Is it ok to be proud to be white?

[Angilion]

"I'm not white and therefore my intentions are obviously good and I have no agenda of my own...." seems to be the default narrative in the media these days!

I think we should arrange a "Men's March", "Pro-British" or a "Straight Pride Parade"! It's weird how these terms would likely be considered negative, offensive and discriminatory whereas the opposite is somehow considered 'progressive'and actively encouraged?

It's not weird, sadly. All ideologies of irrational prejudice work the same way, treating the same things as opposites depending on which group identity they assign to the people doing them. To a pro-white racist, white pride is positive and black pride is negative. To a pro-black racist, black pride is positive and white pride is negative. To a pro-male sexist, male pride is postive and female pride is negative. To a pro-female sexist, female pride is positive and male pride is negative. Etc, etc, ad nauseam.

The only significant difference with modern fashionable irrational prejudice is that it's more politically skilled and so it seeks to destroy the concepts it opposes by corrupting them rather than by opposing them honestly. As a result of the tactic, it's had a lot more success than honest irrational prejudice. Concepts such as equality, tolerance, diversity and liberalism have been almost completely corrupted and destroyed by feminism and the "progressive" left and now mean pretty much the opposite of their true meaning. It's downright Orwellian - Minitru would be proud of that doubleplusgood blackwhite Newspeak. It greatly helps those bigots promote the irrational prejudice and discrimination they love so much. It gives them a false impression of wider support. It gives them a pretence of a moral high ground from which they can attack people in favour of actual equality, etc, and lie about them. It robs people in favour of actual equality, etc, of the words to express their views or even to think about them since we think in words. It's a politically brilliant move. Ethically disgusting and vile, but politically brilliant. They've even succeeding in having irrational prejudice and discrimination labelled as "progressive" when in fact it's obviously extremely regressive. They're like a virus, infecting a cell and corrupting it into a factory to manufacture more of the virus while using it to hide from the host's immune system. They are the Ebola of equality, tolerance, diversity, liberalism, progress and pretty much everything good.

 

[James_Duncan_Smith]

Ah, the old "both sides are at fault" chestnut! This may sound a bit harsh but the idea that progressivism (as it is generally expressed in the West) is anywhere near Marxism is delusional. And I don't use the word "delusional" as an exaggeration of speech, what I'm saying is your view is in direct contradiction with reality, which makes it a construct of imagination and paranoia. What you call "Marxism", along with "Cultural Marxism" and other similar expressions, essentially is nothing more than a conservative meme which is used to attack any opposing views. Most modern progressives today, particularly those in the US and UK, are actually left-Libertarians. Not only do they not care about Marxism but they also don't even know much about it. The USSR and its satellites pushed a type of Marxism (on paper) but considering how it functioned in real life, Communism was a mix of nationalism and Eastern European Feudalism and thus even more distant from progressivism. If you wish to educate yourself on the subject, feel free to start here.

The rise of supremacist views has two main elements. The Internet (and social media as you guessed) and the massive erosion of the quality of life for unskilled/low skilled workers. The latter feel left behind, they are frustrated and they often compete with migrants or minorities for low paying jobs and government aid. The Internet made it easy to find and coordinate with those who share their issues, as well as making it easy for extremists to propagate their views.

The whole thing has nothing to do with Nazis vs Marxists.

What about people who are not low skilled? Or are you trying to imply only low ranks vote for such things?

 

[Zethor]

It's not weird, sadly. All ideologies of irrational prejudice work the same way, treating the same things as opposites depending on which group identity they assign to the people doing them. To a pro-white racist, white pride is positive and black pride is negative. To a pro-black racist, black pride is positive and white pride is negative. To a pro-male sexist, male pride is postive and female pride is negative. To a pro-female sexist, female pride is positive and male pride is negative. Etc, etc, ad nauseam.

No it's not the same, why are you 'skillfully' avoiding the elephant in the room? Write pride is a well known hate slogan, closely associated to nazis. Black/Gay/etc. pride are not.

The only significant difference with modern fashionable irrational prejudice is that it's more politically skilled and so it seeks to destroy the concepts it opposes by corrupting them rather than by opposing them honestly. As a result of the tactic, it's had a lot more success than honest irrational prejudice. Concepts such as equality, tolerance, diversity and liberalism have been almost completely corrupted and destroyed by feminism and the "progressive" left and now mean pretty much the opposite of their true meaning. It's downright Orwellian - Minitru would be proud of that doubleplusgood blackwhite Newspeak. It greatly helps those bigots promote the irrational prejudice and discrimination they love so much. It gives them a false impression of wider support. It gives them a pretence of a moral high ground from which they can attack people in favour of actual equality, etc, and lie about them. It robs people in favour of actual equality, etc, of the words to express their views or even to think about them since we think in words. It's a politically brilliant move. Ethically disgusting and vile, but politically brilliant. They've even succeeding in having irrational prejudice and discrimination labelled as "progressive" when in fact it's obviously extremely regressive. They're like a virus, infecting a cell and corrupting it into a factory to manufacture more of the virus while using it to hide from the host's immune system. They are the Ebola of equality, tolerance, diversity, liberalism, progress and pretty much everything good.

Can you provide some examples of these Orwellian, regressive views you speak speak of?

What about people who are not low skilled? Or are you trying to imply only low ranks vote for such things?

They are more likely to vote for such things, on average.

 

[malachi]

These days, its more of an advantage to be an immigrant in the UK. You get every benefit etc given to you!

Not from my experience!

 

[h4rm0ny]

Who is alive that runs a slave trade then?

Saudi Arabia, Qatar, wealthy Arabs and Sunni Muslim Berbers in Libya...

 

[h4rm0ny]

I’m not proud of being white. It’s just a skin colour.

I am proud of my country though. The history and pageantry of England, the beauty of our countryside and coastlines, the spirit of our citizens and the bravery of the soldiers. I’m also proud of our food. Some people think it’s boring, but whoever decided to put sausages in Yorkshire pudding is ******* culinary genius to match Albert Roux!

There’s lots to be proud of in this country, despite what the people who constantly want to mudsling throw at it, but with regards to the subject, no, there’s absolutely no point in being proud of something about your anatomy that you cannot control. It’s like being proud of having two lungs. Totally pointless.

This pretty much sums it up. Racial pride is a natural reaction to being attacked for one's race. Whether that be Black, White, whatever. Currently there's a lot of negativity directed at White people in academia, the media, whatever. That aids White Supremacists who use it to push a narrative of racial supremacy. But frankly, such people are a near powerless fringe. One can be proud of one's heritage without being against others who do not share it, I think. My views are well-known on this forum: I'll take a person of any colour who shares my values over a person who shares my skin colour but opposes them. I believe the majority here would agree, whichever side of the debate they're on. I could probably get even our resident Chris Wilson to agree with that.

 

[h4rm0ny]

Are you trying to claim white privilege doesn’t exist?

I call it statistical noise and say that undue attention on the idea of it increases racial tension and prejudice. And I'm very confidant in that.

 

[Efour]

White privilege exists in Europe the same way Black or Yellow, for the use of a better adjective, privilege exists in Africa or Asia.
Blending in, being part of the biggest group is always an advantage. Its basic animal existence. Its safety in numbers, flocks, and shoals.
When you push it with an agenda and political goals it becomes problematic.

 

[Angilion]

No it's not the same, why are you 'skillfully' avoiding the elephant in the room? Write pride is a well known hate slogan, closely associated to nazis. Black/Gay/etc. pride are not.

It has always been the case that the same irrational prejudice is fashionable when directed against some groups and unfashionable when directed against others. There is no elephant in the room, only the age old pretence that the same thing is different when the "right" group identity does it. It isn't.

Can you provide some examples of these Orwellian, regressive views you speak speak of?

Anything labelled "progressive". Of course, whether irrational prejudice and discrimination is considered progressive or regressive depends solely on whether or not a person agrees with it.

One example at random:

Further back in the past, it was legal to prevent a person from becoming an MP solely on the basis that they were the "wrong" sex.
The law was then changed to make it illegal to do so.
The law was the changed to make it legal again.

That change, partially disenfranchising people solely because of their sex, is labelled "equality", "diversity", "liberal" and suchlike. Straight out of Minitru from 1984, i.e. Orwellian in that way. I consider an increase in sexism to be regressive. People who like sexism consider it to be progressive.

The general increase in the power of biological group identity ideology. Same as above.

There has also been a sharp decrease in tolerance, with increasing force (both social and legal) being used to suppress dissent. That increase in authoritarianism and compelled obedience isn't at 1984 levels yet, but it's heading in that direction. Somewhat Orwellian in that way, but I was referred explicitly to the use of language when I described the ideology as "Orwellian". .

 

[jonneymendoza]

Or does that automatically make you racist?

I do not think that this would ever be acceptable for a white person to say. What do you think?

why?

does it matter? you should be proud of tour personality, not the colour of your skin!!

 

[Zethor]

It has always been the case that the same irrational prejudice is fashionable when directed against some groups and unfashionable when directed against others. There is no elephant in the room, only the age old pretence that the same thing is different when the "right" group identity does it. It isn't.

Are you even aware of the pathetic mental gymnastics you are trying to pull here? "White pride" is a hate slogan, "X pride" are not hate slogans, that's all there is to it.

Anything labelled "progressive". Of course, whether irrational prejudice and discrimination is considered progressive or regressive depends solely on whether or not a person agrees with it.

One example at random:

Further back in the past, it was legal to prevent a person from becoming an MP solely on the basis that they were the "wrong" sex.
The law was then changed to make it illegal to do so.
The law was the changed to make it legal again.

That change, partially disenfranchising people solely because of their sex, is labelled "equality", "diversity", "liberal" and suchlike. Straight out of Minitru from 1984, i.e. Orwellian in that way. I consider an increase in sexism to be regressive. People who like sexism consider it to be progressive.

The general increase in the power of biological group identity ideology. Same as above.

There has also been a sharp decrease in tolerance, with increasing force (both social and legal) being used to suppress dissent. That increase in authoritarianism and compelled obedience isn't at 1984 levels yet, but it's heading in that direction. Somewhat Orwellian in that way, but I was referred explicitly to the use of language when I described the ideology as "Orwellian".

More mental gymnastics. What law prevents anyone from becoming MP? If you're talking about gender quotas, such a law would not prevent anyone from being a candidate and winning. It would only make it so men can compete for 50% of the chairs, you still have to beat the other candidates, nothing changes from the perspective of a single candidate. Quotas wouldn't be sexist, there wouldn't be an advantage for any sex. Besides, MPs don't become MPs by going through a meritocratic procress, they do so by being born in the right family with the right connections and/or circumstances, right education or just blind luck. It's essentially random, the ones at the top are no more deserving than others so further randomizing things through 50-50 quotas would change absolutely nothing.

Progressives are not authoritarian, they are left-Libertarians for the most part, you don't know the basics of the concepts you're trying to tackle so your labels (Orwellian) and conclusions are without substance, they are meaningless.

 

[Angilion]

Are you even aware of the pathetic mental gymnastics you are trying to pull here? [..]

Physician, heal thyself!

You're claiming that the same thing is different depending solely on which biological group identity you assign to the person doing it. That mental gymnastics is of course a required part of irrational prejudice. Everyone who supports irrational prejudice does it. Presumably some of them really do believe that the same thing is different depending on where in their hierarchy they put the biological group identity of the person doing it.

You believe in judging people on the colour of their skin and not the content of their character. You're not going to understand and acknowledge any different view, so all you can do is continue to protest that the same thing is different when the "right" biological group identity does it. I don't even believe in biological group identity - it's a delusion that serves only to promote irrational prejudice. There's no way I'm going to delude myself enough to fit into your views or pretend to.

[..] Progressives are not authoritarian, they are left-Libertarians for the most part,

Only if you accept their corruption of language. I don't. So I don't think that irrational prejudice is equality, I don't think that discrimination is a good thing, I don't think that authoritarianism is liberal or libertarian, I don't think that biological group identity, stereotyping and imposed compliance is diversity and tolerance, etc, etc.

you don't know the basics of the concepts you're trying to tackle so your labels (Orwellian) and conclusions are without substance, they are meaningless.

I don't agree with your irrational prejudice and corruption of language.

I advocate what used to be called equality, diversity, tolerance, liberalism and suchlike. People like you have corrupted those words to mean the opposite of themselves, so that's why you claim my position is meaningless. Part of the point of corrupting those words was and is to suppress expression of those concepts. It's a good idea if a person wants to promote biological group identity, biological group advocacy, irrational prejudice and discrimination based on sex, "race" and whatever other trivial and usually irrelevant biological traits they decide are important, stereotyping and thus pressure to conform to those stereotypes in the name of group identity and, of course, intolerance of dissent.

 

[Randomface74]

How is this thread still going. Must be bots...

 

[Zethor]

Maybe in your pathetic little narrow mind, but not in mine or many others, and no amount of you bleating or throwing your toys out of the pram will change that.

Just grow up and accept that we don’t all think the same.

I think you're a bit confused, I haven't expressed an opinion, I stated a fact: 'White Pride' has been a nazi slogan for a long time. And facts don't require your acceptance.

Physician, heal thyself!

You're claiming that the same thing is different depending solely on which biological group identity you assign to the person doing it. That mental gymnastics is of course a required part of irrational prejudice. Everyone who supports irrational prejudice does it. Presumably some of them really do believe that the same thing is different depending on where in their hierarchy they put the biological group identity of the person doing it.

You believe in judging people on the colour of their skin and not the content of their character. You're not going to understand and acknowledge any different view, so all you can do is continue to protest that the same thing is different when the "right" biological group identity does it. I don't even believe in biological group identity - it's a delusion that serves only to promote irrational prejudice. There's no way I'm going to delude myself enough to fit into your views or pretend to.

No amount of rhetorical masturbation can change the fact that you refuse to engage my argument. Stop trying to control the conversation and stick to point, I've repeated it 3 times already.

Only if you accept their corruption of language. I don't. So I don't think that irrational prejudice is equality, I don't think that discrimination is a good thing, I don't think that authoritarianism is liberal or libertarian, I don't think that biological group identity, stereotyping and imposed compliance is diversity and tolerance, etc, etc.



I don't agree with your irrational prejudice and corruption of language.

I advocate what used to be called equality, diversity, tolerance, liberalism and suchlike. People like you have corrupted those words to mean the opposite of themselves, so that's why you claim my position is meaningless. Part of the point of corrupting those words was and is to suppress expression of those concepts. It's a good idea if a person wants to promote biological group identity, biological group advocacy, irrational prejudice and discrimination based on sex, "race" and whatever other trivial and usually irrelevant biological traits they decide are important, stereotyping and thus pressure to conform to those stereotypes in the name of group identity and, of course, intolerance of dissent.

Perhaps you should start another thread this one is about whether a nazi slogan is ok or not.

 

[Angilion]

No amount of rhetorical masturbation can change the fact that you refuse to engage my argument. Stop trying to control the conversation and stick to point, I've repeated it 3 times already

I have addressed your "point" repeatedly. It's not a point. It's just the age old "the same thing is different when the right kind of people do it" thing. Par for the course for irrational prejudice, whatever the chosen group(s) and target group(s). You are demanding that I accept that belief as the truth. That will not happen no matter how many times you repeated it. I am arguing against your position - why on earth would I agree with your position just so that you will acknowledge that I have "engaged" it?

 

[cheesyboy]

It's no use bringing the 'real world' to Angilion, he/she operates in a clean slate-world, where no history, even yesterday, ever happened. That his/her arguments always end up pleasing the forum racists, xenophobes, homophobes etc is surely only coincidence.

 

[No1newts]

I don't know much about @Angilion posting history but on this point he is correct. It's an absurd contradiction in the extremes of the libertarian ideology that they attempt to promote equality by use of discrimination and they either cannot see this fact or wilfully choose to ignore it to suit their agenda.

They need to either be honest and admit they are not chasing equality (as @Angilion notes they have either purposefully attempted to redefine equality or are blind to it) and are in fact as bigoted as those they fight against or they can of course continue their absurdity but what you are seeing in reduced tolerance, racism and outright hostility against minorities is an upshot of people recognising they are being unfairly attacked. Of course there are economic factors to consider as well but why didn't you see this push back in the 90/00's? Because the extreme end of the tail at that point wasn't wagging the dog.

The far right and the far left in both politics and morality are much better bed buddies then either wants to acknowledge. They come at it from slightly different angles but both are completely and utterly intolerant of any form of dissent and will attack those who disagree to shut them down.

 

[KizZ]

Being proud of your race? Maybe.
But you can definitely be proud of your heritage, ancestors and their achievements. One night I was thinking in my bed before sleeping how much Western Europeans have contributed to science, technology, engineering etc. and it's mind-blowing! I read a statistic somewhere that from 800 BC to 1950 AD, 97% of the world’s scientific advancements occurred in Europe and North America. I'm not even western European myself.

Sam Hyde did a brilliant skit on this

 

[Efour]

KizZ massive racist

 

[Zethor]

I have addressed your "point" repeatedly. It's not a point. It's just the age old "the same thing is different when the right kind of people do it" thing. Par for the course for irrational prejudice, whatever the chosen group(s) and target group(s). You are demanding that I accept that belief as the truth. That will not happen no matter how many times you repeated it. I am arguing against your position - why on earth would I agree with your position just so that you will acknowledge that I have "engaged" it?

My point is that "white pride" is a nazi slogan so it is not ok. If you argue against that then either you don't believe it is a nazi slogan, in which case you are deluded, or you believe nazi slogans are ok. Which one is it? Do you also support the use of the swastika? It is just an old Indian symbol, right?

I don't know much about @Angilion posting history but on this point he is correct. It's an absurd contradiction in the extremes of the libertarian ideology that they attempt to promote equality by use of discrimination and they either cannot see this fact or wilfully choose to ignore it to suit their agenda.

They need to either be honest and admit they are not chasing equality (as @Angilion notes they have either purposefully attempted to redefine equality or are blind to it) and are in fact as bigoted as those they fight against or they can of course continue their absurdity but what you are seeing in reduced tolerance, racism and outright hostility against minorities is an upshot of people recognising they are being unfairly attacked. Of course there are economic factors to consider as well but why didn't you see this push back in the 90/00's? Because the extreme end of the tail at that point wasn't wagging the dog.

The far right and the far left in both politics and morality are much better bed buddies then either wants to acknowledge. They come at it from slightly different angles but both are completely and utterly intolerant of any form of dissent and will attack those who disagree to shut them down.

What is it with you people? Are you so far down the rabbit hole that you cannot admit something as simple as "nazis, their symbolism and slogans are bad"? Your attempt to twist the conversation is pathetic, just like Angilion's.