True Left
History => Colonial Era => Topic started by: guest5 on July 07, 2020, 02:26:21 pm
-
Old but gold: https://youtu.be/GeixtYS-P3s
-
https://www.youtube.com/@BlackandwhitesocietyTV/videos
-
Some more people looking into Bacon's Rebellion:
The Colonial Roots of Racism (Part 2): Bacon's Rebellion and the Invention of "Whiteness"
This episode is an examination of the steady process of the transformation of slavery into a race-based institution -- a process that began in 1619, but was accelerated in the wake of Bacon's Rebellion.
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
00:39 - Introduction
01:07 - Colonial Roots of Racism
03:44 - Legal Distinction of Black and White
05:39 - Bacon's Rebellion
07:41 - The invention of Whitenes
10:51 - Question of the Day
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5aOzfwrsPYg
-
More people looking into Bacon's Rebellion:
The Invention of Whiteness: America's Original Sin
How Bacon's Rebellion (1676) united black and white laborers against the elite. Why the ruling class feared this cross-racial alliance. The 25-year strategy to divide the underclass.
The Virginia Slave Codes of 1705: Legally inventing whiteness. How new laws stripped rights from Black people while giving privileges to poor Europeans. The creation of a permanent, inheritable racial hierarchy to secure power.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1zvomWU0hc
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjvNojUsAaM
-
Through my own experience, it often feels like "black" Americans, specifically wealthy "black" Americans, are in desperate search of someone outside of the bull-shyte identity the "black" community has bought into to come along and tell them that they are actually correct in struggling against "white" identity? Beyond the obvious sad and pathetic nature of such a worldview, I do find it's most wealthy "black" LAZY-BRAINED rappers who have realized the cash-cow that feeds their wealth is about to die because they are too dumb to keep it alive, fall into this category of degenerate moronic westerner who cannot think for themselves to save their own good graces the most? It often feels like the degenerate "black" western rappers realized they are dumb-**** degenerates too late? Had these degenerate **** actually used two brain cells to think they would have realized they will lose everything they've ever earned if they stay the present course of dumb-**** westerner!? Why not be real from day one, other <s>rappers</s> HIP-HOP ARTISTS seem to get it, why are rappers like Snoop Dogg, Eminem, Dr. Dre, Tupac, etc., such degenerate imbeciles? These people chose their path, did they not?
I also find it amazing how so many of these U.S. "blacks" will scurry out of the wood-work like roaches when you supposedly care about "black"-Americans, yet when you reveal that you're a scared immigrant who does not feel safe in the U.S. because of how U.S. citizens have started treating their guests, these fraudulent U.S. western RAPPERS do not have **** to say, nor will they defend you!
I think, if Hitler was right in thinking only the negro can save America, then America is **** and these people are destined to lose all of their wealth eventually, sooner rather than later!
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aull0fYB0jQ
NEVER FORGIVE. NEVER FORGET.
-
Henry Louis Mencken
Born September 12, 1880 – January 29, 1956, American journalist, essayist, satirist, cultural critic, and scholar of American English.
"The more noisy Negro leaders, by depicting all whites as natural and implacable enemies to their race, have done it a great disservice. Large numbers of whites who were formerly very friendly to it, and willing to go to great lengths to help it, are now resentful and suspicious."
"No government is ever really in favor of so-called civil rights. It always tries to whittle them down. They are preserved under all governments, insofar as they survive at all, by special classes of fanatics, often highly dubious."
"Equality before the law is probably forever inattainable. It is a noble ideal, but it can never be realized, for what men value in this world is not rights but privileges."
– H.L. Mencken, Minority Report: H.L. Mencken's Notebooks (1956)
-
Another one who got away unpunished:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/white-woman-wrongfully-accused-groveland-211636788.html
A White woman who falsely accused four Black men of **** in the Jim Crow-era South in 1949 has died at the age of 92.
Norma Padgett Upshaw claimed the four men – Ernest Thomas, Samuel Shepherd, Charles Greenlee and Walter Irvin – sexually assaulted her in Groveland, Florida, about 30 miles west of Orlando, when she was 17. The group, who came to be called the “Groveland Four,” became the faces of the case considered one of the greatest miscarriages of justice in Jim Crow-era Florida.
Padgett Upshaw died of natural causes on July 12 in Taylor County, Georgia, according to records filed at the probate court. The Washington Post was first to report her death.
There were doubts about Padgett Upshaw’s testimony from the onset, but in the era of Jim Crow, a jury convicted the men without evidence of a crime.
...
After being arrested, Shepherd, Greenlee and Irvin were tortured until police were able to elicit a confession from two of them. Thomas managed to escape custody and was killed after a manhunt.
Greenlee was sentenced to life in prison.
Shepherd and Irvin received the death penalty. While being transported from county jail for a retrial, the sheriff shot them both and claimed self-defense. Shepherd died at the scene and Irvin survived by playing dead. His sentence was later commuted to life in prison.
-
It was democratic system that preserve and justified "Black" and "White" Identity Politics
Two years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act—barely a year after the passage of the landmark Voting Rights Act—54 percent of white Americans said they thought the civil rights marches were “not justified,” according to an August 1966 Harris poll.1 In October, 85 percent of whites responded that the “demonstrations by negroes on civil rights” hurt the “advancement of negro rights.”2 By June 1969, only 32 percent of respondents felt Black protesters were “trying to be helpful.”3 Because of the civil rights movement, the country finally began to address the disparities, inequality, and terrorism that were the by-product of a quadruple century of racial oppression. But when all was said and done, the majority of white people in America had reached one conclusion:
Something was wrong with Black people.
And to fix America’s racial problem, all this country needed to do was to fix Black people. To address the drugs, crime, and poverty caused by wealth disparities, unequal employment, and lack of community resources,they decided to police, arrest, and imprison the people who were subjected to redlining, segregation, and systemic discrimination. While the whitewashing of history has led us to believe that, at the time, we simply didn’t understand that mass incarceration does not stop crime, we always knew it wouldn’t work. Black people knew that America needed an economic solution to address racial inequities. Criminologists and sociologists knew that crime is a socioeconomic phenomenon. We have always known that arresting drug dealers and drug users doesn’t affect the proliferation of drugs.
Source :
Black AF History: The Un-Whitewashed Story of America page 341 - 342
-
It was anti-democratic action which end "Black" and "White" Identity Politics
African American voters overwhelmingly supported Franklin Roosevelt’s four presidential campaigns in 1932, 1936, 1940, and 1944, but for other contests, as many Blacks identified as Republican as Democrat. Then, in 1948, disgusted with Democrat Harry Truman’s order to desegregate the U.S. Army and the Democratic Party’s support for anti–Jim Crow laws, thirty-five delegates from the Deep South walked out of the Democratic National Convention and formed the States’ Rights Democratic Party (Dixiecrats). Black voters flocked to the Democratic Party. To be clear, Black people didn’t switch parties. Their votes had always been split between the two political factions; they just stopped voting for Republicans. Indeed, they had a trick for the racist Republicans’ collective ass.
But, as Saint Jerome said in the Bible, “White people gon’ white.”* For the most part, Southern whites kept voting for Democrats and Republicans couldn’t get a foothold in the South. Republican Dwight Eisenhower won everywhere but the “Solid South” in 1952 and 1956. Then, in September 1957, Eisenhower sent federal troops into Arkansas to enforce the desegregation of Little Rock Central High School. In 1963, John F. Kennedy, a Democrat, broke with the party ideology and used Eisenhower’s playbook to send in the white storm troopers—the Alabama National Guard —to force desegregation at the University of Alabama. Then came the breaking point that would basically change the party affiliation of Southern voters. Shortly before the election of 1964, Democrat Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act.
Aside from Jimmy Carter in 1976, the Solid South would never vote for a Democratic president again.
Those good ol’ Republicans who never read a white lie they didn’t like would like you to believe that Republicans supported the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Democrats opposed it, which is only partially true. To understand the change in both parties’ ideology, all one has to do is count the votes.9
Source :
Black AF History: The Un-Whitewashed Story of America page 325
-
Leftism means retribution, not progress
Bonus story : History on Franklin Delano Roosevelt's New Deal Discriminative Economic Program
My father told me that he’s tired of hearing about slavery because it happened a long time ago and he had nothing to do with it. Plus, it was legal. How can you ask for redecoration for something that wasn’t a crime?
It’s reparations, RB. And your father is right. But just because enslaving and stealing labor from Black people was perfectly legal prior to 1868, America should not get to ignore the calls for issuing dividends to the descendants of the people who supplied this nation with 246 years of unpaid labor. However, there is a more compelling argument that may be more irrefutable. Namely, that slavery was just one small part of a loan that Black people invested into America for which we never reaped the dividends or the principal. At the center of this argument is how this country became and remained an economic superpower due in large part to the contributions of Black America’s sweat equity and actual funds.
But a lot of white people didn’t own slaves! So how is this their fault?
Again, that’s true. Seventy-five percent of white families didn’t own slaves and 1 percent owned forty or more.1 But all those people stil participated in the institution of slavery and benefited from the theft of labor, from the shipbuilders to the textile industry, the international traders to the national defense. This free labor propped up the entire national economy. But that was only a drop in the bucket when it comes to estimating what America owes Black people in reparations. If the Fourteenth Amendment was meant to function as a reset button to offer the American dream to the millions of Black hostages whose involuntary sweat equity built this country into a superpower, then the time since July 9, 1868, can only be described as a period of illegal theft.
According to the Brookings Institution, in 2016, the typical white family’s net wealth was $171,000, while the net wealth of a typical Black family was $17,150.2 The reason for this staggering wealth disparity is not just due to slavery, Jim Crow, or even America’s unique form of racism. Since the moment the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified, America has been engaged in a Robin Hood–like heist. But instead of taking from the rich and giving to the poor, the United States has circumvented the Fourteenth Amendment by stealing Black America’s wealth and giving it to white people. Every white person in America—rich or poor, liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican—has benefited from stolen goods that were hijacked from Black America.
Wait, are you saying all the white people back then were thieves? My mom would never steal!
Yes, all white people. To illustrate what I’m saying, let me tell you a story about where I’m from.
In 1948, when only sixteen states in America had outlawed segregated public schools, Black students in the tiny hamlet of Summerton, South Carolina, where three out of every four residents were Black, finally got tired of being robbed by white people.3
Every day, these young Summertonians maneuvered through one obstacle course after another, only to be rewarded with an inferior education. If the children were lucky, they walked as far as nine miles to attend one of the segregated schools in Clarendon County’s District 22. On other days, rain would force students as young as six years old to wade across a stream to attend school. Often, when the water was particularly high, someone would provide a raft to row their way across the Lake Marion reservoir.
When they arrived at school, they would have to collect wood for their unheated classrooms . . . if they arrived. Sometimes a student would just drown on the way.
This may sound like a rough life for impoverished rural students, but Summerton was not a poor town. The vast majority of Summerton’s Black citizens were employed. Many owned businesses or worked at well-paying jobs in local factories. Their employers withheld federal, state, and local taxes from their paychecks just like their white counterparts. Summerton’s Black residents were not exempt from paying property taxes, sales taxes, or any other assessment their government deemed necessary. Naturally, Black parents were outraged when they discovered the white children didn’t have to make the same daily trek as their children because the district had purchased thirty buses to chauffeur them to school. Incensed, a group of parents begged school board chairman Roderick W. Elliott for just one bus, to serve the county’s Black students.
He said no.
So, Harry and Eliza Briggs, along with nineteen other Black families, contacted the NAACP and eventually filed Briggs v. Elliott, the first of five cases that would later be combined and become known as Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka. But even before their case dismantled the Supreme Court’s “separate but equal” precedent, the parents of District 22 fully understood why their children lived this precariously treacherous existence: white people in the district were stealing their money.
The white Summertonians who rode on school buses bought, in part, with the taxes paid by Black residents whose children crossed a river of racism are a perfect example of this theft. Those white children arrived at school well rested and ready to learn, while their Black counterparts endured inequities laid out in the initial Briggs v. Elliott complaint, including unhealthy and inadequate facilities, an insufficient number of teachers and classroom space, and inadequate resources.
The Black parents were disproportionately paying for white students’ beautiful new schools and the comfort in which they engaged in learning. And this phenomenon wasn’t unique to Summerton. Even though South Carolina was 40 percent Black in 1948, statewide, Black schools were valued at $12.9 million while white schools were worth $68.4 million.4 If those white students succeeded in their resource-filled schools, they could go on to one of more than a dozen public institutions of higher learning in South Carolina.
However, if the Black graduates wanted to attend a state college, because of state segregation laws there was only one choice—South Carolina State College, the only four-year public Black college in the state. This detail wouldn’t matter as much except for three important facts about the taxpayers whose money actually funded South Carolina’s whites-only state postsecondary schools and the one publicly funded Black college, post emancipation:
South Carolina taxpayers paid for seven whites-only colleges.
South Carolina taxpayers paid for zero Black colleges. (South Carolina State College was a land-grant college, which meant it was founded with federal money after the Civil War.)
The majority of South Carolina taxpayers were Black. (According to U.S. census workers, most of the school-age population, taxpayers, and wage earners in the Palmetto State were Black.)
Every Black person in South Carolina was being robbed, and every white person in South Carolina benefited from it.
Okay, I can kinda see your point, but my dad didn’t even go to college. He can’t even help me with my homework!
I’m sorry about that, RB. But the theft of Black wealth wasn’t just limited to education. Four years before Summerton’s Black parents filed suit against their children’s school district, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt signed the Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944. Commonly known as the G.I. Bill, the law offered government-guaranteed home loans and paid tuition costs for World War II veterans . . . unless you were Black.
In the book When Affirmative Action Was White, Ira Katznelson notes that of the sixty-seven thousand mortgages approved under the G.I. Bill in New York and northern New Jersey suburbs, fewer than a hundred of the homebuying veterans were not white. A banker in Corpus Christi, Texas, reportedly explicitly told one Black veteran, “It is almost impossible for a colored man to get a loan.”
When it came to college loans, even colleges in the North rejected Black veterans, and because historically Black colleges and universities were packed to the gills with students who couldn’t attend white schools in the South, in 1946, only 20 percent of the former Black soldiers who applied for education benefits had enrolled in college, according to Hilary Herbold in “Never a Level Playing Field: Blacks and the GI Bill.” “Though Congress granted all soldiers the same benefits theoretically,” writes Herbold, “the segregationist principles of almost every institution of higher learning effectively disbarred a huge proportion of Black veterans from earning a college degree.” And many of the G.I. Bill’s home loan denials were based on a government policy that may be the most important contributor to the racial wealth gap: redlining.
Wait . . . Even when my dad tries to help me with my math homework, my teacher marks a lot of the answers with a red line. Are you saying my teacher is racist?
No, that’s a different kind of redlining, my future fascist. You’re talking about dumblining.
For most of America’s history, metropolitan neighborhoods were organically configured, primarily by economics. Rich people lived in rich neighborhoods, and poor people lived in places that smelled a little bit like garlic. Even Irish, Jewish, and Italian enclaves, while ethnically homogeneous, were characterized by residents of similar socioeconomic standing. Poor Irish lived alongside poor Irish. Middle-class Italians lived with other middle-class Italians. Not only did these groups have the chance to advance economically, but they were also afforded the opportunity to achieve whiteness. And with that assimilation came integration.
In the mid-1930s, the federal government sponsored the New Deal, which created huge economic programs to lift America out of the Great Depression. The government mechanized farms, funded businesses, built suburbs, gave out jobs to any able-bodied American, and created a national minimum wage. The new Social Security Administration (SSA) gave people financial security in their old age. The Works Progress Administration (WPA) gave people jobs. Most important, the Home Owners’ Loan Corporation (HOLC) refinanced mortgages at low interest rates to prevent foreclosures.
New Deal legislation was a massive investment in America’s future, and although it was costly, it helped reduce poverty and charted a path out of the Great Depression. More than any other group of legislation in American history, the jobs, social programs, and guaranteed loans created by the New Deal are responsible for building what we now call the “middle class.” There was only one problem: Black people were overwhelmingly excluded from the most impactful parts of the New Deal.
To ensure that these guaranteed mortgages were not risky, the HOLC created color-coded “residential security maps” of 239 cities. The maps essentially highlighted the neighborhoods that were good investments versus neighborhoods that were poor investments. The “risky” neighborhoods were highlighted in red, including every one of the 239 cities’ Black neighborhoods. In fact, even upscale Black neighborhoods like LaVilla and Sugar Hill in Jacksonville, Florida, visited by Duke Ellington, Ella Fitzgerald, and Zora Neale Hurston, were deemed “too risky” by the HOLC. And instead of solely using these maps for government-backed home loans (which would have been racist in and of itself), banks began using these maps for all home purchases and refinancing. Because of this, as generations of Americans lifted themselves out of poverty, Black people could not take part in America’s primary driver of wealth—homeownership.
Redlining was outlawed in 1968 by the Fair Housing Act, but it still affects almost every economic aspect of Black communities to this day. Nearly every calculable effect of institutional inequality can be traced back to this eighty-five-year-old government policy. Redlining explains why researchers at the Brookings Institution found that homes in neighborhoods where the population is majority Black are valued, on average, $48,000 less than homes in white neighborhoods. The result is a $156 billion cumulative loss in Black-owned property values, even when the white neighborhoods have the same amenities, crime rates, and resources as the Black neighborhoods.5
About 36 percent of education funding comes from local property taxes, the “single largest source of local revenue for schools in the United States.” These lower home values,6 which are the direct result of redlining, mean that schools in Black neighborhoods receive less funding. Therefore, redlining is why Edbuild reports that majority-white school districts receive $2,226 more per student than non-white districts: a theft of $23 billion.7
Residents who live in formerly redlined areas pay higher interest rates and are denied mortgages more often than whites with the same credit and income, according to reporting by the Center for Investigative Journalism. They also pay higher auto insurance rates, pay more for fresh food, have less access to medical care, pay higher interest rates on loans, receive more parking violations, pay higher bail amounts, and wait longer to vote. The white people who built their fortunes from low-interest loans, cheap food, and high home values don’t pay more taxes. Yet they are benefiting from current and past policies that have taken money from Black taxpayers and handed it over to whites.
Doesn’t that sound like theft to you? At the very least, it’s receiving stolen goods.
Source :
Black AF History: The Un-Whitewashed Story of America page 303 - 309
-
Historical Voter Suppression by the "Whites"
On April 15, 1865, John Wilkes Booth assassinated Abraham Lincoln, leaving Confederate sympathizer Andrew Johnson as president. Johnson was a Southerner, a slaveowner, and a Democrat who had been chosen for the vice presidency in the hopes of stopping the South from seceding. As a former senator of the Great State of Tennessee, Johnson repeatedly let his Democrat friends know where he stood on the issue of freedmen: “As for the Negro I am for setting him free but at the same time, I assert that this is a white man’s government,”14 he said in an 1864 speech, reiterating his earlier promises of “a free, intelligent white constituency, instead of a negro aristocracy”15 after the war. When Johnson ascended to the presidency, his first course of action was to stop that slaves-getting-land nonsense.
As second in charge of the new Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen, and Abandoned Lands, Brigadier General Saxton refused to comply with Johnson’s orders, writing that “the faith of the Government is solemnly pledged to these people who have been faithful to it and we have no right now to dispossess them of their lands.”16
Johnson fired him.
As soon as he became president, Johnson pardoned every Confederate traitor who was willing to swear their allegiance to the United States and gave them back their land. And because Sherman’s order was only legal under the War Powers Act, as commander in chief, Johnson simply rescinded it. On March 7, 1866, the Charleston office of the bureau informed Charleston’s white plantation owners who had been dispossessed of their real estate after becoming official traitors to their country that they could return to their plantations as long as they shared with the former slaves, issuing General Order No. 9:
1. The former owners of land upon the Sea Islands . . . will be permitted to return and occupy their lands, or a portion of them, subject to the terms and conditions hereinafter specified.
2. Neither owners of lands nor freed people will be allowed to make use of threats against each other or the authorities of the United States . . . or to do anything to disturb peace on said Islands; but all disputes will be referred to Major Cornelius for adjudication.
3. Grants of land made to the freed people in good faith, by proper authority, or occupied by them . . . will be held as good and valid, until changed or modified by competent authority. But Major Cornelius may set apart and consolidate them contiguous to each other, on one portion of the plantation . . . in such manner as to give the freed people a part possessing average fertility and other advantages.17
In July 1866, Congress agreed to reauthorize the Freedmen’s Bureau while stipulating that all the confiscated lands would be returned to the original owners. For nearly two years, Black people in South Carolina’s Lowcountry actually owned the land on which they had been enslaved. On James Island, America’s slave capital, most of the land had been redistributed to the former slaves before it was taken away. But now these freedmen were surrounded by angry Confederates whose land had been taken by Black repo men. And in those two years, they had all tasted Black power.
...
Building things is hard. Destroying things is easy. After America began to witness what Black people could do if they were simply left alone, the reshapers of their own destiny became the target of disgruntled ex-Confederates who regarded the sharing of power as a collective affront to the white race. For them, power was a zero-sum game. White America’s continued existence depended on the eradication of Black power, and so the destruction began. On July 30, 1866, angered by newly issued provisions that disenfranchised Black voters, a group of freedmen, including hundreds of Black veterans, gathered on the steps of the Mechanics Institute in New Orleans to protest during the Louisiana state constitutional convention.Expressing their outrage in the Blackest way possible, they paraded to the assembly with a marching band to show their displeasure with the exclusionary laws that would become known as the “Black Codes.” As they marched, a mob of white supremacists, policemen, and ex-Confederates brutally attacked the demonstration, until the marchers sought refuge inside the Mechanics Institute, where, as Ron Chernow explained in Grant,
The whites stomped, kicked, and clubbed the black marchers mercilessly. Policemen smashed the institute’s windows and fired into it indiscriminately until the floor grew slick with blood. They emptied their revolvers on the convention delegates, who desperately sought to escape. Some leaped from windows and were shot dead when they landed. Those lying wounded on the ground were stabbed repeatedly, their skulls bashed in with brickbats. The sadism was so wanton that men who kneeled and prayed for mercy were killed instantly, while dead bodies were stabbed and mutilated.23
“The floor grew slick with blood.”
I have never been able to rinse that phrase from my mind. The carnivorous reaction to Black people existing is a theme that runs throughout American history. As early as 1865, the military commanders and workers with the Freedmen’s Bureau began receiving regular reports of “murders and outrages” committed by whites against freedmen. In the Abbeville district of South Carolina, a “desperate and ruffianly character by the name of Reuben Goldberg . . . deliberately, and without provocation, as plenty can testify, shot a Negro by the name of A. Payton, who always bore a good character in this neighborhood and has always been free.”24 Reformer Benjamin Randolph was allegedly murdered in cold blood by a Klansman. Confederate officer D. Wyatt Aiken, a Klan leader, had called for Randolph’s assassination, according to Freedmen’s Bureau officials.25 Aiken was arrested, released two days later, and never faced trial. When they heard about his crime, South Carolina’s white community elected him to serve five terms in Congress.
While many historians describe Reconstruction as a period of “racial unrest” marked by lynchings and “race riots,” it was undoubtedly a war. There were soldiers who wore uniforms, took oaths, and volunteered their service to organized, armed units. They had a common enemy and a plan to take them out. The network of terror cells that sprang up during Reconstruction went by many names, including the White League, the White Knights, the Knights of the White Camellia, and—the most famous of all—the “Circle of Brothers,” otherwise known as the Ku Klux Klan. It was insurrection, ethnic cleansing, and terrorism with a little bit of guerrilla warfare mixed in for good measure. To enforce their goals, the loose confederation of historically white fraternities all had one common strategy: killing as many Black people as possible and overthrowing the government that had enabled their freedom.
In the 1868 election, Black citizens exercised their new right to vote and overwhelmingly supported Republican candidate Ulysses S. Grant. In Eutaw, Alabama, Black voters catapulted Grant to a two-thousand-vote margin in the county. Days before the 1870 midterm election, fearing the power of Black voters, Klansmen opened fire at a rally of twenty-eight hundred Black people, killing at least four and causing hundreds to stay home on election day. The Democratic gubernatorial candidate won the county by forty-three votes.
Ku Klux Klan members in North Carolina assassinated a state senator, murdered a Black town commissioner, and lynched so many Black voters in 1870 that Governor William Woods Holden declared an insurrection, suspended habeas corpus (the right against unlawful detention), and imposed martial law. But none of the more than a hundred terrorists arrested in what would become known as the “Kirk-Holden War” was ever charged with a crime. Holden, however, was removed from office when Democrats gained control of the state legislature after African American voters were forced to choose between voting and their lives.
Many of the reports of these atrocities came directly from the Freedmen’s Bureau. Even before the war’s official end, bureau officers detailed “outrages,” warning that white people were getting a little out of control. In describing a “freed boy” who was “dragged about three miles with a rope around his neck,” residents of Caldwell Parish in Louisiana were told by the sheriff that if they signed a warrant, they would be “met by 50 armed men and killed.” The bureau report ended by noting that “many colored people have been and are being killed in Parish on a/c of political opinions.”26 In Laurens, South Carolina, “ten or twelve persons” were slaughtered the day after the 1870 state elections. A congressional committee investigating Klan violence heard accounts of whites and Black ballot-casters being “waited upon” by a white supremacist mob.
On Easter Sunday in 1873, the Knights of the White Camellia, Klansmen, and Confederate sympathizers opened fire on Black voters in Colfax, Louisiana, burned the victims’ bodies, and threw the corpses in a nearby river. No one knows how many people were murdered during this incident, but a military report lists eighty-one Black men; another fifteen to twenty bodies were fished out of the Red River, and another eighteen were secretly buried. “The bloodiest single instance of racial carnage in the Reconstruction era, the Colfax massacre taught many lessons,” writes historian Eric Foner. “Including the lengths to which some opponents of Reconstruction would go to regain their accustomed authority.”27
The white supremacist terrorism was not confined to violence. Almost every single state of the former Confederacy had begun enshrining Black Codes in their state constitutions in attempts to preserve the social and economic order that existed prior to emancipation. In South Carolina, farmworkers were required to work from “sun-rise to sun-set,” and were mandated by law to refer to their supervisors as “master.” The rules undermined the labor contracts instituted by the Freedmen’s Bureau, and went as far as to forbid any person of color from learning a new trade, declaring, “No person of color shall pursue or practice the art, trade or business of an artisan, mechanic or shop-keeper, or any other trade, employment or business on his own account and for his own benefit, or in partnership with a white person, or as agent or servant of any persons, until he shall have obtained a license therefore from the Judge of the District Court.”28 Even worse, nine states passed or updated their vagrancy laws, essentially redefining “vagrancy” as “existing.” In Mississippi, a Black person was breaking the law if he or she was “found unlawfully assembling themselves together either in the day or nighttime.”29 Kentucky filled up its jails by banning “rambling without a job” or “keeping a disorderly house.” Tennessee laws withheld education from Black children by forcing them to work for free as “apprentices” under their former slavemasters.
Most often, whites used a combination of violence and technicalities to reclaim political and social status. In the 1866 election, when Georgia’s Black voters elected three Black state senators and thirty state representatives, deemed the “Original 33,” white supremacists flocked to the Peach State to expel the lawmakers under the new Black Codes. When the legislators challenged the laws in White v. Clements, the Georgia Supreme Court ruled, “After the most careful examination of this question, I am clearly of the opinion, that there is no existing law of this State which confers the right upon the colored citizens thereof to hold office, and consequently, that the defendant has no legal right to hold and exercise the duties of the office which he claims under her authority.” For its violence and discrimination against Black people, Georgia was placed under military rule again in 1869.
Perhaps the most interesting part about the white supremacist tactics is that, in the long run, they still were unable to defeat the Black majority without cheating. Heading into the 1876 elections, in counties across South Carolina, white supremacist mobs threatened Black voters to vote for Democratic gubernatorial candidate Wade Hampton over Republican governor Daniel Chamberlain. In September 1876, a paramilitary group of five hundred white supremacists murdered about one hundred Black people in Aiken County, after threatening them that “their only safety from death or whipping lies in signing an agreement pledging to vote the democratic ticket at the coming election.”30 The Republican votes there somehow disappeared, but the Democratic votes quadrupled. In Edgefield, the vote total exceeded the voting-age population by more than two thousand.31 The elections board threw out the suspicious counties’ vote totals, which were upheld by a federal court. The Republican presidential candidate won South Carolina, as did the Republican governor.
Events in Louisiana and Florida had played out similarly as they had in South Carolina, with voter intimidation and suspicious vote totals throughout the state. In 1877, fifteen white men—five U.S. senators, five representatives, and five Supreme Court justices*—gathered in a Washington, D.C., room and decided to give the disputed electoral votes to Rutherford B. Hayes, the Republican candidate supported by Black voters, essentially making him the president. In exchange, the whites-only room also agreed to a plan that included three notable provisions:
REMOVAL OF TROOPS FROM THE CONFEDERATE STATES: In many places
in the South, especially Louisiana and South Carolina, the military
presence was the only thing protecting Black freedmen from white
supremacist violence.
FUNDS TO INDUSTRIALIZE THE SOUTH AND RESTORE ITS ECONOMY:
While this never really happened, it was clearly a nod to the white
supremacists who couldn’t compete with the Black laborers.
THE RIGHT TO HANDLE BLACK PEOPLE AS THEY WISHED: The federal
government agreed to essentially disregard the Constitution’s equal
protection clause.
The “right to handle Black people as they wish” became known as Jim Crow. Across the country—not just in the South—states passed segregation laws and disenfranchised Black people en masse. The Compromise of 1877 was the definition of white supremacy: Black voters had given Hayes the presidency, and in exchange, he and his white co-conspirators chose white supremacy over equality.
But there were some things they could not undo. By 1900, 42.8 percent of Charleston County’s Black residents owned land and produced most of the cotton.32 Historically Black colleges thrived, civic organizations flourished, and the religious institutions remained. The foundation created during this period of Black construction would form the framework for every movement for Black liberation going forward. What Black people created in the light of freedom could only be undone by trickery and evil. But that is not the lesson of Reconstruction.
Every single stereotype that remains about Black America was disproven after the Civil War. We were smarter. We worked harder. We were not the violent ones.
The criminal enterprise called America is nothing but a self-perpetuating white supremacy machine. The only parts that are good and decent are the ones we shined with our spit. Everyone who calls themselves a citizen is a by-product of our determination to free ourselves. Due process exists because of us. The Founders only said, “All men are created equal”; we, the ones who made this country, prove it.
Still, that is also not the lesson of Reconstruction.
Source :
Black AF History: The Un-Whitewashed Story of America page 179, 180, 181, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189
-
More generally, World War II did mark some important achievements in America’s struggle for racial equality. For example, Franklin D. Roosevelt became the first president in American history to denounce lynching as a crime. During the 1940 presidential campaign Roosevelt’s Republican opponent Wendell Willkie ran on a civil rights platform, pledging to integrate the armed forces and the federal government if elected. After Black labor leader A. Philip Randolph threatened a massive march on Washington to protest segregation in the defense industry, in June 1941 Roosevelt issued Executive Order 8802 banning racial discrimination in war plants and creating the Fair Employment Practices Commission (FEPC) to enforce it.174 Although the FEPC had little power, the prospect of a federal agency actually devoted to fighting racial discrimination had great symbolic weight and did help Blacks and other minorities gain access to jobs in the burgeoning war industry.
Source :
White Freedom The Racial History of an Idea Tyler Edward Stovall 2021 Princeton University Press page 252
Anti-discrimination means anti-liberal and oppose democratic system
-
The History of Jim Crow Law
Finally, freedom for the former slaves meant the right to vote. Immediately after the end of the war Blacks began organizing to demand suffrage for all men regardless of race. For them, voting, like land ownership, was important both as a practical guarantee and as a symbol of their newly free status. This desire for the political franchise was supported by the Radical branch of the Republican party, which for a decade after Appomattox largely controlled the national government. In 1866 the Republicans passed the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which made all former slaves US citizens, and a year later followed it with the Reconstruction Act, requiring Southern states to ratify the amendment and allow Blacks to vote as a condition of their readmission to the Union. The result was a political revolution in the South, as the former slaves streamed to the polls in overwhelming numbers, with their white allies electing a series of progressive state governments across the region. This expansion of the franchise reached its zenith in 1870 when the Fifteenth Amendment, granting the right to vote to men of all races, became the law of the land.123
Most white Southerners viewed these changes with horror and moved to limit the impact of emancipation as much as possible. In 1865 and 1866 several Southern states passed Black codes that forced freedmen to provide proof of employment, usually by signing contracts to work on plantations. They became one way of “getting things back as near to slavery as possible.”124 More ominously, Southern whites initated a campaign of violence and terror against local Republicans, both Black and white. At the end of 1865 Confederate veterans in Tennessee founded the Ku Klux Klan, which over the next few years murdered hundreds of Blacks and their white supporters. The Klan targeted in particular Republican politicians in a violent attempt to disenfranchise the Black population and maintain white supremacy. This reign of terror continued until 1872, when President Grant suppressed it with federal troops.125
The suppression of the Klan showed that the key to Black freedom lay in the North; only as long as the Radical Republicans held power would they enforce the right of Southern Blacks to vote. By the early 1870s the signs were not encouraging. As we have seen, Black suffrage was not popular in the North before the war, and even after 1865 proposals to enfranchise African Americans were voted down in most Northern states. By the early 1870s many Northern whites were more interested in reconciliation with the South than with protecting Black rights there. The Democratic Party scored a major election victory in 1874, winning control of the House of Representatives, signaling that the reformist approach to the former Confederacy had lost much of its steam. White Southerners soon drew their own conclusions from these signals, and in 1875 renewed their violent campaign against Reconstruction. In Mississippi, armed vigilantes murdered Republican politicians and terrorized their supporters from voting, enabling the Democrats to win the state by a landslide. The same happened in South Carolina in 1876, by which time Democrats and their terrorist allies had overthrown all the Reconstruction state governments in the South. Unlike in 1872, the federal government refused to intervene. Instead, in 1877 the new presidential administration of Rutherford B. Hayes agreed, in exchange for Southern support in the disputed election of the previous year, to withdraw all federal troops from the South and recognize the legitimacy of its Democratic state governments. The so-called Bargain or Compromise of 1877 effectively ended the Reconstruction of the South, and with it hopes for Black freedom.126
The next two decades witnessed the rebirth of white supremacy in the South. During the last quarter of the nineteenth century Southern states passed a series of laws to keep their Black populations separate and inferior. Collectively known as Jim Crow, these measures rigidly segregated Blacks in all major spheres of life, from hospitals, schools, and public parks down to telephone booths and drinking fountains. Facilities available for Blacks were invariably inferior in quality, highlighting their exclusion from the mainstream of Southern life. Jim Crow was not just a Southern phenomenon, however; public racial segregation existed throughout the North and West, and the Supreme Court’s 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson decision upholding the doctrine of “separate but equal” made it in effect national policy.127
The main thrust and goal of the post-Reconstruction reaction, however, was the disenfranchisement of the Black population. Starting in 174 Chapter 4 earnest in 1890, Southern states began enacting a variety of measures to keep African Americans from voting. These included residency requirements, literacy tests, and poll taxes requiring people to pay a fee for the right to vote. As a result of these and other restrictions and of the racist terror that continued to threaten those Blacks who attempted to exercise their franchise, Black electoral participation dropped precipitously in the South. By 1910 only four percent of all Black men in Georgia had registered to vote, whereas for the South in general less than ten percent of eligible African Americans routinely came out for elections. The right to vote had once again become the white to vote, and the effective elimination of the Black franchise and Black political power illustrated the racialized nature of democracy. Since the overwhelming majority of African Americans lived in the South, their disenfranchisement essentially limited voting to whites in general. The Civil War and Reconstruction thus ended in a ringing reaffirmation of white supremacy and white freedom.128
On January 29, 1901, congressman George Henry White of North Carolina gave his final speech in the US House of Representatives. The last of the Black politicians elected during Reconstruction, Representative White had lost his battle for reelection thanks to the disenfranchisement of most of his African American constituents. In the speech that marked the end of Black freedom in America, congressman White declared:
Now, Mr. Chairman, before concluding my remarks I want to submit a brief recipe for the solution of the so-called American negro problem. He asks no special favors, but simply demands that he be given the same chance for existence, for earning a livelihood, for raising himself in the scales of manhood and womanhood that are accorded to kindred nationalities. . . . This, Mr. Chairman, is perhaps the negroes’ temporary farewell to the American Congress; but let me say, Phoenix-like he will rise up some day and come again. These parting words are in behalf of an outraged, heart-broken, bruised, and bleeding, but God fearing people, faithful, industrious, loyal people—rising people, full of potential force.129 Empire, Racial Citizenship, and Liberal Democracy 175 The implementation of Jim Crow throughout the South by the dawn of the twentieth century underscored the durability of slavery and the racial nature of liberty in America as a whole. The defeat of the greatest challenge to white freedom in the nation’s history would play a key role in shaping the character of American democracy in the modern era.
Source :
White Freedom The Racial History of an Idea Tyler Edward Stovall 2021 Princeton University Press page 187, 188, 189, 190
Conclusion :
Anti-Discrimination means individual quality, not democracy and individual rights. Liberalism did not end discrimination
-
https://www.kiro7.com/news/trending/us-army-overturns-convictions-110-black-soldiers-charged-1917-houston-riot/YVERN7LQ2BGNDAEGDJR6D2X5IE/
HOUSTON — The U.S. Army is overturning the convictions of 110 Black soldiers -- 19 of whom were executed -- after they were found guilty of murder, mutiny and assault after a riot during the summer of 1917.
...
The records of the soldiers who were assigned to protect Camp Logan outside of Houston will now reflect that they served honorably.
Who convicted them in the first place?
Within 12 hours of Maj. Gen. John Ruckman’s sentencing in 1917, 13 soldiers were hanged, the Chronicle reported. By September 1918, six more soldiers were executed.
In addition, 63 soldiers were sentenced to life in prison in federal courts.
Two white officers who faced court martial were released, according to the TSHA.
So will Ruckman's descendants be prohibited from reproducing? If not, and if they are not voluntarily refraining from reproducing, then they are valid targets. Otherwise, justice has not been done.
-
New vocabulary to start using:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/ex-confederates-spread-racist-attitudes-far-wide-civil-war-rcna90419
How ex-Confederates spread racist attitudes far and wide after the Civil War
The "Confederate Diaspora" has contributed to systemic racism in almost every area of life, and it continues shape “racial inequities in labor, housing, and policing," researchers wrote.
This is a brilliant term for describing our anti-American enemies on US soil. I am ashamed that I never thought of it myself, despite previously agreeing with the concept:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/trump-a-fascist/msg13620/#msg13620
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/re-uniting-americans/msg15461/#msg15461 )
Continuing:
A new study outlines how white people’s migration during and after the Civil War, from the Confederate South to the West, bolstered white supremacy and institutional racism in non-slave states, helping create the vast racial disparities that exist today nationwide.
Five researchers from separate colleges collaborated on the study, called “Confederate Diaspora,” to compile and study census data that tracked the migration to the West of white Americans, including 60,000 former plantation owners. The former Southerners took on local positions of authority, like police officers, clergy and politicians, giving them influence to create a post-Civil War culture that continued to oppress Black people even after slavery had ended.
...
The former Confederates “continued to transmit norms to their children and non-Southern neighbors,” the researchers wrote, “shaping racial inequities in labor, housing, and policing.”
Researcher Patrick Testa, an assistant professor of economics at Tulane University in New Orleans, said the impact of the Confederates on other parts of the country was deep and long-lasting.
In the three decades following the Civil War, white Southerners were more likely than other white people to take on work in governance, he said, and former slaveholders were even more likely to assume those positions, he said.
“What we show ultimately is that these migrants,” Testa said, “through these governance channels and channels of public-facing authority, helped lay the groundwork for these types of symbols and racial norms and a broad-base Confederate nostalgia to really take off at a national level by the early 20th century.”
One of those “norms” was the institution of the Ku Klux Klan and the racial terror it inflicted in many parts of the country. In the report, the researchers identify “overrepresentation of first-and second-generation migrants in the KKK,” adding that the second generation of the KKK established in 1915 helped to “rejuvenate and mainstream Confederate culture.”
Those born in the South were 11% more likely to belong to the KKK in the Denver metropolitan area, for example, a major hub of Klan activity in the 1920s beyond the South, the report said.
“The harmful legacies of slavery persist beyond those that experience being slaves, but across generations and across places,” Testa said.
Along with census data, the group of researchers analyzed KKK membership records of second-generation Confederate migrants who were born outside of the South but maintained slavery-era norms. “This suggests,” Testa said, the passing down of racial animus from generation to generation may have been “an important vehicle for sustaining diaspora influence long after the initial Confederate migrants had passed.”
As the California Reparations Task Force is set to hand over its recommendations to the state’s Legislature next week, this new study crystalizes how states that did not legally allow slavery, like California, still contributed mightily to oppressing Black people.
...
in the later part of the 19th century it became the home of numerous former Southerners and it was populated by so many Confederate-aligned citizens that it supported John C. Breckinridge in the 1860 presidential election. Breckinridge advocated for the expansion of slavery and supported the 1850 Fugitive Slave Law, which required the return of an enslaved person to a plantation even if he was found in a “free state.”
Because many parts of California favored Breckinridge, it became a popular destination for Southerners at the time. “Outside of the South, California is maybe the most intense in terms of a cultural index that indicates how it accepted racism,” Testa said.
Studying the spread of former Confederates was important, Testa said, because it provides clear data on how the ills of slavery and the Confederate ideology spread across America.
“For the purposes of understanding the multifarious roots of racial division in American society, which continues to be persistent long after, it’s important,” Testa said.
-
Why White Americans look like this
Are these the true faces of White Americans? In this video, we'll delve into genetic data, challenging traditional stereotypes and exploring the complex tapestry of heritage that forms White American identity. From surprising African echoes to diverse European roots, we'll question what 'whiteness' truly signifies. Join us as we decode DNA and reveal the rich and often surprising ancestry of White America. This is much more than a journey through our genes; it's a quest to understand our shared history and identity!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yk13iit8Ldg
Related:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/human-evolution/facial-turanism/
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/mythical-world/turanian-diffusion/
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/mythical-world/gentilism/
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/human-evolution/sexual-dimorphism-preferences/
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/human-evolution/face-shapes-and-preferences/
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/human-evolution/facial-aryanism/
-
It's OK for resorts to be "white":
https://www.yahoo.com/news/denying-humanity-santa-monica-decimated-140010804.html
In 1922, Black businessmen Charles S Darden and Norman O Houston had secured an agreement to purchase the land Shutters now stands on. They were planning to develop a “first-class resort”, complete with a bathhouse, dance hall and amusement center, one they hoped would become a national tourist destination for Black Americans.
It didn’t take long for Santa Monica’s white residents to rally in opposition. The Protective League, a citizens’ group with “a membership of 1,000 Caucasians” that aimed to “eliminate all objectionable features” from the California beach town, lobbied officials to deny the men construction permits and ensure the site was zoned for residential use only. The officials complied.
Three years later, the site became a beach club for white residents.
That is literally how easy it was to practice "white" supremacy. See also:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/news/ethnonepotism/
Continuing:
Many people are unaware that Santa Monica, the coastal enclave now known for its beaches, star residents and hot real estate, was once home to a thriving Black community. The city was at the heart of the dreams of Black entrepreneurs, who had migrated west with their families hoping to flee prejudice and find fortune.
“Everybody saw Santa Monica as the new place of leisure in the early 20th century, and Black folks got in where they could afford to buy land,” said Dr Alison Rose Jefferson, a historian and third-generation Los Angeles resident who has long documented African American history in the Golden state.
Over time, racist policies stripped away the community’s access to the coast, forcing many families out. Today the city is predominantly white and the history of the Black experience in the city was hidden for many people.
...
“Black folks were trying to just be, and recreation was part of that. We needed relaxation and ways to reinvigorate ourselves just like white folks. This was denying our humanity.”
That's the problem. We can't just be so long as "whites" still are. We first have to ensure "whites" have ceased to be.
As white residents and merchants found ways to block Black residents from clubs and beach areas (in violation of unenforced civil rights laws), a Black beach began to emerge in one area near the church. The Bay Street Beach, which white residents pejoratively referred to as “the Inkwell”
...
In the 1950s, governments across the US began decimating Black neighborhoods through “eminent domain”, seizing private land for public projects. The construction of freeways and other public facilities and infrastructure tore through Black historical enclaves in cities such as Miami, Nashville, Montgomery, New Orleans, Kansas City and Oakland.
In Santa Monica, the Interstate 10 freeway displaced an estimated 600 predominantly Black families. One house destroyed had belonged to Nick Gabaldón, the first documented Black and Mexican American surfer in Santa Monica, and “a symbol for all African Americans striving for self-fulfillment and to take advantage of everything the California Dream had to offer”, Jefferson said. Families were dispersed to areas they could afford – far from the beach.
In 1957, three decades after Darden and Houston’s resort proposal was blocked, entrepreneur Silas White had his own plans for a beach club. The Ebony Beach Club would be a membership-based recreation and entertainment venue in a long-vacant building, down the street from the historic church. The project had the support of Nat King Cole, but two months before it was set to open, the city voted to seize the land to build a parking lot for a new “civic auditorium”, a project that ultimately razed the Black neighborhood known as Belmar Triangle. In some instances, the city burned down homes considered “blighted” and then publicized photos of the torched structures to further justify the taking of land in the area, Jefferson said.
See?
-
I saw a clip from Cry Freedom that I thought coincided with this topic. If one needs a reference on why they should not use 'white' and 'black', it is this quote:
(https://sp-ao.shortpixel.ai/client/to_webp,q_glossy,ret_img,w_640/https://escapematter.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Steve-Biko-1.jpg)
-
RACE – THE POWER OF AN ILLUSION How the Racial Wealth Gap Was Created
These scenes are excerpted from California Newsreel’s acclaimed three-part documentary series, Race-The Power of an Illusion. To learn more and watch the entire series, please visit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvY3Ok6YpbU
-
So is that good or bad?
Still bad, because the "white Germans"'s coming during that time also not made the United States rapidly change its colonialist worldview, US only being good when the "blacks" take advantage from the Cold War situation and made a mass protests to enforce anti-racial discrimination rule during the 1960s without democratic approval from the majority of "white race". The world-class prestige.
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/counterculture-era/alice-cooper-vs-homophobia/msg19720/#msg19720
-
So is that good or bad?
-
German Immigrants: not WHITE and not WANTED
In the 1750s, Benjamin Franklin expressed concerns about German immigrants in the Thirteen Colonies, highlighting their potential impact on English culture and language. Franklin believed that Pennsylvania, founded by the English, should not become a "colony of aliens" who would resist assimilation into English customs. His writings reflected a desire to preserve English dominance and cultural identity in the colonies. While Franklin's views were influenced by the context of the time, they shed light on the complexities of early American attitudes toward newcomers and the challenges of cultural assimilation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nw1YXaAU1iA
Note:
German is widely considered among the easier languages for native English speakers to pick up. That's because these languages are true linguistic siblings—originating from the exact same mother tongue. In fact, eighty of the hundred most used words in English are of Germanic origin.
https://www.rosettastone.eu/is-english-a-germanic-language/
Is English originally from German?
English is a West Germanic language that originated from Ingvaeonic languages brought to Britain in the mid-5th to 7th centuries AD by Anglo-Saxon migrants from what is now northwest Germany, southern Denmark and the Netherlands.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_English
The Germanic languages are a branch of the Indo-European language family spoken natively by a population of about 515 million people[nb 1] mainly in Europe, North America, Oceania and Southern Africa. The most widely spoken Germanic language, English, is also the world's most widely spoken language with an estimated 2 billion speakers. All Germanic languages are derived from Proto-Germanic, spoken in Iron Age Scandinavia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanic_languages
::) ;D
-
How Irish Americans became White: finding your roots
Irish-Catholic immigrants have a long and complex history in America, dating back to colonial times. Charles Carroll, an Irish immigrant, came to America in 1706, and his grandson, Charles Carroll of Carrollton, signed his name to the Declaration of Independence. However, it was not until the 19th century that large waves of Irish immigrants arrived in America. The "No Irish Need Apply" signs were evidence of discrimination and prejudice faced by Irish immigrants in the United States, and Ignatiev's argues that the Irish had to work to become "white" in America.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVure-y4RpA
-
The Common-wealth needs to be totally destroyed, as far as i can tell they are the main propagators and maintainers of the deadly parasite that is colonial whiteness. Them and the French and Spanish.
-
Stanford’s White Supremacists
Removing the symbols of the university's history with eugenics won't be enough.
Long before the Varsity Blues scandal of 2019 drew attention to ways economic elites use educational institutions to launder privilege and literal cash, Gilded Age university presidents were shaping their institutions in response to the diversifying population of the United States, and the threat this diversity posed to the social dominance of a majority-white elite. Confident in the natural superiority of the white race, their principal concern was the degeneration of the national genetic stock as a result of demographic turnover. More than a century before white supremacists rallied against the “great replacement” and “white genocide” in Charlottesville, progressive education reformers were sounding the alarm about “race suicide.”
The Leland Stanford Junior University, founded in 1885 by one of the nineteenth century’s most notorious robber barons, offers a special view into the symbiotic mechanisms that connect elite economic interests, liberal progressivism, and academic racecraft. When former California governor and soon-to-be United States Senator Leland Stanford and his wife Jane Lathrop Stanford established a university in memory of their only child, they did so with the belief that their incredible wealth could supply the university with the endowment it needed to entice the nation’s finest faculty and make Stanford a competitive rival to its tony counterparts in the East. Unlike those universities, established by churches and weighted down by tradition, Stanford was founded as a non-denominational and coeducational institution that aimed to be a leader in the sciences, as well as the newly recognized disciplines in the emerging social sciences: psychology and sociology.
To assist them, the Stanfords recruited David Starr Jordan, then the president of Indiana University, to helm their new institution. A fish biologist by training, Jordan was a highly respected man of science who bonded with the Stanfords over their shared admiration for Louis Agassiz, a Swiss naturalist and race pseudoscientist who had once been the Stanfords’ houseguest. At the time of his appointment to lead the nascent university, Jordan was already well on his way to becoming a leading figure in the American eugenics movement: his study of Darwinian biology had predisposed him to accept social Darwinist historical interpretations of the decline of past empires. These were the motivating theories behind his leadership at Stanford, where his devotion to social Darwinism would become his lasting legacy.
While serving as president of Stanford, in 1902, Jordan published a pacifist–nativist tract titled “Blood of a Nation: A Study in the Decay of Races by the Survival of the Unfit.” This book-length essay was expanded from an article that Jordan had published the previous year in Popular Science Monthly. Although not as flagrantly racist as many contemporary nativist and eugenics tracts, the essay was Jordan’s contribution to the paranoid narrative of national genetic decadence that fueled the rise of social Darwinism from the academy to the halls of power in Washington, DC. His book gave a significant institutional platform to a variant of the “great replacement” narrative later repeated by Madison Grant and today peddled by the likes of Richard Spencer. But academic tracts were not Jordan’s most enduring and damaging accomplishment.
During the foundational years of his presidency, Jordan personally undertook efforts in faculty recruitment that made Stanford a hotbed of social Darwinist and eugenicist ideology. Realizing that the nascent social sciences presented opportunities to position Stanford University, and himself, at the cutting edge of social discourse, he concentrated his recruitment efforts in those fields. One of Jordan’s early appointees was Ellwood Patterson Cubberley, whom Jordan named dean of the Stanford School of Education in 1898. Cubberley was a staunch believer in the heritability of intelligence, and promulgated the view, still influential today, that educational testing could identify students with the greatest natural endowments, so that they might be offered the finest educational opportunities and groomed for careers in leadership. Cubberley also originated the notion that schools should be run like businesses, and that both students and teachers should be tested regularly to optimize results—a market-oriented educational philosophy that today undergirds the charter school movement.
Cubberley’s outlook, already hideously fatalistic for an educator, was considerably worsened by his bigotry. According to “Eugenics on the Farm,” a terrific series of articles published by Stanford student-journalist Ben Maldonado to document various strands of the long and ugly history of eugenics on campus, Cubberley’s book Changing Conceptions of Education describes Southern and Eastern European immigrants as “illiterate, docile, [and] lacking in self-reliance.” It comes as no surprise, then, that Cubberley stridently opposed immigration from those regions, on the grounds it “served to dilute tremendously our national stock.”
In 1910, Cubberley recruited Lewis Terman to the Stanford faculty. Terman was a disciple the Alfred Binet, a French psychologist who pioneered the concept of intelligence testing. While at Stanford, Terman carried Binet’s work forward, ultimately resulting in the publication of the Stanford-Binet intelligence test. Like his mentor Elwood Cubberley, Terman was an unwavering utilitarian who believed that widely applied intelligence testing could ensure that children be placed into separate educational tracks and prepared for careers suited to their level of intelligence. Terman and his students used the culturally biased Stanford-Binet test to demonstrate the “natural” intellectual limitations of Mexican and African-American test subjects...
Entire article: https://www.guernicamag.com/stanfords-white-supremacists/
Leland Stanford:
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3e/Leland_Stanford_c1870s.jpg)
-
Latinos And White Supremacy
Bomba Live Host Ray Collazo is joined by racial justice journalist Arturo Dominguez on his recent "Latinos and White Supremacy" article. Collazo and Dominguez discuss how the two Latino assailants of recent Texas mass killings were apparently impacted by white supremacist views.
Dominguez shares how Latinos typically get influenced by white supremacist ideology and how media's portrayal of immigrants contributes to this toxic culture of racist hate. Collazo also analyzes how Latino led hatred is centered on anti-blackness and anti-indigenousness in the United States and Latin America. Collazo and Dominguez discuss solutions to begin addressing white supremacy in the Latino community.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YFT1FlE4lY
Racism Is Also a Latino Issue: Puerto Rican Protesters Speak Out | NBCLX
Afro-Latinxs at a Black Lives Matter protest in San Juan, Puerto Rico, spoke out about the racism they’ve experienced, and about what White Latinxs can do to be better allies. NBCLX storytellers Bianca Graulau and Isa Gutiérrez explain the complicated reality of racism in the Latino community and discuss their own privilege as white-passing Latinas in the United States.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4BHUV0xqpw
-
How non-white people are embracing white supremacy ideology
Katie Phang is joined by Task Force Butler CEO Kristofer Goldsmith to discuss the Allen, TX shooter's racist social media posts and the rising trend of non-white people pushing a white supremacist ideology.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2Q8Plu9dXo
(https://trueleft.createaforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Faryanism.net%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Fneonazi.jpg&hash=68e108e672047dff758d98965908c270f57915d7)
-
How white passing hurt our family
The documentary- series "Finding Lola" is done, but is the journey over? I sat down with my aunt Kathleen (Lola's granddaughter) to talk to her about her reaction after watching the series on our family story, the ancestry dna tests, and how she feels about her newly-found ancestry and family history.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXvfe29KVO8
Passing (racial identity)
Racial passing occurs when a person who is classified as a member of a racial group is accepted or perceived ("passes") as a member of another racial group. Historically, the term has been used primarily in the United States to describe a black or brown person or of multiracial ancestry who assimilated into the white majority to escape the legal and social conventions of racial segregation and discrimination.
Passing for white
Although anti-miscegenation laws outlawing racial intermarriage existed in the United States as early as 1664,[1] there were no laws preventing or prosecuting the **** of enslaved girls and women. **** of slaves was legal and encouraged during slavery to increase the slave population. For generations, enslaved black mothers bore mixed-race children who were deemed "mulattos", "quadroons", "octoroons", or "hexadecaroons" based on their percentage of "black blood".[2]
Although these mixed-race people were often half white or more, institutions of hypodescent and the 20th-century one drop rule in some states – particularly in the South – classified them as black and therefore, inferior, particularly after slavery became a racial caste. But there were other mixed-race people who were born to unions or marriages in colonial Virginia between free white women and African or African-American men, free, indentured, or slave, and became ancestors to many free families of color in the early decades of the United States, as documented by Paul Heinegg in his Free African Americans of Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Maryland and Delaware.[3]
For some people, passing as white and using their whiteness to uplift other black people was the best way to undermine the system that relegated black people to a lower position in society.[4] These same people that were able to pass as white were sometimes known for leaving the African American community and getting an education, later to return and assist with racial uplifting. Although the reasons behind the decision to attempt to pass are deeply individual, the history of African Americans passing as white can be categorized by the following time periods: the antebellum era, post-emancipation, Reconstruction through Jim Crow, and present day...[5]: 4
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passing_(racial_identity)
-
"People of Italian origin living in American land have to stop being "white" and need to be re-mediterraneanized asap."
See also:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/mythical-world/padania-vs-saturnia/
Please feel welcome to continue the discussion over there.
"I feel like the America's are severely lacking in culture"
I disagree:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/counterculture-era/pop-culture-studies/
-
People of Italian origin living in American land have to stop being "white" and need to be re-mediterraneanized asap. I feel like the America's are severely lacking in culture, and instead what we have here is a all pervading, cancerous business mindset and ethos. It's a duty for all people of Mediterranean blood to destroy their inner "white" and other blood poisons so that they can start bringing culture to this place, which will reduce racial and tribal tensions.
-
Finding Your Roots: How Italians became White
Finding your roots? We delve into the forgotten history of Sicilian and Italian immigrants in the Jim Crow South of the United States. Initially welcomed as a source of cheap labor after the Civil War, Sicilian immigrants faced discrimination and persecution as they sought better wages and living conditions. Despite their efforts to assimilate and build successful businesses, they were viewed as not fully white by white Southerners, who imposed on them the same persecution that was customarily inflicted upon African Americans. Shedding light on a dark chapter of American history that is often overlooked, let's find out how (and when) Italians became "White" in American.
The documentary- series "Finding Lola" is done, but is the journey over?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naQiJtBZF1Q
Who is Native American? Who is Black?
The documentary- series "Finding Lola" is done, but is the journey over? This new mini series will explores the history and impact of DNA blood quantum for Native American communities and compare it to the one-drop rule, a similarly problematic concept that was used to define blackness in the United States during the era of slavery and Jim Crow. I speak with Professor and author Andrew Jolivétte, former department chair of American Indian Studies at San Francisco State University (2003-2019). He currently serves as the Board President of the American Indian Community Center in San Francisco, California where he was also Interim Executive Director from 2016-October 2018.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ar7LulevhU
-
The Counter Revolution of 1776 and the Construction of Whiteness – Gerald Horne, (3/6)
On Reality Asserts Itself Mr. Horne says that the defense of massive profits from the slave trade and fear of slave rebellions was an important impetus for the American Revolution
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Snzl41lX54
-
Will Jews and "whites" ever realize that having certain videos removed from Youtube when those same videos are logged on various other sites just ultimately makes them look even more guilty than they already do?
Nope.
-
https://www.yahoo.com/news/occupants-must-white-no-negroes-080000121.html
(https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/Jlz49q9T3qXV4g1k_0OU0A--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTcwNTtoPTcwODtjZj13ZWJw/https://media.zenfs.com/en/modesto_bee_mcclatchy_articles_658/586c57ae80629114df308ef687169c13)
...
At last, after decades of silence, the California Association of Realtors is apologizing for its role in promoting our state’s racist housing policies. Leaders of several California real estate organizations gathered at a press conference Oct. 21, 2022, to focus on next steps to correct years of discriminatory acts that segregated our cities, reduced the ability to build affordable housing and promoted redlining. In 1964, the association attempted to prevent the passage of the Rumford Fair Housing Act that removed discriminatory practices in housing.
Evidence of racism in housing is reflected in the Modesto area. Over half of the subdivisions in our area contained restrictions on their deeds that prevented people of color, especially Black people, from purchasing homes. Many restrictions read as follows: “Occupants must be white or Caucasian: no Negroes, Mexicans, Hindus, Filipinos.”
Jews are welcome, of course, because they are not POC.
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/jews-have-nothing-in-common-with-us!/
-
https://www.yahoo.com/news/presidents-long-history-condescension-indifference-122350268.html
Presidents have a long history of condescension, indifference and outright racism toward Black Americans
...
Here are a few examples:
• Rutherford Hayes, president from 1877-1881, claimed to be a friend of African Americans’ rights. At his inauguration, he said “a true self-government” must be “a government which guards the interests of both races carefully and equally.” But he cut a shady deal to win the presidency in the 1876 election, whose result was as hotly disputed as the 2000 Bush-Gore contest. In that deal, he agreed to withdraw federal troops from Southern states where they’d been protecting Blacks from the Ku Klux Klan and white supremacist depredations. Over the next two decades, Southern whites drove virtually all Black elected officials from office, often by fraud and sometimes at gunpoint, and about 1,500 Southern Blacks were lynched.
• William McKinley, president from 1897-1901, delivered an inaugural address extolling equal rights and declared, “Lynchings must not be tolerated.” However, he remained silent when white supremacists in Wilmington, North Carolina, staged an 1898 coup that ousted all Black elected officials and killed at least 60 Blacks. His lack of response to lynchings prompted a Black-owned newspaper to observe, “The Negroes of this country turn with impatience, disappointment and disgust from Mr. McKinley’s fence-straddling and shilly-shallying discussion of lynch law.”
• Theodore Roosevelt, president from 1901-1909, believed in white superiority while simultaneously advocating educational opportunity regardless of race. In a letter to a friend, he wrote, “Now as to the Negroes! I entirely agree with you that as a race and in the mass they are altogether inferior to the whites.”
• Woodrow Wilson, president from 1913-1921, promised fair treatment for African Americans in his 1912 campaign. But once elected, he defended his Southern Cabinet members who segregated workers in federal departments that hadn’t been segregated, writing, “It is as far as possible from being a movement against the negroes. I sincerely believe it to be in their interest.” Black Democrat Robert Wood of New York unsuccessfully urged Wilson to reverse the segregation policy: “We resent it, not at all because we are particularly anxious to eat in the same room or use the same soap and towels that white people use, but because we see in the separation in the races in the matter of soup and soap the beginning of a movement to deprive the colored man entirely of soup and soap, to eliminate him wholly from the Civil Service.” In a testy White House exchange, Wilson chastised William Monroe Trotter and other Black leaders, asserting that, “Segregation is not a humiliation but a benefit, and ought to be so regarded by you gentlemen. If your organization goes out and tells the colored people of the country that it is a humiliation, they will so regard it … The only harm that will come will be if you cause them to think it is a humiliation.”
• Franklin Roosevelt, president from 1933-1945, was widely admired among African Americans. While his New Deal programs did not benefit Blacks and whites equally, Blacks did receive benefits. But FDR’s actions were always guided by his need to appease Southern segregationists in Congress to pass his other agenda items. And his attitude could be condescending, as when he met with Black leaders about integrating the military. He advised a gradual approach, particularly with the Navy: “We are training a certain number of musicians on board ship. The ship’s band. There’s no reason why we shouldn’t have a colored band on some of these ships, because they’re darn good at it.”
-
https://www.yahoo.com/news/pams-experience-1960s-white-school-080022436.html
New York was a slave state, starting with 11 Black Africans “purchased” by the Dutch West India Company in 1626. Slavery was especially popular on Long Island because the area needed labor. Most slave owners on Long Island enslaved just a handful of people. They worked on farms, in homes and sometimes as tailors, whalers or other skilled jobs.
Long Island’s two counties, known then as Suffolk and Queens (most of today’s Nassau County) had the highest enslaved population in the North during most of the Colonial era, according to historian Christopher Claude Verga, author of “Civil Rights on Long Island.” Or, as WSHU public radio in Westport, Connecticut, put it in 2020, “Slavery was not just a ‘southern’ thing. It played a central role on Long Island.” The station called it “the history that we forget to remember.”
...
This “racial caste system,” as Verga calls it, was still in place a century later when Long Island became a hotbed of Ku Klux Klan activity. The historical record includes jarring documentation of the Klan as a highly visible part of life on Long Island. KKK members in robes and hoods, their faces fully exposed, attended funerals, held rallies, sponsored fire department events and marched in community parades.
This, too, like slavery, was not just "a 'southern' thing."
During the 1920s, as it grew more Catholic, Jewish and Black, Long Island had the largest Klan membership in New York and the Klan had “a strong presence on most of Long Island” until the late 1970s, according to Verga. Klan members “infiltrated local real estate markets and law enforcement and gained political influence.” Real estate brokers, mortgage bankers and insurance companies were their “financial backbone,” Verga wrote.
The wording of this paragraph makes it sound like KKK membership increased because they disliked Jews. In reality, KKK membership increased because Jews were joining up:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/jews-have-nothing-in-common-with-us!/msg607/?topicseen#msg607
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/jews-have-nothing-in-common-with-us!/msg843/?topicseen#msg843
Continuing:
This unholy segregationist alliance locked Black people out of the post-World War II housing boom and white neighborhoods. In Levittown, the archetypal mass-produced suburb that sprang up after the war barely 10 miles from Syosset and spread quickly across the country, developer William Levitt rented and sold affordable homes to white families only. They agreed in their leases and deeds “not to permit the premises to be used or occupied by any person other than members of the Caucasian race,” except for domestic servants.
Levitt was previously covered here:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-right/western-civilization-is-a-health-hazard/msg37/#msg37
Levitt was born in 1907 to a Jewish family. His generation was the second since immigrating from Russia and Austria;[2] the paternal grandparents who immigrated to the United States had been a rabbi grandfather from Russia and a grandmother from Austria-Germany.[3]
Continuing:
It sounds like an outrage now, but as historian Joshua Ruff wrote in American History magazine, it was national policy then: The Federal Housing Administration supported “nationwide racial covenants and ‘redlining’ – or devaluing – racially mixed communities.”
Covenants barring Black or nonwhite residents were common all over the country, including in and around the Washington, D.C., neighborhood where I live today. In 1930, one nearby development promoted itself on a billboard as “restricted” (to whites only). Early in the 20th century, the Chevy Chase Land Co. required that no property “shall ever be sold, leased to or occupied by any person of negro blood.” Except, as in Levittown, your domestic servants could live in your house.
...
It is impossible to overstate the damage done by governments, banks, developers, realtors and countless other players in creating segregated residential suburbs all across America. Though housing discrimination has been illegal for decades, its legacy is very much present.
...
“The official policy was that you do not mix the races in housing. And one way to ensure that is to have a policy that says you can’t get a loan if you’re an African American. You will not be able to get a government-backed mortgage. And you can’t leave the segregated areas and go to another area.”
These policies have reverberated through the generations in lost opportunities for Black families to own homes and build wealth.
-
(Have not listened at time of posting).
Seattle Says "White People are Like the Devil" | Former Employee Files CRT Lawsuit on Seattle
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCUlykmBkFY
Here's what I would do if someone proved to me beyond a reasonable doubt that the identity that had been forced on me was in fact evil: I would instantly stop identifying with that identity, and then spend the rest of my life denouncing it publicly whenever possible. I figure that would be the least I should do in order to attempt to right the wrong for those who had been wronged by the evil identity that had been forced on me without my consent. To not do so would only mean that I actually do consent to said evil identity and that I have no problem with the evil, would it not?
-
https://www.yahoo.com/news/one-familys-photo-album-includes-122833877.htmlhttps://www.yahoo.com/news/one-familys-photo-album-includes-122833877.html
One family's photo album includes images of a vacation, a wedding anniversary and the lynching of a Black man in Texas
...
As a historian and director of the Lynching in Texas project, which has documented more than 600 racial terror lynchings, I receive regular emails from journalists, scholars and activists who want to discuss the history of racial violence.
https://lynchingintexas.org/
My conversations with reporters and historians did not prepare me for one of the emails I received last winter. The writer, a Chicago memorabilia dealer, offered to mail me a photo album that included a picture from a Texas lynching.
I responded that I would appreciate the opportunity to review the album and to help identify the victim.
About a week later, I opened the envelope and found five photos, a small cartoon and a key labeled “Teddie’s pictures.”
Each of the photographs was numbered.
The first was a 6-by-5-inch image of what appeared to be burning wood. It proved difficult to decipher. But the description clarified matters.
It read: “Burning of negro in front of old City Hall, Waco, Texas.”
...
official state interpretation holds that slavery, racism and racism’s deadly manifestation, lynching, did not serve as systemic forces that shaped Texas history but were instead aberrations without any fundamental meaning for Texans – or even beyond the state.
Teddie’s photo album, which also included pictures of Teddie and her husband doing normal, everyday things like riding donkeys and going to wedding anniversary dinners, presented a direct challenge to this interpretation.
...
Why would an educated white woman from Pennsylvania include a picture of a Black lynching victim in a personal photo album?
Why would she take her photos out of chronological sequence and place the lynching picture as the first photo in the album?
One thing is for sure: lynching was not motivated by hate for "black" people. Similarly, riding donkeys was not motivated by hate for donkeys. Here is the donkey-riding photo:
(https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/t2STH.NHJQIDnzQcjSNywg--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTcwNTtoPTE0MDM7Y2Y9d2VicA--/https://media.zenfs.com/en/the_conversation_us_articles_815/213a2a9bbe245650b56573b188e980a1)
Do the "whites" look like they hate the donkeys they are riding? Or do the "whites" look like they just think it's OK to be "white"? (Also note the sexually dimorphic riding postures (which have nothing to do with hating the donkeys either). See also: https://trueleft.createaforum.com/issues/dress-decolonization/msg5632/#msg5632 )
"Whites" hate no one. Bullies never hate their victims. Their victims are their entertainment. Why would they hate their own entertainment? Hate is a leftist emotion:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/true-left-breakthrough-hate/
Continuing:
The answers to these questions reveal a great deal about Texas just 100 years ago.
In my view, the album exposes the priority that Anglo Texans – even new arrivals to the state – placed on white supremacy and Black subjugation.
Teddie likely pasted the picture of Jesse Thomas’ burning body at the beginning of her album because it featured an electrifying, adrenaline-charged event that viscerally illustrated the nature of her new Texas home.
I agree.
In May 1922, for example, white Texans carried out in one month at least 10 lynchings, more lynchings than in any other state but Georgia for the entire year.
Eight of the Texas victims killed in 1922 were burned at the stake in a form of torture that most people today associate with the so-called Dark Ages.
But these horrific acts happened in modern Texas, just a few generations ago. And white people caught the events on film and put the photos in their own family albums.
Related:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/news/crypto-lynching/
Woke comments:
white people who went to church the following Sunday and pretended to be moral human beings.
It was sport. They had picnics. It’s entertaining for the masses.
These Ritualistic Tortures and Human Sacrifices are among their most-loved and prized memories.
and no atonement for this, yet black people are told over and over again to get over it!
The "normalcy" of lynch photos in pale people's photos album is atrocious. They don't even SEE that there is something wrong with this.
Bet these all those white people went to church too.
Now these racists go around wearing red hats and calling themselves MAGA.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1S7T3mRMdVs
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oi4Ll7VGXJk
NEVER FORGIVE. NEVER FORGET.
-
Continued from above.
When I was in graduate school during the early 00s, toward the end of the whiteness-studies boomlet, I often heard – including from my own mouth – the argument that the real problem was that white people weren’t talking enough about their racial identity. If you could get people to acknowledge their whiteness, we told ourselves, then it might be possible to get them to acknowledge the unfair ways in which whiteness had helped them.
How does trapping anti-white pale-skinned people into the mindset that they are forever and unchangably tainted by "whiteness" help to abolish "whiteness"?
In 1860, a man who called himself “Ethiop” published an essay in The Anglo-African Magazine, which has been called the first Black literary journal in the US. The author behind the pseudonym was William J Wilson, a former bootmaker who later served as the principal of Brooklyn’s first public school for Black children. Wilson’s essay bore the headline, What Shall We Do with the White People?
The article was meant in part meant to mock the white authors and statesmen who had endlessly asked themselves a similar question about Black people in the US. But it was not only a spoof. In a tone that mimicked the smug paternalism of his targets, he laid out a comprehensive indictment of white rule in the country: the plunder and murder of the “Aborigines”; the theft and enslavement of Africans; the hypocrisy embodied by the American constitution, government and white churches. At the root of all this, he wrote, was “a long continued, extensive and almost complete system of wrongdoing” that made the men and women who enabled it into “restless, grasping” marauders. “In view of the existing state of things around us,” Wilson proposed at the end, “let our constant thought be, what for the best good of all shall we do with the White people?”
Much has changed since Wilson’s time, but a century and a half on, his question remains no less pertinent.
In his 2019 book Whiteshift, Kaufmann argues that the history of oppression by white people is “real, but moot”, and he advocates for something he calls “symmetrical multiculturalism”, in which “identifying as white, or with a white tradition of nationhood, is no more racist than identifying as black”. What shall we do with the white people? Kaufmann thinks we should encourage them to take pride in being white, lest they turn to more violent means: “Freezing out legitimate expressions of white identity allows the far right to own it, and acts as a recruiting sergeant for their wilder ideas.”
Another usual suspect:
Eric Kaufmann was born in Hong Kong and raised in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada and Japan.[1] His ancestry is half Jewish, one-quarter Chinese and one-quarter Costa Rican.[2][3] His father Steve Kaufmann is of Jewish descent
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Kaufmann
From another perspective – my own, most days – whiteness means something different from other racial and ethnic identities because it has had a different history than other racial and ethnic identities. Across three-and-a-half centuries, whiteness has been wielded as a weapon on a global scale; Blackness, by contrast, has often been used as a shield.
That's because, "whiteness" (like Jewishness) is not a mere ethnic group. It is a tribal identity. An in-group specifically defined to differentiate the tribe from, and broadcast the belief in supremacy over, out-group members.
And "blackness", despite being a crude category, was created by whites (and not by "blacks" trying to form a tribal in-group), explaining the asymmetry.
Nor is there much reason to believe that whiteness will ever be content to seek “legitimate expressions”, whatever those might look like. The religion of whiteness had 50 years to reform itself along non-supremacist lines, to prove that it was fit for innocuous coexistence. Instead, it gave us Donald Trump.
The religion of Jewishness has had at least 3000 years to reform itself along non-tribal lines and prove it was qualified for innocuous coexistence. Instead it has given us Eric Kaufmann (and Jared Kushner, and Jason Miller, and the apartheid state of Israel, and Disraeli, etc. etc. etc.).
Yet even this does not fully answer Wilson’s question. [...] Late in his life, James Baldwin described whiteness as “a moral choice”, as a way of emphasising that it was not a natural fact. But whiteness is more than a moral choice: it is a dense network of moral choices, the vast majority of which have been made for us, often in times and places very distant from our own. In this way whiteness is a problem like climate change or economic inequality: it is so thoroughly imbricated in the structure of our everyday lives that it makes the idea of moral choices look quaint.
[...]
As with climate change, however, the only thing more difficult than such an effort would be trying to live with the alternative. Whiteness may seem inevitable and implacable, and Toni Morrison surely had it right when she said that the world “will not become unracialised by assertion”. (To wake up tomorrow and decide I am no longer white would help no one.)
Here's what the moral choice to abolish "whiteness" looks like on the individual level:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Brown_(abolitionist)
Here's what it looks like on a policy level:
It is said the South will never submit — that we cannot conquer the rebels — that they will suffer themselves to be slaughtered, and their whole country to be laid waste. Sir, war is a grievous thing at best, and civil war more than any other ; but if they hold this language, and the means which they have suggested must be resorted to ; if their whole country must be laid waste and made a desert, in order to save this Union from destruction, so let it be. I would rather, Sir, reduce them to a condition where their whole country is to be re-peopled by a band of freemen, than to see them perpetrate the destruction of this people through our agency. I do not say it is time to resort to such means, and I do not say that the time will come, but I never fear to express my sentiments. It is not a question with me of policy, but a question of principle.
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Thaddeus_Stevens
And, well, this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler
-
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2021/apr/20/the-invention-of-whiteness-long-history-dangerous-idea
If you asked an Englishman in the early part of the 17th century what colour skin he had, he might very well have called it white. But the whiteness of his skin would have suggested no more suitable basis for a collective identity than the roundness of his nose or the baldness of his head. If you asked him to situate himself within the rapidly expanding borders of the known world, he would probably identify himself, first and most naturally, as an Englishman. If that category proved too narrow – if, say, he needed to describe what it was he had in common with the French and the Dutch that he did not share with Ottomans or Africans – he would almost certainly call himself a Christian instead.
That religious identity was crucial for the development of the English slave trade – and eventually for the development of racial whiteness. In the early 17th century, plantation owners in the West Indies and in the American colonies largely depended on the labour of European indentured servants. These servants were considered chattel and were often treated brutally – the conditions on Barbados, England’s wealthiest colony, were notorious – but they were fortunate in at least one respect: because they were Christian, by law they could not be held in lifetime captivity unless they were criminals or prisoners of war.
Africans enjoyed no such privilege. They were understood to be infidels, and thus the “perpetual enemies” of Christian nations, which made it legal to hold them as slaves. By 1640 or so, the rough treatment of indentured servants had started to diminish the supply of Europeans willing to work on the sugar and tobacco plantations, and so the colonists looked increasingly to slavery, and the Atlantic-sized loophole that enabled it, to keep their fantastically profitable operations supplied with labour.
[...]
Toward the end of the 17th century, this scheme witnessed a significant shift: many of the laws that regulated slave and servant behaviour – the 1681 Servant Act in Jamaica, for example, which was later copied for use in South Carolina – began to describe the privileged class as “whites” and not as “Christians”.
One of the more plausible explanations for this change, made by Rugemer and the historian Katharine Gerbner, among others, is that the establishment of whiteness as a legal category solved a religious dilemma. By the 1670s, Christian missionaries, including the Quaker George Fox, were insisting that enslaved Africans should be inducted into the Christian faith. The problem this posed for the planters was obvious: if their African labourers became Christians, and no longer “perpetual enemies” of Christendom, then on what legal grounds could they be enslaved? And what about the colonial laws that gave special privileges to Christians, laws whose authors apparently never contemplated the possibility that Africans might someday join the faith?
The planters tried to resolve the former dilemma by blocking the conversion of enslaved Africans, on the grounds, as the Barbados Assembly put it in 1680, that such conversion would “endanger the island, inasmuch as converted negroes grow more perverse and intractable than others”. When that didn’t work (the Bishop of London objected) they instead passed laws guaranteeing that baptism could not be invoked as grounds for seeking freedom.
[...]
As late as 1694, a slave-ship captain could still question the racial logic newly employed to justify his trade. (“I can’t think there is any intrinsick value in one colour more than another, nor that white is better than black, only we think it so because we are so,” Thomas Phillips wrote in his diary.)
[...]
The economic utility of the idea of whiteness helped spread it rapidly around the world. Du Bois was not wrong to call it a religion, for like a religion, it operated at every psychological, sociological and political scale, from the most intimate to the most public. Like a religion, too, it adapted to local conditions. What it meant to be white in British Virginia was not identical to what it would mean in New York before the American civil war, in India during the Raj, in Georgia during Jim Crow, in Australia after Federation, or in Germany during the Third Reich. But what united all these expressions was a singular idea: that some group of people called white was naturally superior to all others. As Benjamin Disraeli, the Victorian prime minister and one of the most committed race ideologists of his time, put it, “race implies difference, difference implies superiority, and superiority leads to predominance”.
The idea of whiteness, in other words, was identical to the idea of white supremacy.
That final sentence captures an important fact about the formation of a tribal in-group identity.
And, regarding Disraeli, it is no surprise he is a professional tribalist:
Disraeli was born on 21 December 1804 at 6 King's Road, Bedford Row, Bloomsbury, London,[n 1] the second child and eldest son of Isaac D'Israeli, a literary critic and historian, and Maria (Miriam), née Basevi.[3] The family was mostly from Italy, of Sephardic Jewish, mercantile background (of Italian-Jewish descent).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Disraeli
Even Gandhi, during the early part of his life, accepted the basic lie of whiteness, arguing that “the English and the Indians spring from a common stock, called the Indo-Aryan” and that “the white race in South Africa should be the predominating race”.
[...]
For all their evident success, the devotees of the religion of whiteness were never able to achieve the total vision they longed for. In part, this was because there were always dissenters, including among those who stood to gain from it, who rejected the creed of racial superiority.
[...]
Yet if the religion of whiteness was never able to gain acceptance as an unchallengeable scientific fact, it was still hugely successful at shaping social reality. Some of this success had to do with its flexibility. Thanks to its role in facilitating slavery, whiteness in the US was often defined in opposition to blackness, but between those two extremes was room for tactical accommodations. In 1751, Benjamin Franklin could claim that only the English and Saxons “make the principal Body of White People on the Face of the Earth”, and nearly 80 years later, Ralph Waldo Emerson would insist that the Irish, like the Chinese and the Native American, were not caucasian. Over time, however, the definition of who counted as culturally white expanded to include Catholics from southern Europe, the Irish and even Jews, who for centuries had been seen as quintessential outsiders.
The religion of whiteness also found success by persuading its adherents that they, and not the people they oppressed, were the real victims. In 1692, colonial legislators in British Barbados complained that “sundry of the Negroes and Slaves of this island, have been long preparing, contriving, conspiring and designing a most horrid, bloody, damnable and detestable rebellion, massacre, assassination and destruction”. From there, it was a more or less straight line to Woodrow Wilson’s claim, in 1903, that the southerners who started the Ku Klux Klan were “aroused by the mere instinct of self-preservation”, and to Donald Trump’s warning, when he launched his presidential campaign in 2015, that Mexican immigrants to the US were “bringing drugs. And they’re bringing crime. And they’re rapists.”
[...]
Political appeals to white solidarity diminished slowly but certainly. In 1955, for example, Winston Churchill could still imagine that “Keep England White” was a winning general-election theme, and even as late as 1964, Peter Griffiths, a Conservative candidate for parliament, would score a surprise victory after endorsing a nakedly racist slogan. By 1968, however, when Enoch Powell delivered his “Rivers of Blood” speech – in which he approvingly quoted a constituent who lamented that “in 15 or 20 years’ time, the black man will have the whip hand over the white man” – he would be greeted by outrage in the Times, which called it an “evil speech”, and expelled from the Conservative shadow cabinet.
Similarly, rightist political strategists in the US felt the same way:
Questioner: But the fact is, isn't it, that Reagan does get to the Wallace voter and to the racist side of the Wallace voter by doing away with legal services, by cutting down on food stamps?
Atwater: Y'all don't quote me on this. You start out in 1954 by saying, "N*gger, n*gger, n*gger." By 1968 you can't say "n*gger"—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me—because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "N*gger, n*gger."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy#Evolution_(1970s_and_1980s)
In only a decade, the Counterculture was able to kill the supreme grip white supremacy held for 300 years, although the white supremacists remained:
This gradual rejection of explicit, government-enforced white supremacy was hugely consequential in terms of public policy. Yet it did not mean that whiteness, as a political force, had lost its appeal: in the weeks after Powell’s speech, to take just one example, a Gallup poll found that 74% of Britons supported his suggestion that brown-skinned immigrants ought to be repatriated. It also left unresolved the more difficult question of whether whiteness was truly separable from its long history of domination.
Instead of looking too hard at the sordid history of whiteness, many white people found it easier to decide that the civil rights movement had accomplished all the anti-racism work that needed doing. The result was a strange détente. On the one hand, whiteness retreated as a subject of public attention, giving way to a new rhetoric of racial colour-blindness. On the other hand, vast embedded economic and cultural discrepancies allowed white people to continue to exercise the institutional and structural power that had accumulated on their behalf across the previous three centuries.
[...]
Even the phrase “white supremacy”, which predates the word “racism” in English by 80 years and once described a system of interlocking racial privileges that touched every aspect of life, was redefined to mean something rare and extreme. In 1923, for example, under the headline White Supremacy Menaced, the New York Times would print an article which took at face value a Harvard professor’s warning that “one of the gravest and most acute problems before the world today” was “the problem of saving the white race from submergence in the darker races”.
See also:
The Rising Tide of Color: The Threat Against White World-Supremacy (1920), by Lothrop Stoddard, is a book about racialism and geopolitics, which describes the collapse of white supremacy and colonialism because of the population growth among "people of color", rising nationalism in colonized nations, and industrialization in China and Japan. To counter the perceived geopolitical threat, Stoddard advocated restricting non-white immigration into white-majority countries
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rising_Tide_of_Color_Against_White_World-Supremacy
By the 80s and 90s, however, at least in white-dominated media, “white supremacy” was reserved only for the most shocking and retrograde examples of racism. For many people who grew up at that time, as I did, the phrase evoked cross burnings and racist hooligans, rather than an intricate web of laws and norms that maintained disparities of wealth, education, housing, incarceration and access to political power.
And now we have the misfortune of the clunky vocabulary "white privilege" replacing the original meaning of white supremacy. "Privilege" imples there could be some unprivileged form of whiteness, or a state wherein "non-whites" cease being unprivileged and equal to the supposed "privileges" of "whites". In reality, the mere existence of "white" tribal identity is the root of the problem, not the abstract concept of "privilege".
In the 80s and 90s, a group of legal scholars that included Derrick Bell, Kimberlé Crenshaw, Cheryl Harris and Richard Delgado produced a body of research that became known as critical race theory, which was, in Bell’s words, “ideologically committed to the struggle against racism, particularly as institutionalised in and by law”.
Alongside critical race theory, and in many ways derived from it, a new academic trend, known as whiteness studies, took shape. Historians working in this subfield demonstrated the myriad ways in which the pursuit of white supremacy – like the pursuit of wealth and the subjection of women – had been one of the central forces that gave shape to Anglo-American history. For many of them, the bill of indictment against whiteness was total: as the historian David Roediger put it, “it is not merely that whiteness is oppressive and false; it is that whiteness is nothing but oppressive and false.”
In the fall of 1992, a new journal co-founded by Noel Ignatiev, one of the major figures in whiteness studies, appeared in bookstores around Cambridge, Massachusetts. Called Race Traitor, the magazine wore its motto and guiding ethos on its cover: Treason to Whiteness is Loyalty to Humanity. The issue opened with an editorial whose headline was equally provocative: “Abolish the white race – by any means necessary.” This demand, with its echoes of Sartre by way of Malcolm X, was not, as it turned out, a call for violence, much less for genocide.
[...]
For Ignatiev and Garvey, whiteness had been identified with white supremacy for so long that it was folly to think it was salvageable. “So long as the white race exists,” they wrote, “all movements against racism are doomed to fail.” What was necessary, in their view, was for the people called “white” – people like them – to forcefully reject that identification and the racial privileges that came with it.
And when WNs won't give up their racial identity, what then? Who will be the hero willing to implement the Final Solution ending white supremacy and racism?
-
Adoptee Story: "I Didn't Know I Was Black Until You Told Me"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82dkyG-w7wU
-
Have not watched this yet, but I can already tell you the first face on the left of the title screen is closer to the Aryan phenotype than the rest:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuDuKOSQXgk
It is possible that the first two people on the left of the title screen are closer racially to each other than they are to the last two on the right.
Comment:
It's depressing how good humans are at dehumanising others to justify their actions. Even in languages this is seen. Often in tribal languages it's speakers are known as "The People" and of course non-speakers would be called something else. It's crazy to think how small the distances were between tribes considering the other as not humans, maybe even in eyesight. It's the saddest part about the slave trade to me, how some tribes were happy to sell their enemies to the whites, seeing them as animals. Makes me sick.
This is tribalism, Gentiles and Turanians subvert nation-states with their tribalism to this day. The election of Donald Trump in the U.S. is a perfect example of this.
-
Let's talk about Mallory McMorrow and identifying with the bad guy....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KgVF25J8cQ
-
Excellent! This is close to what we have been saying for decades now!
Why I don't relate to my skin colour
NB. This video is entirely my opinion and about my experiences. Please be considerate in the comment section down below. Thank you for your time, engagement, and support! I appreciate and adore you all.
--- chapters ---
2:00 Why I'm bitter | Defining 'tribalism'
6:57 What I (don't) see when looking into a mirror
16:14 Why we 'tribe'
17:20 How my boarding school became my surrogate 'tribe'
28:17 Thank you to my Patrons
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaCEUrVJfTc
"Black" and "white" are social constructs. No one is actually born white, or black! Pinkish and brown perhaps, but why is skin colour so important in the first place?
See also: https://trueleft.createaforum.com/colonial-era/the-'black'-and-'white'-identity-politics-scam/
-
https://youtu.be/fMN768SS1m8
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_eLrMcGy5w
-
Conservatives Are Pre-Mad at Biden's Supreme Court Pick Before the Pick Has Been Made
[...]
During the 2020 campaign, President Joe Biden pledged to nominate a Black woman to the big bench, and on Thursday afternoon he confirmed that he will follow through on that promise. It hasn't yet happened, to be clear, which hasn't stopped the pre-backlash to the future event from rolling in.
https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a38914282/biden-black-woman-supreme-court-nominee/
Meanwhile, the leftist take on this same topic.
(https://i.redd.it/7lkiiiaoo3e81.jpg)
-
Martin Delany: The Father of Black Nationalism (Unique Coloring)
In this episode of Unique Coloring, Daniel J. Middleton draws and discusses the life of abolitionist, physician, and newspaper editor Martin Delany, the acknowledged father of black nationalism and the first black field officer appointed by the Union Army.
This Martin Delany biography features me drawing another grayscale coloring page for my black history adult coloring book.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79fVfTNkeAw
Martin Robison Delany (May 6, 1812 – January 24, 1885) was an abolitionist, journalist, physician, soldier, and writer, and arguably the first proponent of black nationalism.[1] Delany is credited with the Pan-African slogan of "Africa for Africans."[2]
Born as a free person of color in Charles Town, Virginia, now West Virginia (not Charleston, West Virginia), and raised in Chambersburg and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Delany trained as a physician's assistant. During the cholera epidemics of 1833 and 1854 in Pittsburgh, Delany treated patients, even though many doctors and residents fled the city out of fear of contamination. In this period, people did not know how the disease was transmitted.
Delany traveled in the South in 1839 to observe slavery firsthand. Beginning in 1847, he worked alongside Frederick Douglass in Rochester, New York to publish the North Star. In 1850, Delany was one of the first three black men admitted to Harvard Medical School, but all were dismissed after a few weeks because of widespread protests by white students.[3]
Delany dreamed of establishing a settlement in West Africa. He visited Liberia, a United States colony founded by the American Colonization Society, and lived in Canada for several years, but when the American Civil War began, he returned to the United States. When the United States Colored Troops were created in 1863, he recruited for them. Commissioned as a major in February 1865, Delany became the first African-American field grade officer in the United States Army.
After the Civil War, Delany went to the South, settling in South Carolina. There he worked for the Freedmen's Bureau and became politically active, including in the Colored Conventions Movement. Delany ran unsuccessfully for Lieutenant Governor as an Independent Republican. He was appointed as a trial judge, but he was removed following a scandal. Delany later switched his party affiliation. He worked for the campaign of Democrat Wade Hampton III, who won the 1876 election for governor in a season marked by violent suppression of black Republican voters by Red Shirts and fraud in balloting.
Medicine and nationalism
While living in Pittsburgh, Delany studied medicine under doctors. He founded his own practice in cupping and leeching. In 1849, he began to study more seriously to prepare to apply to medical school. In 1850 he was accepted into Harvard Medical School, after presenting letters of support from seventeen physicians, although other schools had rejected his applications. Delany was one of the first three black men to be admitted there. However, the month after his arrival, a group of white students wrote to the faculty, complaining that "the admission of blacks to the medical lectures highly detrimental to the interests, and welfare of the Institution of which we are members". They cited that they had "no objection to the education and elevation of blacks but do decidedly remonstrate against their presence in College with us."[18]
Within three weeks, Delany and his two fellow black students, Daniel Laing, Jr. and Isaac H. Snowden, were dismissed, despite many students and staff at the medical school supporting their being students.[19] Furious, Delany returned to Pittsburgh. He became convinced that the white ruling class would not allow Black people to become leaders in society, and his opinions became more extreme. His book, The Condition, Elevation, Emigration, and Destiny of the Colored People of the United States, Politically Considered (1852), argued that blacks had no future in the United States.[20] He suggested they should leave and found a new nation elsewhere, perhaps in the West Indies or South America. More moderate abolitionists were alienated by his position. Some resented his criticizing men who failed to hire colored men in their own businesses. Delany also strongly criticized racial segregation among Freemasons, a fraternal organization.[citation needed]
Delany worked for a brief period as principal of a colored school before going into practice as a physician. During a severe cholera outbreak in 1854, most doctors abandoned the city, as did many residents who could leave, since no one knew how the disease was caused nor how to control an epidemic. With a small group of nurses, Delany remained and cared for many of the ill.
Delany is rarely acknowledged in the historiography of African-American education.[21] He is generally not included among African-American educators, perhaps because he neither featured prominently in the establishment of schools nor philosophized at length on Black education.[22]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Delany
See also: https://trueleft.createaforum.com/colonial-era/secret-societies-and-occult-forces/
-
https://www.yahoo.com/news/mcconnell-not-alone-lot-white-211016684.html
McConnell’s not alone. A lot of white folks don’t think Blacks are real ‘Americans’ | Opinion
...
if you think McConnell is the only one who needs to be reminded that, as Black poet Langston Hughes once put it, “I, too, sing America,” you haven’t been paying attention. You missed Chuck Todd of NBC’s “Meet The Press” describing how “parents” are worried about critical race theory while “parents of color” might have a different view. You also missed CBS News’ tweet asking, “How young is too young to teach kids about race?” As if children of color don’t learn about race about the same time they learn about walking. Finally, you’ve missed all those news stories where reporters talk about “working-class voters,” “suburban moms” or “evangelicals” when they mean “white” — as if Black and brown people did not work, live outside the city or go to church.
Granted, this is not the bigotry of torches and hoods. No, this rhetorical decoupling of “African” and “American,” of Black people from normal human functions, represents “only” the bigotry of the implicit assumption, the things some people believe without consciously knowing they do — much less interrogating why they do. And yet, they do.
For them, white is the default position, the color of generic American-ness and, truth be told, generic human-ness. By contrast, Black and brown are the colors of exoticism, noteworthy only for how they diverge from, challenge or impinge the perceived norm.
That’s what McConnell’s mouth revealed about him. But it is necessary to recognize that he is not an outlier. Nor is inexact language the sin here. Rather, it is language that implicitly disavows, disinherits and disrespects tens of millions of people who are every bit as “American” as Mitch McConnell on his best day. Yes, it’s “only” the bigotry of the implicit assumption.
But that’s the most common kind.
-
How Slavery Caused the American Civil War
We are starting a new Kings and Generals animated historical documentary series on the history of the American Civil War. In this first episode, we will cover the reasons that caused the American Civil War, and will talk about the effects of slavery, tariffs, taxation, expansion, the election of Lincoln, Bloody Kansas and much more showing the reasons why a number of states seceded from the Union and declared the Confederate States of America leading to a long and bloody conflict. The series will also focus on all the major battles of the war, including Fort Sumter, Bull Run, Antietam, Fredericksburg, Gettysburg, Sherman's March, Appomattox Station, and more.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vb9u4CKxOLE
See also: https://trueleft.createaforum.com/colonial-era/abraham-lincoln/
-
Let's talk about history and an oppressor narrative....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9xl5uvqtQg
Beau answering a CRT question from one of his viewers.
-
https://www.yahoo.com/news/im-black-look-white-horrible-140002729.html
I'm Black But Look White. Here Are The Horrible Things White People Feel Safe Telling Me.
I was outside my house gardening a few weekends ago when a neighbor, whom I had known for almost 30 years, stopped by so I could pet his large, fluffy dogs. I took my gloves off, squatted down to give the dogs a really good scratching around their ears and felt the sun on my back. What could be better? And then my neighbor said: “Why do you have a ‘Black Lives Matter’ sign on your front lawn when all those people do is kill each other?”
My lovely day screeched to a halt.
“You know I’m Black, right?” I said, standing up as tall as my 5’4” frame would allow, the sun shining on my blond hair. I continued to pet his dogs, because I needed the comfort of petting dogs at that moment, and because I needed to keep my hands busy so they didn’t slap that man’s face.
After the usual back and forth of him saying “No!” and me saying “Yes!” and then him trying to gauge exactly “how Black I was” by asking which of my parents was Black and me replying “Both,” we had a very uncomfortable conversation about racism.
I told him about my father’s struggles to get an education because guidance counselors and admissions agents would not accept Black people into community colleges or SUNY programs in the 1950s and ’60s. I told him that even though my father was a veteran, he could not be approved to use the GI Bill for college or buy a house, since no one would process his paperwork because he was a Black man. I told him that people painted “Go Home ****” on the back of our home when my parents finally saved enough money to build a house in the suburbs of Syracuse, New York. And I told him how “Black Lives Matter” calls attention to the fact that Black people are considered less than white people ― and that needs to stop.
I also told him if people don’t understand that Black lives matter, Black people will continue to be murdered by the police and denied opportunities by the establishment. We will not be allowed to participate in the “American Dream,” and we will be made to feel that this is somehow our fault, when it is in fact the fault of a racist society with the full support of our government.
This isn’t the first time I’ve had to have this conversation. Encounters like this have been going on for a very long time for me.
...
There is also the story of a great-aunt, Annie Mother, who would pass as white to purchase properties and then sell or rent them to Black family members and other Black families who could not find decent, affordable housing. I wanted to be like Annie Mother, so I pursued a career in social justice, specifically issues related to housing.
My parents originally tried to purchase a home in Syracuse in the 1960s. Most of the houses they made offers on had deed restrictions that stated the home could not be “sold to Negros.” Determined to own their own home, they decided to build a house, and found some land in a subdivision in Liverpool, New York, where the builder was happy to sell to them. Despite this good news, they soon learned they couldn’t get approved for a mortgage. My dad had a good job at General Electric and my parents had savings, but none of this was enough, because they were Black.
My dad accepted a transfer to a position in Alaska, because he could earn double what he’d make in Syracuse. My mom and I moved in with my grandmother for a year and my mom banked all of my dad’s checks. When he returned, my parents paid cash to have their house built in Liverpool.
This was the same house on which people painted “Go Home ****.” They did this when we already were home ― there was no other “home” to go to. We lived in a white neighborhood, and I went to a school where all the other students were white. Before I started kindergarten, my parents had “the talk” with me. If you don’t know about “the talk,” let me explain it to you. “The talk” is about race. It’s about being Black in a world run by white people, where white people make the rules.
...
I didn’t look Black, but I am Black, so we figured I could and would be subjected to racist actions by my peers. We were prepared for groups of white parents to gather at the school to shout at me. Or spit on me. My parents needed me to understand that if this happened, it didn’t mean I was bad. It meant the adults were bad
...
In high school, one student came dressed as a klansman for Halloween, carrying a noose. Another student, wearing blackface and a loincloth, ran around in front of him. When the few Black students and a number of our white classmates complained to the principal about it, we were told we needed to “develop a sense of humor.”
...
White people think I am white too, and therefore feel safe saying all kinds of horrible things they might not say publicly. I’ve had people tell me it “disgusts” them to see interracial couples. They’ve told me they don’t understand why Black neighborhoods look so “ghetto,” and that Black people are “animals” or “thugs.” Many of these people are educated, and hold jobs or positions that give them some form of power or influence over Black people. They are doctors, judges, lawyers, social workers and politicians. That’s frightening.
...
Living as a Black woman who looks white has allowed me to experience white privilege firsthand. Because people assume I am white, it is assumed I am honest, smart and trustworthy. Many times I have thought to myself: If I looked Black, how would these people treat me? And I have known, without a shadow of a doubt, that I would be treated with disdain or suspicion, or as a criminal. I know in many instances that if I looked Black, the police would have been called to question me. And this sickens and angers me. How many of our Black brothers and sisters have had the police called on them simply for the act of living their lives?
-
It's OK for healthcare to be "white":
https://www.yahoo.com/news/enslaved-peoples-health-ignored-countrys-121853269.html
Foremost among the unrelenting cruelties heaped upon enslaved people was the lack of health care for them. Infants and children fared especially poorly. After childbirth, mothers were forced to return to the fields as soon as possible, often having to leave their infants without care or food. The infant mortality rate was estimated at one time to be as high as 50%. Adult people who were enslaved who showed signs of exhaustion or depression were often beaten.
...
White masters, often brutal and violent, dehumanized the enslaved people who worked for them and became wealthy from their work. Slaveholders justified their treatment by relying on the widely accepted view of Black inferiority and the physical differences between Blacks and whites. Racist medical theory, the racist notion that the blacks were inherently inferior and animal-like who needed maltreatment to be sound for work, was a critical element.
Enslaved people were poorly fed, overworked and overcrowded, which promoted germ transmission. So did their housing – bare, cold and windowless, or close to it. Because they were not paid, slaves could not maintain personal hygiene. Clothes went unwashed, baths were infrequent, dental care was limited, and beds remained unclean. Body lice, ringworm and bedbugs were common.
This treatment began in slave dungeons, built by Europeans on the coastal shores of Africa, where enslaved Blacks awaited shipment to the New World. In Ghana, for example, perhaps 200 were cloistered in tiny spaces where they ate, slept, urinated and defecated. Archaeological research has shown the dirt floors were soaked in vomit, urine, feces and menstrual blood. Conditions within the dungeon were so deadly that cleaning them was discouraged; those who tried risked smallpox and intestinal infections.
...
And if a doctor was involved, Black patients were not necessarily told anything about their condition. The medical report went directly to the slave owner.
...
Some of the Black women were used in medical experiments; much of the research, some conducted without anesthesia, focused on maternal health. As the white scientists inflicted tremendous pain on the pregnant women, the infants being carried sometimes died. Through the torture of these enslaved women, many white physicians and white medical institutions gained considerable fame and wealth.
Adverse health consequences for Blacks facilitated the establishment of some medical advances, such as the invention of the speculum for gynecological exams. One enslaved woman reportedly endured 30 gynecological surgeries without anesthesia. Medical interests and also economic and political interests were served.
-
In the 1950s-1960s, Iceland wanted US troops stationed in it, but not any "black" troops. After repeated pressure by US Presidents and Generals, Iceland eventually agreed to allow literally "three or four" "blacks". It was not until the late 1970s that this policy had ended and the percent of "black" US soldiers stationed Iceland were roughly equal to the overall percent of "blacks" in the military.
The 1951 U.S.-Icelandic Defense Agreement paved the way for a permanent U.S. military presence at the Keflavik base in Iceland, an outpost that played a crucial role in U.S. strategy during the Cold War. The article explores two gender-related aspects of the U.S.-Icelandic Cold War relationship: the restrictions on off-base movements of U.S. soldiers, and the secret ban imposed by the Icelandic government on the stationing of black U.S. troops in Iceland. These practices were meant to “protect” Icelandic women and to preserve a homogeneous “national body.” Although U.S. officials repeatedly tried to have the restrictions lifted, the Icelandic government refused to modify them until the racial ban was publicly disclosed in late 1959. Even after the practice came to light, it took another several years before the ban was gradually eliminated. Misguided though the Icelandic restrictions may have been, they did, paradoxically, help to defuse domestic opposition to Iceland's pro-American foreign policy course and thus preserved the country's role in the Western alliance.
[...]
In no other European country hosting U.S. military facilities did the Americans face harsher restrictions. The United States also reluctantly went along with a secret demand by the Icelandic government to ban the stationing of black soldiers in Iceland—a policy that contravened President Harry S. Truman’s 1948 desegregation order in the U.S. military. After World War II, Greenland (under Danish jurisdiction), Canada, Newfoundland, Bermuda, and the British possessions in the Caribbean were also on a U.S. list of overseas basing areas in which black soldiers were deemed not to be welcome. But all these places except Iceland were removed from the list in the 1950s, although assignments of black troops were sporadically cancelled to countries such as Turkey because of domestic political considerations.
[...]
The article shows that gender was at the heart of Iceland’s exclusionary practices against U.S. soldiers—that the underlying reason for sealing off the Keflavik military base was a patriarchal need to protect Icelandic women from having sexual relations with foreigners. Women’s organizations generally supported this policy. What is more, the Icelandic government was able to dictate the terms of its relationship with the United States throughout the Cold War. The U.S. government had practically no say in the matter.
[...]
In March 1971 the Nixon administration formally handed the Icelandic government a memorandum detailing its complaints and asking for changes. The document noted that “nowhere in the world [were] U.S. troops subjected to such stringent restrictions as in Iceland, neither in democratic nor [in] authoritarian states.”
[...]
During World War II the U.S. military was still segregated, but some influential military officials who favored racial integration tried to resist foreign requests for whites-only deployments. U.S. Secretary of War Henry Stimson rejected such demands by the Australian government and several Central and South American governments. But in the case of Iceland, Stimson, perhaps betraying his ambivalence about race, was far less principled. He claimed that blacks would find it “a bit cold” to stay in Iceland and expressed no qualms about the Icelandic demand to exclude blacks from serving on the island. The U.S. government, it turned out, strictly enforced the ban throughout World War II. In one instance, a plan to send black soldiers to Iceland for a special technical mission was scuttled at the last minute. By mistake, several black troops were briefly sent to Iceland to work in kitchens of the U.S. Navy, but they were withdrawn as soon as the Department of War realized that their presence violated the Icelandic government’s racial policy. Icelandic women who had relationships with white soldiers were ostracized and branded as ****, but when it was revealed that some of the black soldiers had attempted to fraternize with Icelandic women, this was deemed an unpardonable offense.
[...]
After World War II, and particularly after Truman’s desegregation order in 1948, the U.S. military encountered far greater difficulty in acceding to foreign demands for the exclusion of black troops. But when the United States and Iceland negotiated the 1951 Defense Agreement, Icelandic officials used the same arguments they had cited a decade earlier. Icelandic Foreign Minister Bjarni Benediktsson wanted to make sure that “none of our black friends” would be part of the U.S. troops stationed in Iceland, at least not among the first contingent. ... The Keflavik base, which from 1952 to 1961 was under U.S. Air Force command, was the only foreign site at which this discriminatory policy was enforced. Although this policy was officially secret, white troops who came to Iceland in the 1950s were informed of it.
[...]
U.S. Navy in 1961, increased pressure was brought to bear on the Icelandic government. The Kennedy administration even contemplated making a public announcement that the Icelandic government was fully responsible for the policy. Only under this pressure did the Icelandic government agree to a new informal policy, which was conveyed to the U.S. government as follows:
The Icelandic government will not oppose the inclusion of three or four colored soldiers in the Defense Force, [...]
[...]
the government said it was prepared to make the same concession it offered two years earlier: “to allow three or four carefully selected married blacks”
[...]
The Craighill report proved to be the first step toward ending the ban. At the outset, only a few black soldiers were chosen to serve in Iceland—consistent with the Icelandic government’s wishes. Their number increased slowly, and in the 1970s and 1980s all restrictions apparently were removed, probably unofficially.
[...]
The Icelandic policy of preventing sexual relationships between Icelandic women and black soldiers did not change from World War II until the mid-1960s. Yet, interestingly enough, the ban did not apply to other “colored” people. Filipinos, for example, could stay in Iceland without restrictions.
https://direct.mit.edu/jcws/article/6/4/65/12687/Immunizing-against-the-American-Other-Racism
-
Chris Hedges & Cornel West | The Vicious Legacy Of White Supremacy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZH9BiF8FV_0
-
https://deadspin.com/yes-the-nfls-taunting-penalty-is-racist-1847716682
“In general, I don’t really think there’s a place for taunting in the game,” Belichick said on WEEI Boston on Monday. “I think that’s poor sportsmanship and it leads to other things. It leads to retaliation, and then where do you draw the line? I think the whole idea of the rule is to kind of nip it in the bud and not let it get started.
“I’m in favor of that. I think that we should go out there and compete and try to play good football and win the game on the field. I don’t think it’s about taunting and poor sportsmanship. That’s not really my idea of what good football is.”
I’m confused.
Is this the same man who once told his team, “There’s nothing wrong. In fact, you should be excited when you make a play. Hell, look at all the work you put into it?”
Sure is. He even added: “And when you can show that picture visually to your opponent, that’s what intimidation is.”
It’s never lost on me that when white players get fired up or upset on the sidelines, it’s instantly viewed as passion and love for the sport. But, when Black players do it, it’s “too much,” “out of control,” or it “crosses the line.”
Black joy has always been viewed as criminal.
-
Keep in mind, Petito died before reproducing. Make of that what you will.
-
https://www.foxnews.com/media/msnbc-joy-reid-focus-gabby-petito-case-missing-white-woman-syndrome
MSNBC host Joy Reid turned to race Monday while discussing the media's coverage of missing 22-year-old Gabby Petito, dismissing the focus on the case as "missing White woman syndrome."
During a segment on her show "The ReidOut," Reid said while Petito's family deserved "answers and justice," she felt the same media attention didn't apply to non-White people when they go missing..
...
"Well, the answer actually has a name: Missing White woman syndrome. The term coined by the late and great Gwen Iffil to describe the media and public fascination with missing White women like Laci Peterson or Natalee Holloway, while ignoring cases involving missing people of color," she added, referencing two well-known cases of missing women.
...
She also cited statistics from the Black and Missing Foundation that suggested the disparity in media coverage between missing White women and non-White women was attributed to missing minorities often being classified as runaways, minority adults being labeled as associated with crime, and that minorities are dismissed because it's believed they live most of their lives with poverty and crime as a regular part of their lives.
Reid ended the segment by suggesting that missing women of color weren't noticed as much because they didn't look like the daughters or granddaughters of newsroom executives, alluding to one of her guest's earlier claims on the show that stories on missing non-White women weren't sensational enough for the White, middle-aged males leading newsrooms.
Disproportionately many of whom are Jews. Which proves that Jews see themselves as "white".
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/jews-have-nothing-in-common-with-us!/
-
How the Klan "Continued" the Vietnam War at Home
A group of Vietnamese Refugees in Texas in the late 1970s saw their lives turn into a horror show, as the white community terrorized them. What's worse is the Ku Klux Klan got involved. This resulted in a violent clash of communities which exposed the racist underbelly of American culture and launched the infamous militia movement.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOmtWWJAK_A
-
https://www.yahoo.com/news/black-men-executed-1951-****-143500263.html
Black men executed in 1951 **** granted posthumous pardons
Will all identifiable descendants of who had them executed be prohibited from reproducing? That is the important question. And we all know the answer.
RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam granted posthumous pardons Tuesday to seven Black men who were executed in 1951 for the **** of a white woman, in a case that attracted pleas for mercy from around the world and in recent years has been denounced as an example of racial disparity in the use of the death penalty.
...
Four of the men were executed in Virginia's electric chair on Feb. 2, 1951. Three days later, the remaining three were also electrocuted. All of them were tried by all-white juries. It was the largest group of people executed for a single-victim crime in Virginia's history.
...
All seven men were convicted and sentenced to death within eight days. Northam said some of the defendants were impaired at the time of their arrests or unable to read confessions they signed. He said none of the men had attorneys present while they were interrogated.
...
“The Martinsville Seven were not given adequate due process ‘simply for being black,’ they were sentenced to death for a crime that a white person would not have been executed for ‘simply for being black,’ and they were killed, by the Commonwealth, ‘simply for being black,' " the advocates wrote in their letter to Northam.
...
Four of the men testified in their own defense. Rise said two men said they had consensual sex with her, one man denied any involvement, and another man said he was so intoxicated he could not remember what happened.
...
The case of the Martinsville Seven was cited during the legislative debate as an example of the disproportionate use of the death penalty against people of color.
Call it what it is: demographic warfare. Everything our enemies do is to prevent:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/issues/demographic-blueshift/
Therefore everything we do must be to ensure it.
-
White Rage: The Unspoken Truth of Our Nation's Divide
2018 John F. Morgan Sr. Distinguished Faculty Lecture Carol Anderson, Charles Howard Candler Professor and Chair of African American Studies April 9, 2018
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBYUET24K1c
-
The Ocoee Massacre: The Truth Laid Bare
It’s taken nearly 100 years for healing to begin from the 1920 Ocoee massacre. Somewhere between the evil of that night and the long-overdue commemorations of today are timeless lessons you might not expect.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emDt04rT3x4
Elaine Massacre: The bloodiest racial conflict in U.S. history
American streets ran with blood in 1919 during what would become known as "Red Summer". In the small town of Elaine, Arkansas, racial tensions turned to riots after African-American sharecroppers tried to unionize. A staggering 237 people were estimated to be hunted down and killed in what is now known as the Elaine Massacre. The bloodbath made its way all the way up to the United States Supreme Court. This is “Dark History” by the New York Post.
#ElaineMassacre #RedSummer #History
It was called the Red Summer of 1919 named for the blood that ran through America’s cities during months of racial unrest.
African-American soldiers had returned home from “the great war,” World War I, to a country still teeming with discrimination and in their quest for civil rights, tensions between blacks and whites reached a tipping point.
Deadly race riots broke out in over two dozen cities but one rural town — Elaine, Arkansas — would become the epicenter of the bloodshed.
The violence there — lynch mobs, torture, indiscriminate murder — was so horrific, it would go down in history not as a race riot, but as the Elaine Massacre.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jdm1LukEN7w&list=TLPQMjMwODIwMjGrhy9l18Mw8Q&index=2
1946 Columbia Race Riot
Watch as Emory Associate Professor of African American Studies, Carol Anderson, discusses some of the injustices and prejudices of the Jim Crow South as well as those that fought against it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qeCjvqFKxMo&list=TLPQMjMwODIwMjGrhy9l18Mw8Q&index=3
-
How do you know someone is your enemy if you have not read their propaganda? By their actions that you have witnessed?
Regardless, how would Hitler and the NSDAP have understood how to even begin to attempt to subvert Marxism had none of them read Marx? That was in fact one of the goals of the early NSDAP, to convert Marxist German workers to National Socialist German workers, right? How do you undo your enemies lies if you don't even know what they are in the first place?
Furthermore, if you are confident that you stand in truth then lies and misinformation should roll off of you like water on a ducks feather's. No enemy literature would ever be able to convert you. If you fear conversion by reading other literature then you never stood on a strong ideological footing to begin with.
"Even a broken clock is right twice a day".
So basically, 'Know Thy Enemy'? I can concede that point. I am under the assumption that this is the reason why 90sRetroFan consistently makes use of Politically/Zionistically Correct sites like Wikipedia and The Young Turks' YouTube channel.
-
I mean, why would you read the enemy's lies and propaganda?
How do you know someone is your enemy if you have not read their propaganda? By their actions that you have witnessed?
Regardless, how would Hitler and the NSDAP have understood how to even begin to attempt to subvert Marxism had none of them read Marx? That was in fact one of the goals of the early NSDAP, to convert Marxist German workers to National Socialist German workers, right? How do you undo your enemies lies if you don't even know what they are in the first place?
Furthermore, if you are confident that you stand in truth then lies and misinformation should roll off of you like water on a ducks feather's. No enemy literature would ever be able to convert you. If you fear conversion by reading other literature then you never stood on a strong ideological footing to begin with.
"Even a broken clock is right twice a day".
-
I do not understand how the authors political belief's have anything to do with the subject at hand? Could you please explain this to me? Should we also not read rightist literature either then because it's written by rightists? Not sure I understand your logic here? Should National Socialists also not read Marx?
I mean, why would you read the enemy's lies and propaganda? Why would you immerse yourself in their falsities when you know the truth? We know Hitler was the hero of WWII, so why should I read The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich?
-
I do not understand how the authors political belief's have anything to do with the subject at hand? Could you please explain this to me? Should we also not read rightist literature either then because it's written by rightists? Not sure I understand your logic here? Should National Socialists also not read Marx?
-
Clearly one of the better ones then hey? ;)
If you say so. If 90sRetroFan is OK with the use of this video on the forum, then I'm willing to give credit where credit is due and actually read the book.
-
Theodore W. Allen was a Communist.
Clearly one of the better ones then hey? ;)
-
Theodore W. Allen was a Communist.
-
"The Invention Of The White Race" by Theodore W. Allen. Presentation by Jeffrey B. Perry
"The Invention of the White Race" (Verso Books) by Theodore W. Allen, especially Vol. II: "The Origin of Racial Oppression in Anglo-America."
This Slide Presentation/Talk by Jeffrey B. Perry, which draws on insights from Hubert Harrison, was hosted by The Hubert Harrison and Theodore W. Allen Society on January 31, 2013, at the Brecht Forum, when it was still located in lower Manhattan.
On this cold night the building had no heat. The standing room only audience is testimony to the growing interest in Theodore W. Allen's important work and in the struggle against white supremacy.
The video was shot by Fred Nguyen and made available Courtesy Fansmiles Productions.
Please mark this video for viewing and share with others!
"When the first Africans arrived in Virginia in 1619, there were no 'white' people there; nor, according to the colonial records, would there be for another sixty years."
Theodore W. Allen
(Written after searching through 885 county-years of Virginia's colonial records)
Theodore W. Allen's "The Invention of the White Race," with its focus on racial oppression and social control, is one of the twentieth-century's major contributions to historical understanding. This two-volume classic (Vol. 1: "Racial Oppression and Social Control" and Vol. 2: "The Origin of Racial Oppression in Anglo-America") details how the "white race" was invented as a ruling-class social control formation and a system of racial oppression was imposed in response to labor solidarity in the wake of Bacon's Rebellion (1676-77), how the "white race" was created and maintained through "white race" privileges conferred on laboring class European-Americans relative to African-Americans, how these privileges were not in the interest of African-Americans or laboring class European-Americans, and how the "white race" has been the principal historic guarantor of ruling-class domination in America. (See http://www.jeffreybperry.net/_center_... )
"The Invention of the White Race" presents a full-scale challenge to what Allen refers to as "The Great White Assumption" -- "the unquestioning, indeed unthinking acceptance of the 'white' identity of European-Americans of all classes as a natural attribute rather than a social construct." Its thesis on the origin and nature of the "white race" contains the root of a new and radical approach to United States history, one that challenges master narratives taught in the media and in schools, colleges, and universities. With its equalitarian motif and emphasis on class struggle it speaks to people today who strive for change worldwide.
Jeffrey B. Perry contributed new introductions, back matter, internal study guides, and expanded indexes to Verso Books' new expanded edition of "The Invention of the White Race."
For more information on Dr. Perry and his work on Hubert Harrison "the father of Harlem radicalism" (1883-1927) and Theodore W. Allen (1919-2005)
See http://www.jeffreybperry.net
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Gq77rOuZck
-
Ku Klux Klan - The secret history of the KKK (1/2) | DW Documentary
KKK: Three letters that instantly conjure images of hooded processions, public lynchings, and churches in flames. These shocking scenes continue to haunt our collective memory and summon up the darkest chapters of American history.
From the abolition of slavery in the 19th century to the populism of the inter-war period, the civil rights struggle of the 1950s and 1960s, and the recent riots in Charlottesville, the history of the Ku Klux Klan is inseparable from that of the United States. But what do we really know about this secret society? How has it managed to perpetuate itself up to the present day? What hatreds and fears has the Klan fed on, and fueled? What kinds of resistance have civil society and democratic institutions offered? And what does its story tell us about America's relationship to its minorities?
Through the secret history of the Ku Klux Klan, from its creation to the present day, this film will explore more than a century of racial segregation and racism, bringing together numerous archive images as well as interviews with historians and witnesses who have faced the violence of the Klan.
#dwdocumentary #documentary #KuKluxKlan #freedocumentary
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDCyjdHPPtI
-
New U.S. census data shows white population shrank for first time
New U.S. census data released on Thursday show the white population declined for the first time in history last decade, with significant increases among people who identify as multi-racial, Hispanic and Asian driving much of the population growth between 2010 and 2020.
#Census #USCensus #CensusData #US #UnitedStates #Population #News #Reuters
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0p_QwZXg-Ko
I'm assuming people who could easily be mistaken as "white" but reject that identity to the fullest were probably also lumped into this census data considering the U.S. has a lack-luster and half-ass understanding of identity and race, even though both have major effects on the U.S. government itself and the nation as a whole. You would think that a country such as the U.S., which suffers so greatly because of racism and identity related issues, would take the time and effort to get to the bottom of both race and identity once and for all. But then again, that may lead to sanity and clarity and we wouldn't want that now would we?
-
It used to be OK to be a "white" home owner:
https://apnews.com/article/whites-only-property-covenants-race-ethnicity-56d67ad0dff72e8b71de768a24c90274
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — Fred Ware and his son were researching the history of the home he’s owned in the Hartford suburbs since 1950 when they discovered something far uglier than they expected.
Tucked in a list of rules on the home’s original deed from the developer was a provision that said: “No persons of any race other than the white race shall use or occupy any building or any lot,” with the exception of “domestic servants of a different race.”
...
While the U.S. Supreme Court in 1948 ruled such racially restrictive housing covenants unenforceable, many remain on paper today and can be difficult to remove.
...
The restrictive language was written into property documents in communities throughout the U.S. during the early- to mid-20th century amid the Great Migration, which saw millions of African Americans move from the rural South to the urban Northeast, Midwest and West.
These restrictive covenants were a tool used by developers, builders and white homeowners to bar residency by Blacks, Asians and other racial and ethnic minorities. Even after they became unenforceable, according to historians, people privately abided by the covenants well into the 1960s.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8oRHGK7tMQ
-
Chris Hayes: If you think white backlash and moral panic over "critical race theory" is so powerful that it will be the key to taking over Congress in the midterms—you are conceding the central premise of critical race theory itself.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9u0ikQTKDQ
-
It's OK for NFL players to be "white":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=984zyFliJj0
-
GOP Pushing Bill To Ban Teaching History Of Slavery
As the GOP seeks to suppress classroom lessons about racism and slavery, parts of academia are aligning with their right-wing rhetoric. The University of North Carolina now drawing backlash after denying Pulitzer prize-winning journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones a tenured position.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0f0VGK9J1E
-
"The concept of "Asia" cannot be traced to a Chinese source either. The following is the only historically accurate Asia (marked in red):"
"Asia"
"Northeast Asia"
"Southeast Asia"
"Central Asia"
"South Asia"
"Southwest Asia"
Do "Asians" realize how idiotic this category is? There are five sub categories within this single "category"!
-
How The Politics Of White Liberals And White Conservatives Are Shaped By Whiteness
White identity is a potent force in American politics with wide-ranging consequences that are increasingly difficult to ignore. Former President Trump came to power, after all, by using subtle — and not so subtle — language to appeal to millions of white Americans worried that their power and influence in American society are on the decline.
His strategy of white identity politics has continued to work. Not only did Trump campaign on this message in 2016 and win, but after he lost the 2020 election, some of his supporters were so taken by his message that they stormed the U.S. Capitol in defense of white power and white supremacy. While white identity politics have a long, sordid history in the U.S. that predates Trump, we can see how his strategy has taken root in states across the country. Today, Republican lawmakers across the country are working to implement antidemocratic and illiberal policies that threaten to undermine a multiracial democracy all while protecting the power and status of white people.
Understanding the grievances and fear fueling white identity politics on the political right is paramount to our politics. But “whiteness” isn’t something that only animates the politics of white conservatives. Whiteness is central to white liberals’ political identity, too, especially as white Americans must navigate a social and political world in which whiteness is often and explicitly tied to racial injustice — an uncomfortable association for both white conservatives and white liberals.
For years, we have sought to understand how whiteness and perceived threats to it (in social science lingo, “social identity threats”) affect white Americans’ perceptions of their standing in society. Specifically, we have been interested in capturing white Americans’ sense of how their racial identity is viewed by others, especially in light of increased discussions where white Americans are seen as both the perpetrators of racial inequality and the beneficiaries of white privilege.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-the-politics-of-white-liberals-and-white-conservatives-are-shaped-by-whiteness/?utm_source=pocket-newtab
YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE "WHITE"!!! YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE JEWISH!!! YOU ARE CHOOSING THESE IDENTITIES BECAUSE YOU ENJOY BEING IN THE IN-GROUP!!!
-
120 years ago scientists knew the "white race" was nonsense. Yet for some reason academia re-embraced it post-WWII.
(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Ml6NR9wG8f0/Wkm1gjlsD4I/AAAAAAAAA28/Fu-aqEQYmDgTo9KFCgmuhm8gr_E3Un72ACLcBGAs/s1600/Joseph%2BDeniker%252C%2BRaces_de_l%2527Europe_%25281899%2529.jpg)
Strictly speaking, these are not "races" in our sense of the word, but rather ancient ethnic clusters. Nevertheless, scientists went from this level of nuance to crudely asserting there was only a single "white race"... It was only within the past few decades that they have accepted the nuance that the so-called "white race" is really composed of three distinct ancient hunting, herding, and farming lineages--although they still haven't dropped the "white" label...
"I discovered these old scientists had better arguments against ethno-tribalism than present-day biologists. Yet no mainstream biologists and sociologists seem to know about this"
Please present these somewhere when you have time.
I suppose to be precise, technically they were not engaging anti-ethnotribalist arguments, but certainly they were framing biology in such a manner that it benefits our arguments against WN arguments. Basically, it is how they say (1) there is no such thing as a "white race" and (2) assert that all ethnic clusters today are mixed with multiple "races"!.
"It may smack of heresy to assert, in the face of the teaching of all our text-books on geography and history, that there is no single European or white race of men; and yet that is the plain truth of the matter. Science has advanced since Linnaeus' single type of Homo Europaeus albus was made one of the four great races of mankind. No continental group of human beings with greater diversities or extremes of physical type exists. That fact accounts in itself for much of advance in culture. We have already shown in the preceding chapters that entire communities of the tallest and shortest of men as well as the longest and broadest headed ones, are here to be found within the confines of Europe. Even in respect of the colour of the skin, hair, and eyes, responsible more than all else for the misnomer "white race," the greatest variations occur. To be sure, the several types are to-day all more or less blended together by the unifying influences of civilization; there are few sharp contrasts in Europe such as those between the Eskimo and the American Indian, or the Malay and the Papuan in other parts of the world. We have been deceived by this in the past. It is high time for us to correct our ideas on the subject, especially in our school and college teaching.
Instead of a single European type there is indubitable evidence of at least three distinct races, each possessed of a history of its own, and each contributing something to the common product, population, as we see it to-day. If this be established it does away at one fell swoop with the most of the current mouthings about Aryans and pre-Aryans; and especially with such appellations as the "Caucasian" or the "Indo-Germanic" race." -William Ripley, The Races of Europe (1899).
"...let us bear in mind that in no other part of the world save modern America is such an amalgamation of various peoples to be found as in Europe. History, and archaeology long before history, show us a continual picture of tribes appearing and disappearing, crossing and recrossing in their migrations, assimilating, dividing, colonizing, conquering, or being absorbed. It follows from this, that, even if the environment were uniform, our pure types must be exceedingly rare. Experience proves that the vast majority of the population of this continent shows evidence of crossing, so that in general we can not expect that more than one third of the people will be marked by the simplest combination of traits." -William Ripley, The Races of Europe (1899).
"In order to class peoples, nations, tribes, in a word, "ethnic groups," we ought to take into consideration linguistic differences, ethnic characters, and especially, in my opinion, geographical distribution. It is thus that I shall describe the different peoples in the subsequent chapters, while classing them geographically. But for a classification of "races" (using the word in the sense given to it in the introduction), it is only necessary to take into account physical characters. We must try to determine by the anthropological analysis of each of the ethnic groups the races which constitute it; then compare these races one with another, unite those which possess most similarities in common, and separate those which exhibit most dissimilarities.
On making these methodic groupings we arrive at a small number of races, combinations of which, in various proportions, are met with in the multitude of ethnic groups." -Joseph Deniker, The Races of Man (1900).
These quotes and others were posted here:
https://aryan-anthropology.blogspot.com/p/what-is-scientific-racism.html
It is also explained how the present-day False Left approach of attacking racism by attacking the biological data racists misappropriate is an utterly terrible approach. Instead of attacking racism through ETHICAL arguments, the False Left arguments are hinged completely on whether the empirical data are accurate or not! (Spoiler alert: most of that data is accurate and makes it look like racist arguments are superior to False Left anti-racist arguments!!!) Yet, 120 years ago, these old anthropologists already put WN arguments on shaky ground by directly addressing how the data doesn't even support WN arguments.
If present-day anthropologists had read this work, they could both use the data to go on the OFFENSIVE against racists, in addition to using more important ethical arguments against racism. Instead, they are so prejudiced against old work and data that they don't understand, that they attack data which actually helps their arguments... More criticism of the False Left approach can be found here:
https://aryan-anthropology.blogspot.com/p/revisiting-early-20th-century_93.html
-
"Can you create a world map with all the regions of the world appropriately labeled, so that we can refer to it?"
Any world river map will do. For example:
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/87/f3/33/87f333c98e2ebc766578023266723166.gif)
"I'd like to begin using the proper terms for ethnic/cultural/geographic groups, but I don't know exactly what to replace the mainstream terms with."
The nearest river. Recall from main site:
we can simply refer to ourselves and think of ourselves as belonging to the major river basin nearest our homeland (e.g. “Hitler is from the Danube Valley.”), as geography in terms of river basins de-emphasizes ethnic stereotypes and emphasizes the common experience of all the prehistoric valley cultures around the world, which is a basis for recovering Aryan blood memory.
-
@90sRetroFan Can you create a world map with all the regions of the world appropriately labeled, so that we can refer to it? I'd like to begin using the proper terms for ethnic/cultural/geographic groups, but I don't know exactly what to replace the mainstream terms with. A world map from the Aryanist perspective would be perfect to include in one of the articles on the main site during your revision, and it would also be convenient to send to someone concerned with describing people in a non-Western way. Color coding the historically accurate Asia and Africa is a start, but I like the idea of an entire world map that we can use for future reference
-
The Origin of Race in the USA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVxAlmAPHec
See also: https://trueleft.createaforum.com/colonial-era/the-'black'-and-'white'-identity-politics-scam/
-
https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/opinion/article/2184754/chinese-were-white-until-white-men-called-them-yellow
How did East Asians come to be referred to as yellow-skinned? It was the result of a series of racial mappings of the world and had nothing to do with the actual colour of people’s skin.
And there is no such thing as "East Asian" (another Eurocentric concept) either. But continuing:
The term yellow occasionally began to appear towards the end of the 18th century and then really took hold of the Western imagination in the 19th. But by the 17th century, the Chinese and Japanese were “darkening” in published texts, gradually losing their erstwhile whiteness when it became clear they would remain unwilling to participate in European systems of trade, religion, and international relations.
...
“Yellow” was thus a racial marker that had meaning only in relation to the other colours, all of which were defined as against white “normality”. In Blumenbach’s case, Europeans were in the centre of a racial tableau flanked by “Mongolians” and “Ethiopians” with “Americans” and “Malays” in between (Malay was a new, fifth race, comprising the inhabitants of the South Pacific and Australia, only recently discovered). The yellow race became invested with associations that insured that its physical and cultural features were different (or, rather, deviant) from the white European norm. And for other thinkers far more racially virulent than Blumenbach, the races became part of an explicit hierarchy with European white at the top and African black at the bottom, with the “intermediate” races somewhere in the middle.
...
It was at the end of the 19th century that the notion of yellow became canonised in every European language (and East Asian ones). This was the invention of the so-called Yellow Peril in 1895, brought into worldwide circulation by an illustration made after a drawing by Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany and designed as a call to arms for European nations to protect themselves from the potential onslaught of East Asian military aggression, social degradation, and emigration to the West.
...
for now, it is clear the invention of yellow in Western racial thinking cannot be traced to a Chinese source. Yellow was a fantasy like all other racial groupings. It cannot be traced back before the end of the 18th century, and it had no basis in anything other than an attempt to distance certain peoples of the world from an equally fantasised concept of whiteness.
Is it not time that we stopped using this term? Why are we still calling people yellow?
Exactly. And stop with the "East Asian" nonsense also. The concept of "Asia" cannot be traced to a Chinese source either. The following is the only historically accurate Asia (marked in red):
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/ca/Roman_Empire_-_Asia_%28125_AD%29.svg/578px-Roman_Empire_-_Asia_%28125_AD%29.svg.png)
For comparison, this is Xinjiang:
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7f/Xinjiang_in_China_%28de-facto%29_%28%2Ball_claims_hatched%29.svg/603px-Xinjiang_in_China_%28de-facto%29_%28%2Ball_claims_hatched%29.svg.png)
To call China and Japan "East Asia" is at a level of arrogance equivalent to that if China were to call France and Britain "West Xinjiang" (which of course it does not).
-
Will Jews and "whites" ever realize that having certain videos removed from Youtube when those same videos are logged on various other sites just ultimately makes them look even more guilty than they already do?
-
https://twitter.com/BlackSocialists/status/1269394536498966529
“... when European indentured servants joined with Blacks to rebel against their lot in the late 1600s, the propertied class decided to ‘free’ them by giving them a special status as ‘whites’ and thus a stake in the system of oppression.”
-
"Black" and "White" identities did not exist in the American Colonies until after Bacon's Rebellion of the mid-1600's had concluded. Prior to Bacon's Rebellion European and African sharecroppers lived together in the same communities and often intermarried. Unfortunately, Bacon's Rebellion cannot be accurately described as a true form of idealism and populism because the African and European sharecroppers rose up against the American colonial elite as they wanted more indigenous American land for themselves too, however, Europeans and Africans were united in this cause. It was after Europeans and Africans were defeated by the colonial elite in the Bacon Rebellion that the elite came up with the idea of "Black" and "white" identities. The newly minted "whites" were then forced to patrol the newly minted "black" folk under threat of punishment for refusing, this is how slave patrols actually started. (Policing in American "black" communities today is eerily similar to the slave patrols of the colonial era). This is also around the time the American colonial elite passed the anti-miscegenation laws in the colonies in-order to stop the new "white" folks from marrying the new "blacks". There is evidence that "blacks" and "whites" still co-mingled and cohabited even after these laws were passed. Some researches have posited that the United States of today, even after the civil rights movement, is no where near as united as Europeans and Africans were prior to, and during, Bacon's Rebellion....
The Significance and Effects of Bacon's Rebellion
Bacon's Rebellion and the Declaration of the People set a precedent for future Americans to obtain equality. The Declaration of the People initiated the principle of the consent of the people.
The discovery of tobacco started the plantation economy in Virginia and created a demand for cheap labor filled at first by poor, white Indentured servants and then by black slaves. The indentured servants and slaves had joined in Bacon's Rebellion. The fear of another such uprising prompted the hardening of racial lines associated with slavery, as a way for planters and the colony to control the poor
Bacon's Rebellion unified different races and economic classes
Every effort was made to improve the image of those who governed Virginia
Taxes were reduced
Freeman were given back their rights
The colonists were also appeased by the adoption of a more aggressive Indian policy
The notion that Indians and whites could not live together peaceably was enforced, which led to the introduction of the Indian Reservation system in 1677
https://www.landofthebrave.info/bacons-rebellion.htm
How White People Got Made
“When the first Africans arrived in Virginia in 1619, there were no ‘white’ people there; nor, according to the colonial records, would there be for another sixty years.” — Theodore W. Allen
The Virginians legislated a new class of people into existence: the whites. They gave the whites certain rights, and took other rights from blacks. White, as a language of race, appears in Virginia around the 1680s, and seems to first appear in Virginia law in 1691. And thus whiteness, and to a degree as well blackness, was born in the mind of [Colonial] America.
https://medium.com/message/how-white-people-got-made-6eeb076ade42
Black or African American: Neither (Here's Why)
Throughout American history, this group has been called so many labels: Negro, Colored, Black or African American (and countless more). Why? What is the true identity of those claiming to be of Black or African American identity?
Dr. Jose Pimienta Bey goes in depth to substantiate the title, "You are NOT black", exposing the little known negative psychological, legal and spiritual effects of identifying as black when it comes to their ethnicity.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7N330vc6A3U&t=6s
In closing we should also not forget that Western Civilization is Judaic in nature, therefore Western Colonialism is as well by default. It is Jews who came up with the idea of "The Curse of Ham" after all, which has permeated every white supremacist organization the world over via Judeo-Christianity, Christian Identity, and British Israelism. Jews are NOT the historical victims of racism as they claim to be but the perpetrators of it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Identity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Israelism
Professor Tony Martin - The Jewish Slave Trade of Africans
Professor Tony Martin, speaks about the immense Jewish influence in the African Slave Trade as well as the slave trade of Whites and Asians.
Unfortunately... this Black Hero, has died, leaving behind a legacy of rebellion against the vicious and disgusting Jewish power that has haunted him (among many others) until the end of his life for speaking out and exposing them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bu36QjaHHM&t=81s
[attachimg=1]
Jews are racist liars.
“Yes, any community in the world would be a better place without any one referring to themselves as ‘white’.” — Ndlozi
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/south-africa-white-farmers-eff-mbuyiseni-ndlozi-anc-interview-a8271096.html