Or when they see a woman with a hijab minding her own business.
Or when they see an East Asian person minding their own business.
Or you know, just in general when non-white people want to exist in society.
Advertisement
by Dakini » Sun Apr 11, 2021 9:16 am
by Zurkir » Sun Apr 11, 2021 9:16 am
Trollzyn the Infinite wrote:Zurkir wrote:
She’s not the best ever, no. Irrelevant as that is.
She was just a single example.
Have you considered that maybe some people simply want to mind their own business and just keep their head down? Especially when the social and political climates of today are so volcanic and even unpredictable. Some people just want to go about their day free of the insanity of the greater American society. And beyond. I have a number of coworkers and a couple of family members who dodge any and all political and social discussions because of how volatile things are these days.
Something that’s also sus is when someone has a metaphorical gun put to their head and it’s made clear they really should be a broadcast speaker of current interpretations of WS and racism.
I have considered that, and I don't give a shit.
Apathy is in and of itself immoral.
by Zurkir » Sun Apr 11, 2021 9:21 am
Senkaku wrote:Zurkir wrote:[
Have you considered that maybe some people simply want to mind their own business and just keep their head down? Especially when the social and political climates of today are so volcanic and even unpredictable. Some people just want to go about their day free of the insanity of the greater American society. And beyond. I have a number of coworkers and a couple of family members who dodge any and all political and social discussions because of how volatile things are these days.
That makes sense that they want that, but unfortunately they are living in American society, so... it’s not really an option. It’s just a question of how you engage with the insanity; shutting down and trying to avoid it doesn’t mean it won’t still worm its way into your life. It would be nice if we could just not worry about societal issues and go about our daily business without a care in the world, but that just isn’t how life works.
by Trollzyn the Infinite » Sun Apr 11, 2021 9:23 am
by Zurkir » Sun Apr 11, 2021 9:28 am
by Alcala-Cordel » Sun Apr 11, 2021 12:54 pm
Zurkir wrote:Borderlands of Rojava wrote:
I dont think you should be legally obligated to speak against racism, but it tends to be a good thing to say "I think racism belongs in the garbage."
Of course.
The problem is though that the “silence is cowardice” attitude can cause one’s career/job to come to an end or be regularly stifled if those holding that attitude take the radical approach. Just look at Gina Carano, she made the mistake of thinking her Twitter actually belonged to her and refused to tweet her support for BLM which lead to racism accusations and loss of her work at Disney. And that’s just one simple example.
There aren’t as many people who support actual white supremacy and racism as the ivory tower politicians and busybody activists stamp their feet saying that there is. Hint on the “actual white supremacy and racism”.
by Alcala-Cordel » Sun Apr 11, 2021 12:58 pm
Drongonia wrote:Yes. If it's just words, why not? Anti-Whites and supremacists of all other races have the ability to do so.
by Saiwania » Sun Apr 11, 2021 1:19 pm
Borderlands of Rojava wrote:I wish the white nationalists would mind their own business and not have a spaz attack when they see an interracial family at the store.
by San Lumen » Sun Apr 11, 2021 1:21 pm
Saiwania wrote:Borderlands of Rojava wrote:I wish the white nationalists would mind their own business and not have a spaz attack when they see an interracial family at the store.
It kind of is their business if the union in question is causing Whites in absolute terms or as a percentage of global population to decrease more towards extinction. The mission from their perspective is to ensure that the White race has a future, if not an independent state comprised of primarily White people.
Unless it is the person's family/relatives however, there is usually little to no sway that could be had. I don't see it as productive to confront such people. If a White is race mixing, I'm more content to write them off as a race traitor and dismiss them from my mind as just another of the groups of people I hate or will oppose politically.
by Fahran » Sun Apr 11, 2021 1:24 pm
Trollzyn the Infinite wrote:I have considered that, and I don't give a shit.
Apathy is in and of itself immoral.
by Saiwania » Sun Apr 11, 2021 1:29 pm
San Lumen wrote:If someone choses to marry someone of another race who cares? Love is love.
by Sicilian Imperial-Capitalist Empire » Sun Apr 11, 2021 1:31 pm
Saiwania wrote:San Lumen wrote:If someone choses to marry someone of another race who cares? Love is love.
Love is not love for a lot of people. Matter of fact, the further back in time someone goes- the less the concept of love was ever used by anyone as a reason to get married or to become engaged. When marriage was based off of who is a good fit in terms of social status/economics for the other person, was a far more valid system in my eyes than the prevalent norms now.
Love is bullshit enough where divorce is more common for people now than it is to stay married for the long term. As it turns out, it is not a strong foundation for anything because it is a nebulous concept that is subject to fading over time, if it was ever there to begin with.
by San Lumen » Sun Apr 11, 2021 1:31 pm
Saiwania wrote:San Lumen wrote:If someone choses to marry someone of another race who cares? Love is love.
Love is not love for a lot of people. Matter of fact, the further back in time someone goes- the less the concept of love was ever used by anyone as a reason to get married or to become engaged. When marriage was based off of who is a good fit in terms of social status/economics for the other person, was a far more valid system in my eyes than the prevalent norms now.
Love is bullshit enough where divorce is more common for people now than it is to stay married for the long term. As it turns out, it is not a strong foundation for anything because it is a nebulous concept that is subject to fading over time, if it was ever there to begin with.
by Senkaku » Sun Apr 11, 2021 1:37 pm
Saiwania wrote:San Lumen wrote:If someone choses to marry someone of another race who cares? Love is love.
Love is not love for a lot of people. Matter of fact, the further back in time someone goes- the less the concept of love was ever used by anyone as a reason to get married or to become engaged. When marriage was based off of who is a good fit in terms of social status/economics for the other person and their family, was a far more valid system in my eyes than the prevalent norms now.
Love is bullshit enough where divorce is more common for people now than it is to stay married for the long term. As it turns out, it is not a strong foundation for anything because it is a nebulous concept that is subject to fading over time, if it was ever there to begin with.
by Saiwania » Sun Apr 11, 2021 1:37 pm
Sicilian Imperial-Capitalist Empire wrote:That does not give you the right to dictate to people who they should and should not be allowed to marry.
by Fahran » Sun Apr 11, 2021 1:38 pm
Saiwania wrote:Their respective families and relatives are what have pull/influence with regards to that, more often than not. If the family disapproves, they're free to disown/punish their son/daughter however they see fit.
by San Lumen » Sun Apr 11, 2021 1:38 pm
Saiwania wrote:Sicilian Imperial-Capitalist Empire wrote:That does not give you the right to dictate to people who they should and should not be allowed to marry.
Their respective families and relatives are what have pull/influence with regards to that, more often than not. If the family disapproves, they're free to disown/punish their son/daughter however they see fit.
by Dakini » Sun Apr 11, 2021 1:39 pm
Saiwania wrote:Sicilian Imperial-Capitalist Empire wrote:That does not give you the right to dictate to people who they should and should not be allowed to marry.
Their respective families and relatives are what have pull/influence with regards to that, more often than not. If the family disapproves, they're free to disown/punish their son/daughter however they see fit.
by Sicilian Imperial-Capitalist Empire » Sun Apr 11, 2021 1:41 pm
Saiwania wrote:Sicilian Imperial-Capitalist Empire wrote:That does not give you the right to dictate to people who they should and should not be allowed to marry.
Their respective families and relatives are what have pull/influence with regards to that, more often than not. If the family disapproves, they're free to disown/punish their son/daughter however they see fit.
by Genivaria » Sun Apr 11, 2021 1:41 pm
Saiwania wrote:Sicilian Imperial-Capitalist Empire wrote:That does not give you the right to dictate to people who they should and should not be allowed to marry.
Their respective families and relatives are what have pull/influence with regards to that, more often than not. If the family disapproves, they're free to disown/punish their son/daughter however they see fit.
by Senkaku » Sun Apr 11, 2021 1:41 pm
Fahran wrote:If we're going to discuss marriage, there's a whole lot to unpack when it comes to both the "love is love" crowd and the anti-miscegenation crowd. Broadly speaking, both of those arguments appear wrong when we look at statistical data surrounding marital happiness, at the concepts in play, and numerous other factors. Since we're focused on white supremacy in this thread, I won't spare much time for refuting the "love is love" paradigm when it comes to marriage. It suffices to assert that it is trite, shallow, and untrue. With regard to anti-miscegenation arguments, what import does race possess, either intrinsically or in society, that necessitates the state refusing to acknowledge multiracial marriages and families? I cannot think of anything substantive.Saiwania wrote:Their respective families and relatives are what have pull/influence with regards to that, more often than not. If the family disapproves, they're free to disown/punish their son/daughter however they see fit.
Does this not damage the family and the extended kinship network? And for what aim? Loyalty to race, which hardly binds together anyone?
by Fahran » Sun Apr 11, 2021 1:45 pm
Senkaku wrote:“Love is a complicated concept” is not just “love is love,” my point is that Sai’s whole “love was invented by guys like me to sell nylons” schtick is equally simplistic bullshit to the people who just uncritically assume all married couples are perfectly in love or whatever
by San Lumen » Sun Apr 11, 2021 1:46 pm
Fahran wrote:Senkaku wrote:“Love is a complicated concept” is not just “love is love,” my point is that Sai’s whole “love was invented by guys like me to sell nylons” schtick is equally simplistic bullshit to the people who just uncritically assume all married couples are perfectly in love or whatever
Sai's discussion of the history of marriage was a touch more accurate than San Lumen's slogan, but, as you can glean from my past debates on the subject and from my remarks here, I actually take a bit more exception with Sai's dismissal of romantic love than with the reductionism of San Lumen's slogan. In part, because, while both are harmful, the former has more immediacy in the harm it will bring and has less justification for such harm. That said, I'm discussing marriage here, not as the fruition of love, but as a social institution alongside the family.
by Saiwania » Sun Apr 11, 2021 1:47 pm
Fahran wrote:With regard to anti-miscegenation arguments, what import does race possess, either intrinsically or in society, that necessitates the state refusing to acknowledge multiracial marriages and families? I cannot think of anything substantive.
by Dakini » Sun Apr 11, 2021 1:49 pm
Saiwania wrote:Fahran wrote:With regard to anti-miscegenation arguments, what import does race possess, either intrinsically or in society, that necessitates the state refusing to acknowledge multiracial marriages and families? I cannot think of anything substantive.
What is substantive about it is if the sovereign state in question considers itself a nation-state, as defined by having a majority population with a common culture, ethnicity, genetics, history, and so on. China for example, devotes quite a lot of effort in ensuring that they maintain a Han majority throughout their entire territory. Even going so far as to forcibly sterilize Uyghur women and coercing them into having children with Han men or entering into marriages with such men in exchange for money and so on.
Its obvious to me that China sees maintaining native traits/skin color as important, beyond just preserving its culture/society from outside influences.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Ancientania, Godular, HISPIDA, Homalia, Kerwa, Kubra, Likhinia, Neanderthaland, Neo-Hermitius, Omphalos, Port Carverton, Saiwana, Sorastan, The Farimur Terh, Tiami, Trollgaard, Tungstan, Uiiop, Zurkerx
Advertisement