Perhaps the willingness of the left to insult, belittle, and talk down to them as a group, as a racial class, in a way unacceptable towards anyone else, especially by those very same people. Were I to say the Jews must be stopped, for the good of the world, i'd be an alt-right neo nazi anti semitic hateful monster according to these very same publications. You know it's true.
Perhaps the willingness of the left to insult, belittle, and talk down to them as a group, as a racial class, in a way unacceptable towards anyone else, especially by those very same people. Were I to say the Jews must be stopped, for the good of the world, i'd be an alt-right neo nazi anti semitic hateful monster according to these very same publications. You know it's true.
Maybe, as you yourself would say to liberals or other groups, they should stop being so sensitive and triggered and "politically correct". Why do white people need a safe space?? Stop being such an SJW for white people. Seems to me that the virtue signaling here is getting totally out of hand.
This game is actually very easy to play if you just turn the language around on the people who use it.
Perhaps the willingness of the left to insult, belittle, and talk down to them as a group, as a racial class, in a way unacceptable towards anyone else, especially by those very same people. Were I to say the Jews must be stopped, for the good of the world, i'd be an alt-right neo nazi anti semitic hateful monster according to these very same publications. You know it's true.
It is the apparent willingness of right wingers to either completely ignore fairly serious problems of others that has created this disdain. Its exactly like if you lost your finger in an accident and I merely lost a fingernail, and I insist on talking over you by insisting that independent of your loss of limb, I suffered because I lost a nail, so we really need to first make sure I'm okay.
This comes across as insultingly juvenile and petty, and I think you'd be rightfully pissed off to be so belittled.
Right wing =/= white. They don't say right wingers, they don't mean right wingers, they say white people and mean white people. Ignore fairly serious problems as in....disagree with the left about what constitutes a problem and how to solve it? Very unclear as to what real problems are being ignored, and how this is related just to being white and the supposed problems that come with it, such as inherent racism.
What am I supposed to draw from your analogy between the finger and the limb? It's not very clear. What I drew from it, and by all means correct me if i'm wrong, is that Whites have no right to speak out or complain when they are constantly singled out for blanket ridicule, because somebody else has it worse? Is that accurate?
As an aside, generalizations are made about Trump supporters here all the time, and it's never been an issue. And as i've already said, just bcause it does not apply to you, does not mean the pattern doesn't exist, especially when it's right in front of our eyes. If you feel personally attacked, you shouldn't because that's not my meaning or intent.
After the wages of the so-called white-working class continue to not go up, it'll be interesting to see who they blame next, though I'm 100% sure it won't involve what is most needed, which is a mirror.
Well let's get something straight right now: the white working class is not the enemy in this country. No working class community is EVER the enemy and you need to get that through your head right now. The gated white community types who throw around those hip social justice words and try to play moral vanguard are much bigger enemies than any working class community could ever be. I don't give two shits about them and their bourgeois-splaining, virtue-signalling appeals to institutional inequality - mere projection as far as I'm concerned.
What we need in this country is a movement that arises from the working classes, extends to minorities and any other underprivileged, a social vanguard of the oppressed - and a collective rejection of identity politics which exists for the sole purpose of perpetuating division among proletarian ranks.
The only thing the Meryl Streeps of the world, and any other overprivileged, virtue-signalling, identity politics sowing, gated white community bourgeois types can do for such a movement (when it finally comes about) is to turn themselves and all of their assets over to the People's Army immediately. Soon after they will all become intimately acquainted with the redemptive power of forced communal labour.
Both parties as a rule represent corporations over the workers. I'd argue there's more hope to reform the Democratic party. There are already a few Democrats that are not pro-corporate. I don't see anything other than corporate welfare and pro-corporate policy out of the Republican party.
This article is about how white people are feeling discriminated against and has polls and research to back it up with voting patterns.
There is no quotes about starting a white genocide, or no whites allowed on campus. It is all about white people's perception about job growth and how it effected their vote.
It actually kept a very neutral tone through out leaving out statistics that might prove those perceptions wrong such as illustrating the unemployment rate between legal immigrants and naturally born citizens and did nothing to "belittle" those who had these perceptions.
Right wing =/= white. They don't say right wingers, they don't mean right wingers, they say white people and mean white people. Ignore fairly serious problems as in....disagree with the left about what constitutes a problem and how to solve it? Very unclear as to what real problems are being ignored, and how this is related just to being white and the supposed problems that come with it, such as inherent racism.
What am I supposed to draw from your analogy between the finger and the limb? It's not very clear. What I drew from it, and by all means correct me if i'm wrong, is that Whites have no right to speak out or complain when they are constantly singled out for blanket ridicule, because somebody else has it worse? Is that accurate?
Well, I'll analogize more simply: right wing whites have a really nasty, painful hang-nail of injustice. It really sucks! Minorities however tend to have much bigger injuries, like lost fingers. How much patience do you expect when talking about your admittedly nasty hang-nail??
Its really that simple. You just don't complain about a twisted ankle to someone who's lost a leg.
This article is about how white people are feeling discriminated against and has polls and research to back it up with voting patterns.
There is no quotes about starting a white genocide, or no whites allowed on campus. It is all about white people's perception about job growth and how it effected their vote.
It actually kept a very neutral tone through out leaving out statistics that might prove those perceptions wrong such as illustrating the unemployment rate between legal immigrants and naturally born citizens and did nothing to "belittle" those who had these perceptions.
The key is they "feel" discriminated against. They must believe the stories they are being fed by Fox News and other outlets that push the narrative of the poor white man who would be doing better if only the lower classed brown people weren't trying to better their own lives.
And that article discusses how white people who voted for trump seem to feel according to research and polling, it doesn't push your original point that the entire left cries identity politics. It reports, it isn't an opinion piece that pushes one individual's views. It's not a style of news Zeke seems to be saying the left only has things like "O'Reilly Report" - opinion news.
Both parties as a rule represent corporations over the workers. I'd argue there's more hope to reform the Democratic party. There are already a few Democrats that are not pro-corporate. I don't see anything other than corporate welfare and pro-corporate policy out of the Republican party.
It's funny you say that, because I feel the very much the same way about both parties being beholden to corporate influence, but I feel the exact opposite way about which party is more capable of reform and I feel that way because of the 2016 election. While the Democratic party colluded and rigged against their outsider, the much more out of left field and divisive candidate on the Republican side had what appears to be a fair primary. The voters got their man.
What I see is a new center right majority is emerging, one that is liberal on social issues and military issues, moderate on economic issues, and conservative on matters of free speech, border security/immigration, and trade. Trump for all his faults tapped into many of those areas.
@deltago why would they be talking about the white genocide professor or the No Whites Day at Evergreen (and how they cornered and screamed at a white prof. who didn't obey)? I never said they did talk about that and that's a rather arbitrary goal post. The elephant in the room here is the constant negative generalizating about whites as a race that they use as a running theme in both.
If you are doubting the white genocide college prof. or the no whites day ill link ya. This stuff is becoming just as pervasive in higher education (where liberal profs. outnumber conservatives 5 to 1) as it is in left wing media. Why not take a "The Problem of Whiteness" course at the University of Wisconsin-Madison? I wonder when "The Final Solution to The Whiteness Problem" course is coming out.
What social issue is Trump liberal on?? His DOJ was just in court arguing against gay rights and he just attempted to outright ban transgender soldiers from the military, and has been quoted during the campaign as saying that there needs to be "punishment" for women who get abortions. Liberal on social issues?? Trump thus far is a walking culture war.
Both parties as a rule represent corporations over the workers. I'd argue there's more hope to reform the Democratic party. There are already a few Democrats that are not pro-corporate. I don't see anything other than corporate welfare and pro-corporate policy out of the Republican party.
It's funny you say that, because I feel the very much the same way about both parties being beholden to corporate influence, but I feel the exact opposite way about which party is more capable of reform and I feel that way because of the 2016 election. While the Democratic party colluded and rigged against their outsider, the much more out of left field and divisive candidate on the Republican side had what appears to be a fair primary. The voters got their man.
What I see is a new center right majority is emerging, one that is liberal on social issues and military issues, moderate on economic issues, and conservative on matters of free speech, border security/immigration, and trade. Trump for all his faults tapped into many of those areas.
@deltago why would they be talking about the white genocide professor or the No Whites Day at Evergreen (and how they cornered and screamed at a white prof. who didn't obey)? I never said they did talk about that and that's a rather arbitrary goal post. The elephant in the room here is the constant negative generalizating about whites as a race that they use as a running theme in both.
If you are doubting the white genocide college prof. or the no whites day ill link ya. This stuff is becoming just as pervasive in higher education (where liberal profs. outnumber conservatives 5 to 1) as it is in left wing media. Why not take a "The Problem of Whiteness" course at the University of Wisconsin-Madison? I wonder when "The Final Solution to The Whiteness Problem" course is coming out.
Tthere is an element of truth to the Democratic Primary being more difficult for an outsider to win and for insiders having a preference. That doesn't change what's happened since Republican's have been trying to push their platform. Look at what they care about: the "healthcare" bill was a massive tax cut to the 1%, had damn little to do with healthcare other than to throw millions off of healthcare. And that was massively popular with republican senators and republican members of the house. Now, they want tax reform in another way to further cut taxes for the rich. The rich get a 940,000k tax cut while the middle class get 40 bucks. The budget proposed by trump is a massive giveaway to the military industrial complex which offsets spending on people and social programs. Trump's cabinet is filled with goldman sachs people, the most ever. These aren't democratic party ideals.
What we got with democrats was being soft on punishing wall street but putting some slight reforms in, that the trump administraton promptly moved to repeal. Trump's rhetoric is "drain the swamp" and he gets people to repeat it, but look at what he's doing not what he's saying. Where has he toughened rules on wall street or done anything but aim to cut taxes for the rich? Republicans from the "maverick" John McCain to Paul Ryan to Rand Paul are all for this. They cry government overreach but they just want an excuse to cut taxes for their donors. They're in charge, they keep going for this, there is no other agenda seemingly for Republicans.
Martin Shkreli has been sentenced for fraud. We don't know yet how long he'll be behind bars, but he could be in prison for decades.
If we're lucky.
Now, if there were only penalties for harming people from high drug prices, raised just to make more money, we could put more big pharma away. I'd bet if someone dug into them enough some interesting emails or leakers could be found. Too bad, like for this punk, can't charge them for that. Nooooo, that's the American way apparently.
As for this lil 'fast eddie' punk, he's probably got money squirreled away in all sorts of places.
Martin Shkreli has been sentenced for fraud. We don't know yet how long he'll be behind bars, but he could be in prison for decades.
If we're lucky.
I don't think I've seen a more outwardly PROUD financial sociopath in my entire life. It's not just that he hiked those drug prices into the stratosphere and screwed people over, it's the obvious twisted pleasure he took from doing so. And once the media and law caught on to him, he STILL seemed to enjoy it, maybe even more so.
Yeah, the way he acted in his congressional inquiry, public, and tweets, was probably not the best way to keep out of investigators limelight. If I'd been in that hearing on the congressional side I'd been callin' up my boys in black to search that punks life inside and out after those exchanges (Elijah Cummings in particular, he seemed really pissed).
Sociopath is a pretty good term used for him, he sure did seem to enjoy the hurt. He didn't have enough sense or even be capable of NOT showing it so blatantly.
Both parties as a rule represent corporations over the workers. I'd argue there's more hope to reform the Democratic party. There are already a few Democrats that are not pro-corporate. I don't see anything other than corporate welfare and pro-corporate policy out of the Republican party.
It's funny you say that, because I feel the very much the same way about both parties being beholden to corporate influence, but I feel the exact opposite way about which party is more capable of reform and I feel that way because of the 2016 election. While the Democratic party colluded and rigged against their outsider, the much more out of left field and divisive candidate on the Republican side had what appears to be a fair primary. The voters got their man.
What I see is a new center right majority is emerging, one that is liberal on social issues and military issues, moderate on economic issues, and conservative on matters of free speech, border security/immigration, and trade. Trump for all his faults tapped into many of those areas.
@deltago why would they be talking about the white genocide professor or the No Whites Day at Evergreen (and how they cornered and screamed at a white prof. who didn't obey)? I never said they did talk about that and that's a rather arbitrary goal post. The elephant in the room here is the constant negative generalizating about whites as a race that they use as a running theme in both.
If you are doubting the white genocide college prof. or the no whites day ill link ya. This stuff is becoming just as pervasive in higher education (where liberal profs. outnumber conservatives 5 to 1) as it is in left wing media. Why not take a "The Problem of Whiteness" course at the University of Wisconsin-Madison? I wonder when "The Final Solution to The Whiteness Problem" course is coming out.
Lets start with the first one: One Professor, who, by your own link, works for an university who publicly condemned his message with further, serious investigation. What more are you looking for? It is one teacher, yet you are painting all the campus staff with the same brush because of this guys ONE comment. Even though that comment was condemned. It doesn't sound like the secondary education institution is being negative about whites.
Second Link: Interesting paragraph:
Weinstein found himself at the center of a national controversy earlier this year when students became aware of his response to a faculty-wide email announcing that Evergreen State’s [b]annual[/b] “Day of Absence” had been changed so that white students and faculty would be asked to leave campus for a day of diversity programming, [b]rather than[/b] black students and faculty absenting themselves from campus for the same reason.
So in years past, for this "Day of Absence" was held off campus but wanted to do it on campus for this year. If you read the website, EVERYONE is welcome to take part in the Day of Absence activities such as " allies in anti-racism work."
"This year, however, The Cooper Point Journal reports that the format was flipped in response to complaints from non-white students that they feel unwelcome on campus in the wake of Donald Trump’s election, with white students and faculty members being asked to vacate the campus for the day."
The idea of switching it was born more out of protest rather than an act of oppression like the professor stated in his email (especially if this switch was only going to last this one year). The perception then is that this professor was attempting to take away their right to protest, so they brought the protest to him.
Now, I do not condone the activities of the protesters (this was even discussed on this forum when it happened). They seemed to be looking for an easy target to direct their anger towards and found this professor, but the perception that the school was holding a "NO Whites Allowed Day" is just a myth born from the Alt-Right media and once again, this day of absence isn't about making the white person the bad guy. quite the opposite really.
And third:
From the article:
"We believe this course, which is one of thousands offered at our university, will benefit students who are interested in developing a deeper understanding of race issues. The course is a challenge and response to racism of all kinds," read the university statement.
So this senator, without knowing what the curriculum for this course is, condemned it based on its name and his personal perception of the professor to the point where he'd threaten to withhold funding from the school if the course was not cancelled.
It is also being taught at a school where only 2% of the population is black, and 75% of it is white according to this article which also explains the program in more depth than the one you've provided.
"Critical Whiteness Studies aims to understand how whiteness is socially constructed and experienced in order to help dismantle white supremacy." The course explores "how race is experienced by white people." But it also looks at how white people "consciously and unconsciously perpetuate institutional racism."
So basically, this course is to teach the meaning of white privilege, giving examples and offer discussions on how to minimize that privilege to create an equality.
The article also says it doesn't "... know of any criticism that has come from students." With 75% of them being white, it was really such a racist program, one of them would have piped up.
Lets start with the first one: One Professor, who, by your own link, works for an university who publicly condemned his message with further, serious investigation. What more are you looking for? It is one teacher, yet you are painting all the campus staff with the same brush because of this guys ONE comment. Even though that comment was condemned. It doesn't sound like the secondary education institution is being negative about whites.
Even this one is not quite what it seems. The original tweet was an attempt to highlight racism and, though the tweet was certainly astonishingly ill-judged, the university's response doesn't reflect well on them either. The tweet resulted in a torrent of abuse and pressure from some sectors and the university chose to bow to that pressure rather than, for instance: - strongly criticizing the professor for writing something that could be so easily misinterpreted, but - explaining the background to the issue and confirming that they reject racism of all kinds. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/12/26/drexel-condemns-professors-tweet-about-white-genocide
As I've said in the past I think there are radical views on all sides of the debate that are unhelpful from the perspective of trying to find common ground on how best to live together. I suppose part of the skills everyone needs in the modern age is the ability to disentangle where radicals on one side are misinterpreting what is said by another in order to further their own agenda.
Edit: just to clarify my position. I'm not trying to subtly suggest @WarChiefZeke was intending to mislead anyone in his original post on this, but just pointing out the dangers of passing on lists compiled by others who are trying to push a particular agenda.
You know, if I was Trump, I'd be paranoid about having to evacuate the entire West Wing for over a week to fix the HVAC system.
If there isn't surveillance in the White House now, there certainly will be when he gets back. Or maybe I just watch too many spy movies.
The fact is, the leakers he and Jeff Sessions are spending so much time bitching about are almost ALL from inside the West Wing. As such, any leak is ultimately Trump's responsibility if it is coming from the White House. After all, he promised us he would only hire "the best people". We don't need surveillance in the White House to know what's going on. Enough people (who WORK for him) are so horrified by his incompetence for the job he holds that they talk to reporters about it on a daily basis. And as far as I know, they haven't caught a single person. So not only does he hire people willing to sell him out (birds of a feather flock together), he isn't even adept enough to find a single, solitary one of them.
Because nothing makes America Great Again like encouraging the abuse and exploitation of senior citizens in their waning years. Christ. There is no bottom to this barrel.
I'm all for taking a look at these issues from a more holistic perspective.
Certainly we can be open to the possibility that wishing for white genocide was an attempt to highlight racism. I see racism very plainly there, in fact.
In what way can any anti racist message, which I am assuming is the motive you are attributing to him, be interpreted? You'll honestly have to guide me through this one.
For the record, i'm intimately familiar with how certain alt-righters use the term- they fear the social and cultural displacement of europeans and american whites as a result of them becoming minorities in their own countries. This may be a touch better than wishing for their actual deaths. It is NOT a positive message by any means.
Any way you want to turn this square, it's not gonna make a circle. He's promoting a thing, which he calls white genocide, not racial equality. Whatever the meaning of that we want to attribute to him, it's not a racially equal message by any means.
I contend my version of events, that is was a malicious message rather than one merely highlighting racism, is more plausible.
@Deltago, if you are going to defend the course, let's start from the very, very beginning, because I reject the fundamental concept it's supposed to be teaching. The Problem of Whiteness. When did it not become almost the strict definition of racial prejudice to be tying negative beliefs or patterns of behavior to race? I don't care if they swear up and down that they are anti racist. From the course description:
"It explores how they consciously and unconsciously perpetuate institutional racism and how this not only devastates communities of color but also perpetuates the oppression of most white folks along the lines of class and gender. In this class, we will ask what an ethical white identity entails, what it means to be #woke, and consider the journal Race Traitor’s motto, “treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity.”
Preaching at whites about how they perpetuate racism and their Whiteness and "white identity" is a problem whether they intend it or not and they should become, in their words, race traitors. Is there any doubt where the source of the racial prejudice really lies. If this is #woke, I want to remain #inadeepcoma forever. Nothing about this screams equality.
One more thing. That journal they referenced, Race Traitor, with that motto. Their first issue. Had an article entitled "ABOLISH THE WHITE RACE". This is the ideology they are drawing from. It has no place in modern society.
There may indeed be radicals on all sides, but the right doesn't stick up for their real awful people. Nobody in what people call the "alt lite" like Mike Cernovich defend the racists or jew haters in the alt right. You wouldn't see me stick up for the good name of Richard Spencer or defend his ideas. People aren't even aware, broadly speaking, of the real hate from the left. This goes back to the massive discrepancy in political ideology among journalists.
Really?? Cernovich?? Mr. Pizzagate himself?? Here are some DELETED (because he is a coward) tweets from Cernovich:
In August 2012, Cernovich suggested in a since-deleted tweet that men “try” to rape “a girl without using force,” claiming that “it’s basically impossible,” and adding, “Date rape does not exist.”
In February 2016, Cernovich wrote in a since-deleted tweet, “Not being a slut is the only proven way to avoid AIDS,” adding, “If you love black women, slut shame them.”
In a series of since-deleted tweets, Cernovich declared that “White genocide is real” and will “sweep up the SJWs,” referring to so-called “social justice warriors.”
Tip of the iceberg with this guy, and he, as you say, is apparently one of the mild ones. No, he doesn't have to stick up for the racists on the alt-right. He's too busy BEING ONE himself. A cursory Google search reveals this information.
The outright misogyny and eliminationist rhetoric I see in the comment sections of ANY Alt-Right video on Youtube are actually 100x worse than what this guy says. Not dozens, not hundreds, but THOUSANDS of posts basically calling for the eradication of entire races, calling them a blight on humanity and "diseases". But the worst hate of all is saved for trans people, who are dehumanized to a point that is hard to fathom unless the people posting have their own deep-seated sexual hang-ups. And none of this is surprising, since the Alt-Right is primarily composed of young, 20-something males who couldn't get a woman to talk to them with a step by step instruction manual.
There may indeed be radicals on all sides, but the right doesn't stick up for their real awful people.
If you'll recall, @WarChiefZeke, I'm on the left, and I agree with you about the anti-white brigade. Multiple other left-leaning posters in this thread have also condemned left-wing radicals before.
Whatever "white genocide" is supposed to mean, it's not just conservatives that oppose it.
I see in the comment sections of ANY Alt-Right video on Youtube are actually 100x worse than what this guy says. Not dozens, not hundreds, but THOUSANDS of posts basically calling for the eradication of entire races, calling them a blight on humanity and "diseases".
I'm sorry, but a youtube comment just isn't as big a deal as what professors teach kids at universities and what is published in the actual media, not the comments. A youtube troll doesn't have the social prestige, let alone sanction, the influencing power on society, let alone being accepted by society, etc. Truly apples and oranges here.
I'll grant you stuff on Cernovich without skepticism (archive should have it if it exists) because he isn't a neccesary example for my point and I don't follow him enough to have seen before.
If you think those apparently deleted tweets are bad, though, you should be fuming at the stuff they are teaching to young people then in college and media then, right??
Youtube IS actual media, more than at any time in history. Twitter is media. Facebook is media. All of them are more influential than television and print at this point, and they are certainly more important than a smattering of college professors scattered across the country teaching courses you don't agree with. Again, why does EVERY example of this stuff come from college campuses?? Where are the examples of this stuff happening, much less being applied with, you know, ACTUAL POLICY, in the real world?? Let's see the tangible, real-world effects of this so-called "reverse racism" and "white genocide" that doesn't involve two college freshman engaging in a wank-a-thon where the pillars on each side of the argument are Ayn Rand and Che Guevara. When I was in college my political opinions were formed by a mixture of Rage Against the Machine and Marilyn Manson. Most people look back on their early-20s and cringe once they get on a bit in life.
Again, why does EVERY example of this stuff come from college campuses??
You mean besides the list of left leaning journalist outlets doing the same thing and high up political figures on the left? Because I held the american academic and journalist establishments to be both heavily biased and be most heavily infused with the stuff. But we can go into the favored liberal activist groups as well, if we still need more. What other liberal enclaves did I fail to search?
Do you remember when Occupy Wall Street forced white men to get in the back of the line to speak at their General Assemblies? I do.
Or when a Black Lives Matter Toronto co founder was so shockingly racist she was condemned even in The Huffington Post, referring to whites as sub human and more?
Even while condemning them, the author stated they were biased against even suggesting they resign *because they were white*. It's ridiculous, how pervasive it is.
The question eventually becomes how many singular examples can I provide before the pattern is admitted to.
Comments
This game is actually very easy to play if you just turn the language around on the people who use it.
This comes across as insultingly juvenile and petty, and I think you'd be rightfully pissed off to be so belittled.
What am I supposed to draw from your analogy between the finger and the limb? It's not very clear. What I drew from it, and by all means correct me if i'm wrong, is that Whites have no right to speak out or complain when they are constantly singled out for blanket ridicule, because somebody else has it worse? Is that accurate?
What we need in this country is a movement that arises from the working classes, extends to minorities and any other underprivileged, a social vanguard of the oppressed - and a collective rejection of identity politics which exists for the sole purpose of perpetuating division among proletarian ranks.
The only thing the Meryl Streeps of the world, and any other overprivileged, virtue-signalling, identity politics sowing, gated white community bourgeois types can do for such a movement (when it finally comes about) is to turn themselves and all of their assets over to the People's Army immediately. Soon after they will all become intimately acquainted with the redemptive power of forced communal labour.
Personally, I see no value whatsoever in slavery.
This article is about how white people are feeling discriminated against and has polls and research to back it up with voting patterns.
There is no quotes about starting a white genocide, or no whites allowed on campus. It is all about white people's perception about job growth and how it effected their vote.
It actually kept a very neutral tone through out leaving out statistics that might prove those perceptions wrong such as illustrating the unemployment rate between legal immigrants and naturally born citizens and did nothing to "belittle" those who had these perceptions.
Its really that simple. You just don't complain about a twisted ankle to someone who's lost a leg.
And that article discusses how white people who voted for trump seem to feel according to research and polling, it doesn't push your original point that the entire left cries identity politics. It reports, it isn't an opinion piece that pushes one individual's views. It's not a style of news Zeke seems to be saying the left only has things like "O'Reilly Report" - opinion news.
What I see is a new center right majority is emerging, one that is liberal on social issues and military issues, moderate on economic issues, and conservative on matters of free speech, border security/immigration, and trade. Trump for all his faults tapped into many of those areas.
@deltago why would they be talking about the white genocide professor or the No Whites Day at Evergreen (and how they cornered and screamed at a white prof. who didn't obey)? I never said they did talk about that and that's a rather arbitrary goal post. The elephant in the room here is the constant negative generalizating about whites as a race that they use as a running theme in both.
If you are doubting the white genocide college prof. or the no whites day ill link ya. This stuff is becoming just as pervasive in higher education (where liberal profs. outnumber conservatives 5 to 1) as it is in left wing media. Why not take a "The Problem of Whiteness" course at the University of Wisconsin-Madison? I wonder when "The Final Solution to The Whiteness Problem" course is coming out.
http://drexel.edu/now/archive/2016/December/Drexel-response-Ciccariello-Maher/
https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=9393
http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/23/health/college-course-white-controversy-irpt-trnd/index.html
What we got with democrats was being soft on punishing wall street but putting some slight reforms in, that the trump administraton promptly moved to repeal. Trump's rhetoric is "drain the swamp" and he gets people to repeat it, but look at what he's doing not what he's saying. Where has he toughened rules on wall street or done anything but aim to cut taxes for the rich? Republicans from the "maverick" John McCain to Paul Ryan to Rand Paul are all for this. They cry government overreach but they just want an excuse to cut taxes for their donors. They're in charge, they keep going for this, there is no other agenda seemingly for Republicans.
If we're lucky.
As for this lil 'fast eddie' punk, he's probably got money squirreled away in all sorts of places.
Sociopath is a pretty good term used for him, he sure did seem to enjoy the hurt.
He didn't have enough sense or even be capable of NOT showing it so blatantly.
One Professor, who, by your own link, works for an university who publicly condemned his message with further, serious investigation. What more are you looking for? It is one teacher, yet you are painting all the campus staff with the same brush because of this guys ONE comment. Even though that comment was condemned. It doesn't sound like the secondary education institution is being negative about whites.
Second Link:
Interesting paragraph:
So in years past, for this "Day of Absence" was held off campus but wanted to do it on campus for this year. If you read the website, EVERYONE is welcome to take part in the Day of Absence activities such as " allies in anti-racism work."
The reason why they asked it to be switched was due to:
The idea of switching it was born more out of protest rather than an act of oppression like the professor stated in his email (especially if this switch was only going to last this one year). The perception then is that this professor was attempting to take away their right to protest, so they brought the protest to him.
Now, I do not condone the activities of the protesters (this was even discussed on this forum when it happened). They seemed to be looking for an easy target to direct their anger towards and found this professor, but the perception that the school was holding a "NO Whites Allowed Day" is just a myth born from the Alt-Right media and once again, this day of absence isn't about making the white person the bad guy. quite the opposite really.
And third:
From the article:
So this senator, without knowing what the curriculum for this course is, condemned it based on its name and his personal perception of the professor to the point where he'd threaten to withhold funding from the school if the course was not cancelled.
It is also being taught at a school where only 2% of the population is black, and 75% of it is white according to this article which also explains the program in more depth than the one you've provided.
The course explores "how race is experienced by white people." But it also looks at how white people "consciously and unconsciously perpetuate institutional racism."
So basically, this course is to teach the meaning of white privilege, giving examples and offer discussions on how to minimize that privilege to create an equality.
The article also says it doesn't "... know of any criticism that has come from students." With 75% of them being white, it was really such a racist program, one of them would have piped up.
- strongly criticizing the professor for writing something that could be so easily misinterpreted, but
- explaining the background to the issue and confirming that they reject racism of all kinds.
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/12/26/drexel-condemns-professors-tweet-about-white-genocide
As I've said in the past I think there are radical views on all sides of the debate that are unhelpful from the perspective of trying to find common ground on how best to live together. I suppose part of the skills everyone needs in the modern age is the ability to disentangle where radicals on one side are misinterpreting what is said by another in order to further their own agenda.
Edit: just to clarify my position. I'm not trying to subtly suggest @WarChiefZeke was intending to mislead anyone in his original post on this, but just pointing out the dangers of passing on lists compiled by others who are trying to push a particular agenda.
If there isn't surveillance in the White House now, there certainly will be when he gets back. Or maybe I just watch too many spy movies.
Because nothing makes America Great Again like encouraging the abuse and exploitation of senior citizens in their waning years. Christ. There is no bottom to this barrel.
Certainly we can be open to the possibility that wishing for white genocide was an attempt to highlight racism. I see racism very plainly there, in fact.
In what way can any anti racist message, which I am assuming is the motive you are attributing to him, be interpreted? You'll honestly have to guide me through this one.
For the record, i'm intimately familiar with how certain alt-righters use the term- they fear the social and cultural displacement of europeans and american whites as a result of them becoming minorities in their own countries. This may be a touch better than wishing for their actual deaths. It is NOT a positive message by any means.
Any way you want to turn this square, it's not gonna make a circle. He's promoting a thing, which he calls white genocide, not racial equality. Whatever the meaning of that we want to attribute to him, it's not a racially equal message by any means.
I contend my version of events, that is was a malicious message rather than one merely highlighting racism, is more plausible.
@Deltago, if you are going to defend the course, let's start from the very, very beginning, because I reject the fundamental concept it's supposed to be teaching. The Problem of Whiteness. When did it not become almost the strict definition of racial prejudice to be tying negative beliefs or patterns of behavior to race? I don't care if they swear up and down that they are anti racist. From the course description:
"It explores how they consciously and unconsciously perpetuate institutional racism and how this not only devastates communities of color but also perpetuates the oppression of most white folks along the lines of class and gender. In this class, we will ask what an ethical white identity entails, what it means to be #woke, and consider the journal Race Traitor’s motto, “treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity.”
Preaching at whites about how they perpetuate racism and their Whiteness and "white identity" is a problem whether they intend it or not and they should become, in their words, race traitors. Is there any doubt where the source of the racial prejudice really lies. If this is #woke, I want to remain #inadeepcoma forever. Nothing about this screams equality.
One more thing. That journal they referenced, Race Traitor, with that motto. Their first issue. Had an article entitled "ABOLISH THE WHITE RACE". This is the ideology they are drawing from. It has no place in modern society.
There may indeed be radicals on all sides, but the right doesn't stick up for their real awful people. Nobody in what people call the "alt lite" like Mike Cernovich defend the racists or jew haters in the alt right. You wouldn't see me stick up for the good name of Richard Spencer or defend his ideas. People aren't even aware, broadly speaking, of the real hate from the left. This goes back to the massive discrepancy in political ideology among journalists.
In August 2012, Cernovich suggested in a since-deleted tweet that men “try” to rape “a girl without using force,” claiming that “it’s basically impossible,” and adding, “Date rape does not exist.”
In February 2016, Cernovich wrote in a since-deleted tweet, “Not being a slut is the only proven way to avoid AIDS,” adding, “If you love black women, slut shame them.”
In a series of since-deleted tweets, Cernovich declared that “White genocide is real” and will “sweep up the SJWs,” referring to so-called “social justice warriors.”
Tip of the iceberg with this guy, and he, as you say, is apparently one of the mild ones. No, he doesn't have to stick up for the racists on the alt-right. He's too busy BEING ONE himself. A cursory Google search reveals this information.
The outright misogyny and eliminationist rhetoric I see in the comment sections of ANY Alt-Right video on Youtube are actually 100x worse than what this guy says. Not dozens, not hundreds, but THOUSANDS of posts basically calling for the eradication of entire races, calling them a blight on humanity and "diseases". But the worst hate of all is saved for trans people, who are dehumanized to a point that is hard to fathom unless the people posting have their own deep-seated sexual hang-ups. And none of this is surprising, since the Alt-Right is primarily composed of young, 20-something males who couldn't get a woman to talk to them with a step by step instruction manual.
Whatever "white genocide" is supposed to mean, it's not just conservatives that oppose it.
I'll grant you stuff on Cernovich without skepticism (archive should have it if it exists) because he isn't a neccesary example for my point and I don't follow him enough to have seen before.
If you think those apparently deleted tweets are bad, though, you should be fuming at the stuff they are teaching to young people then in college and media then, right??
Do you remember when Occupy Wall Street forced white men to get in the back of the line to speak at their General Assemblies? I do.
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/999048
Or when a Black Lives Matter Toronto co founder was so shockingly racist she was condemned even in The Huffington Post, referring to whites as sub human and more?
http://m.huffingtonpost.ca/james-di-fiore/black-lives-matter-toronto-yusra-khogali_b_14635896.html
Even while condemning them, the author stated they were biased against even suggesting they resign *because they were white*. It's ridiculous, how pervasive it is.
The question eventually becomes how many singular examples can I provide before the pattern is admitted to.