"The History of White People": What it means to be white

[DeesKo]

Hey Deesko, no need to justify anything to Rhodey... Jus sayin'

He's an asshole and he's getting banned as soon as Timmy leaves the booth.

Idance

oh, I'm not worried about justifying anything to anybody and really, I don't think he is an asshole or should be banned. It takes all kinds.

[djmarbll]

I'm saying a good portion of her list comes off condescending and false in 1988, even moreso in 2010.

The way I see it, a good majority of her list of "white privledge" is little more than her displaying her misquided opinions of non-whites.



I mean, I could see these kinda things being pertinent in 1960, but cmon, in 1988.....

I understand on the surface level, it seems progressive of her to write a piece acknowledging some of the complaints people have been voicing for decades but how progressive is it to go so far out of your way pandering that you accidentally let your own racist opinions of folks rear it's ugly head?

If she wanted to talk about white privledge, she should have added that she could write such a blah article 20 years too late and not only find a publisher for it, but have it redistributed for decades and quoted like it came from Ghandi or something.

Peace

I still see most of that list as relevant.

[jimmymack-2000]

Sorry but "wise" and "Viking" are two words that don't belong in the same sentence.

SAY WHAT FOOL?!?!

[djmarbll]

I haven't seen that footage in years!

[BrazenMuse]

For the NONWHITES here:


Please observe the responses from suspected white posters on this forum. I have not called anyone out of theirname, cursed, e.t.c. but yet I'm told,

I need to "change my viewpoint" , I'm "stupid" "dont know shit". This is to be EXPECTED when nonwhites challenge the system of racism white supremacy head on.

It all Cool and the Gang....

"suspected" white posters? Like there's some barrel of crackas who hang out on here and make Proclamations of Obfuscation? Ummm...do we really sit here worrying about this? The only observation I've made of Deesko is that he's a very thoughtful person ... The current observation I'm making of you is that your attachment to this binary dynamic is unhealthy, and unwelcome. If you are going to make a coherent argument, make it without the mudslinging. It probably wounds you in your heart to think that there are PEOPLE of good will in ALL "races" and that there are other ways to view this dynamic you are stuck on calling "racist white supremacy."

I don't care much for "racialists" no matter their color or allegiance. I don't care for arguments that obscure more than they reveal. It's okay, though. It takes all kinds to remind us of what we don't want to be, things we don't want to say. Next you'll be telling me that, as a racially mixed relativist , my white ancestry makes me suspect and all that. Ummm, genetic determinism also is one of those things I don't believe in. "Race" is something that we don't choose and cannot change, but our actions in the world are our actions. As McIntosh's example points out, there are plenty of folk who could use a good bit of consciousness raising...but consciousness raising doesn't mean buying into some other bs "ism" either. It means being aware, yes. And it takes work, yes. And it means using that awareness to guide our actions and our activism. Sorry, Charlie, I don't buy the giant conspiracy thing. Anything widespread enough looks like a conspiracy in the right light...but the "conspiracy," if there is one, is about class, about money and about keeping folk squabbling about ephemera while our pockets are being looted and we are being kept from making common cause with people in the same boat we are in. Rich folk are interested in staying rich. On the level of the local and the national and the global. If you are in the way of that, then you're going to have trouble from those who have enough money and power to cause it. Not because you're brown or whatever, but because your labor is useful in maintaining their status....

[AMc]

I still see most of that list as relevant.

Only a White person could go through that list and decide whether it's relevant or not, no? IMO it's way too absolute.
For example:

"I am never asked to speak for all the people of my racial group."

- Perhaps Peggy McIntosh is never asked, but trust me, it happens and in more places than just DHP....

"I can take a job with an affirmative action employer without having co-workers on the job suspect that I got it because of my race."

- Yet the topic being discussed is "White Privilege", so no one is assuming one got the job because of that privilege?

Please note, there are some issues in that list I agree with....."I can easily buy posters, postcards, picture books, greeting cards, dolls, toys, and children's magazines featuring people of my race."

- Very true.

[D J 1 3 8]

that list has been posted on this page many many times over the years
nothing new here

[House]

"suspected" white posters? Like there's some barrel of crackas who hang out on here and make Proclamations of Obfuscation? Ummm...do we really sit here worrying about this? The only observation I've made of Deesko is that he's a very thoughtful person ... The current observation I'm making of you is that your attachment to this binary dynamic is unhealthy, and unwelcome. If you are going to make a coherent argument, make it without the mudslinging. It probably wounds you in your heart to think that there are PEOPLE of good will in ALL "races" and that there are other ways to view this dynamic you are stuck on calling "racist white supremacy."

I don't care much for "racialists" no matter their color or allegiance. I don't care for arguments that obscure more than they reveal. It's okay, though. It takes all kinds to remind us of what we don't want to be, things we don't want to say. Next you'll be telling me that, as a racially mixed relativist , my white ancestry makes me suspect and all that. Ummm, genetic determinism also is one of those things I don't believe in. "Race" is something that we don't choose and cannot change, but our actions in the world are our actions. As McIntosh's example points out, there are plenty of folk who could use a good bit of consciousness raising...but consciousness raising doesn't mean buying into some other bs "ism" either. It means being aware, yes. And it takes work, yes. And it means using that awareness to guide our actions and our activism. Sorry, Charlie, I don't buy the giant conspiracy thing. Anything widespread enough looks like a conspiracy in the right light...but the "conspiracy," if there is one, is about class, about money and about keeping folk squabbling about ephemera while our pockets are being looted and we are being kept from making common cause with people in the same boat we are in. Rich folk are interested in staying rich. On the level of the local and the national and the global. If you are in the way of that, then you're going to have trouble from those who have enough money and power to cause it. Not because you're brown or whatever, but because your labor is useful in maintaining their status....

well said

I thought folk got past rhodeys type of racist theorizing during their first year out of high school. Then I realized, weak men keep this nonsense going in order to make themselves feel better about their own inadequacies and impotence.

It really is hard to read this nonsense, knowing that a black man holds the most powerful office on the face of the planet.

Then again, Obama's a winner. Shitheads talk shit.

rhodey, what's todays mathematics?

[rhodey]

Here's where your disingenous framing reveals your intent. I posted multiple comments related to the lousiest things I think I've ever heard said about non-whites. Each one of them is one of the lousiest too me for personal reasons.

You quote one comment out of context to suite your needs and ignore the others as they don't fit your needs.

More importantly, you don't know me, you don't know my life or even why those items would be important to me but you're going to sit here and condemn me as a racist white supremist on absolutely nothing more than your predisposed ideas that since I said I'm white, I SURELY must have attended KKK meetings and keeping it to myself to keep you down.

I do not understand how you do not realize you are EXACTLY that which you claim to hate the most.

Question for you Deesko...


Counter racism = hating White people?


Why do think so many people, both White and non-white make this connection?

Particularly, why do so many people who say:

1. \"all people practice racism\"

2. \"racism is NOT White supremacy\"


still think Counter racism = hating White people?

( and by 'hate\" they often mean \"blame\")


\"why do you hate White people\" is the response I often get when I make a statement that reveals

1. what racism is,

2. how it works,

3. and how to counter it.

It even occurs when I don't use terms like \"White supremacy\"or \"White people\"

It never fails, at some point somebody jumps in and says:

\"you hate White people\"

or

\"Why do you hate White people\"

Thing is... in a lot of ways, I don't disagree with some of your premises but you go completely overboard with your across the board defamation of character with your wildly sweeping accusations.

What premise do you agree with?

Normal people don't accuse someone of being a white supremist lightly, and I'm sure you do not either because you take it far more serious than the normal person. That means when you call me a white supremist, you don't mean it in some grandoise, roll with me I'm just trying to make a point, kinda way. No, you mean you consider me a threat to your existance. You consider me a bad person. You consider me harmful to peaceful coexistance

Define "normal people".

... and you decided all of that about me through nothing more than my skin color.

BUT YET...

BUT YET...

You'll call me a white supremist and then say you haven't called anybody out their name.




No, I'm not wasting my time looking for something that isn't there.

Hey I dont know you personally , that is correct, I can only judge you by your actions. Everyone must judge for themselves. But I 'd be lying if I said I BELIEVE the LOUSIEST thing you have heard about nonwhites is that they are taking over the soap operas. It's up to EACH individual to make that decision for themselves.

[rhodey]

well said

I thought folk got past rhodeys type of racist theorizing during their first year out of high school. Then I realized, weak men keep this nonsense going in order to make themselves feel better about their own inadequacies and impotence.

It really is hard to read this nonsense, knowing that a black man holds the most powerful office on the face of the planet.

Then again, Obama's a winner. Shitheads talk shit.

rhodey, what's todays mathematics?

If you are asking my opinion (so eloquently I might add) about Obama , I shall give it.

I thought Obama's electionwas been eye-opening. I've watched as white people carefully tread the subject of the "historical nature" of Obama's victory. Nobody ever probes the white person as to what "historical nature" of his victory means. My hypothesis is that if the said white person was to explain what they meant in great detail, it would mean they would have to reveal some truth about Racism/White Supremacy.

It opens them up to all kinds of other things.

Experiment: The next time a white person mentions the "historical nature" of Obama being elected president, ask them what the historical nature is? Also when a white person says something like I never thought I would see this in my lifetime, ask them why not? And don't help them with the answer.

[AK]

If you are asking my opinion (so eloquently I might add) about Obama , I shall give it.

I thought Obama's electionwas been eye-opening. I've watched as white people carefully tread the subject of the "historical nature" of Obama's victory. Nobody ever probes the white person as to what "historical nature" of his victory means. My hypothesis is that if the said white person was to explain what they meant in great detail, it would mean they would have to reveal some truth about Racism/White Supremacy.

It opens them up to all kinds of other things.

Experiment: The next time a white person mentions the "historical nature" of Obama being elected president, ask them what the historical nature is? Also when a white person says something like I never thought I would see this in my lifetime, ask them why not? And don't help them with the answer.

Dude, I don't know where you live, but it's going to be a nice day tomorrow in Chicago. Take a walk outside in the sunshine and smell some flowers.

[House]

If you are asking my opinion (so eloquently I might add) about Obama , I shall give it.

If I wanted to know what you "thought", I'd look in the bowl after I defecated.

Go make a difference. Stand up philosopher isn't your strength

[rhodey]

If I wanted to know what you "thought", I'd look in the bowl after I defecated.

Go make a difference. Stand up philosopher isn't your strength

Oh I intend to sir, good day.

[rhodey]

Dude, I don't know where you live, but it's going to be a nice day tomorrow in Chicago. Take a walk outside in the sunshine and smell some flowers.

I will smell the sunshine when no one is mistreated and when the people that need the most help receive it. Until then, I have a lot of work to do.

[Moksha]

Apparently you determine this, as you are the one who divides up the world into these two groups.

For the purposes of this conversation, and to answer YOUR question as YOU phrased it, the Turks are non-white. This seems to be the general consensus amongst both the Turks themselves and others. From Wiki: "All the Turkic peoples native to Central Asia are of mixed Caucasoid and Mongoloid origin. Of these Central Asian Turks, Kazakhs and the Kyrgyz are closer to Mongoloids racially."



What does this have to do with the fact that you refuse to ask the two questions I have put to you. My "race" has nothing to do with your refusal to answer two very straightforward questions. Unlike others, I refuse to get sidetracked by your straw men and ad hominem attacks.



No, you did not respond. A response to this question would be the name of a "source", which you have steadfastly refused to provide.




I'll put this to you in really, really simple terms, as you have now dodged these questions nearly a dozen times in this thread:

1. What is your source for saying that "whites" control 90% of resources and make up 10% of the population? Do you even have a source? (If you refuse to answer again, we can all just assume that you have no source and made this "fact" up from your own imagination, with no relation to reality.)

2. What "white" on "non-white" genocides have taken place in the last 100 years? You obviously thought you were making some important point when you asked me the question in reverse order, clearly implying that there had been a rash of "white" against "non-white" genocides. I want to know what they were, otherwise you once again prove yourself to be a liar.


Regardless of what Monny thinks makes for good argument, I'm not trying to debate the validity of any of your bigger theories about white supremacy. I just want your answers to the two questions above about your previous posts. Nothing more, nothing less. I have no interest in entering into such a discussion with somebody who refuses to support his position, as I think such a person is disingenuous. Anybody who thinks it's okay to make up facts out of the thin air is not a good partner for discussion.

as i thought. no answers.

[rhodey]

as i thought. no answers.

Here's another "source" for you Moksha

A while ago President Lula said:

‘I’m not acquainted with any black banker,’ he said. ‘The part of humanity that’s responsible should pay for the crisis.’


If that's true, why didn't Barack Obama say that?


Nothing gets interesting until non white people start calling white people on their bullshit TO THEIR FACE that second. Not the next day.

.

Does your self identified consensus of turks who identify as nonwhite include the many Bosnian and Ukrainian descended Turks that look like this?




Also do you feel Wikipedia determines who is white/nonwhite? If so what did people use before there was a Wikipedia?

Also where does it say Greeks and Armenians are white? "askJove.com"?

[Moksha]

Here's another "source" for you Moksha

that is NOT a source. A source is a reputable place, other than your anus, that uses the words and figures: "90%" "resources" "10%" "population"

Can you please just admit that you were dishonest and made up these figures then presented them as facts? Then, i'll quit harassing you about this question.

[Moksha]

Nothing gets interesting until non white people start calling white people on their bullshit TO THEIR FACE that second. Not the next day.

Seeing as how you're the one that has been proven to be on bullshit, I find this quite ironic.

Nothing gets interesting until non white people start calling white people on their bullshit TO THEIR FACE that second. Not the next day.

Does your self identified consensus of turks who identify as nonwhite include the many Bosnian and Ukrainian descended Turks that look like this?

Also do you feel Wikipedia determines who is white/nonwhite? If so what did people use before there was a Wikipedia?

Also where does it say Greeks and Armenians are white? "askJove.com"?

Okay, fine. Turks are white and Greeks and Armenians are not white(congratulations Armen!). Makes no difference to me.

So, there were no non-white on white genocides in the last 100 years, and as you have refused to name any (though, you dishonestly implied they existed), there were no white on non-white genocides over the last 100 years.

So what's your fucking point about genocides in the last 100 years?

I suspect you thought there had been a bunch of white on nonwhite genocides, and implied that as a fact. Then you got called on your bullshit. After two days of manically Googling for an example of the fact you had made up in your head, your only defense is straw men arguments about Turks in Bosnia and ad hominem attacks on those calling you out on bullshit with your "are you white?" witch hunt.

The reason I'd suggest that others shouldn't have deeper discussions with you is because I think the above two instances show that you are a liar. And, there's no point having a meaningful discussion with the kind of person who creates facts up out of thin air. In the age of the internet, it ain't that hard to find "facts" that support almost any wacky conspiracy theory. You couldn't even do that with the infinite resources of the web.

[Bill Blake]

You got people arguing about who is white or non-white in a topic initially about race being a superfluous construct.

[Moksha]

You gotta people arguing about who is white or non-white in a topic initially about race being a superfluous construct.

hahahah!

I just gave up on the extra keystrokes of putting quote marks around the terms.

[Armento]

rhodey.. can i be asian? i want that fuckin metabolism

[ngeso]

Okay, fine. Turks are white and Greeks and Armenians are not white(congratulations Armen!). Makes no difference to me.

rhodey.. can i be asian? i want that fuckin metabolism

...

[the crackhouse]

I will smell the sunshine when no one is mistreated and when the people that need the most help receive it. Until then, I have a lot of work to do.

Better think about suicide then, seriously!

Idance

[DeesKo]

Question for you Deesko...


Counter racism = hating White people?

Nah, not at all and I never said nor implied that.

Why do think so many people, both White and non-white make this connection?

Implementation my man, implementation.

I am against racism, however, the means in which I talk about racism do not imply nor leave the impression that I am either a knee-jerk white liberal pandering, or that I hate white people.

I, personally, have never known anyone of sound mind to equate being against racism as equaling hating white people.

If you are finding that a majority of people you interact with in your crusade come away from your discussions feeling like you hate white people, maybe you should think about your communications within your crusade.

It never fails, at some point somebody jumps in and says:

\"you hate White people\"

or

\"Why do you hate White people\"

If you do not actually hate white people, perhaps you should look at the way you are communicating your ideals because if people are consistently walking away from interaction with you thinking you hate white people, and you do not, clearly you are not communicating effectively.


[/quote]
Hey I dont know you personally , that is correct, I can only judge you by your actions. Everyone must judge for themselves. But I 'd be lying if I said I BELIEVE the LOUSIEST thing you have heard about nonwhites is that they are taking over the soap operas. It's up to EACH individual to make that decision for themselves.[/QUOTE]

The problem is, you are not judging me by my actions, you are judging me by your predisposed notions of who I should be, and how my actions may or may not live up to that predisposition.

For instance, the moment with my grandmother was one of my lousiest moments in MY life because someone I loved, revered & respected dropped a bomb on me that diverged DRASTICALLY from my view on life and what I would have expected to be her view on life. In other words, it really bothered me on a number of levels to find out my sweet little old wise knowledgable loving grandmother was such a vehement racist.

That moment can't even come close to me hearing some dumbfuck redneck I don't know with an IQ of 3.65 saying something stupid on Howard Stern.

But yet, your predisposed notions of what I should have said, what I should have experienced and how those things should have affected me and what I should have said to you trumped everything else.

This is why I said you are the very thing you hate. A key aspect of racism requires one to be predisposed to passing judgements on others based on nothing but skin color which is PRECISELY what you did too me.

Peace

[rhodey]

Nah, not at all and I never said nor implied that.



Implementation my man, implementation.

I am against racism, however, the means in which I talk about racism do not imply nor leave the impression that I am either a knee-jerk white liberal pandering, or that I hate white people.

I, personally, have never known anyone of sound mind to equate being against racism as equaling hating white people.

If you are finding that a majority of people you interact with in your crusade come away from your discussions feeling like you hate white people, maybe you should think about your communications within your crusade.




If you do not actually hate white people, perhaps you should look at the way you are communicating your ideals because if people are consistently walking away from interaction with you thinking you hate white people, and you do not, clearly you are not communicating effectively.

Hey I dont know you personally , that is correct, I can only judge you by your actions. Everyone must judge for themselves. But I 'd be lying if I said I BELIEVE the LOUSIEST thing you have heard about nonwhites is that they are taking over the soap operas. It's up to EACH individual to make that decision for themselves.[/QUOTE]

The problem is, you are not judging me by my actions, you are judging me by your predisposed notions of who I should be, and how my actions may or may not live up to that predisposition.

For instance, the moment with my grandmother was one of my lousiest moments in MY life because someone I loved, revered & respected dropped a bomb on me that diverged DRASTICALLY from my view on life and what I would have expected to be her view on life. In other words, it really bothered me on a number of levels to find out my sweet little old wise knowledgable loving grandmother was such a vehement racist.

Have you ever heard a racist joke?


Peace[/QUOTE]

That moment can't even come close to me hearing some dumbfuck redneck I don't know with an IQ of 3.65 saying something stupid on Howard Stern.

But yet, your predisposed notions of what I should have said, what I should have experienced and how those things should have affected me and what I should have said to you trumped everything else.

This is why I said you are the very thing you hate. A key aspect of racism requ

I disagree, me having "predisposed" notions of what (you) should have said.." (and I didn't) is NOT racism white Supremacy. Me not liking you because you are white is not racism whitesupremacy. Me being suspicious of you because you are white is LOGICAL. Deesko I suspect you already now this.

Deesko why did think the lousiest thing you have heard said about nonwhites, is that they are taking over the soap opera's, why do you think saying that made your grandma a "vehement racist"?