Facts about racism

Post Reply New Topic

Do you have any physical evidence for the claims though? Not denying them, you just seem to usually be a lot more skeptical, well at least when I've shown you evidence.

http://www.dailywire.com/news/7274/cops-shoot-white-guy-fresno-nobody-pays-attention-hank-berrien

Where's CNN etc????

http://www.dailywire.com/news/7274/cops-shoot-white-guy-fresno-nobody-pays-attention-hank-berrien

Where's CNN etc????

Any evidence for these claims?

That's not an accusation of wrongdoing, and therefore nothing to feel guilty about.

It's an accusation of being blind to the other person's subjective beliefs about your personal experiences. Perhaps you don't find that insulting. That's entirely your prerogative. It also implies racial insensitivity - which, in my experience, quickly escalates to outright accusations of racism (there are numerous examples on this board, I've experienced it first hand) - based solely on the nature of skin colour, as well as the explicit statement that you're somehow immune to negative outcomes based on skin colour.



Except that's not how its being used. The statistical averages were directed specifically towards kraftiekortie by way of explaining to him that his experience was irrelevant. Statistical averages have their place, and being used as a bludgeon to tell someone on this board how lucky they are to be white is, in my opinion, not that place. Being white didn't prevent me from suffering all the hardships associated with growing up in one of the poorest housing estates in the UK. Nor was it any bar to those who sought to oppress my Northern Irish forebears.

When you personally witness the reality of the most disenfranchised people in the UK, it predisposes one to take a dim view of anyone claiming bigotry is something that doesn't happen to white people because of the distorting affect of the 1%, among other arbitrary averaging of data.



I'm aware of that. It doesn't alter my response.



Utter drivel. Racism is discrimination, antagonism or prejudice directed against people of other racial, ethnic or national groups. It is a belief or an action undertaken by an individual or a group, and is absolutely not solely practised by those who are the majority ethnicity. The existence of a recent progressive alternative does not override nor replace the extant definition, nor will I do anyone the disservice of assuming they're applying that narrow, contentious definition unless explicitly stated - in which case I shall, naturally, reject it on the grounds that it's racist.



There are significant numbers of Americans of all hues who very much perceive whiteness in a negative light. Likewise, there are numerous Americans who perceive blackness as being a positive. Incidentally, belief that one race is superior to another, even if it is not your own race, is still racism.



Bill has demonstrated racial discrimination against white people, as have you with your assertion that White Americans cannot experience racism. It might not be as extreme as a desire to eradicate all members of a perceived "inferior" race, but it is still discriminatory.

The current upswing of anti-white sentiment is considered a contributory factor to the increase in white nationalism - though it is, of course, not the sole contributory factor.



What Bill effectively proposed is that we should put zero effort into fighting bigotry against white people because he defines it as being impossible. I'm as on board with that as I am with the notion we should cut funding for women's shelters because there are more homeless men. Both issues are deserving of our time, and all individuals who suffer it are deserving of our support.



Appalling metaphor. The wars weren't fought concurrently. If they were, we'd still distribute our resources on both fronts.



No, it isn't. On both counts. Equality doesn't mean treating everyone the same, it means not treating people differently because of arbitrary differences. There's a huge distinction between the two positions. I'm not opposed to providing wheelchair ramps, providing (effective) remedial classes for those who require more assistance, etc. What I oppose are things like tokenism and divisive rhetoric which does literally nothing to alter outcomes, other than to create further tension, and which diminishes individuals to little more than avatars of those aforementioned arbitrary characteristics.



Perhaps, but this isn't the first time I've seen someone raise this point, absent anyone posting anything that suggests they don't understand it. One should also be careful one isn't being patronising, which is a definite possibility when explaining a metaphor to someone with an ASD.



Much as I appreciate healthy scepticism, there are plenty of examples of racism against wealthy blacks (including the link within Walrus' post).

Edit: as he just pointed out

SJWs are also in favor of reversing the civil rights movement.

I hope you don't think I'm a "white nationalist."

I'm married to a black woman.

I just don't believe that I have to "check my privilege" because I'm white.

Yes, I do understand that "minorities" are disproportionately represented in jails in the US. I work closely with the courts in NY County.

Seriously? Whites are just as much victims of racism as are blacks?

When have whites been regarded as potential criminals by the police due to the color of their skin? When have whites been herded into jails and prisons at same rate as blacks? And just who is behind this alleged discrimination against whites?

And no, the growth of the white nationalist movement is not at all justified by this so called racial discrimination against whites, but is rather a purely reactionary movement bent of reversing civil rights gains made by minorities.

No. Some whites experience worse bigotry than some blacks, and vice versa. I believe I made that abundantly clear.

Are you genuinely expressing outrage, or are you merely virtue signalling? It certainly doesn't come across as the former to me.



Why do you place a higher emphasis on skin colour rather than other distinctions? Whites have been persecuted for their religious beliefs, their nationalities and their customs and appearance. Look at how the Irish fared at the hands of the British and tell me how that's in any way different just because the justification de jure wasn't skin tone.

Your focus on skin is the product of a US-centric perception of a horrific practice that has likely been part of human existence for as long as we've been a social mammal. Look beyond this narrow perspective and you'll realise there's no difference between slaughtering and exploiting based on skin tone or on the basis of having ginger hair, worshipping the wrong fertility idol, praying on the wrong day, or by nature of having been born on the wrong section of dirt.

Even the word "slave" is derived from the widespread practice of enslaving pale-skinned Eastern Europeans. Bigotry and distrust of "other" is a human social issue, not a black one. If you wish to be taken seriously as being "inclusive", you're doing an incredibly shoddy job.



I didn't say it was justified by it, I said it was a contributory factor. That you've labelled it a "reactionary movement" rather suggests you at least partially agree, despite your lazy, general characterisation of it being about "reversing civil rights".

Frankly, Bill, I don't believe I've been at all ambiguous when it comes to presenting my opinions on this matter. If you continue to misquote and misrepresent my position, I can only assume you're arguing in bad faith and for dishonest reasons.

Gazi Kodzo is a good example. He feels all whites owe him and his race "retribution". That all whites are colonist. He is against black soldiers. He beloved all blacks should go back to Africa.

(Sigh) I've been talking about race relations in modern America, whereas you only sprung it on me with your last post that you're talking about the whole history of mankind.

But even so, while whites have been discriminated against due to their religion or nationality, it's very often been at the hands of other whites, making it not a racial matter.