Why are racists so afraid of being labled racist?

A RACIST might say something like:

[video=youtube;_dPs7WQ_ypY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dPs7WQ_ypY[/video]


A Racist might say something about offending "His People"
http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshg...k_Panther_case _focus_demeans_my_people.html

[video=youtube;OeAmIIQTbXc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OeAmIIQTbXc[/video]


Some very bad things happened in the deep south in the late 19th and early 20th century. I don't remember any case of White People standing on street corners in major cities with a blow horn, openly advocating killing of Black Babies?!!!

If I remember correctly, the acts of the KKK were so despised by most Americans, that the KKK members had to perform their vile acts as part of a secret society under the cover of masks and hoods.

They certainly did NOT shout for the murder of Black Babies on Street Corners!





A Racist might say that all the people of a particular race have a "Duty to Die"

Again, while the KKK members, when among ONLY their own, certainly said things about all Brown or Black people needing to die, they did NOT shout it publicly from Federal Buildings in major population centers.






What seems to count in the minds of Liberal today as supposedly "Vile White Racism" pales in comparison to the TRUE RACISM of Anti-White Racism spewed, and often ACTED UPON, by Blacks and Latinos:


View attachment 26674 View attachment 26671 View attachment 26672

These are the real faces of American Racism.... Anti-White Racism.

There is an Epidemic of Violent Racist Attacks going on in America, but the White people involved are not the perps, but rather are the VICTIMS!


-

 

I wouldn't know. Good, logical, sound arguments coming from conservatives are as rare as virgins at FSU.

 

So, when a Liberals is not spewing false "Racists" accusations, they are just wallowing in cheap ad hominem attacks.

Sadly, If Liberals didn't have Racial Pandering and election fraud, and had to rely solely on their debate skills, there would not be a single Liberal holding office.

In America, there once was a proud "Classic Liberal" tradition, which held historic figures like Thomas Jefferson, Teddy Roosevelt, and John Kennedy. Today, Liberalism has been reduced to the sad, corrupt, narrow minded bigotry of Eric Holder.

-

 

Man, I bet you are the forum darling over at Stormfront.

 

So is it possible to disagree with him, AND think he's a horrible liar, a terrible leader and president, without being a racist? Much of the MSM thinks so, since they barely criticize the guy, for fear of being called a....you know. And can facts be racist?

 

Its a label. No one wants one.

Everyone (almost) is guilty of the most simple and benign form of racism, which is believing in the concept of race. Its impossible not to, its so much a part of history and cultural behavior and so forth that to try to not believe in it is ridiculous. Ethnic differences can be respected, and appreciation of any particular races history, or the recognition of any certain races need for protection could not exist without this level of racism.

The next level is thinking that there are definite differences in the races beyond ethnic tradition or physical appearance. Most people are guilty of some level of this kind of racism. We tend to assign traits to races and make judgements based on them consciously or unconsciously. Intelligent, athletic, violent, aggressively sexual, creative, etc.. Chances are when you think those words you associate a certain race with them, maybe several races depending on the word. It is a product of first and secondhand experience. The less personal experience we have with any particular race the more likely we are to pigeonhole them into stereotypical attributes.

The final level of racism is fear of them. Seeing them as inferior or different and dangerous. This is what we typically think of as racism and the way it is expressed is in anger or hatred. Revulsion.

Tribal racism is what we see in institutional racism. It has some of all the other in it but revolves around survivalism. People in this category never admit their bias because it would be stupid to. They likely enough have lots of experience with other races and have learned that when the chips are down they need to look to their own for help. If we can change to the point that this kind of racism no longer exist..... but we are not there yet.

 

"Racist" may be a label no one wants, but it sure as hell is a label that Samir Shabazz and Eric Holder both deserve!

 

My experience has been that true racists---those who think a skin color is superior--tend to wear the racist tag without complaint.

Problem is---as someone else stated---the term "racist" is fairly meaningless now. A person who disagrees with Obama is racist. A person who thinks a person should be judged on their charactor and merit--and not by the color of their skin is racist. A person who thinks its ok for blacks to vote republican is racist. Pretty weird where the term leads nowdays. And sadly---anybody who wants to acknowledges the problems within black communities---are held as racists.

 

"Why are racists so afraid of being labled racist?"

Because if one has a good job, position or business and gets labeled as a reputed racist, he loses the whole taco.

 

That is because they are exercising scientific analysis that offends your sense of social justice and lack of understanding the evolution of knowledge/technology.

You live a sheltered life, and because there is a category error in play. The derogatory term is "ethnocentric," and because it is more difficult to articulate, the easier term, "racist," is used.

A racist has the similar sensibilities as a dog breeder, and so, He observes different breeds of humans are some how more adept to different tasks of natural selection - white Anglo-Saxons seemingly are disposed to preserve mankind. Due to under-developed technology, and less intelligent white people in positions of power, there were injustices that contemporary less intelligent types, such as yourself, do not consider in their analysis of human events - mistakes were made. Superior intelligent white people are ultimately held accountable, because the inferior races are advised to charge us as having inherently (genetics) known better.

White people should have known better than to enslave black people who were living peacefully and prosperously in Africa - how white people did it was by an act of the devil, but black people, out of convenience, do not believe it - they believe white people should have known better.

Let's make it clear, you are referring only to white racists, because no other race can be racist - right? Although, black members of the Black Panthers political party can claim that black people inherently understand compassion and justice better than any other race - they are not racists, because only white people have organized the most comprehensive legislative and justice systems, and wield the power unjustly - right???

Consequently, with respect to the previous argument concerning superior genetics there was an incorrect social evolution somehow the peaceful blacks were over powered by the violent whites, and for some reason the blacks have never been able to deliver the better justice system, because whites hold them back - just ask Nelson Mandela.

No. No one else finds it strange - only you. You see your use of "label" is the same thing as "calling names." You just do not see it that way, because you are of inferior reasoning skills, and probably inferior schooling.

I can guarantee you that all the races of the world look to the white man for solutions to the world's problems, and I am very proud to tasked with the responsibility - let me know when you see that someone other than a white person has the solution to a social problem you believe exists?

For example - who wrote the American Civil Rights Act of 1964 that black people are so proud of???

Nelson Mandela died knowing that educated black people would rather cry of oppression in America than help him organize a country for black people. The whole world is beginning to recognize this, and black people will probably be the last to recognize it, because of their vicarious and zealous identification with a black man being president of the historically "prejudiced," and corrupt, United States government. It is a good guess that Mandela refused to see President Obama, because of this dilemma.

For non-whites, it is not about eliminating the corruption by correcting the problems (changing Washington), but rather, it is about vicariously wielding the unjust political powers to oppress whites to the advantage of the elites of their demographic - poor blacks are not going to gain anything for their efforts of support for President Obama, just like poor whites do not gain anything when whites wield corrupt political power. In fact, wealthy blacks will probably not benefit either - the corrupt white bankers seem to still be winning.

 

Hugh.... Obama and Holder are both Blatant Racist, as was IceT, Tupac, Jamie Foxx and a host of others, and they didn't loose their careers?


Oh! Wait! I forgot about the Liberal Double Standard!

-

 

Your problem is you can't read. Strawman.

 

It depends on your definition of racism I think. Insofar as racist now means someone who accepted reality, we have a lot of racists.

For example, I once knew some conservative Somali people who were some of the best people I've ever known in my life. I would have gone to the ends of the earth for them. I've probably done more for black individuals who are down on their luck than you will ever do. But if I acknowledge that blacks have a lower average IQ than some other ethnicities, I get labeled a racist. It's stupid.

 

He's rubber you're glue

 

It's not a liberal double standard, because they're all entertainers, and they're allowed artistic license like T.S. Elliot.

 

I assumed the obvious: that everyone knows blacks and Democrats cannot be racists.

But wait! I see you caught that at the end of your post. Good response.

 

And that, inadvertently, eliminates the distinction between a racist and an ethnocentrist.

 

Obama and Holder are Artists? Wait, is that a Con..... *sic

-

 

The racists are people who accuse others of being racist. They are racist against white people.

 

AKR is probably thinking of Paula Deen and other people who cry when called racist. This is because it will destroy their careers and reputation.

The white race is superior at this moment. It might not be due to genetics but because of culture. Why is this controversial? Whites contribute to the economy while lots of blacks are in welfare or jail. Some cultures are superior.

 

You still don't know what constitutes a racist, even after I gave you the definition. I'm merely responding to
your opening post..#1 where you are somewhat stunned that people you call racists haven't come out to admit it.
So your problem remains in that you haven't seen anyone claiming to be superior over another race. Until you
do, you will have to (*)(*)(*)(*) and and hang your head in embarrassment.

 

A French comedian has been banned from entering the UK by the Home Office following an anti-semitism row involving Nicolas Anelka. Dieudonne M'bala M'bala previously announced he would visit London to support the West Bromwich Albion footballer , who faces a ban for performing the comic's "quenelle" salute on the pitch, which is believed by some to be an anti-semitic gesture. The Football Association (FA) charged Anelka over the pose, struck after scoring against West Ham on December 28, and he faces a minimum five-match ban if found guilty. Anelka has denied the charge and requested a personal hearing. A Home Office spokeswoman said: "We can confirm that Mr Dieudonne is subject to an exclusion order. The Home Secretary will seek to exclude an individual from the UK if she considers that there are public policy or public security reasons to do so." Dieudonne, who has been prosecuted for inciting racial hatred through anti-Semitic jokes and comments, is credited with creating the quenelle, a hand and arm movement alleged by some to be a reverse Nazi salute.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/dieudonne-quenelle-salute-french-comedian-3108256

 

If you don't have a form of ID, not only don't I want you voting, I don't even want 'you' in the country. There's the green card, Nationalization, etc, etc. Someone who doesn't follow the law and who has dual nationalities or cultural 'interests' is a national security threat

Boston happened precisely because of that threat.

 

AFIK, there is only one human race, and that is homo sapiens sapiens. The taxonomical usage of race to define human subspecies evolved in the 17th century, but was as untenable then as it is today. Scientists consider biological essentialism obsolete, and generally discourage racial explanations for collective differentiation in both physical and behavioral traits.

There are of course ethnic groups (the basic three being Caucasoid, Mongoloid, and Negroid) with national characteristics brought about by environmental and sociological factors, and the term ethnocentrism may be applied with varying degrees of validity to what is popularly termed nationalism and racism. There may be physical differentiation (in the very general sense - relating to features and physique) but are no genetic differences between these human ethnic groups. And ethnicity certainly imposes no limits upon inherent intellectual abilities.

That there are differences in the development of various human societies (whether ethnically diverse or homogenous) is indisputable, but both history and common sense informs us that the reasons therefor are environmental, historical, and sociological.

To put it simply, my ethnic background is predominantly Anglo-Saxon, but it will be my environment, the culture in which I was educated and from which I gained my value systems, and the type of upbringing I experienced, which will have a strong influence upon whether I develop into a worthwhile human being (however that may be defined) who is an asset to his society. No ethnic characteristics will play a significant role in that process.

Given all of which, how can any human being who claims to be even moderately intelligent, assert ethnic superiority or otherwise? Is it not obvious that the historical problems places like Brixton in the UK, Harlem in the US, and Redfern in Australia, have faced, originate in economic and cultural disparity? Poverty and obvious wealth disparity, allied to a sense of injustice, are the primary motivators of both crime and societal violence. When we develop social values which are sufficiently unselfish (and enlightened) as to address these universal social problems, I suspect we will see less 'ethnic unrest'.

And 'racist' (like 'liar') is not a term I tend to use, but to those who give reason to be classified as such, would 'ethnocentric' be more acceptable?

 

The whole Obama admin is full of racist, and is about racism. Racist elected them.