Equal Time for White People

In multiracial and multicultural societies, select members of racially unconscious groups begin to increase the extremity of their views and fight for interests which would be unnecessary were the society in question uniracial. If Western nations were as racially coherent as they were a century ago, there would be no need for courses specifically intended to teach White heritage and culture to the populace. As demographics change and exclusive rights enable minority races to compete economically with the majority race, the majority sees its interests as a racial group threatened and as a result becomes more ethnocentric and ethnically conscious. Recently, as colonialism has receded and demographics have shifted radically in favor of non-Whites, White people have begun to become more racially conscious in societies where displaying such consciousness is "politically incorrect". This is precisely why "White Pride" groups (and extreme rightwing groups), which have seen recent surges in membership, were nonexistent in times where White domination in all facets of White nations was present and assured. Finally, since Western societies have treated White racial consciousness as being an outlet for racism (despite not treating racial consciousness amongst minority races in a similar manner), it has gone underground.

Whites as a racial group display the lowest levels of ethnocentric activity of all races, which is a characteristic of their unique evolutionary path. Thanks to the majority of college professors in White nations being liberal and having strong radical and communist sympathies, multiculturalism has become a topic incapable of being debated. In addition, more and more courses have been offered with the specific intent to bolster racial and ethnic consciousness amongst non-Whites and lower ethnic consciousness amongst Whites. When everything is said and done, you have a White host nation whose White citizens are socially incapable of showing any indication of ethnic consciousness in fear of offending the minority guests. This reality is truly unprecedented and worthy of great attention. Of course, this reality is also rather unsurprising as very high level intelligence cultural Marxists have been criticizing all institutions of the White Western Christian world for over a century. Were the Whites of past times racially conscious, today's multiculturalism and exclusivism in favor of minority races would not have been able to occur. Of course, as I already mentioned, the Whites of past times had no reason to be racially conscious because they didn't view other races as worthwhile competitors both economically and intellectually.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Not if you want to get into specifics, a general history course wouldn't have time to cover everything. That being said the general American history course could stand to go into a bit more detail considering the impact other races and cultures had on the American cultural development we know today.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I don't think its possible to have an American course in history or literature for example and not include the work of at least a few africa americans, especially in literature. But I guess I see your point in the details of covering everything. Anyway my point is that there is an american legacy that is not specifically an african american legacy since it doesn't happen in a vacuum but is intricately tied to mainstream american society. For example Miles Davis and Duke Ellington are important to Jazz in general, Jazz in general is an american musical phenomenon.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

That's not true SAM. They teach a great deal of misinformation in those black pride classes.

They also engage in revisionist history. Black kids are being taught in these classes that white "slave catchers" went into Africa and caught slaves with nets. They don't tell them what really happened: that blacks sold other blacks to white people. I wonder why they don't cover that little gem of a fact during their "Black History Month" too.

The point is, if racism is wrong or over-representation of one race is wrong, then it's ALWAYS wrong -- regardless of who the perceived victims might be or how noble their goals are. When you cater to a particular race, you are in fact indulging in racism... regardless of who is doing it. If people think that it's perfectly okay to have so-called "black culture" curriculums offered in our colleges and universities, then I for one would like to demand that equivalent courses in "white culture" be offered at the same time and in the same schools. If nobody is willing to offer such courses, then the black-oriented classes need to be shut down and abolished -- on the grounds that they do, in fact, encourage racism and racial bias. That is the solution I would prefer.

 

I should mention I've been to a racial specific class and a feminism class even. And I'm... well... something... some kind of mutt, I usually pass for white but I'm certainly not white by any neo-nazi standard.

 

Well ...white "History", is basically simply "History". I imagine you can take classes in asian history, etc.

If it pisses you off that much or is a "requirement". Go to school somewhere else. Don't give them any of your money.

 

Jesus, I can't believe you guys aren't refuting this shit better.

Classes emphasizing black history ARE NOT RACIST. Racism is thinking people are inferior or your race is superior due to race.

As has been pointed out, there is historically a severe lack of attention to the history of blacks, both with regard to slavery and the history of Africa (apart from Egyptians). Furthermore, many people claim that black complicity in the slave trade is ignored and if known it would absolve Europeans and Americans of the crime. That is absurd. Blacks did not invent the trade, which was originally driven by European demand for sugar, and later American demand for labor in the cotton industry. Whatever victimizing occurred in traditional African society was nothing compared to the scale at which Europeans treated black people as property.

White people history is basically history as it has been taught in Europe and America until very recently.

 

No, Fuck is a different swear word ... when you say Frak it's more fun and has a different feeling to it. Softer, like you're not really seriously all the pissed but could be, but just don't care all that much.

Fracken white people...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

You'd have to watch Battlestar Gallactic to appreciate it. Which you should, as it's a great series.

 

God you people are culturally illiterate! Is there anyone anywhere who gets sniffy!!!!!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USkCsrO9sz4

 

Or maybe the supremacists aren't smart enough to understand what people are saying?

It might have something to do with frustration, because—

—in twenty years or so that I've followed this general debate in our society, the white supremacists still don't understand that. I'm of the opinion that they just don't want to. So instead of stating the obvious, people are trying to play a longer hand and set rhetorical and logical traps. But the problem with that approach is that the supremacists are almost completely arbitrary, and change tacks on a whim with no regard whatsoever to consistency or conceptual integrity.

 

Nuns! Arse!

 

On the contrary. The white supremacists (as does anyone who wants to incite) know exactly what gets people all wound up: fear. Fear of other in particular so they play on those deepseated fears. Sad thing is; most of the time it works.

 

Feck!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Exactly.

Helping make society more equal by teaching all sides of history, not just the white version, is not racist.

 

Not only possible, but until recently normal - standard.

 

Why is it that if anyone brings up this topic they are immediately labeled as a white supremacist? Tiassa are you implying Saven is a white supremacist? I think this is a tactic to dissuade people from addressing topics not deemed politically correct and its bullshit. If he had begun a thread of not enough courses on minority topics there would be no negative drama. Its a way of finger pointing to dismiss and silence debate.

 

Years of experience.

It's not the topic that is the problem. Address the topic without beginning on a basis of bigoted assumptions and racist whining, and discussion will happen with less labeling.

There is a real topic here, after all. Speaking of my own ethnic group, I've found that few people are reasonably acquainted with the Scotch-Irish role in the history of America - as a defined and self-recognized ethnically coherent group of related people, that is; as individuals they are prominently considered.

This group identity analytical approach has its strengths and weaknesses, worthy of discussion. But the OP approach is not much help.

 

That's fascinating. I mean I think I am pretty good at detecting bigotry and I didn't read any of that in the OP.

So when he writes this:

"The point is, if racism is wrong or over-representation of one race is wrong, then it's ALWAYS wrong -- regardless of who the perceived victims might be or how noble their goals are. When you cater to a particular race, you are in fact indulging in racism... regardless of who is doing it. If people think that it's perfectly okay to have so-called "black culture" curriculums offered in our colleges and universities, then I for one would like to demand that equivalent courses in "white culture" be offered at the same time and in the same schools. If nobody is willing to offer such courses, then the black-oriented classes need to be shut down and abolished -- on the grounds that they do, in fact, encourage racism and racial bias. That is the solution I would prefer."

You read bigot.

In what part of the post exactly does the bigotry appear or reveal itself?

What is the 'correct' way of broaching the subject?

 

Are classes in Asian history over-representing Asian people and thus racist? Are classes about Art over-representing Artists and thus biased against non-artists? Specialization in education cannot be considered bias, and complaining specifically about specialized black history courses reveals more about the complainer than the subject.

 

Oh so if someone questions a woman's study group then they are immediately anti-woman is the reasoning? So basically you have proved my point which is that a value judgement is placed on anyone who raises an issue thats deemed untouchable by the politically correct police thought force. He used Blacks as an example but you didn't ask him if he felt that way about all groups because he is a de facto racist by even broaching the subject. So let's note, an all white community is xenophobic and ethnocentric but an all asian or black community is not. An all black club is an exertion of cultural expression but a white club is a congregation of neo nazi's and white supremacists. Yeah I get it

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Haha! Wow!

Political correctness is insidious.