I am proud to be white!

[Black Dog]

jbg:

We don't need to combat reverse racism with old-fashioned race hatred.

There's no such thing as "reverse racism". It's just racism.[/pedantry]

[Who's Doing What?]

The same way one demonstrates their pride in anything; by being proud of their accomplishments, not by rallying against/putting down others.

Who is putting anyone down? Not me.

I am, and have for a long time, looking at this objectively. I will call a spade a spade and if someone thinks that makes me racist I don't give a flying F.

How are you showing that "white pride?" The same way arch angel did?-- by cutting down other races? I don't have to cut down other families to be proud of my own, and by the same token, I don't have to cut down other races/heritages to be proud of mine.

Again with the cutting down of other races BS. The whole point is that where a Black person has black pride, or a latino has machismo, what do whites have?

In many ways "white man" was evil, and did destroy other cultures. That's not to say that the white man is to blame for all that is wrong in the world today-- it's recognizing the wrong that was done.

Right, the white man was/is so much more evil than people of other races.

Genocide in Africa, Honour Killings in the Muslim world, Ghengis Khan, The Pharoahs of Egypt, the millions killed in China, ritual executions in Central and South America, are these not atrocities also?

I don't think Hitler has anything to do with any of it. He was deranged and not in any way shape or form representing "the white man." We were, in fact, fighting against Hitler.

Hitler has nothing to do with it? How can you say that?!?!?!

He wanted a pure arian race. His vision spawned neo-nazi movements across the western world. He has a lot to do with perverting ANY idea of "white pride".

I can't argue that a lot of that goes on. But seriously, I don't understand this need for "white pride." I agree with a lot of what Cybercoma has said in that regard. Why do we, who haven't been downtrodden as a race, need to express "white pride?" What have we overcome as a race to be proud of? For the most part, I consider myself fortunate that I haven't had to deal with some of the things other races/cultures have.

That's what AA programs aim to do-- give everyone an equal opportunity to succeed. If some education and job opportunites disqualify you, that is no different other education and job programs disqualifing others. You don't like being disqualified, they didn't like being disqualified.

We need white pride because we have been brought up to be ashamed of being white because of what has happened in recent history. We now discriminate againstourselves in favour of people of other races, for what? Are they better qualified? Smarter? No. The only reason we do this is because we have been taught to be ashamed of being white and how terrible we treated other cultures. Well I have a news flash for you. I wasn't the one steering the slave ship. I wasn't the one wiping out the Buffalo. I wasn't the one who did whatever it is people think we should be ashamed for.

How can you possibly get that I'm defending people who aren't even here out of what I said? I'm not "defending" anyone. My response was in regards to what Archangel said, not what some people who aren't even here supposidly said.

You are defending the same type of people that were here. They are the ones who in any other culture would be labelled Terrorists and swiftly dealt with. But like I said, you want to defend them that is your business. Just don't expect me to buy any of their crap when I know what is really going through minds. They would kill you for your land if they thought it was theirs and they were given the opportunity. This was made very clear to me more than once. BTW they think they should own ALL of Canada. So excuse me if I don't get misty eyed when someone else comes on these boards and relates similar things that have been said to them. I believe AA and I don't think she was putting them down but relating how it was she lost her illusion about other races.

I have had people of different minorities, get up and move on the subway when I said hello. I have had people stare straight ahead and ignore me even though we are only 12 inches apart on a crowed bus. I have listened to speeches of how the whiteman has ruined everything.

Ofcourse while listening to the speech I wondered how he liked his whitemans car and his white mans house, and his white mans clothes, and his white mans appliances and technology?

Then I wondered if he would be willing to give them all up to go back to his tipi and deer skins with his spear and bow and arrow?

[Who's Doing What?]

I am proud of nothing I didn't accomplish on my own. But if you haven't accomplished anything....being born left handed, near sighted or white is a good as anything....

Left handed - Check

Near sighted - Check

White - Check

Holy crap a trifecta of pride.

[guyser]

Again with the cutting down of other races BS. The whole point is that where a Black person has black pride, or a latino has machismo, what do whites have?

Lousy dance moves and innate inability to jump.

We need white pride because we have been brought up to be ashamed of being white because of what has happened in recent history. We now discriminate againstourselves in favour of people of other races, for what? Are they better qualified? Smarter? No. The only reason we do this is because we have been taught to be ashamed of being white and how terrible we treated other cultures. Well I have a news flash for you. I wasn't the one steering the slave ship. I wasn't the one wiping out the Buffalo. I wasn't the one who did whatever it is people think we should be ashamed for.

I have no idea who schooled you or where, but I highly doubt anyone anywhere has taught you to be "ashamed of being white" ! It seems ludicrous to even suggest.

. So excuse me if I don't get misty eyed when someone else comes on these boards and relates similar things that have been said to them. I believe AA and I don't think she was putting them down but relating how it was she lost her illusion about other races.

I have had people of different minorities, get up and move on the subway when I said hello. I have had people stare straight ahead and ignore me even though we are only 12 inches apart on a crowed bus. I have listened to speeches of how the whiteman has ruined everything.

Ofcourse while listening to the speech I wondered how he liked his whitemans car and his white mans house, and his white mans clothes, and his white mans appliances and technology?

Then I wondered if he would be willing to give them all up to go back to his tipi and deer skins with his spear and bow and arrow?

Seems like you are making a mountain out of a molehill.

She "discovered" internet sites that slammed whites. Big deal. Lots of other sites slam immigrants and others, but one would not use stupid sites like those to formulate their opinion of what other ethnicites thought of white Canada.

Whitemans car/house/clothes/appliances? And here I thought anyone could just buy them. How does it work, does the whiteman subsidize their purchase?

[cybercoma]

Bullshit.

Skin pigmentation is not really much of a hindrance in this country.

Unless you live in Toronto and are being profiled by the police.

[kimmy]

There's no such thing as "reverse racism". It's just racism.[/pedantry]

That's where you're wrong, my usually accurate friend.

Those who defines such things state that Racism is embodied by a power differential. Racism is what people with power do to people without power. If people without power were prejudiced agaisnt people with power, it would be reverse racism!

"Reverse racism: A term created and used by white people to deny their white privilege. Those in denial use the term reverse racism to refer to hostile behavior by people of color toward whites, and to affirmative action policies, which allegedly give 'preferential treatment' to people of color over whites. In the U.S., there is no such thing as 'reverse racism."

Neat definition, huh? It came from that University of Delaware "residential life" diversity facilitation training course that was discussed in this forum a while back.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/WalterE...ic_cesspools_ii

A copy of the "training manual" is available here:

http://www.thefire.org/pdfs/730a8163b35b36...b889c832ce9.pdf

You might want to review before the next pop-quiz.

Lousy dance moves and innate inability to jump.

I have no idea who schooled you or where, but I highly doubt anyone anywhere has taught you to be "ashamed of being white" ! It seems ludicrous to even suggest.

You had better join Black Dog on the Group W bench, because you obviously haven't completed your re-training either. If you had, you'd recall that:

"A racist: A racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality. By this definition, people of color cannot be racists, because as peoples within the U.S. system, they do not have the power to back up their prejudices, hostilities or acts of discrimination. (This does not deny the existence of such prejudices, hostilities, acts of rage or discrimination.)"

Now, I don't like it anymore than you guys, but who am I to argue with the University of Delaware curriculum and the esteemed Dr Butler?

So maybe I'm just reading this the wrong way, but to me it sounds like Dr Butler is saying that each and every white person, at least those within the United States, should be ashamed.

I doubt many of you would argue with me if I claim that this sort of statement is not much different from statements made by other "anti-racist" activists in Canada and the US.

Why would anybody be surprised that sentiments like ArchAngel's would be a natural reaction to this type of rhetoric?

-k

Edited January 29, 2008 by kimmy

[White Doors]

I'm proud to be 5'2"!

All 5'2" people are better'n other people....trust me on this, we are friendly and make the bestest best friends. Tall people are mean. LOL

see how much nonsense this is? Feeling pride for something we have no control over ourselves. It's so silly.

Culture (and religion or lack thereof) plays much more of a role in shaping a person's attitude, education, and intelligence than the level of one's melatonin.

I was born in Canada through no choice of my own, so therefore would the same thing hold true to be proud of your country?

[Argus]

Unless you live in Toronto and are being profiled by the police.

If young black males didn't commit almost all the violent street crime in Toronto then young Black males wouldn't receive such a disproportionate amount of attention from the police.

In other words, the police interest has nothing to do with skin pigmentation and everything to do with group behavioural patterns.

[jbg]

In other words, the police interest has nothing to do with skin pigmentation and everything to do with group behavioural patterns.

Not profiling defies logic. One looks among Jews for financial frauds and crimes. One doesn't look among Jews for suicide bombers, or gangsta rappers.

[Argus]

Not profiling defies logic. One looks among Jews for financial frauds and crimes. One doesn't look among Jews for suicide bombers, or gangsta rappers.

I don't think anyone has ever associated a particular criminal behaviour pattern among Jews other than creating bad comedies.

[M.Dancer]

Not profiling defies logic. One looks among Jews for financial frauds and crimes. One doesn't look among Jews for suicide bombers, or gangsta rappers.

So you are suggesting that come audit time at the banks they randomly pick out a few lundsmen and send in a forensic accountant to examine them for potential fraud?

[gc1765]

I was born in Canada through no choice of my own, so therefore would the same thing hold true to be proud of your country?

I consider myself lucky to be Canadian, more so than proud.

I can also look at all the great things that Canada has done, and if I had been involved in them, I would be proud.

[Black Dog]

That's where you're wrong, my usually accurate friend.

Those who defines such things state that Racism is embodied by a power differential. Racism is what people with power do to people without power. If people without power were prejudiced agaisnt people with power, it would be reverse racism!

Clown Hall, kimmy? Really? I know you're just fucking around here, but I should point out that the definition you cite from that rarefied and hallowed institution that is the University of fucking Delaware actually backs my position:

"Reverse racism: A term created and used by white people to deny their white privilege. Those in denial use the term reverse racism to refer to hostile behavior by people of color toward whites, and to affirmative action policies, which allegedly give 'preferential treatment' to people of color over whites. In the U.S., there is no such thing as 'reverse racism."

Basically, the guy is saying that it's a bogus term, and in that much, he's correct.

The term "reverse racism" usually references instances of not-white people being racist towards white people. Which is really just plain ol' racism.

So maybe I'm just reading this the wrong way, but to me it sounds like Dr Butler is saying that each and every white person, at least those within the United States, should be ashamed.

He is and he's probably wrong. So what? Should we not examine issues of race, privilege and power dynamics at all ever?

I doubt many of you would argue with me if I claim that this sort of statement is not much different from statements made by other "anti-racist" activists in Canada and the US.

I sure would. Honestly: "Here's a fringe academic from nowheresville: now let's apply their position to everyone with possible political sympathies." is a strategy that's beneath you.

Why would anybody be surprised that sentiments like ArchAngel's would be a natural reaction to this type of rhetoric?

Yeah, because behind every racist belief is an anti-racist cause?

[Wild Bill]

Gee, and I thought only white men could be racist!

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/world/env....html?id=270365

[Renegade]

We need white pride ... I wasn't the one steering the slave ship. I wasn't the one wiping out the Buffalo. I wasn't the one who did whatever it is people think we should be ashamed for.

WDW, I assume by "white pride" pride in European white culture rather than pride in your skin colour. Odd that you feel a "need" to have pride in a culture of your ancestors, but disavow any actions you don't think are pride-worthy because you didn't personally partake in them.

[kengs333]

WDW, I assume by "white pride" pride in European white culture rather than pride in your skin colour. Odd that you feel a "need" to have pride in a culture of your ancestors, but disavow any actions you don't think are pride-worthy because you didn't personally partake in them.

Isn't that what Indians do? I've never seen a discussion about restoring Indian culture that included mention of some of the more gruesome burial and religious practices that Indians used to practices, not to mention some of the more brutal things that they are alleged to have done on a routine basis. Even suggest such a thing as holding Indians responsible for atrocities that that committed would be considered racist. So why can't Europeans have the same luxury of adhering to an idealized concept of their history?

Whatever the case, I'm inclined to think that the OP is in fact a current member of this forum, one who has an obsession with "white nationalism"--hence its use in the post...

[kengs333]

Those who defines such things state that Racism is embodied by a power differential. Racism is what people with power do to people without power. If people without power were prejudiced agaisnt people with power, it would be reverse racism!

There was a study not long ago that is supposed to have used a testing method that objectively determines whether or not people show preferential treatment to certain groups. It showed that both blacks and whites were about equal in showing preference to their own skin colour; the difference was that whites tended to be apologetic for being this way, while blacks tended to be proud of the fact that they behaved this way.

[Renegade]

Isn't that what Indians do? I've never seen a discussion about restoring Indian culture that included mention of some of the more gruesome burial and religious practices that Indians used to practices, not to mention some of the more brutal things that they are alleged to have done on a routine basis. Even suggest such a thing as holding Indians responsible for atrocities that that committed would be considered racist.

First, how do you know all Indians do so or are you prone to sweeping generalizations which assume that the behaviour of some individuals can be assigned to the group at large?

Second, how is that even relevant? What another group does or doesn't do doesn't excuse one's own behaviour.

So why can't Europeans have the same luxury of adhering to an idealized concept of their history?

Everybody, even Europeans, can have the luxury of being hypocritical in pronouncing their "pride" but nobody, not even Europeans, should be exempt from having that hypocracy being called out.

[Melanie_]

There was a study not long ago that is supposed to have used a testing method that objectively determines whether or not people show preferential treatment to certain groups. It showed that both blacks and whites were about equal in showing preference to their own skin colour; the difference was that whites tended to be apologetic for being this way, while blacks tended to be proud of the fact that they behaved this way.

Try it out here

Edited January 30, 2008 by Melanie_

[kengs333]

First, how do you know all Indians do so or are you prone to sweeping generalizations which assume that the behaviour of some individuals can be assigned to the group at large?

Yeah, that's right, I'm "prone to sweeping generalizations" because nothing that I've heard or read ever has suggested that Indians of any kind have been apologetic about the atrocities that their ancestors committed. What a brilliant statement. People like you never fail to amaze me. Show me a book or any form of media in which any Indian group collectively apologizes for anything that their ancestor did.

[cybercoma]

So maybe I'm just reading this the wrong way, but to me it sounds like Dr Butler is saying that each and every white person, at least those within the United States, should be ashamed.

I don't think he's saying they should be ashamed. I think he's trying to say white people are born into a position of privilege in the US and through that they hold a position of power over minorities. Only the group holding the power can exert the force necessary for racism. If the non-privileged/powerless group tries to be racist it's moot because they hold no power.

It actually makes sense, but is racist in itself because it doesn't allow an opportunity for an equilibrium to be met. Whites in this case would seemingly always been in a position of privilege. I can't ever see there being true equality with Dr. Butler's ideas.

[kimmy]

Clown Hall, kimmy? Really? I know you're just fucking around here, but I should point out that the definition you cite from that rarefied and hallowed institution that is the University of fucking Delaware actually backs my position:

"Reverse racism: A term created and used by white people to deny their white privilege. Those in denial use the term reverse racism to refer to hostile behavior by people of color toward whites, and to affirmative action policies, which allegedly give 'preferential treatment' to people of color over whites. In the U.S., there is no such thing as 'reverse racism."

Basically, the guy is saying that it's a bogus term, and in that much, he's correct.

The term "reverse racism" usually references instances of not-white people being racist towards white people. Which is really just plain ol' racism.

Since "racism" has the connotation of whitey picking on non-whitey (?) and since some people (such as Dr Butler) argue that non-whites aren't able to be racist, "reverse-racism" makes the distinction that the racism flows in the reverse direction.

If the term "reverse racism" offends the sensibilities of people like Dr Butler, then I am in favor of its use. If the term offends the sensibilities of pedants, then doubly so.

He is and he's probably wrong. So what? Should we not examine issues of race, privilege and power dynamics at all ever?

I certainly didn't say that.

I ask you the same question: should we just pretend that people like Dr Butler aren't part of the "anti-racism" movement? It seems like you more liberal types are the ones uncomfortable discussing this sort of "anti-racist" rhetoric.

I doubt many of you would argue with me if I claim that this sort of statement is not much different from statements made by other "anti-racist" activists in Canada and the US.

I sure would. Honestly: "Here's a fringe academic from nowheresville: now let's apply their position to everyone with possible political sympathies." is a strategy that's beneath you.

I am not seeking to apply that position to everyone within the "anti-racist movement".

I merely claim that the kind of statements made in Dr Butler's programme are hardly unique. Many academics and activists put forth arguments along the same line as Dr Butler. I just made mention of the University of Delaware "diversity training" course because it was handy and had been discussed here before. Give me a couple of days and I'll bury you under an avalanche of material from "anti-racists" that'll make even the most liberal white people blanch.

I'm surprised you'd even ask to be shown. We both know it'll be easy for me to dig up plenty of similar material to illustrate the point that Dr Butler's views are hardly isolated among "anti-racist" activists.

Why would anybody be surprised that sentiments like ArchAngel's would be a natural reaction to this type of rhetoric?

Yeah, because behind every racist belief is an anti-racist cause?

A straw-man? Was that a straw-man, BD? From you?

Behind every racist belief? Of course not. Behind every racist? Of course not.

I seek to point out that framing this debate in the confrontational terms often used by many "anti-racist" activists creates an accusatory, adversarial tone that likely generates antipathy. Do you disagree? Do you want to argue the point? Do

-k

{yes, I realize that I've used "scare quotes" 20 times in this message. I can't bring myself to type "anti-racist" without "scare quotes".}

[kimmy]

I don't think he's saying they should be ashamed. I think he's trying to say white people are born into a position of privilege in the US and through that they hold a position of power over minorities. Only the group holding the power can exert the force necessary for racism. If the non-privileged/powerless group tries to be racist it's moot because they hold no power.

Well, actually what he's saying, in black and white,

"A racist: A racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality."

See? That's not the same as what you said at all.

What you said is that white people are born into privilege. What he's saying is that all white people are racist.

"A racist: A racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality."

See? See how that's kind of different from what you thought he said? You thought he said that white people are born into privilege, but what he actually said is that a white person "is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system."

You've been socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist system. You're a racist. Now don't you feel ashamed?

If you don't think he's telling white people to be ashamed, then how do you think people should feel when they're told they're racist?

-k

[Black Dog]

Since "racism" has the connotation of whitey picking on non-whitey (?) and since some people (such as Dr Butler) argue that non-whites aren't able to be racist, "reverse-racism" makes the distinction that the racism flows in the reverse direction.

Ah, so let's mangle the language for the lulz. Way to stick it to the man University of Delaware, kimmy!

Of course, you realize that by taking the position that "reverse racism" is somehow different from regular racism, you're conceding that racism is a one-way street (white against non-whites) and that the reverse requires a special term to distinguish it, thus validating the silly belief that only whites can be racist , the very bel;ief you're trying to repudiate.

If the term "reverse racism" offends the sensibilities of people like Dr Butler, then I am in favor of its use. If the term offends the sensibilities of pedants, then doubly so.

Then you won't complain if I refer to you as, say, "shitcock" instead of kimmy, then? I mean, you wouldn't want to be pedantic or anything...

I certainly didn't say that.

I ask you the same question: should we just pretend that people like Dr Butler aren't part of the "anti-racism" movement?

How about some context around your definition of what this "movement" is? It's not a stretch to say the NAACP, the ACLU, the ADL and the Black Panthers are part of the "anti-racist movement", but that doesn't mean any are representative of the whole or that alll ascribe to a monoithic belief system.

It seems like you more liberal types are the ones uncomfortable discussing this sort of "anti-racist" rhetoric.

Yeah, which is why I'm here, discussing it.

I am not seeking to apply that position to everyone within the "anti-racist movement".

I merely claim that the kind of statements made in Dr Butler's programme are hardly unique. Many academics and activists put forth arguments along the same line as Dr Butler. I just made mention of the University of Delaware "diversity training" course because it was handy and had been discussed here before. Give me a couple of days and I'll bury you under an avalanche of material from "anti-racists" that'll make even the most liberal white people blanch.

If that's how you want to spend your time, dear shitcock, that's up to you.

I'm surprised you'd even ask to be shown. We both know it'll be easy for me to dig up plenty of similar material to illustrate the point that Dr Butler's views are hardly isolated among "anti-racist" activists.

That such material exists isn't at issue here. The relevance and application is. I know very well that there's a lot of such wankery in academic circles, but that's where it tends to stay.

A straw-man? Was that a straw-man, BD? From you?

Just answering like with like.

I seek to point out that framing this debate in the confrontational terms often used by many "anti-racist" activists creates an accusatory, adversarial tone that likely generates antipathy. Do you disagree? Do you want to argue the point?

Maybe. But who cares? There's a multiplicity of approaches that can be taken and I don't see anything wrong with putting out views that challenge and prompt discussion. Half the time, this stuff is so outrageous, I can't help but imagine the whole point is to provoke.

Edited January 31, 2008 by Black Dog

[Ergonomic]

I personally am proud to be a middle aged male who can still put together a stiff pecker. I'd like to say that it has something to do with my upbringing, my accomplishments, what have you, but it's just bloody genetics.

What a weird thread.