Having just re read the autobiography of malcolm x, I think there is some value in making provocative statements like that. Mainly, it acts as good bait that exposes the superiority complex of people who identify as that group, and forces them into either a defense (along racial lines), or an honest appraisal of their history. The only people getting offended by those statements, are not ppl likely to join the side of the oppressed anyway, because the emotional basis for their beliefs is still some form of white supremacy, however diluted that may be.
Also its an understandable reaction from oppressed groups who have been told from cradle to grave, in media and culture, that they’re inferior to whites, and that the only way to be successful, is to emulate whites, the way they talk, dress, etc.
For some context, the hot topic in the US right now is critical race theory and the response from the right so far has been to ban it from education and to misrepresent it. The straw man they use is that CRT is actually race realism against white people. They’ve chosen this approach because they think it will be useful for deflecting the guilt of their own racism onto others and obfuscating the reasoning for the ban.
Now most people are not fooled by this, because it is moronic. But saying Anglo-Saxons are genetically predisposed to violence leans right into this straw man, and the left defending it would make it more believable to people. I don’t see how such a statement leads people to an “honest appraisal of their history.” In my experience, people are much more likely to discount everything you say beyond that point.
Since you read the autobiography of Malcolm X, you know that in one case he regretted telling a woman there was nothing she, a white woman, could do that would help their cause. I agree on the point of provocative statements, but not every provocative statement is useful just because it is provocative.
On the second paragraph I fully agree.
so now I’m just someone biting a “bait”, with a “superiority complex”, someone “not likely to join the side of the oppressed”, and having “the emotional basis of my beliefs” being “white supermacy”. at least you considered an alternative, someone
who have been told from cradle to grave, in media and culture, that they’re inferior to whites, and that the only way to be successful, is to emulate whites, the way they talk, dress, etc.
which I can’t tell if is better or worse.
not to mention the one calling me a reactionary or suggesting I don’t understand the pain of indigenous people. all that because I rightfully called out a genuinely racist title? you people are so fucking cruel.
a few days ago there was a thread on lemmy.ml and we all blamed sinophobes for their bigotry, but when it’s reversed it’s ok? we said dismissing an open source CPU for being Chinese is bigotry, and it’s not an acceptable excuse that “they mean the communist party would put backdoors in it”. but now “white people are genetically berutal against indigenous people” is a delicate metaphor? don’t be so biased. racism is wrong, no matter the race.
edit: this reminds of a thread on lemmygrad a while back, when I explained why tiktok might even be worse than instagram or youtube (its addictive aspects) and how it can be even more harmful (by lowering the attention span to 15 seconds of esily digestable videos), but apparantly lemmygrad users believed being Chinese makes it ok somehow? like have some consistency guys.
a few days ago there was a thread on lemmy.ml and we all blamed sinophobes for their bigotry, but when it’s reversed it’s ok?
White isn’t a race, its a social construct that has come for historical reasons to stand for a group of European colonialists from a variety of countries. I’d tread very carefully if I were you, because we will not tolerate white supremacists whining about “reverse racism” here.
White isn’t a race, its a social construct that has come for historical reasons to stand for a group of European colonialists from a variety of countries.
I never said white is a race either. I didn’t even mention white. we were talking about Anglo-Saxons I assume? even then I clarified in one of my comments that Anglo-Saxons aren’t technically a race.
I’d tread very carefully if I were you
and now I’m getting ban threats from an admin of lemmygrad because we disagree over a title. why are you so hostile? did I say anything outrageous without knowing? I apoligoze if I did, but can you point to it?
white supremacists whining about “reverse racism” here.
bold claim. I never suggested, or even implied that white people are superior or any bullshit like that. as I said I didn’t even mention white, you brought it up. I just said saying that an ethnic group has a negative trait in their DNA is racist. but apparantly it’s a controversial take on lemmygrad.ml
and you would do me a favour if you don’t classify me in the “reverse racism” crowd. I did not say there’s sytematic racism against “white people”, I didn’t even come close to that. it was just a title.
but well, thanks for your warning, and for not banning me. I enjoy talking to you guys, just wished you would reply to me and explain why I’m wrong, instead of downvoting me. that would make a more productive discussion, and a more pleasant experience.
Having just re read the autobiography of malcolm x, I think there is some value in making provocative statements like that. Mainly, it acts as good bait that exposes the superiority complex of people who identify as that group, and forces them into either a defense (along racial lines), or an honest appraisal of their history. The only people getting offended by those statements, are not ppl likely to join the side of the oppressed anyway, because the emotional basis for their beliefs is still some form of white supremacy, however diluted that may be.
Also its an understandable reaction from oppressed groups who have been told from cradle to grave, in media and culture, that they’re inferior to whites, and that the only way to be successful, is to emulate whites, the way they talk, dress, etc.
For some context, the hot topic in the US right now is critical race theory and the response from the right so far has been to ban it from education and to misrepresent it. The straw man they use is that CRT is actually race realism against white people. They’ve chosen this approach because they think it will be useful for deflecting the guilt of their own racism onto others and obfuscating the reasoning for the ban.
Now most people are not fooled by this, because it is moronic. But saying Anglo-Saxons are genetically predisposed to violence leans right into this straw man, and the left defending it would make it more believable to people. I don’t see how such a statement leads people to an “honest appraisal of their history.” In my experience, people are much more likely to discount everything you say beyond that point.
Since you read the autobiography of Malcolm X, you know that in one case he regretted telling a woman there was nothing she, a white woman, could do that would help their cause. I agree on the point of provocative statements, but not every provocative statement is useful just because it is provocative.
On the second paragraph I fully agree.
just saw this comment and now I wanna cry T_T
so now I’m just someone biting a “bait”, with a “superiority complex”, someone “not likely to join the side of the oppressed”, and having “the emotional basis of my beliefs” being “white supermacy”. at least you considered an alternative, someone
which I can’t tell if is better or worse.
not to mention the one calling me a reactionary or suggesting I don’t understand the pain of indigenous people. all that because I rightfully called out a genuinely racist title? you people are so fucking cruel.
a few days ago there was a thread on lemmy.ml and we all blamed sinophobes for their bigotry, but when it’s reversed it’s ok? we said dismissing an open source CPU for being Chinese is bigotry, and it’s not an acceptable excuse that “they mean the communist party would put backdoors in it”. but now “white people are genetically berutal against indigenous people” is a delicate metaphor? don’t be so biased. racism is wrong, no matter the race.
edit: this reminds of a thread on lemmygrad a while back, when I explained why tiktok might even be worse than instagram or youtube (its addictive aspects) and how it can be even more harmful (by lowering the attention span to 15 seconds of esily digestable videos), but apparantly lemmygrad users believed being Chinese makes it ok somehow? like have some consistency guys.
White isn’t a race, its a social construct that has come for historical reasons to stand for a group of European colonialists from a variety of countries. I’d tread very carefully if I were you, because we will not tolerate white supremacists whining about “reverse racism” here.
I never said white is a race either. I didn’t even mention white. we were talking about Anglo-Saxons I assume? even then I clarified in one of my comments that Anglo-Saxons aren’t technically a race.
and now I’m getting ban threats from an admin of lemmygrad because we disagree over a title. why are you so hostile? did I say anything outrageous without knowing? I apoligoze if I did, but can you point to it?
bold claim. I never suggested, or even implied that white people are superior or any bullshit like that. as I said I didn’t even mention white, you brought it up. I just said saying that an ethnic group has a negative trait in their DNA is racist. but apparantly it’s a controversial take on lemmygrad.ml
and you would do me a favour if you don’t classify me in the “reverse racism” crowd. I did not say there’s sytematic racism against “white people”, I didn’t even come close to that. it was just a title.
but well, thanks for your warning, and for not banning me. I enjoy talking to you guys, just wished you would reply to me and explain why I’m wrong, instead of downvoting me. that would make a more productive discussion, and a more pleasant experience.