Log in

View Full Version : Abolish the White Race



Morpheus
6th January 2004, 02:27
RACE TRAITOR, treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity
Abolish the white race - by any means necessary

The white race is a historically constructed social formation - historically constructed because (like royalty) it is a product of some people's responses to historical circumstances; a social formation because it is a fact of society corresponding to no classification recognized by natural science.

The white race cuts across ethnic and class lines. It is not coextensive with that portion of the population of European descent, since many of those classified as "colored" can trace some of their ancestry to Europe, while African, Asian, or American Indian blood flows through the veins of many considered white. Nor does membership in the white race imply wealth, since there are plenty of poor whites, as well as some people of wealth and comfort who are not white.

The white race consists of those who partake of the privileges of the white skin in this society. Its most wretched members share a status higher, in certain respects, than that of the most exalted persons excluded from it, in return for which they give their support to the system that degrades them.

The key to solving the social problems of our age is to abolish the white race. Until that task is accomplished, even partial reform will prove elusive, because white influence permeates every issue in U.S. society, whether domestic or foreign.

Advocating the abolition of the white race is distinct from what is called "anti-racism." The term "racism" has come to be applied to a variety of attitudes, some of which are mutually incompatible, and has been devalued to mean little more than a tendency to dislike some people for the color of their skin. Moreover, anti-racism admits the natural existence of "races" even while opposing social distinctions among them. The abolitionists maintain, on the contrary, that people were not favored socially because they were white; rather they were defined as "white" because they were favored. Race itself is a product of social discrimination; so long as the white race exists, all movements against racism are doomed to fail.

The existence of the white race depends on the willingness of those assigned to it to place their racial interests above class, gender or any other interests they hold. The defection of enough of its members to make it unreliable as a determinant of behavior will set off tremors that will lead to its collapse.

RACE TRAITOR aims to serve as an intellectual center for those seeking to abolish the white race. It will encourage dissent from the conformity that maintains it and popularize examples of defection from its ranks, analyze the forces that hold it together and those which promise to tear it apart. Part of its task will be to promote debate among abolitionists. When possible, it will support practical measures, guided by the principle, Treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity. Dissolve the club

The white race is a club, which enrolls certain people at birth, without their consent, and brings them up according to its rules. For the most part the members go through life accepting the benefits of membership, without thinking about the costs. When individuals question the rules, the officers are quick to remind them of all they owe to the club, and warn them of the dangers they will face if they leave it.

RACE TRAITOR aims to dissolve the club, to break it apart, to explode it. Some people who sympathize with our aim have asked us how we intend to win over the majority of so-called whites to anti-racism. Others, usually less friendly, have asked if we plan to exterminate physically millions, perhaps hundreds of millions, of people. Neither of these plans is what we have in mind. The weak point of the club is its need for unanimity. Just as the South, on launching the Civil War, declared that it needed its entire territory and would have it, the white race must have the support of all those it has designated as its constituency, or it ceases to exist.

Elsewhere in this number, readers will find an account of John Brown's raid on Harpers Ferry and some of the events it set in motion. Before the Civil War, the leading spokesmen for the slaveholders acknowledged that the majority of white northerners, swayed above all by the presence of the fugitive slave, considered slavery unjust. The Southerners also understood that the opposition was ineffective; however much the white people of the north disapproved of the slave system, the majority went along with it rather than risk the ordinary comforts of their lives, meager as they were in many cases.

When John Brown attacked Harpers Ferry, Southern pro- slavery leaders reacted with fury: they imposed a boycott on northern manufactures, demanded new concessions from the government in Washington, and began to prepare for war. When they sought to portray John Brown as a representative of northern opinion, Southern leaders were wrong; he represented only a small and isolated minority. But they were also right, for he expressed the hopes that still persisted in the northern population despite decades of cringing before the slaveholders. Virginia did not fear John Brown and his small band of followers, but his soul that would go marching on, though his body lay a-mould'rin' in the grave.

When the South, in retaliation for Harpers Ferry, sought to further bully northern opinion, it did so not out of paranoia but out of the realistic assessment that only a renewal of the national pro-slavery vows could save a system whose proud facade concealed a fragile foundation. By the arrogance of their demands, the Southern leaders compelled the people of the north to resist. Not ideas but events were in command. Each step led inexorably to the next: Southern land-greed, Lincoln's victory, secession, war, blacks as laborers, soldiers, citizens, voters. And so the war that began with not one person in a hundred foreseeing the end of slavery was transformed within two years into an anti-slavery war.

It is our faith - and with those who do not share it we shall not argue - that the majority of so-called whites in this country are neither deeply nor consciously committed to white supremacy; like most human beings in most times and places, they would do the right thing if it were convenient. As did their counterparts before the Civil War, most go along with a system that disturbs them, because the consequences of challenging it are terrifying. They close their eyes to what is happening around them, because it is easier not to know.

At rare moments their nervous peace is shattered, their certainty is shaken, and they are compelled to question the common sense by which they normally live. One such moment was in the days immediately following the Rodney King verdict, when a majority of white Americans were willing to admit to polltakers that black people had good reasons to rebel, and some joined them. Ordinarily the moments are brief, as the guns and reform programs are moved up to restore order and, more important, the confidence that matters are in good hands and they can go back to sleep. Both the guns and the reform programs are aimed at whites as well as blacks - the guns as a warning and the reform programs as a salve to their consciences.

Recently, one of our editors, unfamiliar with New York City traffic laws, made an illegal right turn there on a red light. He was stopped by two cops in a patrol car. After examining his license, they released him with a courteous admonition. Had he been black, they probably would have ticketed him, and might even have taken him down to the station. A lot of history was embodied in that small exchange: the cops treated the miscreant leniently at least in part because they assumed, looking at him, that he was white and therefore loyal. Their courtesy was a habit meant both to reward good conduct and induce future cooperation.

Had the driver cursed them, or displayed a bumper sticker that said, "Avenge Rodney King," the cops might have reacted differently. We admit that neither gesture on the part of a single individual would in all likelihood be of much consequence. But if enough of those who looked white broke the rules of the club to make the cops doubt their ability to recognize a white person merely by looking at him or her, how would it affect the cops' behavior? And if the police, the courts, and the authorities in general were to start spreading around indiscriminately the treatment they normally reserve for people of color, how would the rest of the so-called whites react?

How many dissident so-called whites would it take to unsettle the nerves of the white executive board? It is impossible to know. One John Brown - against a background of slave resistance - was enough for Virginia. Yet it was not the abolitionists, not even the transcendent John Brown, who brought about the mass shifts in consciousness of the Civil War period. At most, their heroic deeds were part of a chain of events that involved mutual actions and reactions on a scale beyond anything they could have anticipated - until a war that began with both sides fighting for slavery (the South to take it out of the Union, the north to keep it in) ended with a great army marching through the land singing, "As He died to make men holy, let us fight to make men free."

The moments when the routine assumptions of race break down are the seismic promise that somewhere in the tectonic flow a new fault is building up pressure, a new Harpers Ferry is being prepared. Its nature and timing cannot be predicted, but of its coming we have no doubt. When it comes, it will set off a series of tremors that will lead to the disintegration of the white race. We want to be ready, walking in Jerusalem just like John. What kind of journal is this?

RACE TRAITOR exists, not to make converts, but to reach out to those who are dissatisfied with the terms of membership in the white club. Its primary intended audience will be those people commonly called whites who, in one way or another, understand whiteness to be a problem that perpetuates injustice and prevents even the well-disposed among them from joining unequivocally in the struggle for human freedom. By engaging these dissidents in a journey of discovery into whiteness and its discontents, we hope to take part, together with others, in the process of defining a new human community. We wish neither to minimize the complicity of even the most downtrodden of whites with the system of white supremacy nor to exaggerate the significance of momentary departures from white rules.

We should say that there are some articles we are not interested in publishing. Since we are not seeking converts, we probably will not publish articles which lecture various organizations about their racial opportunism. Also we probably will not publish articles promoting inter-racial harmony, because that approach too often leaves intact differential treatment of whites and blacks and provides subtle confirmation of the idea that different races exist independently of social distinctions.

In the original film version of ROBIN HOOD (starring Errol Flynn), the Sheriff of Nottingham says to Robin, "You speak treason." Robin replies, "Fluently." We hope to do the same.

from RACE TRAITOR no. 1 (Winter 1993)

MiDnIgHtMaRaUdEr
6th January 2004, 02:52
wtf are you talking about son?! I can't make much sence out of that, and what I did catch dosen't look to pretty.

BuyOurEverything
6th January 2004, 03:02
I agree with MiDnIgHtMaRaUdEr. Whatever the fuck you are trying to say sounds pretty bad.

Hampton
6th January 2004, 03:04
Did anyone read past the title? I know I didn't.

Can we eliminate the ruling class instead?

(*
6th January 2004, 03:19
So there is nothing physical to abolish, but rather our mentality.
Society is bound by the notion that white people are superior, yet there is no pure white race.

This is what I gathered from what I read. Not sure if that is what you are trying to point out.


The white race cuts across ethnic and class lines. It is not coextensive with that portion of the population of European descent, since many of those classified as "colored" can trace some of their ancestry to Europe, while African, Asian, or American Indian blood flows through the veins of many considered white. Nor does membership in the white race imply wealth, since there are plenty of poor whites, as well as some people of wealth and comfort who are not white.

I agree with that.

Comrade Ceausescu
6th January 2004, 03:25
This is bullshit.Death to all racists.

Pete
6th January 2004, 03:33
I read it all. It has one major flaw, it only wants to abolish the "white race" (white nationalism of all sorts basically) but it doesn't even touch the topic of abolishing the "black race" or the "altzan race" or the "asian race" or anything like that. Quite a mistep. A quite stronger arguement would have been: fuck race, instead of fuck the white race.

It is a pretty large flaw too, and I can only assume that their motives are good, but that aside it could easily be taken as an overtly racist peice. I did read the whole thing, and I can see that it isn't, but their semantics are wrong, and it will hurt them, I believe, in the long run.

-Pete


Edit: Cleaned up some double tags

Urban Rubble
6th January 2004, 03:43
Good Lord. Is there any dispute that if he replaced white with anything else he would be immediately banned ?

Nice job Morpheus, you saved me the trouble of making you look like an idiot in the CC thread.

Pete
6th January 2004, 03:58
That is not what I meant UR. All races, the social constructs, should be abolished, not just one of them. As the bible says (paraphrased and used because it is a good common sense quote) you shouldn't point out the straw in your niegbours eye before you remove the log from your own.

SonofRage
6th January 2004, 04:59
Yes, the concept of race as we no it is only a social construct decided by arbitrary physical characteristics and has has no valid biological basis.

Rastafari
6th January 2004, 05:06
BLIND HATRED-the Nazi Cereal of Choice!

Guest1
6th January 2004, 10:52
You're idiots.

I've seen the site he got this from, it's a website of white people who want to abolish the white race. They target the white race because they are members of it, and it has a special place of privilige in our society.

How could it be treason if they weren't white?

Next time, read, and you might learn something. Yes, abolish the white race, and you know what UR, I'll replace it with somehting else. Abolish every race.

Look past your blindness and stop whining. There was no attack here. Besides, have you thought maybe that Morpheus could be white?

Pepo
6th January 2004, 15:03
Amén brother

Pete
6th January 2004, 15:11
Thanks CyM, that was really helpful. Seeing as their was no link provided, we must take it at the value of the words themselves, and as I admited in previous posts in this thread, I could see that their was no attack meant, but it could easily be taken as such. I don't know how much this article applies to my situation, but it most likely does. Race is just not something that passes through my mind very often, except in highschool when some of my friends would tell me I couldn't go to a certain place with them because I wasn't Korean. I actually don't think your post was directed as much at me as those who said it was bullshit without reading further.

Hampton
6th January 2004, 16:19
http://racetraitor.org/

It was a book called Race Traitor (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0415913934/qid=1073409206/sr=8-2/ref=sr_8_2/103-2164700-2383023?v=glance&s=books) put together by Harvard's Noel Ignatiev.

http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/1002/100702ignatievnoel.jpg

He also had this gem to say in an interview :

“The goal of abolishing the white race is on its face so desirable that some may find it hard to believe that it could incur any opposition other than from committed white supremacists.” Thus does he put whites on notice. If they oppose their abolition, they are “white supremacists.”

Here (http://www.vdare.com/roberts/harvard_genocide.htm)

But on the site they say this which makes a little more sense:

"What we hate is a system that confers privileges (and burdens) on people because of their color. It is not fair skin that makes people white; it is fair skin in a certain kind of society, one that attaches social importance to skin color. When we say we want to abolish the white race, we do not mean we want to exterminate people with fair skin. We mean that we want to do away with the social meaning of skin color, thereby abolishing the white race as a social category. "

Invader Zim
6th January 2004, 16:58
From what little, I bothered reading of the post (i'm not good on long articals, I lose interest) i assume rather than actually destrying the race Hitler style it is saying destroy the concept of the white race, and all that goes with it. Such as the mentality of superiority, etc.

I got that impression from this quote: - "Moreover, anti-racism admits the natural existence of "races" even while opposing social distinctions among them."

But I didn't read very much of the artical, I could be wrong.

Soviet power supreme
6th January 2004, 17:26
This nails the point

RACE TRAITOR aims to dissolve the club, to break it apart, to explode it. Some people who sympathize with our aim have asked us how we intend to win over the majority of so-called whites to anti-racism. Others, usually less friendly, have asked if we plan to exterminate physically millions, perhaps hundreds of millions, of people. Neither of these plans is what we have in mind. The weak point of the club is its need for unanimity.

To put us fight against each others.

DeadMan
6th January 2004, 21:14
Isn't hating the white race racist? I'm white. I don't care. I hang out more with as they put it 'slighty tanned people :lol: :P ' then a bunch of stupid white people haha. I find that people similar to me are boring. I'd rather hang out with people who do things differently (food, customs and what not). That way you get more fun out of life.

DeadMan.

MiDnIgHtMaRaUdEr
6th January 2004, 22:19
Yeah, we all know people have to have a different color skin to be different. :angry:

Rasta Sapian
6th January 2004, 22:45
what is this talk about "white membership" Does every race have a membership?
All people are now treated equal! :blink:

U can't determine what race you will be born into.
U can treat others races as equal human beings.

Morphius, u better check yourself before u reck yourself.

peace

DeadMan
6th January 2004, 23:51
Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2004, 06:19 PM
Yeah, we all know people have to have a different color skin to be different. :angry:
No. Not really, but in a multi-cultural are like where I live pretty much everyone is the same except for first generation immigrants who still hold alot of there roots down. Most second/third/fourth generation immigrants (I am a fourth generation immigrant from both sides of my family) have lost there customs. I work with 3 Chinese immigrants that have come to our country less then 1 year ago. They bring me real chinese food because I simply can't get enough of the sweets and the spices. My boss is from Trinidad, he still holds that rich accent (he says ciar instead of car) and we talk to eachother with that accent and he laughs at me for not getting it right. I think it's a blast to go hang out with them then to just hang with some of my other friends who would rather sit and watch tv.

DeadMan.

Morpheus
7th January 2004, 01:19
Most of the "critiques" against the article in this thread don't even bother addressing the arguement it made. Several admitted they didn't even bother reading the article - which is called being closed minded and dogmatic. Several are just knee jerk racism, using the standard "reverse racism" rhetoric popular among contemporary white supremacists - accusing opponets of being "racists," "hatred," etc. Equating this position with Nazism is absurd, the Nazis sought to phyically exterminate members of oppressed races. I seek not the physical destruction of white individuals, but the abolition of the social relations which are races and all other hierarchical social relations. I'm white, so don't give me this bullshit about hating white people. And if a non-white person hates white people, although there may be some problems with such a view, it is not racist because they do not have power in contemporary society. Racism = prejudice + power. Prejudice without power is not racism. Calling for the abolition of the white race is no different than calling for the abolition of the capitalist class, they are both social constructions. Yes, we should abolish all classes & all races but our main target presently should be the white race and the capitalist class because they are on top.

Rasta Sapian,

Yes, all races have "memberships" just as classes & nations do. And all people aren't treated equal, that's racist nonsense. Whites are more likely to have more wealth and recieve a better education. A disproportionate amount of people of color are in prison, and people of color are more likely to be harassed by the police. The percentage of whites in positions of great wealth & power is much greater than the percentage of whites in the general population. 100% of American Presidents have been white men.

Urban Rubble
7th January 2004, 02:14
You're idiots.

I've seen the site he got this from, it's a website of white people who want to abolish the white race. They target the white race because they are members of it, and it has a special place of privilige in our society.

How could it be treason if they weren't white?

Next time, read, and you might learn something. Yes, abolish the white race, and you know what UR, I'll replace it with somehting else. Abolish every race.

Look past your blindness and stop whining. There was no attack here. Besides, have you thought maybe that Morpheus could be white?

Well right back at you dickhead.

Listen, I have no problem with the concept of aboloshing races, the thing is, it comes off pretty horribly when you say abolish the white race. I agree, abolish race, but he makes it sound as if one race should be wiped out over another.


Yes, abolish the white race, and you know what UR, I'll replace it with somehting else. Abolish every race.

No, you didn't put another race in. Say it like this "Abolish the black race", comes off as pretty fucking offensive, no ?

Fuck it, I think I'm done at Che Lives. Nice talking to you guys.

redstar2000
7th January 2004, 05:11
I'm a little surprised that people didn't immediately see what Morpheus's post and the site itself was "getting at".

"Abolish the White Race" is clearly a "provocative" way of saying abolish white supremacy.

I assume the provocative words were chosen because of the felt need to "make themselves heard" above all the empty blather and pious platitudes about "race" that characterize American society.

Back in the early 1970s, there was a group of young whites in Houston called "The John Brown Society" which centered around the abolition of white skin privilege.

The question I would raise is that is this "new phrase" a case of being "too clever" for one's own good? The phrase is so readily and easily misunderstood...does that really help matters?

It's quite true that "race" is a social construct...even though popular understanding is far from catching up with biological reality.

Most people--perhaps nearly all people--still think in terms of "racial identity" (even though what they're really thinking in terms of is various rival social constructs).

Would it not be more useful to say simply and straightforwardly: there's no such thing as race, period!? And then continue, of course, to explain why that is a scientifically true statement.

I can respect the people at that site for their "in your face" approach; insofar as I have personal "heroes", John Brown is certainly one of them (though his military practice was terrible...almost as if he "wanted" to be a martyr).

But I don't feel any strong desire to emulate the folks at "Abolish the White Race". Perhaps I am "too simplistic", but I still think the best way to fight racism is to fight racists directly and openly.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

Weidt
7th January 2004, 05:17
Excellent rebuttal, Morpheus. I am glad to see someone at Che-Lives who not only knows how to read, but also how to think critically, ie use their brain.

The abolition of the white race and the bourgeoisie is the primary goal en route to the abolition of all races and all classes and the emergence of socialism.

RedCeltic
7th January 2004, 05:58
Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2004, 12:17 AM
Excellent rebuttal, Morpheus. I am glad to see someone at Che-Lives who not only knows how to read, but also how to think critically, ie use their brain.

The abolition of the white race and the bourgeoisie is the primary goal en route to the abolition of all races and all classes and the emergence of socialism.
The only thing I can really add is that I agree with Weidt's post 100%. That was a great article Morpheous posted, yet people seemed to have gotten hung up on semantics.

We see from time to time, groups or individuals that get worried of rising levels of immigration, or interracial marrage and worry about a loss of power of the white race, or... as a former poster "Thine Stalin" once argued on this board... that the white race will become a minority, and maybe the other races will make us their slaves.

Why do we need to abolish the "White Race?" Because it's the white race that created the concept of race that we seem unable to shake. And therefore it is up to us who belong to the "White Race" to loose all concept of it, in order for concepts of race in general to faid away.

ÑóẊîöʼn
7th January 2004, 08:38
Abolish the White Race!

Guest1
7th January 2004, 11:14
fuck, urban. I'm getting tired too.

whine about racism against whites and americans all you want. it doesn't exist, especially not in this article.

and you can replace it for "abolish the black race", but it wouldn't be so clearly not racist. because you are white, and american, and priviliged. let's just say you said that. then let's just say that by abolish, you meant exterminate, there's nothing stopping america from doing it. after all, it already pretty much exterminated native americans. whereas if someone meant exterminate the white race, he would be a horrible person for saying it, but no one would be threatened by it.

I'm sick of this acting like a victim, you're not a victim UR. don't worry, you don't have to feel threatened, whites will be in power and subjugating millions for years to come.

Urban Rubble
7th January 2004, 19:57
whine about racism against whites and americans all you want. it doesn't exist, especially not in this article.

Where the fuck did I do any of this ? Have you even read my posts ? I said it was a great article, but the title comes off sounding very wrong. I don't know about you, but when I read something that says to abolish any race it sounds pretty bad. I read the article and I understood it, and I agree with it. I never fucking whined about racism toward whites.


I'm sick of this acting like a victim, you're not a victim UR. don't worry, you don't have to feel threatened, whites will be in power and subjugating millions for years to come.

Fuck you man. Don't patronize me.

I never said I was a victim. A few days ago I made mention of the double standard that allows for making harmless jokes about Americans but not about anyone else. I said we should be allowed to joke about cultural differences as long as it isn't mean spirited. Where in the fuck did I say I was a victim ? Why do you want to paint me as some whiny white boy who feels like he is oppressed ? Why ?

Morpheus
7th January 2004, 21:11
Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2004, 06:11 AM
Would it not be more useful to say simply and straightforwardly: there's no such thing as race, period!? And then continue, of course, to explain why that is a scientifically true statement.
But this still leaves open the door for racism. Many modern racists base their arguements on "cultures" - that "white culture" is superior to "black culture" and so on. White supremacist ideology does not have to be based on biology. It is necessary to take this a step further, and argue for the abolition of races in general and the white race in particular.

Jesus Christ
7th January 2004, 22:02
http://www.sacwriters.com/quizzes/racist/racist.gif

Guest1
8th January 2004, 08:21
Well right back at you dickhead.

Listen, I have no problem with the concept of aboloshing races, the thing is, it comes off pretty horribly when you say abolish the white race. I agree, abolish race, but he makes it sound as if one race should be wiped out over another.

Oh no! it makes me feel a little threatened when you talk about abolishing my race! couldn't you please take all the bite out of it and water it down completely so it doesn't confront the elite head on anymore? I don't like to feel that my race is in anyway more responsible for the worlds problems than, say, africans who were enslaved for centuries, native americans who were slaughtered, surely they're all just as guilty of the enslavement of mankind?



Yes, abolish the white race, and you know what UR, I'll replace it with somehting else. Abolish every race.

No, you didn't put another race in. Say it like this "Abolish the black race", comes off as pretty fucking offensive, no ?

Problem is, it's not the same, no matter how much your position of privilige allows you to ignore that. Go and tell the oppressed peoples of the world that they shouldn't attack the white race as an institution first, the institution that institutionalizes racism across the world, but that they should attack every race in general and ignore the pale skin colour of their oppressors. The problem is, race cannot be abolished in general, till you make a concerted attack on the cultural identity of the hornet's nest of racism that is the white race. Destroy the white race, annihilate the definition of the white race until no one can indentify with it, then no one can defend it ignorantly. Seeing as it's the race that is the source of most racism, you've already achieved most of your goal of destroying all races just by destroying the white race. After that, every other race will fall like dominoes.

Then again, I doubt you really care, cause it burns to see those words. You identify with the white race, and are compelled to defend it. You would rather it just be a very abstract idea of some drugged up language enthusiast that you can say you support, but only if you know it'll never actually achieve any revolutionary progress.


Fuck it, I think I'm done at Che Lives. Nice talking to you guys.

How surprising, you call me a dickhead, and when I counter and say you love to play the false victim, what do you do? You play the false victim, oh no, I'm hurt, I'm leaving now!

Go cry somewhere else, I'm not buying it.

Bastardo
8th January 2004, 08:35
If we all keep fucking each other eventually we'll all end up the same colour... ;)

Urban Rubble
8th January 2004, 21:47
Oh no! it makes me feel a little threatened when you talk about abolishing my race! couldn't you please take all the bite out of it and water it down completely so it doesn't confront the elite head on anymore? I don't like to feel that my race is in anyway more responsible for the worlds problems than, say, africans who were enslaved for centuries, native americans who were slaughtered, surely they're all just as guilty of the enslavement of mankind?

Why do you feel the need to be such an asshole to me ? You know damned well that I am aware of what the white race has done. You know I am aware of the propblems the white race has caused. All I was saying is that the title of that article sounds harsh when you read it. It sounds like they are saying to exterminate the white race. That is all I was saying. I don't have any idea why you feel the need to paint me as some kind of white supremicist who is denying the things my race has done, you know very well that I do not think Africans and Native Americans are the reason for the state the world is in.

You're doing the same thing EC was doing to me, sensationalizing things to paint me as something I am not.

Oh, and I'm sure it wouldn't still "confront the elite head on" if it had been titled "Abolish race distincitions".


Problem is, it's not the same, no matter how much your position of privilige allows you to ignore that. Go and tell the oppressed peoples of the world that they shouldn't attack the white race as an institution first, the institution that institutionalizes racism across the world, but that they should attack every race in general and ignore the pale skin colour of their oppressors. The problem is, race cannot be abolished in general, till you make a concerted attack on the cultural identity of the hornet's nest of racism that is the white race. Destroy the white race, annihilate the definition of the white race until no one can indentify with it, then no one can defend it ignorantly. Seeing as it's the race that is the source of most racism, you've already achieved most of your goal of destroying all races just by destroying the white race. After that, every other race will fall like dominoes.

You have totally missed my point. All I was saying is that it comes off a bit harsh sounding. That is it. I am not implying any of the things you listed above.


How surprising, you call me a dickhead, and when I counter and say you love to play the false victim, what do you do? You play the false victim, oh no, I'm hurt, I'm leaving now!

How convenient, you totally ignore the fact that you called me a fucking idiot in the first place. I wasn't even pissed, I was just jokingly saying right back at you dickhead. Am I supposed to just grin and bear it when you call me an idiot.

I didn't play the victim, show me where I did. As for me leaving, I said it because I was very frustrated and I still am. I probably will not leave, I was just frustrated. I wasn't considering leaving because I was "hurt". I was thinking about it because I am sick of the attitudes of the childeren on this site.

Guest1
9th January 2004, 02:01
I wasn't addressing anyone specifially, that's why I said "you're all idiots". You responded with a personal insult, instead of realizing the pretty blatant mistake you and a few others were making and continuing from there. Why did I resort to using the term "idiots"? Because a very reasonable person posted a very reasonable article, and it was dismissed by almost everyone who posted before me as racist. Not only that, people got angry, and someone even started a thread about it being racist in the CC.

If that's not idiotic, I don't know what is.

You responded to my general attack on this stupidity by attacking me, so you focused the debate on you. You're not the only whiner here, everyone who though that is it was offensive is a whiner, you however made it personal. That is why I took you on.

You know I'm very open and forgiving, but there are certain issues I am unapproachable on. This is one of them. There's also a way to talk to me. I lost my temper because I'm pissed at people calling a white man racist for advocating the utter distruction of the most harmful racial construct known to man, his own race. I'm sorry, it doesn't happen very often. Your response, though, was unnecessary. You need to realize you lash out, alot. Not only that, but you lash out and then ask "why are we fighting"? I'm not sure if this is something you are aware of, something you mean to do, but it sure is annoying.

Besides, this is the internet, how the fuck am I supposed to tell you were joking? Couldn't you have responded later by saying "chill, I was only joking"? That would have saved alot of hostility. Especially my blatant ditching of all attempts at a rational discussion in the last post. At that point, it was purely an attack on you, which is why I was being sensationalist. I had come to the conclusion this stuff had gone on long enough.

You have to admit, exaggeration is a larger than life version of the truth. Think about that and see if there's anything you can change about how you deal with people to stop these exaggerations. Constructive criticism, not an insult.

I'm ok now, but my patience is very thin these months, as it'll continue to be. So let's keep this a discussion, not an argument.

LuZhiming
10th January 2004, 23:17
I don't mean to take this off topic, but what exactly does "white" mean? Does it include Iranians or Kurds for example?

AngelWithNoWings
11th January 2004, 17:37
"Bill Brasky hated mexicans...and he was half mexican! And he hated irony."

Inti
12th January 2004, 23:25
I guess Im a "race traitor", because I was born with wite freckled skin and happily married a Peruvian cholita:) Couldnt be happier and we will have loads of kids just to piss the white supremacists off.. Hehehe :D I think that if the people still exists in a couple of thousands of years more, everyone will be mixed and there wont be such a thing as a white, yellow, brown, black, green, red, purple or whatever race... I feel sorry for those mentally defunct people that thinks "Race"..

Urban Rubble
13th January 2004, 02:36
I guess Im a "race traitor", because I was born with wite freckled skin and happily married a Peruvian cholita:) Couldnt be happier and we will have loads of kids just to piss the white supremacists off..

Heh, me too. My girlfriend (who I will most likely marry eventually) is Cambodian and is darker than most Africans. I go to Stormfront all the time and tell them that I'm dilluting their precious white race just to spite them. Though in reality I would rather adopt a child, it's a bit less selfish. There are so many kids in orphanages that can't get taken in by a family.

But if you listen to the people here you'll know that I'm a racist because I don't feel ashamed of my whiteness.