We can agree that as a summary of your stated views it is highly accurate, and for this admission you have my thanks.
There's a spectrum from wanting to get along to open hostility and once you go a certain ways along it you can expect pushback. "Oh those embarrassing white people who won't just roll over and die so my vision of historical progress can be validated and I don't have to feel so embarrassed".
Yes, these are exactly the stakes: everyone who is not white to your eyes, including the race traitors in the midst of your (imaginary) white nation, are working toward the death of white people as such. That is what black people are doing when they meet on their own to discuss racism. Any "white" response to this threat is understandable.
It's interesting that you think I feel everyone can get along - I don't. But who are white progressives really helping, anyways? Besides making themselves money as academics on the basis of other people's victimhood.
That is ignorant in too many ways to count, such as the equivalence of "white progressives" with "academics." As for the latter, do you have any idea what academics make, or how? 59% are adjuncts, with employment conditions a cut above the gastronomy sector. Making controversial statements (or even statements that fucked-up crackers such as yourself consider "controversial") is dangerous to them. And yet many often go ahead and do it anyway, for no reason other than that believe what they say -- just like you, supposedly.
As for the tenured minority, they're already as high as they can go. All tenure means is they can speak with a relative lack of fear. By making "controversial" statements they don't rise any further, or sell more books (since barely anyone sells books, with exceptions numbering maybe 1 in 400), or get a bonus for making PR for the univesity. None of that. Perhaps you are thinking of the income models enjoyed by media pundits, like the Glenn Beck whom you sound just like, or by whores pimping PR in the corporate sector, or by the fake academics with the private think tanks.
It is of course also incredibly ignorant with respect to what drives people to organize against racism, as if predatory banking, slumlords and gentrification, low wages, pervasive discrimination, the war on drugs, differential justice, mass incarceration and frequent policing-by-murder would go ignored by the Freedmen, if only those white liberal academics and outside agitators would stop putting ideas in their heads!
As to AD's comment, note that since the start of this thread i've been arguing against the white nationalist conceit that whites need their own state in North America.
That's mighty white of you, tapitsbo. (And never mind that "whites" have their own states, all of them, by property ownership.) Just for the record, I will add that I'm totally against cannibalism.
I have never been to a meeting of white people in my life.
Excuse me, do you qualify as what in this society is called a white person? Then certainly you are lying, or engaging in an incredible act of self-delusion. I suppose you mean you have never been to an meeting of white supremacists who meet with the explicit purpose of advancing white supremacy? Such a shame you are now gradually being forced to do that by reading about uppity black students in Toronto!
This forum was a big part of making me think about this stuff though. I used to read AD's copy and pastes in complete earnest not questioning a word. Now obviously I have my doubts about the narrative.
Sure, AD provoked you into your new racist consciousness. By the way, I'm sure he's really raking it in, posting articles here to encourage others' victimhood. It's a great fucking business model.