The Student Room Group

More racist stuff

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Retired_Messiah
OK so 3 questions:

1) What actually is a microagression? Anybody got examples?
2) How do they keep PoC down exactly?
3) Why is PoC an acceptable term while coloured people generally isn't, when semantically they both mean exactly the same thing?



If somebody says that on this forum one more time then I will happily let ethnic minorities wipe me off the face of this ****ing earth.


1: What does this mean?

2: No, it isn't code for white genocide. However, it is code for hatred of white people which down the line might lead to a genocidal 5% nation thing, you know, Jay Z and all that.

I'll give you a micro aggression my lad. White people living. Because according to the "liberal" definition of it, white people oppress black people or something.

Load of tosh.
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by _Winston_
1: What does this mean?

2: No, it isn't code for white genocide. However, it is code for hatred of white people which down the line might lead to a genocidal 5% nation thing, you know, Jay Z and all that.

I'll give you a micro aggression my lad. White people living. Because according to the "liberal" definition of it, white people oppress black people or something.

Load of tosh.

You are not the type for whom the questions were aimed at.
Original post by Retired_Messiah
You are not the type for whom the questions were aimed at.


Fair 'nuf.
Original post by _Winston_
Fair 'nuf.


Your avatar and name may well be it... :biggrin:
Original post by Captain Haddock
And I'm here all day, everyday. About 60% of London is white, and about 60% of rough sleepers in London are also white. Ethnic minorities are also way disproportionately homeless, countrywide.


You didn't even read that report, did you? Trying to pull a fast one and pretend your estimate of 60% was a fact?

In 2012 more than half of the homeless people in London were non-UK nationals,many illegal and not on the consensus or residents in London. Great numbers from Eastern and Central Europe. And many of the homeless in London come down from all over the country. That was always been the case.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/over-half-of-londons-rough-sleepers-now-non-uk-nationals--2
(edited 6 years ago)
Reply 25
I do agree that a lot of things that are said about "white males" would be considered abhorrent if said about any other race or gender. They are often spoken about in general terms that are wholly unacceptable in 2018. The amazing thing is that feminists (and it is feminism that often spouts racist sexist rubbish) fails to see the hypocrisy of their racist, sexist attitudes.
Original post by Retired_Messiah
OK so 3 questions:

1) What actually is a microagression? Anybody got examples?
2) How do they keep PoC down exactly?
3) Why is PoC an acceptable term while coloured people generally isn't, when semantically they both mean exactly the same thing?



If somebody says that on this forum one more time then I will happily let ethnic minorities wipe me off the face of this ****ing earth.


o dear.. somebody is triggered
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by Underground906
You didn't even read that report, did you? Trying to pull a fast one and pretend your estimate of 60% was a fact?

In 2012 more than half of the homeless people in London were non-UK nationals,many illegal and not on the consensus or residents in London. Great numbers from Eastern and Central Europe. And many of the homeless in London come down from all over the country. That was always been the case.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/over-half-of-londons-rough-sleepers-now-non-uk-nationals--2


Nothing you just said contradicts anything I posted.
People wonder why the popularity of right wing movements is growing
Original post by AngeryPenguin
The fact that you don't notice white peoples' daily microaggressions towards POC is proof of your white privilege.


youre not white??
Original post by Hirsty97
People wonder why the popularity of right wing movements is growing


hirsty just relax ok don't get angry x
Original post by Retired_Messiah
OK so 3 questions:

1) What actually is a microagression? Anybody got examples?
2) How do they keep PoC down exactly?
3) Why is PoC an acceptable term while coloured people generally isn't, when semantically they both mean exactly the same thing?


I have the same questions. Basically I've learned it's social racism, that the world needs to stop and people need to be sacked and exiled for not wanting to stand next to a coloured person or someone in a hijab at Maccas :rolleyes:. Racism to me is institutional racism not letting someone work or study or get medical treatment or arresting them for worthless things or attacks them and of course that should be corrected. But it shouldn't be coddling them if someone uses their right to have an opinion about them that they don't like. This is what triggers hatred and resentment from the other side dummies.
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by Bang Outta Order
hirsty just relax ok don't get angry x


I'm cool as a Shaolin monk
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
Working class are the key words there. Now, if only there was a party that represented working class poeple. And what if there was a party that didn't represent the interests of working class people, I wonder what tactics it would employ to get thier votes when all it can offer them is more pain and misery.




You meme game is on fire today.


There isn't a party which represents the White working class population anymore and there hasn't been for many years. White working class people are politically homeless.

Brexit was the result of the alienation of white working class people.
Original post by Hirsty97
I'm cool as a Shaolin monk


so you're right wing? Brexit and all? Cos if you are, then why? You're from a good background you've got nothing to be angry about.
Original post by Bang Outta Order
so you're right wing? Brexit and all? Cos if you are, then why? You're from a good background you've got nothing to be angry about.


I'm not right-wing I'm a a right-libertarian of the minarcist strand. I try to detach myself from politics and look at things as objectively as possible. Which includes emotions. I was sympathetic toward Brexit but didn't support it as it didn't correspond to my economic interests.

I guess a bit of a utilitarian too because I want what is best for the maximum number of people. We need equality of opportunity but people can't get mad when there is an inequality of outcome. You can't attribute statistical differences between race and gender on prejudice as there are likely different explanations. You can't have a cohesive polyethnic society when pernicious lies are propagated oft by the establishment and it's fourth estate that intends to demonise the ethnic majority and consequently stoke ethnic tensions.

Also in case you didn't catch my reference earlier:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRTtlorJsYo
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by Hirsty97
I'm not right-wing I'm a a right-libertarian of the minarcist strand. I try to detach myself from politics and look at things as objectively as possible. Which includes emotions.

I guess a bit of a utilitarian too because I want what is best for the maximum number of people. We need equality of opportunity but people can't get mad when there is an inequality of outcome. You can't attribute statistical differences between race and gender on prejudice as there are likely different explanations. You can't have a cohesive polyethnic society when pernicious lies are propagated oft by the establishment and it's fourth estate that intends to demonise the the ethnic majority and consequently stoke ethnic tensions.






**** it I'll figure this **** out in the morning. But you had a bit of a stammer there; you said "the" twice in your last sentence. Tryna confuse me are ya? :tea: So all this fancy **** is basically saying, you are right wing but not a nazi, and for the majority of this country, which is white and you don't sympathise with nonwhites, but you're not hateful to nonwhites either because you're for the greater good. Got it.
Original post by Bang Outta Order




**** it I'll figure this **** out in the morning. But you had a bit of a stammer there; you said "the" twice in your last sentence. Tryna confuse me are ya? :tea: So all this fancy **** is basically saying, you are right wing but not a nazi, and for the majority of this country, which is white and you don't sympathise with nonwhites, but you're not hateful to nonwhites either because you're for the greater good. Got it.


No that's awful. I hate identity politics. I want people to help themselves rather than rely on government support. All activist groups such as BLM act as a vehicle to induce white guilt and make the resource redistribution more palatable.
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by Hirsty97
No that's awful. I hate identity politics. I want people to help themselves rather than rely on government support. All activist groups such as BLM act as a vehicle for is to induce white guilt to coerce the resource transfer through tax from one area to another.


If that's your opinion. I personally think BLM has a hate mongering nonblack/non Christian person involved in its creation or funding them, sitting back like Dr. Evil laughing at the chaos that ensues and divides people further. The statement itself went from being a valid plea of nonviolence, to being a stupid amateur street militia. And I doubt black scholars are that stupid to let that happen.

Anyway. Back to you. People can't help themselves. We live in a world where without a surplus of money you can't live a standard life or survive at all. And money doesn't grow on trees. You get it ONLY through employment, wealthy family, or education, all of which most people don't have even if they want to. And in basic layman terms, you are a right winger and conservative, you want to conserve this country and its culture. And that's fine so am I, but apparently for different reasons. Which is also fine.
Original post by Bang Outta Order
If that's your opinion. I personally think BLM has a hate mongering nonblack/non Christian person involved in its creation or funding them, sitting back like Dr. Evil laughing at the chaos that ensues and divides people further. The statement itself went from being a valid plea of nonviolence, to being a stupid amateur street militia. And I doubt black scholars are that stupid to let that happen.

Anyway. Back to you. People can't help themselves. We live in a world where without a surplus of money you can't live a standard life or survive at all. And money doesn't grow on trees. You get it ONLY through employment, wealthy family, or education, all of which most people don't have even if they want to. And in basic layman terms, you are a right winger and conservative, you want to conserve this country and its culture. And that's fine so am I, but apparently for different reasons. Which is also fine.



Does that man also happen to be the one that broke the British bank? I wonder.

Sure employment is good and poverty can be curtailed by making rational decisions and good parenting. There's a statistic wherein if you do two things: don't have kids outside of wed-lock and finish high school there's a 99% chance you won't end up poor. The welfare state isn't sustainable. You can't just print money ad infinitum and think a crash won't happen. Government assistance has become like a drug for wide swathes of the population across developed nations.

Quick Reply

Latest