LOIE
Gold Member
- May 11, 2017
- 954
- 325
- 190
Here's the distinction: anger is defined as a strong feeling of annoyance, displeasure or hostility. Hatred is defined as intense dislike or ill will. I can be angry at someone and not hate them. I can be angry at someone I like and have no ill will against them. They are not the same.Nah sorry, I don't get the distinction. No matter how you try to justify it, hate is hate. You can mince words all you like but if you hate someone that you have never even met as a person or on an individual basis and are simply judging them strictly by their race or skin color, then you by definition are a racist.Outright discriminatory laws have been changed, thanks to people fighting for their rights. But people's thoughts and attitudes often remain the same and the bad vibes that go out create friction..No, because we are talking about racism, not prejudice and all these people are white.
What's so different about one who thinks of Poles as dumb, Italians as mafia, or Germans as Nazis, as opposed to one who views Blacks as such?
Yeah, there's a major difference.
Anti-White prejudices is more tolerated in this society, it's more rampant in the media, and there's no sensitivity training to combat it.[/QUOTE
but you have also consistently failed to produce laws and policies designed to deny you of opportunities by non whites based upon those perceptions. And that's to be expected from a stormfront trooper.
There were no laws put into place in the post Civil War North to particularly hold back Blacks, or White Catholics, or Jews.
There was however Liberty to deny jobs, or housing to such groups
Which did in fact happen to all those groups.
But, now, laws have been set in place to support any group which is denied housing, or jobs.
Furthermore there's Affirmative Action to prop up minorities, but Polish men at least can't take advantage of that
I totally agree. I believe that people of any color can have prejudices and preferences and call people names and even hate and despise them. That in itself does not make them racist. I agree that racism is systemic, not individual.When some1 says "black people can be racist"It really is unbelievable how some blacks the racist kind, never see their racism but always see it coming from white people. A black kid reportedly was told he was racist by another in school so he went home and told his dad who said there's no such thing as black racism .... only white people are racist...LOL.
I mean you can be in denial all you like but the truth is racism comes in ALL colors. If you stereotype a certain race and associate their skin color with detrimental remarks basically lumping them all together, then you are a RACIST.
What they are really talking about is "name calling"
That's it.
Black people can't be racist
A black person in an authority position can discriminate against a white person but this rarely happens because
A) Such persons are rare relative to whites in authority.
B) In virtually all cases, there are authorities above those black people who are white, and who can slap that black person down and wouldn't stand for such actions.
C) Even in cases where a black person was on top a power structure (as with President Obama), he was not free to do anything to oppress white people (even if he wanted to) given his need to attract white support in order to win election or pass any of his policy agenda.
There are no institutional structures in the U.S or in Europe in which black people exercise final authority : not in the school systems, labour market, justice system, housing markets, financial markets, or media.
So the ability of black folks to oppress white people does not exist.
Questions ?
“What about in majority non white countries where they have power. They could practice racism to whites ?”
This ignores that white supremacy is a global thing.
So racism to whites even in places like Japan, India, Nigeria and Ghana is limited by the reality of global economics and the desire for good relations with the West
“But let’s say a black person wanted to commit a violent act towards whites and said he did so because he hated whites, surely that is racism”
Not really.
Because that’s ACT 1
I could slap a Tiger in the face….but that would be ACT 1
ACT 2 would mean the tiger ripping my face of. So the thought of ACT 2 deters me from doing ACT 1
Black people are well aware of the harsher penalties that come with doing any shit to a white person. So the racism of violence is not really racism at all. After all, to exercise this racism, one has to break the law and subject themselves to legal sanction.
What use is racial violence to whites when you’re going to spend the rest of your days rotting in Shawshank ?
Racism is more potent when it can be used without having to break the law. So discrimination in lending, though illegal is not going to result in the perp going to jail; so too with employment discrimination or racial profiling.
Take this guy
He hates white people and thinks whites babies should be killed.
Yet what kind of power does he have ? None. He’s in a position to kill no one and if he were to try he would go to jail. Forever. That’s not racism.
Racism is when you can deny people jobs, housing, health care, decent educations, or their physical freedom via the justice system, thereby wrecking their lives.
And there are no black folks who can do any of that wholesale to whites, but there are white folks in positions to do those things, and who do them regularly.
Just as we can't imagine a black man writing a book the white equivalent of The Bell Curve claiming white people are stupid being published, being reviewed respectfully by mainstream media, or becoming a best-seller.
So when people talk about white people experiencing racism, what they are talking about is name-calling.
That’s it.
And even that’s limited because white people have created a system where they live as far away from black people as possible and they don’t deal with black people at work, because the system has shut that down too.
And white people have a system that protects them in case they get called too many names and if that black person dares get physical then white people have the system of white supremacy that will protect them and give them the benefit of the doubt.
Even if a black person threatens to call physical harm to white person. White people have the system of white supremacy to protect them. Even if a white person thinks the black person is threatening them then white people have the system of white supremacy to protect them.
Michael Dunn in Florida thought he saw Jordan Davis with a gun. He shot him, killed him and they could not convict this guy a murderer.
Even if that black person does not exist, the system of white supremacy will believe the white person. The Susan Smith case in the USA. This woman killed her kids and did the the old "A black man did it" they were rounding blk men up for weeks. White people do this all the time.
There is no such thing as systematic black racism
In the book "The Priesthood of all Believers" James Luther Adams refers to the "principality of pigment." He states that the more this principality favors the people of one pigment, the more it engenders resentment and resistance at the hands of the people of other pigments.
I believe we all know which pigment has been historically treated as the favored one.
When someone writes something we don't like, we can easily say they are full of hate, but it may be a misinterpretation coming from something we already have in our own mind.