Anti-white Prejudice - does it exist?

[Libby1]

6 minutes ago, Prudence V said:

I’m assuming you mean the film “Mugabe and the White African”? Free the is Zimbabwean, not South African. Mugabe had nothing to do with South Africa, which is a separate country. Likewise, I assume you mean the *Southern* African Development Community, which covers the whole region, rather than the single country of South Africa (which has nothing to do with Zimbabwe.

Rather than focusing on a typo, do you want to address the main thrust of what I wrote in the context of whether this could be classed as prejudice against white people?

Edited July 9, 2020 by Libby1

[Prudence V]

For anyone who’s actually interested in what happened in Zimbabwe, regarding “land seizures” - as part of the Lancaster House talks during the transition to democracy, the U.K. offered to fund land redistribution so that the landless black majority would not forever be economically subjugated to the white minority, who owned the bulk of the land (many of whom fled Zim on independence, to SA, and continued to own the land as absentee landlords). Tony Blair reneged on that, sending Claire Short to tell Mugabe that the U.K. was going to break its promise. Since the U.K. didn’t deliver on its promise to fund land redistribution, the Mugabe government decided it would have to expropriate the land to effect a more socially just redistribution. 
 

Sadly, that land redistribution programme landed up becoming beset with political cronyism, nepotism, etc due to Mugabe’s desperation to cling to power. How it was handled was bad, but the principle of land redistribution was sound. If the U.K. had not reneged on its promise, things would have been very different. 

Edited July 9, 2020 by Prudence V

[Prudence V]

1 hour ago, Libby1 said:

I'm not sure how a person would dispute that those farmers were not only subjected to prejudice based on being white, but brutalised for it

By knowing the facts. 
 

Doubtless there were some “war vets” who were prejudiced against white settlers - there is enough video footage of groups of young black men running around chanting anti-white slogans to support that. But the thrust of the policy was economic. It was about land redistribution - as I covered in my post, above - and also to a lesser degree political. Mugabe wanted to stay in power. He felt threatened by the rival MDC, which was largely supported by whites. I have family and friends -including white people - who continue to farm in Zimbabwe. Not all white people had their farms seized. Not all white people feel threatened or victimised. Not all white people were subject to harassment, loss of their businesses or their dignity. There are plenty of white people who see themselves as Zimbabweans, who don’t keep British passports in their back pockets, who continue to work, live and live in Zim and see it as their home. 
 

If you compare the land seizures - which saw *some* white people lose farms, with the *legislated, systematic* removal of _all_ land from _all_ black people under racist white rule, you’ll see it’s a very different picture. 

[Libby1]

3 minutes ago, Prudence V said:

By knowing the facts. 
 

So you disagree that what happened to Ben Freeth and his father-in-law amounted to racial discrimination?  

Edited July 9, 2020 by Libby1

[Emilie Jolie]

Whites overseas colonising, appropriating natural resources, dividing whole comtinents up along random lines with no regard for local history, waging imperialistic economic wars, detroying and pillaging whole countries, imposing racist laws or discriminating against minorities abroad and at home still now, payed for by the white-majority taxpayers at home? Shrug. Oh well, what can you do. Not our problem, not our fault, it's human nature, we're all as bad as each other, not playing white victimhood, it's all in the past. 

Some evidence that individuals or groups of white people have been the victims of anti-white prejudice, arguably on the back of all the above? THIS IS HORRIBLE. IT'S EXACTLY LIKE RACISM. WHY DO WE NEED TO CHANGE WORDS?! Etc. One-way empathy only.

[Libby1]

26 minutes ago, Emilie Jolie said:

Whites overseas colonising, appropriating natural resources, dividing whole comtinents up along random lines with no regard for local history, waging imperialistic economic wars, detroying and pillaging whole countries, imposing racist laws or discriminating against minorities abroad and at home still now, payed for by the white-majority taxpayers at home? Shrug. Oh well, what can you do. Not our problem, not our fault, it's human nature, we're all as bad as each other, not playing white victimhood, it's all in the past. 

Some evidence that individuals or groups of white people have been the victims of anti-white prejudice, arguably on the back of all the above? THIS IS HORRIBLE. IT'S EXACTLY LIKE RACISM. WHY DO WE NEED TO CHANGE WORDS?! Etc. One-way empathy only.

My understanding is that you started this thread on the basis that you don't believe there is such a thing as anti-white racism, and invited people who disagree with that position to explain why they disagree.  If what you really wanted to do was rant about people who disagree with your position, there's a dedicated section on this forum for ranting and venting.   That would be more honest than pretending you wanted to have a polite and meaningful discussion where you'd be open to alternative perspectives.

[Emilie Jolie]

44 minutes ago, Libby1 said:

My understanding is that you started this thread on the basis that you don't believe there is such a thing as anti-white racism, and invited people who disagree with that position to explain why they disagree.  If what you really wanted to do was rant about people who disagree with your position, there's a dedicated section on this forum for ranting and venting.   That would be more honest than pretending you wanted to have a polite and meaningful discussion where you'd be open to alternative perspectives.

Yikes. Did my previous post hit a nerve or?

[Emilie Jolie]

2 hours ago, Prudence V said:

By knowing the facts. 

This.

Besides that, Ben Freeth and other white farmers have been awarded reparations in 2017 - not as much as what he wanted, but Zimbabwe has one of the highest levels of extreme poverty (34% in 2019) and corruption so they haven't done too badly.

Edited July 9, 2020 by Emilie Jolie

[Timshel]

2 hours ago, Prudence V said:

It was about land redistribution - as I covered in my post, above - and also to a lesser degree political. Mugabe wanted to stay in power. He felt threatened by the rival MDC, which was largely supported by whites.

If you compare the land seizures - which saw *some* white people lose farms, with the *legislated, systematic* removal of _all_ land from _all_ black people under racist white rule, you’ll see it’s a very different picture. 

 

2 hours ago, Libby1 said:

So you disagree that what happened to Ben Freeth and his father-in-law amounted to racial discrimination?  

Sure Libby, Ben Freeth and his family experienced discrimination.  There is a disconnect as I posted that this unfortunate event did not occur in a vacuum.  It isn't that anti-white prejudice does not exist.  On the contrary, some instances of backlash are well documented.  The disconnect occurs when there is either willful or ignorant dismissal of correlational information.

All racism (including all definitions) are discordant to a free life for any individual.  Perhaps if any person who offers an example of racial prejudice will also acknowledge a congruent stream of historical racism at once.  That is the key and I don't know what Emilie would like this thread to look like;   but we are all at fault, the sooner we stop pointing fingers the sooner and better we get on with productive evolution.

[Emilie Jolie]

13 minutes ago, Timshel said:

Perhaps if any person who offers an example of racial prejudice will also acknowledge a congruent stream of historical racism at once.  That is the key and I don't know what Emilie would like this thread to look like;

Thanks Timshel. That's it, exactly. It's not a question of turning a blind eye to individual instances of anti-white prejudice (which I'm pretty sure I've acknowledged - I double-checked), it's about looking at the bigger picture. 

 

 

 

Edited July 9, 2020 by Emilie Jolie

[sothereiwas]

Racism used to happen, and still happens. Is that what we are supposed to be acknowledging here? If so, mission accomplished?

[Emilie Jolie]

16 hours ago, sothereiwas said:

Racism used to happen, and still happens. Is that what we are supposed to be acknowledging here? 

You're not supposed to do anything, sothereiwas.

The overall point is that unless you recognise anti-white prejudice isn't happenstance, rather a consequence of 'our' actions that 'we' all finance with our taxes, things won't be better for whites or for minorities.

Anti-white prejudice is no doubt an awful experience for those individuals who lived it; it's currently not so widespread that it impacts white people's daily lives as a whole, though. There may be pockets of prejudiced people (a tiny minority within a minority), but the overwhelming majority of non-whites don't hate us. It doesn't help to make something seem bigger than it is, and comparing this to actual racism is, to my mind, completely counterproductive.There needs to be a sense of proportion.

Racism is power. Whites still have power and influence across the board. That's the state of things.

Personally, I don't believe there to be an obvious reason as to why people can't be regarded as equals, regardless of race, or religion, or whatever tribe you belong to. 

We haven't always proven ourselves to be the best example as far as treating others right, but we can lead by a new example, ie figure out how we can build bridges with those individuals who are prejudiced, so as to avoid repeating the same mistakes again.

 

[sothereiwas]

12 minutes ago, Emilie Jolie said:

rather a consequence of 'our' actions that 'we' all finance

No. Nope. Not a thing. I never did any of that. 

This is the sort of garbage that happens if we begin to accept the idea that people are indelibly bound together as groups based on immutable characteristics. That way of thinking is pure evil and destructive to society. I have more in common with Martin Luther King than I do with Nathan Forrest. That's just a fact and if the color of my skin blinds people to that, they are blind.

  

12 minutes ago, Emilie Jolie said:

Racism is power.

Um no, racism is racism. I thought we got past this canard. 

Edited July 10, 2020 by sothereiwas

[Emilie Jolie]

11 minutes ago, sothereiwas said:

No. Nope. Not a thing. I never did any of that.

 You're doing it right now with the tax dollars you pay your administrations, in your lifetime in the present, to carry out wars abroad, impose economic sanctions, sell arms to the highest bidders regardless of their track record in human rights, or get rid of elected heads of state to 'impose democracy'. 

Do you not think actions have consequences? 

Edited July 10, 2020 by Emilie Jolie

[Weezy1973]

7 hours ago, Emilie Jolie said:

 You're doing it right now with the tax dollars you pay your administrations, in your lifetime in the present, to carry out wars abroad, impose economic sanctions, sell arms to the highest bidders regardless of their track record in human rights, or get rid of elected heads of state to 'impose democracy'. 

Do you not think actions have consequences? 

Individuals don’t really choose how their tax dollars get spent, nor are they experts in foreign policy. This seems like a bit of a stretch...

[Bantosm]

Of course anti-white prejudices exist. Case in point, 'Karen' and 'Chad' to refer white men or women who are entitled.

Now if any other race was singled out with a first names used to criticize a certain perceived behavior it would be deemed racist and rightly condemned but with white people the term is popularized as new lexicon.

[sothereiwas]

29 minutes ago, Weezy1973 said:

Individuals don’t really choose how their tax dollars get spent, nor are they experts in foreign policy. This seems like a bit of a stretch...

Also, last time I perused the tax code I didn't see where only white people were required to pay taxes. Not yet anyway.

[Emilie Jolie]

50 minutes ago, Weezy1973 said:

Individuals don’t really choose how their tax dollars get spent, nor are they experts in foreign policy. This seems like a bit of a stretch...

They choose who they vote for. At least I do, very carefully. Besides, it's not even about 'choosing' - it's about joining the dots.

You don't need to be an expert in foreign policy to know how your tax dollars are spent; just read the news - it's all there...

Besides, plenty of it is all over history books.

I can tell this touches a raw nerve for some, yet what I consider to be a big stretch myself is exclusively focusing on (yes, very problematic) anecdotal evidence and demanding empathy while dismissing the glaringly obvious bigger picture. 

 

 

 

Edited July 10, 2020 by Emilie Jolie

[Weezy1973]

5 minutes ago, Emilie Jolie said:

 

I can tell this touches a raw nerve for some, yet what I consider to be a big stretch myself is exclusively focusing on (yes, very problematic) anecdotal evidence and demanding empathy while dismissing the glaringly obvious bigger picture. 

 

 

 

I don’t disagree with you. Racism is a problem, whereas anti-white prejudice barely registers as a problem, even though there may be isolated incidents here and there.

 

That being said,  blaming people (white people primarily) for choices their government or others in power are making regarding tax spending and foreign policy Is a stretch. And if you want people to take this issue seriously, blaming them for systemic racism when so much of it isn’t in their control isn’t the way to do it. 

[Emilie Jolie]

11 minutes ago, Weezy1973 said:

That being said,  blaming people (white people primarily) for choices their government or others in power are making regarding tax spending and foreign policy Is a stretch. And if you want people to take this issue seriously, blaming them for systemic racism when so much of it isn’t in their control isn’t the way to do it. 

See, that's where I can tell that you either have read the thread with one eye as you've not posted until now, or your are deliberately misconstruing my views for your own reasons. I've not blamed people for systemic racism or anything else - it's a ridiculous claim to make. Quite clearly, I said it was about looking at things only one way. 

NVM. I don't want an argument. Think what you like, it's all good with me!

Edited July 10, 2020 by Emilie Jolie

[Weezy1973]

8 hours ago, Emilie Jolie said:

 You're doing it right now with the tax dollars you pay your administrations, in your lifetime in the present, to carry out wars abroad, impose economic sanctions, sell arms to the highest bidders regardless of their track record in human rights, or get rid of elected heads of state to 'impose democracy'. 

Do you not think actions have consequences? 

This was the quote I was referring to @Emilie Jolie. Telling someone they’re doing it right now, can be construed as blaming whether you’re meaning to or not.

 

[sothereiwas]

19 minutes ago, Weezy1973 said:

anti-white prejudice barely registers as a problem

The direct effect of actual legalized institutional racism is minimal so far - I'm not really bothered by it at all, directly. The problem is when we start to go down the road where we say some racial discrimination is OK, it's a cancer to our society. Racial discrimination is not OK in the general case, and shouldn't be made legally acceptable. Once we start down that road of treating a person as a member of a group rather than an individual who should be looked at on their own merit, nothing good will come of it. 

[Emilie Jolie]

1 minute ago, Weezy1973 said:

This was the quote I was referring to @Emilie Jolie. Telling someone they’re doing it right now, can be construed as blaming whether you’re meaning to or not.

 

Pointing out a fact (a portion of the taxes are in fact going exactly where I said they were going...) is not blaming. That is quite literally what they are doing, if they are paying their taxes...

I can see why there is resistance to the points I (and other posters) was making on the thread, to be honest. 

[Weezy1973]

8 minutes ago, Emilie Jolie said:

Pointing out a fact (a portion of the taxes are in fact going exactly where I said they were going...) is not blaming. That is quite literally what they are doing, if they are paying their taxes...

I can see why there is resistance to the points I (and other posters) was making on the thread, to be honest. 

And again not arguing, but it’s not like they have a choice. Not paying taxes is illegal, regardless of whether or not you voted for the government in power.

Edited July 10, 2020 by Weezy1973

[Emilie Jolie]

30 minutes ago, Weezy1973 said:

And again not arguing, but it’s not like they have a choice. Not paying taxes is illegal, regardless of whether or not you voted for the government in power.

People vote for gvts to carry out policies paid by taxes. Some of those taxes go towards what I've already stated ad nauseam - it's not a finger pointing, blaming exercise as you tried to put forward while 'not arguing', it's a plain fact. Clearly, a majority of people keep on voting for administrations that perpetuate that cycle - again, another fact.  

What is your point, exactly? That we have no choice but to elect warmongering imperialists? We do have choices, but whatever.

Regardless of choice, my whole point is quite simply a matter of putting things in perspective; if people can't bring themselves to doing that, there'll be more of the same. 

 

Edited July 10, 2020 by Emilie Jolie
Typos