Good luck telling that to many in the USA. Show them literal blood feuds and tribal wars that have gone on for decades and regularly includes what would amount to war crimes between neighbouring African tribes and it will be flat out ignored because it goes against every "noble savage" or "homogenous" teamwork that so many retards keep trying to push.
I do. They don't seem to like it. Especially the Communists who are benefiting from racial division.
Then I tell them that their ethnicity is actually American. Well, not the Communists. Communists are only Communists. They're barely people. Typically it's the black MAGA supporters who go with me on that.
Don't worry, my campaign to make people accept American as an Ethnicity is actually going better than expected. The plurality of white Trump supporters, particularly white Trump supporters, identify as ethnically American in several of the battleground states. It's actually a leading demographic indicator of Trump support.
Did I ever say that all pollsters were full of shit? If you want to see the break down, go watch some of Richard Barris's work breaking down the cross tabs of his own polls. I'm not going to take a few hours to find you which hour he goes over it. Tell you what, when I see it again, I'll let you know and give you a timestamp.
I don't think they count as a race or ethnicity. There's no such thing as "Brown" "Hispanic" or "Latino". You can't take 100% of the population south of the Rio Grande, and north of the Antarctic circle, and call it one race, ethnic group, or demographic.
What it does represent is a nicer form of "La Raza".
I've said it before, National Socialism and Fascism was popular with the West because it is the practical application of Socialism, even more practical than Fabian Socialism. We have already imported EFF style Black National Socialism, and we have already imported "Bronze" National Socialism as well.
Not just practical, but also more authentic at the same time. Socialism lives in denial of its true nature, fascism is when it stops coping and accepts itself for what it really is.
Well, sort of. I'd say what you're describing is Marxist-Leninism. However, Marxist-Leninism is so crazy, so violent, kills so many people, and so divorced from reality that even Lenin had to come to some terms that it didn't work. Lenin always complained about the Socialist Intelligentsia who never seemed to have a real grasp of understanding power or how to wield it, and even worse, always sought to fulfill the Marxist prophecy rather than act with aggression to conquer anyone that stood in their way.
Fascism actually recognizes the limits of the Marxist Dialectical framework, and seeks to create the revolutionary outcomes of Rousseau and Socialism, while being encumbered by some amount of reality. You can't govern the economy from a single desk, so you intentionally create a ruling oligopoly between state, labor, and business; then you require each of them to be members of the party. You accept that dissent may exist, but you always keep it too terrorized to object. You accept that the "Socialist New Man" will not exist until you raise the children yourself, and indoctrinate them into war. Then, you recognize that your goal is conquest, not "something something and then the workers uprise, question mark, profit."
Fabian Socialism is the most explicitly inauthentic form of Socialism, but because it always seeks subversion, persuasion, and slow marching, it (again) limits itself to reality long enough to make Socialism seem practical. But it's inauthenticity (which is purely tactical) drives the revolutionaries up a wall.
I don't think its dumb. OP can correct me if I am wrong, but I think he is saying:
Celtic, Norman, Slavic, etc are all 'ethnic groups' that happen to be White. But a collection of "Whites" while all being of the same "race", they can be different ethnicity.
So there is no "White ethnic group", as within the White Grouping there are a multitude of ethnicity.
He's partially correct, but it's still a bad take, since he's just pushing his own narrative, as always. There are plenty of worse mistakes made here than talking about "ethnic whites," and yet this is what he feels the need to jump in on. I think that's what people get tired of.
It's also not the full story, and context is always important. You could argue that, in the American context, for example, "White" is an ethnicity. It's made up of subgroups, sure, but there's still a common language, nation, and generally birthplace.
But it's more his behavior than his argument that people are objecting to, I believe. I'm not saying he said this, but it does share some similarities to the tried and true "White people aren't real" nonsense. Call them whatever you want, but Hwites clearly are real, and there are clearly plenty of people who hate them. I'm suspicious of people who continually go out of their way to deflect from that, when it's clearly observable.
"Whites aren't an ethnic group, it's a racial group." No matter how you feel about that statement, or its accuracy...what's the motivation of saying it?
I don't follow users enough to know who has which leanings, which is good/bad. Bad, that I will always give the poster the benefit of the doubt, but good that I always take the post as just the post - and nothing more real or imagined.
FWIW, I come from a time when it was just accepted that this is the internet. There are no race, ethnic, religion, etc - Only ideas. That the idea, not the person, needs to be looked at, examined and discussed. If the idea is sound, then what difference does it make who is making the idea?
Now, having said that I don't follow people so he could be good, bad or worse but what he said is logically sound(IMO), and I say that as a pro-White person. Also, didn't he make the case that he feels the same way about black people, and that there can be no black ethnic state, for precisely the same reason. So it didn't sound (at least to me) that he was being unfair in his application of logic.
You are also correct in that whatever people feel about it, there are plenty of people that are showing their open hatred towards Whites, but that is pure jealousy and envy.
White, Black, Red, and Yellow are simply not ethnicities. It also fundamentally undermines the concept of a "white ethno-state". You can't have one. You have to have an ethnicity to focus on, even if that is an emergent ethnicity like "Boer", "Rhodesian", or "American". It's no different from saying, "I want an Asian ethno-state". That's not a thing.
I accept that argument to a degree. Appalachian isn't even descendent from the English, but Scotch-Irish or Ulster Scotts (Ulstermen / People of Ulster in Britain).
Even during the revolution one could argue that each state was effectively it's own ethnicity.
And to be clear, there seems to be much more self-identification by the people of the United States with America rather than with each state. Sure you get proud Texans, but not so many people show Texas loyalty to Wyoming.
The difference from our founding to where we are now is that we have a much more interconnected and homogenous American culture and value set based on the Civic National identity that we cultivated. There is unquestionably and an American Nation (in the same way a person is British), but the issue is whether or not you can call that an ethnos. I tend to lean that the American ethos is still developing (no thanks to mass migration), but there will inevitably be one, and after time it won't make sense to say that an American can really trace his lineage to anywhere back but the US, because of the integration of populations and peoples within it.
It'll take a thousand years for Americans' DNA to get so thoroughly mixed that it's a single ethnicity, and it will only happen if society doesn't collapse back into the stone age. Without modern transportation, a Minnesotan would almost never meet a Texan, and over a thousand years their language would diverge.
What counts as an ethnic group if people of the great western tradition and European decent don’t? The only difference with whites is that it’s the most widely appropriated and emulated ethnicity.
Seems like you’re making a semantic argument more than anything then. When people say Asian they know there are many different cultures within there, but Asian people still share more in common with other Asians than they’ll tend to with other cultures and races, and calling people ‘white’ functions similarly and works pretty well.
There is. My middle income area (now lower-middle income area, thanks Biden) has had a lot of black people move in. Most of them good neighbors. This is because I’m in a red county suburb and they’re fleeing the high crime blue city that’s majority black because they can’t stand the crime there, either.
And the children of these atypical blacks will regress to the mean of their kind and turn the place into Hell.
Happened everywhere that thought they were smarter than those ''racist US Whites'' and were delusional enough to think that simply screening the first generation they let in would prevent the same problems from occuring.
Denial of what? I didn't say ANYTHING about the future - I just posited my observations about the NOW and note I said "MOST" - yeah, we've already had "incidents" of petty crime AND the outright claims of racism against the owner which almost never happened in the 10 previous years I was here.
I grew up elsewhere in what was once a strong white, middle/lower class suburb that's gentrified into a Somali warzone for almost the same reasons (and the city putting a block of section 8 apartments all around the area didn't help).
I am WELL aware of what's coming, fortunately, A> I rent and B> the town is still majority white (and known as such).
YES, I'm planning on moving - but the Biden economy is killing me for home ownership. I've got enough to cover the downpayment but houses here avg 500k which is a $3000/month payment due to the interest rates taking off, which is almost TRIPLE my current rent!
In fact I'm looking at moving out another county to the north, problem THERE is that that starts to butt up against another nearby almost blue city where black population is increasing to the SOUTH. We're getting phalanxed...
When people say "White Flight," they mean the mass movement of Whites trying to get away from blacks. So "Black Flight" would be blacks moving to get away from Whites. This doesn't happen.
I disagree - White people aren't fleeing purely on the color of skin but of the increased crime and violence that comes from such majority Black Areas.
I didn't say skin color, I said blacks, because with them comes crime and decay. And you didn't refute the point, which is that blacks do not flee from Whites.
Ok, sage, how do you define blacks WITHOUT skin color?
I define them as the whole package, which is not just skin color, but their culture, nature, and other group attributes. To make this clear to you, Whites don't move away because of their skin color. They move away because their skin color is a good indicator of everything else that inevitably comes with it, as we can see with American inner cities, Haiti, and Africa.
Do you include asians in that mix or are they "White"?
Asians are Asian. I'm not sure what your point is here.
As for fleeing from whites - oh, I'd say look at Tulsa Oklahoma circa 1920...
You need to compare like to like.
When people talk about White Flight, they're about Whites choosing to move away from blacks. Blacks aren't intentionally trying to make Whites move away, it's a consequence of their actions. The Tulsa Massacre, on the other hand, was force directed at blacks to drive them out.
My point stands; blacks do not choose to move away from Whites.
There's nothing to suggest whites don't like her. She just needs to assume that because she's a racist cunt, and needs to blame white people for her problems.
"Okay, Shynaqua, all you gotta do is be civilized, friendly, respectful, and humble. All that adds up to being persuasive. Remember, you're representing Kamala Harris to protect your abortion rights!"
Because it absolutely grinds the gears of other race haters that I understand ethnicity, and I reject race hatred in all it's forms. They'd rather silence someone opposing race hatred generally, then keep race hatred going to use in gaining recruits and polarization.
Everyone believes in a white ethnic group, except white leftists and normies.
And most other groups have been trained to hate whites.
#NotAll, and all that, but certainly something worth keeping in mind.
Leftists believe in it to hate it.
Whites aren't an ethnic group, it's a racial group.
It's okay, blacks aren't an ethnic group either.
Good luck telling that to many in the USA. Show them literal blood feuds and tribal wars that have gone on for decades and regularly includes what would amount to war crimes between neighbouring African tribes and it will be flat out ignored because it goes against every "noble savage" or "homogenous" teamwork that so many retards keep trying to push.
I do. They don't seem to like it. Especially the Communists who are benefiting from racial division.
Then I tell them that their ethnicity is actually American. Well, not the Communists. Communists are only Communists. They're barely people. Typically it's the black MAGA supporters who go with me on that.
Don't worry, my campaign to make people accept American as an Ethnicity is actually going better than expected. The plurality of white Trump supporters, particularly white Trump supporters, identify as ethnically American in several of the battleground states. It's actually a leading demographic indicator of Trump support.
Him playing word games with definitions like this is a leftist tactic.
From my real life interactions with people? No.
Did I ever say that all pollsters were full of shit? If you want to see the break down, go watch some of Richard Barris's work breaking down the cross tabs of his own polls. I'm not going to take a few hours to find you which hour he goes over it. Tell you what, when I see it again, I'll let you know and give you a timestamp.
This reminds me of don't tell Latinos that they're not a race. Even though they aren't.
I don't think they count as a race or ethnicity. There's no such thing as "Brown" "Hispanic" or "Latino". You can't take 100% of the population south of the Rio Grande, and north of the Antarctic circle, and call it one race, ethnic group, or demographic.
What it does represent is a nicer form of "La Raza".
I've said it before, National Socialism and Fascism was popular with the West because it is the practical application of Socialism, even more practical than Fabian Socialism. We have already imported EFF style Black National Socialism, and we have already imported "Bronze" National Socialism as well.
Not just practical, but also more authentic at the same time. Socialism lives in denial of its true nature, fascism is when it stops coping and accepts itself for what it really is.
Well, sort of. I'd say what you're describing is Marxist-Leninism. However, Marxist-Leninism is so crazy, so violent, kills so many people, and so divorced from reality that even Lenin had to come to some terms that it didn't work. Lenin always complained about the Socialist Intelligentsia who never seemed to have a real grasp of understanding power or how to wield it, and even worse, always sought to fulfill the Marxist prophecy rather than act with aggression to conquer anyone that stood in their way.
Fascism actually recognizes the limits of the Marxist Dialectical framework, and seeks to create the revolutionary outcomes of Rousseau and Socialism, while being encumbered by some amount of reality. You can't govern the economy from a single desk, so you intentionally create a ruling oligopoly between state, labor, and business; then you require each of them to be members of the party. You accept that dissent may exist, but you always keep it too terrorized to object. You accept that the "Socialist New Man" will not exist until you raise the children yourself, and indoctrinate them into war. Then, you recognize that your goal is conquest, not "something something and then the workers uprise, question mark, profit."
Fabian Socialism is the most explicitly inauthentic form of Socialism, but because it always seeks subversion, persuasion, and slow marching, it (again) limits itself to reality long enough to make Socialism seem practical. But it's inauthenticity (which is purely tactical) drives the revolutionaries up a wall.
You have the dumbest takes.
He's protecting the Grift. Only jews get to be special whites.
He's one of the "special whites"
It gets a bit old...
I don't think its dumb. OP can correct me if I am wrong, but I think he is saying:
Celtic, Norman, Slavic, etc are all 'ethnic groups' that happen to be White. But a collection of "Whites" while all being of the same "race", they can be different ethnicity.
So there is no "White ethnic group", as within the White Grouping there are a multitude of ethnicity.
He's partially correct, but it's still a bad take, since he's just pushing his own narrative, as always. There are plenty of worse mistakes made here than talking about "ethnic whites," and yet this is what he feels the need to jump in on. I think that's what people get tired of.
It's also not the full story, and context is always important. You could argue that, in the American context, for example, "White" is an ethnicity. It's made up of subgroups, sure, but there's still a common language, nation, and generally birthplace.
But it's more his behavior than his argument that people are objecting to, I believe. I'm not saying he said this, but it does share some similarities to the tried and true "White people aren't real" nonsense. Call them whatever you want, but Hwites clearly are real, and there are clearly plenty of people who hate them. I'm suspicious of people who continually go out of their way to deflect from that, when it's clearly observable.
"Whites aren't an ethnic group, it's a racial group." No matter how you feel about that statement, or its accuracy...what's the motivation of saying it?
Thanks for the thoughtful reply.
I don't follow users enough to know who has which leanings, which is good/bad. Bad, that I will always give the poster the benefit of the doubt, but good that I always take the post as just the post - and nothing more real or imagined.
FWIW, I come from a time when it was just accepted that this is the internet. There are no race, ethnic, religion, etc - Only ideas. That the idea, not the person, needs to be looked at, examined and discussed. If the idea is sound, then what difference does it make who is making the idea?
Now, having said that I don't follow people so he could be good, bad or worse but what he said is logically sound(IMO), and I say that as a pro-White person. Also, didn't he make the case that he feels the same way about black people, and that there can be no black ethnic state, for precisely the same reason. So it didn't sound (at least to me) that he was being unfair in his application of logic.
You are also correct in that whatever people feel about it, there are plenty of people that are showing their open hatred towards Whites, but that is pure jealousy and envy.
You're correct, they just don't like it.
White, Black, Red, and Yellow are simply not ethnicities. It also fundamentally undermines the concept of a "white ethno-state". You can't have one. You have to have an ethnicity to focus on, even if that is an emergent ethnicity like "Boer", "Rhodesian", or "American". It's no different from saying, "I want an Asian ethno-state". That's not a thing.
America is too big to have a single ethnicity. New Englander and Appalachian are separate ethnicities, for example.
I accept that argument to a degree. Appalachian isn't even descendent from the English, but Scotch-Irish or Ulster Scotts (Ulstermen / People of Ulster in Britain).
Even during the revolution one could argue that each state was effectively it's own ethnicity.
And to be clear, there seems to be much more self-identification by the people of the United States with America rather than with each state. Sure you get proud Texans, but not so many people show Texas loyalty to Wyoming.
The difference from our founding to where we are now is that we have a much more interconnected and homogenous American culture and value set based on the Civic National identity that we cultivated. There is unquestionably and an American Nation (in the same way a person is British), but the issue is whether or not you can call that an ethnos. I tend to lean that the American ethos is still developing (no thanks to mass migration), but there will inevitably be one, and after time it won't make sense to say that an American can really trace his lineage to anywhere back but the US, because of the integration of populations and peoples within it.
It'll take a thousand years for Americans' DNA to get so thoroughly mixed that it's a single ethnicity, and it will only happen if society doesn't collapse back into the stone age. Without modern transportation, a Minnesotan would almost never meet a Texan, and over a thousand years their language would diverge.
Cool opinion bro, I'll let you know when I give a shit about it.
I like how they get mad at the truth because they don't think it's beneficial.
You, sir. Have just defined "malinformation". Which the Biden admin attempted to regulate.
Oy vey
Right on schedule.
What counts as an ethnic group if people of the great western tradition and European decent don’t? The only difference with whites is that it’s the most widely appropriated and emulated ethnicity.
The ethnic groups that Europeans are made out of. English, Scotish, Irish, Welsh, French, German, Danish, Dutch, Spanish, Italian... etc
Seems like you’re making a semantic argument more than anything then. When people say Asian they know there are many different cultures within there, but Asian people still share more in common with other Asians than they’ll tend to with other cultures and races, and calling people ‘white’ functions similarly and works pretty well.
It's weird seeing someone have the self-awareness to know that Whites don't like them, but not have enough to see it's because of how they act.
Or even enough sense to get the fuck away. If we are so evil and dangerous, why isn't there Black Flight?
No gibs, otherwise.
There is. My middle income area (now lower-middle income area, thanks Biden) has had a lot of black people move in. Most of them good neighbors. This is because I’m in a red county suburb and they’re fleeing the high crime blue city that’s majority black because they can’t stand the crime there, either.
And the children of these atypical blacks will regress to the mean of their kind and turn the place into Hell.
Happened everywhere that thought they were smarter than those ''racist US Whites'' and were delusional enough to think that simply screening the first generation they let in would prevent the same problems from occuring.
Your neighborhood is about to turn into shut and you’re in denial.
Denial of what? I didn't say ANYTHING about the future - I just posited my observations about the NOW and note I said "MOST" - yeah, we've already had "incidents" of petty crime AND the outright claims of racism against the owner which almost never happened in the 10 previous years I was here.
I grew up elsewhere in what was once a strong white, middle/lower class suburb that's gentrified into a Somali warzone for almost the same reasons (and the city putting a block of section 8 apartments all around the area didn't help). I am WELL aware of what's coming, fortunately, A> I rent and B> the town is still majority white (and known as such).
YES, I'm planning on moving - but the Biden economy is killing me for home ownership. I've got enough to cover the downpayment but houses here avg 500k which is a $3000/month payment due to the interest rates taking off, which is almost TRIPLE my current rent!
In fact I'm looking at moving out another county to the north, problem THERE is that that starts to butt up against another nearby almost blue city where black population is increasing to the SOUTH. We're getting phalanxed...
When people say "White Flight," they mean the mass movement of Whites trying to get away from blacks. So "Black Flight" would be blacks moving to get away from Whites. This doesn't happen.
I disagree - White people aren't fleeing purely on the color of skin but of the increased crime and violence that comes from such majority Black Areas.
I didn't say skin color, I said blacks, because with them comes crime and decay. And you didn't refute the point, which is that blacks do not flee from Whites.
Ok, sage, how do you define blacks WITHOUT skin color? Do you include asians in that mix or are they "White"?
As for fleeing from whites - oh, I'd say look at Tulsa Oklahoma circa 1920...
I define them as the whole package, which is not just skin color, but their culture, nature, and other group attributes. To make this clear to you, Whites don't move away because of their skin color. They move away because their skin color is a good indicator of everything else that inevitably comes with it, as we can see with American inner cities, Haiti, and Africa.
Asians are Asian. I'm not sure what your point is here.
You need to compare like to like.
When people talk about White Flight, they're about Whites choosing to move away from blacks. Blacks aren't intentionally trying to make Whites move away, it's a consequence of their actions. The Tulsa Massacre, on the other hand, was force directed at blacks to drive them out.
My point stands; blacks do not choose to move away from Whites.
THAT'S BECAUSE THEY'RE BLACK, race isn't just skin color the 2 go hand in hand.
If you own and don't sell right now you are a fool.
She was so close to self-realization.
"You know this is a white -you know this is a Trump-based neighborhood. So send somebody that's more pleasant for speaking to them."
she knows she's aggressive and unpleasant to talk to, but it's still the white peoples fault
It makes sense when you look at it through the lense of someone who's been programmed by the DNC:
I believe that's spelled "wypipo" :P
huwaighhpiipeaux
Shaniqua y-p3po
DEY DON' BE WASHIN' DEY CHICKEN!
Or eating cornstarch....
There's nothing to suggest whites don't like her. She just needs to assume that because she's a racist cunt, and needs to blame white people for her problems.
They say White people nasty.. but everyone wants to live where whitey lives, take what they have and marry/rape a whitey lol.
And of course.. opposite is true for africans. No one wants to live with them or among them. Not even their own.
Bet she lives in a white neighborhood though.
And probably complains constantly about the raycism.
Let's begin.
N.
I
G
G
E
R
The feeling's mutual I assure you.
"Okay, Shynaqua, all you gotta do is be civilized, friendly, respectful, and humble. All that adds up to being persuasive. Remember, you're representing Kamala Harris to protect your abortion rights!"
Difficulty: impossible.
you're free to leave at any time.
She's wrong about White people being nasty, especially having access to a mirror.
I mean, from a marketing perspective, she's not wrong lol
Race haters doing their normal thing. This is why you can't allow any of these Leftist freaks in any position of power.
I don't know why you're being downvoted for pointing out the woman in this video is being racist.
he's being downvoted for his opinion in other threads, not this one.
Because it absolutely grinds the gears of other race haters that I understand ethnicity, and I reject race hatred in all it's forms. They'd rather silence someone opposing race hatred generally, then keep race hatred going to use in gaining recruits and polarization.