If you can't beat them, call them raciss. by Wulfenstar

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

If you can't beat them, call them raciss.

POSTED BY: WULFENSTAR
UPDATED: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 07:17
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 4923
PAGE 3 of 3

Tuesday, July 13, 2010 4:19 PM

CHRISISALL

You are sick, Lex...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, July 13, 2010 4:35 PM

FREMDFIRMA

ummm.

this is a thing, a familiar comfort, see?
when something bad happens in your life every day over a long period of time it goes from being horrible to intolerable and eventually becomes a familiar thing, like part of your life as much as waking up in the morning, and people find comfort in their rituals because it is structure, which gives them a foundation from which they can pretend the world makes some kind of sense even when it really doesnt except in our perceptions of it.

so when that bad thing doesnt happen its like this hole in your reality, like the sun didn't come up or something and you cant deal because it shows you that even your own precious rituals are nothing more than a collection of habits with which you fool yourself into thinking the world runs the way you expect it to, like youre important enough to matter, when the reality is that the world doesnt care about you at all.
most people find that knowledge so scary that even something really awful is better because no matter how awful it is, they can depend on it and pretend they are the center of their own reality, the hero of their own story, with all the immunities that implies rather than accepting just how random and unfair life really is, especially when someone has been bashing them over the head with it, and when all of someones illusions about reality start crashing, they always grab for the strongest, easiest one to keep alive, the one that doesnt take any effort, doesnt require any proof, the very foundation of the little sand castle which is most peoples make-believe understanding of the world around them, cut into nice neat little slices where everything fits and nothing every has to be questioned, every explanation makes sense, a little tiny circle around them so they dont have to look past themselves and see the ocean of the real world because it scares them so very much.

-frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, July 13, 2010 5:46 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
By that rationale Agent,

I am owed lots of money. I am owed a position in a high paying job, I am owed a house, a car, and my own TV station. I deserve my own business, where I do not have to pay as high of a tax, AND.... while Im at it...I deserve to never be questioned/called out on my words regarding race.

Not only that, I demand to have every company make available option #3 on their phone sytems whereby people who speak Wulf can talk to customer service.

I am owed free healthcare, and my own security force.

See? i was the victim of real racism, the bloody kind, and it happened in MY lifetime (not hundreds of years ago).

So why dont you guys get to working on that? I'll wait.

You say that you are "owed" these things. Do you think that there are people somewhere who have been GIVEN all these things solely because of the color of their skin?

Do you know some black person who was given lots of money, a high paying job, a TV station, a house, a car, and all the rest of it, and didn't have to do a thing for any of it? Do you really? Can I have his or her name?

Black people, brown people, yellow, red, white people, male, female, gay, straight people... Nobody is "owed" anything but a chance at that house, car, job, or any of it. You can pretend that the black guy you hate because he has a nice home, a pretty wife, and a big-screen TV got them as some sort of reward just for being black, but it just might be because he worked his ass off and got educated while you were off playing Baby Gangsta with your homeys. Did you ever consider that? You're as ridiculous as those you hate, those you despise, those you call "animals" and worse, those gangstas who you left behind, and who now look at you as having only gotten ahead of them because you're white and had it handed to you, and not because of any hard work you may have put in to EARN IT.

AURaptor's Greatest Hits:

Friday, May 28, 2010 - 20:32 To AnthonyT:
Go fuck yourself.
On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you.

Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, July 13, 2010 5:59 PM

KWICKO

Wulf, you seem to see anti-discrimination laws as racist towards you. You seem to believe that because someone beat you down for being white in a black neighborhood, that equates to racism. You seem to think that affirmative action programs are institutionalized racism.

Institutionalized racism is going to the bank for a home mortgage, because you've found a really nice house in a good area, and you can afford it because you just got a good raise and have a bright future - and then being told that you can't buy that house, not because of anything you've done that would disqualify you, but because you're black. Period.

Institutionalized racism is being thrown in jail for daring to drink out of the "Whites Only" drinking fountain. Or being denied admission to the country club because of your race, unless you want to work as a waiter there.

Anti-discrimination laws don't say that you have to hire blacks over whites; they say you can't show a pattern of preference. If you routinely interview people for a position, and 100% of the time you decide to hire the white guy, even though the black guy or brown girl was just as qualified, just as good at the job, then that's a problem. You've shown a pattern of discrimination.

I'm not crazy about affirmative action programs, but I can see where they'd be useful in a broad sense. Say you have 1000 employees in a factory. It would make sense that in general, your employee demographics would somewhat closely resemble the overall population demographics in your area. If they don't, you might have a race problem. If I'm running a factory in an area that's made up of a population that's 75% black, and I only hire white workers for my factory, that's pointing out a pretty glaring inconsistency.

AURaptor's Greatest Hits:

Friday, May 28, 2010 - 20:32 To AnthonyT:
Go fuck yourself.
On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you.

Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, July 13, 2010 6:13 PM

KWICKO

Quote:
Originally posted by Malachite:
Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Wait, what? Niki, no. You misunderstood the link. Your conclusion is fallacious.

You can't approach a logical quandry by making your conclusion first, i.e. "Wulf is wrong" and then make an argument for why Wulf is wrong by inference from his background. It's not addressing his argument, it's making a personal attack on Wulf and his background. The argument you are making is "this is why Wulf is the way he is," not "this is why Wulf is wrong about racism."

Byte, I agree with this. I did not find HK's pseudo-analysis of Wulf compelling...

On another point related to the argument. What is everyone's response to this part of the article?
Quote:

Rand Paul , who came under fire in May for criticizing the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Paul said he supports the act and opposes discrimination, but added that the government doesn't have a right to tell private restaurant owners who they can and cannot serve.

This seems like an odd statement to me. Paul opposes discrimination (in his personal life, I presume), but doesn't want the government interfering with what private citizens decide to do, even if what they do is discriminate. Is that a core belief of people who want to minimize government interference? That they may have personal beliefs, but they don't want the government to make their beliefs law? I can sort of see that point. At the same time, I can also see that not having anti-discrimination laws would be a step backwards, because it would only increase the opportunities to be racist or lead to more obvious examples of segregation (like restaurant owners posting "no blacks" in the window or something). Anyone else want to comment on Paul's quote?

My problem with Paul's quote is this: He's saying that if you open a business to the public, you should be able to deny people service based on nothing but the color of their skin. Now, if you want to have a PRIVATE Whites-Only Dinner Club, you can do that (they generally still call those "country clubs" where they still exist); but once you open to the general public, you're open to THE GENERAL PUBLIC. Even the black ones. You can say, "No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service", but if you say "Whites Only", then you're not open to the public. You're open only to whites.

So that's my problem with Rand's stance on it. I can post a "No Blacks" sign on my house if I want; it's not open to the public. I can't post a "No Blacks" sign on a public park.

AURaptor's Greatest Hits:

Friday, May 28, 2010 - 20:32 To AnthonyT:
Go fuck yourself.
On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you.

Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, July 13, 2010 6:22 PM

KWICKO

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
As to Rand Paul...

His position is clear.

If you own a business, its YOUR business.

You want to be an idiot and ban a certain customer base, thats on YOUR dumbass.

So if, say, Starbucks decided to ban guns - concealed or open - in their establishments nationwide, you'd no doubt fully support that decision, right?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, July 13, 2010 6:37 PM

KWICKO

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
"You were laughing when you typed that right? Come on, be honest!"

Actually, I wasn't laughing. I was being honest.

I believe that if we all stopped trying to segregate ourselves according to race, and instead, focused on our common heritage of being Americans... things would be a lot better.

Again, I point out that you're still thinking in groupthink. You're trying to move past small tribes into the larger nation-state era of thinking, but it's a global world now. Your leaders do not think of themselves as Americans. Your admired businessmen do not care about Country. Patriotism™ is now a brand name, and we stamp it for you wholesale in China, where we can do it for $0.03 per unit.

Quit thinking small. We're not one nation; we're one world. There's only one race: The Human Race. And you're getting passed and falling behind in it.

Quote:

But its a long road to that. One of the first steps being... stop giving special consideration to "protected" groups.

I actually agree with you on this. Stop affirmative action, stop quotas, stop even being allowed to ask someone their race on an application. Stop those perks and protections afforded to spouses, or people with children, stop all those tax breaks and rebates, stop all those employee benefits, stop "protecting" the wealth of hedge-fund managers who pay the 20% capital gains tax on their wages instead of the 38% income tax. Stop giving special consideration to gays - apply the same laws and rules to them as you apply to everyone else, and quit singling them out. You with me on all that?

Quote:

But thats me, and just my silly little opinion. I do live in Wulfie-world (tm) where miracles can happen, and people can actually live together without being boxed off in corners.

Just for future reference, if you're using Windows, the ™ superscript is done by holding down the "Alt" key and typing "0153". On a Mac, it's just Option-2. Might help if you're going to stay in WulfieWorld™.

AURaptor's Greatest Hits:

Friday, May 28, 2010 - 20:32 To AnthonyT:
Go fuck yourself.
On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you.

Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, July 13, 2010 6:41 PM

KWICKO

Quote:
Originally posted by mincingbeast:
Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Some of the things people say here make me physically ill.

No, Im serious.

Ill read some inane post, missing the whole point or trying to cover up their inequities... and I feel ill. Like vomitous.

Dude, why in the devil's name would you make such an admission? Ty Cobb once said "Never let them hear you holler," because once folks now where you're soft, they'll attacK you there. Cobb was a great man. And wise, too.

Anyway, I think you're neat, but in light of your admission, wonder if I will be able to resist trying to make you puke and/or befoul your briefs through forum posts. I have always wished my posts had the power to make people physically ill.

Searching for the Brown Post, eh? I take it you've heard of the mythical "Brown Chord" in music, that will make the listener lose control of his bowels? Sounds like you're after the forum equivalent. Good luck in your quest; I'll be surprised if you find it. In fact, I think it's fair to say, if you find it, I'll shit myself!

And with that, I think I'm *finally* caught up in this thread. It moved quick, and I had a long day, a hard bike ride, and a late night on top of that, but I think I'm up to speed.

Wulf, your salient point here seems to be that it's racist of the NAACP to point out racist elements in the Tea Parties, and all racism is wrong, no matter who's doing it. And you back it up with an article wherein the Tea Parties call out the racist elements in the NAACP.

Doesn't that make the Tea Parties racist, then, by your own argument and the transitive law of mathematics?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, July 13, 2010 7:33 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
So if, say, Starbucks decided to ban guns - concealed or open - in their establishments nationwide, you'd no doubt fully support that decision, right?

Ooooh. Ouch. Touche!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, July 14, 2010 3:46 AM

MALACHITE

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Quote:
So if, say, Starbucks decided to ban guns - concealed or open - in their establishments nationwide, you'd no doubt fully support that decision, right?
Ooooh. Ouch. Touche!

I thought Paul was okay with letting restaurant owners forbid guns in their establishment. I get this from his other quote in the article

Quote:
"If we want to harbor in on private businesses and their policies, then you have to have the discussion about, 'Do you want to abridge the First Amendment as well,'" Paul said on MSNBC's Rachel Maddow show. "If you decide that restaurants are publicly owned and not privately owned, then do you say that you should have the right to bring your gun into the restaurant, even though the owner of the restaurant says, well, no, we don't want to have guns in here."

I interpreted from this quote (and his other one in the article) that Paul was okay with restaurant owners banning patrons of a certain color, just like he was okay with restaurant owners banning patrons from bringing in firearms. He makes race and bearing arms equivalent in this instance -- but they aren't. The problem is, bearing arms is a voluntary thing, that someone can choose to leave in the car. But you can't voluntarily leave your race behind in the car.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, July 14, 2010 3:58 AM

MALACHITE

I just wanted to post an interesting link/study summary, which I thought was relevant. It's main point is that if we try to teach our kids to be colorblind, we won't overcome racism. Even if we teach our kids vague statements like "Everybody's equal" or "We're all the same under the skin", it didn't seem to overcome racist thoughts. This article argues for actually teaching our kids that kids are different colors and races -- that by parents ignoring differences in color/race, the kids assume that people of another color are different and shouldn't be talked about because they are bad. Any thoughts? (As always, you can't judge a study by its media coverage, but still...)

http://www.newsweek.com/2009/09/04/see-baby-discriminate.html

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, July 14, 2010 4:04 AM

MALACHITE

Quote:
Originally posted by mincingbeast:
Haha, quick, get a load of the self-loathing goy crackers.

Don't know if this is sarcasm, but if your underlying point is, "It is pointless to be ashamed of your color either because you're in the majority or because people of your color have been oppressive towards other races", I'm totally with you. (Of course, you can still feel bad that others have been oppressed and work to change that, but you don't have to feel bad about your color itself).

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, July 14, 2010 4:58 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

This IS part of their culture... so Im waiting to see who will be the first person to judge.

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/07/13/vaseline-launches-skin-white
ning-facebook-tool-india/

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, July 14, 2010 5:48 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Now I’VE got a lot of catching up to do! But there’s only a little I want to respond to.

Yes, ending racism isn’t the complete “fix”, certainly. Humans all too easily find some reason to make others “different”, “less than”, etc. Nationalism, religion, class, politics (as we see here with the dehumanization of one side or the other)...racism is just one, and one I find reprehensible. I don’t think there’s anything moronic about it, Chris, it’s a fact of human nature—SOME human nature. People seem to NEED an enemy of some sort, I’m not sure why.

Chris, thank you for that. I hate the French in general (see, I have my own prejudices!). I ADORE the language, but the people...not so much! I’ve got a soft spot for Brits, Aussies and Canucks, on the other hand...and of course Afghans. But I could do without the French quite nicely, thank you.

Boy, Frem, you got that right:

Quote:
most people find that knowledge so scary that even something really awful is better

I’m not sure I agree with the rest, but it’s been very disheartening to learn that one—which is one of the reasons we elect the morons we do.

Mike, does no good to ask those questions of Wulf...he believes what he believes and I’m sure he’s convinced there are MANY blacks who’ve been given those things without working for them. Just as your excellent descriptions of institutionalized racism won’t get through; I’m sure he’s got some rationalization to come back with; if not, he’ll just call you names.

And yes, that’s my problem with Rand, too. He says that any “government sponsored” place should be open to all, like a park, but that private enterprise shouldn’t be messed with. His (and some here) argument is that it’s bad business and you’d lose business if you excluded one race, so private enterprise would learn and change. That is such idiocy it makes me laugh; businesses in the South pre-Civil Rights did FINE by excluding black people, and probably would have continued to do so if there had been no Civil Rights Act, etc.

Mala, you’re absolutely right, in my book; Paul’s correlation between guns and race is a fallacy. In part because, as you said,

Quote:
The problem is, bearing arms is a voluntary thing, that someone can choose to leave in the car

There’s more to it, of course, but I found his comparison a bad one for that reason alone.

Fascinating article, Mala. It holds up my own belief; that most humans will find something to identify with and look at anyone who doesn’t identify with that same thing as “the other”.

Quote:
Bigler's experiment seems to show how children will use whatever you give them to create divisions

makes perfect sense to me, given children will pick on someone “different” (like me, being tall), even if it’s just that the person is shy or talks differently. The “white bread” kids that are forceful and self-confident are the ones people gravitate toward—even tho’ the VISIBLE self-confidence can often hide feelings of inferiority. The fact that children often ridicule and/or pick on anyone who is perceived as “different” relates directly to race, in my opinion.

I found it really interesting that parents had such a hard time talking to their kids about race. Is it an indication that we’re in a “tweener” time, where the changes have been so short over a couple of generations that we’re not sure how to handle it yet? Maybe it’s easier to ACT on lack of racism than to know how to TALK about it?

Wulfwind, the article you linked BACKS the concept that there is racism, I’m not sure what YOU perceived it as saying. You’re also forgetting that the caste system in India has been around for thousands of years, and it was the lighter-skinned who had the highest position in that caste order. Also that Indians admire most things American, so it’s not surprising they’d want to emulate us. Bear in mind that, in the cradle of civilization—in other words, where we ALL come from—lighter-skinned people were considered inferior. It goes both ways, it’s a reflection of man’s need to consider some group “less than”...if you bother to read the article Mala put up, you’ll see that prejudice and discrimination run both ways even in children, by the red/blue t-shirt experiment. Nobody says there isn’t racism on both sides, only that in America, in this time, OUR problem with racial differences still exists. And its institutionalization still exists, even if it’s not blatant everywhere.

Obama is half White, yet everyone considers him Black. I wonder why that is, if racism is dead? Why is he portrayed as a monkey, a witch doctor, etc.? Because racism still exists in America. Your argument about the NAACP is false on the face of it, which you’ve never addressed. The NAACP was calling for bringing attention to the racism, nothing more. The other side was calling for the NAACP to lose its non-profit status, which goes a whole lot further. That speaks to the attitudes on both sides quite clearly, but you never responded to it.

I'm happy for you that you're content to dream of your little WulfWorldTM (Mike, the Alt 0153 didn't work for me). But I'm afraid it's not connected to any real world, and never will be.

Lastly, can you ever find ANYTHING that isn’t propounded by FauxNews? It’s obviously your primary authority, but that doesn’t make it a valid one.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, July 14, 2010 5:49 AM

MALACHITE

RE: skin whitening facebook app

Interesting (and a bit sad if it is because they actually idealize whites). This appears to be an application which promotes their skin lightening cream product, which is actually doing quite well now in India. Evidently, fair skin is an important feature when considering a future spouse. I wonder what the draw is? (Is it that they want to look white, because whites are the ideal for beauty or power for them? or is is it something else). The something else could be some socially ingrained preference or something. In the US, for example, we tend to idealize big breasts (see the boob thread if you have doubts) as desirable, and if a female doesn't have them, there is a booming implant industry there to take care of that "short coming"...

ETA: It looks like Niki already answered some of my questions about white skin being idealized in India.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, July 14, 2010 5:53 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Yup, Mala. Again, I'd bet thousands of years of the caste system in India, while I believe no longer legal, lingers...that may well be part of it.

And you're right; different body features are positive and negative in different cultures. Some like their women "with some meat on their bones", ours portrays the "optimum" woman as clotes racks, i.e., runway models, etc.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, July 14, 2010 7:17 AM

FREMDFIRMA

that study mentioned in newsweek was a preloaded setup done to try to validate a belief that probably isnt true, it was bad science and we discussed it here before i think and tore its credibility to bitty pieces.
and nobody likes the french, even the french dont like the french, but i really like french toast and french fries so i forgive them for being snooty jerks.
and its true people dont pick their race, some of this is as stupid as saying "have you tried not being black?" which is stupid, but not nearly as stupid as that people can be really racist even within their own, just look up what the paper bag test is, i think.
its all so completely stupid.

-frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE