Skip to main content

I'm sure you've all heard that idiotic mantra parroted at least once before and so have I. I usually don't let it get to me but a few minutes ago I encountered it in a place I wouldn't expect nor was it welcomed and I need to vent while it is still fresh in my mind.
Go below the golden emblem now please.

How many of you know of Dragon Ball Z? I assume many of you if not fans have children who were fans once with it being the most popular manga/anime in history. Well, now I have to ask you how many of you are aware of TeamFourStar of youtube. They feature excellent parody videos of the series, perhaps the most famous parody series online. Well, I had just been over to watch their latest upload (part 2 of ep. 30) and what do you think I see; some idiot going on about white genocide and anti-racist means anti-white all of that nonsense. This is how I respond to him (paraphrasing):

1. To claim that whites in America are enduring some sort of genocide is ridiculous considering the non-hispanic white populationm, in terms of actual people has continued to INCREASE, it just so happens that it hasn't been able to keep up with non-white growth and therefore their total percentage of the country's population has gone down.

2. That America was never a white country. That indigenious people roamed what would later be known as America long before whites arrived and when they did they also brought African slaves. Then of course, there is the migration of people from Asian countries to work on railroads and seeking better lives for themselves and their families. The only reason the non-white population isn't bigger than it is now is because of racists immigration quotes imposed on non-European countries (and if I remember correctly also southern and eastern European countries for a time.)

3. And lastly, why in the world did he even bother posting that on a parody video in the first place? The only people that his mantra of "anti-raicst is a codeword for anti-white." are other idiots who alrady share his stupid, racistm, and paranoid delusions.

He responded by going off on a tangent about how multiculturalism and immigration is destroying white countries. and, you guessed, 'anti-racist is a codeword for anti-white" with out answering any of my points. I told him I have no intention of replying to him anymore because he obviously wouln't listen and that I will be deleting any furthur replies from him (and his type keep replying for a while).

But, to add a little bit of spin to the situation some else also objected to him (many people objected actually this was just a special case) stating that his concerns should be with blacks (as if we were the only one's he was talking about) but only with "illegal beaners", yep a nativst jumped in to disagree with him apparently because he wasn't hating Mexicans enough. This one went on to talk about how he hates all "beaners" and how his ancestors were nothing like them because they all learned English (the nativists always seem to some how get it in their heads that before Mexicans and other Hispanics/Latinos started immigrating that all new arrivals were guick to learn English and that none of them wanted to preserve their own culture).

And that was pretty much it, I wouldn't normally be bothered by this, I know there are idiots out there and you can't change their minds, what gets me is that he decided to post his garbage on that video. He was clearly trolling and didn't really expect anything to come out of it (though I checked out his channel and he really does seem to believe his own vile). It's that he decided to troll their. I mean it's Youtube, there are thousands maybe millions of videos he could have gone to and had much better success. I guess what annoys me most about it is that on top of being racist he's also stupid.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I always say that if you are a member of the (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, slowbutsure

    class of oppressors you cannot be oppressed.  But with stupid people they dont understand so it does not always work.  But you have to call this guy on it so that others may understand.

    •  uninterestingly tautological, (6+ / 0-)

      at best.  whites can be oppressed by any number of things; by your sloppy formulation, you presumably mean something like "whites can't be victims of white racism," which is itself contestable inasmuch as it presupposes some monolithic and heterogeneous white population.

    •  White & FEMALE? White & LGBT? White & DISABLED? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      for 6 too

      Some whites can be and are oppressed. To say otherwise is - well - stupid. And also racist, but anti-racists can't possibly be that, now can they?

      The money changers Jesus threw out of the Temple are back as the GOP, using his corpse as a ventriloquist's dummy. (Hat tip to Kossack "Stuart Heady")

      by WereBear Walker on Fri Jun 22, 2012 at 09:08:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You must be having a slow night to make this (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        for 6 too

        comment necessary.  Maybe you should go pick on someone your own size.  You are acting like a bully.

        "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." - John F. Kennedy

        by helpImdrowning on Fri Jun 22, 2012 at 09:17:19 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  To better clarify my comment, to call someone's (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        for 6 too

        thoughts "stupid" is lazy at best and meant to intimidate and humiliate at worst.  To intimidate and humiliate is to bully.  While your examples of white people in groups that are oppressed is accurate, was it really necessary to put those labels all in caps and then resort to calling someone else's thoughts stupid?  The caps indicated anger and vehemence as did the "stupid".  Kind of bullying.  I wish you well.

        "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." - John F. Kennedy

        by helpImdrowning on Fri Jun 22, 2012 at 10:29:29 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Then lina is also bullying? Please note s/he ... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          ... applied the term "stupid" to those who reject the notion that whites cannot be oppressed in any way whatsoever because in race relations, they are (often) the oppressor. I was merely quoting back.

          BTW, my use of caps was not out of anger, but as a way to highlight how very wrong the notion is that the oppressor in a given context can never, ever be the oppressed in any other context.

          The money changers Jesus threw out of the Temple are back as the GOP, using his corpse as a ventriloquist's dummy. (Hat tip to Kossack "Stuart Heady")

          by WereBear Walker on Fri Jun 22, 2012 at 11:07:49 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Although you are accurate in your (0+ / 0-)

            statement that s/he used the word "stupid", it was definitely in a different context than your use.  S/he wasn't referring to anyone in particular, while you were.  Not saying it was more or less offensive at the end of the day, however, it does not change the bullying factor.  Face facts, you are a very intelligent and articulate person, others are not.  It is not really useful or productive to beat down or scare away people who are on our side with the ego need to win through semantics and debate.  Just sayin'.....

            "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." - John F. Kennedy

            by helpImdrowning on Sat Jun 23, 2012 at 01:53:10 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  well I used "stupid" and not "idiot" (0+ / 0-)

              Idiot used in the diary has connotations to me when people were judged on the intelligence scale as "morons", imbeciles and idiots so I was not comfortable with idiot.  ANd I did not make the statement just for racism. If you oppress others you really should not think of yourself as oppressed as in white v black, straight v gay, religion, gender etc. which I thought was the point of the diary. But you can be oppressed if you are white  plus some other oppressed grouping just not usually just on race. You still have to challenge others no matter where or when if they make racist, sexist or homophobic statements.  But I did not mean to ridicule or agitate.  But thanks for helping me out with my comment.

  •  It's always good to push back against stupidity (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    slowbutsure, nokkonwud

    The morons and the bigots assume the silence is approval.

  •  Well, since the designation of "white" (3+ / 0-)

    is a product of racism, I'd have to say yes. I'm european-american, not white.

    Lo que separa la civilizacion de la anarquia son solo siete comidas.

    by psilocynic on Fri Jun 22, 2012 at 05:26:58 PM PDT

  •  This is in line with a study I read a year ago (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    helpImdrowning, cacamp

    Wish I remembered the source, but it said that whites are different than blacks in this country in that they see racism as some sort of zero sum game, that somehow if there's less racism towards blacks, there will be more directed toward whites. IMO, I think it taps into the subconscious idea that whites really do realize how black americans have been abused by this country and fear they have some sort of retribution coming to them and probably deserve it.

    Just another day in Oceania.

    by drshatterhand on Fri Jun 22, 2012 at 06:39:26 PM PDT

    •  equality (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Racists definitely view civil rights as zero sum. It's mind-boggling to hear people claiming victimhood because of increasingly anti-racist attitudes, as if not being able to call someone the n-word means that whites are oppressed.

      •  Well, no one should NOT be able (0+ / 0-)

        to call someone the n-word or any other racial/ethnic slur at that because of free speech, I think a better way to phrase things is that, they can say it but people won't support them and will most likely ridicule them now, and they take that to mean they are being oppressed.

  •  The concept of white privilege fits this zero sum (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    WereBear Walker


    "If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Winston Churchill

    by Kvetchnrelease on Fri Jun 22, 2012 at 07:05:18 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site