Learning about white privilege is anti-white, studies prove

[Telconi]

To what degree would my skin color determine how my society would be?

Recall that the premise is that pride in any aspect (race, gender, orientation, religion) is evil and leads to supremacist movements.

People should not be recalling your straw men if at all possible.

[Scomagia]

Untrue. My values are, to a great extent, formulated by the society in which I live. My society happens to be a very diverse mix of races, hence my values come from not one race but either all contributing races in my society or no race at all. I prefer the latter, since racial affiliation and systems of value have absolutely no correlation.

In truth, much of my values, along with most people on this forum (whether they'll admit it or not) comes from the Judeo-Grecian-Christian tradition which is a primarily religious and ontological affiliation, as opposed to racial. There's a hefty dose of Buddhist values in the mix of my values, as well.

By saying you live in a society, you're proving me right. A society is a synonym for a tribe, something naturally occurring within our species as a measure of protection. As racial affiliation is a component to forming tribes, you cannot reject racial affiliation if you want to be in a society. It's inherent and inseparable. You will not be able to claim otherwise without being the hypocrite, and you nor i will live to see our species move past the point where this isn't true.

Life sucks, deal with it.

Racial affiliation is not a necessary component to forming tribes. Tribes may form with it or without it.

I can, actually, reject racial affiliation as important and still be in a society as my society does not hold any racial affiliation or categorization to be a prerequisite for being a member. I do not hold affiliation with my supposed race, assuming a coherent definition of such exists, any more than I hold affiliation with being a male, being tall, or being sexy. I can be categorized into each of these groups. That does not mean I hold anything else in common with other categorized members of those groups necessarily.

[Myrensis]

What alternative would you propose? Black Shame? Black Neutrality?
The former we’ve already seen the consequences of, and the latter is nigh impossible for any characteristic.
You claim the slope is slippery, but I remain unconvinced.

So racially focused claims of pride and superiority are okay if you're black? Am I misunderstanding you?

No, because 'black pride', like 'gay pride' and various other minorities ethnic or otherwise, is not an expression of 'superiority', it's about declaring that you're still here and not going to be silent despite all the bullshit and discrimination and oppression you've faced as a group.

'White Pride' carries negative connotations because, urr, they haven't survived or overcome a history of abuse and disenfranchisement, they were the ones doing the abusing and disenfranchising, and, in spite of how much they like to claim the contrary, still benefit from being part of the majority in a society that for most of it's history was deliberately structured to favor them and shit on minorities and 'undesirables', even though as we all know the Civil Rights Act ended all racism and discrimination in America forever and always.

[Scomagia]

Recall that the premise is that pride in any aspect (race, gender, orientation, religion) is evil and leads to supremacist movements.

People should not be recalling your straw men if at all possible.

Indeed. Also, I never said holding pride in one's religion was evil. Unlike the other listed examples, religious affiliation is based on acceptance of certain metaphysical, ethical, and moral tenets. Supposing objective morality exists, or even that some religious worldviews are beneficial regardless of their objective truth value, if you assume yours to be the correct or best one, it would make sense to be proud of adopting and spreading those tenets.

[Liriena]

There's no such thing as "white civilization". There is a multiplicity of cultures and civilizations which are currently majority white as per the contemporary definition of that word. But those cultures and civilizations are just as connected to each other as they are to many majority non-white ones, and owe as much of their collected heritage to them as they do to their majority white peers. Some delusional concern with the purity of skin tone didn't determine the construction of the many European cultures, nor did some sort of unified European culture. The idea that all of Europe and all white people share a singular heritage is historical illiteracy in the service of a retroactive appropriation of other people's heritage by mediocre demagogues and the vulnerable and alienated people that they recruit.

Lithuanian culture and Catalan culture have little in common, and both have had as much influence on my own heritage as aboriginal and Japanese culture. My pale skin doesn't make me the heir of the medieval Ukranians or the Pictish tribes. Nor does it oblige me to try to stupidly ensure some sort of cultural "purity" for "white" cultures thousands of miles away whose language I don't speak.

Whites and their genetic makeup

Not all people who might be considered white today have the same genetic makeup. And that's without getting into the historical "flexibility" of whiteness as a concept and the centuries of gatekeeping that white ruling class people engaged in to keep undesirable European ethnic groups (usually those whose regions tended to be economically and politically marginalized, dominated and/or exploited) out of that category.

along with their shared origin and history

You mean our shared history of killing each other en masse every couple decades and eradicating those of our own "race" who we saw as lesser or heretical? Our shared history of mutual gatekeeping and ethnic hierarchization within the same "race"?

Your illogical conclusion that Japanese, Aboriginals, Ukrainians, and Pictish people all have the same cultureand shared civilization because of their "retroactive appropriation" is a cosmopolitan fallacy.

How did you manage to misread my argument this badly?

Cultures are essentially phenotypes

No. Cultures are not biological phenomena.

Civilizations go through periods of rise and decline.

Yeah, things change constantly. For example, some of the greatest civilizations of the 15th and 16th centuries declined and eventually ceased to exist at the hands of those violent, barbaric mongrel races from Western Europe. Which is why I consider myself an Inca nationalist. I don't think white people are civilized enough to rule South America, and as evidence of that I'd point to basically the entirety of South American history since Columbus' arrival. I'm being, of course, quite tongue in cheek on the racial aspect of it.

Civilization, at least White civilization, is not improving at all.

That's debatable. I mean, I'm not a huge fan of capitalist obsession with growth and innovations that only serve to make us more dependent on the "free market", at the expense of our quality of life and the future of our environment... but majority white countries have continued to grow and innovate, as have others.

Intelligence levels have been declining exponentially in recent years, and many professionals and experts believe it is the egalitarian myth that defines our lifestyles that is leading to this decline, not our respective phenotypic cultures.

Which professionals and experts, exactly, are blaiming this alleged decline in intelligence on white people losing their racial purity?

For more information on this topic, I suggest finding out more about this book: https://www.amazon.com/At-Our-Wits-End- ... 184540985X

So your source is a couple of avowed white supremacists with no credibility to speak of, no peer review, and close ties to your political movement. Very reliable.

[Gormwood]

People should not be recalling your straw men if at all possible.

Indeed. Also, I never said holding pride in one's religion was evil. Unlike the other listed examples, religious affiliation is based on acceptance of certain metaphysical, ethical, and moral tenets. Supposing objective morality exists, or even that some religious worldviews are beneficial regardless of their objective truth value, if you assume yours to be the correct or best one, it would make sense to be proud of adopting and spreading those tenets.

Religious Pride is acceptable to you. *coughs in Crusades and Inquisition*

[Diarcesia]

To what degree would my skin color determine how my society would be?

Recall that the premise is that pride in any aspect (race, gender, orientation, religion) is evil and leads to supremacist movements.

It's not evil it itself, more like it is one helluva drug for one's ego.

[Diarcesia]

So racially focused claims of pride and superiority are okay if you're black? Am I misunderstanding you?

No, because 'black pride', like 'gay pride' and various other minorities ethnic or otherwise, is not an expression of 'superiority', it's about declaring that you're still here and not going to be silent despite all the bullshit and discrimination and oppression you've faced as a group.

'White Pride' carries negative connotations because, urr, they haven't survived or overcome a history of abuse and disenfranchisement, they were the ones doing the abusing and disenfranchising, and, in spite of how much they like to claim the contrary, still benefit from being part of the majority in a society that for most of it's history was deliberately structured to favor them and shit on minorities and 'undesirables', even though as we all know the Civil Rights Act ended all racism and discrimination in America forever and always.

Then what are they supposed to do? I don't think denying their identity is a direction we want to go, nor do I think that's what's on your mind.

[Kaystein]

By saying you live in a society, you're proving me right. A society is a synonym for a tribe, something naturally occurring within our species as a measure of protection. As racial affiliation is a component to forming tribes, you cannot reject racial affiliation if you want to be in a society. It's inherent and inseparable. You will not be able to claim otherwise without being the hypocrite, and you nor i will live to see our species move past the point where this isn't true.

Life sucks, deal with it.

To what degree would my skin color determine how my society would be?

Very little. Mostly it'd have to do with adaptions to different regional environments, and interbreeding that happened between pure homo-sapiens and other human species like neanderthals that happened tens of thousands of years ago. This has inevitably effected the brains of the individual races of humanity in subtle ways (which we're still learning about). I'm not an expert on it, so don't ask me to elaborate anymore.

[Liriena]

So racially focused claims of pride and superiority are okay if you're black? Am I misunderstanding you?

No, because 'black pride', like 'gay pride' and various other minorities ethnic or otherwise, is not an expression of 'superiority', it's about declaring that you're still here and not going to be silent despite all the bullshit and discrimination and oppression you've faced as a group.

'White Pride' carries negative connotations because, urr, they haven't survived or overcome a history of abuse and disenfranchisement, they were the ones doing the abusing and disenfranchising, and, in spite of how much they like to claim the contrary, still benefit from being part of the majority in a society that for most of it's history was deliberately structured to favor them and shit on minorities and 'undesirables', even though as we all know the Civil Rights Act ended all racism and discrimination in America forever and always.

It's almost as if the various forms of "pride" don't all exist in one shared, shallow, universal, ahistorical vacuum, but rather are the results of different historical processes with different roots and consequences.

[Scomagia]

So racially focused claims of pride and superiority are okay if you're black? Am I misunderstanding you?

No, because 'black pride', like 'gay pride' and various other minorities ethnic or otherwise, is not an expression of 'superiority', it's about declaring that you're still here and not going to be silent despite all the bullshit and discrimination and oppression you've faced as a group.

'White Pride' carries negative connotations because, urr, they haven't survived or overcome a history of abuse and disenfranchisement, they were the ones doing the abusing and disenfranchising, and, in spite of how much they like to claim the contrary, still benefit from being part of the majority in a society that for most of it's history was deliberately structured to favor them and shit on minorities and 'undesirables', even though as we all know the Civil Rights Act ended all racism and discrimination in America forever and always.

It's still an illogical valuation based on poorly defined criteria. There's nothing about being Black that you should be proud of because being Black literally only means that you are, in fact, Black. It isn't an achievement or set of reasoned principles. It's a poorly defined category based on melanin content and ancestral origin.

The correct answer to racism is not to affirm that your race is a good race, worthy of pride. The correct answer is to refute the very idea of valuation based on race. Anything else is to play a mirror game with the very ideology of oppression to which you are referring.

[Liriena]

No, because 'black pride', like 'gay pride' and various other minorities ethnic or otherwise, is not an expression of 'superiority', it's about declaring that you're still here and not going to be silent despite all the bullshit and discrimination and oppression you've faced as a group.

'White Pride' carries negative connotations because, urr, they haven't survived or overcome a history of abuse and disenfranchisement, they were the ones doing the abusing and disenfranchising, and, in spite of how much they like to claim the contrary, still benefit from being part of the majority in a society that for most of it's history was deliberately structured to favor them and shit on minorities and 'undesirables', even though as we all know the Civil Rights Act ended all racism and discrimination in America forever and always.

Then what are they supposed to do?

Us white people? We could do with a lot of deconstruction, for starters. Gotta tear down the toxic, rotting edifice of modern racial categories before we can build a collective identity worth having.

[Gormwood]

No, because 'black pride', like 'gay pride' and various other minorities ethnic or otherwise, is not an expression of 'superiority', it's about declaring that you're still here and not going to be silent despite all the bullshit and discrimination and oppression you've faced as a group.

'White Pride' carries negative connotations because, urr, they haven't survived or overcome a history of abuse and disenfranchisement, they were the ones doing the abusing and disenfranchising, and, in spite of how much they like to claim the contrary, still benefit from being part of the majority in a society that for most of it's history was deliberately structured to favor them and shit on minorities and 'undesirables', even though as we all know the Civil Rights Act ended all racism and discrimination in America forever and always.

It's almost as if the various forms of "pride" don't all exist in one shared, shallow, universal, ahistorical vacuum, but rather are the results of different historical processes with different roots and consequences.

But if white supremacists aren't allowed to express white pride, why should blacks have black pride or LGBTs have LGBT pride?

[Kaystein]

Racial affiliation is not a necessary component to forming tribes. Tribes may form with it or without it.

I can, actually, reject racial affiliation as important and still be in a society as my society does not hold any racial affiliation or categorization to be a prerequisite for being a member. I do not hold affiliation with my supposed race, assuming a coherent definition of such exists, any more than I hold affiliation with being a male, being tall, or being sexy. I can be categorized into each of these groups. That does not mean I hold anything else in common with other categorized members of those groups necessarily.

Who's more powerful, you or people that would argue against that notion? Who holds more influence and can sway more minds? You'd probably be marginalized for openly holding that view. Your friends probably won't care, but your neighbors might.

You know what though?

Forget those people, keep doing your thing. If more people like you held that notion of choice, we'd be that much closer to ending war.

[Scomagia]

Indeed. Also, I never said holding pride in one's religion was evil. Unlike the other listed examples, religious affiliation is based on acceptance of certain metaphysical, ethical, and moral tenets. Supposing objective morality exists, or even that some religious worldviews are beneficial regardless of their objective truth value, if you assume yours to be the correct or best one, it would make sense to be proud of adopting and spreading those tenets.

Religious Pride is acceptable to you. *coughs in Crusades and Inquisition*

Dude, what part of "I'm not conversing unless you're interested in friendly discussion" didn't you get? Go waste your snarky shitposts on somebody else. The only reason I even wrote the post you replied to is because you deliberately added in something I didn't say.

[Diarcesia]

Then what are they supposed to do?

Us white people? We could do with a lot of deconstruction, for starters. Gotta tear down the toxic, rotting edifice of modern racial categories before we can build a collective identity worth having.

How about western philosophy or the enlightenment ideals that coalesced in Europe? Those are worth being considered part of the white collective heritage in a positive way.

Imo that white countries are taking concrete steps to tear down institutional racism is something for them to be proud of in the sense of "we're still here", a proof that they can unshackle themselves from the racist past.

[Gormwood]

Religious Pride is acceptable to you. *coughs in Crusades and Inquisition*

Dude, what part of "I'm not conversing unless you're interested in friendly discussion" didn't you get? Go waste your snarky shitposts on somebody else. The only reason I even wrote the post you replied to is because you deliberately added in something I didn't say.

Welcome to a public board. You were implying religious pride is beneficial unlike pride in other things and I brought up the Crusades and Inquisition to refute that.

[Liriena]

Us white people? We could do with a lot of deconstruction, for starters. Gotta tear down the toxic, rotting edifice of modern racial categories before we can build a collective identity worth having.

How about western philosophy or the enlightenment ideals that coalesced in Europe? Those are worth being considered part of the white collective heritage in a positive way.

Why should all of white people be regarded as heirs to the Enlightenment when only a few of the majority-white societies at the time that still exist had authors who participated in it?

And if you mean in terms of the Enlightenment having an influence on contemporary societies, even then it could not be regarded as exclusively part of a "white collective heritage", since a lot of racially diverse or majority non-white societies have been directly influenced by the Enlightenment.

Western philosophy is that: western philosophy. It's not "white philosophy". It doesn't belong to a specific skin tone. It belongs, at least in terms of its origins, to a vaguely defined geographical region.

Imo that white countries are taking concrete steps to tear down institutional racism is something for them to be proud of in the sense of "we're still here", a proof that they can unshackle themselves from the racist past.

Yeah, that's actually a neat example. I could see that working. White supremacists would despise it too, which makes it even better.

[Badb Catha]

This is unsurprising. "White Privilege" is a propaganda tactic; it's express purpose is meant to sway opinions.

[Galloism]

Dude, what part of "I'm not conversing unless you're interested in friendly discussion" didn't you get? Go waste your snarky shitposts on somebody else. The only reason I even wrote the post you replied to is because you deliberately added in something I didn't say.

Welcome to a public board. You were implying religious pride is beneficial unlike pride in other things and I brought up the Crusades and Inquisition to refute that.

I would question whether pride is ever really that beneficial honestly, but if that counts as a refutation....

Well, the Black Panthers say “hi”.

[Diarcesia]

How about western philosophy or the enlightenment ideals that coalesced in Europe? Those are worth being considered part of the white collective heritage in a positive way.

Why should all of white people be regarded as heirs to the Enlightenment when only a few of the majority-white societies at the time that still exist had authors who participated in it?

Still a product of white culture. I guess something for whites to look up to and get inspired. Not just whites, but all the others who want to improve on the Enlightenment ideals.

And if you mean in terms of the Enlightenment having an influence on contemporary societies, even then it could not be regarded as exclusively part of a "white collective heritage", since a lot of racially diverse or majority non-white societies have been directly influenced by the Enlightenment.

Western philosophy is that: western philosophy. It's not "white philosophy". It doesn't belong to a specific skin tone. It belongs, at least in terms of its origins, to a vaguely defined geographical region.

I thought I don't need to disclaim that "western" and "white" are equivalent... Again, "western" gets associated with "white" because "western" countries are majority-white.

[Costa Fierro]

That's what happens when a racial group is constantly told to be ashamed of who they are and get fed up with it.

That is not a justification. Racial pride and supremacy are evil, full stop. If you engage in either then you are engaging in an evil practice. Historicity is not an excuse for such shitty models of behavior and thinking.

It can and does produce backlash against those that are perceived to be granted a privileged status within society.

[Kustonia]

Why should all of white people be regarded as heirs to the Enlightenment when only a few of the majority-white societies at the time that still exist had authors who participated in it?

And if you mean in terms of the Enlightenment having an influence on contemporary societies, even then it could not be regarded as exclusively part of a "white collective heritage", since a lot of racially diverse or majority non-white societies have been directly influenced by the Enlightenment.

Western philosophy is that: western philosophy. It's not "white philosophy". It doesn't belong to a specific skin tone. It belongs, at least in terms of its origins, to a vaguely defined geographical region.

I thought I don't need to disclaim that "western" and "white" are equivalent... Again, "western" gets associated with "white" because "western" countries are white-majority.

...and because Western countries were founded by White people.

[Gormwood]

Welcome to a public board. You were implying religious pride is beneficial unlike pride in other things and I brought up the Crusades and Inquisition to refute that.

I would question whether pride is ever really that beneficial honestly, but if that counts as a refutation....

Well, the Black Panthers say “hi”.

And the BPP would have never existed if certain blacks didn't feel oppressed by Jim Crow segregation enough to feel a need to protect themselves from it.

[Diarcesia]

I thought I don't need to disclaim that "western" and "white" are equivalent... Again, "western" gets associated with "white" because "western" countries are white-majority.

...and because Western countries were founded by White people.

I probably got the grammar wrong here. To rephrase... Disclaimer: "Western" is not supposed to be exclusive to "white". They get associated because whites are a majority in those countries. And yes, because they founded the political entities in it.