Identity

submitted by Tarrock from media.communities.win

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Site_rly_sux 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

No, just race. Race is a social concept and not grounded in science. The good thing about science is that it has actual evidence you can point to - so if you think race is scientific, you can easily demonstrate that.

Humans, history, ancestral origins - I don't think I said anywhere that these don't exist. I think if you really thought I was saying that humans and history don't exist, your response to me would be a bit different. That's how I know you're a histrionic whining baby

[–]Psychosomatic 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

I see. We are continually told to acknowledge black culture and black history, this too must too must also be incorrect as black would be unscientific, they are merely human culture and human history? My original comment would still be valid as I denounced anti-white propaganda.

[–]Site_rly_sux 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I am telling you that there is no monoculture of blackness which encompasses Tasmania and Lesotho and Senegal.

What I think you're referring to is the shared experience of African Americans. It so happens that the name for that shared culture is Black, which happens to be the name of the perception of skin pigmentation. Black culture exists for African Americans. But there is no singular culture for papau new guinea and somalia.

[–]Psychosomatic 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

Behold my pride in the shared experience of being White British 🖕

[–]Site_rly_sux 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Oh ok. So would that be the saxon-speaking english or the gaelic-speaking highlander or the brythonic-speaking cornish. Because those are three separate cultures with different ancient history, ancestry, religion, experience of Rome, food, language, literature, theatre, political organisation, ethnicity, haploid genotype, etc etc. It's not a monoculture except for in your imagination maybe. There is still a border between the Brits and the Celts. They kill each other, today, because they don't think they're the same people, like you seem to.

And of course. None of those are the same as Slavic or Finno-Ugric. Which is what I've been saying this whole thread: that there is no common whiteness. And you seem to be agreeing with me, here

[–]Psychosomatic 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

What you are succeeding in, is dissecting a generalisation to its finer details of subcultures when it was unnecessary. We could discuss my specific regional history and how it relates to me, but that wasn't my point. You can be proud to be who you are no matter which subculture you belong to.

[–]Site_rly_sux 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

We could discuss my specific regional history

The point of this thread and the op image is that you don't have a regional history.

You have a white history and that's it. Nobody is British, nobody is Irish, nobody is French - they are just white. Any difference between Brit and French is erased: you are just white, you are not white British. By claiming that Britishness exists, you're eliminating the singular property of whiteness. No - you aren't British with a regional history - you are solely white, exactly the same as Germans and Albanians and so on.

I am arguing against that. I have said over and over again that whiteness does not exist, but ethnicities do. I agree that you might be overwhelmingly some British ethnicity with a regional history. That has been my point the whole thread. Glad you are agreeing with me.

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

🍻