White anxiety finds a home at Fox News

[abucs]

You forgot white victomolgy and Christian victomolgy (think war on Christmas). Oh, and my personal favorite, male victomolgy (aren’t men supposed to be strong and not whine about being picked on?)

When they start teaching little kids that at school and design university courses to indoctrinate adults that way and when politicians demand mandatory white/Christian or male quotas as social justice compensation then I will take what you say seriously.

 

[niceatheist]

It does, indeed. KKK, BLM. Any form of identity politics or intersectionality. And Americans of good will must reject all of it. Jason Kessler and Jeong must be viewed and rejected as the racists they are.

It takes a very special kind of false equivalency to put Black Lives Matter in the same sentence as the KKK. Either that or an extraordinary sense of irony.

I’m curious though. If this kind of categorization is bad, does that mean civil rights activists in the 1950s and 1960s were like the KKK?

 

[sallybutler]

I think that by having quotas for every other group, the groups you are concerned about also have quotas by default (default also being an option). So your wish has been granted.

 

[abucs]

I think that by having quotas for every other group, the groups you are concerned about also have quotas by default (default also being an option). So your wish has been granted.

First of all they are groups that you are concerned with. You introduced your favourite victim groups as male, white and Christian. They are your specified groups.

Secondly, quotas, no, what you think doesn’t make sense Sally. Quotas are for certain groups with ability not given the top priority.

For example, you take a field where men dominate and say hey there has to be more females there, it is not fair, structural inequality blah blah blah, victimhood, these are the quotas demanded.

But you take a field where women dominate and there is no push to have male quotas and move women aside.

 

[dvdjs]

So you are allowed to read what someone says and come to a conclusion but when someone like @Ridgerunner says does the same you say things like “You first ought to speak truthfully about what people said.” or “It is always better to hear people in their own words rather than the words that others stuff into their mouths.”

You are straining. As noted in the thread I listened to her full monologue.
I did not distort anything that she said. I then ventured an opinion that did not involve making stuff up. She talks of demographics and of not recognizing places as America. It is not a stretch. And unlike the other situations that you allude to, no one has provided an sensible alternative interpretation of her remarks.

Do you have something to contribute, on the topic?

 

[dvdjs]

Study how we managed it in the past, we intentionally ensured a wide dispersion of immigrants, which worked well in terms of racial and ethnic diversity. From the historical perspective. there is a reasonable concern that we have lost this balance.

What we have done in the past may or may not be a model. The Chinese exclusion act was deplorable.
The strong influx during the industrialization period was not dispersed and was largely southern and eastern Europeans against whom there was considerable animus, which ultimately led to the National Origins Act of 1924.

 

[dvdjs]

Your arguing is non-sense here.

I am not arguing with you at all. I am simply adding content to your post so that people do not get the wrong impression.

 

[Xystus]

It is not a stretch

and getting “bitter clinger” from “they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion” is a streach?

you take things hyper-literally when you try to make it seem others make stuff up about what was said but then allow yourself to “come to a conclusion”, a courtesy you do not allow others, when it suites you better.

Do you have something to contribute, on the topic?

Pointing your your hypocrisy is not allowed in this discussion? more likely just not welcomed by you.

 

[sallybutler]

I said males were my favorite “victim”: group. Mainly because I find it ironic that I thought males were taught to be strong and stoic and to not blame others, but rather to overcome all obstacles put in their way.

As for Christians, I am reminded that Christ said we would not have it easy if we follow him. It annoys me that people complain when they feel they are being picked upon for being Christian instead of thanking God for being able to share in the suffering (albeit in a very very teeney tiny way) of Christ.

You now understand why I have problems with these two groups in particular complaining about those as being the reasons they are victims. If you think being white makes you a victim and you want to whine about it, fine whine away. But if you feel that Christians should be treated better than Christ Himself was treated, you are missing what Christ taught. And if you feel that men now longer need to be “manly men”, then tell them to whine away.

 

[dvdjs]

and getting “bitter clinger” from “they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion” is a streach?

Yes. First, when given as a quote, it is objectively false. Moreover, these selected phrases are part of a larger context that show empathy: "And it’s not surprising then … " which you conveniently left out of your quote. Whether or not the people of that region have been bitterly disappointed by the failure of government ot do what they want, and whether or no the politics there have devolved to single issues and wedge issues is debatable. But the question of whether the deliberated twisting of reflective words - on why Obama’s program of “change” had so little traction there - into an attack is anything other than rank partisan polemics is not.

allow yourself to “come to a conclusion”, a courtesy you do not allow others, when it suites you better.

I don;t disallow anything. But all conclusions here are subject to discussion on the basis of the integrity of the facts and logic used to support them. And adherence to forum rules.

Pointing your your hypocrisy is not allowed in this discussion?

Read the forum FAQs.

You may wish to respond to something by disagreeing with it. That’s fine. But remember to criticize ideas, not people. Please avoid:

Name-calling
Ad hominem attacks …

 

[Xystus]

Moreover, these selected phrases are part of a larger context that show empathy: "And it’s not surprising then … "

So all i have to do is say “And it’s not surprising then …” before calling somone something and it makes it OK. got it.

Please avoid:

Name-calling
Ad hominem attacks …

I have done neither.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Moreover, these selected phrases are part of a larger context that show empathy: "And it’s not surprising then … "

An absurd assertion. It’s anything but empathy. It’s disdain like “deplorables” and “change their religion” and “medieval” and “backward” applied to Catholicism.

When members of a political party just can’t keep themselves from occasionally casting these expressions of extreme disdain at those who do not follow their ideology, you know they mean exactly what they sound like.

 

[Cathoholic]

dvdjs . . .

I am simply adding content to your post so that people do not get the wrong impression.

If you believe that, then go ahead and say "it was wrong for CNN or anyone else to impugn Laura Ingrham’s motives (which was part of my point)."

 

[qui_est_ce]

Feanor2:

By self destruction do you mean- not enough white people?

Well this is the politically correct mindset to try and force the conversation into a protected politically correct category.

Self destruction obviously refers to the cultural identity and being of a people. Race can be part of that.

Because culture is somewhat analogous to race in most of the world then this could be part of that. If you put 10 million Nigerians and 15 million Chinese into the Philippines then yes on the surface the races would change. Of course there would be much more destruction in the areas of culture regarding a set of values and ways of being that has become integral to the Philipino. The Philipino cultural expression instead of being relaxed and comfortable and strong would be under pressure and there would be a breaking point where Philipino culture breaks down and most people turn away from what it has meant to be Philipino.

As an avid traveler who loves the local cultures of many people this is a crime masquerading as a set of ethics. It is thoroughly evil.

Exactly what Lenin, then Stalin did to Ukraine.

 

[Cathoholic]

abucs said . . .

(Culture destruction) is a crime masquerading as a set of ethics. It is thoroughly evil.

Well said abucs.

(Just like the “fake news” trying to destroy the reputation of Laura Ingraham by Kludt and Stelter here impugning her motives.

I wonder if these guys will lose their social media accounts now for propogating a “conspiracy theory”?).

.

Exactly what Lenin, then Stalin did to Ukraine.

That was likewise well stated qui_est_ce.

 

[dvdjs]

So all i have to do is say “And it’s not surprising then

No what you have to do is read the who statement and make an effort to comprehend what Obama was saying, instead of straining to play gotcha.

I have done neither.

You have made posts with content relevant to the thread to attack me personally.

 

[dvdjs]

“it was wrong for CNN or anyone else to impugn Laura Ingrham’s motives (which was part of my point).”

In conversations with others, i have made it clear that I think the criticism is merited. What ever message she might have like to have given, people who heard her, in particular the white nationalist and racist freak taht she had to disavow, got the white nationalist message.

My conversation with you, however, was simply about providing a quantitative perspective on “a lot”.

 

[dvdjs]

An absurd assertion. It’s anything but empathy. It’s disdain

You have every right to interpret the words of others in the most uncharitable manner or in the manner that seeks partisan gain. But is is sad when people make such choices.

like “deplorables”

Do you disagree that racism, sexism, homophobia, and Islamophobia are deplorable? Really? Doesn’t that transcend political party in the US?

 

[dvdjs]

When members of a political party just can’t keep themselves from occasionally casting these expressions of extreme disdain at those who do not follow their ideology, you know they mean exactly what they sound like.

Trump and his fans?

 

[Cathoholic]

dvdjs . . .

In conversations with others, i have made it clear that I think the criticism is merited.

It’s impugning motives (of Laura Ingraham).

Clearly NOT merited.

But then again, you have every right to interpret the words of others in the most uncharitable manner.