Hate Has No Home Here

No I don't. I don't believe anything you posted. Just bs. You're trying to play some victim card because you're white. That's hilarious.

 

100+ posts later and you still have no understanding?

 

Nothing I can do anything about.

 

Well that sounds too vague. What and whose attitudes should be changed. What specifically happens behind the scenes.

 

IMHO, this S isn't going to end well.

 

Don't kneel on neck of black man until death
Don't call cops on Black people because they are in the same park as you
Don't make it harder to get loans. Redlining practice legally ended around 1970 but still went on behind the scene until very recently.

Have ppl just recognize it exists. Knowing the issue is always the 1st step.

 

You know what? You got me. I was wrong to say that you were admitting hypocrisy: to be hypocritical, you would have to have claimed to be for equity while simultaneously saying that whites are racist for being for being for white solidarity, white identity, and a sense of white victimization, but it's okay--and, in fact, encouraged--for blacks to be for black solidarity, black identity, and a sense of black victimization.

Sorry for erroneously implying that you were for equity, which would have made you a hypocrite, as those beliefs would be incongruous, leading to cognitive dissonance.

Again, I apologize. Please forgive me.

 

You sounded like you were feeling sorry for whites. No reason to.
Whites made all the rules in this country for 250 yrs

 

You said:

I replied:

Can you not read your own posts? In the first sentence, you said that there were "poor victimized white men," but then in the second, you said that they "have never been victimized," which does not make sense.

 

Ok. Black men are off limits for police brutality.
Calling 911 on black men are off limits if you are white and concerned for your life. Blacks should be held at a lower standard when it comes to credit score for home ownership purposes.

You really believe treating blacks differently then whites will make things better?

 

Look at the crime and anarchy coming out from the left. Look at the politicization at the highest levels of government in an attempted political coup. Look "woke" and BLM movements and their attempts to destroy our history. Look at the attempts to turn us socialist.

 

You are arguing from a viewpoint of collectivism, whereas I am arguing from that of individualism. Individuals who were white made the rules, but whites as a unit did not. Even from this country's very founding, there were whites who were discriminated against. For example, whites who did not own property were initially denied the franchise. Did they create the rules to prevent them the right to choose whom was going to represent them? Do you see the lack of nuance your perspectives has? I, as a white man, for example, did not create affirmative action. Affirmative action is de jure systemic racism against white people. Did people who were white create it (and some minorities, too?)? Yes, but it does not affect them. Chelsea Clinton went to Stanford. Both of Chuck Schumer's kids went to Harvard. Hell, one of them went to both Harvard and Yale. Rich whites, or whites via legacy admission, or whites with political clout, or strong-enough connections thereof, do not have to worry about the albatross of rules against their race, since they set up de facto, nuncupative avenues to get around them. And it was created by whites who wanted to virtue signal, because they do not have to sacrifice, but still be seen as woke for allowing others of their skin color to carry the yoke in their place, which will prevent the mobs from coming to their homes with pitchforks and torches; it's other whites, like me, the ones who don't make all the rules, that have to eat it.

 

Oh sheesh. Read the post I responded to.

Can you not read sarcasm?

It started with your reply about white men getting elected to office. Etc.

You wanted sorry feelings.

 

Oh. Where did I say if one's life isn't threatened. I didn't.

Treating differently? They've been treated differently since nation founding. They were not full human for a long time.

Anyway. No need for further waste of time. Ignorance is bliss they say.

 

Sarcasm?

If you were being sarcastic, I would have responded like Tom Cruise did to the dispatcher in this movie:

 

How do you explain the democrat party, they are the party of hate? Name anything American they dont hate these days.

 

You were playing poor suffering white people.
It was a group that made rules. Not individual.
AA was to try for more equality for all ppl.
Since white men did a lot of exclusions in setting the rules.
Blacks were not full human.
Women couldn't vote.

It took amendments and a war to start the road to equality for all. AA is another step in the process.
So I don't need to hear how unfair us white men are treated. That is for those who feel sorry for themselves.
I don't. And I don't feel guilty either.

 

Baseball. Hot dogs. Apple pie.
Equality for all.

 

So whites who did not own property, as part of a group, agreed to be discriminated against by willingly be against having the franchise? (1) And speaking of the Civil War, were the middle-class, working-class, and poor whites in favor of the Enrollment Act of 1863, which allowed people, no matter the race, to pay not to be drafted in the war? (2) This is why the Civil War is argued as a rich man's war, but a poor man's fight (3). Why should middle-class, working-class, and poor whites suffer for the sins of certain rich whites of yore?

AA is systemic racism. Plain and simple. De jure systemic racism, affirmative action, on the books, does not make any qualification about which whites to discriminate against, but, de facto, it generally targets middle-class, working class, and poor whites.

You mention the need for a Civil War in order to begin paving the road to equality, and you justify the existence of affirmative action as a stone in that very road. Keeping this in mind, explain to me the morality of a descendent of a black slave owner, for example, getting into Harvard over a white man who was a descendent of a working-class draftee of a the Civil War who was killed in action, because he could not pay the commutation fee.

Time and again, middle-class, working-class, and poor whites have been given the shaft while also simultaneously told how much privilege they have, and it is your type of thinking that has perpetually justified this injustice.

1: https://www.loc.gov/teachers/classr...ntations/elections/founders-and-the-vote.html
2: https://slate.com/human-interest/20...a-substitute-to-enlist-in-the-union-army.html
3: https://www.fords.org/blog/post/civil-war-150-a-rich-mans-war-and-a-poor-mans-fight/

 

Where in the heck are whites suffering because of skin color. Be real and not so dramatic.

How are you suffering?

Edit. All wars are fought by poor and middle class. For the rich Elite's.

 

Can you please use a consistent, not a contradictory, logic? Your overall logic so far has been of an extreme collectivism: whites have done this, whites have done that.

Now you're switching gears, trying to argue with extreme individualism, asking for an anecdotal example of how I personally have suffered, even though (a) anecdotal evidence, whether I have any to share or not, neither effectively proves nor disproves the larger picture and (b) does not illustrate or repudiate that whites have suffered because of affirmative action, and other past and current injustices. Getting into the right college, for example, is fundamental to how effective you will be in the marketplace. Like it or not, when an employer is reviewing an application, and they see Harvard in the "Education" section of the résumé, it definitely gives the applicant an edge, especially if the applicant has successfully networked in the rarified halls of Harvard.

But I want to go back my penultimate post. I asked you to explain something, which you dodged.

I said, "You mention the need for a Civil War in order to begin paving the road to equality, and you justify the existence of affirmative action as a stone in that very road. Keeping this in mind, explain to me the morality of a descendent of a black slave owner, for example, getting into Harvard over a white man who was a descendent of a [sic] working-class draftee of a the Civil War who was killed in action, because he could not pay the commutation fee." Please explain the morality of that.

 

I've said nothing about collectivism. You're making that up

I merely asked how whites are suffering. I am white and not suffering.
Are you suffering for being white? How? Be specific.

You're fabricating an argument for me that I've not done.
Why? To argue against yourself?

 

What are you talking about that you "said nothing about collectivism." Arguing from a collectivist standpoint does not require you to use the word "collectivism" or any of the variants thereof. Collectivism, as defined by the Merriam-Webster dictionary, is "emphasis on collective rather than individual action or identity." You are arguing from a viewpoint of collectivism because you speak about whites acting as part of a group, as opposed to individual whites acting by themselves, which would be arguing from the viewpoint of individualism, from which I am arguing. You have used a collectivist viewpoint to justify individual whites being discriminated against in the form of affirmative action. This is arguing from a viewpoint of collectivism. Get it?

How am I suffering for being white? Let's see. There is systemic, government-sanctioned racism against people of my skin color. Has it applied to me? Possibly, since it has not been struck down as unconstitutional. I'll never know if I did not get a certain job because of affirmative action, or if I did not get into a particular college because of it. And since that is a possibility, I could be living a better life if those government-sanctioned obstacles were not there.

 

If these signs are virtue signaling then so are MAGA hats.

Can't have it both ways.

You see kids, we have a problem in society. Institutional racism and white privlesge are real things that exists. Until those who are not victimized by these issues stands up for the rights of those that are victimized, then we live in an I just society.

It's that simple.

 

No, you can, in fact, have apples and oranges at the same time.