A comparison showing MSM treatment of Sotomayor/Kagen and Roberts

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Dronetek, May 11, 2010.


  1. and then there's fox news lol
     

  2. :p


    MSNBC is obviously state run, state controlled media.

    How is it that every discussion is now about race?

     
  3. If a bias confirms your bias is it really biased?

    Can 'non-biased-ness' be biased?

    :smoking:
     
  4. :bongin:






    What? :confused:


    :smoking:
     
  5. Dronetek playing the victim card. Why no, I don't see the pattern. Tell us all again how the right is victimized by the media. :rolleyes: I'm sure I'll forget all about how the media got on board with the neocon-inspired Iraq war, covered shit up for the government, got caught and then apologized for it. I'm sure to not remember that while you righties are being victimized by the media covering a left-appointed supreme court candidate.
     
  6. #46 Gooch_Goblin69, May 12, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: May 12, 2010



    You still don't see your own hypocrisy. It's fine for brown people to say LA RAZA and be proud of there race but Ayran is a bad word and you can't say that cause if you do your a racist. Don't try to hide the fact that if a white person says they are proud to be white they are immediately looked at as racist, even by some other white people. It's just the same if a brown person says they are proud to be brown. It's all fucking stupid. You didn't determine your skin color who fucking cares what color you are.

    And what about mexicans here calling for the USA to give back Arizona and New MExico to MExico? That should be considered treason in my opinion. If Americans went to Canada and started demanding that British Columbia be part of Washington State since it used to be way back when...they'd kick us the fuck out. Saying return Arizona and New mexico to mexico is like saying I live in America and I still root for Mexico over the place I live now, it shows disloyalty to your country.


    And see there you go with Sir Elliot. Trying to insinuate he is a racist by asking if he's in the Ayran brotherhood.
     
  7. La Raza is strong, La Raza doesn't assimilate.
     
  8. That being said doesn't it seem obvious that the media just supports what ever the people in power(IE: a very small group of political players) want them to support?

    Who's in power now?

    What does that tell you about the media's agenda?
     
  9. Yeah man, Pat Buchanan totally gave that one up.
     
  10. #50 AHuman, May 13, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: May 13, 2010
    Gooch, I think you're misunderstanding newskoolgrower... He's not saying folks who go around saying "Aryan pride!" are necessarily racist, he's saying that the term has an extensive history of racial persecution and today is associated very much with the neo-Nazi movement. It's technically possible to be an innocent follower of 'Aryan pride', one totally unafilliated and unsympathetic with these neo-Nazi movements, but that's like someone saying '******' and being totally unaware of the historical context - ie, lychings, Jim Crow laws etc. The person could say "Why, that's just a deviation of the Latin word for 'black', I wasn't using it to signify the racial inferiority of black people!", and they could hypothetically be telling the truth... but we'd still say "Well, the word has ugly historical connotations so don't use that word." Same deal here, 'Aryan' has a racially charged history and it's not wise to go slinging it around, especially with its affiliations to neo-Nazism.

    You see the point here? It's not racist in itself, but it might as well be because it's affiliated with white power hate groups and Nazism, which is ABSOLUTELY racist. Therefore, don't use the term if you're not a neo-Nazi (which I really, really hope you're not...) because it's going to provoke confusion and allegations of racism that are totally understandable because of the historical/social context. No, there needs to be a new name for a new movement if that's what you want to do - make a fresh start totally removed from hate or racial superiority, a group that is simply there for white people to meet under their common racial identity (which is a bit ridiculous imo, because 'white' covers everything from Croatian to Lapps, Welsh to Spanish... and arguably the people of Turkey, Uzbekistan etc too) and share that cultural experience. Call it 'the Paceface Brigade' :D

    Edit: 'Aryan' is a terrible word to use also because, as we know, it refers to Hitlers 'master race', who were blond hair, blue eyed Germans. As according to the racial theories of the day, there were three white 'races' - the Mediterranean, the Aryan and the Alpine. So, if you have descent from Norway, Spain, Italy, Croatia, Poland, Scotland, Ireland, Serbia, Russia and even the mountainous areas of Germany itself... sorry my friend, you're probably not an 'Aryan'. For this reason as well as the social one I said above, it's a terrible, terrible term to use, grossly inefficient in describing the 'white race' and charged with hatred and racial supremacy from the neo-Nazis.
     
  11. Ok mexicans saying La raza is "going to provoke confusion and allegations of racism" So they shouldn't say it. It's no different.
     
  12. La Raza doesn't have a history intertwined with the Holocaust and you will be hard pressed to find La Raza sympathisers who sympathise with the Holocaust like neo-Nazis/the Aryan Brotherhood etc do...
     
  13. You still don't get it and I doubt you ever will...... You seem to think the base requirements for racism are being related to Nazis, Aryan's or having white skin. You dont seem to be able to see racism in any other shade.

    You're a true believer Dickie.......

    By the way, you jerks completely derailed this thread. Any of you geniuses have anything to say about the topic?
     
  14. You're twisting things. I've never said there's no such thing as black supremacy, Asian supremacy or any other breed of non white racist groups. I'm talking about using the term 'Aryan' to refer to white pride, when it's both a misnomer and tied inexplicably with both odious concepts of historical genocide and the smypathisers of these genocidal campaigns. These people believe that white people - the 'Aryan race' - are superior to other racial groups, they believe 'mixing blood' is a race crime, they very likely believe in social Darwinism and thus advocate active agression against other races in order to be the 'master race' and they are truly racist in every sense of the word. Why do you defend such a term? Why would you WANT to be affiliated with these people?

    Basically, you've either misunderstood me or are deliberately twisting words to make me look like a dickhead. Racism can be practised by members of any race. Pride is not racism. I personally think it's stupid to be proud of something that you didn't do any work to achieve or consciously choose, but whatever - as long as its white people/black people/any race celebrating their heritage and their culture and not hating on other cultures, I don't mind it. So have your white pride, just don't call it 'Aryan pride' or defend the fuckwits who do, because you're defending white supremacy and racial hatred.
     

Share This Page