Equal Time for White People

My school has a class on the culture of white middle America this upcoming fall semester. Problem solved, quit your bitching.

It sounds interesting if I had any free time in my schedule I'd take it just to learn something.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Who's bitching Cutsie? Saven simply questioned something that's 'taboo'.

I on the other hand is trying to point out something which is fair since its being insinuated that Saven is a white supremacist which I think is particularly unfair and nasty.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

A white history class would be redundant, since white people's history has never been under-represented. Yes, you are a racist in the USA if you insist that a white history class is even necessary.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I agree that european history is represented.

So that's okay with you? Its okay to label people as racist for asking for a white history class? Actually he wasn't asking for a white history class he said if Blacks can have a black study group then its only fair to have a white study group and he thinks the idea of a separate group as inherently racist. For that he is labeled racist which not only is ridiculous but an insult to the very notion of free thought and debate.

In short you dismiss the topic by attacking the character of the one broaching the subject. Another way of silencing debate since you are basically saying that its not to be questioned.

 

Hey Cutsie better not take that class its racist you know. Spider just said so

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

In the context of almost all of the history classes currently being offered amounting to "white history" in the first place, and the demand that the black history classes be eradicated, yes.

Or do you not agree that white history is already amply represented?

And yet, he maintains membership in and allegiance to a separate group - i.e., "white people" - which is, according to him, an inherently racist position.

And so, by his own insistence, any consistent person must consider him a racist.

 

I'm dismissing the topic because it's dumb to fight for the rights of people who's rights were never really threatened. The claim of reverse racism is often the last argument of the blatant racist.

 

Go just two posts back and you will find the answer. Read the thread and you would have known what's what. Just a suggestion

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

If you went back and read the posts you would have seen this posted by Saven:


"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 shouldn't post in threads you think are dumb. He never said anything about fighting for rights and he never said anything about reverse racism which by the way does exist. He simply called into question the validity of having separate groups and then calling a white group racist.

 

Oooo it's a bit dry for my tastes.

 

Again:

After which point you agreed that the general cirricula at these schools has always been exactly such a course in "white culture." The supposed lack of which is the entire basis for the racist program promoted by the OP.

Do you or do you not agree that white culture is amply represented in schools? You said a few posts ago that you did, of course, but since then you've continued to defend a stance premised on exactly the opposite supposition.

 

Quad. Begin from post one and read through the thread before you come up with your stupid questions.

 

It's a very simple, direct question. Why do you go to such lengths to avoid answering it, unless you don't like the implications?

Anyone who can't see that the author of the OP is a blatant racist - from the material in red, if nothing else - is either a fool or a liar.

 

And its very simple to read my posts asshole. Go back and do the work and stop being so lazy.

 

I have read them, identified certain troubling inconsistencies, and asked you to address them. It really doesn't get much more straightforward than that, and childish bristling isn't going to convince anyone of anything. Or, nothing you'd want them convinced of, anyway.

I'd either respond substantiatively or just quit, if I were you.

 

Where is the inconsistency? Show the posts where I am being inconsistent.

 

I just finished doing that - repeatedly - and you just finished trying to distract me with insults instead of responding. Why don't you just read the last 10 or so posts in this thread, and try again?

 

Distract you? I asked you to show me a post of mine where i am being inconsistent. What exactly is the inconsistency?

 

You're genuinely unable to recall the subject matter of my posts of 5 minutes ago, which you've been responding to? Doesn't speak well of you.

But for the third time: you claim to agree, on the one hand, that white culture is amply represented in school cirricula. And then you agree with the premises of the OP, which explicitly states that white culture is NOT represented in school cirricula.

Which is it?

 

You say I am inconsistent and I say show me the post which shows an inconsistency on this subject. Now prove your assertion, the onus is on you not for me to prove something that hasn't been pointed out. Show me the post that says I agree with the OP that white culture is not represented