User Controls
What's so bad about White Supremacism anyway?
-
2020-10-01 at 11:33 AM UTCPeople act like it's the worth thing in the world, but name me one thing that's bad about it?
Go on, I'll wait. -
2020-10-01 at 11:42 AM UTCFolx???
-
2020-10-01 at 9:51 PM UTCfuys?
-
2020-10-02 at 12:20 AM UTCtbh it's a pretty gay thread
-
2020-10-02 at 12:23 AM UTCThere is literally nothing wrong with it
The jewish apparatus has demonized the concept to keep their only truly capable enemy weak.
Think about it, what is white supremacy?
It's simply believing the European race to be above others and to do things specifically for your race.
White supremacy is perfectly healthy, kikes practice racial supremacy in every aspect but when you critisize those hooked nosed bastards they pull the "anti-semitism" card.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2020-10-02 at 12:25 AM UTC
Originally posted by Indiana-Is-Eternal There is literally nothing wrong with it
The jewish apparatus has demonized the concept to keep their only truly capable enemy weak.
Think about it, what is white supremacy?
It's simply believing the European race to be above others and to do things specifically for your race.
White supremacy is perfectly healthy, kikes practice racial supremacy in every aspect but when you critisize those hooked nosed bastards they pull the "anti-semitism" card.
You are 100% right.
jedi Supremacy is widely practiced but always ignored.
Any time the MSM media has a phrase with 'white' in it you can replace it with 'jedi' - or vice versa - and it suddenly makes perfect sense.
White supremacy - jedi supremacy
Unearned white privilege - Unearned jedi privilege
White fragility - jedi fragility
Anti-semitic conspiracy theory - Anti-white conspiracy theory. -
2020-10-02 at 12:27 AM UTCwhat would it mean practically?
-
2020-10-02 at 12:37 AM UTCIt is an inherently non-factual ideology based around the belief that nebulously defined "whites" are intrinsically superior by some kind of equally nebulously defined objective measure? That it is fundamentally at odds with the state of the world, which shows whites on very clear downward and outward trajectory? That it reeks of a last desperate attempt to cling to glory that you had no part in?
-
2020-10-02 at 12:43 AM UTC
Originally posted by Meikai It is an inherently non-factual ideology based around the belief that nebulously defined "whites" are intrinsically superior by some kind of equally nebulously defined objective measure? That it is fundamentally at odds with the state of the world, which shows whites on very clear downward and outward trajectory? That it reeks of a last desperate attempt to cling to glory that you had no part in?
Question for you my progressive transvestite friend - why are racial categories sometimes "nebulously defined", and sometimes not?
For example, when talking about BLM, no one ever says "ugh that's ridiculous I mean what exactly defines 'black'? checkmate losers".
Ditto with "anti-semitism", there's no hand-wringing about who is and isn't jedi. Progressives seem to know exactly what the racial categories are in these situations.
Anyway, let's say I use the same definition Harvard uses when selecting people for admission based on their race. Or maybe what the South African government does to financially penalize their white minority. Just to set some parameters about who or who isn't white, and avoid this pointless bickering. -
2020-10-02 at 3:42 AM UTC
Originally posted by rabbitweed Question for you my progressive transvestite friend - why are racial categories sometimes "nebulously defined", and sometimes not?
For example, when talking about BLM, no one ever says "ugh that's ridiculous I mean what exactly defines 'black'? checkmate losers".
Ditto with "anti-semitism", there's no hand-wringing about who is and isn't jedi. Progressives seem to know exactly what the racial categories are in these situations.
Anyway, let's say I use the same definition Harvard uses when selecting people for admission based on their race. Or maybe what the South African government does to financially penalize their white minority. Just to set some parameters about who or who isn't white, and avoid this pointless bickering.
1) There is constant confusion. White presenting/passing bpoc deal with unique struggles. Numerous times I have seen people get blasted on leftbook for "speaking for black people" or whatever, only for it to be revealed they are just really white passing and I've had the joy of watching a (fellow?) progressive have a fucking meltdown trying to backtrack. Black is just as nebulous a term, and it was foisted up on them when whites stole their heritage and their history. jedis are seen as white by others, many see themselves as white, many draw a distinction - so again, confusion.
2) There's no confusion when it comes to antisemitism because unlike "black" and "white", it is not nebulously defined. Even if "jedi" was nebulously defined (which it arguably isn't - matrilineal inheritance), the act of being prejudiced against that nebulously defined group is a much more easy thing to pin down. -
2020-10-02 at 3:47 AM UTC
Originally posted by Meikai 2) There's no confusion when it comes to antisemitism because unlike "black" and "white", it is not nebulously defined. Even if "jedi" was nebulously defined (which it arguably isn't - matrilineal inheritance), the act of being prejudiced against that nebulously defined group is a much more easy thing to pin down.
A) Who are and aren't classified as 'Semites'?
B) Does criticism of the 'state' of israel constitute antisemitism? -
2020-10-02 at 3:51 AM UTC
Originally posted by aldra A) Who are and aren't classified as 'Semites'?
B) Does criticism of the 'state' of israel constitute antisemitism?
A) In the context of "antisemitism", it is jedis. More broadly, there are many Semitic peoples, but in this specific context it refers to the Israelites and their descendants. Yes? Yes.
B) Not always, but usually. And even on the rare occasion that someone manages to criticize the state of Israel for a valid and factual thing without being overtly antisemitic, the person in question was usually motivated to criticize Israel in the first place by their underlying antisemtic sentiment. Is attacking Israeli policy inherently antisemitic? No. But antisemitic pieces of shit sure love to do it. -
2020-10-02 at 4 AM UTCso... semitism and antisemitism refer to different groups? that's kind of confusing
-
2020-10-02 at 4:09 AM UTC
Originally posted by aldra so… semitism and antisemitism refer to different groups? that's kind of confusing
That isn't what I said now is it. I simply explained that in the context of antisemitism, "Semite" refers to a jedi person. Because that is the context in which you asked. Semitism is a word rarely used by comparison, although it can supposedly refer specifically to the jedi people also. "Semitic" however, has more broad meaning. As I said. -
2020-10-02 at 4:21 AM UTCoh, so even though 'semitism' refers to a language group that contains Arabic and others, when we talk about 'antisemitism' the definition changes and we're only talking about j'ews.
because if it didn't israel would be the most antisemitic group on the planet. -
2020-10-02 at 4:39 AM UTC
Originally posted by aldra oh, so even though 'semitism' refers to a language group that contains Arabic and others, when we talk about 'antisemitism' the definition changes and we're only talking about j'ews.
because if it didn't israel would be the most antisemitic group on the planet.
Semitic refers to a language group. Semitism does not. And given that the concept of "antisemitism" and "being antisemitic" is not a matter of a linguistic prejudice but of a cultural/religious/racial one, the fact that it only refers to jedis in said context is not particularly noteworthy.
Is "antisemitic" a perfect word? Nope. But it has grown into the meaning it was given in this context, and there is nothing overly strange about it. -
2020-10-02 at 4:48 AM UTCThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2020-10-02 at 4:50 AM UTC
Originally posted by aldra I hope you're just messing around and don't consider this to be reasonable or sensible use of language
I... do consider that a sensible use of language, because it is the Semitic language group, and "semitism" insofar as it relates to linguistics is merely a trait of the languages within that language group. -
2020-10-02 at 8:45 AM UTCY'all niggas arguing semantics in this bitch? Profound af bros.
-
2020-10-02 at 4 PM UTC
