CDZ Social Media Double Standard

[AzogtheDefiler]

In its latest demonstration of political disingenuousness, Twitter temporarily suspended Turning Point USA communications director Candace Owens’ account — after she took racist tweets from New York Times editorial board member Sarah Jeong, replaced the word “whites” with “blacks,” and tweeted them out again.

For Example:

Black people are only fit to live underground like groveling goblins. They have stopped breeding and will all go extinct soon. I enjoy being cruel to old black women.

The above statements are from @nytimes editor @sarahjeong. I simply swapped out the word “white” for “black”.

Owens was then suspended. Hilariously, Twitter then backtracked and admitted its mistake. So, how exactly did Twitter make that error? Human complaints? Algorithms? We have no way of knowing. But suffice it to say that the double standard in social media just received another piece of bolstering evidence. As Owens stated, Jeong’s comments were “horrifically racist, but somehow we’ve gotten to a point in society where it’s OK to say the exact same thing about white people, and that’s problematic.”

 

[Toronado3800]

In its latest demonstration of political disingenuousness, Twitter temporarily suspended Turning Point USA communications director Candace Owens’ account — after she took racist tweets from New York Times editorial board member Sarah Jeong, replaced the word “whites” with “blacks,” and tweeted them out again.

For Example:

Black people are only fit to live underground like groveling goblins. They have stopped breeding and will all go extinct soon. I enjoy being cruel to old black women.

The above statements are from @nytimes editor @sarahjeong. I simply swapped out the word “white” for “black”.

Owens was then suspended. Hilariously, Twitter then backtracked and admitted its mistake. So, how exactly did Twitter make that error? Human complaints? Algorithms? We have no way of knowing. But suffice it to say that the double standard in social media just received another piece of bolstering evidence. As Owens stated, Jeong’s comments were “horrifically racist, but somehow we’ve gotten to a point in society where it’s OK to say the exact same thing about white people, and that’s problematic.”

Yeah, something about comforting the afflicted and defending the downtrodden.

It is worth noting though and not a bad topic to discuss.

 

[oldsoul]

In its latest demonstration of political disingenuousness, Twitter temporarily suspended Turning Point USA communications director Candace Owens’ account — after she took racist tweets from New York Times editorial board member Sarah Jeong, replaced the word “whites” with “blacks,” and tweeted them out again.

For Example:

Black people are only fit to live underground like groveling goblins. They have stopped breeding and will all go extinct soon. I enjoy being cruel to old black women.

The above statements are from @nytimes editor @sarahjeong. I simply swapped out the word “white” for “black”.

Owens was then suspended. Hilariously, Twitter then backtracked and admitted its mistake. So, how exactly did Twitter make that error? Human complaints? Algorithms? We have no way of knowing. But suffice it to say that the double standard in social media just received another piece of bolstering evidence. As Owens stated, Jeong’s comments were “horrifically racist, but somehow we’ve gotten to a point in society where it’s OK to say the exact same thing about white people, and that’s problematic.”

Yeah, something about comforting the afflicted and defending the downtrodden.

It is worth noting though and not a bad topic to discuss.

Sad that no one seems willing to do it though.

 

[sakinago]

In its latest demonstration of political disingenuousness, Twitter temporarily suspended Turning Point USA communications director Candace Owens’ account — after she took racist tweets from New York Times editorial board member Sarah Jeong, replaced the word “whites” with “blacks,” and tweeted them out again.

For Example:

Black people are only fit to live underground like groveling goblins. They have stopped breeding and will all go extinct soon. I enjoy being cruel to old black women.

The above statements are from @nytimes editor @sarahjeong. I simply swapped out the word “white” for “black”.

Owens was then suspended. Hilariously, Twitter then backtracked and admitted its mistake. So, how exactly did Twitter make that error? Human complaints? Algorithms? We have no way of knowing. But suffice it to say that the double standard in social media just received another piece of bolstering evidence. As Owens stated, Jeong’s comments were “horrifically racist, but somehow we’ve gotten to a point in society where it’s OK to say the exact same thing about white people, and that’s problematic.”

Yeah, something about comforting the afflicted and defending the downtrodden.

It is worth noting though and not a bad topic to discuss.

Sad that no one seems willing to do it though.

I’ll do it. It’s preposterous to say that racism is only limited to whatever group happens to be in power, and ok for a minority group to say/do blantantly racist things. Racism is just a symptom of the outdated survival mechanism that is tribalism. Tribalism served humanity sufficiently when stranger danger was a real threat when limited resources and disease played crucial roles in human survival. In these times another tribe represented something unpredictable and dangerous, since they could come in, wipe out the men, enslave the rest, and steal all the food and land...obviously not a good outcome. And we’ve seen what happens when one group comes into contact with another when Europeans made contact with native Americans. Some 90% of the Native American population was wiped out by diseases that Europeans largely had immunity too, (and the whole smallpox blankets thing is a myth, or at the very least limited to a very small number of bad actors), the spread of disease happened naturally in the Native American population. With the strength and stability that the US and NATO display deterring most of the powerful bad actors around the world from seeking conquest elminates much of the “stranger danger”. While antibiotics and modern medicine eliminates most threats from the spread of disease.

We see this type of pathological tribalism occur in largely homogenous populations where race is not a factor. Look at Ireland, the Protestants (north) vs the catholic (south). The Serbian/Kosovo conflicts. Rawandian genocide, or Sudanese conflict. And most notably, the state of current US politics we see the rise of this tribalism. You don’t even have to look at US politics to see tribalism, look at any sports fan base and you’ll see a beautiful demonstration of tribalism, though in many cases less pathological. Race is a more common manifestation of tribalism, because it’s easier to differentiate “us” from “them” when you’re looking at outward appearances. Tribalism has been the driving force behind almost every decimating war there has been. There is absolutely no excuse to support or to turn a blind eye to this type of pathological tribalism. Those who do so are supporting just bad overall people that don’t desearve such treatment. I honestly can’t believe that this is a topic up for debate. Racism is bad, duh...that should be the end of it.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Conservatives need to stop whining about this non-issue.

The notion that racism against whites is "acceptable" is another ridiculous rightwing lie.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Conservatives need to stop whining about this non-issue.

The notion that racism against whites is "acceptable" is another ridiculous rightwing lie.

I've seen many of your posts. They suck. Sorry to tell you this.

 

[Dan Stubbs]

In its latest demonstration o

disingenuousness, Twitter temporarily suspended Turning Point USA communications director Candace Owens’ account — after she took racist tweets from New York Times editorial board member Sarah Jeong, replaced the word “whites” with “blacks,” and tweeted them out again.

For Example:

Black people are only fit to live underground like groveling goblins. They have stopped breeding and will all go extinct soon. I enjoy being cruel to old black women.

The above statements are from @nytimes editor @sarahjeong. I simply swapped out the word “white” for “black”.

Owens was then suspended. Hilariously, Twitter then backtracked and admitted its mistake. So, how exactly did Twitter make that error? Human complaints? Algorithms? We have no way of knowing. But suffice it to say that the double standard in social media just received another piece of bolstering evidence. As Owens stated, Jeong’s comments were “horrifically racist, but somehow we’ve gotten to a point in society where it’s OK to say the exact same thing about white people, and that’s problematic.”

Yeah, something about comforting the afflicted and defending the downtrodden.

It is worth noting though and not a bad topic to discuss.

Sad that no one seems willing to do it though.

I’ll do it. It’s preposterous to say that racism is only limited to whatever group happens to be in power, and ok for a minority group to say/do blantantly racist things. Racism is just a symptom of the outdated survival mechanism that is tribalism. Tribalism served humanity sufficiently when stranger danger was a real threat when limited resources and disease played crucial roles in human survival. In these times another tribe represented something unpredictable and dangerous, since they could come in, wipe out the men, enslave the rest, and steal all the food and land...obviously not a good outcome. And we’ve seen what happens when one group comes into contact with another when Europeans made contact with native Americans. Some 90% of the Native American population was wiped out by diseases that Europeans largely had immunity too, (and the whole smallpox blankets thing is a myth, or at the very least limited to a very small number of bad actors), the spread of disease happened naturally in the Native American population. With the strength and stability that the US and NATO display deterring most of the powerful bad actors around the world from seeking conquest elminates much of the “stranger danger”. While antibiotics and modern medicine eliminates most threats from the spread of disease.

We see this type of pathological tribalism occur in largely homogenous populations where race is not a factor. Look at Ireland, the Protestants (north) vs the catholic (south). The Serbian/Kosovo conflicts. Rawandian genocide, or Sudanese conflict. And most notably, the state of current US politics we see the rise of this tribalism. You don’t even have to look at US politics to see tribalism, look at any sports fan base and you’ll see a beautiful demonstration of tribalism, though in many cases less pathological. Race is a more common manifestation of tribalism, because it’s easier to differentiate “us” from “them” when you’re looking at outward appearances. Tribalism has been the driving force behind almost every decimating war there has been. There is absolutely no excuse to support or to turn a blind eye to this type of pathological tribalism. Those who do so are supporting just bad overall people that don’t desearve such treatment. I honestly can’t believe that this is a topic up for debate. Racism is bad, duh...that should be the end of it.

I noticed that when meeting a common enemy race is not a factor. This was proven during the Revolutionary War

 

[sakinago]

Conservatives need to stop whining about this non-issue.

The notion that racism against whites is "acceptable" is another ridiculous rightwing lie.

These post are from a New York Times editor...she remains an editor, at the New York Times. Is there a more prominent American newspaper out there? Are these posts not racist? Why was an African American female blocked on Twitter for quoting verbatim this post with the exception of changing out the words white and black? Why wasn’t this editor blocked from twitter after posting these? Would this type of post be accepted by anyone at the New York Times had they changed the words from white to black? HELL NO!

Saying that racism can only be done by whites in America IS in fact a major theory posited by many on the left. And the New York freaking Times is clearly demonstrating their belief in that theory. Do you subscribe to that theory Clayton?

 

[Toronado3800]

Conservatives need to stop whining about this non-issue.

The notion that racism against whites is "acceptable" is another ridiculous rightwing lie.

These post are from a New York Times editor...she remains an editor, at the New York Times. Is there a more prominent American newspaper out there? Are these posts not racist? Why was an African American female blocked on Twitter for quoting verbatim this post with the exception of changing out the words white and black? Why wasn’t this editor blocked from twitter after posting these? Would this type of post be accepted by anyone at the New York Times had they changed the words from white to black? HELL NO!

Saying that racism can only be done by whites in America IS in fact a major theory posited by many on the left. And the New York freaking Times is clearly demonstrating their belief in that theory. Do you subscribe to that theory Clayton?

There may be 101 nutballs in this country of 350 million out there saying racism is only a white thing. I just don't see it. I see 10101 posts about how blacks can be racist and 0 about how just whites can be racist. My person conversations are similar. Consider how many folks think the earth is 6,000 years old or just have no idea about the 4.5 billion year theory and 101 nutballs doesn't seem like such a problem.

I'll say whites are in a position of power and our tendency to comfort the afflicted will prosecute them literally and online more often.

Heck, I'm sure after the 101st Airborne had to be called out to get black kids into school plenty of black kids hated the average white man and I can't say I don't understand where they were coming from. Hopefully they knew who the President was that called out the airborne to intimidate the national guard and hopefully they noticed the white boys in the airborne who helped get them into school though.

 

[sakinago]

Conservatives need to stop whining about this non-issue.

The notion that racism against whites is "acceptable" is another ridiculous rightwing lie.

These post are from a New York Times editor...she remains an editor, at the New York Times. Is there a more prominent American newspaper out there? Are these posts not racist? Why was an African American female blocked on Twitter for quoting verbatim this post with the exception of changing out the words white and black? Why wasn’t this editor blocked from twitter after posting these? Would this type of post be accepted by anyone at the New York Times had they changed the words from white to black? HELL NO!

Saying that racism can only be done by whites in America IS in fact a major theory posited by many on the left. And the New York freaking Times is clearly demonstrating their belief in that theory. Do you subscribe to that theory Clayton?

There may be 101 nutballs in this country of 350 million out there saying racism is only a white thing. I just don't see it. I see 10101 posts about how blacks can be racist and 0 about how just whites can be racist. My person conversations are similar. Consider how many folks think the earth is 6,000 years old or just have no idea about the 4.5 billion year theory and 101 nutballs doesn't seem like such a problem.

I'll say whites are in a position of power and our tendency to comfort the afflicted will prosecute them literally and online more often.

Heck, I'm sure after the 101st Airborne had to be called out to get black kids into school plenty of black kids hated the average white man and I can't say I don't understand where they were coming from. Hopefully they knew who the President was that called out the airborne to intimidate the national guard and hopefully they noticed the white boys in the airborne who helped get them into school though.

Not quite, it’s pretty much anyone who subscribes to post-modern theory, which is heavily taught and primary theory in the humanities. It’s a theory that pretty much replaces power, with wealth, in communist theory (it’s a little more complicated than that, but that’s the gist of its conclusion, or at least how it’s taught currently). So if whites are predominantly more powerful in the nation, only they have to power to be racist. Let’s just say there’s a lot more than 101 humanities professors out there, and waaay more students and graduates who have bought into this theory.

You can push anecdotes all you want, but the proof is staring you in the face with this NY times editor. Again, this is The NY Times we’re talking about, with an editor making very clear, and public racist comments towards whites. And The NY Times is backing her up.

Also plenty of people are calling white people racists, all the time. Trump and his supporters are called and portrayed as racist all the time. If you’re for strong boarders or for the Wall, it’s because you’re racist. Cops are apparently all racist. I don’t know what you’ve been reading on here, but you’re either blind to it, or just drawn to stories of people claiming blacks (or whatever non-white) can be racists.

The point you make is not even in the right direction. You should be starting with the question, can non-whites also be racist. I don’t know why there is such a push to sweep this under the rug by dismissing it as a few bad actors, or not a big deal. If they can be racist, then dismiss them as a-holes. I mean pretty much every prominent person on the American right is forced to condemn or distance themselves from Neo Nazis and the KKK, even though those groups fall on the far European right. They aren’t even close to small government, constitutional textualist conservatives on the American right, Neo Nazists are national socialist who want an ethno-centric socialist government. Yet, Antifa shows up in the thousands to protest an Orthodox Jew, who received the largest amount of hate mail ever from white supremacist, and antifa’s reason for protesting him is because they call that guy a Neo Nazi....yet antifa is boarderline embraced by left leaning MS media.

 

[sartre play]

Any one can be racist, thought everyone knew that.

 

[sakinago]

Any one can be racist, thought everyone knew that.

Start paying attention to the rhetoric coming out of the universities. It’s been going on for the past 10 years (really longer) but has been rising in prominence. The graduates coming out with “only whites can be racist in America” post-modernist rhetoric are starting to take over HR departments, manegerial posistions, etc. Post-Modernism is there to burn down what you or I consider common sense.

 

[Toronado3800]

Conservatives need to stop whining about this non-issue.

The notion that racism against whites is "acceptable" is another ridiculous rightwing lie.

These post are from a New York Times editor...she remains an editor, at the New York Times. Is there a more prominent American newspaper out there? Are these posts not racist? Why was an African American female blocked on Twitter for quoting verbatim this post with the exception of changing out the words white and black? Why wasn’t this editor blocked from twitter after posting these? Would this type of post be accepted by anyone at the New York Times had they changed the words from white to black? HELL NO!

Saying that racism can only be done by whites in America IS in fact a major theory posited by many on the left. And the New York freaking Times is clearly demonstrating their belief in that theory. Do you subscribe to that theory Clayton?

There may be 101 nutballs in this country of 350 million out there saying racism is only a white thing. I just don't see it. I see 10101 posts about how blacks can be racist and 0 about how just whites can be racist. My person conversations are similar. Consider how many folks think the earth is 6,000 years old or just have no idea about the 4.5 billion year theory and 101 nutballs doesn't seem like such a problem.

I'll say whites are in a position of power and our tendency to comfort the afflicted will prosecute them literally and online more often.

Heck, I'm sure after the 101st Airborne had to be called out to get black kids into school plenty of black kids hated the average white man and I can't say I don't understand where they were coming from. Hopefully they knew who the President was that called out the airborne to intimidate the national guard and hopefully they noticed the white boys in the airborne who helped get them into school though.

Not quite, it’s pretty much anyone who subscribes to post-modern theory, which is heavily taught and primary theory in the humanities. It’s a theory that pretty much replaces power, with wealth, in communist theory (it’s a little more complicated than that, but that’s the gist of its conclusion, or at least how it’s taught currently). So if whites are predominantly more powerful in the nation, only they have to power to be racist. Let’s just say there’s a lot more than 101 humanities professors out there, and waaay more students and graduates who have bought into this theory.

You can push anecdotes all you want, but the proof is staring you in the face with this NY times editor. Again, this is The NY Times we’re talking about, with an editor making very clear, and public racist comments towards whites. And The NY Times is backing her up.

Also plenty of people are calling white people racists, all the time. Trump and his supporters are called and portrayed as racist all the time. If you’re for strong boarders or for the Wall, it’s because you’re racist. Cops are apparently all racist. I don’t know what you’ve been reading on here, but you’re either blind to it, or just drawn to stories of people claiming blacks (or whatever non-white) can be racists.

The point you make is not even in the right direction. You should be starting with the question, can non-whites also be racist. I don’t know why there is such a push to sweep this under the rug by dismissing it as a few bad actors, or not a big deal. If they can be racist, then dismiss them as a-holes. I mean pretty much every prominent person on the American right is forced to condemn or distance themselves from Neo Nazis and the KKK, even though those groups fall on the far European right. They aren’t even close to small government, constitutional textualist conservatives on the American right, Neo Nazists are national socialist who want an ethno-centric socialist government. Yet, Antifa shows up in the thousands to protest an Orthodox Jew, who received the largest amount of hate mail ever from white supremacist, and antifa’s reason for protesting him is because they call that guy a Neo Nazi....yet antifa is boarderline embraced by left leaning MS media.

To be simple, I am concerned we are arguing out of the habit or arguing.

I think its obvious whites, blacks, asians, whoever can be racist. Heck, leave too many whites together and a Croatian can spot a Serb from a mile away. Too many black sand apparently they'll sell eachother to the whites. Our asian brothers aren't as good as eachother if they haven't fled the mainland or something.

About left and right:

Its really time to get out the political X/Y coordinate chart. But yeah, every time someone tells me they have a black friend I try to push their KKK support button to see what I get. In other words, when ppl tell me welfare was invented to enslave blacks I also probe about the KKK. In regards to Neo Nazi's and being socialist. Its good that neither party wants to associate with the scum of the earth. The X/Y coordinate chart wraps just like a globe and the NAZI's got purged.

Just to argue:

The left leaning MS media? Who we talking about here? Fox news? General Electric? Some other multi-billion dollar international conglomerate hippies? If Fox is left of you then so be it. I'll give you that before the Rush revolution the average journalism student was there to fight the power, comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. Those folks are still alive I suppose.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

I'm saddened that this sort of behavior is being taught in university. Academia seems to want to change the meaning of words to fit into a narrow new agenda of identity politics that defies reason. It's irresponsible and the repercussions seem to be affecting society in a negative fashion by alienating large swaths of demographics.

I'm sure it seems silly to some to say this currently, but I was raised that there is no such thing as 'black racism', 'white racism', etc, but simply racism. I believe it still applies no matter what party you belong to, but it seems the purveyors of identity politics seek to change all that by changing the definitions of words and phrases that have been in use since the birth of our nation. Why? I couldn't tell you for certain, but the narrative seems to be based completely upon feelings and emotion rather than facts and ideas.

Quotes like the one from Jeong should be purged from the get go, but it would seem newsrooms have drastically changed over the last decade from my experience. An individual with such caustic opinions about skin color would have never made it through the vetting process for an Editorship, because these are supposed to be the arbiters of objectivity for your publication. Divisive opinions effect the publisher's bottom line. Since print media has been withering on the vine in terms of revenue generation for decades, there's little margin for error.

First proofreaders were scrapped due to attrition. Then internet/social media became a new tool in the media arsenal to increase viewership and revenue. Reporters are required to wear several hats as content creators for print, web and social media in a job that pays in the neighborhood of $25-30k per year. Some print media companies have merged with local TV news companies to cut costs even further.

Add in the creation of non-traditional media outlets like bloggers, YouTube and other social media, the line of objectivity gets blurred even more. Social media are platforms rooted in narcissism, so objectivity seems counter intuitive. Corporations own the platforms, so they are the gatekeepers to censoring content using constantly evolving standards. This has to be a gargantuan task, so some automation is likely required, even though I personally disagree with it on principle. Manpower is a finite resource. I can only assume many things fall through the cracks.

In closing, I believe the overall quality of actual 'news' has suffered greatly because of a dramatic increase in the sheer number of outlets available for 'news'. The overlap skews this content. Since the ever ongoing goal of outlets is to get the content out there first (fact-checking be damned), quantity over quality will continue to be the norm.

 

[sakinago]

Conservatives need to stop whining about this non-issue.

The notion that racism against whites is "acceptable" is another ridiculous rightwing lie.

These post are from a New York Times editor...she remains an editor, at the New York Times. Is there a more prominent American newspaper out there? Are these posts not racist? Why was an African American female blocked on Twitter for quoting verbatim this post with the exception of changing out the words white and black? Why wasn’t this editor blocked from twitter after posting these? Would this type of post be accepted by anyone at the New York Times had they changed the words from white to black? HELL NO!

Saying that racism can only be done by whites in America IS in fact a major theory posited by many on the left. And the New York freaking Times is clearly demonstrating their belief in that theory. Do you subscribe to that theory Clayton?

There may be 101 nutballs in this country of 350 million out there saying racism is only a white thing. I just don't see it. I see 10101 posts about how blacks can be racist and 0 about how just whites can be racist. My person conversations are similar. Consider how many folks think the earth is 6,000 years old or just have no idea about the 4.5 billion year theory and 101 nutballs doesn't seem like such a problem.

I'll say whites are in a position of power and our tendency to comfort the afflicted will prosecute them literally and online more often.

Heck, I'm sure after the 101st Airborne had to be called out to get black kids into school plenty of black kids hated the average white man and I can't say I don't understand where they were coming from. Hopefully they knew who the President was that called out the airborne to intimidate the national guard and hopefully they noticed the white boys in the airborne who helped get them into school though.

Not quite, it’s pretty much anyone who subscribes to post-modern theory, which is heavily taught and primary theory in the humanities. It’s a theory that pretty much replaces power, with wealth, in communist theory (it’s a little more complicated than that, but that’s the gist of its conclusion, or at least how it’s taught currently). So if whites are predominantly more powerful in the nation, only they have to power to be racist. Let’s just say there’s a lot more than 101 humanities professors out there, and waaay more students and graduates who have bought into this theory.

You can push anecdotes all you want, but the proof is staring you in the face with this NY times editor. Again, this is The NY Times we’re talking about, with an editor making very clear, and public racist comments towards whites. And The NY Times is backing her up.

Also plenty of people are calling white people racists, all the time. Trump and his supporters are called and portrayed as racist all the time. If you’re for strong boarders or for the Wall, it’s because you’re racist. Cops are apparently all racist. I don’t know what you’ve been reading on here, but you’re either blind to it, or just drawn to stories of people claiming blacks (or whatever non-white) can be racists.

The point you make is not even in the right direction. You should be starting with the question, can non-whites also be racist. I don’t know why there is such a push to sweep this under the rug by dismissing it as a few bad actors, or not a big deal. If they can be racist, then dismiss them as a-holes. I mean pretty much every prominent person on the American right is forced to condemn or distance themselves from Neo Nazis and the KKK, even though those groups fall on the far European right. They aren’t even close to small government, constitutional textualist conservatives on the American right, Neo Nazists are national socialist who want an ethno-centric socialist government. Yet, Antifa shows up in the thousands to protest an Orthodox Jew, who received the largest amount of hate mail ever from white supremacist, and antifa’s reason for protesting him is because they call that guy a Neo Nazi....yet antifa is boarderline embraced by left leaning MS media.

To be simple, I am concerned we are arguing out of the habit or arguing.

I think its obvious whites, blacks, asians, whoever can be racist. Heck, leave too many whites together and a Croatian can spot a Serb from a mile away. Too many black sand apparently they'll sell eachother to the whites. Our asian brothers aren't as good as eachother if they haven't fled the mainland or something.

About left and right:

Its really time to get out the political X/Y coordinate chart. But yeah, every time someone tells me they have a black friend I try to push their KKK support button to see what I get. In other words, when ppl tell me welfare was invented to enslave blacks I also probe about the KKK. In regards to Neo Nazi's and being socialist. Its good that neither party wants to associate with the scum of the earth. The X/Y coordinate chart wraps just like a globe and the NAZI's got purged.

Just to argue:

The left leaning MS media? Who we talking about here? Fox news? General Electric? Some other multi-billion dollar international conglomerate hippies? If Fox is left of you then so be it. I'll give you that before the Rush revolution the average journalism student was there to fight the power, comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. Those folks are still alive I suppose.

Or we disagree on how big of a problem anti-white racism is. Which was my point. It’s no longer a small group of loons, it’s prominent theory being pushed in universities. This is post-modernism, there is no absolute truth, absolute truth is just something the powerful use to oppress the weak. It’s essientially communism but substituting power instead of wealth/economics. Under this theory, in the US, calling out racism against whites as racism, is the powerful (whites), trying to still oppressing the weak (non-whites). And since there’s no absolute truth, only power games, it’s all fair game to be racist to the powerful. It’s the same reason that universities like Harvard are fine with being openely prejudice towards Asians in their admissions since they are a more “powerful” (as in are generally strong in academics) group. Same reason that if you’re white, or male, or heterosexual, etc, you have no room to speak or give opinions on matters of race, feminism, or LGBT issues, since you are apart of the power group. It’s the same reason why white privelage, based on immutable characteristics, holds water in the mainstream, and if you’re white (no matter your circumstances) you are supposed to confess to you’re privelage, and fight against your own “power group.” It’s why Scarlet Johansson isn’t allowed to portray a transgendered in a movie. There is no “reason” or “truth”, only the powerful oppressing the weak. You either fight for the “oppressed”, or fight for the “powerful” and are 100% in the wrong no matter what.

We certainly agree that racism isn’t limited to just whites. My first post in this thread was racism is just a pathological symptom of tribalism. Tribalism is an evolutionary adaptation of sorts that is a bit outdated, but did serve early humanity when there was considerable risk of being wiped out, raided, or enslaved by another tribe, and also not contracting disease, for which you and your tribe has no immunity against. We see this pathological tribalism between homogenous racial groups all the time. Croats vs Serbs is a good example, others are the rawandan genocide, catholic vs Protestant Irish, Britain vs France, Suni vs Shiite, etc. You can even see tribalism, to a lesser pathological level, in sports fans. Racism is just an easier form of pathological tribalism to fall into since one can tell right of the bat that someone else is different. Post-modernism not only encourages this type of tribalism, but embraces the pathology to it. You are apart of a tribe, that tribe is either the oppressor or the oppressed, and you need to either fight for the oppressed tribe, or you are in with the evil oppressors.

I don’t like the European/traditional political spectrum, it’s does not do a sufficient job describe American politics. You can’t have diametrically opposes groups such as national socialist (Nazis) and libertarians both considered far right. That’s not a good classification method. Both ends of the European spectrum both want extreme government control, one is just with a nationalistic veneer, the other more globailistic, with anarchy right in the center of both.

That being said, I consider Fox News as the main, and really only, mainstream media source for the right. Now there are definitely other right wing media sources, and some with quite an impressive reach. These, however, do not hold a candle to the large scale operations and outfits that I consider mainstream. I think fox blows, as well as the rest of mainstream media. If I was forced to choose one to watch/read an hour a day, with current state of politics, it’s probably be Fox since I’d throw the remote at the TV with less frequency vs the likes of CNN. Mainstream media just blows, it’s an outdated medium, that reduces complex issues into six minute segments with heads screaming at each other, not even having the same conversation, let alone honest and intellectual ones. They go after “click bait” headlines, and just rile up the base as their business models. It’s why it’s a dying formula, and cannot die fast enough in my opinion. Even though it is dying, they still retain a substantial power grip over the political conversations and topics with their “click bait” headlines.

 

[Toronado3800]

Conservatives need to stop whining about this non-issue.

The notion that racism against whites is "acceptable" is another ridiculous rightwing lie.

These post are from a New York Times editor...she remains an editor, at the New York Times. Is there a more prominent American newspaper out there? Are these posts not racist? Why was an African American female blocked on Twitter for quoting verbatim this post with the exception of changing out the words white and black? Why wasn’t this editor blocked from twitter after posting these? Would this type of post be accepted by anyone at the New York Times had they changed the words from white to black? HELL NO!

Saying that racism can only be done by whites in America IS in fact a major theory posited by many on the left. And the New York freaking Times is clearly demonstrating their belief in that theory. Do you subscribe to that theory Clayton?

There may be 101 nutballs in this country of 350 million out there saying racism is only a white thing. I just don't see it. I see 10101 posts about how blacks can be racist and 0 about how just whites can be racist. My person conversations are similar. Consider how many folks think the earth is 6,000 years old or just have no idea about the 4.5 billion year theory and 101 nutballs doesn't seem like such a problem.

I'll say whites are in a position of power and our tendency to comfort the afflicted will prosecute them literally and online more often.

Heck, I'm sure after the 101st Airborne had to be called out to get black kids into school plenty of black kids hated the average white man and I can't say I don't understand where they were coming from. Hopefully they knew who the President was that called out the airborne to intimidate the national guard and hopefully they noticed the white boys in the airborne who helped get them into school though.

Not quite, it’s pretty much anyone who subscribes to post-modern theory, which is heavily taught and primary theory in the humanities. It’s a theory that pretty much replaces power, with wealth, in communist theory (it’s a little more complicated than that, but that’s the gist of its conclusion, or at least how it’s taught currently). So if whites are predominantly more powerful in the nation, only they have to power to be racist. Let’s just say there’s a lot more than 101 humanities professors out there, and waaay more students and graduates who have bought into this theory.

You can push anecdotes all you want, but the proof is staring you in the face with this NY times editor. Again, this is The NY Times we’re talking about, with an editor making very clear, and public racist comments towards whites. And The NY Times is backing her up.

Also plenty of people are calling white people racists, all the time. Trump and his supporters are called and portrayed as racist all the time. If you’re for strong boarders or for the Wall, it’s because you’re racist. Cops are apparently all racist. I don’t know what you’ve been reading on here, but you’re either blind to it, or just drawn to stories of people claiming blacks (or whatever non-white) can be racists.

The point you make is not even in the right direction. You should be starting with the question, can non-whites also be racist. I don’t know why there is such a push to sweep this under the rug by dismissing it as a few bad actors, or not a big deal. If they can be racist, then dismiss them as a-holes. I mean pretty much every prominent person on the American right is forced to condemn or distance themselves from Neo Nazis and the KKK, even though those groups fall on the far European right. They aren’t even close to small government, constitutional textualist conservatives on the American right, Neo Nazists are national socialist who want an ethno-centric socialist government. Yet, Antifa shows up in the thousands to protest an Orthodox Jew, who received the largest amount of hate mail ever from white supremacist, and antifa’s reason for protesting him is because they call that guy a Neo Nazi....yet antifa is boarderline embraced by left leaning MS media.

To be simple, I am concerned we are arguing out of the habit or arguing.

I think its obvious whites, blacks, asians, whoever can be racist. Heck, leave too many whites together and a Croatian can spot a Serb from a mile away. Too many black sand apparently they'll sell eachother to the whites. Our asian brothers aren't as good as eachother if they haven't fled the mainland or something.

About left and right:

Its really time to get out the political X/Y coordinate chart. But yeah, every time someone tells me they have a black friend I try to push their KKK support button to see what I get. In other words, when ppl tell me welfare was invented to enslave blacks I also probe about the KKK. In regards to Neo Nazi's and being socialist. Its good that neither party wants to associate with the scum of the earth. The X/Y coordinate chart wraps just like a globe and the NAZI's got purged.

Just to argue:

The left leaning MS media? Who we talking about here? Fox news? General Electric? Some other multi-billion dollar international conglomerate hippies? If Fox is left of you then so be it. I'll give you that before the Rush revolution the average journalism student was there to fight the power, comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. Those folks are still alive I suppose.

Or we disagree on how big of a problem anti-white racism is. Which was my point. It’s no longer a small group of loons, it’s prominent theory being pushed in universities. This is post-modernism, there is no absolute truth, absolute truth is just something the powerful use to oppress the weak. It’s essientially communism but substituting power instead of wealth/economics. Under this theory, in the US, calling out racism against whites as racism, is the powerful (whites), trying to still oppressing the weak (non-whites). And since there’s no absolute truth, only power games, it’s all fair game to be racist to the powerful. It’s the same reason that universities like Harvard are fine with being openely prejudice towards Asians in their admissions since they are a more “powerful” (as in are generally strong in academics) group. Same reason that if you’re white, or male, or heterosexual, etc, you have no room to speak or give opinions on matters of race, feminism, or LGBT issues, since you are apart of the power group. It’s the same reason why white privelage, based on immutable characteristics, holds water in the mainstream, and if you’re white (no matter your circumstances) you are supposed to confess to you’re privelage, and fight against your own “power group.” It’s why Scarlet Johansson isn’t allowed to portray a transgendered in a movie. There is no “reason” or “truth”, only the powerful oppressing the weak. You either fight for the “oppressed”, or fight for the “powerful” and are 100% in the wrong no matter what.

We certainly agree that racism isn’t limited to just whites. My first post in this thread was racism is just a pathological symptom of tribalism. Tribalism is an evolutionary adaptation of sorts that is a bit outdated, but did serve early humanity when there was considerable risk of being wiped out, raided, or enslaved by another tribe, and also not contracting disease, for which you and your tribe has no immunity against. We see this pathological tribalism between homogenous racial groups all the time. Croats vs Serbs is a good example, others are the rawandan genocide, catholic vs Protestant Irish, Britain vs France, Suni vs Shiite, etc. You can even see tribalism, to a lesser pathological level, in sports fans. Racism is just an easier form of pathological tribalism to fall into since one can tell right of the bat that someone else is different. Post-modernism not only encourages this type of tribalism, but embraces the pathology to it. You are apart of a tribe, that tribe is either the oppressor or the oppressed, and you need to either fight for the oppressed tribe, or you are in with the evil oppressors.

I don’t like the European/traditional political spectrum, it’s does not do a sufficient job describe American politics. You can’t have diametrically opposes groups such as national socialist (Nazis) and libertarians both considered far right. That’s not a good classification method. Both ends of the European spectrum both want extreme government control, one is just with a nationalistic veneer, the other more globailistic, with anarchy right in the center of both.

That being said, I consider Fox News as the main, and really only, mainstream media source for the right. Now there are definitely other right wing media sources, and some with quite an impressive reach. These, however, do not hold a candle to the large scale operations and outfits that I consider mainstream. I think fox blows, as well as the rest of mainstream media. If I was forced to choose one to watch/read an hour a day, with current state of politics, it’s probably be Fox since I’d throw the remote at the TV with less frequency vs the likes of CNN. Mainstream media just blows, it’s an outdated medium, that reduces complex issues into six minute segments with heads screaming at each other, not even having the same conversation, let alone honest and intellectual ones. They go after “click bait” headlines, and just rile up the base as their business models. It’s why it’s a dying formula, and cannot die fast enough in my opinion. Even though it is dying, they still retain a substantial power grip over the political conversations and topics with their “click bait” headlines.

On the tangent of political spectrum's, check out this site. It's test is interesting to say the least but I love the idea behind it. The Political Compass

 

[sakinago]

These post are from a New York Times editor...she remains an editor, at the New York Times. Is there a more prominent American newspaper out there? Are these posts not racist? Why was an African American female blocked on Twitter for quoting verbatim this post with the exception of changing out the words white and black? Why wasn’t this editor blocked from twitter after posting these? Would this type of post be accepted by anyone at the New York Times had they changed the words from white to black? HELL NO!

Saying that racism can only be done by whites in America IS in fact a major theory posited by many on the left. And the New York freaking Times is clearly demonstrating their belief in that theory. Do you subscribe to that theory Clayton?

There may be 101 nutballs in this country of 350 million out there saying racism is only a white thing. I just don't see it. I see 10101 posts about how blacks can be racist and 0 about how just whites can be racist. My person conversations are similar. Consider how many folks think the earth is 6,000 years old or just have no idea about the 4.5 billion year theory and 101 nutballs doesn't seem like such a problem.

I'll say whites are in a position of power and our tendency to comfort the afflicted will prosecute them literally and online more often.

Heck, I'm sure after the 101st Airborne had to be called out to get black kids into school plenty of black kids hated the average white man and I can't say I don't understand where they were coming from. Hopefully they knew who the President was that called out the airborne to intimidate the national guard and hopefully they noticed the white boys in the airborne who helped get them into school though.

Not quite, it’s pretty much anyone who subscribes to post-modern theory, which is heavily taught and primary theory in the humanities. It’s a theory that pretty much replaces power, with wealth, in communist theory (it’s a little more complicated than that, but that’s the gist of its conclusion, or at least how it’s taught currently). So if whites are predominantly more powerful in the nation, only they have to power to be racist. Let’s just say there’s a lot more than 101 humanities professors out there, and waaay more students and graduates who have bought into this theory.

You can push anecdotes all you want, but the proof is staring you in the face with this NY times editor. Again, this is The NY Times we’re talking about, with an editor making very clear, and public racist comments towards whites. And The NY Times is backing her up.

Also plenty of people are calling white people racists, all the time. Trump and his supporters are called and portrayed as racist all the time. If you’re for strong boarders or for the Wall, it’s because you’re racist. Cops are apparently all racist. I don’t know what you’ve been reading on here, but you’re either blind to it, or just drawn to stories of people claiming blacks (or whatever non-white) can be racists.

The point you make is not even in the right direction. You should be starting with the question, can non-whites also be racist. I don’t know why there is such a push to sweep this under the rug by dismissing it as a few bad actors, or not a big deal. If they can be racist, then dismiss them as a-holes. I mean pretty much every prominent person on the American right is forced to condemn or distance themselves from Neo Nazis and the KKK, even though those groups fall on the far European right. They aren’t even close to small government, constitutional textualist conservatives on the American right, Neo Nazists are national socialist who want an ethno-centric socialist government. Yet, Antifa shows up in the thousands to protest an Orthodox Jew, who received the largest amount of hate mail ever from white supremacist, and antifa’s reason for protesting him is because they call that guy a Neo Nazi....yet antifa is boarderline embraced by left leaning MS media.

To be simple, I am concerned we are arguing out of the habit or arguing.

I think its obvious whites, blacks, asians, whoever can be racist. Heck, leave too many whites together and a Croatian can spot a Serb from a mile away. Too many black sand apparently they'll sell eachother to the whites. Our asian brothers aren't as good as eachother if they haven't fled the mainland or something.

About left and right:

Its really time to get out the political X/Y coordinate chart. But yeah, every time someone tells me they have a black friend I try to push their KKK support button to see what I get. In other words, when ppl tell me welfare was invented to enslave blacks I also probe about the KKK. In regards to Neo Nazi's and being socialist. Its good that neither party wants to associate with the scum of the earth. The X/Y coordinate chart wraps just like a globe and the NAZI's got purged.

Just to argue:

The left leaning MS media? Who we talking about here? Fox news? General Electric? Some other multi-billion dollar international conglomerate hippies? If Fox is left of you then so be it. I'll give you that before the Rush revolution the average journalism student was there to fight the power, comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. Those folks are still alive I suppose.

Or we disagree on how big of a problem anti-white racism is. Which was my point. It’s no longer a small group of loons, it’s prominent theory being pushed in universities. This is post-modernism, there is no absolute truth, absolute truth is just something the powerful use to oppress the weak. It’s essientially communism but substituting power instead of wealth/economics. Under this theory, in the US, calling out racism against whites as racism, is the powerful (whites), trying to still oppressing the weak (non-whites). And since there’s no absolute truth, only power games, it’s all fair game to be racist to the powerful. It’s the same reason that universities like Harvard are fine with being openely prejudice towards Asians in their admissions since they are a more “powerful” (as in are generally strong in academics) group. Same reason that if you’re white, or male, or heterosexual, etc, you have no room to speak or give opinions on matters of race, feminism, or LGBT issues, since you are apart of the power group. It’s the same reason why white privelage, based on immutable characteristics, holds water in the mainstream, and if you’re white (no matter your circumstances) you are supposed to confess to you’re privelage, and fight against your own “power group.” It’s why Scarlet Johansson isn’t allowed to portray a transgendered in a movie. There is no “reason” or “truth”, only the powerful oppressing the weak. You either fight for the “oppressed”, or fight for the “powerful” and are 100% in the wrong no matter what.

We certainly agree that racism isn’t limited to just whites. My first post in this thread was racism is just a pathological symptom of tribalism. Tribalism is an evolutionary adaptation of sorts that is a bit outdated, but did serve early humanity when there was considerable risk of being wiped out, raided, or enslaved by another tribe, and also not contracting disease, for which you and your tribe has no immunity against. We see this pathological tribalism between homogenous racial groups all the time. Croats vs Serbs is a good example, others are the rawandan genocide, catholic vs Protestant Irish, Britain vs France, Suni vs Shiite, etc. You can even see tribalism, to a lesser pathological level, in sports fans. Racism is just an easier form of pathological tribalism to fall into since one can tell right of the bat that someone else is different. Post-modernism not only encourages this type of tribalism, but embraces the pathology to it. You are apart of a tribe, that tribe is either the oppressor or the oppressed, and you need to either fight for the oppressed tribe, or you are in with the evil oppressors.

I don’t like the European/traditional political spectrum, it’s does not do a sufficient job describe American politics. You can’t have diametrically opposes groups such as national socialist (Nazis) and libertarians both considered far right. That’s not a good classification method. Both ends of the European spectrum both want extreme government control, one is just with a nationalistic veneer, the other more globailistic, with anarchy right in the center of both.

That being said, I consider Fox News as the main, and really only, mainstream media source for the right. Now there are definitely other right wing media sources, and some with quite an impressive reach. These, however, do not hold a candle to the large scale operations and outfits that I consider mainstream. I think fox blows, as well as the rest of mainstream media. If I was forced to choose one to watch/read an hour a day, with current state of politics, it’s probably be Fox since I’d throw the remote at the TV with less frequency vs the likes of CNN. Mainstream media just blows, it’s an outdated medium, that reduces complex issues into six minute segments with heads screaming at each other, not even having the same conversation, let alone honest and intellectual ones. They go after “click bait” headlines, and just rile up the base as their business models. It’s why it’s a dying formula, and cannot die fast enough in my opinion. Even though it is dying, they still retain a substantial power grip over the political conversations and topics with their “click bait” headlines.

On the tangent of political spectrum's, check out this site. It's test is interesting to say the least but I love the idea behind it. The Political Compass

I saw something similar before, concepts like this are better at mapping the spectrum. I thought you were referring to this type of thing, when talking about X,Y. This particular site I see as waaaay off in their analysis. They list both Hillary and Johnson further right than trump, with Jill stein closest to the center (as well as the only person on the left), as well as less authoritarian than Johnson...when she’s an admitted socialist. This seems like a man ad created for the Green Party/Stein, in that its trying to tell people, you don’t want Hillary, trump, or Johnson...Jill is actually kind of normal. This chart is just bizarre, what on earth are their thresholds and methods??

 

[FA_Q2]

Conservatives need to stop whining about this non-issue.

The notion that racism against whites is "acceptable" is another ridiculous rightwing lie.

And yet, in the OP, there was a clear example given.

Seems that the only one lying here is you...

 

[Toronado3800]

There may be 101 nutballs in this country of 350 million out there saying racism is only a white thing. I just don't see it. I see 10101 posts about how blacks can be racist and 0 about how just whites can be racist. My person conversations are similar. Consider how many folks think the earth is 6,000 years old or just have no idea about the 4.5 billion year theory and 101 nutballs doesn't seem like such a problem.

I'll say whites are in a position of power and our tendency to comfort the afflicted will prosecute them literally and online more often.

Heck, I'm sure after the 101st Airborne had to be called out to get black kids into school plenty of black kids hated the average white man and I can't say I don't understand where they were coming from. Hopefully they knew who the President was that called out the airborne to intimidate the national guard and hopefully they noticed the white boys in the airborne who helped get them into school though.

Not quite, it’s pretty much anyone who subscribes to post-modern theory, which is heavily taught and primary theory in the humanities. It’s a theory that pretty much replaces power, with wealth, in communist theory (it’s a little more complicated than that, but that’s the gist of its conclusion, or at least how it’s taught currently). So if whites are predominantly more powerful in the nation, only they have to power to be racist. Let’s just say there’s a lot more than 101 humanities professors out there, and waaay more students and graduates who have bought into this theory.

You can push anecdotes all you want, but the proof is staring you in the face with this NY times editor. Again, this is The NY Times we’re talking about, with an editor making very clear, and public racist comments towards whites. And The NY Times is backing her up.

Also plenty of people are calling white people racists, all the time. Trump and his supporters are called and portrayed as racist all the time. If you’re for strong boarders or for the Wall, it’s because you’re racist. Cops are apparently all racist. I don’t know what you’ve been reading on here, but you’re either blind to it, or just drawn to stories of people claiming blacks (or whatever non-white) can be racists.

The point you make is not even in the right direction. You should be starting with the question, can non-whites also be racist. I don’t know why there is such a push to sweep this under the rug by dismissing it as a few bad actors, or not a big deal. If they can be racist, then dismiss them as a-holes. I mean pretty much every prominent person on the American right is forced to condemn or distance themselves from Neo Nazis and the KKK, even though those groups fall on the far European right. They aren’t even close to small government, constitutional textualist conservatives on the American right, Neo Nazists are national socialist who want an ethno-centric socialist government. Yet, Antifa shows up in the thousands to protest an Orthodox Jew, who received the largest amount of hate mail ever from white supremacist, and antifa’s reason for protesting him is because they call that guy a Neo Nazi....yet antifa is boarderline embraced by left leaning MS media.

To be simple, I am concerned we are arguing out of the habit or arguing.

I think its obvious whites, blacks, asians, whoever can be racist. Heck, leave too many whites together and a Croatian can spot a Serb from a mile away. Too many black sand apparently they'll sell eachother to the whites. Our asian brothers aren't as good as eachother if they haven't fled the mainland or something.

About left and right:

Its really time to get out the political X/Y coordinate chart. But yeah, every time someone tells me they have a black friend I try to push their KKK support button to see what I get. In other words, when ppl tell me welfare was invented to enslave blacks I also probe about the KKK. In regards to Neo Nazi's and being socialist. Its good that neither party wants to associate with the scum of the earth. The X/Y coordinate chart wraps just like a globe and the NAZI's got purged.

Just to argue:

The left leaning MS media? Who we talking about here? Fox news? General Electric? Some other multi-billion dollar international conglomerate hippies? If Fox is left of you then so be it. I'll give you that before the Rush revolution the average journalism student was there to fight the power, comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. Those folks are still alive I suppose.

Or we disagree on how big of a problem anti-white racism is. Which was my point. It’s no longer a small group of loons, it’s prominent theory being pushed in universities. This is post-modernism, there is no absolute truth, absolute truth is just something the powerful use to oppress the weak. It’s essientially communism but substituting power instead of wealth/economics. Under this theory, in the US, calling out racism against whites as racism, is the powerful (whites), trying to still oppressing the weak (non-whites). And since there’s no absolute truth, only power games, it’s all fair game to be racist to the powerful. It’s the same reason that universities like Harvard are fine with being openely prejudice towards Asians in their admissions since they are a more “powerful” (as in are generally strong in academics) group. Same reason that if you’re white, or male, or heterosexual, etc, you have no room to speak or give opinions on matters of race, feminism, or LGBT issues, since you are apart of the power group. It’s the same reason why white privelage, based on immutable characteristics, holds water in the mainstream, and if you’re white (no matter your circumstances) you are supposed to confess to you’re privelage, and fight against your own “power group.” It’s why Scarlet Johansson isn’t allowed to portray a transgendered in a movie. There is no “reason” or “truth”, only the powerful oppressing the weak. You either fight for the “oppressed”, or fight for the “powerful” and are 100% in the wrong no matter what.

We certainly agree that racism isn’t limited to just whites. My first post in this thread was racism is just a pathological symptom of tribalism. Tribalism is an evolutionary adaptation of sorts that is a bit outdated, but did serve early humanity when there was considerable risk of being wiped out, raided, or enslaved by another tribe, and also not contracting disease, for which you and your tribe has no immunity against. We see this pathological tribalism between homogenous racial groups all the time. Croats vs Serbs is a good example, others are the rawandan genocide, catholic vs Protestant Irish, Britain vs France, Suni vs Shiite, etc. You can even see tribalism, to a lesser pathological level, in sports fans. Racism is just an easier form of pathological tribalism to fall into since one can tell right of the bat that someone else is different. Post-modernism not only encourages this type of tribalism, but embraces the pathology to it. You are apart of a tribe, that tribe is either the oppressor or the oppressed, and you need to either fight for the oppressed tribe, or you are in with the evil oppressors.

I don’t like the European/traditional political spectrum, it’s does not do a sufficient job describe American politics. You can’t have diametrically opposes groups such as national socialist (Nazis) and libertarians both considered far right. That’s not a good classification method. Both ends of the European spectrum both want extreme government control, one is just with a nationalistic veneer, the other more globailistic, with anarchy right in the center of both.

That being said, I consider Fox News as the main, and really only, mainstream media source for the right. Now there are definitely other right wing media sources, and some with quite an impressive reach. These, however, do not hold a candle to the large scale operations and outfits that I consider mainstream. I think fox blows, as well as the rest of mainstream media. If I was forced to choose one to watch/read an hour a day, with current state of politics, it’s probably be Fox since I’d throw the remote at the TV with less frequency vs the likes of CNN. Mainstream media just blows, it’s an outdated medium, that reduces complex issues into six minute segments with heads screaming at each other, not even having the same conversation, let alone honest and intellectual ones. They go after “click bait” headlines, and just rile up the base as their business models. It’s why it’s a dying formula, and cannot die fast enough in my opinion. Even though it is dying, they still retain a substantial power grip over the political conversations and topics with their “click bait” headlines.

On the tangent of political spectrum's, check out this site. It's test is interesting to say the least but I love the idea behind it. The Political Compass

I saw something similar before, concepts like this are better at mapping the spectrum. I thought you were referring to this type of thing, when talking about X,Y. This particular site I see as waaaay off in their analysis. They list both Hillary and Johnson further right than trump, with Jill stein closest to the center (as well as the only person on the left), as well as less authoritarian than Johnson...when she’s an admitted socialist. This seems like a man ad created for the Green Party/Stein, in that its trying to tell people, you don’t want Hillary, trump, or Johnson...Jill is actually kind of normal. This chart is just bizarre, what on earth are their thresholds and methods??

I dunno, I have taken it a couple times over the years and end up a few left of center and a few down myself. They separate personal freedoms into the up / down and economic into the left / right so they way I like to regulate businesses drives me left of center and the way I "fight the power" of the NSA to watch me drives me down. Its a long series of questions and they have a somewhat British point of view so read carefully.

 

[sakinago]

Not quite, it’s pretty much anyone who subscribes to post-modern theory, which is heavily taught and primary theory in the humanities. It’s a theory that pretty much replaces power, with wealth, in communist theory (it’s a little more complicated than that, but that’s the gist of its conclusion, or at least how it’s taught currently). So if whites are predominantly more powerful in the nation, only they have to power to be racist. Let’s just say there’s a lot more than 101 humanities professors out there, and waaay more students and graduates who have bought into this theory.

You can push anecdotes all you want, but the proof is staring you in the face with this NY times editor. Again, this is The NY Times we’re talking about, with an editor making very clear, and public racist comments towards whites. And The NY Times is backing her up.

Also plenty of people are calling white people racists, all the time. Trump and his supporters are called and portrayed as racist all the time. If you’re for strong boarders or for the Wall, it’s because you’re racist. Cops are apparently all racist. I don’t know what you’ve been reading on here, but you’re either blind to it, or just drawn to stories of people claiming blacks (or whatever non-white) can be racists.

The point you make is not even in the right direction. You should be starting with the question, can non-whites also be racist. I don’t know why there is such a push to sweep this under the rug by dismissing it as a few bad actors, or not a big deal. If they can be racist, then dismiss them as a-holes. I mean pretty much every prominent person on the American right is forced to condemn or distance themselves from Neo Nazis and the KKK, even though those groups fall on the far European right. They aren’t even close to small government, constitutional textualist conservatives on the American right, Neo Nazists are national socialist who want an ethno-centric socialist government. Yet, Antifa shows up in the thousands to protest an Orthodox Jew, who received the largest amount of hate mail ever from white supremacist, and antifa’s reason for protesting him is because they call that guy a Neo Nazi....yet antifa is boarderline embraced by left leaning MS media.

To be simple, I am concerned we are arguing out of the habit or arguing.

I think its obvious whites, blacks, asians, whoever can be racist. Heck, leave too many whites together and a Croatian can spot a Serb from a mile away. Too many black sand apparently they'll sell eachother to the whites. Our asian brothers aren't as good as eachother if they haven't fled the mainland or something.

About left and right:

Its really time to get out the political X/Y coordinate chart. But yeah, every time someone tells me they have a black friend I try to push their KKK support button to see what I get. In other words, when ppl tell me welfare was invented to enslave blacks I also probe about the KKK. In regards to Neo Nazi's and being socialist. Its good that neither party wants to associate with the scum of the earth. The X/Y coordinate chart wraps just like a globe and the NAZI's got purged.

Just to argue:

The left leaning MS media? Who we talking about here? Fox news? General Electric? Some other multi-billion dollar international conglomerate hippies? If Fox is left of you then so be it. I'll give you that before the Rush revolution the average journalism student was there to fight the power, comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. Those folks are still alive I suppose.

Or we disagree on how big of a problem anti-white racism is. Which was my point. It’s no longer a small group of loons, it’s prominent theory being pushed in universities. This is post-modernism, there is no absolute truth, absolute truth is just something the powerful use to oppress the weak. It’s essientially communism but substituting power instead of wealth/economics. Under this theory, in the US, calling out racism against whites as racism, is the powerful (whites), trying to still oppressing the weak (non-whites). And since there’s no absolute truth, only power games, it’s all fair game to be racist to the powerful. It’s the same reason that universities like Harvard are fine with being openely prejudice towards Asians in their admissions since they are a more “powerful” (as in are generally strong in academics) group. Same reason that if you’re white, or male, or heterosexual, etc, you have no room to speak or give opinions on matters of race, feminism, or LGBT issues, since you are apart of the power group. It’s the same reason why white privelage, based on immutable characteristics, holds water in the mainstream, and if you’re white (no matter your circumstances) you are supposed to confess to you’re privelage, and fight against your own “power group.” It’s why Scarlet Johansson isn’t allowed to portray a transgendered in a movie. There is no “reason” or “truth”, only the powerful oppressing the weak. You either fight for the “oppressed”, or fight for the “powerful” and are 100% in the wrong no matter what.

We certainly agree that racism isn’t limited to just whites. My first post in this thread was racism is just a pathological symptom of tribalism. Tribalism is an evolutionary adaptation of sorts that is a bit outdated, but did serve early humanity when there was considerable risk of being wiped out, raided, or enslaved by another tribe, and also not contracting disease, for which you and your tribe has no immunity against. We see this pathological tribalism between homogenous racial groups all the time. Croats vs Serbs is a good example, others are the rawandan genocide, catholic vs Protestant Irish, Britain vs France, Suni vs Shiite, etc. You can even see tribalism, to a lesser pathological level, in sports fans. Racism is just an easier form of pathological tribalism to fall into since one can tell right of the bat that someone else is different. Post-modernism not only encourages this type of tribalism, but embraces the pathology to it. You are apart of a tribe, that tribe is either the oppressor or the oppressed, and you need to either fight for the oppressed tribe, or you are in with the evil oppressors.

I don’t like the European/traditional political spectrum, it’s does not do a sufficient job describe American politics. You can’t have diametrically opposes groups such as national socialist (Nazis) and libertarians both considered far right. That’s not a good classification method. Both ends of the European spectrum both want extreme government control, one is just with a nationalistic veneer, the other more globailistic, with anarchy right in the center of both.

That being said, I consider Fox News as the main, and really only, mainstream media source for the right. Now there are definitely other right wing media sources, and some with quite an impressive reach. These, however, do not hold a candle to the large scale operations and outfits that I consider mainstream. I think fox blows, as well as the rest of mainstream media. If I was forced to choose one to watch/read an hour a day, with current state of politics, it’s probably be Fox since I’d throw the remote at the TV with less frequency vs the likes of CNN. Mainstream media just blows, it’s an outdated medium, that reduces complex issues into six minute segments with heads screaming at each other, not even having the same conversation, let alone honest and intellectual ones. They go after “click bait” headlines, and just rile up the base as their business models. It’s why it’s a dying formula, and cannot die fast enough in my opinion. Even though it is dying, they still retain a substantial power grip over the political conversations and topics with their “click bait” headlines.

On the tangent of political spectrum's, check out this site. It's test is interesting to say the least but I love the idea behind it. The Political Compass

I saw something similar before, concepts like this are better at mapping the spectrum. I thought you were referring to this type of thing, when talking about X,Y. This particular site I see as waaaay off in their analysis. They list both Hillary and Johnson further right than trump, with Jill stein closest to the center (as well as the only person on the left), as well as less authoritarian than Johnson...when she’s an admitted socialist. This seems like a man ad created for the Green Party/Stein, in that its trying to tell people, you don’t want Hillary, trump, or Johnson...Jill is actually kind of normal. This chart is just bizarre, what on earth are their thresholds and methods??

I dunno, I have taken it a couple times over the years and end up a few left of center and a few down myself. They separate personal freedoms into the up / down and economic into the left / right so they way I like to regulate businesses drives me left of center and the way I "fight the power" of the NSA to watch me drives me down. Its a long series of questions and they have a somewhat British point of view so read carefully.

Oh well there’s the problem. If you’re for freer markets that should move you center, there is so little difference between far right and far left economic policies (economics makes up a large part of these philosophies). You could pretty much copy and paste Sen. Warrens tariff policies pre-trump onto what trump is saying now. Bernie is for tarrifs as well. I mean I guess it kind of makes sense in American politics, but the problem is while the rhetoric and focus may be different from the far left and right, their solutions and what they put into practice are very similar. I say with go with the European model, and recognize that anarchy is dead center, and things like constitutionalist, classic liberal (Jeffersonian), and libertarian flank very close to either side of anarchy. Or make a Y, have the bottom of the spectrum be anarchy, have the right tip be for fascism, the left tip for communism (no one ever said spectrums have to move from side to side), so there’s less to no govt control at the bottom, government control gets progressively higher and branches off on whatever the driving rhetoric is. Yea economics are the cannons of these philosophies, yes the social issues do matter, but are secondary and always changing with the culture and times.

Plus no way in hell is Jill stein that center. Their center is waaay off. She’s a self proclaimed socialist, pretty much a Bernie Sanders with an emphasis on the environment. Or trump that far right, he should be more center since he talks about lower taxes and less regulation, but also advocates for tariffs and single payer healthcare. Yea I’m not a fan of that compass.