https://www.adl.org/racism
From ADL “* In the above definition, the term “white supremacy” refers to the systematic marginalization or oppression of people of color based on a socially constructed racial hierarchy that privileges people who identify as white. It does not refer to extremist ideologies which believe that white people are genetically or culturally superior to non-whites and/or that white people should live in a whites-only society How is that not white supremacism? How can we take the ADL’s reporting on white supremacy seriously when they fundamentally change the meaning of it like that?
The ADL'S definition of racism is itself racist because it ‘privileges’ white people in its definition.
Here is my favorite contradiction “acknowledging white-supremacy as a problem is white-supremacist" LOL you can’t make this s**t up if you tried
“Though many believe that race is determined by biology, it is now widely accepted that this classification system was in fact created for social and political reasons. There are actually more genetic and biological differences within the racial groups defined by society than between different groups”
I agree—so why then do these people try to double down on such harmful fallacy?
So if race is a social construct why is the ADL upholding it?
If we’ve identified race as the harmful pseudoscience that it is, why would we continue to choose to uphold race? Why not consign it to the dustbin alongside the miasma theory and phrenology?
"Race does not exist". , "White people should do this and that", ok choose one
“There are actually more genetic and biological differences within the racial groups defined by society than between different groups”
Counterpoint is that you can have two heavily flattened normal distributions, that would honor this sentence even though there are two normal distributions
But Liberal 2.0ers instead of seeing just how tone deaf that sentence do not seem to know even what the "normal" in normal distribution
means. "First, the so-called normal distribution of statistics assumes that there are default humans who serve as the standard that the rest of us can be accurately measured against..."
Never try to fight Liberal 2.0ers on their terms at all because if they even see a crack forming they will just change the rules and you'll still lose.
How can we Liberal 2.0ers labeling everyone a ’racist’ when they keep changing the definition of ‘racism’ Between that and them calling everyone a racist nowadays, it appears they don’t even know what real racism is or what it means
They had to narrow the definition of racism (by changing in) because it became untenable to claim that what they advocate for wasn’t racist.
There is no hope for the Liberal 2.0ers in the US. When they keep redefining terms that people previously understood in order to gaslight them, they are going to notice, and that is going to give more strength to the GOP and the right wing extremists.
These Liberal 2.0ers actually claim it is better to be a poor white person than just a poor person
The fallacy of Racialism is the current biggest impediment to creating a class consciousness
Define the terms and you win the debate.
People need to start pushing back strong, and very publicly, against the woke redefinition of everything from "racism" and "woman" to "equity" and "sex".
It is getting to the point where they are literally starting to win arguments by simply saying "go look it up in the dictionary".
So between this revisionism, some American institutions trying to massage the meaning of “people of color” to no longer include Asians and the confusion that takes place in some circles whenever a “bipoc” attacks an Asian person for no reason in order to blame their attacks on “white supremacy”, where exactly do Asians stand in this particular worldview?
Do Asians have enough bipoc -ness to be considered victims of racism, while any racial prejudice that an Asian person may possess is sanitized by virtue of them being a “bipoc” and therefore not racist?
So are Asians considered “white adjacent” enough that their place on the “socially constructed racial hierarchy”by Liberal 2.0ers, reverses these conditions, causing racial prejudices against Asians not to be considered racist, while any racial prejudice held by an Asian person now carries the stigma of “racist”?
The ADL rightfully says that people who talk about "the great replacement" and demographic change are white supremacists, but the ADL also says that Palestinian refugees who come back to their homes, in ADL’s words "would pose a threat to its(Israel's) national security and upset the country’s demographic makeup ".
Or will all future incidents involving racial prejudices in which a white person is not involved have to be judged on a case by case basis, with perpetrator and victim having to play a game of “I’ll show you my bipoc-ness if you show me yours” to decipher where each person sits on the “socially constructed racial hierarchy” by Liberal 2.0ers and determine whether someone has done a racism or not?
It’s like are Asians are not brown enough for Liberal 2.0ers? Modern Cold War? Their definition is nuts and American as heck. They must include racial stuff in everything. In Europe they know that you can be racist between white people
Zionism is the belief that Jews should have an ethnostate, where they at all times are the majority and Lebensraum. https://www.adl.org/resources/glossary-terms/zionism.
The ADL being so blatantly Liberal 2.0 can lead to them falsely being called ‘hypocrites’ on Zionism by Left wingers and even right wingers. I know that the ADL are not ‘hypocrites’ and that there is no comparison between having a Jewish state like Israel (which is justifiable and can be rationalized) and what alt right bigoted losers like Richard Spencer wants (which is pure evil) .
But the ADL needs to be less Liberal 2.0 and more pro Palestinian (in non woke, and diplomatic ways) as to not to give that false equivalency of Zionism and Spencerism any legitimacy
The ADL basically says that Israelis cannot be racist against Palestinians since to the ADL Jewish people aren't considered 'white' by US centric criteria?. Why is this definition of racism so US-centric?
Comments
Post a Comment