Tipote said:

What is this bullshit? man you disappoint me more and more. Does this back up the alt-right claim that there are plans for a bloody coup? raiding peoples houses etc etc..?

---

does their claim seem less likely knowing that people are promoting to do violence and "lead people" to places to assault them?

PS: the alt-right only became known when ANTIFA started fighting Trump MAGA supporters. funny that. i hope that the alt-right don't puss out and they take to the streets. if they puss out i will officially disavow every instance of my general support for them and stick to civic nationalism support, being that is my forte anyway.

akira_akuma said:

does their claim seem less likely knowing that people are promoting to do violence and "lead people" to places to assault them?

---

your video doesn't really show anything . the alt-right position is that antifa are planning to bloody and violent raids of peoples homes and seizure of weaponry. Where is the evidence for that?

Surely, the groups that are actually planting bombs, shooting and running over demonstrators should be the concern? not people defending themselves and others from that violence.

The fact that I hear more Americans defend Nazis over Antifascist groups should be more of a concern for us all.

Will Scarlet said:

I have been silently following this debate for some time now and have come to the conclusion that the most racially biased contributor is Enlil.

---

Will Scarlet said:

Tipote 'This discussion is about people of colour', I think this thread is entitled 'Nazis are cunts'. Yes, they are, but I have one problem with that statement. The problem is that the term 'Nazi' has become meaningless because it is now a term to describe any person who is winning an argument with a liberal.

---

Tipote said:

Will Scarlet said:

Secondly, making sweeping generalisations about people based on skin colour is wrong, and that applies to you Tipote.

---

Like what?

---

Tipote said:

akira_akuma said:

does their claim seem less likely knowing that people are promoting to do violence and "lead people" to places to assault them?

---

your video doesn't really show anything .

---

Will Scarlet said:

Tipote, you imply that antifa are solidarity activists, you appear to live in UK/France so you must know more about them than most Americans, after all they have been active here much longer.

You will know that in the UK they evolved from the Hope not Hate organisation.
You will also know that Hope not Hate were a front for the Socialist Workers Party.
The Socialist Workers Party are a Trotskyist grouping, but you will know that already.

You are an apologist for a communist political party whose aim is to overthrow the elected governments of the Western democracies by any and all means, but you are intelligent enough to know that. In fact is that you are not just an apologist for,  but are an active member of the extreme left.

---

Not sure where you get your information from... Antifa evolved from hope not hate? nope. Antifa in Europe and the UK has a history that predates Hope not Hate by..er..quite a long way..

Antifa is not an organisation, its a coalition of tons of groups and individuals using various tactics. Do people fighting fascism automatically become communist? And if that is the dichotomy, surely its better to be against the fascists than with them?

When you say they have been "here" longer. Where are you?

Also, you didn't explain to me what sweeping generalisations I made about skin colour.

Tipote said:

I'm done with you

---

Tipote said:

akira ignored by 52 people

---

Bubbles85 said:

You people

---

Tipote said:

Tantrika said:

Tipote said:

...Instead...why can't we dismantle these structures that unfairly advantage white people if we really want to live in a free society for everyone?

---

Because too many people would rather insulate such structures
and provide them legitimacy
by creating additional structures set to unfairly advantage non-white people

to take this to a level different from race
white English speakers in North America hold more privilege than white French speakers in North America...

---

Perhaps i didnt understand your point. Why is it unfair to give some advantages to people of colour to address the imbalances in place for hundreds of years?

Qman might call this political correctness gone mad but I think its worth pointing out people tend to use the term "people of colour" over "non-white" because even the language reinforces that sense that white is the norm and all others deviate. I'm not trying to police terminology but just explaining why people say some things and not other things.
...

---

Perhaps you did not comprehend the point,
because you tried to frame my post as referring to the situation as 'unfair'
which was never the aim of the post

the point of the statement was
that you cannot both dismantle structures of power
and create new structures of power
and still end up with equality

dismantling the power structures is one thing
but creating new ones in a hopes of 'balancing' out cultural opportunities
simply reinforces and legitimizes the structures that exist
by propping up everything around the 'central structural issue'
the central structure is reinforced as a 'necessary' social component
when it is not actually such

regarding this portion specifically

Quote:

...
Your point about French culture is an interesting one but its not a subject I'm that familiar with. However, I would point out that French speakers, like myself, can change our language but I can't change my skin colour.

I don't see an issue for french speaking areas to want people mainly speaking french, but I'm sure most people have a good level of English. White people generally speaking to not have a good understanding of the black lived experience and history.

---

it may not be the area you wish to fall back to
since Islamists can change their religion, but not their skin colour
but the 'problem' surrounding Islamic culture is the teachings of the religion
hence why it is referred to as 'Islamic terrorism' rather than 'Brown terrorism'

French people in North America are frequently expected to give up their cultural heritage
because 'the English won'
it is a helpful mirror to the white vs. other skin colours framing
to recognize that historical rifts impact more than just imbalances based on race or gender
there are deep-seated cultural imbalances all over the place

am not stating that it is an issue for Québec to highlight French culture,
enjoyed living in Québec and am descended from a rebel leader who tried to free French Québec from the British
but due to his death causing the whole family to be excommunicated from the Catholic Church and move West from Québec
have lived with a lot of familiarity as to how much harassment French individuals receive outside of Québec
simply because Québec puts so many structures in place to emphasize French culture

Canada also suffers from less issues in terms of black rights than the United States does
With our most marginalized minority being full-blooded Natives and the Métis (descendants of French and Native intermarriage prior to English rule)

Tipote said:

...

Quote:

Tantrika said:You ableist

---

Youre right, I shouldn't call people tards

---

Personally suffer from a mental health disability,
but do not really take offense to terminology that impacts the mentally ill or intellectually handicapped
just find it interesting, because colloquial use of 'retarded' and 'tard'
or referring to Trump and his supporters as 'mentally ill'
seem to be common points of argument these days,
tho the mentally ill and intellectually handicapped have, and still do, face plenty of discrimination
and the cunts in the original Nazi regime forced such individuals
to undergo medical sterilization to keep them from 'polluting' the gene pool
prior to simply exterminating them along with everyone else

but, most notably,
in this thread the appropriate terminology for you to use
would have been to refer to them as cunts

Tantrika said:

the point of the statement was
that you cannot both dismantle structures of power
and create new structures of power
and still end up with equality
dismantling the power structures is one thing
but creating new ones in a hopes of 'balancing' out cultural opportunities
simply reinforces and legitimizes the structures that exist
by propping up everything around the 'central structural issue'
the central structure is reinforced as a 'necessary' social component
when it is not actually such

---

Tantrika said:

it may not be the area you wish to fall back to
since Islamists can change their religion, but not their skin colour

---

Tantrika said:

but the 'problem' surrounding Islamic culture is the teachings of the religion
hence why it is referred to as 'Islamic terrorism' rather than 'Brown terrorism'

---

Quote:

French people in North America are frequently expected to give up their cultural heritage
because 'the English won'

---

Quote:

it is a helpful mirror to the white vs. other skin colours framing
to recognize that historical rifts impact more than just imbalances based on race or gender
there are deep-seated cultural imbalances all over the place

---

Tantrika said:

Personally suffer from a mental health disability,
but do not really take offense to terminology that impacts the mentally ill or intellectually handicapped
just find it interesting, because colloquial use of 'retarded' and 'tard'
or referring to Trump and his supporters as 'mentally ill'
seem to be common points of argument these days,
tho the mentally ill and intellectually handicapped have, and still do, face plenty of discrimination
and the cunts in the original Nazi regime forced such individuals
to undergo medical sterilization to keep them from 'polluting' the gene pool
prior to simply exterminating them along with everyone else

---

Quote:

but, most notably,
in this thread the appropriate terminology for you to use
would have been to refer to them as cunts

---

Tipote said:

qman said:

People are disadvantaged everyday because of their looks, sex, sexuality, age, culture, religion, genetics, social-economic status and geographical location, why the fixation on just race? 

---

Race is obviously a huge factor and its something that cannot be changed like the others you mention.

Quote:

People and environments will never be equal in nature because human nature doesn't allow for it.

---

You always beat around the bush and shy away from being direct.

So you believe there is a natural order that is like that because ..human nature?

So no point trying to address inequalities in the present?

Quote:

Because buying slaves, housing, feeding, clothing, providing health care and retirement for free labor wasn't a good economic return for the investor. Why don't we do it today?  Because it's cheaper to build a factory in some third world nation and pay them .30 cents per hour.

---

I accept that the economic viability wasn't a constant. You always distract from the point, which was that vast wealth was accumulated off the backs of slaves.

Quote:

I'm sure the idea behind the slave trade was about a higher standard of living which enhances the chances for survival and reproduction, why is this such a difficult concept to understand, humans wanted more resources and would do whatever it took to do it.

---

Its not a difficult concept that people can dehumanise others and exploit them. The point is that it is wrong. Clearly you have no moral qualms about it. Any disadvantage that blacks have in US society you probably put down to nature.

You haven't made the case that Europe needed to dominate most of the world and exploit people for their own survival.

Quote:

I'm trying to explain to you why it happened in the first place and why your judgments in the year 2017 come from a position of privilege as you place unrealistic judgment on people without understanding their environment.

---

Well you try to explain why it happened but dont seem to accept that those historical events have impact on the present day. Why should black people - regardless of whether they were actually descendants of slaves or not, be disadvantaged by systems that continue from the past and which are perpetuated in the present?

Your argument seems to be that things were fucked up in the past so why change anything in the present? are the past and present separated by a vaccuum?

The very fact that I have to have this back-and-forth with you shows you don't see what the problem is for people of colour. You yourself dismiss their concerns and silence them. You can do this because you are not affected. The ignorant apologist white centre covers the rise of the Nazis and KKK that you think don't exist in your country..

---

"Race is obviously a huge factor"

And you're not going to stop race baiting until you see complete equality, I got news for you- it's never going to happen. People like yourself are making things multiples times worse for non-whites and white people.

"So you believe there is a natural order"

There's human nature which you think you can change, women are always going to find richer men more attractive if all things being equal, where is your outrage?  You have none because it makes complete sense even though it's highly unethical and discriminatory. Why do women do this?  Better chances of survival and passing on DNA, real commonsense stuff here.

"So no point to address inequalities in the present?"

You think unequal results means there's so form injustice taking place, that's where the problem lies. You're constantly looking for victims and perpetrators and then creating your own form of justice. You're always looking for a fight, even if there's no good reason for it.

"You haven't made the case that Europe need to dominate most of the world...for their own survival"

I don't need to make the case, they thought it was in their best interests to do what they choose to do, it's what all groups of people do, enhance their goals through organization, that includes survival.

"The point is that is was wrong (slavery)"

I agree, but you can't let it go. My ancestors were also enslaved, that's what humans did to other humans in the past.

Tipote said:

ANTIFA Schedule For Nov. 4th Bloody Violence

Quote:

Antifa has announced that they are planning to kill every single Trump voter, Conservative and gun owner this November 4th.

The far-left terrorist organization have vowed to commit acts of ‘bloody violence’ by raiding peoples homes, seizing weapons and causing civil unrest on the streets of America.

---

Does anyone here believe this nonsense?

It feels like the Nazis are inflating a bullshit threat to justify their brutal "self defense" against antifascist demonstrations.

I've heard a lot about this antifa 4th nov bloody and violent plot but I only hear about it from the alt-right. Such bullshit.

How far would you apologise for Nazi violence?

---

Tipote said:

akira_akuma said:

does their claim seem less likely knowing that people are promoting to do violence and "lead people" to places to assault them?

---

your video doesn't really show anything . the alt-right position is that antifa are planning to bloody and violent raids of peoples homes and seizure of weaponry. Where is the evidence for that?

Surely, the groups that are actually planting bombs, shooting and running over demonstrators should be the concern? not people defending themselves and others from that violence.

The fact that I hear more Americans defend Nazis over Antifascist groups should be more of a concern for us all.

---