What is racism?

gandalf

Mr. White answer my question WHAT IRISH CULTURE Are you trying to preserve???

Define what is an pure Irish Person??

Or can't you actually answer this ?

Is Paul McGrath Irish in your eyes?

Is Phil Lynott Irish in your eyes?

Come on then stop avoiding these questions!!

Gandalf.

bertiebowl

The fallacy here is that two countries-Nigeria and Romania-account for more than half of all asylum applications in Ireland.Yet neither is in a 'sh1tstorm',as you so gracelessly put it:both are democracies and Nigeria is an oil-exporter.

Er, Mr. "White" are you REALly saying that there are no problems with living in Nigeria?

What about that woman sentenced to being stoned to death under the Islamic Sharia law for adultery? (She says she was raped).

What about the massive poverty, as a result of year's of dictatorship?

The fact that the average income per year in Nigeria is a whopping $300??

HA HA HA - you REALly make me laugh!

Meh

Originally posted by Mr White
A specious argument,as anyone can see from the facts of the case.These were pre-meditated racist murders of unsuspecting strangers,which rightly led to guilty verdicts. Since their defence said nothing about 'retaliation' or 'retribution'(each brother blamed the other) your rationalization makes no sense.

Nowhere in that story does it say that the murders were racially motivated. Seems that you're the one not making sense. Unless you can provide another link saying that they were actually black supremacists?

http://www.amren.com/sheehan.htm

http://www.amren.com/braun.htm
Forgotten Black Voices
American slaves had surprisingly positive things to say about slavery.

http://www.amren.com/braun2.htm
The vast majority of South African blacks do not want black rule.

(1) Blacks cannot manage a modern industrial democratic society; (2) blacks know this and would never think of denying it were it not for white liberals insisting otherwise; (3) except for those black elites who hope to take power, black rule is in no one's interest, especially not blacks; (4) blacks know this better than anyone and are terrified of black rule.

I think that's all I need to say about that particular source.

the passive behaviour of the white victims shows how conditioned they were to their own demise.

So they just sat there to be murdered because trying to rescue themselves would have been "politically incorrect"? Do you realize how ludicrous this is? Have you lost all contact with reality?

bonkey

Originally posted by Mr White
"Poles bomb Warsaw!";"Spielberg attacked by jew-eating octopus!";"They hate our freedom";"Bob the Unlucky Octopus is a reliable source of information":true of false?The last is definitely false judging by his mendacious post above.

Actually, by his track record, I would generally consider Occy a pretty reliable source.

You, on the other hand, are using sites such as the blatantly racist Amren to try and support an argument you wish us to accept as fact?

Yet neither is in a 'sh1tstorm',as you so gracelessly put it:both are democracies and Nigeria is an oil-exporter.

I'm pretty sure that were Ken Saro-Wiwa alive today, he would love to know that the country which persecuted and killed him was, in fact, a nice place what with the oil and democracy an all.

As for the Irish times link you posted - that brings you to the results of a search which does not include the words "Nigeria" or "Romania" anywhere. Given that the articles themselves are unavailable, as they are subscription-based content, I cant read them.

Care to supply any "open" source for your information?

Less than 4% of applicants in 2001 qualified for asylum under Geneva Convention rules;58 sought judicial reviews of decisions,out of over 12,000 applications; while a grand total of 365 failed applicants were deported during the year,a fraction of those who should have been deported.

I dont think you'll find a single person here who will argue that the current system is acceptable or being managed correctly.

However, this has nothing to do with your "solution" which is to "keep Ireland white". This is a seperate issue. Its not about advocating that we have stricter control to only admit the genuine cases....you're advocating that we keep the "incompatible" cultures out....which is blatantly racist.

Stop fogging the issue, and address the point.

Oh - and I notice how you're still blindly ignoring Gandalf's challenge. Go on - answer his question from your enlightened point of view. Please. Explain whether Paul McGrath and Phil Lynnot can be / should be considered Irish. If the cannot, explain what the problem is. If they can, then explain the need to "keep Ireland white".

Go on. I dare ya

Any more lies?

OK. I've had it with warning you about civility.

You have 24 hours to either apologise, or prove that Occy was willingly trying to deceive people - that knew what he was posting was false and was out to mislead us.

I dont care if his information is or is not incorrect. Being wrong is completely different to lying. One implies you are not in possession of the correct facts. The other implies that you are in the possession of said correct facts, and deliberately choose not to use them.

Failing either of these actions - proof or apology (I dont care which) - you will be immediately and irrevocably banned from politics.

jc

Biffa Bacon

In fairness bonkey Occy said worse to him

Biffa Bacon

By the by I'm opposed to a multicultural Ireland. Not that I don't want any immigrants here, I just don't want very many. We should only allow them in if they are genuine asylum seekers or if they're economically necessary.

The Gopher

Originally posted by Mr White
".

Violent interracial crimes in [ are committed almost exclusively by blacks,contrary to PC dogma which depicts them as victims in a 'racist' white society.

A million whites are victims of black criminals every year,and 120,000 blacks are victims of white criminals.Logically if a group is a minority then they will have a larger percentage of victims of the majority race than ciminals in that race will have on the minority.Take this for example.
Back in the 70s,when there were probably only a few hundred black people in Dublin,there is one young black guy who commits crime on a daily basis.Seeing as there are fewer black people to rob probably all the victims of his crimes will be white.The fact is that white american criminals attack black americans at the same rate blacks attack whites-the fact theyre a minority makes it look otherwise.
It is true that clsoe on 50% of the states 2 million prisoners are black.The reason is that crack offenders are subject to mandatory terms in some states.Since crack is a traditionally black drug more blacks go to prison for it despite the fact large amounts of whites are caught with drugs such as heroin and powder cocaine.Blacks comprise 13% of the population but only 12% of drug abusers,yet they account for over 50% of drug possesion jailings.

gandalf

Oh and Mr. White answer my questions as well or I will ban you.

You started this thread off saying you wanted to protect Ireland for the Pure Irish so I think the questions I have posted are very relevant.

Gandalf.

Mr White

Gandalf:the thread is called 'What is racism?',not 'What is Irish culture?'.You want to change the subject? Tough.Two threads have been closed after I posted on them because I supposedly veered off topic.You must apply your own rules,otherwise you're likely to be called a...hypocrite.

Bonkey:Was Wichita racist?If the roles were reversed,and blacks were the victims,I doubt if you or the controlled media would be splitting hairs about motive.There'd be a feeding frenzy,with talk of a black backlash.

Your ultimatum:Suckpoop Bob has no evidence to support his mendacious claim.I will defend myself if and when I choose.

Paul Sheehan:writes for the Sydney Morning Herald,not Amren,which I nonetheless recommend.

Zombrex

Mr White has come to the startling conclusion that, in the past, a black person has committed a racist crime

I know, I was as shocked as the rest of you ...

Thank you Mr white, for drawing this forgotten history to our attention

I now, naturally assume that black people are, well, evil, and desire no respect at all ... I will now tear up this "black loving" propaganda that is, well all modern history books, that show nearly every black leader in American history was shot and killed, because after all black people have been shooting and killing whites as well so that makes it okay.

I would also like to thank the modern Nazis, for pointing that there were, yes hard to believe, bad Jewish people. Naturally they are lying about the whole holocaust .. the 6 million Jew are to be found in the Isle of White, running a hair dressers. Oh yes, and Hitler, though he hated Jews, and wanted them wiped from this earth, would never actually order that they would be killed .. cause he was really a nice person and wouldn't do that ... to .. er ... a race of people he wanted wiped from the earth.

Oh and yes, I would also like to thank the creationist for drawing my attention to the fact at we do not know every single possible thing about evolution, so naturally it is completely wrong and God created the world in 6 days (measured on earth of course, not a day on any of the other billion planets in the universe ... I assume)


Mr White, do you have any point to posts saying black people commit crimes, or are you just trying to wow this board with you in-depth knowledge of black history?

DiscoStu

Originally posted by The Gopher

It is true that clsoe on 50% of the states 2 million prisoners are black.The reason is that crack offenders are subject to mandatory terms in some states.Since crack is a traditionally black drug more blacks go to prison for it despite the fact large amounts of whites are caught with drugs such as heroin and powder cocaine.Blacks comprise 13% of the population but only 12% of drug abusers,yet they account for over 50% of drug possesion jailings.

whos been watching the west wing

Originally posted by Mr White

Irish people must champion the racial interests of non-whites.We must sacrifice our own future on the alter of 'diversity' and cooperate in our own dispossession.We are to encourage,even subsidize,the displacement of Irish culture by alien people and cultures.To refuse to do so is racism.

Mr. White one of your opening points was that we are allowing our culture to be eroded by what i can only assume you mean areblacks going by your name. gandalf is perfectly justified in asking what culture when phil lynnot, an irish "cultural icon" is black.

Turnip

My opposition to immigration is based mostly on economic grounds. We do not need to import labour when we have labour here that can fill gaps in the workforce. Not PC but I'm absolutely against people coming here who might have medieval attitudes to women and homosexuals (and kites?) and the values that people of all political shades here share and I would not like to associate with them anymore than I'd like to associate with Irish people with similar views.

But my question is this: When did the Irish become part of the White Race? We have always been adjudged (by the anglo saxons) to be inferior. In the last century, James Anthony Froude described the Irish as being "more like squalid apes than human beings." The evidence to back his claim was there. The Irish in 19th century New York (along with other racially 'inferior' types like Italians and Jews) were responsible for incredible amounts of crime and vice and debauchery. (I'm looking forward to Scorcese's Gangs Of New York Film about this.) So were Froude's theories of scientific racism correct? Are the Irish a congenitally stupid, thuggish, lazy race who should be extinct? Or was he merely referring to Mr.White's forebears?

Sometimes I think we have more in common with other post colonial nations who've been treated as brutally in their histories as we have, than we do with the so called civilised nations who make up the White Race.

DadaKopf

As far as I'm aware, genetically, there is so little difference between all varieties of human beings on this planet as to make arguments over race completely pointless. Most (and I mean most, not all) of the biological differences that differentiate each 'race' are largely cosmetic. Each racial grouping's ability to survive, work, contribute to society are therefore equal.

This means that the issue of 'race' as it has been represented for hundreds of years by peoples since ancient times is cultural (and perhaps psychological). That's why this argument isn't about 'race' it's about ethnicity (or more broadly, culture). This is why it's possible to make a case against, say, Nigerian immigrants because they come from a corrupt culture and are ripping people off. But the ethnicity/culture argument also makes it possible to make a case against Irish people who are racist or xenophobic. What this approach does is gives us something to work with. It doesn't, however, stop prejudice but it leaves the issue open-ended enough to never allow social Darwinism to re-emerge.

But we have to ask whether prejudice (and by association racism and subjugation) can ever be eradicated? The simple answer is no; people have an unswerving instinct to exclude 'the other' (whatever it is they don't understand or perceive as threatening) in the interest of security.

Considering, then, that racism is cultural and unjustifiable on biological grounds, we have to examine the assumptions dominant in society that embody racist tendencies and perpetuate subjugation and minimise them. It's just that the application of the 'othering' instinct has become a lot more hidden. Prejudice being justified in different ways.

Few people would say, for example (at least with a straight face), that Hispanics are genetically inferior to whites and are therefore more disposed/suited toward menial labour; it's more that business policy (coupled with government policy) uses their weak economic position to exploit them and prejudicial/racist values (and people) continue to support a system that is more than happy to keep them there to maximise profit; finally, the market itself reinforces the popular perception of the Hispanics' uselessness (but at least they can become Americans - the US is great that way). (This is in no way unique to America, or the 20th century or capitalism or anything.)

Modern-style racism based on Darwinist theories is just a modern dressing to a different problem. It’s not the validity of evolutionary theory itself that’s being argued but the assumptions that put it there, and keep it there, in the first place.

Meh

Originally posted by Mr White
Gandalf:the thread is called 'What is racism?',not 'What is Irish culture?'.

You were the one who brought up Irish culture, in the post which started this thread. Nice selective memory there... So answer the question anyway: do you accept Phil Lynott and Paul McGrath as Irish or not?

Bonkey:Was Wichita racist?If the roles were reversed,and blacks were the victims,I doubt if you or the controlled media would be splitting hairs about motive.There'd be a feeding frenzy,with talk of a black backlash.

It's impossible to prove a negative, so why don't you go ahead and produce some evidence that Wichita was racially motivated? Speculation about how people would have reacted if it had been whites killing blacks instead doesn't count. Neither do links to pro-slavery/pro-apartheid sites.

gandalf

Originally posted by Mr White

[snipped]

[*]Irish people must champion the racial interests of non-whites.We must sacrifice our own future on the alter of 'diversity' and cooperate in our own dispossession.We are to encourage,even subsidize,the displacement of Irish culture by alien people and cultures.To refuse to do so is racism.
[/list=1] You won't see any of these meanings in a dictionary or the rules of this forum,but you know if you express agreement with my views you'll be censored and maybe even banned.So be careful.

This is from the opening statement of your so called arguement Mr. White it central to this thread and I am not a hypocrite asking you the questions. Now answer them or get ready to be silenced.

Gandalf

bonkey

Originally posted by Mr.White
Was Wichita racist?If the roles were reversed,and blacks were the victims,I doubt if you or the controlled media would be splitting hairs about motive.There'd be a feeding frenzy,with talk of a black backlash.

Well, your doubt would be well misplaced then. I am not blind or stupid enough to believe that any crime comitted where the perpetrator and victim are racially different is a racially motivated crime.

Just as a person can murder someone of their own race for a given reason, so can the same crime be comitted interracially without it being racist.

For it to be racist, there would have to be evidence of racial intent, and I would not accept something as racist without this evidence....regardless of who comitted the crime.

Your ultimatum:Suckpoop Bob has no evidence to support his mendacious claim.I will defend myself if and when I choose.

No. My ultimatum is simple. You inferred he is a liar. Whatever about any other insults, I will not accept this one on this forum from anyone. Either prove or retract your claim, or suffer the consequences. You can choose not to defend yourself...as is your choice, but dont think for a second that this means I cannot or will not take action.

jc

bonkey

Having decided not prove or rescind the "liar" insinuations in the given time-frame, Mr.White is now banned permanently from the politics board.

This discussion can continue without its originator should people decide they wish to continue the discussion.

Let me be very clear on one thing....whatever about other reasons which may or may not ultimately have led to a banning, I will not tolerate anyone levelling claims about lying at someone else. There is a world of a difference between being ill-informed, mis-informed, and lying.

I will be sending Mr White a copy of this post via PM.

jc

pro_gnostic_8

I think that the recent preoccupation in this thread with the subtleties of difference in physical attributes between races blurs the more significant consideration of cultural asymmetry. An indigenous Irish person may share 99.9999% genetic coding with a Congolese but both are separated by light-years in culture and outlook.

That there is a certain reluctance by some of us to enthuse about the influx of large numbers of non-EU nationals should not infer a racist mentality but is rather a concern that the values and mores of our own tradition might be under threat of usurpation. Is it not unreasonable to request that our own culture is not eclipsed in the course of "celebrating" multiculturalism? Diversity is all very well but it cannot be welcomed at the expense of the disenfranchisement of Irish culture and a decline in jobs, housing and living-standards for native Irish people.

Originally posted by gandalf
Ok Mr. White what exactly are you trying to protect here.

I want you to define what you mean by Irish Culture, what exactly are you trying to perserve. Go on then try and persued this liberal leftie why I should agree with your vision.

Define for me what a pure Irish person is ?

Define for me what Irish Culture is ?

Go on I challange you

Gandalf.

In the absence of Mr White, could I offer a reply to the above? As I said in anearlier post Culture is primarily an expression of a set of moralities, philosophies and outlook.............a community-specific consciousness formulated through the history of a race. Adding an Irish dimension results in an appreciation for the Irish language, Irish democratic and social system, and kinsmanship.

gandalf

pro_gnostic_8 thank you for your reply. However I was asking Mr.White for his particular understanding of what he meant by culture. Unfortuantely he didn't respond.

Gandalf.

DadaKopf

Pro-gnostic_8: isn't that kind of what I said in my above post?

We're not talking about racism (the genetic argument is meaningless), we're talking about ethnicity/cultures/subcultures and people's emotional/psychological reactions to those, apart from the obvious, and valid, economic concerns.

Mr White no longer has a place in the disussion.

Meh

Originally posted by pro_gnostic_8
the values and mores of our own tradition might be under threat of usurpation. Is it not unreasonable to request that our own culture is not eclipsed in the course of "celebrating" multiculturalism?

As I said in my first post in this thread, you must have a very low opinion of Irish culture. If it can't survive a few tens of thousands of economic migrants (about 1-2% of the population), then it must be be a pretty sorry excuse for a culture.

Diversity is all very well but it cannot be welcomed at the expense of the disenfranchisement of Irish culture and a decline in jobs, housing and living-standards for native Irish people.

I agree entirely. There's no excuse to treat people differently simply on the basis of their ethnicity. Immigrants should be encouraged to integrate into Irish society for their own benefit (for example, the English tests for new citizens that they have in the UK).

Bob the Unlucky Octopus

I would like to begin by stating first of all, I have been reading the progress of this thread, and am personally glad that bonkey has taken the action that he has done- although not for the same reasons. There are undeniable racist messages in Mr White's arguments- as a libretarian no one advocates free speech more than myself, but there are limits to what a responsible adult should seek to assert on a message board accessed by minors in my humble opinion.

I do feel that the arguments are worth picking apart however, lest anyone be taken in by their specious and subversive nature. The fact that I take some pleasure in deconstructing such deviously crafted statements is almost of no consequence, I believe this thinking is to be adversarially confronted whenever and wherever it is discovered. Thus, I feel obliged to defend my position and respond.

In fairness bonkey Occy said worse to him

I realize that my remarks come across as belligerent and perhaps even obnoxious in places. I've been posting on this board a long time, but in all that time I've rarely felt as strongly about a post as when I read Mr. White's statements. I apologize if this has caused offence to those reading this and colored the legitimacy of jc & gandalf's decisions. I am generally not as coarse in my statements- I however felt personally slighted by many of the suggestions made and responded acrimoniously, a fact I feel many wouldn't blame me for. Still, my apologies.

Originally posted by Mr White
A specious argument,as anyone can see from the facts of the case.These were pre-meditated racist murders of unsuspecting strangers,which rightly led to guilty verdicts. Since their defence said nothing about 'retaliation' or 'retribution'(each brother blamed the other) your rationalization makes no sense.

Just as a matter of record, the deposing attorney in the matter of State vs. Carr & Carr was one Robert "Zippy" Ziphorkis, currently deputy DA for Marin County CA, rising star in the 7th federal district circuit and an old personal friend. The facts of any case for the record, are not contained in a sensasionalist chatshow transcribed onto a website. Rather they are recorded by the state involved and archived accordingly with the judge's reccomendations. Having a somewhat inside knowledge of the facts of this case and taking a personal interest (Nick Baicouainu an old school-friend lives 40 miles away from Wichita), I thought I'd make the facts clear to the rest of the people here. I'm saddened that you think me a liar, and disappointed you didn't take the effort to check AMCAS at your local legal library, woulda taken 5 mins to verify the facts, which were as follows:

With the exception of the last killing, all of these were retributive crimes, exacted revenge for a perceived commercial takeover by a local authority of a section of low-cost housing. All this information is in the public domain, yet sensationalist programmes with racial allegations unfortunately sell more papers and improve the ratings more. FOX has a very poor record for me here, their crackpot team of "legal experts" would have the likes of Marshall, Trevthick and Stevenson turning in their graves and send shudders up Scalia & Rhenquist's spines.

Violent interracial crimes in America are committed almost exclusively by blacks,contrary to PC dogma which depicts them as victims in a 'racist' white society.

Amren is to put it bluntly, as racist as you are. Such a morally bankrupt body should have no substance attached to its claims. The assertion that *racial* violence is almost exclusively a black province is laughable. Talk to any county sheriff or police chief and the statement will be exposed for the lie it is. The victimization argument similarly cuts little ice with me. A truly TINY fraction of violent crime is racially motivated, most violent crime has deep social roots completely divorced from any race-related divisions.

The Wichita murders were not a 'freak occurence' as you claim,while the passive behaviour of the white victims shows how conditioned they were to their own demise.This is what one-sided diversity 'celebration' leads to. The fallacy here is that two countries-Nigeria and Romania-account for more than half of all asylum applications in Ireland.Yet neither is in a 'sh1tstorm',as you so gracelessly put it:both are democracies and Nigeria is an oil-exporter.

These were freak crimes, it's been repeatedly stated by the prosecution, defence AND the judge. Only sensationalist media reporting has ever made the public believe otherwise. A responsible observer who believes in accountability wouldn't attach any credence to such an observation.

Secondly, those fleeing Abacha & his successor regimes deserve every dispensation in my opinion. The violent tribal divides of Nigeria against the backdrop of prosperous expatriate companies like Royal Dutch Shell is good enough for any asylum standard short of a facist one. Those fleeing Romania's discriminative gypsy policies also deserve dispensation, they're fleeing racial persecution. Given that you're a racist, that'll cut little ice I'm sure, but I'm happy governments aren't as blinkered.

The fact that Nigeria's an oil-rich nation means nothing either btw. Saudi Arabia is the richest oil-nation on the planet, national riches don't filter down to the poorest though, the concept of wealth distribution has yet to penetrate the thinking of several resource-rich nations. Given that these people are often discriminated against and bullied into submission, I feel we owe them a chance. Then again I'm American, and our nation was founded on giving the oppressed a chance. One would hope that's why so many Irishmen laid down their lives for their nation's freedom, for the principles of liberty and equality irrespective of race or religion.

Wrong again,zippy.Less than 4% of applicants in 2001 qualified for asylum under Geneva Convention rules;58 sought judicial reviews of decisions,out of over 12,000 applications; while a grand total of 365 failed applicants were deported during the year,a fraction of those who should have been deported.

Possibly in Ireland, though if that's the case I'm suprised they're so far behind the *European* average that I quoted. The EU's special commision dealing with asylum deemed that 70% of applicants had a legtimate claim for asylum with proof to back their claims. If Ireland falls outside this average for western europe then that's as may be, and perhaps the Irish government can do more. That's a matter for them though, not you or I.

You're clearly pulling figures from the air. Again,this is quite misleading.'Officially',China and N.Korea are people's democracies,but everyone knows they're communist dictatorships.Likewise,most of Sub-Saharan Africa is democratic in form only,and out of 60 muslim member states only 1,Turkey,is a democracy. As I said:"The UN is a sham,given that a majority of its members are dictator-ships".

Any more lies?

My figures there were taken from Amnesty's 1999 study into government liberties. I sincerely doubt, having read the report, that an NGO like amnesty would be unable to make the relatively simple logical leap from people's democracy to one-party state only 10 years after Tiannemen. 10% is still 10 percent too many, yet the UN provides a forum for engaging these dictatorships and undemocratic states. Syria's positive vote on the recent UNSC resolution is an indication of the shifting global trend, of nations like Libya and Syria eager for acceptance into a more liberal, streamlined view of world politics. This can only bode well for the idea of democracy in their countries and for their neighbors as well. Given that even the world's last remaining superpower chose to exercise the diplomatic option THROUGH the united nations when unitlateralism was the more expedient route speaks volumes for its importance. If it's a sham, it's a pretty f*cking good one :P

TacT

Bob the Unlucky Octopus

Dunc you pos! Imma slap you silly when I'm over next

TacT

I love it when you talk dirty