Discussion: Racism - Part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
I agree with you a lot, but sometimes you're too aggressive for your own good, in a way that I don't think has a real end goal in mind. As long as we keep these discussions about each other's character instead of just the ideas, the more circles we go in. I kinda regret my initial comment, not for the underlying idea so much, but for how snarky it is. I try and avoid that.

All valid points. Although I'd say this thread was a lost cause a long time ago, it's a thread about racism in a politics forum that's essential function has become complaining about whites - it's likely to go in circles forever irrespective of what you or I or anyone else does.

Most of the posters in here aren't actually interested in addressing racism or even conceptually engaging with potential solutions - they're here to be aggressively defensive about their own identities and dismissive of others'.

I've asked people several times in this thread to lay out their own vision of what a potential solution/set of solutions look like for discriminatory norms in a society and in most cases people don't actually want to, they just want to keep complaining about how enough isn't being done for them.
 
That article reminds me of a Dave Chappelle bit about experiencing something so racist that you're not even offended and just go "god damn that is racist". That article is so over the top that you can't take it seriously. It's so clear that he's trying to hard to get people offended. There are jackasses like that but I expect more from people here on this forum.

The anti-whiteness aside, this is where white males and the "black power" people see eye to eye and for very similar reasons(but from different perspectives). White feminism as they call it is often very petty and they act like they are oppressed. Famous actors say stupid things all the time. No doubt Hollywood is a really gross place for women but Emilia Clarke is so succesful and for her to act like a victim is silly.
 
At the same time what's really silly is random people telling Emilia Clarke she can't experience sexism because she can afford a Bentley for every day of the week and she's a world famous actor. This hive-mind belief that we can invalidate someone's personal experience because they're affluent or successful is frankly moronic.

I've seen dark-skinned black women chastise and talk down to light-skinned black women because light-skinned black women "have it better" and won't experience racism the same way dark-skinned black women would. I've seen lesbian/bisexual women talk down to and invalidate the sexist experiences of heterosexual women because heterosexual women "won't experience sexism as badly as LGBTQ women". Now whether or not that makes for engaging and interesting academic research should be separated from whether or not it's useful in every day life. What's to be gained from trying to police other people's perceptions of their own experiences?

How about when someone says they've experienced something reasonably unpleasant or traumatic other people don't play the trauma police and decide for other people what they are or aren't allowed to complain about? Otherwise everyone in any interaction they have must relinquish their own agency or personal experience and allow those who deem someone else's identities to be privileged decide what you are or aren't allowed to believe about your own life.
 
Emilia Clarke went to a good school, just like all them white women! Who cares about her opinion?
 
Can rich women be victims of sexism. Naturally. But Emilia Clarke said her experience of being an actress in Hollywood is like racism.
 
So why is it necessary to bring up her background, and how all white women are alike? Couldn't the writer just have attacked her point and not her upbringing?

I don't even think her point is THAT ridiculous. She's talking about treating others differently for superficial reasons, something that pertains to both racism and sexism. She just stumbled a little in the execution.
 
Can rich women be victims of sexism. Naturally. But Emilia Clarke said her experience of being an actress in Hollywood is like racism.

It's all relative and depends on the immediate environment.

Hollywood can be extremely sexist and misogynist.
 
So why is it necessary to bring up her background, and how all white women are alike? Couldn't the writer just have attacked her point and not her upbringing?
Absolutely. The writer is an ass.
 
Can rich women be victims of sexism. Naturally. But Emilia Clarke said her experience of being an actress in Hollywood is like racism.

Sure, but it seems disingenuous and slightly ignorant of us to project a bunch of our own meaning onto her statements without allowing her the opportunity to explain what she means.

If someone is a new school regressive liberal then "racism" is defined as when whites use social, political and economic power to subjugate other races, and "sexism" means when men use social, political and economic power to subjugate women. So if her statement was meant to imply that she believes sexism is as one-sided as racism supposedly is in America then it doesn't seem illogical.

The real reason the faux critic from the web site jumped on this story is it's in vogue for intersectionals and race-traders to jump down wypipo's throats whenever those wypipo have the gall to express any view that may make them seem like living, breathing entities. And another reason is because very specific identity groups are being told by "experts" like this fraud they they have a preordained right to monopolize all offense, subjugation, inequality and social grievances.
 
How about when someone says they've experienced something reasonably unpleasant or traumatic other people don't play the trauma police and decide for other people what they are or aren't allowed to complain about?
Well put. I'm reminded of when I was going thru a bad breakup. My daughter's grandpa is a Vietnam vet and a retired cop and has PTSD. I was trying not to bring up anything that was bothering me because what he has seems so much worse. He wouldn't have it. "Your pain is your pain." I think he's on to something there with the whole empathy approach.
 
Well put. I'm reminded of when I was going thru a bad breakup. My daughter's grandpa is a Vietnam vet and a retired cop and has PTSD. I was trying not to bring up anything that was bothering me because what he has seems so much worse. He wouldn't have it. "Your pain is your pain." I think he's on to something there with the whole empathy approach.

It's a much more constructive approach to have in social engagements. At an academic or policy-making level of course there might be merit in stratifying who needs the most help, and obviously at an objective and disembodied level a broken toe isn't as painful or traumatic as cancer (to use a terrible analogy), but there's really nothing to be gained by adopting that perspective when we're engaging with each other.

It seems far more constructive for people to feel like they're reasonably allowed to voice any grievances they may have, and for the rest of a community to reasonably listen to it irrespective of where it falls on a hierarchy of grievances.

But that's not what identity politics subscribers want, the golden rule for ideologues employing identity politics is that you have to make a population believe all resources are scarce and that each group is in competition with each other for all those resources, and that groups are actively trying to keep resources from other groups - and it's working damn well in the US right now.
 
People know deep inside that resources aren't scarce but they need a scapegoat for their dull, mediocre lives.
 
To use DeadPresident's approach, how is it helpful to just say "white this" and "white that"? It only distances white people to the point where you just end up preaching to the choir. Why would I cooperate with someone who seemingly has a distaste for white people?

its not a distaste for white people its a distaste for an attitude that white people tend to express all the while claiming they don't believe racism is a major factor for non whites in america at the same time pointing out all the supposed racism they claim to experience. An attitude that says racism against whites is a real thing while racism against minorities isn't as bad as they claim it is.
 
Last edited:
All valid points. Although I'd say this thread was a lost cause a long time ago, it's a thread about racism in a politics forum that's essential function has become complaining about whites - it's likely to go in circles forever irrespective of what you or I or anyone else does.

Most of the posters in here aren't actually interested in addressing racism or even conceptually engaging with potential solutions - they're here to be aggressively defensive about their own identities and dismissive of others'.

I've asked people several times in this thread to lay out their own vision of what a potential solution/set of solutions look like for discriminatory norms in a society and in most cases people don't actually want to, they just want to keep complaining about how enough isn't being done for them.

racism in america was created by whites so yes the chief component in complaints about will pertain to whites... what are you talking about?

in order to find solutions you would have to radically change how america functions. Something of a burn it down and start over again approach otherwise its just rearranging deck chairs on the titanic.
 
I want the men who are killing trans women of color to be prosecuted under hate crime statues as applicable
 
The only thing atrocious going on in here is from members that think racism against whites is justified and ok. No one is saying racism against minorities is justified and ok.
 
racism in america was created by whites so yes the chief component in complaints about will pertain to whites... what are you talking about?

No engagement with you ever seems to generate anything positive, generally because of your arbitrary choices of discussion geared (seemingly) exclusively to let you just vent out your dislike for whites - but let's try.

You seem to have some kind of fetish for picking points in history to try and justify your dislike for whites, or to justify why whites should be on the receiving end of specific kinds of treatment. A) How do you logically justify this, and B) What does it actually help?

Let's say we could actually 100% determine which whites in the USA are descendants of actual slave owners - what then? Let's say we can quantify and establish the exact methods by which all them evil white people gained their money and we know who did it by being racist, what then? And then if all of the actual racists have been identified, does that then exempt "good whites" (I know, absolute fantasy, but go with me on this) from being subject to dismissive and blatantly racist treatment from faux progressives? I suspect none of these answers are relevant, though, and you, just like most intellectually lazy racists, need an easy and eternal target for you to aim your vitriol at and don't actually want the problem solved.

Next issue, how do you forcibly redistribute wealth if you've identified the evil recipients of financial privilege as a result of what their ancestors did? I've got a good idea; how about you emotionally blackmail them into signing their estates over to impoverished minority families and then encourage them to commit suicide? In fact, why stop there? Why don't you write to BLM and advise them to instruct all white allies to do the same. I mean, whites are intrinsically scum, so a benefit to the entire world would be for those evildoers to sign over their ill-gotten gains to more deserving and virtuous people and then offing themselves so we don't need to deal with their ilk anymore.

Oh…wait, that's all preposterous drivel. See? Anyone can vomit intellectually spurious tripe onto a page - my question though, as always, is what practical and pragmatic suggestions for a solution do you have?

in order to find solutions you would have to radically change how america functions. Something of a burn it down and start over again approach otherwise its just rearranging deck chairs on the titanic.

You've been called out for saying moronic things in the past by users that aren't me, but this takes the cake. I understand in your warped reality where racism is America's biggest problem and all minorities are under explicit subjugation and lead terrible lives this idea makes sense, but in the real world where most minorities lead perfectly acceptable lives, it's absolutely lunacy.

"Burn it down and start over again" - How will all the minority-identity people who are doing very well feel about your assessment, or will they, like all those pesky whites, simply want to protect what privilege and resources they've got? You're buying into the black nationalist separatist hype that's so in vogue in the USA right now, maybe one day you'll join everyone else in reality and realize that while the USA has some historical disparities that do need to be addressed, it's far from the apocalyptic doomsday all the race-baiters want you to think it is.
 
Last edited:
The only thing atrocious going on in here is from members that think racism against whites is justified and ok. No one is saying racism against minorities is justified and ok.

But remember, many of the users in this thread reject that definition of racism. The new definition of racism isn't about individuals, it's about a specific category of people (evil whites) using social, political and economic structures to eternally subjugate non-white groups.

Ergo, only whites can be racist. It's a very convenient little kafkatrap.
 
I dunno, imagine if whites were brutally enslaved by blacks during the 1700's and 1800's, whites were treated like 2nd class citizens by blacks for most of the 1900's, then whites watch as the first white president who does a decent job is called racial slurs for 8 years in a supposedly post racial society, and then Al Sharpton is elected based mostly on black nationalist sentiment.

And the moment a white person suggest black supremacy is a bigger problem than white resentment blacks pile on shaming them for it.

Even if blacks are overly paranoid and defensive about white supremacy, can you blame them? Let's just consider the last 300 years and the resurgence of white nationalism globally.

If there were no black resentment or rebellion it would be kind of weird at this point.
 
Last edited:
Also there has been so much gaslighting whenever blacks vent about 300 years of racism...

"You're the racist" is pretty much the obligatory response.

Meanwhile black nationalism remains on the fringes but Donald Trump is president and white nationalism is a global movement with sway in every European nation.

I'm going to go ahead and suggest white supremacy is a bigger problem than blacks being understandably resentful in a very powerless way.
 
Last edited:
What some of you don't understand is that we hear the same arguments about reverse racism from white supremacist and white nationalist all the time.

So you need to convince us that you oppose the rise of white nationalism before you can convince us our current strategy against white nationalism is counter-productive.
 
I dunno, imagine if whites were brutally enslaved by blacks during the 1700's and 1800's, whites were treated like 2nd class citizens by blacks for most of the 1900's, then whites watch as the first white president who does a decent job is called racial slurs for 8 years in a supposedly post racial society, and then Al Sharpton is elected based mostly on black nationalist sentiment.

And the moment a white person suggest black supremacy is a bigger problem than white resentment blacks pile on shaming them for it.

Even if blacks are overly paranoid and defensive about white supremacy, can you blame them? Let's just consider the last 300 years and the resurgence of white nationalism globally.

If there were no black resentment or rebellion it would be kind of weird at this point.

You're kind of doing the same thing the hellified does in a way. Most reasonable people worth talking to won't discount any of what you say, but reciting past atrocities is only so useful, and it's completely useless when (as hellified's posts suggest, although I'm not saying you suggest this) used as a method to figure out who is responsible for taking charge of creating better conditions for others.

I don't know about what anyone else is suggesting about the level of concern related to black/white supremacy, my statements regarding that always come from the perspective of "Is it useful in achieving [insert objective]?". Now, if someone's objective is a unified and cohesive society where everyone, irrespective of race, religion, or creed, has the same opportunity and environment to achieve prosperity, then rising black nationalism doesn't do anything to achieve that, as understandable and emotionally satisfying as it may be.

Not to sound callous but some of this also just comes down to demographics. In every country the dominant numbers want to preserve the cultural fabric to reflect that statistical prevalence. Whites are going to react with resistance to cultural shifts away from what they're used to, the same way there's resistance in the ME, in South America, etc, etc, etc. A white-majority population is always going to have a specific cultural make up, if people don't accept that then either move or go to war to change it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"