Teenage Wildlife

IMPORTANT: Use your registry nickname as your username when logging in to Conversation Piece!


Free for All
   >> A Crack in the Past
Thread views: 2731 Previous threadView all threadsNext threadFlat Mode*

Auntie Prism
(stardust savant)
02/21/11 12:45 PM
Will I post another of this length? Probably not [re: Auntie Prism] Reply to this post

power2charm: [Squall of Sacred Cow]:

In reply to:

You digust me, but an opinion is worth hearing. Let's talk about the Asians since none of them are here. Heavens, none of them, and other races, can be Bowie fans can they? Have you formulated a secret handshake yet?


Sweetheart, what are you on about? Have you never heard members/leaders of the black....ooh, I mean "African American," community discussing white ....damn, caucasions as if they weren't there to overhear? I sure have. I'm glad they do - I want to know what they think.

It's apparent to me, having reviewed your posts, that you don't have the slightest inkling what I am getting at with this thread. If you did, you wouldn't be "disgusted." Nor are you capable of getting a clue.

Why confuse the issue, you and eraserhead both, by insinuating that I have some influence here that prevents people from doing their own thinking? In fact, where is your criticism of your friend, eraserhead, who made the mildest most milquetoast post a racist could ask for in his first reply?

I don't doubt that some Asians would be offended by the rickshaw comment - it goes to prove that certain members of every race, creed and culture under God's blue sky have a sizable branch up their butts.

You know who the biggest racist on this thread has been? Eraserhead, that's who. In e-head's warped world, all foreigner's are light and life, and all established Swedes are relative nincompoops. Go back and read his posts - it's shocking - just mix the races up and pretend where he spoke ill of Swedes he was instead speaking of the newcomers - and you can be one hundred times more offended than by anything I've insinuated.

This thread confirms my suspicions - racism has us all in its grip, and not the least those who most vociferously decry it.

Put on your hoods, Snowchild and Eraserhead, and join the parade.

ziggywombat: [moo. as if, i was never sacred. ]: i think one of the most racist behaviours is walking about with a chip on your shoulder ready to jump all over anything you feel is a slur directed at you. everyone judges everyone all the time, it's the way the human mind works.

and it' not just a visible minority thing, i've a very mixed background, i've still gotten racist remarks directed at me. last year a bunch of indo-canadian boys in a couple of my classes never bothered to learn my name but called me "hey, white girl" whenever they wanted to borrow something. that's just one example.

don't act like you've never judged anyone, it simply isn't possible and it just make you look like a self righteous prick.

Arthur0Dent: I can't be the only one who immediately thought of Never Be Rude to an Arab.

eraserhead: [Nobody laughs anymore]:

In reply to:

You know who the biggest racist on this thread has been? Eraserhead, that's who. In e-head's warped world, all foreigner's are light and life, and all established Swedes are relative nincompoops. Go back and read his posts - it's shocking - just mix the races up and pretend where he spoke ill of Swedes he was instead speaking of the newcomers - and you can be one hundred times more offended than by anything I've insinuated.


power2charm, you can't turn everything I said around. You can't pretend that I spoke ill of the newcomers when I spoke ill of the Swedes. Turn everything someone says around, and Jesus Christ would be the Devil himself.

And yes, the foreigners I've met or known have been "light and life" as you put it. You can't change that fact. Most Swedes are spoiled, greedy, shallow people. You can't change that fact either. I think, in general, you'll find more assholes in rich Western countries (like the USA or Sweden) than you do in poorer countries like Somalia or Greece or Iran. I think people become assholes because they have problems, and problems are more likely to appear if you own a lot of things. The more cars, houses, money you own, the more you have to worry about, and being worried and troubled affects your psyche, and all the stress makes you a rude person, basically. In non-materialistic cultures, they don't judge a man by what he's got, they're more interested in the spiritual aspects of life, which is the only real life.

I went back and read my posts, and if what I have to say is "shocking" to you, then that says more about you than about me. In my first post I talked about how nice, friendly, warm and open the immigrants that I have met or known are. I also said that our Western lifestyle is doomed, that the capitalism, materialism, industrialism and competition we think so highly of will destroy our souls in the end. Am I a racist because I'm strongly opposed to Western "culture"? TS Eliot's The Waste Land and Kafka's The Trial and a bunch of other classics basically say the same thing. Are they racists? I also said that, in general, I find dark women more attractive and way more interesting than most Swedish women. Is that so shocking to hear?

power2charm: [I'd rather be a sacred cow than a snail, if I could, oh yes I would]:

In reply to:

power2charm, you can't turn everything I said around. You can't pretend that I spoke ill of the newcomers when I spoke ill of the Swedes.


I'm not doing that eraserhead. I made the comment about switching Swedes with newcomers to illustrate that racism isn't only racism when it flows from caucasion to dark skinned. What you are saying is a) just the flip side of what others have insinuated and b) MORE racist than anyone else because I don't see anybody else on this thread calling Arabs or Africans, as cultural groups, "assholes."

In reply to:

And yes, the foreigners I've met or known have been "light and life" as you put it. You can't change that fact. Most Swedes are spoiled, greedy, shallow people. You can't change that fact either. I think, in general, you'll find more assholes in rich Western countries (like the USA or Sweden) than you do in poorer countries like Somalia or Greece or Iran. I think people become assholes because they have problems, and problems are more likely to appear if you own a lot of things. The more cars, houses, money you own, the more you have to worry about, and being worried and troubled affects your psyche, and all the stress makes you a rude person, basically. In non-materialistic cultures, they don't judge a man by what he's got, they're more interested in the spiritual aspects of life, which is the only real life.


Well, this is a load of shit, imo, but you are welcome to your opinion. But if the difference between being spiritual and being an asshole is economic - then why discuss it in terms of people's race or nationality? Why discuss it as a RACIAL issue, as you have done? It suggests that you don't actually think of the issue in strict economic terms. Do Turks or Somalians who achieve the good life in Sweden then become spoiled assholes? Or do they magically retain their simple spirituality? If they retain it, how do they do so? By the magic of being dark-skinned?

In reply to:

Am I a racist because I'm strongly opposed to Western "culture"


Yes, I believe that if you ascribe to any given culture a lot bad attributes, and no good ones, and conclude by calling all members of that culture assholes, you've got a problem with cultural racism.

In reply to:

I also said that, in general, I find dark women more attractive and way more interesting than most Swedish women. Is that so shocking to hear?


No more shocking than twister stating he finds caucasion women more attactrive than dark-skinned women. Now, tell me, eraserhead, since that is the only thing twister said on the thread (besides the whole bit about sacred cows, which isn't relevant), and since his opinion is merely the flip-side of yours on the subject of beautiful women, you must concede he is no more or less racist than you, right?

eraserhead: [500 years of genocide]:

In reply to:

I made the comment about switching Swedes with newcomers to illustrate that racism isn't only racism when it flows from caucasion to dark skinned.


It's ignorant and stupid to label black people's anger towards white people as racism. Think about how black people have been treated politically, legally, and socially within your history in the United States of AmeriKKKa. Black people were slaves in your country for 500 years. 500 years of slavery and institutionalized racism... 500 years of genocide.

Chuck D says black people can't be racists. To be racist you have to be in a position of supreme power and control. You have to have the ability to make great decisions based solely around race. White people own everything and have total control, therefore only they can be racist due to the word's definition. But according to you, when someone calls the white man an asshole for being responsible for 500 years of genocide, he or she is a "racist"?

In reply to:

Do Turks or Somalians who achieve the good life in Sweden then become spoiled assholes?


Yes and no. It depends. If you're not that strong, there's a big chance you get poisoned by the Western "culture". This monster we've created is always hungry, so you never know. I think it is capable of taking over the most innocent, good-hearted souls. This so called "technological progress" of ours is nothing but a slow suicide, as I see it. And I'm not the only one to have this opinion. Even in America, there are some people who recognize this, for example the Green Party.

In reply to:

I believe that if you ascribe to any given culture a lot bad attributes, and no good ones, and conclude by calling all members of that culture assholes, you've got a problem with cultural racism.


I didn't say all people in the West are assholes, I said the majority of people are. I know several really good people. My mother is one of them. She's practically a saint, so of course there are exceptions. But according to your point of view, Eliot, Kafka and Beckett were all racists because their works are very critical of the Western waste land. All Marxists are racists, all communists are racists. Iggy Pop is a racist. Lou Reed is a racist. And so on. Because all these people have openly stated that they are fed up with this sick society. They're all strongly opposed to the Western "culture" where money is God. If you want to call these people racists, then fine, go ahead.

twister: [Keepin' The White Man Down!]:

In reply to:

But according to you, when someone calls the white man an asshole for being responsible for 500 years of genocide, he or she is a "racist"?


Absolutely. I am a white man. I, personally, am not responsible for 500 years of genocide. If someone holds that genocide against me, and thinks I'm an asshole because I'm white like those that were behind said genocide - when my being white is something I never had any choice about - yes, I'd say that's racist as hell.

Wraith2: Okay, let me try my hand at this whole issue. People are basically the same. Yes, we do have differences at the genetic level and our personalities are influenced by our ethnic groups. However, if you can't deal with that, then get the fuck off this planet because whether or not you like it, we are one species.

The scariest people are not the dumbasses like Shambuei who sit around in their trailers, masturbating in their own feces and saying 'it's time fer all the niggers to die,' it's the people who try to give some legitimacy to their racist beliefs. Those who try and pervert science and religion to justify their own sickness. They would have you think that they are proponents of "racial pride," but racial pride doesn't involve hating other races.

There are three types of racists: those that fear, those that hate and those that do both. The first kind will look at someone different and be afraid because of what they do not understand. They see only the superficial differences between themselves and others and are frightened by the idea that someone could exist outside the orthodoxy of their own society. The second kind are so mired in self-hatred, that they need something, anything, to turn against. They have so much hate that if they were to direct it inward, then they would kill themselves. Thus, they need a scapegoat, and (going back to type I racists) they pick a group of people that they don't understand because they can easily distance themselves from that group.

Power2charm, I think your core problem is that you aren't trying to accept others. You are a type I racist: you look at the faces of others, see something different and are afraid. I don't know why you feel this way, that is something that you must find for yourself, but if you continue down this path, then you will probably never come back. Eventually, you will become a type II, consumed with hate, and that's not something anyone should want to be. I understand your point about wanting to be around your own kind, but you have to understand this: people are your own kind. Even if they don't look like you, even if they don't act like you, we are one species that grows more and more alike every day. (And for the record, the Chinese have their Chinatowns because racists wouldn't let them build near the homes of white people.)

The Heirophant (Anonymous): [Intrinsic racism]: Another thread wherein eraserhead attacks the sacred cows. Two things should be made clear to the protagonists in this irrational debate: firstly (for eraserhead), posters only post what they believe are objective and rational posts, and secondly (for the cows), that it is not possible for posters to separate their personal attitudes towards others from their opinions. One is less likely to argue with a 'friend' than a neutral poster, and more likely to argue with a 'foe' or 'nemesis'. Consciously or not. Objective posting is impossible, but I will leave you to decide whether or not an unconscious preference is rational.

Modern racism is a term which some posters here have attempted to use, but with very little understanding of it's meaning. Historically, racism is some negative feeling towards or opinions of another race. Yet modern racism is far more widespread and far less obtrusive. Professor Appiah's (Harvard) intrinsic racism, one of the best definitions of modern racism, is determined as the "moral differentiation between members of different races [due to the belief that] each race has a different moral status... Just as .. many people assume that the fact that they are biologically related to another person - a brother, an aunt, a cousin - gives them a moral interest in that person, so an intrinsic racist holds that the bare fact of being of the same race is a reason for preferring one person to another." (Racisms, 1990 - Kwame Anthony Appiah). Professor Appiah is one of the world's foremost writers on racism, and according to his views any preference based on race is a form of racism. There is no requisite for action or behaviour on the part of the individual - the preference itself is sufficient.

Many modern Kantian ethicists will argue that any behaviour that is not pro-racial diversity is a form of modern racism. This goes further than the 'preference is racism' viewpoint, in that anyone who doesn't explicitly prefer to be in the company of a mixture of races is a racist. Racial theorists who support these seeming extreme arguments are not uncommon, yet the general academic community does consider them to be slightly radical. In any case, diversity is usually regarded as something to be valued.

Power2charm's post should be given merit for bringing up educational discussion, and should be criticised for endorsing rather than denying racist tendencies. Informally, I am not a believer in the 'ignore it and it shall go away' school of thought, and subsequently I have no problem with the initial post at all. However it is undeniably (and self-admittedly) racist in nature.

PostModernRacist (Anonymous): [I am a Racist, therefore I am not a Racist]: The topic of racism in the post-modern world is both broad and difficult. Since short and sappy seem to be the order of the day here lately, I will simply tell you all a true story about yours truly.

I was at the gym on a Friday night about a month ago. I didn't arrive there in a bad mood - wasn't feeling any particular mood, really. But I walked up the stairs to the main floor of the gym and the first thing I see is this Black guy on one of the good treadmills. He has the treadmill ramped up on an incline and he's running - shuffling - on it with a dead, tired look in his eyes, his black hair dripping with sweat.

I looked at him and thought spontaneously to myself, why do all Blacks look like they should be carrying spears when they run?

During the same evening I was in another area of the gym where there are free weights and barbells, and these two German guys were loudly conversing in their native tongue while "lifting," and it annoyed me. Partly because it was loud, and if the language were English I probably still would have found it grating. But partly, I admit, was the fact that I didn't come to my gym on a cold, wet Friday night to have a couple of Germans aka-laka-lakaling at me. (I must give credit for "aka-lakaling" - a dear friend from a former job once said she didn't fancy vacations to foreign lands where the natives would be aka-laka-lakaling at her, which struck me as funny).

Post-Modern racism is a curious thing. Racism in the Modern sense is dead, it is the province of lunatics. The racism I believe that I exhibit is something different. It is a desire for comfort. For familiar words and thoughts, for some homogeneity among all the diversity.

Here in the Northeast, there is more cultural diversity than in other areas of the United States. When I go to a coffee shop on a late Sunday afternoon, I know for a fact I will hear languages other than English spoken. I'm ok with that. But if the Italians have their Little Italy's, then am I wrong to build ideallic White-Americanavilles in my mind? Are the people of Greenwich or Westport or New Canaan, Connecticut, wrong to build them in fact?

Yes, post-modern racism is a curious thing. I'm not convinced it is wrong.

SnowChild: [I am Not a Racist/An Apology]: Okay, I put my hands up, I have been a lot more abrasive in my comments than I should have been. And this earns me no medals, because I know that as soon as anger is generated over my anger, hatred is an ends in itself and hatred against me needs no justification.

I don't think it's fair that a post gets dedicated to me accusing me of wanting everyone else to be the same. What I want is a wish that more people would say things a little more louder and more bravely (like my idiocity, if be it), that is different from a wish like power2charm who wants a world where everyone is like him.

You have to admit that everything here consists of double standards and everyone can be accused of the same. You say that I quote badly out of context, twister, but then you're committing a similar crime when your argument for why one of my opinions is supposedly wrong is because I'm 'a moron'. I have never sunk as low as labelling people with hurtful names on the basis of disagreeing with their personality. Do you think this may be a form of neo-hatred power2charm alludes to? Or perhaps you yourself do not know what I am trying to say? I am not stupid, I understood well what everyone was trying to say. What I myself was trying to say is that I felt that the answers were so timid and so open to being disguised agreements (when others were insisting they were straight forward disagreements) that I didn't agree they were disagreements at all. I was mocking them with that out of context juxtaposition (it's unkind, it's bad, but it does sound stupid). My thesis supervisor would have made me write lines and repent till I bled. Sorry you didn't find it as funny as EuropeanCannon post.

Look, what are we trying to achieve here in the end and what have we achieved? Power2charm purposely put up a provocative post and he expected to get trashed. He would have been disppointed, I suspect, if he didn't. A debate in the true sense would include middleground and extremist attitudes. Some people had to provide the extremist attitudes. What would have happened if that didn't happen? A few small comments and then a topic that completely sinks, with the net result being no real struggle against a deadly serious topic - racism. And nobody gets their dirty good fight. Anyone could have taken any roles at any point, on any side, since it was such an absurb, somewhat playful half-humourous post filled with horrid comments Ö if it wasn't so hurtful. What is reality is that people end up filling vacant positions and assigning roles to themselves, while inevitably ending up within forced roles. Look at you: in order to slam me, you defend FiGgu, regardless of what you think of him. I donít think his original post interested you much at all. Look at everyone here with their nicks and little cyber personalities (everyone is a little Bowie).

What would this world be if nobody bothered to say "This upsets me, I think it is wrong and I would like to have a strong say? I want to follow reason. I also want to fucking scream" That would be quite a sad, passive world. The fact is: the level of intelligent thought would not have gotten this far if nobody was prepared to provoke another into it.

I apologise for not being a lot of fun. I cannot apologise for my opinions. This is something I believe strongly in. I apologise for being a bad sport. My conduct wasnít the best. An Australian is always a good sport and I shame Adam and all the rest of the little vegemites who generally, are the upholders of everything good and fair there is here. In my opinion, with regards to racism and nationalism, it is much more constructive to point out what is good and live by a process of affirmation than to wallow in deduction, which cannot achieve anything but to narrow-in your narrow-mindedness until you believe you have come to something personally right. So graciously, now I hope this debate is on it's way to it's death and everyone can resume their level headed positions, thank you for the interesting debate, look, itís a lot better than Labyrinth-fan baiting eh?

SnowChild: [Friendship VS Allaince]: In response to the title of your post: Yes, I admit that Eraserhead is my friend. I respect him, I admire him, I enjoy his views. I admit that and I see nothing wrong with it. Friends are good. I am not going to pretend I don't know him like others may do with each other to prove a point. He would be thoroughly insulted. But this is different from an alliance. We never directly stand up for each other, jump to each other's defences or put words into each other's mouths. I let him fight his own battles on this board and he for me. On this thread alone he has more than once criticised me on my opinions and if he thinks I am wrong he says so because personal opinion is more important to him than sparing feelings. And that I think, is what Eraserhead upholds and stands for and for that I commend him. As for the challenges and motives, I will let Eraserhead speak for himself if he choose to, that's how it works.

I am not telling you how to feel. I am only telling you my motivations. Re-reading all the posts, I admit that I was overly venement, unfortunately it all fell on you and I am sorry because you were a lot more fair to my post than me to you. Actually, it was a lot more favourable than what I expected because I knew I was in a position for further venom and it came quite politely. I think I was just sick of the politeness. I wanted to attack the ideas, not the people personally - so I am honestly sorry if you got upset because I am sure you're a nice person in real life.

With the scared cow mentality - the thinking is that opinions and the actual people are seperate and are treated thus. It's to do with siding with opinions, not with people. In the end it should be a fight on the ideas - not about the people. When you side with people you become bias and defend through intentional crowds and sadly, the choice to uphold ideas because you personally believe them take second place to sentiments.

SnowChild: [After All?]: Hrmph. From the ill-conceived racial title you have chosen, I think you're the one with no idea. From my humble opinion I think I KNOW what you are getting on about. You are calling yourself a new brand of Racist. Everyone here can see that. And if your comments about the 'homogenous' behaviour of certain races are not to be met with disgust by some, I don't know what you expected. Although it is fair and open for discussion, it is hurtful. You complain that you are being hurt when you are the one hurting others in the first place. You bred the hatred. And would there be any sense of justice at all, if you were allowed to, with no censorship at all, voice all you like and not have some people counter it?

You call yourself a Racist - as far as I am concerned, people getting offended and angry at you should make you feel more proud that you are suceeding in your aim. If no one dared to kick up a fuss - it would be like this. Person calls himself Racist. A few small disagreements. A few sarcastic jokes. Don't you see how serious it is about the nature of human kind if it sank after that? I would be dead scared. Regardless of the playful matter you framed the topic in, it would say apathy and no-stance and that is frightening. Give credit to the people on your polar end, they're doing their job as well.

Eraserhead is on a different tangent to me, you will see I have different things to say from him. If you want to know why you are being attacked and not Erasehead - it's because he never stated he was a Racist (you did). As far I can tell, Eraserhead is a pessimistic Nationalist, not a Racist. He groups his own countrymen into one big lump - he doesn't sort out seperate people to attack. I am not saying that this is right, I'm just saying I don't think he's a Racist as you insist.

In the end I guess this is saying, under all the fluff, that if someone wants to be a racist, let them be because under no circumstance can you think ill of them. I think the winner is ... racism. You are the winner and I am the loser according to Twister who is the upholder of free speech here. Hmm. Yeah.

Personally, I am hurt because I think you assume I'm white and keep writing in that perspective. Do you even know what race I am?

twister: [SnowChild]:

In reply to:

I don't think it's fair that a post gets dedicated to me accusing me of wanting everyone else to be the same.


I do. You stated, very clearly, that you wished more people would take up the same stance as you. I don't believe anyone has objected to your expressing your sentiments exactly how you have, though you're quite happy to blast other's for not conforming to the acceptable standard you see fit.

In reply to:

You say that I quote badly out of context, twister, but then you're committing a similar crime when your argument for why one of my opinions is supposedly wrong is because I'm 'a moron'.


That's not even remotely similar. I answered one of your questions in a way that was negative of you. Offering my opinion, which is negative of you. You took EuropeanCanon's words, a sarcastic take on the idiocy of racism, and twisted them to make it look as if he himself advocated racism.

In reply to:

I have never sunk as low as labelling people with hurtful names on the basis of disagreeing with their personality.


I think WildWind, to use her as an example, has suitably explained repeatedly why her response is exactly as it is. When you accuse her of offering "disguised agreement", I think you're a moron. You may think I'm a moron for thinking as such, and you're welcome to say so.

In reply to:

Or perhaps you yourself do not know what I am trying to say?


If I believed power2charm actually had an ounce of genuine racism in his blood, that he would allow his minor grievances with the "akka-lakking" to influence his opinion of another human being, I'd be writing a very different post right now. If I believe power2charm actually wanted a world full of people of his own race, I'd be writing a very different post right now. But I don't believe he is, by any stretch. I'd actually thought WildWind and fiGgU_ had over-reacted, long before you showed up and chastised everyone for not disagreeing vehemently enough.

In reply to:

Look at you: in order to slam me, you defend FiGgu, regardless of what you think of him. I donít think his original post interested you much at all.


Very little in this thread interested me. I defended fiGgU_'s post because I thought you were being ludicrous and disagreed with you.

In reply to:

What would this world be if nobody bothered to say "This upsets me, I think it is wrong and I would like to have a strong say?


The thing is, everyone has been quite happy for you to express yourself in your screaming and shouting way. The only problem has been you want everyone else to adopt the same attitude - so much so that you're chastising others for not being harsh enough even if they're agreeing with your sentiments.

Kirk: [Git]: You're not as smart as you think you are, twister. Get over yourself.

twister: [So I'm, like, 2? 3?]:

In reply to:

You're not as smart as you think you are, twister. Get over yourself.


Kirk, on a scale of 1 to 10, in terms of intelligence, I consider myself roughly a 4.

Paris: [I'm alive/I'm dead/I'm a stranger/Killing an arab]:

In reply to:

everyone judges everyone all the time, it's the way the human mind works


Exactly, I had a post like this that I was about to enter, but I couldn't phrase it with political correctness. Truth is, all racism is is blind sterotypes. The kinds we have with cops, blondes, lawyers. If somebody has something on you, fuck 'em.

sexy grandpa: [Listen to thisÖ]: I am currently a music student at college, were last November, I was approached by a good friend informing me I had an admirer. I really am quite a shy person and so waited to be approached by the girl. She's prity, she's a fan of Beck ,and so am I, and she like's me.Oh, she's Musilm too.
I thought nothing of this and within two weeks we were getting sort of close. Then, to cut an extreamly long story short, a car approached me, the two Asian guys tried to get me in but luckly enough I was with other people. So they have threatened to kill me and follow me reguarly.
I'm not rasist. After all, why should I be?....

abe11825: [ErÖ]: Excuse me for interrupting everyone's posting. I am sorry. You all have good reasons and I agree with a couple, but I just want to point out that every race does their own "aka-laka" no matter if it is English, Swedish, Japanese, Zimbabwe, etc. To every race, it's different. So going back to the original postó

In reply to:

(p2c)...and these two African guys were loudly conversing in their native tongue while "lifting," and it annoyed me. Partly because it was loud, and if the language were English I probably still would have found it grating. But partly, I admit, was the fact that I didn't come to my gym on a cold, wet Friday night to have a couple of Zimbabwes aka-laka-lakaling at me. (I must give credit for "aka-lakaling" - a dear friend from a former job once said she didn't fancy vacations to foreign lands where the natives would be aka-laka-lakaling at her, which struck me as funny). ...


How do you know thy don't get annoyed when you talk English? They might have the same feelings towards you when you do it. Just shrug it off and don't let it get the best of you. That is all.

For me, I am Jewish. I loathe my religion. I hate it, but it is to the point that I do not care. People know Jews for being rascist little money grubbers. Who is to say they are not? It could be you that is the money grubber. Rascist? maybe. I don't know. out of the Jews I know (and i know a lot of Jews) They are not rascist. Sure, they like to save their money and spend a little more on something, but who doesn't do that once in a while?

Go ahead, tear my post to shreads. I don't care. Just remember, I tried to have a say in it.

Ruskie: [What's the difference]: http://www.alllooksame.com

I only got 6, i guess some of you would think that enough to make me a racist?

sedna: i only got 6 too

abe11825: I got a 5. I should know better considering my room mate is Japanese!!

twister: [Ring Jewish weather; warn them of the holocaust]: I was at an all-Jew school walking up to children saying "gas, gas, gas", when I suddenly remembered this thread.

It amuses me that the two people here arguing the most heatedly against power2charm's original post are themselves opposed to diversity in their own ways.

Eraserhead, you believe yourself to be on a "higher level of spirituality" than most people. You have been known to preach on other threads that people should become more like you. You denounce meat-eaters as idiots and Americans (sorry, the majority of Americans) as assholes.

SnowChild, while you are far less guilty of this than Eraserhead, you can't deny that you lamented the posters on this thread for not sharing the same view point as you. In fact, you went so far as to lament them for not holding it and expressing is as strongly as you did. You too openly wished that people could be more like you on this thread.

eraserhead: [Shakespeare was right]: Twister, if you don't stand up for something, you'll fall for anything. Why should I pretend that Silvio Berlusconi is on the same spiritual level as I am? Jesus said that we shouldn't judge one another, but what did Jesus and his followers do? They travelled around the country judging everyone, judging and judging and judging. You can see the irony in that. I don't think Jesus was wrong to judge people though. Even if it's ironic that Jesus first told people not to judge each other and then he and his followers went out to judge people, he did what he had to do.

We all have certain roles to play. Sure, this is just a message board, but nevertheless real people read these messages and real people post here, so I think this place is as good as a bar or whatever to express opinions. It's my job to criticize meat-eating and criticize the American lifestyle, for example. It's your job to call me a fascist. I make you think, you make me think, people who read this get to see both sides, and possibly a third side, if someone else has another point of view. I believe that, as long as I'm true to my intuition and my gut feeling about things, I'm doing the job I'm supposed to do, I'm saying the things I'm supposed to say. I'm adding balance to this message board. Just like everyone else is adding something. That's all I have to say about this. Shakespeare said that the whole world is a stage and we are merely actors on that stage. You're doing your job, I'm doing my job.

Cisite: [Using Your Race]: I am not racist in any respect but would like to point out something that happened to me recently. I am presently going out with a girl in my year called Leah, one of her friends is called Kirsty a quite loud and pushy black girl. For some reason known only to hr she suddenly becamse intent on splitting Leah and I up. She was (luckily) unsuccesful and the lies and things she had said were uncovered. I then confronted her and told her exactly what i though of her. The words "scheming", "lying", "two faced" and "bitch" featured lagrely in my discussion but I did not once make a comment relating to race or the colour of her skin. The next day I was brought up before the headmaster on accusations of being racist. Her mentality is that if someone of another colour insults them (even i it has nothing to do with racism) then they are being racist against her because she is black. Has anyone else encountered people with similar attitudes?

power2charm: [Chuck D's Mo' Better Dictionary. Word!]:

In reply to:

It's ignorant and stupid to label black people's anger towards white people as racism. Think about how black people have been treated politically, legally, and socially within your history in the United States of AmeriKKKa. Black people were slaves in your country for 500 years. 500 years of slavery and institutionalized racism... 500 years of genocide.

Chuck D says black people can't be racists. To be racist you have to be in a position of supreme power and control. You have to have the ability to make great decisions based solely around race. White people own everything and have total control, therefore only they can be racist due to the word's definition. But according to you, when someone calls the white man an asshole for being responsible for 500 years of genocide, he or she is a "racist"?


I wanted to get back to this, but I've had some ISP problems this past week. First, when Chuck D finishes the rest of his dictionary, maybe his peculiar definition of racism will persuade me a little bit more than it does. It is completely arbitrary - and probably apologist of his own race's racist tendencies - to say only the race in power can be called racist. How do you account for the anti-discrimination legislation - one might call it "institutionalization" - that has been force since the 60s and is enforced? I would say minorities have succeeded in making America, institutionally speaking, a nation of equality, which is a fine thing.

So you will argue that in our hearts and minds, we do not think of other races as we do our own? I would agree, and here is where Chuck's definition rings false. Bigotry is really a matter of people's visceral response those of different cultures or races. It doesn't matter whether it is a white man's fear of or discomfort with Africans, or vice versa.

Second, don't throw the word genocide around so loosely. It does not describe the treatment of blacks in the US at any point in our history.

Rather than words comes the thought of high windows


 
Entire thread
Subject  Posted byPosted on
*I am a Racist (03/02)  Auntie Prism02/21/11 12:42 PM
.*Re: I am a Racist (03/02)  Auntie Prism02/21/11 12:44 PM
..Will I post another of this length? Probably not  Auntie Prism02/21/11 12:45 PM
Jump to

Teenage Wildlife Davie Bowie | Email Us! Forums powered by WWWThreads v5.1.5perl

Teenage Wildlife Home Page Bowie's music Info on Bowie Other Media Have your say! Search the Site Help me!


Toolbar (Interact)

Etete Systems