Ziad wrote:The difference in your examples is that they don't go we are superior based on our skin color... those are more of religion or cast based discrimination or conflict.
Discrimination and persecution, Ziad, are discrimination and persecution. Those being discriminated against don't give a bugger whether it's because one is Hutu and the other is Tutsi, or whether the homicidal lunatic that blew up their family was Shia or Sunni, or whether they were black white or brindle.
How is it even remotely different?
Hutus killed Tutsi in Rawanda because they considered them inferior.
Shia kill Sunni and Sunni kill Shia and Sufis kill Wahabis and Salafis kill Huthis etc etc etc because they follow a slightly different dogma and are considered inferior.
I see you have skipped over your own racist statement that having white skin is akin to wearing a Swastika around, but that's OK.
.
This is the sort of subject that although it needs to be openly and comprehensively discussed, can rapidly descend into acrimony so lets just leave it at this, people who continue to drag up the actions of past generations to flog present day people who had no control over those actions are the ones who are perpetuating the problem.
So called reverse discrimination is still discrimination, and those who feel they are being punished for something over which they have no control are going to react negatively and people like Hanson and Cottrell will be seen as having a valid point. That is something we do NOT need.
For all I know, you may have experienced colour based discrimination and have a very personal reason to feel as you do, I hope not but it's unfortunately not uncommon, as your Swastika comment shows.