you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]outrageousboote 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

The system is trying to decrease white status and population, the average nonwhite is not fond of honkies but i'm not talking about the spic, chink or nig down the street.

[–]JollyRunstride 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

oh yeah those "chinks" and "nigs" are barley human beings! We whites obviously deserve to be On Top with the highest status!

[–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I'd be fine with freedom of association but such a concept is totally incomprehensible to most non white groups.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

No

(If you have a reliable source that discusses the developments of societies, do mention it. Or consider Popper's 'Open Society and its Enemies', or Arendt's 'The Origins of Totalitarianism', or more generally, Macintyre's 'After Virtue'.)

[–]outrageousboote 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Absolutely yes, whites aren't allowed to self-segregate, have freedom of association or expression or act in their own racial interests. Meanwhile coloreds are allowed to do these things.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

This is an interesting point.

But I do think whites self-segregate quite often.

Perhaps you are referring to legal requirements for hiring practices, which can limit the hiring of whites, in favor of non-whites. This is sometimes appropriately called 'positive discrimination' or 'reverse discrimination', and can unjustly favor a poorly qualified person and reject a much better qualified person who happens to be white.