DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
True Left
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Colonial Era
*****************************************************
#Post#: 10920--------------------------------------------------
Re: The "Black" and "White" Identity Politic
s Scam
By: Zea_mays Date: January 30, 2022, 5:44 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote]Conservatives Are Pre-Mad at Biden's Supreme Court Pick
Before the Pick Has Been Made
[...]
During the 2020 campaign, President Joe Biden pledged to
nominate a Black woman to the big bench, and on Thursday
afternoon he confirmed that he will follow through on that
promise. It hasn't yet happened, to be clear, which hasn't
stopped the pre-backlash to the future event from rolling
in.[/quote]
HTML https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a38914282/biden-black-woman-supreme-court-nominee/
Meanwhile, the leftist take on this same topic.
HTML https://i.redd.it/7lkiiiaoo3e81.jpg
#Post#: 10942--------------------------------------------------
Re: The "Black" and "White" Identity Politic
s Scam
By: 90sRetroFan Date: January 31, 2022, 8:23 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_eLrMcGy5w
#Post#: 10989--------------------------------------------------
Re: The "Black" and "White" Identity Politic
s Scam
By: christianbethel Date: February 2, 2022, 2:44 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://youtu.be/fMN768SS1m8
#Post#: 12431--------------------------------------------------
Why I don't relate to my skin colour
By: guest55 Date: April 1, 2022, 4:21 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Excellent! This is close to what we have been saying for decades
now!
Why I don't relate to my skin colour
[quote]NB. This video is entirely my opinion and about my
experiences. Please be considerate in the comment section down
below. Thank you for your time, engagement, and support! I
appreciate and adore you all.
--- chapters ---
2:00 Why I'm bitter | Defining 'tribalism'
6:57 What I (don't) see when looking into a mirror
16:14 Why we 'tribe'
17:20 How my boarding school became my surrogate 'tribe'
28:17 Thank you to my Patrons[/quote]
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaCEUrVJfTc
"Black" and "white" are social constructs. No one is actually
born white, or black! Pinkish and brown perhaps, but why is skin
colour so important in the first place?
See also:
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/colonial-era/the-'black'-and-'white'-identity-politics-scam/
#Post#: 12932--------------------------------------------------
Re: The "Black" and "White" Identity Politic
s Scam
By: guest55 Date: April 20, 2022, 11:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Let's talk about Mallory McMorrow and identifying with the bad
guy....
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KgVF25J8cQ
#Post#: 13932--------------------------------------------------
'Humans Are Not Equal': The Dishonest History of Race
By: guest78 Date: June 8, 2022, 1:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Have not watched this yet, but I can already tell you the first
face on the left of the title screen is closer to the Aryan
phenotype than the rest:
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuDuKOSQXgk
It is possible that the first two people on the left of the
title screen are closer racially to each other than they are to
the last two on the right.
Comment:
[quote]It's depressing how good humans are at dehumanising
others to justify their actions. Even in languages this is seen.
Often in tribal languages it's speakers are known as "The
People" and of course non-speakers would be called something
else. It's crazy to think how small the distances were between
tribes considering the other as not humans, maybe even in
eyesight. It's the saddest part about the slave trade to me, how
some tribes were happy to sell their enemies to the whites,
seeing them as animals. Makes me sick.[/quote]
This is tribalism, Gentiles and Turanians subvert nation-states
with their tribalism to this day. The election of Donald Trump
in the U.S. is a perfect example of this.
#Post#: 14595--------------------------------------------------
Re: The "Black" and "White" Identity Politic
s Scam
By: guest78 Date: July 9, 2022, 2:44 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Adoptee Story: "I Didn't Know I Was Black Until You Told Me"
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82dkyG-w7wU
#Post#: 14766--------------------------------------------------
Re: The "Black" and "White" Identity Politic
s Scam
By: Zea_mays Date: July 19, 2022, 8:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://www.theguardian.com/news/2021/apr/20/the-invention-of-whiteness-long-history-dangerous-idea
[quote]If you asked an Englishman in the early part of the 17th
century what colour skin he had, he might very well have called
it white. But the whiteness of his skin would have suggested no
more suitable basis for a collective identity than the roundness
of his nose or the baldness of his head. If you asked him to
situate himself within the rapidly expanding borders of the
known world, he would probably identify himself, first and most
naturally, as an Englishman. If that category proved too narrow
– if, say, he needed to describe what it was he had in common
with the French and the Dutch that he did not share with
Ottomans or Africans – he would almost certainly call himself a
Christian instead.
That religious identity was crucial for the development of the
English slave trade – and eventually for the development of
racial whiteness. In the early 17th century, plantation owners
in the West Indies and in the American colonies largely depended
on the labour of European indentured servants. These servants
were considered chattel and were often treated brutally – the
conditions on Barbados, England’s wealthiest colony, were
notorious – but they were fortunate in at least one respect:
because they were Christian, by law they could not be held in
lifetime captivity unless they were criminals or prisoners of
war.
Africans enjoyed no such privilege. They were understood to be
infidels, and thus the “perpetual enemies” of Christian nations,
which made it legal to hold them as slaves. By 1640 or so, the
rough treatment of indentured servants had started to diminish
the supply of Europeans willing to work on the sugar and tobacco
plantations, and so the colonists looked increasingly to
slavery, and the Atlantic-sized loophole that enabled it, to
keep their fantastically profitable operations supplied with
labour.
[...]
Toward the end of the 17th century, this scheme witnessed a
significant shift: many of the laws that regulated slave and
servant behaviour – the 1681 Servant Act in Jamaica, for
example, which was later copied for use in South Carolina –
began to describe the privileged class as “whites” and not as
“Christians”.
One of the more plausible explanations for this change, made by
Rugemer and the historian Katharine Gerbner, among others, is
that the establishment of whiteness as a legal category solved a
religious dilemma. By the 1670s, Christian missionaries,
including the Quaker George Fox, were insisting that enslaved
Africans should be inducted into the Christian faith. The
problem this posed for the planters was obvious: if their
African labourers became Christians, and no longer “perpetual
enemies” of Christendom, then on what legal grounds could they
be enslaved? And what about the colonial laws that gave special
privileges to Christians, laws whose authors apparently never
contemplated the possibility that Africans might someday join
the faith?
The planters tried to resolve the former dilemma by blocking the
conversion of enslaved Africans, on the grounds, as the Barbados
Assembly put it in 1680, that such conversion would “endanger
the island, inasmuch as converted negroes grow more perverse and
intractable than others”. When that didn’t work (the Bishop of
London objected) they instead passed laws guaranteeing that
baptism could not be invoked as grounds for seeking freedom.
[...]
As late as 1694, a slave-ship captain could still question the
racial logic newly employed to justify his trade. (“I can’t
think there is any intrinsick value in one colour more than
another, nor that white is better than black, only we think it
so because we are so,” Thomas Phillips wrote in his diary.)
[...]
The economic utility of the idea of whiteness helped spread it
rapidly around the world. Du Bois was not wrong to call it a
religion, for like a religion, it operated at every
psychological, sociological and political scale, from the most
intimate to the most public. Like a religion, too, it adapted to
local conditions. What it meant to be white in British Virginia
was not identical to what it would mean in New York before the
American civil war, in India during the Raj, in Georgia during
Jim Crow, in Australia after Federation, or in Germany during
the Third Reich. But what united all these expressions was a
singular idea: that some group of people called white was
naturally superior to all others. As Benjamin Disraeli, the
Victorian prime minister and one of the most committed race
ideologists of his time, put it, “race implies difference,
difference implies superiority, and superiority leads to
predominance”.
The idea of whiteness, in other words, was identical to the idea
of white supremacy.[/quote]
That final sentence captures an important fact about the
formation of a tribal in-group identity.
And, regarding Disraeli, it is no surprise he is a professional
tribalist:
[quote]Disraeli was born on 21 December 1804 at 6 King's Road,
Bedford Row, Bloomsbury, London,[n 1] the second child and
eldest son of Isaac D'Israeli, a literary critic and historian,
and Maria (Miriam), née Basevi.[3] The family was mostly from
Italy, of Sephardic Jewish, mercantile background (of
Italian-Jewish descent).[/quote]
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Disraeli
[quote]Even Gandhi, during the early part of his life, accepted
the basic lie of whiteness, arguing that “the English and the
Indians spring from a common stock, called the Indo-Aryan” and
that “the white race in South Africa should be the predominating
race”.
[...]
For all their evident success, the devotees of the religion of
whiteness were never able to achieve the total vision they
longed for. In part, this was because there were always
dissenters, including among those who stood to gain from it, who
rejected the creed of racial superiority.
[...]
Yet if the religion of whiteness was never able to gain
acceptance as an unchallengeable scientific fact, it was still
hugely successful at shaping social reality. Some of this
success had to do with its flexibility. Thanks to its role in
facilitating slavery, whiteness in the US was often defined in
opposition to blackness, but between those two extremes was room
for tactical accommodations. In 1751, Benjamin Franklin could
claim that only the English and Saxons “make the principal Body
of White People on the Face of the Earth”, and nearly 80 years
later, Ralph Waldo Emerson would insist that the Irish, like the
Chinese and the Native American, were not caucasian. Over time,
however, the definition of who counted as culturally white
expanded to include Catholics from southern Europe, the Irish
and even Jews, who for centuries had been seen as quintessential
outsiders.
The religion of whiteness also found success by persuading its
adherents that they, and not the people they oppressed, were the
real victims. In 1692, colonial legislators in British Barbados
complained that “sundry of the Negroes and Slaves of this
island, have been long preparing, contriving, conspiring and
designing a most horrid, bloody, damnable and detestable
rebellion, massacre, assassination and destruction”. From there,
it was a more or less straight line to Woodrow Wilson’s claim,
in 1903, that the southerners who started the Ku Klux Klan were
“aroused by the mere instinct of self-preservation”, and to
Donald Trump’s warning, when he launched his presidential
campaign in 2015, that Mexican immigrants to the US were
“bringing drugs. And they’re bringing crime. And they’re
rapists.”
[...]
Political appeals to white solidarity diminished slowly but
certainly. In 1955, for example, Winston Churchill could still
imagine that “Keep England White” was a winning general-election
theme, and even as late as 1964, Peter Griffiths, a Conservative
candidate for parliament, would score a surprise victory after
endorsing a nakedly racist slogan. By 1968, however, when Enoch
Powell delivered his “Rivers of Blood” speech – in which he
approvingly quoted a constituent who lamented that “in 15 or 20
years’ time, the black man will have the whip hand over the
white man” – he would be greeted by outrage in the Times, which
called it an “evil speech”, and expelled from the Conservative
shadow cabinet.[/quote]
Similarly, rightist political strategists in the US felt the
same way:
[quote]Questioner: But the fact is, isn't it, that Reagan does
get to the Wallace voter and to the racist side of the Wallace
voter by doing away with legal services, by cutting down on food
stamps?
Atwater: Y'all don't quote me on this. You start out in 1954 by
saying, "N*gger, n*gger, n*gger." By 1968 you can't say
"n*gger"—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced
busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so
abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all
these things you're talking about are totally economic things
and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than
whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not
saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract,
and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem
one way or the other. You follow me—because obviously sitting
around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than
even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than
"N*gger, n*gger."[/quote]
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy#Evolution_(1970s_and_1980s)
In only a decade, the Counterculture was able to kill the
supreme grip white supremacy held for 300 years, although the
white supremacists remained:
[quote]This gradual rejection of explicit, government-enforced
white supremacy was hugely consequential in terms of public
policy. Yet it did not mean that whiteness, as a political
force, had lost its appeal: in the weeks after Powell’s speech,
to take just one example, a Gallup poll found that 74% of
Britons supported his suggestion that brown-skinned immigrants
ought to be repatriated. It also left unresolved the more
difficult question of whether whiteness was truly separable from
its long history of domination.
Instead of looking too hard at the sordid history of whiteness,
many white people found it easier to decide that the civil
rights movement had accomplished all the anti-racism work that
needed doing. The result was a strange détente. On the one hand,
whiteness retreated as a subject of public attention, giving way
to a new rhetoric of racial colour-blindness. On the other hand,
vast embedded economic and cultural discrepancies allowed white
people to continue to exercise the institutional and structural
power that had accumulated on their behalf across the previous
three centuries.
[...]
Even the phrase “white supremacy”, which predates the word
“racism” in English by 80 years and once described a system of
interlocking racial privileges that touched every aspect of
life, was redefined to mean something rare and extreme. In 1923,
for example, under the headline White Supremacy Menaced, the New
York Times would print an article which took at face value a
Harvard professor’s warning that “one of the gravest and most
acute problems before the world today” was “the problem of
saving the white race from submergence in the darker
races”.[/quote]
See also:
[quote]The Rising Tide of Color: The Threat Against White
World-Supremacy (1920), by Lothrop Stoddard, is a book about
racialism and geopolitics, which describes the collapse of white
supremacy and colonialism because of the population growth among
"people of color", rising nationalism in colonized nations, and
industrialization in China and Japan. To counter the perceived
geopolitical threat, Stoddard advocated restricting non-white
immigration into white-majority countries[/quote]
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rising_Tide_of_Color_Against_White_World-Supremacy
[quote]By the 80s and 90s, however, at least in white-dominated
media, “white supremacy” was reserved only for the most shocking
and retrograde examples of racism. For many people who grew up
at that time, as I did, the phrase evoked cross burnings and
racist hooligans, rather than an intricate web of laws and norms
that maintained disparities of wealth, education, housing,
incarceration and access to political power.[/quote]
And now we have the misfortune of the clunky vocabulary "white
privilege" replacing the original meaning of white supremacy.
"Privilege" imples there could be some unprivileged form of
whiteness, or a state wherein "non-whites" cease being
unprivileged and equal to the supposed "privileges" of "whites".
In reality, the mere existence of "white" tribal identity is the
root of the problem, not the abstract concept of "privilege".
[quote]In the 80s and 90s, a group of legal scholars that
included Derrick Bell, Kimberlé Crenshaw, Cheryl Harris and
Richard Delgado produced a body of research that became known as
critical race theory, which was, in Bell’s words, “ideologically
committed to the struggle against racism, particularly as
institutionalised in and by law”.
Alongside critical race theory, and in many ways derived from
it, a new academic trend, known as whiteness studies, took
shape. Historians working in this subfield demonstrated the
myriad ways in which the pursuit of white supremacy – like the
pursuit of wealth and the subjection of women – had been one of
the central forces that gave shape to Anglo-American history.
For many of them, the bill of indictment against whiteness was
total: as the historian David Roediger put it, “it is not merely
that whiteness is oppressive and false; it is that whiteness is
nothing but oppressive and false.”
In the fall of 1992, a new journal co-founded by Noel Ignatiev,
one of the major figures in whiteness studies, appeared in
bookstores around Cambridge, Massachusetts. Called Race Traitor,
the magazine wore its motto and guiding ethos on its cover:
Treason to Whiteness is Loyalty to Humanity. The issue opened
with an editorial whose headline was equally provocative:
“Abolish the white race – by any means necessary.” This demand,
with its echoes of Sartre by way of Malcolm X, was not, as it
turned out, a call for violence, much less for genocide.
[...]
For Ignatiev and Garvey, whiteness had been identified with
white supremacy for so long that it was folly to think it was
salvageable. “So long as the white race exists,” they wrote,
“all movements against racism are doomed to fail.” What was
necessary, in their view, was for the people called “white” –
people like them – to forcefully reject that identification and
the racial privileges that came with it.[/quote]
And when WNs won't give up their racial identity, what then? Who
will be the hero willing to implement the Final Solution ending
white supremacy and racism?
#Post#: 14767--------------------------------------------------
Re: The "Black" and "White" Identity Politic
s Scam
By: Zea_mays Date: July 19, 2022, 8:04 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Continued from above.
[quote]When I was in graduate school during the early 00s,
toward the end of the whiteness-studies boomlet, I often heard –
including from my own mouth – the argument that the real problem
was that white people weren’t talking enough about their racial
identity. If you could get people to acknowledge their
whiteness, we told ourselves, then it might be possible to get
them to acknowledge the unfair ways in which whiteness had
helped them.[/quote]
How does trapping anti-white pale-skinned people into the
mindset that they are forever and unchangably tainted by
"whiteness" help to abolish "whiteness"?
[quote]In 1860, a man who called himself “Ethiop” published an
essay in The Anglo-African Magazine, which has been called the
first Black literary journal in the US. The author behind the
pseudonym was William J Wilson, a former bootmaker who later
served as the principal of Brooklyn’s first public school for
Black children. Wilson’s essay bore the headline, What Shall We
Do with the White People?
The article was meant in part meant to mock the white authors
and statesmen who had endlessly asked themselves a similar
question about Black people in the US. But it was not only a
spoof. In a tone that mimicked the smug paternalism of his
targets, he laid out a comprehensive indictment of white rule in
the country: the plunder and murder of the “Aborigines”; the
theft and enslavement of Africans; the hypocrisy embodied by the
American constitution, government and white churches. At the
root of all this, he wrote, was “a long continued, extensive and
almost complete system of wrongdoing” that made the men and
women who enabled it into “restless, grasping” marauders. “In
view of the existing state of things around us,” Wilson proposed
at the end, “let our constant thought be, what for the best good
of all shall we do with the White people?”
Much has changed since Wilson’s time, but a century and a half
on, his question remains no less pertinent.[/quote]
[quote]In his 2019 book Whiteshift, Kaufmann argues that the
history of oppression by white people is “real, but moot”, and
he advocates for something he calls “symmetrical
multiculturalism”, in which “identifying as white, or with a
white tradition of nationhood, is no more racist than
identifying as black”. What shall we do with the white people?
Kaufmann thinks we should encourage them to take pride in being
white, lest they turn to more violent means: “Freezing out
legitimate expressions of white identity allows the far right to
own it, and acts as a recruiting sergeant for their wilder
ideas.”[/quote]
Another usual suspect:
[quote]Eric Kaufmann was born in Hong Kong and raised in
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada and Japan.[1] His ancestry
is half Jewish, one-quarter Chinese and one-quarter Costa
Rican.[2][3] His father Steve Kaufmann is of Jewish
descent[/quote]
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Kaufmann
[quote]From another perspective – my own, most days – whiteness
means something different from other racial and ethnic
identities because it has had a different history than other
racial and ethnic identities. Across three-and-a-half centuries,
whiteness has been wielded as a weapon on a global scale;
Blackness, by contrast, has often been used as a shield.[/quote]
That's because, "whiteness" (like Jewishness) is not a mere
ethnic group. It is a tribal identity. An in-group specifically
defined to differentiate the tribe from, and broadcast the
belief in supremacy over, out-group members.
And "blackness", despite being a crude category, was created by
whites (and not by "blacks" trying to form a tribal in-group),
explaining the asymmetry.
[quote]Nor is there much reason to believe that whiteness will
ever be content to seek “legitimate expressions”, whatever those
might look like. The religion of whiteness had 50 years to
reform itself along non-supremacist lines, to prove that it was
fit for innocuous coexistence. Instead, it gave us Donald
Trump.[/quote]
The religion of Jewishness has had at least 3000 years to reform
itself along non-tribal lines and prove it was qualified for
innocuous coexistence. Instead it has given us Eric Kaufmann
(and Jared Kushner, and Jason Miller, and the apartheid state of
Israel, and Disraeli, etc. etc. etc.).
[quote]Yet even this does not fully answer Wilson’s question.
[...] Late in his life, James Baldwin described whiteness as “a
moral choice”, as a way of emphasising that it was not a natural
fact. But whiteness is more than a moral choice: it is a dense
network of moral choices, the vast majority of which have been
made for us, often in times and places very distant from our
own. In this way whiteness is a problem like climate change or
economic inequality: it is so thoroughly imbricated in the
structure of our everyday lives that it makes the idea of moral
choices look quaint.
[...]
As with climate change, however, the only thing more difficult
than such an effort would be trying to live with the
alternative. Whiteness may seem inevitable and implacable, and
Toni Morrison surely had it right when she said that the world
“will not become unracialised by assertion”. (To wake up
tomorrow and decide I am no longer white would help no
one.)[/quote]
Here's what the moral choice to abolish "whiteness" looks like
on the individual level:
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Brown_(abolitionist)
Here's what it looks like on a policy level:
[quote]It is said the South will never submit — that we cannot
conquer the rebels — that they will suffer themselves to be
slaughtered, and their whole country to be laid waste. Sir, war
is a grievous thing at best, and civil war more than any other ;
but if they hold this language, and the means which they have
suggested must be resorted to ; if their whole country must be
laid waste and made a desert, in order to save this Union from
destruction, so let it be. I would rather, Sir, reduce them to a
condition where their whole country is to be re-peopled by a
band of freemen, than to see them perpetrate the destruction of
this people through our agency. I do not say it is time to
resort to such means, and I do not say that the time will come,
but I never fear to express my sentiments. It is not a question
with me of policy, but a question of principle.[/quote]
HTML https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Thaddeus_Stevens
And, well, this:
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler
#Post#: 15406--------------------------------------------------
Re: The "Black" and "White" Identity Politic
s Scam
By: 90sRetroFan Date: August 30, 2022, 2:40 am
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oi4Ll7VGXJk
NEVER FORGIVE. NEVER FORGET.
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page