More reasons why I do not much care for the Liar Tony Perkins

Black-and-white photographs clipped from newspapers call to mind the distant past.

That’s particularly true when the content of the photo seems to show something from a bygone, shameful era in American history. For those of us born after the Civil Rights movement, the idea of something like White Citizens Councils seems like an ugly relic from the middle part of the last century.

But this photograph is from 2001:

That’s the Liar Tony Perkins there, smiling at the podium during a May 2001 meeting of the Council of Conservative Citizens in Baton Rouge.

The White Citizens Councils still exist, they’ve just rebranded, slightly, changing their name but not their agenda. They remain committed to white nationalism and white separatism. That’s who they are — the essential, unmistakable core of who they are, why they are, and what they are.

Does this mean that the Liar Tony Perkins is a white nationalist or a white separatist? No. But it does mean that he was willing to get chummy with white nationalists and white separatists, recently — here in the 21st century. They do not regard him as an opponent or as a critic of their views.

What has the Liar Tony Perkins been up to since chuckling with anti-miscegenation activists in 2001?

Well, it seems he’s been lying. A lot.

And, as John Aravosis explains, that habitual dishonesty is “Why the Family Research Council is a hate group“:

At one point, I had the Congressional Research Service send me a copy of every single document the Family Research Council had written about gays, and then I had CRS get me every single document listed in the FRC doc’s footnotes. I.e., all the “original sources” for the Family Research Council’s anti-gay claims.

And there were a lot of them. At the time, FRC’s list of footnotes could be nearly as long as the written part of the document itself.

What did I find when I went through the original sources cited in the footnotes? I found that nearly every single footnote was a lie. Not a lie in the conventional sense — meaning, they didn’t make up a source that didn’t exist. Rather, they did things like quoting a damning opinion from a judge in a court case without mention that the judge was in the minority, that the gays had actually won the case they were citing.

Or they’d quote a study with a hideous conclusion about gays and lesbians, only for you to realize later that the actual quote in the study was rather benign — instead, FRC “forgot” to put an end-quotation mark on the quote, added an ellipse, and then put their own damning conclusion.

…  These are not honest people simply expressing a contrarian view of politics, like Democrats and Republicans do every day in Washington.

And the FRC is branching out. Perkins has hired a new attack dog — former Army Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin, a man rebuked by former President George W. Bush for his anti-Muslim hate-speech. The same thing Bush criticized Boykin for is what made Boykin attractive to the FRC: He’s willing to spew innumerable hateful lies about anyone he considers his enemy.

See for example, Boykin’s recent description of the Southern Poverty Law Center: “this anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic, Marxist organization called the Southern Poverty Law Center, which is just an evil group of people.”

Perkins and Boykin “are not honest people simply expressing a contrarian view of politics.” These are not honest people. Period.

Stay in touch with the Slacktivist on Facebook:

James Dobson is reliably untrustworthy
He's got the biggest King James you've ever seen
Ralph Reed's history with casino moguls
'Religious outreach'
  • Fusina

    I have stopped wearing my jewelry with crosses on it out in public due to being embarrassed by these idiots. I do not want to be associated with people like this. Course, they probably wouldn’t want to be associated with people like me, either

    I’ve also found that I wouldn’t be recognized as a christian when I eat out–having worked as a waitress and with two sisters and a brother who also did worked as wait staff, I totally overtip.

  • Kiba

     

    I totally overtip.

    As an ex-waiter I do this too.

  • myfanwy

    As the mom of two kids who waited tables in high school and beyond, I always overtip–to make up for the people who “forget” to tip at all.

  • Tricksterson

    I find it amusing, in a dead baby joke kind of way, that white racists get so pearl clutching with the vapors exercised over “miscegenation” when in the bad old days they so long for most race mixing was the result of white men raping black women, not the other way around.

  • Madhabmatics

    See, they had to change their rhetoric. When people said “Race mixing is communism” it made communists look too cool.

  • Kubricks_Rube

    Linking your point to the Todd Akin story: On his show Thursday night, W Kamau Bell said, “If women can’t get pregnant from legitimate rape, why are there so many light skinned black people walking around Alabama?”

  • Nicanthiel

    -puts on Hazmat suit to deal with this reply-

    Oh but you see, it’s not legitimate rape if you own the vagina and/or it’s used with your permission by a man you approve of. See also, husbands and wives, fathers and daughters, etc.

    -takes off Hazmat suit and bleaches everything-

  • Tricksterson

    The Hazmat suit thanls you for bleaching it because even it was repelled.

  • EllieMurasaki

    I find it amusing, in a dead baby joke kind of way, that white
    racists get so pearl clutching with the vapors exercised over
    “miscegenation” when in the bad old days they so long for most race
    mixing was the result of white men raping black women, not the other way
    around.

    How can that possibly be race mixing? The child of a black woman is black regardless of who the father is. A black child only has a white parent if the white parent is the mother.

    (brb scrubbing taint off hands)

  • Loki100

    It takes some ridiculously huge nerve to call the Southern Poverty Law Center Anti-Semitic.

  • LL

    You know, I kinda understand wanting to make the distinction between the actual racists (the true believers) and the people who just cozy up to them for political expedience, but to my mind, there really isn’t much difference between them. 

    Kinda like there’d be no difference between the guy who wants to blow up an abortion clinic, for example, and the guy who procured the explosives for him. The procurer may not actually give a shit about abortion, but helping someone blow up an abortion clinic is pretty much the same as doing it yourself to my way of thinking (and I’m pretty sure most law enforcement people would agree with me on that). So speaking to a group of racists at their invitation and telling them a bunch of shit they want to hear is pretty much the same as being a racist, regardless of how you actually feel about non-white people. It isn’t your supposed intent that matters (despite our current fixation on “intent” in various contexts), it’s the end result. If the end result is that you give a racist organization your support, you are, pretty much by definition, a racist. 

    Regardless of what people who speak at the invitation of racist organizations say to the contrary. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Charity-Brighton/100002974813787 Charity Brighton

     I agree completely. I think the connection is even worse than that; if you blow up a clinic, the specific reasons for it are really of interest to reporters and attorneys. They don’t matter to your victims. They’re not going to care that you really didn’t have anything against them personally or that your death was a political statement or anything like that.

    It’s almost the same as the difference between someone who bullies you because they don’t like you and someone who bullies you because they want other bullies to like them. The effect is literally identical; it’s not like getting beaten up by a gang is any better when only some of the people dislike you personally.

  • http://www.facebook.com/jeffrey.kramer.71 Jeffrey Kramer

    The FRC of course is fresh from blaming the Southern Poverty Law Center for “licensing” the shooting of an FRC employee by referring to FRC as a “hate group.”

    If you yourself actually believe that calling an organization a “hate group” licenses the murder of its employees, then how do you permit your spokesman to call another group  an “anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic, Marxist organization… just an evil group of
    people”?

    If they had any trace of the normal human capacity for shame, they would be too heavily weighed down by guilt and anguish over their obvious duplicity to be able to get out of bed in the morning.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    Why denigrate the Council of Conservative Citizens? Can’t whites have representation without being called “racist?”

  • AnonymousSam

    Let’s see. Let’s just run through the CCC’s own website (caution, I get an advisory when viewing this page that it may contain spyware).

    We believe the United States is a Christian country. … We therefore oppose all efforts to deny or weaken the Christian heritage of the United States, including the unconstitutional prohibitions of prayers and other religious expression in schools and other public institutions.

    First off all, the first amendment prohibits mandating prayer in schools or even of creating an atmosphere where prayer seems expected, to respect the religious beliefs and lack thereof of others. Second of all, this isn’t a Christian nation. A nation filled with Christians, yes, but not a theocracy, nor should it be. This would be in direct violation of the founding father’s intentions.

    We believe the United States is a European country and that Americans are part of the European people. … We therefore oppose the massive immigration of non-European and non-Western peoples into the United States that threatens to transform our nation into a non-European majority in our lifetime.

    I’ve yet to be convinced that mixing races is a bad thing or that its opposition is not a racist thing. How can you have white supremacy without racism? Answer: You can’t.

    We believe that illegal immigration must be stopped, if necessary by military force and placing troops on our national borders; that illegal aliens must be returned to their own countries; and that legal immigration must be severely restricted or halted through appropriate changes in our laws and policies.

    There’s so much wrong with this that I barely know how to begin. The illusion of millions of dirty foreigners coming into the nation and wrecking things is, at beast, a No True Scotsman fallacy taken to an extreme where the arguer claims that no true citizen would ever work to bring about harm to the rest of the nation, despite the fact that this is exactly what they’re doing. The old yarn about illegal aliens coming in and stealing all the jobs? Yeah, that doesn’t happen. Those illegal aliens don’t tend to bother with the jobs anyone else wants. Trust me, I’ve worked next to them plenty of times. There was room for more, picking strawberries for about $1.50 an hour under the hot sun.

    We also oppose all efforts to mix the
    races of mankind, to promote non-white races over the European-American people through so-called “affirmative action” and similar measures, to destroy or denigrate the European-American heritage, including the heritage of the Southern people, and to force the integration of the races.

    Yeah, I’m having a really hard time figuring how you can assume this has nothing to do with racism.

    This goes on for fourteen paragraphs. Of their fourteen points, I can sympathize with only parts of a couple of them. Most are so twisted by misinterpretation of what the laws actually state or are intended for that they bear no resemblance to fact or reason (such as opposing the ACA in favor of charities instead, the insistence that the first amendment is all about being able to force Christianity down everybody else’s throats, the belief that sociology and psychology are substitutions for justice…).

    Quite a few of these are laden with hatred for other races, for non-Christians and for non-white non-straight non-affluent non-males in general.

    Whites can have representation. That’s not what the CCC is about, though. At all.

  • http://deird1.dreamwidth.org Deird

    We believe the United States is a European country

    Whoa. Geography fail.

  • AnonymousSam

    I assumed they meant “of European descent,” referring to America’s pure Caucasian blood, etc.

  • Lunch Meat

    Yeah, how dare all those Native Americans enter our country illegally and corrupt our pure perfect European blood??

    *head asplodes from the stupid*

  • Tricksterson

    Well, in origin yes, most of the structure and culture was Anglo-Saxon although even at the beginning there was osmosis with the First nations and the African cultures of the slaves which of course the Founding Fathers would have denied.

  • Baeraad

    Now there’s a change of pace. Usually these people are ranting about how the US is definitely *not* some pseudo-commie European country, so enough with these suggestions about welfare reform!

    Personally, I like it better when they do that. USians of European descent are descended from people who hated Europe so much that they’d risk their lives crossing the ocean in rickety ships and then building a whole new life for themselves from scratch rather than to have to live there any longer. And ever since then, all we’ve heard from them is how much better, bolder and manlier than us they think they are. After all that, I feel it’s a bit too late for some of them to start pretending to like us just so they’ll have an excuse to hate everyone else. :P

  • Tricksterson

    Oh no,they still don’t like you because all the good, strong Europeans came here.  You’re just the decadent remnants.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     The generalities of the Constitution still do not address the beliefs of our forefathers. If we wished to be technical, the Naturalization Act of 1790 (which remained a legal for 162 years up until 1952) limits immigration to only “free white persons.”
    Hatred is ultimately subjective, but we must realize a common fact. The CofCC believes in white separatism, not the supremacy of a people. If this were fundamentally true, then blacks and Latinos wouldn’t join the Council.
    One particular Hispanic lady who’s a member (and is currently running for president of the United States as an independent) is Samm Tittle, a proud Hispanic who realizes that whites are facing discrimination in hiring and representation in the media.
    You mentioned that race-mixed pertains to racism, but mixing the races does impact the children and the community in a harmful way. Take, for example, biracial children. They endure identity issues and cannot understand the concept of race, and therefore, will ultimately slam down anyone who mentions the value of race. It’s harmful to the stability of our union, but I wouldn’t support the criminalization of dating outside one’s race, simply because when something becomes illegal, it will become more popular (Prohibition).
    Thank you for responding eloquently and with citations from the Statement of Principles. I know we’ll never meet common ground, but I sincerely believe these 14 points would strengthen our country if implemented.
    You call it hate; I call it love. Love of country and people.

  • EllieMurasaki

    whites are facing discrimination in hiring and representation in the media.

    Which is obviously the reason that so many characters–everyone, I hear, but the enemies and the bad-guy-who-goes-good–in M. Night’s The Last Airbender had ‘Caucasian’ on their casting calls, why Katniss Everdeen is white in the Hunger Games movie, and why there was such a shitfit when in that same movie Rue and Cinna turned out to be black. In the Avatar: the Last Airbender cartoon, everybody is Asian except for those who are clearly Inuit. In the Hunger Games novel, Katniss is dark, Rue much darker, and Cinna’s skin tone is (as I recall) unmentioned.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     That isn’t what I mean. I’m referring to videos and multimedia directed at our youth. Lady GaGa, for instance, is telling our youth that nothing is wrong with gay marriage or illegal immigration, breaking down our traditions. Justin Bieber’s girls in his videos are all non-white, thus, encouraging dating outside of one’s race.
    I find it dangerous to the future of white genealogy in Western Civilization. Will we fall like Rome or degenerate to Third World status because of youthful apathy and Agnostic attitudes towards race and religion?
    It’s a frightening concept to behold.

  • EllieMurasaki

    If you thought there was anything wrong with illegal immigration, then you’d move your ass back to whatever European country spawned your ancestors.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     I’m of mixed ethnicity (Scottish, German). I’m not beholden to any particular European nation, so I have no place to go. Might as well camp out here for now. :p

  • EllieMurasaki

    You’re missing my point. Here’s a visual representation of my point: http://www.northernsun.com/Indian-Territory-T-Shirt-%281021%29.html If you’re visual-impaired, it’s a T-shirt that shows the Americas from Panama north, caption “Indian Territory”.

    They were here first.

    Nobody from east of the Atlantic asked the permission of anybody west of the Atlantic to set up housekeeping over here. We sailed our happy asses across the wide blue sea and started chopping trees to build houses, and we were glad when our Native buddies made sure we didn’t all die that first winter after the Mayflower but we were even gladder when the diseases we brought that our Native buddies had no immunity to killed them all off. And when we did start running into actual Native resistance, every time we signed a treaty with them, we lied, took what we wanted, and gave them not a single thing we’d promised in exchange. Also Trail of Tears and can we get Andrew Jackson the fuck off our currency already?

    If illegal immigration is wrong when Mexicans do it, it was wrong when white folks did it. And observe please that Mexicans, unlike white folks, aren’t actually trying to kill and/or evict the current residents in order to take possession of their land.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     You’re stuck with me because Europe isn’t white anymore. It’s filled with immigrants, too, and not only that, but I’m mixed ethnicity.
    Your acceptance of interracial relationships really hurts you, EllieMurasaki, in the end because now their offspring are in your land. If you tell them to leave, then they [we] have no place to go. You’re stuck with me because you had no problem with people mixing their ethnicity/race/phenotypes.

  • AnonymousSam

    And yet none of this is actually a drawback unless you’re racist.

  • EllieMurasaki

    Your acceptance of interracial relationships really hurts you, EllieMurasaki

    Uh-huh. Tell that to someone who isn’t planning on adopting from China.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     I thought you were American.

  • EllieMurasaki

    I am American. I am very white. Though I am capable of being pregnant, I have no intention of doing so, ever. Therefore, if I want kids, I must adopt them. It so happens that China has quite a number of girl kids in orphanages because China instituted a one-child-per-family policy (not good, but not unreasonable, especially with their population problem) and Chinese culture got it in their collective head that an adult daughter is not as capable of supporting aged parents as an adult son.

  • AnonymousSam

    You forgot the number one reason to do so: Asian kids are adorable.

  • EllieMurasaki

    Eh. Kids are adorable full stop. Until they dump half the pantry on the kitchen floor and bust open the flour sacks, anyway, and usually even then.

  • AnonymousSam

    >:0

    We will have to agree to disagree.

    Heretic.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    China’s policy on favoring their sons irks me to such a profound point. Tens of millions of Chinese men will not have the ability to find partners, and now that foreigners are adopting those children out of China, fewer Asian men will be able to marry  their Asian darlings.
    No offense to you, but this adoption of their children to the United States does compromise even more the stability of their homogenous Asian populace and the survival of the nationalistic state.

  • EllieMurasaki

    You do know that the only reason most Chinese folk identify their ethnicity as Han Chinese is because, when China was expanding towards its present borders, people of a variety of local ethnicities got assimilated by the Han? Rather like the way a lot of white people in the US identify as ‘American’ because they don’t know what parts of Europe their ancestors came from, they just know they’re white. Only with centuries longer for people to forget that the population of China used to have a lot more ethnic divisions.

  • PJ Evans

    Your acceptance of interracial relationships really hurts you,
    EllieMurasaki, in the end because now their offspring are in your land.

    Tells me all I need to know: you’re a racist and unwilling to see people as people because they don’t look just like you, and maybe don’t believe like you or eat like you.

    Here, have some wat. Or some sushi. Or some adobo.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     I thought she was an American, an American of East Asian ethnicity. Don’t stuff words in my mouth, anti-racist.

  • Lori

     

    I’m mixed ethnicity   

    Mixed ethnicity like  Scottish & Irish? Or are you telling us that you’re racism comes from self-loathing?

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    Mixed ethnicity: Scottish + German.

  • http://mmycomments.blogspot.com/ mmy

    @facebook-100002582493999:disqus 
    Mixed ethnicity: Scottish + German 

    You do realize, do you not, that there is not such thing a single, simple “German” ethnicity? I have listened often enough to Prussians stereotyping and othering Bavarians and Bavarians stereotyping and othering Prussians to be convinced of that. Even the language varies quite noticeably as you move along the Rhine.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Ethnicity as we know it based on nationality. All that matters is that I’m mixed ethnicity.
    That’s my point altogether.

  • http://mmycomments.blogspot.com/ mmy

    @facebook-100002582493999:disqus 
    Ethnicity as we know it based on nationality. 

    Huh? What? When?

    Canada is a nation but not an ethnicity (just go ask the various political actors in Quebec right now.) Many (current) nations used to be subsumed within the old Soviet Union — they are now independent. The ethnicity of the people who lived in those areas didn’t change the moment their nationality did.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    But no white people are indigenous to Canada; therefore, ethnicities of whites do not formally exist in Canada. One could argue on behalf of the Acadians and some Quebequoise inhabitants, but they are not indigenous to that land.
    I was talking about Germany anyway, and you started talking about some exception that had nothing to do with our convo. We were talking about Germany’s ethnicities within its nation. 

  • PJ Evans

     No white people are indigenous to anywhere outside of Eurasia, and not all of that.
    Argument fail. You’re a racist.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    White people are indigenous to Europe; black people are indigenous to Africa & Australia; yellow people are indigenous to Oceania and Asia, and American Indians are indigenous to the Americas.
    If being right makes me racist, then you, PJ, need to look up the term “racist.”

  • Lori

    Yellow people? Seriously? Yellow people? Yellow people are only indigenous to Springfield. Unless you’re a cartoon there are no yellow people.

    It is definitely not being right that makes you a racist.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    You idiot. There’s no problem with “white people” or “black people,” but “yellow people” is a racist term to you? Hypocrite!

  • Gotchaye

     The people to whom “yellow people” is typically applied often find it offensive, and don’t typically use it to refer to themselves.  The other two aren’t offensive terms by virtue of the fact that people aren’t, as a rule, offended by them.

  • Lori

    You idiot. Do you actually claim not to understand what’s wrong with calling people “yellow”? Really?

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    Just pointing out your double standards. Based on those double standards, coupled with your abrasive attitude, you have been correctly judged.

  • Lori

    Oh sure, it makes perfect sense for you to sit in judgement of my “abrasive attitude”. Not being polite enough to a racist is way worse than being a racist.

    Also, I was not expressing a double standard. What I was expressing was astonishment. Even most racists know better then to call Asians “yellow”. That’s pretty much entry-level human decency now days. Your obsession with white and black aren’t surprising. You’re open use of yellow is a bit. You’re not just racist, you’re old school racist. Do you have any tattoos Richard? Maybe a double 8 or a 14?

  • Gotchaye

    I found double 8.  Google isn’t helping on 14, other than that it’s for some gang.

  • Lori

     14 is for “the 14 words”: “We must secure the existence of our people and a future for White Children.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteen_Words

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    Explain how I’ve been racist. Tell me one specific thing I’ve said (quoted) that illustrates my “racism.”
    I don’t see how I’ve said anything racist. In fact, I believe that most of my points are common sense.
    88? I hate Nazism with a passion because Hitler divided Europe and caused people to embrace unlimited immigration. Europe wouldn’t be so “mixed” today if it weren’t for Hitler.
    14? I agree with the 14 words but not the man who wrote them. David Lane was a  murderer of the innocent, and I don’t subscribe to violence.

  • Lori

    Tell me one specific thing I’ve said (quoted) that illustrates my “racism.” 

     “I agree with the 14 words.”

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    “We must secure the existence of our people and a future for White Children.”
    That isn’t racist, Lori. Explain how you conceive this quote to be racist. As far as I’m concerned, it’s about the preservation our race, ensuring that we aren’t blended out of existence like what happened to the Native American peoples.
    I feel sorry for the Native Americans but ultimately cannot do anything to reverse the horrors my ancestors  inflicted upon the tribes through rape and pillaging.
    The only way to correct those ills is to ensure that my kinfolk don’t die out through blending. I’m not going to intimidate interracial couples or cause mayhem. Instead I’m going to teach my friends and family about the importance of race and the beauty of a people that may be extinguished from the planet.
    Explain how that’s racist.

  • Lori

    I don’t have to explain it Richard. Every time you lay out a bit more of your beliefs you explain it just fine. Ensuring that your “kinfolk don’t die out through breeding” is,in and of itself, a racist concept. I’m glad that you aren’t violent about it, but not being violent doesn’t mean you’re not racist. You can keep saying it, but that won’t make it true.

    The fact that you would attempt to link preserving your “kinfolk” from “breeding” with correcting the ills done to Native Americans is also racist, not to mention totally batshit. Keeping your line pure doesn’t do anything for Native Americans. Only a racist would even think that.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    Tell that to the Native Americans living on reservations whose forefathers feared having their daughters raped by foreign invaders that their worries were all a “racist concept.”
    You wouldn’t get very far.

  • EllieMurasaki

    Native American women fearing rape by white men did not and does not have a damned thing to do with “keeping the race pure”. It did and does have to do with rape hurts.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     But do you know why the white men raped those Native American women? It was about blending out the Native American peoples.

  • AnonymousSam

    The sudden silence isn’t because you just made a profound point. It’s because you’ve just proven yourself to be stunningly and embarrassingly racist. The fact that this is even your interpretation of why men rape women, especially women of another race, is an indicator of just how strongly racism influences your thinking. I hope for your sake that it was a spur-of-the-moment thought and not something you’ve actually dwelt upon, for what little it would say about your character either way.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    Racism has been used against people for centuries. You don’t think the European conquest of the Americas was racist? Seriously?

  • AnonymousSam

    Let me get this straight. You think colonists raping natives was all about making them have multiracial babies. Someone points out how fucking idiotic that theory is, and your response is to affirm that conquest involves racism.

    In other words, you’re under the impression that one of the first steps in taking over a country involves raping the women to make them start churning out little babies in your skin color, and that this is intentional, systematic, and for a specific intent which has something other to do than what all other rape is about.

    Moreover, you really have thought about this, and it’s entirely logical to you. “Step one, land the ships. Step two, build a base. Step three, start raping the women. Step four, mine for gold.” The idea springs so readily to mind that you can’t even tell why someone would object to the idea. “Well, how else would you take over a country?”

    You are a fucking horrible person, Richard Hansen. It’s amazing how you continue to primp yourself as though putting on a smile and declaring your martyrdom for the children would convince anyone but yourself.

  • EllieMurasaki

    To be entirely fair to Richard, for the duration of slavery in the US, one reason white men raped black women was to make babies. Slave babies. Increase the value of one’s property at no cost to oneself.

    Also, and probably mostly, because white men had power and black women did not, and I suspect these men would have preferred the babies to have their mother’s skin tone rather than a blend (a runaway slave with dark skin is rather more easily caught than a runaway slave who has enough white ancestors to look convincingly white), but the baby thing was definitely a factor.

  • AnonymousSam

    I won’t argue that some rapists actually do want their victims to get pregnant and have children. Richard is asserting that the reason colonists raped natives was so that they would have white children and it would destroy their culture.

    There may well have been some sadistic people who thought of such a thing–those racists who we apparently need to cater to by separating out the races and making racial purity very very important, which will surely remove all the problems of racism (in Bizarro World)–but it damn well wasn’t part of the process of taking over.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    If “it damn well” isn’t a part of the process, then how do you explain why Israel made it illegal for Arabs and Israeli Jews to marry? I commend Israel for being aware of its identity and realizing that through the mixing of these two peoples that the dominant people will take over.
    Israel segregated its schools of Jews and Arabs, forced the Arabs into the West Bank and Gaza, and ensures penalty for miscegenation of Jews and Arabs. 
    Even in Hanukkah, the celebration marks the preservation of the Jewish people from preventing the foreigners from marking their people and assimilating them through rape and pillaging. The menora marks the lighting of the candles and the oil that sustained them which lasted eight days as the Jewish people escaped to a temple in Jerusalem and sought safety from the invaders.
    Now Israel has the right idea. What do you think would happen, if Israel let the Arabs move into Israel en masse and intermarry with the Jewish people? There wouldn’t be a Jewish people anymore.
    It IS a “part of the process of taking over.”

  • EllieMurasaki

    What makes you so certain that the Jews would become Arabic, rather than the Arabs becoming Jewish or the children maintaining the cultural traditions of both sets of ancestors?

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    The Arabs despise Israel because of its expansionist settlements across the West Bank. The Arabs would plunder the Israelis, if they had the chance.

  • EllieMurasaki

    ‘Plunder’ and ‘marry’ are not words that belong in the same sentence, Richard.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    Theoretically, no. Realistically, yes. 

  • Lori

    The Arabs have a more than high enough birth rate that they don’t need to have children with people they “despise”. Your arguments are not only not true, they’re not even internally consistent.

  • Gotchaye

    That’s not really the sense I get, even from very pro-Israel people, of why Israel’s doing what it does.  They’re not that worried about being race-mixed out of existence.  But they’re very worried that hordes of Arabs are going to pour in and become citizens (and vote) and then turn on the Jews.  So they work very hard to maintain a bright line between Jews and non-Jews such that they can clearly identify a group to be treated as second-class citizens.

    Marriage law there is also fairly complicated.  It’s typically handled by religious courts, and until fairly recently there wasn’t really such a thing as a secular civil marriage in Israel (in many ways there still isn’t).  It was only in 2006 that the ability of a religious court to deny recognition to civil marriages conducted /outside/ of Israel was overturned.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    I agree with your point on Israel using Jewish identity as protection from being attacked in their homeland.
    But I must ask you, do you believe that these laws preventing intermarriage, segregated schools, and settlements in foreign community spell out racism at all? In other words, do you believe that Israel’s stance on the issue is racist? If so, is it justified?

  • EllieMurasaki

    Richard is asserting that the reason colonists raped natives was so that
    they would have white children and it would destroy their culture.

    Wouldn’t work, unless the rapist took an active hand in raising the kid. Culture doesn’t have a damn thing to do with DNA. Kid grows up in Cherokee culture? Kid’s Cherokee. Lighter skin tone than Mom, if conceived when some white slime raped Mom, but still Cherokee. Related, the concept of ‘banana’, originated (I hear) by girls born in China and raised by white US folk. Yellow outside, white inside.

    Things much more effective at destroying Native American culture than raping Native American women: smallpox, alcohol, Carlisle Indian Industrial School. Not that Carlisle itself was particularly effective, they didn’t have a real high graduation rate and folks got real adept at hiding their kids from the Carlisle recruiters, but a dramatic increase in the percentage of Native kids who were students at Carlisle or similar and a dramatic decrease in the amount of abuse that went on there while keeping the focus on indoctrinating students into white culture and not letting them preserve their links to their own, and there probably wouldn’t be a hell of a lot of Native culture surviving till today.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    At first, the European colonists didn’t impose indoctrination programs to manipulate the identity of the Native children. Instead they conquered the land, in order to make way for a growing settler population.
    Rape of the people defintiely is a start, and then keeping them disadvantaged economically and not educating them (i.e., Carlisle Indian Industrial School) led to them feeling confused about their identity, not being accepted by either white society or Native society.
    That effort was an attempt at corrupting the culture by tampering with the cultural identity of the Native children, the successing generation, and thus, breaking down Native soceity which would make them more susceptible to white  expansionism and takeover.
    Some Native American culture exists in abundance on the reservations and the West. The Lakota Indian reservation, for instance, showcases a proud but poor people. Ziebach County in South Dakota is the poorest country in the entire country but is one of the branches of the Lakota people.
    Whites today are trying to correct the atrocities of their ancestors by providing more autonomy for the reservations and allowing them to open casinos (at least in my region) to fund their communities. It’s a process operating at the speed of molasses but will eventually lead to a collective improvement of the nearly extinguished Native peoples.

  • EllieMurasaki

    None of which addresses my point that a kid raised Cherokee is Cherokee no matter where the sperm came from.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    A kid born into a non-Cherokee family who joins the Cherokee people isn’t ethnically Cherokee.
    I don’t even think someone born out of the lineage is eligible to join.

  • EllieMurasaki

    You said white men rape Cherokee women in order to produce babies who are not fully Cherokee. I said a half-Cherokee baby who grows up among Cherokee folk is in fact Cherokee. You respond to that by saying someone who–this is the wrong way to put this but I suspect there isn’t a right way–converts to being Cherokee is not Cherokee.

    The fuck does that have to do with the price of peas in Persopolis?

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Hey, I was just reading what you wrote and responding to it. Sorry if it wasn’t as clear as intended.

  • Lori

    You have no idea what you’re talking about. You’ve taken a jumble of facts and run them through them through some sort of racist mental blender and created a fantasy. The fact that you tried to lecture me about not knowing history really took a lot of nerve. No that is not a compliment.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    The fact that you call reason a “racist mental blender” means you can’t debate this issue, nor can you handle the truth.
    Lori, tell your friends at the SPLC and the ADL I said hey.

  • Lori

    The “banana” thing is a general accusation about assimilation into the white dominated US culture and not specifically about Chinese children adopted by white families. It definitely pre-dates it being common for white couples to adopt girls from China. People called my Chinese ex that when he was young. He was raised by his biological parents and he’s older than the Chinese adoption trend.

  • Lori

    But making slave babies was about making money, not about destroying the black race through race mixing. Slave owning rapists were very explicit about the fact that they were making black children, not white or mixed children. That was the point of the “one drop” rule.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     No. Not about making “multiracial babies.” IT WAS ABOUT DILUTING THEIR BEING. It was about removing the aura of the native population and replacing it with that of the European peoples. Why do you think invaders the women and destroy buildings of the civilizations they plunder? It’s to replace them and expand the territory of the invaders!
    Anyone with a grasp of history can tell you that any conquest ever conducted has always involved destroying the population and replacing it with  that of the invaders. Perhaps you’ll one day understand cause and effect, but until then, you will remain clueless and defensive on race, for you do not know why it is important in history.
    I’d have to say, you have a horrible sense of judgment. You could say
    that my beliefs are “f**king horrible,” but to call me that shows your
    audacity and arrogance. You don’t know me; you know only my opinions on
    race.
    I might as well be arguing with a parrot. You’ll never grasp the whole of my point, just creating fallacies to attempt to disprove my claims which unfortunately, you cannot disprove.

  • AnonymousSam

    I’ll disprove them by allowing a future to develop without people like you. My only regret is that neither of us will be around to see it.

    And as Lori said, oddly enough, I find myself unmoved by your contempt. Part of this is because I’m a sociopath and you’d have a damned hard time indeed finding enough common ground on which to successfully impugn any part of my being I felt had the potentiality to be so slighted.

    The other part is that, again as Lori said, I’d be far more disturbed if you could connect with me on any level. Your insults, placed in proper context, boil down to “You’re a terrible excuse for a racist person, and one day, you’ll understand how important racism really is!”

    Nah, don’t count on it. But by all means, I refer you back to my original point: Please go jump off a cliff, Richard. That stands a far greater chance of improving the gene pool than anything else you intend to do in this lifetime.

  • Lori

    Diluting their being and removing their aura?

    Shouting that crap does not make it true, s lose the caps lock.

    Why do you think invaders the women and destroy buildings of the
    civilizations they plunder? It’s to replace them and expand the
    territory of the invaders!

    If the invaders” goal was to replace the native population then the smart move would be to kill them, not breed mixed race children. Those children were not accepted as white, (“half breed” was not a term of endearment), so how exactly were they more useful for expanding the territory controlled by whites than simply killing all the natives would have been? If diluting their being and removing their aura was the plan for taking over the territory of the natives why were death and resettlement systemically implemented, but rape was not?

    You don’t know me; you know only my opinions on race.

    According to you, race is one’s “being” and “aura”. I have no idea what you mean by “aura”, but a person’s “being” is pretty much who they are. Presumably that’s why it’s so horrible for it to be diluted by mixing with another race.

    So by your own standards knowing your race and your opinions on race tells us about your being. What more than your “being” would someone really need to know about you?

    You’ll never grasp the whole of my point, just creating fallacies to
    attempt to disprove my claims which unfortunately, you cannot disprove. 

    We grasp your point, we just don’t believe it. We don’t believe it because it’s not true. Your claims can be disproven, but that doesn’t matter to you. You will never accept that because you’re a racist. You can go right on living in your racist fantasy, but you can’t get the rest of us to join you in it.

    And with that, I’m off to bed. As much “fun” as it’s been wading in your white separatist swamp, I’ve had more than enough for today.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    So if a racist proved that 2 + 2 = 4, you’d still say, “You’re a racist; therefore, what you just said isn’t true”?

  • EllieMurasaki

    No. It was, as rape always is, about proving that the rapist has power and the victim does not.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    Well, actually you are mistaken. Frank Capra, a Sicilian-born American film director, released Why We Fight which was a war-time propaganda film based on showing the evils of Nazism.
    It displays “how Hitler divided Europe” (in description of the film) and the divisive nature caused by his rule.
    So I guess Frank Capra was an indecent, racist man…
    Idiot.

  • Lori

    Yes, Frank Capra was rather racist.  He was born in 1897 and was typical of his time.  Unless you’re incredibly spry for a 115 year old that has nothing to do with you.

    Also, unless the next words on the title card were “because it promotes race mixing” (and I’m pretty sure I’d recall if they were), I think it’s safe to say that Capra’s concerns about a divided Europe were not the same as yours and therefore having nothing to do with your point.

    Keep digging that hole Richard.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    So you judge a man, simply by the time he was born?
    Keep digging your hole of hate for those who don’t think your way. I have no hatred of you, but your sniveling judgments and arrogance tell a different story about yourself.
    Not only did you just judge someone based on the year they were born, but you also have the audacity to decide who’s racist simply by what horrible atrocities they choose to say are horrible.
    Decent people do think Hitler was evil for dividing Europe, and we also believe Hitler was evil for attempting to exterminate an entire people. 11,000,000 people he tried to kill which I regard as abhorrent, but yet you have the nerve to call someone racist, simply because they mentioned his division of Europe first.
    Here’s a history lesson for you: he DID divide Europe first! The Final Solution came afterward. Choosing which atrocities are worse and which ones matter show carelessness on your part and apathy for the past.
    If you really want to make a point, then make it reasonable. Are you capable of doing that, or are we going to see more blanket statements about people from another time period?

  • Lori

     

    So you judge a man, simply by the time he was born? 

    Obviously not. I do however judge people at least partially on the world they knew. It’s difficult to transcend the attitudes that surround you for most of your life and I try to take that into account in an appropriate way when judging people from the past. That doesn’t mean being of another time is a blanket excuse, which is why I acknowledged that Capra was rather racist.

     

    Here’s a history lesson for you: he DID divide Europe first! The Final
    Solution came afterward. Choosing which atrocities are worse and which
    ones matter show carelessness on your part and apathy for the past. 

    What in the world? When did I make any assertions about what Hitler did first?

    More to the point,  you didn’t mention anything about dividing Europe being bad because it was the first thing Hitler did. You said that you hated it because it  “caused people to embrace unlimited immigration”, which lead to Europe becoming too “mixed” for your tastes. You don’t get to try to change the argument now. In case you’re not clear on this, that’s not “reasonable”.

     

    If you really want to make a point, then make it reasonable. Are you
    capable of doing that, or are we going to see more blanket statements
    about people from another time period? 

    You mean like your incredibly ignorant blanket statements about the rape of Native American women by white men?

    Strangely, I find your negative opinion of my reasonableness to be of no concern whatsoever. In fact, I’d be a lot more worried if you did consider me reasonable.

  • http://mmycomments.blogspot.com/ mmy

    @facebook-100002582493999:disqus 
    I was talking about Germany anyway, 

    You were demonstrating that you can only “win” by making words mean whatever works for you.

    Many Bavarians think of themselves as having different a different ethnicity than Prussians. The issue (from their point of view) is about something other than the extremely superficial issue of skin colour. 

    And since none of us live anywhere near where our great(to the 50th) grandparents — none of us are really “local.”

    Also if you actually could read and understand French you wouldn’t make the silly statements you do about Quebecois concepts of ethnicity. Hint: they are a major, major, major issue in current politics. As in, once again people are talking about a referendum over separatism.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    I recognize the stance of cultural identity within large countries encompassing a variety of different cultures. France, for instance, has its Basque folks near the Pyrénéees Mountains who strive to preserve their dying language.
    The reason I mentioned “Scottish” and “German” as my ethnicity is because I can’t narrow it down any more than that. I can only go by nation, until I have an intensive look at my genealogy. 

  • AnonymousSam

    So while developing your racist fears of other races, you had an existential crisis upon realizing the implications this had of your own mixed heritage and incorporated a rationalization mechanism (“I don’t hate them, I love what I should be”). Are you aware that reaction formation is strictly a temporary coping mechanism, and that you will eventually have to confront your mixed heritage with all the loathing your subconscious is bottling up for yourself?

    God help you when that happens.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     That’s why I classify myself as a white American of mixed European ethnicity. Most whites in Europe have mixed ethnicity as well, but since my lineage has existed for decades (maybe 1.5 centuries) in the United States,  then I see no reason to leave.
    I don’t feel any hatred towards my mixed ethnicity. Granted that I’m white and united by race with other whites of their ethnicity, I see no problem.
    I suppose that since mixed-race and biracial people cannot understand the concept of race without feeling left out, that it explains why they tend to tell others that race doesn’t exist — as a temporary coping mechanism — for their own ills of not being able to identify with one people [unless that one people is humanity as a whole].

  • EllieMurasaki

    I suppose that since mixed-race and biracial people cannot understand
    the concept of race without feeling left out, that it explains why they
    tend to tell others that race doesn’t exist

    This is how we know you don’t read Racialicious. I mean, I could have guessed, but this proves it. It’s not possible to read Racialicious for any length of time and come away with either of those impressions.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    Hey, I didn’t know reading a blog titled “Racialicious” was a prerequisite to commenting on this board. You people have to tell me this, or at least post a disclaimer:
    “Warning: Those posting on this board who have not read Racialicious will be banned from the discussion.”
    I’m on the website right now…

  • Lori

    Wow, Scott and German. You mongrel, you. You’re like that old joke about the bar that had both kinds of music, country and western.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    Very true. Thanks to your acceptance of interethnic and interracial relationships, you’ll soon be surrounded by more “mongrels” like me.
    Your words, not mine. XD

  • Lori

    I take it that you have no sarcasm detector.

    And actually, I’m not going to be surrounded by people like you. Your brand of racism is dying out and eventually you’ll be gone.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Don’t hope for any of that. “Racism” has existed for centuries and will continue to worsen as liberals attempt to push the races together.
    Your opinions are actually fueling racism.

  • AnonymousSam

    … Because designating another race as Untouchable does so much to encourage people to consider them equals.

  • Lori

    Well sure Richard, because without the CCC whites would have no representation at all.

    Please crawl back into whatever hole you crawled out of.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Well, where do whites have representation as a race? It’s a simple question, and I’m not referring to television shows or multimedia where they are commonplace. I mean as a race, where are they represented?

  • PJ Evans

     It’s the default race for many cultural institutions in the US, and a lot of government ones, also. I’m sure you’ve noticed how many governors, senators, congresspeople, and presidents are NOT white and male.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     I can’t fault you there. That is quite true, but the U.S. is a majority-white country, and according to our immigration documents prior to 1965, we were a white country and were destined to remain white.
    Even George Washington endorsed this idea, when he signed the 1790 Naturalization Act wherein it’s stated the only “free white people” may emigrate from Western Europe.
    Abraham Lincoln also believed in relieving the slaves of their bondage by planning to repatriate them to West Africa. I can send you a quote of that, if you’d like.
    If I were Somali and immigrated to Iceland and felt disenfranchised because of my lack in racial representation in government, does that mean we should have a couple Somali parliament members? No. Iceland is a white country, and that Somali man’s ethnicity is exclusive to Somalia, not Iceland. The same is with the United States… We are traditionally a white country, but anyone can rise to power, regardless of race. Seriously, we have a biracial man as president; anyone can make it in America.

  • AnonymousSam

    Annnnd after a glance at Richard’s profile, I suddenly lose hope in reaching the inner human within him. Anyone who opens their mouth to say a word about a KKK Grand Wizard that isn’t carefully thought out does not deserve my time of day. Please jump off a cliff, Richard.

  • http://twitter.com/FearlessSon FearlessSon

    The first thing I did when I saw Richard’s comment was glance at his profile.  

    Yeeeeah, not particularly pretty.  

  • http://dpolicar.livejournal.com/ Dave

    General note: If anyone reading this thread is getting the impression, from the relatively few people engaging with Richard, that the ideas he’s espousing are generally accepted or valued here, I would personally greatly appreciate it if you let me know. Thanks.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     I wouldn’t call them accepted. My ideas are old-fashioned, but hey, some people subscribe them and others don’t.
    My ideas aren’t hateful; I’m just adding in my 2 cents where offered. Most people here are 180 degrees on the other side of the political spectrum, so no, most people commenting here do not agree with me.
    You’re very welcome, Dave.

  • AnonymousSam

    The generalities of the Constitution still do not address the beliefs of our forefathers.

    But I can. Of the 55 men who signed the Constitution, 49 of them were Protestants and two were Roman Catholic, and yet the document is oddly lacking in affirmation of their beliefs. Conspicuously lacking, as it were.

    If we wished to be technical, the Naturalization Act of 1790 (which remained a legal for 162 years up until 1952) limits immigration to only “free white persons.”

    And to be technical, women weren’t allowed to vote until 1920 and the laws of nearly two centuries forbid them to do so. There were also laws and discriminatory practice forbidding women to hold office, to teach in schools, to attend schools, to serve in the military (another one the CCC hates) and other proscriptionary mandates.

    Just as women are, in fact, American citizens and people — so too are people of non-European descent.

    Hatred is ultimately subjective, but we must realize a common fact. The CofCC believes in white separatism, not the supremacy of a people.

    I love how you say these things as if they weren’t related. Here’s an analogy: White separatism is to white supremacy what patriotism is to jingoism. For further reading, I refer you to much of the early to mid twentieth century when “separate but not equal” was affirmed in the supreme court.

    If this were fundamentally true, then blacks and Latinos wouldn’t join the Council.

    There are poor people voting for Mitt Romney, too. Apparently people don’t always support what’s in their best interests.

    You mentioned that race-mixed pertains to racism, but mixing the races does impact the children and the community in a harmful way. Take, for example, biracial children. They endure identity issues and cannot understand the concept of race, and therefore, will ultimately slam down anyone who mentions the value of race.

    So in order to build a better tomorrow, we should uphold racism as a justifiable reason to promote discriminatory legislation and practices? Sorry, no. The fact that people cover their ears and scream “I hate it!” doesn’t mean their hatred is justified, only loud. Such reasoning is the height of pathetic apologistism, like Fox News’s claim that they only broadcast what people really want to see. “Don’t shoot the messenger, even if the messenger happens to agree with and perpetuates the message of their own free will!”

    More related nonsense: “I’m only saying what everyone’s thinking!”

    It’s harmful to the stability of our union, but I wouldn’t support the criminalization of dating outside one’s race, simply because when something becomes illegal, it will become more popular (Prohibition).

    Thank you for admitting that you’d want to and for demonstrating a shallow understanding of human motivation. Protip: People date outside their race because they start talking to people outside their race and discover that, shockingly, these people of different skin tone are human beings as well, oftentimes to the point of being quite compatible them. It’s almost as though skin tone weren’t an indicator for personality, values or cultural stereotypes!

    I sincerely believe these 14 points would strengthen our country if implemented.

    And I sincerely believe treating millions of people as second-class citizens would destroy our country in both the short term and the long term. The short term because we’ve had a few generations of people grow up with the freedoms afforded to whites and they’re not likely to give them up and be directed to the Colored People’s Facilities without a fight, and the long term because the intermixing of cultures and perspectives has, genetically, socially and economically, proven to have significant benefits.

    You call it hate; I call it love. Love of country and people

    It’s just that you love one people so much more than anyone else…

    Lady GaGa, for instance, is telling our youth that nothing is wrong with gay marriage or illegal immigration, breaking down our traditions

    Just because something has persisted over a long period of time doesn’t make it better than the alternative. Superstitions are a form of tradition; have you suffered grave ills for not throwing salt over your shoulder? Some have it that Judas spilled salt at the last supper, suggesting that this superstition dates back thousands of years, but how has it impacted your life? Significantly? A little? Not at all?

    Cultural norms change. Social mores change. Appeals to tradition, besides being a logical fallacy, are nothing more than a rallying cry out of fear of change. What value does a specific trend of genetics carry, particularly if, as you insist, you don’t believe that the genetics of other races are inferior?

    Will we fall like Rome or degenerate to Third World status because of youthful apathy and Agnostic attitudes towards race and religion?

    “The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise.

    – Commonly attributed to Socrates, circa 400 BCE.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    I would continue to debate you, but you use the changing of “cultural norms” as a way of smacking away tradition, without analyzing the possible consequences of such changes.
    Your quote from Socrates actually reinforces my stance, since it actually outlines the issues with cultural change and its influence on tradition. “Bad manners” devleoping widespread in a generation does lead to the end of a country.
    You do realize that cultural change occasionally brings goodwill and strength to a nation. Legalizing marijuana, for instance, would limit the power of Mexican drug cartels. Believing that race doesn’t exist, however, is ignorant and won’t bode well for the future of Western Civilization [or any civilization wherein the people believe in such]. 
    And love for one’s people is something you can agree with. I doubt you love everyone, and if you say you do, then you lie. You cannot love what you do not know, since what isn’t known cannot be judged.
    Dating outside of one’s race happens because of cultural assimilation. After three generations of living amongst the indigenous population, people producing racial hybrids will become commmonplace as seen with the Baby Boomer generation, a mix of European ethnicities having happened after the solidarity of  the U.S. in WWII.
    What I find most biased is your perception of hate. You call not admitting women to serve on the battlefield hatred, when I call it respect for the family. Can you imagine the harshness a child endures without a loving present father, as experienced too often in the African American community? What about no loving or present mother? Limiting this horror by courteously removing women from the front of battle will ensure fewer single-parent family situations. It won’t guarantee all family relationships will include the traditional familial strucutre, but i’ll surely decrease the number of odd ones.
    We’ll never meet common ground… You believe that the working class shouldn’t vote for Romney, a man of whom I don’t favor at all in this year’s election, but yet you hint at them being more attuned to Obama’s liberalism. Sir, we are not Europe. Self-reliance trumps socialism in this country, and business shall succeed in the land of the United States.
    Thank you for writing so much and contributing your words. These discussions are thought-provoking but also like climbing the Tower of Babel. Neither one of us would ever reach the top, meaning that none of us will convince the other of any truths. I know that mine are valid and backed up by history; I know yours are exploratory but ultimately not fit for refreshing America to its more sound past.

  • EllieMurasaki

    Believing that race doesn’t exist, however, is ignorant and won’t bode
    well for the future of Western Civilization [or any civilization wherein
    the people believe in such].
    (brackets original)

    Broken clock, I suppose, because unlike everything else you’ve said, this sentence is right.

  • Lori

     

    You call not admitting women to serve on the battlefield hatred, when I call it respect for the family. 

    You do realize that not all women are or want to be mothers, don’t you? You’re excluding all women from a job for the supposed benefit of a living arrangement many women are not part of. This is, not to put too fine a point on it, hateful BS.

     

    What about no loving or present mother? Limiting this horror by
    courteously removing women from the front of battle will ensure fewer
    single-parent family situations.    

    First of all, doing something “for” someone that they don’t actually want is not a courtesy. It’s controlling and that means it’s ultimately hateful. You can continue to delude yourself that you’re some sort of knight in shining armor, but you’re not.

    Second, how does keeping women from combat positions ensure fewer single parent families? When men with kids go off to war what kind of family situation do you think those kids have? A family with just a mom is a single-parent family, just like a family with just a dad is a single-parent family. Moms don’t count as 2.

    I don’t know if he’s still around (I don’t think I’ve seen him post in a while) but there’s a slacktivite who had to fight for custody of his kids while he was serving in combat in Iraq. The fact that he was in battle meant that his kids were in a no-parent situation for a while, which was not a great thing for the kids. Are you going to start fighting to “courteously” keep all parents from having combat positions?

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    white separatism

    I think that really says it all.

    People who want to be racist and “polite” about it adopt terms like this, as well as use high-falutin’ patronizing rhetoric about cultural incompatibilities and omg teh biracial kids oh noes.

    The fact is, all the above reverses cause and effect with regard to culture and identity.

    It is precisely because through socialization and media, that the dominant paradigm of whiteness being the default is disseminated to all that people of the “wrong” color are conditioned to see themselves not as equals, but as inferiors, or perhaps at best, “not-quite-there”.

    So the cultural identity issues Mr Hansen wrings his hands over are due to the very culture he holds up as the correct and valid one.

    Mitt Romney himself confessed to the fact that blacks, for example, continue to have it worse than whites and admitted that equality is not an accomplished fact.

    So any claims of pre-existing equality as a justification to blame minorities for their problems are demonstrably known to be false even among people who use that mythology as a cudgel to beat minorities over the head in front of a white audience.

  • PJ Evans

     I figure this troll would have a zoo if he could see my workplace. It looks like America: black, white, Asian, Latino, men and women. He wouldn’t be happy with management either, because it isn’t predominantly white men.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     It’s not about being “wrong.” It’s about the preservation of a people whose genes for their [white] skin are recessive. Biology plays a part in this, as well. If my grandchildren wish to marry their own race but cannot because everyone else around them is mixed or biracial, then society will practically FORCE them to pursue a relationship which is actually in their detriment.
    Many points sustain both our arguments, but I’m letting you know mine.
    NO. Whites are not superior. I don’t look at a superiority or inferiority system of categories for the races. For one thing, we’re all equal in the way we’re being humans. I just like white people and don’t want to see them lose their traits.

  • EllieMurasaki

    It’s about the preservation of a people whose genes for their [white] skin are recessive.

    Biology fail. Skin tone is not dominant/recessive, it’s codominant, and there are bunches of genes involved. And it’s not like it’s impossible for brown people to have white babies. Somewhere on the internets is a picture of a pair of fraternal twins. One’s about as pale as people get, one’s equally dark.

    If my grandchildren wish to marry their own race but cannot because
    everyone else around them is mixed or biracial, then society will
    practically FORCE them to pursue a relationship which is actually in
    their detriment.

    One, that’s your and your grandchildren’s fault for thinking skin color is relevant in a prospective mate, and two, if your granddaughter doesn’t want to marry a person of color, she doesn’t have to. She can skip the whole marriage thing entirely. Or she can move to Maine, where there are hardly any people of color, and marry somebody there.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    I seriously what is this

    Richard Hansen, do you seriously spend this much time running down everybody’s exact ethnicity?

    Like, srsly. Anybody who has that much of a weird interest in this shit either has a fetish I’m ot sure I wanna know about, or they’re obvs racist and want to be sure they’re not OMG MIXING TEH BLUD or something.

    And this?

    For one thing, we’re all equal in the way we’re being humans. I just
    like white people and don’t want to see them lose their traits.

    That’s always been a code phrase for “those funny other-color people are doing things I don’t like.”

    News flash: in Europe and Canada + USA + Oceania, every day is de facto white pride day, no matter what alarmist crap anyone likes to peddle.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    There is no “de facto white pride day.” We can’t say to one another how happy we are to be white and celebrate with maypole dancing, speeches from the CofCC, and racial integrity. It’s non-existent… Well, actually it isn’t non-existent.
    The annual European American Heritage Festival happens every year in Pulaski, TN, along with the CVEAS festival in Southern California. Apart from these minute small-town festivals, the idea of a “white pride day” doesn’t exist.
    If I told another white person where I live how proud I am, he or she would probably slap me and call me racist.

  • EllieMurasaki

    There is no “de facto white pride day.” We can’t say to one another how
    happy we are to be white and celebrate with maypole dancing, speeches
    from the CofCC, and racial integrity.

    That’s really damn strange, because I distinctly recall attending St. Patrick’s Day parades, a Greek festival, and Oktoberfest.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     That’s not about race, though. Huge difference.

  • EllieMurasaki

    Because there are so very many Greek and Irish people with dark skin. If we put people in Ireland who identify as White Irish or as Other White on one side of the line and everybody else, including the Irish Travellers because I have no idea whether they consider themselves white or not, on the other? Six point five percent. And I’d lay money that everybody in Ireland who identifies as Asian, Black, or Other and some of the Not Stateds are either immigrants themselves or the children or grandchildren of same.

    Greece, .14% Pakistani, .09% Indian, .06% other, and everybody else in the country is of European origin.

    Germany I’ll give you, as their population is twelve percent of mixed origin and/or origins other than Europe. I suspect I am being unjust in giving you Germany, because Oktoberfest is about traditions that predate the immigration of people of color to Germany, but I’ll give you Germany.

    However, any attempt to say that St. Patrick’s and Greek-heritage celebrations are anything other than taking pride in one’s white heritage, well, that’s just a bold-faced lie.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    In my perception of ethnicity, ethnicity corresponds to one’s being indigenous to the land. For instance, the Blackfeet American Indian tribe is indigenous to Montana and southern Alberta.
    “Irish people with dark skin” are not indigenous to the land and have genes which  help them live in equatorial environments, rather than those of cold, low-UV Europe.

  • EllieMurasaki

    So basically you just conceded that, when you said St. Patrick’s isn’t a white pride festival, you were lying. Gotcha.

    I have better things to do than talk to a racist liar. Any Avatar: the Last Airbender fans around here? I am absolutely in love with a couple fics by http://www.fanfiction.net/u/77482/Vathara –“Theft Absolute” is real short but essential reading before one gets started on Embers. Vathara’s thought things through ever so much further than the AtLA creators did, and researched the hell out of everything, and I am adoring Vathara’s depiction of the various cultures in AtLAworld. And more to the point, the culture clashes. Be warned that Embers is six hundred thousand words and counting; judging by a comparison of Embers and canon timelines, I’d bet on another three hundred thousand words before the story ends. I only just finished what’s there today, though, so maybe I ought to reread http://archiveofourown.org/users/Damkianna/works?fandom_id=65 –two hundred fifty thousand words of pure AtLA awesome!women. A bunch of little AUs–five people somebody’s mother might have been, five things somebody else’s mother might have done–and one fairly massive what-if-Katara-were-the-Avatar AU. Not massive on the same scale as Embers, but well over the two-hundred-thousand-word mark.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     I will not be held hostage by a word invented by communists to persecute me for being white and proud. Your “racist” slur stops here.
    And a St. Patrick’s Day festival ISN’T a white pride festival because it only celebrates ONE ethnicity.

  • Gotchaye

    How about Ren Fairs, then?

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     I love the Renaissance Faire. Although it doesn’t explicitly support white pride, it does offer a fun vision of Middle-Ages Europe.

  • Lori

      I will not be held hostage by a word invented by communists to persecute me for being white and proud. 

    So has racism been around for centuries or was it invented by communists? Make up your tiny little mind, or at least pick a story and stick to it.

    Your “racist” slur stops here.

    No, it does not. People are going to go right on calling you a racist because that’s exactly what you are. If you don’t want to have that truth pointed out you are of course free to refuse to post here. Don’t let the door hit you on the ass on your way out.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Well, Leon Trotsky coined the term. That’s what I meant.

  • Nathaniel

    Communists? What next, are you going to tell us about the menace represented by Viking raiders? 

  • http://mmycomments.blogspot.com/ mmy

    @EllieMurasaki:disqus 
    any attempt to say that St. Patrick’s and Greek-heritage celebrations are anything other than taking pride in one’s white heritage, well, that’s just a bold-faced lie. 

    Oh yeah. If you ever watched the Orange Order marching to celebrate the Battle of Boyne it is nothing but a celebration of a certain type of Protestant European identity.

    And for those who find those marches colourful, joyful celebrations of heritage — they are specific commemorations of the conquest of people who spoke a different language and practiced a different religion.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    Yep. MMy, you are correct. These celebrations often are based off of one particular culture, rather than a race. 

  • http://mmycomments.blogspot.com/ mmy

    @facebook-100002582493999:disqus 
    Yep. MMy, you are correct. These celebrations often are based off of one particular culture, rather than a race.  

    You are misunderstanding me (I suspect on purpose) — the celebration is about one group of white people beating another group of white people. It isn’t about culture as you understand it — it is about culture that views itself as inheritable — in other words — it is a form of racism.†

    † Just as, at one time, many people in the US considered the (overwhelmingly) Catholic Irish to be “black” for the purposes of immigration. To be Catholic was to be “othered” from the dominant understanding of “whiteness.”

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    It isn’t racism because it isn’t directed at another race. It’s an intraracial disagreement.
    Using that logic, we can say the same about Hanukkah, a Jewish military victory over forced assimilation of other peoples. You wouldn’t call Hanukkah racist, would you? I wouldn’t. A people has the right to preserve itself. Simple as that.

  • PJ Evans

     I worked with a guy who celebrated St Paddy’s Day by wearing an orange shirt.

  • http://mmycomments.blogspot.com/ mmy

    @Invisible_Neutrino:disqus  Somehow Hansen’s worries about the ethnicity of different posters made me think of the discussions that sometimes go on in Quebec as to whether someone is really an allophone, an Anglophone, or a Francophone if one of their grandparents was an allophone, another an Anglophone and two were Francophones.

    BTW, are you getting much election coverage out in BC? 

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    I feel like I’ve been living under a rock. *googles, and reads up on Quebec election stuff*

  • http://mmycomments.blogspot.com/ mmy

    @facebook-100002582493999:disqus 

    Before you write one more (idiotic) word about race, culture, identity and place of birth I suggest you go read (preferably in French†) the arguments about all three going on right now in the Quebec election.

    † Because you cannot even begin to “get” political discussion in Quebec if you can’t read them in the original French.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    Merci beaucoup. Je cliqueras cette link et liseras l’information. Je peux liser les articles français.

  • Lori

    As an aside, did anyone else notice where Perkins and the rest of the racists were having their meeting and get a bit of a chuckle from it?

    It wasn’t that long ago that Italians definitely weren’t white, but now the supposed defenders of eternal white racial purity are having their little hate-fests at Bonanno’s Restaurant. Presumably the irony is lost on them. It’s possibly also lost on the owner’s of Bonanno’s (the other possibility being that the only color they care about is green and as long as the haters pay their tab, they don’t care). 

  • EllieMurasaki

    I had a thought. Not sure if it’s an accurate or true thought, but it’s a thought.

    Celebrating the history and heritage of a group that lacks privilege–African Americans, native Hawaiians, queer folk, women, whatever–that’s a way of saying “All you people who say we’re inferior, you’re wrong. We are who we are and we are just as good as you.” And, y’know, no quarrel with that.

    Celebrating the history and heritage of a group that has privilege, that’s a way of saying “We’re number one! We’re number one!” That’s all right for sports teams, but for skin tone, sex, sexuality, culture? Not so much.

    Not sure what, in that framework, to do with St. Paddy’s. Irish folk have historically lacked privilege, but that isn’t so true today, and also all the people who swear on March 17 that they’re Irish but who make no such claim any other time of year.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    Interesting thought. I’d just like to add that celebrating one’s race, no matter the race, isn’t itself racist.
    In fact, on your point, one could argue that whites are soon to be underprivileged because of affirmative action and the upcoming minority status for whites. Whites are already a minority in Texas, California, New Mexico, and Arizona.
    My definition of racism is showing hatred or violence towards those not of one’s race. I don’t hate anyone else’s race, and therefore, cannot be correctly judged as racist. I’m just white and proud and dream of white descendants. I love the skin, voice, facial features, eyes, etc. and don’t want to see those features bred away.

  • EllieMurasaki

    In fact, on your point, one could argue that whites are soon to be
    underprivileged because of affirmative action and the upcoming minority
    status for whites. Whites are already a minority in Texas, California,
    New Mexico, and Arizona.

    That certainly explains why Arizona’s papers-please law would have targeted Arizona’s white residents, not its brown ones.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     The majority doesn’t always win, you know. Special interest groups will always have their way, as seen with Law SB1070 in AZ.

  • Lori

    Well count your blessings you big ol’ racist. You will not see those features you love so much bred away. By the time it happens you’ll be long dead and past seeing anything.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    My descendants, however, will exist at that time. I do it for the children, not for myself. 

  • Lori

    Your children, having been raised by a racist, may care. The decedents who are actually alive when the features you love so much cease to be common almost certainly won’t give a crap. Life moves on. You’re not doing anything for “the children”, it’s all about you.

  • Gotchaye

    I think there’s a lot to that.  It’s definitely a lot harder for privileged groups to find things to celebrate while not seeming like jerks.  I’m not sure if it’s about modern privilege structures, though; I think it’s about historical ones.  The problem for white Americans is that it’s hard to find distinctively white American objects of celebration that aren’t distinctively white American because of white American racism.  One can’t celebrate the 4th of July as a distinctively white holiday without raising tricky questions about why the history of it is dominated by white people.  When African-Americans celebrate black history, they don’t have to grapple with black history only being distinctively black because everyone else was excluded.

    I think it’s historical rather than modern privilege because, in many ways, Jews in the US today are white.  But we still do a bunch of history/heritage celebration, and it seems to me that this is mostly OK.  It only gets creepy (IMO) when it shades into bragging about the disproportionate number of prominent Jews in the US today.  I similarly don’t have a problem with St. Patrick’s Day; it’s not celebrating the Irish being horrible to some other group in the way that a “white Americans’ day” necessarily would.  It’s just celebrating Irishness, without comment on how Irishness compares to any other identity.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Right on. It works with cultural identity or ethnic identity, to the point of racial identity. Racial identity is alright for underprivileged groups but not for the majority because of fears that it’d be a festival of superiority.
    I wonder if in 50 years what the future will be for identity in general…

  • Lori

     

    I similarly don’t have a problem with St. Patrick’s Day; it’s not
    celebrating the Irish being horrible to some other group in the way that
    a “white Americans’ day” necessarily would.  It’s just celebrating
    Irishness, without comment on how Irishness compares to any other
    identity.  

    St. Patrick’s Day has its controversy though because it doesn’t just celebrate Irishness, at least in its pre-“Kiss Me, I’m Irish”, green beer for everyone, form it celebrates Irish Catholicness. That’s why we have fights over whether or not LGBTQ groups can march in the big parade. The Catholic Church sponsors the parade in NYC and they care more about the Catholic part than the Irish part. They don’t care if you’re so Irish your brogue is still fresh, if you’re gay & out they don’t want you celebrating with them.

  • Gotchaye

     Ah.  I didn’t know any of that.

  • Lori

    What AnonymousSam said.

    I mean damn, I thought the “yellow” thing was totally beyond the pale but you topped yourself.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    Established facts and axioms can be true no matter who says them.

    However, when one starts subjectively interpreting them, that may be called into question.

    This idea that you have, Richard Hansen, that somehow mixing of races and ethnicities is inherently bad because it does not result in a fusion, but instead a division, is really a quite self-limiting and quite mentally cramped idea.

    It takes no account of the fact that were humans to eventually become some undifferentiated shade of beige in skin color, we each of us would still carry the cultural specifics of the nation and region we were born in.

    It also takes no account of the fact that anti-racism isn’t about being falsely “color blind”; instead, it’s about recognizing that even though each of us is different, at the core we all share one undisputed fact: we all of us are members of the same species.

    “I rejoice in our differences”. For all that it’s a science fiction saying attributed to Vulcans, it is no less a rather profound statement.

  • EllieMurasaki

    were humans to eventually become some undifferentiated shade of beige in skin color

    Not happening. Most of us, maybe, but all? I refer you again to the picture of fraternal twins, one very dark, one very pale.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    Eh, given a long enough period of time with no selective pressure in favor of any kind of skin color it would be reasonable to suppose that skin color might converge to some kind of intermediate.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     But that’s the very opposite of what I want. If you celebrate diversity, you celebrate the different variations of races on this planet. By promoting this “beige” hybrid, you actually destroy all diversity of skin color. Imagine a world where all dogs looked the same or toucans had the same color beaks?
    If that’s what you want, then you actually destroy diversity.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    The time scale is too long for me to be worried about it. And in any case, you seem to assert that culture is linked to skin color, whereas it is easy to show it is not.

    Also note I did not phrase the ‘uniform color’ as a certainty, only as a possibility.

    The point is, unlike you, I don’t really care much about the preservation of culture via skin color. I do care about the preservation of culture through education and understanding. All culture, by the way.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Education and understanding, tripled with the preservation of skin color, will allow for a beautiful people of any kind. Are you telling me that you would prefer to see all the Asians, Europeans, Africans, and others all wiped away and replaced by some monotonous brown hybrid?
    If that’s what you want, then I’ll fight to ensure that the naive don’t destroy diversity.

  • Lori

    Once again, your racism renders you unable to grasp the point. Skin color and other physical features related to race are not the only kind of diversity and there is beauty outside the narrow confines of your obsession with race. People in the future will be just fine. They’ll have diversity and beauty even if they don’t have the pure Aryan features that you mistakenly think are so critical.

    And you’ll be dead so it won’t matter to you. And your descendents won’t care.

  • Beroli

    And your descendents won’t care. 

    They’ll care enough to be embarrassed that one of their ancestors was such a racist in the 21st century, I daresay.

  • PJ Evans

     You really seriously think skin color has anything to do with culture, education, and understanding, o racist troll?

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     It has nothing to do with it, and I never said it did. I just want my grandchildren and children to be happy and not have to date someone they’d want to date, simply because everyone around them doesn’t have the features they find attractive.
    I don’t know if you want a future of everyone looking the same, but if you do, then I will continue to fight for diversity.

  • EllieMurasaki

    I had a long comment here but the power blipped and I lost it. Let me sum up: You do not know that your children and grandchildren will be attracted only to other white faces. Proof: I am white. The people I am physically attracted to come in all colors.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     But IF they wish to date only whites, then I wish to ensure them the possibility that their environment will not change, basically granting them the chance to date white if they so pleased.

  • EllieMurasaki

    THERE WILL ALWAYS BE WHITE PEOPLE YOU MORON. I KNOW THIS BECAUSE OF THOSE FRATERNAL TWINS, WHOSE PARENTS ARE BROWN PEOPLE, WHERE THE TWINS ARE ONE VERY WHITE AND ONE VERY BLACK.

  • PJ Evans

     That’s their business, not yours. you effing racist.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    Where did I say it should be our business? What are you even referring to? Use quotes before you make incendiary judgments.

  • AnonymousSam

    not have to date someone they’d want to date

    I’m going to assume you mean “not have to date someone they don’t want to date.” The alternative is… well, I wouldn’t put it past you, but I’d like to assume you have some grain of reasonable being inside you somewhere and wouldn’t want to deny people the right to date who they wish.

    But then I re-read that post and struggle to grasp at your process of logic. Do you really envision a future when your cocoa-skinned descendents are going to look around and sigh melancholily and confide to one another, “If only there were white people in the neighborhood! I feel so cheated, knowing I’ll have to date a black man and have black kids, but… oh well, I guess I’ll have to whether I like it or not”?

    I’m sure your children’s children’s children*10^300 will have far better things to worry about than whether the people they grew up with and have no reason to believe are anything but natural are somehow cheating them out of a more fulfilling relationship. Love is love and you have no bloody right to try and control where people find it (via legislation or otherwise), regardless of what you find attractive.

    Skin color preference even in the most innocent of places is still 100% subjective. Even if skin color begins to blend together over the centuries, the only reason your descendents will have for being ashamed of their coloration is if you teach them to be ashamed of their coloration. You know, like racist people do to biracial children, and like what you’ve been doing over the course of several pages now.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     We don’t even know if our economy will survive another decade. Considering that if our economy collapses in 10 years, ethnonationalism and tribalism based on race will rise from the ashes of a non-existent economy. Race isn’t going away through encouraged mixing, considering that many people out there believe the way of which I speak: millions of all ages.
    We have no idea if they will have “far better things to worry about” triplegoogal years from now. The universe as we know it has only lasted a tiny decimal of one triplegoogal years, 12 billion years approximately, referring to the Big Bang.
    We shouldn’t teach people to feel ashamed of being mixed, but we ought to pressure those who are “pure” (I don’t believe in racial purity, since even the so-called purest of people are only 99.4% of their pure race) to date those who are of their own race.
    My reason goes beyond superficial desires of attraction. We cannot forget that in the United States, minorities vote liberally, while most whites vote conservative. By mixing the races, the offspring will ally with those who claim the whites are destroying this country and undermining the union. The mixed are a danger to themselves, if they are Americans, for many (not all of course) will believe race doesn’t exist and will encourage people to lose their “purity.” It’s cancerous to a homogenous racial society, and to worsen such matters, these mixed peoples are belittled, thus, forcing them to want revenge by promoting people to mix their colors. Take popular music today that tells youth that we were “Born This Way” and that anyone who believes in religion or race is a “hater” and deserves to die.
    We are destroying this union through inner fighting between the races, encouraged by those who are told they cannot identify with any race because of their mixed racial genealogy.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    Final footnote: You’ve been cribbing from “The Leopard’s Spots”. Dixon always claimed the true danger was from “mulattos”, those biracial people you insist don’t fit neatly into any slot you want to put them in.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Well, Thomas Dixon claimed a lot of things. He wrote “The Clansman,” a play honoring the Ku Klux Klan, a disastrous organization that violated the 5th Amendment of those the group lynched.
    Everyone in this country is innocent until proven guilty, and Dixon didn’t honor the Constitution. Now on his point about mulattos, his grievances towards them were arisen from motives of terror; mine are from worries of the future.

  • Lori

    I just want my grandchildren and children to be happy 

    If this is true then the don’t burden them with your racism. Instead allow them to use their energies on things that actually matter. They’ll be far more likely to have happy lives than if they expend their resources worrying about the imaginary horrors of “race mixing”.

    I don’t know if you want a future of everyone looking the same, but if you do, then I will continue to fight for diversity.

    White people all have the same skin color and yet I doubt you think they all look the same, so why do you like everyone will look the same in the future?People will be individuals. They’ll look at each other and see similarities and differences. They’ll recognize friends and family and those who are famous in whatever medium exists then. Some traits will be considered generally more attractive than others and people will recognize them and seek to emulate them.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    I love how you try to “gotcha” it with me and have it both ways. You want pure racial lines in the name of “diversity”, when any understanding of diversity includes those instances when the lines become blurred, as in with biracial people.

    This conversation is now over.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     The term “diversity” as derived from the liberal left is an untrue definition.
    If I want a rainbow of paint color for my house, I shall buy 8 different paint cans. Now if I mix all these colors together and then paint my house, the color would be wholly brown, not colorful or diverse.
    I’m not trying to “gotcha” you, just telling you what “diversity” really means.

  • Lori

    No, you’re telling us that your definition of diversity is only about skin color. You can say that all you want, but that doesn’t make it true.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     You must have a wrong interpretation of my argument. I actually do believe “all of us are members of the same species.”
    I don’t believe in superiority.
    I just want white children and for my children to have white children.
    I don’t see what all this hullabaloo about “racism” is all about, to be honest.

  • PJ Evans

    I don’t believe in superiority.
    I just want white children and for my children to have white children.

    And this is somehow not racist?
    Not everyone in my extended family is white. They’re all my family, and I don’t care what they look like outside..

  • Lori

    By mixing the races, the offspring
    will ally with those who claim the whites are destroying this country
    and undermining the union. The mixed are a danger to themselves, if they
    are Americans, for many (not all of course) will believe race doesn’t
    exist and will encourage people to lose their “purity.” 

    So your argument is that race mixing is bad because it leads to race mixing. That’s a really ridiculous thing to say.

    Your problem is that you believe that racial purity has intrinsic value. It does not.

     It’s cancerous
    to a homogenous racial society,

    We don’t have a homogenous racial society. No one does. And so what? Why would a racially homogenous society of such value that we should care? You’re only answers to this seem to go back to attraction, which you have now claimed is not the only issue. So, what reason do you have, beyond the fact that “Aryan” features give you wood and you assume your decedents will feel the same, that we should want a homogenous racial society?

    and to worsen such matters, these mixed
    peoples are belittled  

    Your solution for this is for mixed race people not to exist? Why don’t we just stop belittling them?

    thus, forcing them to want revenge by promoting
    people to mix their colors.

    Who are these vengeful mixed race people you fear so much?

    Also, mix their colors? What is this, art class? Come to think of it, art class would be way more fun than your dreary fantasy world.

    Take popular music today that tells youth
    that we were “Born This Way” and that anyone who believes in religion or
    race is a “hater” and deserves to die.

    Your obsession with Lady Gaga is pretty tired, but for the sake of argument I’ll play along. Popular music like “Born This Way” doesn’t say that haters like you deserve to die. It says that you’re wrong and that people shouldn’t listen to you, but should instead value themselves for who they are. I realize that to a racist like you being ignored and watching the world move on without you may feel like death, but it’s really not the same thing. Eventually you’ll die off and we’ll all be better off without you, but that’s really not the same thing either.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Actually a racially homogenous society does exist. It’s called China, a nationalistic country where everyone is united under the banner of socialism. I’m not a socialist, nor do I promote that economic system, but I do honor the belief of solidarity amongst a people.
    Having visited China a couple years ago, I went from the cities to the farms and noticed only 1 white man living in the Mainland. Although Hong Kong was slightly more mixed, the racial solidarity was evident.
    Race-mixing begets race-mixing. That’s common knowledge. If a biracial child searches of a mate, he’s more likely to choose someone not mixed, considering that more “pure” people exist than mixed ones.
    For those white people whose ethnic traits mirror that of their heritage (i.e., Ireland, Scotland, Saxony, etc.) they ought to beget children with those of their ethnicity… But in America, such a phenomenon is unrealistic, considering that most Americans are of mixed ethnicity.
    And I won’t comment on your personal attacks against me. Keep your hatred to yourself. I’m not offending you personally in any manner, so I resent your notion that “we’ll all be better off without you.” Maybe my ideas but not me as a human being [or a toucan].

  • Lori

     

    It’s called China  

    You clearly know nothing about China. Here’s a tip: the fact that all the “yellow” people look the same to your racist eyes doesn’t mean that it’s a racially homogenous country.

    Did you share your views on racial homogeneity with any actual Chinese people? If you did I’d love to hear what they had to say when you suggested that they’re all the same.

    Having visited China a couple years ago, I went from the cities to the
    farms and noticed only 1 white man living in the Mainland. 

    “Very few white people” =/= “racial homogenous”.

     

    For those white people whose ethnic traits mirror that of their heritage
    (i.e., Ireland, Scotland, Saxony, etc.) they ought to beget children
    with those of their ethnicity…   

    Why?

    This is the basic question we’ve been asking since you started sharing your racist views with us and which you’ve been unable or unwilling to answer. All your arguments are based on the idea that racial purity has intrinsic value. It does not.

     

    I’m not offending you personally in any manner, so I resent your notion that “we’ll all be better off without you.”   

    I most certainly do find you personally offensive. You promote ideas that we would be better off without. To the extent that you’re successful in your goals we’re better off without you.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Very few white people and a majority of Asians at over 99% does equal “racial homogeneity” actually.
    On “the basic question we’ve been asking since you,” let me tell you why I believe people should beget with those sharing their own traits. The reason is… ~drum beat~ …Because I value diverse life. I don’t want to see everyone looking the same or wielding the same genes as everyone else. We love people who are different and wish for them to better themselves, so that we can all develop peacefully.
    If you find “me” offensive, then I shudder to think how you find Abraham Lincoln, a man who planned to repatriate all slaves once freed. “There is no room for distinct races of white men in America, much less for two distinct races of whites and blacks. I can conceive of no greater calamity than the assimilation of the negro into our social and political life as our equal… “We can never attain the ideal union our fathers dreamed with millions of an alien, inferior race among us whose assimilation is neither possible, nor desirable.” (Address of Colonization Deputation of Negroes. Washington, D.C. August 14, 1862). He goes on to say, “Whether it is right or wrong I need not discuss. But this physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both as I think your race suffer very greatly, many of them by living among us, while ours suffer from your presence.”
    What do you think about Lincoln now?

  • EllieMurasaki

    I don’t want to see everyone looking the same or wielding the same genes as everyone else.

    Know a really good way to avoid having everyone look the same? Intermarriage.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    Just plain wrong. I mean everyone on the planet having the same color and features which would only happen through intermarriage.

  • hidden_urchin

    I mean everyone on the planet having the same color and features which would only happen through intermarriage.

    Wow.  Did you get your biology information from a 1930s eugenics propaganda piece?  That’s the only way I can explain your being so wrong.

    Those of us whose information is somewhat more recent know that it is highly unlikely that intermarriage will lead to homogeneity in this manner. 

     We know that the characteristics that comprise a human being are governed by a vast array of interactions among genes and between the genes and the environment (not to mention random mutations).  There is simply no way everyone on earth would end up with “the same color and features” because genetics isn’t that simple.   Mendelian inheritance doesn’t apply here.

    We also know that the biggest threat to a population is inbreeding. Inbred organisms are at higher risk for genetic problems and the related physical and mental health problems.  If you want to know what happens over multiple generations when people don’t marry outside of a small group then I might suggest you look up the Habsburgs particularly Charles II.

    In short, I might suggest that you drop the concept of racial purity lest “Dueling Banjos” becomes your family’s theme song.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Okay + mutations. Your point is…?

  • hidden_urchin

    Your point is…?

    Since you apparently lack reading comprehension skills, or are being willfully stupid, I’ll simplify further:

    1.) Your understanding of genetics does not reflect current knowledge.  Genetics and evolutionary biology do not support your statements. 

    2.) People who don’t  marry outside of accepted groups end up inbreeding.  How badly inbred the offspring are depends on how small the group is.  What you advocate is a genetic disaster.  See point #1.

    Simple enough for you?

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    1.) Not to annoy you, but what statements are you referencing? In addition, from what source can you dispel any belief that race matters?
    2.) So Steve Jobs was an inbred? Both his parents were white.

  • hidden_urchin

    1.) Not to annoy you, but what statements are you referencing? In addition, from what source can you dispel any belief that race matters?

     
    The primary statement I was replying to was quoted in my first response to you.  However, pretty much any statement you have made concerning genetics is pathetically wrong.  I will not go through them one by one because others here have already replied to them. 
     
    Neither post of mine involved race.  Both were about genetic diversity in populations.  Your request for sources involving race is irrelevant.
     

    2.) So Steve Jobs was an inbred? Both his parents were white.

     
    So I’m guessing you didn’t read my statement that the level of inbreeding depends on the size of the population?  Or are you just trying to be cute?
     

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    If the size of the population is 243,041,695 (the 2011 estimate for whites in the U.S. according to the U.S. Census Bureau), then Steve Jobs has an unlikely chance of being an inbred.
    I did read your statement, but I must ask, since conservative whites are often portrayed as inbreds: Were you hinting that I may be an inbred?

  • hidden_urchin

    …then Steve Jobs has an unlikely chance of being inbred.

    I take it you’ve never heard of “pedigree collapse” then?  We all have some measure of inbreeding.  It isn’t just about first cousins or whatever it is you think “inbreeding” means.  Since the reproductive population is currently quite large, however, the ocasional crossing of related genomes isn’t a problem because there is a far greater amount of outbreeding.  The problem is if you narrow the reproductive population, such as 17th century European royalty intermarrying in order to preserve family property.

    Were you hinting that I may be an inbred?

    No.  But if the rest of the world marries without regard for skin color in the distant future and your descendents do not then they will be.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     I understand the concept of “pedigree collapse” now that you mention it, but I don’t believe that someone whose family hasn’t in the past 20 years ever had someone of another race in their family lineage means that inbreeding can occur. There are hundreds of millions of white people out there and billions of Asians. If they keep to themselves in reproducing, then I don’t understand how inbreeding would occur, unless they reproduced in the same family.

  • hidden_urchin

    I understand the concept of “pedigree collapse” now that you mention it…

    Yeah?  Did Google help you with that one?

    …I don’t believe that someone whose family hasn’t in the past 20 years ever had someone of another race in their family lineage means that inbreeding can occur.

    Twenty years?  My posts are referring to “multiple generations” and a “distant future.”  That is a much greater timescale than twenty years. If you can’t even tell the difference between a twenty year time span and “multiple generations” or “distant future” then there is no way you can understand anything else I’m saying because my posts require a better reading comprehension level than early grade school.

    I’m suspicious, though, that you understand quite well what I am saying and are feigning ignorance because to acknowledge that what I am saying is accurate would be to demonstrate your complete and utter idiocy and to ignore what I am saying altogether would defeat your stated purpose of staying on the board until you can post unchallenged.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Pardon me. 20 generations is what I meant.

  • hidden_urchin

    …I don’t believe that someone whose family hasn’t in the past 20 [generations] ever had someone of another race in their family lineage means that inbreeding can occur.

    As I have said several times now, and do not intend to say again because it is really simple and you should have understood it by now, the amount of inbreeding depends on the size of the reproductive population.  Inbreeding can absolutely occur within twenty generations if the reproductive population is small due to geographic isolation, such as on an island, or due to social convention, such as groups that intentionally isolate themselves from others. 

    Your hypothetical family may not have a problem if their place of residence for that time was a large population center but if they are from an island community with few immigrants then inbreeding is far more likely.

    The bad assumption that you are making is that every person capable of reproducing is a potential reproductive partner. 

    There are hundreds of millions of white people out there and billions of Asians. If they keep to themselves in reproducing, then I don’t understand how inbreeding would occur, unless they reproduced in the same family.

    The bad assumption that you are making, again, is that every person capable of reproducing is a potential reproductive partner. 

    Ideologically, white separatists are not a massive group.  The group will only get smaller as the rest of the world becomes more understanding, multicultural, and heterogeneous.  People will leave the group due to ideological conflicts which will reduce the reproductive population.  There will be fewer people outside the group who meet the standards for “whiteness” which will reduce chances for outbreeding even if they aren’t repulsed by the group’s ideology.  As the reproductive population of the group shrinks inbreeding will become inevitable.  Eventually, the number of genetic problems will be so overwhelming that no reproduction will occur.  The group will cease to exist.

    That’s the great irony of race-based reproduction.  In the end, homogeneity leads to extinction.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Well I actually agree with you now, having read more closely your details on the population. Sorry for my misunderstanding, for my days have been busy lately.
    Implying that the “group will only get smaller” doesn’t attest to the facts. The Stormfront forum of white nationalists, for instance, has had a steady growth rate since the 90s (now nearing a couple hundred thousand), and as a result of the Internet, more people can share ideas about race and can change their beliefs from multicultural to racial separatist or vice versa.
    Because the population of separatists increases with multiculturalism, we cannot truly say that separatists will eventually become inbred. Perhaps if the U.S. economy collapses from its enormous deficit and inability to pay its debts to foreign countries,  money will not be usable for transactions. We could regress to tribalism which would then encourage separatist beliefs in general, since multiculturalism does not coincide with individuals living in a dog-eat-dog scenario.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    Well, I did posit that perhaps a lack of selective pressure and a long enough time scale might cause human skin color to coverge to some kind of intermediate. I did not, however, offer that as a certainty.

    In any case, it was EllieMurasaki who took my hypothesis and assumed I was stating it as fact.

  • EllieMurasaki

    In any case, it was EllieMurasaki who took my hypothesis and assumed I was stating it as fact.

    Come again?

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    I said “were humans …” etc.

    That was a supposition. Not an assertion of fact.

  • EllieMurasaki

    Oh. That bit. That was less me taking what you said as fact and more me saying why your hypothetical was implausible. Sorry for confusion.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    Ah. Fair enough. In any case, the point I was trying to make is that culture is not innate to skin color, as though it were transmitted by some mystical means.

    In point of fact, American culture (its food, music, and so on) itself is a rich fusion from many different sources and admittedly appropriated as “THE culture” by some white people. That doesn’t obviate the fact that peoples of all colors want to participate in it and even pass those values on to their children. I recently read of an ex-Soviet gulag officer who defected, and his son went on to go to an American university while he himself worked at many different jobs to try and make a living.

  • PJ Evans

    Just plain wrong. I mean everyone on the planet having the same color
    and features which would only happen through intermarriage.
    <

    In a few thousand years, maybe. But, given that climate is a source of those genes, probably not.
    Why should you care about it? You'll be dust before it happens.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    Granted that my great^50-grandchildren will live in that future society, I do care about the outcome of today’s decisions.

  • Lori

    What do you think about Lincoln now? 

    The same thing that I thought about Lincoln before I read your post.

    Maybe you’re used to talking to people who are ignorant of history and therefore surprised by that quote, but I’m not so your feeble attempt at a “gottcha” has no effect on me.

    The only thing worth saying about your pathetic display is that you should have paid attention to the date when you typed it and then given some thought to its significance.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    I think it’s also worth noting that Lincoln was quite the pragmatist when it came to pushing for an abolitionist stance in US politics. That being said, it meant he said some things which, in retrospect, are seriously problematic.

    But he is more complex than I think a lot of people give him credit for.

  • Lori

    Absolutely. Lincoln is an incredibly interesting figure precisely because he was more complicated and difficult than people often suppose. He actually wrote remarkably little about his personal views on race, what he did write isn’t easy to pigeonhole  and he was quite clear on the fact that his primary goal as president was preservation of the Union.

    I’ve really been enjoying the fact that the 150th anniversary of the start of the Civil War has brought out a raft of new books on the topic. There are 3 or 4 on Lincoln that I want to read, but haven’t gotten to yet. I have another, unrelated, book to finish first, but then I plan to start Winston Groom’s book about Shiloh. After that I’m planning to get into The Fiery Trial by Eric Foner. I’ve heard good things so I’m really looking forward to it.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     He said it, right? Granted that he even spoke that way about non-whites, would mean that you would have an unfavorable view of him. David Duke at one time spoke blatantly about his hatred of non-whites, and when compared to me, I look like Mother Theresa.
    Duke isn’t so vocal about his views, but still, you would view him unfavorably. If you’d view him unfavorably, then why wouldn’t you view Lincoln unfavorably for his actions, regardless of the date?

  • Lori

     

    majority of Asians at over 99% does equal “racial homogeneity” actually.  

    You didn’t answer, so I’ll ask again. Did you tell any Chinese people that they’re 99% the same and have a racial homogenous society? If so, how did they respond?

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     No, I did not ask anyone about racial homogeneity in China. When one travels overseas, inquiring about such topics as race, politics, religion, salary, jobs, and other news-related subjects is quite a no-no.

  • Lori

      No, I did not ask anyone about racial homogeneity in China.

    So you’re just projecting your own ignorance on them. You should stop doing that.

    When one travels overseas, inquiring about such topics as race,
    politics, religion, salary, jobs, and other news-related subjects is
    quite a no-no. 

    What do we have to do to convince you to consider this blog “overseas”?

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     I’m afraid I don’t understand your question on “overseas.” China is overseas, and that’s where I traveled; therefore, I went overseas.

  • Lori

    I want you to pretend that this blog is “overseas” and apply your “overseas” rules to it. IOW, stop talking about your racist crap.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    I’m basically replying to y’all. If you want me to stop talking about it, then you can stop replying.

  • Lori

    Are you promising to go away if we stop talking to you?

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     One by one, yes. I’ll then post my epilogue to our debate about my feelings on the Council of Conservative Citizens, since that is after all what attracted me to this board in the first place.

  • Lori

    I think I can safely speak for the rest of the group when I say, that first part is a deal. We ignore you, you stop talking.

    As for the second part, we don’t need to know anything more about your feelings on this issue. You don’t get to yammer on some more and then expect us not to challenge you or if we do, to tolerate you spewing more because we broke agreement 1.

    Just consider the conversation over and go back to wherever you came from.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    I don’t care to change your minds. It isn’t my place to do that, and I will continue to speak on the CofCC, if necessary to fulfill my happiness.

  • Lori

    Fulfill your happiness somewhere else Richard.

  • hidden_urchin

    One by one, yes.  I’ll then post my epilogue to our debate about my feelings on the Council of Conservative Citizens, since that is after all what attracted me to this board in the first place.

    So you pretty much just want to have the last word and a platform where you can spew your bile unchallenged. 

    Get a blog.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Well, no one would visit it. That’s the problem. lol

  • Lori

     

    We love people who are different and wish for them to better themselves, so that we can all develop peacefully. 

    So, what does it mean to you for people who are “different” to “better themselves”?

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     By “different,” I’m referring to people of different races, those with features which are recessive, and basically those whose features are fragile to nature.
    By “better themselves,” I’m hinting at American politics. Many believe a racial hierarchy exists in the U.S. wherein the “white man” (as some put it) controls the country, while the minorities are beneath that white man. In terms of “bettering themselves,” I hope for non-whites to shy away from socialism and anti-American principles, especially those which would attack whites or harm them. If whites become a minority, we may have a variant of Jim Crow laws legislated against whites which would infringe on our free speech and gun rights. “Jim Crow” originated from a minstrel song in the 1800s… Perhaps we whites will have “Taylor Swift” laws or something of that sort made into law against us for all the atrocities our forefathers committed.
    In short, I wish for every sort of race to understand that fundamental laws of personal freedoms, the laws of nature as provided by John Locke, are indeed for all people of the U.S. Therefore, we oughtn’t support a revolution to destroy any race or infringe upon any group’s liberties. I don’t believe in making interracial marriage or interracial unions illegal, in honor of John Locke’s beliefs.

  • AnonymousSam

    And this is the shit you say which proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are racist. The fact that you honestly seem to believe that whites are just a few percentile points away from becoming a persecuted minority — who do you think would be persecuting whites?

    Then right there is your problem. You’re claiming that you don’t hold any racist beliefs about people, yet in the same breath, you’re setting them up as potential enemies who are right on the verge of taking over and punishing you for perceived wrongs.

    You can’t have it both ways. Your fear of The Other comes out too loud and clear for anyone to believe you’re half as accepting of others as you say you are.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     “Who do you think would be persecuting whites?”
    Gee, I don’t know. Maybe the fastest growing minority in the U.S. of Hispanics, of whom they believe that we as whites stole their land and want to take it back through high birth rates. To a degree, I don’t mind that… They can have Aztlan. 
    I’m not setting anyone up. If we were a minority, it’d be the other way around.

  • EllieMurasaki

    So because white folk are the majority, they have the right to persecute brown folk, and if Hispanics got to be the majority, they’d have the right to persecute white folk?

    Yeah, going back to my Avatar fic now. I don’t think it’s possible to have a reasonable discussion with someone who thinks anybody ever has the right to persecute anybody. I’ll probably be back, because I need to be knocked on the head several times before I’m dissuaded from a course of action no matter how foolish I know that action to be, but right now I’m leaving.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Hell no! I never once mentioned persecution. I have no interest in persecuting minorities, and if you believe I once hinted at such a horror, then quote me.
    You have the same natural rights as me. Where the Heck did you interpret my words as such?

  • EllieMurasaki

    Richard Hansen, nineteen minutes before I type this:

    Hell no! I never once mentioned persecution. I have no interest in
    persecuting minorities, and if you believe I once hinted at such a
    horror, then quote me.
    You have the same natural rights as me. Where the Heck did you interpret my words as such?

    Richard Hansen, thirty-four minutes before I type this:

    “Who do you think would be persecuting whites?”
    Gee, I don’t know.
    Maybe the fastest growing minority in the U.S. of Hispanics, of whom
    they believe that we as whites stole their land and want to take it back
    through high birth rates. To a degree, I don’t mind that… They can
    have Aztlan. 
    I’m not setting anyone up. If we were a minority, it’d be the other way around.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    You misinterpreted my message. When I typed, “If we were a minority, it’d be the other way around,” I was saying that you’d pity me for being a minority and the roles would change.
    I wasn’t answering your first question, when I wrote that. I was pointing out that if whites were oppressed by Hispanics, for instance, that they’d be the “racist” ones, and we’d be the oppressed…
    And to relate it to the article, we’d be able to have our Council of Conservative Citizens. In that case in which the roles were reversed, the Hispanics would be criticized by the media for courting with La Raza.

  • AnonymousSam

    And it’s a proven fact that African-Americans are shiftless and lazy who rape women and have lower than average IQ with larger than average rear ends, Mexicans are greasy and lazy drunkards who only care about the next siesta and tequila, Jews are long-nosed cheats who’ll do anything for a buck, and and and BUT I’M NOT RACIST IF IT’S TRUE! IT’S A CONSPIRACY A VAST LIBERAL CONSPIRACY TO OBFUSCATE THE TRUTH OUR CHILDREN WILL BE BORN WITH MOTTLED SPOTS AND CHRISTIANITY WILL START TEACHING THAT CHRIST WASN’T WHITE AND I’LL HAVE TO GIVE UP MY AYN RAND BOOKS AND AND AND *Collapses and hyperventilates in a fervid panic over the scary people with different-colored skin*

    Thanks for coming out, Richard. You’ve been a big hit, but there are people from the late twentieth century and beyond who aren’t already a lost cause. When that defense mechanism of yours turns off and you start having heart palpitations, perhaps you’ll figure out what it is you’re missing.

    And believe me, when a diagnosed sociopath tells you that you’re missing something vital, something crucial to your ability to interact with people like an actual human being, that’s a sign.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     The Hell? I don’t think any of that crap about minorities. You’re generalizing from what you’ve heard from actual racists.
    If you want to find something you deem as racist that I’ve said, then find a quote, like a decent person. Don’t shove words in people’s mouths to give merit to falsehood. It’s like finding hen’s teeth on Mars; it cannot be done.

  • Kubricks_Rube

    If you find “me” offensive, then I shudder to think how you find Abraham Lincoln

    I know, right? And have you read the Emancipation Proclamation lately? Not one word on gay marriage! Fuck that guy and anyone else who lived in a different cultural context! Seriously, if Lincoln was merely less racist than his peers but not less racist than my peers, then, um, QED I suppose.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     “Frank Capra was rather racist.  He was born in 1897 and was typical of his time.”
    Your sarcasm doesn’t make note of the fact that Lori said the above quote, denoting that Capra was a racist, simply because of the time he lived.

  • Lori

     

    Your sarcasm doesn’t make note of the fact that Lori said the above
    quote, denoting that Capra was a racist, simply because of the time he
    lived. 

    Good god, you really do have poor reading comprehension don’t you.

    I did not say that Frank Capra was racist simply because of the time he lived. I made two, related statements. Let me spell them out for your more clearly. I will try to use small words and type slowly.

    1. Frank Capra held racist views.

    2. Those views were not unique to Capra. They were typical of the time in which he grew up.

    Capra does not get a free pass for being racist, but his views have to be looked at in the context of the times in which he was raised.

    That has nothing to do with you. You should know better and you don’t. You are willfully ignorant and that makes your racism worse. The fact that you brought Capra up in the context of a discussion of your own racism reflects far more poorly on you than it does on him.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Technically, he did get a free pass because he died before the 1960s, at time in which your beliefs on race became popular.
    You may have been using small words, but we can type up a storm on here. If you feel as though concise messages don’t work, then type them out to however long you feel most comfortable.

  • Lori

     

    Technically, he did get a free pass because he died before the 1960s, at time in which your beliefs on race became popular.  

    He does not get a free pass from me, you idiot.

  • Kubricks_Rube

    My sarcasm doesn’t note your exchange on Capra because I was addressing your reference to Lincoln, where you stated, essentially, that he was more racist than you are. That’s why I noted that you and Lincoln have vastly different cultural contexts and therefore your views can’t be directly compared. There was no direct comparison raised in the Capra part of this discussion. I will also say that I am reading Lori’s quote about Capra differently than you are. She did not say that Capra was racist because of when he lived; rather, she answered your question that yes, he was racist, and then noted that this was typical of the time he lived. There’s a huge difference.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    Now I see it. Does this mean that simply because I live in a time after Brown v. Board of Education and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that I should think a certain way?
    It’s almost like spitting on someone for wearing white after Labor Day. Speaking of Labor Day, I hope everyone had a good one. ^_^

  • Lori

    Does this mean that simply because I live in a time after Brown v. Board
    of Education and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that I should think a
    certain way? 

    No. You should “think a certain way” because it’s right. The fact that you live after the Civil Rights era simply removes any excuse you could have for not knowing that.

    None of this is the equivalent of spitting on someone for wearing white shoes after Labor Day. Who does that any way? Do you come from someplace where people are as stupid about fashion as you are about race, or what?

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Well, people used to take the rules of Labor Day more seriously than today. For instance, it was taboo for ladies to wear white after Labor Day… And I postulate that the reason stemmed from fears that if a lady wore white after Labor Day and was in a blizzard, any rescuers would be unable to spot her.

  • http://blog.trenchcoatsoft.com Ross

     

    Keep your hatred to yourself. I’m not offending you personally in any
    manner, so I resent your notion that “we’ll all be better off without
    you.

    Given that living in a world without racists seems not to be an option, I think we’re better off with you than without you. I only wish that ALL racists were as blatant about it as you are.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     I wish all haters were as blatant as you. You and Lori are vile towards people for simply uttering their little harmless opinion which just happens to be unfashionable in this day and age.
    Thank you for showing your true colors. Wishing death unto those you disagree really shows how open-minded you really are.

  • Lori

    You and Lori are vile towards people for simply uttering their little
    harmless opinion which just happens to be unfashionable in this day and
    age.

    Your opinion is neither harmless, it’s hateful and hurtful. To the extent that it’s less accepted than it used to be it’s because a great many people have worked very hard in order to get history to arc toward justice, not because of changes in something as trivial as fashion.

    As for the notion that we’ve been “vile” to you, you’re either putting it on in a dishonest attempt to paint yourself as the victim or your feelings are remarkably delicate for a guy who goes around saying that a whole category of other human beings shouldn’t exist and are to be feared.

    Wishing death unto those you disagree really shows how open-minded you really are. 

    Your reading comprehension is really very poor. I didn’t wish for your death. There’s no need to. Death eventually comes for us all.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Well, you hoped for my death; therefore, wishing for it.
    Victimhood in this scenario is ultimately subjective, for I don’t see myself as a victim. I see myself as a conservative whose ideas are more agreeable than your slanderous offense and repetitious name-calling (i.e., “racist”).

  • EllieMurasaki

    I am really truly sick of people who think it’s worse to call someone names than to be someone who those names accurately describe. There are exceptions, of course (there is no shame in being someone accurately if insultingly described by ‘whore’), but it actually is worse to be a racist than to call someone racist.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     If you’re “sick of people” like me, then sign off and go to the doctor. According to your perverted logic, you construe me as a racist which I have no problem with… Besides, there are people who still believe the Earth is flat.
    What I’m tired of is hearing it every comment, as if people would forget after a couple seconds.  Say it once and move on to an actual debate.

  • Lori

     

    there are people who still believe the Earth is flat. 

    Ah, your intellectual equals. They hold a long-disproved idea about the earth. You hold a long-disproved idea about human beings. You’re made for each other.

    Say it once and move on to an actual debate.

    Talk about irony. Your answer to every question comes back to asserting, without proof, that racal purity has intrinsic value. If it does not (and it doesn’t) your entire argument comes down to personal taste. There is no reason whatsoever for the world to be run to your personal taste.

    If you have something else to offer then stop repeating yourself and move on. If you’ve got nothing else then run along back to whatever hateful corner of the internet you crawled out of. I think I hear Storm Front calling your name.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     I never once said it had “intrinsic value.” I said it matters to me and people who find people who look a certain way attractive. 

  • Lori

     

    I said it matters to me and people who find people who look a certain way attractive.  

    Why in the world would you think that other people should arrange their lives, and a whole category of people (the “mixed race”) should not exist, simply to accommodate your preferences? I mean that’s really ballsy. And I don’t mean that in a good way.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    No person is capable of being ballsy on the Internet.

  • EllieMurasaki

    Okay, let’s go upthread a bit. You said white men raped Native women to produce half-Native babies, thereby diluting Native culture. I said a half-Native kid, if raised by the Native parent and not the white one, is culturally pure Native. You said a white kid adopted by Native folk cannot be Native. I’m still waiting to hear what your second statement there has to do with either my statement or your first one.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Well, they have nothing to do with each other. “White men raped Native women to produce half-Native babies, thereby diluting Native culture” is an attempt at destroying the Natives and replacing them with whites.
    A white kid adopted by Native folk is still white racially and is not of the Native ethnicity; however, he is culturally Native.

  • Lori

     

    Well, you hoped for my death; therefore, wishing for it. 

    Nope. I simply said that we’d be better off after it happens. I didn’t hope for it or wish for it or suggest that I would like it to happen at any particular point or in any particular way. You are going to die some day. We all do. It is my opinion that when that happens the world will likely be a tiny bit better a place for the absence of your advocacy for hatred.

    If you don’t want people to think the world will be better off when you’re gone then stop spewing hateful crap.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     What you call “hateful crap” is simply unfashionable because of the brainwashing from liberals. Had liberals not forsaken the majority, my ideas would resound in popularity throughout the U.S. in the 21st Century.

  • AnonymousSam

    No, sorry, it’s hateful crap. It’s very simple: You don’t get to decide what labels you get or whether they’re socially acceptable simply because you don’t like how they get divided up. You don’t get to claim love for your neighbors while spitting on them for doing things you don’t like. You don’t get to claim that you believe in racial equality while considering other races inferior.

    This is the ouroboros that modern day Christians are still running into again and again when they proclaim how virtuous and forgiving and loving they are while trying to deny people their civil rights for their own good. Smiling while believing that certain people are less than fully human doesn’t make you a good person simply because you were smiling while you thought it. If you truly believed in racial equality and Christian love, you couldn’t hold these beliefs alongside them.

    So no, you’re a racist whether you dress up in a white hood and lynch non-whites or whether you just sit around on weekends and defend the people who name themselves after the groups who do. Your nine to five job is irrelevant. The fact that you have a loving family is irrelevant. The fact that you’re a combination of two nationalities or that your friends are non-whites is irrelevant. All that matters at the end of the day is that you tried to exert your will upon the world to decide who gets to do what and when and with whom based on something as superficial as “race.” The sum is not a net positive and you’re not the one who gets to decide that.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     I don’t mind being called a racist by people who don’t know the term. I’m arguing with a Bill Maher audience anyway, I suppose. lol

  • EllieMurasaki

    I think we’re having a two-peoples-divided-by-a-common-language problem. When we, or at least when I, say ‘racist’, the intended meaning is ‘someone who thinks race should matter’, or its friendlier but stupider cousin, ‘someone who thinks race does not matter’. Context tells us that when we say ‘racist’ to describe Richard Hansen, we’re using the ‘should’ meaning, not the ‘does not’ meaning. These are both distinguished from ‘non-racist’, which is ‘someone who thinks race should not matter, knows that it does, and is working towards a world where it will not’.

    (Stephen Colbert’s television persona is a vehement ‘does not’. Given that he uses this to call out shoulds and other does-nots, I believe that under the mask, Colbert is not racist at all. Privileged, of course, he’s white, he benefits from the racial history of the US same as any other white person in this country, but I think he knows that, and too many white folk don’t.)

    When you say ‘racist’, Richard, or when you hear us say it, what do you understand it to mean?

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     My definition for “racist” is someone who believes that we should remove the human rights of races who are different.
    Adolf Hitler, Theodore Bilbo, and Hiram Evans were racists.

  • Lori

     

      My definition for “racist” is someone who believes that we should remove the human rights of races who are different.  

    Your definition of “racist” is quite lacking. It’s very convenient the way you keep defining racism in a way you believe lets you off the hook.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Intimidating minorities would be racist, under my context of the word.

  • EllieMurasaki

    You say, Richard, that you value diversity. Presumably this means you value things that white folk got from brown folk. Like the basics of chemistry, and the concept of zero. (Arabic numerals are called such for a reason. It’s not strictly accurate, because the Arabs got the idea from the Hindus, but the Europeans did get it from the Arabs.)

    But you want to know something? Whenever large enough numbers of different peoples get together for peaceful reasons, then either everybody involved is the same sex (which is stupid for other reasons, but I don’t much want to have Feminism 101 with you when we’re having so much trouble with Racism 101) or it is going to happen that a man of one people and a woman of another will fall in love, or at least in lust, and make babies.

    Multiracial people are an inevitable result of the sort of intermingling of peoples that is necessary for us to learn from one another and take advantage of the diversity you say you prize.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     We were black 3.6 million years ago, before we dispersed across the planet and changed due to environmental factors. I understand and want to keep those features preserved.
    It is not “necessary for us to learn” from one another and take advantage of mixing genes. It’s necessary to respect them and provide them the same liberties and rights, but there’s nothing to be learned. If we must learn something, then what is it?

  • EllieMurasaki

    You’ve never tried to do math with Roman numerals, have you?

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    VXIIXIIIXV XIIIXXIXVIIIIXVIVIXIIX
    Your name in Roman numerals. Each letter is represented by a set of numerals marking the number of the letter on the Latin alphabet.  :P

  • EllieMurasaki

    That’s not math, that’s the sort of stupid numerology trick people do to prove such-and-so is the Antichrist because 666.

    Solve b^ii = b + vi for b without converting from Roman numerals to Arabic. Then tell me again how the Arabs should never have learned about zero from the Hindus and the Europeans certainly shouldn’t have learned about it from the Arabs.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    b^ii = b + vi
    b^ii – b = vi
    log(b^ii) – b = log(vi)
    ii – b = log(vi)
    -b = log(vi) – ii
    b = -(log(vi)) + ii
    My algebra skills have been lacking, I must say. How’d I do?

  • EllieMurasaki

    (1) log base what?

    (2) How’d you come up with logarithms without use of the concept of zero?

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    We borrowed zero from India, remember? We can slip it in that Roman numeral in today’s age.
    I guess that equation would have been unsolvable in Ancient Greece after all.

  • EllieMurasaki

    Yes, that equation would have been unsolvable in Europe until we figured out zero. Which could have taken a long damn time had we not been in contact with Arabs who’d been in contact with Hindus who’d figured it out for themselves.

    Are you aware, now, of why contact with other cultures is vital? Are you willing to concede that the multiracial people who inevitably result from such contact are not in fact a bad thing?

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Contact to exchange information and trade is vital but not exchanging genes.

  • EllieMurasaki

    Either everyone on all sides who makes contact with any other side was born with a penis (or a vagina, but everybody has to agree on which, and history says penises usually win), or men from one side come in contact with women from another. And if that latter happens with any degree of frequency, babies happen. The choices are have multiracial people or have total isolation. Which, in your view, is worse?

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Well, China was in “total isolation” for a millennia and made trade with the Europeans via middlemen between the two continents.
    Isn’t it possible not to mix with those far beyond the land, but at the same time be able to maintain a developing civilization? I know the Han are a mixture of the Uyghur, Manchurian, Mongol, Canton, etc., but they formed a nearly impenetrable union that traded with foreigners and also maintained a system that surpassed most other civilizations.

  • EllieMurasaki

    And you don’t think the Chinese interbred with their neighbors, and those neighbors with those neighbors, and on west till we hit Europe?

  • EllieMurasaki

    And you don’t think the Chinese interbred with their neighbors, and those neighbors with those neighbors, and on west till we hit Europe?

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     I’d need to see proof.

  • PJ Evans

     There was certainly trade between China and the rest of the world. It’s not expecting much to assume that there was more than just trade going on – even if it was only close neighbors in some areas at some times. There’s even some thought that some Roman soldiers captured in western Asia might have ended up on the Chinese frontier. (‘Total isolation’? You need an impenetrable barrier for that. Can’t think of any habitable place that completely isolated.)

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    I have no problem with them living here to conduct trade… I simply don’t want them producing children with those who aren’t of their people.
     

  • Kiba

    Yeah…I’m guessing someone hasn’t heard about the Tarim mummies.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    There’s also the Kennewick Man found by archaeologists in Washington state. Apart from evidence of Haplogroup R1a (Y-DNA) characteristics discovered in the Tarim Mummies, how do we know that they were truly of European descent or simply a mutation of the Asian migration into East Asia?

  • PJ Evans

     So why are you not purebred anything? There was, by your own statement, ‘race mixing’ in your background. (No you don’t get to avoid it. You aren’t pure anything but human.)

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    Racial purity isn’t a viable concept, since everyone claiming purity has 99.4% (estimated) European, for example, racial background.
    But I am white, and by a common trait of race, which minorities take for granted and use to their advantage in the United States, using race to the whites’ advantage would allow us to maintain conservative principles from slipping away. Have you ever noticed how conservatives have never been able to keep hold of their goals for sustaining an idyllic America, since Brown v. Board of Education in 1954?
    That event marks the time the tables turned, and America began a civil rights movement which to this day is still fomented by progressives nationwide. In order to restore (as I believe you would call “regress”) America to simpler, traditional times, some of us would prefer organizations like the Council of Conservative Citizens as a vehicle to encourage  reforms to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, in order to allow people the right to live in all-white communities if they so pleased.
    If they so pleased. Remember “if they so pleased” because we don’t want all-out segregation because it would hurt minorities; we don’t want all-out integration because it would infringe on the rights of people to pursue their individual beliefs [on race or such] in an Orwellian government-overlord setting.
    These communities, we believe, will not be a burden to any state or county that didn’t accept them. We simply want state’s rights to decide which states will host these communities (1 in a county at most) which would allow all-white residents, all-black residents, all-Hispanic residents, all-biracial residents… Whatever the person who purchased the land desired. They’d be tiny neighborhoods, and that’s all we wish.
    We don’t want to infringe on your rights, PJ. Some people just want separate communities and join the CofCC for hope to mobilize change. To be honest, it’s more about freedom than any sense of racism, despite what the progressives say.
    How does that sound?

  • EllieMurasaki

    Have you ever heard the term “white flight”?

    We have what you say you want. You can stop asking for it any time now.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    Doesn’t work. Those neighborhoods that are “white” are open to everyone.  If one wishes to live in a neighborhood that only accepts a certain race, then it will require reforming the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that restricts “discrimination based on race.”
    Some devoted whites are populating Kalispell, Montana to create an all-white town. The government will probably respond by importing Somali refugees and sending them to Kalispell to tell off the white separatists of Kalispell…
    To prevent that injustice, we need some sort of way to ensure a small all-white community. Blacks have historically black towns (i.e., Eatonville, Florida), but whites have no towns, unless you count towns of 250 in the middle of North Dakota as suitable places for whites to gather for jobs and a regular approach.
    Remember this is for anyone, and “white flight” doesn’t even begin to address the needs of blacks who want all black neighborhoods.

  • EllieMurasaki

    Another thing you need to learn: the difference between de jure and de facto.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    But de jure in this case will yield us more freedom. The freedom to choose where we’d wish to settle. 

  • EllieMurasaki

    You can settle any damn where you please. You cannot have the government declare that only people you like may settle there with you, but as long as you do not actually get caught rounding up a lynch mob, there is nothing stopping you from making it an uncomfortable place for people you don’t like to be.

    I do not advocate this course of action. I want to be entirely clear on that. But that does not mean people do not follow it. Another term you need to learn? Sundown town.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     I’ve visited sundown towns, but even those are losing their racial composition. Vidor, Texas for instance is now only 91% white. Harrison, Arkansas is 95% white, and Petal, Mississippi is only 95% white. Vidor has a wonderful Dairy Queen, by the way. When I was driving through Texas, I stopped there for an Oreo Blizzard and enjoyed he taste. (this isn’t relevant, but I’m a conversational person. Do you like Blizzards? ^_^)
    They’re not sundown towns anymore, I’m afraid. The government wouldn’t declare anything about these lands at all. Private contractors will decide if they want their community to be all-white or all-bisexual or whatever they so choose.
    There is actually an all-white private school backed by the Council of Conservative Citizens of Mississippi. It’s called Carrollton Academy and was able to bypass any worries about race by enrolling one Asian student. 406/407 students are white at that school. (:
    Any racial community would need to be private. We don’t want the government segregating anyone. We’re all about free will here.

  • EllieMurasaki

    I feel so sorry for that Asian student at Carrollton. There is no way that kid is getting out of that school without having had it drummed into their head that they are Different. Not Good Enough. Unless the kid gets results twice as good as anyone else, of course, and even that is likely to get the kid the (grudging) respect due someone only slightly inferior, rather than the respect due an equal or better. And given the attitudes likely held by the parents of the students at Carrollton? Even in the unlikely event that the Asian student can find other students who aren’t racist, the Asian student will have no friends and no dates, because anyone the Asian student attempts to befriend or ask out, those kids’ parents will have a shitfit.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    Well, then you should support the Council of Conservative Citizens in reforming the Civil Rights Act of 1964, so that Asian child doesn’t have to go to that school.  They admitted a non-white student, so the school didn’t get canceled because of its lack of diversity.
    Besides, kids are usually more open-minded than their parents. Who knows. Maybe she fits in well at that school.

  • EllieMurasaki

    No. I should support the enforcement of the Civil Rights Act, so that that Asian student at Carrollton is not the only student of color there, and so that the white students at Carrollton know that students of color are their equals. More than that. So the white students know that students of color are no different from them. A concept you could do with learning.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Well, they can know they’re their equals without having to be alongside one another. All humans are equal. Why do you think I believe otherwise?

  • EllieMurasaki

    The best metric for determining whether someone thinks gay and bi folk are equal or inferior? How many of them they know. Someone who never knowingly meets a gay person can go her whole life thinking gay folk are subhuman. Slap her in the face a few times with the fact that the neighbors down the street, the kid’s second-grade teacher, the other kid’s best friend’s parents are gay folk, and that being gay doesn’t actually make these people not like her? She’s a lot more likely to be reasonable.

    I imagine it works the same way with race. A white person who never meets a person of color might believe that people of color are no different from white folk, but he’s much more likely (especially if his parents deliberately set up housekeeping somewhere they’d never have to encounter people of color) to believe that people of color are lesser. If he only meets people of color a few times in his life, or if those he meets conform to the negative stereotypes about them, that idea isn’t likely to shift. If classmates and neighbors and folk in the supermarket are people of color, it’s a lot harder to escape knowing that they are just like us.

    I am willing (for sake of argument) to grant that you are arguing in good faith, that you truly do not believe that people of color are an inferior type of being. But if that is the case, then you must be made to understand that minimizing the contact between white people and people of color will magnify the attitude that white people and people of color are inherently different, and it is historically really hard for people who believe two groups are different to believe that neither group is better. We see this in Yankees versus Red Sox, for fuck’s sake. Isolating groups by skin tone is going to create racism if it isn’t there already, and multiply the effects of racism already present.

    Either you believe that white people are superior to people of color, or you are really fucking ignorant about every-fucking-thing touching on the concept of race. There really isn’t a third option here.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    Someone “could” show hatred to a person they’ve never met of another race, but that scenario can also take place with someone who does know very well that type of person. You’re creating hypothetical statements at an attempt to prove that even voluntary separation, a person’s own free will should be stripped completely in the situation of a person wishing to live amongst like-minded and like-bodied people.
    People who’ve never met another race before don’t necessarily view them as lesser. Take, for example, the Aztecs when they first laid eyes on the conquistadors whose skin matched that of Quetzalcoatl, one of their gods. They accepted them lovingly, and never even met that race of people before.
    Well, I wouldn’t call it “really hard” or “really easy” for people not to make negative judgments about those of another race. It depends entirely on the stigma of the people and their outlook. If you ask me, I believe we should teach that everyone is equal, but we ought to respect the value of our race, the same as I believe other races should honor theirs (meaning marrying into that race but also believing all are equal in beauty but have different attractions. whites = whites, blacks = blacks, multiracial = multiracial). That’s an idyllic society and will never be founded, in today’s times as we know it.
    And finally about whether I agree with your 1st or 2nd choice, I choose your 2nd one [even though I disagree with your perception on being “really f**king ignorant”] because I don’t believe whites are any more superior than blacks or Hispanics or any other type of people.

  • EllieMurasaki

    If the Spanish had had the same view of the Aztecs that the Aztecs had of the Spanish, the history of the Americas would be very different. Prisoner’s dilemma, Richard. Either both parties trust, or both parties distrust, or one party trusts and one does not. It’s better all around if both parties trust, but if only one party trusts? That side is fucked.

    We teach that everyone is equal today. It’s not a lesson everyone learns, because it’s not a lesson everyone lives. Too many young black folk think they’re trash, because they see society treating their parents like trash. And too many young white folk think everyone of color is trash, because they see society treating people of color like trash, or because they hear that people of color are trash and they hardly ever see people of color at all. Isolating the races will make that worse, not better.

    If people want to live with like-minded folks, we can’t stop them and shouldn’t and won’t try. But yes, everyone should absolutely be made to associate with people who aren’t like them, on equal terms. That’s the only way to get everyone to the bone-deep understanding that we’re all people together. Though I do have to admit, being forced to associate with you? Isn’t doing much to improve my opinion of racist fuckwits.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    I’m afraid that you contradicted yourself. “If people want to live with like-minded folks, we can’t stop them and
    shouldn’t and won’t try. But yes, everyone should absolutely be made to
    associate with people who aren’t like them, on equal terms.”
    By saying you “shouldn’t and won’t try” to end the ability for people to separate themselves into their own communities, you say that racially conscious people should be able to separate themselves from multicultural society. Yet you contradicted yourself by saying that everyone “should absolutely be made to associate with people who aren’t like them.” Do you possibly have a part of you that agrees with my assertion that racially conscious people should be able to live in their own communities?
    Well, the belief of being forced is actually true. It sounds oppositional but holds a lot of truth, considering that people cannot have all-white or all-black schools, even if these schools were private and were opened in communities with large percentages of those eligible to attend. 

  • EllieMurasaki

    I am saying people can live in Whitesville all they want, but their kids need to go to school in Multiculturalville.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Well, I’d be okay with that. We have to make compromise sometimes, and I feel that’s doable. ^_^

  • EllieMurasaki

    And yet you think it is a good thing that that school you mentioned has only one student of color. And I suspect you strongly oppose desegregatory busing.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     I don’t think it’s a good thing, really. I told you that I feel sorry for that girl in a few ways but hope she’s doing well.
    I oppose forced busing and would prefer separate busing, but I can easily compromise with busing and schools, if that’s what it takes to have a white community.

  • PJ Evans

     I pity people who can’t stand living in a place where being a majority isn’t good enough for them. Have you considered moving to Iceland? /s

  • PJ Evans

     I pity people who can’t stand living in a place where being a majority isn’t good enough for them. Have you considered moving to Iceland? /s

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    I’m not of Scandinavian ethnicity. I’ll respect the Icelanders and allow them to keep their civilization. 

  • PJ Evans

     Then stop complaining about there being no place white enough to suit you and your racist friends.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     You’ll complain, when you become a minority.

  • EllieMurasaki

    [citation needed]

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     City-Data.com

  • EllieMurasaki

    I ask how you know that PJ Evans, if part of a minority, would complain about being part of a minority. You respond with census statistics?

    Price of peas in Persopolis.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     I assume because the majority of people in the United States are white, and many of the liberals I’ve met who confront me on the issue of race are white. He never disclosed his race, but we can always infer.
    Census statistics on those percentages I listed. To what information I’ve written would you like a citation?

  • EllieMurasaki

    I want to know what mind-reading technique you used to discern that PJ Evans would object to being part of a minority.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     I never said he’d object to being a minority; I claimed he would probably be white because most conscious liberal whites and those who hate racially conscious white people are typically white.

  • Lori

    Apparently you missed this Richard, but plenty of non-whites are disgusted by racists like you.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Ditto.

  • EllieMurasaki

    PJ: I pity people who can’t stand living in a place where being a majority
    isn’t good enough for them. Have you considered moving to Iceland? /s

    Richard: I’m not of Scandinavian ethnicity. I’ll respect the Icelanders and allow them to keep their civilization.

    PJ: Then stop complaining about there being no place white enough to suit you and your racist friends.

    Richard: You’ll complain, when you become a minority.

    Richard forty minutes later: I never said he’d object to being a minority

    Sure you didn’t.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     He doesn’t now. But what will happen when he does… Or perhaps he already is… We do not know.
    And no, I didn’t. He never responded to it, so his race is TBA.

  • Lori

    They people trying to take over Kalispell are not “devoted whites”, they’re Neo-Nazis. Heavily armed Neo-Nazis. Did you think no one here would know that and you could just mischaraterize the issue and not get called on it? Newsflash Richard–this group tends to be pretty well informed*.

    You keep saying that you don’t believe in violence and then expressing admiration for violent racists.

    The government will probably respond by importing Somali refugees and
    sending them to Kalispell to tell off the white separatists of
    Kalispell… 

    Are you high?

    *If anyone hasn’t heard about the “Patriot Movement’s” attempt to turn NW Montana into paradise for violent racists, this article will give you the basics:

    http://www.alternet.org/story/153162/how_white_supremacists_are_trying_to_make_an_american_town_a_model_for_right-wing_extremism

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Well, those “violent racists” simply want a small white town. They are militant because they’re ultra-sensitive to change, imposed by multiculturalism. You should thank them for wanting to separate themselves from society.
    Well, the government sent Somali refugees to Minneapolis, a once white city of whites whose ancestors inhabited Scandinavia and Germany. The population of Minneapolis in Somalis is approximately 10%, I believe. Whites are about 71% in the racial composition of Minneapolis, if you can believe that.
    High? No. I live on sea level.

  • PJ Evans

     It’s easier to do math with Roman numerals if you have an abacus handy. Or just something that can be use for one: lines to put counters on. That’s what the Romans did, after all.

  • Lori

    I remember doing a whole thing with beads when we learned Roman numerals in elementary school, but all the detail has been lost. Fortunately it’s unlikely that I’ll ever need the skill again, because it’s gone.

  • Lori

    This is a fair point. Better the racists who just put it right out there so we can all avoid them than the ones who are sneaky about it.

  • Mark Z.

    It’s called China, a nationalistic country where everyone is united under the banner of socialism.
    Tell that to a Tibetan.

  • Lori

    The Mongols would also like a word.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    China’s nationalistic tendencies led it to imperialize land and not give it back to the Tibetans.
    But Tibet, Manchuria, and the Uyghurs are an exception. I’m talking about traditional widesperad Han Chinese here.

  • EllieMurasaki

    Didn’t I just tell you yesterday that the Han Chinese are what the US will be if enough white folk get uninterested enough in genealogy for long enough to forget which ancestors came from which parts of Europe?

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     I don’t believe we discussed China yesterday. I thought the Han were a distinct people, but now that you mention it, it’s totally possible that the Han are a mix.

  • Lori

     

    And believe me, when a diagnosed sociopath tells you that you’re missing
    something vital, something crucial to your ability to interact with
    people like an actual human being, that’s a sign.  

    It’s tough to argue with that Richard.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Tell that to Abraham Lincoln. The primary difference between us on cultural influences pertaining to race is that he lived before the 1960s, and I’m alive after it… And his convictions  and opinions were more radical than mine.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    http://www.math.yorku.ca/Who/Faculty/Kochman/M4400/DarkAges.pdf

    According to this, Greek mathematics (which, presumably, the Romans borrowed) was done by converting algebraic methods into geometric methods. While ingenious, I suspect this process had serious limitations. In addition the PDF notes that their mathematical structure was unnecessarily rigid, demanding a very formalized system of logic.

    Given that you can actually teach very advanced calculus techniques using only heuristic arguments, the Greeks and Romans likely hobbled themselves in developing more advanced methods beyond counting and geometry.

    http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/2006/08/16/roman-numerals-and-arithmetic/

    Roman abacuses (abaci? Ugh. I hate Latinized plurals.) existed to do rapid arithmetic, but if you had to do it by hand, as the blog notes, it could get very tedious.

    It’s clear that the Romans had an incomplete concept of the number zero. The idea of using it with a number system to indicate multiples or fractions (as we do in the Hindu-Arabic derived system) was not developed, so if you told a Roman you had zero of something, he or she would understand that (“nothing”), but would not grasp the concept of using multiples of ten to quickly shift the decimal point of a number.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     I respect people who do their research. I’m always trying to bulk up on history, so I thank you for posting those links. ^_^

  • Lori

    A tangent, but one related to bigotry best left behind—the official Democratic Party platform is out and it supports full marriage equality.

    Freedom to Marry. We support the right of all families to have equal respect, responsibilities, and protections under the law. We support marriage equality and support the movement to secure equal treatment under law for same-sex couples. We also support the freedom of churches and religious entities to decide how to administer marriage as a religious sacrament without government interference.

    We oppose discriminatory federal and state constitutional amendments and other attempts to deny equal protection of the laws to committed same-sex couples who seek the same respect and responsibilities as other married couples. We support the full repeal of the so-called Defense of Marriage Act and the passage of the Respect for Marriage Act.

    History moves on and hateful bigots get left a little further behind.

    Full platform is here: http://www.democrats.org/democratic-national-platform

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     That’s about marriage. I’m talking about businesses being able to open monoracial subdivisions which cannot legally take place because of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
    We wouldn’t trash the document but reform it. I don’t want segregation for all; I want the choice to go separate ways.

  • Lori

    I wasn’t talking to you Richard.

    And you’re still a racist. And you “the choice to go separate ways” is segregation.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     Segregation is not a choice.

  • Lori

    And neither is what you’re suggesting. The only way for racist white people to have the “choice” to live in their own lily-white compounds is to take away the choice of others to live there. Segregation.

  • AnonymousSam

    It doesn’t entirely surprise me. It’s been a big thing in the campaigning here in my state — oddly, on behalf of both Democrats and Republicans. I guess we’re just an awesome state that way.

    What saddens me though is that the Texas GOP has added repealing the Voter Rights Act of 1965 to their official platform, right next to opposing higher education and critical thinking skills.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    If the document is “codified and updated,” then it shows dishonesty on the part of the Texas GOP. We don’t know what they wish to modify, and that’s a darn shame for right-wing politics in Texas. 

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    Some devoted whites are populating Kalispell, Montana to create an
    all-white town. The government will probably respond by importing Somali
    refugees and sending them to Kalispell to tell off the white
    separatists of Kalispell…

    *stares*

    *blinketyblink*

    Are you, like, for real?

    Jesus. Just when I swear not to keep engaging directly, Richard Hansen, you go and drop stuff like this in blog comments.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     That’s what the government did to Minneapolis. Who’s to say it won’t send non-whites to Kalispell, in order to spoil the chance of having an all-white town of over 20,000 people?
    They’ll say its to integrate the community, but it’s really to cause strife. I’d feel sorry for those refugees, considering that they’d have to live amongst militant white separatists.
    But hey, more reason to get the government out of our business, right? (:

  • Lori

    That is not how the Minneapolis area ended up with a large Somali population. Do you read any factual information sources or do you get all your “knowledge” from white supremacist blogs?

    They’ll say its to integrate the community, but it’s really to cause
    strife. I’d feel sorry for those refugees, considering that they’d have
    to live amongst militant white separatists.

    You are high, aren’t you?

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     White supremacist blogs? No, I got mine from interpreting City-Data.com.
    No. I told you I live on sea level.

  • Lori

    City-Data.com did not tell you that the government brought Somalis into Minneapolis to cause strife. You got that shit from somewhere and it was not a legitimate news or information source because it’s not true. It’s a racist fantasy. You got it from a racist source or you dreamed it up yourself. Either way, don’t blame that crap on census data.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     I assumed. Besides, the government works in mysterious ways. If you don’t believe me, then surf those “white supremacist” websites to find what you supposedly believe exists there.
    I’m not a member of any of that quibble. I’m my own man, like John Steinbeck.

  • Lori

    You looked at the census date and just “assumed” that the Somali population is high in Minneapolis because the government “imported” them to cause trouble? That’s ridiculous. How embarrassing for you. Or at least you would be embarrassed if you had any sense at all.

    As for the government moving in mysterious ways, they’re not that mysterious. It’s no surprise at all that you’re a conspiracy nut as well as a racist. Those things seem to go together. The only place you’re your own man is in your own mind. In the real world you’re just a bog standard racist.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    Well, something IS up. It’s just finding the theory that makes the most sense that causes the issue.
    I don’t believe wholeheartedly in the ZOG belief, but I do believe that liberalism does eventually want us to forget that race exists, not ZOG but powerful liberals themselves of all peoples. 

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    Is there even any legal basis for the US government to direct the settlement of refugees beyond immediate housing needs?

    And is there demographic data that would even support such ridiculous assertions?

  • Lori

     

    Is there even any legal basis for the US government to direct the settlement of refugees beyond immediate housing needs?  

    Not exactly. The government assigns refugees to their initial location, but where that is depends on which organizations volunteer to help them. The first group of Somali refugees was sent to Minneapolis because there were groups, mostly church-based, who volunteered to provide assistance and support. Naturally once a group gets settled and established later refugees follow them. 

    It’s the same reason Minneapolis-St. Paul has an incongruously large population of Hmong.

    And is there demographic data that would even support such ridiculous assertions? 

    Do you mean evidence that Richard would say supports it or evidence that a person without a racist axe to grind and a vivid fantasy life would say supports it?

    If the former, then yes. There are a few large pockets of non-white immigrants in previously very white locations.

    If the latter, then no. All those pockets have perfectly reasonable explanations that have nothing to do with the government using non-white immigrants as some sort of weapon against racists. (see above)

    If Richard wants to blame someone I guess he could whine to the Lutherans. Their aid organizations seem to be largely responsible for Minneapolis having large refugee populations.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    Not exactly. The government assigns refugees to their initial location, but where that is depends on which organizations volunteer to help them. The first group of Somali refugees was sent to Minneapolis because there were groups, mostly church-based, who volunteered to provide assistance and support. Naturally once a group gets settled and established later refugees follow them.

    It’s the same reason Minneapolis-St. Paul has an incongruously large population of Hmong.

    Sounds like a rather innocuous “path dependence” thing then, where future events tend to evolve from one important past event.

    Hardly the stuff of “social engineering” conspiracies!

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     That would make sense, Lori. Thanks.
    Could I add in something else? You’re familiar with Vidor, Texas, right? It’s a former sundown town in the Beaumont area off of I-10 in eastern Texas. Anyway in the early 1990s, Texas decided to diversify the area by opening section-8 housing for mostly minorities… A way of removing the stigma of it being a white town.
    The Texas state government, however, forgot about the upcoming Camellia White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan rally… As a result of the rally, nearly all the residents in the public housing developments ditched the area. Because the government sent in non-whites to break down the sundown town, I thought it would be plausible that the government would send refugees to Kalispell to offset any hope of a large white town.
    I mean, it could happen. The Texas government did it… Governor Schweitzer of Montana could easily suggest such for Kalispell, too.

  • AnonymousSam

    I was only able to find one source indicating this event had ever taken place, and it was actually very unprofessional and biased, and the official Ku Klux Klan website for that region points to… a Korean-Japanese belly dancer’s homepage. Wikipedia references the event in question, but with no citation whatsoever beyond that one disputed source and is thus contested as reliable information.

    Likewise, the Wikipedia article made reference to the KKK murder of one of said families who were allegedly moved there — and could still only provide one citation, the same as the above. It doesn’t speak well of the source that even the
    date of the event is in question — it’s either 1964
    or 1993. The source is also heavily anecdotally driven and comes from
    CNN, which I can’t speak much of, public news media being what it is.

    I’m not saying that it didn’t happen, but it seems odd that there would be so little record of it ever happening if it did. The one source each article cites is so questionable that I’d be inclined to chalk it up to a crackpot getting air time.

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

     The KKK rally may not have served as the catalyst for the public housing families to leave; however, we do know one thing. They did leave shortly after arriving and not because of budget cuts.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

     Fostering ethnic hatreds is easy enough when people live right next to each other (see: Yugoslavia, Serbs and Croats). How much easier would it be if the peoples in question barely have contact with one another?

  • http://www.facebook.com/richard.hansen.1675 Richard Hansen

    In today’s globalist society, it wouldn’t matter how far away the groups reside. Unless of course, we teach everyone constatly that everyone is equal, in these monoracial societies, the chance of widespread ethnic hatred will be lowered.
    It is, however, difficult to ensure that everyone will foster egalitarian beliefs on behalf of equality as human beings.
    All I want is to live in “Whitesville” as EllieMurasaki put it. lol

  • Gary Jenkins

    Whites BUILT modern America. White ancestors did not work hard for the next generation to give the US away to non-Whites. (Only 2% of slave owners were White, and Jews owned most of the slave ships)

    Whites have brought freedom of speech and democratic values and freed slaves wherever they go, as well as raise living standards of ALL races, concepts and actions that non-Whites have yet to foster and cultivate.

    Non-Whites ADDED a little. (Including increased crime, new diseases, different customs, different habits, an increased tax burden, anti-White hatred, and an entitlement mentality)

    You can’t maintain a 1st world nation with low IQ, 3rd world immigrants. High national IQ corresponds strongly to a high average living. (Science is not racist)

    Racially diverse societies are a HUGE source of tension and conflict.

    Racially homogenous societies don’t suffer from racism and the BILLIONS spent annually on racism lawsuits.

    If diversity was so natural, why are BILLIONS spent annually on Diversity programs, Tolerance programs, etc., and yet NO improvements have been forthcoming?

    Science has proven (see Harvard Professor Robert Putnam, Bowling alone) that people in diverse societies: 1. TRUST EACHOTHER LESS (including their own race), 2. are LESS LIKELY TO GIVE TO CHARITY, and 3. are LESS HAPPY.

    Think about this: WHITES ARE THE ONLY RACE CELEBRATING DIVERSITY AS THEY BECOME MINORITIES IN THEIR OWN SOCIETIES.

    Where are non-Whites going to get their welfare from when Whites become a minority? No welfare = HUGE Hispanic and Black riots.

    Non-Whites love White societies because Whites build the best societies.

    Only Whites are crazy enough to spend BILLIONS on illegal immigrant welfare. No other race is stupid enough to do that.

    Whites altruistic behavior and moral universalism is destroying their own civilization.

    Many Whites don’t realize, non-Whites don’t play by White rules, and never will.

    Will non-Whites give Whites minority benefits when Whites become a minority? NOPE !

    Most Whites lack a racial consciousness. Most non-Whites are loyal to their own race. BIRDS OF A FEATHER FLOCK TOGETHER?

    Many Whites hate on their own race (Most are Liberals and have been instilled with WHITE GUILT by the anti-White media ). Liberals appeal to EMOTION, not SCIENCE.

    Would America have become a first world nation if Whites had never colonized it? NOPE !

    Most White immigrants assimilate after one generation. Most non-Whites never assimilate.

    Different races are suited to being governed by different sets of laws that suit their own racial attributes. Some races are COLLECTIVISTIC ex. Chinese; some races are INDIVIDUALISTIC ex. Whites.

    Liberals LOVE diversity, but usually choose to live in White neighborhoods.

    Many Whites STILL don’t understand, non-Whites view their own race as their nation. Blood is thicker than water. Nationalism trumps patriotism.

    QUESTION: What can Whites do to prevent themselves from becoming a minority? (Except for having more kids)

    Racial diversity = less Whites = more crime = more poverty.

    Racial diversity only benefits non-Whites.

    The USA is dying BECAUSE OF RACIAL DIVERSITY ! Taiwan, Japan, and China are thriving because they are racially homogenous, high IQ societies.

  • EllieMurasaki

    Cite your statements. All of them. I’m particularly interested in ‘only two percent of slaveowners were white’ and ‘Native Americans could not possibly have made the technological and economic advances white people did’, but cite sources for every statement you’ve made, because every last one sounds like utter bullshit.

  • http://dpolicar.livejournal.com/ Dave

     Shame on you.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    Cribbing from The Leopard’s Spots, are we?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_B26XPJSYUDVSU3JSDIKGIB2DDE Miss Fiona

    I’m not going to side with all of Gary’s statements, but I believe he may have a point about only 2% of whites owning slaves. Think about it. Owning a slave was something only the wealthy could afford, and most white southerners lived as poor farmers. His other comments seem sketchy, but the slavery one sounds right.

  • rikalous

     You’ve got it backwards. Gary didn’t say that only 2% of whites owned slaves. He said that only 2% of slaveowners were white, or in other words that 98% of slaveowners were nonwhite.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_B26XPJSYUDVSU3JSDIKGIB2DDE Miss Fiona

     Well okay then. But even so, it is true that only 2% of whites owned slaves.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    Merci beaucoup. Je cliqueras cette link et liseras l’information. Je peux liser les articles français.

    I just noticed you conjugated your verbs wrong. If you’re going to show off, do it right.
     

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_B26XPJSYUDVSU3JSDIKGIB2DDE Miss Fiona

    Tu es persistant. mdr


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X