Yay for poor immigrants- Benefits of white flight.

[MrAngry]

White flight? This is what some want us to believe, lots of us dark folk congregating and forcing poor down trodden white folks away.

A thought occurred to me, why are most of the poor areas of the UK non white? Could it be that whites are now better off and have moved into more salubrious areas as their wealth and disposable income has increased?

Perhaps racists should be pleased that most of the poor are now non white, the real objection seems to be when non whites move out of poverty and have the temerity to mingle with the middle classes. Or is it really the bullshit of love of country and race blah blah blah?

[Count Sudoku]

White flight? This is what some want us to believe, lots of us dark folk congregating and forcing poor down trodden white folks away.

I'm sorry, are you actually questioning that this is happening?

A thought occurred to me,

Oh boy...

why are most of the poor areas of the UK non white?

Because most non-whites are deadbeats?

Could it be that whites are now better off and have moved into more salubrious areas as their wealth and disposable income has increased?

Yeah, that's the ticket. When the welfare parasites moved into their neighborhoods, the whites' income and wealth suddenly increased and they were able to move to the rich areas.

Perhaps racists should be pleased that most of the poor are now non white,

Yes, what a blessing to have an ever growing number of parasites to support.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080307/mother_fire_080307/20080307?hub=TopStories

Montreal mother saves seven children from fire

A Montreal mother is being hailed as a hero after she threw her seven children out a second-floor window as a raging fire threatened to engulf them.

The woman and her children, who are between ages two and 10, were all taken to hospital early this morning. Their injuries include third-degree burns and respiratory problems.

One child, a three-year-old girl, is in critical condition.

There were snowbanks outside of the woman's window, which were credited for breaking the two-story drop for many of the children. One child was caught by a neighbour.

The fire is believed to have started in a sofa in the basement of the building. There was no smoke detector in the woman's home.

Neighbours awoke shortly after midnight Friday, when they heard screams, CTV Montreal's Maya Johnson said. By the time many of them looked outside, the home was engulfed in flames and the mother was throwing the children out the window.

"Obviously, it was very difficult for the mother to make that decision and by the end, she had to throw herself out of the window," Johnson said.

Neighbours said the family seemed close and that the woman showed remarkable courage.

"She had a lot of courage to (do that). When you panic you don't know sometimes what you can do," a neighbour told CTV News.

Montreal fire officials said the incident highlights the importance of having a working smoke detector.

http://images.ctv.ca/archives/CTVNews/img2/20080307/450_mtl_fire_080307.jpg

This is the best part, the comments of all these retard canucks

CAW
Awesome! Her actions need to be recognized, and an award for Bravery needs to be prefered on her.

Again, Awesome!!!

D in BC
I hope this courageous mother and her children all survive this horrifying ordeal. This incident highlights the need for smoke detectors and fire safety measures in our homes. My thoughts are with this family during what is undoubtedly a difficult time.

bb
Smart and quick thinking - this mom ROCKS!!

Now give her landlord a kick in the pants for no smoke detectors. What a fool.

I invite other Phora members to comment on this.

the real objection seems to be when non whites move out of poverty and have the temerity to mingle with the middle classes. Or is it really the bullshit of love of country and race blah blah blah?

The Indians didn't like it when a few white guys went over there and improved things for them. What the fuck makes you think we would like it when a shitload of you come here and send the country down the toilet?

[MrAngry]

I'm sorry, are you actually questioning that this is happening?

I'm not, I'm questioning the full motive.



Oh boy...

Now now.... :bbbat:



Because most non-whites are deadbeats?

Where have the white dead beats gone?



Yeah, that's the ticket. When the welfare parasites moved into their neighborhoods, the whites' income and wealth suddenly increased and they were able to move to the rich areas.

So the poor whites moved out where and how and with what? Surely the shitty white areas would have moved elsewhere?




The Indians didn't like it when a few white guys went over there and improved things for them. What the fuck makes you think we would like it when a shitload of you come here and send the country down the toilet?


This just looks like rhetoric.....

[Count Sudoku]

I'm not, I'm questioning the full motive.

Good...

Now now.... :bbbat:

Had to say it...

Where have the white dead beats gone?

They went somewhere else where other white deadbeats live and they wouldn't be attacked and harassed daily by roving gangs of niggers and pakis.

So the poor whites moved out where and how and with what? Surely the shitty white areas would have moved elsewhere?

They were probably renting and don't own that much. They probably move frequently even without ethnic cleansing being a factor. I'm sure there were white deadbeats living in Detroit but most of them eventually left.

This just looks like rhetoric.....

The wogs made a big deal about "Africa for Africans and Asia for Asians" and wanted Whitey to leave during decolonization even though he was the only thing propping up their countries. Now the fuckers want to colonize our territories. "Whitey!, go back to Europe!...(and take me with you)".

[Winston]

White flight is a mainly middle class thing. The poor Whites still exist, and I can't quite see how anyone living in Britain would not know this.

[Dan Dare]

...A thought occurred to me, why are most of the poor areas of the UK non white? ...

Might it have something to do with the socio-economic status of the non-white people have have been admitted to the UK in the last 50 years or so?

[MrAngry]

White flight is a mainly middle class thing. The poor Whites still exist, and I can't quite see how anyone living in Britain would not know this.


Yes they still exist, but not in the numbers of the 60's and 70's. Poor white areas in Liverpool have high gun and knife crime and I would guess that there'd be flight from these areas too.

[MrAngry]

Might it have something to do with the socio-economic status of the non-white people have have been admitted to the UK in the last 50 years or so?


Nail on head..............

[Omniel]

The white middle and upper classes are avoiding the underclass, like they've always done. It just happens that some ethnicities produce more underclass than others, and more criminals too. It's pretty simple to understand, it's not rocket science.

[Grapple]

Might it have something to do with the socio-economic status of the non-white people have have been admitted to the UK in the last 50 years or so?
Seems strange, since most of the immigrants have not been the lowest and poorest of the countries they came from but a much higher status since they have had to come up with thousands of pounds to come to Britain. So in fact these are a select group of immigrants, the poorest in “socio-economic status” are still in the slums of their own countries.

[harjit]

The Indians didn't like it when a few white guys went over there and improved things for them. What the fuck makes you think we would like it when a shitload of you come here and send the country down the toilet?

1. There are some Westerners, especially tech workers, who are finding opportunities in India. If, for the sake of argument, things were to really boom there I would have no problem with mass numbers of Westerners moving there. It's better than being a poor country.

2. Indian immigrants typically have an above-average income in North America. I think it's the same in the U.K. as well.

3. Who's "we"? Why are you any more entitled to call yourself a "host" than anyone else? (I assume you're talking about Canada here because that's where you are).

[Count Sudoku]

1. There are some Westerners, especially tech workers, who are finding opportunities in India.

Yes, they're following their outsourced jobs.

If, for the sake of argument, things were to really boom there I would have no problem with mass numbers of Westerners moving there. It's better than being a poor country.

Maybe you wouldn't but I doubt that view is shared by most Indians. I wonder what the reaction would be if the government decided to let in millions of Africans?

2. Indian immigrants typically have an above-average income in North America. I think it's the same in the U.K. as well.

I am not talking about economics in regards to Indians. I am talking about cultural and biological genocide.

3. Who's "we"? Why are you any more entitled to call yourself a "host" than anyone else? (I assume you're talking about Canada here because that's where you are).

Hopefully "we" are an ever increasing number of white people who are sick and tired of having our countries colonized.

[Grapple]

Harjit says

If, for the sake of argument, things were to really boom there I would have no problem with mass numbers of Westerners moving there. It's better than being a poor country.
Then why should rich countries want a lot of poor third worlders moving to their countries, it just makes the rich country poorer. It makes a few people richer, but overall the country is poorer. Its better for a rich country to stay rich rather then import in poverty, we already have enough poor in the West all ready, we don’t need more.

You might argue that having poor workers is an economic advantage, but India has lots of poor workers and even with this supposed “boom” its still a dump.

Of course the West should reject all the Hindu immigrants on the simple rule that their ideology is based on caste and therefor incompatible with Western society. While Muslims are just Jews with another crazy book and should be sent back to the countries where they belong.
3. Who's "we"? Why are you any more entitled to call yourself a "host" than anyone else? (I assume you're talking about Canada here because that's where you are).
This is another reason why third worlders should not be allowed to come to the West, once you get here you get uppity and start thinking that the people who built the country are no longer in charge. And don’t bring up western values of equality, yours society is that of caste, if you want to change that, go back to India and bring equality there.

[Hartmann von Aue]

In fact, I would argue that cultureless "westernized" professionals like Harjit are artificial Jews.

They think they should be in charge, and they love to see the things we hold sacred desecrated.

The history of our civilization means nothing to them - it's just something that happened for their convenience.

[MrAngry]

Yes, they're following their outsourced jobs.

And so? It 's not a new phenomenon for Westerners to follow opportunities, history is littered with examples.



Maybe you wouldn't but I doubt that view is shared by most Indians. I wonder what the reaction would be if the government decided to let in millions of Africans?

When the local population cannot provide the labour to support its own economic growth or infrastructure then what is the alternative?


I am not talking about economics in regards to Indians. I am talking about cultural and biological genocide.

Yes like that is likely to happen, the ratio of interracial relationships based on colour would have to be astronomical.



Hopefully "we" are an ever increasing number of white people who are sick and tired of having our countries colonized.

Such emotive language, people may get sick and tired of mass immigration only a few will display virulent racist attitudes, like yourself albeit in the anonymity of the internet.

[MrAngry]

Then why should rich countries want a lot of poor third worlders moving to their countries, it just makes the rich country poorer. It makes a few people richer, but overall the country is poorer. Its better for a rich country to stay rich rather then import in poverty, we already have enough poor in the West all ready, we don’t need more.

The rich country imports labour to support its growth, how many people do you know that are westernised that aspire to manual labour, cleaning toilets and low skill manufacturing jobs?


You might argue that having poor workers is an economic advantage, but India has lots of poor workers and even with this supposed “boom” its still a dump.

Just use Google to educate yourself on the rising economic and social standards in India, yes 50% are still very poor, but even Europe has poverty or haven't you heard? India's recent economic rise is still in it's infancy as is China's so your comparison is premature, lets see what the situation is in 30 years shall we?



Of course the West should reject all the Hindu immigrants on the simple rule that their ideology is based on caste and therefor incompatible with Western society. While Muslims are just Jews with another crazy book and should be sent back to the countries where they belong.

But not Catholics, Mormons or Seventh day adventists? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:


This is another reason why third worlders should not be allowed to come to the West, once you get here you get uppity and start thinking that the people who built the country are no longer in charge. And don’t bring up western values of equality, yours society is that of caste, if you want to change that, go back to India and bring equality there.

Harjit is a Canadian, or should that be a CanIndian :) . Who are you to decide what he should do or not? You're as much a foreigner as he is or isn't in this case.

[Count Sudoku]

And so? It 's not a new phenomenon for Westerners to follow opportunities, history is littered with examples.

That remark was more sarcasm than refutation.

When the local population cannot provide the labour to support its own economic growth or infrastructure then what is the alternative?

Have more kids? And the answer is that the oh so tolerant Indians would lnych their politicians.

Yes like that is likely to happen, the ratio of interracial relationships based on colour would have to be astronomical.

The ratio doesn't have to be astronomical and genocide does not necessarily mean every single white person disappears. Go read the UN definition of genocide...

http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide/gendef.htm

The definitional article included in the 1948 convention stipulates:

Article II

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

Such emotive language, people may get sick and tired of mass immigration only a few will display virulent racist attitudes, like yourself albeit in the anonymity of the internet.

The current demographic trends in the West are unprecedented. Who knows what will happen in the future.

[MrAngry]

That remark was more sarcasm than refutation.
Nice cop out.



Have more kids? And the answer is that the oh so tolerant Indians would lnych their politicians.

Would they? Example?




The ratio doesn't have to be astronomical and genocide does not necessarily mean every single white person disappears. Go read the UN definition of genocide...

http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide/gendef.htm

The definitional article included in the 1948 convention stipulates:

Article II

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:



(a) Killing members of the group;

Not happening.....



(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

Not happening.....


(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

Not happening.....

I think we can safely deduce that there is no genocide according to the UN definition of genocide.

[Count Sudoku]

Would they? Example?

http://cricketblog.aol.in/2007/10/16/indian-crowds-and-racism/

There is a lot of discussion happening over whether Andrew Symonds had been racially abused or not. I have read so many articles on this that I feel compelled to put in my two cents on something I felt would blow over on its own, simply because it was too small. Don't get me wrong here; racism by itself is not a small matter to be dismissed lightly. But everything has to be seen on a case-to-case basis. I understand the Vadodra and Nagpur crowds might not have been the most sophisticated to have ever adorned the cricket grounds of the world, but whether or not they really understand what racism means is a point open for discussion.

Andrew Symonds says that the crowd made monkey noises at him. There are many questions that spring to mind here. What exactly is a monkey noise? I am sure I wouldn't be able to differentiate a monkey noise from an owl noise or any of those noises frequently heard on silent nights. I doubt if the crowds at Vadodra or Nagpur had such skilled people who could unflinchingly make those "monkey" noises at Symonds.

Not happening.....

Not happening.....

Not happening.....

So mass race mixing doesn't lower the white population?

[harjit]

This is another reason why third worlders should not be allowed to come to the West, once you get here you get uppity and start thinking that the people who built the country are no longer in charge. And don’t bring up western values of equality, yours society is that of caste, if you want to change that, go back to India and bring equality there.
It's been the same story in North America again and again.

Each successive immigrant group, white or non-white, faced discrimination and catcalls of "go back where you came from" or "if you're so great then improve things back home".

You and Leon_de_Poncins seem to be under the impression that white immigrants came to "build civilization" or something similarly holier-than-thou, and not to pursue opportunities, or live in a place that may jive with their values better (as was my parents' reason for coming).

There is nothing that can be said about non-white immigrants to North America that can't be said about white ones.

[Hartmann von Aue]

There is nothing that can be said about non-white immigrants to North America that can't be said about white ones.

There is a dominant, common cultural heritage among the whites that is not shared by the non-whites.

They have a right to preserve that - to be the masters of their own land.

[harjit]

There is a dominant, common cultural heritage among the whites that is not shared by the non-whites.

1. In earlier days the linguistic and cultural distances within the different European cultures was as wide as the difference between European and non-European cultures today.

2. In North America most newcomers assimilate.

3. None of this matters in multicultural and multiracial societies, either way.


They have a right to preserve that - to be the masters of their own land.

It's not "their own" land. You can only say that about land you've purchased or inherited from your family.

If you successfully dragoon white people (or blue-eyed people, or left-handed people, or flat-footed people, or whatever your group is) into a movement where they think the presence of The Other is a detriment to them, and are able to gain sufficient numbers, you may have a convincing power argument.

But you have no moral or logical argument, and that may partly explain why you're not winning on the power count either. (I'll allow that the correspondence between moral/logical correctness and practical power is not always one-to-one in every case, but the former certainly increases the possibility of gaining the latter). There is nothing special about you and your kind, Leon. You are just part of a long American tradition of bigoted anti-Semites who have been trying to do the same thing, using the same petty atavistic fear-mongering arguments throughout most of the 20th century, only to suffer one setback, large or small, after the other. You are irrelevant, obsolete, defeated and discredited. Nothing personal.

[1-800]

1. In earlier days the linguistic and cultural distances within the different European cultures was as wide as the difference between European and non-European cultures today.

2. In North America most newcomers assimilate.

3. None of this matters in multicultural and multiracial societies, either way.


I respond:

Your first assertion is ridiculous. All of the immigrants to America who came in appreciable numbers prior to the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, save for Jews, were united by a Christian heritage. And which languages are closer -- German and English or Urdu and English? Really now...

The genetic differences are greater than the cultural and linguistic differences, in any case, and that is what matters. I don't want assimilation, as that leads to loss of genetic diversity.

Moreover, only two of the European immigrant groups, the Irish, importing a ancient hostility from their homeland, and, much more noticeably, the Jews, whose story we all well know, were hostile to the interests of the majority population. Almost all non-European immigrants work to undermine the interests of the host population -- and even if they do not work under the aegis of various ethnic lobbying groups to clamor for government favors, their very presence in our lands is damaging.


It's not "their own" land. You can only say that about land you've purchased or inherited from your family.

This land was settled by our ancestors, its laws and institutions to be preserved in perpetuity for their posterity: us. That this chain of succession has been broken by racial aliens who have slimed their way onto our shores is of no consequence.

But you have no moral or logical argument, and that may partly explain why you're not winning on the power count either.

There is both a logical and moral component to our argument, but you choose to ignore it, since it runs counter to your interests. An ethny needs to control its living space to protect against the vicissitudes of fortune: famine, war, a declining birthrate, etc. If a homogeneous ethny can't protect its land, then it is finished. The immigration practices of the United States are tantamount to genocide of its majority population.


You are just part of a long American tradition of bigoted anti-Semites who have been trying to do the same thing, using the same petty atavistic fear-mongering arguments throughout most of the 20th century, only to suffer one setback, large or small, after the other. You are irrelevant, obsolete, defeated and discredited. Nothing personal.

Yes, well, enjoy the world when it resembles the India from which your parents fled to Euro-settled Canada.
:rofl:

[harjit]

I respond:

Your first assertion is ridiculous. All of the immigrants to America who came in appreciable numbers prior to the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, save for Jews, were united by a Christian heritage. And which languages are closer -- German and English or Urdu and English? Really now...

My point being that there was probably more hostility among these European groups in those days than there are between (for example) average white suburbanites and their Chinese neighbors today.


The genetic differences are greater than the cultural and linguistic differences, in any case, and that is what matters. I don't want assimilation, as that leads to loss of genetic diversity.

On the contrary there would be MUCH more genetic diversity. Assuming genetic diversity is something to give a flying fuck about in the first place.


Moreover, only two of the European immigrant groups, the Irish, importing a ancient hostility from their homeland, and, much more noticeably, the Jews, whose story we all well know, were hostile to the interests of the majority population. Almost all non-European immigrants work to undermine the interests of the host population -- and even if they do not work under the aegis of various ethnic lobbying groups to clamor for government favors, their very presence in our lands is damaging.

Hello? They are part of the host population now.


This land was settled by our ancestors, its laws and institutions to be preserved in perpetuity for their posterity: us. That this chain of succession has been broken by racial aliens who have slimed their way onto our shores is of no consequence.
Your ancestors? I didn't realize Turks fought the Iroquois.

But anywhoo, back to laws and institutions. Those who break the law are put away, and institutions are evolving organisms, not something to be forcibly fossilized. They go the way they will.

And even if these were concerns, race is not a tie that binds in terms of institutions. In Japan, Westerners are more familiar with the laws, institutions, and first-world business practices than are their fellow-Mongoloid Chinese. Various tribal customs and languages in Africa are not such that movement from tribe to another would be seamless, even though they are all Negroids. There is no viable state that founded upon race alone, as you seem to want America to be.


There is both a logical and moral component to our argument, but you choose to ignore it, since it runs counter to your interests. An ethny needs to control its living space to protect against the vicissitudes of fortune: famine, war, a declining birthrate, etc. If a homogeneous ethny can't protect its land, then it is finished. The immigration practices of the United States are tantamount to genocide of its majority population.

The United States is not an ethnic or racial state.

[1-800]

My point being that there was probably more hostility among these European groups in those days than there are between (for example) average white suburbanites and their Chinese neighbors today.

Yes, probably. But so what?


On the contrary there would be MUCH more genetic diversity. Assuming genetic diversity is something to give a flying fuck about in the first place.

No, there would not be -- the genetics of European Caucasian populations are unique, as are those of other racial subsets. I would prefer to preserve them. I do not wish to lose this genetic information to admixture.


Your ancestors? I didn't realize Turks fought the Iroquois.


I am speaking for Euro-derived Americans, even if I am not necessarily one of them. Does gratitude and concern for your hosts shock you so much?


And even if these were concerns, race is not a tie that binds in terms of institutions. In Japan, Westerners are more familiar with the laws, institutions, and first-world business practices than are their fellow-Mongoloid Chinese. Various tribal customs and languages in Africa are not such that movement from tribe to another would be seamless, even though they are all Negroids. There is no viable state that founded upon race alone, as you seem to want America to be.


The American South was, prior to integration. However, a racial state is unique to the nations of the overseas European diaspora -- the result of successive waves of European immigrants. I don't expect Chinese to get along any better with Japanese than with Estonians, just because the Chinese and Japanese are genetically closer.

Things are different in the genetic reservoirs of the European peoples, their home states.


The United States is not an ethnic or racial state.

No, it is not. However, I would prefer to see it return ethnically homogeneous nation-states, competing in a true 'free market', as opposed to a panmixia of various groups squabbling for government power and favors, coerced into sharing living space by the power of the state.

[harjit]

Yes, probably. But so what?

My comments about cultural distances then and now were in response to this quote:
There is a dominant, common cultural heritage among the whites that is not shared by the non-whites.


No, there would not be -- the genetics of European Caucasian populations are unique, as are those of other racial subsets. I would prefer to preserve them. Our genetic information would be lost through admixture.

I don't how how unique the genetics of the major races are, or how closely they follow the racial lines. Different markers align differently from what I've heard. I admit I'm not knowledgeable on the topic.

As for diversity, the world wouldn't take on a uniform cafe au lait Tiger Woods look. There would be all kinds of permutations and combinations.

Either way, how much does this mean to anyone who is not a genetics dweeb in the first place?

(By the way, I'm not promoting or championing race-mixing. Besides antagonizing WN types, the truth is that I don't care one way or another).


I am speaking for Euro-derived Americans, even if I am not necessarily one of them. Does gratitude and concern for your hosts shock you so much?

I don't think of myself as a guest. Particularly since I'm not first generation and was not the one who immigrated. But sure, I do in my own way have a sort of regard for those who have longer roots in the country, whether Europeans or First Nations peoples. But that's private and subjective and not relevant to what we discuss on this board.

(In Japan, OTOH, I do feel like a bit of a guest.)


The American South was, prior to integration. However, a racial state is uniquely American -- the result of successive waves of European immigrants. I don't expect Chinese to get along any better with Japanese than with Estonians, just because the Chinese and Japanese are genetically closer.

I suppose this singular and exceptional American racial state could exist in theory. Among all the other things we can discuss about it, we know it's not going to happen. So in the meantime your position only creates division and hostility.


No, it is not. However, I would prefer to see it return ethnically homogeneous nation-states, competing in a true 'free market', as opposed to a panmixia of various groups squabbling for government power and favors, coerced into sharing living space by the power of the state.

I don't like identity politics and race-hustlers either.

[007]

or live in a place that may jive with their values better (as was my parents' reason for coming).

Could you elaborate on this a little, please. How did Canada jive better with your parent's values?

[MrRS]

White flight? This is what some want us to believe, lots of us dark folk congregating and forcing poor down trodden white folks away.

A thought occurred to me, why are most of the poor areas of the UK non white? Could it be that whites are now better off and have moved into more salubrious areas as their wealth and disposable income has increased?

Perhaps racists should be pleased that most of the poor are now non white, the real objection seems to be when non whites move out of poverty and have the temerity to mingle with the middle classes. Or is it really the bullshit of love of country and race blah blah blah?
Come on, lets see you provide some evidence of this.

[MrAngry]

Come on, lets see you provide some evidence of this.


Evidence of an opinion?

[MrRS]

Evidence of an opinion?
Yes...........

[Starr]

Originally Posted by Count Sudoku

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

This description does at least come quite close. Our group cultures are being destroyed in the name of universalism. We are projected, if things remain as they are, to become minorities in our own countries in the not so distant future. If we discuss this, as a negative(one can always say it is a wonderful thing, which alone says a lot considering if you were to express joy about the declining percentage of any other group you would be called a hatemonger) in "polite society" we face all kinds of possible negative consequences, including being labelled as something that has become one of the great sins, today, racism. People have been given the idea that it is somehow morally wrong to care, specifically about the survival of their own people and race. White western culture, our ancestors, etc. are forever being demonized to the point where people have lost their willingness to fight against all of this. These last couple of things could be called deliberate.

[Warka]

There is nothing special about you and your kind, Leon. You are just part of a long American tradition of bigoted anti-Semites who have been trying to do the same thing, using the same petty atavistic fear-mongering arguments throughout most of the 20th century, only to suffer one setback, large or small, after the other. You are irrelevant, obsolete, defeated and discredited. Nothing personal.

For a tradition that's as good as dead and buried- irrelevant, obsolete, defeated and discredited- you and many others sure devote an awful lot of time and resources attacking it. Why is this?

The question is rhetorical, no need to answer. We all know why- the tradition is obviously not irrelevant, obsolete, defeated or discredited. If it were, you and your ilk would simply leave it on the vine to wither and die.

[harjit]

For a tradition that's as good as dead and buried- irrelevant, obsolete, defeated and discredited- you and many others sure devote an awful lot of time and resources attacking it. Why is this?

The question is rhetorical, no need to answer. We all know why- the tradition is obviously not irrelevant, obsolete, defeated or discredited. If it were, you and your ilk would simply leave it on the vine to wither and die.

It's mostly frustration with myself that keeps me coming back. I need to improve at thinking logically in hostile situations and it's very tough to master this. It becomes like an addiction to a sim game, or gambling or something.

Most people who fight racism seriously or professionally are focused on the institutional kind, not racial separatists or supremacists. I once spoke to someone in that field and she didn't know about Stormfront.

[MrRS]

Most people who fight racism seriously or professionally are focused on the institutional kind, not racial separatists or supremacists. I once spoke to someone in that field and she didn't know about Stormfront.

Most people who claim to fight racism can't give a definative answer to what racism is.

[Omniel]

Most people who claim to fight racism can't give a definative answer to what racism is.
Most people think racism is hating people because of the colour of their skin, a crazy obsession with melanin driven by an irrational red rage due to a lack of education and/or low intelligence. Antiwarriors go one step further and see racists as people who are evil or sick in the head because they make judgements or decisions based upon observing racial patterns of behaviour. These brave antis realise that the terrible racist people must be fought tooth and nail, by whatever means necessary.

[MrAngry]

Most people think racism is hating people because of the colour of their skin, like a crazy obsession with melanin driven by an irrational red rage due to a lack of education and/or low intelligence. Antiwarriors go one step further and see racists as people who are evil or sick in the head because they make judgements or decisions based upon observing racial patterns of behaviour. These brave antis realise that the terrible racist people must be fought tooth and nail, by whatever means necessary.

Good Lord man, I am suprised at you, playing stereotypes, please find more than 2 anti racists that post here or MSF that fit your description and I'll find you plenty that fit the racist stereotype. Typically racists haven't covered themselves in glory throughout history have they? c1939-40 being a case in point, also the skinhead movement of the 70's and 80's wasn't quite peace and love so please forgive me if I feel that on the whole racists are scum sucking low lifes.

I understand racial frustrations, I have worked in areas like Oldham so I do appreciate how local people feel, I am not a fan of multiculturalism either.

Finally, I do believe that negative discrimination based on race should be fought, as much as I believe that positive discrimination should be.

[Omniel]

Good Lord man, I am suprised at you, playing stereotypes, please find more than 2 anti racists that post here or MSF that fit your description and I'll find you plenty that fit the racist stereotype.
Most of those who 'fight racism' don't like to actually pay attention to discourse posted on sites like this or even MSF for that matter, let alone post here. They're not interested in discussion or debate, they prefer to lobby for policy changes, attend marches or smoke weed and organise student events with their antiracist pals.

[MrRS]

please find more than 2 anti racists that post here or MSF that fit your description and I'll find you plenty that fit the racist stereotype.
Kamandi
Y_I_(b)Otter
Daryle Lamont Jenkings
mikfrompakistan
King Mob
Descendent
Mansa Musa
Arnold Judas Rimmer
rach
Mickey Mouse

[1-800]

Typically racists haven't covered themselves in glory throughout history have they? c1939-40 being a case in point.

c1939-1940 racists would also include the great majority of Europeans and their kin in the European diaspora, however, not just the Nazis.

[Kriger]

It never ceases to amaze me how it is always the White racists that the antis come here to attack. And how the antiracists do nothing more than get everyone riled up over....nothing.

[Winston]

c1939-1940 racists would also include the great majority of Europeans and their kin in the European diaspora, however, not just the Nazis.

Exactly. But you're still leaving out all the non-White racists. Racism seems to be the default human reaction to the introduction of outsiders into a living space. I blame any and all results on those who do the introducing.

[Dan Dare]

Those who create the most noise about the racist and xenophobic Minutemen and the US-Mexico border fence remain curiously silent about the Great Fence of India (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article782933.ece).

[harjit]

Kamandi
Y_I_(b)Otter
Daryle Lamont Jenkings
mikfrompakistan
King Mob
Descendent
Mansa Musa
Arnold Judas Rimmer
rach
Mickey Mouse

Huh? :confused:
......................

[Starr]

Good Lord man, I am suprised at you, playing stereotypes, please find more than 2 anti racists that post here or MSF that fit your description and I'll find you plenty that fit the racist stereotype.

.

Anti racist posters on these forums often don't fit that because they have been exposed to the reality of outspoken racial views, rather than just taking their cues on what the reasons for those racial views are from the tv. Irrational hatred based on nothing more than skin color as an explanation is the kind of idea that you hear attributed to racists all of the time.

[harjit]

Anti racist posters on these forums often don't fit that because they have been exposed to the reality of outspoken racial views, rather than just taking their cues on what the reasons for those racial views are from the tv. Irrational hatred based on nothing more than skin color as an explanation is the kind of idea that you hear attributed to racists all of the time.
True, partly it's because of our exposure to WNs, and partly because I don't think most of us come here with any serious leftist agenda. I suspect most of us are just non-whites who found this racist stuff on these boards putting down non-whites and found it personally offensive in a "I'm not like that" kind of way.

Coincidentally I just posted my observations on the difference between internet "antis" and mainstream leftists here:
http://www.thephora.net/forum/showpost.php?p=525785&postcount=185

[MrAngry]

Kamandi
Y_I_(b)Otter
Daryle Lamont Jenkings
mikfrompakistan
King Mob
Descendent
Mansa Musa
Arnold Judas Rimmer
rach
Mickey Mouse


Aw c'mon you know thats bollocks...

[MrRS]

Aw c'mon you know thats bollocks...It's all true Mr. A .
Someone once told me that i took a sympathetic view towards Nazi's on SF and after careful consideration i found them to be right. Some people on SF, albeit a small number are rather unpleasent. The same applies on MSF and no matter how much you want to believe they are all nice people the fact is that they are fruitcakes.