They aren't "racist" they're just anti-white. Racism is nothing more than an attack word used to make people back down. These people are the ideological descendants of those who popularized and made the term, it does not intimidate them.
The "true believers" will just shout back "You're the bigger racist!" to which the public will silently agree out of fear. If you call them anti-white, they may deny it or better yet try to show how that's a good thing. The public will begin to think in terms of pro-white and anti-white, at least in a very small part.
If somebody cannot be in favour of their innate nature, then they are so possessed by shame that you would be able to puppeteer them into doing anything.
Anti-white is the most broad term, since it works for both self-hating whites and outsiders who hate them too.
The people in power who were anti-white convinced society in 1965 to open the floodgates to many more immigrants who are also anti-white. The only people who don't want a "race war" are the whites with all the ideological weapons pointed at them. Whether they want it or not, it has been happening for quite a while.
The fastest way to lose a war is to pretend that it's not happening.
"racism" equals hatred of other races; loving ones own race equals ? They only offer rhetorical tools for blame to create conflicts for division, while not offering any so called race a defense against miscegenation, which is what the rhetoric of racism, and the entire freemasonic black/white checkerboard game is protecting.
Nature segregates differences as inspiration needed for each ONE to sustain self within ALL. Miscegenation (corruption of differences) robs us of inspiration; which corrupts ONEs comprehension of ALL perceived; which causes ONEs lack of self discernment as being ONE potential within ALL potentiality.
Anti-racism in Britain is used by upper class leftists - champagne socialists - to crush the working class. In their view, the working class is simultaneously underprivileged and yet, overpaid.
They want the working Englishman as poor and impoverished as possible, so that he will finally get back to working in dangerous mines and factories owned by - well, by the upper class, of course.
They use immigrants as a cudgel with which to beat him, and use their own failure to elect a female leader of the labour party as a rope with which to tie him down and gag him.
Now, it is impossible for him to protest against what is being done without being called a racist or sexist. There is simply no way for him to articulate the problem he is facing that won't be construed as a form of bigotry, and by extension, evidence of his privilege.
'And that is: even when white working class boys have lower educational qualifications and a lower likelihood of going to university, they have higher employment rates and higher social mobility
So is ok to discriminate against poor white people because even though the discrimination is happening they still manage to somehow not live on government handouts? That is the standard.
equity = commit immoral acts of discrimination against innocent people based on the color of their skin because elites think it is worth it
So the group that gets taught at a young age to not rely on government handouts or preferential treatment succeeds at not needing government handouts or preferential treatment when they're older?
The UK is a lost cause. Whites need to either stage a full scale revolt or leave en mass to Switzerland, Denmark or Poland. Let the shitskins have it.
Ideally they would all come to the US, which would swing things in our favor to an insane degree. Of course, for that very reason the US will do anything they can to keep them out.
No. The plight of poor white boys is increasingly commented on, and finally being recognised as an issue by everybody except Twitter and the racist victim groups.
Which is actually helping make them look stupid and causing a lot of other people to distrust them.
Today's report has been distressing all those victim groups because it states that there is not systemic racism, and that you need to look at the underlying causes of disparity rather than assuming it's all down to racism.
It's only fair to apply that same approach to disadvantaged white boys. Understand and address the underlying issues - e.g. I would guess that factors include income, famliy support, home life stability, attitude of teachers, feminisation of the school curriculum and yes, elements of racism (i.e. opportunities being focused on other racial groups).
Pretending it's all due to racism will fix at most one of those.
Strangely, racism goes up when the government sets a policy of failing a specific racial group and insists that continuing to fail this racial group is the road to progress.
So the UK is proud about being taken over by meatheads who can't even think as long-term as a squirrel does.
Good luck with that, and enjoy your decline into a turdwhirled shit-hole full of humans who aren't even superior to rodents, aren't actually "superior" to anything at all, except in their own silly, narcissistic heads.
'The Commission notes that the average GCSE attainment score for Indian, Bangladeshi and Black African pupils was above the White British average.'
More information is needed, specifically is this change due to the scores of BAME students improving or due to the scores of white students going down. Of course, if you're going to aim for an ideal, it should be no significant difference between the groups, so I expect to see educational programs meant to improve the scores of white British students.
They aren't "racist" they're just anti-white. Racism is nothing more than an attack word used to make people back down. These people are the ideological descendants of those who popularized and made the term, it does not intimidate them.
The "true believers" will just shout back "You're the bigger racist!" to which the public will silently agree out of fear. If you call them anti-white, they may deny it or better yet try to show how that's a good thing. The public will begin to think in terms of pro-white and anti-white, at least in a very small part.
If somebody cannot be in favour of their innate nature, then they are so possessed by shame that you would be able to puppeteer them into doing anything.
you're right - that's a better term. I wonder about other names:
"self-hating whites?"
"rich whites who want poor people to focus on a race war instead of wealth inequalities"
Anti-white is the most broad term, since it works for both self-hating whites and outsiders who hate them too.
The people in power who were anti-white convinced society in 1965 to open the floodgates to many more immigrants who are also anti-white. The only people who don't want a "race war" are the whites with all the ideological weapons pointed at them. Whether they want it or not, it has been happening for quite a while.
The fastest way to lose a war is to pretend that it's not happening.
It's just Marxism evolving.
https://www.anumuseum.org.il/blog-items/frankfurt-school-jewish-intellectuals-made-60s/
The goal is the destruction of western capitalist nations. Mass unskilled immigration is just one of many tools used to achieve those ends.
"racism" equals hatred of other races; loving ones own race equals ? They only offer rhetorical tools for blame to create conflicts for division, while not offering any so called race a defense against miscegenation, which is what the rhetoric of racism, and the entire freemasonic black/white checkerboard game is protecting.
Nature segregates differences as inspiration needed for each ONE to sustain self within ALL. Miscegenation (corruption of differences) robs us of inspiration; which corrupts ONEs comprehension of ALL perceived; which causes ONEs lack of self discernment as being ONE potential within ALL potentiality.
Great post.
boys
Primarily, white working class boys.
Anti-racism in Britain is used by upper class leftists - champagne socialists - to crush the working class. In their view, the working class is simultaneously underprivileged and yet, overpaid.
They want the working Englishman as poor and impoverished as possible, so that he will finally get back to working in dangerous mines and factories owned by - well, by the upper class, of course.
They use immigrants as a cudgel with which to beat him, and use their own failure to elect a female leader of the labour party as a rope with which to tie him down and gag him. Now, it is impossible for him to protest against what is being done without being called a racist or sexist. There is simply no way for him to articulate the problem he is facing that won't be construed as a form of bigotry, and by extension, evidence of his privilege.
So is ok to discriminate against poor white people because even though the discrimination is happening they still manage to somehow not live on government handouts? That is the standard.
equity = commit immoral acts of discrimination against innocent people based on the color of their skin because elites think it is worth it
So the group that gets taught at a young age to not rely on government handouts or preferential treatment succeeds at not needing government handouts or preferential treatment when they're older?
What a surprise!
It is ok to discriminate poor whites because they cannot be controlled.
White perseverance in action.
/Hail equity.
The UK is a lost cause. Whites need to either stage a full scale revolt or leave en mass to Switzerland, Denmark or Poland. Let the shitskins have it.
Ideally they would all come to the US, which would swing things in our favor to an insane degree. Of course, for that very reason the US will do anything they can to keep them out.
No. The plight of poor white boys is increasingly commented on, and finally being recognised as an issue by everybody except Twitter and the racist victim groups.
Which is actually helping make them look stupid and causing a lot of other people to distrust them.
Today's report has been distressing all those victim groups because it states that there is not systemic racism, and that you need to look at the underlying causes of disparity rather than assuming it's all down to racism.
It's only fair to apply that same approach to disadvantaged white boys. Understand and address the underlying issues - e.g. I would guess that factors include income, famliy support, home life stability, attitude of teachers, feminisation of the school curriculum and yes, elements of racism (i.e. opportunities being focused on other racial groups).
Pretending it's all due to racism will fix at most one of those.
^ This
Strangely, racism goes up when the government sets a policy of failing a specific racial group and insists that continuing to fail this racial group is the road to progress.
Who would have thought?
There are many anti-white academics - openly institutionally racist :
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11957331/cambridge-uni-backs-academic-tweeted-white-lives-dont-matter/
So the UK is proud about being taken over by meatheads who can't even think as long-term as a squirrel does.
Good luck with that, and enjoy your decline into a turdwhirled shit-hole full of humans who aren't even superior to rodents, aren't actually "superior" to anything at all, except in their own silly, narcissistic heads.
They aren't "people".
More information is needed, specifically is this change due to the scores of BAME students improving or due to the scores of white students going down. Of course, if you're going to aim for an ideal, it should be no significant difference between the groups, so I expect to see educational programs meant to improve the scores of white British students.
We really should of left europe to the germans in WW1 and 2.