As a <White>Italian</White>, I surely feel demonized by the Guardian style of 'journalism' and American leftists. Too bad no one is calling them out. I guess Fascist tendencies too are acknowledged out of convenience, not rationality.
1. You can write a civil rebuttal that uses evidence to dismantle the point he's trying to make.
2. You can downvote him.
What you should not do is write a comment like this, where you vent emotionally without providing anything for anyone to grasp onto or respond to. Those kinds of comments get flagged (by clicking the timestamp on the comment, revealing the "Flag" button).
What. What?
Okay the last 2 years of political history have been a major, successful backlash by white men. Donald Trump won the election largely by the white vote. Brexit is happening largely due to the British brand of white identity politics.
> Yet, such racial discrimination is accepted and normalized.
What the heck are you talking about? White people and in particular white men still dominate the capital of a very large portion of the world. They're still over-represented in every growth sector of the economy in the US. They're still receiving more leniancy for crimes than equivalent socioeconomic substitutes that are non-white.
Are you mad because people notice this and are frustrated with the pace of change in your Facebook feed? Are you mad because you're confusing that gentle pressure with an actual injustice?
> White people and in particular white men still dominate the capital of a very large portion of the world.
Does this fact make slandering any better? what's the minimum economic divide that gives me a free pass over hate speech?
> They're still over-represented in every growth sector of the economy in the US.
The Japanese are over-represented in every growth sector of the economy in Japan. The Chinese are over-represented in every growth sector of the economy in China. US is majority white, plus there's a constant flux of people from Europe. People of different cultures, but mostly sharing the same skin color. US is also leading the efforts toward more diversity.
> They're still receiving more leniancy for crimes than equivalent socioeconomic substitutes that are non-white.
Statistics alone don't tell us the reason why. But you should try going from prison to prison to teach white inmates about their privilege. And, again, poor white people are not fed and sheltered by magic of statistical average.
> Are you mad because people notice this and are frustrated with the pace of change in your Facebook feed?
I'm afraid people think physical violence is something to be celebrated and used against political opponents. But your condescending tone is not worthy of further discussion.
I'm not sure that anyone is "radicalizing" the population anymore than it already is. America has had a small but vocal radical left for a long time.
> Does this fact make slandering any better? what's the minimum economic divide that gives me a free pass over hate speech?
I really wish I knew what you were talking about.
> The Japanese are over-represented in every growth sector of the economy in Japan. [etc]
These are unfair comparisons and you know it. I used the term "over-represented" carefully. We'd expect a regression of the workforce to something roughly approaching the actual national population averages. Instead, we do not see that at all.
> Being against Trump is not mutually exclusive to holding media accountable.
I really wish I understood even remotely what you were actually aiming at. "Holding media accountable?"
> I'm afraid people think physical violence is something to be celebrated and used against political opponents.
Okay, stop right here. Let's break this down, because I _do_ think I know what you're talking about. You're mad because #punchanazi is a thing, and because Richard Spencer has been hit twice.
Let's point two things out here:
1. In general, the protest in the US has been overwhelmingly and surprisingly peaceful with the exception of a very small number of extreme groups in the margins, _with 2 exceptions_. Both involve members of a vocal minority of people who incite violence against vulnerable people while claiming that is their ideology.
2. Richard Spencer is someone who plainly and loudly advocates for the removal of anyone who is not "white" from America, by force if necessary. He advocates the end of a free and open society to create a "white homeland." He is not a 'political opponent.' He's an advocate for the collapse of a free, democratic society into a religiously motivated fascist state.
He's a special case. And he represents a historically special case. And before you say I'm misrepresenting his case, you should listen to him talk to people who accuse him of being a fascist actor.
> But your condescending tone is not worthy of further discussion.
It's not my fault you refuse to actually mount an argument there, Red_Tarsius. Other people who are not me and lack my somewhat wry writing style have pointed out you're not bringing much to the table other than hemming and hawing about how put upon you feel and how we should all play nice with the actual nazis among us.
You call yourself "an enemy." I wonder what you think that's really like. There's a really sharp divide in my life around the things that made me feel bad and the people who genuinely hurt me for what I was. I only consider one group my enemy.
Shame only works inasmuch as you believe folks have a point. It doesn't work on the guiltless or the guileless.
These objections do not necessarily imply that we should not attempt to publicly shame shameworthy behavior, but such tactics do harm some people who are guiltless (unless "guilt" here is intended to include feeling a sense of guilt without having actually done something wrong, in which case the statement seems tautological) and guileless. So does asserting that they don't in a public setting like this, independently of whether the particular individual the assertion is deployed against is themselves worthy of disapproval.
Have you been in suspended animation for the past century or so?