I Am the Least Racist Person You Know

[Speaker to Animals]

I disagree that the solution is to act just like them.

Calling for a white flavored racism to combat black flavored racism is dumb.

It's not racism to look out for your self-interest.

Racism is Congressman Guiterrez trying to colonize America and wipe out white people. Saying, hey guys, it's not really in our interests to be colonized by Mexicans is not racism.

Depends on how you do it.

Rejecting Martin and siding with Malcolm is the wrong way to go.

Literally the only people who side with Martin right now are counter-signaling whites. It's an incoherent and irrational ideology.

There is nothing wrong with people organizing around their racial interests. It's not wrong when blacks do it and it's not wrong when whites do it. What's wrong is when you use a position of power to discriminate and punish entire racial groups unjustly for the benefit of your own (i.e. what is happening against whites across the board right now).

[SuburbanFarmer]

Calling for a white flavored racism to combat black flavored racism is dumb.

Wisdom.

[Okeefenokee]

Balkanize my shit right up then, fam.

That'll be fun.

[DBTrek]

Calling for a white flavored racism to combat black flavored racism is dumb.

Wisdom.

Seems like an argument that was made last month in some thread or another.

Good to see late converts spontaneously reaching enlightenment.

[Okeefenokee]

Calling for a white flavored racism to combat black flavored racism is dumb.

Wisdom.

Seems like an argument that was made last month in some thread or another.

Good to see late converts spontaneously reaching enlightenment.

My wife says to tell you thanks for bringing me around, because living with a white nationalist was hell on her before you came around.

[DBTrek]

Glad I could help, buddy.
I figured it might have been a personal spat which had you thinking about deporting your family. We’ve all been there. My family is largely Californian so I know the temptation.
Lulz.

[Okeefenokee]

I think the thread you're talking about was the one where someone like Penner or Kath trotted out that dumb idea that America was always a multicultural nation of immigrants, and was never in favor of being white.

Then,

I was at the gym improving myself for the past three hours, so forgive me for not laying down some facts earlier before the weaponized lunacy picked up pace in this thread..

It was disputed that the European immigrants to America were integrated under the auspices of white identity. These people seem to believe that this Multi-Cult extends back into history. If that is the case, then explain the following points:

(A) Why were the first nations beaten to shit and physically removed to reservations if this nation was not predicated upon and built for white identity?

(B) Why were Africans enslaved and considered nothing more than talking farm chattel by the Supreme Court if this was a multicultural wonderland?

(C) Why did we have strict miscegenation laws if white identity was not a thing, was enforced by law, and the government was serious about protecting it?

(D) Addendum to (C): why did there exist no such laws for Mexicans, blacks, or natives?

(E) Why did we have strict segregation laws and policies that kept minorities out of positions of power and even out of jobs and unions until the 1960s if this was a multicultural and multiethnic country?

(F) Do any of you even read history books at all?? Why am I wasting my time with this level of stupid?

Accepting that all that shit happened is not the same thing as defending it.

It's going back to the idea of Anglo-Saxon vs Celt rather than how it's all been boiled down to just white.

I'm still not getting this...

Is the premise that America was always a white ethno state (like Germany)... and it was a mistake allowing it to become a "multiethnic" state... and that this is the root of American instablilty?

Is that the premise?

In other words - America would have been better not abolishing slavery and not rolling back Jim Crow... and not allowing non-white immigration.

I just want to understand the competing arguments here....

None of them are my positions, so I don't want to get them wrong, but old school racial identity didn't have as much to do with being white as much as it did what kind of white.

Even though you might say white America, you knew that didn't mean that scots and brits were equal simply by both being white.

That doesn't really mean much to most people today. It's become simply skin color, where all white people are just white people, unlike the past. So the idea of a white ethno state would include all white people under today's definition, but only germans, or only poles, under the old definition.

So the argument was about which kind of white ethno state you mean when you talk about creating one today. Smitty said germans only (including the brits in with them I assume). Speaker said everyone. I think Capps was germans only also.

[Okeefenokee]

I'm not all that interested in it, though. Would be cooler if we were talking about a new crusade or something. Something where I could play too.

[clubgop]

Calling for a white flavored racism to combat black flavored racism is dumb.

Wisdom.

He says while advocating for open borders.

[DrYouth]

There is nothing wrong with people organizing around their racial interests. It's not wrong when blacks do it and it's not wrong when whites do it. What's wrong is when you use a position of power to discriminate and punish entire racial groups unjustly for the benefit of your own (i.e. what is happening against whites across the board right now).

What's happening to whites right now is that whites in a position of power are discriminating against whites.
Which, I have to admit... is sort of messed up.

Electing Trump was a reaction to that scenario.