DirtbagLeft
Well-known member
Understanding the sentiment and agreeing with the sentiment. Yes. It is true that we won't achieve racial reconciliation until all white people are dead. We will also not achieve racial conciliation until all back people are dead, all Asians, all etc. The people who say this however are absolute fucking morons because while I get that it expresses their frustration unless one is familiar with the intent of those words it consequentially does more harm than good to express ones frustration that way.Many of your colleagues are far less circumspect. You know the ones talking about we won't achieve racial reconciliation until all the white people are dead.
The intent is not genocide but the destruction of whiteness as a meme. Blackness as a meme. etc... Just like we will not achieve cultural advancement until the all Christians are dead. It's a true statement. It's something I deeply desire. And yet it completely frames my intended meaning out of context. In order for the last Christian to be dead does not necessitate genocide (something I am avidly against). What it necessitates is that no one living think of themselves as Christian. Genocide (an option off the table) is one possible means of achieving this goal. Another way of achieving this goal is to convince people that Christianity is not only factually wrong but an evil and morally bankrupt philosophy.
you can try your historical revisionism but it wont work. Italians, Spaniards, Irish etc. were all excluded from the category of white in the past. White was restricted to Anglo-Saxon's in the early US. Would you like me to pull up the quote's about German's?Actually being white was seen as distinct-even in America, where white skin was contrasted with blacks, Asians, and native americans. The idea of a pan white identity is present in the original birth of a nation. And in the works of race theorists in the early 20th and late 19th centuries.
Yes that was the 20th century understanding based on pseudo-science. Would you like to provide quotes as to why southern Europeans were inferior? Or would it expose the irrationality of the system?Even in the early 20th century-white people were themselves in a hierarchy-Nordics/anglo Saxons the best, French and eastern Europeans in the middle, Latins and emotional southern Europeans at the bottom.
This is actually laughable. The Pan European myth didn't exist until the 1980's and it was manufactured by revisionists.Even so-the idea of a pan European identity has existed for at least 200 years. And arguably since early modern if not medieval times.
So you are admitting that those who are not anglo-saxon are not white. As for the Irish and Italians being seen as distinct it wasn't just "some" ie a small fringe movement. The White Anglo Saxon Protestant's (WASP's) carried out on a large scale a propaganda campaign against the non-white invading Catholics. Anglo-Saxon is an identity white is a moving goal post.And yes there is a common "white" culture. It just so happened to be tagged as Anglo Saxon. In America. Irish and Italians were seen as distinct as late as the mid 20th century in some circles.
So the idea of white people having no distinct identity is just fucking nonsensical. It was just a complex identity with lots of variation.