It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Trump’s supporters believe a false narrative of white victimhood

page: 9
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:49 PM

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Nice compilation. I may paste that in somewhere in the future...

Feel free! TONS more, too, as I stated. I literally could have spent hours posting such articles. The stuff has been in the news for years now, and is one reason the election went as it did.

posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 09:31 PM
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

You seem to forget about Dallas, Baton Rogue. There are other less noted details surrounding those events ( such as but not limited to how after Dallas BLM then doubled down and held nationwide celebratory marches [for days wasnt it?]).

Ah, okay I wasn't thinking of those two ambush cop slayings. The Dallas shooting was a mass murder. The other, by definition, was not however, I won't nitpick. Long, that Baton Rouge murderer, had a long, documented history of mental issues from what I remember? And wasn't he somehow involved with the fringe-right sovereign citizens "movement?" I'll concede on Johnson because I seem to remember him actually mentioning BLM and having some involvement in anti-Trump rallies.

If your thesis is that identity politics employed by the Left is somehow responsible for those, then aren't you obligated to acknowledge that comparable violence from those with right-wing affinities are similarly inspired by the identity politics of the Right?

Dylan Roof? The white pan-nationalist/ethno-nationalist/macro-nationalist (whatever) terrorist who just killed six people in a Quebec mosque? How about Robert Dear who shot up the PP? Along with the obvious, he also gave anti-Obama statements so there was clearly political motivation.

How about this would be murderer (should we call him a terrorist?) who shot 5 BLM protesters in 2015?

Scarsella and three other men, all wearing face masks, went into an encampment outside a police station in north Minneapolis to livestream Black Lives Matter protests that had closed down a city block. Scarsella, who has a permit to carry a concealed weapon, brought a .45-caliber handgun and fired at demonstrators in what his attorneys say was self-defense. CBS Minnesota reports that jurors saw numerous text messages Scarsella sent friends, including one saying, “Cool – the gun I’m getting is proven to kill black guys in a single shot.

And it only gets worse as we go back. What year was Anders Breivik? 2011? What was his motive? European ethno-nationalism? When it comes to identity politics, there are few innocents and every demographic has unhinged assholes looking for a reason to kill people. You seem to be currently hyperventilating over what you see as fomented by the Left while you're completely ignoring the flip side — to whatever degree any of these people are actually inspired by any ideology or rhetoric.

Tortures: Those Critical Race Theory indoctrinated hyper-racist degenerate Chicago thugs abducted and tortured that autistic kids for days. We all only saw a little sliver of his horrific experience, but in that clip we heard "F- Donald Trump" ETC ETC. So dont play dumbfounded.

CRT indoctrinated hyper-racists? As little as I care for CRT, where are you making that connection? I'm not dumbfounded, it's a single act by a handful of racist halfwits. Remember this from Decemeber?

White Teen Avoids Prison Time For Brutal Coat Hanger Rape Of Disabled Black Student

The racist rapist was making racist jokes and singing klan-related songs as he was penetrating a mentally handicapped peer with a hanger. Is the Right on the hook for that in your opinion? The perp got 2-3 years probation and 300 hours of community service. What do you think will be the sentences for the racist anti-Trump kidnapping torturers?

What little sliver of horror were we exposed to in this case? It was barely covered. Fox News and the right-wing echo chamber — and you — keep shoving this horrible crime from Chicago in everyones' faces but you've been silent on the other. Why is that? Why the selective outrage? Expediency? Cherry picking to feed your confirmation bias? More than a little hyperbole?

Don't forget, I'm not a republican/conservative so my tribalist emotional investment at this juncture is something non-existent compared to yours, that is being able to defend the team isn't even a thing for me, but I'll play along with you.

I'm not defending any of these criminals, murderers, terrorists, etc. I consider myself a liberal and a progressive and Left-center-Left. That doesn't make me feel any kinship to people simply because they or "on the Lef" (or claim to be) or self-describe that way or what have you. I have nothing in common with these people you mention. Ideologically, philosophically, personally, I have little to nothing to do with the illiberal, anti-free speech (regressive) black bloc rioters who don't have the balls, intellect or depth of character to take on a smart though gimmicky provocateur who relies heavily on novelty and shock value. Don't be this!

I'll be back in a little bit to pick up where I left off.

posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 09:54 PM
a reply to: SoulSurfer

How much play are you expect to get out of these antifa halfwits who rioted at UC Berkeley?

Do you think they meant an actual war or did they mean a figurative war? I'd say the latter. Unless you are arguing that they're going to fight a literal war with their signs, cardboard shields, fists and dumpster fires?

On the other side we have people saying the words "civil war" and they're not using the term figuratively. I'm sure you've also seen some quite specific statements about armed conflict. I know I have.

So that's point one. My second point here would be that the people who are going on about "civil war" is exponentially larger than the number of black bloc protesters nationwide. For all the times that this mini-riot at UC Berkely (and it was mini, if you need examples of actual riots, let me know) has been shoved in the faces of liberals, anti-Trump posters, what have you — how many times have you seen any posters expressing their support or approval?

The overwhelming majority doesn't have anything to do with them.

No consider how many times you've seen right-wing, anti-Obama, pro-Trump, whatever posters on ATS predict, allude, threaten or otherwise mention "civil war?" I'd be willing to bet that I could come up with hundreds of examples.

posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 09:58 PM
a reply to: theantediluvian

Hmm. Since the MSM and the Republicans and conservatives in general aren't all out in the open every single day propping up and promoting White Supremacy stuff, I hadn't heard of quite a bit of that.

It's fallacious to assert that because KKK types coudl be classified as rightwingers that it means that they're some sort of mainstream movement, that mainstream people largely support them, that conservatives are being perpetually indoctrinated / socially engineered to nurture & protect & think like them.

If that was happening then they'd already have chapters in my big series I started. But it isn't.

Conversely, Black Power / SJW Supremacy is the mainstream of left now. It's the daily bread & butter; it's the milk & cookies and every day is xmas (well pre-election night I suppose).

Proving white supremacists exist doesn't speak to my long post.

The CRT bit does. You seem to not be realizing that the CRT noise has actually been around since the 70's, although then mostly in academia circles, but this logic has been increasingly spewing out into the society starting with the black community. The teens+ now have all been raised on it their whole lives by my estimation. With social media we're now seeing it run amok; we can openly see it period. When you can search youtube for |blacks cant be racist| and "About 286,000 results" pop up, that's not some idea that just leaked out a few years ago. It was already well cemented, the Progressive Stack just took it to the next level (in 2010 at Occupy) and that's when the true hardcore SJWFRONT was born. By the next election, now it's already blossomed into having bonafide Paid Riot Squads, or are they naturally occurring "Black Shirts"? (probably both) And people are getting hurt and killed, and the party the MSM and your team are all out in the open defending it if not openly endorsing it while encouraging more.

They're not going to listen to a bastard outsider like me. Leading the new way away from them and their social de-evolution is up to people like you.

And you really ought to check out that D'Souza documentary I mentioned. Make a debunker post?
edit on 13-2-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 10:03 PM

originally posted by: Tsubaki
Let's see how many pages before the content of the OP is actually addressed.

I've already seen a flew deflections - that seems to be the norm on ats now.

I see you've done a great job here at addressing it your self.

edit on 2/13/2017 by Alien Abduct because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 10:10 PM

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: amazing
There is no white victim hood.

That's right. Of course! because minorities CANT be racist, and whites aren't capable of experiencing racism. Thank you for correcting the record oh wise one whom wears "Social Justice Warrior" on your sleeve. I'm white so I'm off now to go punch myself in the head twelve times while repeating Hail Hillary.

Well what are you really saying? That you aren't successful in life because minorities are trying to keep you down? Or you struggle with reverse racism on a daily basis? I've never seen that happen...not in any way that would keep you down for long.

I'm not saying it can't happen or doesn't happen in specific individual cases but it's rare and even if some minority is trying to keep you down, why do you let them? Move on. NO one determines your success except you.

posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 11:27 PM

originally posted by: amazing
There is no white victim hood. It just isn't happening. Sure, you'll bring up a crime, blog, threat, protest, special circumstance, but in all honesty there is no vast conspiracy against white people and white people have it pretty good.

If you are white and failing it is because you're not working hard or you're not working smart. But even before work comes responsibility. YOU have to be responsible for where you're at in life and take actions to correct and adjust it.

I would add if your anything and failing it is because you aren't working hard. How many minorities do we each know that started with nothing, some in Harlem like Dr. Sowell, and some who started dirt poor who made fantastic fortunes who's only common denominator with each other was working hard and EARNING it. The undertone I see here with the attitude of the left toward successful people whether black, white or whoever, is that the lazy people are jealous of those who earned great things by working hard. They want it all but as they are not willing to actually work for it they are jealous and lust for the other persons stuff. But hey, I was an 11 year old paper boy who drove a paper route as a 15 year old because i worked my way up that ladder and then did very well in school because I worked on it, what do i know?
edit on 13-2-2017 by Justoneman because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 14 2017 @ 12:32 AM

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Give up the act. As if everyone doesn't know this has been the game:

I suggest you cut the crap, and start critiquing the extremists on your side for playing these Critical Race Theory games of deliberate systematic anti-white bigot mongering agenda crap.

This insane hyper-bigoted logic has mass murders, riots, abductions, torture, etc happening at a steady constant pace for how long now? And this all started when? OH, after black president, womens & gays & minorities & trans all had equal rights, better career availability outlooks, and even greater anti-discrimination protections than straight cis white males. You guys got everything you wanted, and then declared open war on everybody that doesn't think like you.

Keep doubling and tripling and quadrupling down on this BS, and the best case scenario your new Identity Politick liberal maniacism crushes the Democrat party into pariah obscurity for many elections to come... and if in response to that you keep on with your tribalist civil war agenda you're guaranteed to eventually see a true truly oppressive mass white supremacist movement. This is human nature stuff: when a tribe out in the open declares war on another and continuously offends and assaults and murders them eventually the other tribe will merge as one and crush their opponent. And dont even dare act like white's as a mass group have had some agenda to abuse and oppress and destablize every one else in our society. That's the MYTH.


posted on Feb, 14 2017 @ 12:37 AM
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Re: Southen Strategy

With the quotes they did paste in, I could see where a lot of people would be all OMG. Yet that compared to the mass scale CRT/PS/PC/SJW craze I finally took note of last year, on a shock value of 1-10 that page is a 0.1 to the SJW's 10.

I think your concept of the scale of these issues is completely out of whack and that's part of the problem. I don't think your own feelings of alarm are a very objective standard. Let's talk about real world impact. Which brings me to this:

I'm no expert on this: can you provide all kinds of demonstrations of actual GOP policies that directly hurt se black folks? It seems I'd have stumbled into, you guys would constantly be posting that kind of stuff. Instead what I've seen is all kinds of examples of liberal run cities that are ever increasingly detrimental to their minority inhabitants by essentially every metric. "Plantation Politicks" is the term here.

When you use the term plantation politics, it's a good sign that you're immersed up to your neck in identity politics, mostly conservative (though some progressives will use the term when criticizing Democrats). It's the embodiment of a false narrative but I'll set that aside for now and give you some examples of negative impact of GOP policy.

We can start with Goldwater who of course opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. I don't think this needs much explanation. It resulted in a historic landslide defeat of Goldwater. It also precipitated the Southern Strategy. The GOP knew that it was a crossroads. I don't think you fully appreciate what happened at this point. The GOP under Nixon chartered a course of abject pandering to base, racial fear and animus among mostly poorer whites.

Report: Aide says Nixon's war on drugs targeted blacks, hippies

Washington (CNN)One of Richard Nixon's top advisers and a key figure in the Watergate scandal said the war on drugs was created as a political tool to fight blacks and hippies, according to a 22-year-old interview recently published in Harper's Magazine.

"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people," former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman told Harper's writer Dan Baum for the April cover story published Tuesday.

"You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin. And then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities," Ehrlichman said. "We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."

Ehrlichman's comment is the first time the war on drugs has been plainly characterized as a political assault designed to help Nixon win, and keep, the White House.

I don't know how much more clear it could be when it comes to the shift that occurred at the end of the Civil Rights Era as lines were drawn at Goldwater and the Nixon administration began in earnest to alter the political and social landscape of America by steering the GOP on a course of let's call it "white resentment."

What about Saint Ronnie? Ronald Reagan opposed every landmark piece of Civil Rights legislation:  the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (which he called "humiliating to the South.") and the Fair Housing Act of 1968.

In his first year in office Reagan sought to reverse a 12 year-old IRS policy of denying tax exemptions to schools that discriminate on the basis of race. Why did they do this? To get the tax exemption restored for the all-white Bob Jones University. He faced huge backlash and ended up proposing new legislation that reversed his reverse.

Reagan cut funding for both the EEOC and the Justice Department's civil rights division. The result was that the EEOC was filing less than half the cases it was prior and drastically fewer discrimination cases were investigated. While not specifically anti-minority, let's not forget another policy of Reagan that was extremely bad for urban areas in particular. Ronald Reagan first defunded the mental health system in California and then later, the entire country. The result? Psychiatric patients turned out into the streets to swell the ranks of the homeless and the incarcerated. Did you know that as many as a quarter of all homeless people are mentally ill? That was all under the guise of shrinking government. In typical GOP fashion, that really means growing the parts of government like "defense" spending that they and their lobbyist love and defunding social programs.

Speaking of social program cuts, Reagan also cut funding for AFDC, for employment training (CETA), school lunches, subsidized housing, etc.

In 1988, Reagan vetoed the Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1988. Why? Because the act prohibited discrimination in organizations receiving federal funding. His veto was overturned. Reagan drastically escalated the War on Drugs. Classic Problem – Reaction – Solution. This is interesting:

In the late 1980s, a political hysteria about drugs led to the passage of draconian penalties in Congress and state legislatures that rapidly increased the prison population. In 1985, the proportion of Americans polled who saw drug abuse as the nation's "number one problem" was just 2-6 percent. The figure grew through the remainder of the 1980s until, in September 1989, it reached a remarkable 64 percent – one of the most intense fixations by the American public on any issue in polling history. Within less than a year, however, the figure plummeted to less than 10 percent, as the media lost interest.

I didn't mean to dedicate this much time to the gipper but you asked a question that's not easily answered in a few lines.

I'm sure if we wanted to painstakingly detail all of the anti-minority policy positions of the guy responsible for the "welfare queen" trope, it would fill countless threads. Black unemployment was the highest it has ever been under (21% with an average of 19.5%) under Reagan. Reagan also oversaw the highest percentage of black people living in poverty since the Census Bureau has been tracking that data, 36%. Perhaps the worst legacy though was the promotion of the narrative of "plantation politics" and how Democrats were destroying the black community with social welfare.
edit on 2017-2-14 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 14 2017 @ 12:57 AM
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

(continuing from last post)

Pointing to specific Rust Belt cities like Detroit that have been devastated by the loss in manufacturing jobs and trying to draw a correlation to Democratic mayors ignores the overall trends.

Under Democratic Presidents, Minorities Make Economic Gains - And So Do Whites

Economic outcomes clearly diverge under Democratic versus Republican presidents – especially for African Americans.

Under Democratic presidents, black families’ incomes grew on average $895 dollars annually, but grew only by $142 dollars under Republicans. The black unemployment rate fell by a net 7.9 percentage points across the 26 years of Democratic leadership, but went up by a net of 13.7 points during 28 years of Republican presidencies. Across the years of Democratic leadership, black poverty declined by a net of 23.6 percentage points, but grew by three points when Republicans held the White House.

Although data on Latinos and Asian Americans do not go back as far in time, the results are similar. For Latinos, Democratic presidencies are associated with large annual gains in income, substantial declines in poverty, and real drops in unemployment, while under Republican administrations Latinos tend to lose income, become poorer, and experience greater unemployment. Latino incomes grew an average of $627 annually under Democrats, but declined by an average of $197 annually under Republicans. Less consistent data for Asian Americans also suggest gains under Democrats versus stagnation under Republicans.

Tellingly, white Americans make gains under Democrats, too. On average, under Democratic administrations, white incomes have grown, and white joblessness and poverty have declined.

Before I move on, I would like to point out something I didn't address in the last post. GOP presidents weren't the only ones who pushed the War on Drugs, built more prisons and drastically promoted mass incaceration. Bill Clinton did as well. He's also on the hook for the growth in mandatory minimum sentences.

Ugh, this is so disorganized! I've got some code to wrap up but I wanted to address some of the ways that the current GOP's policies have negatively impacted minorities. One of the most overt is the push to disenfranchise as many blacks and other minorities as possible.

North Carolina GOP Brags Racist Voter Suppression Is Working—and They’re Right

In July, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down HB 589, going out of its way to note the racist nature of the law. The state’s general assembly had “requested data on the use, by race, of a number of voting practices,” wrote the court. And then, “Upon receipt of the race data, the General Assembly enacted legislation that restricted voting and registration in five different ways, all of which disproportionately affected African Americans.”

Federal court invalidates maps of two NC congressional districts

RALEIGH A federal court panel ruled on Friday that two of North Carolina's congressional districts are racial gerrymanders and must be redrawn within two weeks. An order, written by U.S. Circuit Judge Roger L. Gregory, also bars elections in North Carolina's 1st and 12th congressional districts until new maps are approved.

Court Rules Florida’s Early Voting Restrictions are Discriminatory

On Thursday evening, the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. rejected the early voting change in those five counties, ruling [pdf] that the changes seem likely to keep minorities from going to the polls. “The State has failed to satisfy its burden of proving that those changes will not have a retrogressive effect on minority voters,” it said.

African-Americans in Florida were much more likely to vote early than whites in four of the five most recent federal elections, according to court testimony from Professor Paul Gorke, an expert on the practice from the Early Voting Information Center, a nonpartisan research center based in Reed College, Ore.

In 2008, 54 percent of Florida’s African-American voters in Florida voted early — twice the rate of whites, according to Gorke, who testified for the Justice Department in this case. In 2010, early black voters exceeded early white voters by about a third.

Blacks also voted at nearly double the rate of whites in the first five days of early voting, Gorke told the court. Those are the days that state officials want to eliminate this year.

The GOP's Stealth War Against Voters

The data is processed through a system called the Interstate Voter Registration Crosscheck Program, which is being promoted by a powerful Republican operative, and its lists of potential duplicate voters are kept confidential. But Rolling Stone obtained a portion of the list and the names of 1 million targeted voters. According to our analysis, the Crosscheck list disproportionately threatens solid Democratic constituencies: young, black, Hispanic and Asian-American voters – with some of the biggest possible purges underway in Ohio and North Carolina, two crucial swing states with tight Senate races.

Nevertheless, tens of thousands face the loss of their ability to vote – all for the sake of preventing a crime that rarely happens. So far, Crosscheck has tagged an astonishing 7.2 million suspects, yet we found no more than four perpetrators who have been charged with double voting or deliberate double registration.

We had Mark Swedlund, a database expert whose clients include eBay and American Express, look at the data from Georgia and Virginia, and he was shocked by Crosscheck's "childish methodology." He added, "God forbid your name is Garcia, of which there are 858,000 in the U.S., and your first name is Joseph or Jose. You're probably suspected of voting in 27 states."

That's the program pushed by Kris Kobach who has been bending President Trump's ear on such things as "extreme vetting."

Anyway, some things to mull over. I've got to go get some work done!

posted on Feb, 14 2017 @ 01:26 AM
A lot of butthurt flows in this thread. LOL

I have no doubt Trump and his supporters believe the crap they spew. All they need is a YouTube video, blog or whatever ridiculous medium to believe any crap story.

They call any media that proves Trump is disliked, fake but those are the facts. The only reason he won was because no one took him seriously and were sure Clinton was going to win, they were wrong but it will be fixed in the next election.

If Trump does not get impeached by then, he will lose in a landslide, that is of course if he and his admin don't figure a way to fix it.

Anything to do with Trump is being dumped from businesses because they know he is toxic and the majority of consumers make that call.

When the right protests, no one cares because they are the minority but when the left does, everyone listens and dumps anything to do with Trump. So the left has so much power and they will not take him lightly next time, so enjoy these four years, possibly less..

edit on 14-2-2017 by cantthinkofausername because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 14 2017 @ 01:31 AM

originally posted by: cantthinkofausername
A lot of butthurt flows in this thread. LOL

I have no doubt Trump and his supporters believe the crap they spew. All they need is a YouTube video, blog or whatever ridiculous medium to believe any crap story.

They call any media that proves Trump is disliked, fake but those are the facts. The only reason he won was because no one took him seriously and were sure Clinton was going to win, they were wrong but it will be fixed in the next election.

If Trump does not get impeached by then, he will lose in a landslide, that is of course if he and his admin don't figure a way to fix it.

Anything to do with Trump is being dumped from businesses because they know he is toxic and the majority of consumers make that call. T

When the right protests, no one cares because they are the minority but when the left does, everyone listens and dumps anything to do with Trump. So the left has so much power and they will not take him lightly next time, so enjoy these four years, possibly less..

Do you not see the hypocrisy of your own words?

posted on Feb, 14 2017 @ 11:03 AM

originally posted by: Kettu

No one asked you to feel guilty.

No one makes you feel anything.

What ever it is you feel, you choose to feel that way.

Yeah, that's where you lost me completely...
No one 'chooses' to feel something. Emotion is a reaction on something past and hopefully an automatic, sub-consciously controlled response.

Right when I see a real victim, an innocent being suffering because of environment, I have to stop and think "suffering, this is bad, be sad *beep boop*"

Emotion is not something controlled by the conciseness, you can mitigate reaction through self-control, but what is felt is not controlled by a switch. Past experience definitely has an influence on perspective, as does the perspective at time of experience.

But wait! don't let my definition of emotion let this fail!
I choose to feel apathetic about this!

posted on Feb, 14 2017 @ 11:05 AM

originally posted by: GreenGunther

originally posted by: Kettu

No one asked you to feel guilty.

No one makes you feel anything.

What ever it is you feel, you choose to feel that way.

Yeah, that's where you lost me completely...
No one 'chooses' to feel something. Emotion is a reaction on something past and hopefully an automatic, sub-consciously controlled response.

Emotion is internal and only comes from you.

Yes, it can be your reaction to something - - but still comes from you.

Emotion is not an external force.

posted on Feb, 14 2017 @ 11:11 AM
a reply to: Annee

Ones reaction does not have to be a reflection of ones emotion.
This is self-control, and helps one to get by in society.

posted on Feb, 14 2017 @ 11:13 AM

originally posted by: Kettu

originally posted by: Substracto
But but but, he said he would drain the swamp! and the first thing he does is to call all his swamp big ol'corps friends into government!!

To drain the swamp or to keep digging in the swamp, that is the question.

Exactly. A lot of the people suffering who voted for Trump lost their homes/jobs due to the sub prime mortgage bubble/housing crisis.

Goldman Sachs has a lot of blood on their hands for that.

And who does Trump invite inside the White House? The same people that caused a massive, world-wide economic crisis and poverty/job loss for the very people that voted for Trump.

The irony. It's as if they want to be perpetual victims and go again for round number two or something.

The premise is 100% faulty. The idea of white's having priveledge is silly, but even if it were true -- when they are also discriminated against could be seen as equalizing.

when you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like discrimination.

Lets just say color people are being discriminated against -- now if you start discriminating against white people, you did just equalize them, but you didn't start treating either of them fairly or end discrimination, they are equalized by equally being discriminated against.

So while it's true that if you did have some kind of privileged, an advantage, and then lost that advantage, you could feel "discrimination" the other alternative is equally possible/probable and almost certainly true -- it's that white's get discriminated against also.

Whoa, who would have thunk it. White people get framed by police regularly, white people get turned down jobs because they are white, so on and so forth, if you say it didn't happen you're ignoring the truth to promote you discrimination/white privileged narrative.

What is white privilege and how do I sign up to activate and/or redeem mine?

Anyone who believes in white privilege is a moron and is actually completely blind to the real issue. It's wealth privilege. It's not racist, it's classist -- if you're poor, you have no privilege, the richer you get, the more privilege you obtain. This is not a black or white thing -- Morgan Freeman has a lot more privilege than your local non-famous ethnic rapper. You think Morgan Freeman is getting traffic tickets?
edit on 14-2-2017 by SRPrime because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 14 2017 @ 12:22 PM
a reply to: Kettu

There is only one race. The human race. Colour of skin has nothing to do with it.
You are accusing people of being racist, knowing full well your statement is specious and misleading.
You have an agenda.

posted on Feb, 14 2017 @ 02:52 PM
You're right but don't expect Trump supporters to listen or even understand what you are saying. It's funny how none of the people criticizing you in this thread are unable to actually discuss the main arguments you put out in your OP and instead rely on passive aggressive insults and misdirection.

At the end of the day there is no talking to a Trump supporter. They are what Bob Altemeyer likes to call 'right wing authoritarian followers'. If you want to read more about it you can look him up on google and go to his site.

posted on Feb, 14 2017 @ 04:11 PM
Clinton supporters believe a false narrative of (insert offended social justice group here) victim hood.

Fixed it for you.

posted on Feb, 14 2017 @ 05:46 PM

originally posted by: Ohanka
Fake news from a leftist rag continuing down the FAILED "identity politics" path I see.

Give it up. You lost. Find something else. People don't want to be divided on race or other nonsense anymore. This is all you have? Sad.

Maybe do something the majority of people agree with, Like President Trump

Could you crowbar in a few more stale empty cliches perhaps? You forgot butthurt.

top topics

<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in