Rasisme mot Hvite

[Crooked Cracker]

jjkoggan skrev (1 time siden):

No, because only white people are capable of shaping institutional racism except in very isolated environments in western societies.

Certain white people are capable of this, and sometimes they do it to other white people as well. However not all racism is institutional.

jjkoggan skrev (1 time siden):

 

 Greg will have a better shot at getting a job than Jamal no matter how often black people call the Greg’s of the world honkies, but the same is not true for Jamal.

That doesn't change that an intention of using 'honkie' can be racist.

jjkoggan skrev (1 time siden):

As far as interpersonal racism goes, both sides can be equally harmful, but the toolbox of epithets for black people to use against whites is weak and limited due mostly to the lack of historical oppression whites have suffered from blacks.  I doubt many white Americans even know what the slurs against whites are, they are so impotent and imprecise.

 

I think this is more due to fact that generally white people are not being encouraged to feel like a victim over words, however racism may manifest in other ways like violence that surely will be felt equally on the body, less you think white people have some superpower there aswell. 

[jjkoggan]

Crooked Cracker skrev (31 minutter siden):

Certain white people are capable of this, and sometimes they do it to other white people as well. However not all racism is institutional.

That doesn't change that an intention of using 'honkie' can be racist.

I think this is more due to fact that generally white people are not being encouraged to feel like a victim over words, however racism may manifest in other ways like violence that surely will be felt equally on the body, less you think white people have some superpower there aswell. 

Culture/beliefs and practices that create institutional racism come from all corners of society, not just a chosen few elites as you repeatedly imply. 
 

And yes, interpersonal racism can be equally evil and tragic regardless of ethnicity.  Again, interpersonal racism can be equally evil and tragic.  A white hating Breivik could hurt just as many people as a black hating Breivik.  

The only superpower white people have is more social power to create and influence culture, attitudes, beliefs laws and practices than minorities that create institutional racism.  

Endret 19. april av jjkoggan

[Boing_80]

Neptun1 skrev (3 timer siden):

De gamle egyptere, syrere, irakere osv. som på mange måter brakte verden videre var ikke arabere.
Araberne var - og er et krigersk folkeslag fra den arabiske halvøy som invaderte og islamiserte alle landene i Midt-Østen og Nord-Afrika på 600-tallet.
Å si at de har bidratt med store oppfinnelser er som å storme inn i biblioteket i Alexandria og påstå man har skrevet alle bøkene der.

Araberne ødela det som var bygget i Midt-Østen - og ødeleggelsene fra før-islamsk tid fortsetter den dag i dag.
https://www.nrk.no/urix/dette-er-kulturminnene-is-skal-ha-odelagt-sa-langt-1.12372615

Så mye bullshit og manglende kunnskaper!!! Vil du være dum så må du bare være det, men historien forteller noe annet 

Herregud! Må bare flire over noe så obskønt dumt som  er skrevet i den siterte teksten.

Endret 19. april av Boing_80

[Crooked Cracker]

jjkoggan skrev (17 minutter siden):

Culture/beliefs and practices that create institutional racism come from all corners of society, not just a chosen few elites as you repeatedly imply. 

Institutional means it's coming from certain places with influence, not everyday commoners.

jjkoggan skrev (17 minutter siden):

And yes, interpersonal racism can be equally evil and tragic regardless of ethnicity.  Again, interpersonal racism can be equally evil and tragic.  A white hating Breivik could hurt just as many people as a black hating Breivik.  

Yes, and it should be adressed as such.

jjkoggan skrev (17 minutter siden):

The only superpower white people have is more social power to create and influence culture, attitudes, beliefs laws and practices than minorities that create institutional racism.  

Obviously not the case for the world, where whites are a minority themselves. Like I said you can't conflate certain societal conditions on to entire races, it will simply be wrong. I suggest you may call it majorityism or powerism and seperate these terms from racism.  

[Neptun1]

Boing_80 skrev (1 time siden):

Så mye bullshit og manglende kunnskaper!!! Vil du være dum så må du bare være det, men historien fortteller noe annet 

Herregud! Må bare flire over noe så obskønt dumt som  er skrevet i den siterte teksten.

T.o.m. Spania ble erobret av de blodtørstige hordene.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Muslim_conquests

[Boing_80]

Neptun1 skrev (36 minutter siden):

T.o.m. Spania ble erobret av de blodtørstige hordene.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Muslim_conquests

Fortsett med avsporingene. Du har hittil gjort en særdeles god jobb.

[Martelè]

Boing_80 skrev (16 minutter siden):

Fortsett med avsporingene. Du har hittil gjort en særdeles god jobb.

Hva skjer?

[Boing_80]

Martelè skrev (1 time siden):

Hva skjer?

Liverpool vinner.

[SkyMarshall Arts]

Har enda til gode å bli diskriminert mot som hvit i Norge. Eneste må vel være noe drittslenging på avstand fra de rimelig usmakelige gjengene med muslimske ungdommer som reker rundt i Drammen sentrum og bidrar til samfunn og trivsel. Bortsett fra det må "rasisme mot hvite" være noe tøv som er arvet og importert fra amerikansk media/sosiale medier og lite relevant her til lands. Men nå bor jeg på landet, så er kanskje annerledes innover der betongen tar over.

[Martelè]

SkyMarshall Arts skrev (2 timer siden):

Men nå bor jeg på landet, så er kanskje annerledes innover der betongen tar over.

Ja, det burde vel være ganske logisk

[JornHansen]

Neptun1 skrev (15 timer siden):

Hva er det du forsøker å si med dette bildet?
- At araberne er heldige som bor på et hav av olje (som eies av noen få familier), at Vesten har dyktige arkitekter og ingeniører eller at bygningsarbeidere fra Asia er billige? Ikke én eneste ting gjør de selv.

Det er flott å se at du ruller deg rundt i din egen raseteori. Det viser med all tydelighet hvor rasistisk du faktisk er, og at ingen som er imot rasisme trenger å ta deg på alvor.

[JornHansen]

Boing_80 skrev (12 timer siden):

Så mye bullshit og manglende kunnskaper!!! Vil du være dum så må du bare være det, men historien forteller noe annet 

Herregud! Må bare flire over noe så obskønt dumt som  er skrevet i den siterte teksten.

Jepp. Når man lirer av seg det der og linker til en nyhet om IS så tenker jeg vi har nådd et foreløpig lavmål.

[Neptun1]

JornHansen skrev (7 timer siden):

Det er flott å se at du ruller deg rundt i din egen raseteori. Det viser med all tydelighet hvor rasistisk du faktisk er, og at ingen som er imot rasisme trenger å ta deg på alvor.

Hva har din elendige kommentar med noe av det (spesifikke) jeg skrev å gjøre?
Ingenting selvfølgelig fordi hjernevasken har virket. 

Virker ikke som noen i målgruppen har hørt om den muslimske ekspansjonen på 600 tallet.

Endret 20. april av Neptun1

[jjkoggan]

Crooked Cracker skrev (19 timer siden):

Institutional means it's coming from certain places with influence, not everyday commoners..  

No, institutional in this sense means it is established as a convention or norm in a culture, something that many ordinary people like teachers, nurses, police persons, doctors, real estate agents/salespeople etc.. do and establish it as  a cultural norm that hinders minorities.  It becomes so deeply embedded in a culture that many aren't aware it is happening.

Sitat

Yes, and it should be adressed as such.

Certainly, but not seen as the only form of racism, nor as equally evil when it is a reaction to oppression.  A slave who kills the brutal slave owner should not receive the same degree of punishment as the slave owner who kills the slave.

 

Sitat

Obviously not the case for the world, where whites are a minority themselves. Like I said you can't conflate certain societal conditions on to entire races, it will simply be wrong. I suggest you may call it majorityism or powerism and seperate these terms from racism

Obviously I was talking about a western context.  Discrimination based on race is racism even though power is a main component of institutional racism.  The colonial era showed also that minorities can oppress other races with enough power.   Even today the economic hegemony and influence of the western world often garners white privilege in the non-western world as it tries emulate the economic success of the west.

[Crooked Cracker]

jjkoggan skrev (16 minutter siden):

No, institutional in this sense means it is established as a convention or norm in a culture, something that many ordinary people like teachers, nurses, police persons, doctors, real estate agents/salespeople etc.. do and establish it as  a cultural norm that hinders minorities.  It becomes so deeply embedded in a culture that many aren't aware it is happening.

Well according to the dictionary the word means 'of, in, or like an institution or institutions'. Also, if you want to define it as you do it's fair to say that institutional racism also occurs against white people as seen with many articles and other outlets that straight up problematize white people.  

jjkoggan skrev (16 minutter siden):

Certainly, but not seen as the only form of racism, nor as equally evil when it is a reaction to oppression. 

This is a dangerously bad take, some scrawny and lonesome white kid getting harassed or beaten up for his skin color is not a defendable reaction to oppression, it's just crude thuggery with racist motives.

jjkoggan skrev (16 minutter siden):

 

A slave who kills the brutal slave owner should not receive the same degree of punishment as the slave owner who kills the slave.

As said countless times to you aready, the slave\owner relation can't be applied to every white and non-white person in the world.  

jjkoggan skrev (16 minutter siden):

 

Obviously I was talking about a western context.

Not, the term racism is not restricted to the western world.

jjkoggan skrev (16 minutter siden):

 

  Discrimination based on race is racism even though power is a main component of institutional racism.  The colonial era showed also that minorities can oppress other races with enough power. 

That means racism can exist without any white people involved. Glad we sorted that out.

jjkoggan skrev (16 minutter siden):

 

 Even today the economic hegemony and influence of the western world often garners white privilege in the non-western world as it tries emulate the economic success of the west.

That is successful and rich privilige, you keep making the same logical fallacy of conflating certain conditions to race in absolute terms. I've tried to explain this repeatedly to you yet you insist on making this error. There are certain correlations between race and wealth but defining enire races accordingly will always lead to a clear inconsistency in the real world.  

[jjkoggan]

Crooked Cracker skrev (20 timer siden):

Well according to the dictionary the word means 'of, in, or like an institution or institutions'. Also, if you want to define it as you do it's fair to say that institutional racism also occurs against white people as seen with many articles and other outlets that straight up problematize white people.  

An institution in sociology is a bit different than what you might be thinking of and yes, institutional racism is not specific to a certain race as I have told you many times, one could certainly argue that south african whites experience institutional racism to some degree, for example. In the west, however it is difficult for minorities to exert meaningful institutional racism because it is not widespread enough nor in enough positions of power to be significant except in very isolated situations.

 

“Institutional racism” can be defined as the racial attitudes found in a ethnic group’s traditions, beliefs, opinions, and myths that are firmly ingrained in the very fiber of the ethnic group’s cultural paradigm, where such traditions, beliefs, opinions, and myths have been practiced and sustained for so long, that they are accepted as common facts, understood to be normal behavioral practices whereas, such practices in effect marginalize, and demonize the human worth of another ethnic group.

Sitat

 

This is a dangerously bad take, some scrawny and lonesome white kid getting harassed or beaten up for his skin color is not a defendable reaction to oppression, it's just crude thuggery with racist motives.

As said countless times to you aready, the slave\owner relation can't be applied to every white and non-white person in the world.  

 

Violence is never the answer and should always be condemned and punished, but reactions to oppression are not just crude thuggery,  they are a reaction to unfair practices that serve to oppress.   The oppressors are the ones that are thugs.

The slave/owner metaphor is not to say every white/nonwhite situation is the same,  it is just to illustrate that on a moral basis oppressors and the oppressed are not the same.

 

Sitat

Not, the term racism is not restricted to the western world.

Nor have I ever asserted that it is restricted to the western world. 

Sitat

That means racism can exist without any white people involved. Glad we sorted that out.

No, there have to be at least 2 races, though they are not required to live with each other.

Sitat

That is successful and rich privilige, you keep making the same logical fallacy of conflating certain conditions to race in absolute terms. I've tried to explain this repeatedly to you yet you insist on making this error. There are certain correlations between race and wealth but defining enire races accordingly will always lead to a clear inconsistency in the real world.  

There is no logical fallacy.   People can make assumptions based on skin color, i.e.   white skin = wealth,  black skin = poverty/crime in certain corners of the world.  Assumptions about persons based on their skin color is racist in nature.

I have tried many times to explain to you that I am not conflating certain conditions to race in absolute terms.  I think you are assuming that because I am discussing racism in the western world that I think it applies universally.  If so , you have minsunderstood.

[JornHansen]

Neptun1 skrev (På 20.4.2025 den 18.16):

Hva har din elendige kommentar med noe av det (spesifikke) jeg skrev å gjøre?
Ingenting selvfølgelig fordi hjernevasken har virket. 

Virker ikke som noen i målgruppen har hørt om den muslimske ekspansjonen på 600 tallet.

Hvis du hadde hatt minimalt med historiekunnskap så hadde du vist at Europa ikke hadde noe som helst å komme med i år 600. Det var bare vikingene som hadde litt krigskunst, mest fordi vi hadde de beste båtene og fordi vi hadde en religion som gjorde oss ekstremt blodtørstige og uredde. Romerriket hadde vært dødt i over 100 år og vi hadde bare barbarer igjen til å styre Europa. Selvsagt kunne muslimene ekspandere når vi bare hadde bablende ullhuer her i Europa. 

Kan du ikke bare lese en bok eller noe istedenfor for å komme med de infantile teoriene dine?

[Neptun1]

JornHansen skrev (2 minutter siden):

Hvis du hadde hatt minimalt med historiekunnskap så hadde du vist at Europa ikke hadde noe som helst å komme med i år 600. Det var bare vikingene som hadde litt krigskunst, mest fordi vi hadde de beste båtene og fordi vi hadde en religion som gjorde oss ekstremt blodtørstige og uredde. Romerriket hadde vært dødt i over 100 år og vi hadde bare barbarer igjen til å styre Europa. Selvsagt kunne muslimene ekspandere når vi bare hadde bablende ullhuer her i Europa. 

Kan du ikke bare lese en bok eller noe istedenfor for å komme med de infantile teoriene dine?

Vanskelig å forstå hva du vil frem til.
Jeg linket til kart av den muslimske ekspansjonen på 600-tallet. Av europeiske land var det kun Spania som ble invadert av araber-muslimer sørfra.

Siden kom det osmanske riket - som hadde sitt utspring fra Tyrkia. De regjerte over en del av dagens sør/øst-europeiske land til de ble kastet ut. Albania er fremdeles muslimsk.

[Boing_80]

Neptun1 skrev (32 minutter siden):

Vanskelig å forstå hva du vil frem til.
Jeg linket til kart av den muslimske ekspansjonen på 600-tallet. Av europeiske land var det kun Spania som ble invadert av araber-muslimer sørfra.

Siden kom det osmanske riket - som hadde sitt utspring fra Tyrkia. De regjerte over en del av dagens sør/øst-europeiske land til de ble kastet ut. Albania er fremdeles muslimsk.

Det er jo helt åpenbart hva du prøver på. Du prøver å skape en dikkotomi  der Europa =  de snille og resten av verden som de slemme. Er det en ting historien og historikere  har lært oss så er det at kontekstuelle faktorer spiller en stor rolle i verdenshistorien.

[Crooked Cracker]

jjkoggan skrev (2 timer siden):

An institution in sociology is a bit different than what you might be thinking of

I'll stick with the dictionary definiton.

jjkoggan skrev (2 timer siden):

 

one could certainly argue that south african whites experience institutional racism to some degree

Well I suppose institutions by your definition wants them dead, so a tad racism there maybe.

jjkoggan skrev (2 timer siden):

 

, for example. In the west, however it is difficult for minorities to exert meaningful institutional racism because it is not widespread enough nor in enough positions of power to be significant except in very isolated situations.

With todays demographics it may be more widepread than you perhaps think.

jjkoggan skrev (2 timer siden):

 

“Institutional racism” can be defined as the racial attitudes found in a ethnic group’s traditions, beliefs, opinions, and myths that are firmly ingrained in the very fiber of the ethnic group’s cultural paradigm, where such traditions, beliefs, opinions, and myths have been practiced and sustained for so long, that they are accepted as common facts, understood to be normal behavioral practices whereas, such practices in effect marginalize, and demonize the human worth of another ethnic group.

To me that sound like common racism but I never went to sociology class tho.

jjkoggan skrev (2 timer siden):

Violence is never the answer and should always be condemned and punished, but reactions to oppression are not just crude thuggery,  they are a reaction to unfair practices that serve to oppress.   The oppressors are the ones that are thugs.

Is that really how you would describe an incident where one little kid gets beaten up for being white? That's a bit disturbing.  

jjkoggan skrev (2 timer siden):

The slave/owner metaphor is not to say every white/nonwhite situation is the same,  it is just to illustrate that on a moral basis oppressors and the oppressed are not the same.

So you would think it's moral to beat up or harass individuals who shares an arbitrary trait with the actual oppressors?

jjkoggan skrev (2 timer siden):

 

Nor have I ever asserted that it is restricted to the western world. 

You claimed it was obvious we talked about the west, yet we never stipulated that. 

jjkoggan skrev (2 timer siden):

There is no logical fallacy.   People can make assumptions based on skin color, i.e.   white skin = wealth,  black skin = poverty/crime in certain corners of the world.  Assumptions about persons based on their skin color is racist in nature.

Going by you oppressor\majority\power reasoning there will be assumptions about skin color tho, it's why I argued against it.

jjkoggan skrev (2 timer siden):

I have tried many times to explain to you that I am not conflating certain conditions to race in absolute terms.  I think you are assuming that because I am discussing racism in the western world that I think it applies universally.  If so , you have minsunderstood.

You are conflating like crazy, and even when limited to the western countries there will be discrepancies. it's why it's not a good idea to attribute certain power\influence\oppressiveness to skin color, something you clearly did.