It's okay to white, identity politics and white supermacy

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NEXT
 

ineptelephant:

StatusNil:
snip

RikuoAmero:
For those who are asserting that the phrase it's okay to be white is somehow indicative of a racist meaning, I would like to ask a question. Remember when Black Lives Matter first started? Remember how those who were against the movement were told that if they had a problem with the phrase then they must be racist against blacks? Does the same logic apply here?

Depends, do you believe in a thing called context? Because the context here is flyers being stuffed right outside the Native Studies department. I'm just going to copy/paste what jklinders posted:

At the University of Alberta in Canada, one of the posters appeared Tuesday outside the school's Native Studies department, according to a media report. That came a day after a racist jack-o'-lantern was left outside the same academic office.

I would compare it to, say, if people were to leave flyers reading "Its O.K. to be German" right outside a Holocaust museum. Is it O.K. to be German? Yes, of course, but context is important. I can't see an argument to the contrary unless you are willing to dismiss all subtelty and subtext.

What next, shall I start leaving flyers reading "Its O.K. to be male" outside of women's refuges from abuse? Perhaps a few flyers reading "Its O.K. to carry guns" posted around that small town in Texas that has just come up in the news?

I could go on but I hope you get the point. As a "Gotcha" attempt this is dreadfully poor.

Did you ask similar questions about the phrase BLM popping up? Or did you take that phrase as a given? Of course black lives do matter and it doesn't matter where the phrase pops up?
As for your example about saying it's okay to be German outside a holocaust museum... Are you legitimising racism (or whatever word best fits that example) against Germans? Not all Germans were Nazis.
Same goes with saying it's okay to be male outside a woman's shelter. Your examples only make sense if we assume a stance of bigotry.

ineptelephant:

Depends, do you believe in a thing called context? Because the context here is flyers being stuffed right outside the Native Studies department. I'm just going to copy/paste what jklinders posted:

At the University of Alberta in Canada, one of the posters appeared Tuesday outside the school's Native Studies department, according to a media report. That came a day after a racist jack-o'-lantern was left outside the same academic office.

Oh no, not the Native Studies department! How will the poor Critical Race Theorists manage to get through their daily Abolition of Whitecraft seminars with that kind of hate menacing them? And coming so soon after probably one of their own ranks stuck some feathers in a pumpkin to no doubt "start a conversation"?

Besides, the esteemed University of Alberta was by no means the only place where these acts of aggression were taking place, forcing all concerned to swiftly affirm their firm objection to Whiteness.

PsychedelicDiamond:
In a vacuum there'd be nothing wrong with the statement "It's okay to be white". But look at it this way: There's nothing wrong with the statement "I like cars" but if you hang a sign with the text "I like cars" in front of a grieving widows house whose husband was ran over by a car recently it's an act of provocation.

Did people hang those signs in front of a grieving widows house whose husband was killed by white supremacists? If not your example is not comparable to what has happened.

And those signs are an act of provocation. They were meant to be one. Their point was never to express happiness over how lovely it is to be caucasian. It was a reaction to white hegemony being challenged. The implicit statement was "There's no reason to question what it means to be part of the most privileged ethnic group in a multiethnic society, it's okay to be white." But they knew it's what they meant, they knew who ever read it knew what they meant and they knew that if anyone called them out on it they could play victim and claim unfair treatment for being called out on making a statement that, out of context, seems perfectly innocent.

It doesn't seem to have been meant as a provocation but as pure baiting. And what did the baiting show? That some people do consider it shameful for people not to feel bad about being white. It's no different from groups who bait pedophiles by using fake child profiles, if the person is not a pedophile the bait will fail. They wanted to test a hypothesis through baiting and their hypothesis proved right.

And "There's no reason to question what it means to be part of the most privileged ethnic group in a multiethnic society, it's okay to be white." is your interpretation of what was actually being said. And this is one of the major problems of social progressives of the 21st century: interpretations running wild.

Silent Protagonist:
It's not a particularly clever trap, but apparently there are plenty of people willing to take that bait. How could you not predict that the first thing that will happen if you take offense at this is that you will be accused of thinking that it's not okay to be white? In the wake of the whole Black Lives Matter vs ALL Lives Matter nonsense you don't even have the obvious out of suggesting the phrase "It's okay to be white" somehow implies being anything but white is not okay.

It should be obvious that these posters were not designed to promote a white identity, but to provoke a reaction from the Social Justice types to create/reveal more evidence of anti-white bigotry. The posters have been moderately successful in that regard

You know if Milo can't be anti-gay because he's a fan of giant black cock then how can "SJW's", many of whom are white, be anti-white?

Jux:
Dog whistle racism as far as I'm concerned. It's not just ok to be white, it's always been advantageous to be white in the US. Silvanus nailed it that the underlying implication is that whiteness is under attack, and this seemingly milquetoast poster is just reassuring people that it's ok to be themselves. It does nothing but feed a victim complex to the most privileged people here. What I find hilarious though is that the same people that will nod and say 'Yea, it is ok to be white!' will turn around and get frothy at the mouth as soon as you make a statement like 'Black Lives Matter'.

http://portlandtribune.com/pt/9-news/377206-263279-sources-say-identity-politics-in-city-council-race
https://www.facebook.com/SpencerForPortland/

Totally no racism there.

CheetoDust:

Silent Protagonist:
It's not a particularly clever trap, but apparently there are plenty of people willing to take that bait. How could you not predict that the first thing that will happen if you take offense at this is that you will be accused of thinking that it's not okay to be white? In the wake of the whole Black Lives Matter vs ALL Lives Matter nonsense you don't even have the obvious out of suggesting the phrase "It's okay to be white" somehow implies being anything but white is not okay.

It should be obvious that these posters were not designed to promote a white identity, but to provoke a reaction from the Social Justice types to create/reveal more evidence of anti-white bigotry. The posters have been moderately successful in that regard

You know if Milo can't be anti-gay because he's a fan of giant black cock then how can "SJW's", many of whom are white, be anti-white?

This line of reasoning only destroys Sjw thinking not reinforce it.
After all... How many times have we been told that there is no racism against whites, that one quite simply cannot be such, it's an impossible position to be? And yet... Apparently now according to you it is possible to be racist against whites?
So to borrow a tactic from Black Lives Matter... Is it okay to be white?

RikuoAmero:
Did you ask similar questions about the phrase BLM popping up? Or did you take that phrase as a given? Of course black lives do matter and it doesn't matter where the phrase pops up?

The Black Lives Matter movement is based on entirely a different context. So no, I didn't ask the same question. A while ago I used to be on the bandwagon "Why is it called Feminism? It should be 'Humanism' if its for equal rights" but after a while I saw how petty and ultimately meaningless a disagreement it was. The same case can be made for BLM. I can support an organization that doesn't include me by name, especially when my race is one that is assumed as the default in a lot of social situations.

RikuoAmero:
As for your example about saying it's okay to be German outside a holocaust museum... Are you legitimising racism (or whatever word best fits that example) against Germans? Not all Germans were Nazis.
Same goes with saying it's okay to be male outside a woman's shelter. Your examples only make sense if we assume a stance of bigotry.

those are some wonderful mental gymnastics there, friend. I never implied anything of the sort, to the point that your misinterpretations are actually quite malicious.

For clarity (assuming you care enough to read): I am not, nor did I ever suggest that being white is inherently bad. Likewise, my examples do not in any way state that it is inherently bad to be male or German. You have entirely made that up. The problems raised by those examples is of intent. Why are people pointing out how great it is to be German outside a Holocaust museum? Because words and statements can have meaning outside of their most literal interpretation. The literal statement "Its O.K. to be German" when removed from that given context is perfectly acceptable. Nazism is not the dominant ideology of Germany and even during WW2 you are right, many Germans weren't Nazis at all. It is perfectly O.K. to be German, or any nationality. But when you add in the context of the Holocaust museum the entire statement changes meaning, because meaning can be given literally through the language and also non-literally, through subtext.

"The lady doth protest too much!" has subtext, because the statement implies that said lady protests too much for a reason. I don't think I can possibly agree with the bastardizing of language in an attempt to remove one of its most useful and interesting functions. Idioms, metaphors, similies; you are putting a lot of the interesting parts of language up for the chopping block here.

RikuoAmero:

CheetoDust:

Silent Protagonist:
It's not a particularly clever trap, but apparently there are plenty of people willing to take that bait. How could you not predict that the first thing that will happen if you take offense at this is that you will be accused of thinking that it's not okay to be white? In the wake of the whole Black Lives Matter vs ALL Lives Matter nonsense you don't even have the obvious out of suggesting the phrase "It's okay to be white" somehow implies being anything but white is not okay.

It should be obvious that these posters were not designed to promote a white identity, but to provoke a reaction from the Social Justice types to create/reveal more evidence of anti-white bigotry. The posters have been moderately successful in that regard

You know if Milo can't be anti-gay because he's a fan of giant black cock then how can "SJW's", many of whom are white, be anti-white?

This line of reasoning only destroys Sjw thinking not reinforce it.
After all... How many times have we been told that there is no racism against whites, that one quite simply cannot be such, it's an impossible position to be? And yet... Apparently now according to you it is possible to be racist against whites?
So to borrow a tactic from Black Lives Matter... Is it okay to be white?

Of course it's possible to be racist against whites...

But the thing is, the " sjws" think that the context and intent surrounding the statements "black lives matter" and "it's okay to be white" are different and therefore make the statements different. The baying 4chan retards are the ones who think the statements are equivalent but being against the latter makes you anti-white but being against the former doesn't make you anti-black. In short the left thinks the two statements are different so the reactions to them should be different but the right thinks the two statements are equivalent so the reactions to them should be different. Because it turns out the white genocide types are a bunch of dipshits. Who knew?

ineptelephant:

RikuoAmero:
Did you ask similar questions about the phrase BLM popping up? Or did you take that phrase as a given? Of course black lives do matter and it doesn't matter where the phrase pops up?

The Black Lives Matter movement is based on entirely a different context. So no, I didn't ask the same question. A while ago I used to be on the bandwagon "Why is it called Feminism? It should be 'Humanism' if its for equal rights" but after a while I saw how petty and ultimately meaningless a disagreement it was. The same case can be made for BLM. I can support an organization that doesn't include me by name, especially when my race is one that is assumed as the default in a lot of social situations.

RikuoAmero:
As for your example about saying it's okay to be German outside a holocaust museum... Are you legitimising racism (or whatever word best fits that example) against Germans? Not all Germans were Nazis.
Same goes with saying it's okay to be male outside a woman's shelter. Your examples only make sense if we assume a stance of bigotry.

those are some wonderful mental gymnastics there, friend. I never implied anything of the sort, to the point that your misinterpretations are actually quite malicious.

For clarity (assuming you care enough to read): I am not, nor did I ever suggest that being white is inherently bad. Likewise, my examples do not in any way state that it is inherently bad to be male or German. You have entirely made that up. The problems raised by those examples is of intent. Why are people pointing out how great it is to be German outside a Holocaust museum? Because words and statements can have meaning outside of their most literal interpretation. The literal statement "Its O.K. to be German" when removed from that given context is perfectly acceptable. Nazism is not the dominant ideology of Germany and even during WW2 you are right, many Germans weren't Nazis at all. It is perfectly O.K. to be German, or any nationality. But when you add in the context of the Holocaust museum the entire statement changes meaning, because meaning can be given literally through the language and also non-literally, through subtext.

"The lady doth protest too much!" has subtext, because the statement implies that said lady protests too much for a reason. I don't think I can possibly agree with the bastardizing of language in an attempt to remove one of its most useful and interesting functions. Idioms, metaphors, similies; you are putting a lot of the interesting parts of language up for the chopping block here.

So I take it then that you have no problem with a movement called Meninism or Mens Rights Activism?

As for me making it up that being German is bad or being male... You were the one disagreeing with the statement of its okay to be white and then giving examples of saying its okay to be German outside a holocaust museum.
The only way your example makes sense is if you yourself take it that being German and expressing that its okay to be German outside a holocaust museum (with no followup that other races are lesser) is a bad thing.
I'm not the one who gave that example and implied it. That was you and I responded by pointing out that it Is okay to be German.

So I will ask again, does the phrase Black Lives Matter mean something other than just or do those who had disagreements with the phrase have a point?

Being white is under attack.

There's no evidence it's happening on some huge scale. And chances are it's not happening on the same level a lot of people are saying.

However, there's plenty of evidence of anti-white sentiment in various communities.

Just as anti-black sentiment should not go unopposed, there's no reason anti-white sentiment should either. As such, a small flyer saying a fairly inoffensive message is a fairly tame response to the various anti-white posters, protests and attacks we've seen.

Context is important. But, nowhere does it seem that these flies have been used in an aggressive one. Typically random public spaces.

Much in the same way a "Black Lives Matter" flyer would be offensive at a police funeral, however, I've yet to see evidence that there's an intentional effort to place them in provocative places.

CheetoDust:

RikuoAmero:

CheetoDust:
You know if Milo can't be anti-gay because he's a fan of giant black cock then how can "SJW's", many of whom are white, be anti-white?

This line of reasoning only destroys Sjw thinking not reinforce it.
After all... How many times have we been told that there is no racism against whites, that one quite simply cannot be such, it's an impossible position to be? And yet... Apparently now according to you it is possible to be racist against whites?
So to borrow a tactic from Black Lives Matter... Is it okay to be white?

Of course it's possible to be racist against whites...

But the thing is, the " sjws" think that the context and intent surrounding the statements "black lives matter" and "it's okay to be white" are different and therefore make the statements different. The baying 4chan retards are the ones who think the statements are equivalent but being against the latter makes you anti-white but being against the former doesn't make you anti-black. In short the left thinks the two statements are different so the reactions to them should be different but the right thinks the two statements are equivalent so the reactions to them should be different. Because it turns out the white genocide types are a bunch of dipshits. Who knew?

Precisely my point and very likely the point from the 4channers who did this. Also there's a difference between believing whites are facing discrimination and believing there is an active plot to genocide them. I believe the first but not the second.

ineptelephant:

A while ago I used to be on the bandwagon "Why is it called Feminism? It should be 'Humanism' if its for equal rights" but after a while I saw how petty and ultimately meaningless a disagreement it was.

Actually by the law of "context" it isn't. Feminists have been and still are fighting a big fight against languages in order to take down gendered words or grammatical rules. "Policemen", "firemen", the French grammar (currently there is a big discussion going on in France about that) and vocabulary are heavily under fire(and it wouldn't surprise me other languages face the same). Now ask yourself this, why do feminists think it's so important to change "Policeman" to "Police Officer" or pushing for this "inclusive grammar" in the french language while changing "Feminism" , a 100% gendered word, to humanism or egalitarianism is out of the question? You're willing to piss off millions by changing established grammar rules but switching one word is too much? Why? If you ask me it says a lot about the movement and what it stands for.

RikuoAmero:

CheetoDust:

RikuoAmero:

This line of reasoning only destroys Sjw thinking not reinforce it.
After all... How many times have we been told that there is no racism against whites, that one quite simply cannot be such, it's an impossible position to be? And yet... Apparently now according to you it is possible to be racist against whites?
So to borrow a tactic from Black Lives Matter... Is it okay to be white?

Of course it's possible to be racist against whites...

But the thing is, the " sjws" think that the context and intent surrounding the statements "black lives matter" and "it's okay to be white" are different and therefore make the statements different. The baying 4chan retards are the ones who think the statements are equivalent but being against the latter makes you anti-white but being against the former doesn't make you anti-black. In short the left thinks the two statements are different so the reactions to them should be different but the right thinks the two statements are equivalent so the reactions to them should be different. Because it turns out the white genocide types are a bunch of dipshits. Who knew?

Precisely my point and very likely the point from the 4channers who did this. Also there's a difference between believing whites are facing discrimination and believing there is an active plot to genocide them. I believe the first but not the second.

So the entire point of "it's okay to be white" was to piss people off and "blm " was about racism? So the intent and context of the two statements was different and they should be treated differently? Either the statement "it's okay to be white" was meant in earnest, like "black lives matter" and should therefore be treated as exclusionary or racist for not saying "it's okay to be any colour"by the people who think that of BLM, or it was meant as an attempt to piss people off in which case it is inherently different in terms of context and intent and should therefore be treated differently.

If you believe " it's okay to be white" is a necessary and valuable anti-racist sentiment but "black lives matter" as a statement is racist and exclusionary then you're a hypocrite.

If you believe "it's okay to be white" was an attempt at taking a dig at people concerned about racism and intended to piss people off then you acknowledge what the left is saying about it is true. It's a disingenuous statement intended to piss people off. The right wants to act like the two statements are equivalent while maintaining that theirs is "for the lulz"

StatusNil:
Oh no, not the Native Studies department! How will the poor Critical Race Theorists manage to get through their daily Abolition of Whitecraft seminars with that kind of hate menacing them? And coming so soon after probably one of their own ranks stuck some feathers in a pumpkin to no doubt "start a conversation"?

So you have no interaction or knowledge whatsoever regarding this department but would still like to take a few lines to state your theory which is in no way based on personal issues? Great. Its obvious that you have strong views about race relations theory, but are you aware just how amusing your apropo of nothing rant about "abolition of Whitecraft" comes off as?

You are clearly trying to paint them as this caricature of all that is wrong with liberal universities but only suceed in making yourself into the opposite caricature. Not helped by that very Zontar-esque "after probably one of their own ranks stuck some feathers in a pumpkin".

Probably hm? Probably based on what evidence specific to the case? Rather than your opinions on the way academia is going (which is worth precisely nothing) ?

StatusNil:
Besides, the esteemed University of Alberta was by no means the only place where these acts of aggression were taking place, forcing all concerned to swiftly affirm their firm objection to Whiteness.

If you need to take a moment to get out all of your frustration at universities for whatever thankfully unstated personal reason, might I suggest a ChatBot for all your venting needs?

In short, I'm not particularly interested in your lack of argument and meaningless diatribe. In all of this nonsense you haven't answered in any way a single point that was raised in the post you are responding to. "forcing all concerned to swiftly affirm their firm objection to Whiteness." doesn't sound too far out of place as a propaganda piece run by Stormfront. You are a walking, posting caricature fitted with buzzwords galore.

If all you have to talk about is how people hate white people, then you are in the wrong place because I don't think that at all. If you would rather live in a world without subtext ("There is nothing wrong with writing those flyers, either the white ones or the German Holocaust ones") then kindly go and read Wittgenstien's Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus and enjoy the lingual wonders of a boring, literal world.

https://twitter.com/anima_tk/status/927620407095521281

They certainly seem like nice, well-adjusted folk.

RikuoAmero:
So I take it then that you have no problem with a movement called Meninism or Mens Rights Activism?

Inherently? No, not at all. When there is an issue that some MRA are tackling that really is to do with the cultural or social problems affecting men then I am 100% behind them. My problem with MRAs is when they only care about issues in response to Feminist talk on a subject. When the movement becomes reactionary it just becomes another "whataboutism" status quo mouthpiece similar to "Blue lives matter". If people only bring up male rape statistics in response to women bringing up female rape statistics then it comes across that you aren't actually interested in the problem as much as you are interested in other people not bringing it up.

RikuoAmero:
As for me making it up that being German is bad or being male... You were the one disagreeing with the statement of its okay to be white and then giving examples of saying its okay to be German outside a holocaust museum.

No. No, I didn't, not even in a single place. quote the exact phrase where I implied such a thing, if you would be so kind.

RikuoAmero:
The only way your example makes sense is if you yourself take it that being German and expressing that its okay to be German outside a holocaust museum (with no followup that other races are lesser) is a bad thing.

Are you joking? As I have already stated, the point of the example is that a statement that is perfectly benign ("Its O.K. to be German") can be non-benign depending on the context (Being written outside a Holocaust museum). NO WHERE DID I IMPLY THAT IT IS BAD TO BE GERMAN. You have addressed my point with such poor aim that you may as well have been shooting in the opposite direction, in a different plane of existence altogether. I would say that you have pulled it out of your arse, but that could only be the case if your sphincter was a wormhole to a different dimension.

RikuoAmero:
I'm not the one who gave that example and implied it. That was you and I responded by pointing out that it Is okay to be German.

Such utter tripe. This is what it must be like to be Rex Tillerson.

RikuoAmero:
So I will ask again, does the phrase Black Lives Matter mean something other than just or do those who had disagreements with the phrase have a point?

You can ask as many times as you like, my answer isn't going to change. No, it doesn't, because of the existence of context.

The Lunatic:
Being white is under attack.

?

There's no evidence it's happening on some huge scale. And chances are it's not happening on the same level a lot of people are saying.

?

However, there's plenty of evidence of anti-white sentiment in various communities.

Well, given the history of the last 600 years ...

Just as anti-black sentiment should not go unopposed, there's no reason anti-white sentiment should either. As such, a small flyer saying a fairly inoffensive message is a fairly tame response to the various anti-white posters, protests and attacks we've seen.

Can people actually define 'anti-white' sentiment? After all, I'm fairly critical of European colonialism. I'm also pretty critical of the fact that the West is allied to Saudi dictators and Salafist warlords, that seem to wish to make the world worse for everyone not a Sunni.

I mean, Persians are white ... Iranic people have a better claim to being truly Caucasoid than Europeans. And I've got plenty of things to say concerning Western-backed regime change in Iran, and subsequent Western-backing of their enemies.

So is that like being pro-whiter-than-your-average-white?

Context is important. But, nowhere does it seem that these flies have been used in an aggressive one. Typically random public spaces.

Much in the same way a "Black Lives Matter" flyer would be offensive at a police funeral, however, I've yet to see evidence that there's an intentional effort to place them in provocative places.

Context is important. So is describing what you actually mean.

Chewster:
https://twitter.com/anima_tk/status/927620407095521281

They certainly seem like nice, well-adjusted folk.

Good fucking lord. Few things adequately display a person's insecurity like angry messages after failing to get a reply.

That use of "female" as a noun rather than an adjective is really telling, too. It seems like the gender equivalent of "I insist on calling black people Negros".

EDIT: Perhaps someone can help me; what is the term for the opposite of political dog-whistling? As in, a word or phrase that a person may use that betrays their personal ideology far more than they intended it too?

ineptelephant:
EDIT: Perhaps someone can help me; what is the term for the opposite of political dog-whistling? As in, a word or phrase that a person may use that betrays their personal ideology far more than they intended it too?

A Freudian slip, also called a parapenis parapraxis.

bastardofmelbourne:

ineptelephant:
EDIT: Perhaps someone can help me; what is the term for the opposite of political dog-whistling? As in, a word or phrase that a person may use that betrays their personal ideology far more than they intended it too?

A Freudian slip, also called a parapenis parapraxis.

Thank you!

Addendum_Forthcoming:
Context is important. So is describing what you actually mean.

Sure.

http://www.ibtimes.com/black-man-targets-teenage-girl-anti-white-attack-throws-liquid-face-2606444
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/exclusive-anti-white-assaults-brooklyn-week-article-1.2527899
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2346713/Leader-Black-Panthers-sports-tattoo-reading-Kill-Whitey-cheek-arrested-carrying-unlicensed-loaded-weapon-wearing-bullet-proof-vest.html
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/christinerousselle/2017/01/04/four-people-in-custody-after-live-streaming-the-kidnap-and-torture-of-a-purported-trump-supporter-n2267307
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/10/31/having-white-nuclear-family-promotes-white-supremacy-says-new-york-professor-report-says.html
http://nypost.com/2017/04/05/black-woman-sick-of-fancy-white-people-allegedly-attacks-couple/
http://www.npr.org/2017/10/24/559604836/majority-of-white-americans-think-theyre-discriminated-against
http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article183086416.html
http://www.newsweek.com/culture-war-academia-troll-conservative-infowars-ivy-league-race-689735#1508555132.23

These are just ones I could find randomly off-hand on DuckDuckGo.

As I said, it's not some sort of grand conspiracy. But, are there people in America who hold anti-white sentiment? Of course there are.

So, why shouldn't these people be opposed? And what more measured response can there be than a simple white piece of paper with 5 words on it.

It's not some grand protest, or some nation wide assembly. It's literally a flier.

Addendum_Forthcoming:

Can people actually define 'anti-white' sentiment? After all, I'm fairly critical of European colonialism. I'm also pretty critical of the fact that the West is allied to Saudi dictators and Salafist warlords, that seem to wish to make the world worse for everyone not a Sunni.

I mean, Persians are white ... Iranic people have a better claim to being truly Caucasoid than Europeans. And I've got plenty of things to say concerning Western-backed regime change in Iran, and subsequent Western-backing of their enemies.

So is that like being pro-whiter-than-your-average-white?

Racism is fairly simple to define. It an irrational negative opinion of some sort, based entirely upon a person's race.

The "It's okay to be white" thing seems mostly a North America thing. So, we're talking "white" in the North American sense. Not white in the wider sense. As such, the other definitions are largely irrelevant. Just as "Black Lives Matter" isn't asking why African nations are fighting each other.

The Lunatic:

Sure.

http://www.ibtimes.com/black-man-targets-teenage-girl-anti-white-attack-throws-liquid-face-2606444
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/exclusive-anti-white-assaults-brooklyn-week-article-1.2527899
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2346713/Leader-Black-Panthers-sports-tattoo-reading-Kill-Whitey-cheek-arrested-carrying-unlicensed-loaded-weapon-wearing-bullet-proof-vest.html
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/christinerousselle/2017/01/04/four-people-in-custody-after-live-streaming-the-kidnap-and-torture-of-a-purported-trump-supporter-n2267307
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/10/31/having-white-nuclear-family-promotes-white-supremacy-says-new-york-professor-report-says.html
http://nypost.com/2017/04/05/black-woman-sick-of-fancy-white-people-allegedly-attacks-couple/
http://www.npr.org/2017/10/24/559604836/majority-of-white-americans-think-theyre-discriminated-against
http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article183086416.html
http://www.newsweek.com/culture-war-academia-troll-conservative-infowars-ivy-league-race-689735#1508555132.23

These are just ones I could find randomly off-hand on DuckDuckGo.

As I said, it's not some sort of grand conspiracy. But, are there people in America who hold anti-white sentiment? Of course there are.

So, why shouldn't these people be opposed? And what more measured response can there be than a simple white piece of paper with 5 words on it.

Pretty sure they are, after all ... in some of these stories perpetrators are known and they're up for assault charges.

Racism is fairly simple to define. It an irrational negative opinion of some sort, based entirely upon a person's race.

The "It's okay to be white" thing seems mostly a North America thing. So, we're talking "white" in the North American sense. Not white in the wider sense. As such, the other definitions are largely irrelevant. Just as "Black Lives Matter" isn't asking why African nations are fighting each other.

So it's pointless and we should ignore it? Clearly it's trolling people on the basis of a nothingburger?

ineptelephant:
Its obvious that you have strong views about race relations theory, but are you aware just how amusing your apropo of nothing rant about "abolition of Whitecraft" comes off as?

Laugh it up:

Critical Race Theory Calls for Permanent, Codified Racial Preferences

At the heart of Critical Race Theory lies the rejection of colorblind meritocracy. Formal equality overlooks structural disadvantages and requires mere nondiscrimination or "equal treatment." Instead, Critical Race Theory calls for "aggressive, color conscious efforts to change the way things are." It contemplates "race-conscious decision making as a routine, non-deviant mode, a more or less permanent norm to be used in distributing positions of wealth, prestige, and power.

http://hlrecord.org/2016/02/racism-justified-a-critical-look-at-critical-race-theory/#_ftn2

Sure, that's just the disreputable alt-right blog, the Harvard Law Record. But they have references to primary sources in footnotes for you to investigate. Of course, I would think there's something deviant about establishing the permanent norm of racial division of "wealth, prestige and power". After all, I have been known to quote approvingly the words of Literal Black Hitler here:

image

ineptelephant:
You are clearly trying to paint them as this caricature of all that is wrong with liberal universities but only suceed in making yourself into the opposite caricature. Not helped by that very Zontar-esque "after probably one of their own ranks stuck some feathers in a pumpkin".

Probably hm? Probably based on what evidence specific to the case? Rather than your opinions on the way academia is going (which is worth precisely nothing) ?

It's not like there's no pattern: https://www.thecollegefix.com/post/33530/

ineptelephant:

"forcing all concerned to swiftly affirm their firm objection to Whiteness." doesn't sound too far out of place as a propaganda piece run by Stormfront.

I'll take your word for it, since I never go myself. But the problem is that those fuckers used to be wrong about this stuff. And now we have people high on "woke" gleefully making their propaganda accurate. 4 Great Social Justice!

ineptelephant:
kindly go and read Wittgenstien's Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus

"Roughly speaking: objects are colourless."

Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus: 2.0232

FalloutJack:
Where was 'white race' when people were putting up signs saying 'No Irish'?

It was still there, there was just no solidarity like there is now because there was no need for it because you didn't have entire movements dedicated to attacking all whites politically.

It's actually odd you, like most, bring up the Irish when the Irish had most of the propaganda against them be reliant on them being white for it to even work.

CyanCat47:
[The reason that pan-white identity doesn't really work is that A not the entire population of europe is caucasian and B ethnic hatred and supremacy existed between caucasian, christian, european nations decades into the 20th century, and the assimilation of caucasian peoples happened as a result of the fear and/or threat of harassment and violence from those with british protestant heritage. If not for anti-german hate after WW1, the US would have been significally more german today

And yet we're continually told by the same people who claim that the universally accepted idea of "white" is false that there is somehow a universal idea of what it is to be black. Odd how despite there actually being a unifying concept based on elements of shared culture it's the one that's only skin deep that we have to accept while the one that exists far beyond that is the one we have to reject.

Probably wouldn't be so bad if the religious left also didn't go out of its way to attack whites as a whole and to actively try to make us all vote against our interest (which is why in this day and age being a white progressive is nothing more then the opposition of one's own interests)

Addendum_Forthcoming:
Pretty sure they are, after all ... in some of these stories perpetrators are known and they're up for assault charges.

So the legal system is the only way we should fight racism?

I don't think that's a good idea.

Addendum_Forthcoming:
So it's pointless and we should ignore it? Clearly it's trolling people on the basis of a nothingburger?

If you want to ignore racism, that's your choice. Nobody is forcing you to do anything.

Okay I have a lot to let out of my system so bear with me. Basically the crux of my post is that it's not about the message itself (though that is flawed) but rather who it is that's saying it. Namely the same usual crowd of fascists, they are the same people as from Charlottesville and all points before then.

Also just quickly if you want a quick video summary I recommend the following video as a required viewing:

Again a lot of my points are informed or are better explained in this video so you should watch this if you want better context to the terms I'm using. You should watch it anyway though because Contrapoints is hilarious, I love her work and she's pretty damn informative too.

Just a quick couple of early caveats:

If you'll forgive my quick dip into absurdism. I just wanted to elaborate on a point my fellow filthy SJW Reptilian brethren touched upon.

Seanchaidh:
Whiteness was invented as a way to justify colonial exploitation, slavery, genocide, and so on. Whiteness is not European culture, it's not an attitude of solidarity in response to oppression, it's simply a way to keep the lower classes divided and focused on each other rather than the people at the top laughing all the way to the bank. What is there actually worth redeeming in whiteness? Discard it, if that is possible.

altnameJag:

Zontar:

altnameJag:
...the fuck is "white"?

For everyone else, it's Europeans.

So, Irish, German, , French, Spanish, Bulgarian, Portuguese, Slavs, Romani, Finns, Welsh, Anglo-Saxons, and Moors are all white? 'Cause, well, your definition only works if you exclude people who've been living in Europe for centuries.

...honestly, not seeing it. Hell, I'm fairly certain I've got basically nothing in common with your average Anglo-Saxon Protestant given I'm a Catholic Serbian mutt whose family moved generationally west over the years.

Or at least, those fuckers had a plenty good time describing how folks like mine were going to subvert western values and destroy America. Because, you know, Eastern Europeans weren't actually white. Until the next batch of immigrants moved in and my folks were able to blend, anyway. Really got to thank both the empty spaces of Minnesota/Wisconsin and the Irish for that one.

So again, as a race, what the fuck is white?

STRAWY THE STRAWMAN: "But wait! Why then is there such a thing as a 'black' identity when there's no such thing as a 'white Identity'. What is the difference?

MANDY McMOUTHPIECE: "Well Strawy that comes down to the fact that, at least as far as the United States is concerned most African Americans are descended from people who were brought there as slaves. Africa much like Europe is not one single nation but rather is built up on many smaller nations, just like a Scott is not the same thing culturally as a Brit, there were and are still many major cultural differences in the various regions of Africa. These topographical and cultural differences of places like Zimbabwe, Tanzania, Ethiopia and Algeria among others each had their own cultures and their own ways of doing things. But then as many thousands of people from Early African nations were bought and sold to white people as slaves and transported to America they were essentially property. They were stripped of whatever cultural heritage they may have had to individual areas of Africa and instead all grouped together as 'Black', as mentioned above the only time European settlers of the United States and Europe as a whole started using the term 'white' rather then just 'Irish' or 'English' or 'French' etc was specifically so that they could both reduce 'black' people to a lower status while elevating themselves to a higher status and using that to justify the atrocities that would befall generations of African slaves.
Moving forward and many generations later these 'blacks' have no idea of their specific nations of origin nor of their cultural practices nor do they have any way to trace their genetic roots. Generations of working alongside white people has eroded their culture significantly and even their genetic makeup has been altered through decades of rape (and consensual sex) at the hands of white people. By the time the slaves were freed and the civil war ended (which is indeed what that war was about! I know, shocking) there was suddenly an entire subset of the American people who could not trace their heritage back to a specific country of origin, rather their entire cultural identity was their skin color. The very thing that had been used to classify the as less then human for so long. Hence why in America it is known as 'Black culture' or the 'Black identity', in lieu of heritage of nation or culture of specific regions it is instead a culture based on a shared identity and shared living experience and that has carried from then all the way to here in 2017.

STRAWY STRAWMAN: Okay that makes sense I guess. But what about white people, why aren't we just referred to as 'white'. Why can't we get our own identity? Is it because of revenge? That's not fair! I'm getting angry now!

MANDY McMOUTHPIECE: Woah there hold your horses buddy. The main reason why we don't really classify whites, at least not to the degree of black people in the US, by skin color is because there is no reason to do so. As mentioned above 'white' is a very innocuous term that can have dozens of meanings. Does it just mean European or does it mean only people of Germanic origin? Australia tried to enact a 'white Australia policy' for several decades and they ran into the same problem of 'how white is white enough and what the hell constitutes 'white' anyway?' Eventually they were forced to forgo the policy altogether in the seventies and just start letting immigrants of all skin colors in.
The fact of the matter is if you wanted to you could probably trace your family origins pretty well couldn't you? Let's say you are an American, where did your great great grandparents come from?

STRAWY STRAWMAN: Oh that's easy. My great great grandmother was Dutch, she settled from Holland in 1912 and my great great grandfather was an Irish immigrant working as a fisherman. They married in the fall of 1914. I guess that makes me... Dutch Irish? But I think really that was over a hundred years ago so I'm just an American.

MANDY McMOUTHPIECE: Exactly, you don't need to identify as 'white' because your heritage wasn't wiped clean from your distant ancestors so that they could make for more effective household property. When you factor in the fact that Black Americans had to deal with segregation, Jim Crow Laws and had to fight every inch for basic civil rights and in the process turn what was once used to marginalize them and turn it into a powerful culture and a statement of their humanity. With that in mind is it truly so hard to understand why so many people can say 'I'm proud to be black?'

STRAWY STRAWMAN: I suppose not, but then why can't I take pride in being white?

MANDY McMOUTHPIECE: In theory there is nothing wrong with that but remember the slavery and slaughter of black Americans was justified in part for several centuries as being because their skin color made them 'inferior'. The idea of a 'White identity' or an identity based solely on the color of one's skin was forged at least in part by white colonials to justify horrific atrocities and crimes and to prop themselves up as 'superior'. Once again in an ideal society no one would use their skin color to define who they are as people, Martin Luther King Jr. himself even said as much. It's just that in the case of Black Americans, they never had a choice. Society stripped them of their country of origin and reduced their whole identity to a skin color. Unlike black Americans, white Americans don't need to define themselves by their skin colors because they still know their countries of origin. And while it might be a sad thing to think about, unfortunately the connotations of the racist double meaning behind 'the white identity' are still there and throughout history they were and still are to this day used to justify racism, oppression and even violent crimes. Even genocide.

STRAWY STRAWMAN: Yikes, that's saddening. I guess I just wish I had my own identity you know? It's great that black Americans have this shared cultural experience and overcame oppression. I wish I had something to take pride in too.

*FASHY SMASHY FASHSIST enters stage right*

FASHEY SMASHY: FAKE NEWS!! The white race is superior, don't listen to this cuck. He's trying to brainwash yoooooou and soon your wife will be having sex with black men! Take pride! Hail trump!.... Pizza gate. Frogs. Frogs everywhere. Give in to your anger! Give in to your hate!

*MANDY throws rock at FASHY SMASHY who promptly runs away*

MANDY McMOUTHPIECE: Away with you! Anyway try to think of it like this, you have a heritage. Few people have had to overcome quite as many forms of adversity as the Irish, google the potato famine for an example of the kinds of things your ancestors had to endure. You have a legacy of two remarkable people who left their country of origin to find a new life in America and succeeded. You have the legacy of dreamers who managed to make a home for themselves in America and that is a legacy to be proud of. You don't need to define yourself by your skin color. Hell you don't even need to define yourself by your ancestors country of origin. You can define yourself however you want. Perhaps instead of thinking about your identity in the context of the past, try to create a brand new one. Just remember that while there may sometimes SEEM to be double standards in how we respond to one culture or another it probably doesn't mean there is a conspiracy against white people, these issues are deep and complex and require a lot of research and understanding. And remember people like Fashy Smashy want you to be angry and make assumptions so you should always take the time to google and understand all points of view BEFFORE deciding on the truth. Just remember just because something seems like a double standard on the surface doesn't mean it always is.

STRAWY STRAWMAN: Golly gee I never thought of it like that, thanks Mandy McMouthpiece!

MANDY McMOUTHPIECE: No problem.

*Mandy and Strawy hug and go to exit stage left but are plowed over by Fashy Smashy's deadly Meme-Mobile*

FASHY SMASHY: Hahahahahahah! Take that liberal cucks!

AUDIENCE: Hilarious JOKE! Stupid SJW?s trying to bully us and tell us what do! They?re the real fascists!

FASHY SMASHY: Damn right?. Now about that Jewish Question?

AUDIENCE: You validate our anger so let's listen to you!

*Curtains fall while Springtime for Hitler plays*

Zontar:
MAXIMUM ZONTAR

Oh Zontar I have watched you from afar for quite a while now. You continue to fascinate me. I'm not going to talk about the other stuff you bring up because A. I think I've covered my point fairly conclusively already and B. I don't have twenty years to spare.

But I am fascinated by one continuous thread of hypocrisy I find from you and the right in general in relation to political violence. You constantly say 'the left is too violent, the left is too extreme and it's driving people right', by implication arguing that the new rise of fascism is the fault of the left for being too extreme and that 'Antifa' thugs need to be defeated and will at the hands of glorious president Trump.

You say all these things and yet when I look at the news I consistently see stories like this:

Yeah I know 'fake news' but honestly its a pretty comprehensive list of some extremely violent and biogted sentiment surrounding American right wing politics and Trump in particular. To say nothing of Dylann Roof, the Quebec Shooter and the Charlottesville Nazis. (on both sides remember, the people who got hit by the car are equally as culpable as the guy who ran them over). I see this violence, I see it getting dismissed, I see the people in the Alt Right gloating about it and rubbing it into people's faces. After Heather Heyer died there were a lot of digusting posts calling her a fat skank, trying to argue she died of a heart attack as a way to shift blame. (It was blunt force trauma: http://www.newsweek.com/charlottesville-heather-heyers-cause-death-revealed-medical-report-686471) insulted her directly and gloated about the fact that she was dead: https://web.archive.org/web/20170814185757/https://www.dailystormer.com/heather-heyer-woman-killed-in-road-rage-incident-was-a-fat-childless-32-year-old-slut/ and some even going so low as to suggest sending protestors to her funeral to harass her family (oh hi Gamergate alumni Weev, fancy seeing you here) https://imgur.com/a/dsAVZ

I guess my question to you, Zontar is how come any and all violence on the right isn't a big deal and is solely the fault of leftists and no one else but I, as a leftist, can't suggest that maybe the only reason there is all this violent 'antifa' crap out there right now *might* just be a response to violent Trump loving zealots and white supremacists terrorizing neighborhoods and smugly gloating while people's lives are destroyed by horrific policies and mocking innocent people who die trying to protest them?
Why does the right get a free pass but the left doesn't? If you would like to surprise me I'd like a straight answer as to why all of the violence and the smug gloating in the face of this violence, to say nothing of the racist misogynistic and homophobic shit is okay but any leftist who so much as raises a fist to any of it is the devil incarnate? I'm sure you'll scream fake news but hey you might surprise me.

Also how come in two posts you have described the left as simultaneously a giant terrifying mass that you are bravely opposing and also a pathetically weak and futile enemy that can't possibly fight your noble might? How can they be both at once? Or is this Schrodinger's Leftist again?

Oh and if you're looking for an example of white privilege being able to smugly meme and joke about people getting their lives torn apart by cruel immigration laws or women with their backs to the wall because they may no longer have the right to an abortion or transpeople being kicked out of the military because you know it won't effect you and you can make up any bullshit conspiracy story you want to justify it? That's like sooooo much privilege.

Also the fact that a Muslim man killing six people causes the President to flip out and demand laws for stronger immigration against all Muslim brown people while two white guys within only about a month of each other have killed a combined 87 people or so prompts to response at all even though all democrats want is gun control and the notion of.... I dunno.... limitation on white guys as a concept isn't even discussed.

Or the fact that the guy who killed Heather Heyer might be facing less prison time then the protestors who smashed six windows?

Yeah the world's totally anti white. Your so clever to see it.

RikuoAmero:
Remember when Black Lives Matter first started? Remember how those who were against the movement were told that if they had a problem with the phrase then they must be racist against blacks? Does the same logic apply here?

Okay, see if you can follow me on this.

The reason why the group became known as 'Black Lives Matter' got the name it did was NOT because the full statement was 'Only black lives matter and white people must all die and burn in Hell'. The term originated because of two important things, number one that black people are regularly unfairly and maligned and stereotyped by the media and are on the recieving end of disproportionate amounts of police scrutiny and police violence to the point where 'having to know what to say if a policeman approaches you and how to move to avoid getting shot' is something they have to teach ten year olds in predominantly black schools. Literally black people have genuine reason to fear death in a scenario where most average white people might at worst face a fine. The killings of Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown cannot be justified in my opinion, no matter what people might say.
Now people on the far right try to talk about racial crime statistics and stuff like that as a smokescreen but it does not change the fact that in the United States of America the constant fear of police brutality and gun violence is always at the backs of the minds of many black people, especially young black men.

The OTHER reason it was dubbed 'Black Lives Matter' which I'm annoyed more people don't bring up is the fact that when these shootings take place the police officers involved have a habit of not getting punished. Instead they go unpunished and get away. Zimmerman was one example that caused a LOT of anger but there have been others. Sometimes its justified with arguments about the supposed correlation of violence in black communities, sometimes the deceased is labelled as a 'thug' in media and sometimes its just treated as a whoopsy daisy and never talked about again. At worst the cop might get a slap on the wrist. Now obviously this is hardly universal but it happens enough times to cause major upsets and levels of distrust between African American citizens and the people who are ostensibly supposed to be protecting them.

And that's at the core of it. Not only do black people die unjustly with alarming frequency at police hands but when it happens over and over again its not treated the way it should be, a serious crime. Because that wasn't a whoopsy daisy, that was someone's son, brother, best friend or boyfriend. That wasn't just a mistake, that was a human being who died and left an entire community heartbroken in their wake. Black Lives Matter was founded on the idea that their lives should be worth more then a shrug and 'oh well', that literally American society should place more value on a black person's life then they do some trigger happy cop's reputation. Just like they would, and do, on the occasions where a white person gets unjustly gunned down.
Again make up any excuse about gun crime statistics and race as you want but when a black man can get killed for moving too quickly while following police instructions of exiting his freaking vehicle that's all a moot point. Especially if in many cases the police officer can sleep comfortably knowing they probably won't face any consequences for it.

Bearing that in mind maybe the slogan should have been 'Black Lives Matter too' or ironically 'all lives matter' just to clarify to uncertain whites that being upset about how black people are treated by the police in America isn't a comment against white people in general. But honestly maybe they just expected white people to look at the situation honestly, listen to their complaints, take note of it and maybe I dunno read between the lines and see what 'Black Lives Matter' actually means in context? Because adding shit like 'Black Lives Matter and white people do as well, can't forget the white people, wouldn't wanna risk offending them.' or 'All Lives Matter' just dilutes the message. Because maybe, just maybe the message that 'Black Lives Matter' should be enough and we shouldn't need to bend over backwards to add caveats about 'oh and white people do as well' when the entire god damn focus is on the lived experiences of the black people to whom this issue effects! White people shouldn't need to have their name mentioned to understand and care about issues and Black people shouldn't have to constantly stop what they are saying just to assure the white people who aren't gunning down black people in stop and frisks that they don't mean to offend them. That should go without saying. Just like sometimes men who support women's rights should really practice what they preach and just shut up on occasion to let women's voices actually be heard because even though their support should be welcomed the movement is not about them and maybe that's okay.
A lot of the time when I see people saying 'shouldn't it be all lives matter' all I see really is 'I don't like the fact that I'm not being mentioned! Everything is about me! How dare black people talk about life experiences that effect them without doing so in a way that accommodates me!'

Now Black Lives Matter is far from perfect, there are many flaws and lots of times where they have gotten violent and aggressive and even kind of separatist which is not helpful. Yes there are some anti white elements sprinkled in there by more extreme members but you know what? This comes from decades of anger at being treated like second class citizens, feared, marginalized and targeted by police brutality and constantly being told that literally their lives are worth less then the reputations of the people who leave them in this constant state of fear.

(some people will no doubt bring up those black teenagers who kidnapped and tortured a white kid and filmed it saying 'fuck Donald Trump', you know those awful shitty excuses for human beings who were actually punished? I will ask you in turn to google the time a black kid was raped with a coathanger by a group of white footballers in a shower. Those footballers only punishment was probation and a judge arguing that they shouldn't have to suffer the consequences of being a registered sex offender: http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/football-player-hanger-assault-avoid-prison_us_585ac1d0e4b0eb586484dd02 again, not just about crime but how that crime is punished and what it says about American society is at the core of Black Lives Matter)

Meanwhile the Alt Right, who are 100% the people behind this little stunt, make no mistake, manage to radicalize young white guys into forming Nazi parties, militias, torch wielding mobs and yes even violent gun and car murderers over, among other things, the rise of 'PC culture' and 'safe spaces' and imaginary 'global discrimination of white people' because they are just now starting to realize that the world does not actually revolve around them.
I don't support violence on either side but at least one side is dealing with real world problems not fantasy pizzagate erotic fanfiction.

StatusNil:
SNIP

*Wipes tears away from eyes while laughing*

I know man it's hilarious right? I tell you what it's almost as funny as that hilarious and wacky prank of when that guy brilliantly rammed his car into a crowd of counter protestors and injured dozens and killed a woman. Oh man comedy genius I tell you those stupid liberal snowflakes were so fucking triggered at that woman's funeral, they couldn't stop crying! It was sooooo funny.

For real though dude it's the same group of people. The same people who are responsible for the atrocities in Charlottesville and for people like Dylan Roof, the Quebec shooter and many others past, present and oh yes future, getting inspired to do yet more brilliantly edgy antics. Man remember when ol' Dylan just memed the hell out of those black churchgoers. Man he really showed the liberal cucks that day!

It starts as jokes or innocuous phrases and once they start to reel people in it becomes much more then that and eventually it all leads the same way.

People aren't getting angry at this shit because they hate white people or because they're easily triggered or anything like that. They are angry at this because they know exactly where this shit came from. That's why they are angry. Because more and more people on the left are having to recognize fascist dog whistles as what they are and after Charlottesville which is still fresh in a lot of people's minds it makes them angry. You aren't an idiot, you know that.
People aren't refusing to tolerate this because they hate white people, they hate it because they know this is fascism's new way of trying to slip into ordinary discourse and they don't want to allow it.

You wanna inspire and empower the people who killed Heather Heyer, the people in that black church and who want to see many more people die in the near future? You want to laugh and meme on as the next inevitable lunatic kills the next Heather Heyer or shoots up a sidewalk or plows into a Muslim screaming 'they all must die'? You be my guest dude.

Just don't for one second pretend you are doing anything else.

Shadowstar38:

"Context"

A klan backed openly racist misogynistic cheeto has managed to pussy grab his way into office and his disgusting white supremacist supporters have stopped hiding in the shadows and now feel emboldened to go out into the streets armed to the teeth to protest, to commit hate crimes and yes to kill. Recently a large number of white nationalists screaming 'white pride' and 'blood and soil' cemented the idea of 'white identity' pretty strongly in the eyes of the world by terrorizing people and performing multiple acts of violence.
Before all of that however, it began with innocent seeming memes specifically designed to appeal to disgruntled angry young white people. From places like 4Chan.

Implication

After Charlottesville fascists deliberately attempted to distance themselves from the image above and try to rebrand themselves in a more friendly light. To whit they have ditched all the Nazi stuff (on the surface) and now present everyone with the question 'Gosh guys it's sure nice to be white' in a very deliberate effort to provoke an angered response because like I mentioned above people are catching on. And once again the genesis of this little stunt came from places on the internet like 4Chan.

If anyone actually understood what these words mean, they'd immediately realize this was a harmless act.

I do. And that's why I disagree.

I see a deliberate attempt to rile up liberals using propaganda that's just innocent enough sounding that even though people
on the left who have to deal with fascist rhetoric on a daily basis can recognize it as such straight away, the average white person might not. And then before liberals even have a chance to explain their position (because you know the nuance and complexity of these issues is hard to explain in quick conversation, as is the case with nearly every political issue in the world) the Alt right can water this down into bite sized digestible chunks of 'OMG SEE?! The Libruls hate whites!!! They don't want us whites to have our own identity! We aren't safe! LIBERAL SCUM LIBERAL SCUM!' then any white people who are convinced join to their side do so and then it goes from 'why can't white people be allowed to be proud of ourselves' to 'why can't white people have our own homeland not shared with others?' then it becomes 'Diversity is code for ANTI WHITE' and 'MUSLIMS ARE THE REAL THREAT!' and so on. Eventually 'edge' is encouraged as jokes and memes get much worse. What may have started as just a joke gets more and more real the more isolated and radicalized these groups get and what may have started as jokes at the expense of oversensitive 'SJW's' become sincerely held beliefs and soon there's another Charlottesville and another Heather Heyer. And that's to say nothing of if they manage to elect a candidate who follows their views politically and can actually make some of their worst ideas come true. If that day comes expect any talk of 'peaceful relocation of non whites from our new homeland' to just become 'send 'em to the gas chambers!'

Do I sound paranoid? Hell yes. I am paranoid. That's a consequence of the constant gaslighting and fear mongering that groups like this employ. They start with jokes and eventually through radicalization we get people like the hilarious shitposter in his wacky mememobile or lovable scamp Dylan Roof killing people. This isn't based on speculation, this is based on observation of things that HAVE occurred. Very recently. And believe it or not this is how Nazism was able to grab its stranglehold on Germany. Hitler didn't start by saying 'Fuck all the Jews let's kill them all' he started much more slowly then that.

I'm sure people will look at this post and say 'hah look at this triggered liberal, he's being so paranoid and hyperbolic' (but Pizzagate is totes real right guys?) but frankly we can't keep pretending that online behavior doesn't correspond to the real world. Elliot Rodger was just some woman hating loser who couldn't get laid once upon a time but he found his gross little online niche circle and eventually he went out and actually killed people and now there are new gross misogynistic creeps who can't get laid who worship him as 'Saint Elliot' and try to convince other lonely confused virgin men to join their disgusting echo chamber. How long until one of the proud and growing 'Incels' community actually goes out and does another massacre, inspired by the rhetoric they inspire themselves by. Especially since earlier this year one of them proudly admitted to raping a girl who was passed out drunk at a party, that day may come very soon.
Dylan Roof was just a lonely skinny pasty little man child but thanks to fascism and online rhetoric he found his own niche and went out and massacred nine people in a Church and now we have the Charlottesville Nazi's surrounding and menacing people with torches and again ramming their vehicles into people and killing them. Even here in my home country of Australia I see the shit posted under every new One nation video or article and I just think 'it can't happen here' but I know in my heart it can. It can happen anywhere.
So hell yes I'm scared.
And I'm a WHITE STRAIGHT MAN. I'm just burdened by empathy for people who don't look like me and understand that not every political issue needs to involve me or even reference me directly for it to be one that I worry about.

Again the words themselves 'It's okay to be white' are fairly innocuous and innocent and were they by themselves I would agree that liberals are overeacting (though I would argue this is a lose/lose situation, either you challenge them and give them what they want or you don't challenge them and invite fascist rhetoric into your school) but those words 'Context' and 'Implication' that you brought up? The current unstable political environment we are in? THAT'S the damn context! And where it led last time and where it WILL lead again is the 'implication'

inu-kun:
I might have the wrong info on it, but apperantly 4chan started a very hilarious kind of trolling, promoting putting signs with the most inoffensive sentence possible "It's Okay to Be White". The idea is that the current political climate even that sort of inoffensiveness is akin to white supermacy.

Because it is. You know it is.

As a side note guys. I'm Australian. I'd love nothing more then to not have to think about any of this and be in me Holden and drink me VB and dodge dropbear attacks but I still have to be here and calling this shit out because I can't let ignorance stand. Also I am not a native to your country but I learned so much about the historical context surrounding these issues with a simple ten minute google search, really what is your excuse?

Vrex360:
You want to laugh and meme on as the next inevitable lunatic kills the next Heather Heyer or shoots up a sidewalk or plows into a Muslim screaming 'they all must die'? You be my guest dude.

Just don't for one second pretend you are doing anything else.

You seem like a reasonable fella, so pardon me for keeping this brief. You wanna shout and pump your fist and congratulate yourself when the next inevitable sad sack slides into homicidal lunacy because they see no other way out? Hey, I can't stop you.

Just don't for one second pretend you're doing anything else.

Vrex360:
I guess my question to you, Zontar is how come any and all violence on the right isn't a big deal and is solely the fault of leftists and no one else but I, as a leftist, can't suggest that maybe the only reason there is all this violent 'antifa' crap out there right now *might* just be a response to violent Trump loving zealots and white supremacists terrorizing neighborhoods and smugly gloating while people's lives are destroyed by horrific policies and mocking innocent people who die trying to protest them?

Because right wing violence isn't downplayed by the media and left wing violence isn't up-played to the point people think the one that's more likely to be an issue you're likely to come across in your day to day life is reversed, and that the openly fascist movement that is Antifa long predates the very fascist groups it claims to exist to oppose (in the rare case they're even fighting a group that could be called fascist, which is almost never actually the case).

Why don't I answer your question with a question: why are you defending terrorism?

Why does the right get a free pass but the left doesn't?

Someone has the media's stance inverted. Not only does the right not get a free pass, hate groups like the SPLC exist to try and make it so that anything on the right gets destroyed either through liable or through promoting assassination (the SPLC's liable is responsible for at least one terrorist attack on US soil, shocking as it may seem the FBI only stopped using them as a source instead of treating them like the hate group they are).

Oh and if you're looking for an example of white privilege being able to smugly meme and joke about people getting their lives torn apart by cruel immigration laws or women with their backs to the wall because they may no longer have the right to an abortion or transpeople being kicked out of the military because you know it won't effect you and you can make up any bullshit conspiracy story you want to justify it? That's like sooooo much privilege.

White privilege objectively doesn't exist and as much as the religious left wants to believe otherwise that anti-climate change tier reality rejection changes nothing, no matter how much you moan over "cruel immigration laws" (that are actually so ludicrously lax that the only reason it's not unparalleled in the developed world is because Germany and Sweden made the mistake of kicking down the door and letting literally anyone in, a mistake most accept as being just that).

Also the fact that a Muslim man killing six people causes the President to flip out and demand laws for stronger immigration against all Muslim brown people while two white guys within only about a month of each other have killed a combined 87 people or so prompts to response at all even though all democrats want is gun control and the notion of.... I dunno.... limitation on white guys as a concept isn't even discussed.

If you've lurked half as much as you implied you'd know why a group that is 17 times as likely to kill people as another group, who can easily be stopped from being a problem with proper vetting instead of open doors, isn't comparable to a purely domestic issue.

This point was brought up and shot down by myself and others so many times in the past year it's neither funny nor worth touching again. You may enjoy broken records, but I don't.

Or the fact that the guy who killed Heather Heyer might be facing less prison time then the protestors who smashed six windows?

That guy hasn't been sentenced yet, we don't even know if he'll be slapped with murder or manslaughter (and anyone saying that it's definitively one or the other is an armchair layer and nothing more), and while I suspect that the "protesters" are probably repeat offenders (they're Antifa after all) I honestly don't believe you. I flat out don't believe you. And given you'll post links to subreddits that openly take the stance that anyone right of Mao is a fascist who needs to be hung and that only the left most 5% of society has a right to exist, well what's the point of anyone who's conservative, liberal, moderate, libertarian, or even just moderate socialist even arguing with such irrationality?

StatusNil:

Vrex360:
You want to laugh and meme on as the next inevitable lunatic kills the next Heather Heyer or shoots up a sidewalk or plows into a Muslim screaming 'they all must die'? You be my guest dude.

Just don't for one second pretend you are doing anything else.

You seem like a reasonable fella, so pardon me for keeping this brief. You wanna shout and pump your fist and congratulate yourself when the next inevitable sad sack slides into homicidal lunacy because they see no other way out? Hey, I can't stop you.

Just don't for one second pretend you're doing anything else.

Oh no I actually believe and advocate helping people. There are lots of lonely and sad people in the world who need help and I have offered help to people in my own life many times. I happen to believe that members of the Alt Right CAN redeem themselves and become better people again, many former hate group members have done so in the past. I believe that there are a lot of vulnerable young men (and women) out there who feel directionless and helpless and that through therapy and supportive environments and away from toxic poisonous predatory atmospheres like the Alt Right there can be hope. I believe in second chances, it's never too late to be a good person.
Seriously where the hell did you get the impression I was congratulating myself?

But if someone genuinely feels 'trapped' by things as petty as 'SJW's' or an imagined sense of persecution because they can't call women 'cunts' or because society generally is more concerned by systemic racism of marginalized groups rather then focusing on them and them alone and decides the only way out is through murder. That's on them. I'm sorry.
Me being overly SJW like did not MAKE them decide to go out and kill people. They did that themselves. That was THEIR choice and that is the moment when my sympathy dies. I don't think that's unreasonable.
If someone chooses to reject society and join a hate filled echo chamber then I will try everything I can to convince them that society will forgive them and they have a chance. As will a multitude of others. If they choose not to take it, if they choose to mock the people hurt or killed by the actions of their shitty little hate group and if they choose to do the hurting and killing that's on them and they can go fuck themselves.

I don't do anything to make these people do the things they do. Because I recognize what the Alt Right is and I don't accidentally endorse it by laughing at its oh so hilarious memes and jokes. I can rest comfortably.

Silent Protagonist:
What? Do you mean the OP? If so then I would say they are reacting to the reaction. It's just Trevor's axiom. Abbreviated: A does something to B to provoke an overreaction from C, whose overreaction provokes a counter reaction from D and so on. In this case the 4chan trolls are A, the places the posters were put up are B, the social justice types I alluded to would be C, the OP would be D, and all the rest of us in this thread would be the and so on.

It's just that I also probably fall somewhere under the SJW umbrella and have never heard of this incident. Granted I don't really take part actively in social media but this just seems to be stunt #9981 in the Chan game of "hurr hurr, look how edgy I am."

Oh Zontar this is going to be the start of something beautiful.

Zontar:

Vrex360:

Because right wing violence isn't downplayed by the media and left wing violence isn't up-played to the point people think the one that's more likely to be an issue you're likely to come across in your day to day life is reversed,

Or it's because that's like actually the truth?
Like seriously the overwhelming majority of spree shooters are far right wing in origin. Anders Brevik, Dylann Roof, Elliot Rodger. Hell ISIS is technically right wing. Again do you have any reputable sources to back up the idea that Left Wing violence is so prevalent and deadly?
My two cents? If there were hordes of bloodthirsty Antifa Orcs prowling the streets for prey that piece of shit who wrote the article mocking Heather Heyer would be pretty dead by now (I notice you had nothing to say about that by the way, don't think I didn't). As would Donald Trump.

When the Women's March on Washington occured earlier this year something like 100,000 people strong there was not a single arrest. When the Right Wing rallied in Charlottesville there were torches, beatings and a murder via car.

More leftists = no violence at all. More rightists = actual fucking murder and imagery deliberately meant to invoke a lynch mob.

That right there might be the reason people believe right wing violence is a bigger issue.

and that the openly fascist movement that is Antifa long predates the very fascist groups it claims to exist to oppose (in the rare case they're even fighting a group that could be called fascist, which is almost never actually the case).

A citation would be nice on that front.

From what I understand 'Antifa' isn't an organzied group at all. It's a blanket term for people who oppose fascist ideas. I mean it makes for a good boogeyman but from what I can tell it's not actually a full fledged movement.

Also how come every time I hear about violent Antifa spree shooters lately it always ends up being fake news from Russian sources. Got a perspective?

EDiT: Also at Charlottesville they were chanting 'blood and soil' 'Jews will not replace us' invoking imagery of a lynch mob, bringing out swastikas and firing guns and pledging allegence to 'God Emperor Trump' how is that anything other than fascist?

Why don't I answer your question with a question: why are you defending terrorism?

I'm.... not? I never actually defended Antifa.

I'll play that game too:

Why are you downplaying the literally scores of examples I compiled in which violence was done specifically in Trump's name and he condoned it? Are you an advocate of beating Hispanic homeless men and urinating on him? And do you like that when faced with this daddy Trump just called the perpetrators 'passionate'?
I mean granted the urine aspect speaks pretty strongly to Trump so there's that.

Someone has the media's stance inverted. Not only does the right not get a free pass, hate groups like the SPLC exist to try and make it so that anything on the right gets destroyed either through liable or through promoting assassination (the SPLC's liable is responsible for at least one terrorist attack on US soil, shocking as it may seem the FBI only stopped using them as a source instead of treating them like the hate group they are).

I have yet to see a single group on the SPLC that hasn't earned its place there. Once again maybe the reality is there's lots of hate groups on the right?

White privilege objectively doesn't exist and as much as the religious left wants to believe otherwise that anti-climate change tier reality rejection changes nothing,

Nuh uh.

no matter how much you moan over "cruel immigration laws" (that are actually so ludicrously lax that the only reason it's not unparalleled in the developed world is because Germany and Sweden made the mistake of kicking down the door and letting literally anyone in, a mistake most accept as being just that).

So when ICE agents pull shit like this:
https://www.newsy.com/stories/detained-immigrant-sues-ice-agents-claims-excessive-force/
https://www.aclu.org/issues/immigrants-rights/ice-and-border-patrol-abuses
https://www.theverge.com/2017/2/27/14728978/immigrant-deportation-hunger-strike-solitary-confinement-ice-trump

That's not crue...... oh yeah. You love Joe Apario. Never mind.

If you've lurked half as much as you implied you'd know why a group that is 17 times as likely to kill people as another group, who can easily be stopped from being a problem with proper vetting instead of open doors, isn't comparable to a purely domestic issue.

Yeah and imagine what would happen with tighter gun control? Maybe no groups would be able to readily kill people so much. But for some reason the right would rather vilify 1.6 billion people then even have a discussion about gun control.
Again, literally people's rights as human beings being placed lower on the list of priorities over American's rights to own expensive penis extensions... I mean guns.

This point was brought up and shot down by myself and others so many times in the past year it's neither funny nor worth touching again. You may enjoy broken records, but I don't.

I don't. They don't sound nice.

Or the fact that the guy who killed Heather Heyer might be facing less prison time then the protestors who smashed six windows?

That guy hasn't been sentenced yet, we don't even know if he'll be slapped with murder or manslaughter (and anyone saying that it's definitively one or the other is an armchair layer and nothing more),

Yeah I bet he'll get away with charges of 'mental health' yet another way white offenders are treated differently to brown ones. If he were brown and had the word 'Ali' in his name I'm willing to bet you'd be using the fact that it's taken so long for him to be charged as evidence of a leftist conspiracy.

{quote]and while I suspect that the "protesters" are probably repeat offenders (they're Antifa after all) I honestly don't believe you.[/quote]

Deflect deflect deflect. Wow. I mean you're right. They may have smashed more then one set of windows. Totes the same thing as deliberately killing someone. But yes lets go back to the part where the people you're advocating actually fucking killed someone. Not the fantasy strawman you made up in your head.

Again this is coming right off the tail end of you trying to downplay a very blatant example of terrorism. So Zontar:
Why are you defending terrorists?

I flat out don't believe you.

Ouch you have broken my heart.

Google it yourself.

And given you'll post links to subreddits that openly take the stance that anyone right of Mao is a fascist who needs to be hung and that only the left most 5% of society has a right to exist,

Actually it's mostly the fairly universal standard of 'openly racist fascists are bad' but whatever. And again I posted the subreddit solely because it was easier then posting each individual news source. Your saying the food is bad because you don't like the color of the lunchbox basically.

well what's the point of anyone who's conservative, liberal, moderate, libertarian, or even just moderate socialist even arguing with such irrationality?

Hence why so many people might feel compelled to 'bash the fash' because how can we indeed.

Zontar:
[

And yet we're continually told by the same people who claim that the universally accepted idea of "white" is false that there is somehow a universal idea of what it is to be black. Odd how despite there actually being a unifying concept based on elements of shared culture it's the one that's only skin deep that we have to accept while the one that exists far beyond that is the one we have to reject.

Oh yeah I also covered this.

*Blows kiss*

Zontar:

CyanCat47:
[The reason that pan-white identity doesn't really work is that A not the entire population of europe is caucasian and B ethnic hatred and supremacy existed between caucasian, christian, european nations decades into the 20th century, and the assimilation of caucasian peoples happened as a result of the fear and/or threat of harassment and violence from those with british protestant heritage. If not for anti-german hate after WW1, the US would have been significally more german today

And yet we're continually told by the same people who claim that the universally accepted idea of "white" is false that there is somehow a universal idea of what it is to be black. Odd how despite there actually being a unifying concept based on elements of shared culture it's the one that's only skin deep that we have to accept while the one that exists far beyond that is the one we have to reject.

Probably wouldn't be so bad if the religious left also didn't go out of its way to attack whites as a whole and to actively try to make us all vote against our interest (which is why in this day and age being a white progressive is nothing more then the opposition of one's own interests)

What exactly is this anti-white policy then? How exactly is the government disadvantaging caucasians in a way it isn't inconveniencing every other ethnic group? In a country where a sherrif interned people with no warrant because he thought they looked mexican and the police frequently shoots bystanders because their complexion is dark, i should really like to know what kind of anti-white policy is in effect

Silent Protagonist:

A right-wing poster here counts as a social justice type?

What? Do you mean the OP? If so then I would say they are reacting to the reaction. It's just Trevor's axiom. Abbreviated: A does something to B to provoke an overreaction from C, whose overreaction provokes a counter reaction from D and so on. In this case the 4chan trolls are A, the places the posters were put up are B, the social justice types I alluded to would be C, the OP would be D, and all the rest of us in this thread would be the and so on.

I understand that whole concept. The only problem is that the people in category A are literally fascists that's not hyperbole that's literally what they are. People overreact precisely because they know that's what they are. Yes SJW's can be stupid and overreact to stuff okay? I fully acknowledge that. But in my opinion this is the biggest crossroad the human race may ever cross. The choice is between well meaning but may overreact and be preachy and obnoxious sometimes or people who's ultimate end goal is genocide (that is where all fascism inevitably ends up). If you choose the latter over the former, that's on you.

And again the reason why so many people react the way they do is because they are (or know) people from specific groups that fascists love to target. As such they have a lot to worry about if these guys end up winning so hell yes they might overreact because they are scared of what might end up happening to them or their loved ones. And the privilege to be able to just look at that from the outside and mock and say 'what dumb SJWs' and treat the whole thing like a dumb meme, that is like the textbook definition of white privilege.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here