Abolish the White Race - By Any Means Necessary

[Joe Hillshoist]

[tapitsbo]

I'm no expert but I have certainly come across information which conflicts with some of what you are saying.

A lot of emphasis has understandably been placed on the early modern prototype of scientific racism, and understandably so. It seems there were analogues to what we consider "racism", in both academic and vernacular terms, preceeding this era.

I'm not aware that American colonies originally balked at enslaving people with the same skin colour.

Slavery certainly seems to have existed in many cultures in antiquity - more recently the slave trade to the Arab world seems to have some overlap with the European practice of slavery. One of the causes seems to have been being sold by one's own people - a common denominator throughout many other situations from history.

It is of course interesting to observe the parallels between historical slavery and "covert" slavery such as mind control, as hava1 once pointed out on this board.

Also interesting to observe the location where slavery is literally practiced out in the open to this day, which still contrasts with institutional racism in the USA, however abhorrent it is in the prison system.

Then it is even more interesting to compare all of this info with the "legitimate" narrative about slavery performed in educational institutions and popular media.

As far as the thread title goes, I interpret it as a double entendre that is meant to suggest both a conceptual abolishment and a more literal process of removing european peoples from the world as has been discussed in the more recent pages. The irony being that it is this agenda which at the present time is most invested in maintaining the category "White" even as it keeps up a pretence of openness to deconstructing all such classifications or actually existing differences.

[Joe Hillshoist]

As far as the thread title goes, I interpret it as a double entendre that is meant to suggest both a conceptual abolishment and a more literal process of removing european peoples from the world as has been discussed in the more recent pages. The irony being that it is this agenda which at the present time is most invested in maintaining the category "White" even as it keeps up a pretence of openness to deconstructing all such classifications or actually existing differences.

You can interpret it how you like, doesn't make you right. The term white race deliberately removes the concept of separate European peoples and puts all those cultures under one generic umbrella that never actually existed. It also removes people with one white parent from the group that they have some ancestral heritage with.

I'm not a member of the white race even tho my mum is white because the fuckwits that came up with the term made it exclusionary not inclusive. My kids might be because they've got one black grandparent* and can pass off as white in a country where burns black eventually.

If you want to defend that fine. It means you are gonna end up my enemy when the people you stand with get their much longed for race war.

*(And one black parent according to the exclusive nature of who gets to be in white race.)

[tapitsbo]

tl;dr the last sentence of what I wrote means people like American Dream are the ones most invested in the category "white"

I couldn't give a fuck about people's genetic background - i only became interested in this topic when i came to understand the curious intricacies and hypocrisies surrounding politics that had seemed pretty straightforward to me when I was younger... zealous ethnonationalism for some and brainwashing into exaggerated self-hatred for others. I don't belong to an "ethnicity" myself having ancestors from many yet I'm identified as part of a "problem minority" in the supposedly cosmopolitan cities I've lived in.

Who's the one longing for a race war? Seems like you as far as I can tell. I am interested in peace myself and what always interested me about this board was the honesty some posters had about the low intensity warfare that grinds on as part of the human condition it would seem

Like it or not, AD's voice is the voice of the now nearly univocal establishment as they smarmily admitted with their comments about academia, maybe in some countries like the BRICS it would not be, but their claim to be beyond taking sides is as ludicrous as e.g. Ukranian nazis claiming to be "beyond left and right."

[Joe Hillshoist]

tl;dr the last sentence of what I wrote means people like American Dream are the ones most invested in the category "white"

i don't know what people like AD means but if it means me or the Australians whose blogs he posts then its flat out wrong.

I couldn't give a fuck about people's genetic background - i only became interested in this topic when i came to understand the curious intricacies and hypocrisies surrounding politics that had seemed pretty straightforward to me when I was younger... zealous ethnonationalism for some and brainwashing into exaggerated self-hatred for others. I don't belong to an "ethnicity" myself having ancestors from many yet I'm identified as part of a "problem minority" in the supposedly cosmopolitan cities I've lived in.

Where do you live?

Who's the one longing for a race war? Seems like you as far as I can tell. I am interested in peace myself and what always interested me about this board was the honesty some posters had about the low intensity warfare that grinds on as part of the human condition it would seem

I wanna be left alone to raise my family. That's less likely now than it was 15 years ago thanks to people who are obsessed with "whiteness" and whop aren't like AD.

Like it or not, AD's voice is the voice of the now nearly univocal establishment as they smarmily admitted with their comments about academia, maybe in some countries like the BRICS it would not be, but their claim to be beyond taking sides is as ludicrous as e.g. Ukranian nazis claiming to be "beyond left and right."

I dunno where you live but the voice of the "establishment" is not saying that here.

[tapitsbo]

Alright well Canada and Australia are maybe a touch different but AD-alikes who are more often than not de facto ethnonationalists are very invested in quarantining the people they identify as "whites" and it's ironic that you want to raise your family in peace when you're the one talking about forcing eugenics/breeding programs and race wars on others

When I say "establishment" I am talking about mainstream institutions - murdoch/neocon style bullshit sings a different tune and is more mainstream in australia, sure, but it is another arm of the same self-described permanent establishment

[kool maudit]

The title of this thread, if voiced to someone unaware of critical race theory and similar/related academic trends, would sound like a call for genocide.

That's why people use it, why this thread is called this, why Tim Wise says it, why Noel Ignatiev says it. Because it sounds that way and gets attention and is thrilling/daring/dangerous/revolutionary-sounding. And then once people are listening you can get into the history and structure and falseness of the white identity and whatever else.

It's a cheap trick and a bad thread.

[tapitsbo]

Everyone reading this board is aware of Critical Race Theory.

[Sounder]

Being a working person, and without much awareness of ideological intricacies, I am interested in learning about details and perspectives that activists produce.

At the same time, I am not at all inclined to enter into an indoctrination program run by people that seem obsessed with race, in the name of abolishing conceptual structures using race as dividing markers among humans.

I'm beginning to feel like the constant repetition of the accusation that 'some posters' here represent for far-right ideas, is a sly method designed to elicit the response, non vocalized; Hey, I'm no right wing bigot, OK, I'll read some of AD's material.

Thus one enters the indoctrination program.

[kool maudit]

Everyone reading this board is aware of Critical Race Theory.

True enough, but isn't this a bit like the Aleister Crowley "child sacrifice just means masturbation" thing?

He said child sacrifice for a reason, even if that's true. It is a certain kind of image. Same here.

Anyway, what time I have for all this is long since past. My posts communicate my thoughts.

[jakell]

Everyone reading this board is aware of Critical Race Theory.

TBH, I'm not, but I can have a good guess of what it entails. It sounds to me like another attempt to academicise something that has been out in the wild for a long time in order to seem to get to grasp with it whilst at the same time keeping a safe distance.
It's academics speaking to each other in their own language, and another reason why the far-right are creatively laughing at the Left and are constructing their own platforms that seem to actually speak to people.

Also looking forward to AD's next outing of 'queer theory', which he has mentioned a fair bit, but not really addressed yet. It seems from the same stable.

[Searcher08]

Altho the kiwis will probably ride out whatever happens for as long as anybody.

That's because they have a polyamorous relationship with sheep.

[Searcher08]

In Rome, at some points in time anyway, slaves had a pathway to citizenship.

So even Rome - the most violent and brutal empire of its time - enabled slaves to become citizens, albeit in remarkable circumstances.

Slavery in Rome was not based on "race" skin colour. It was based on poverty and your political relationship to the Roman Empire. If you fought them and didn't submit or were poor you were more likely to end up a slave (or dead). Most Ottoman slavery was carried out to provide bodies for the mind control cult they drew their elite warriors and much of the empires admin staff from. This was not based on race either but did originate in the capture of prisoners during religious conflicts.

Throughout history the primary cause of slavery was being on the losing side of a military conflict or poverty.

No other system of slavery balked at enslaving people with the same skin colour the way the European colonies in the Americas did. Especially in the US.

It certainly seems that slavery based on race was a uniquely (north and south) American institution that continues today as America does what it can to re institute black slavery via over policing and private prisons.

Except if they were Irish.
There was not a lot of balking that happened over *their* skin colour.
Slad has posted lots of stuff about Irish slavery in the West Indies and America here.
It provides the counter-example to AD's thesis.

Similarly, in Mauritania...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Mauritania
Slavery in Mauritania

Slavery in Mauritania has been called "deeply rooted" in the structure of Mauritanian society, and "closely tied" to the ethnic composition of the country.[1]

In 1981, Mauritania became the last country in the world to abolish slavery,[2] when a presidential decree abolished the practice. However, no criminal laws were passed to enforce the ban.[2][3][4] In 2007, "under international pressure", the government passed a law allowing slaveholders to be prosecuted.[2] Despite this, the number of slaves in the country has been estimated by the organization SOS Slavery to be up to 600,000 (or 17% of the population),[5] and by Global Slavery Index to be at least 140,000 (or 4% of the population).[2] Sociologist Kevin Bales and Global Slavery Index estimate that Mauritania has the highest proportion of people in slavery of any country in the world.[6][7] While other countries in the region have people in "slavelike conditions", the situation in Mauritania is "unusually severe", according to African history professor Bruce Hall.[2]

The position of the government of Mauritania is that slavery is "totally finished ... All people are free",[8] and talk of it "suggests manipulation by the West, an act of enmity toward Islam."[2]

[Joe Hillshoist]

Altho the kiwis will probably ride out whatever happens for as long as anybody.

That's because they have a polyamorous relationship with sheep.

I can't believe there are no sheep smileys. That genuinely made me laugh out loud. Cheers.

[Joe Hillshoist]

In Rome, at some points in time anyway, slaves had a pathway to citizenship.

So even Rome - the most violent and brutal empire of its time - enabled slaves to become citizens, albeit in remarkable circumstances.

Slavery in Rome was not based on "race" skin colour. It was based on poverty and your political relationship to the Roman Empire. If you fought them and didn't submit or were poor you were more likely to end up a slave (or dead). Most Ottoman slavery was carried out to provide bodies for the mind control cult they drew their elite warriors and much of the empires admin staff from. This was not based on race either but did originate in the capture of prisoners during religious conflicts.

Throughout history the primary cause of slavery was being on the losing side of a military conflict or poverty.

No other system of slavery balked at enslaving people with the same skin colour the way the European colonies in the Americas did. Especially in the US.

It certainly seems that slavery based on race was a uniquely (north and south) American institution that continues today as America does what it can to re institute black slavery via over policing and private prisons.

Except if they were Irish.
There was not a lot of balking that happened over *their* skin colour.
Slad has posted lots of stuff about Irish slavery in the West Indies and America here.
It provides the counter-example to AD's thesis.

Similarly, in Mauritania...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Mauritania
Slavery in Mauritania

Slavery in Mauritania has been called "deeply rooted" in the structure of Mauritanian society, and "closely tied" to the ethnic composition of the country.[1]

In 1981, Mauritania became the last country in the world to abolish slavery,[2] when a presidential decree abolished the practice. However, no criminal laws were passed to enforce the ban.[2][3][4] In 2007, "under international pressure", the government passed a law allowing slaveholders to be prosecuted.[2] Despite this, the number of slaves in the country has been estimated by the organization SOS Slavery to be up to 600,000 (or 17% of the population),[5] and by Global Slavery Index to be at least 140,000 (or 4% of the population).[2] Sociologist Kevin Bales and Global Slavery Index estimate that Mauritania has the highest proportion of people in slavery of any country in the world.[6][7] While other countries in the region have people in "slavelike conditions", the situation in Mauritania is "unusually severe", according to African history professor Bruce Hall.[2]

The position of the government of Mauritania is that slavery is "totally finished ... All people are free",[8] and talk of it "suggests manipulation by the West, an act of enmity toward Islam."[2]

I have Irish ancestors who were transported to Van Dieman's Land. What happened to them was terrible. From what i understand that is what happened in America and the Windies as well. But those people weren't slaves, even tho they almost were. If they had kids their kids were free. None the less there was real anti irish racism in Australia. Maybe not as bad as anti black racism but only cos it longer to recognise another white skinned person wasn't a wasp.

Happy to be corrected if you be bothered showing me the links.