Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Edl The Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Argh Racism!; draft article - thoughts wanted
Topic Started: Apr 14 2010, 11:54 PM (122 Views)
pyrus
Member Avatar
Patriot
Hello

I'm working on an article about racism. Any thoughts / contributions would be more than welcome....




I think there are 6 main types of people in the racism debate:

1. People who think race is important (we're talking about it aren't we?), and who may have some pride in their heritage or 'their people' more broadly (wherever they may come from). These people think that a lot of racial discrimination comes about as a result of unfair prejudices, and must be challenged. But they accept that there are a few minor cases where 'discrimination' (and by that I just mean acknowledging differences) is perfectly fine. For example, these people might claim that it would be acceptable to discriminate against white actors if you were looking for an actor to play a black man in a play (and that claiming this wasn't acceptable would be ridiculous political correctness). These people are broadly opposed to racism, but may be relatively ambivalent to the subject, perhaps because it may simply not be an issue for them. They may talk about racial issues, they may not. I would say that this description fits most people.

2. There are the genuine racists. People who think one race is superior to another AND that this race should be able to discriminate against the inferior races. 'Discriminate' doesn't necessarily mean anything as extreme as 'herd them all to the gas chambers', but regardless of the lengths to which they would go, these are the people who have a strong racial element to their politics. It should be remembered that whilst their racial politics may be disturbing, this does not mean that they do not have anything of interest to say about race, or about any other matter.

3. There are also some truly principled characters out there who are vehemently opposed to any kind of unfair racial discrimination (and probably include any kind of racial politics in this category). To those who genuinely hate racism, it doesn't matter who the aggressor is and who the victim is - it's the principle of treating someone unfairly because of their race that they're opposed to. And personally I think this should be applauded, because it doesn't mean getting all agitated over any mention of race, it means opposing genuine dangerous prejudice.

4. On the other hand, there are a great number of less principled characters. These are the sort of people who think historical 'white aggression' is justification for 'getting their own back'. They see the whole concept of racism not as an important tool in routing out dangerous prejudices, but as a weapon that they can use to act on their own prejudices. This is how we get the seemingly contradictory view that only white westerners can be racist (what a racist view that is!).

5. Similarly, there are those who want to strike out against the history of imperialism, the 'establishment', 'the Western World' more broadly, or some other vague 'majority' or dominant figure. They have little interest in race and, because they do not share the principles of group 3, they have no interest in discovering or rooting out genuine prejudices. So, they too will use the charge of racism as a weapon, and they'll use it against anyone who disagrees with them. An example would be those who call any sensible discussion about Islam racist (despite the obvious fact that it's got nothing to do with race). Their object isn't to have any sort of discussion about race, but to exploit our hysteria about racism to ascribe views or characteristics to those who they wish to demonise.

6. Then there is the most dangerous bunch of all - the self-loathers. These people combine all the worst characteristics of groups 4 and 5 with a baffling self-hatred. They're part of whatever group they've decided they hate - which means they're probably white, or in some way part of 'the establishment' or 'the Western world' or a mix of them all. They'll support any minority against the majority group that they hate so much, and as a result they'll think of themselves as champions of the downtrodden. But these are certainly not the principled members of group 3. There's is not a principled stand against racism, but the choosing of sides (again, a confusingly racist thing to be doing). Sometimes it may look like this group is helping to fight genuine racism, but they're not tackling prejudice, they're just trying to tip the scales in favour of their chosen side. They don't hate oppression, they don't hate unfair discrimination, they hate the majority. These people are adept at deception (including self-deception) and could be more dangerous than group 2. Who are these people? Isn't it obvious? These are the UAF.

Where does the EDL fit into all of this?

Nowhere - because the EDL isn't about race, and never has been.




Presumably most of us are in group 1, with a few from group 3. But these are far from catchy titles. I'm quite happy with 'genuine racists' for group 2, and 'self-loathers' for group 6. Any ideas for the others?
(All about me: http://s1.zetaboards.com/EDL_The_Forum/topic/3771350/)

My YouTube channel
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Heathen
Member Avatar
Member
Input!

Letter from Germany
08.03.10: The distinguished writer Henryk M. Broder is perhaps Germany’s most eloquent critic of the Islamization of Europe. His most recent books are Hurra,wir kapitulieren (2006) and Kritik der reinen Toleranz (2008); he blogs at achgut.de and contributes regularly to Der Spiegel. In this essay Broder explores the mentality of his fellow Western authors and intellectuals who have chosen to appease Islam.

http://www.rights.no/publisher/publisher.asp?id=59&tekstid=3368

As well as a number of other well written articles at the HRS
http://www.rights.no/publisher/publisher.asp?id=59&type=artikkel&side=1
Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil – Thomas Mann

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil.... is for good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke

All political parties must be held responsible, and that takes a strong grassroot movement! - Tim Phillips
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
This Is England
No Avatar

Racism is just an ugly word.
Its probably the most exploited / mis-quoted / inappropriately used word in history.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

I don't think of racism as 'you are' Or ' you arnt' but as a spectrum. We've all made jokes, had racist thoughts and I don't think many of us are ashamed of it but in the scale of 1 to 10 I would concider myself a 2. Racism is usualy used in today's society as a way to keep people like us quiet without really understanding who we are and what we do. It's a way to dismiss our argument before we have even started. Race shouldnt even matter in today's society as were all British FFS.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
pyrus
Member Avatar
Patriot
Heathen
Apr 15 2010, 12:06 AM
great article, thanks

definitely got the 'self-loathers' covered there

unwanted, unneeded, 'guardians'!
(All about me: http://s1.zetaboards.com/EDL_The_Forum/topic/3771350/)

My YouTube channel
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

I think group 2. are "racial supremacists".

Group 1 might be described as "racial agnostics" or "racial pragmatists". By that I mean that they accept that people are going to classify others based on how they look, but that those appearances don't necessarily indicate any value-ranking of one 'racial group' over another. Nevertheless, they don't want to reject the classifications outright, and they might have times when they want to re-inforce it (as in your casting example).

There is another group that is missing: those who think that the concept of race is stupid and is not a sound basis for any kind of explanation or action. I think this would be a very small group though (maybe I'm the only member of this group). The odd thing is that most "anti-racists" who object to discrimination, actually want to hold on to the idea that "the races" are different, and that somehow there is genuine meaning in the categorization ("equal but different").

There is an documentary from a German TV company on the muslim trade in african slaves: http://vimeo.com/10374645 There is an african scholar in that who says that the reason why africans don't want to admit that muslims were the mainstay of that slave trade was because they get too much money out of making the white people feel guilty. It might be quite interesting for you.

Incidentally I have had chinese friends who have told me in all honesty that they have trouble remembering if they've met some white person before, because they all look the same :)
Quote Post Goto Top
 
pyrus
Member Avatar
Patriot
thanks for your comments :)

I intended group 2 to include 'racial supremacists', but also those people who particularly dislike one race of people. The sort of people who think that we might use the term 'black crime' to refer to crimes that are committed not simply 'by black people', but also BECAUSE these people are black. It's possible to scapegoat one group of people, or attribute negative characteristics to a race of people, without any corresponding sense of supremacism. Will work on the distinction.

I wanted group 1 to include all people capable of having a sensible discussion about race (whether it happens to be something that particularly interests them or not). I'm struggling to understand exactly what you mean by 'the concept of race is stupid'. Some of the ideas that people have about race may be stupid, but it's a perfectly sensible thing to have recognised that there are differences between different peoples. Race is a sensible concept - it's what you do with it that matters.

onto the film!..

...brilliant - really interesting ideas about Africa's development, and I think the account of how black and white people reacted differently to the professor's lecture is really telling

thanks again
Edited by pyrus, Apr 17 2010, 10:10 PM.
(All about me: http://s1.zetaboards.com/EDL_The_Forum/topic/3771350/)

My YouTube channel
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Blah, racism gets thrown around a lot. No-one is better than someone else just because they have a different colour skin though.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · EDL Chat · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Feliz Navidad (Gold) created by Sarah & Delirium of the ZNR