White anxiety finds a home at Fox News

[abucs]

Sure. But honest assessment precludes the use of the the word drastic it describe immigration rates of 0.3%

I am assuming Laura used the word drastic. A few things, firstly you have to add the official and official numbers to get the true rate of immigration. Secondly you have to allow for the accumulative calculations and lastly you have to look at the affect on the culture.

In the United States the immigrant population is a factor in one of your parties winning politically office. This is a very worrying development, encourages politically based migration which is divisive and not in the best interests of a country.

Malaysia a few decades ago opened up its borders to the Malay population of Indonesia so as to get a more stable Malay majority. I have nothing against Malay people. Where I lived in the Philippines is Malay as is Brunei where I am now. What Malaysia did though was an abasement of democracy. It imported voters instead of appealing to existing voters through its record of government. Not a good thing.

Of course the Chinese (largely Christian) population in Malaysia just had to take it and the numbers of non Malay people allowed into university was restricted to 5% which is a way of getting them to emigrate out of Malaysia and to keep them from occupying the top government positions in large numbers.

When immigration has a strong affect on politics it is a problem. One could even use the word drastic.

 

[abucs]

What you wrote about is the identity politics of someone who was already in a favored social position attacking those lower on the social ladder ramping up the racism present in that society that resulted in the Holocaust. That is what is happening in America and you have no right to attack the Church and Her Leaders for pointing that out.

No Griz, Hitler joined the German Labour Party which changed its name to the National Socialist Workers Party.

The Jewish population was portrayed as being the business class and Hitler’s party was appealing to the German workers. Jews were portrayed as traitors to Germany who got rich during World War I due to business interests while German workers died on the front. The great debt that was put on Germany after WW1 as reparations was argued by the National Socialists as the international Jewish banking class oppressing German workers. Go back and read the propaganda of the National Socialists coming to power.

Just like Islamic State they saw themselves as the victims. That is a very dangerous mindset.

Trump has the opposite mindset. If anything he goes too far in the opposite direction telling everyone how much of a winner he is. That is part of the attraction. He is asking people to be winners like he claims he is. All of his rhetoric is pertaining to taking things into your own hands and making something of yourselves.

His rhetoric isn’t about taking things off others in the name of social justice.

That was Hitler’s National Socialist Workers Party.

 

[dvdjs]

I am assuming Laura used the word drastic

Racism is definitely not refusing to be silent when a political elite and politically correct religion want to drastically change the make up of your home country.

It is you departing from a discussion informed by reality to speak instead of sudden and drastic changes to population of a country.

… you have to allow for the accumulative calculations and lastly you have to look at the affect on the culture.

In the United States the immigrant population is a factor in one of your parties winning politically office. This is a very worrying development, encourages politically based migration which is divisive and not in the best interests of a country.

The history of the US is a history of immigration laced with hostility to immigration, and assimilation amidst a great fear of the impossibility of assimilation. It has worked well, if not perfectly for us. If we want to look for causes of deterioration in culture, it would take utter blindness, or something far worse, to assign that yo immigrants.

Malaysia a few decades …

What you describe in Malaysia is the use of immigration and social legislation to favor one group, and perhaps scapegoat another, rather than a policy of inclusiveness. The parallel here is the white nationalism whose ranks strongly support Trump and his media people.

 

[abucs]

No the parallel that was clearly pointed to was the use of immigration as a political weapon.

What we are talking about in todays debate in different parts of the world is a scale of immigration that is huge and will only get bigger.

You are looking back at the past and then trying to extrapolate that forward as if it is the same thing. There are many differences and it is not credible in my opinion to pretend that there are not differences.

Yes, I thought I may have used the word drastic, but couldn’t find it in a quick reread.

I stand by my words in explaining what racism is not :

Racism is definitely not refusing to be silent when a political elite and politically correct religion want to drastically change the make up of your home country.

 

[abucs]

Portray is the key word because it is a falsehood propagated by the political forces to make the working class with the actual power feel like a victim. Like now. Your ability to delude yourself to justify attacking the Catholic Church is amazing though.

Ignoring the delusion silliness, identity politics of victimology IS false. You shouldn’t fall for it.

What socialism aims to do is take away business power (and cultural power) through the use of electoral power. The state is the mechanism for that. Hitler’s call was vote for us and we’ll take their stuff and give it to you.

It is the typical socialist theft dressed up as social justice.

Hitler’s socialists not only took Jewish property but like the Russian Bolsheviks before them took Church property in the name of social justice for the ordinary German worker. The people voting for the Nazis were in the main not the ones of some higher economic class.

 

[Theo520]

I thought it was a well written and thoughtful opinion piece. Food for thought and conversion. Whether you agree or not with some or all of it. But so far I get “leftism’ “lofl” and “white people are just the worst” No where in this article does it say that. But why bother…

NOpe
It was a weak article that tries to re-frame the discussion of legitimate political issues as subtly being racist, without actually supporting their re-framing of the issues.

Advocating for legal immigration is just the rule of law, it’s not racist.

 

[Inisfallen]

Every form of social or cultural discrimination in fundamental personal rights on the grounds of sex, race, color, social conditions, language, or religion must be curbed and eradicated as incompatible with God’s design.

Wow. Apparently cafeteria Catholicism is not unique to liberals.

 

[JonNC]

It didn’t start with Hitler throwing Jewish bodies in ovens, but rather with laws to de-humanize Jewish people. If you can’t see the same thing happening in America, then that is very sad. Your attacks on the Church because you can’t see the racism are pathetic and should not be allowed on a Catholic site.

Well, yeah. Racism is overt in some places. The New York Times recently celebrated the hiring of it.
But if you’re talking about laws, the United States, lead by the Republican Party has done a very good job of eliminating laws that codified racism.

 

[dvdjs]

No the parallel that was clearly pointed to was the use of immigration as a political weapon.

Yes the political weapon is to scapegoat immigrants and racial minorities as a threat to the majority culture and seek legislation that promotes the majority culture. What happened in Malaysia is paralleled in the Trump agenda.

I stand by my words in explaining what racism is not :

That is a Humpty-Dumpty definition.

 

[dvdjs]

Advocating for legal immigration is just the rule of law, it’s not racist.

Advocating against legal immigration on the grounds of demographic change such that we hardly recognize America anyone is racist.

 

[niceatheist]

Theo520:

Advocating for legal immigration is just the rule of law, it’s not racist.

Advocating against legal immigration on the grounds of demographic change such that we hardly recognize America anyone is racist.

And not terribly new. Abuc’s position is essentially the Know Nothing position of the mid-19th century. If Abuc’s intellectual forebearers, who used almost identical arguments to his, had had their way, there’d be a whole lot less Catholics in America right now. But it’s okay, because Catholics, after an actually fairly long time, aren’t viewed as a threat to the white protestants that they were even a generation ago, so now social conservatives in the Protestant and Catholic camps can now align themselves to find someone else to fear and hate.

I guess that’s a kind of inclusivity.

 

[JonNC]

JonNC:

Well, yeah. Racism is overt in some places. The New York Times recently celebrated the hiring of it.
But if you’re talking about laws, the United States, lead by the Republican Party has done a very good job of eliminating laws that codified racism.

Racism certainly continues to exist in America.

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.

 

[abucs]

What we are seeing is identity politics of victimology and somehow you are claiming that isn’t happening in the US

You have victimology in the US. It is the Marxist inspired sub cults of political correctness. It is feminism, it is black victimology, it is gay victimology, etc.

 

[abucs]

Yes the political weapon is to scapegoat immigrants and racial minorities as a threat to the majority culture and seek legislation that promotes the majority culture. What happened in Malaysia is paralleled in the Trump agenda.

Again you are ignoring the parallel expressed that one group needs immigrants to attain political power. So called sanctuary cities are a creation of that political party thumbing its nose at federal law in favour of a voting block that will give it power backed by the politically correct tenets of victimology. That is both divisive and putting party interests ahead of law. When one group starts doing that there is little logical room to argue against others groups when they follow suit.

I stand by my words in explaining what racism is not :

Explaining what something is not is not giving a definition of what it is.

If I say a car is not a living thing which produces bananas then that is not an attempt to give a comprehensive definition of what a car is.

 

[abucs]

Wow. Apparently cafeteria Catholicism is not unique to liberals.

It is an ill thought out concept and I explained different situations that go against what it says and yet for which most people would consider sensible. You are welcome to discuss those examples if you like.

 

[abucs]

I think you are mistaken in claiming groups that organize to end unequal or unjust treatment are participating in victimology. That almost mocks their calls for fair treatment.

Fair treatment is fine but the devil is in the detail. Basing selection criteria on race and gender quotas in deference to politically correct inspired tools such as structural oppression is not treating people fairly.

It is the opposite of that.

Then there’s the whole academic teaching of political correctness with accompanied “history as group victimhood” which is another disaster.

 

[dvdjs]

Again you are ignoring the parallel expressed that one group needs immigrants to attain political power.

On the contrary, the parallel is that tone group obtains political power though a hyper nationaism with scapegoating of others.

 

[abucs]

On the contrary, the parallel is that tone group obtains political power though a hyper nationaism with scapegoating of others.

When Trump argues for mass white immigration into the United States and for race quotas to be implemented for University entrants then you will have your parallel but that is far away from the world we live in. Well, most of us.

In the meantime you have, rather typically, refused to comment on the actual parallel that was given.

 

[abucs]

Which then becomes the excuse of white people who claim, despite clearly being treated differently and more justly than other parts of the population to lash out and propagate a new racism.

No, please state under the law where white people are treated more justly than other races and where, under the law, there is any lashing out of this group against other citizens of a different race.

 

[abucs]

This is a societal problem that encroaches into all aspects of culture including the justice system.

So there are no laws that you can point to. When there are laws that favour white people you will have my support.

Until then I oppose the divisive victimology that tries to portray society as one group oppressing another. Such a portrayal wishes to control people for political purposes. It is wrong.