White backlash?

[Euclidean]

I think Riley's point isn't that he necessarily endorses the sentiment behind such an idea as "White Power!" but rather he's pointing out the frustration many people feel in our society.

It is perfectly acceptable, nay encouraged, for any ethnic group but one to proudly proclaim "Viva la raza", "Black Power", etc.  Such cries are applauded, encouraged, and heralded in certain circles.  Under various guises, the main one I see being encouraging diversity, those who push these agendas do anything they can to set apart one group from all others.

There is one common thread however: "white" people are not to, at any point, engage in any of the same behaviors.  So, which is it?  Is it not acceptable for anyone to proclaim themselves a supreme group or ethnicity, or is it acceptable for everyone to do so?

And quite frankly the latter of those two is far more equitable than there being one group which isn't allowed to talk about the issue or say the word "*let's not go there*" on television while members of other groups say bigoted and racially charged things often without consequence.

[jnojr]

In any event, it is a legitimate counter to 'viva la raza':

Legitimate how?   Since when is racism of your own a "legitimate" response to someone else's racism?

"Legitimacy" has nothing to do with it.

The more our government and rampant political correctness try to force us to accept millions of impoverished immigrants, the more of a backlash will build against them.  Mark my words... incidents like this are going to become more frequent and more serious.  If we have amnesty, or anything short of a renewed commitment to border security, I believe within a very few years we'll start seeing more and more "immigrant bashing".  "Right" and "wrong" have nothing to do with it... Most American citizens simply do not want to be overrun with poor Third Worlders and then be forced to support them.  As "legitimate" outlets for their frustration are shut off, they will turn to "illegitimate" outlets.

[De Selby]

"Legitimacy" has nothing to do with it.

In fairness, you should recognize that I was responding to someone who specifically said "White power is a legitimate counter to 'viva la raza'".  So legitimacy does have something to do with it in terms of it being precisely the issue raised.

Mark my words... incidents like this are going to become more frequent and more serious.

And the more serious ones will likely result in serious prison time for the offenders. 

"Right" and "wrong" have nothing to do with it...

I do agree that some of those who are passionately involved in the immigration debate do not care about right from wrong.

As "legitimate" outlets for their frustration are shut off, they will turn to "illegitimate" outlets.

What legitimate outlet for frustration with illegal immigration has been shut off?

[Paddy]

In fairness, you should recognize that I was responding to someone who specifically said "White power is a legitimate counter to 'viva la raza'".  So legitimacy does have something to do with it in terms of it being precisely the issue raised.

I was wrong.  The correct response to 'viva la raza' is immediate deportation.

Mark my words... incidents like this are going to become more frequent and more serious.

And the more serious ones will likely result in serious prison time for the offenders.

Only if they're white

"Right" and "wrong" have nothing to do with it...

I do agree that some of those who are passionately involved in the immigration debate do not care about right from wrong.

That would be illegals and their proponents, lawbreakers, who by definition do not care about right from wrong.

What legitimate outlet for frustration with illegal immigration has been shut off?

Enforcement and immediate deportation.

[richyoung]

Uhhh, how so? How does speaking a language other than english introduce a "race parameter"?

...when its the language of a naon-Caucasian, (that is to say "different race") invader....

The U.S.A. was founded by 'whites', specifically, caucasians of northern Europeon extraction.  We subsequently invited others to freedom.  Don't mistake our hospitality for weakness.

Oh, I see.  So you don't count the millions of black slaves as Americans?

Reading is fundamental - try looking up the word "founded" in your Funk and Wagnel's....  now tell me how many non-Whites signed the Declaration of Independence, or held leadership positions in the Continental Congress or Army....

They were just invited guests, and are subject to the "hospitality" of the northern europeans?

No - they were property...."chattel" property. to be specific - in the same category as wives, children, indentured servants, livestock, etc.   The vast majority of which would have been killed for violating a taboo or losing an inter-tribal war, were there not a way for their African captors to turn them into trade goods...

The proposition that America today is a white man's land where all others are guests is simply untenable.  The "we" in America does not mean just whites-at least, not the last time I checked.

NO, but it HSOULD mean just "Americans" - as in United States Citizens - along with LEGAL visitors.

Their 'leg to stand on' is their heritage.

What "heritage" is that? 

The continuation and development of democracy, greatest standard of living in the world, inventive genius, generaly fair and honest legal system...you know, the same reasons that millions are swimming the rio & hopping the fence...

[richyoung]

As far as the blacks selling each other? Sure..they did do.

Corrected the tense - it's still happening in parts of Africa today.

But, sadly, nobody seems to care. 

..because those are CHRISTIANS being captured into slavery by MUSLIMS - not a priority to Farakahn...

[De Selby]

...when its the language of a naon-Caucasian, (that is to say "different race") invader....

Are you presuming here that the only native is caucasian?  If not, then how does any "non caucasian language" constitute "the language of an invader"?  And how would this apply to the language at issue, spanish, which is the language of a caucasian people?

now tell me how many non-Whites signed the Declaration of Independence, or held leadership positions in the Continental Congress or Army....

Funny, I didn't see "only people who signed paperwork" in the definition of "founded."  I count the soldiers who fought the battles, the workers who made their guns, powder, and clothing, and those who fed them as being part of the effort.  Indeed, were there no popular support, the masses of colonists could've easily sold every name on the declaration to the British and kept things going just like in the Imperial days. 

And if you factor in founding a nation of democracy and freedom, without racism, then there's no debate: of course millions of black Americans and other minorities were instrumental in achieving that goal.  So yeah, I take issue with anyone who claims that America, land of the free, was only founded by "white people from Northern Europe".

No - they were property...."chattel" property. to be specific - in the same category as wives, children, indentured servants, livestock, etc.

Do you not find it ironic that you can give "Northern Europeans" the sole credit for founding a nation of freedom in one breath, and then turn around to post this just a few lines later? 

The continuation and development of democracy, greatest standard of living in the world, inventive genius, generaly fair and honest legal system...you know, the same reasons that millions are swimming the rio & hopping the fence...

Yeah, the problem is that these things are the heritage of all races of people who believe in equality and freedoms.  They are definitely not the heritage of the various gangs throughout American history who chanted "White power!" during civil discussions.

[richyoung]

Are you presuming here that the only native is caucasian? 

Yhe AMerican culture is white, English speaking, anglo-saxon Protestant.  Tap dance all you want - thats what it IS.

If not, then how does any "non caucasian language" constitute "the language of an invader"?  And how would this apply to the language at issue, spanish, which is the language of a caucasian people?

We are being invaded by Mexicans, and other Latin-Americans, who a mix of some Spanish, but predominantly Indian ancestry.  Further, the "Spanish" they speak is not the same as spoke in Spain.

Funny, I didn't see "only people who signed paperwork" in the definition of "founded."

It doesn't count till you sign on the line....those who "declared independence" are those who were the ...Founding Fathers - a pretty lily white bunch....

  I count the soldiers who fought the battles, the workers who made their guns, powder, and clothing, and those who fed them as being part of the effort. 

"Effort" not equal "Founding".

 

Indeed, were there no popular support, the masses of colonists could've easily sold every name on the declaration to the British and kept things going just like in the Imperial days. 

"Support"  not equal "Founded".

And if you factor in founding a nation of democracy and freedom, without racism, then there's no debate: of course millions of black Americans and other minorities were instrumental in achieving that goal. 

"Achieving" not equal "Founding".  English a second language for you?

So yeah, I take issue with anyone who claims that America, land of the free, was only founded by "white people from Northern Europe".

Whether you "take issue" with it or not doesn;t change th historical fact that it indeed was so.  Deal with it.

No - they were property...."chattel" property. to be specific - in the same category as wives, children, indentured servants, livestock, etc.

Do you not find it ironic that you can give "Northern Europeans" the sole credit for founding a nation of freedom in one breath, and then turn around to post this just a few lines later? 

Who ever said history was without irony?  Whether I find it ironic or not, it was, in fact, so.

The continuation and development of democracy, greatest standard of living in the world, inventive genius, generaly fair and honest legal system...you know, the same reasons that millions are swimming the rio & hopping the fence...

Yeah, the problem is that these things are the heritage of all races of people who believe in equality and freedoms.  They are definitely not the heritage of the various gangs throughout American history who chanted "White power!" during civil discussions.

Those things are the heritage of those who MADE IT SO, and without those dead white dudes that FOUNDED this country, there would be no dream for others to realize. - sadly, much of humanity is yet to catch up....

[De Selby]

Yhe AMerican culture is white, English speaking, anglo-saxon Protestant.  Tap dance all you want - thats what it IS.

No tapdancing here, just an honest question: Says who?  Where did this resolute definition of what is "American culture" come from?  And what does that make blacks who may have been here for longer than most of the white population?

We are being invaded by Mexicans, and other Latin-Americans, who a mix of some Spanish, but predominantly Indian ancestry.  Further, the "Spanish" they speak is not the same as spoke in Spain.

Since your Funk and Wagnall's dictionary is already on the desk flipped open to "founded", you need to turn a few pages forward to "I" for "Invade."

The Spanish they speak is different in the same way that American English is different from Canadian and British English-that is, in sound and in some slang, but not enough to constitute even a different dialect.  But I notice that your claim seems to be heading towards skin color, and not language.  If that's so, why mention learning the language in school at all?

"Effort" not equal "Founding".

Like I said, I looked up founding.  Nothing about "signing the papers" in there.  Maybe you don't think the work needed to be done to "found" the nation, but that's going to be a tough case to make. 

"Achieving" not equal "Founding".  English a second language for you?

Yes, but the distinction you are pointing out here ignores the point made.  The grammar is fine-the problem is not my writing or diction, it is your unwillingness to comprehend the point.  You are reducing the whole concept of "founding America" to signing a single sheet of paper, which is (expressed in any grammatical style or language) a ridiculous proposition.

Those things are the heritage of those who MADE IT SO, and without those dead white dudes that FOUNDED this country, there would be no dream for others to realize. - sadly, much of humanity is yet to catch up....

Except that people of this heritage didn't make it so-you just acknowledged that they treated women, children, and blacks as "chattel".  That is hardly the stuff of freedom and liberty. 

You can try to one line your way out of every point, but if you want to take the discussion seriously, you'll have to do better and exercise your analytical skills alongside your dictionary research skills.

[richyoung]

SS - you don;t WANT to learn - you think you know it all already.  Rave on...

[De Selby]

SS - you don;t WANT to learn - you think you know it all already.  Rave on...

What was I supposed to learn from being referred to a dictionary and told that, on the one hand, only white people founded the "nation of liberty" and are entitled to take credit for the personal freedoms we enjoy today, but on the other that they treated non-whites and women as chattel?

[Perd Hapley]

shootinstudent, back out now, whilst your sanity remains intact.  If it's not too late.   

[richyoung]

SS - you don;t WANT to learn - you think you know it all already.  Rave on...

What was I supposed to learn from being referred to a dictionary...

The definition and use of the words you not only don't know the definition and use of, but are in fact convinced they mean and are used other than the way they actually are...

...and told that, on the one hand, only white people founded the "nation of liberty"...

White men, actually.  At the time the events in question happened, white men had a near monopoly on political power and wealth in Europe and the English colonies in the New World.  That may seem shocking to those cursed with a politically correct public school education.  Nonetheless, thats THE WAY IT WAS.  White men founded the United States.  They also RESISTED the founding of the United States.  The imported slaves.  They protested slavery.  They were the only ones who had a meaningful say in anything at the time & place in question.  Names like Crispus Atticus and Molly Pitcher have made it down to us through the ages exactly BECAUSE they were so much an exception.

... and are entitled to take credit for the personal freedoms we enjoy today,...

Yes, absolutely.  They didn't have to risk being executed for treason, much less having their estates confiscated, or pillaged, to seperate us from England.  Even those that did didn't have to engage in a risky experiment in democracy - they could have instituted a monarchy.  How many democracies, (I know, I know, "constitutionally limited republics") still a varient of democracy....) existed just beforre the U.S.?  ZERO!  How many after?  ONE!  Even so, the attempt could have turned to despotism and bloodshed, as did France's.  Instead, the Founding Fathers not only risked their lives and wealth to secure freedom and prosperity for their childrenm, they brought hope and an example to the whole world.  This is NOT to say that the dream sprang forth fully realized - indeed, it is still yet to be fully realized yet today, and will probably never be fully, perfectly realized.  They did FOUND, (your word, remember?) the experiment - and without a begining, there is no middle and no end.  Have others, of every concievable race and color given even up to the full measure of their existance to protect and further this experiment?  Of course!  But thats NOT what we are discussing - we are discussing the "founding" - and the Founding Fathers were exclusively English speaking Christian white males.

but on the other that they treated non-whites and women as chattel?

That was the past.  They do things differently there.  For bonus points, read up on how they treated Irish immigrants (even white English speeking Christian ones...), indentured servants, native Americans, Chinese railroad workers.  For more bonus points, read up on how the newly freed Negro was welcomed with open arms in Northern utopias like Chicago, Kansas City, New York, etc, by the Yankess who supposedly cared so much about their welfare.  Why so shocked?  Are you unaware that signifigant parts of the world TODAY treat women as chattel, and don't fully recognize minority religions?  (Hint: "religion of peace").

[De Selby]

shootinstudent, back out now, whilst your sanity remains intact.  If it's not too late.   

I shouldn't have waited to recognize just how right you were.

richyoung,

It looks to me like you simply don't want to recognize the contributions that non-whites made to creating America.  You've got the fundamentals right there in your post-how they sacrificed their lives to make this a country with justice and freedom.  The problem is that you're stuck on ignoring that because only white people are commonly referred to as "The Founding Fathers", as if receiving the magic title of "Founding Father" means you get sole credit for the freedoms we currently enjoy. 

It looks like we agree on the facts: that white Christian protestants were not only not solely responsible for creating a state with freedom and equality for everyone, but that they actually worked against this, and that the justice and liberty we enjoy today are the fruits of many races' and religions' hard work. 

You just don't think that work is relevant or deserves any credit, because, apparently, "America is a white culture", so any work done by others just doesn't count as "American" or it's not relevant for some other reason.  Is that a fair summary of your point?

[richyoung]

shootinstudent, back out now, whilst your sanity remains intact.  If it's not too late.   

I shouldn't have waited to recognize just how right you were.

richyoung,

It looks to me like you simply don't want to recognize the contributions that non-whites made to creating America. 

The contribution that non-whites made to FULFILLING and CONTINUING the dream that is America is huge and ongoing.  However to "colorize" the CREATION of that dream by putting minorities in that simply weren't there is revisionism.  "Creation"  implies STARTING and BEGINING, and in the begining, those in positions of wealth, power, and influence were universally white males - sorry if that hurts your feelings, but thats simply how it was BACK THEN.  Women and other races were'nt in a position to either volunteer or withhold anything meaningful - such participation as they had was at the direction of...white men.  The amazing thing is that very dream began to cause the inclusion of other races and genders - as soon as 60 years later, both Anglos AND mexicans stood togerther within the Alamo for Texas independence.  A mere 25 years after that, black enlisted men and officers fought on BOTH sides of a bloody conflict that settled the issue of slavery for all time.  That's HUGE movement in less than 100 years - ALL made possible by the original Founding Fathers and their dream.

You've got the fundamentals right there in your post-how they sacrificed their lives to make this a country with justice and freedom.  The problem is that you're stuck on ignoring that because only white people are commonly referred to as "The Founding Fathers", as if receiving the magic title of "Founding Father" means you get sole credit for the freedoms we currently enjoy. 

Again, to "create" is to "begin" - only those that actually BEGAN the country should get credit for , well, begining the country.  Naturally, what they began was strongly influenced by white, English-speaking, Christian concepts and traditions - it still is.  For a counter example, look at what passes for law and justice in places like Zimbabwe....

It looks like we agree on the facts: that white Christian protestants were not only not solely responsible for creating a state with freedom and equality for everyone, but that they actually worked against this, and that the justice and liberty we enjoy today are the fruits of many races' and religions' hard work. 

Yes.  Again, only white Christian protestants had acces to  money, land, power, guns, ships, the press - they were the only ones at the time that COULD have done it....

You just don't think that work is relevant or deserves any credit,

Not true.  Major props to anyone, regardless of race and nationality, who has helped us get to here.  However, it does nothing but DIMINISH those very real accomplishments to also crow-bar them into the CREATION of that dream when they simply weren't there, or to deny that the prinicples and attributes of our culture that are threatened by unassimilated immagrants are those of a white, Protestant, Anglo-Saxon culure.

because, apparently, "America is a white culture",

Not apparently.  Is.  Look at your television.  Bryant Gumble isn't speaking Spanish, or "Black English", or Jamacain patios.  He's speaking corn-fed Middle America White dialect.  Same for Wayne Brady, Geraldo Rivera, Oprah, Cameron Diaz....

... so any work done by others just doesn't count as "American" or it's not relevant for some other reason.  Is that a fair summary of your point?

NO.  Your words were "I take issue with anyone who claims that America, land of the free, was only founded by "white people from Northern Europe".  I merely pointed out that whether YOU "take issue" with that historical fiact has no effect on the truth that it was, in fact, so.  Then YOU threw out a bunch of stuff about the ONGOING contributions of minorities to FULFILLING that dream, (which are inarguable - but have nothing to do with FOUNDING IT, or the inherent WASP nature of it.)  So my point is that you are wrong, and indignant about it, for some reason...

[cordex]

A mere 25 years after that, black enlisted men and officers fought on BOTH sides of a bloody conflict that settled the issue of slavery for all time.

Settled it "for all time"?  Aren't you still upset about slavery within the NFL?

[richyoung]

I don;t like ANYTHING that interfers with ANYONE'S free negotiation of work - so yes, I don;t like the NFL's draft system, unions, Selective Service, etc....

[jnojr]

"Legitimacy" has nothing to do with it.

In fairness, you should recognize that I was responding to someone who specifically said "White power is a legitimate counter to 'viva la raza'".  So legitimacy does have something to do with it in terms of it being precisely the issue raised.

Mark my words... incidents like this are going to become more frequent and more serious.

And the more serious ones will likely result in serious prison time for the offenders. 

"Right" and "wrong" have nothing to do with it...

I do agree that some of those who are passionately involved in the immigration debate do not care about right from wrong.

As "legitimate" outlets for their frustration are shut off, they will turn to "illegitimate" outlets.

What legitimate outlet for frustration with illegal immigration has been shut off?

How about getting illegal aliens deported?

People are not going to be satisfied with marching in anti-illegal-alien rallies and chanting slogans while more and more illegal aliens pour into our country.  We do not want to "vent" and then go home.  We want the problem solved.  We want our border secure.  We want no more illegal aliens having anchor babies, collecting welfare, running up ER bills they'll never pay, living 20 to a clown house next door to us, etc.  If the governmetn doesn't act to secure our borders and deport illegals, then people will start to act.  Yes, some will go to prison... but how long will it be before "vigilantes" start getting juries full of people who are also sick and tired of the invasion and refuse to convict them?

I am not saying that it's "right" for people to turn vigilante.  I do not think it's "right" that some poor illegals may wind up beaten or worse for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.  I'm saying that it's going to happen when it becomes clear to people that the "legitimate" means of ridding themselves of illegals have completely failed and have no hope of working.

There are many indications that our economy is in deep trouble, and that a recession may be around the corner.  The policies that the Fed is pursuing to try to prevent a collapse will only lead to bigger problems tomorrow.  Wait and see what happens if unemployment starts to take off.  People can get pretty nasty when they see a scapegoat for their problems.  The Germans of the 1930s didn't innately hate Jews... Hitler told them look, those damn Jews are responsible for the plight you find yourselves in!  We Germans are a great people, and we've been dragged down by the subhuman filth!  Find them!  Report them!  Cheer as we drag them away!

No, I am not claiming that we are going to start a mass roundup and "elimination" of illegal aliens.  But there is a seething bed of resentment towards millions of people who are at least perceived as coming here to milk us dry, and towards a government that has completely ignored our repeated demands that something be done.  It is entirely possible that that resentment will boil over.

[De Selby]

How about getting illegal aliens deported?

Deporting illegal aliens is, last I checked, not only allowed but actually has happened millions of times.

And, what does deporting people have to do with "legitimate means of expressing opposition" to illegals?  No matter how many illegals the Federal police deport in a given year, does that impact your ability as an individual to demand more deportation?

If the governmetn doesn't act to secure our borders and deport illegals, then people will start to act.  Yes, some will go to prison... but how long will it be before "vigilantes" start getting juries full of people who are also sick and tired of the invasion and refuse to convict them?

So in other words, what you said about legitimate outlets for frustration just wasn't so? They're not shut off, it's just that nobody will accept any solution other than massive Federal police searches around the US to deport every last illegal?

I would say that vigilantes who commit crimes will likely never, ever find juries that refuse to convict them on this issue.  Especially not the vigilantes who chant "White power!" at their rallies.

can get pretty nasty when they see a scapegoat for their problems.  The Germans of the 1930s didn't innately hate Jews... Hitler told them look, those damn Jews are responsible for the plight you find yourselves in!  We Germans are a great people, and we've been dragged down by the subhuman filth!  Find them!  Report them!  Cheer as we drag them away!

I think we agree that people can be irrational and brutal.  Is this a reason to appease the "White power!" chanters?

  But there is a seething bed of resentment towards millions of people who are at least perceived as coming here to milk us dry, and towards a government that has completely ignored our repeated demands that something be done.  It is entirely possible that that resentment will boil over.

I agree that it's always possible to have racist sentiments boil over.  But why should we encourage this behavior by appeasing them and giving in to their demands?

[Perd Hapley]

A mere 25 years after that, black enlisted men and officers fought on BOTH sides of a bloody conflict that settled the issue of slavery for all time.

Settled it "for all time"?  Aren't you still upset about slavery within the NFL?

Owned!!   

[longeyes]

I would say that vigilantes who commit crimes will likely never, ever find juries that refuse to convict them on this issue.

Really?  Of course, the infamous O.J. jury might qualify as a jury operating by a "higher calling," no?

For those people "Justice" was being served by pursuing what I'll call meta-Justice.  (I'm not condoning it any more than "jnojr" was, just noting what's really going on under the surface of politically correct reportage.)

This occurs when governmental authority becomes viewed as tyrannical and de-legitimizes itself by omission or commission.  There are millions of angry Whites who increasingly believe that their own Government is either not working in their interest or actively at cross-purposes.  This anger is only going to increase if real substantive steps are not taken, and soon, to remedy what is viewed as an out of control alien invasion.  Any economic downturn or any signal dramatic event could ignite a major conflict.

[richyoung]

A mere 25 years after that, black enlisted men and officers fought on BOTH sides of a bloody conflict that settled the issue of slavery for all time.

Settled it "for all time"?  Aren't you still upset about slavery within the NFL?

Owned!!   

[LostInSPace]  Oh, the pain....the PAIN! [/LostInSpace]

[MechAg94]

Mentioned above, but Spanish speaking people died at the Alamo and fought at San Jacinto.  They were in Texas when it was accepted as a state in the USA.  I am not too concerned about Spanish speaking people in Texas or teaching Spanish.  Spanish was the only foreign language available in my high school.  Everyone took it, even the hispanic kids.  The hispanic kids normally did worse in the class.  Lots of white kids did badly in English class so that is not saying much.  I can't speak spanish, but I did learn a lot about how to pronounce it and still know some words.  That still doesn't change the fact that a working knowledge of English is essential in this country as well.

As my mother tells me, my Grandfather was the first generation of kids in their family that didn't learn to speak German.  It was during WWI and they had those laws against teaching German.  My mother says her Grandparents spoke German around the house all the time. 


Back to some confusion on the first page:  "White power!" as a slogan/chant is associated with the KKK.  Much like Nazi salute has been associated with the Nazis.  Using that slogan lumps you in with the KKK whether you like it or not.