Just some thoughts about pride in your identity

Not quite but if that is what you want to believe, I have better things to do this evening than write a detailed history of Roman occupation. Either way, it was not an occupation that saw Britons discriminated against on the basis of colour or sexuality so is somewhat out of the bounds of this debate.

Nah - this is just an anti-left take on the whole matter. It is a bit pathetic really.

I'm not white bashing. Just trying to understand why it is ok to be proud to be black but not ok to be proud to be white. I think the bottom line is that as white people, we really don't understand just how good we have it.

Not quite but if that is what you want to believe, I have better things to do this evening than write a detailed history of Roman occupation. Either way, it was not an occupation that saw Britons discriminated against on the basis of colour or sexuality so is somewhat out of the bounds of this debate.



Nah - this is just an anti-left take on the whole matter. It is a bit pathetic really.



I'm not white bashing. Just trying to understand why it is ok to be proud to be black but not ok to be proud to be white. I think the bottom line is that as white people, we really don't understand just how good we have it.

This is very warped take leftists have where eg white people enslaving black people is somehow worse than when black people enslave other black people.

Wrong again the Roman which has many black soldiers were very violent and abusive again British population. Local Britain's where not allowed to marry Romans or allowed to live Roman town etc.

Black people enslaving black people are not doing so because those they are enslaving are black. They are doing it because they don't like those they are enslaving or they come from a rival tribe / country / region.

You seem to be confusing the idea of oppression on the basis of tribe, region or natural resource and oppression based simply on the colour of your skin.

Ok so?

I'm not confusing anything. I'm asking why it's worse to be brutally enslaved because of "racism" than brutally enslaved because of other factors.

Frankly the descendants of white owned black slaves are far better off than their black owned compatriots.

It shouldn't...I would say its the opposite. There is actually little to be proud of in that you were conquered, especially if your ancestor's rolled over without a fight.

It makes me laugh that somehow, enslaving someone for that specific characteristic is sooooooo much worse than all the other examples of it.

Open question
Why is it only ok to be proud of your background only if you have previously been a "victim" (real or imagined) ???

Conversely, why should someone be proud of their background if they have never been a victim?

I think that pride, in general, should come from either overcoming a struggle or accomplishing something. If someone has never struggled or hasn't accomplished anything then I don't see what they should be proud of.

Being proud of something that has never been a hindrance to you is such a weird thing. It would be like me saying I am proud to have white skin or brown hair.

Because it's part of their identity

Seems pretty subjective to me. I don't think people need other peoples validation to be proud of something.

Not really it's pretty normal actually. If you asked an undiscovered indigenous tribe person somewhere if they were proud of their background they would tell you yes.

It's only in our cancerous, atomistic, materialistic, neoliberal "Society" that people feel like this.

Do you think people should be proud of every aspect of their identity? Plenty of things form this: their name, skin colour, eye colour, hair colour, height, weight, sexuality, gender, disabilities (or lack thereof), etc. Even someone's choice of clothes, their job and their hobbies can form their identity.

If you want to be pedantic about it then, sure, pride is ultimately subjective. If we're going to settle on this then I don't see what the point of your question is.

It seems like you are interested more in what some people think of other people's pride, which I've given my own personal opinion on.

I don't consider it cancerous, atomistic, materialistic, *some other buzzowrd*, etc, to not feel pride in many parts of my identity. Is it really "cancerous" that I'm not waving the banner of 'brown eyes pride' or 'no disabilities pride'? Should I wave these banners?

In any case I think you've inadvertently answered my question:

Pride is ultimately pretty subjective and there's no real reason why it should be based on being a victim - and indeed some would argue that's nothing nothing to celebrate about...

Ok so?

I'm not confusing anything. I'm asking why it's worse to be brutally enslaved because of "racism" than brutally enslaved because of other factors.

Frankly the descendants of white owned black slaves are far better off than their black owned compatriots.

This thread is about pride in your identity. I have only been talking about identity regarding colour or sexuality. Brutality is brutality. There are no gradations.

But I have less time for people who are brutal simply because someone looks or thinks differently. Where as I have no time for violence I can at the very least understand the motivation of brutality for resources or land.

So you agree with me then...

Those two things are usually blurred though would you agree? Esp through things like colonialism.