Equal Time for White People

In the choice of vocabulary such as "cater to", in the obliviousness to the present and long-standing existence of exactly what he claims to find lacking, in the attempted sendup which reveals the stereotypical view of its composer, and so forth.

One possibility, if he has a sense of humor: He could demand that the white studies classes be accurately named, as the black studies classes are. Right now they are often called "American History" and "Literature" and such, which clearly denigrates the racial commonality of their content. Why not show some pride?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

From what I understand white cultural groups do not exist in high schools or university, anyone is free to correct me if I am wrong. But again this isn't his point really, he seems to question the validity of racial heritage groups under the banner of non-racism. He never said anywhere that whites were being disenfranchised he said he wouldn't even advocate the mock list being used in schools. You seem to hypersensitive and reading something that isn't there. Neither Saven in his OP nor I in my post have said anything about minorities being favored. I do recognize though that if any cultural group under the banner of white-american as opposed to afro american for example would be considered racist. I don't see the point in calling it racist if other groups can have these kind of groups.

And as far as this:

And yet he spends his free time looking out for the interests and advancement of his own race group, and inventing false pretexts to suppress any other racial groups, in public institutions no less, including crass demonization of black studies.


It seems more than a tad bit hysterical and malicious since you are assuming 'advancement of his own race group', which he in no way nor shape indicates, and then you go so far as to say he is inventing false pretexts. Ask him if he hates blacks or minorities but don't just assume this. I think the fact that you need to have these groups is a sign of racism because if you had an inclusive school curricula you wouldn't need all these separate group as you would be teaching the contributions of all americans and since the contributions have been diverse there would be no need to represent them in the contributions of a particular group. Like I said before you cannot study the history of jazz without mentioning Miles Davis nor can you study american literature without mentioning langston hughes and James Baldwin so what would the point be of a separate group.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

That's the title of the thread but the content isn't about an inequity towards whites. Again he is questioning whether it isn't inherently racist to have these groups.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I know that Cutsie it isn't the point is it. The point I made is whether it is fair to categorize Saven as a white supremacist or racist simply because he questioned the validity of these groups.

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

i say! who let the sand peeps in?

/outraged

 

So you guys are just complaining about the use of a word then? It probably most likely has something to do with the residual sting leftover from Jim Crow laws and from way before that (as there are many people who still remember what life was like at the time) Whenever white was mentioned in front of something it meant no other race was included. And even to this day for the most part when someone feels the need to include white in the description of their group it usually means others are excluded. However if that isn't the case then they should be able to leave it if they wish. When Saven started naming classes I assumed he meant that it was unfair that there was no class called "White Cultural Studies" and since there isn't all other cultural studies courses should be disbanded. Am I still missing the point?

I don't think Saven is racist, he just wants to whine.

 

No I don't think you have missed his point. Tiassa implies he is a white supremacist, Spider says that even bringing up the topic is racist and now Quad comes in and has labeled the thread starter as some kind of neo nazi white supremacist.

Actually you and I are the few who took the time to deal with the issue head on without all the insinuations of racism. I not only think political correctness wrong but unhealthy. Look at the hysteria in Quads posts for christs sake. You would have thought Saven had a swastika as an avatar

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Lol, what's even more entertaining is that the people who are attacking me on the basis of being anti-black for condemning these courses, would no doubt oppose similarly designed courses aimed at promoting whiteness (like the mock curriculum in my OP) in the same way that the current ones promote blackness or any other sort of ethnic characteristic.

The hypocrisy and double standards is very revealing about them, in a lot of ways.

 

What part of "the proposed curriculum is not serious" do you little klownshoes not get? All it is, is a little mockery and reversal of the black pride classes that are being taught -- and it's hilarious how well it mirrors the material in those classes.

 

After a full rundown: most of you are far too dim to understand the point of this thread, I see. I said it very plainly that the ultimate solution should be simply to abolish these racial pride classes entirely. I also said plainly that I'm not truly for white pride classes being taught in schools.

Lucysnow, nieztschefan, and maybe a couple others were the only people who caught onto this, and I applaud them for their good sense. The rest of you need to stop actively searching for things to attack. Search for meaning instead. It will do wonders for your intellectual development.

 

But there is a real need for expressions of pride, just as with the feminist movement, gay pride, and the new atheists. Our society has a history of oppressing these minorities and only activism can correct this.

 

Rule # 2 in the Troll Handbook

When other people join in the thread, the rules are simple: if they side with you, follow-up immediately and enthusiastically, congratulating them on their courage and intelligence; if they side with your opponent, insult the tossers.​

 

Why is there such a need? If black cultural values are truly as valuable as they are saying, then they shouldn't need any amount of black pride posturing in order to convince themselves of it. And let us not mistake ourselves: these courses are designed for them and only them. Most of the seats are taken by the minority whose image is being celebrated in the class.

 

Be careful when the sun comes up, Gustav Troll King, or you will turn to stone!

 

I don't know what black cultural values are, I was referring to black history and accomplishments, the knowledge of which will go a long way towards ending irrational racism in this country. Black people need to know their own history as much as other races need to know about it, as they are the victims of irresponsible neglect in this area too.

 

I don't agree. You're right in that people on all sides need to get over it and move forward. But courses like these are merely a diversionary tactic on the part of blacks. When I see courses such as these being taught in our colleges, I tend to react with LESS sympathy, not more. These folks need to grow up and start fixing their own communities. This is never going to happen, however, if they continue to focus so heavily upon racial differences -- and racial pride months and college classes such as the ones that I've described are only reinforcing that sense of separation.

 

and if this activism occasionally goes overboard, getting perhaps a bit irrational and radical, we can, as a compassionate and caring people, afford them some indulgence.

yep
sounds good to me
a liberal do gooder
not a jack booted nazi
not a republican thug

 

not a saven/lucysnow/cutie/niet
4 thick as bricks freaks that imagine this is a bbs over at aol

/sneer

 

Maybe you have to ask yourself why that is. Do you feel perhaps that they are out of their subservient place in society when celebrating the deeds of their ancestors?

Knowledge of their own history does not in any way detract from that task. It might help them find solutions appropriate to their culture.

Well nothing you might wish is going to change the fact that their culture is separate, and that is nothing bad. The bad thing is hating them for it. We are a multicultural society that can tolerate different ways of living.

 

This and that

I disagree insofar as I don't think your point necessarily stands to the contrary.

I mean, yes, white supremacists know exactly what gets people wound up, but it's difficult to view them in a context that suggests they know how wrong they are, both morally and intellectually, but go on with it, anyway. I mean, there are far easier and more popular ways to go out of one's way to be a complete prick than white supremacy. One could run for office, for instance. Or get a scholarship to Harvard Law, pass the bar, and then become an ambulance chaser advertising for class action clients on late-night television.

• • •​

One need not be a white supremacist to fall under their spell. It's an easy, empowering notion of equality the supremacists offer.

If we were talking about beauty pageants (e.g. Miss Black America), I'd be right there with him. But in the United States, there is a long-running battle between "orthodox" (for lack of a better term) and revisionist historians. This is one of the notable times when the revisionists have been right. For instance, consider the idea of a Lone Star edition textbook. In these, which were (and maybe still are) published for the satisfaction of textbook review boards in Texas, myths were retained in the historical narrative because it was unfair to actually tell history according to its sources.

This sort of fight carries out in various forms over time. In the '90s it was blasphemous to suggest that the story of Christopher Columbus should be taught according to the primary source record. After all, it's just unfair to cast a national hero in such terms. A slaver and a murderer? Oh, the horrible, horrible liberal revisionists! Who cares if we have it in Columbus' own hand? He's an American hero, damn it!

At least into the 1980s, history textbooks were teaching that Jim Crow laws came about because blacks were too lazy after emancipation to be useful. You know, them Negroes brought it on themselves.

More to the point, it's an answer to Spidergoat. I can only apologize for not being more careful in order to phrase the answer specifically to your satisfaction.

To the other, it would be helpful if you would be so kind as to condescend to post a list of your standards, so that we mere mortals can be better assured of how not to offend you.