Anti-White Institutionalized Racism

[Agnapostate]

I hear much agitation from online white supremacists about the institutionalized racism endured by whites in South Africa and Zimbabwe as the allegedly anti-colonialist social revolutions there allegedly disenfranchise the European populations of those countries, prompting mass emigration. To what extent are these contentions valid or based in fact?

[fa2991]

None.

[Stand Your Ground]

I don't know if I would call it racism or not but my girlfriend is white, she works with all people from India, they own a hotel, the boss sits on his ass, his wife spends the hotel's money and my girlfriend has to pick up the slack that the boss's daughters don't do or feel like doing. They play on the work computers most of the time and half ass the rooms. And they still make 2 or 3 times what my girlfriend makes. Maybe not racist but biased at least, IMO.

[bricolage]

I don't know if I would call it racism or not but my girlfriend is white, she works with all people from India, they own a hotel, the boss sits on his ass, his wife spends the hotel's money and my girlfriend has to pick up the slack that the boss's daughters don't do or feel like doing. They play on the work computers most of the time and half ass the rooms. And they still make 2 or 3 times what my girlfriend makes. Maybe not racist but biased at least, IMO.

Thats just nepotism, its not racism.

[hatzel]

I do know from a few documentaries I've seen that the Afrikaners at least consider themselves somewhat at risk from discrimination. This is to say, physical as well as anything. Lots of them bear arms and so on, and they sure think that there is discrimination against them, now that they're the minority.

Don't know if this is necessarily true, but some of them sure think it is. We might be able to assume that these ideas don't just appear out of thin air, but I doubt it's institutionalised. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that some discrimination against the whites exists. I don't see why we would assume that there isn't a single non-white in the whole country who would hold some kind of anti-white sentiment, and we might say that it's almost understandable, as a 'revenge' thing, but institutionalised? I don't think I buy that, but the abolishment of institutionalised privileges could be construed by some as almost paramount to institutionalised racism, relatively speaking. In comparison to how it was. Might just take a little while, I think it's mainly the older generations who were used to the old system, whilst the younger people don't have the frame of comparison, so don't feel the change.

[Aesop]

Well to white nationalists the holocaust didn't happen, biologically races exist, so i would not really take what they say to have any substantial truth. In such countries like south africa it is not the minority white poplution that often finds it self at the end of poor schooling, long-term unemployment. In regards to mass migration that is a myth, although in south africa there was a small amount of emigration to australia for different reasons but it was not down to unbearable racism towards 'whites.

[bricolage]

Re: South Africa, ideas of white discrimination come from policies like 'Black Economic Empowerment', a form of positive discrimination and proposed land reform... as it happens BEE has been nothing but cronyism and the ANC has lagged even behind the World Bank on land reform, meaning most of it is still white owned. Additionally the country remains essentially as spatially segregated as it ever was, black South Africans may now have the right to move where they want, but it doesn't mean anything when you can't afford to do so. Like Krimskrans said I'm sure some black South Africans feel very negatively about white South Africans, why wouldn't they considering the history, that being said I don't buy into the whole reverse racism discourse nor do I think this is in anyway 'institutionalised'.

[hatzel]

Yes, I'd agree. I think if you're used to your dominance being institutionalised, the minute the institution changes, even if just to bring about complete equality, you'll consider the institution to be acting against you. That said, I believe I'm also right to suggest that the western half is still pretty much black-free (okay, I exaggerate, but that's surely Orange country), although it's sparsely populated. So we might say that the minority whites still effectively 'own' vast swathes of land, but I'm not sure how many of the non-whites would even want to live out in the sticks...

We might be able to consider this stuff natural. It will take at least a generation or two for relations to get anything like normal. I don't remember the end of slavery in the US magically creating complete equality between all people. In the same way, the end of enforced segregation doesn't automatically end voluntary segregation, or segregation stemming from other causes, such as land prices.

[bricolage]

So we might say that the minority whites still effectively 'own' vast swathes of land, but I'm not sure how many of the non-whites would even want to live out in the sticks...

When I mentioned spatial considerations I was thinking on more of a micro-urban scale, ie. Alexandra vs Sandton in Johannesburg.

[Obzervi]

The retaliation against the white ruling class was justified, considering they had oppressed for indigenous populations for so long. No sympathy in my book, they don't belong in Africa anyway. If anything the whites should be happy the blacks don't drive them into the sea for all the shit they've done.

[Agnapostate]

I'm wondering about the claims made by sources such as this page. I'd say that maybe in South Africa it's the sort of informal de facto disempowerment more than de jure institutionalized racial discrimination? But the mass media frequently claims that the Mugabe government of Zimbabwe orchestrates racially discriminatory policies against white farmers regardless of their socioeconomic status, justifying confiscatory actions with anti-colonial rhetoric. I know that both countries are characterized by massive white emigration rates.

The retaliation against the white ruling class was justified, considering they had oppressed for indigenous populations for so long. No sympathy in my book, they don't belong in Africa anyway. If anything the whites should be happy the blacks don't drive them into the sea for all the shit they've done.

How does this apply to whites with no complicity in the matter, born in these African countries into the present circumstances? They're being punished for an accident of birth that they had no choice or control over?

[Wanted Man]

I do know from a few documentaries I've seen that the Afrikaners at least consider themselves somewhat at risk from discrimination. This is to say, physical as well as anything. Lots of them bear arms and so on, and they sure think that there is discrimination against them, now that they're the minority.

Weren't they always the minority?

[hatzel]

Weren't they always the minority?

I meant the abstract minority. Minority, powerwise, rather than in terms of numbers As if they used to be the majority, just with a much smaller population than the enforced minority or...something like that...I didn't want to say 'oppressed', or 'weak', because these are all a bit too loaded for me...

[Amphictyonis]

Thats just capitalism, its not racism.

fixed

[Omnia Sunt Communia]

While it's true that the "reverse discrimination" in Mugabe's Zimbabwe and ANC South Africa are white supremacist fictions, I would make the argument regarding the latter situation that the Afrikaners are colonized by the South African political state, and suffer from disproportionate political and economic discrimination in comparison to English-speaking whites. Very similar to the Scotch-Irish "hillbillies" of Appalachia.

[Queercommie Girl]

While it's true that the "reverse discrimination" in Mugabe's Zimbabwe and ANC South Africa are white supremacist fictions, I would make the argument regarding the latter situation that the Afrikaners are colonized by the South African political state, and suffer from disproportionate political and economic discrimination in comparison to English-speaking whites. Very similar to the Scotch-Irish "hillbillies" of Appalachia.

You mean the Dutch colonists in South Africa were colonised by the English?

It's true that one shouldn't put all white people into a single simplistic category in all contexts. Often colonialism exists as a complex sum of multiple layers of oppression.

Example: In many parts of south-east Asia: there is a three-tier system of colonialism, not a two-tier one. E.g. in Taiwan when it was under Dutch rule, you had the Taiwanese aboriginals at the very bottom, the later Han Chinese migrants in the middle, and the Dutch colonists at the top. Later when Taiwan was under Japanese domination, the top colonialist layer was replaced by Japanese imperialists. In many other parts of south-east Asia like Malaysia when it was under European colonialism, the ethnic Chinese migrants in the area often acted as a "middling layer" between the Europeans and the natives.

In a sense the Afrikaners were a "middling layer" between the English-speaking white colonists and the various native black tribes like the Zulu.

But then just as the biggest oppressors of men are usually other men, the biggest oppressors of white people are usually other white people, not coloured people. In this sense then "reverse racism" simply doesn't exist.

[gorillafuck]

I don't know if I would call it racism or not but my girlfriend is white, she works with all people from India, they own a hotel, the boss sits on his ass, his wife spends the hotel's money and my girlfriend has to pick up the slack that the boss's daughters don't do or feel like doing. They play on the work computers most of the time and half ass the rooms. And they still make 2 or 3 times what my girlfriend makes. Maybe not racist but biased at least, IMO.

That's because they're bourgeois, not because they're Indian. Jesus Christ that's so blindingly obvious.

[Stand Your Ground]

That's because they're bourgeois, not because they're Indian. Jesus Christ that's so blindingly obvious.

Never said it was because they are Indian, that would be fucked.

I was saying how the other employees that are Indian get treated better than the one who is white.

[Dimentio]

You mean the Dutch colonists in South Africa were colonised by the English?

It's true that one shouldn't put all white people into a single simplistic category in all contexts. Often colonialism exists as a complex sum of multiple layers of oppression.

Example: In many parts of south-east Asia: there is a three-tier system of colonialism, not a two-tier one. E.g. in Taiwan when it was under Dutch rule, you had the Taiwanese aboriginals at the very bottom, the later Han Chinese migrants in the middle, and the Dutch colonists at the top. Later when Taiwan was under Japanese domination, the top colonialist layer was replaced by Japanese imperialists. In many other parts of south-east Asia like Malaysia when it was under European colonialism, the ethnic Chinese migrants in the area often acted as a "middling layer" between the Europeans and the natives.

In a sense the Afrikaners were a "middling layer" between the English-speaking white colonists and the various native black tribes like the Zulu.

But then just as the biggest oppressors of men are usually other men, the biggest oppressors of white people are usually other white people, not coloured people. In this sense then "reverse racism" simply doesn't exist.

Another classical example of three layer oppression is Norman England. At the bottom, there were the Celts, then the Anglo-saxons, and the Norman aristocracy on the top.

[cska]

I wish South Africa did more to redistribute the wealth of the whites there. Unfortunately, between Mandela and the fall of the USSR, the ANC never got to do much.