The Psychology of White Supremacy

[IrezumiKiss]

I'm telling myself this historical self-indulgence is all still on topic for the thread, because the white supremacist construction of "whiteness" is ahistorical.

They pretend that "whiteness" is grounded in fundamental cultural differences, but if you look closely at world history, "white" as an identity is only about 400 years old.

Runs counter with the creation of chattel slavery as an institution in America and the general colonization of The Americas/New World through native genocide in general.

All for running the engines of economic dynasties both in the Americas and in Europe. With every successive generation, the institution is honed further, the engine's roots grow deeper and the ideologies of racism as a system for the identity of whiteness to hold dominion over the free human labor of non-whites by consistently devaluing their humanity in society become entrenched faith.

Too many deep tangents from the above that could be written to write out now, but summed up, we are living with the legacy of that past history and that horrible, ugly faith every day in the here and now.

 

[RandyRebecca]

I don’t believe in inferior races…that is kind of the point.

White people are mentioned because we are the victims of this cruel experiment that has subsequently denied us of our identity and our ethnic homelands.

Ethnic homelands? Have you heard about the history of the Native Americans?

Our (white people's) ancestors were Europeans, either looking for new jobs, opportunity etc. in the "new world", or to practice religious beliefs that were outlawed in European countries, or to engage in criminal activity on the western frontier where anything went in a lawless location and where Native Americans were expelled from their lands. We are not the native population of these lands historically.

There are no “facts” in what she said, you both are comically stupid when it comes to how nations work.

She wants to believe that North Africans and Greeks preserved the Roman Empire until the bitter end but what actually happened was that they took the superior technology that the Romans gave them and started to rebuild THEIR OWN civilizations that used to be revered and left their Roman oppressors to fade into oblivion.

The (Western) Roman Empire was overthrown by Germanic barbarians in 476 AD, after about 3 centuries of decline. It had nothing to do with race in any way. The (Eastern) Roman Empire (sometimes called the "Byzantine Empire") had Constantinople as its capital and lasted until 1453, when it was overthrown by the Ottoman Turks.

The fact that the Western Roman Empire was overthrown by Germanic barbarians, who were on a much lower cultural level than the Romans, is why there was centuries of stagnation in Europe known as the "Dark Ages", which lasted until the 10th or 11th centuries AD, so about 500 years of Dark Ages.

 

[Chobham]

Where were you first exposed to your ideas about white decline and globalism?

So explain to me exactly how those two seperate ideas are tied together?

 

[Lazaran]

So explain to me exactly how those two seperate ideas are tied together?

^
(Quoted for posterity and stupidity).

Chobby should take a guess who in this thread originally tied those two separate ideas together.



Chobby

 

[Chobham]

^
(Quoted for posterity and stupidity).

Chobby should take a guess who in this thread originally tied those two separate ideas together.



Chobby

Ignorance is bliss and often disguised by belittlement based on nothing concrete.

Which is a polite way of saying you are an irredeemable piece of shit. You have no idea what 'Globalization' is about, how or why it's collapsing or why that collapse is going to be a nightmare for those nations in the developing nations. You, in your abysmal ignorance, are celebrating death and suffering.

 

[Lazaran]

•
Chobby still hasn’t answered who in this thread originally tied those two separate ideas together.



Chobby

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

So explain to me exactly how those two seperate ideas are tied together?

QueanKing believes there’s a global conspiracy by Jews to destroy the white race.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

Ethnic homelands? Have you heard about the history of the Native Americans?

Our (white people's) ancestors were Europeans, either looking for new jobs, opportunity etc. in the "new world", or to practice religious beliefs that were outlawed in European countries, or to engage in criminal activity on the western frontier where anything went in a lawless location and where Native Americans were expelled from their lands. We are not the native population of these lands historically.


The (Western) Roman Empire was overthrown by Germanic barbarians in 476 AD, after about 3 centuries of decline. It had nothing to do with race in any way. The (Eastern) Roman Empire (sometimes called the "Byzantine Empire") had Constantinople as its capital and lasted until 1453, when it was overthrown by the Ottoman Turks.

The fact that the Western Roman Empire was overthrown by Germanic barbarians, who were on a much lower cultural level than the Romans, is why there was centuries of stagnation in Europe known as the "Dark Ages", which lasted until the 10th or 11th centuries AD, so about 500 years of Dark Ages.

The Dark Ages got that name because there wasn’t much historical information about what was going on, not because civilization literally collapsed. The Goths under Odoacer who stepped into the power vacuum left by the loss of Roman authority were about as civilized as the Romans had been. Charlemagne was crowned Holy Roman Emperor by the Pope in 800 and reorganized what is now Germany and France into a single centralized state. Even without the western empire life in Western Europe kept cranking along.

The popular depiction of the Middle Ages as a grim, backward time is mostly Renaissance propaganda.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

And then it all died despite technically being so big that it should have been impossible for the Roman Empire to die.

Maybe because the heart and brain of the empire died and it could no longer live no matter what the body did.

The Romans themselves knew their empire was too big to survive. That why Diocletian split it into eastern and western halves and set up a system where four emperors ran it instead of one.

 

[Bray123]

According to Leon Trotsky, fascism is a mass movement of counter-revolutionary despair. It is financed by big capital as shock troops against the organized labor movement, but big capital never really sees the fascists as one of their own. Marxism is revolutionary hope, fascism is counter-revolutionary despair.

Fascism, funded by big business, organizes the elements in capitalist society that have been consumed by despair, and directs them as a battering ram against the organized labor movement and its trade unions. The coming to power of fascism only happens when the ruling capitalist class has failed with every other method to restore "order", i.e. capitalist order. If fascism does come to power, it smashes the labor movement to bits in the most extreme scenario, and the state will then forcibly aid big business corporations to profitability, completely at the expense of defenseless workers. This is what happened in Germany 1933-1934 and beyond. This differentiates fascism from a military coup dictatorship, for example, as military coups tend not to have a mass base and tend to take place behind the backs of the people in most circumstances.

As it happened in 1930's Weimar Republican Germany, thus it would come to pass in 21st Century MAGA Republican USA.

 

[Chobham]

The Romans themselves knew their empire was too big to s.......

 

[Chobham]

The Romans themselves knew their empire was too big to survive. That why Diocletian split it into eastern and western halves and set up a system where four emperors ran it instead of one.

All of what you have said is true. All of what everyone has said about the Roman Empire is true from a purely political point of view. The decline, and fall, of the Roman Empire is primarily due to 2 factors. Demographics and geography.

Demographics; As the Empire grew in wealth and power the citizens had fewer children. To the point that the Empire awarded medals to women that had 3 or more children. There are tombs on the Apia Way where women entombed therein have had their 'medals' chiseled into their mortuaries. A zero population growth society has to have a fertility rate of 2.1, anything less than that and your society is dying/contracting. Even the Romans were aware of that and a great deal of the political decisions made in the latter Empire were driven by that awareness. You can see that today in the developed world with one of the biggest losers on the demographic front being China as a result of their 'one child' policy. China is done, by the end of this decade there will be a dramatic regime change there.

Geography; Rome was unable to feed itself starting with shortly after the beginning of Empire (arable land). Their primary source of grain was Egypt and what they could garner from their conquered territories. Pax Romana was largely as a result of a plentiful food source and a slowly contracting population. Look around, what nations are net importers of food? What nations are dependent on other nations for the fertilizers, etc., for the foods they do produce? Again, look around. The number of nations that can be self-sufficient agriculturally to sustain their populations are few and far between.

Globalization; Globalization doesn't have a damn thing to do with race or creed. It originated with the Breton Woods Accords that were agreed to in the 1945-46 time frame. In essence the deal was this. The US would use it's navy to patrol the seas to guarantee that any nation could trade with any other nation unmolested. This gave the opportunity for nations that were food poor but resource rich to trade said resources for food. It was an arrangement that allowed the entire world to prosper limited only by individual nations politics.

We, the US, are becoming weary of that arrangement. We really no longer care. Our total foreign trade is only 10% of our economy and 5% of that is with Mexico and Canada. We are quite capable of covering that remaining 5% without having to cover everyone else's ass. And which nations are going to suffer the most? The very nations that you are postulating suffered under 'White Supremacy.' This has already started and it's going to get worse over the next decade or so.

Whatever education you received has done you no service.

 

[dkovic77]

I don’t believe in inferior races…that is kind of the point.

White people are mentioned because we are the victims of this cruel experiment that has subsequently denied us of our identity and our ethnic homelands.

Wow… your ethnic homelands. Please do tell us, oh Oracle, you are referring to nothing in the “New World” as your ethnic homeland.

Just because the Europeans were efficient (well the disease brought with them did the trick) at eradicating a substantial the population of the Americas upon their arrival doesn’t just magically make it y”our ethnic homeland”.

The fact that you believe that signals you really need some help.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

All of what you have said is true. All of what everyone has said about the Roman Empire is true from a purely political point of view. The decline, and fall, of the Roman Empire is primarily due to 2 factors. Demographics and geography.

Demographics; As the Empire grew in wealth and power the citizens had fewer children. To the point that the Empire awarded medals to women that had 3 or more children. There are tombs on the Apia Way where women entombed therein have had their 'medals' chiseled into their mortuaries. A zero population growth society has to have a fertility rate of 2.1, anything less than that and your society is dying/contracting. Even the Romans were aware of that and a great deal of the political decisions made in the latter Empire were driven by that awareness. You can see that today in the developed world with one of the biggest losers on the demographic front being China as a result of their 'one child' policy. China is done, by the end of this decade there will be a dramatic regime change there.

Geography; Rome was unable to feed itself starting with shortly after the beginning of Empire (arable land). Their primary source of grain was Egypt and what they could garner from their conquered territories. Pax Romana was largely as a result of a plentiful food source and a slowly contracting population. Look around, what nations are net importers of food? What nations are dependent on other nations for the fertilizers, etc., for the foods they do produce? Again, look around. The number of nations that can be self-sufficient agriculturally to sustain their populations are few and far between.

Globalization; Globalization doesn't have a damn thing to do with race or creed. It originated with the Breton Woods Accords that were agreed to in the 1945-46 time frame. In essence the deal was this. The US would use it's navy to patrol the seas to guarantee that any nation could trade with any other nation unmolested. This gave the opportunity for nations that were food poor but resource rich to trade said resources for food. It was an arrangement that allowed the entire world to prosper limited only by individual nations politics.

We, the US, are becoming weary of that arrangement. We really no longer care. Our total foreign trade is only 10% of our economy and 5% of that is with Mexico and Canada. We are quite capable of covering that remaining 5% without having to cover everyone else's ass. And which nations are going to suffer the most? The very nations that you are postulating suffered under 'White Supremacy.' This has already started and it's going to get worse over the next decade or so.

Whatever education you received has done you no service.

You’ve only read part of the discussion I was having with QueanKing. He’s a white nationalist who equates “globalism” with an international Jewish conspiracy to destroy the white race. That’s why I was asking him about globalism and white supremacy. If you think he’s wrong I welcome you to take the matter up with him. I think he’s foolish.

 

[Bray123]

You’ve only read part of the discussion I was having with QueanKing. He’s a white nationalist who equates “globalism” with an international Jewish conspiracy to destroy the white race. That’s why I was asking him about the globalism and white supremacy. If you think he’s wrong I welcome you to take the matter up with him. I think he’s foolish.

Good luck with that, he's toasted.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

Runs counter with the creation of chattel slavery as an institution in America and the general colonization of The Americas/New World through native genocide in general.

All for running the engines of economic dynasties both in the Americas and in Europe. With every successive generation, the institution is honed further, the engine's roots grow deeper and the ideologies of racism as a system for the identity of whiteness to hold dominion over the free human labor of non-whites by consistently devaluing their humanity in society become entrenched faith.

Too many deep tangents from the above that could be written to write out now, but summed up, we are living with the legacy of that past history and that horrible, ugly faith every day in the here and now.

I was guessing the 17th century, but I suppose the origin of “whiteness” could be pushed back to the 16th century. I don’t think it predated the colonial enterprise, however. Whiteness didn’t cause colonialism and chattel slavery, it was invented afterward so the slavers and colonists could feel better about themselves.

It serves a similar function with modern white racists, which is why they cling to their white identity so tenaciously.

 

[Rightguide]

All of what you have said is true. All of what everyone has said about the Roman Empire is true from a purely political point of view. The decline, and fall, of the Roman Empire is primarily due to 2 factors. Demographics and geography.

Demographics; As the Empire grew in wealth and power the citizens had fewer children. To the point that the Empire awarded medals to women that had 3 or more children. There are tombs on the Apia Way where women entombed therein have had their 'medals' chiseled into their mortuaries. A zero population growth society has to have a fertility rate of 2.1, anything less than that and your society is dying/contracting. Even the Romans were aware of that and a great deal of the political decisions made in the latter Empire were driven by that awareness. You can see that today in the developed world with one of the biggest losers on the demographic front being China as a result of their 'one child' policy. China is done, by the end of this decade there will be a dramatic regime change there.

Geography; Rome was unable to feed itself starting with shortly after the beginning of Empire (arable land). Their primary source of grain was Egypt and what they could garner from their conquered territories. Pax Romana was largely as a result of a plentiful food source and a slowly contracting population. Look around, what nations are net importers of food? What nations are dependent on other nations for the fertilizers, etc., for the foods they do produce? Again, look around. The number of nations that can be self-sufficient agriculturally to sustain their populations are few and far between.

Globalization; Globalization doesn't have a damn thing to do with race or creed. It originated with the Breton Woods Accords that were agreed to in the 1945-46 time frame. In essence the deal was this. The US would use it's navy to patrol the seas to guarantee that any nation could trade with any other nation unmolested. This gave the opportunity for nations that were food poor but resource rich to trade said resources for food. It was an arrangement that allowed the entire world to prosper limited only by individual nations politics.

We, the US, are becoming weary of that arrangement. We really no longer care. Our total foreign trade is only 10% of our economy and 5% of that is with Mexico and Canada. We are quite capable of covering that remaining 5% without having to cover everyone else's ass. And which nations are going to suffer the most? The very nations that you are postulating suffered under 'White Supremacy.' This has already started and it's going to get worse over the next decade or so.

Whatever education you received has done you no service.

Will Durant in Caesar and Christ, explained the collapse against that of Gibbon as follows:

"The breakup of the old religion had begun long before Christ…Moral disintegration had begun with the Roman conquest of Greece [in the 2nd Century B.C.], and had culminated under Nero [in the mid-1st Century A.D.]; thereafter Roman morals improved, and the ethical influence of Christianity upon Roman life was largely a wholesome one. It was because Rome was already dying that Christianity grew so rapidly. Men lost faith in the state not because Christianity held them aloof but because the state defended wealth against poverty, fought to capture slaves, taxed toil to support luxury, and failed to protect its people from famine, pestilence, invasion, and destitution; forgivably they turned from Caesar preaching war to Christ preaching peace, from incredible brutality to unprecedented charity, from a life without hope or dignity to a faith that consoled their poverty and honored their humanity. Rome was not destroyed by Christianity, any more than by barbarian invasion; it was an empty shell when Christianity rose to influence and invasion came…. The political causes of decay were rooted in one fact—that increasing despotism destroyed the citizen’s civic sense and dried up statesmanship at its source."

Sounds like a prophetic warning of things to come if we don't snap out of our authoritarian elitist-centric shit.

 

[butters]

i love the free history lesson i got reading these replies to the nazi

i knew bits and bobs, but never the kind of details being posted so LOVE LOVE LOVE what this thread became!

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

Will Durant in Caesar and Christ, explained the collapse against that of Gibbon as follows:



Sounds like a prophetic warning of things to come if we don't snap out of our authoritarian elitist-centric shit.

Will Durant wrote this passage in the 1940's:

"The breakup of the old religion had begun long before Christ…Moral disintegration had begun with the Roman conquest of Greece [in the 2nd Century B.C.], and had culminated under Nero [in the mid-1st Century A.D.]; thereafter Roman morals improved, and the ethical influence of Christianity upon Roman life was largely a wholesome one. It was because Rome was already dying that Christianity grew so rapidly. Men lost faith in the state not because Christianity held them aloof but because the state defended wealth against poverty, fought to capture slaves, taxed toil to support luxury, and failed to protect its people from famine, pestilence, invasion, and destitution; forgivably they turned from Caesar preaching war to Christ preaching peace, from incredible brutality to unprecedented charity, from a life without hope or dignity to a faith that consoled their poverty and honored their humanity. Rome was not destroyed by Christianity, any more than by barbarian invasion; it was an empty shell when Christianity rose to influence and invasion came…. The political causes of decay were rooted in one fact—that increasing despotism destroyed the citizen’s civic sense and dried up statesmanship at its source."

While I agree that The Story of Civilization was a mammoth achievement of popular history, there have been 80 years of scholarship since Caesar and Christ, and I don't think many historians today would agree with these words.

With Constantine, Christianity became the state religion of the Roman Empire. For the next 1000 years, Christianity was aggressively promoted and expanded by emperors in both the east and the west. Without the official support of the Roman Empire and its successor states, Christianity would probably only be remembered today as a minor Jewish sect.

 

[butters]

Men lost faith in the state not because Christianity held them aloof but because the state defended wealth against poverty, fought to capture slaves, taxed toil to support luxury, and failed to protect its people from famine, pestilence, invasion, and destitution;

times may change but that base nature of those who would benefit from the woes of others never does

 

[IrezumiKiss]

times may change but that base nature of those who would benefit from the woes of others never does

And absolutely nothing in that quote you highlighted is out of place in regarding today's society. Everything still applies.

 

[Lazaran]

You’ve only read part of the discussion I was having with QueanKing. He’s a white nationalist who equates “globalism” with an international Jewish conspiracy to destroy the white race. That’s why I was asking him about globalism and white supremacy. If you think he’s wrong I welcome you to take the matter up with him. I think he’s foolish.

•
You answered the question Chobby avoided like the plague.

Ironically, Chobby highlighted a couple key psychological traits of white supremacists.:

Ignorance inspired arrogance.

Chobby arrogantly launched a snarky attack despite being totally ignorant of the history of the exchange between you and another ignorant, arrogant white supremacist.

Perfect.



Chobby

 

[DeluxAuto]

Rome died because of it, it is literally just a wasteland.

My parents have and they showed me the graffiti all over what once was the mighty Roman Empire. It’s a travesty not a marvel.

Graffiti? THE HELL YOU SAY! Taggers toppled the Roman Empire. Who knew?!

 

[DeluxAuto]

QueanKing's historical hysterical confusion

Just a slight tweak.

 

[icanhelp1]

I was guessing the 17th century, but I suppose the origin of “whiteness” could be pushed back to the 16th century. I don’t think it predated the colonial enterprise, however. Whiteness didn’t cause colonialism and chattel slavery, it was invented afterward so the slavers and colonists could feel better about themselves.

It serves a similar function with modern white racists, which is why they cling to their white identity so tenaciously.

Cling to their whiteness identity?? What is that? Are you describing the Polish? The Italians? The French? Scandinavians? Is whiteness the opposite of blackness?