Where do you think the United States of America sits on this pyramid?

I think we’re at the “call for violence” stage. Also this is the trump/HitlerNazi/Putin/Kim/Napoleon formula for world war.

A Project of the Leadership Institute
Course uses 'Pyramid of White Supremacy' to teach diversity

Kassy Dillon

Staff Writer & Talent, The Daily Wire
@kassydillon




Jan 17, 2018



A course at Salisbury University in Maryland is using a “Pyramid of White Supremacy” to help teach students about diversity and “cultural competence.”
“Avoiding confrontation with racist family members” and “remaining apolitical” make up the base, which is deemed critical for more egregious things like mass killings and genocide.

A course at Salisbury University in Maryland is using a “Pyramid of White Supremacy” to help teach students about diversity and “cultural competence.”

The one-credit course, “Diversity and the Self,” is a required class for any student hoping to obtain an elementary education major.

"This class was extremely difficult to get through if you did not think like a liberal. Instead of teaching diversity, this class taught us that being white was a bad thing."

The pyramid ranks various concepts on different levels according to severity, with “Indifference” forming the base of the pyramid and “Genocide” residing at the top.

“In a pyramid, every brick depends upon the one below it for support,” an accompanying caption explains. “If the bricks at the bottom are removed, the whole structure comes tumbling down.”


Things like “avoiding confrontation with racist family members,” “remaining apolitical,” or saying “politics doesn’t affect me” make up the base of the Pyramid of White Supremacy, directly underneath forms of “minimization” such as “denial of white privilege” and “not believing experiences of POC [people of color].”

The next level up is “veiled racism,” which the graphic defines to include “cultural appropriation” and a “Euro-centric curriculum.”

Worse still, according to the pyramid, are “anti-immigration policies,” “stop and frisk” policing strategies, and “funding schools locally,” all of which fall under the category of “discrimination.”

Above that the pyramid lists “calls for violence” such as “swastikas,” “Confederate flags,” and “the n-word,” followed by actual acts of violence like “unjust police shootings,” “lynching,” and all other hate crimes.

“We had to study the pyramid and also take a group quiz,” a student in the class who wishes to remain anonymous told Campus Reform, noting that the placement of certain elements on the pyramid raised eyebrows.

“I find it ridiculous that ‘unjust police shootings’ is at the top of the list next to mass murder and genocide,” the student remarked. “The pyramid was not only biased, the way they ranked the events did not make much sense.”

According to the syllabus, the course “reviews theories and aspects of cultural competence most relevant to teaching in diverse classrooms,” and “explores the ideals of freedom, democracy, justice, equality, equity, and human dignity from the perspective of the individual.”

[RELATED: Prof creates checklist for detecting white supremacy]

“This class was extremely difficult to get through if you did not think like a liberal. Instead of teaching diversity, this class taught us that being white was a bad thing,” the student complained. “We were told that we were only privileged because we are white and basically we did not actually work for what we have.”

Erin Stutelberg, the professor teaching the course, practices what she preaches outside of the classroom, as well. On her Facebook page, her display photo is a picture of her with a sign saying: “White Silence = Violence.”

Campus Reform reached out to Stutelberg for comment, but has not received a response.

Follow the author of this article on Twitter: @kassydillon
Will you help expose liberal bias on America's campuses?


Campus Reform exposes the liberal bias and abuse against conservatives on America’s colleges and universities.

As a Campus Reform reader, you know about the abuse taking place at our nation’s higher education institutions, and you know how important it is to bring these stories to light.

College campuses are no longer bastions of higher learning. Leftist professors indoctrinate students with their agendas. They even silence conservative students with their attempts to suppress free speech.

Campus Reform depends on the financial support of concerned Americans like you to report on leftist indoctrination on college campuses and uncover the blatant misconduct of university administrators, faculty, and students.

In other words. The class is hard to get through for trump following sheep.

Based on Trumps words the other day in Brietbart, we are at the Calls for Violence..

The President sets the tone. He's supposed to be a leader,, so if that's the truth, even in this case, yup, calls for violence is where we are.

I am not sure how this type of thinking helps people come together. In fact, I think it only helps to widen the divide.

I am going to try to converse about this. I will make no intentional jabs. I am making a good faith effort to present any questions as legitimate and not setups for “gotcha” type moments, though admittedly there may not be a very good answer for some of them.

For now, put aside my own personal feelings towards the diagram. If I were to disagree with some part of the pyramid – how am I expected to express my dissent without being disregarded or labeled as an enemy ? The lowest levels of the pyramid seem to want to take a sensitive subject and make it a binary argument; the “you’re either with us or against us” mentality.

Next, I did some background reading on this pyramid after I saw it posted. Thank you to fishtheice for posting an article on it. My personal opinion is that a link providing context and background in the initial post would have been helpful. My perception is that including the pyramid alone would tend to invite hostility rather than promote discussion and debate, so I agree with Versatile on this point. This will likely further a divide, on both sides, instead of reconciling it. Then again, this is a political topic and based on historical data, civil discussion and reconciliation was a longshot to begin with. To play devil’s advocate, I can also foresee how the article would not change this outcome for many reasons (source bias, reader bias, not reading it, etc).

I want to make it clear this is not me calling you out here. I am merely giving you feedback on my reaction. I do not know what your intent was and I am not asking you to reveal it. Bluntness and shock are often good tools; I recognize that might have been the intended effect. I guess it comes back to what the goal of the pyramid itself is. I leave that open and unanswered for now instead of labelling it immediately.

I will say that I do see some logic in the argument the pyramid is portraying. I can see how being indifferent and therefore being on the “against” side can support those who are truly on Team Against Diversity. I know that silence can often be perceived as agreement, and rightly so in many cases. I understand how avoiding conflict and being apolitical can lead to terrible atrocities. I understand the insidious nature of how viewpoints, feelings, and reactions can progress and escalate rather quickly.

However, in the most general of terms, I find the argument that being complacent or indifferent is equivalent to being complicit to be flawed. Just because a person makes the claim that indifference equals complicity does not mean it is true in every context it is applied to. Not every question requires an opinion or a yes/no answer. Not every argument necessitates taking an all-or-nothing-make-no-compromises position. Some are; many are not. To be clear, I am not attempting to define or imply a definition of where racial relations and diversity should be categorized with my prior statements.

No matter what your motivations were, you made me think about this a good deal.

The US pretty much covers the full pyramid if you count mass shootings as mass killings. Everything else happens on a frequency of hierarchy. The higher up the list you go the less frequent or accepted it is, but it still exist.

This is as stupid as that hockey stick graph.

I'm not sure how continually taking people to task over Hue Jackson and Sashi Brown helps a fan base come together. In fact, I think it only splits our fan base up further.

I'd like to hear you expand upon this.

I agree, for the record.

Let's villify an abstract group of people for villifying an abstract group of people. Makes sense, or not. Let's stop trying to label people as members of often stereotyped groups. Our inherent desire to simplify things leads to "this or that"/"black or white" forces/groups inherently in opposition rather than one big group with individuals all along a spectrum.

Of course it has to be a "Pyramid of White Supremacy." It can't be a Pyramid of Racial Conflict or something that didn't paint the "opposing" side in a negative light. As long as people insist on there being "sides", there will be conflict.

It's like people think of themselves as their skin color, which is ridiculous if you stop to think about it. It's often I'm black/white with I'm a person/human being secondary. Identities can be tied way too much into that skin color when it'd make a lot more sense if people thought of themselves as people who happened to be of whatever skin color. You can't choose your skin color, but you can choose what kind of person you are.

Good!



Critical dialogue is needed. People claiming "I can't deal with this because it puts me in an awkward spot due to my own beliefs" or "I want a safe space that won't challenge my whiteness" never goes well.



Sometimes you have to call a spade a spade.



Any act of civil disobedience against the larger culture always gets labeled with "don't do it this way! Give me a safe space away from your criticism and actions.







Yup. Look up MLK's quote on "the white moderate".



Action means more than anything. Some actions are loud and other are silent.



Indifference basically remains willful ignorance. I'd hate for anyone to remain indifferent on white supremacy.



Good. I can't change minds, so I go in to get people to think. I accomplished my job, and you experienced some cognitive dissonance.

Thank you for taking the time to reply. These are the kind of posts we've truly missed since the old board closed. These are the type of posts I miss from the days when we could actually discuss controversial topics.

We have large swaths of individuals identifying themselves as white supremacists and white nationalists. This pyramid only uses labels people already assign to themselves. If you have a problem with the word white being used, please raise your criticism with these groups.




Not really, actually. Color, creed, heritage, etc. all makes up who we are in our identity. We should celebrate our differences, and recognize the uniqueness of everyone.

This is close to the "I don't see color" argument, and this argument seeks to remove agency from individuals that aren't white.

I know this is a very simplistic approach to all of this, however.

It seems to me sitting back and saying nothing is very much like watching your neighbors house being broken into and refusing to call the cops because you don't want to get involved.

Your neighbor pays the price, the wrong doer goes on to repeat this another day and you did nothing to help any of it.

You summed up Dr. King, Pit.

I will say that I think he used a pretty big generalization when using the term "white moderate". I'm very much a moderate in the way my politics leans. However, I'm not moderate in my belief that all Americans should be treated the same. That one race shouldn't be labeled as a problem or be targeted in sentencing for the same crimes. So I am certainly one who considers himself more liberal on social issues and in standing up for our nations people of all races and religions. But overall a moderate.

So while I certainly understand the message he was trying to convey, often times you don't actually reach the people you could otherwise reach had you worded things differently.

So if you were born to parents who were White Neo-Nazis, it would be okay for you to be a white Neo-Nazi?

That is effectively the logic of your argument. Sounds silly, right? It's obviously not your argument, but it follows the pattern you laid out.

I agree that we should celebrate our differences and the uniqueness of everyone. I don't think skin color or who your parents were should be seen as the basis of who a person is.

People should be judged by their actions, not where they came from. Just because your parents did something, doesn't mean you should.

Color, creed, heritage being such a part of our identities is part of the problem. Where you are going should be more important than where you came from. Why let things outside of your control define you? Why do we do this to ourselves?

This outlook sets us up for conflict based upon things we and others can't help. You're setting people at odds just due to the fact that they were born to different people by relying (or allowing) on color and heritage to largely define a person.

I can see color and appreciate the difference without it having to have any more meaning than that. Really, that is all it is, a different color. Now if a person embraces the stereotypes/heritage associated with a group, that is a choice. There is nothing inherently bad with embracing a heritage, but just the fact that it is "heritage" doesn't make something good/acceptable, either.

Not seeing color doesn't take anyone's agency. Seeing color and making assumptions based upon them and allowing that to affect you does. Claiming not to see color while taking someone's agency can/does happen, but it doesn't invalidate the concept that color shouldn't be a factor in decision making unless one is talking decorating.

I'm not sure where I said it's okay to celebrate being a neo-nazi, but nice try.

Obviously we should celebrate the positive aspects that uplift individuals.
------------------------
The rest of your post addresses the same long-winded argument about colorblindness, and we disagree on this.

I would have to say that using terms such as African American, Hispanic America and phrases that use any location or nationality ahead of the word American does more to divide us than to unite us.

I'll just agree with the celebration of positive aspects, and bow out of the politics forum.

My use of hyperbole in an attempt to illustrate a point was in poor taste, moreso when taken out of context.

Several months back, the NY Times Magazine did a feature piece titled: "U.S. Law Enforcement Failed to See the Threat of White Nationalism. Now They Don’t Know How to Stop It."

Worthy read....

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/03/magazine/FBI-charlottesville-white-nationalism-far-right.html

Watch out, you'll get called out for hijacking your own thread.

MLK is definitely using the term as far as social issues are concerned. while he certainly had his views when it came to economics, which is what you're hinting at when you talk about being a moderate, he's talking about a specific aspect.

what he was saying is pretty straight forward. so i disagree with your point about wording something differently. what he was saying is straight to the point, and people needing a different 'word' will be just another excuse to dismiss the point entirely.

if you can understand what he's saying, i dont see why others need an excuse for why they don't understand it.

this is going to be a long post, but people want real talk and not trolling so deal with it.

so to address the chart:

i'm going to attempt to tread carefully here, because there's been some really good responses, and i dont want to derail the thread.

obviously im not white (not completely as you all know lol), so all i can do is speak to the chart from my own perspective as a minority. i have to put a **disclaimer* out there and state that ill be using some of my military experience in, cause i know certain people love to complain that i talk about that aspect of my life, but its relevant in this topic. so Rocket, i'll break down block by block and i hope i can get some decent responses.

Indifference:

This right here tends to be the bulk of....well everyone. white black latino etc. but since we're specifically talking about white supremacy in this thread, this tends to be a problem that goes back to post slavery days. this is the very vague base of the tribalism issue in this country. and its hard not to fault white americans for not caring so much about racism, because minorities are by definition, a minority. so unless it directly effects the majority in a negative way, a lot of white americans simply change the channel or do something else when the topics of racism pops up.

now, to pit's point which i just disagreed with, you could swap out the word 'indifference' out with 'complacency', but it doesn't matter.

Minimisation

This is the part of the chart where stuff starts hitting the fan, and tends to be the bulk of the divide. previously, i have defined white privilege as the ability of white americans to judge minority groups as a whole, while simultaneously DEMANDING that they be judged as an individual.

and that pretty much sums up that block of the chart. this causes the most divide in the country.

example: when white americans were literally rioting in the streets, damaging property and setting fire to vehicles over ohio state winning a national title, the media and white americans labeled it as "they were just taking the celebration too far". when black americans starting rioting over REAL issues over civil rights and police shootings, we instantly got labeled thugs, savages, go back to africa, etc etc.

another example: a white CIA agent's daughter got busted running a drug ring, and when the mug shot dropped, the media and white america started call her cute and adorable and everything like that. when black americans get arrested for selling drugs, we get called thugs and animals and we need to be put behind bars for life.

we're constantly told our experiences aren't real, or overblown. but when white americans go through adversity, they demand that their situation be taken with the up most seriousness.

like the opioid crisis. you see, white america had no problem throwing every black and latino drug user/dealer in jail during the 70's/80's/90's, while going through a very bad drug epidemic. but now that white americans are going through their own drug epidemic, all of a sudden we all need to "rally together", and now talks of funding rehab and all these others things must be taken seriously, and swiftly.

see, when its blacks or latinos, its just their problem. when its white americans? now its all of our problem, and now we need unity. funny how that works.

Veiled Racism:

This part is why we have such a big problem with the bottom 2 blocks. Fox news, Brietbart, the daily caller, and other publications like this push these narratives to no end. we have posters right here on the board who do it non stop. ya know, the guys who think if you argue with the cops, that should automatically equal a death sentence. the "i feared for my life" kinda people. Tucker Carlson is especially bad at this, from his "white genocide" segments, to his anti multi-culturism hot takes. he isn't close to being the only one, but he's the most readily available example of it.

the people who dwell into the veiled racism are the kind of people who love preaching about their european heritage....but won't actually move back there because they know their bigoted asses aren't welcomed. these are the kinds of people who whine about black history month, HBCU's, and BET because somehow, they skipped history class, and all the other colleges/networks that are dominated by white people are magically being discriminated against. ok.

basically, the "i have a black friend" kinda people.

Discrimination:

imma leave this block alone, and just remind the board that we had a poster who once stated on the boards that he was scared to go to time square because it was filled with brown people.

i think that pretty much covers it.

Calls for Violence:

This is an interesting one, especially since you can't really just come out and opening call for it. Trump is a perfect example, even though he's more or less been open about it. but the rhetoric is there. ya know, the "eventually people will get tired of", "we don't like demographic changes", and along those lines.

the call for violence is becoming less and less, and thats because of the style of movements we're dealing with today. years ago, a lot of the leaders in these movements knew that there was no way you can walk around like jackbooted thugs, because everybody could spot you and tell who you are.

so now klan members, neo nazi's, and white nationalist do the very thing i've seen muslim extremist do in every one of my 4 deployments: blend in amongst the population, and sow in the ideology methodically. i often wondered when i was deployed about how in god's name can these terrorist plant IED's in crowded areas/villages. yea, there's SOME people providing cover, but often? a lot of the civilians don't even know they're doing it. because they look just like every. other. person.

and the same technique is used right here in America.

"bob can't be racist!! i known him all my life!!". yea, except you don't go home with him at night. so you didn't see that he was spreading racist memes, visiting stormfront, and whining about immigrants and blacks online using a fake profile. you see, most supremacist have replaced the direct violence with the veiled racism. how? they're our lawyers, judges, cops, teachers etc. why? because its easier to spread the ideology when you simply look like a normal guy who just got fed up with the "PC crowd". it easier to get a movement going, or to join one and help spread the word.

yea, its that subtle. thats one of the many techniques muslim terrorist use to recruit in the middle east. and all it takes is an incident here or there to sway some folks.

"omg, did you see what that black person did?"

"hey, you think that brown person is here legally?"

"oh look, another us drone bombed a place and killed civilians. whats wrong with these americans? something must be done..."

thats all it takes. people are completely unaware with how easy it is to start a movement. to slowly change policies. to turn one group against another.

Violence:

this one is straight forward. its slightly on the rise, but most people are still scared to confront somebody face to face, especially solo dolo. i'm hesitant to agree with police brutality being there because it is a complex aspect of what we're talking about.

Mass murder:

this is a fact. we all know what race is responsible for the majority of mass killings, especially with regards to america. and i hate to say race, because its not white women doing it, its white men.

most acts of violence deal with men, in general. so maybe thats something that should also be in discussion: the gender aspect.

anyway, i know that was long but i tried to be as thorough as possible.

I hope people actually take you seriously with your post and viewpoint.

Thank you for the reply.

Donald Trump Jr. is defending Chelsea Clinton after the former first daughter was blasted by NYU students who blamed her tweet for the New Zealand mosque attacks.

“It’s sickening to see people blame @ChelseaClinton for the NZ attacks because she spoke out against anti-Semitism,” Trump tweeted Saturday. “We should all be condemning anti-Semitism & all forms of hate. Chelsea should be praised for speaking up. Anyone who doesn’t understand this is part of the problem.”
-Donald Trump Jr.

What are your thoughts on the white supremacy pyramid, 40?

I think you meant to start a new thread. Should I point you to the link for the new thread button?

After your history of posting BS threads, I won't even look at it. Zero Credibility.

this post falls under the "minimisation" block.

Maybe some other time. jfan is involved in this thread and he just loves to get others to gang up on me. I'm not interested.

Also, Rocket did not take the time to even consider my point and just threw out some absurd analogy.

Maybe we can talk about it in a PM where folks are in such a rush to criticize those of us who want all folks to come together instead of labeling others and practicing tribalism.

I disagree with you regularly because you take the Aaron Burr position, or you get angry when people don't wholly agree with your opinion.





Merriam-Webster defines absurd as

Source

I mean I could go back and get receipts for all the times you've gone off with tangents about how everyone else is wrong about football and you're right, but I'm not sure Purp has enough characters allotted per post for me to provide those receipts.

Also analogy is

Link

Guess what, it's related but I guess...

Think about your last post and your very first post.

I'll leave the thread, Rocket. Have a nice evening.

I'm not sure where my last post makes me fall anywhere on the white supremacy pyramid. Can you enlighten me?

Like I've got that kind of influence around here. Only one of us tries to dominate interactions and tells people what and where to post...and it ain't me.

You're just a dirty conservative who clings to his guns too much.

You've got me all figured out just like someone else in this thread does!

Good stuff. I do appreciate your reply as well. I read this forum a decent amount and it’s nice to see good discussion taking place.

My final point I want to make on the topic is that I would caution against counting the indifferent among those who are opposed.

I will share some additional insights I have gained from reading your reply and the rest of the thread.




My initial worry was that this created two sides with little or no room for discussion so I appreciate your response.




As much as I would like to argue that another avenue might be more effective, in all likelihood the outcome would likely remain in the same realm as the one chosen. In the same vein, some methods of communication will completely turn me off to the message (in general, not specific to this topic).

Presently I am at a loss for how can we ultimately bring people together to discuss after getting their attention. I guess at the end of the day it’s near impossible to win. It might also be impossible to not alienate/divide no matter what you do, at least initially.

Considering these points, I guess a person needs to do what he or she feels is right so long as it does not harm others in the process. I’ll add I feel it’s important to listen to feedback along the way.



Excellent quote in general and the perfect one here. MLK’s words on how he found the indifferent (“shallow understanding….”) to be more frustrating than those flat out opposed (“absolute understanding…”) had me intrigued. I can see his point of view here.

I am torn on whether the indifferent audience today will be more willing to listen vs 50 years ago. Considering some of my prior comments, I am going to say that it is no easier today than it was during the 1960s.




Agreed. Action is most important and takes many forms.



I will admit that after having read through the rest of the thread I find that I initially misunderstood the chart title – I mistook white supremacists for simply whites. It does not appear I was alone in this regard. That being said, one can simply be white (and not a white supremacist) and empower the white supremacy, so my misunderstanding does not really impact any of my thoughts thus far.



I think we share a similar approach. As I said initially, I really do appreciate your response. I hope that I can continue to learn through future conversation with you and others. My posts may not always be this in depth - you caught me on a good day

You don't want to comment of the thread topic because you say it's BS, yet you came in to post unrelated Trump crap in an effort to distract and derail the subject. You're obviously uncomfortable with this subject matter... Why?

I don't think the United States sits anywhere on that pyramid.

I believe there are some PEOPLE who may sit in different places on that pyramid, but your once again trying to lump everybody into one group (just like those in the south did against people of color during the days where way to many folks looked down their noses at people of color)

As I have said so many times before. Unless or until we look at people for the color of their blood and not the color of their skin we are adding to the problem not helping to eliminate the problem.

As if any of the trump sheep care about coming together. Isn’t it obvious that trumps agenda is to separate America by race and class? You’re either with him all in, or you’re his enemy. He’s set the table. What side are you all going to sit on?

Do you assume that anyone who disagrees with a liberal stance is a Trump sheep?

Nope. I’ve never said that and never meant to imply that.

The GOP sheep on Capitol Hill who are jumping of the cliff which trump, and fox propaganda who have turned a very small percentage of Americans and a couple of my family members into a-holes. They’re all the sheep.

On the upside to all of this chaos ... environmental issues and gun control have a open door now. Enjoy.

I learned a long time ago to be suspect of Pyramid Schemes and Rocket's threads.

Well, sonny, I find it absolutely FASCINATING to read your comments on Agenda Man's tactics and behavior, with apparently no sense of irony whatsoever on your part.

The exaggerated claims of being persecuted, attacked, and ganged up on?

The over-reliance on victimization by nearly non-existent boogeymen?

Reports of violence offered in defense of the cause?

Demonization and denunciation of others as a smokescreen to cover up individual failings?

Also, an active campaign by those in power to avoid discussion of these specific issues?

You see no parallels, here, at all?

You can strip out the racial overtones and replace it with a different flavor...

Religious, ethnicity, race, they all work equally well, and can wind up in the same place.

Genocide....

The only alternative is not to engage in the behavior of hate based on difference.

It is what I try to do and suggest to others... it is a learned behavior that needs to be unlearned.

j/c

People who are not looking for a message won't find it. Those looking for a message can see it plain as day.....

“We are determined to take our country back,” Duke said from the rally, calling it a “turning point.” “We are going to fulfill the promises of Donald Trump. That’s what we believed in. That’s why we voted for Donald Trump, because he said he’s going to take our country back.” - David Duke

Nelson, are you a white nationalist or white supremacist?

Duke's idea of taking America back is completely different from the idea of 99 percent of Trump's supporters and to suggest otherwise is shameful bigotry on your part.

-Securing our Borders
-Job Creation for all
-Fair Trade Deals with other Nations
-Curbing Abortion
-Ending Political Correctness and promoting Free Speech
-Putting Government back in the hands of the People

These are some of the things the 99 percent voted for.

Step by Step by Step they are getting done.

That is just pouring gasoline onto a fire, and you should think about what you say.

First, Pit, your comments involving a man who represents a fraction of a percentage point of American population, your contention that he somehow in your warped version of reality, speaks for all or any significant fraction of white americans, are repugnant and despicable. Blatant ignorant pandering.

Now, sonny, I will explain how this works. You don't answer my questions, I don't answer yours. However, you answer mine, and I Will answer yours. Ask Swish, though he forgot what question he actually asked.

Do you, or do you not, see a strong correlation between your comments on a particular poster's statements and tactics, and the general theme of your pyramid, as I pointed out?

Why do you keep bringing me up in your useless nonsense? I didn’t say one word to you in this thread until now.

It looks like he falls under indifference and minimization.

I brought you up, Swish, because I made you the same deal, and I honored it. You have, as I said, misquoted the question that I actually answered, but I insisted on your answer, and gave mine afterwards. If you don't want your existence referenced, you are free to cease it.

Now sonny boy is obviously afraid to even consider the concept contained in my question.

It's Ok, conquer your fear and embrace rational thought over emotional outburst. You may continue with your false accusations and baseless insinuations if you have nothing else to offer, but you should really, at least occasionally, make the effort.

Maybe if you stopped with silly name-calling I'd engage, but till then...nope.

I wonder if he will actually break down the chart in his own words, instead of just responding to others.

Or we could get another descriptive take on the benefits of turkey basters.

Or an ice cream cone.

You might as well ask for a critique of the physics involved in Mary Poppins. It is a pointless endeavor.

Now, analyzing why you will not confront the evidence that your boogeyman does not exist, in anywhere near the numbers you insist it does, is much more illuminating.

Did you feel like a White Savior, or just an ordinary savior, when you campaigned to change the name of a mountain, on a map? Anybody, perhaps a Native American, ever tell you that neither mountains nor they themselves, need maps?

The building you teach in, is it made of animal hides, or wood and plastic and metal? Electric lights? Printed books? Computers?

For all your preaching about preserving cultures, you are an implement of it's destruction.

so you still wont do a break down?

lame. nobody cares what you have to say until you actually address the topic.

So now you speak for everyone? Pfft.

I care to hear what he has to say as he is both intelligent and interesting.

So are you lying or spewing?

I've stayed away from this topic because there is zero chance of intelligent debate on such an issue.

I will say that Trump certainly encourages and enables the crazies on the extremes - it's why the NZ shooter referenced Trump ... it's why the crazy coast guard guy had a kill list of all the people Trump despises and attacks ... It's black and white in my opinion and I'm equally certain that the stooges who parrot whatever Trump says will deny it. . . . I guess my question for any historians among us - has there EVER been a time when the crazies on the fringes have so frequently named the POTUS as a source of verification or reference to further their hate filled agendas?

As for as the Pyramid of White Supremacy - I don't know. The quote from MLK was powerful and remarkable.

I do know that White Privilege is 100% real. Take any study of different ethnic groups in the USA - take a sample of the population with equal education, qualifications, background, parenting, social-economic background .... and among that group - the white's will always come out ahead. Whether you examine the low end of the spectrum and look at crimes they commit and the time they spend in jail etc - through the middle class - through to the elite. Again - I am sure those that don't want to accept this won't = and others will accept it is simply a reality.

Are we talking about our self proclaimed genius? Did someone finally draw him a picture to help him with Quick Reply.

Coming from somebody who also refuses to address the actual chart, you’re just as worthless.

So are you going to bring some intelligent debate to this forum?

Waiting.

Not a chart, a rocket pyramid scheme.

I will say that Trump certainly encourages and enables the crazies on the extremes - it's why the NZ shooter referenced Trump ... it's why the crazy coast guard guy had a kill list of all the people Trump despises and attacks ... It's black and white in my opinion and I'm equally certain that the stooges who parrot whatever Trump says will deny it. . . . I guess my question for any historians among us - has there EVER been a time when the crazies on the fringes have so frequently named the POTUS as a source of verification or reference to further their hate filled agendas?

As for as the Pyramid of White Supremacy - I don't know. The quote from MLK was powerful and remarkable.

I do know that White Privilege is 100% real. Take any study of different ethnic groups in the USA - take a sample of the population with equal education, qualifications, background, parenting, social-economic background .... and among that group - the white's will always come out ahead. Whether you examine the low end of the spectrum and look at crimes they commit and the time they spend in jail etc - through the middle class - through to the elite. Again - I am sure those that don't want to accept this won't = and others will accept it is simply a reality.

....... It's ok - I've already got you pegged for head in sand denier.

Still waiting...

https://www.tolerance.org/magazine/fall-2018/what-is-white-privilege-really


I know it's a lot of words - and you might find it uncomfortable. Go on, educate yourself.

Let me give you a hint about intelligence.

It is not about blaming the major storms that hit America on Trump.
It is not about focusing on the shoes worn by the first lady.
It is not about a crazed lunatic dropping Trumps name.
It is not about crying over Trump tossing paper towels when hundreds are dead in PR.
It is not about blaming Trump for the Hate in this country while you constantly spew Hate.
It is not about blaming Trump for every ill that happens on the planet.
It is not about calling Trump a racist when he has done more for minorities than the minority president who served before him.

Those things are not intelligent, they are signs of emotional problems.

Try avoiding the insanity and focusing on Economics, Jobs, National Security, Prison Reform, Trade, Law and Order.
You know, intelligent, adult things that are real world concerns.

So you are going to be indifferent to his feelings and minimize his complaints because he isn't doing what you want him to do? Where does that put you on the pyramid? Just saying.

Seriously, I might, too. The "sonny" bit is uncalled for.

Still I think putting the name of group in a title of a chart like that is a bad idea even if (especially if) people self identify as belonging to said group. It still seems hypocritical as it basically stereotypes the group. While the things on the chart CAN be true, they aren't necessarily true and can lead to radicalizing people on the fence as they feel like they are personally, purposefully being attacked/misrepresented/stereotyped. Sort of a "if I'm going to be judged as this anyway, why try to be better?" kind of deal.

Maybe if you weren’t banned so much, maybe you would’ve actually learned what I do where I serve. You know nothing about me. Please prove with empirical evidence how I support white supremacy. Please provide receipts where I enact and use white supremacist views.

You and 40 should go light some more lamps. You truly rock as gaslighters.

I think it’s pretty easy to show and tell through actions if you support white supremacy/white nationalism.

Kind of like it’s easy enough to say and show if you like eating apples. You either do or don’t.

Go troll somewhere else.

Seriously? That's the comparison you're going with? After earlier talking about the complexity of identity?

According to the pyramid, if the militant arm of the Black Panthers and the militant arm of the KKK are having a shoot out in the street and I avoid the confrontation, I'm a white supremacist.

If a black man avoided the confrontation, would he be a white supremacist? Or a black supremacist for that matter?

Over-generalizations just seem to be a common pitfall to me. It's the way we've been conditioned to think. It's not a good thing. It leads to us vs. them dichotomies in practically every situation. The whole "if you're not with us, you're against us" resonates, but that doesn't make it true. Confrontation inevitably follows.

that makes no sense whatsoever.

It really is a straightforward thing to just give thoughts on the chart, or the situation, in general.

But when somebody continuously dodges and responds to responses with the purpose of not addressing the actual topic, it leaves one open to criticism.

Your second paragraph implies that people either don’t want to be better, or won’t even acknowledge that they CAN become better. I dunno if you read my breakdown, but I went block for block addressing it. I disagree with this notion that it’s a stereotype, especially if you already know you don’t fall under certain categories.

To me, it’s hypocritical that the same people who who don’t want to be stereotyped are the same ones who group minority groups together repeatedly. Ya know, my definition of what white privileged is that I posted in my breakdown.

You’re sentence of “why try to be better” is understood, but I still disagree with it. Apply that to any situation and it falls apart quickly.

“If people think imma racist, why bother convincing them I’m not?”

“Since people think I’m a child molester anyway, might as well keep doing it”

“People think I’m smelly, so why bother taking showers?”

Sounds good until it’s actually applied to something. Then it falls apart quickly. But hey, that’s just me. People can certainly have their opinions about me, but I simply won’t let narratives fly that aren’t true. You’re atleast gonna have your opinion of me based on correct information. Not false ones.

Makes no since that you have beef with the title of the chart. You either identify with supremacy or you don’t. But the chart explains the methodical path of complacency that leads to those groups feeling empowered.

Grimm brown isn’t racist. But if Grimm keeps making up excuses for white supremacy and nationalist, and plays the “what about game” just like them, I dunno what Grimm expects people to view him as.

I’m not accusing you of any of that, by the way. Just using an example. Complacency can and has led to complicity.

Before the holocaust in Germany, they had years of blameing everything on the Jews.

This country is beginning to blame everything on whites.

I'll agree to disagree. It may make no sense from your perspective/experience. But, people are all different, even within artificially imposed "groups." I'm also not sure what exactly you are referring to/which part.



I'll agree with you here. But both sides of the "argument" are guilty of it.



I'm not sure which 2nd paragraph you came away with that from. The entire pyramid basically says white supremacists do x, y, and z. How is that not stereotyping?



There is some hypocrisy in that, but then there is also some hypocrisy when minorities place themselves in those same groups. The drive to put things in groups unnecessarily is an issue all around.

As far as the silliness of the why try? argument, proving/disproving the things you listed are easy. However, when it comes to a version of white supremacy where doing nothing makes you a member, it's rather difficult to disprove a negative.




I haven't made any excuses. Being racist is abhorrent. At the same time, it's not a one way street. The title of the pyramid focuses on a single group for a topic that many other groups' names could also be used and apply equally. So, why not use a more general term and focus on the bad acts instead of a specific group?

Basically, it's a clickbait title that's bound to rile a lot of people up and will probably do more to divide people than bring them together.

The pyramid itself is more or less good. The title frames it in a way that will put off the people it could help the most. That seems counterproductive to me.

You're basically arguing for a safe space that removes whites from the title so white people aren't offended.

Jewish people, the people who were a minority in Germany, were used a scapegoat to justify why Germany got a bad deal after WWI.

The United States, according to the constituion, was set up to allow oppression of certain groups of people. These are facts.

White people will never be oppressed in this country. It's impossible.

Let me get this straight....so, in order to answer your original question, we must first accept the undeniable fact that we are a white supremist nation, and only address racism committed my whites?

It's sad that that is all you come away from my post with.

I'll probably keep this up anyway ( ) because I can't help but think the world would be a better place if we could get past the groupthink/tribalism/us-them rut.

Hate the act, not anyone you think could fit in a group based upon incomplete information.

Don't worry about what group they may or may not be a part of, and look at the individual's actions, not their exterior.

Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore by their fruits you will know them.

The purpose of the pyramid is to show white supremacy is much more than just people running around wearing bedsheets, and then going to the middle of the woods to burn crosses.

This thread is a prime example to show that people want to believe racism is defeated, struggle with reconciling parts of society that contribute to institutional racism, and that a large swath of the initial founding and structures to society comes from horribly misguided white supremacist actions.

Seems to me this thread is all about another angle for a racist attack on white people by those who wish to blame all their own failings on that group.

Keep on lighting the flames. When did you start lighting gas lamps?

So, the answer is yes?

The white guilt is strong in this one, Obi-Fan.

Yet you offer no evidence of how large or how small this group of like thinkers actually are. Emboldening them certainly won't make their numbers smaller.



Unless you're over 80 years old you can't cut that crap out right now.



I'm not really interested in the entire pyramid idea. I think both sides could take measures to make race relations better.

But let's just look at what happened in New Zealand. World leaders from all over have stepped forward and called this a terrorist act. A religion other than Christians or Jews was attacked in a blatant act of terrorism. Yet Trump refuses to call it that.

If you can't see how those who would carry out such terrible acts of violence on immigrants or other religions see that, you can't be helped.

It's because you refuse to see common sense when it stares you in the face. You'll be waiting till hell freezes over before you would ever be able to do any basic math on a subject like this.

You fear actual debate so all you can do is post BS. You make this forum weaker with every touch of your keyboard.

So, I've been pondering this a bit. And a thought that has come up.

The old saying, "Don't judge a book by its cover." It's good advice. But, It's really hard to follow all the time. We live in a fast-paced era of snap judgments. Twitter hot takes are the norm. Patience is in short supply any more (unless you're a Browns fan waiting on winning seasons,but I digress.) We subconsciously try to fit people into boxes/groups we've created (or been conditioned to see) as short cuts to help get through the day. The boxes don't always fit, though, and we rarely take the time (have the patience) to really let a person's actions define them. It's also hard to over-write the initial impression that was based upon the group a person was placed in based on a snap judgment. Confirmation bias will put more weight on things that could support that initial ID and cognitive dissonance will minimize things that go against the initial impression.

You look in the mirror in the morning. What do you see? I'm a white/black/hispanic/whatever man/woman. You put yourself in that group with whatever connotation that has for you. People often let that define them. It's easy to do without even thinking about it.

Being able to put things in groups quickly is useful in many situations. However, when it comes to people it comes with many harmful side effects. I'm not sure what can be done about it. Awareness is probably a good first step.

E pluribus unum, Latin for "Out of many, one", is the motto of the United States of America.

Considering our leaky borders, maybe we should change that motto to E pluribus magis.

All are welcomed, we just ask that you be here legally.

We are a melting pot of people from around the world and it is obvious America will be a White/Hispanic Majority in the near future, which I think will be good for America's future.

Both are hard working, family oriented, religious groups and make a nice mesh. Hispanics have lead the way for years now in establishing small businesses in the US.

Yes, let's make it damned near impossible for people to come here legally and tell them they must come here legally. It's why saying, "A wall will solve the problem!" is so misleading. We need a total reform of immigration law and standards.

Putting a band aid on a bullet wound isn't going to solve the problem.

You are a moderate with 50 more years of history and progress to reflect on than the moderates he would have been talking about back then...

A moderate 50 years ago was somewhere in the range of, stop blasting the negros with fire hoses, it's ok if our kids go to school together as long as they don't date each other, we can work together as long as the white guy is the employer and the negro is the employee, and it's ok if the neighborhoods we live in aren't TOO far apart but they will be different neighborhoods..... we passively support your call for progress but aren't willing to risk our own standing in the community by getting out there to help you fight for it...

Yet I'm not one who wishes to set myself apart by using terms like African American or Hispanic American. I don't put another nation or location ahead of American. I guess I could go with I'm a Sottish, Irish, Native American, but I don't.

I think we can all do a better job of trying to unite as a nation rather than try to accentuate why we are not one as a nation and a people.

I agree with your point about my perspective being skewed based on the time in which I live.

Sottish? Isn't that a form of Squid?

Hmmmmmmmm

We're used to it. Being mostly Scotch Irish the Irish ddn't want us and the Scott's didn't want us. That's why we're here. The difference in all of that is that if you wanted us here I would be worried.

Oh! Scottish!

Got it.

TBH, if you are first or maybe second generation in this country, I can see you clinging to some of your old heritage and wanting to acknowledge it... but after that, it's time to move on. You are American.

What's this supposed to mean. I'm not all in or his enemy.

Rocket you are literally on this pyramid.

White Savior complex. lol

I don't think so at all. Just because Rocket takes a stand on these issues does not make it him being motivated for self serving reasons. But I think your post might have been self serving for purposes of deflection. Just saying.

Maybe you should learn the meaning behind the terms, else you are showing up to a battle of the wits with empty chambers in your weapon. Again, just saying.

Imagine that, the very first post of yours calling me a racist. Then calling me stupid. You're a quality poster for the alt left trolls on this board.


Battle of wits wits who, you? Nah I can formulate my own opinions and not parrot all the alt left, everyone is a bigot but me narrative. Being someones dog doesn't make you enlightened.

I never called you a racist or stupid. If you feel that impulsively, it's not on me. You are one of those guys that plays the middle against both ends. I know who you are. Your agenda is to shake the cage and see who you can rattle. <- Now that was me calling you what I think you are. And you are also acting a little like a snowflake, FYI this is not a safespace.

And THANKS for calling me a quality poster. And calling me a troll and a dog is hilarious! You upped your game. In one post you made a huge assumption and lambasted me for telling you to learn the terms before you accuse somebody of being something. Priceless.

Please you can play that game all you want. I am not mincing words with you, if you want to try and insinuate I'm a racist and that I lack wits I'm just going to ignore you and move on. I've grown weary of your garbage posting on this forum.

Well move along then. I promise you won't hurt my feelings. lol

But I seriously did not insinuate those things, you interpreted those things. Now I'm curious as to rather you will except that or not. There is no mincing or twisting going on here. Just you having an issue where there was none.

Too bad you have no clue that my master's project calls for a much larger Alaska Native voice in education.

Nice try, BpG. You struckout.

Nah, I think I hit the nail directly on its head.

j/c

From my perspective it's much more difficult for people to see and understand racism when it's not something they have to deal with on a consistent basis.

I don't feel that everyone who doesn't see it, recognize it or doesn't think it's a huge problem is a racist. They simply have trouble seeing it and understanding it because it's something they haven't had to deal with.

Let me give you an example........

Jews were just slaughtered in a Synagogue in Pittsburgh not so long ago. Fifty Muslims were just slaughtered in New Zealand.

Yet some of those that don't have to deal with these things on a personal level still insist that racism isn't a big problem.

At the same time they feel Christians are under attack in America because people say Happy Holidays. They claim they are under attack because people don't wish to give them permission to discriminate against their fellow Americans.

They really have no idea what being under attack really means. Unless of course you were a black Christian killed in a black church in Charleston by a racist named Dyllan Roof.

Yeah, racism and white extremism isn't a huge problem.

I agree 100% with this. I was one of those people who did racist crap without knowing it was racist when I was young. My hometown was roughly 10% black growing up. I had more black friends than most of the other white kids but that didn't stop me from doing stupid crap.

Most of my black friends were as close as siblings to me when we got together to play or hang out. One friend used to let me (others too) rub his head because we were fascinated by his hair. Using the 'N' word was second nature and being call honky or white boy was no big deal. Jokes about watermelon and fried chicken, or our tans, or hiding in the dark... It was all racist as hell! We or at least I didn't even know until I was a young adult because my black friends never said anything to me if it ever bothered them. I had no idea how bad it really was.

But even today, those same black friends treat me like a brother, we don't always see each other as often as we'd like but even if years pass between meetings, the feelings have never changed. Sadly though I've lost a couple to cop related shootings and seen many other ways that they have been treated as less than me or white people over the years. This awakening has in part brought me to where I'm at now.

I'd argue that racism is a bigger problem than you let on (you seem to only be looking in one direction), and white extremism (while assuredly a big problem) is rather sensationalized.

The belief that people not of a certain race can't understand racism is, itself, racist.

I'm really not trying to minimize the impact/effects of racism by white racists because it is real, but it is not a problem in isolation. Extreme acts and terrorist plots are terrible whoever commits them.

The whole "all you white people don't understand" argument only highlights their "other group-ness" and reinforces the divide.

...Honestly, I'm not sure why I bother on here. No one seems to want to find common ground. Sides slinging mud back and forth seem to be the purview of this forum.

We're all one race really. As long as we continue to look at things in terms of us and they, though, it'll be hard to achieve real equality while insisting on inherent differences. "You're not one of us" is the bane of progress in "race" relations. Pointing out the differences wouldn't seem to be a step in the right direction if the goal is to be treated the same.

and yet thats pretty much what you did. congrats. i wasn't gonna bother responding to your last post toward me because it clearly seems we won't be seeing eye to eye on this issue, but i can't let this particular post go untouched.




if we're talking globally, then yes. if we're talking just America, then please stop playing games.



wrong.

rac·ism
/&#712;r&#257;&#716;siz&#601;m/Submit
noun
prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.

i see i have to post the definition of racism for the thousandth time on this board. the point is that the majority doesn't have to deal with racism anywhere near what the minority has to. thats a fact. simply implying that some whites don't understand racism isn't racist, as their is NO intention of superiority behind that statement, and doesn't lump the entire race/ethnicity into one.




you basically just went "all lives matter". good job.



says the guy who just minimized the effects and current rise of white nationalism/supremacy. interesting comment for sure.




i really dislike comments like this, because the whole "we're all one people" seems to be the common notion.....right up until something happens.

"we're all one race! we're all american! i don't see color"

*crime rates in chicago slightly increase*

"thats black peoples problem and has nothing to do with me!"

yea, we're all one race....until all of a sudden, we aren't.

So, mud slinging and ad hominem attacks. No attempts to find common ground. Why am I not surprised? Do you not see the irony here? What is your goal?

re:the definition of racism- I'm not sure what you think you are proving by constantly citing it. You don't need to be a majority to feel superiority.

The unspoken thought that "that white guy is clueless when it comes to racism" could be coming from a sense of superiority. I know it and he doesn't. What is that thought being based on? How do you know the range of another person's experience? You might not be doing it, but I'm guessing it wouldn't overly surprise you if you heard someone say it.

You're final argument kind of sums up the problem. You don't want racism, but you have a problem with everyone being one race. Ain't that the rub?

The first goal, as it should be for any true American, is to rid ourselves of the Criminal-in-Chief. Then most libs will be more than happy to move to the middle when the right does... There's common ground.

You see bro, the left has moved right so many times since the 80's that we have basically been Reaganites for the last two decades. But the tea party, the racist party of no during Obama's presidency, and then Trump and shoving those SCOTUS justices down our throats was a bridge too far.

So the right is going to have to find its way back to true middle or this is just where we will be. You can thank the tea party, Trump, Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan, and Nunes types for that. The common ground is way to the left.

The problem with getting rid of Trump is that it would make Pence President. I'm on board with getting rid of him. Not so sure I'd agree with who you chose to replace him.

The common ground I was thinking was more basic human decency than politics.

I suppose this is a political forum, so decency is sadly unexpected.

The two party system faces strikingly similar problems to racism. (is it sad I thought I'd typo'd faces as feces only to do a double take and find out I hadn't? It does kind of sum up my thoughts on most of politics)

I doubt the dems will impeach Trump at this point unless he is reelected. Then they will try.

this post falls under the minimisation block.

...What exactly is being minimized here?

I didn't say anything about something not being a problem or less of a problem in the entire post.

How does pointing out other factors that contribute to an admitted problem equate to minimizing?

If anything, I'd say you are the one trying to minimize/ignore issues. I freely admit that there are big issues. I'm just unwilling to only castigate one side.

White Supremism exists and is horrible. How many times do I have to belabor the obvious?

Other groups can and do minimize and ignore problems, too. Willful ignorance isn't a good look on anyone.

I think first you need to get past what you think is happening verses what is really happening. Over 70% of terrorist killings in America come from right wing extremists and racially motivated killings. I know it's not popular to call it terrorism when white people do it but that doesn't change the fact that it is.

I know it's great to try to point to the other 30% and act like racism and right wing extremists aren't the issue, but by and large, they are.

And it's nice to call it divisive if that's the angle you wish to perceive it from. But the actual point is that everyone should recognize what's going on, everyone should call it out and work together to combat it.

But it's obvious you don't want to see it, or help fight it because your entire, "let's just all get along" idea has gotten us to where we are now.

And having a president saying there's "good people on both sides" when one side is responsible for 70% of the problem doesn't help either.

I would like to read those statistics you posted but you forgot to post links.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/03/magazine/FBI-charlottesville-white-nationalism-far-right.html

https://qz.com/1435885/data-shows-more-us-terror-attacks-by-right-wing-and-religious-extremists/

https://www.cbsnews.com/video/us-sees-rise-in-right-wing-extremism/

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/concern-gro...ism-2019-03-19/

Uh, none of those stories back up your numbers. What gives?

Yeah, it's only the vast majority here. It's 70% globally.

We should ignore the vast majority here because you know, it's only a small group and not as bad as people say it is.

https://www.jta.org/2019/01/24/opinion/r...umbers-dont-lie

I'm fine with calling it terrorism because it is.

But it's not all white people, which seems to get lost at times. It's a fringe group that gets a ton of media coverage which gets people fired up and makes the group seem more prevalent than it is. It's kind of the same thing that happened to Muslims post 9/11. Most of the Muslims in the country are "normal," law-abiding citizens. However, they were, and some cases still are, painted with the terrorist brush.

More than 70% of the entire population of the US is white, so it's not surprising that they'd account for a similar percentage of "the problem".

Data from here- Census.gov

What percentage of the total "white" population do those that commit terrorist acts make up?

According to NewAmerica.org 86 people have been killed by terrorists with "Far Right Wing" ideologies since 9/11. Link

I'd think the same number of perpetrators as victims would be a decent guesstimate due to the nature of most of these attacks, but for argument's sake let's make it 10 perpetrators for every victim.

76.6% of the 325 million total population from the first link is roughly 250 million white people in America. 860 terrorists out of 249,500,890 white people is a really small number. .000003-ish.

Those "860" extremists are awful. But, the 249,500,000-ish white people that aren't terrorists feel the bleed over effect.

Some might try to call that minimizing, but I'd call it a call for objectivity.

Yes, something should be done about the extremists.

Blaming an entire race (even if just for not doing more) for the acts of a miniscule percentage of their total population that they've never actually interacted with seems problematic.

Most sane people don't go out looking for terrorists on their own. Terrorists are for the most part (entirely) irrational and what can really be done about that? People with the training (FBI, etc.) find them and punish/stop them. How often do average people go looking for terrorists of any race let alone their own? The expectation to do more sounds great. But what realistically can the average person do?

Well there are over 1000 hate groups in America and that number is on the rise. So I don't know what more you need to think we all need to unite to help stop it. It certainly doesn't help when your president tries to minimize it. Much like you seem to be doing.

Hate groups increase every year and are up by over 30% since 2004. They rose by 7% just last year.

See, while you did show that America is 70% white, it's one of those things where stats are manipulated. Out of that 70%, what percentage are right wing extremists?

Since whites seem to "meet their quota" in hate crimes, it's only getting worse.

But let's ignore that right wing hate groups have risen by 30% in the past 15 years and up by 7% in the past year by trying to whitewash it with some stats.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/20/us/hate-groups-rise.html

j/c...

There is an interesting article in the recent issue of the The Atlantic titled, "White Nationalism’s Deep American Roots: A long-overdue excavation of the book that Hitler called his “bible,” and the man who wrote it".

It's a lengthy, but worthwhile read to anyone interested.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc...onalism/583258/

J\C While the whole democratic house refuse to call out the anti semites in their party which should make every dem. an ANTI SEMITE smfh

They called out all hate. Maybe it's time you do the same.

Pot meet kettle your one of the most vial hateful posters on this board and you lump every conservative with every hate group cause they don't agree with you .
Maybe if you try to have an honest debate with some here and give people a fair chance to explain their thoughts but you don't.

Obviously your comprehension has gotten worse and I didn't believe that was humanly possible.

See... a great hateful insult ,you must be so proud.

So?

So whites will fight back.

As if I didn’t see that coming. Go Oh BTW ... Hitler lost, as will you.

You may see it as hateful but what it is would be correct.

Because well, Trump.

You see, this isn't, or should I say shouldn't be a political issue. It's certainly not for me.

Do you even know how many Republican politicians stand up and speak out against white supremacists? Many, I'd say even the majority of them do. They fully understand it's an ever increasing and growing problem in our nation.

It's actually a subject where all of our people should speak out strongly against it. A subject we used to all be fairly united about. President Bush, both of them in fact spoke out strongly against it. I speak out strictly to those who try to deny or minimize the threat it poses. Not all Republicans.

But you can't see beyond it being a political thing. That's where your comprehension breaks down. Sure there are some Republicans who refuse to see its impact. They refuse to see it's a growing problem. But far from all of them.

But you just go on with your bad self.

I'll condemn all hate groups.

What do the numbers look like for groups over all, though? Seems like there are a ton of groups for everything any more. Anyone with a computer can start one now, and basically every household has at least access to one.

Since the groups are now on the internet, they are easier to find and count.

Based on the numbers I found and posted about already, the number of right wing extremists that act on those sentiments is less than .000004 % of the white population. I'll admit the number of those that don't act is possibly 1000s of times higher, but that would still be a small percentage of the total.

You're welcome to find some actual supported numbers and show us your results as far as percentages.

Hate groups of all shapes and sizes are a problem. Trump encouraging them is a problem.

What do you propose everyone does about them?

I hear lots of harping on problems, but I haven't seen many realistic proposals for solutions.

Voting for the other end of the spectrum isn't really an answer. Vacillating between extremes is how we ended up with Trump in the first place.

Group-itis is the problem of our time. Everything's this group vs. that group. We can't figure out a group that is big enough for everyone, or at least many won't accept it.

If you have questions on "other groups" I would suggest you do some research and give us that information. I mean we all have google, right?

I'm not a single issue voter. Until the last election in my state I voted for a Republican Gov. I vote Republican quite a bit of the time in fact. As I just stated in my previous post many Republican politicians speak out quite strongly against white supremacists.

What I don't believe anyone can truly debate is that by not speaking out against it and publicly minimizing the issue certainly bolsters and emboldens those who are already a part of the problem. It legitimizes their beliefs to those who are of like mind.

There's really no room for that in our society.

I am "speaking" out against them.

I'll disagree that looking at additional issues or putting issues in an accurate perspective is the same as minimizing issues. Honestly, I'd think that making a group look bigger and more pervasive than it actually is would embolden and legitimize that group more than factually looking at the numbers and saying look at that tiny group of crazy, evil racists that hundreds of millions of their "own people" don't like.

Making the (false) argument that the majority of white people tacitly support them would seem to be counter-productive (if we're following the legitimizing and emboldening train of thought).

With regards to the earlier question, I did a google search of "number of groups created on Facebook since 2001," but couldn't find a clear answer. I imagine the figure is something astronomical.

If only the GOP sheep on capital hill would speak out and not be afraid of surviving the ensuing trump Twitter rant.

Pit's link gives about 60 incidents and less than 100 deaths, in a full year.

Every single major city in the US beats those numbers for murders. Many major cities beat those numbers in 90 days.

I am not saying 80-90 deaths is a good thing. I am saying that, like so many things, it is all a matter of "compared to what?". There are likely individual sections of New York and other cities that beat those number on drug overdoses alone, in a much shorter period of time.

If preventing deaths from right wing or other extremists is more important than preventing much larger numbers of deaths from other causes, well then, I disagree.

As far as "hate groups", who exactly gets to make that qualification? I have seen such a designation given to people who just did not want the statues to come down, for historical reasons. I have seen that designation given to people who wanted to lower taxes for less social programs. I have seen that designation given to people who want to make this country great again. That designation was given unjustly to the kids from Covington.

If you want to solve the problem, find the three most definite factors for predicting poverty and work to eliminate them. You will find that the simple act of defining and stating them will have you qualified as a racist.

As for fighting back, most of us will just find more important uses for the fruits of our labor than providing welfare checks.

Did somebody say racial hate crimes?

Truly horrible.

That should never happen to anyone.
Interesting that you should choose that particular vid, since this one is what set that entire 'two weeks of hell' in motion:




Without these four thugs getting blanket acquittals, YOUR video never happens.

Uniforms or street clothes: a thug is still a thug.

Riley and Nelson, please stop replying to me. Please click the correct poster you wish to reply to.

Rocky, your reply fits under soo many different parts of the pyramid.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cv6tuzHUuuk

Grimm,

you posted earlier in this thread a sentiment of not being confident in the fruitfulness of the endeavor of participating. I think you are well justified in such a feeling.

It is fruitless. There's virtually nothing to be gained because there's virtually no one who is calling for a conversation who's actually serious about having a conversation.

Let's take this thread for example (I don't think Rocket is the only one, but this is the current thread):

In the original post he puts up the pyramid and asks where we fall on it. Now, if one is truly interested in a discussion or exchange of ideas, the premise it is based on has to be objectively agreed upon. If one can't be purely objective, it then has to contain as few assumptions or pre-conceived limitations. If there isn't, then there simply isn't room for discussion to take place.

But while the premise was skewed, you could work with it if some context was added. Fish posted an article about and Rocket's reply was to throw out an insult saying only Trump sheep would have a hard time passing the course.

That right there shows Rocket isn't actually interested in an exchange of ideas. All he wants is to hear his point echoed back at him. Anyone who doesn't contribute to that echo, we see throughout the thread is subjected to ridicule, attempts to shame, and have straw man arguments attributed to them.

He's not the only one. You've made some pretty good posts trying to bring objectivity to the topic. In return you're accused of trying to minimize the scope or importance, or to deflect.

These people only come across as those seeking to have their virtue signalling validated. That's it. What I haven't figured out yet is if the exploitive element to their behavior is on accident, on purpose, or inherently recognized but they're willing to benefit from it because well, that's the nature of exploitation isn't it?

There is no amount of admission of guilt,apology,checked
privilege, or penance that you can do that they would ever make room for you on their pedestal of virtue. They need a boogeyman. They need someone to exercise their own prejudice and bigotry against.

Final thought on this: what they claim to be minimization, deflection, or dismissal IMO in large part is simply fatigue. The majority of people to include those who didn't vote for President Obama believed from a racial aspect it was good for the Country. Instead of moving forward with that together, it was used to turn the tables. Literally every single criticism of President Obama was labeled as racist. Good and decent people got tired of the Chicken Little and Boy Crying WOlf BS that they simply stopped caring when they realized that there was literally nothing they could say or do that wouldn't get them called a racist.

Swish had a good question I thought about (and I paraphrase) whether it should be important enough to care about being called racist and proving you aren't. Or to some effect.

Prove it to whom? And by what standard? By whose
standard?

There is racism IN America. I don't deny that. What I don't have time for is people who claim to be concerned about an issue but then exaggerate the issue at every corner and who refuse to look at it objectively in order to arrive at a solution.

Someone who is willing to do that is few and far between.

You mean OCD. I said nothing to fish about the course.

Nice try.

Ah, I stand corrected, but not by you. It was Perfect who said it. You guys all sound the same anyway though so...

I don’t go comparing you to dummy police officers, do I?

I don't know. If you did/do I wouldn't be able to hear it over the echo of exploitation anyway.

I hear a nearly non-stop, high-pitched, droning whine.

Sonny.

Get checked for tinnitus.

Maybe you should leave your room and actually talk to other people.

So that’s all you got from my multiple post? Smh.

Funny you bring up that fact that you’re essentially dismissed no matter what you say, yet I’ve been getting that day one since posting on the boards about this topic and you never say a word.

You’re right though, there’s no point in talking about it. I’m a minority so I’ll just get dismissed by the majority regardless.