PDA

View Full Version : The White Anti-Racist Is an Oxymoron


Columnist
12-29-2009, 05:06 PM
http://www.revleft.com/vb/white-anti-racist-t125705/index.html


The White Anti-Racist Is an Oxymoron:
An Open Letter to “White Anti-Racists”
By Tamara K. Nopper

I received an annoying e-mail about white people and their struggle to do anti-racist work. I keep reading and hearing white people talk about their struggle to do anti-racist organizing, and frankly it gets on my nerves. So I am writing this open letter to white people who engage in any activist work that involves or affects non-whites. Given that the US social structure is founded on white supremacy, and that there is a global order in which white supremacy and European domination are at large, I would challenge any white person to figure out what movement or action they can get involved in that will not involve or affect non-white people.


That said, I want to begin with what has become a realization for me through the help of different politically conscious friends. There is NO SUCH THING AS A WHITE ANTI-RACIST. The term itself, "white anti- racist" is an oxymoron. In the following, I will explain why. Then, I will begin to detail how this impacts non-white people in organizing work specifically, along with how it affects non-white people generally.


First, one must realize that whiteness is a structure of domination. As such, there is nothing redeemable or reformable about whiteness. Intellectuals, scholars and activists, especially those who are non- white, have drawn our attention to this for years. For example, people such as Malcolm X, W.E.B. DuBois, Marcus Garvey, James Baldwin, Toni Morrison, Ida B. Wells, Sojourner Truth, Frederick Douglass, and many, many others who are perhaps less famous, have articulated the relationship between whiteness and domination.


Further, people such as Douglass and DuBois began to outline how whiteness is a social and political construct that emphasizes the domination, authority, and perceived humanity of those who are racialized as white. They, along with many other non-white writers and orators, have pointed to the fact that it was the bodies who were able to be racialized as "white" that were able to be viewed as rational, authoritative, and deserving. Further, and believe me, this is no small thing, white people are viewed as human. What this means is that when white people suffer, as some who are poor/female/queer, they nevertheless are able to have some measure of sympathy for their plight simply because they are white and their marginalization is considered an emergency, crisis or an issue to be concerned about.


Furthermore, even when white people have been oppressed by various dimensions of classism, homophobia and heterosexism, they have been able to opt for what DuBois, in his monograph "Black Reconstruction" brilliantly called "the psychological wage of whiteness." That is, whites that are marginalized could find comfort, even if psychological, in the fact that they were not non-white. They could revel in the fact that they could be taken as white in opposition to non-white groups. The desire for this wage of whiteness was also what drove many white people, albeit marginalized, to engage in organized violence against non-whites.


Of course, legal cases such as the Dred Scott Decision along with many different naturalization cases involving Asian individuals, has helped to encode a state-sanctioned definition of whiteness. But there are other ways in which white people can be racialized as white by the state. They are not stopped while driving as much as non-white people. Their homes and businesses are not raided and searched as much by police officers, INS or License and Inspections (L&I). White people's bodies are not tracked and locked up in prisons, detention centers, juvenile systems, detention halls in classrooms, "special education" classes, etc. White people's bodies are not generally the site of fear, repulsion, violent desire, or hatred.


Now some might point out to me that white people are followed, tracked and harassed by individuals and state agents such as the police. This is true. Some white women get sexually harassed and experience state-sanctioned discrimination. Queer whites are the subject of homophobia, whether by individuals or by the state through laws and the police. Some queer whites are harassed by cops. Activist whites are stopped by police. White people who play rap music and wear gear are stopped by cops. Poor whites can be criminalized, especially by the state around welfare issues. What I want to point out is that, while I do not condone police violence and harassment, there is a way in which white people will not be viewed as inherently criminal or suspect unless they are perceived as doing something that breaks particular norms.


Conversely, other racial groups, particularly Blacks and Native Americans, are considered inherently criminal no matter what they do, what their sexual identity is or what they wear. Further, it has always struck me as interesting that there are white people who will attempt to wear what signifies "Blackness," whether it is dreadlocks (which, in my opinion, should be cut off from every white person's head), "gear," or Black masks at rallies. There is a sick way in which white people want to emulate that which is considered "badass" about a certain existential position of Blackness at the same time they do not want the burden of living as a non-white person. Further, it really strikes me as fucked up the way in which white people will go to rallies and taunt the police with Black masks in order to bring on police pressure. What does it mean when Blackness is strategically used by whites to bring on police violence? Now I know that somewhere there is a dreadlocked, smelly white anarchist who is reading this message and who is angry with me for not understanding the logic of the Black masks and its roots in anarchism. But I would challenge these people to consider how they are reproducing a violence towards Blackness in their attempts to taunt and challenge the police in their efforts.


Now back to my point that white anti-racism is an oxymoron. Whiteness is a social and political construct rooted in white supremacy. White supremacy is a structure and system of beliefs rooted in European and US imperialism in which certain racialized bodies (non-white) are selected for premature negation whether through cultural, physical, psychological genocide, containment or other forms of social death. White supremacy is at the heart of the US social system and civil society. In short, white supremacy is not just a series of practices or privilege, but a larger social structure and system of domination that overly-values and rewards those who are racialized as white. The rest of us are constructed as undeserving to be considered human, although there is significant variation within non-white populations of how our bodies are encoded, treated and (de)valued.


Now, for one to claim whiteness, one also is invested in white supremacy. Whiteness itself is a political term that emerged among European white ethnics in the US. These European ethnics, many of them reviled, chose to cast their lot with whiteness rather than that with those who had been determined as non-white. In short, anyone who claims to be white, even a white anti-racist, is identifying with a history of European imperialism and racism transported and further developed into the US.


However, this does not mean that white people who go around saying dumb things such as "I am not white! I am a human being!" or, "I left whiteness and joined the human race," or my favorite, "I hate white people! They're stupid" are not structurally white. Remember, whiteness is a structure of domination embedded in our social relations, institutions, discourses, and practices. Don't tell me you're not white but then when we go out in the street and the police don't bother you or people don't ask you if you're a prostitute, or if people don't follow you and touch you at will, act like that does not make a difference in our lives. Basically, you can't talk, or merely "unlearn" whiteness, as all of these annoying trainings for white people to "unlearn" racism will have you think.


Rather, white people need to be willing to have their very social position, their very relationship of domination, their very authority, their very being...let go, perhaps even destroyed. I know this might sound scary, but that is really not my concern. I am not interested in making white people, even those so-called good-hearted anti-racist whites, comfortable about their position in struggles that shape my life in ways that it will never shape theirs. I recently finished the biography of John Brown by DuBois. The biography was less of a biography and more of an interpretation by DuBois about the now-legendary white abolitionist. Now while John Brown's practice was problematic in many ways--he still had to be in control and he had fucked-up views that Blacks were still enslaved because they were too "servile" (a white supremacist sentiment)--what I took from Brown's life was that he realized that moral persuasion alone would not solve racial problems. That is, whites cannot talk or just think through whiteness and structures of white supremacy. They must be committed to either picking up arms for other people (and only firing when the people tell them so), dying for other people, or just getting out of the way. In short, they must be willing to do what the people most affected and marginalized by a situation tell them to do.


Now I am sure that right now there are some white people saying that other people cannot understand what is going on, that they do not have the critical analysis to figure stuff out, or that non-white people have fucked up ideas. This is just white supremacist bullshit because it is rooted in the idea that non-white people have not interpreted their experiences and cannot run things themselves. It also assumes that there are not internal conversations within communities--which I do not think white people need to be privy to or participate in--in which people struggle out their own visions for society and how to go about achieving them. In short, this perspective by whites that non-white people cannot be in control of our own destinies is rooted in a paternally-racist approach to non-white people.


Further, it is also rooted in the idea that white people are not racist or do not benefit from racism. Rather, white people at meetings will often discuss how they feel "silenced" by non-whites, or that they are being "put in their place." Let me make one thing clear: it is impossible for a non-white person to put a white person in her place. This is not to say that non-white people cannot have a sexist or homophobic attitude towards a white person. But to say, or even hint at that as a "WHITE" person someone is being put in their place--whoever says this just needs to shut the fuck up because that is some bull. It is impossible for whiteness to be put in one's place, because that is a part of whiteness, the ability to take up space and feel a prerogative to do so.


Further, the idea that white people are being put into their place relies on the neo-conservative view of reverse racism that has characterized the backlash against non-whites, especially Blacks, in the post-civil rights era. So when you say these types of things you are actually helping to reproduce a neo-conservative racial rhetoric which relies on the myth of the "threatened" and "displaced" white person.


Additionally, white activism, especially white anti-racism, is predicated on an economy of gratitude. We are supposed to be grateful that a white person is willing to work with non-white people. We are supposed to be grateful that you actually want to work with us and that you give us your resources. I would like to know why you have those resources and others do not? And don't assume that just because I have to ask you for resources that it does not hurt me, pain me even. Don't assume that when you come into the space, that doesn't bother me. Don't assume that when you talk first, talk the most, and talk the most often, that this doesn't hurt me. Don't assume that when I see you get the attention and accolades and the book deals and the speaking engagements that this does not hurt me (because you profit off of pain). And don't assume that when I see how grateful non-white people are to you for being there, for being a "good white" person that this doesn't hurt me. And don't assume that when I get chastised by non-white people because I think your presence is unnecessary that it does not hurt me. Because all of these things remind me of how powerless non-white people are (albeit differently) in relation to white people. All of these gestures that you do reminds me of how grateful I am supposed to be towards you because you actually (or supposedly) care about what is happening to me. I am a bit resentful of economies of gratitude.


Further, this structure of white supremacy known as white anti-racism also impacts the larger social world because it still makes white people the most valued people. Non-white people are forced to feel dependent and grateful to white people who will actually interact with us. We are made to feel that we are inferior, incapable, that we really do need white people. And the sad thing is, that given all of the resources that whiteness has and that white people get and control, there is an element of material truth in all of this, I am afraid. But white people need to think of how their activism reproduces the actual structure of white supremacy some--not all whites activists--profess to be about. This structure of white supremacy is not just in an activist space, it actually touches upon and impinges on the lives of non-white people who may not be activists (in your sense) or who do not interact with you in activist worlds.


But consider what your presence means in a community that you decide to set up your community garden in, or your bookstore in, or your meeting space in, or have your march in. What does it mean when you decide that you want to be "with" the oppressed and you end up displacing them? Just because you walk around with your dreadlocks, or decide that you will not wear expensive clothes does not mean that your whiteness does not displace people in the spaces you decide to put yourself in. How do you help to bring more forms of authority and control in a neighborhood, whether through increased rent and housing costs, more policing, or just the ways in which your white bodies can make people feel, as a brilliant friend of mine once asked, "squatters in somebody else's project"?


So what does this mean for the future of white anti-racists? This might mean to first, figure out ways in which whiteness needs to die as a social structure and as an identity in which you organize your anti-racist work. What this looks like in practice may not be so clear but I will attempt to give some suggestions here. First, don't call us, we'll call you. If we need your resources, we will contact you. But don't show up, flaunt your power in our faces and then get angry when we resent the fact that you have so many resources we don't and that we are not grateful for this arrangement. And don't get mad because you can't make decisions in the process. Why do you need to? Secondly, stop speaking for us. We can talk for ourselves. Third, stop trying to point out internal contradictions in our communities, we know what they are, we are struggling around them, and I really do not know how white people can be helpful to non- whites to clear these up. Fourth, don't ever say some shit to me about how you feel silenced, marginalized, discriminated against, or put in your place. Period. Finally, start thinking of what it would mean, in terms of actual structured social arrangements, for whiteness and white identity--even the white antiracist kind (because there really is no redeemable or reformed white identity)--to be destroyed.


In conclusion, I want to say to anyone who thinks that this is too academic or abstract, I write as a non-white person, meaning that from my body, my person, I experience white supremacy. I also draw my understanding of white supremacy from non-white people, many engaged in various struggles of activism, but most importantly just to speak out and stay alive. They did not get accolades from many for speaking out but instead experienced constant threats on their lives for just existing and doing the work that they did. Moreover, I want to know when a discussion of whiteness, white supremacy and domination became seen as abstract and not rooted in the everyday concrete reality that we experience?

Obscuratus
12-29-2009, 07:56 PM
Thanks for the laughs, Columnist.

Intellectuals, scholars and activists, especially those who are non- white, have drawn our attention to this for years. For example, people such as Malcolm X, W.E.B. DuBois, Marcus Garvey, James Baldwin, Toni Morrison, Ida B. Wells, Sojourner Truth, Frederick Douglass, and many, many others who are perhaps less famous, have articulated the relationship between whiteness and domination.

Does Ms. Nopper live in the same century that we do?
Nearly every one of these "scholars" lived or were raised in a time when incompetent whites were promoted over their skilled black peers, and a black man in a white neighbourhood "was up to some mischief".

But then again, she isn't even aware that - with all this "white privilege" - East Asians regularly outscore whites on tests.

At the end of it, I see hypocrisy:
She lectures white Leftists that non-whites believe they know what's best for white Leftists, while criticising the all-too-common "well-meaning" white Leftists who believe they know best for the "po' minorities".

But I would challenge these people to consider how they are reproducing a violence towards Blackness in their attempts to taunt and challenge the police in their efforts.

I'm not really contributing anything with this - just pointing out the insane lengths black academic paranoia will go to turn anything into possessing racial connotations.

Midgaard
12-29-2009, 09:51 PM
Anti racists actually engage in a form of backhanded racism against non whites with their insistence that whites must help the brown hordes because we re so educated and privledged.

Frank
12-29-2009, 10:35 PM
In conclusion, I want to say to anyone who thinks that this is too academic or abstract, I write as a non-white person, meaning that from my body, my person, I experience white supremacy. I also draw my understanding of white supremacy from non-white people, many engaged in various struggles of activism, but most importantly just to speak out and stay alive. They did not get accolades from many for speaking out but instead experienced constant threats on their lives for just existing and doing the work that they did. Moreover, I want to know when a discussion of whiteness, white supremacy and domination became seen as abstract and not rooted in the everyday concrete reality that we experience?

I would hardly consider the above fallacy piece to be remotely academic. It is a non-sequitur to argue that a White person cannot oppose "racism" because of the alleged racial power structure of one (out of many) White nations largely losing its "whiteness" due to mass immigration, forced integration etc...

I know of Jewish people who are staunch anti-Zionists; should I accuse them of being frauds because Israel is a rabid Zionist state? This would strike me as a TRUE form of bigotry and sheer nonsense as there are Jewish people who have nothing to do with the Israeli power structure.

As far as the following goes:

Of course, legal cases such as the Dred Scott Decision along with many different naturalization cases involving Asian individuals, has helped to encode a state-sanctioned definition of whiteness. But there are other ways in which white people can be racialized as white by the state. They are not stopped while driving as much as non-white people. Their homes and businesses are not raided and searched as much by police officers, INS or License and Inspections (L&I). White people's bodies are not tracked and locked up in prisons, detention centers, juvenile systems, detention halls in classrooms, "special education" classes, etc. White people's bodies are not generally the site of fear, repulsion, violent desire, or hatred.

Now if one were to read the "National Crime Victimization Surveys" from the past few years could we come up with a reason other than racism for the higher "minority" crime and arrest rates? Maybe "minorities" are viewed as inherently criminal due to the massive crime rates within their populations? Hell, with the number of White women being raped by black males I would say Whites have not adopted the views that minorities are inherently criminal as such a view would have saved these White women horrific fates.

However, I do agree with the sentiment that most (at least those I have dealt with) White "anti-racists" are indeed hypocrites but for differing reasons; I find most of them actually loathe their fellow Whites on a racial level masking their racism under the guise that Whites are inherently racist compared to non-Whites due to power levels, genetics etc...and opposing said Whites is anti-racism.

Now back to my point that white anti-racism is an oxymoron. Whiteness is a social and political construct rooted in white supremacy.

Actually, White is the term used to describe caucasoid people of European descent who happened to be the creators and administrators of Western civilization.

Only so called "anti-racist" hatemongers treat this simple but accurate term as a means of supremacist identification. A person who refers to himself as "White" is not reveling in supremacist thought but merely identifying himself by his lineage and heritage just as a black man could identify himself as black because he is...you guessed it...black.

I will note though that these same hatemongers have little issue with attaching colour labels to other racial groups to denote their lineage. It is only evil to identify as White but it is alright to identify as black even though murder, slavery and even in recent history genocide has been practiced in Africa.

Angler
12-29-2009, 10:44 PM
Obviously the essay is complete horseshit, but I'm glad Ms. Nopper wrote it, and I hope it gets a lot of exposure. It just might help some leftist whites wake up and realize that "anti-racism" isn't about people of different ethnic groups living together in peace and harmony, but about hating whites and ensuring that they are never considered to have the moral high ground. Even anti-racists with pure intentions are unwittingly aiding those whose goal is nothing more or less than the marginalization of whites.

that guy
12-29-2009, 10:47 PM
This witch is obviously psychotic. I couldn't read more than a few lines. The only question is, is she a :negro: or merely a :jew: ?

Hermetic
12-29-2009, 11:00 PM
Ms. Nopper, I am a White Devil and I agree, now when enough Whites agree we can get the Fourth Reich rolling.

White anti-racists are just fighting against the healthy order of Nature, within and without.

Richard Parker
12-30-2009, 03:16 AM
She's full of shit and must be stopped by any means necessary.

I need some smart and diligent white people to help with all the important cutting-edge anti-racist work I am conducting here on the Phora. I've reached the outer genetic boundaries to my IQ, and the indolent nature stemming from having ancestry in tropical lands is making me want to take a freaking nap.

Gregz
12-30-2009, 03:30 AM
I've found her blog! We have our selfs a jumped up ultra-Marxist. Hell she even has a Ph.D. in sociology! :popcorn:

About the author:

An educator, researcher, writer, and Ph.D. in sociology, Tamara K. Nopper’s work focuses on the role of policies, racism, sexism, homophobia, and economics in shaping social relations as well as activist responses to inequality. Her academic publications and teaching focus on race and racism, immigration, economics, citizenship, Asian American communities, and American ethnicity. Her work has also been published in popular media outlets, including magazines, newsletters, on-line publications, and blogs. Nopper has worked in activism addressing Asian American community development, immigrant rights, and counter-military recruitment. She has also organized many public sociology events dealing with Black-Asian relations, state violence, militarization, and Hurricane Katrina.

She may be reached at tnopper (at) yahoo.com.


Education:

Ph.D., Department of Sociology, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA. Spring 2008

Dissertation Title: “Beyond the Bootstrap: How Korean Banks and U.S. Government Institutions Contribute to Korean Immigrant Entrepreneurship in the United States”

Qualifying Areas: Gender and Sexuality and Race and Ethnicity

M.A., Sociology, The University of Toledo, Toledo, OH

Thesis: “The Racialization of Space and Roles: Observed Patterns of Interaction in a Korean-owned Black Hair Store”

http://bandung1955.wordpress.com/about/

Starr
12-30-2009, 03:34 AM
Rather, white people need to be willing to have their very social position, their very relationship of domination, their very authority, their very being...let go, perhaps even destroyed. I know this might sound scary, but that is really not my concern. I am not interested in making white people, even those so-called good-hearted anti-racist whites, comfortable about their position in struggles that shape my life in ways that it will never shape theirs. I recently finished the biography of John Brown by DuBois. The biography was less of a biography and more of an interpretation by DuBois about the now-legendary white abolitionist.

And what will the result of this be? Will all disaprities magically disappear? Will we see blacks imprisoned only at a rate in keeping with their percentage of the population. Will we see blacks and these formerly white raceless people equally represented in all walks of life. Keep on dreaming.

Once again I must say I am still waiting on all of these special privilages and social advantages I supposedly have.:deadhorse:

You can't really blame negroes for thinking like this. If racism is not responsible for their plight than what is the other major alternative? No people are going to want to think of themselves in that kind of a way.

Richard Parker
12-30-2009, 06:10 AM
Once again I must say I am still waiting on all of these special privilages and social advantages I supposedly have.:deadhorse:
Umm, er... you wouldn't be confined to Opposing Views on Stormfront. That must count for something!

largethumbs
12-30-2009, 06:32 AM
Isn't this what many of the racialists here have been saying for months now? That to be anti-racist is to be anti-white?

Richard Parker
12-30-2009, 06:47 AM
Isn't this what many of the racialists here have been saying for months now? That to be anti-racist is to be anti-white?
When white antis are accused of being part of the racist white power structure by radical blacks, and at the same time get called anti-white by racialists, it's a strong indication that both sides are wrong, overly-extreme, and probably deserve each other.

Macrobius
12-30-2009, 06:57 AM
Umm, er... you wouldn't be confined to Opposing Views on Stormfront. That must count for something!

Yes, but significant as Stormfront's reach is, it pales next to the raw power of mass communications available to non-whites like Obama, via http://noradsanta.org, as pimped on the FedGov's official 'Gov Gab' blog (http://blog.usa.gov/roller/): http://blog.usa.gov/roller/govgab/entry/tracking_santa_2_0?comment=view

http://i49.tinypic.com/htw8lc.png

This blog will be an invaluable resource in helping us keep citizens informed of the many opportunities and programs offered by the U.S. government.

-- http://www.govtech.com/gt/articles/151308

Stormfront should consider launching a 'nordic santa dot com' domain once a year, to get the message out. Dang. It's already taken: http://nordicsanta.com/

Northern_Paladin
12-30-2009, 07:02 AM
White Supremacy may end in America by 2050. That's when Whites will constitute 48% of the population with at least 50% over age 50. Even now the under 16 age belongs to Minorities, that will only increase, so the future will belong to Non-Whites.

White Supremacy is taken for granted now. But it will not always be. If Whites wait until 2050 to launch a Race War it will be too little too late. But Ultimately Whites will lose, because they are being out reproduced too fast, and don't have the Ruthlessness and Courage to maintain their Status. If Whites become Minority slaves in the future than they totally deserve it.

America is headed towards Perma-Decline, unless shift and decisive action is taken soon, but I doubt such action will ever be taken as Whites have been trained by Government and Media to be Pacifists and accept their fate.

No Multicultural Empire in History where there is no clear majority has ever lasted more than a few decades.

tricknologist
12-31-2009, 12:56 AM
When white antis are accused of being part of the racist white power structure by radical blacks, and at the same time get called anti-white by racialists, it's a strong indication that both sides are wrong, overly-extreme, and probably deserve each other.

Or that it means that they're both right, since the alleged "white power structure" is mainly comprised of rich white liberals and those that intend to profit from flooding our country with foreigners.

R1a-I2a1 Rock Farmer
12-31-2009, 01:23 AM
No Multicultural Empire in History where there is no clear majority has ever lasted more than a few decades.

I guess you missed the Roman and Habsburg Empires.

Boleslaw
12-31-2009, 01:55 AM
So much for Dr. King's dream of "judge not by skin color".

calvin
12-31-2009, 02:21 AM
The lower races are like children, the more you try to be "down with the kids" the more they despise you. They despise you because they know that they are inferior. Like children they need firm boundaries and a hierarchy of power in which they play a role appropriate to their abilities. Liberal regimes always cause a ferment of dissatisfaction from the untermensch (even the lower sectors of the white race) whose greatest fear is to be left to live under their own incapable, incompetent rule. The white man is the best thing that ever happened to Africans, they are literally shitting themselves at the prospect of the white man surrendering power and handing over responsibility for them to Orientals, Arabs and Mexicans.

curtalus
12-31-2009, 02:28 AM
This article is an excellent example of baffling with bullshit when diamonds are not available. You really need hip waders to read through this victomology hoodoo. And a sense of humor.


white people are viewed as human. What this means is that when white people suffer, as some who are poor/female/queer, they nevertheless are able to have some measure of sympathy for their plight simply because they are white and their marginalization is considered an emergency, crisis or an issue to be concerned about.Really now? I am waiting for my sympathy regarding my plight of having been born dirt poor. This is victimology 101, here folks.
Furthermore, even when white people have been oppressed by various dimensions of classism, homophobia and heterosexism, they have been able to opt for what DuBois, in his monograph "Black Reconstruction" brilliantly called "the psychological wage of whiteness." That is, whites that are marginalized could find comfort, even if psychological, in the fact that they were not non-white. They could revel in the fact that they could be taken as white in opposition to non-white groups. The desire for this wage of whiteness was also what drove many white people, albeit marginalized, to engage in organized violence against non-whites.Yep, this is what all the poor kids were saying, "I am glad as hell I am poor and not a nigger. Glad I tell ya." Yup, its true. :nuts:
White people's bodies are not generally the site of fear, repulsion, violent desire, or hatred.This is one of the most bizarre and outlandish claims I have ever read.
Further, it really strikes me as fucked up the way in which white people will go to rallies and taunt the police with Black masks in order to bring on police pressure. What does it mean when Blackness is strategically used by whites to bring on police violence? Now I know that somewhere there is a dreadlocked, smelly white anarchist who is reading this message and who is angry with me for not understanding the logic of the Black masks and its roots in anarchism. But I would challenge these people to consider how they are reproducing a violence towards Blackness in their attempts to taunt and challenge the police in their efforts.And then it gets loonier. Anarchists are using black masks to provoke police violence against blacks in the ghettoes and else where; what could be more obvious? :nuts: This is WAY over the top, even for a super marxist that relies on emotion instead of proof.
They must be committed to either picking up arms for other people (and only firing when the people tell them so), dying for other people, or just getting out of the way. In short, they must be willing to do what the people most affected and marginalized by a situation tell them to do.See we can all make good for White Supremacy by endorsing colored supremacy, in all its rainbow radiance. White power equals bad and evil; colored power equals utopia and happiness. Look at Africa if you don't believe me! :)

Northern_Paladin
12-31-2009, 02:38 AM
I guess you missed the Roman and Habsburg Empires.

They were not multiracial though. Both crumbled because of Race Wars.

The Roman Empire was strongest when it encompassed Southern Europe. Later as more groups were added to the Empire Rome fell due to internal fueds between the Germanics and Romans.

R1a-I2a1 Rock Farmer
12-31-2009, 02:51 AM
They were not multiracial though. Both crumbled because of Race Wars.

The Roman Empire was indeed multiracial.

Nor did either collapse because of "race wars".

Flying Drumhead Court-Martial
12-31-2009, 07:01 AM
Haha. This doesn't fit in well with the Marxist-Whiggerist vision of RevLeft. Those commie fags just want to interbreed and be a homogenous blob once and for all, but the niggers can't help but get uppity. That's good because their obnoxiousness will sooner or later reignite waves of hatred against them once and for all.

Camacho
12-31-2009, 07:37 AM
Thesis: “The Racialization of Space and Roles: Observed Patterns of Interaction in a Korean-owned Black Hair Store”"Doctor" Tamarra Nopper? :rolleyes:

Very sophisticated studies she is conducting; judging by this research I predict the Negroes will have split the atom within the next 5 years.


edit: As a side note, I wouldn't really be surprised if her thesis was little other than a diatribe against the other "minorities" who seem to dominate the local businesses in black neighborhoods fresh off the boat.

I live in mostly a "black area" and of the dozens of local small businesses--dry cleaners, convenience stores, salons, etc-- in my neighborhood I would say over 90% are owned by either Indians/Sikhs, Asians, Arabs, whites, and even a Mexican joint. I've dealt with only one black small business owner here; he runs a furniture store around the corner and charged me $10 more at the point of sale than promised me the week before.

Flying Drumhead Court-Martial
12-31-2009, 07:52 AM
Total TNB. He saw that extra crack rock and a bulb lit. That's why they need at least a Korean master.

Columnist
12-31-2009, 08:48 AM
Or that it means that they're both right, since the alleged "white power structure" is mainly comprised of rich white liberals and those that intend to profit from flooding our country with foreigners.
The rich white liberals do not see other whites as fellow whites.

Northern_Paladin
12-31-2009, 08:52 AM
The Roman Empire was indeed multiracial.

Nor did either collapse because of "race wars".

You can't contradict history. Roman crumbled when it was looted by Germanics.

calvin
01-01-2010, 10:23 AM
A major reason for the fall of Rome was that its outer empire populace was unarmed and its towns unfortified, because Rome could not trust its multi-ethnic subjects not to rebel.

Empress Cheesatine
01-03-2010, 03:23 PM
I'm not going to waste my time reading this whole leftist rant, I think I can gather enough of this woman's idiocy by looking at the first paragraph:

I received an annoying e-mail about white people and their struggle to do anti-racist work. I keep reading and hearing white people talk about their struggle to do anti-racist organizing, and frankly it gets on my nerves. So I am writing this open letter to white people who engage in any activist work that involves or affects non-whites. Given that the US social structure is founded on white supremacy, and that there is a global order in which white supremacy and European domination are at large, I would challenge any white person to figure out what movement or action they can get involved in that will not involve or affect non-white people.

Three points with this imbecilic herd animal mentality that this woman subscribes to.

1) The approach to the subject of American (and by extension worldwide white-to-nonwhite race relations is a Marxist dialectic based view on race otherwise known as Critical Race Theory. Most people are so gullible of what they parrot, they don't realize they're parroting Marxist-originated social theory invented by radical moonbat leftists known for their bizarre flights of paranoid fancy. (See Derrick Bell) They actually think this crap is grounded in reality and is verified by a post-modern Biblical interpretation.

2) If she and people like her were truly "antiracist," they would be focusing on all acts of racism and not just alleged ones by whites. Whites can be and are victims of racism also, yet these pseudo-moralistic demagogues have a blind spot the size of a black hole on this issue. The existence of this moral blind spot isn't merely an accident but is indicative of the bankruptcy of the so-called "antiracist" and "civil rights" movements. There is an obvious ulterior motive to this kind of activity since they themselves do not subscribe to or practice the very moral code they claim to promote for others. As usual, they claim to be "color blind" but behave the exact opposite. For a race that doesn't exist, these people have absolutely no trouble finding whose feet to lay the blame at.

3) The idea that a country founded by and nearly wholly populated by whites until after the 1960s being controlled by whites is "racial supremacism" is laughable on it's face. Apparently in a country founded by and 90% populated by whites is supposed to be controlled by Martians and Venusians. Only with regard to whites do these hysterical maniacs call a demographic founding majority controlling its own national space an act of evil. Get out the tin foil hats. The day I swallow this crap is the day these clowns attack Ghana for being controlled by blacks. D'oh.

Tellurocrat
01-03-2010, 04:47 PM
To be fair, the far leftist forum that's posted on, did not share any of her racist opinions.

Frankly I don't know why you're surprised. She's the equivalent of White Nationalists in so many ways, no?


Phora gets a mention too:

If stormfront and all of the insane stalinoids on (or banned from) revleft were genetically spliced and the resulting child was dropped on the head and left in a cellar until it grew up that child would be the phora. Fucking nutters, full of Nazbols too.

It's why I'm still here, I guess.

Columnist
01-03-2010, 05:31 PM
Frankly I don't know why you're surprised. She's the equivalent of White Nationalists in so many ways, no?

I do sometimes sympathize with Non-white Nationalists.

Flying Drumhead Court-Martial
01-03-2010, 05:50 PM
To be fair, the far leftist forum that's posted on, did not share any of her racist opinions.

Yes, they do, but this is inconvenient for them because a non-white is telling the mostly-white leftists that they are still racist. So how are they going to share in that?

This article was originally posted on the Jew Noel Ignatiev's website: RaceTraitor.org. The leftists generally agree with her all the way up until she calls out anti-racist whites, then they get offended, "But I hate whites as much as everyone!"

Empress Cheesatine
01-03-2010, 07:42 PM
To be fair, the far leftist forum that's posted on, did not share any of her racist opinions.

I don't look often at that forum and certainly not on the thread regarding this post, however I've yet to see a leftist condemn this kind of thinking. Critical Race Theory is generally very widely accepted on the political hard left, and the softer left subscribe to a more watered-down version of this dogma. This anti-white racist hypocrisy was one of the major factors of my disillusionment with the left which led to my eventual abandonment of it. What helped me along the line was reading books by the likes of David Horowitz's Hate Whitey and Larry Elder's Ten Things You Can't Say in America.

Richard Parker
01-04-2010, 02:35 AM
It turns out Tamara K. Nopper is an Azn.

As an Asian-American woman, I am keenly aware that Asians are about to become a popular media topic if not the victims of physical backlash.
http://www.wiretapmag.org/stories/43081/

GUEST: Tamara K. Nopper, an Asian American graduate student in sociology at Temple University, where she teaches classes on ethnicity, race, and Asian American studies. She is also a writer and anti-war activist volunteering with the Central Committee for Conscientious Objectors (CCCO)
http://cleveland.indymedia.org/news/2007/04/25298.php

As a resident of Philadelphia and an Asian American concerned with and engaged in research and writing about Black-Asian relations...
http://bandung1955.wordpress.com/2009/12/21/model-minorities-versus-black-reverse-racists-blacks-asians-south-philadelphia-high/

As an Asian American sociologist who first began researching and writing about racial conflict between Blacks and Asian Americans during my sophomore year, my work could easily be labeled comparative.
http://bandung1955.wordpress.com/2009/11/03/where-do-we-go-when-we-go-beyond-black-and-white/

calvin
01-04-2010, 09:10 AM
The untermensch outlier is right, we are still racists. Everything is fucking racist. Dawkins's "Selfish Gene" testified to that decades ago. Racism is both natural and normal. Given the reality of the universality of racism we must assume that racism serves a useful function in the natural world. Once again it is obvious that racism is an evolutionary mechanism. It is a mechanism that supports genetic diversification for the purpose of genetic advancement and specialization. Racism would prevent the disaster of a high IQ Finn marrying the average IQ African girl that wrote this article and the resultant probable loss of GI in their offspring.

Richard Parker
01-04-2010, 09:14 AM
The untermensch outlier is right, we are still racists. Everything is fucking racist. Dawkins's "Selfish Gene" testified to that decades ago. Racism is both natural and normal. Given the reality of the universality of racism we must assume that racism serves a useful function in the natural world. Once again it is obvious that racism is an evolutionary mechanism. It is a mechanism that supports genetic diversification for the purpose of genetic advancement and specialization. Racism would prevent the disaster of a high IQ Finn marrying the average IQ African girl that wrote this article and the resultant probable loss of GI in their offspring.
Refer to post immediately above yours.

Columnist
01-04-2010, 10:10 AM
Noel Ignatiev is many things, but not a hypocrite:

http://racetraitor.org/

Zionism, Antisemitism, and the People of Palestine
By Noel Ignatiev
The first is race, which is a myth generally and is particularly a myth in the case of the Jews. The “Jewish” population of Israel includes people from fifty countries, of different physical types, speaking different languages and practicing different religions (or no religion at all), defined as a single people based on the fiction that they, and only they, are descended from the Biblical Abraham. It is so patently false that only Zionists and Nazis even pretend to take it seriously. In fact, given Jewish intermingling with others for two thousand years, it is likely that the Palestinians—themselves the result of the mixture of the various peoples of Canaan plus later waves of Greeks and Arabs—are more directly descended from the ancient inhabitants of the Holy Land than the Europeans displacing them.


Is a Jewish Anti-Zionist an oxymoron?

Empress Cheesatine
01-04-2010, 12:20 PM
It turns out Tamara K. Nopper is an Azn.

As we've seen, her background is sociology. The field is rife with Marxist-type thinking. You can even see it in reading course descriptions of sociology courses, the hard leftist theory oozes from it like pus from a blister. I wonder if she's ever said that the oriental race doesn't exist? For someone who says that race doesn't exist, she's awfully hung up on it.

Empress Cheesatine
01-04-2010, 12:21 PM
Noel Ignatiev is many things, but not a hypocrite:

Yes, it's always refreshing to see a morally consistent Jew, one who wants to destroy his own as much as he does others.

Empress Cheesatine
01-04-2010, 12:24 PM
Yes, they do, but this is inconvenient for them because a non-white is telling the mostly-white leftists that they are still racist. So how are they going to share in that?

Whites are behaving in child-like suicida ignorance to allow racial aliens to tell them how they should view themselves and their own people. In the name of fairness we are being told to drop our identities, loosen our borders and embrace universalism while those who demand us do so nearly to a man do the exact opposite with their own people and countries.

calvin
01-05-2010, 10:01 AM
Yes, it's always refreshing to see a morally consistent Jew, one who wants to destroy his own as much as he does others

These people always pretend to be equally critical of their own kind. In reality Jews have a whole raft of protections by appeal to racism, anti-semitism and the big daddy, argumentum ad holocaustum, that Whites do no enjoy. These tropes can be invoked and kick in at any point in time when Ignatiev's attacks seem to be having real consequences for Israel or Jews. Jewish intellectuals are always willing to dip their toes into self criticism in order to drown gentiles in it.

The entire narrative of historical anti-Semitism and the holocaust apocrypha protects Jewish people from attacks on their ethnic integrity, so that they can shrug off these attacks. Two groups are being urged to drink poison, but one group has the antidote in its back pocket.

Richard Parker
01-05-2010, 12:31 PM
These people always pretend to be equally critical of their own kind. In reality Jews have a whole raft of protections by appeal to racism, anti-semitism and the big daddy, argumentum ad holocaustum, that Whites do no enjoy. These tropes can be invoked and kick in at any point in time when Ignatiev's attacks seem to be having real consequences for Israel or Jews. Jewish intellectuals are always willing to dip their toes into self criticism in order to drown gentiles in it.

The entire narrative of historical anti-Semitism and the holocaust apocrypha protects Jewish people from attacks on their ethnic integrity, so that they can shrug off these attacks. Two groups are being urged to drink poison, but one group has the antidote in its back pocket.
Is there anything Jews can say or do that doesn't indict them?

calvin
01-05-2010, 03:58 PM
Is there anything Jews can say or do that doesn't indict them

I don't get your point Harjit. What I am saying is that if someone invites you to join them in a cliff jumping suicide pact you'd be stark fucking stupid to just go ahead and jump without being sure they were going along for the ride. In Ignatiev's case he seems to be wearing a pretty big parachute. In any case if a Jew wants to commit cultural suicide let him go ahead, he should just do it and keep his snout out of our business.

Columnist
01-05-2010, 04:49 PM
http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=22&x_article=580

Judt wrongly charges that Israel is out of step in an era which values international law: “It has imported a characteristically late-19th-century separatist project into a world that has moved on, a world of individual rights, open frontiers and international law.” But, Israel's Law of Return is entirely consistent with international law, such as the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination (1965). According to Article 1(3), nations are permitted to favor certain groups for citizenship provided there is no discrimination against any particular group. In addition, Article 1(4) allows for “affirmative action,” entitling states to exercise preferences in granting citizenship to remedy the effects of past discrimination. In the case of Israel, such prior incidents of past discrimination include Britain's 1939 decision to ban Jewish immigration to the Palestine Mandate, thereby sealing the fate of thousands of European Jews.

Israel sees itself as a case of Affirmative Action; This argument was also made by Alan Dershowitz in The Case For Israel.
This will pose a problem for Leftist Anti-Zionists in favor of Affirmative Action. Although they can argue that it is unjust for Palestinians to suffer for the misdeeds of others.