Well, I knew you were a scared little baby, yes. Just wasn’t sure you had that much self-awareness. Looks like even pond scum could pass a mirror test nowadays, though.
Setting aside the concerns of the wizards and knuckle draggers, Reihan Salam at the Atlantic Magazine delves into some of the motivations for anti-white sentiment among elite Asians. [INDENT] The people I’ve heard archly denounce whites have for the most part been upwardly-mobile people who’ve proven pretty adept at navigating elite, predominantly white spaces. A lot of them have been whites who pride themselves on their diverse social circles and their enlightened views, and who indulge in their own half-ironic white-bashing to underscore that it is their achieved identity as intelligent, worldly people that counts most, not their ascribed identity as being of recognizably European descent.
…But many of the white-bashers of my acquaintance have been highly-educated and affluent Asian American professionals. …
Some of this is just obvious edgelord trolling… [/INDENT] …but another motivation is signaling your sophistication and mastery of ironic coding. And other motivations: Sarah Jeong, Harvard, and Strategic White-Bashing - The Atlantic
It all boils down to fitting in to liberal elite circles. For the most part, people are social chameleons who just want to blend in with their surroundings.
Upwardly mobile youth intuitively grok that this sort of attitude will get them ahead in life, so they wholeheartedly adopt the social justice dogma of elite universities. For whites, that dogma may include self-flagellation. That makes sense. It’s depressing that more people don’t challenge it, but it’s hard to resist the pressures of social conformity.
Tell that to the white farmers in South Africa who are having their land taken from them without compensation. Of course, America is not South Africa. But it’s proof that it’s at least possible for whites to be the victims of racism.
Of course, as I noted before, it was a terrible mistake to give the biggest bully pulpit to a swallower of conspiracy theories and a racist like Trump. And Fox news and others are happy to repeat the hate.
What white farmers? Why are you spreading bullshit white supremacist propaganda?
Anyone can be a victim of racism. What is absurd is the notion that whites merely being a dominant plurality rather than an absolute majority is going to make one fucking iota of difference in how you live your life. I live in California, land of the “white minority.” People haven’t started spitting on me or banning me from the front of the bus yet.
That’s one take on the Atlantic article IMHO. There are other takes. Here’s one: irony ain’t self flagellation, nor is self-deprecating humor. Just ask Bob Dole.
Those who remembering their college days will have a rough familiarity with this. They will also recall that there were lots of social niches in college, with most having a foot in more than one. Those whose perceptions of college are molded by Fox News risk being laughed at, as Fox News has no interest in informing its audience. Their aim is to jizz it up.
The key attribute though is to show off your ability to navigate your way among bright people of every background. Word play, irony, and a striking yet canny perspective outside expectations (but not too outside) help as well.
Name a single one.
No-one’s having their land taken away because they are White. If anyone has their land taken (and paid fair market prices rather than the inflated prices they’re holding out for) it’ll be because they’re the current holders of land that isn’t rightfully theirs. And if they happen to all be White, that’s not because they’re the *victims *of racism, it’s because they’re the *beneficiaries *and profiteers of previous White racism. Because that’s how Apartheid worked.
But feel free to post your racist talking points like this post in the current GD thread on SA.
Except for me, and at least a couple other people I’ve seen on this board describe themselves as Democrats. Unless you simply don’t believe us due to an assumption that people who complain about this couldn’t actually truly be Demorats, which makes your argument circular reasoning and thus not really an argument at all.
I’m with you on many of the points you have been making. But not here. I don’t feel any sympathy for those farmers. Unless there are children being killed as in the Mau Mau rebellion, in which case I do feel sympathy for them.
The Democrats used to be the party of unapologetic racists, I see no reason to doubt there’d be a few holdouts.
Sorry, I was skimming headlines. I should have studied this issue more before commenting.
I consider myself extremely liberal. If I had my druthers, America would have a robust Scandanavian style social democracy. I want Medicare For All, a Universal Basic Income, I’m pro-choice. I wrote editorials in my college newspaper arguing to legalize gay marriage back in 2004 (back when public opinion was solidly against it). I’ve voted Democrat in every single election that I’ve been elegible to vote (2002). I just don’t buy the identitarian left narrative on race. I believe we need to stop obsessing over race and strive for a colorblind society. Using dehumanizing language against white people hurts that goal.
This article sums up my thoughts pretty well:
Yeah. But the fact you both didn’t, AND you unthinkingly embraced the white nationalist narrative because “yeah, that sounds about right” is kind of telling, innit ?
Cool story, bro!
Props for fessing up. I’ve made media errors too (so has everyone else). You might want to ID the organs that presented you with a misleading headline though. No snark, and it’s an iterative process.
I understand attacks on SJWs. My stance c. 2005 was to shrug: I had roughly the take that Bernie Sanders used to have: resolve the class issues and race would take care of itself. There was lots of African American advancement during the 1990s when we had solid macroeconomic policy.
That’s not my view now. You tube videos of police treatment of African Americans was the first prong of evidence against that view. The election of Donald Trump, a con-man and failed businessman who skillfully formed an inane platform on largely racial and entirely fact free resentment, showed the… deep seated racism in American society. In 2005 that last phrase would have caused me to turn my attention elsewhere, away from the English majors and towards the policy wonks.
Police reform and addressing hiring discrimination are a heavy lift. They are a little outside the box. But I don’t think minorities in the US have gotten a fair shake. Once the Dems take power, I think steps are appropriate. That means somewhat less effort towards expanding the earned income tax credit and somewhat more listening to Black Lives Matter. At the margin: politics happens at the margin.
I read Ta-Nahsi Coates now and follow 5-7 Black Male on twitter. Here, I read Banquet Bear and Dibble a little more charitably. After the bigots came out of the woodwork, I began to see a bigger problem.
Well said. I’d add that that bigger problem you mention is very much not the quite small amount of snark directed at Mayonnaise-Americans.
Whoops, sorry. That was dehumanizing. I meant to say “directed at Chad and Becky.”
Whoops again. “The melanin-deprived.”
It’s fallacious to dismiss criticism of left identity politics because the right is so much worse. We need to have higher standards for our own; we need to have broad electoral appeal to get political power (including, crucially, statehouses as 2020 and redistricting loom); and whatever problem one confronts, someone can always point to another that is worse.
Riiiight, I’m an octagenarian Dixiecrat in an Alabama holler, pining for the days of Strom Thurmond and George Wallace. :rolleyes:
Odd that my favorite presidents are Grant, LBJ, and Obama. Or that my least favorite (certainly the ones I consider most overrated) are Jackson and Wilson.
From the article: [INDENT] More recently, we have seen a rise of the identitarian lefties who hold very different ideas about objective truth, evidence, reason and language and who view society as structured by discourse (ways of talking about things) which perpetuates systems of power and privilege. As they often fit the definition of “radical” but have little in common with the older radical leftism and seldom address economics or class issues coherently, preferring to focus on identity groups like race, gender and sexuality, things have become much more messy, and communication and compromise much more difficult. These are the individuals who frequently insist that the liberal lefties are actually right-wing.
…Concepts like “intersectionality,” “toxic masculinity” and “white fragility” became a part of social justice activism. [/INDENT] Emphasis added. People described in the article exist. But they don’t frequent this message board, Sarah Jeong is not one of them, and I suspect their numbers are fairly small if not de minimus. I’ve seen those 3 terms applied by those who have conventional ideas about objective truth, evidence, reason, and language.
Frankly, I think identity politics is practiced far more by the Trump et al than by his opponents. And while I trust there is a good take-down of leftish identity politics, I haven’t seen it on this message board. Here’s one decent critique of language policing from Jan 2016 though. Footnote 4 is a decent summary: Are Liberals Responsible for the Rise of Donald Trump? – Mother Jones
andros: Yeah, that stuff flows by this SWM without issue. It’s a little problematic though, as to some extent you are punching down. Are We No Longer Allowed to Mock White Men? – Mother Jones
Wow. Usually if I want to see a masturbation session that intense, I have to go to RedTube.