• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

Tuppen

Member
Nov 28, 2017
2,053
This. "Whiteness" is just a placeholder, as long as people are willing to buy in and support the system in exchange for at least a perceived higher place in the totem pole and benefits, you're going to continue to run into problems.

Basically, you cant fight fire with fire. Fighting this fight along racial and ethnic lines is actually what the conservatives and fascists want.
Yes, more or less white people makes no difference. The privileged group will just change.

Are you talking about a particular country, because worldwide you can see that progressive initiatives are hindered by more than just a white people majority?

Edit: didn't see US in title. Although, thinking about it, using the rest of the world as an example I'm sceptical that that would be the case.
Yes. Since racism is everywhere there's no reason to believe that less white people would lead to it disappearing.

Yeah, of course. There's nothing special about white people insofar as these issues go. What I mean is that white people will fight for and against progress. People of other ethnicities and races will do the same. It's the power structures that need dismantling. The grotesque income inequality has to be dealt with. That kind of thing.

As a first step, we need to get the hell out there and vote. The Democrats aren't perfect, but the Republicans are proto-fascists, ready to implement it. Getting Democrats in real power can also help us push the Overton Window.

It also feels a bit short sided to wonder about "real progress" when you look at where this country started and compare it to now.
To get some where regarding inequality the discussion needs to be more about class and less about ethnicity. Making it about race and religion is just a way for the wealthy to keep the others down.

I don't think the problem is white people, but rather their (of some) ideology. Otherwise it is like saying, "can Afghanistan ever reach peace as long as Afghans are a majority?". Afghans are not the problem, radical Islam is. Same in the US, the problem is racism, white supremacism and traditionalist Christianity, not white people.
And this is important. People are not the problem, their ideas are.
 

Deleted member 431

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,675
Even if whites are a minority in the country you still have the Electoral College for presidential elections which I believe is a larger hurdle.
 

John Rabbit

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,094
I feel like saying "white people ended slavery" basically ignores the reality of continued rampant systemic racism that minorities deal with on an hourly basis in this country.

Like yeah it's no longer legal to OWN PEOPLE, but rich whites definitely found myriad other more subtle and nefarious ways to keep minorities under their boot and basically keep the same hierarchy in place.

And let's not pretend that the abolishment of slavery and giving women/minorities the right to vote didn't come with it's own obscene amount of pushback from a huge contingent of men/whites.
 

TaySan

SayTan
Member
Dec 10, 2018
31,404
Tulsa, Oklahoma
I believe over time the "privilege group" will change. Much like the Irish, Italians and Ashkenazi Jews at one point were not considered white and our now we'll accepted as white.
 

Deleted member 1635

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,800
more likely they're just viewing those events in their complete and total contextual relationship to today. Progress wasn't on Lincoln's mind when he abolished anything. He was trying to win a war, and wanted to damage his enemy by taking away a fundamental part of their economy.

It's a fact. It may go against the historical storytelling and the subsequent framing in most media, but there it is.

No, you really don't know for sure what was on Lincoln's mind. We only have a variety of evidence from public record and the rest we can only speculate.
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,846
No, because a) progress in the modern era has happened despite that, and b) everyone else isn't some monolithic progressive voting bloc that is all happy together in unity. They have different issues, problems, and interests, and are mostly cohered by a lack of viable alternatives in the present.

Then there's the possibilities floated that East Asians or Hispanics become generally accepted as white as well, and thus expand the bloc. Either way whites will remain the plurality for years.
 

Akira86

Member
Oct 25, 2017
19,585
No, you really don't know for sure what was on Lincoln's mind. We only have a variety of evidence from public record and the rest we can only speculate.
I was legit hoping you wouldn't come back with the ol "you can never know what is on a person's mind" philosophical claptrap.

But actually since he wrote about his motivations, and scholars have kind of studied this, they kinda can.
 
Oct 31, 2017
6,747
I feel like saying "white people ended slavery" basically ignores the reality of continued rampant systemic racism that minorities deal with on an hourly basis in this country.

Like yeah it's no longer legal to OWN PEOPLE, but rich whites definitely found myriad other more subtle and nefarious ways to keep minorities under their boot and basically keep the same hierarchy in place.

And let's not pretend that the abolishment of slavery and giving women/minorities the right to vote didn't come with it's own obscene amount of pushback from a huge contingent of men/whites.

Yeah I'm really appalled that posters are trying to get away with "white people ended slavery and gave equal rights to everyone" but I know if I say much of anything in this thread I'll probably be banned.
 

Deleted member 1635

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,800
I feel like saying "white people ended slavery" basically ignores the reality of continued rampant systemic racism that minorities deal with on an hourly basis in this country.

Like yeah it's no longer legal to OWN PEOPLE, but rich whites definitely found myriad other more subtle and nefarious ways to keep minorities under their boot and basically keep the same hierarchy in place.

And let's not pretend that the abolishment of slavery and giving women/minorities the right to vote didn't come with it's own obscene amount of pushback from a huge contingent of men/whites.

It's takes like this...

To compare the troubles that people face today with outright slavery. It's just ugly and ridiculous, and is going to push any reasonable person away from listening to you.

I was legit hoping you wouldn't come back with the ol "you can never know what is on a person's mind" philosophical claptrap.

But actually since he wrote about his motivations, and scholars have kind of studied this, they kinda can.

Yes, and scholars aren't exactly unified on exactly what Lincoln thought. I only took issue with your calling his motivations a "fact" as if we know everything we could possibly know about his feelings and beliefs based on some of his letters and other documents.

I'm not trying to make Lincoln out to be some ultra-progressive super hero, but I think painting him in the other extreme is probably not going to be accurate, either.
 

Tuppen

Member
Nov 28, 2017
2,053
I was legit hoping you wouldn't come back with the ol "you can never know what is on a person's mind" philosophical claptrap.

But actually since he wrote about his motivations, and scholars have kind of studied this, they kinda can.
So if ending slavery was just a way to win an ongoing war, why did the south secede?
 

John Rabbit

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,094
It's takes like this...

To compare the troubles that people face today with outright slavery. It's just ugly and ridiculous, and is going to push any reasonable person away from listening to you.
Yeah I didn't do anything you just claimed, but okay. I find the statement "white people ended slavery" as some kind of 'proof' that whites are capable of "real progress" to be completely ignorant at best and pointedly dismissive at worst. That's what my post was about. I didn't compare current struggles with past struggles whatsoever.
 

Servbot24

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
43,065
I don't believe any race is genetically inferior to another, so no.

It will take a massive education and political overhaul though.
 

Heraldic

Prophet of Regret
The Fallen
Oct 28, 2017
1,633
This thread is the epitome of an ERA thread. Absolute bonkers. White people on here with an absolute self loathing. Y'all gone full satire.
 

Akira86

Member
Oct 25, 2017
19,585
So if ending slavery was just a way to win an ongoing war, why did the south secede?
Abolition had been going as a movement long before Lincoln came into the mix. The South did not secede because Lincoln threatened to make them be good and not slavers anymore. They didn't want *anyone* to turn that lever, or even to have the power to do so. Lincoln turned the lever, during the war, because it would hurt the South.
 

Deleted member 431

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,675
Yeah I'm really appalled that posters are trying to get away with "white people ended slavery and gave equal rights to everyone" but I know if I say much of anything in this thread I'll probably be banned.
It also ignores the fact that blacks fought for their freedom every step of the way, and weren't simply given it to them by the good graces of white people.
 

Doomsayer

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,621
Progress is always going to be fought against by close minded people. There are tons of white politicians who even now are suggesting MAJOR fundamental changes and progressive ideals (look at what Bernie Sanders literally just proposed about prisons, Warren and her internet suggestion).

There are people who are going to fight with them about it because they are genuinely terrible people and also because of money. Money doesn't have a specific race attached to it. Money and power corrupt all. To say or even suggest that is no way progress can be made with white people in charge is fucking nonsensical garbage.
 

Powdered Egg

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
17,070
Am I in before "Obama would have never been elected if it wasn't for us Whites. You're welcome!" ?

And I am sticking to my guns equality is at least 200yrs out and wouldnt be surprised if it never happens. This nation was built on anti-Blackness/White Supremacy and would be unrecognizable without it. White Americans ain't ready for that.
 

Elfforkusu

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,098
Quantify "progress" .

I'd argue we're making progress. The racists are desperate, they know they're losing their grasp on things and they're lashing out.

(This may be optimistic, but i'm not optimistic about most things)
 
Oct 31, 2017
6,747
It also ignores the fact that blacks fought for their freedom every step of the way, and weren't simply given it to them by the good graces of white people.

Exactly, it completely ignores that freedoms and civil rights were fought for tooth and nail and hardly given in whole at any time, even now. They probably think black men were voting free and easy before white women, too.
 

TDLink

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
8,411
Yes. What is this question?

There are a ton of other, far more progressive, countries that are majority white. But honestly it has nothing to do with the race of the majority of any given country. Like others have brought up in this thread too, while the US has always been majority white, there HAS been progress since its founding. And there will continue to be.

Also, you're never going to get rid of the majority because new people will get inducted into the majority, just like how Italians, Irish, and Jews have in the past.
 

Deleted member 1635

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,800
Abolition had been going as a movement long before Lincoln came into the mix. The South did not secede because Lincoln threatened to make them be good and not slavers anymore. They didn't want *anyone* to turn that lever, or even to have the power to do so. Lincoln turned the lever, during the war, because it would hurt the South.

The only reason the war started though, was because the Republicans opposed the expansion of slavery and it was pretty clear they wanted to move to abolishing it entirely, which caused the pro-slave states to attempt secession. So, yeah, he made the emancipation proclamation after the war began, but it's not like it was just some opportunist act and they didn't give a shit about abolishing slavery at all.
 
Oct 30, 2017
8,706
More specifically, I think the greater/more specific impetus to progress is the Republican Party dominating our politics as a minority party. The smaller party is dominating our politics. Aligned with big money interests, the ability to change on a structural level is tough.
 

Akira86

Member
Oct 25, 2017
19,585
The only reason the war started though, was because the Republicans opposed the expansion of slavery and it was pretty clear they wanted to move to abolishing it entirely, which caused the pro-slave states to attempt secession. So, yeah, he made the emancipation proclamation after the war began, but it's not like it was just some opportunist act and they didn't give a shit about abolishing slavery at all.
as much as I wanted to once believe in America having some kind of progressive foundation, despite itself, through the benevolence of its representative democracy. I've instead come to believe that America is mostly about practicality, and high minded ideals are not flying out of windows, they are thrown at high velocity. They didn't give many shits about abolishing slavery and truly didn't give a shit what happened to those former slaves.
 
Jun 20, 2019
2,638
I don't understand the working theory here. Is it racial essentialism making white people out to be pre-disposed to be the villains of history? Or is it that social structures within white demographics that lead to structural racism are too engrained within white culture to dismantle without force?
 

Tuppen

Member
Nov 28, 2017
2,053
Abolition had been going as a movement long before Lincoln came into the mix. The South did not secede because Lincoln threatened to make them be good and not slavers anymore. They didn't want *anyone* to turn that lever, or even to have the power to do so. Lincoln turned the lever, during the war, because it would hurt the South.
I don't really get your point. Maybe Lincoln wouldn't have been the president to abolish slavery if the south hadn't seceded but they did so since the writing was on the wall. It seems unlikely that slavery in the US wouldn't have been abolished during the 19th century either way and it would have been done by a white congress and president. Which was the original point that progress can be made while white people are the majority.

The only reason the war started though, was because the Republicans opposed the expansion of slavery and it was pretty clear they wanted to move to abolishing it entirely, which caused the pro-slave states to attempt secession. So, yeah, he made the emancipation proclamation after the war began, but it's not like it was just some opportunist act and they didn't give a shit about abolishing slavery at all.
This
 

samoyed

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
15,191
Yeah, Civil War, Civil Rights, Stonewall, but it's always threatened to be rolled back by the white majority.
 
Oct 27, 2017
7,973
Yes? I don't think race has so much to do with it, it's just parts of majority panicking at losing their status atm. Lots of progress has been accomplished already with a white majority though, including major inroads in LGBT rights most recently.

Like, worldwide even non whites can be cruel and opressive, it's not exclusive to white people.
Exactly this. Look at the thread about LBGTQ people in Palestine, people with power and status hold down people who can threaten that power and status
 

Akira86

Member
Oct 25, 2017
19,585
I hoped we could all agree that the abolition of slavery was meaningful progress, but it seems that may not be the case.
abolition didn't happen at the proclamation. people said a lot of things they didn't do and didn't get done for another 100 years at that point. So where one person can see a great revolution, someone else can see the sun rising and the sun setting.

and knowing that the sun just might rise and set again tomorrow.

but the signature and the intentions and all of that, admittedly it was a small step in a better direction.
 

samoyed

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
15,191
The white lash to the civil war was Jim Crow.

The white lash to civil rights was the war on drugs.

The white lash to Obama was Trump.

Progress can be made, but the white majority bleeds nonwhites for every inch.
 

Gobias-Ind

Member
Nov 22, 2017
4,022
Uh, I dunno. I think we can make progress if we can reinvigorate participation in democracy and shake up our economic system. Build and anchor economic power in traditionally underserved communities. Nationalize Wal-Mart. Stuff like that.

I think if your theory of change includes a need for demographic changes you should probably go ahead and articulate how you're going to make those demographics change.
 

Deleted member 1635

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,800
abolition didn't happen at the proclamation. people said a lot of things they didn't do and didn't get done for another 100 years at that point. So where one person can see a great revolution, someone else can see the sun rising and the sun setting.

and knowing that the sun just might rise and set again tomorrow.

Of course it didn't happen immediately with the proclamation. Things rarely happen over night, but it seems like you're wanting to act as if the proclamation was ultimately meaningless and things would have played out exactly the same without it and Lincoln's actions. I see why you would feel that way, since you've already said expressed your disillusionment with the American ideals.
 

TSM

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,821
I don't think we can have real long term progress anywhere on this planet as long as the current paradigm of capitalism exists. Bad behavior is almost always far more profitable than good behavior. Bad actors will continuously be undermining any good people are trying to accomplish because there's money in it for them.
 
OP
OP
808s & Villainy
Oct 27, 2017
42,700
I don't understand the working theory here. Is it racial essentialism making white people out to be pre-disposed to be the villains of history? Or is it that social structures within white demographics that lead to structural racism are too engrained within white culture to dismantle without force?
The bolded. It's less about white Americans being bad, which was never my point or implied in what I posted, and more that enough of them are resistant to any systemic changes that might erode their privileges that becoming the minority and being forced to adjust might be the only way those systemic issues can actually be addressed
 

squeakywheel

Member
Oct 29, 2017
6,077
Very difficult for now. Maybe when the rural folks finally learn to accept "others" without judgment in about 50 years or so.
 

MegaBeefBowl

Member
Oct 31, 2017
1,890
Online politics seem to be way farther left than the actual electorate, and there seems to be a lot of assumptions about conservatism being a white thing.

Would whites losing the majority result in progress? In areas regarding racial discrimination, probably.

But we seem to not recognize things like, Latinos being very socially conservative. They have the lowest approval on weed legalization at 49%. They're tied with Black Americans on the disapproval of abortion. Speaking of Black Americans, they're the last group in the US to hit over 50% approval on same sex marriage (2016, whereas Hispanics and Whites made the mark in 2012-13).

Progress is complicated. The social values of different cultures and communities means progress in different aspects. Waving a magic wand and Thanos snapping all the Whites wouldn't solve every problem. Also, I'd wager that the discussion that it might, is potentially alienating to our white allies.
 

Nepenthe

When the music hits, you feel no pain.
Administrator
Oct 25, 2017
20,676
The white lash to the civil war was Jim Crow.

The white lash to civil rights was the war on drugs.

The white lash to Obama was Trump.

Progress can be made, but the white majority bleeds nonwhites for every inch.
This is my initial take. Progress has undoubtedly been made within America, but it always comes with a million different asterisks and addendums that people like to forget or handwave.
 
OP
OP
808s & Villainy
Oct 27, 2017
42,700
But we seem to not recognize things like, Latinos being very socially conservative. They have the lowest approval on weed legalization at 49%. They're tied with Black Americans on the disapproval of abortion. Speaking of Black Americans, they're the last group in the US to hit over 50% approval on same sex marriage (2016, whereas Hispanics and Whites made the mark in 2012-13).
These are all fair points and I'm glad you brought them up. Conservatism isn't limited to white Americans and other groups have their own issues that they're being, in terms of progress, on. I think the key difference is what different groups view as their key issue or litmus tests. Essentially the driving force behind single issue voters.

Take Black Americans for instance with regards to acceptance of same sex marriage. Whereas it took them longest to have >50% acceptance of same-sex marriage, it doesn't appear to be a key issue in terms of what party/candidate they vote for given the overwhelming percentage who vote Democrat regardless even when the candidate/party is entirely in favor of it. Now there could, and probably are, a number of other factors behind that which I'll readily admit I don't know

 

Haze

Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,776
Detroit, MI
That's a tough question.

We managed to kill slavery and end a good bit of federally-endorsed discrimination with a white majority, but there's still so much to do. I'd say not necessarily a hard "no" but it's definitely a major impediment.
And it feels like a majority of white people think this was all that need to be done and we live in a post-racial utopia that is being upset by race baiting minorities that just want to divide us.
 

Deleted member 16025

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,506
What the fuck is going on in this thread? This reads to me like "hey white people are solely responsible for all of America's problems and shit won't get better until they are gone, amirite?"

This thread is disappointing as hell. I thought this forum was supposed to be more progressive than that.
 

MegaBeefBowl

Member
Oct 31, 2017
1,890
These are all fair points and I'm glad you brought them up. Conservatism isn't limited to white Americans and other groups have their own issues that they're being, in terms of progress, on. I think the key difference is what different groups view as their key issue or litmus tests. Essentially the driving force behind single issue voters.

Take Black Americans for instance with regards to acceptance of same sex marriage. Whereas it took them longest to have >50% acceptance of same-sex marriage, it doesn't appear to be a key issue in terms of what party/candidate they vote for given the overwhelming percentage who vote Democrat regardless even when the candidate/party is entirely in favor of it. Now there could, and probably are, a number of other factors behind that which I'll readily admit I don't know

That's an interesting point.

(What i'm about to say is speculative, so if anyone has evidence to the contrary, I'd love to hear it)

I wouldn't be surprised if these demographics aren't becoming single issue voters on these points is because they have more pressing matters to worry about. Your opinion on abortion is likely to take a backseat if you are worried about being violently removed from the country by white supremacists. That makes sense. I do, however, wonder if removing that threat (Whites losing power of majority) would allow for that opinion on abortion to become your single issue?