CRT: Whiteness is Inherently Evil

[Immanuel Can]

You appear not to have addressed the point of mine you quoted about how tackling racism isn't racist.

Yeah, actually...I did.

I asked you what you thought "tackling" looked like. You didn't answer yet, but you can now.

[FlashDangerpants]

From mid-40s to mid-60s was the most free society ever in history in the US...

So the period that coincides with McCarthyism and segregation is as free as Americans have ever been eh?

...but it all went away after that.

Those damned Hippies!

I grew up in the 40' and 50s in what was then the largest leather manufacturing city in the world. Our home was at the intersection to two streets and every family in every house on those two streets were of different ethnic backgrounds, Irish, English, Chinese, French, Greek, Italian, Finish, Black, Japanese, Portugeuse, Turkish, etc. Most of the men worked in the leather factories or in the many businesses that such cosmopolitan city supported from banks to bakeries.

In the almost twenty years I lived there people didn't even lock their cars or houses at night. As a boy growing up in that city, I never saw racism. There was some religious prejudice (which I was not aware of as a boy), but nothing ethnic. Even as a child I could go anywhere in that city safely and there were almost no restrictions on what I could do or where I could go.

My grandfather owned a successful business (all were successful because people believed in earning their own way) and Saturday nights he walked the mile home with the weeks recepts in a paper bag. There were no policemen around at night (and hardly any during the day), there was simply no danger of being robbed. In the almost twenty years I lived there, there was never a murder, a violent crime (there were fights) and any woman could safely walk any street at any time of the day or night.

It is not possible to know what the life of individual Americans in those days were like without actually experiencing them. You apparently know only what your teachers have taught you, believing, just as most people do today, whatever the, "media," and, "politicians," emphasize actually matters, like McCarthyism and segregation, both political issues very few Americans of any ethnicity were the least bit interested in or involved with.

No political system can make any society free. The freedom enjoyed in the 40's through the early 60's was because the government was not as big and powerful, especially at lower (state and municipal) levels, as it has become since the Viet Nam war. With few exceptions, one could live their life without government interference and without having to get government approval for what they bought or owned, what to do with their money, what to eat, what drugs to buy or not buy, how to use their own property, who they would spend their time with. Now the government interferes in all these things, and almost every other aspect of an individual's life.

To be clear about this, your great era of freedom was the same period when persons who married outside their race, in any of the states marked in a darker green or any shade of red in the below map, could go to prison for that crime?

[mickthinks]

You mean these 40s and 50s, RC?

[RCSaunders]

So the period that coincides with McCarthyism and segregation is as free as Americans have ever been eh?
Those damned Hippies!

I grew up in the 40' and 50s in what was then the largest leather manufacturing city in the world. Our home was at the intersection to two streets and every family in every house on those two streets were of different ethnic backgrounds, Irish, English, Chinese, French, Greek, Italian, Finish, Black, Japanese, Portugeuse, Turkish, etc. Most of the men worked in the leather factories or in the many businesses that such cosmopolitan city supported from banks to bakeries.

In the almost twenty years I lived there people didn't even lock their cars or houses at night. As a boy growing up in that city, I never saw racism. There was some religious prejudice (which I was not aware of as a boy), but nothing ethnic. Even as a child I could go anywhere in that city safely and there were almost no restrictions on what I could do or where I could go.

My grandfather owned a successful business (all were successful because people believed in earning their own way) and Saturday nights he walked the mile home with the weeks recepts in a paper bag. There were no policemen around at night (and hardly any during the day), there was simply no danger of being robbed. In the almost twenty years I lived there, there was never a murder, a violent crime (there were fights) and any woman could safely walk any street at any time of the day or night.

It is not possible to know what the life of individual Americans in those days were like without actually experiencing them. You apparently know only what your teachers have taught you, believing, just as most people do today, whatever the, "media," and, "politicians," emphasize actually matters, like McCarthyism and segregation, both political issues very few Americans of any ethnicity were the least bit interested in or involved with.

No political system can make any society free. The freedom enjoyed in the 40's through the early 60's was because the government was not as big and powerful, especially at lower (state and municipal) levels, as it has become since the Viet Nam war. With few exceptions, one could live their life without government interference and without having to get government approval for what they bought or owned, what to do with their money, what to eat, what drugs to buy or not buy, how to use their own property, who they would spend their time with. Now the government interferes in all these things, and almost every other aspect of an individual's life.

To be clear about this, your great era of freedom was the same period when persons who married outside their race, in any of the states marked in a darker green or any shade of red in the below map, could go to prison for that crime?

To be clear about this, you are confusing what governments did with what individuals were. I knew mixed marriages then. No one gave them a second thought. I happen to be a remote product of one.

There will always be racists and irrational prejudices--just read most of the posts on this thread. All governments and all government programs and policies are always racist.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Does anyone really think that the US today is anything like it was in the 50s and 60s?

No, it was a completely different country.

From mid-40s to mid-60s was the most free society ever in history in the US, but it all went away after that. Of course, even that time was spoiled between 1950-53 with the Korean war. Americans love war.

I actually meant the opposite of that. What about segregation, lynchings, the draft, McCarthyism...?

[vegetariantaxidermy]

I have noticed that it has become fashionable and acceptable to disparage and belittle so-called 'white people'. It's all through mass media, from mainstream comedy shows to wanky university lectures. 'White privilege' has become a normal part of wank conversations. Would that be 'privileged' like all the dirt poor American 'whites' who are homeless and have no money for decent medical care?
You only have to transpose the word 'white' for 'black' in these sneering references to see how disgustingly racist it is.

[henry quirk]

I have noticed that it has become fashionable and acceptable to disparage and belittle so-called 'white people'. It's all through mass media, from mainstream comedy shows to wanky university lectures. 'White privilege' has become a normal part of wank conversations. Would that be 'privileged' like all the dirt poor American 'whites' who are homeless and have no money for decent medical care?
You only have to transpose the word 'white' for 'black' in these sneering references to see how disgustingly racist it is.

Poor whites don't count.

Why?

Cuz -- the logic goes -- if a white man can't cut it in a systemically racist world (one skewed to favor him specifically) then he must be subnormal, retarded, inferior: a n*****.

See, if any non-white can't cut it, it's the white man's fault; if a white can't cut it, well, he has no one to blame but himself.

[RCSaunders]

Does anyone really think that the US today is anything like it was in the 50s and 60s?

No, it was a completely different country.

From mid-40s to mid-60s was the most free society ever in history in the US, but it all went away after that. Of course, even that time was spoiled between 1950-53 with the Korean war. Americans love war.

I actually meant the opposite of that. What about segregation, lynchings, the draft, McCarthyism...?

Well, I think it's all you were taught about in you socialist school, which is not your fault. The US is very big and very diverse. There has never been a single, "American," culture or society. I described the people and country I knew and lived in. You only know about a fraction of what existed in the US at that time that you were taught about.

It doesn't really matter, it's all gone now. Believe what you like.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

No, it was a completely different country.

From mid-40s to mid-60s was the most free society ever in history in the US, but it all went away after that. Of course, even that time was spoiled between 1950-53 with the Korean war. Americans love war.

I actually meant the opposite of that. What about segregation, lynchings, the draft, McCarthyism...?

Well, I think it's all you were taught about in you socialist school, which is not your fault. The US is very big and very diverse. There has never been a single, "American," culture or society. I described the people and country I knew and lived in. You only know about a fraction of what existed in the US at that time that you were taught about.

It doesn't really matter, it's all gone now. Believe what you like.

Nothing to do with whatever school I went to. It's just history.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

I have noticed that it has become fashionable and acceptable to disparage and belittle so-called 'white people'. It's all through mass media, from mainstream comedy shows to wanky university lectures. 'White privilege' has become a normal part of wank conversations. Would that be 'privileged' like all the dirt poor American 'whites' who are homeless and have no money for decent medical care?
You only have to transpose the word 'white' for 'black' in these sneering references to see how disgustingly racist it is.

Poor whites don't count.

Why?

Cuz -- the logic goes -- if a white man can't cut it in a systemically racist world (one skewed to favor him specifically) then he must be subnormal, retarded, inferior: a n*****.

See, if any non-white can't cut it, it's the white man's fault; if a white can't cut it, well, he has no one to blame but himself.

Those c@@ts can flagellate themselves until they are skinless for all I care, but they can go fuck themselves if they think I'm ever going to join them. Patronising amoebas.

[Veritas Aequitas]

From: viewtopic.php?p=515518#p515518

For CRTists, in their interpretation, being racist is being evil, i.e. not morally good.


Your views?

My view?

My view is that this entire thread is based on a strawman and consequently not worthy of further contributions.

If there is anything that characterises CRT is the notion that no race can be "inherently" anyting, since they consider race to be socially and culturally defined and NOT natural being characterisable as having "inherent" qualities.

Where is the strawman?

"Whiteness is Inherently Evil" is a belief held by those who agree with CRT.
I did not misrepresent their argument which is evident in the CRT writings and practices by CRT activists.

You right that CRT is contradictory in claiming for essence of 'whiteness' when they claim that race is a a social construction. If they claim it is an essence, then there is no room for change and improvements.
Note the idea and practice of "whiteness" [toxic concept] was raised by whites in the first place for their selfish interests. This is typical of majority everywhere regardless of which skin color.

However, we cannot deny, in reality and practice, since the past and even now, there are still people who have a sense of 'whiteness' [of superiority] who exploited their 'whiteness' over 'blackness'.

Since there had been problems with the concept of 'whiteness' and other 'color_ness' we need to discuss it, on how it emerged and what are the pros and cons of it.
This is the philosophical issue of the Problem of Universals.
IMO, since the net-effect of the concept of whiteness universals is a such as drastic net-negative we should research further into the roots of such a concept and resolve its issues.
Note this is complex which I don't see you have the capacity for it.

The current problem is, despite the net-negative of the concept of whiteness, blackness and race, the CRTists insist on retaining this toxic concept of whiteness as permanent for their ideological and political interests which could bring more negative evils to humanity.
Why the CRTists want to insist of race distinction is due to ignorance [lack depth and width like you], i.e. ignorance of philosophy-proper and their lack of high moral-sense.

What we need to do is to put in more rigorous discussions and arguments into the issue of CRT and I don't see this is done properly.

James Lindsay [of Cynical Theories], for example, in countering CRTs rejection of objective reality, relied on the Correspondence Theory of Truth and other lowly rated philosophically ideas.

[FlashDangerpants]

I grew up in the 40' and 50s in what was then the largest leather manufacturing city in the world. Our home was at the intersection to two streets and every family in every house on those two streets were of different ethnic backgrounds, Irish, English, Chinese, French, Greek, Italian, Finish, Black, Japanese, Portugeuse, Turkish, etc. Most of the men worked in the leather factories or in the many businesses that such cosmopolitan city supported from banks to bakeries.

In the almost twenty years I lived there people didn't even lock their cars or houses at night. As a boy growing up in that city, I never saw racism. There was some religious prejudice (which I was not aware of as a boy), but nothing ethnic. Even as a child I could go anywhere in that city safely and there were almost no restrictions on what I could do or where I could go.

My grandfather owned a successful business (all were successful because people believed in earning their own way) and Saturday nights he walked the mile home with the weeks recepts in a paper bag. There were no policemen around at night (and hardly any during the day), there was simply no danger of being robbed. In the almost twenty years I lived there, there was never a murder, a violent crime (there were fights) and any woman could safely walk any street at any time of the day or night.

It is not possible to know what the life of individual Americans in those days were like without actually experiencing them. You apparently know only what your teachers have taught you, believing, just as most people do today, whatever the, "media," and, "politicians," emphasize actually matters, like McCarthyism and segregation, both political issues very few Americans of any ethnicity were the least bit interested in or involved with.

No political system can make any society free. The freedom enjoyed in the 40's through the early 60's was because the government was not as big and powerful, especially at lower (state and municipal) levels, as it has become since the Viet Nam war. With few exceptions, one could live their life without government interference and without having to get government approval for what they bought or owned, what to do with their money, what to eat, what drugs to buy or not buy, how to use their own property, who they would spend their time with. Now the government interferes in all these things, and almost every other aspect of an individual's life.

To be clear about this, your great era of freedom was the same period when persons who married outside their race, in any of the states marked in a darker green or any shade of red in the below map, could go to prison for that crime?

To be clear about this, you are confusing what governments did with what individuals were. I knew mixed marriages then. No one gave them a second thought. I happen to be a remote product of one.

There will always be racists and irrational prejudices--just read most of the posts on this thread. All governments and all government programs and policies are always racist.

For those of us who lack an intimate understanding of the US leather garments industry in the mid 20th century, what colour is your state on that map?

To hear your rosy reminiscence one might assume that MLK was just a drama queen with nothing real to complain about. The real problem here is the less ancient whitesplainers than you who are just carrying on that tradition you have established.

[Sculptor]

From: viewtopic.php?p=515518#p515518

For CRTists, in their interpretation, being racist is being evil, i.e. not morally good.


Your views?

My view?

My view is that this entire thread is based on a strawman and consequently not worthy of further contributions.

If there is anything that characterises CRT is the notion that no race can be "inherently" anyting, since they consider race to be socially and culturally defined and NOT natural being characterisable as having "inherent" qualities.

Where is the strawman?

"Whiteness is Inherently Evil" is a belief held by those who agree with CRT.

Exactly. You know what the strawman is.
CRT 101, race is not "inherent".

You must have known you were making a stupid inflamatory remark when you started the thread. Why be surprised when someone calls you up on it??

CRT holds that "race" as a category is not a biological or innate category, but is purely cultural.
This refelction is borne out by the simple fact that no single human is capable of representing a specimen type for any "race", and that all humans are capable or producing progeny with any other human from Australia to Scotland or from Tumbuktu to San Diego.
It is also patently obvious that most humans exhibit traits that could so eaily be represented by ANY defined race, and that such characteristics by which races are defined are arbirtary and mostly visual bearing little relationship to ability, capacilty or morality.
There is more difference between members of the same race than could ever be demonstrated by differences between the races.
Sadly Identity Politics has just about screwed all the good work of early CRT thinkers.
Rather than show the vanity of racialism, it tends to provide people the tools to re-infoce racial stereotyping.
This, whilst seeming to empower the underprivileged and oppressed groups, plays into the hands of the dominant groups who can now point to the differences that are made the fetishes of the powerless. ANd it is by these means that disadvantaged groups participate in their own oppression.

[Veritas Aequitas]

My view?

My view is that this entire thread is based on a strawman and consequently not worthy of further contributions.

If there is anything that characterises CRT is the notion that no race can be "inherently" anyting, since they consider race to be socially and culturally defined and NOT natural being characterisable as having "inherent" qualities.

Where is the strawman?

"Whiteness is Inherently Evil" is a belief held by those who agree with CRT.

Exactly. You know what the strawman is.
CRT 101, race is not "inherent".

You must have known you were making a stupid inflamatory remark when you started the thread. Why be surprised when someone calls you up on it??

Can you read??

Note I stated in the OP;

[*]For CRTists, in their interpretation, being racist is being evil, i.e. not morally good.[/color]

The statements are made by the followers of CRT not me.
How come you are accusing me of "you were making a stupid inflamatory remark."
You are insulting your own intelligence.

For the CRT, "whiteness" whilst socially constructed is inherently or in another sense, implicitly evil.

[Sculptor]

Where is the strawman?

"Whiteness is Inherently Evil" is a belief held by those who agree with CRT.

Exactly. You know what the strawman is.
CRT 101, race is not "inherent".

You must have known you were making a stupid inflamatory remark when you started the thread. Why be surprised when someone calls you up on it??

Can you read??

Note I stated in the OP;

[*]For CRTists, in their interpretation, being racist is being evil, i.e. not morally good.[/color]

The statements are made by the followers of CRT not me.
How come you are accusing me of "you were making a stupid inflamatory remark."
You are insulting your own intelligence.

For the CRT, "whiteness" whilst socially constructed is inherently or in another sense, implicitly evil.

You have decided to avoid the issue. Trouble is the the entire thread is named with that strawman, so you have no leg to stand on.

You are now claiming something else entirely.
Being racist IS indeed not good. This is DIFFERENT from the claim that "whiteness is inherently evil".

You are now claiming that, as yet unidentified "CRTists" are making statements ,yet you are not citing any of these mysterious people.
Strawman upon strawman.