Anti-white sentiments

Author: Analgesic.Spectre

Posts

Total: 51
Topic's author
#1
Analgesic.Spectre
Analgesic.Spectre's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 468
1
1
6
Analgesic.Spectre's avatar
Analgesic.Spectre
1
1
6

No such thing as anti-white? Whites have nothing to complain about?

White groups are under attack by all kinds of media and jurisdictions. Ultimately, there is a push to pathologise formation of white groups. Let's look at some evidence:

"I feel as if I do not belong when I am the one non-White person in class." This, on the surface, seems to be a harmless quote, wherein a person feels uncomfortable being with other racial groups (which is, to use a bogus leftist term, "racist"). However, notice the underlying implication here of a white-group being seem as something which causes other people stress. Is that too much of a stretch?

"Students of color reported feeling uncomfortable and unwelcomed just walking into or sitting in the classroom, especially if they were the only person of color, or one of a few." Again,there is an issue with the solely white group. Coincidence? Notice how the inverse is never mentioned (whites feeling uncomfortable).

In fact, throughout this entire report (which was taken very seriously by the Huffington Post), it is whites and white groups who are portrayed as problematic, and people of color's feelings that are most valuable -- there is no comment to the inverse(http://www.racialmicroaggressions.illinois.edu/files/2015/03/RMA-Classroom-Report.pdf).

But we've only just begun.


"Too old, too white, too male?": (https://www.politico.com...)

"Report: military leadership too white and too male": (https://federalnewsradio.com...)

"Officials Say US Special Forces Are Too White And Too Male": (http://dailycaller.com...)

"New LAFD recruit class is nearly all male, overwhelmingly white": (http://www.latimes.com...)

"Brooklyn school cutting gifted program to boost diversity": (http://www.nydailynews.com...)

Seeing a trend? They pathologise white groups. It is bad for whites to be in a group. That last article is about a school cutting gifted program because students are too white.

Not too bad? How about being attacked purely because you are white?

How about having all your achievements minimised and discounted, due to having "white privilege?":(https://www.dailywire.com...)

Howabout having campaigns to remove a recognised flag, because itdepicts a white person? (Yes, a flag is being attacked)(http://www.newsweek.com...)

How about being banned from a job, purely because you're white?(https://www.express.co.uk...)

Still not done.

Is black pride okay? Yes (https://en.wikipedia.org...)

Is National Hispanic month a thing? Yes (https://en.wikipedia.org...)

Is white pride okay? No (https://en.wikipedia.org...)

It's no longer the fact that differing racial groups have racial preference and interest towards their own. It's now a fact that white groups are under attack simply for being white.
#2
coal
coal's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 1,950
3
3
9
coal's avatar
coal
3
3
9
I assume Cassie wrote this post.  

Reads like Jeanine Shapiro wrote it.  

Is nonsense. 

Topic's author
#3
Analgesic.Spectre
Analgesic.Spectre's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 468
1
1
6
Analgesic.Spectre's avatar
Analgesic.Spectre
1
1
6
-->
@coal
>ignores all evidence presented
>tone polices
>makes a two-worded, bare assertion, and yet can't even maintain grammar throughout

Another worthwhile poster on Dart.
#4
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,647
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
Anti-white sentiments
 We are seeing this in our society here in England. They ( blacks and whites) are all but saying it is bad to be white. 
#5
dylancatlow
dylancatlow's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 97
0
0
3
dylancatlow's avatar
dylancatlow
0
0
3
Of course there's anti-white sentiment. When referring to the white race as a whole, you're expected to do the equivalent of role your eyes and sigh. Portraying whites in a positive light is forbidden unless it's qualified praise, and unless you have expertise in traversing minefields, even that is going to get you labeled a Nazi.

Just take the reaction to the "It's okay to be white" slogan. The people who freaked out over this claim that they agree with the slogan. Yet they themselves have never said it and never will, and were shocked to see it openly expressed. How are we supposed to believe that their "agreement" is genuine when the statement they "agree with" is one that actually frightens them? That they *claim* to agree with it tells us nothing, since of course "anti-racists" are not going to openly admit that their "hated of racism" is really just an expression of their "hatred of hierarchies", with whites being on top. It's not only whites that we're supposed to hate. We're also supposed to hate males, objective truth, rich people, IQ tests, basically anything which hints at the fact that some people are "lesser than". 

Basically, one side said to the other "We think you're racist against white people", and they responded with "Yes, we are". 
Topic's author
#6
Analgesic.Spectre
Analgesic.Spectre's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 468
1
1
6
Analgesic.Spectre's avatar
Analgesic.Spectre
1
1
6
-->
@dylancatlow
Of course there's anti-white sentiment.
I just wanted to document it with concrete proof.

Just take the reaction to the "It's okay to be white" slogan. The people who freaked out over this claim that they agree with the slogan. Yet they themselves have never said it and never will, and were shocked to see it openly expressed.
The truth is often seen, rarely heard.

Basically, one side said to the other "We think you're racist against white people", and they responded with "Yes, we are". 
As much as they are being hypocritical, I wouldn't start using their faulty language. I deconstruct the term "racist" here: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/174



#7
dustryder
dustryder's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 1,080
3
2
4
dustryder's avatar
dustryder
3
2
4
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
I feel like you're glossing over some aspects of what you describe as anti-white sentiment. For example, black pride is a celebration of the challenges and oppression that black people in American society have overcome. White people in America in general have never faced the same adversity or challenges in comparison as a whole.

National hispanic month in the same vein is an acknowledgement of hispanic contribution to American culture as a minority.

So exactly does white pride celebrate? Simply being white?  That seems rather frivolous and flippant to what other groups are celebrating to me. Now if you were to celebrate your cultural background, that'd be perfectly fine. And this is currently done in bastille day/independence day/st patricks etc etc.

As for being criticised for being a white dominant group, is it anti-white to recognise that a homogenous group in defiance of country demographics is problematical? Either other races don't wish to join in which case there's an image problem or candidates of other races are being rejected in greater frequency, in which case there is contribution to racial inequality
#8
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@dylancatlow
Why do you feel so threatened by these reactionary claims?
#9
Outplayz
Outplayz's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,193
3
3
5
Outplayz's avatar
Outplayz
3
3
5
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
Who cares... let whites, which i technically am one too according to surveys, get attacked. White chicks are the hottest and everyone's just jealous. 
Topic's author
#10
Analgesic.Spectre
Analgesic.Spectre's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 468
1
1
6
Analgesic.Spectre's avatar
Analgesic.Spectre
1
1
6
-->
@dustryder
I feel like you're glossing over some aspects of what you describe as anti-white sentiment. For example, black pride is a celebration of the challenges and oppression that black people in American society have overcome. White people in America in general have never faced the same adversity or challenges in comparison as a whole.

National hispanic month in the same vein is an acknowledgement of hispanic contribution to American culture as a minority.
Yeah, because civilising America was a breeze for whites.

As for being criticised for being a white dominant group, is it anti-white to recognise that a homogenous group in defiance of country demographics is problematical? Either other races don't wish to join in which case there's an image problem or candidates of other races are being rejected in greater frequency, in which case there is contribution to racial inequality
Do you honestly believe that a multi-racial society is optimal for a nation?
#11
dustryder
dustryder's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 1,080
3
2
4
dustryder's avatar
dustryder
3
2
4
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
Yeah, because civilising America was a breeze for whites
Well, being kidnapped, enslaved and then segregated/discriminated against is a fairly high bar to match.

That, and I'm not sure how prideful one should be when colonisation essentially amounts to invasion

Do you honestly believe that a multi-racial society is optimal for a nation?
You know, I haven't the slightest idea. But I can't see the harm in a 50/50 black/white society split given the only difference being physical characteristics
Topic's author
#12
Analgesic.Spectre
Analgesic.Spectre's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 468
1
1
6
Analgesic.Spectre's avatar
Analgesic.Spectre
1
1
6
-->
@dustryder
Well, being kidnapped, enslaved and then segregated/discriminated against is a fairly high bar to match.

That, and I'm not sure how prideful one should be when colonisation essentially amounts to invasion
Your take on North American "slavery" is shallow, and therefore misses some important nuance. In practice, these "slaves" were essentially serfs or peasants.

Slavery made the lives of the Americans-Africans better, if you take a proper look at it. The people who were slaves in America would have been slaves in Africa anyway, so it's not like they would have been treated better, had they not been "kidnapped". In fact, most African countries didn't achieve a literacy rate of 20% before 1950 (lol), whilst the Africans given a better life in America reached a 20% literacy rate by 1870, all without any kind of push for their literacy. These African-Americans worked not only less than their masters, but also less than the average farmer in America.

I could further delve into the poor living conditions in Africa, particularly in comparison to America. I could also further expound upon the benefits African-Americans enjoyed by being relocated to America. I'll probably construct a thread sometime (because, frankly, I'm not convinced you're worth the effort), debunking all the bs progressive brainwashing you've obviously been taught in school.

Besides, if you dislike America so much and are so ashamed of its history, why don't you go and live in the lovely African country of Ethiopia? I'm sure you would enjoy the modern benefits of mud huts and witch-burning.

You know, I haven't the slightest idea. But I can't see the harm in a 50/50 black/white society split given the only difference being physical characteristics
You're right, you haven't the slightest idea. You just regurgitate the brainwashing that left your brain squeaky clean. You just take the ignorant "why not?" approach, hoping for good results. I'm glad you're not in charge of anything important.

I've already written a thread on how racial groups differ at the genetic level, and not just the "physical level" (wow, great term. It's not nebulous at all!).

#13
Plisken
Plisken's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 706
2
1
5
Plisken's avatar
Plisken
2
1
5
The Africans sold for chattel would have been better off dead.  Ethiopia is an ancient Christian stronghold in eastern Africa.  Witch hunts used to take place all over the world, as well as slavery.  American slavery had a tendency for dehumanizatuon.

Topic's author
#14
Analgesic.Spectre
Analgesic.Spectre's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 468
1
1
6
Analgesic.Spectre's avatar
Analgesic.Spectre
1
1
6
-->
@Plisken
The Africans sold for chattel would have been better off dead.
This is a really excellent point. You've done so well to write this without a single shred of evidence. Stating opinions, without providing any argumentation or sources, is the best way to convince people. You are a pioneer on Dart.

Ethiopia is an ancient Christian stronghold in eastern Africa.  Witch hunts used to take place all over the world.
Yeah witch hunts did used to take place all over the world. In Europe, it was the Middle Ages. In Africa, they used to do that back in 2014 (https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/05/opinion/the-persecution-of-witches-21st-century-style.html).


Whoops, that year might be 2018:

"According to news reports, at least 20 inmates of the woman's jail at Bimbo, in Bangui, Central African Republic, were accused earlier this year of charlatanism and witchcraft, crimes included in the country's penal code."


That sure is a long time ago. It's a good thing accusations of witchcraft only "used" to happen in Africa.

#15
dustryder
dustryder's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 1,080
3
2
4
dustryder's avatar
dustryder
3
2
4
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
Your take on North American "slavery" is shallow, and therefore misses some important nuance. In practice, these "slaves" were essentially serfs or peasants. ~
Well that's certainly an interesting take on American slavery.

You're right, you haven't the slightest idea. You just regurgitate the brainwashing that left your brain squeaky clean. You just take the ignorant "why not?" approach, hoping for good results. I'm glad you're not in charge of anything important.

I've already written a thread on how racial groups differ at the genetic level, and not just the "physical level" (wow, great term. It's not nebulous at all!).
You have a great gift for pulling red herrings out of your ass and slathering them all over my screen
#16
triangle.128k
triangle.128k's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 502
3
2
6
triangle.128k's avatar
triangle.128k
3
2
6
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
One question:

How do you propose dealing with differences in IQ of races? Would you support establishing a hierarchy that places whites over blacks and other nonwhite races? Or would you prefer to let these differences show naturally without any discriminatory law? 

#17
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
Do you honestly believe that a multi-racial society is optimal for a nation?
Clearly not, for most interpretations of the word 'nation'.

The question is whether the concept of 'nations' is optimal for humanity and the planet or if we'd all be better off without 'nations'.

#18
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,263
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@keithprosser
Multi race is fine. Multi cultural is the death of any nation as there is no one culture worth defending together.
#19
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
But if the whole world is muti-cultural what would there be to fight about?

Countries, religions, tribes, clans.... they all exist to divide people into 'us' and 'them'.   Why do that?

If Germany had won ww2 I'd probably still be a retired computer programmer today.  Who wins a war matters a lot to those who like to pull the levers of power but they don't make much real difference to the mass of people who still get up in morning, go to work, watch TV, sleep and repeat.   

When I lived and worked in East Africa most people I met were dirt poor and scraping a living.   Having a black President rather than a white Governor general was irrelevant to them.  Revolutions change the bosses, but exchanging one elite for another makes no difference to the masses, except a lot of them get killed in the process.

i'd bet you have a lot more in common with an ordinary moderate muslim than you do with a fanatial Christian,but if the barricades do go up you'll be shooting at men with families and mortgages who support their local football team, not the religious fantics who put you in the front line to die.



 

#20
Plisken
Plisken's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 706
2
1
5
Plisken's avatar
Plisken
2
1
5
-->
@Greyparrot
You call yourself a libertarian so you are probably against ethnic nationalism taking root amongst and between the United States, not supportive of ethnic cleansing.  Every culture needs to be afforded the capacity to assimilate to the end of their common cause in relationship through the states.


#21
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@keithprosser
Well said.
#22
Plisken
Plisken's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 706
2
1
5
Plisken's avatar
Plisken
2
1
5
-->
@keithprosser
The war to end all wars is always going to be resisted by someone.  How are you proposing the world goes from multi-cultural, as it is now, to universalizing the separation of church and state?

#23
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@disgusted
Thanks- but I'd add the words 'for them' right at the end if I could change it!

...not the religious fantics who put you in the front line to die for them.
#24
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Plisken
Anyone who doesn't resist war is an imbecile.
#25
KingLaddy01
KingLaddy01's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 411
0
1
2
KingLaddy01's avatar
KingLaddy01
0
1
2
-->
@disgusted
Nice response, fruitcake.
#26
KingLaddy01
KingLaddy01's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 411
0
1
2
KingLaddy01's avatar
KingLaddy01
0
1
2
I assume Cassie wrote this post.  

Reads like Jeanine Shapiro wrote it.  

Is nonsense. 
So judging from these sentences I'd say you are about 14-16.

Can we be sure you are YYW?
#27
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,263
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@keithprosser
This is a silly sentiment. If global multicultures don't matter and they are all essentially equal, why are there migrants and refugees? Why won't any of the relatively civilized nations in the Middle East take in the Palestines? Obviously some cultures are more prosperous and peaceful and safer than others.

America stopped encouraging assimilation many decades ago when they started teaching the myth that all cultures are essentially equal.


#28
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,263
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Plisken
You call yourself a libertarian so you are probably against ethnic nationalism taking root amongst and between the United States, not supportive of ethnic cleansing.  Every culture needs to be afforded the capacity to assimilate to the end of their common cause in relationship through the states.


America has had many decades experimenting with non-assimilation of cultures. One side effect of this policy are social communities using law enforcement and prisons to settle cultural disputes. America now has an exorbitant prison population filled with people who have not assimilated into civilization. The recidivism rate suggests the prison system is completely unable to perform the role of assimilating people. Most schools are forbidden to cite the pledge of allegiance, or teach anything resembling a unifying culture. This diversity has also spilled over into the law, where the law becomes so distorted through conflicting precedents from judges with different cultures that law enforcement can't understand the spirit of any law. 

A nation needs a unifying culture. Period. Or that nation will not exist. The sole purpose of having a nation is to protect a culture. Otherwise we will see a civil war, and soon, as states become increasingly tribal and realize they have less and less in common culturally with the other states, especially between the coastal cultures and fly-over cultures.

So to your point, a libertarian ideal is going to encourage secessionism citing the central core tenet of libertarians to have the freedom to associate, but we all know how that would turn out today.
#29
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
I was repsonding to

Multi race is fine. Multi cultural is the death of any nation as there is no one culture worth defending together.
As I understand you, you say no-one would fight to defend britain (ie a nation) unless there was a unifying 'british culture'.   I better make sure I understand you before we argue anything!

I suppose there are two images of 'multi-culturalism'.   One image resembles a mosaic of hermeticaly sealed, independent ghettos; another image is much more fluid where colour and religion are of no more significance than county of birth, ie having a workmate or neighbour who is a pakistani moslem is no more or less of significance than if he was from Kent or Lancashire.

The latter is my utopian ideal - I think I might prefer monoculture to the former.  Self evidently what we have today more closely resembles a mosaic than utopia.  Neither right nor left like the mosaic model - they differ on what should replace it.



 
#30
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,263
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@keithprosser