White males should organize.

[9sublime]

Your failing to see my basic point.

While I agree that discriminating against whites in the examples you have given me is wrong, I don't agree that a white group would be able to change anything and would only segregate society further.

If whites wanted to change all this, they could have done, under no official banner. However, they haven't, and I don't think making a formal pressure group would be of any benefit.

 

[Libsmasher]

Your failing to see my basic point.

While I agree that discriminating against whites in the examples you have given me is wrong, I don't agree that a white group would be able to change anything and would only segregate society further.

Segregation is not the issue - discrimination and racist defamation are the issues.

If whites wanted to change all this, they could have done, under no official banner. However, they haven't, and I don't think making a formal pressure group would be of any benefit.

First of all, it's white males, not "whites" - white women have been the biggest beneficiaries of "affirmative action" (although even they sometimes get ripped off as Gratz and Grutter showed) and are treated as the queens of the universe by the media - only black males are treated better.

Some white males have been intimidated into silence by the usual Orwellian lib ploy that complaining about anti-white racism is itself racism. Others have been brainwashed by the ever-present corporate and lib media and government propaganda into supporting their own destruction. White males are individualists and competitors and don't have the herd instinct of other groups, but in a democratic polity it is exactly such group action to which the establishment responds - blacks eg have used it to become society's only super-citizens. Because of their aggressive and competitive nature, many white males see that the system is rigged against them, but believe that they are smart enough to outwit the system and come out OK - sometimes they do, and sometimes they don't. The purveyors of anti-white male racism/sexism probably understand this individualistic nature of white males (eg, white males don't get together and go out and burn down cities when something happens that they don't like) and know it can be used against them, as part and parcel of the strategy to buy off with privileges organized minorities who are a potential threat because they ARE organized. White males need to have their consciousness raised, to use an old feminist phrase.

 

[9sublime]

Segregation is not the issue - discrimination and racist defamation are the issues..

Making a group for white males sounds like it will encourage segregation, even if it is not your personal intention.

First of all, it's white males, not "whites" - white women have been the biggest beneficiaries of "affirmative action" (although even they sometimes get ripped off as Gratz and Grutter showed) and are treated as the queens of the universe by the media - only black males are treated better..

Petty semantics, and more segregation.

Some white males have been intimidated into silence by the usual Orwellian lib ploy that complaining about anti-white racism is itself racism. Others have been brainwashed by the ever-present corporate and lib media and government propaganda into supporting their own destruction. White males are individualists and competitors and don't have the herd instinct of other groups, but in a democratic polity it is exactly such group action to which the establishment responds - blacks eg have used it to become society's only super-citizens. Because of their aggressive and competitive nature, many white males see that the system is rigged against them, but believe that they are smart enough to outwit the system and come out OK - sometimes they do, and sometimes they don't. The purveyors of anti-white male racism/sexism probably understand this individualistic nature of white males (eg, white males don't get together and go out and burn down cities when something happens that they don't like) and know it can be used against them, as part and parcel of the strategy to buy off with privileges organized minorities who are a potential threat because they ARE organized. White males need to have their consciousness raised, to use an old feminist phrase.

Yes, we established this. However, your not debating the point anymore, your just repeating why you think we should have a white male organization. However, when I've asked you about it, you've just said this stuff over and over again.

 

[Sihouette]

There are two angles to consider with racism:

1. suppressing someone in spite of their acheivements due to the color of their skin.

2. elevating someone in spite of their acheivements due to the color of their skin.

Both devalue the individual. For sexism just use gender instead "the color of their skin".

****
My own knowledge of people is that they are all equal in spirit no matter what flesh they happen to wear. When we focus on either aspect of racism we focus on the flesh and not the person. I think all job applications should be blind ones that do not ask for gender or race on the application. They should only list past experience and performance. Anyone caught circumventing this should be heavily fined and even serve jail time.

In a perfect world.

 

[9sublime]

It's a good point, but we don't live in a perfect world and instead we live in a world where people do base judgement on the colour of skin.

But instead of being irrational and allowing black but not white organizations, either both need to be allowed, or both need to be banned. The more preferable option is to allow both of them, but that is as far as I agree with libsmasher.

My issue is: of what benefit would there be of forming a white group to help white "surpression" or whatever bigged up word you want to call it. There is none, and the very objection he has to black groups should rationally be the same objection he has to a whites only group and thus he should have no desire in joining one.

And thats why I think his desire for a white group highlights an underlying insecurity with skin colour and how the world is moving on.

 

[Libsmasher]

Making a group for white males sounds like it will encourage segregation, even if it is not your personal intention.

Libs encourage segregation all the time, eg the implicit segregation from their "multi-culturalism", and their support for huge numbers of unassimilable hispanics who form virtually a separate nation within US borders.

Petty semantics, and more segregation.

Get a dictionary, and read it every day.

Yes, we established this. However, your not debating the point anymore, your just repeating why you think we should have a white male organization. However, when I've asked you about it, you've just said this stuff over and over again.

You continue to duck and evade. Did you protest black organizations? Hispanic? Womens? Gays? No, you appear to have only only found your voice when it comes to white males, because everyone except WMs is supposed to organize and get privileges - WMs exist just to get f__ed over by a PC culture.

 

[Libsmasher]

It's a good point, but we don't live in a perfect world and instead we live in a world where people do base judgement on the colour of skin.

But instead of being irrational and allowing black but not white organizations, either both need to be allowed, or both need to be banned. The more preferable option is to allow both of them, but that is as far as I agree with libsmasher.

Then you agree completely re the subject of this thread (maybe you should go back and reread it here? ) - because that's all I said.

My issue is: of what benefit would there be of forming a white group to help white "surpression" or whatever bigged up word you want to call it. There is none, and the very objection he has to black groups should rationally be the same objection he has to a whites only group and thus he should have no desire in joining one.

This is a bald-faced blowing away of the facts -

1. white males are the only ones who don't get "affirmative action"

2. "affirmative action" is a zero sum game: There only so many employees a company needs, there only so many slots open at harvard; accepting some because of their (non-white) skin color or (non-male) genitals is LOGICALLY INSEPARABLE from racial discrimination against white males.

3. "Affirmative action" is pervasive - it happens at ALL universities, ALL professional and grad schools, HUGE numbers of scholarships, fellowships, internships; police and fire departments, union apprenticeships, various government jobs; the military; government contracts; ALL big corporations.

And thats why I think his desire for a white group highlights an underlying insecurity with skin colour and how the world is moving on.

Right, someone who complains about massive, pervasive racial discriminastion is "insecure".

Someone who can't face the facts and debate them is insecure.

 

[9sublime]

This is going round in circles.

If you are so against ethnic only groups, it seems irrational to me that you are so keen to form a white one.

 

[Libsmasher]

This is going round in circles.

If you are so against ethnic only groups, it seems irrational to me that you are so keen to form a white one.

I'm not for a "white one", but rather one to end "affirmative action" and racial disparagement in the media, racist practices in the current era that are directed largely against white males. Anyone who opposes this supports racism.

 

[9sublime]

I'm not for a "white one", but rather one to end "affirmative action" and racial disparagement in the media, racist practices in the current era that are directed largely against white males. Anyone who opposes this supports racism.

So now you don't think white males should organise? Sounds like you should change the thread title.

 

[Libsmasher]

So now you don't think white males should organise? Sounds like you should change the thread title.

Any serious argument from you ended about three posts ago. End of thread.

 

[9sublime]

Any serious argument from you ended about three posts ago. End of thread.

You titled the thread, white males should organise. Now you are telling me white males shouldn't organise. Maybe you don't see the serious contradiciton, but I do.

 

[Libsmasher]

You titled the thread, white males should organise. Now you are telling me white males shouldn't organise. Maybe you don't see the serious contradiciton, but I do.

The contradiction exists only in your head. You switched the thread from a substantive debate on the issues, to you essentially arguing with yourself over your own misunderstanding of what I said.

 

[Phoenix68]

White males should organize​

.

.
AGAIN???!!!!!
.

.​

 

[Gabriel_Bell]

So, obviously, the solution of the decline in numbers of White people can be solved by White Men all joining together in a common cause?

But of course, even if all those White Men were gay, they would not cause the percentage of White people to increase... I suggest that to do this, the only solution will involve a major effort by both White Men and White Women.

It's the only way.

If the problem is too many Muslims, then another solution would be to cause them to abandon Islam for some other belief.

In the same way that in Europe, the percentage of practicing Christians is shrinking.