Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

“It’s OK to be white” posters - the reaction Watch

    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Can't believe how exhausted I am after reading this thread...and I'm only eight or so comments in.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Peer Support Volunteers
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Airplanebee2)
    It’s the mess that happens when proper analysis hits a widespread belief of fiction.
    Your subjective perception of the world does not - and will never - reflect fact. That assumption in itself is a fallacy and one which a self-proclaimed 'philosopher' such as yourself should avoid.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dima-Blackburn)
    OP has a huge persecution complex. Elsewhere he was complaining how men like him are the real victims when they get rejected during the process of sexually harassing women. OP’s unironic use of buzzwords and attributing positions to his opponents exemplifies identify politics.
    I guess the only possible reason that someone might oppose the fiction that is postmodern social theory is that they have a persecution complex.

    Your assertion isn’t simply saying, I disagree with you therefore you’re mad, is it? 🙈🙈🙈
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Airplanebee2)
    The year 2500 AD : How can you be proud of your great grandfather for building this house because he hired people in the 2380s who stepped on ants. It’s completely barbaric, we should shun off that part of history, because you see we are on a path to a Nihilistic utopia where we are just pure streams of good thought - and my son make sure you understand what good thought is - equality.
    I'm talking about being proud of people who did the slave trade. Are you proud of those people?
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Paracosm)
    Your subjective perception of the world does not - and will never - reflect fact. That assumption in itself is a fallacy and one which a self-proclaimed 'philosopher' such as yourself should avoid.
    Of course you are right. I guess that there are varying levels of method which have varying proportions to fact - which is an absolute. When people claim to have a fact, over an assertion they are really only claiming a higher degree of validation.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Airplanebee2)
    I guess the only possible reason that someone might oppose the fiction that is postmodern social theory is that they have a persecution complex.

    Your assertion isn’t simply saying, I disagree with you therefore you’re mad, is it? 🙈🙈🙈
    Word salad. I’d recommend you improve your structure of writing; ideally you should be concise and support your assertions with evidence. Incoherent, irrelevant rants are seldom well received.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JMR2017)
    I'm talking about being proud of people who did the slave trade. Are you proud of those people?
    I’m talking about being proud of people who walked on ants. How could someone possibly be proud of them, you see all ideas are equally valid under postmodernism except of course for prejudice and oppression. And there is an ever changing relativist definition of prentice and oppression which changes with time, therefore anything before 1960 is prentice and ever year this goes forward. You can’t be proud of anecdotes before this cut off date or you will be supporting prentice and oppression.

    And you especially can’t challenge false postmodern social theory, because you will bring the entire political system down.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dima-Blackburn)
    Word salad. I’d recommend you improve your structure of writing; ideally you should be concise and support your assertions with evidence. Incoherent, irrelevant rants are seldom well received.
    No it’s just using humour by putting some the most revolutionary political analysis of our time in txt speak 😜
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    I think you are trying too hard to victimise white people- ofc white people may face racist attacks but this is far less commonplace than white attacks on black people or other POC. White people now shouldn't feel personally responsible for the actions against other races but that doesn't mean that you should ignore what happened and is still happening to a still shockingly large number of different races. Just because a poster says that racism against POC is still happening doesn't mean you have to turn it around, ignore the original point and try to claim that there's some blatant, overt form of widespread racism against white people.

    N.B. no such thing as anti-white racism; racism itself implies discrimination against any race by any other race
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HistoryWhiz6)
    I think you are trying too hard to victimise white people- ofc white people may face racist attacks but this is far less commonplace than white attacks on black people or other POC. White people now shouldn't feel personally responsible for the actions against other races but that doesn't mean that you should ignore what happened and is still happening to a still shockingly large number of different races. Just because a poster says that racism against POC is still happening doesn't mean you have to turn it around, ignore the original point and try to claim that there's some blatant, overt form of widespread racism against white people.

    N.B. no such thing as anti-white racism; racism itself implies discrimination against any race by any other race
    Oh dear - I can hear the statisticians now coming for you.

    Do you have any statistical evidence for this claim that white on black crime is proportionately higher than black on white crime?
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Airplanebee2)
    No it’s just using humour by putting some the most revolutionary political analysis of our time in txt speak 😜
    Incoherence cannot be blamed on “txt speak”. I have no idea what your “revolutionary political analysis” is, tbh. So far you’re made a few disconnected assertions here and there about random topics; we’ve heard these generic 4chan-esque conspiracy “WOKE” rants before countless times, so where’s the revolutionary part?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Seeing so many triggered people over these simple posters with a simple, non-offensive statement "It's okay to be white" 😂😂😂

    Exactly what the people behind the posters hoped to happen. You all proved their point.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dima-Blackburn)
    Incoherence cannot be blamed on “txt speak”. I have no idea what your “revolutionary political analysis” is, tbh. So far you’re made a few disconnected assertions here and there about random topics; we’ve heard these generic 4chan-esque conspiracy “WOKE” rants before countless times, so where’s the revolutionary part?
    See the 2nd and 3rd paragraphs of the OP and the somewhat sarcastic commentary on postmodern social theory.

    It turns upside down the thinking of the 60s student radicals, postmodernists and western cultural revolution that followed. It is contrary to the British political establishment, media and education system and is therefore revolutionary. I have posted a short film to help you understand.

    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    • TSR Support Team
    • Peer Support Volunteers
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Airplanebee2)
    I’m talking about being proud of people who walked on ants. How could someone possibly be proud of them, you see all ideas are equally valid under postmodernism except of course for prejudice and oppression. And there is an ever changing relativist definition of prentice and oppression which changes with time, therefore anything before 1960 is prentice and ever year this goes forward. You can’t be proud of anecdotes before this cut off date or you will be supporting prentice and oppression.

    And you especially can’t challenge false postmodern social theory, because you will bring the entire political system down.
    However, your interpretation does not properly account for the fluidity and emotionality of human society. Certain societal and/or historical events have undoubtedly contributed to the development of our society and shaped it to be what it is today. This is how societal development comes to be and it is how we progress as a civilised people. It is crass therefore, to suggest that we should not reflect on or give notice to certain historical or socioeconomic factors when it comes to defining what is socially acceptable in this, our civilised society.

    Furthermore, it is a logical fallacy to compare the societal understanding of race and racism/whatever your convoluted point is with the idea of someone historically stepping on an ant. This is a ridiculous oversimplification and it displays a clear lack of engagement or well-versed thought in constructing your argument. If you want to actually challenge this, you must first formulate your arguments without resorting to an ab absurdo argument, which reduces the validity of your interpretation and causes general irritation.

    I don't agree with you for a moment, but you're not doing yourself any favours.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dima-Blackburn)
    Incoherence cannot be blamed on “txt speak”. I have no idea what your “revolutionary political analysis” is, tbh. So far you’re made a few disconnected assertions here and there about random topics; we’ve heard these generic 4chan-esque conspiracy “WOKE” rants before countless times, so where’s the revolutionary part?


    If you’re accusing me of writing conspiracy theories, please quote which assertion I make which is incorrect as opposed to an Ad Hominem.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Airplanebee2)
    See the 2nd and 3rd paragraphs of the OP and the somewhat sarcastic commentary on postmodern social theory.

    It turns upside down the thinking of the 60s student radicals, postmodernists and western cultural revolution that followed. It is contrary to the British political establishment, media and education system and is therefore revolutionary. I have posted a short film on the OP to help you understand.
    I’ve read it all. More buzzwords. More petty generic reactionary rants. Revolutionary, my arse :rofl: Perhaps you should share your revolutionary political insights (remember, you’re the only one who’s talking about it in the UK as you claimed) on a more appropriate forum: https://www.reddit.com/r/im14andthisisdeep/
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    this the kinda guy who's really pale and always sits alone in class and doesnt have any friends because he always goes on political rants whenever anyone speaks to them
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Paracosm)
    However, your interpretation does not properly account for the fluidity and emotionality of human society. Certain societal and/or historical events have undoubtedly contributed to the development of our society and shaped it to be what it is today. This is how societal development comes to be and it is how we progress as a civilised people. It is crass therefore, to suggest that we should not reflect on or give notice to certain historical or socioeconomic factors when it comes to defining what is socially acceptable in this, our civilised society.

    Furthermore, it is a logical fallacy to compare the societal understanding of race and racism/whatever your convoluted point is with the idea of someone historically stepping on an ant. This is a ridiculous oversimplification and it displays a clear lack of engagement or well-versed thought in constructing your argument. If you want to actually challenge this, you must first formulate your arguments without resorting to an ab absurdo argument, which reduces the validity of your interpretation and causes general irritation.

    I don't agree with you for a moment, but you're not doing yourself any favours.
    Fluidity, in terms of whims and over use of emotion in making interpretations of the world is very negative. You see it works in the postmodern context, it however doesn’t work in evolution. In postmodernism if you make an incorrect interpretation, it’s equally right, and the state bails you out. In evolution you are literally killed off by an incorrect interpretation. Well the postmodern utopia might not like to admit it. It it is inside the construct of nature. So what does this say? It will eventually be killed off.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dima-Blackburn)
    I’ve read it all. More buzzwords. More petty generic reactionary rants. Revolutionary, my arse :rofl: Perhaps you should share your revolutionary political insights (remember, you’re the only one who’s talking about it in the UK as you claimed) on a more appropriate forum: https://www.reddit.com/r/im14andthisisdeep/
    So what am I reactionary towards?
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by B-sian)
    this the kinda guy who's really pale and always sits alone in class and doesnt have any friends because he always goes on political rants whenever anyone speaks to them
    And later in life people felt sorry for him and bought The Big Issue off him.

    But eventually they realised that he was right and Teresa May was a social justice warrior that should have gone to the Green Party.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: November 10, 2017
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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

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