I like Ecclesiastes. She inspires me to create this thread on race and racism. I’m going to deconstruct the main point right away. What do liberals have against race? Why do liberals not want race to exist?
I believe these answers are simple. First of all, the problem is not “liberalism” in itself. The problem is white liberals. Some liberals accept race existence. Some liberals are even racist. Is it possible to be racist and liberal? Yes, I think so, even though this is a very rare, fringe position. How many liberal racists do you know? A liberal racist, is probably, a political separatist. This type of person probably favors segregation and does not see segregation as “bad”, wrong, morally evil, etc. But this is beside the point.
White liberalism is a problem. Because white liberals sometimes deny the existence of race, and sometimes accept it. Here or there. They demonstrate selective reasoning. White liberals accept race existence when it suits them, and denies race existence when it hurts their primary ideology. So white liberals enjoy the luxury of hypocrisy. It is a “pick and choose” argument. You accept points when they help you, reject points when they don’t. Emotional reasoning, illogical, irrational. So there is a feminine aspect to this. What is a female white liberal? What is her piece of this puzzle, where does she fit in? This is also beside the point.
White liberals use race like a double edged sword, as an offense and defense. On one hand, white liberals “accept racism” and white privilege. On the other hand, they want to “end white privilege”. White liberals feel guilty, just from being born white. So you see the justification immediately. If whites admit that race exists, then privilege can exist, based on race (not class). If race does not exist, then white liberals cannot be privileged. So white liberals go this way or that. But white liberals prefer the non existence of race, since it is their “shortcut” path to legitimizing “white privilege”.
Let’s assume that race exists, for a moment. Race existence (race realism) has NOTHING TO DO with equality and inequality. Just because different races exist, doesn’t mean there is some “inherent, innate” difference between races, although almost everybody presumes there is, for good reason.
Because we can assume, for the sake of argument, that race exists, but it is merely superficial. This is the “We all bleed red” argument, or “We’re all black when the lights are off” argument.
If race is merely superficial, then so what? What can we do with this premise. White liberals would then have the ammo they need to defend themselves from the “white privilege” accusation. Because this is what white liberals hate the most. They don’t want to think it possible that people are “born privileged”. They want to falsify this idea, at all costs. This is the #1 threat to white liberalism. It is the idea of “innate privilege” that threatens liberalism. Because then, people are not born free, nor slaves, but with “difference”. And liberals don’t want people, anybody, to be born “different”.
This is the core of the nature-nurture dichotomy, or gene-meme. Liberals are anti-nature, anti-genes. To liberals, all is nurture, all is meme, all is education, all is nurture.
You can educate the stupidity out of everybody. Blank Slate Theory is the foundation of liberalism.
Let’s assume there exists “black liberals”. Black liberals also do not want “race” to exist. Because black liberals want opportunity and the ability to acquire privilege, if privilege is accessible. For example, do you personally want your children to be born poor, ugly, stupid, slaves, ill, diseased, in the worst possible conditions? No, probably not, I’ve never heard of anybody wanting this. Why would you want your newborn children born in the worst possible conditions? You want them born in the best conditions. And this is what privilege means precisely. It means to be born with silver spoon in hand.
And parents work hard, very hard, sometimes even sacrificing their health and lives, to ensure that their children and babies have privilege. People fight for privilege, sometimes to the death. This is true through war, too. Wars are fought, over resources, which parents want, need, demand, for their children. Privilege is a very real phenomenon.
And why should blacks be denied privilege, at least in the sense, that they want to feed their children. And that is more than a privilege. It is a necessity. Blacks want the “white privilege” to be shared. And white liberals, who hate themselves, and feel guilt, claim to want to give up this privilege. Now I personally believe that white liberals are actually evil liars. They claim to want to give up all their privilege to blacks, but they don’t. Instead, they do the opposite, because they’re hypocrites. They say one thing, but do the exact opposite. And this throws black liberals completely off base. Black liberals are more attracted to white conservatives.
Because blacks want the privilege. They want the opportunities. And white liberals routinely fail to give them up.
Because race is the barrier. Race is what white liberals use, as their shield, to keep blacks away from “white privilege”.
I think this is the underlying motivation, rationale, justification for liberalism, race, and “racism”, between whites and blacks, in America, in this 20th Century.
This is the context, not the 18th Century, not the 10th Century, not Russia, not Brazil. I represent a SPECIFIC CONTEXT!!!
So you can’t really argue, can you? No, you can’t take everything I say completely off base. You have these points, don’t you??? Just give me one counter argument, just give me a few counter points, if you dare.
Do it, go on!
