Who's Next.

News and events in the media and political arena relating to firearms.

Re: Who's Next.

Post by Sergeant Hartman » 26 Aug 2018, 6:29 pm

Going back to black pride or brown pride..... the reason I suppose its there is cuz those people were discriminated against and treated like animals by some "white" american people... so I suppose I think they come up with those names to show their xxxxxxx again the white power movement of the past
Sergeant Hartman
Sergeant Major
Sergeant Major
 
Posts: 1722
Victoria

Re: Who's Next.

Post by Gaznazdiak » 26 Aug 2018, 9:08 pm

I know this whole subject is a potential minefield, I get what you're saying Ziad, and to a a certain extent I agree. I believe that it's perfectly normal for black or brown skinned people to express pride at being black or brown skinned because that is an integral part of their identity. But so is my white skin an integral part of mine.

If I was to express the spurious claim that my white skin conferred some manner of superiority, then I would be at fault.

You not only speak of symbols and of skin colour being a symbol, but suggest that my white skin is as much a symbol of persecution as a Swastika, that statement, old mate is racism in it's most pure form.
You also totally omit the positive things that Europeans have achieved not just alongside the negative but since.

I was hoping not to have to go here because it will only feed into the stereotype you are perpetuating, that being that not only have the white races been the only ones to ever cause the persecution of others but that if we should have the temerity to feel the same pride as non-white people we are somehow perpetuating the persecution, but you opened this door, so be it.

As Daddybang mentioned there have been millennia of atrocities committed by other than whitey, atrocities that are still going on as we debate this subject today. Mass murder, genocide, and slavery across Africa and Asia, an epidemic of rape in India of such proportions it's almost the national sport, with 40% of the victims gang raped and murdered being children, a seemingly endless wave of brutality and terrorism across the Middle East with national armies like the Syrians bombing and gassing their own unarmed civilian populations.

You tell us that these people have the right to be proud while they are still perpetuating savagery today and we Europeans should not, even though our own savage behaviours are largely, if not quite entirely far in our past.

Just how long are the totally innocent descendants of past generations meant to feel shame for things centuries in the past in which we had no part, while others who are causing the majority of suffering, grief and population displacement in the world today are seemingly inviolate?
fideles usque ad mortem
User avatar
Gaznazdiak
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1379
New South Wales

Re: Who's Next.

Post by Sergeant Hartman » 27 Aug 2018, 5:34 am

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.

Coming to say australia, while the white settlers did a lot of atrocities against the native population, it was done in the past, so no I don't think current "white" Australians should pay for what was done. But it was a part of the history of this country and needs to be acknowledged as such. Unless ofcourse some people still think that it was the right thing that was done.

Yes you are right it's a minefield. As we are talking about symbolism here. I think it comes to respect and empathy for everyone and every side... which many people even the so called greenies forget.
Sergeant Hartman
Sergeant Major
Sergeant Major
 
Posts: 1722
Victoria

Re: Who's Next.

Post by Gaznazdiak » 27 Aug 2018, 10:29 am

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.
fideles usque ad mortem
User avatar
Gaznazdiak
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1379
New South Wales

Re: Who's Next.

Post by Sergeant Hartman » 27 Aug 2018, 12:54 pm

Hey sorry. No where was my intention that swastika is related to being white. If you got the meaning and we're offended. I apologize. It was meant to be a separate example.

As I said in my last post whatever was done in the past was not done by you so there is no need to be ashamed or held liable.

But unfortunately for you the term white power is still used by many ultra right and neo-Nazi groups in a way similar to what used to happen 50/100 years ago or their attempt at getting back to those things.
Sergeant Hartman
Sergeant Major
Sergeant Major
 
Posts: 1722
Victoria

Re: Who's Next.

Post by Gaznazdiak » 27 Aug 2018, 2:02 pm

No apology needed Ziad, perhaps my response was badly worded and I'm sure you weren't deliberately trying to be offensive, but surely you can see from that minor instance how a casual reference to things like that can sow misunderstandings and division. It's also, admittedly, hard for some to differentiate the two when so many white people have done so much harm under that banner.

Peel the skin off anyone and we're all the same red and stringy mess underneath.

I may be branded as a happy-clappy, but I just cannot see why we can't just judge the value of people purely by their actions and behaviours.

The moment we introduce tribalism with things like black or white or left or right, logic goes out the window and rational debate becomes bogged down in mud slinging.

Either everyone should be allowed to love the skin they're in or nobody should.

I can't recall how we got here from a report of an actor taking a rummage in someone's privates 40yrs ago, but it was interesting anyway.
:drinks:
fideles usque ad mortem
User avatar
Gaznazdiak
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1379
New South Wales


Back to top
 
Return to Firearms related media and politics