Angry White People

[Joe Hillshoist]

Seems like focusing on white people might not be the best solution to addressing racism, based on that little clusterfuck. Crackers are out here really trying to be post-Racial. Don't interrupt the process.

Lets re consider that after a survey asking crackers how important other people's race is to various sense's of identity.

[Joe Hillshoist]

My perception is that the term "racism" in this century is mostly not used about "hate" but about a serious of conflicts over who should have the authority to constitute an "ethnicity" or at times a broader identity, inevitably shading into matters like how kinship and filiation and their relationship to the state, religion etc. or epistemic issues related to history and its transmission, etc.

Many groups and individuals are going to express feelings besides "hate" in relation to these issues. What's more, "victimhood" is not the only expression of identity or difference in play in the world today - readings of these discussions that simply seek to correct a balance of victimhood, in one way or another, are not attentive to potential aspects of the future that are not solely tragic.

Here’s the thing: I grew up here in Fort Greene. I grew up here in New York. It’s changed. And why does it take an influx of white New Yorkers in the south Bronx, in Harlem, in Bed Stuy, in Crown Heights for the facilities to get better?

[backtoiam]

Lets re consider that after a survey asking crackers how important other people's race is to various sense's of identity.

Really? Maybe you care more than the crackers?

[Joe Hillshoist]

Lets re consider that after a survey asking crackers how important other people's race is to various sense's of identity.

Really? Maybe you care more than the crackers?

In case you didn't notice what i suggested is exactly what the OKCupid data does. Why don't you look at it and see who cares about what.

[jakell]

I had trouble getting my head around the OKCupid piece, but the second YouGov one sort of jumped out at me (the first one seemed very badly phrased and focused).
Going by those proportions, it seems that White Nationalists have got a lot of work to do and can only gaze enviously upon the same figures for blacks. I suspect though that there is a fair amount of virtue signalling present in the white responses, something that is pretty hard to measure.

Hopefully we'll get back around to Benjamin Zephaniah's piece at some point. I think it deserves some attention.

[Sounder]

Wombaticus Rex » Wed Mar 02, 2016 11:31 am wrote:

Seems like focusing on white people might not be the best solution to addressing racism, based on that little clusterfuck. Crackers are out here really trying to be post-Racial. Don't interrupt the process.

General Patton wrote...
Whoa whoa hold up.

We need to address racism by whites with just as much, if not with more prejudice than other racial groups. White racists need to be named and shamed. And their tweets should be broadcast nationwide and put in nationally circulated newspapers. And get them fired from their jobs, email campaigns work well for that.

If you see something say something.

There's no reason to stop now that we've almost won.

What you mention General Patton is part of the process. (Although I don't personally go for those methods and prefer more subtle social signaling.)

I work in the trades, where there has been a fair bit of racism on display.

But, over time I have seen guys become much more careful in expressing those kind of sentiments and see non-racists grow in influence in that scene. I think it's like Nordic said in reference to racists in LA. Where he said it hard to be racist in LA because it would take too much energy.

Consciousness changes.

[FourthBase]

The soft pale kids in sociology classes, learning about Angry White People?

Great punchline for an epic post.

[Sounder]

I would love to see it Fourth Base, preferably not in the format of a rant.

[FourthBase]

I would love to see it Fourth Base, preferably not in the format of a rant.

You already saw it, above.

I'm talking about Wombat's own epic post.

[Joe Hillshoist]

I had trouble getting my head around the OKCupid piece, but the second YouGov one sort of jumped out at me (the first one seemed very badly phrased and focused).
Going by those proportions, it seems that White Nationalists have got a lot of work to do and can only gaze enviously upon the same figures for blacks. I suspect though that there is a fair amount of virtue signalling present in the white responses, something that is pretty hard to measure.

Hopefully we'll get back around to Benjamin Zephaniah's piece at some point. I think it deserves some attention.

I think we should follow this track for a while. The Op isn't going anywhere. From where I sit we are starting to examine "white privilege" or institultionalised racism. If you want to run away from that that's your decision i spose.

Its interesting that a couple of things are coming into focus. Spike Lee's rant reflects the value placed on families wrt race quite starkly. Gentrification means spending on services for a start.

Given black women have the lowest fuckability rating on Ok Cupid, and these things ultimately reflect breeding choices; and given the value placed on black communities before and after "gentrification" we can see a pattern developing. Black women consistantly dominate athletic competition and when all other things are equal show no disadvantage in intellectual or cultural pursuits there is no genetic reason to avoid breeding.

So it must reflect a cultural bias of some sort.

If you'd rather avoid that fine.

Lets look at the YouGov data that caught your eye instead. Obviously the first set shows some pretty strong basis for institutional racism and you have trouble with that sort of thing.

So we'll look at the second.

One the face it of it it seems black people are the most belligerent about race. Hispanic people are pretty uppity about it too but whitey is way cool. Because whites are more evolved they know race isn't as big a deal as it seems.

Black people on the other hand. It seems black people need to make up for something. Why be proud of something essentially out of your control - your genes? Isn't it better to focus on achievements in the real world.

What do you think jackell? Maybe its an inherent character flaw. Maybe the need to boost race is really a reflection of their inherently flawed nature. It might explain why they seem to be leaners not lifters. That vocal pride makes up for real pride in actual achievement. After all the rest of society is always carrying them. Proportionally who pays the most tax? Not black people. They are a net drain on the economy. Maybe the false pride hides something deeper. A real shame at their inability to match it with everyone else. After all in the last 300 years its pretty clear who contributed the most to America. Even the Hispanics built nations in North America. Its no wonder they promote so much fuss about white nationalism. Its a distraction. Wouldn't you agree? I guess those that talk about it the most do it the least.

[jakell]

I had trouble getting my head around the OKCupid piece, but the second YouGov one sort of jumped out at me (the first one seemed very badly phrased and focused).
Going by those proportions, it seems that White Nationalists have got a lot of work to do and can only gaze enviously upon the same figures for blacks. I suspect though that there is a fair amount of virtue signalling present in the white responses, something that is pretty hard to measure.

Hopefully we'll get back around to Benjamin Zephaniah's piece at some point. I think it deserves some attention.

I think we should follow this track for a while. The Op isn't going anywhere. From where I sit we are starting to examine "white privilege" or institultionalised racism. If you want to run away from that that's your decision i spose.

Granted is is pretty parochial, and I very likely relate to the specifics more that most here. That NF documentary provides some more context for the earlier parts, and I have some thoughts on the later bits that can wait, like you said.. it's not going anywhere

Its interesting that a couple of things are coming into focus. Spike Lee's rant reflects the value placed on families wrt race quite starkly. Gentrification means spending on services for a start.

Given black women have the lowest fuckability rating on Ok Cupid, and these things ultimately reflect breeding choices; and given the value placed on black communities before and after "gentrification" we can see a pattern developing. Black women consistantly dominate athletic competition and when all other things are equal show no disadvantage in intellectual or cultural pursuits there is no genetic reason to avoid breeding.

So it must reflect a cultural bias of some sort.

If you'd rather avoid that fine.

Lets look at the YouGov data that caught your eye instead. Obviously the first set shows some pretty strong basis for institutional racism and you have trouble with that sort of thing.

So we'll look at the second.

One the face it of it it seems black people are the most belligerent about race. Hispanic people are pretty uppity about it too but whitey is way cool. Because whites are more evolved they know race isn't as big a deal as it seems.

Black people on the other hand. It seems black people need to make up for something. Why be proud of something essentially out of your control - your genes? Isn't it better to focus on achievements in the real world.

What do you think jackell? Maybe its an inherent character flaw. Maybe the need to boost race is really a reflection of their inherently flawed nature. It might explain why they seem to be leaners not lifters. That vocal pride makes up for real pride in actual achievement. After all the rest of society is always carrying them. Proportionally who pays the most tax? Not black people. They are a net drain on the economy. Maybe the false pride hides something deeper. A real shame at their inability to match it with everyone else. After all in the last 300 years its pretty clear who contributed the most to America. Even the Hispanics built nations in North America. Its no wonder they promote so much fuss about white nationalism. Its a distraction. Wouldn't you agree? I guess those that talk about it the most do it the least.

With inserted concepts like 'belligerence', and value judgements like 'uppity' and 'too cool', it seems to me that you are complicating the issue, these don't seem to be present in the data.

If I may borrow some cooler thinking on the subject from WN's (I'm sure there are other expressions of this, but theirs seems the most uncluttered), it could be said that the data here indicates that blacks tend more to be 'race realists', and that others have modified their outward expressions somewhat (virtue signalling, or just plain fear of the thought police), whites being the biggest pussies.
This is actually also an attempt at levelling racial sensibility, but coming from a different direction.

[Karmamatterz]

Given black women have the lowest fuckability rating on Ok Cupid, and these things ultimately reflect breeding choices

Not that sex is major part of this discussion, but fuckability is 100% about desire. Body type (fat, skinny, muscular etc..) how a person carries themselves in body language. Desire can be influenced by skin and hair color as well. If someone desires another person for sex what has that got to do with politics and racial issues? Maybe those online profiles are horribly written and the person is just flat out not attractive to the audience of that website. Big deal.

[tapitsbo]

I had trouble getting my head around the OKCupid piece, but the second YouGov one sort of jumped out at me (the first one seemed very badly phrased and focused).
Going by those proportions, it seems that White Nationalists have got a lot of work to do and can only gaze enviously upon the same figures for blacks. I suspect though that there is a fair amount of virtue signalling present in the white responses, something that is pretty hard to measure.

Hopefully we'll get back around to Benjamin Zephaniah's piece at some point. I think it deserves some attention.

I think we should follow this track for a while. The Op isn't going anywhere. From where I sit we are starting to examine "white privilege" or institultionalised racism. If you want to run away from that that's your decision i spose.

Granted is is pretty parochial, and I very likely relate to the specifics more that most here. That NF documentary provides some more context for the earlier parts, and I have some thoughts on the later bits that can wait, like you said.. it's not going anywhere

Its interesting that a couple of things are coming into focus. Spike Lee's rant reflects the value placed on families wrt race quite starkly. Gentrification means spending on services for a start.

Given black women have the lowest fuckability rating on Ok Cupid, and these things ultimately reflect breeding choices; and given the value placed on black communities before and after "gentrification" we can see a pattern developing. Black women consistantly dominate athletic competition and when all other things are equal show no disadvantage in intellectual or cultural pursuits there is no genetic reason to avoid breeding.

So it must reflect a cultural bias of some sort.

If you'd rather avoid that fine.

Lets look at the YouGov data that caught your eye instead. Obviously the first set shows some pretty strong basis for institutional racism and you have trouble with that sort of thing.

So we'll look at the second.

One the face it of it it seems black people are the most belligerent about race. Hispanic people are pretty uppity about it too but whitey is way cool. Because whites are more evolved they know race isn't as big a deal as it seems.

Black people on the other hand. It seems black people need to make up for something. Why be proud of something essentially out of your control - your genes? Isn't it better to focus on achievements in the real world.

What do you think jackell? Maybe its an inherent character flaw. Maybe the need to boost race is really a reflection of their inherently flawed nature. It might explain why they seem to be leaners not lifters. That vocal pride makes up for real pride in actual achievement. After all the rest of society is always carrying them. Proportionally who pays the most tax? Not black people. They are a net drain on the economy. Maybe the false pride hides something deeper. A real shame at their inability to match it with everyone else. After all in the last 300 years its pretty clear who contributed the most to America. Even the Hispanics built nations in North America. Its no wonder they promote so much fuss about white nationalism. Its a distraction. Wouldn't you agree? I guess those that talk about it the most do it the least.

With inserted concepts like 'belligerence', and value judgements like 'uppity' and 'too cool', it seems to me that you are complicating the issue, these don't seem to be present in the data.

If I may borrow some cooler thinking on the subject from WN's (I'm sure there are other expressions of this, but theirs seems the most uncluttered), it could be said that the data here indicates that blacks tend more to be 'race realists', and that others have modified their outward expressions somewhat (virtue signalling, or just plain fear of the thought police), whites being the biggest pussies.
This is actually also an attempt at levelling racial sensibility, but coming from a different direction.

Critical Race Theory and similar schools of thought are often allied to broad identity groups that may or may not practice some measure of "race realism" (something which itself is often a very questionable practice). What is more than clear is that these groups often outwardly disavow the basis of "race" to some extent or characterize it as colonialist imposition, etc.

I think you'll find scanty interest in collaboration on the sort of "levelling" you're talking about here as most people certainly don't want to collaborate with so-called "White Nationalists" for a variety of reasons that may or may not include include skepticism about what you call "race realism".

What we're left with is the question over who has authority over identity, and whether collaboration or dialogue is possible. Since you and Joe are talking about blacks and whites, I find it interesting that most blacks and whites are in agreement about denying this authority to somebody like Rachel Dolezal.

In my opinion, in practice it is the likes of American Dream, rather than self-identified "white nationalists", who have more influence and authority over "whiteness" in contemporary North America. There is a parallel here to e.g. a contruct of "blackness" that is imposed from outside. Obviously this is not an exact parallel but that is simply for fodder for discussion.

[jakell]

I had trouble getting my head around the OKCupid piece, but the second YouGov one sort of jumped out at me (the first one seemed very badly phrased and focused).
Going by those proportions, it seems that White Nationalists have got a lot of work to do and can only gaze enviously upon the same figures for blacks. I suspect though that there is a fair amount of virtue signalling present in the white responses, something that is pretty hard to measure.

Hopefully we'll get back around to Benjamin Zephaniah's piece at some point. I think it deserves some attention.

I think we should follow this track for a while. The Op isn't going anywhere. From where I sit we are starting to examine "white privilege" or institultionalised racism. If you want to run away from that that's your decision i spose.

Granted is is pretty parochial, and I very likely relate to the specifics more that most here. That NF documentary provides some more context for the earlier parts, and I have some thoughts on the later bits that can wait, like you said.. it's not going anywhere

Its interesting that a couple of things are coming into focus. Spike Lee's rant reflects the value placed on families wrt race quite starkly. Gentrification means spending on services for a start.

Given black women have the lowest fuckability rating on Ok Cupid, and these things ultimately reflect breeding choices; and given the value placed on black communities before and after "gentrification" we can see a pattern developing. Black women consistantly dominate athletic competition and when all other things are equal show no disadvantage in intellectual or cultural pursuits there is no genetic reason to avoid breeding.

So it must reflect a cultural bias of some sort.

If you'd rather avoid that fine.

Lets look at the YouGov data that caught your eye instead. Obviously the first set shows some pretty strong basis for institutional racism and you have trouble with that sort of thing.

So we'll look at the second.

One the face it of it it seems black people are the most belligerent about race. Hispanic people are pretty uppity about it too but whitey is way cool. Because whites are more evolved they know race isn't as big a deal as it seems.

Black people on the other hand. It seems black people need to make up for something. Why be proud of something essentially out of your control - your genes? Isn't it better to focus on achievements in the real world.

What do you think jackell? Maybe its an inherent character flaw. Maybe the need to boost race is really a reflection of their inherently flawed nature. It might explain why they seem to be leaners not lifters. That vocal pride makes up for real pride in actual achievement. After all the rest of society is always carrying them. Proportionally who pays the most tax? Not black people. They are a net drain on the economy. Maybe the false pride hides something deeper. A real shame at their inability to match it with everyone else. After all in the last 300 years its pretty clear who contributed the most to America. Even the Hispanics built nations in North America. Its no wonder they promote so much fuss about white nationalism. Its a distraction. Wouldn't you agree? I guess those that talk about it the most do it the least.

With inserted concepts like 'belligerence', and value judgements like 'uppity' and 'too cool', it seems to me that you are complicating the issue, these don't seem to be present in the data.

If I may borrow some cooler thinking on the subject from WN's (I'm sure there are other expressions of this, but theirs seems the most uncluttered), it could be said that the data here indicates that blacks tend more to be 'race realists', and that others have modified their outward expressions somewhat (virtue signalling, or just plain fear of the thought police), whites being the biggest pussies.
This is actually also an attempt at levelling racial sensibility, but coming from a different direction.

Critical Race Theory and similar schools of thought are often allied to broad identity groups that may or may not practice some measure of "race realism" (something which itself is often a very questionable practice). What is more than clear is that these groups often outwardly disavow the basis of "race" to some extent or characterize it as colonialist imposition, etc.

I think you'll find scanty interest in the sort of "levelling" you're talking about here as most people certainly don't want to collaborate with so-called "White Nationalists" for a variety of reasons that may or may not include include skepticism about what you call "race realism".

What we're left with is the question over who has authority over identity. Since you and Joe are talking about blacks and whites, I find it interesting that most blacks and whites are in agreement about denying this authority to somebody like Rachel Dolezal.

In my opinion, in practice it is the likes of American Dream, rather than self-identified "white nationalists", who have more influence and authority over "whiteness" in contemporary North America. There is a parallel here to e.g. a contruct of "blackness" that is imposed from outside. Obviously this is not an exact parallel but that is simply for fodder for discussion.

There's no collaboration with WN's, I just used them to describe that approach**, I also borrow the fairly recent phrase 'race realism' from them, hence my use of inverted commas. to me it seems a useful phrase and a useful approach that could have come from anywhere.
It's noticable that progressive types have difficulty talking about race and usually emotion gets in the way of discourse (witness my recent Rotherham remark, but it happens all over the place), and ironically, even though I am often in disagreement with them, it's easier to talk to WN's about it.

The 'levelling' I refer to is that of finding a parity between the black and white attitudes described by the statistics. The progressive approach is to prefer that provided by whites, but alternatively, we could see that the one provided by black as the more 'human', response, and the white attitudes as the skewed one ( of which I speculated on possible reasons)


** actually, it would be more accurate to use 'alt-right', but as that's a recent phenomenon that I'm not sure has any solidity yet, I'm sticking with the older, broader category of WN for now' even though it does tend to invoke the Nazis etc etc in some minds).

[tapitsbo]

I don't think that many progressives will object to the attitude provided by blacks when it is provided by blacks, indeed they will feel it is justified in context. I'm not sure that I am in a position to disagree with them, frankly.

The level of abstraction you are introducing will be foreign to a lot of people discussing these topics.

I'm also not sure how to interpret Joe's remarks about OKCupid data. Is he suggesting some sort of corrective action, and what form would this take?