Harvard professor argues for 'abolishing' white race

[David Floyd]

Example of a behavior involving sub-conscious racism, would be if you saw a lone black man at night, outside, approaching from the opposite direction, and you cross the street.
Then the next night, you see the same occurence, but this time he's white, and you merely pass him by on the same side of the street he is on.
Both persons lets say, have the same similar clothing and walked in the same casual demeanor.

This isn't necessarily racism. If you are in a city, and you are aware of the fact that a higher percentage of blacks commit violent crime than whites, then crossing the street is valid, I would say, especially if you are female.

Would I personally do it? Well, if I did, I'd probably treat everybody the same - I'm not a fan of large urban areas and feel inherently unsafe when I'm alone at night. I have a lot of martial arts experience, and am not worried about getting jumped unless the other guy is armed. If I was carrying a concealed handgun I'd feel a little better, but again, you can't be too careful.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Seeker
Even a 5th generation East Asian, despite external differences, are also accepted.

Trust me, this is not true. East Asian are still treated quite differently than whites regardless of how long their families have been in Canada or how they behave.

Originally posted by Seeker
For 'good as white' to become 'equality', does the ethnic group have to become more assimilated? Is that the price?

Seems to be. A 5th generation Italian or Irish Immigrant, because their skins are white, are accepted.

I don't know if that is necessarily true. The 5th generation Italian or Irish retain their religion and yet anti-Catholic sentiments have virtually disappeared in Canada. Many Italian-Canadians still retain cultural differences that set them apart from British-Canadians.

Economically, it could be argued that with income level there is no signicantly obvious differences between Italian-Canadians and Chinese-Canadians, and yet Chinese-Canadians still face racist attitudes while Italian-Canadians do not. The ability of a Chinese-Canadian to achieve a high level in a corporation is likely less than that of non-English whites.

So we have two groups, both of which retain strong culture differences from the English-Canadian mainstream, both of which are roughly at the same economic level, and yet the two groups are treated differently.

This suggests that the difference is not due to economics or with how non-white people behave.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by David Floyd
This isn't necessarily racism. If you are in a city, and you are aware of the fact that a higher percentage of blacks commit violent crime than whites, then crossing the street is valid, I would say, especially if you are female.

It would be racism. You see a black person and you assume the person is a criminal, even though only a small fraction of the black population in the US have committed violent crimes.

As well, while it is true that violent crime within the US black community is higher than in the US white community, black- against-white crime rarely happens.

So the reality is, a white person faces more danger meeting a white person on a dark street than a black person.

The decision to cross the street is a racist decision.

[David Floyd]

It would be racism. You see a black person and you assume the person is a criminal, even though only a small fraction of the black population in the US have committed violent crimes.

You can label it whatever you like, I'm just going to go ahead and call it valid safety precautions which again, I would do regardless of if the person was black, white, or purple.
If someone chooses to see that as racist because the person happens to be black, then tough ****. I care more about safety than someone's feelings.

As well, while it is true that violent crime within the US black community is higher than in the US white community, black- against-white crime rarely happens.

Doesn't make me feel any safer being by myself on a dark street at night.
Hell, when I was in Washington DC last, I happened to be on the subway at 2 am by myself and I was scared ****less. Racist? No. Safety conscious? Yes.

So the reality is, a white person faces more danger meeting a white person on a dark street than a black person.

A white person faces danger from anyone, I wouldn't say they face more from white people by any means.

The decision to cross the street is a racist decision.

Again, call it what you like - in the end, it's a SAFE decision.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Originally posted by Gatekeeper
Ron Jeremy, Carver:

Hey, what's gonna happen to my "image" if I ever start making between $30,000 and $50,000 a year after taxes? Will I go from "oppressor" status to "mass murder" status due to lifestyle choices?

Gatekeeper

I think that, regardless of your financial position, your status as "tosspot" will remain secure. Hold on to that rock of certainty, Gatekeeper! Cling to it!

Still paying off the college fees? You're going to shatter our cosy little worlds by revealing that recent graduates often don't have much money? Well stick a chopstick up my bum and call me "Betsy", college boy- that's the favourite hard luck tale of every comfortably-well-off-to-obscenely rich middle-aged white person.

But I digress. What you're disputing is just the degree of application. Nobody has disputed the crux of the article- that a white skin should not carry special privileges. Significantly, the objections to the destruction of the white race as a social construct (congenital advantage through race) aren't materialising either.

Still- thanks for the sob story about your finances. Ha, ha, ha. I suppose you can start a thread telling us unenlightened ones what the inside of a soup kitchen looks like, or how much you get for giving favours to burly Latvian dockers with hands like plates. In any event, I think we both doubt that the story will be similar in ten years time. Unless you're a bit simple, of course. Which looks distinctly possible.

Consider this, though. Are you saying that the social construct of the white race does not exist, or simply that you don't fit into it? Because, try as I might, I can't find any part of the article that says "this is true of all people with white skin". However if you're still unconvinced, just look at the numbers of CEO's of FTSE or Dow Jones listed companies who are black. Or mere directors, for that matter.

[Ned]

Well, Ron, Given that the Irish were not "immediately" white tells me that "whiteness," within the professors construct, is also about religion and national origin as well.

So, what the author really is talking about is the "in" group vs. the others as a general proposition. This could apply generally to any country. It is not specific to the United States or to race.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Congratulations, Ned. It's taken 5 pages of posts, but you're catching up.

[Az]

well, I think we can all agree that :

a) People who live in a certain country shouldn't be treated differently because the colour of their skin.
b) People's skills have nothing to do with the colour of their skin.

However:

Ignatiev in a blinding flash of insight saw that Melanotan could also abolish white skin itself and hence all the ills he saw in it.

If all Caucasians were required to take Melanotan, this would be like giving all whites a race transplant operation.

The same drug that in Australian experiments turned light-furred dogs and rats dark could turn every one of the world's whites into "people of color."

Ignatiev picked up his telephone and volunteered to fly to Australia and become a guinea pig for the Monash University scientists. Six months later, looking into his mirror Ignatiev saw that his fondest wish had come true. He had shed the white skin that had made him hate himself so much.

[Ned]

Thanks, Ron, but it also means that all the author is doing is advocating "sensitivity" to these issues in private matters and equality of treatment under the law. I think we can all agree that both are desirable, not only for the US, but for the whole world.

But the way he does it is offensive.

[chequita guevara]

I wonder if anyone would have paid any attention if the author had simply said, "Abolish Race!"

[Az]

well, it certainly wasn't his point. He's ... well, I don't know what the hell is he doing. It feels like he really has something against white people. read my quote?

[DinoDoc]

See what the tenure system gets you.

[chequita guevara]

My other comment, however is, what do you expect from a Maoist?

[zulu9812]

It occurs to me that all this Harvard nutcase will succeed in doing is stirring up white supremacists to protect themselves from the new 'threat', as they might see it.

[Carver]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Who opposed the use of niggardly?

Carver for one. But there was a big hubbub about it.

Stop lying Imran. Show me a quote where I said I was against the use of niggardly. There is none, I never said it. Don't lie and don't misquote me.