White Pride

[Michael Hardner]

On 8/21/2018 at 11:22 AM, Leon said:

Calling Peterson a 'shit intellectual'  isn't criticism.   It is merely mindless 'white noise' and deserves the appropriate attention.

I already withdrew the comment one page back...

[Shady]

On 8/19/2018 at 12:48 PM, Argus said:

This is an excellent writeup on the topic.

White Americans may be embracing a race long associated with blandness and bad bread in part because they’re within shouting distance of becoming a minority in what they had been regarding as their country. Donald Trump is an aggravating factor, but American retreat to racial foxholes well predates his watch. For I also blame identity politics — which have whipped up racial antagonism, encouraged nakedly anti-white bombast and ushered in a glaring double standard that’s unsustainable. You cannot have black identity politics, and Latino identity politics, without conjuring the pastel version. Yet only ‘white identitarians’ are demonised as driven by hatred. Whites are the sole race the mainstream western media forbids to forge a sense of unity or to defend their own interest. The only identity whites are allowed is self-disgust. Whites who stray from ceaseless self-crit are moral degenerates.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2018/08/identity-politics-are-by-definition-racist/

This example is a good illustration of the topic you started.  It’s things like these that pull people towards alt-right resources and feelings.  Apparently this is what equality looks like now.

[Donnie]

On 5/14/2018 at 1:24 PM, Michael Hardner said:

"I stopped supporting him after he aligned himself with the fake news industry..."

I supported him earlier on, then I stopped.  What is unclear in that ?

In other words you see no media bias whatsoever.  Is that your position?

[Michael Hardner]

56 minutes ago, Donnie said:

In other words you see no media bias whatsoever.  Is that your position?

That's not a logical conclusion to what I said.

[Donnie]

6 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

That's not a logical conclusion to what I said.

I wasn't making any conclusion. 

I was merely asking a question.   

You refused to answer for whatever reason. 

 Thank you just the same sir.

[Michael Hardner]

22 hours ago, Donnie said:

1. I wasn't making any conclusion. 

2. I was merely asking a question.   

3. You refused to answer for whatever reason. 

 Thank you just the same sir.

1. "In other words you see no media bias whatsoever."

2. I should have answered "what are you talking about ?".  I made no comment on media bias - I went back and it wasn't even being discussed.  

3. The point came from out of nowhere.  I don't recall seeing media coverage of him, ie. the news.

You're welcome ?

 

[Donnie]

28 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. "In other words you see no media bias whatsoever."

2. I should have answered "what are you talking about ?".  I made no comment on media bias - I went back and it wasn't even being discussed.  

3. The point came from out of nowhere.  I don't recall seeing media coverage of him, ie. the news.

You're welcome ?

 

Ok.   I'll break it down below.   Sorry.  

You stopped supporting or following or watching P after he appeared on Rebel. Due to a journalistic bias perceived by you.  

So since youre so seemingly against media bias.  I want to know if you feel other media outlets in Canada are biased. 

And basically do you continue to support these outlets by consuming their content?

Thats what I was getting at in the earlier post of mine.

Edited March 16, 2019 by Donnie

[John Otis]

On 5/10/2018 at 1:18 AM, Argus said:

A few items and articles have provoked thought of late about the deliberate division of people into separate identity groups that politicians and social activists are busily engaged in. For politicians it's a way to win votes by tailoring legislation and policies to specific identity groups and sub-identity group members. For the social justice activists, who are inspired by Marxist anti-Capitalist ideology its the division of the world into oppressor and oppressed so they can harangue the former while exploiting the latter.

If we're all divided into separate 'tribes' now, then tribal behaviour will follow. We are, as a species, hard wired into tribalism after all. If the politicians and media and academics keep separating us into our separate groups, then those groups become tribes. The white tribe, the black tribe, the native tribe, the muslim tribe and the christian tribe, the asian tribe and the the gay tribe among others.

The problem is that these tribes are not treated equally. In fact, one is constantly singled out for abuse and attack. That being the white one. And that produces an obvious sense of resentment we can see rising in the form of populism and far right political parties, particularly in Europe where such tribalist separation is more advanced than here (though Trudeau is fighting desperately to catch up). Political tribalism and identity group tribalism are dividing America in the same way.

At its core, the problem is simple but fundamental. While black Americans, Asian Americans, Hispanic Americans, Jewish Americans, and many others are allowed – indeed, encouraged – to feel solidarity and take pride in their racial or ethnic identity, white Americans have for the last several decades been told they must never, ever do so.
People want to see their own tribe as exceptional, as something to be deeply proud of; that’s what the tribal instinct is all about. For decades now, nonwhites in the United States have been encouraged to indulge their tribal instincts in just this way, but, at least publicly, American whites have not.

On the contrary, if anything, they have been told that their white identity is something no one should take pride in. “I get it,” says Christian Lander, creator of the popular satirical blog Stuff White People Like, “as a straight white male, I’m the worst thing on Earth.”

...

Or consider this blog post in the American Conservative, worth quoting at length because of the light it sheds:

I’m a white guy. I’m a well-educated intellectual who enjoys small arthouse movies, coffeehouses and classic blues. If you didn’t know any better, you’d probably mistake me for a lefty urban hipster.

And yet. I find some of the alt-right stuff exerts a pull even on me. Even though I’m smart and informed enough to see through it. It’s seductive because I am not a person with any power or privilege, and yet I am constantly bombarded with messages telling me that I’m a cancer, I’m a problem, everything is my fault.

I am very lower middle class. I’ve never owned a new car, and do my own home repairs as much as I can to save money. I cut my own grass, wash my own dishes, buy my clothes from Walmart. I have no clue how I will ever be able to retire. But oh, brother, to hear the media tell it, I am just drowning in unearned power and privilege, and America will be a much brighter, more loving, more peaceful nation when I finally just keel over and die.

Trust me: After all that, some of the alt-right stuff feels like a warm, soothing bath. A “safe space,” if you will. I recoil from the uglier stuff, but some of it— the “hey, white guys are actually okay, you know! Be proud of yourself, white man!” stuff is really VERY seductive, and it is only with some intellectual effort that I can resist the pull … If it’s a struggle for someone like me to resist the pull, I imagine it’s probably impossible for someone with less education or cultural exposure.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/mar/01/how-americas-identity-politics-went-from-inclusion-to-division

Sorry I got bored reading it again.

 

I'm just going to take a wild guess and assume that as a white person you feel oppressed?

 

According to a lot of colored people, it is because they are victims of the whites ruthlessness. They claim that the whites have caused the most harm through colonization, imperialism, slavery, racism, wars, interference, forcing their culture and just the overall oppression of the colored people; therefore they believe that whites need to adhere to their needs even if it means oppression of the white people.

 

And to them, it isn't oppression of the white people but justice; if a white person is suffering, they deserve it  and some believe that if whites never existed, the world would be a better place to live.

 

Have you noticed that white movies and TV shows need to have colored people in them otherwise it would be considered racist if there weren't? Why doesn't China or Japan or India need to have other races in their Bollywoods? It is because they did not do anything bad.

 

Also notice how in TV shows or movies where the main character is supposed to be a non-white but is played by a white actor, people get angry? But when non-white foreign films do the same, nobody says anything? Because white people are evil and have to pay for their sins by making sure the actors are in accordance to the main character's nationality. Non-whites have not done anything wrong, so it is okay for them not to do that.

Edited March 16, 2019 by John Otis

[Michael Hardner]

7 hours ago, Donnie said:

1. You stopped supporting or following or watching P after he appeared on Rebel. Due to a journalistic bias perceived by you.  

2. So since youre so seemingly against media bias.  I want to know if you feel other media outlets in Canada are biased. 

3. And basically do you continue to support these outlets by consuming their content?

4. Thats what I was getting at in the earlier post of mine.

1. Rebel doesn't have a journalistic 'bias'.  They are barely journalists.  I would say the National Post has a journalistic bias, but I still read them all the time.  North 99 doesn't have a journalistic bias either.  They and The Rebel are pure propaganda pieces.

2. No.  Not against media bias.  Yes, the National Post, the Toronto Star, the CBC.  Everything run by a human has a bias, but the question is more how much they fight themselves to try to be objective.

3. I don't think consuming content automatically supports an outlet.  If so, then I guess I support the Rebel because I do glance at some things they post.

4. I appreciate that.  The issue I have isn't with bias, but with the new brand of digital propaganda rag.  The Rebel, in particular, earns its bread by enraging people and pushing them further apart by exaggerating situations through flamed-out stories.  By aligning with that, JP shows he needs money more than he needs to have integrity.  

 

 

[Donnie]

@Michael Hardner

Ok.  Cool.  I appreciate the response.  I dont disagree with you entirely btw.  

I dont read Rebel at all.  Im still on their mailing list so I see the headlines.  Sometimes they have a point.  Other times less so.

Id much prefer it if news outlets wete honest about their bias.  Instead of purporting to be giving neutral coverage.

Also, i firmly agree with you on all humans being biased.  It's incredible hard to be completely unbiased in coverage.

I look forward to more exchanges with you.  Thank you for well thought out replies.

[Michael Hardner]

9 hours ago, Donnie said:

1. much prefer it if news outlets wete honest about their bias.  Instead of purporting to be giving neutral coverage.

2. Also, i firmly agree with you on all humans being biased.  It's incredible hard to be completely unbiased in coverage.

3. I look forward to more exchanges with you.  Thank you for well thought out replies.

1. There are 3 flavours: those who try to be objective, those who claim to be objective but pursue an agenda, and those who are just propaganda and are not even truthful.
2. We are not robots.

3. It doesn't take much, but thanks.

[Donnie]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. There are 3 flavours: those who try to be objective, those who claim to be objective but pursue an agenda, and those who are just propaganda and are not even truthful.
 

I think its hard for a media outlet to be straight up propaganda.  Not even cbc does this.  I would've said cnn.  But they did run propaganda re. Covington School coverage. And are now being sued for some $250 million.

I would think most fit into the second option listed.

I prefer to just have the facts.  Hard data.  I don't need some poli sci grad telling me what they think as I dont care and am likely smarter than they are.  Most pundits on tv can only see whats in front of them instead of the real game being played. 

TV news and newspapers are mostly garbage for the sheep.  Which is why these mediums are dying and almost dead.

 

[Michael Hardner]

8 hours ago, Donnie said:

 TV news and newspapers are mostly garbage for the sheep.  Which is why these mediums are dying and almost dead.

 

I disagree.  The Globe and Mail is still influential and an agenda-setter... but this is OT

[GostHacked]

On 3/15/2019 at 11:30 PM, Donnie said:

Ok.   I'll break it down below.   Sorry.  

You stopped supporting or following or watching P after he appeared on Rebel. Due to a journalistic bias perceived by you.  

So since youre so seemingly against media bias.  I want to know if you feel other media outlets in Canada are biased. 

And basically do you continue to support these outlets by consuming their content?

Thats what I was getting at in the earlier post of mine.

The other notion is that Hardner should denounce anyone who has been on Rebel Media.

[Donnie]

On 3/17/2019 at 10:10 AM, GostHacked said:

The other notion is that Hardner should denounce anyone who has been on Rebel Media.

Why should this be the case?

[Realitycheck]

I have never understood why someone should be proud of something over which they had no control. Skin colour, place of birth etc. Smacks of an inbred sense of insecurity, which is of course, the very root of all racism regardless of the skin colour of said racist. 

[Michael Hardner]

19 hours ago, Realitycheck said:

I have never understood why someone should be proud of something over which they had no control. Skin colour, place of birth etc. Smacks of an inbred sense of insecurity, which is of course, the very root of all racism regardless of the skin colour of said racist. 

The word "Pride" came up as a solution to people feeling ashamed of these things.  But "Black unashamedness" sounds dumb, so Black Pride, the 1960s, James Brown succeeded as ideas.

 

"White Pride" is basically a license to suppress people.  These words aren't all logically mapped to their roots.

 

People should be proud of their character, their achievements but not really things that were given to them.

[bush_cheney2004]

12 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

The word "Pride" came up as a solution to people feeling ashamed of these things.  But "Black unashamedness" sounds dumb, so Black Pride, the 1960s, James Brown succeeded as ideas.

 

You left out a whole lot of history and context here....including "Black Power".

 

 

[Michael Hardner]

13 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

You left out a whole lot of history and context here....including "Black Power".

I don't really know it that well but I would be glad to take notes if you have anything to describe.

[bush_cheney2004]

31 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I don't really know it that well but I would be glad to take notes if you have anything to describe.

 

I think the point here is that black "pride" did not exist without far more aggressive and militant groups with civil rights objectives in the U.S. (e.g. X, Black Panther Party), Africa, and elsewhere.

So called "white pride" cannot be negatively dismissed given the full context and spectrum of black pride and black power groups/objectives if that is the historical comparison you are trying to make.

White pride and white power are not necessarily the same thing.

 

Edited March 29, 2019 by bush_cheney2004

[Michael Hardner]

8 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

White pride and white power are not necessarily the same thing.

In practical terms, and in the absence of any organization they are pretty much the same thing. 

And further - even though Black pride isn't exactly 'pride' but 'unashamedness' - the reasons for the movement were pretty clear, even if the objectives weren't... or maybe were just broad 'consciousness raising'.  

[bush_cheney2004]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

In practical terms, and in the absence of any organization they are pretty much the same thing. 

And further - even though Black pride isn't exactly 'pride' but 'unashamedness' - the reasons for the movement were pretty clear, even if the objectives weren't... or maybe were just broad 'consciousness raising'.  

 

Nope...far more complex than that.    You didn't live through it in the U.S., and watching it on TV isn't the same.

White pride is a purposeful distinction between White/Black power.    And they have the constitution/charter on their side.

White pride is instantiated by many, many mainstream organizations and traditions.

Edited March 29, 2019 by bush_cheney2004

[eyeball]

4 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

White pride is instantiated by many, many mainstream organizations and traditions.

Systematically so to speak.

[Realitycheck]

"Instantiated"? 

[Rue]

On 3/28/2019 at 7:22 AM, Michael Hardner said:

The word "Pride" came up as a solution to people feeling ashamed of these things.  But "Black unashamedness" sounds dumb, so Black Pride, the 1960s, James Brown succeeded as ideas.

 

"White Pride" is basically a license to suppress people.  These words aren't all logically mapped to their roots.

 

People should be proud of their character, their achievements but not really things that were given to them.

Yes.  I am not proud of being a Jew. The Talmud and Torah warned that pride is a moral weakness just like the New Testament does anecdotes many other philosophies and other religions do. The belief Jews have the right to sufferage or statehood is not based on pride but survival. Zionism is not about pride or feeling superior to others. I agree with religions and philosophies that warn pride is a weakness .

I do understand anyone who feels if they have been ridiculed responding to the ridicule with pride and dignity.

In that sense it is different than being used to feel better than someone else.  In that sense we really mean self respect not a nacissistic sense of self importance.

White pride is usually used as a justification to hate, resent non whites and justify it. Show me a white person using it to address hatred against whites in a healthy way and not as a platform to hate others I probably would see it as a healthy response to hatred.

All that said I believe we need to learn humility not pride.

Those are all my personal views to add to all of the comments.

Have someone show me someone with white pride who is not a neo nazi.

I like beliefs and values that teach humility. Pride to me is not something I need, I don't feel the need to show how wonderful I am. Pride for me is what insecure people give off..compensating for feeling inferior. Martin Luther King's version of identity I like. He preached for dignity of his people with humility. He was far more effective than any black panther. James Brown's pride really meant self respect. He did not preach false pride. His version of pride was self-respect but no false inflated ego.

 

 

Edited April 1, 2019 by Rue