White Power USA: Video Report By Al Jazeera

[mentalgongfu2]

Some day I'm going to write an essay attempting to explain why, despite their real and perceived privileges of gender and race, many white males in America are aggrieved at the constant repetition that their experiences and opinions are not worthy of consideration and that any personal expression that deviates from politically correct speech is inherently racist and/or sexist. It can be, but is not inherently. The essay will go on to explore how such individuals are led by exterior forces to identify themselves at an early age as "whites," and, when their personal experiences and perceptions are treated as illegitimate, can transform from a self-identification as "white" to a group identification as "white" as they are painted into an ideological corner and feel forced to decide between maintaining a sense of pride or maintaining a sense of guilt over being born with fair skin and male genitalia. That is one of the processes that encourages the development of white supremacist groups. I believe that process is called "radicalization" these days, but I suppose my essay on the dangers of the growing use of that vague and leading term would be out of place in this context.

[American Dream]

mentalgongfu2 wrote:

many white males in America are aggrieved at the constant repetition that their experiences and opinions are not worthy of consideration and that any personal expression that deviates from politically correct speech is inherently racist and/or sexist. It can be, but is not inherently.

Ok, this might hold true in some situations but how often is it the norm? If so, in what settings?

I don't personally think that identity politics is alone a complete enough formulation to change our social institutions. but given that it has been posing a challenge to old ways of being, how could we reasonably tell the difference between when the critics are being "too PC" versus when the defenders actually are being racist or sexist?

[mentalgongfu2]

Ok, this might hold true in some situations but how often is it the norm? If so, in what settings?

Sorry AD, I have no statistical analysis to answer that. All I can say is, people tend toward more radical views when they feel disenfranchised, and this feeling is not limited along racial or gender lines, although it often finds expression in the context of race or gender.

I don't personally think that identity politics is alone a complete enough formulation to change our social institutions. but given that it has been posing a challenge to old ways of being,

I don't understand what that is supposed to mean, but considering humans tend to frame the rest of the world in the context of self and group identity, I think it is an important factor in our relationships with other people.

how could we reasonably tell the difference between when the critics are being "too PC" versus when the defenders actually are being racist or sexist?

It's like pornography; I don't know how to define it, but I know it when I see it. The Southern Poverty Law Center does a good job of illustrating this concept lately. Assuming racist motives in the absence of evidence thereof is a common feature, as is finding racist implications when a speaker happens to notice and comment on differences of ideology or behavior among various groups.

[American Dream]

American Dream wrote:

Ok, this might hold true in some situations but how often is it the norm? If so, in what settings?

mentalgongfu2 wrote:

Sorry AD, I have no statistical analysis to answer that. All I can say is, people tend toward more radical views when they feel disenfranchised, and this feeling is not limited along racial or gender lines, although it often finds expression in the context of race or gender.

I think you're missing my point. I'm asking if you think it's common that white men are marginalized or oppressed simply for being who they are, for being unfairly stigmatized as the perpetuators of racism and/or sexism. I'm thinking that it's fairly uncommon- that the places where people who are kinda fanatical about bashing the white man, and have institutional power to hurt him, are the exception and not the norm.




American Dream wrote:

I don't personally think that identity politics is alone a complete enough formulation to change our social institutions. but given that it has been posing a challenge to old ways of being,

mentalgongfu2 wrote:

I don't understand what that is supposed to mean, but considering humans tend to frame the rest of the world in the context of self and group identity, I think it is an important factor in our relationships with other people.

I'm saying that identity politics can be an incomplete formulation (if we say that racial/ethnic identity or gender is the be-all and end-all) but I do think there is a challenge up to old ways of being racist and sexist, and that this challenge is both valid and important.





American Dream wrote:

how could we reasonably tell the difference between when the critics are being "too PC" versus when the defenders actually are being racist or sexist?

mentalgongfu2 wrote:

It's like pornography; I don't know how to define it, but I know it when I see it. The Southern Poverty Law Center does a good job of illustrating this concept lately. Assuming racist motives in the absence of evidence thereof is a common feature, as is finding racist implications when a speaker happens to notice and comment on differences of ideology or behavior among various groups.

I hope I'm misunderstanding you here- Are you saying that the groups commonly called racist- white supremacist, holocaust denier/revisionist, "Christian Patriot", the BNP, the Pacifica Forum etc. etc. are actually the victims of prejudice rather than the perpetuators of it?

[mentalgongfu2]

I think you're missing my point. I'm asking if you think it's common that white men are marginalized or oppressed simply for being who they are, for being unfairly stigmatized as the perpetuators of racism and/or sexism. I'm thinking that it's fairly uncommon- that the places where people who are kinda fanatical about bashing the white man, and have institutional power to hurt him, are the exception and not the norm.

I would agree it's fairly uncommon; certainly much less common than the reverse, but my point is not that white men are marginalized and oppressed, but that regardless of the validity of their experience from the perspective of an outside observer, a significant number of that population perceive themselves as marginalized and feel they receive undue blame for the ills of the world; and this perception is at least part of what drives some people into separatist or supremacist groups, especially when coupled with a response from the exterior world that tells them it is ridiculous for them to feel that way. This is simply my observation from discussions when I have been on the end of telling someone their perception was ridiculous - the fact that they have relative privilege and that others cannot see the marginalization they feel does not negate the feeling, and in fact, serves to re-affirm their experience of being misunderstood and unfairly blamed.

I hope I'm misunderstanding you here- Are you saying that the groups commonly called racist- white supremacist, holocaust denier/revisionist, "Christian Patriot", the BNP, the Pacifica Forum etc. etc. are actually the victims of prejudice rather than the perpetuators of it?

I'm saying no such thing; but I would hazard a guess many members of such groups do feel that way. I'm saying people who would not lump themselves into any of the above groups are lumped in by others, as you have just done, because they identify with the marginalized feeling, and after some time of being labeled racist, they can decide "if they're gonna call me racist, I might as well be."

[American Dream]

Thank you for clarifying some of what your previous statements, mentalgongfu2.

I still don't understand though what how this fits in with what you said before:

American Dream wrote::
how could we reasonably tell the difference between when the critics are being "too PC" versus when the defenders actually are being racist or sexist?


mentalgongfu2 wrote::

It's like pornography; I don't know how to define it, but I know it when I see it. The Southern Poverty Law Center does a good job of illustrating this concept lately. Assuming racist motives in the absence of evidence thereof is a common feature, as is finding racist implications when a speaker happens to notice and comment on differences of ideology or behavior among various groups.

[mentalgongfu2]

It sounds like your asking for a litmus test, and, as I said, I don't know what that would be.

I don't intend to play a game of 20 questions, but in good faith I'll try one example to better explain what I mean.

Joe grows up in a nice neighborhood in the downtown area of a mid-size midwestern metro. Over several decades, that area becomes ghettoized, and the "nice neighborhood" turns into a bad neighborhood, where break-ins, drug trafficking and other criminal behavior is common. It so happens that during this same time period there is a significant shift in the racial makeup of the residents in this formerly nice neighborhood. Joe notices this, and says to a friend, "Boy, the neighborhood has really gone downhill since all the ______ started moving in."

Is Joe racist, or is Joe commenting on the reality he has observed?

[American Dream]

In answer to your question, I would say that this mythical Joe could well be racist, and also commenting on the reality he has observed. It doesn't have to be an either/or thing.

However I don't really understand how that links up to what you seem to be saying about the SPLC unfairly picking on all these hate groups that aren't really hate groups at all...

[mentalgongfu2]

MARK POTOK: We know nothing of this man. We did not have him in our files. We found absolutely nothing in the way of real background on the movement or association with any group. But, yeah, as a general matter his ideas seem connected to at least some of the core ideas of the radical right . . . In 1995, not long after the Oklahoma City bombing, a man attempted to blow up what I think is the very same building in Austin, the IRS building in Austin back in '95. In addition there were attempts to blow up IRS buildings by people on the radical right in Michigan and in Las Vegas as well. So this is kind of a traditional target of the radical right.

SPLC Picks and Chooses Tragedies
Posted on: 2010-02-25 15:22:28

They're all about money, bigotry and an agenda.

by Rick Spyker

The Southern Poverty Law Center has long outlived its usefulness. What was once a noble organization dedicated to protecting civil rights has now become nothing more than a far-left echo chamber.

For example, during a recent appearance on MSNBC, the SPLC's Mark Potok implied that Joseph Stack, the perpetrator of the suicide attack on the IRS building in Austin, may have been linked to the "radical right." What absolute nonsense.

Even an analyst from an organization without the SPLC's $150 million endowment could figure out that someone who quotes Lenin, hates George Bush, is anti-capitalist and pro-socialized medicine is probably not a right-winger.



Potok mentioned that the SPLC didn't have a file on Stack. I wonder why? Probably for the same reason they don't have a file on Amy Bishop, the University of Alabama in Huntsville professor charged with murdering three of her co-workers. As an avowed leftist who was obsessed with Obama, she just didn't fit their profile of what a violent wacko should be (i.e. a conservative good ol' boy Republican).

In fact, the SPLC has yet to even comment on the Huntsville massacre, despite the fact that all of the victims were minorities. Amy Bishop killed or wounded every minority member of the UAH biology department faculty. And yet the SPLC, an organization ostensibly dedicated to protecting minority rights, doesn't give this violent racial incident one mention on its Web site.

Apparently, this particular senseless tragedy just doesn't fit with its agenda.

[American Dream]

Huh?


mentalgongfu2 wrote::

It's like pornography; I don't know how to define it, but I know it when I see it. The Southern Poverty Law Center does a good job of illustrating this concept lately. Assuming racist motives in the absence of evidence thereof is a common feature, as is finding racist implications when a speaker happens to notice and comment on differences of ideology or behavior among various groups.

Is your post above the best evidence available in support of this point?

[American Dream]

Joe Stack attacked the IRS by flying his plane into one of its buildings. Is he a hero?...

Stack is also becoming a hero to the radical right – specifically, white supremacists and their fellow travelers, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center. Supremacist web forums have been filled with comments that elevate Stack into an icon of resistance to tyranny, writes Mark Potok, director of the SPLC’s Intelligence Project.

Potok quotes one poster on Stxrmfrxnt.org, a large supremacist web site, as saying, “The Guy is a true HERO!!!”

There is no indication that Stack himself had racist ideas, but that has not stopped those who do from being thoroughly excited by his actions, writes Potok on the SPLC’s “Hatewatch” blog.

“A few other white supremacists suggested that lionizing Stack could be a bad thing for the radical right, but they appeared to be in a minority,” writes Potok.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0222/ ... e-heats-up

[barracuda]

Is Joe racist, or is Joe commenting on the reality he has observed?

Just kibitzing, but I would have to say that it is very likely he is racist, but that his understanding of what occured to his nice neighborhood is probably twisted by an inability to view the larger corporate and governmental or societal moves which caused the ghettoization in the first place, e.g., large chain-owned outlet stores drove former neighborhood ma & pa shops out of business; government kickbacks to suburban real estate developers which left the city center devoid of the presence of middle class inhabitants; police inaction towards drug sales due to precinct payoffs led to huge ramp-up in drug trafficing, etc. Most people never have the opportunity to connect the dots while their lives seem to be disintegrating - they just look for the closest, easiest thing to fear and hate.

[mentalgongfu2]

AD, I had no point other than an attempt to answer your question:

how could we reasonably tell the difference between when the critics are being "too PC" versus when the defenders actually are being racist or sexist?

to which I suggested assuming racist motives in the absence of evidence thereof

We know nothing of this man. We did not have him in our files. We found absolutely nothing in the way of real background on the movement or association with any group. But, yeah, as a general matter his ideas seem connected to at least some of the core ideas of the radical right . . .

But, you are back to your usual MO, and I don't see us getting any further in this discussion, so I am done trying to engage with you on this topic. I'm nowhere near as interested in discussing the Southern Poverty Law Center as you seem to be. I regret my feeble attempt to develop an understanding of this particular fringe of our society.

If you need me, I'll be at home building a web bot.

Barracuda, I was waiting for someone to say something along those lines. Perhaps mythical Joe has developed racist feelings because he has mistaken chronology for causation.

[American Dream]

http://www.theworldismycountry.org/allp ... yan-nation

Oregon: Hundreds Gather in Grant County to Fight Plans by Aryan Nations

By Richard Cockle
The Oregonian | February 26, 2010



Grant County residents turned out in force at a town hall meeting this morning to object to efforts by a white supremacist group calling itself the Aryan Nations to establish a new headquarters in John Day.

“Never have I been to a community who reacted so quickly as you have to say no,” civil rights activist Tony Stewart, 68, of Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, told the standing-room-only crowd of about 375 people at the Canyon City Community Hall, just south of John Day. At least 100 others were turned away because of fire regulations.

An additional 300 watched a live Internet stream, said Scotta Callister, editor of John Day’s Blue Mountain Eagle weekly newspaper, which sponsored the meeting. A second meeting is planned for tonight.

“It gave this community a chance to put a voice to its values,” Callister said. “That’s powerful.”

Stewart was joined by Coeur d’Alene attorney Norman Gissell. The two men helped win a landmark judgment in 2000 against the Aryan Nations, a group in Hayden Lake, Idaho, led by Richard Butler, who has since died.

Earlier this week, dozens of residents walked downtown John Day carrying signs against the supremacist group in response to a visit last week by Paul R. Mullet of Athol, Idaho. He identified himself as the hate group’s national director and told residents he was in the county to look at properties for what he said was planned to be a neo-Nazi headquarters.

Callister said the group’s intentions are still unknown.

Stewart said: “If they do come, they won’t have any success. This community has sent a message.”

– Richard Cockle

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ss ... ay_to.html

[American Dream]

http://news.infoshop.org/article.php?st ... 8041704992

Eugene Anti-fascists Brutalized and Charged. One in Jail.

On Friday May 7th during a meeting of the Pacifica Forum where known National Socialist Movement speaker Jimmy Marr was hosting an anti-Semitic event entitled “Deciphering Jewish Intellectual Movements” multiple Antifa activists were brutalized, detained, and charged.

After several stink bombs were deployed, campus and city police seized and brutalized Antifa activists. Some activists were thrown down a short flight of stairs whilst other Antifa incurred similar injuries revolving around head trauma and choking. We will release more details as they come to us.

One Antifa activist is currently being held in the Lane County Jail. Please call Lane County Jail at (541) 682-4263 and demand the activist's immediate release.