CircleA

Reply to comment by CircleA in Non-vegans: Why? by curious

CircleA wrote

They have a very flawed idea of food and sustainability if they think using land to grow meat makes any logical sense. They could just be eating the food they grow themselves and be food secure for life, and even feed a whole village of people, instead of growing acres and acres of grain to feed to a few animals that give them just a few lbs of protein. Growing meat is like supporting inequality and starvation.

2

CircleA OP wrote (edited )

And this only scratches the surface of the problematic language in that thread. Here's everything:

"Most white people's privilege is tantamount to the privileges bestowed upon a house slave during slavery. It's only good in comparison to the worse thing. I can't say what house slaves would have chosen, knowing how people can identify with their attacker and fall into learned helplessness, but it's objectively clear that not being a slave at all is better than being an honored slave... Saying "fuck cis people" won't encourage many people to reflect on their internalized transphobia. It will convince people that reflecting on their internalized transphobia isn't a safe thing to do.

This isn't even subtle or pedantic, the language we're talking about. If you refer to my feelings as "fee fees", I'm going to have a very clear understanding of your feelings about me and I'm not going to want to help you or join forces with you because I will know that's a dangerous game.

It's possible to ask people to self-reflect while treating them with a minimal amount of dignity and respect. The fact that so many people are fighting to hard against this makes me wonder what's really going on here."


"So basically “fuck white people” is the “i want the right to be politically incorrect” for leftists. People who use it don't care how it's perceived, as long as they and their intended audience know what it's supposed to mean."


"'Please, give me even one example of a time you were shown that you would be better off being another race. Tell me about all the benefits you would gain from not being white."

"Would’ve been a lot easier to get into a good college if I were black."


"Saying this is like saying that inner city drive-bys are a "black" problem because they allow drugs and gangs to live in "their communities". That's not going to do anything but piss people off, and it's not going to do anything about the real issues like poverty driving the problem."


"No one is actually trying to ignore white supremacy. We're telling you that white supremacy survives in America so long as poor white folk are made to feel like they have more in common with rich white folk than they do with poor black and brown folk. This use of the term whiteness reinforces that. It's insidious, performative nonsense."


"Do you realize how religous this sounds? All white people are born with original sin, and must work tirelessly to rout it from within them though it’s impossible to do so."


"It is an insult to them personally, which is why blanket statements like this help no one, no matter who is making it, or at what race it's directed at."


"Being white literally is a phenotype though? Instead of turning it into an inherently racist argument, could we not just call them racists? People say it isn't racism, but it actually is. I'm not equating the racism that caucasians get to the racism that minorities face by any means, there are obviously much different degrees at play here - but it is still straight up racism. And you know what they say, can't kill hate with hate. Just makes everyone hate eachother more. I'm not trying to defend imperialist bourgeois culture, I don't have a pro-white agenda, I'm just saying that throwing around race based insults is only going to further divides and prevent any constructive conversation, not stimulate growth."


"That isn't the definition of racism, though. You're twisting it to fit your agenda. Yes, systematic institutionalised racism exists, but no, that isn't the only version of racism. The definition of racism is;

the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.

So using "whiteness" as some sort of qualifier to make broad, sweeping statements about that group of people is racism, going by the actual definition of the word."


"Conflating race with culture in a broad group isn't useful, especially considering there's no inherent link between the two. It's the same shit that white nationalists do. Now, if you wanna attack ideas like colonialism, nationalism, and racism that are parts of the common history of most white folks (by virtue of, y'know, European history, and in a smaller-but-still-large portion of the population, North American history), those are valid targets that nobody reasonable is going to take objection to.

We've got words for these things, painting them with an overly broad brush like this is just needlessly alienating and polarizing."


"Okay, I agree with you that the ideology you call “whiteness” must be destroyed, but i feel that calling it “whiteness” is unnecessarily alienating, and may cause potential allies who ultimately agree with our positions, to be turned off to the movement. Especially since, as you yourself said, this ideology is not inherently related to phenotype, i feel like “right wing” is a better descriptor for this ideology."


"Completely agree, it just sounds like all white people are being grouped together when you blame it on "whiteness". And isn't like the point of us getting over racism is to not generalize people like that anymore? I'm white and I certainly don't agree with how those political refugees are being treated, but I certainly take offense when I'm blamed for a problem I in now way support"


"To me these comments sound exactly like Nazi attempts at laying the blame for the ills of Capitalism on the Jewish people, as it was convenient using the anti semetic tropes of the time, while "white people" whatever the fuck that means, may be more deserving, it is still the same level of bullshit.

I am not saying there is anything wrong with fighting racism at all, and have attended many an anti racism rally.

I am questioning a comment thread talking about "whiteness" being a disease, and all sorts of shit where if you replaced white with Jew it would be straight up Neo Nazism.

Cant we just stop assuming what people think based on the colour of their skin?"


"Language like this is why we will never have a revolution."


"Agreed. The generalizing of the statement is racist in and of itself. I'm white and I dont want to see children teargassed wtf."


"So we're not talking about white people, but we're talking about whiteness, but every white person is "guilty of" whiteness? Basically you're talking about white people + a tiny group of non-white people so make it sound like you're not racist? Nice."

2

CircleA OP wrote (edited )

You're right, it could be read that way. But he followed that up with this and then all this:

If you want to fight white supremacy in america or brittain thats perfectly fine with me. Ill throw you a like. But stop pretending that someone from eastern europe that had never seen a person of colour in their life is (the problem).


Its not what Im doing at all. I dont believe being self-described as a minority gives you the right to approach people in r/anarchism who are by and large anarchists everyway you please. We enforce this sometimes absurds AOP (anti oppression policy) for every trangression on the block to the point that even ageism is a thing now but can be bothered to prevent people saying white people should die. Its a double standard.


Lets theoreticly say im a total monster (im not): Who says they have a right to do so? Its anarchism not opressedpeopleventingtheirfeelings.

No but seriously. A majority of europe is not responsible for their frustration and source of opression. And them saying we are is well frustrating.

Tell me though. Judging by the comments of the thread that inspired both of these posts and the comments on my post... is r/anarchism now for minorities by minorities or is it an anarchist sub. Because if phenotypocly white people have no place here than let me know so I can leave because I have just about had it.


What you cant reasonably do is conflate the concepts of whiteness and being white. Its confusing, causes unnecessary drama and gives you way out if you are called on your shit.

I for example took two years of social studies and the concept of "whiteness" barely came up with at all...


Then after being asked not to misgender someone who he called 'man':

Man can mean human.

Piss off.

What are you even on about. Its how I use the word man. I did the whole 70s slang thing ironicly for so long its stopped being ironic. And you both are being weird about it.

4

CircleA wrote

If you reject the common definition of racism for your own,

It's not my definition, it's the standard definition as defined by countless writers, activists and academics.

Wealthy white American men don't get to decide what racism is when their group is responsible for 99.9% of it.

what do you call what other people define as racist

white fragility, most likely.

Do you think "racial discrimination" is a more accurate term for what I consider to be racism?

This definition?

My view is that it is wrong to stereotype people or treat them differently based on aspects of their person they had no control or choice in.

I'll need to see examples of this supposed racial discrimination against whites in America (where whites are the dominant group) in order to comment.

3

CircleA wrote (edited )

Isn't that a fundamentally racist view though?

You don't understand what racism is.

Read this:

https://www.dailydot.com/via/reverse-racism-doesnt-exist/

and this

https://www.dailydot.com/via/gwen-stefani-cultural-appropriation-harajuku-girls/

she's the classic colonizer, using people from other cultures to make bank.

1