Race- Privilege, Relations, Racism, etc.

And what did these brave souls do after this? They ran off under the cover of darkness. That's okay though, their fraternity has been closed for good since they are no longer welcome at the university and all the belongings they had have been dumped.

It's a shame really. These fools have honestly destroyed their lives. They won't be able to get a job now that this has gone viral. They won't be able to travel, and what girl would be interested in them? Sure they might have Bioshock Infinity but what happens when they get bored of that? What a sad pathetic waste of an excuse for human beings.

I doubt they will face very much in the way of real consequences.

edited 10th Mar '15 1:05:25 AM by Know-age

With the video going viral and given they were so brave after this they fled the university under the cover of darkness like scared little rabbits do they honestly think they will not be held accountable for this stunt? Good luck.

I can't think of how will they belong into a persona nongrata category, they most likely come from racist bagrounds so they will be welcome home.

A Mississippi sheriff’s deputy was fired late last week over an Xbox Live rant in which he claims he gets "paid to beat up n*ggers."

The chief of Baton Rouge, La.'s public transportation system is apologizing for saying he would "love" to have fewer African-American bus drivers because it would help the transit agency attract white riders.

edited 12th Mar '15 1:52:40 PM by AngelicBraeburn

A short but effective article by Ta-Nehisi Coates on the American Civil War: The Civil War isn't Tragic.

Oh man, that is so weird, I listen to Backstory all the time so I already knew that the civil war's motive were... less than honorable for both the north and the south. I do like this article, it's most certainly very true that when given the matter a bit more thought it's difficult to call the thing "tragic".

That was a good read.

I can see why he says that, and in that sense I agree that "the tragedy" there is not one of brother versus brother, but of the very ridiculous idea that slavery was some sort of fundamental truth.

If you want to know more about the Civil War, have a gander at Battle-Cry of Freedom: The Civil War Era by James M. McPherson and Freedom National: The Destruction of Slavery in the United States by James Oakes.

See, I think the whole thing about less-than-honourable motives is a relic of the revisionist school - Oakes argues quite convincingly that the Republicans always wanted to destroy slavery, and that their ambiguous public statements on the topic was just good politics, intended to nurse an uneasy white America into supporting it. The Republicans never separated saving the Union and killing slavery. The American Civil War wasn't a War to restore the Union that became a war to destroy slavery - it was a war to restore the Union and destroy slavery.

Coates has a follow-up article: The Civil War isn't Tragic, Cont.

edited 15th Mar '15 12:35:38 PM by Achaemenid

I have McPherson's book on the shelf. Definitely on queue.

edited 15th Mar '15 12:41:21 PM by Aprilla

Even Ulysses S Grant said the war was a necessary thing in order to end slavery. He even went so far as to say it was good that it lasted as long as it did, because a one or two year war would have left slavery intact.

I remember as a child when I watched reruns of the Dukes Of Hazard, and all my understanding of the General Lee was that was the name of a nice car. And now, well, confederate flags painted on a car, that ain't a good thing. Really, it's friggin' weird that a show made on the late 20th century got away with that. I find it really difficult to interpret the characters of the dukes and their choice of name for the car as anything but trying to revise history there. And it pains me that people in the US right now feel that is justified.

That is one of the side effects of the post war reconstruction period sadly. All the screwups there really did a number on things and its still being felt.

What's weird about it? You have people bending over backwards insisting that the war wasn't about slavery at all and that owning a Confederate Flag isn't a sign that you're a racist. The south never got over the Civil War.

edit: I've never personally witnessed this but I've also heard that some southerners refer to the Civil War as "The War of Northern Aggression." That should tell you all you need to know about the kind of people we're dealing with.

edited 15th Mar '15 2:59:43 PM by Kostya

The War of Northern Aggression, the War of Southern Independence, the War of Confusion, etc.

You get all that shit down here.

Basically, there are a bunch of poor, dumb white people down here with generations of poverty and issues who are trying to get things together. And that stupid piece of shit flag and what people have been indoctrinated to believe is a weak source of identity that acts as a cultural bandaid to feel like you've a worthy heritage and current identity.

As a Brit I'm now inspired to start calling the American Revolution "the war of colonial aggression".

The US flag?

My state actually banned the selling of the rebel flag by the state government, I'm assuming from like gift shops or bumper stickers or something. For the life of me I can't imagine why anyone thought selling the rebel flag in California was a good idea, but I do see some people with it on the back of their pick-ups.

You see the Confederate Flag occasionally outside the US, usually in the hands of Country Music fans.

When I was 13 I had a black man rip a bandanna out of my hair with a big chunk of my hair with it because it looked like a rebel flag to him.

No one came to my rescue and had I not had better parents I could have very easily turned into white trash who hated and feared black people for it.

There are a lot of issues with that rag.

Why White People Freak Out When They're Called Out About Race

Yeah, that about sums it up. It's not helpful when you try to offer your perspective, and terms gets tossed around such as "reverse racist", "race baiter" and, for white people trying to gain a better understanding of the issues, "white knight", or "white guilt".

What happens too often in these hypothetical discussions is an attempt to redirect and dictate the focal point or the tone in a way that makes you look like the bad guy. There are several examples of which I can think.

"The trans-Atlantic slave trade was a horrifying system."

"That's true, but black people sold other black people into slavery, and slavery was practiced by nearly all civilizations."

"The brutalization of Indian citizens under British rule was pretty nasty."

"Yes, but Gandhi was a purported racist who hated black Africans. He was also kind of an Islamophobic jerk."

"Poverty and incarceration rates are a major problem in the US education and justice systems."

"If you'd just pull your pants up, you could get a job more easily."

These are all technically true statements, but the people saying them often think they're operating under good intentions when they just come off as assholes who are socially and culturally tone deaf.

edited 15th Mar '15 11:17:24 PM by Aprilla

Say, we all know miscegenation was a big thin in the Americas but here is one of Aszur's very own idiotic questions.

Are pale Latin Americans considered "White" or still "Latinos"? Or is it just a matter of convenience? ("White" when they do something good, "mixed blood" when they do something stupid)