^^^ That point has also already been addressed several times.
The groups that deserve to be shined a spotlight on and to have their feet held to the fire are the corrupt wealthy and the corrupt powerful. NOT the poor, not the poverty-ridden and not the poorly educated.
It is a well supported fact that crime and violence are a result of poverty and poor education.
And I was just refuting the claim that I “hate white people things” so...
“Shining the spotlight” only means that you are ignoring the reality of the world just to focus on one issue while ignoring the rest. It from my perspective, you might just singling out one specific case because, well you’re racist.
Why are the poor/uneducated less responsible for their actions as the rich and powerful?
Following your logic: It is also an established fact that power corrupts. So (using your logic’ maybe blame the corrupting nature of power rather than the ppl corrupted by it?
Edit. Note: I’m not white. I’m Asian. So I don’t have any personal stake at defending white ppl. You just come out as racist to me, too.
Last edited by Nibedicus on Dec 5th, 2017 at 03:44 AM
This reasoning is a bit more sober and sensible. I would argue that the two statements are not equivalent, as I have been arguing throughout this entire thread.
Anti-white racism and anti-minority racism are both bad, but it has a much more pronounced effect on minorities than it does on white people. And that is due to the power difference between them.
And criticism of the corrupt elites is not the same as criticizing white people. In fact, the corrupt elites are the cause of racial friction between the lower classes.
So how do we solve a problem like the crime rate in black communities? Trump and his MAGA pals weaponize cops and talk about martial law in the inner cities and bullet proof robocops to solve the problem, as if more violence will solve violence. All the while, they slash public education funding and fuk with education programs for the poor, and sh!t on welfare and try to destroy PBS.
These are primarily white people who have had much more opportunity in their lives, a better education, a head start you could say, and they are pushing a platform that strangles the policies designed to bring the black community out of poverty. And these white people are the scummiest because they are ultimately screwing over their own supporters, poor white people are suffering too. Unfortunately, poor white people ally themselves with the rich white people instead of the black community.
If any group deserves to be attacked it's those who have privilege and power, but use it corruptly and inappropriately.
And I’ve noticed your conservative tendencies. It’s always rich when traditionalists and conservatives call others racist.
Yes, white and latino criminals exist. As it happens, wealthy blacks and latinos exist, too. I'll give you another chance: why you are willing to make one a race issue, and not the other?
I’m pro gun control. I am all for racial equality. I am extemely for renewable power and preventing climate change. And I hate Trump.
I’m pro-life and against persecution due to one’s religion. And that’s it.
So I don’t know what you are talking about.
The rest of hour post is irrelevant. This is NOT about excusing black or white ppl from the bad stuff they do. It is about you being a racist. Which, to me, you seem to be.
Your use of “If any group deserves to be attacked...” to justify your white hate is a clear indication of it.
No one deserves to be attacked UNLESS they are the specific individual committing said act to be attacked for. Don’t blame white ppl for the bad shit other white ppl do.
Because black people are proportionally in poverty at a much higher rate than white people. Conversely, 96% of the top 1% of America are white people. White People hold 90 to 95% of America’s wealth.
Because one is the result of unresolved issues America created, the other isn't.
Furthermore, Firefly didn't make it a race issue, he simply said there's nothing unreasonable about the most critiques revolving around white people when white people have the most instutional power and hence can do the most harm. He's not saying white people as a whole should be attacked, he's saying that people crying that white people are being treated unfairly because more white people get criticized than black people are ignoring that white induviduals make a larger portion of america than black people do.
Centuries of segregation, slavery, discrimination put black people in a systematic hole. While the government has stopped actively digging that hole deeper, they haven't pulled black people as a whole in the hole that America put them in.
As a result, issues like poverty, our fcked criminal justice system, and unequal education all disproportionly affect black people. When you're raised in terrible conditions, you're going to have a much harder time avoiding becoming a terrible person. As America has placed black people in disproportionately terrible conditions, it makes sense that crime is commited disproportionately by black people.
Gender: Male Location: The Proud Nation of Kekistan
So would you say your implicit agreement with the notion that one of those two statements is racist was a miscommunication rather than your actual stance?
So would you say you do not stand in defense of Robtard's greater emphasis of white people doing bad shit when the white people in question are in no exceptional position of wealth or power? Ie. white shooters?
If both of these things were miscommunications that don't reflect your actual views then I'll gladly walk back my stance.
Hold on are you talking about the power difference between an impoverished black guy and a wealthy elite white guy here? Or between anyone of white skin and anyone of white skin?
And I do not agree that racism against blacks is any more egregious than racism against whites, as a matter of principle both are equally contemptible and the idea that they should be held to different standards is not an idea I agree with. Particularly since it's not black people who are frequently slandered with some collective guilt by the MSM, and that it's not black people who are discriminated against by affirmative action policies, and that it's not blacks who some college professors are slandering as inherently guilty of racism by dint of birth. I'm not whipping my dick out here and thrusting it into a measuring contest of whose oppressed how much but the idea that anti-white racism can be ignored because its inconsequential is absurd.
So from a logical and moral standpoint creating a distinction between how bad racism is based on the target is not something that makes sense to me, and I also don't think it's practical in the interest of protecting minorities.
The reason I don't think its practical is because you can't separate anti-white and anti-black racism for each other. I hate the alt-right, I think their vile pseudointellectual pieces of shit with a very twisted and warped sense of principles. That being said the quickest way for the alt-right to grow and anti-minority sentiment to grow is to have university faculty spreading the idea that white people are collectively guilty of racism and black people are collectively innocent, to have affirmative action and diversity hiring policies that discriminate against black people (and someone high up in the DNC saying they were looking for someone who was specifically in a "marginalized" identity category to hire for positions), to have people cheering at the idea of white people becoming a minority, to have people publish anti-white shit in MSM, and to have people be apologists for this shit and say it should be ignored.
You can't incur or allow racial sentiment to exist in either direction and expect there not to be reciprocal backlash. It's why I criticize the intersectional people who claim to act in the interests of minorities for their bullshit anti-white crap that drives up the amount of support the alt-right gets, and that's why I criticize the people who backlash against this SJW BS by joining the alt-right because they're just feeding into the narrative that there's a bunch of fascists and that white people are evil. It's why I'm not hesitant at all to call out any form of racism, and that's why I'm not eager to differentiate which types of racism are better or worse based on the group on the receiving end, because I don't think that's helpful. Both of these things are responsible for the state of race relations and racial tensions, and it's not helpful to ignore/downplay or be an apologist for one of these things.
__________________
Shadilay my brothers and sisters. With any luck we will throw off the shackles of normie oppression. We have nothing to lose but our chains! Praise Kek!
THE MOTTO IS "IN KEK WE TRUST"
Last edited by Emperordmb on Dec 5th, 2017 at 04:37 AM
If this is what I think you're referring to, he was mocking certain conservatives(Surtur) who engaged in similar activities on the forums. Firefly has repeatedly made clear he isn't attacking white people, so your attempt at apply a position he's explicitly opposed to him is nothing more than drawing up a strawman. What DD called racist wasn't what rob said. What DD called racist was firefly's statement that it makes sense white people would induvidually receive the most criticism as they are the largest and most powerful section of american society.
That's a fcking joke, because that's not a remotely racist statement.
And I said as much. That still doesn't support your assertion that Firefly is being racist or justify DD continually trying to slander fly as one on the basis of him making a factually accurate statement regarding white people as individuals rather than a collective.
I see you're taking cues from Surt now.
I find it funny the person attacking my character is trying to accuse me of claiming moral high ground.
If you weren't just cherrypicking parts of the discussion to fuel your attempt at calling out non existent hypocrisy, you might have noticed I twice critcized Firefly for
A. accusing New Guy of racism
B. trying to equate attacking people on the basis of an ideology as attacking people on the basis of race
I have no interest in defending "leftists", my only interest here is to defend stances that are right, and attack arguments that are wrong. I also try to defend people from unjustified character attacks.
Not once did Firefly ever say anything racist, and hence Double D's repeated insistence of Firefly's racism is nothing more than baseless ad hominem that you jumped in on.
If you plan on responding, try and focus on my arguments.
KMC Community Forums
Dec 5th, 2017 03:25 AM
