When does pride in your race cross the line?

[Seppo Ilmarinen]

I am growing very suspicious of people who claim that there isn't a collected White Genocide agenda taking place and who bleat about MLK and color blindness.

Either way, ignorance won't save them. They'll burn in the camps with the rest of the BadWhites all the same eventually.

This 'White Genocide' hyperbole is disinformation program made for people to get trapped to the other side of the fringe identity politics game.

Better not fall for it.

 

[PaleFace]

This 'White Genocide' hyperbole

How is it hyperbole?

The lands of White people are being invaded without their consent. White people are routinely pathologized and attacked in the media, academia, by the politicians, even by the priests. White people are literally called "demons" and it is never OK to be White.

Every time that Whites are given an opportunity to vote, they vote to end mass migration, but they are never listened to.

What is happening to Whites now matches with the UN definition of Genocide.



Where are the counter-arguments?

All I hear is that it's just "wrong" to play Identity Politics for Whites.

But no one denies the points I have raised about what is actually happening. They simply say that it is immoral to notice or do something. How sick and twisted is that?

 

[psychegram]

How is it hyperbole

Generally people conceive of genocide as involving concentration camps or roving bands of machete-wielding irregulars attempting the violent extermination of a rival ethnic group. Since that isn't happening, and isn't likely to happen, most people consider it hyperbole.

The UN definition I believe also includes much softer measures, such as (but not limited to) deliberately separating the youth of a given group from their parental culture.

I don't personally consider the genocide label to especially helpful, regardless of it's technical accuracy, precisely because it is so vague, and there's such a huge distance between the image people have of it vs. its legal definition. The PTB's intent seems to be more along the lines of a total cultural rupture rather than the complete biological extermination of any given target group. They want slaves, not corpses.

 

[United Gnosis]

How is it hyperbole?

The lands of White people are being invaded without their consent. White people are routinely pathologized and attacked in the media, academia, by the politicians, even by the priests. White people are literally called "demons" and it never OK to be White.

Every time that Whites are given an opportunity to vote, they vote to end mass migration, but they are never listened to.

What is happening to Whites now matches with the UN definition of Genocide.

Which Whites? Are English White? If they are, how do they compare to French Whites? Is the fundamental difference between English philosophy and continental thought significant? Are poles White in a similar way to the Spanish or Greek? Are Slavs white? And what about the Japanese, they're often more bleachy-white than the average european 'White'. What percentage of White genetics do you need to qualify as White? Say a 80% white, 20% moor spaniard, does he count as White? What about French Canadians? Do they descend from French Whiteness as their colons, or do they descend from Crown Whiteness as slaves of the Empire?

None of these are valid questions, because they are constructed atop irrelevant assumptions. This group labelling assumption is terribly crude and leads nowhere because it is not even rooted in reality. Yes, of course, there is a 'White genocide" in that the dominant sociocultural foundation is a meme of identity politics and that whiteness bad, and some of all colors fall prey to that gaslighting and start perceiving the world in terms of abstract group identities. And they decide to jam all enemy ideologies into the "whiteness' category and label the group as one. It's utterly dissociated, especially when they call anything Whiteness, but the fact of their system of thought in no way means it is applicable or relevant.

 

[PaleFace]

They want slaves, not corpses.

They're willing to break a few eggs to get there.

Just look at South Africa. How many Whites murdered there since the end of civilized South Africa?

Next people will say that Nelson Mandela and his terrorist wife were role models like MLK that are misunderstood...

 

[PaleFace]

Which Whites? Are English White? If they are, how do they compare to French Whites? Is the fundamental difference between English philosophy and continental thought significant? Are poles White in a similar way to the Spanish or Greek? What percentage of White genetics do you need to qualify as White? Say a 80% white, 20% moor spaniard, does he count as White? What about French Canadians? Do they descend from French Whiteness as their colons, or do they descend from Crown Whiteness as slaves of the Empire?

Spectrum fallacy. Just because there are shades of yellow doesn't mean that yellow doesn't exist. Old and tired anti-White talking point.

Why are you trying to deconstruct White identity? Textbook CRT tactic.

 

[United Gnosis]

Why are you trying to deconstruct White identity?

I'm sorry, why are you trying to construct one in the first place? Why are you so against the lived experience of Whites that there is no such thing as "white identity"?

 

[PaleFace]

I'm sorry, why are you trying to construct one in the first place? Why are you so against the lived experience of Whites that there is no such thing as "white identity"?

When it comes time to apply for welfare, college, talk to HR, pay reparations suddenly White identity exists and everyone knows who is being talked about.

But when Whites start pushing back against it and standing up for themselves then all of a sudden White identity doesnt exist and fades into the ether...

Curious.

 

[psychegram]

Why are you so against the lived experience of Whites that there is no such thing as "white identity"?

I gotta push back there. That may be true in Europe, where the finer distinctions between the European nations are emphasized. In North America, that's certainly not the case.

Certainly for me, my "lived experience" is that white identity is very much a thing.

 

[psychegram]

Just a thought.

I think there's a generational divide on this topic.

Older generations came of age in a context where we were all going to get over our differences. The civil rights/MLK thing. Individualism was taken to something of an extreme, and any identification with white heritage was pathologized.

Younger generations have grown up in a very different context. They go through a school system where CRT is the dominant ideology. If they're white, they're shamed for it. Many get bullied, even beaten up by non-white kids, whom the teachers refuse to punish because they don't want to seem "racist". But the teachers certainly will punish any white kids who stand up for themselves. After all, that's "racist".

Given that context, I think it should be obvious why many of the platitudes of the civil rights era taste like ashes in the mouths of the youth, and why they react to them with mockery.

Put it this way. If you've got a kid who's being a bully, then you need to teach that kid to be nicer to others. But if you've got a kid who keeps getting bullied, then you need to teach him to stand up for himself. What's happening right now in this analogy is that the kids getting bullied are being treated like they're the bullies - when they complain, they're told they should just be nice to the bullies. That isn't helpful.

In other words, between the two unhealthy extremes - racial supremacism and racial inferiorism - white youth have been forced to adopt the latter. When they complain about this, they're lectured about the dangers of the former. That's pretty much the opposite of useful. In the specific situation in which they find themselves, they don't need to be told that excessive identity with their group is a spiritual danger - they don't suffer from an excess of racial pride, but rather by its precise opposite. Sermons on the dangers of racial identity are, in this context, a form of emotional abuse.

 

[PaleFace]

I think there's a generational divide on this topic.

Yeah, I was getting an old hippy vibe from United Gnosis for sure. I think he knows he's wrong, but he senses my radiant youth through the screen and feels threatened. I kid of course;)

Given that context, I think it should be obvious why many of the platitudes of the civil rights era taste like ashes in the mouths of the youth, and why they react to them with mockery.

Preach brother, preach! Hallelujah!

What's happening right now in this analogy is that the kids getting bullied are being treated like they're the bullies - when they complain, they're told they should just be nice to the bullies. That isn't helpful.

Lawdy lawdy! He ain't stoppin!

white youth have been forced to adopt the latter. When they complain about this, they're lectured about the dangers of the former.

*smacks lips* mhmmmmm. Tell 'em, you tell 'em!

Sermons on the dangers of racial identity are, in this context, a form of emotional abuse.

This mac-daddy long-legged shucking an jivin' tom cat jus' got school'd!

Jokes aside, that was a very insightful post. I hope that the Race Universalists in this thread read it and consider their biases before sounding off on pro-Whites to get a moral high and a kick of dopamine like they've been trained to their whole lives.

You share the same position as the Deep State and TPTB. Either find the moral courage to re-examine your anti-White biases or get out of the way of people who are just trying to speak truth to power.

 

[Joe]

I am growing very suspicious of people who claim that there isn't a collected White Genocide agenda taking place

I'd say you're suspicious about a lot more than that! You complete looper.

 

[psychegram]

Just a thought.

I think there's a generational divide on this topic.

Older generations came of age in a context where we were all going to get over our differences. The civil rights/MLK thing. Individualism was taken to something of an extreme, and any identification with white heritage was pathologized.

Younger generations have grown up in a very different context. They go through a school system where CRT is the dominant ideology. If they're white, they're shamed for it. Many get bullied, even beaten up by non-white kids, whom the teachers refuse to punish because they don't want to seem "racist". But the teachers certainly will punish any white kids who stand up for themselves. After all, that's "racist".

Given that context, I think it should be obvious why many of the platitudes of the civil rights era taste like ashes in the mouths of the youth, and why they react to them with mockery.

Put it this way. If you've got a kid who's being a bully, then you need to teach that kid to be nicer to others. But if you've got a kid who keeps getting bullied, then you need to teach him to stand up for himself. What's happening right now in this analogy is that the kids getting bullied are being treated like they're the bullies - when they complain, they're told they should just be nice to the bullies. That isn't helpful.

In other words, between the two unhealthy extremes - racial supremacism and racial inferiorism - white youth have been forced to adopt the latter. When they complain about this, they're lectured about the dangers of the former. That's pretty much the opposite of useful. In the specific situation in which they find themselves, they don't need to be told that excessive identity with their group is a spiritual danger - they don't suffer from an excess of racial pride, but rather by its precise opposite. Sermons on the dangers of racial identity are, in this context, a form of emotional abuse.

Another analogy: you wouldn't lecture an anorexic teenager about the dangers of obesity. She's already terrified of obesity and that's why she's in danger of starving to death. While you might be right in the abstract that obesity is really bad, in her specific case all you're accomplishing is to deepen her neurosis.

As I believe the C's said: there's right, and there's wrong, and there's the specific situation that determines which is which.

 

[United Gnosis]

When it comes time to apply for welfare, college, talk to HR, pay reparations suddenly White identity exists and everyone knows who is being talked about.

But when Whites start pushing back against it and standing up for themselves then all of a sudden White identity doesnt exist and fades into the ether...

Curious.

The simple fact that the self-concept of "white"" or the concept of 'Whiteness' is being applied does not mean that it applies to reality. I'm not going to defend a lie and enter an identitarian game when it is clear that entering that arena is the losing move. 'I'm sorry'. Reality is as it is.

I'm of the Korzybski "the map is not the territory" school, also of the spiritual tradition that "The Dao that can be spoken is not the True Dao". Both of these stances are part of each other. Rational, finite language cannot describe transrational, infinite reality. And the reality is that Identity describes the Eternal Truth of the Dao, as simple a mathematic Identity, ultimately reducing to 1 = 1. The Truth of Identity is holographically linked the Dao that cannot be spoken. Not a constricted definition of rational concepts such as gender identity or race.

Tons of dangerous consequences happen as part of choosing to step into the trapped battlefield of identitarianism. The only winning move is not to play.

Sermons on the dangers of racial identity are, in this context, a form of emotional abuse.

I understand your concern, but do not understand how that can be said to apply on a Work forum. The emotional response of having one's self-concept challenged will go to the full extent of a psychotic "NOOOO"-yelling-to-the-sky, a-la 2016's SJWs. That the young are increasingly gaslit into crystallizing around such identitarian constructs do not change the nature of the program. Of course the program will be offended. To call that emotional abuse seems quite ridiculous, however I will also accept that criticism in that if you reacted that way, I must have been quite too abrupt for effective communication. Sorry, it was not my intent to 'sermon'. But I do think this is a particularly relevant area for forum members to contribute both out of scholarly research and out of practice.

And it is my understanding, from Gurdjieff's descriptions of crystallization, and from my applied practice of meditation, that attachment/revulsion programs are bound up under identification-complexes, for lack of a better word. They are the spiritual abscesses in which ignorance grows. Sure, I will entertain it, but to identify with it is another story entirely, and I would never wish that to my worst enemy.

I'm curious if you put it to the Cs, "simply put, is identification the path to STS? And is intersectionality identification?"
Contrary to my first quote, this is something I'm pretty sure I know. And if I'm wrong, I don't think it bodes well for anybody who believes in the sovereignty of Consciousness.

 

[United Gnosis]

You share the same position as the Deep State and TPTB. Either find the moral courage to re-examine your anti-White biases or get out of the way of people who are just trying to speak truth to power.

Who are you talking to in that quote?