effectively scientific separating out social/structural factors from biological ones. I propose carefully programmed robots on Mars as parents as a thought experiment but I would never support being thoughtlessly cruel towards children.


A lot comes down to how someone is raised (nurture), but parts of it is hereditary (nature).
"I only read American. I want my fantasy pure." - Dave
User avatar
DrEvil
 
Posts: 3981
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:37 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Abolish the White Race - By Any Means Necessary

Postby American Dream » Fri Mar 31, 2017 9:38 pm

I'm mostly with you on your first and third comments though I would say that IQ tests mostly measure ability to get higher scores on other tests, to perform according to expectations in academic and office settings etc. That is only one kind of intelligence.

As to "We're all the same species, but we are divided into distinct groups". I don't see it in my North American reality. I see very fuzzy boundaries that are more defined by what you claim and what you perform (i.e. ethnicity). People mixed a lot and I don't know where the boundaries are. Are there absolute markers of genetics or appearance to you in defining these "races"?
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Abolish the White Race - By Any Means Necessary

Postby American Dream » Sat Apr 01, 2017 10:23 am

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library ... e-of-color

Aragorn!


The Prison-House of Color


The history of thought is the history of its models

Fredric Jameson


The image that the term “a person of color” brings to mind speaks to the bias of the interpreter. White racists see the person of color as the target of their bias, the center of their mythology, and the point that they must counter. The liberal left sees the person of color as the racialized product of decades of government works, as the producer of quality popular culture, as statistics, and as the noble worker of the land. The radical left see the person of color as the revolutionary subject that must be made aware of their historic task. But what does the ‘person of color’ see themselves as? Are we the angry objects of a thousand protest pictures or do we embody the cruelty of immigration and domestic policy? Are we an amalgam of all of these perspectives or are we an identity yet-to-be-determined? Finally, and above all else, are we defined by the color of our skin?

Let us address the last point first. Is the racist reality of our society a visual reality or is it a social, economic, and political reality? Is race a real biological, inherent, and melanin related phenomena or is it a cultural fact? The term ‘Person of Color’ answers both of these questions along biological lines. A person of color then is an object of politics but a subject of science. This results in a cottage industry of scientific research about diabetes, obesity, and other economic realities in the service of creating public policy about housing, school breakfast programs and Medicare. The term, then, prioritizes an external and perceived (color, biology, public policy) definition over a cultural or political one.

As a counter-point, white people have an entirely political understanding of their own identity. They easily accept that Italians and Irish people were not white and became white as they accepted certain conventions, mores, and economic realities. ‘White’ has been an increasingly economicized identity as more and more ‘people of color’ (or who were of color) have been accepted into positions of power. Racism by the capitalist white has become as much a struggle against the perception of there being any other economic reality possible as against people of color as outsiders to our economic reality. The fight against Affirmative Action has been as much about resisting the role of the State to positively affect people’s lives (e.g. a fight against Socialism) as it has been about depriving people of color of opportunity. That is why there has been comparatively little outcry at the replacement of Affirmative Action by scholarships, favoritism, and student narratives. The real struggle was as political as it was racial.

In Charles W. Mills important essay ’“But What Are You Really?” The Metaphysics of Race’ this question is addressed from an angle. Instead of challenging terminology, Charles concerns himself with building a position of racial constructivism where both the reality and unreality of race can be understood. This unfolds into a description of a series of ‘Racial Trangressives’ with a specific set of characteristics to be evaluated; Bodily Appearance, Ancestry, Self-Awareness of Ancestry,Public Awareness of Ancestry, Culture, Experience, and Subjective Identification. Detailing Mills’s ‘Transgressives’ is beyond the scope of this essay, but by conceiving of a new way to quantify the experience of race, Mills goes a long way toward highlighting what is incomplete about our understanding.

Sociology may provide us final insights as to why the term ‘people of color’ continues to have purchase. To quote Randall Collins “Social order is seen as being founded on organized coercion. There is an ideological realm of belief (religion, law), and an underlying world of struggles over power; ideas and morals are not prior to interaction but are socially created, and serve the interests of parties to the conflict.” While the term ‘people of color’ may itself be an inadequate self-description of real living people (and their experiences) it is a socially created term that has come into vogue in a political atmosphere. It has largely replaced the term ‘minority’ to convey a more ‘politically correct’ image of a portion of the population that, to the extent that it has had one political agenda, has become politically ineffective. While spectacular racism continues to grab headlines, the transformation of the ‘welfare’ state towards a ‘pay to play’ state falls further and further in the page count of our local papers. Which begs the question, what population has been best served by the linguistic transformation of minorities into people of color? Has that transformation been a cause or a symptom of the failure of the political changes of the seventies to have staying power?

As a racial transgressive whose experience is not reflected in the amount of melanin in my skin these issues have continued to trouble and fascinate me. I have been particularly engaged with the way that the left deals with the issue of identity for its own gain and in our name. I strongly distrust calls for the universality of our experience and then our response. Every call for ‘people of color’s’ action against this or that public policy or state-crafted indignity sounds like another phrasing of the same old failed politics of the state. I do not hear this language used to actually demonstrate a diversity of approaches to common problems, but how common problems should be addressed by a diversity of people. The problems of ‘my people’ never make it through this powerful message.

Which brings me to the assertion that the term people of color, or person of color, is inadequate in its purpose to unify me with other people. It is inadequate because of its determinism. It continues to be a political assertion of unity-of-purpose without regard to the political consequences of what identity-as-color entail. It fails because it generalizes the wrong aspect of the ‘minority’ experience. If I am going to join under any flag it will have to embrace the multitude of ways that people have been transformed into aberrations and outsiders, and not just the biological ones.


Bibliography

Fredric Jameson “The Prison-House of Language”

Charles W. Mills “Blackness Visible” Essays on Philosophy and Race

Randal Collins “Conflict Sociology”

Ethnic Terms Pondered by Linguists, Others San Jose Mercury News, 27 July 1999


Being at one is god-like and good, but human, too human, the mania Which insists there is only the One, one country, one truth and one way.”

Friedrich Hölderlin, 1799
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Abolish the White Race - By Any Means Necessary

Postby DrEvil » Mon Apr 03, 2017 7:29 pm

American Dream » Sat Apr 01, 2017 3:38 am wrote:I'm mostly with you on your first and third comments though I would say that IQ tests mostly measure ability to get higher scores on other tests, to perform according to expectations in academic and office settings etc. That is only one kind of intelligence.


Sure, it's the kind of intelligence that gets you ahead in today's complex society where pattern matching and the ability to draw inferences are important skills. If the test was geared towards a hunter-gatherer lifestyle we would all be drooling idiots, but that would be pointless because we don't live in a hunter-gatherer society.

As to "We're all the same species, but we are divided into distinct groups". I don't see it in my North American reality. I see very fuzzy boundaries that are more defined by what you claim and what you perform (i.e. ethnicity). People mixed a lot and I don't know where the boundaries are. Are there absolute markers of genetics or appearance to you in defining these "races"?


Sooo... you don't have people with different skin colors in North America?

Some people are black and some people are white and that's down to genetics, and some people are a mix of different ethnic groups with the resulting traits again down to genetics.

It's really simple: skin color isn't caused by how you grow up, it's based on the genes of your parents, and so are several other traits like hair color or the shape of your eyelids (epicanthic fold), or in the case of Ashkenazi Jews (and Cajuns and French Canadians apparently): Tay-Sachs.
"I only read American. I want my fantasy pure." - Dave
User avatar
DrEvil
 
Posts: 3981
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:37 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Abolish the White Race - By Any Means Necessary

Postby American Dream » Mon Apr 03, 2017 9:24 pm

Phenotype only goes so far- and it isn't very accurate to essentialize those with very similar skin tone or physical features as being "the same". I think it's something like .01% of genes that determine phenotype, no?

As to the standardized IQ tests effectively quantifying certain abilities that are commonly sought in workplaces, I agree that they do. I do not know of any evidence that sorts out genetic heritability from environmental heritability and links them, say to specific genes that are widely distributed amongst "superior" populations. I definitely do not believe that this is the one and only Intelligence with a capital I either (the mythical and monolithic "G" of Murray and Herrnstein).

If you know of really good evidence rooted in specific genetic markers that proves old school Race Theory, please share it here.

Also, if you know of any good genetic/physical correlation around "Race" it would be good to see it: Are there specific measurable skin tones that mark the beginning and end of certain discrete races? Do these correspond to a preponderance of similar genetic factors? Where and how are the "mixed" people differentiated from the pure?

It all seems rather subjective and- dare I say it?- socially constructed.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Abolish the White Race - By Any Means Necessary

Postby Iamwhomiam » Wed Apr 05, 2017 2:39 pm

Considering the reaction from some after I posted about whites becoming a minority in the USA by 2040, I expect the same from posting this bit I read today in the NY Times: by 2036 Muslims will become more numerous in the world than Christians or any other religion.
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6572
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Abolish the White Race - By Any Means Necessary

Postby Luther Blissett » Wed Apr 05, 2017 5:05 pm

How the narrative around white women's innocence taught me to let them get away with violence

A few days ago, as I rode the train home from work with my boyfriend and we discussed the rough days (weeks, months, years) we had been having, I was taken aback but not surprised when a white woman interjected. “Make sure you keep eating!” she told us with a smile. It wasn’t a funny comment given the seriousness of the conversation and how unwelcome unsolicited advice from strangers is in general, but my partner and I laughed back anyway. She was, it would seem, simply trying to lighten the mood, if not actually attempting to give solutions to our plight.

We tried to return to our conversation, although something about the mood had shifted. The sacred moment of venting we so needed having been stripped from us, we eventually stood in silence until the woman reached her stop. As she left, she touched my partner on the arm and reiterated, “Remember to keep eating!” smiling again, before disappearing into the Harlem world above us, possibly walking on top of our heads past the new Whole Foods opening on 125th St. in just a few months, marking the critical next step of gentrification in the historically Black neighborhood.

By Hari Ziyad*, AFROPUNK Contributor

Were a white man to have barged his way into a private and serious conversation, give such unsolicited and unhelpful advice, and touch me or my partner without consent, things probably would have gone down very, very differently. I am well aware of the historical violence behind white people ignoring or purposefully overstepping boundaries, physical and otherwise, when it comes to Black people and our bodies. But I have a much harder time challenging this violence when it comes from white women, especially when they claim to be allies, having been taught to presume their innocence from the day I was born.

My mind and body immediately responded to the insidiousness of this woman’s actions by shutting down, but my conscious reaction was to explain her violence away. I interpreted her smile to mean good intentions, as if white women haven’t smiled their way through our murders for centuries. As Ahmad Greene-Hayes argues in “Hillary Clinton and the White Women Who Lynch Us”:
“White women weren’t passively complicit in the racial-sexual terror that pervaded black communities; they were active culprits — hands stained and streaming with black blood.

Kathleen Blee notes in Women of the Klan, 'In the aftermath of a 1924 Klan riot… Mamie H. Bittner, a thirty-nine-year-old mother of three children and member of the Homestead, Pennsylvania WKKK testified that she, along with thousands of other Klanswomen paraded through town, carrying heavy maple riot clubs [and] that the WKKK was teaching its members to murder and kill in the interest of the Klan.' Indeed, white women, like their male counterparts, despised Black people and yearned to be violent, even if it meant sacrificing notions of white female virtuosity.”

I have previously written about how white gay men have been the primary enactors of violence toward me because, by virtue of my queerness, I am forced into community with them without having any promise of rectifying their anti-Blackness in return. Similarly, that white women suffer from patriarchy not only means I am supposed to find solidarity with them too, but to also always consider this to mean they are perpetual victims. White women have been positioned as the epitome of vulnerability and virtuosity to the point where they can hardly do any wrong, despite having done so much already.

Before Donald Trump was elected, the bartender at my regular happy hour spot–a white woman–had begun to get comfortable with my coworker and me after eventually learning our names and faces. She too had an annoying habit of interrupting our conversations (this and other experiences being why the actions of the white woman on the train were so unsurprising), but we chalked it up to it being her job. At some point, she decided to happily tell us about her support of Trump, her distaste for “illegal” immigrants (she had recently immigrated the “right way,” she made sure to let us know), and how Black neighborhoods are more dangerous because we don’t know how to take responsibility for our crimes.

Needless to say, I left (without paying), and did not return back to the bar again (until I heard she was fired), but I couldn’t shake the feeling that there was something about the way I had let her get so comfortable that encourages this special brand of terroristic violence that white women enact behind their smiles and fragility. I thought about all the white women who I side step on the sidewalk, who expect and receive seats on crowded trains while Black women and girls stand, constantly ignored, and who teach our kids without loving them, and began to understand the importance of an active resistance and commitment to unlearning white women’s victimhood. The last time a white woman walked through a door I held open without acknowledging my existence, what to speak of my service, was months ago–not because they’ve astonishingly began to acknowledge Black people more often, but because I stopped holding doors. And my life is much better for it.

But, in part because of me, there’s a white woman walking around Harlem violently reminding Black folks to remember to eat their way out of the violence they experience while pushing overpriced Whole Foods stores into their neighborhoods and them out of their homes. No one ever said the road to unlearning would be easy.
The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4990
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Abolish the White Race - By Any Means Necessary

Postby Iamwhomiam » Wed Apr 05, 2017 5:40 pm

The author's point may be valid but their complaint of the white woman interrupting their argument being described as "violence" toward them or or that she tapped their partner's shoulder when exiting to remind them to eat, as an act of violence, is absurd. I assure you, I'm not missing their point.
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6572
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Abolish the White Race - By Any Means Necessary

Postby American Dream » Thu Apr 06, 2017 11:34 am

Mexican Is Not a Race

Image

“During ‘nation building’ in both Mexico and Brazil, elites promoted strong mestizaje ideologies that imagined the prototypical citizens of each country to be mixed-race, although the imagined mix was different in each country. To say a country or place is racially homogenous because everyone’s a ‘mix’ of the same peoples is to acknowledge existing racial divisions without acknowledging the racial hierarchies from which they stem, and as long as there are prisons, plantations, maquiladoras, favelas, etc., one can only ignore these hierarchies and their relation to the racialization of peoples.”


Read at: http://thenewinquiry.com/features/mexic ... ot-a-race/
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Abolish the White Race - By Any Means Necessary

Postby American Dream » Fri Apr 07, 2017 9:45 am

Rhyd Wildermuth April 7, 2017

The World Without Forms

Image

I will tell you what I do not like. I do not like racism or racialism; I do not like gender or genderism. I do not like property or propriety, nor do I Iike borders and what they define. Also, Capitalism and Liberal Democracy and Empire are my least favorite things in the world, along with their shadow, Fascism.

Here, though, I should remind you: “Fascism” means nothing at all. It is a word invoked by people overcome with a strong urge to shore up the ruins of Empire by recourse to even more tenuous concepts with even less material basis: Tradition, Race, Gender, Morals, the Nation. Though the words are mere sounds we make with our throats or symbols printed with ink or displayed on screens, they each serve to outline vaguely (and by their vagueness gain more power) ideas which nevertheless have great power in the realm of the human social.

Max Stirner called these ideas ‘spooks.’ Others would call these ‘constructs.’ I prefer to name them spectres or Egregores. They are also the mythic, and it’s the realm of the mythic I understand best, which is also the realm the Fascists are trying to take from us...




The Fascists Know What We Prefer To Forget

Race, Gender, and all other ‘identity’ categories function this same way. Gays imagine themselves part of a ‘gay community,’ yet there is no such thing, only an imagined kinship with people who just happen to like sex with people who have the same genitals as themselves. A horrific attack on people who call themselves gay (such as the Pulse massacre in Orlando) thus manifests in individual gays elsewhere (as was the case for myself and many of my gay friends) as an attack on us as well.

We see this egregoric manifestation even stronger in whiteness. Whiteness has no material basis, yet it does not need one to manifest through the social interactions of humans. Whiteness ‘possesses’ the white person, and appears to inhabit their interactions with people possessed by other egregoric racial categories (Black, etc.) regardless of their oppositional nature. In fact, the conflict and tension between egregores only further refines and entrenches their influence and power.

Neither the conservative Right nor most of the liberal or radical Left challenge these egregores. Instead, they strengthen and re-invest these egregores with power by insisting they are real and meaningful fields of social struggle (regardless of their final goals). We see this most tragically on the Left, which generally accepts the constructed nature of identities, yet also insists identity is a valid (if not foundational) field of political struggle.

Consider the problem of Gender. Most Leftists accept Judith Butler’s proposition that gender is performative, not essential or biological (likewise the Egoist position). Yet, particularly on the “Social Justice” Left, essentialism and a fear of straying too far from Liberal Democratic forms creates a contradictory position, seen particularly in the arguments around trans women. On the one hand, Leftists insist woman is a constructed category, yet then assert that trans women are women. That is, woman is constructed, but in order to liberate another constructed category, trans women (as category) are absolutely (essentially) part of a woman (as category), making both again essentialist, Similarly, maleness is a category that the Left generally seeks to make irrelevant, but then the Left reduces men to an essential category in which every man essentially causes exploitation, violence, and oppression (“#YESALLMEN”).

Even if it were only the Left attempting to define the boundaries of these egregoric categories, we would find ourselves in an interminable deadlock. Unfortunately, there is a much stronger and less self-conscious current which already understands the great power these egregores have over the actions of humans.

A brief glance at the Nazi project is probably sufficient for us to grasp how Fascism not only is more comfortable with the egregoric nature of these concepts, but also understands how best to manipulate them. Nazi theorists (social, occult, legal, scientific, etc.) cobbled together a new mythic reality for Germany quite quickly. Tibetan and Hindu spirituality, Nordic and Germanic folklore, and general occult studies as well as previously oppositional and antagonist political, social, and scientific forms all became part of the egregore of Nazism, seizing the mythic imagination of a (likewise mythic) Nation.

Consider: before the Nazis, the Aryan race was a mere fringe scientific theory. During the Nazi ascension, the Aryan race was a thing, alive, ‘self-evident.’ So, too, Germany itself: suddenly a nation created only three decades before arose fully-formed with an ancient history as if it had always been there.

Did the Nazi theorists actually believe their own mythic creation? Or were they consciously creating something new? It’s impossible to know. The same question could be asked of Lenin and Stalin: did they really believe in the existence of the Worker?

Or more controversially regarding the identity politics of the Left: gays did not exist as a category in the 1800’s, nor did trans people. When the political category/egregoric identity of ‘gay’ and ‘trans’ arose, suddenly they were self-evident, alive, meaningful, and strangest of all: ‘true.’ Did those who constructed gayness and trans identity know they were making something up? How many who embrace these identities (unless they’ve really read Foucault) even realize that they do not stretch back into prehistory, let alone before the 20th century?

The point here is not to unravel the nightmare of Left identity politics, only to show how Leftists unconsciously do the same thing that Fascists consciously do. Leftists construct identities and egregores without any reference to the material world, yet then quickly accept them as if they have always existed, just as a Nationalist embraces the Nation and a White Supremacist embraces the White Race.

Leftism (and anti-fascism) as it currently exists is thus insufficient for combating the mythic power of Fascism until we acknowledge how much of this mythic, egregoric power we’ve not only ceded to Fascists, but then clumsily mimic.


More at: https://godsandradicals.org/2017/04/07/ ... out-forms/
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Abolish the White Race - By Any Means Necessary

Postby DrEvil » Fri Apr 07, 2017 3:30 pm

American Dream » Tue Apr 04, 2017 3:24 am wrote:Phenotype only goes so far- and it isn't very accurate to essentialize those with very similar skin tone or physical features as being "the same". I think it's something like .01% of genes that determine phenotype, no?

As to the standardized IQ tests effectively quantifying certain abilities that are commonly sought in workplaces, I agree that they do. I do not know of any evidence that sorts out genetic heritability from environmental heritability and links them, say to specific genes that are widely distributed amongst "superior" populations. I definitely do not believe that this is the one and only Intelligence with a capital I either (the mythical and monolithic "G" of Murray and Herrnstein).

If you know of really good evidence rooted in specific genetic markers that proves old school Race Theory, please share it here.

Also, if you know of any good genetic/physical correlation around "Race" it would be good to see it: Are there specific measurable skin tones that mark the beginning and end of certain discrete races? Do these correspond to a preponderance of similar genetic factors? Where and how are the "mixed" people differentiated from the pure?

It all seems rather subjective and- dare I say it?- socially constructed.


Quickly:

Skin color is not a social construct.

My point is: Not everything about a person is determined by nurture, some of it is determined by nature, and in the case of intelligence it's a mix of both. At least a small part of it is inherited, but it can obviously be improved through nurture.
"I only read American. I want my fantasy pure." - Dave
User avatar
DrEvil
 
Posts: 3981
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:37 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Abolish the White Race - By Any Means Necessary

Postby American Dream » Fri Apr 07, 2017 3:37 pm

Sure, I get that but is there a fixed color line that you know of that defines "races" into genetically similar groupings? In my world, the same skin tone can correlate to different "races".
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Abolish the White Race - By Any Means Necessary

Postby DrEvil » Sat Apr 08, 2017 5:14 pm

Sure, if you're white there's a good chance you're of European origin, black is African etc. That's it.
Obviously there's people of mixed ancestry (pretty much everyone if you go back far enough) which muddies the waters, but most people can tell the difference between a Nigerian and a Swede.

And no, there isn't (to my knowledge) a color chart you can reference to determine someone's race (duh), but I'm pretty sure there's a genetic "chart". That's how you can have your DNA sampled to determine your ancestry.

I'm still not sure why this is so hard for you to understand. All I'm saying is that people are different, and some of it is down to genetics (and yes, I know that some parts of the left go into grand mal seizures at the mere mention of the word genetics and start screaming "Nazi", which I think is fucking stupid). Nothing more and nothing less.

If you think I'm implying that some people are better than others on a genetic level or something along those lines (old fashioned race theory as you put it) you would be wrong (except Trump).

That doesn't mean that people aren't different, just that I don't think it should be used to determine their value as a human being. Some people are smart, some are stupid, some are black and some are white and so what? It says nothing about who they are as a person.
"I only read American. I want my fantasy pure." - Dave
User avatar
DrEvil
 
Posts: 3981
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:37 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests