[Pants-of-dog]

@Tainari88

Seria “pantalones hecho de perro” en vez de “pantalones del perro”.

I will switch to English to be polite. My name is based on a Cree name for white people. The Cree term is atim mitas, and it translates literally to “dog pants”. It is a comment on how bad white settlers were at hunting, as the only animal they could find and kill (in order to make pants) was dog. Since dogs come when you call them, they are very easy to hunt.

@Buzz62

This has arrived at the usual part of the discussion with you where you simply accuse everyone of being meanies to you. If you have anything to say about the actual topic, let me know.

[Potemkin]

the basic truth that, in any argument between 2 opposing ideas, the reality and truth of the matter is found in the middle of said argument.

Lol.

[SolarCross]

.
I will switch to English to be polite. My name is based on a Cree name for white people. The Cree term is atim mitas, and it translates literally to “dog pants”. It is a comment on how bad white settlers were at hunting, as the only animal they could find and kill (in order to make pants) was dog. Since dogs come when you call them, they are very easy to hunt.

Your username is a racial slur like kike, honkey or n*****?

[Pants-of-dog]

Is N***** always a racial slur? What about when a black man uses it to describe his deep friendship with another black man?

Like “Man, you my N*****!”?

[Heisenberg]

Serious question: is there any white person on Earth who is actually offended by the terms "honkey" and "cracker"? I find it simply impossible to believe that there are.

[SolarCross]

Is N***** always a racial slur? What about when a black man uses it to describe his deep friendship with another black man?

Like “Man, you my N*****!”?

That's why I asked, it was a question, duh.

When a black man uses the n-word to his friend he (presumably) doesn't mean it as a pejorative. Pejorative = slur.

[Victoribus Spolia]

is there any white person on Earth who is actually offended by the terms "honkey" and "cracker"? I find it simply impossible to believe that there are.

None of the white people I personally know get butt-hurt over words like all the other races do.

*patiently waits for some tirade about whites being the REAL snowflakes.*

[Pants-of-dog]

That's why I asked, it was a question, duh.

And I am helping you figure out the answer instead of just giving you the answer. You’re welcome.

When a black man uses the n-word to his friend he (presumably) doesn't mean it as a pejorative. Pejorative = slur.

Right, so these these types of words are not necessarily slurs. It depends on context.

Why is N***** a slur when a white supremacist yells it at a black person, but not when blacks use it among themselves?

———————————

None of the white people I personally know get butt-hurt over words like all the other races do.

And can you think of a reason why?

*patiently waits for some tirade about whites being the REAL snowflakes.*

I would suggest that the people who find this debate to be toxic are the snowflakes.

[SolarCross]

Right, so these these types of words are not necessarily slurs. It depends on context.

Why is N***** a slur when a white supremacist yells it at a black person, but not when blacks use it among themselves?

Okay so your username is a racial slur. That's ironically kind of appropriate for you. We can move on now.

[Pants-of-dog]

Okay so your username is a racial slur. That's ironically kind of appropriate for you. We can move on now.

Please explain how my name is a racial slur. Thanks.

[Tainari88]

What happened to Buzz? Did he get banned for a week? Over what? Oh well...

He really is upset over something. I guess for him it is hard being white. Maybe someone should start a new topic? It might start with something like this:

It is hard being a white man:

1) I am supposed to be at the top of the economic food chain and be a great success and have all the perks. But I don't. I struggle everyday for my daily bread. It is mostly the fault of who? ______________________. (Fill in the scapegoat).

2) I too have pain in my heart. My feelings get hurt when people expect me to be the top of the food chain when I am part of the racial group most committing suicide and that has to talk to others about how being white has kept me from affirmative action programs. I need an affirmative action program for white males who failed to become millionaires.

3) I am stuck having to pay for all the lazy minorities who are a burden on society. My taxes keep going up because of the amount of ____________________________. (The next scapegoat group).

All this can be resolved. It can. You just realize capitalism is going to squeeze everyone who is not the top 1% dry and that it is a systemic thing. It is including white men in the mix of people to squeeze dry. Then you can grow in knowledge of who the enemy is...and stop trying to live up to 'great success' expectations and sleep well at night, not worried about all the groups who are not white and not men somehow taking what is your heritage and birthright away.

You can finally start taking action to deal with your working class/middle class, etc class but not millionaire class status and be a man focused on something realistic and not a lot of scapegoating on the wrong people.

[Victoribus Spolia]

I would suggest that the people who find this debate to be toxic are the snowflakes.

Yeah, you don't have to be a snowflake to know that "substance" hasn't been the name-of-the-game on this thread for some time now.

[Pants-of-dog]

Yes, I have been pointing that out ever since i first replied to the OP.

Specifically, the claim that lacks substance is that there was a significant backlash to this poster campaign. There wasn’t.

[Political Interest]

If the 'white' socially constructed superiority is worth shit in the world, and all they have is themselves and strawman fallacies in their insecure heads--as their ability to do what? I am a white man who knows it is good to be white. I am a good dude. Is that the only thing they got there? As their ticket to power? Then what have they got left? Not much. White man too lazy to read in order to enter into an international politics forum and fight with the 'enemy' without any knowledge. My impact on discourse in the international community of political writing in the big world of the internet? I did not study or care about the stuff. But I went in there and cried. Kicked and screamed for attention. Trolled. Victory. I did it all on my own.....all by myself, don't you know, I am all by myself.....Don't want to be all by myself, anymore......I need to debate with the opposition but I never got an education on anything to debate with....all by myself.

Tainairi, you must remember that not all of this is white supremacist construction. Perhaps in an American context it is. Afterall, I find it ridiculous when white Americans complain about immigration when they are not indigenous to the American continent.

However, in Europe it is the same. If you disagree with what is essentially an open settlement policy into Europe, you will again be accused of being a white supremacist. Sometimes the so called white supremacist concerns are in actual fact based on legitimate concerns. Why for example, should people in France, England or Germany not express some worry about their demographic future? And to write his off as privilege anxiety or some type of white supremacism is simply dishonest. If someone really thinks that then what they are saying is that whites do not have the right to ethnic identity and a basic sense of their collective future. I understand how ridiculous it seems for whites to talk about persecution and how garish this seems. But there are truly some honest people who do have legitimate concerns, especially in Europe. For example, being alarmed at the fact that the English ethnic group is now a minority in London is not necessarily xenophobic or racist. I find it utterly ludicrous that a white English proletarian, a white French proletarian and a white German proletarian should believe mass immigration is somehow in their interest. And what is even more outrageous is the suggestion that these peope should consider themselves privileged because of their skin colour. Therefore the only true proletariat in these societies becomes the immigrant proletariat.

The Anglophone left fascinates me. I've noticed that they don't actually champion the cause of the working class in their countries. And for some reason they seem to view the immigrant working class in their countries as a more authentic or oppressed working class than the white working class. All of their narratives are about whiteness and privilege. It's as though they view their societies as being a white bourgeoisie, white petty bourgeoisie and an immigrant or non-white proletariat. Very fascinating. But then who speaks for the white working class? In England I have never actually met a white working class socialist. And if you put me in a room with most of these leftists I am probably the most working class person there, but I am not even working class.

Would East Germany not be too white for the Anglophone left?:

[ThirdTerm]

There is a district in London which used to be a stronghold of the British National Party. Until recently, Labour only promoted the interests of ethnic minority groups, while turning its back on the white working class. This is a dangerous trend which only encourages the rise of far-right parties. The white working class in the UK is as oppressed and disadvantaged as Asian migrants and Labour needs to make efforts to listen to them. In the post-New Labour era, Labour has become a party of middle class voters.

Faced with a rise in populist sentiment, such are the circumstances for the international left today. Here in the United States, downtrodden and perplexed Democrats are faced with a choice of seeking to win back a white, working-class constituency whose support for their party has dwindled in every presidential election cycle since 1992, or double-down on cultivating their coalition of ethnic minorities and white urban cosmopolitans.

However, unlike America’s Democrats, Labour does not have the luxury of reverting to such a coalition. (It’s not even clear that Democrats do.)

Whereas ethnic minorities of Latino, African and Asian descent comprise 40% of the American population and will pass 50% in due course, minority constituencies in Europe comprise no more than 20% in any one country, so parties of the left must be able to sustain their appeal to white, working-class voters if they are to have any chance of assembling ruling majorities.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... to-by-left

[jessupjonesjnr87]

Reverse racism works in the same way that a poor person can oppress a rich one.

What's reverse racism? Isn't it all just racism?

[Tainari88]

Tainairi, you must remember that not all of this is white supremacist construction. Perhaps in an American context it is. Afterall, I find it ridiculous when white Americans complain about immigration when they are not indigenous to the American continent.

However, in Europe it is the same. If you disagree with what is essentially an open settlement policy into Europe, you will again be accused of being a white supremacist. Sometimes the so called white supremacist concerns are in actual fact based on legitimate concerns. Why for example, should people in France, England or Germany not express some worry about their demographic future? And to write his off as privilege anxiety or some type of white supremacism is simply dishonest. If someone really thinks that then what they are saying is that whites do not have the right to ethnic identity and a basic sense of their collective future. I understand how ridiculous it seems for whites to talk about persecution and how garish this seems. But there are truly some honest people who do have legitimate concerns, especially in Europe. For example, being alarmed at the fact that the English ethnic group is now a minority in London is not necessarily xenophobic or racist. I find it utterly ludicrous that a white English proletarian, a white French proletarian and a white German proletarian should believe mass immigration is somehow in their interest. And what is even more outrageous is the suggestion that these peope should consider themselves privileged because of their skin colour. Therefore the only true proletariat in these societies becomes the immigrant proletariat.

The Anglophone left fascinates me. I've noticed that they don't actually champion the cause of the working class in their countries. And for some reason they seem to view the immigrant working class in their countries as a more authentic or oppressed working class than the white working class. All of their narratives are about whiteness and privilege. It's as though they view their societies as being a white bourgeoisie, white petty bourgeoisie and an immigrant or non-white proletariat. Very fascinating. But then who speaks for the white working class? In England I have never actually met a white working class socialist. And if you put me in a room with most of these leftists I am probably the most working class person there, but I am not even working class.

Would East Germany not be too white for the Anglophone left?:

It is always interesting to understand how working class people are constantly betrayed by divisions that are largely artificially created. In England as in the majority of the world's working class they tend to intermarry with other people who are equally working class or broke living in the same neighborhoods.

What I think is interesting are societies that have a hard time integrating different races of people? Can you give me an example of any successful multiracial intermarrying among many at least three different ethnic groups over a long period of time? Because that would be interesting.

I have this video. I grew up in this society. I did Political Interest. At the same time many people have and continue to have stereotypes about how a person from a certain nationality 'should' look like. I am from the Spanish speaking Caribbean. This means the vast majority of us have been mixed race people for a very very long time.

All this racial hatred is kind of irrelevant in the sense that interracial mixture has gone on for millenia among many cultures. But people continue with obsolete concepts of what constitutes a 'race'.

I get the 'you are white' you can't be Puerto Rican. Then my sister spends money on DNA and surprise. Mixed. Normal for our region. Got some of this or that. But a lot of people are into somatic looks.

Race according to many anthropologists is a very tiny thing. It is far more common to find a spectrum of diversity in a single group.

The Caribbean @Political Interest is a huge melting pot. We got every race of every continent on the globe there and all of them wind up mixing biologically, socially, and in every significant way with each other. Why is it so hard for many of European origin to think that is something strange? It has already happened and continues to do so.

All people have culture. That is what people should focus on in terms of analyzing how people think, behave and have their values. One can be looking like an African on the outside, but be British in culture, language and values. For me? The latter is the defining factor of who that person is inside. The same can be said of a blond looking European who grows up in Kenya speaking Kikuyu and behaving and thinking like an East African tribal person. That is where he grew up and how he sees his world. The blond look is just a look. It is not his identity.

I think that point is lost on people who think modern societies follow some predictable pattern. They don't. We travel and we mix. Nothing pure anymore. Even way back in the 16th century.

Political Interest, in my nation the most famous nationalist of all was a man of mixed race. Our typical mixture--Indian, African and Basque Spanish extraction. All three. He represented us as a nation. He was a nationalist. I don't think 'race' is what is the overriding factor in wanting to protect national identity. It is the definition of being a nation. This is the definition:

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/nation

[Sivad]

The author is not saying that his or her kids should not be friends with white people. Instead, the author is saying that his or her kids may never actually be able to be friends with white people even if they wanted to.

Yeah, he's saying white people can't be trusted. That's racism.

If you define racism as prejudice and discrimination towards someone of another race, then this is not reaching kids racism. It is, instead, teaching kids that they will be targets of prejudice and discrimination and that the kids need to be wary of this when they are developing relationships that should be based on mutual trust, honesty, and respect.

Just stop. There's no need to defend this racist, he's a deplorable and his racism should be repudiated.

[Political Interest]

It is always interesting to understand how working class people are constantly betrayed by divisions that are largely artificially created. In England as in the majority of the world's working class they tend to intermarry with other people who are equally working class or broke living in the same neighborhoods.

Everyone inter-marries in England. It is not a question of class. The middle classes also marry people from different ethnic groups. And in the vast majority people still marry within their own ethnicity, as in any country. Your use of the words 'artificial divisions' is very interesting. Would you be able to explain further? Who is creating them and how? And this is not a question of race, either. A mass settlement of Germans into England would also cause significant tensions. It's also not a question of racism because it has nothing to do with who is right or wrong, or the merits and vices of any particular race. It's simply the weakness of human beings.

What I think is interesting are societies that have a hard time integrating different races of people? Can you give me an example of any successful multiracial intermarrying among many at least three different ethnic groups over a long period of time? Because that would be interesting.

I think we can find this in any country. Even in Japan there live nearly a million Koreans. And despite the fact that these are both Asian ethnicities there still was discrimination and other issues until the 1990s. And the settlement of Koreans into Japan was not even a mass migration. But when it becomes an issue of mass settlement, in an old world context (notaby in Europe), this can be very irresponsible as it always results in resentment, tension and instability in the long run. Those who promote this policy are always the bourgeois establishment politicians and their middle class supporters. Racism is unacceptable and sickening, but it's a misunderstanding to construct the argument as a binary pro-immigration (anti-racist) and anti-immigration (racist) discussion. Unfortunatley, due to the racist history of a lot of English speaking societies, it is difficult to take a person seriously if they claim to be against mass immigration without being racist. And then there are the genuine racists and the far right who delegitimise any discussion of the problems caused my immigration by blaming migrants for a society's problems.

I have this video. I grew up in this society. I did Political Interest. At the same time many people have and continue to have stereotypes about how a person from a certain nationality 'should' look like. I am from the Spanish speaking Caribbean. This means the vast majority of us have been mixed race people for a very very long time.

All this racial hatred is kind of irrelevant in the sense that interracial mixture has gone on for millenia among many cultures. But people continue with obsolete concepts of what constitutes a 'race'.

I get the 'you are white' you can't be Puerto Rican. Then my sister spends money on DNA and surprise. Mixed. Normal for our region. Got some of this or that. But a lot of people are into somatic looks.

Race according to many anthropologists is a very tiny thing. It is far more common to find a spectrum of diversity in a single group.

This is true. Even in Europe you can find many different types of appearances in a single European country.

The Caribbean is a huge melting pot. We got every race of every continent on the globe there and all of them wind up mixing biologically, socially, and in every significant way with each other. Why is it so hard for many of European origin to think that is something strange? It has already happened and continues to do so.

It is not only those of European origin who find it strange. If anything you will find many Europeans are very liberal. Most will not disapprove if their children marry someone of a different race. And in Asia there are many who would not be happy about their children marrying someone from another Asian ethnicity, let alone someone from a completely different race.

All people have culture. That is what people should focus on in terms of analyzing how people think, behave and have their values. One can be looking like an African on the outside, but be British in culture, language and values. For me? The latter is the defining factor of who that person is inside. The same can be said of a blond looking European who grows up in Kenya speaking Kikuyu and behaving and thinking like an East African tribal person. That is where he grew up and how he sees his world. The blond look is just a look. It is not his identity.

But ethnicity does not change depending on where a person grows up.

I think that point is lost on people who think modern societies follow some predictable pattern. They don't. We travel and we mix. Nothing pure anymore. Even way back in the 16th century.

Political Interest, in my nation the most famous nationalist of all was a man of mixed race. Our typical mixture--Indian, African and Basque Spanish extraction. All three. He represented us as a nation. He was a nationalist. I don't think 'race' is what is the overriding factor in wanting to protect national identity. It is the definition of being a nation. This is the definition:

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/nation

What seems to have happened in Puerto Rico is that the Spanish colonists established themselves there and assimilated the indigenous population into their ethnic group. Puerto Rico is in the main part a Spanish ethnos.

[Pants-of-dog]

Yeah, he's saying white people can't be trusted. That's racism.

Just stop. There's no need to defend this racist, he's a deplorable and his racism should be repudiated.

No, this is not racism. The author is not saying that white people cannot be trusted. The author is saying that his or her children may never be able to trust a white person because they will not know if this white person is racist or not.