- cross-posted to:
- memes@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- memes@lemmy.ml
cross-posted from: https://hexbear.net/post/7760707
“Death to Germany because they say their reason for existing is to support ‘Israel’[1]? That’s genocidal against Germans.”
Sorry, but I don’t care about your colonizer fragility.
Not a joke, they call this “Staatsräson”. ↩︎
You must log in or register to comment.
If those feddit.org mods knew how to read this post they’d be very upset.
They can’t even see it anymore, because of the defederation. Which is very much a good thing. I can just imagine how those feddit trolls would react to this.
Well, i mean, for hundreds of years western white peoples idea of self determination was hunting people of color for sport… so…
Something something accusations and confessions with these people
Yes, it’s always projection. The reason they’re afraid of these things is because the imperial core did them and still does them and they project that on the global south.
So like, where would I go?
racist post.
Sorry, but I don’t care about your colonizer fragility.
Do you care about the rules here?
Absolutely no posts or comments meant to relativize(/apologize for), advocate, promote or defend: Racism
Top item in rule 7’s list.
I wonder if you even realise you’re doing it. The false equivalence, the collective blame by skin colour alone…
[Edit: not to mention the apparently absent consideration of the colonized white people with their land stolen, because that would defeat the racist narrative presented here in the OP image.]
This isn’t racism
You’re just in the post and you don’t like it
Fragile little colonizer
There is no such thing as anti-white racism.
You aint a real leftist unless you swallow every sabotage stance ever invented by COINTELPRO.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_Hoc_Committee_for_a_Marxist-Leninist_Party
[T]he time for building a multinational party has not yet come. Since Blacks are more advanced politically than whites (as are Latins, American Indians, etc.), the amalgamation of all groups in one party would result in fragmentation, disunity and the rapid dissolution of such a party. Racism is still so strong as to separate all but the most revolutionary of comrades. […] Blacks must work with Blacks, Latins with Latins, whites with whites.
- An Undercover CIA Agent
The fact that “white” once excluded “Irish” under certain conditions doesn’t make anti-white racism real.
White people can be racist against white skin people cause the concept of race is social construct designed by oppressors to colonize and oppress anyone.
Ireland was colonized by the British since the early 12th century. Irish people have faced inherent power systems that was only in favor of the British.
“Whiteness emerged in the colonial period,” she notes. “Before that there were Normans and Saxons and Irish, and various assorted people, but there weren’t whites as such.”
In what way does whiteness influence our thinking? “Everywhere European colonialism happened – and it happened in Ireland too – there were certain ideas, concepts and categories that got sent out to the world. There was a ranking of peoples, and part of the idea of colonialism was that European peoples were the vanguard of the human race: scientifically, technologically, aesthetically, morally, philosophically, politically.
“Whiteness is a historical formation. You can talk about the Irish experience in very particular terms because they were coming in to the labour market at the lowest of the low. They weren’t included in the club of whiteness in the beginning, but have had a particular experience in colonial migration and the labour market because they were at least seen as European, and so were able to make the shift that I think is harder for African-Americans today or people from Latin America or Asia.”
https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/unthinkable-are-irish-people-becoming-less-black-1.2453237
Or how Eastern Europeans faced violence during Brexit.
One of the most concerning aspects of the study was the reports from the young people on the increasing levels of racism and xenophobia in their neighbourhoods since the Brexit Referendum. This had changed the way they felt about their neighbourhoods and the UK- and was a trigger point for some to think about moving, perhaps to another country. Half of the young people in the study said they have seen more racism and discrimination since the Brexit vote and over 75% said they experienced personal attacks, from verbal abuse, being told to ‘go back’ to their country or being called names, such as ‘terrorist’, ‘prostitute’ or ‘bin scrappers’.
For young people who think of Britain as their home, these experiences are deeply distressing - many told about the disruption to their sense of identity, like Arthur: “I moved here when I was six years old, and even though I speak English with a British accent, as a result of using the language for over 11 years, when people find out I am Polish, I often face racism and discrimination. I find that I belong as long as no one finds out y nationality.”
The rise in hate crime rates was put at 41% by a Home Office report in the year immediately after the Brexit vote, with 5468 incidents recorded. This is likely the tip of the iceberg- young people said they do not normally report incidents, as teachers or police would not treat these incidents seriously- possibly because they are white. As over 500 young people, half of the participants, described incidents they were victims of or they witnessed, the evidence shows that being white is not a protective factor for young people from migrant background living in post-Brexit Britain. To protect themselves, young people said they started avoiding speaking their home language in public, learnt to put on a local accent or tried to ‘blend in’ through the clothes they wore or their appearance. Fears of discrimination and attacks leads young people to deny who they are and their multicultural identity.
Nigel Farage’s very racist Reform Party has a legitimate shot at forming the next UK government. Nigel Farage has gone on the record displaying their hatred for Eastern Europeans.
Farage made his bold claim during a Wednesday morning broadcast, questioning host Nick Ferrari directly. ‘If I said to you that swans were being eaten in Royal Parks in this country, that carp were being taken out of ponds and eaten in this country by people who come from cultures that have a different… would you agree it happened, is happening here?’
He later clarified his belief that the alleged perpetrators were Eastern Europeans from nations where such practices might be culturally acceptable. The Reform UK leader framed the incident as evidence of broader cultural clashes brought on by mass migration, a theme central to his party’s 2025 platform.
Which the hateful allegation of eating swans and carps is the same thing as JD Vance claiming that Haitians are eating cats and dogs.
Or how about Untermensch was a slur to mean to anyone of Eastern European descent.
It was mainly used against “the masses from the East”, that is Jews, Roma, and Slavs (mainly ethnic Poles, Belarusians, Czechs, Ukrainians, Russians and Serbs).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Untermensch
The Aryan master race conceived by Adolf Hitler and the other Nazis graded humans on a scale of pure Aryans to non-Aryans (who were viewed as subhumans).[10] At the top of the scale of pure Aryans were Nordic-type Germans and other Nordic-Aryan Germanic and Northern European peoples, including the Dutch, Scandinavians, and the English.[10] Latins were held to be somewhat inferior, but were tolerated; and the French were thought to have a suitable admixture of Germanic blood.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_policy_of_Nazi_Germany
Or Finnish people in immigrant to the US.
Acrimony toward Finnish social radicals in Minnesota’s political milieu reached a head in the case of John Svan and 15 associates. On January 4, 1908, a trial was held regarding whether John Svan, a socialist, and several other Finnish immigrants would become naturalized United States citizens or not, as the process only was for “whites” and “blacks” in general and district prosecutor John Sweet maintained that Finnish immigrants were Mongols. Sweet linked the “socialistic ideology” of Finnish radicals with other collectivist East Asian philosophies to underscore his position that Finns were of an Asiatic frame of mind that was out of harmony with American thought. The judge, William Alexander Cant, later concluded that the Finnish people may have been Mongolian from the beginning, but that the climate they lived in for a long time, and historical Finnish immigration and assimilation of Germanic tribes (Teutons)—which he considered modern “pure Finns” indistinguishable from—had made the Finnish population one of the whitest people in Europe. If the Finns had Mongol ancestry, it was distant and diluted. John Svan and the others were made naturalized US citizens, and from that day on, the law forbade treating Finnish immigrants and Americans of Finnish descent as not white.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_whiteness_in_the_United_States#Finnish_Americans
Italians had no protection under the law in the US for a period of time. Italians were considered to be white and we’re not given any protection.
The 1891 lynching of eleven Italian men in New Orleans following the murder of police chief David Hennessy highlighted this precarious position. Though legally white, Italians were not fully accepted into the social privileges associated with whiteness. Public reactions to the lynching often portrayed Italians as inherently criminal and racially suspect.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_whiteness_in_the_United_States#Italian_Americans
This is why racism is a social construct created by the ruling class. The definition of whiteness can and will change at the behest of the ruling class to justify oppressing anyone who doesn’t fit the the parameters of being white. Even though historically Irish, Eastern Europeans, Finnish, and Italians have skin color that is white and are not considered white.
White people can be racist against white skin people cause the concept of race is social construct designed by oppressors to colonize and oppress anyone.
This is true, but the distinction between “white people” and “white skin people” makes it clear that the boundaries of “white people” are in effect defined by who is not a target of racism. It is, as you say, a social construct.
Frankly I usually just default to saying fuck the Anglo-Saxons.
A lot of “white” people aren’t Anglo-Saxons, though.
There is no such thing as anti-white racism.
That’s fun when uttered in intentional irony, satirically mocking the implausibility, ignorance, bigotry, denialism, etc. But I suspect you are saying that in all seriousness.
I’m genuinely baffled that you think I or other people who have said the same thing are being ironic. As others have pointed out, racism requires power structures. Anti-white “racism” isn’t real because it has no power structure to enforce it.
not enough people know racism != bigotry
edit: okay, i guess i have to expain.
explanation of the difference between racism and bigotry
what most people call racism is a form of bigotry. in this case what they are talking about is discrimination, hate speech, and hate action based on the socially derived construct of race. what race has been throughout the ages has changed. but some contributing factors to race are phenotype (skin tone, bone structure, hair color, eye color, other physical attributes), national identity, language spoken, and religious practice. in our current age of scientific racism, the most common factors for discrimination on race are phenotype and familial belonging through genetics.
racism is influenced by bigotry, but does not require bigotry to sustain itself. usually racism is established through bigotry and then maintained through access to capital. what racism is is structural social imbalance based on race. racism requires a power shructure that favors one group based on the socially derived construct of race at the expense of another, or multiple other, groupings.
one of the most common misconceptions is that whiteness is determined by skin tone. it is not. whiteness is access to privelege in a color-coded racist society. let’s start by using the racist structure that’s most familiar to me to explain. i live in the so-called united states. i have always live in majority minority neighborhoods. the fact that this is even possible, for me to have lived my entire life in majority minority neighborhoods, suggests a problem. my current neighborhood, my neighbors are all pale. they are, however, not white. they don’t get to be white because the primary determinant of whiteness in the so-called united states because they have accents and dress a little bit differently. for this, the determiners of whiteness, the police, harass them. in otherwords, the police use their access to violence to maintain a racial hierarchy that my neighbors don’t get to benefit from because they’re not white, they’re pale.
this is what is meant when people say “you can’t be racist against white people.” if you could, that would mean they’re not white, because racism requires you having access to privelege in a racial hierarchy and whiteness is who benefits from that. you can be biggoted against white people. and in fact white people with proximity to poverty frequently endure bigotry for not performing whiteness correctly. often, because they’ve grown up in majority minority neighborhoods and have picked up social behaviors from people who do not get to be white, be that how they talk, how they dress, or even how the approach problem solving. if you’ve ever heard the term “white trash” you’ve heard a slur for poor white people that often the people around them take more offense to than they do.
edit 2: boo me all you like. @LeninWeave@lemmy.ml and i rarely agree, and in this case we do, and i’m gonna celebrate that for us. go read a book or something
someone can be prejudiced against white people but simple prejudice is not racism on its own. racism requires social structures
Of course they are serious. Because there is no such thing as anti-white racism
Cracker
“they’ll do to us what we did to them” and then there’s every AES ever and also south africa to show that no, no. no.
but this myth is still going strong.
In this very thread someone seems to be saying that the nationalism of colonized people is the same as european blood and soil nationalism.
They also have “proud Zionist” in their bio which regardless if ironic or not is a sign that someone is a moronic piece of shit with no morals
They called Israel a “national liberation state” in the other comment, which regardless of how many layers of irony are happening seems to be an attempt to dismiss Palestinian national liberation which is deeply disgusting.
I just replied to your other comment
I saw that actually
I know people give trots lots of shit (I do too) but they don’t have takes this bad or as morally reprehensible
(if you check the comments this person made they say stuff like Marxism isn’t moralistic which is true but it’s not like that means that you shouldn’t have morals after all everyone recognizes thatremoved is wrong no matter the context)
They reference Bordiga and constantly admonish national liberation movements in the global south, including Palestinian liberation, and argue against the dissolution of imperialist states as it would “destroy value” and therefore put the advance to socialism backward.
I agree. But please add other imperial countries to your flag list, like for example russian flag and other well known capitalist state from Asia.
This feels like whataboutism, especially if the poster is American. I’m Canadian and I mainly criticize Canada/US/Israel, because that’s the empire I’m a citizen of.
So commenting about imperialist state under anti imperialistic meme is whataboutism?
And I’m living in Europe, and I criticize imperialism that doesn’t affect me that much like usa, Israel, but also Russian imperialism and attack on independent country Ukraine, and that is showing Europe and Poland as it’s enemy. I’m also criticizing Chinese exploitation of Africa, so the thing that gives us very cheap goods.
But what this have to do with the topic, I don’t know.
Do you bite, the hand that feeds you? Do you stay , down on your knees?
Of course these fuckers won’t unilaterally speak out against authoritarians.
EDIT : these people are the kind that will say “Down with rainbow capitalism” and if you ask them “because of the rainbows or because of the capitalism?” they will refuse to give a straight answer.
And where is the most imperialistic country in Europe, Russia ruled by right wing authoritarian regime.
Country well known for constant invigilation, killing opposition, journalists, activists, LGBT people and so on. Country that wants to rebuild old imperium, attacked Ukraine and want to demilitarize eaastern Europe and so on.
deleted by creator
In a last year, how many wars was started by France? How many times France was aggressive towards neighbours? How many times wanted other independent country to cut ties to its allies and get rid of military?
But there’s Africa and other parts of the world. Yes. And Russian forces are also there
We know that usa is the biggest imperialist, but it’s not the only one.
deleted by creator
So France bad because it’s exploiting Africa, but when ruSSia is doing the same thing and way worst things in Europe “that’s doesn’t change the fact…”?
Noone is saying that France is good or not exploiting Africa, but one of us is pretending that Russia is not doing worst things.
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
I’m not sure I understand what this comment means.
Mocking left-wing nationalists since it doesn’t solve anything for those actually being oppressed (3rd world proletariat) and just promotes “blood and soil” type shit
National liberation from imperialism and colonialism is a good thing, actually.
interesting, but national liberation doesn’t create global socialism instantly, so its bad actually. I am very intelligentOh duh I should’ve realized!
As a Motor for liberation.
Nationalism must be abandoned and the national Elite is not allowed to be formed, be it bureaucratic or capitalist.
Otherwise it is just a vehicle from one oppression to the next.
Nationalism as a reaction to imperialism and colonialism is progressive, and aids the liberatory movement. Nationalism in the context of an imperialist country solidifies imperialism. Nationalism is not something that exists in the abstract, but instead is highly contextual.
Yes and therefore after the national liberation was achieved the context of Nationalism Changes drastically
Sure.
i think i’d clarify that there’s a difference between having a national identity and organizing a state around national supremacism. i want to live in a place where i am allowed to be Appalachian. i do not want to live in a place where Appalachian is a state promoted identity and other identities are excluded
There’s also a difference between the kinds of progressive nationalist movements like Algeria in kicking out the French, and creating a national supremacist state.
I’m still not sure I understand. Are you saying that it doesn’t help the third world proletariat for stolen land to be returned to them and for them to have self-determination? Would it not help Palestinians to have their land returned and have control of their own nation?
No it doesn’t help the proletariat, it only changes who the oppressor is and arguably only makes it easier and cheaper in the long run for foreign imperial powers to economically exploit them.
This article honestly sums it up better than I ever could and isn’t too long, I’d recommend giving it a read.
Also, national liberation would simply not work in Palestine - after all, do you really believe that if Palestinians came out furiously waving their flags one morning, it’d make Israel (which is another national liberation state btw) feel bad and stop their genocide and settling?
national liberation would simply not work in Palestine
Congratulations you have the same take as the corrupt as fuck Palestinian authority
what do you propose that we give up and just let ourselves be killed to the point of extermination ??
I know this isn’t hexbear but This is Ramadan and I see this shit
No human language can describe the anger I am feeling right now.
I’m sorry you had to see this kind of garbage comment. Embarrassing that we have “leftists” willing to say things like this.
Thank you comrade
I genuinely wonder where people like this come from cause it’s like they were designed in lab specifically to piss you off
I am not talking about opposing China or Vietnam because for years most western communists opposed china and Maoists in China do oppose pretty much every country in the world including countries like Cuba
I am specifically referring to them sayings Israel is a “national liberation” state ??? and the nonsensical implication that the Palestinian Proletariat should unite wit the Israeli proletariat to overthrow their perspective bourgeoisie
not a single communist in either Palestine or Israel would tell you this because it’s dumb
it’s the equivalent of telling Black people during the civil rights protests that they shouldn’t fight against segregation and instead should unite with the white working class
I’m sorry, comrade.
thanks bro
Israel (which is another national liberation state btw
Israel is a settler colonial state. That is the exact opposite of national liberation. What are you talking about?
national liberation does not only apply to anti-colonial movements
Okay, but that it still doesn’t apply to Isreal. Its a settler colonial state. They took the land from people who were already living there. How could you possibly call that “national liberation”?
Mocking left-wing nationalists since it doesn’t solve anything for those actually being oppressed (3rd world proletariat)
So did the revolutions in Vietnam, or cuba, or north korea, or burkina faso, etc. not help the proletariat and just lead to “blood and soil type shit.” All of those involved colonized people taking back their land and involved elements of nationalism.
Can you name a time this happened?
self determination would solve many of our problems.
how? the people of the global south to my experiece see their role in the world to act as responsible parties to the land they are indigenous to. the people of the global north, be they 1st world or 2nd world, have invaded this land, don’t respect its laws, and have claimed it as their own. this is what is meant by stolen land. it’s not a blood and soil thing where the land belongs to the people via bloodright. it’s more accurate to say the people belong to the land, be that indigenous american relationships to turtle island or the concept in palestinian teaching that they are seeds.
i’m ready adjust my stance, but your notion that landback movements to return people to their stolen land and allow them to manage their society based on their relationship to the land being anti-left, or even fascist, strikes me as very odd at best, and possibly paternalistic at worst
