babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
I'm not sure what youre getting at but the Nazis quickly became so maniacal that they wouldn't even "allow" Jews to escape, which is one of the things that made their particular brand of applied racism so particularly crazy.
Fascinating.
500/6 = 83 times as bad, eh?
Jews did leave Germany. They were encouraged to leave by various repressive measures. Obviously some of them refused to follow orders.
They seized power in 1933, and about 30, 000 civil servants lost their jobs soon after. Eventually anyone who couldn't prove their racial purity was banned from public service in the years to come. By 1938, Jews were prohibited from going to movie theaters, art exhibitions and Jewish children excluded from public schools. Several countries closed their doors to Jewish emigres fleeing the Nazis, including the U.S. and Canada. But the U.S. feds granted special permits for corporations to carry on with business as usual in Nazi Germany up to late 1942.
The first mass exterminations of Jews and everyone else took place in Ukraine and Russia. In Russia, the final solution meant Jews, Russians, Gypsies, everyone. No Russian prisoners of war were taken or Geneva Conventions were respected. For them it was just blitzkrieg, bullets, and flamethrowers.
[ 04 May 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]
Ah yes, the monolithic "Europeans". Just one big family. All the same, really...
Personally I don't think the historical realities of the Irish experience dismiss or denigrate the experiences of those who continue to experience racism nor is it true that all experiences of colonization are the same, nor should it be silencing of the voices of racialized and colonized groups. Anyone that would utilize Irish history to justify racism and white supremacy has a piss poor understanding of that history"
You said what I wanted to much better, thank you. These painful comparisons can get very murky very quickly and can easily be misused by defenders of our privileged status quo, yeah, but once they're worked through taking into consideration the differences in relative position now (and certain extent to willing Scots/Irish "Indian fighters" of yore) they can at least be made with some due care. More succinctly than I usually can, hopefully. [img]smile.gif" border="0[/img]
[ 04 May 2008: Message edited by: Erik Redburn ]
Belgian colonialists murdered an estimated 10 million blacks in the Congo alone. Dogs had more rights.
Only five million blacks have been murdered in the Congo since 1998 by the nouveau colonialism. But it can't really be said that MNC's, weapons manufacturers, and banksters have been shirking their neocolonial duties in Africa because they fund the killing on an ongoing basis. Trudeau through Clark and Chretien made personal fortunes with mining shares in the Congo. And the Americans are in there for a cut as per usual.
However, I have suggested before, and should have considered more carefully before wading into this mess, that is is probably best to avoid the concept of 'racism' altogether when discussing the ideology and the practice of the ongoing colonial project. This practice is more accurately described as the implementation and institutionalization of white supremacist cultural domination. To avoid confusion over the widespread appropriation of 'racism' by non-racialized people, I will make an effort to be clearer, and use the term 'white supremacist' instead.
I was so busy scrolling I forgot to say what I wanted. I think Makwa when you use white supremacist it refers to black and white, KKK and that gang. At least to me.
This whole discussion had nothing to do with that and started with a simple question.
I always find it a bit unfair that we 'white folk' are made to feel guilty because we are white. You managed to stop the discussion.
Too bad it was interesting.
[ 05 May 2008: Message edited by: clersal ]
[ 05 May 2008: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]
by bigcitygal
What if the anti-racism forum was held to the same standards as the feminism forum?
You remember the standards of the feminism forum don't you?
All men must be proclaimed and actual feminists/feminist allies. If, through their words, they reveal they are not, they will be asked to no longer contribute in the feminism forum. At the very least.
Which is not to say that all feminists, women and men, agree with each other. Absolutely not. But if some man wants to discuss men's issues, masculinity, male gender roles, he's welcome to take that to "Body and Soul" or "Humanities and Social Science" or anywhere else on babble where the majority of threads are by and about men.
What if the anti-racism forum was held to the same standards?
What if all white contributors needed to demonstrate their anti-racism alliance, through their words?
What if all non-POC and non-FN people were asked/asked themselves to wait a moment: this forum doesn't centre around your experiences. Maybe, just maybe, posters of colour and FN posters know a bit more about this than you do? Just maybe? Is it possible?
Alas, my What If? world is not so. Please breathe a sigh of relief.
And continue.
As you were.
Cut Me Own Throat Dibbler has apparently decided that the responses I have provided have proved to be non-answers. Perhaps I havn't been specific enough. So, let me be precise.
If I were an English person who got beat up by a couple of unpleasant, perhaps nationalist Scottish folk for the sole fact that I had an English identity, I would file that under 'shit happens', fuck it, some people are assholes. I hope that I could recover enough from such an assault to go home and complain about it to friends who would give me sympathy and tea.
I have been beaten specifically as an Indian more than a few times, by many people, police, security, white and native. I am familiar with the issue of racialized violence, and it does not impress me. My analysis is not about the hypothetical beating in the street, which for me has been more than hypothetical on a number of occasions, but about the systemic history of organized violence which in our context is racially oriented.
I hope that this answers your question.
For me, the concept of 'white allies' is simply a conceptual contradiction. I don't worry about it any more, nor do I take it personally. It's just merely another step on the rhetorical argument which is my life and my lived experience, and the life of every other FN person I know.
It's all good. Carry on. It's only a bulleten board. It's only a hobby. I already know how the white folk I must live and work with consider me. I have made my peace with that. It's time to chill, and let it be. It's an ongoing discussion which can never be resolved, and recognizing that is a part of the process of acceptance.
As somebody once said, we are all sisters and brothers of another mother.
I think that we were asking are there many different kinds of racism or not.
I certainly wasn't giving any personal experiences as this is not a feminist forum.
We white folk were not setting any perametres we were asking questions.You cant imagine why I should feel guilty. Simple, you keep calling me white folk. I represent myself and not 'White Folk'.
CMOT Dibbler. Cut Me Own Throat Dibbler?
Sorry CMOT but it did make me giggle.
[ 05 May 2008: Message edited by: Makwa ]
What do you make of this, bcg:
How does that fit into your "what if" musing?
Aw, shucks Makwa, we aren't in the same place on this. That's fine. I was, after all, musing.
My location around allies is that I have to navigate my white family's racism all the time, since forever. My white family, whom I love, has been the starting point for me to understand what it means to stand with rather than speak for, or change the subject.
Politically, the having of allies is not a choice for me, or a game of "who's read more Fanon than whom". [img]smile.gif" border="0[/img] I know there are white allies out there. I have many in my life.
unionist, my "what if" musings were about holding an arbitrary line (that doesn't exist) in the AR forum. My "what if" musings were dreams. Dreams perchance to sleep, or something like that. We all know the dead white guy canon, yes? Your question is akin to asking me why I hate oranges when I've said that I like apples and I just want to talk about apples right now.
I think that the idea that white people do not and can not, and have not, racialized other white people is actually a contradiction in usage of "racialize". The term is about the subjective creation of race as an construct to be imposed on another, and therefore, implies that anyone can be "racialized" more or less by anyone. If you this is what you are saying, well, its just not right.
If you are saying that a collective experience of racialized people does not really include white people (of whatever brand) in the present day context of 21st century North America, and that you think that this muddying of the waters is part of the process of de-legitimizing the experience of people who are racialized now and today then I think you have a good case.
White supremacist is just fine by me.
[ 05 May 2008: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]
They are now, more or less, at least that's the case in Western Europe. Most of Western Europe's small minded bigots are now more interested in demonizing Russians, turks and other majority world refugees than they are about portraying each other as inhumanely evil. But then of course there's the Roma...
[ 05 May 2008: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]
That looks like good advice to me. How about just starting more discussions on the real problems of racism in the here and now, ones which more directly involve those who are most often by victimized by it? That could just work.
Makwa, I understand your frustration. I think you are very articulate and I enjoy readign your posts.
Personally, long time ago I came to the conclusion that I am not going to waste my energy to try to convince people who don't want to be convinced and only use my energy and their power and privilege to further their agenda.
I concluded that I am going to invest my energy to bring awareness about issues and bring together those who have awareness and their lived experiences have given them the knowledge to understand these issues. These discussions only brig people together and perhaps more and more people will take on that cause.
I think your energy and wisdom would be best spend discussing issues with people who want to make a difference in fight to eliminate racism.
There are always a group of people who use their power and privilege to even take over our oppression (oppression envy). I don’t think they would want for one second to live the life we are living but want to own our oppression to have all the say about how it should be dealt with. Why waste your time discussing it in this manner?
Thanks for sharing your wisdom.
It is very hard for me to take what are espousing as being truly interested in anti-racist initiatives between us. IMV, your use of "white folks" is racially disparaging. A person here would not get away with saying; "black folks, yellow folks, or brown folks". There is no reason for in "white folks" to be used, unless of course you are trying to be deliberately racially disparaging...and if that is the case...well...there simply is no point available for interpersonal reconcilliation to occur.
I agree with your view that the use of "white folk" is disparaging.
However, this forum is not about what is very hard for white folks like us to take. Think about it.
That makes no sense. White folks are better at it and will continue to win. The very best you can hope for is war. Only a dummy plays to his opponent's strong suit.