Turn on thread page Beta

Institutional sexism/ racism - white boys the problem watch

Announcements
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    It seems like the Telegraph has dome some real work recently.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education...ment-aide.html

    Now I'm going to put to you a quote from page 2 of the best comments section, something I can sympathise with. When the poster said this: Of course if there is a war that threatens our country, culture and way of life, (yes I know we already are losing that war) the white boys will patriotically sign up to fight the external enemy while the others will either join the foe or become conscientious objectors. Thus there will be a few million fewer left of us.

    This was the highest rated reply

    "Oh but in some ways this is good news my friends.

    You see these boys are going to grow into men. They are going to realize that their own government and the elite have totally f""k""d them over. When they start to realize that they are going to become quite angry, ...... then we shall see

    Hopefully they have time to take their nation back and set things to right again.

    Now some people think hitler and Stalin were bad men, but I will tell you this, in one of those schools there is a boy growing up and he is going to make hitler look like a saint and stalin a boy scout.

    Rivers of blood indeed."



    What do you guys think? Has the educational system become overly feminised, metrosexual and institutionally racist? (towards whites).

    Is it because young white men (working class predominantly ) live in a society that hates them, a society which systematically assaults, their culture, their colour and their very being. They look around and they get told at every opportunity that they are worthless and that all other people are superior and that their culture needs "enriching". White men are always the bad guys in a BBC drama & are always derided in adverts. Any mixed race couple on TV will be a white girl & a black/Brown man, never the other way round. Is it saying that white females prefer non whites? Only therefore adding to the sense of inferiority young white boys must feel after years of leftwing, feminist, pro multicultural indoctrination.

    When you have right wing press like the daily mail screaming down their ears that all muslims are going to bomb them, and that all white young males are potential rapists, drug dealers and scroungers. The sun telling them that it is right to wolf whistle, and the ideal female is on page 3. Feminists screaming that they are part of the patriarchy, and footballers showing that even if you have the IQ of a lemon, as long as you spit, dive and can run around for 90 minutes you can go far in life. Why bother to study? What's the point?

    Why study when the media incites white boys to turn to crime?
    Why study when the educational system is not geared for males in general? (especially white working class males)
    Why study when you can get money for free just by turning up a few times a week at the jobs centre?
    etc etc etc
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Oh dear.

    How about they just try to tackle underachievement regardless of skin colour? That seems like the more sensible option...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the mezzil)
    When they start to realize that they are going to become quite angry, ...... then we shall see. Hopefully they have time to take their nation back and set things to right again
    They're going to engage in an armed rebellion, are they? Go on, I dare you. Just reach for a gun and see what happens.

    Now some people think hitler and Stalin were bad men, but I will tell you this, in one of those schools there is a boy growing up and he is going to make hitler look like a saint and stalin a boy scout.
    You do realise that this just screams "creepy revenge fantasy", of the sort generally produced by frustrated, basement-dwelling virgins.

    What do you guys think? Has the educational system become overly feminised, metrosexual and institutionally racist? (towards whites).
    No. The only people who tend to believe that are oversensitive, underachieving crybabies who blame their own lack of ability and work ethic on the existence of other races and people with a different sexual orientation.

    I don't take boys like that seriously; they can't even manage their own life, how could they be a serious threat to anyone else on a large scale?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MostUncivilised)
    They're going to engage in an armed rebellion, are they? Go on, I dare you. Just reach for a gun and see what happens.



    You do realise that this just screams "creepy revenge fantasy", of the sort generally produced by frustrated, basement-dwelling virgins.



    No. The only people who tend to believe that are oversensitive, underachieving crybabies who blame their own lack of ability and work ethic on the existence of other races and people with a different sexual orientation.

    I don't take boys like that seriously; they can't even manage their own life, how could they be a serious threat to anyone else on a large scale?
    I did not say the first two point, I merely sympathise, it was another poster. But anyway, even if they did reach for a gun, who is going to stop them? Which ethnic/ gender/ class group is predominantly in the armed forces, and who's side do you think they will be on? (plus the poster was putting it in the context of white working class boys all serving and being militarily trained, so it would be a coup, not a rebellion if anything)

    My point actually was that there is no decent role models for white working class males, and there is no motivation to study, which is why white boys are failing at school. The fact remains that white boys from deprived backgrounds are now the worst performing ethnic group in reading tests.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the mezzil)
    But anyway, even if they did reach for a gun, who is going to stop them?
    Errr, the same organisations that deal with any gun-wielding traitor? Or do you support treason if it's undertaken by white, working-class people? I'm guessing you're a huge supporter of IRA terrorists. I vaguely recall they tried to reach for some kind of weapon in Gibraltar, and the armed forces made fast work of them.

    Which ethnic/ gender/ class group is predominantly in the armed forces, and who's side do you think they will be on?
    The military hasn't rebelled against the crown and lawfully-constituted government even when inequality and poverty of opportunity was far worse than it is now (at least, not since the English Civil War). How do you figure that's going to change now? I realise that many racists engage in wishful thinking and hope it will happen, but they should be able to intellectually separate that from its actual likelihood of occurring.

    My point actually was that there is no decent role models for white working class males, and there is no motivation to study, which is why white boys are failing at school.
    So you're claiming that one can only take inspiration from someone who is the same race, gender, class and sexuality as themselves?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MostUncivilised)
    Errr, the same organisations that deal with any gun-wielding traitor? Or do you support treason if it's undertaken by white, working-class people? I'm guessing you're a huge supporter of IRA terrorists. I vaguely recall they tried to reach for some kind of weapon in Gibraltar, and the armed forces made fast work of them.



    The military hasn't rebelled against the crown and lawfully-constituted government even when inequality and poverty of opportunity was far worse than it is now (at least, not since the English Civil War). How do you figure that's going to change now? I realise that many racists engage in wishful thinking and hope it will happen, but they should be able to intellectually separate that from its actual likelihood of occurring.



    So you're claiming that one can only take inspiration from someone who is the same race, gender, class and sexuality as themselves?
    Traitor or patriot, depends on how you view someone who is taking an armed stance against governmental injustice. I'm a member of the infantry in the Territorial Army, so don't even bother trying to accuse me of being unpatriotic either, I'd kill and die for this country.

    Furthermore, I am not suggesting a coup, I am saying it is something that is a (unlikely) possibility, that is all. Just look at the French revolution (yes I know it was a while ago), and the storming of the bastille, which side were the army on then (made up of working class men)

    Lastly, no I am not saying one can only take inspiration from someone who is exactly like themselves, what I am saying is that when you have no body who is of a similar ethnic/class background as you, it doesn't really reassure oneself.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I think the problems more to do with British culture, rather than anything racial. Many "non-whites" (or immigrants) don't necessarily adopt the culture fully, most mix it with their own cultural values, which would explain why they may excel in certain area's that British culture would hinder a person in.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the mezzil)
    Traitor or patriot, depends on how you view someone who is taking an armed stance against governmental injustice. I'm a member of the infantry in the Territorial Army, so don't even bother trying to accuse me of being unpatriotic either,
    I was in the Australian Army reserves (same head of state), and I have no hesitation in saying that sympathising with a violent overthrow of the democratically-elected government treads a line that comes very close to treason, and is totally anathema to anyone who values the English-speaking common law tradition of rule of law and evolutionary (rather than revolutionary) societal and political change.

    To advocate for that, or sympathise with it, not only shows a remarkable lack of insight into or adherence to our own history and political traditions, it's also morally bankrupt and prima facie unjustifiable.

    I'd kill and die for this country.
    It seems to me that you'd be willing to kill to the wrong people.

    Just look at the French revolution (yes I know it was a while ago), and the storming of the bastille, which side were the army on then (made up of working class men)
    Apples and ludicrous oranges, my friend. In 18th century France 80% of the population was locked into an appallingly exploitative agrictultural economy that was dire in terms of the lack of opportunity, learning, material security. France in 1788 still had legal serfdom, ffs.

    Britain of the 21st century isn't even comparable, they're like parrallel universes. For the most part, people in the 21st century are well-fed, well-housed, the average person lives longer than the wealthiest aristocrats 200 years ago. When you flick a light-switch, light comes on. You can drink water without fearing you'll get cryptospiridium. The police are, for the most part, reasonably effective in apprehending criminals and we have a legal system that is generally regarded as fair and free of corruption.

    The idea that some kind of violent revolution will emerge in such a society used to be the preserve of the far-left, parties like the SWP who are always sure the workers revolution is just around the corner. I suppose we can now add to that the far-right.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MostUncivilised)
    I was in the Australian Army reserves (same head of state), and I have no hesitation in saying that sympathising with a violent overthrow of the democratically-elected government treads a line that comes very close to treason, and is totally anathema to anyone who values the English-speaking common law tradition of rule of law and evolutionary (rather than revolutionary) societal and political change.

    To advocate for that, or sympathise with it, not only shows a remarkable lack of insight into or adherence to our own history and political traditions, it's also morally bankrupt and prima facie unjustifiable.



    It seems to me that you'd be willing to kill to the wrong people.



    Apples and ludicrous oranges, my friend. In 18th century France 80% of the population was locked into an appallingly exploitative agrictultural economy that was dire in terms of the lack of opportunity, learning, material security. France in 1788 still had legal serfdom, ffs.

    Britain of the 21st century isn't even comparable, they're like parrallel universes. For the most part, people in the 21st century are well-fed, well-housed, the average person lives longer than the wealthiest aristocrats 200 years ago. When you flick a light-switch, light comes on. You can drink water without fearing you'll get cryptospiridium. The police are, for the most part, reasonably effective in apprehending criminals and we have a legal system that is generally regarded as fair and free of corruption.

    The idea that some kind of violent revolution will emerge in such a society used to be the preserve of the far-left, parties like the SWP who are always sure the workers revolution is just around the corner. I suppose we can now add to that the far-right.
    Dude i never came up with the idea in the first place, as i said before i was QUOTING somebody from the telegraph forum. I sympathise with the view, as in i understand it, that doesnt mean i AGREE with it, read what i said! However, i know plenty of people who do agree with it, that is the dam point i was making!

    Furthermore i am well aware of the differences in social and economic situations of now and then, and i am studying the subject right now (doing an essay atm) as im at uni of manchester and that is one of my modules. I was using it as an example. Of course however, we as humans always want more, so it doesnt matter if we have warm taps, people will gladly fight to "better" themselves against something they see as unjust. That is another point i am making.

    Oh and no i am not far right, if that was aimed at me.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the mezzil)
    Dude i never came up with the idea in the first place, as i said before i was QUOTING somebody from the telegraph forum. I sympathise with the view, as in i understand it, that doesnt mean i AGREE with it, read what i said! However, i know plenty of people who do agree with it, that is the dam point i was making!
    And I'm saying how anyone could get past the utter stupidity, immorality and impracticability of such an idea. Its' ludicrousness and irresponsibility prevents any
    sympathy whatsoever.

    In the Anglosphere, we've often had rabble-rousing politicians, on both sides going back to the mid-17th century. I myself am a committed socialist (Fabian or parliamentary socialist, rather than revolutiionary Marxist-Leninist) with many criticisms of our society and economy But going outside the parliamentary and constitutional confines of democratic and evolutionary change has always been considered out of bounds in the body politic, and for good reason.

    Where armed revolts did occur in our history, they tended to be in support of parliamentary government and in opposition to unrestrained executive power (English Civil War, Glorious Revolution, American Revolution). These revolutions were based on ideas first, not crude deference to military power. As a result, the Anglosphere (UK, US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand) has not had a dictator since the 1660s, in contrast to almost all other countries in the world (continental Europe was predominantely under totalitarian or authoritarian domination, communist and fascist, for most of the 20th century; same viz Asia, South America, Africa)

    Oh and no i am not far right, if that was aimed at me.
    I think it's fair to point the argument in your general direction. Violent overthrow of our constitutional monarchy and parliamentary system of government (or in the US, their limited Republican, in the classical sense, constitution) offends the sensibilities of all sensible, normal people. It's simply a non-starter.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MostUncivilised)
    And I'm saying how anyone could get past the utter stupidity, immorality and impracticability of such an idea. Its' ludicrousness and irresponsibility prevents any
    sympathy whatsoever.

    In the Anglosphere, we've often had rabble-rousing politicians, on both sides going back to the mid-17th century. I myself am a committed socialist (Fabian or parliamentary socialist, rather than revolutiionary Marxist-Leninist) with many criticisms of our society and economy But going outside the parliamentary and constitutional confines of democratic and evolutionary change has always been considered out of bounds in the body politic, and for good reason.

    Where armed revolts did occur in our history, they tended to be in support of parliamentary government and in opposition to unrestrained executive power (English Civil War, Glorious Revolution, American Revolution). These revolutions were based on ideas first, not crude deference to military power. As a result, the Anglosphere (UK, US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand) has not had a dictator since the 1660s, in contrast to almost all other countries in the world (continental Europe was predominantely under totalitarian or authoritarian domination, communist and fascist, for most of the 20th century; same viz Asia, South America, Africa)



    I think it's fair to point the argument in your general direction. Violent overthrow of our constitutional monarchy and parliamentary system of government (or in the US, their limited Republican, in the classical sense, constitution) offends the sensibilities of all sensible, normal people. It's simply a non-starter.
    Pretty much sums up why you have such a problem with what I said. I don't see the need to carry on this conversation, certainly not if you are just going to label me a far right wing extremist.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the mezzil)
    Pretty much sums up why you have such a problem with what I said. I don't see the need to carry on this conversation, certainly not if you are just going to label me a far right wing extremist.
    What a bizarre and preposterous statement! There is nothing inherently offensive about Fabian/parliamentary socialism. On the other hand, advocating a violent overthrow of the government takes you into Hitler/Stalin territory. You literally have no more moral authority than Pol Pot after making such a claim.

    In fairness, I think you accept that you actually haven't thought too deeply about these issues, clearly haven't ever had to deal with a serious responsibility like parenthood or elected office, when one tends to leave behind such juvenile and self-indulgent fantasies.

    The difference between us is that as a Fabian/parliamentary socialist, I believe that the reforms I seek can only derive legitimacy if done through our democratic processes and established constitution. You, on the other hand, sympathise with a violent, totalitarian overthrow of the monarchy and parliament, and a complete break with our tradition (on both sides of politics) of evolutionary change that invariably that conforms to the rule of law.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the mezzil)
    It seems like the Telegraph has dome some real work recently.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education...ment-aide.html

    Now I'm going to put to you a quote from page 2 of the best comments section, something I can sympathise with. When the poster said this: Of course if there is a war that threatens our country, culture and way of life, (yes I know we already are losing that war) the white boys will patriotically sign up to fight the external enemy while the others will either join the foe or become conscientious objectors. Thus there will be a few million fewer left of us.

    This was the highest rated reply

    "Oh but in some ways this is good news my friends.

    You see these boys are going to grow into men. They are going to realize that their own government and the elite have totally f""k""d them over. When they start to realize that they are going to become quite angry, ...... then we shall see

    Hopefully they have time to take their nation back and set things to right again.

    Now some people think hitler and Stalin were bad men, but I will tell you this, in one of those schools there is a boy growing up and he is going to make hitler look like a saint and stalin a boy scout.

    Rivers of blood indeed."



    What do you guys think? Has the educational system become overly feminised, metrosexual and institutionally racist? (towards whites).

    Is it because young white men (working class predominantly ) live in a society that hates them, a society which systematically assaults, their culture, their colour and their very being. They look around and they get told at every opportunity that they are worthless and that all other people are superior and that their culture needs "enriching". White men are always the bad guys in a BBC drama & are always derided in adverts. Any mixed race couple on TV will be a white girl & a black/Brown man, never the other way round. Is it saying that white females prefer non whites? Only therefore adding to the sense of inferiority young white boys must feel after years of leftwing, feminist, pro multicultural indoctrination.

    When you have right wing press like the daily mail screaming down their ears that all muslims are going to bomb them, and that all white young males are potential rapists, drug dealers and scroungers. The sun telling them that it is right to wolf whistle, and the ideal female is on page 3. Feminists screaming that they are part of the patriarchy, and footballers showing that even if you have the IQ of a lemon, as long as you spit, dive and can run around for 90 minutes you can go far in life. Why bother to study? What's the point?

    Why study when the media incites white boys to turn to crime?
    Why study when the educational system is not geared for males in general? (especially white working class males)
    Why study when you can get money for free just by turning up a few times a week at the jobs centre?
    etc etc etc
    You can blame left wing militants and feminists for this. It's happening not just in the UK but in the US and Canada too.

    Read this book if you are interested.



    http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-War-Agai...1793929&sr=8-1
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Yeah white people are the problem take a look at thishttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2283777/Boy-9-hanged-bullied-white.htmlAlso nearly all racist rants you see are by white females, not males.But I'm proud of them for speaking up and telling the truth.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MostUncivilised)
    What a bizarre and preposterous statement! There is nothing inherently offensive about Fabian/parliamentary socialism. On the other hand, advocating a violent overthrow of the government takes you into Hitler/Stalin territory. You literally have no more moral authority than Pol Pot after making such a claim.

    In fairness, I think you accept that you actually haven't thought too deeply about these issues, clearly haven't ever had to deal with a serious responsibility like parenthood or elected office, when one tends to leave behind such juvenile and self-indulgent fantasies.

    The difference between us is that as a Fabian/parliamentary socialist, I believe that the reforms I seek can only derive legitimacy if done through our democratic processes and established constitution. You, on the other hand, sympathise with a violent, totalitarian overthrow of the monarchy and parliament, and a complete break with our tradition (on both sides of politics) of evolutionary change that invariably that conforms to the rule of law.
    :yawn: Assumptions...
 
 
 
Poll
Should Banksy be put in prison?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.