Welcome to the Second Life Forums Archive
These forums are CLOSED. Please visit the new forums HERE
Can we get some clarification here? |
|
|
Griffin Aldwych
Registered User
Join date: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 65
|
03-21-2007 13:08
I read my last few posts, and even I think I sound like a racist, even though I know I'm not. I just thought I'd better accuse myself of it before someone else did. Also a good time to stop posting and take a deep breath I think.
|
|
Colette Meiji
Registered User
Join date: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 15,556
|
03-21-2007 13:14
No, we don't have equality. That I will grant you. But there is CERTAINLY a lot more protection in place if you are NOT white than if you are. There are more protections for whites than for minorities in the US. There are simply more "visible" protections for minorities. Status quo and non legislative Majority protections are extremely more effective than what little legislation does for minority groups. I find this statement very frightening. Is that what it's going to take? For every white majority democracy in the world to surrender power to the non-white minority? Or do we have to go all the way and submit ourselves to slavery to the non-white races to prove how sorry we are for something that happened 200 years ago? This sounds paranoid. Simple genetics will make White People a minority in America before too much longer. |
|
Lorelei Patel
was here
Join date: 22 Feb 2004
Posts: 1,940
|
03-21-2007 13:32
Your Italian American etc groups...are their any for the traditional White Anglo Saxon Protestants? I'm guessing not... Um... the country club? Congress?  _____________________
============
Broadly offensive. |
|
Lilliput Boshops
Registered User
Join date: 25 Oct 2006
Posts: 89
|
03-21-2007 13:32
Gee, and I thought I was being naive. So when the Sunni's and the Shi'a are going at it hammer and tongs in Iraq, who holds the power? Which side is the racist? It's nothing to do with power, it's do with hatred, ignorance and intolerance. I didn't say "racist." I said "racism." Racism is an institution that is inextricably linked to who holds the power. The conflict in Iraq is, indeed, about who holds the power. |
|
Lorelei Patel
was here
Join date: 22 Feb 2004
Posts: 1,940
|
03-21-2007 13:34
When I checked this morning, the 14 Words group had changed it's name to 14 Worms. If the name fits... eta... On further thought, I find it fitting and humorous if that is the name the group itself chose to take. I'd be much more uncomfortable if it was a name LL imposed. Forcibly changing group names doesn't sit well with me already. Changing it to something derogatory would be worse. Don't get me wrong, I really, really, *really* don't like the sentiment behind groups like this, for several very good reasons. I think actions like this only feeds their paranoia, however, and gives them the ability to say they're downtrodden and treated unfairly. I'd much rather they be given enough rope. _____________________
============
Broadly offensive. |
|
Har Fairweather
Registered User
Join date: 24 Jan 2007
Posts: 2,320
|
03-21-2007 13:40
Heh. Sounds like a Freudian slip...
Hey, if that's how they identify themselves, who are we to argue? : P |
|
Lilliput Boshops
Registered User
Join date: 25 Oct 2006
Posts: 89
|
03-21-2007 13:55
Heh. Sounds like a Freudian slip... Hey, if that's how they identify themselves, who are we to argue? : P And, on the subject of identifying themselves, I've always been much more concerned about the racists who sneak around, influencing policy and so forth. At least the ones in the white hoods (or with a tag over their head) are easy to spot. |
|
Lorelei Patel
was here
Join date: 22 Feb 2004
Posts: 1,940
|
03-21-2007 14:01
Heh. Sounds like a Freudian slip... Hey, if that's how they identify themselves, who are we to argue? : P ... but what if it isn't? LL has been making sport of changing group names. I would like some, ah, clarification! _____________________
============
Broadly offensive. |
|
Har Fairweather
Registered User
Join date: 24 Jan 2007
Posts: 2,320
|
03-21-2007 14:03
We are at an interesting juncture in human history.
Until maybe late in the 19th century attitudes we now call racist or chauvinistic were probably a Darwinian benefit to groups that adopted them. And now we live in a world civilization where there are nuclear and other means of mass destruction, and such attitudes are suddenly (in paleontological terms) not only counterproductive but also a possible threat to human survival. As they said for a while at Apple, Inc.: Think Different! |
|
Griffin Aldwych
Registered User
Join date: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 65
|
03-21-2007 16:01
There are more protections for whites than for minorities in the US. And you're right, I AM paranoid. Foprtunately I'm bright enough to see the wolf beneath the sheep's clothing that is organisations like the British National Party. But as long as white people feel disadvantaged in their own (sic) country, some of them will turn to parties like the BNP to defend their interests. God forbid that they ever achieve anything like power...I think the country would descend into civil war within a matter of weeks. And yet...on the other hand, our attempted enforcement of democracy in the Middle East is exactly the same but in reverse. I don't need there to be democracy there...the people don't want it, the political powers don't want it. I still blame the media, or at least the fact that our developmnet has not yet matured to a point where we can handle what it shows us. We can't see other people without pointing at them and laughing, and then trying to make them more "like us". |
|
Colette Meiji
Registered User
Join date: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 15,556
|
03-21-2007 16:21
May well be a US/UK difference then. Over here there's a definite favouring of minority groups - not just racial but sexual as well. It's also causing a backlash by increasing membership of far right political parties. And you're right, I AM paranoid. Foprtunately I'm bright enough to see the wolf beneath the sheep's clothing that is organisations like the British National Party. But as long as white people feel disadvantaged in their own (sic) country, some of them will turn to parties like the BNP to defend their interests. God forbid that they ever achieve anything like power...I think the country would descend into civil war within a matter of weeks. . What you described is how its perceived by many in the US as well. However its simply not the truth. An entrenched Majority provides far more advantages to members of that group - than any protective legislation could. Basically while minorities require help from the governement at times for protections, those of the majority group already receive those protections by social covenant, In other words- those are the ones the minorities need protected FROM. Many in the US see affrimitve action as far too beneficial to minorities at the expense of white people. However a white person still enjoys a better chance of completing college and getting good employment than a minority, even though if you look at the "laws" the minority should have an advantage. Its entirely possible in the UK the situation is different - I am of course less well versed as to the situation there. However, just becuase it SEEMS a minority group is favored does not mean that when results are scientifically evaluated , that this is true. -------------------- In an absolute sense - worrying about racial "purity" is a waste of time. Pure racial examples will become rarer and rarer as the world becomes more linked by technology. People forget that the only reason all these racial types exist was groups of people evolved in isolation to adapt to climatic conditions. As our technology continues to increase and people are more globally mobile, the increase of global community will lead to increased mixing of racial types. Evidence this has already started is quite evident. Eventually it is likely, this mixing will continue to a point where determining exact continents of original DNA origin will be difficult. |
|
Griffin Aldwych
Registered User
Join date: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 65
|
03-21-2007 17:22
In an absolute sense - worrying about racial "purity" is a waste of time. It's more cultural identity that I would want to protect - that is what I see being eroded when largely white groups are forced by political pressure to accept non-white members. As I said - the non-white cultures are allowed to congregate solely with other members of their culture...but that sort of gathering for whites only is viewed as "unhealthy". |
|
Colette Meiji
Registered User
Join date: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 15,556
|
03-21-2007 18:50
Yes, that does sound very Arian...it's not racial purity that worries me so much...I think you're right, racial distinctions will fade with time...though I think 100's of years rather than tens... It's more cultural identity that I would want to protect - that is what I see being eroded when largely white groups are forced by political pressure to accept non-white members. As I said - the non-white cultures are allowed to congregate solely with other members of their culture...but that sort of gathering for whites only is viewed as "unhealthy". On the contrary - Western European/American culture has been the most pervasive cultural force in the history of the world. This is largely due to its rise coinciding with technology and then later cemented by the advances in communications. Many cultures were forced to accept the ways of the Europeans at the wrong end of a gun. Whole civilizations were changed, some largely swept away. Today many cultural groups feel hard pressed to keep their identity in face of Western Media/culture/entertainment/governments/trade. You are right it will take several hundreds of years for genetic racial distinctions to fade, cultural distinctions will fade quicker. Its already well underway. In the 100,000 year history of modern humans its just a blip. |
|
Jamey Satyr
Lifetimer
Join date: 16 Nov 2003
Posts: 39
|
03-22-2007 05:18
Just because someone hijacks a quote or an emblem doesn't undermine the original intention. Take away the Hitlerian connotations now associated with "Arbeit Macht Frei" (work makes you free) and there is a very interesting parallel in a predating, benign culture...the Franciscan Monks. They believed that only through hard physical labour could a person's mind be "free" to worship. And if you're ever wondering where you may have seen the Swastika before...look very closely at buddha...it is quite often engraved onto statues of him, and was a symbol, again, for inner peace. And interesting as this is...it doesn't address my original point...is it necessarily racist to promote white culture? If so, is it therefore racist to promote black culture? It's just another facet of the "slippery slope" argument - positions and boundaries on what is "offensive" are very personal - and so having someone ELSE draw those boundaries on your behalf is always a worrying thing. Just a couple of notes of clarification, in Zoroastrianism the Swastika is also a symbol for the rotating sun, and the Nazi symbol version is a right facing Swastika standing on a corner, rather than the 'foot'. As far as I know, no other group has done that. _____________________
You all disgust me. Meeting adjourned. --Timothy Montgomery, ASB.
|
|
Jamey Satyr
Lifetimer
Join date: 16 Nov 2003
Posts: 39
|
03-22-2007 05:51
And all the above "white" groups are constantly being lambasted to increase their NON-white membership. I don't see anyone telling BET to play more Vanilla Ice. I'm going to take flames for this, so I want to state in advance that I don't hold ANY racist views at all...the only thing I'm intolerant of is arseholes, and no one racial group has a monopoly on those... ...but... ...since all white groups are petitioned to accept more black members, yet no black groups are petitioned to accept white members, is anyone actually surprised that more white people take solace in those 14 words? Anglo Saxon is very DEFINITELY a culture however. Italian as a culture is inseparable from it's Catholic faith roots. It's not so easy to draw lines like that. I wouldn't disagree - that's my own reaction too...I just wonder how far down the "equalisation" road we have to go before groups with "Black" in their title are ASLO seen as racist. Which starts to drift away form the point...I'm not disputing they exist...I'm asking why is one side of the coin viewed as acceptable, and the other as racist? Edit: As to those 14 words...from what I infer (and I never heard of them prior to reading this post either) they are viewed as racist not becuase of what they say, but because of who said them, the actions that they took, and the beliefs that they held. I get kind of annoyed by this. Occasionally, a total idiot will say something that is very profound, or a giant intellect will spout utter garbage. Are we to discount both utterances equally, in favour of their previous "reputation" (be it good or bad). I wish words stood for what they said and no more and were taken at face value, instead of carrying all this baggage with them. If that makes me naive, so be it. A very poignant post. I, for one, living in the south eastern uninted states, can not tell you how tired I am of being called a 'Cracker', 'Honkey', 'Whitebread' and so on. I could sit back and wax eloquent about my ancestry, from the scots and the irish, to the dutch, to my english and french ancestors, or even talk about the Cherokee blood that flows through me, the same blood spilled by the invaders of this land. Instead, I'm just a human being, an american bred mutt, and I'm sick of people telling me I should be _ashamed_ for looking white, and that I owe _anyone_ _anything_ when _I_ did them nor their ancestors any wrong. Can we just put up the d*mn lables for a change? Can we take pride in background without casting blame on someone else? Can't I be proud of my Cherokee and Celtic blood and not have to blame the european invaders and their 'helpers' for taking and raping the land? People are people, regardless of nationality or skin color. Live with it. _____________________
You all disgust me. Meeting adjourned. --Timothy Montgomery, ASB.
|
|
Jamey Satyr
Lifetimer
Join date: 16 Nov 2003
Posts: 39
|
03-22-2007 06:08
Just a thought... If y'haven't heard of it, check out the concept of "White Privilege". When I first read it, it kinda blew me away. The reason that "White" groups are generally considered... less than savoury, shall we say... is that traditionally, it can be generally accepted that most organized groups are white, or at least accept whites, or are tolerant of whites, if not sharing the exact same views, hence my comments about the TV channels. As a white person, I can be pretty well assured that when I turn on one of the major networks, I will see my race and culture represented there and represented in a good light. This is true for most things in our world. Stores, magazines, movies, This isn't so for other races and cultures, which is why they create groups where they WILL be represented. Unfortunately, this came about because the anglo-saxons bred like rabbits and spread, much like a rash, over almost the entirety of the european continent. So, you have russians, italalians, greeks, french, english, irish, scottish..all white, but still all their own distinct 'cultures' and 'races', to an extent. Heck, without the classic deep tan look, most amerindian descendants don't look a heck of a lot different from 'white men', so they fall under the 'privilege', too, for the most part, unless they call their race into it. It's not like 'White Privilege' was meant to happen, it just turned out that way. Hopefully, given a little more time, especially if all the groups that keep calling attention to differences and inciting emotions specifically dealing with being different from 'others' will go away, race matters will disappear, or, at least, become little more than a very minor issue. _____________________
You all disgust me. Meeting adjourned. --Timothy Montgomery, ASB.
|
|
Jamey Satyr
Lifetimer
Join date: 16 Nov 2003
Posts: 39
|
03-22-2007 06:31
Racism is inextricably bound to power, and who has it. If blacks held the lion's share of the power in the US, then it would make sense to argue that the NAACP is a racist group. But blacks don't hold the lion's share of the power, so it's a stupid argument. Racism is not inextricably bound to power. Anyone can be a racist, all they have to do is hate another race. For a lengthy, and easy to understand discorse on racism go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism No specifics on a 'race' are given in the definition. 'Amusingly', racial prejudice against white people is on the rise in the south eastern US. Currently it's 'just' a large increase in dirty looks, name calling, and so on, but some alarmists predict an outbreak of violence 'in the future'. A group of my friends, last year in Atlanta, were told that a _busy_ Waffle House was closed. They were white, everyone inside wasn't. From the point of view of a (amateur)sociologist, it's going to be interesting to see where all of this goes. Provided it doesn't end in violence, of course. _____________________
You all disgust me. Meeting adjourned. --Timothy Montgomery, ASB.
|
|
bilbo99 Emu
Garrett's No.1 fan
Join date: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 3,468
|
03-22-2007 07:34
People are people, regardless of nationality or skin color. Live with it. We all bleed red .. sadly, an observation rarely acted upon  |
|
Gummi Richthofen
Fetish's Frasier Crane!
Join date: 3 Oct 2006
Posts: 605
|
03-22-2007 08:54
Businesses want to be here because potential customers are here. And a looooooooot of their potential customers also like to get their freak on. So, less freak = fewer people = worse for business. You could as easily argue it that way. Sadly, no. I can tell you from RL experience that businesses which invest in delivery platforms or brands with <ahem> alternative morals, very quickly find themselves the target of co-ordinated, structured letter-writing campaigns by religious groups, who tell the managers and board of "brand X" that unless they apply pressure, or remove their association, the church in question will then boycott their brand and tell other churches to do the same. I first saw this type of behavioue way back in the 80's, so it doesn't even require the Internet to be involved, for groups like these to swing into action. Now that the Internet IS involved, you can see them at work in situations where a hosting company suddenly withdraws someone's website, for alleged "adult content". This isn't a process with any legal review in it, it's back door "Sister Superior Knows Best" stuff. You can't appeal, you can't even find out who your accusers are. These guys think Miller's "The Crucible" is about nasty men... |
|
Chris Norse
Loud Arrogant Redneck
Join date: 1 Oct 2006
Posts: 5,735
|
03-22-2007 08:59
Just a thought... If y'haven't heard of it, check out the concept of "White Privilege". When I first read it, it kinda blew me away. The reason that "White" groups are generally considered... less than savoury, shall we say... is that traditionally, it can be generally accepted that most organized groups are white, or at least accept whites, or are tolerant of whites, if not sharing the exact same views, hence my comments about the TV channels. As a white person, I can be pretty well assured that when I turn on one of the major networks, I will see my race and culture represented there and represented in a good light. This is true for most things in our world. Stores, magazines, movies, This isn't so for other races and cultures, which is why they create groups where they WILL be represented. Sorry white privilege is a myth. |
|
Chris Norse
Loud Arrogant Redneck
Join date: 1 Oct 2006
Posts: 5,735
|
03-22-2007 08:59
Racism is inextricably bound to power, and who has it. If blacks held the lion's share of the power in the US, then it would make sense to argue that the NAACP is a racist group. But blacks don't hold the lion's share of the power, so it's a stupid argument. Racism is racism, power has nothing to do with it. |
|
Gummi Richthofen
Fetish's Frasier Crane!
Join date: 3 Oct 2006
Posts: 605
|
03-22-2007 08:59
I didn't say "racist." I said "racism." Racism is an institution that is inextricably linked to who holds the power. The conflict in Iraq is, indeed, about who holds the power. There are various long-term interests which try to uphold this concept; however, it can be comprehensively disproven, over and over again. Both Apartheid in South Africa, and the Klan, are working-class proletarian movements (ie, they arose in groups who DIDN'T have "the power" ."Racism" has been defined as "the abuse of everyone else by the whites", but while whites were coming up with that nonsense, all the other races were getting right on with the business of hating one another just like they always have. |
|
Chris Norse
Loud Arrogant Redneck
Join date: 1 Oct 2006
Posts: 5,735
|
03-22-2007 09:03
However a white person still enjoys a better chance of completing college and getting good employment than a minority, This is due to personal choices and culture not the "racism" boogey man. |
|
Colette Meiji
Registered User
Join date: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 15,556
|
03-22-2007 09:38
This portion of the thread has gone from people expressing their veiws on a couple racial topics to a bunch of unsubstantiated comments that make debateable claims. I dont think any unbiased research agrees with most of the recent posts.
Rather than to continue with the back and forth - since the threads devolved into a certain lock anyhow- Id like to point out none of that is really the point. The issue was - should racial groups espousing white supremacy be allowed to still exist, while the TOS/CS seems to forbid them If that is not clear enough prehaps some clarification on the racial issue needs to be made in addition to the sexual one. |
|
Lorelei Patel
was here
Join date: 22 Feb 2004
Posts: 1,940
|
03-22-2007 10:02
To go back to the topic yesterday, does anyone know if the group itself changed its name to 14 Worms, or was it done by LL for them?
_____________________
============
Broadly offensive. |