It's Okay To Be White campaign

[The Klishi Islands]

However, when I said "racial tensions" I meant "tensions having to do with race." This is clearly a tension being created having to do with race, regardless of whether or not the people getting angry belong to a particular political persuasion.

Fair enough, we'll chalk that up to english being limited, we both understand what just happened.

Fair.

Ah, well, okay. Agreed, the left does not mean minorities – though statistics do show that, in the United States, the majority of racial/ethnic minorities vote Democratic/lean left (which I recognize do not mean the same thing). If current trends continue, the Democratic party's voter base will be majority-minority.

However, when I said "racial tensions" I meant "tensions having to do with race." This is clearly a tension being created having to do with race, regardless of whether or not the people getting angry belong to a particular political persuasion.

May I jump in here, while most minorities vote democrat. I do agree this is a very sensitive issue, so I will be sensitive about it. However, the Democratic party planned to have Black Americans voting democrat for the next 150 yrs. After the end of slavery, however at the same time. Minorities like Muslims and some Chinese, not all same with a few other Asian countries vote democrat. This is cause they are from countries, who's power is greatly influenced by socialist powers. Course this has the opposite affect as well, for a few of those individuals within these minorities.

I'd argue that it has far more to do with the GOP actively chasing policies that have detrimental impacts on minority groups (and, in some cases, are actively discriminatory, like Trump's call for a "total shutdown" of Muslim immigration, etc). The Democrats, because this is a two-party system, then swoop in to advocate the opposite policies, and in doing so court minority (non-white) voters.

[Principality of the Raix]

I'd argue that it has far more to do with the GOP actively chasing policies that have detrimental impacts on minority groups (and, in some cases, are actively discriminatory, like Trump's call for a "total shutdown" of Muslim immigration, etc). The Democrats, because this is a two-party system, then swoop in to advocate the opposite policies, and in doing so court minority (non-white) voters.

Sorry had to take a lot of what you said out, however this is where I want to focus. I do agree, some of that is the case. Thing is, Trump is not the first president to place a Muslim ban. Obama, also did this when he first went into the white house.

Now as for the Democratic side, I can not deny this is exactly what is occurring. However, at the same time towards a lot of like anti-immigration policies that target Illegal immigrants; A lot of legal immigrants side with this view.

Edited in;

https://sethfrantzman.com/2017/01/28/obamas-administration-made-the-muslim-ban-possible-and-the-media-wont-tell-you/

[36 Camera Perspective]

Enough about fucking triggers. You have to confront your triggers to overcome them.

yeh lets make rape victims watch clips about rape because thatll definitely work

Oh, right; they should spend the rest of their lives avoiding their triggers so that they never overcome them.

Think about drug addicts. The best rehab centers teach addicts how to confront and cope with their triggers, not run away from them. Why? Because if you don't teach someone how to deal with triggers, which will inevitably happen, then they'll never get over their problem. If you run away from your triggers, you won't know what to do when they inevitably happen. Fact.

From the APA:

A final problematic assumption is that avoiding trauma reminders is healthy. The opposite is true. Avoidance behaviors make PTSD worse, and effective treatments include safe exposure to thoughts and feelings related to the trauma.

Oh, and by the way, making a rape victim watch a video about rape would generally not be triggering anyway:

Even if there are students with PTSD in class, offering general warnings about sensitive topics may be ineffective due to the unpredictable nature of triggers. Not only do many people with PTSD experience distress without knowing what triggered it, but triggers often relate to experiences occurring immediately prior to the trauma, not the trauma itself. For example, an assault victim may be triggered by reminders of the setting of the attack rather than the attack itself, and that means trigger warnings about assault will be of no benefit.

[36 Camera Perspective]

yeh lets make rape victims watch clips about rape because thatll definitely work

"You triggered snowflake! So what if we praise your rapist as our hero and keep those beautiful, beautiful statues of his in the city square?! That's like, history or something." -Right-Wing logic

An incredibly feeble attempt at tying in the Confederate statue controversy. 0/10.

[Vassenor]

I mean I am still waiting for actual examples of this purported anti-white sentiment.

[Anarcho capitalist utopia]

It's ok to be white.

[The Klishi Islands]

I'd argue that it has far more to do with the GOP actively chasing policies that have detrimental impacts on minority groups (and, in some cases, are actively discriminatory, like Trump's call for a "total shutdown" of Muslim immigration, etc). The Democrats, because this is a two-party system, then swoop in to advocate the opposite policies, and in doing so court minority (non-white) voters.

Sorry had to take a lot of what you said out, however this is where I want to focus. I do agree, some of that is the case. Thing is, Trump is not the first president to place a Muslim ban. Obama, also did this when he first went into the white house.

Now as for the Democratic side, I can not deny this is exactly what is occurring. However, at the same time towards a lot of like anti-immigration policies that target Illegal immigrants; A lot of legal immigrants side with this view.

I mean, they were very different policies. Trump's was constructed, again, after he called for a "total and complete shutdown" of Muslims entering the United States and after he reportedly asked Giuliani how to construct a "legal" Muslim ban. Obama's was in response to a specific threat, and was far different, and after several years in the White House.

Additionally, yes, many legal immigrants do favor immigration restrictions... But the public as a whole is fairly divided on the issue.

[36 Camera Perspective]

I mean I am still waiting for actual examples of this purported anti-white sentiment.

Remember: intersectionality is a crucial concept to apply to analyzing society, unless you're white.

[The Alexanderians]

I mean I am still waiting for actual examples of this purported anti-white sentiment.

Remember: intersectionality is a crucial concept to apply to analyzing society, unless you're white.

What if you're mixed?

[Vassenor]

[align=][/align]

I mean I am still waiting for actual examples of this purported anti-white sentiment.

Remember: intersectionality is a crucial concept to apply to analyzing society, unless you're white.

What's that supposed to mean in this context?

[Principality of the Raix]

Sorry had to take a lot of what you said out, however this is where I want to focus. I do agree, some of that is the case. Thing is, Trump is not the first president to place a Muslim ban. Obama, also did this when he first went into the white house.

Now as for the Democratic side, I can not deny this is exactly what is occurring. However, at the same time towards a lot of like anti-immigration policies that target Illegal immigrants; A lot of legal immigrants side with this view.

I mean, they were very different policies. Trump's was constructed, again, after he called for a "total and complete shutdown" of Muslims entering the United States and after he reportedly asked Giuliani how to construct a "legal" Muslim ban. Obama's was in response to a specific threat, and was far different, and after several years in the White House.

Additionally, yes, many legal immigrants do favor immigration restrictions... But the public as a whole is fairly divided on the issue.

True, but once more if trumps was similar he would of included iraq. Instead it is based on the CIA and other intelligent findings that placed those nations as beds for terrorism within 2016 even as far back as 2015.

[Ostroeuropa]

[align=][/align]

Remember: intersectionality is a crucial concept to apply to analyzing society, unless you're white.

What's that supposed to mean in this context?

That whites should have their own representation and so should males in terms of groups dedicated to resolving their issues and fighting racism/sexism against them, and these groups should be socially acceptable.

Allies of whites and males should join these groups too.

Such as Karen Straughan and the many other women of the mens rights movement who argue for basic fairness.

[36 Camera Perspective]

Remember: intersectionality is a crucial concept to apply to analyzing society, unless you're white.

What if you're mixed?

Race is a social construct, something something, a mixed person can teeter back and forth between perceived whiteness and perceived otherness, something something, this is the same thing as navigating a racially based spectrum of power, something something.

[Crockerland]

I mean I am still waiting for actual examples of this purported anti-white sentiment.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Hebrew_Israelites
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation_of_Yahweh
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israelite_Church_of_God_in_Jesus_Christ
http://www.newsweek.com/mugabe-whites-cant-own-land-zimbabwe-257529
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuwaubian_Nation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Black_Panther_Party
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_African_farm_attacks

[Principality of the Raix]

I mean I am still waiting for actual examples of this purported anti-white sentiment.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Hebrew_Israelites
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation_of_Yahweh
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israelite_Church_of_God_in_Jesus_Christ
http://www.newsweek.com/mugabe-whites-cant-own-land-zimbabwe-257529
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuwaubian_Nation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Black_Panther_Party
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_African_farm_attacks

Wanna say something, the South African thing has been occurring for a while now. It is really not new...

[36 Camera Perspective]

What's that supposed to mean in this context?

Intersectionality is a widely held and popular doctrine in contemporary social justice research/rhetoric; according to intersectionality, we must look at identity as a dynamic interaction of race, gender, sexuality, class, etc, as a whole, rather than breaking them down into their constituent parts. As I stated earlier, the advent of social justice research's/rhetoric criticism of "white feminism" is a perfect illustration of how intersectionality works out in practice. One time at UCSC, when protestors were blocking cars from traveling on the roads, one of the drivers opened her window to tell the protestors that she was a feminist too, so they shouldn't be blocking her from traveling. They responded by saying "Fuck your white feminism!" (these women were black), implying that she, as a white woman, may understand the struggles of being a woman, but not a black woman. (When this lady responsed "Fuck your black feminism!", she was called a racist...go figure).

[Zitrone]

The poll wants me to explain so I will I guess. It's perfectly okay to be white, it just seems to me that this campaign is simply bait to get people riled up in an already heated and highly partisan political environment, which simply fuels the right's "omg lol it's 'bash a liberal o' clock' again" mentality that just sharpens that partisan divide and prevents rational discourse between either side. The message is simple, by itself correct, and perfectly acceptable as a method of discourse. I'm not abandoning my support of free speech as I have showed in other instances (such as with the football players' peaceful protest) just because I don't entirely agree with the message and that by itself would not be provocative in a more favorable context. I mean, I just don't think any racially-based campaign is a good idea in today's environment. Ethnic pride? Sure, why not? It's a good way to blend cultures and gain exposure to and a new perspective on foreign peoples and ways of life. I'd love to know more about African art styles, or French cuisine, y'know? I wish things like the BLM movement-and now, I suppose, this movement too-would transition to a more inclusive approach based on ethnic pride (which anyone can relate to) and/or a greater focus on economic concerns that encompass all races, genders, and ethnicities, which promote unity and equality, and allow for a more concentrated effort on improving the socioeconomic wellbeing of the poor and working class. I suppose the biggest issue with this movement is that I think people should've understood coming into it that it would be provocative, and that it ultimately would do less to highlight racial tensions than it would to strain ideological tensions. For that reason, the movement is bad. Perfectly legitimate? Of course. And I understand where the movement comes from, because there are some people who out there who hate on whites for no good reason and are by all accounts racist. But the ideological divisiveness around racial pride just divides us on race and ideology. And that goes for black pride stuff too, in my opinion.

TL;DR I suppose what I'm ultimately getting at as a purpose for this lengthy essay of sorts is that we should move discourse away in general from something racial-centric to that of ethnic pride and the economic concerns of all poor and working class people. This movement just makes the cohesion of our society in that respect much harder as ideological division and racial division hurt us greatly.

[Cannot think of a name]

http://www.newsweek.com/mugabe-whites-cant-own-land-zimbabwe-257529

A noted human rights abuser and despotic ruler of a post colonial African nation who fed political dissidents to wild animals has, among his other atrocities, banned land ownership to white people?

Well shit, this certainly an attack on suburban American kids. Better annoy the American left, that’ll address it.

[Ostroeuropa]

http://www.newsweek.com/mugabe-whites-cant-own-land-zimbabwe-257529

A noted human rights abuser and despotic ruler of a post colonial African nation who fed political dissidents to wild animals has, among his other atrocities, banned land ownership to white people?

Well shit, this certainly an attack on suburban American kids. Better annoy the American left, that’ll address it.

South africa in the modern day also has anti-white racism issues.
The problem is that anti-colonial studies came from many of these nations and subsequently twisted our academia.
Rhodesia is merely one nation that adopted it and had enough whites without power to make it noticable.

Rhodesian whites is to South African whites
As
Natsoc Germany Jews are to American Jews in the 1940s.

Sort of like if 1850's europe was dumped in the north atlantic, and we let their crazy racist bullshit just take over all of our universities.

The anti-white narratives come from xenoracism that was counted as legit by our academia and media, because the elite is rich and as a consequence insulated to the effects of racism, same as the House of Saud don't give a fuck about islamophobia and don't experience it.

Difference is, our elites then screech at us the racism of foreign nations.

[Cannot think of a name]

A noted human rights abuser and despotic ruler of a post colonial African nation who fed political dissidents to wild animals has, among his other atrocities, banned land ownership to white people?

Well shit, this certainly an attack on suburban American kids. Better annoy the American left, that’ll address it.

South africa in the modern day also has anti-white racism issues.
The problem is that anti-colonial studies came from many of these nations and subsequently twisted our academia.
Rhodesia is merely one nation that adopted it and had enough whites without power to make it noticable.

Rhodesian whites is to South African whites
As
Natsoc Germany Jews are to American Jews in the 1940s.

Sort of like if 1850's europe was dumped in the north atlantic, and we let their crazy racist bullshit just take over all of our universities.

The anti-white narratives come from xenoracism that was counted as legit by our academia and media, because the elite is rich and as a consequence insulated to the effects of racism, same as the House of Saud don't give a fuck about islamophobia and don't experience it.

Difference is, our elites then screech at us the racism of foreign nations.

Academia made colonized people hate colonialism and not colonialism itself? Awesome.

[Crockerland]

http://www.newsweek.com/mugabe-whites-cant-own-land-zimbabwe-257529

A noted human rights abuser and despotic ruler of a post colonial African nation who fed political dissidents to wild animals has, among his other atrocities, banned land ownership to white people?

Well shit, this certainly an attack on suburban American kids. Better annoy the American left, that’ll address it.

Did you really read this post before hitting Submit and think "Yeah, that's a good response"? Baffling.

Are you suggesting that because Mugabe has done other bad things that his anti-white hatred doesn't count? Or that people don't count as contributing to anti-white racism if they don't specifically target white suburban children? Both are asinine stances.

[Cannot think of a name]

A noted human rights abuser and despotic ruler of a post colonial African nation who fed political dissidents to wild animals has, among his other atrocities, banned land ownership to white people?

Well shit, this certainly an attack on suburban American kids. Better annoy the American left, that’ll address it.

Did you really read this post before hitting Submit and think "Yeah, that's a good response"? Baffling.

Are you suggesting that because Mugabe has done other bad things that his anti-white hatred doesn't count? Or that people don't count as contributing to anti-white racism if they don't specifically target white suburban children? Both are asinine stances.

Connect the dots between some internet dweebs trolling the left to mugabe and how this campaign in anyway addresses anything in Africa. I like a good contortionist act.

[Ostroeuropa]

South africa in the modern day also has anti-white racism issues.
The problem is that anti-colonial studies came from many of these nations and subsequently twisted our academia.
Rhodesia is merely one nation that adopted it and had enough whites without power to make it noticable.

Rhodesian whites is to South African whites
As
Natsoc Germany Jews are to American Jews in the 1940s.

Sort of like if 1850's europe was dumped in the north atlantic, and we let their crazy racist bullshit just take over all of our universities.

The anti-white narratives come from xenoracism that was counted as legit by our academia and media, because the elite is rich and as a consequence insulated to the effects of racism, same as the House of Saud don't give a fuck about islamophobia and don't experience it.

Difference is, our elites then screech at us the racism of foreign nations.

Academia made colonized people hate colonialism and not colonialism itself? Awesome.

No, colonized people hated colonialism and the race of the colonists.
Potentially in many cases because of the ideology of racism imparted to them, sure.

But those people who then threw out the colonists because they despised their race were then considered intellectual juggernauts and super important by our academia.

This allowed them to corrupt our institutions from within, essentially colonizing our universities without firing a shot, because our universities were unable to view things in universalist terms, but viewed everything in marxist ones, with oppressors and oppressed, rather than oppressive statements/policies and universalist ones.

I'd argue this began with feminism and their class/demographic war narrative being accepted.

[Crockerland]

Did you really read this post before hitting Submit and think "Yeah, that's a good response"? Baffling.

Are you suggesting that because Mugabe has done other bad things that his anti-white hatred doesn't count? Or that people don't count as contributing to anti-white racism if they don't specifically target white suburban children? Both are asinine stances.

Connect the dots between some internet dweebs trolling the left to mugabe and how this campaign in anyway addresses anything in. I like a good contortionist act.

What the fuck are you talking about? Did you not read the post I was responding to?

[Cannot think of a name]

Connect the dots between some internet dweebs trolling the left to mugabe and how this campaign in anyway addresses anything in. I like a good contortionist act.

What the fuck are you talking about? Did you not read the post I was responding to?

Did you read the thread that question was asked in?