Daily News Thread 7/11

College can be good, but at the moment the vast majority of the higher-ups steering the general discourse allowed and the type of education allowed to be taught on campus, including factors like federal funding, make modern colleges a complete disaster. The only point in going is to get a piece of paper. You could educate yourself better at home on the computer in one year than these people could educate you in four. Colleges are so heavily censored and one-track in thought. There's no room for questioning anymore. Try to stray from the norm and have an original thought on a subject and a student group assisted by a professor or two, with the higher-ups turning a blind eye, will make your life a living hell. Colleges aren't about education anymore, they're about selling a piece of paper.

Yes, if there's anything that will build class solidarity among rural working-class whites it's being lectured on how racist they are for the nth time, except now the condescension comes from fellow rural whites instead of white urbanites

I thought Karl Marx invented the Frankfurt school in order to fight for civil rights? How could he be a racist?

This is why extreme anti-idpol is almost as cancerous as extreme idpol. People used to dislike the elitism of colleges but now they shun higher learning altogether because a few loudmouths who didn't even go to college are convinced it's filled with communisntislamofascistsatheist SJAYDUBYAS

To be honest there are some extreme idpolers in certain areas and majors but it's not as a big of a deal or a threat as people say. Where as reactionary thinking and power is still a major threat on and off college campuses and anti-intellectualism has always been a cancer in America.

As if there is anything wrong with what you quoted.

How are you going to build class solidarity if you have a majority of it wanting to lynch the rest?

Or do niggers just never work and 100% of them are lazy lumpen?

...

"Anti-idpol" as practiced by reactionaries is white idpol.

Go read his views on blacks.

By emphasising commonality, not difference. Again, if rural working-class whites wanted to be lectured on how everything they do is unintentionally racist, liberalism provides as much of an opportunity for that as Redneck Revolt does.

It would probably be a good idea to not enter working-class white communities with the assumption that they want to lynch black people, and need you to tell them not to

Why do retards always freak out over anti-racism and make it out to be "hurr I blame you for white supremacy". No one is saying the words "blame", "responsibility", "admit", or any other guilt-ridden terms except you. Give me a fucking break

White supremacy is identity politics, Richard spencer even calls himself a white identerian sometimes.

As for universities, a combination of costing 10 billion dollars to attend one and then go into massive debt, and evidence that they are all liberal brainwashing mills were you can waste your time learning about how white people are evil and get a minor in beyonce studies doesnt really endear it to proles

fuckin' neato how is that relevant? unless you want to go full hillshill about karlbros why is a guy 150 years ago being racist relevent at all?

...

I was looking at that Guardian piece on Redneck Revolt and I thought the KKK member in the 2nd picture had a Kekistani flag on him. I reserved image searched to find out it was not that but I found this article having some good pictures of Nazi retards in action. If you are one of those people that saves those kinds of pictures and you haven't seen it:
theguardian.com/world/gallery/2017/jun/04/neo-nazi-gathering-kentucky-kkk-traditionalist-worker-party

And yet he supported the civil war explicitly for the liberation of enslaved blacks.

Because he's the basis for most far-Left viewpoints in the West right now, with many citing and quoting him. So how are his social views not relevant when his politics are? They go hand in hand.

how is anyone convinced that this is the master race?

And yet he didn't think they should be allowed into his country.

Again these communities already get the "you're an unintentionally racist fucknut that oppresses people of color with your mere existence" speech from liberals, if they wanted that why wouldn't they just turn to liberalism? At least they can get some gibs out of it from the Dems

Lincoln thougt that blacks were sub-human filth that should be shipped back to africa and yet he still lead a war that ended slavery in America. Personal views are not relevant to politics ouside of tumblr call out culture.

Learn how to read. It's obvious who's being "blamed" here and it's not rural whites
This is only your reading because that's what you're primed to see but it's a blatant misrepresentation. There is absolutely nothing wrong with anything they said here.

Lincoln was the perfect politician, he'd tell white Northerners he was shipping every black back to Africa while telling black Northerners that they (and their Southern brethren) would be treated as equal citizens

no doubt you can learn from other sources, but as the way things stand it's hard to make a lively hood without a decent job, something that a degree is needed, whether it's a piece of paper or not. I agree with you on the point that colleges themselves are in a bad spot, but making tuition cost even more is just making it worse, hell at this rate no one will go to college, debt is already so high that you'll have to pay it off over years and years just so you aren't trying to feed a family one a minimum wage job.

His views are clearly far to the left even on social issues for his time. By that reasoning anyone who's against immigration NOW is necessarily a right-wing reactionary. This is an extremely liberal position to take

And there's nothing in there that rural working class whites can't get from mainstream liberalism, right down to the "racism was created and perpetuated by white elites to divide the working class, so you're really just voting against your own interests because you're a racist if you don't support the Democrats"

Again, if they want to be successful they should emphasis commonality, not march into these communities and act as if they need aggressive anti-racist deprogramming

...

It's why Hillary was such a fan

Stop projecting goals and statements that don't exist

So why should his politics not be questioned, and be adhered to as a grand milestone in political history, while his social views, which are at the core of all of his views, are chosen selectively to fit into people's modern perspectives? What I'm asking is, why should the modern world be morphed to suit his political views, while his social views are morphed the suit the modern world?

Do you believe that marxist theory hasn't developed at all since the late 1800s?

All the reactionaries creaming themselves over this then turn around and say white women should have a bunch of kids.

I can't even.

...

That reminds me of Lyndon Johnson who was the main force behind the Civil Rights Act ending Jim Crow not Kennedy.

He referred to them as niggers and actually did think they were truly inferior, but that it was redundant and illogical to deny them equal rights as you would not need to discriminate against them if they were inferior as a just and meritocratic system would ensure that everyone will be rewarded accordingly.

Not much, no.

This is our objection, the whole "you magically perpetuate white supremacy by being white" idea is idealist as fuck. It's also untrue - there's a reason historical white supremacist societies consisted of a small, voting landed elite and everyone else (black and white) disenfranchised and powerless.

For fuck's sake, the article points out locals joining the Redneck Revolt protestors against the white nationalists, it's pretty clear that the problem isn't that these communities are bastions of white supremacy that need explicit instruction by RR to not be so fucking racist

Also "actively anti-racist" tends to equal "Let me tell you about how racist you and all other white people are". Most white proles don't need to be told for the nth time to not be a cunt to people of color

Yes, I read the statement just fine. All this boils down to is "racism exists as the tool of the elites". Despite your insistence, this is not an inherently liberal position (and in fact liberalism is notable for going out of its way to not place any blame on class structures or elites in any way)

What the statement doesn't say:

Good thing no one said this

Hillary and Obama like Lincoln because Doris Kearns Goodwin made him look like a centrist piece of shit in the book Team of Rivals. The fairy tale of pragmatic Lincoln pitted against two extremes the south and republican conservatives and the left wing of republicans represented by Thaddeus Stevens.. They like to use this to excuse their current timid and tepid neoliberal agenda, when in reality whether or not you agreed with his politics or motives Lincoln was willing to take radical positions. Starting a new party is pretty radical, pushing for a constitutional amendment during wartime is pretty radical. The house divided speech threatening and warning the south before he was even president was pretty radical. These are not things a "centrist" would do."

Doris is a fraud by the way who isn't liked by other scholars of US history.

Racism is idpol. Being anti-racism is being anti-idpol. "Let me tell you about how racist you and all other white people are" isn't anything anyone is saying in redneck revolt

…and in enacting this racism, white proles themselves also become "tools of the elites" is the implied line

pretty fucking heavily implies that the aforementioned white proles are guilty of being "too stupid" to not notice how they're been used to carry out the elites' actions.

Because liberalism blames white people for perpetuating white supremacy, of which your average basic bitch liberal tends to agree - the solution being aggressively anti-racist measures enacted by government, business, and NGO bodies to stamp out this racism instead of overthrowing capitalism (as the Left promotes as the solution)

The soviets called idpol bourgeoisie nationalism

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourgeois_nationalism

After the October Revolution, the Bolshevik government based its nationalities policy (korenization) on the principles of Marxist-Leninist ideology. According to these principles, all nations should disappear with time, and nationalism was considered a bourgeois ideology.[1]

In his Report on the 50th anniversary of the formation of the USSR, Leonid Brezhnev emphasized: "That is why Communists and all fighters for socialism believe that the main aspect of the national question is unification of the working people, regardless of their national origin, in the common battle against every type of oppression, and for a new social system which rules out exploitation of the working people."

All proles are "tools of the elites" under capitalism. Why are you so convinced that this statement exempts non-white proles?

And those two statements are not equivalent except through heavy reaching

Yes, and this statement does not blame white people and instead blames the ruling class. Unless your objection is that white supremacy doesn't exist or that it's not a tool of the bourgeoisie in the west, I'm not clear what your objection is

Ah yes, if there's one thing the West bourgeoisie is it's enforcing white supremacy, even as practically every Western nation is expected to become minority white in the next fifty years - but hey, its still a "white supremacist" system because whites are a slightly disproportionate part of the elite, right? And all those trendy academics pretty much concur that its a white supremacist system we're living in

Damn dude how did you even know it was this book in particular?

Lmao and there it is

Could have saved me a lot of time if you had just started with "racism doesn't exist"

And you could have saved us a lot of time by just agreeing that RR has more interest in hectoring the racist proles than actually building any sort of class solidarity. I wonder if they'll have struggle sessions where everyone confesses to being a massive racist too

I don't agree with your ridiculous premises based on the latest Molymeme video to begin with. The west isn't scheduled to be "minority white" in the next 50 years, and racism DOES exist and is a tool used by the elites. You're not an anti-liberal you're just someone who watched a few too many SJW cringe compilations on youtube

Lincoln was radical in the way that he was willing to do anything to preserve the union. Even freeing the slaves.

There were actually extremist republicans who were batshit crazy and wanted revenge but lincoln was more moderate and wanted everyone to move on

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_Republican

didn't happen
Your fanfiction of what might happen in an RR meeting is irrelevant

Lmfao dude your position is literally "racism doesn't exist". This is just plain retarded.

mic.com/articles/106252/the-year-white-people-will-become-a-minority-in-america-has-been-declared#.KfkpPX0ja

independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/white-britons-will-be-minority-before-2070-says-professor-8600262.html

And in this white proles are presumably complicit, because racism can only be a tool of the elite if the proles are actually being racist.

What next, are you going to say that yes the police are a tool of the elites to suppress revolutionary movements, but policemen aren't to blame for acting in that capacity?

(You)

Because they have both referenced it before and the Author is a friend of Obama because of the book. It's like the play "Hamilton" it's one of those shitty things you have to like to be in with these people.

If someone has been duped, its better off to tell them to their face than try to spare their feelings. Most working class people get this, and rural white workers are nowhere near as tender and easily offended as you're making them out to be. Anyway, no one in rural america is going to confuse redneck revolt for liberals because they are pro-gun. By far and away the thing that pisses rural americans off the most about liberals is the anti-gun rhetoric. Gun owners are more likely to vote republican in every modern election. Imageboard and reddit users believe everything is down to sjws and white backlash against white guilt but regular people have entirely different priorities than internet sinners.

You replied to a post reiterating that your position is "racism doesn't exist" with basically "yeah, so what"? Don't feign indignation now

The sense of victimhood and lack of free will is absolutely pathetic. I'm the lower end of working class and I don't sit here and pretend my life is the way it is because "muh rich" abused me. Who was out there marching, demanding the government infringe on our freedoms and take away our first and second amendment rights? Who was it that marched on behalf of corporate interests and demanded more regulations and more taxation, which kill our small businesses while doing little to these massive corporations due to loopholes? It wasn't the rich. No, it was middle class, spoiled, suburban women and teens. Societal filth. Society doesn't break down into financial classes, it breaks down into intellectual classes. I fully own that my lack of upward financial movement is due to my lack of care for financial improvement. I don't then go out and act on behalf of corporate interests and demand politicians harm my neighbors to moral signal my adherence to a flawed moral system.

One of those priorities probably isn't being lectured on how they need to be less racist though

Racism exists, but not in the stupid "Racism = prejudice + power" sense that tends to be used to justify the argument that we live in a white supremacist society that East Asians (and certain other minority groups) "just happen" to be more successful in aggregate in (or is East Asian success ackchooally proof that we live in a white supremacist system because muh model minority? Checkmate, racists)

Rural White Americans also hate Commies, just so you know.

...

Man politicians are lame.

I don't have time to get into this with you in detail but to put it succinctly these claims always presume extrapolation of trends that are very unlikely to sustain, as well as some really iffy categorization of what constitutes "white" to begin with.

What is your stance here exactly? There are only a few options here

Probably isn't going to win them over many recruits

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here other than actually there are material reasons why blacks inherently have worse outcomes that has nothing to do with racism

Part of that is because their image of 'commies' is shaped entirely by media and hostile word of mouth. No one is going to like you before you talk to them. I've lived in rural 90+% white midwestern american towns for decades for what its worth.

The nazi's were the masters of killing off the white race.

In war. Russians killed more through other means though.

When did you start hating black people?

This is why I don't understand liberal racists. If niggers are all dumb criminals then why not discriminate based on actual criminality and intelligence (whatever that means in this context) instead of skin colour? If throwing all blacks back to Africa means you have to keep all retards of other races in what's the benefit or logic?

Leaving aside the very notion of an actual debate, his team is probably going to follow Fox's proven Colmes and Beckel Model: pair idiot reactionaries with even more idiotic liberals, with maybe a few $$$green capitalists$$$ thrown in.

...

Macaroni is right, but there are many more problems than this.

wut

Makes you think.

the confederates wouldn't have blacks to complain about if they didn't assassinate him.

I think that's dodgy (so are claims of Marx being exceptionally racist, though I could be wrong about Marx) - Lincoln took racist positions but by the end of his life he was getting ready to allow black people the vote (or he already had, I forget), which pretty much runs contrary to "back to Africa" in general. Not to say your point doesn't stand - plenty of major figures in the Union (including Lincoln, who wasn't the worst) said or even did incredibly racist things. And Robert E. Lee pretty much only fought for the south because he lived there - he'd been an abolitionist beforehand, if I'm not mistaken.

makes me wonder why no ones talking about it

If there is a god we can convict shillary and trump at the same time.