Modern Racism or Xenophobia in general, destroy the myth of Neonazism

halfalp

Regular Member
Messages
1,499
Reaction score
222
Points
0
Ethnic group
Swiss
Y-DNA haplogroup
R-L2
mtDNA haplogroup
J1c5a
Hello, i want to create a thread who dont want to pretend anything, and if it become toxic, its gonna be closed anyway. I respond to a thread in a very hot-tempered way few times ago and want to give a point about.

Their is a myth, creating or thinking by people, especially elder, but not just, that every racism or xenophobia in general are the relants of the nazis or the fascists. This is your biggest mistake and i'm gonna explain you why. Says that those behavior are the relants of nazis, is literally saying that, world doesn't move, that everything is static, a big manicheism that, when the Bad gonna be destroyed, only the Good gonna survive. It is of course absolutely not the case, last french elections see more than 10 millions french vote for Marine LePen( and she only lost because of a poor TV debate ), AfD in germany and FPO in austria and a lot more. So we see, a new form of xenophobia emerge, not from the nazis, not from the fascists but a modern one, our, if i may say. Social-democrats with their Providence State, Socialism with their thiefs, Immigration... All those little things create that xenophobia and conservatism. People thinks that child is the exemple to follow, but look a black kid says something to a white kid who never says anything racist and he gonna show his real face. Everybody understand difference, everybody has a different feel about difference, but more obviously, everybody has his own life experience, who can be very discusting for some. Xenophobia gonna be in the future, a must-live-with, both in europe and north america, their is no political behind, just the real voluntee of some of the people. Are we gonna be killed for that ? I wonder sometimes, it seems, that our view are considered as inexistant. I'm personnally a xenophobic person, not a racist one neither a racialist, this is my life, my rights, but people has to understand that i lived things, that others dont and that change everything for millions of people. Europeans isn't a race to save or whatever, create a wall and some gonna want to climb it, just for the sake of adventure, but there are the others, those who dont think like that, those that nobody ever listen, those who gonna grow more and more, untill somebody give attention to them, but it might be too late. I hope, in the future, people gonna realise that, if they dont, well, thats what we call ostracism, and being ostracist with your own people, that's what we call trahison. Hitler, Islamists do you know what they have in common ? The feel to have been betrayed, by jews, communists even germans for the first and by progressists in favor of occidental living by the later. We dont create those emotion by ourselves, it's not our fault, it's life that always want to seperate each other, the real point is, how understand to live knowing that ?
 
The word racism really became popularised by the Nazi and became stigmatised in Western society after WWII. The stigma is still strong but most people today use the word far too lightly for anything to do with xenophobia or intolerance of other cultures, lifestyles or even religions. In most cases that isn't racism at all. The problem is that almost everybody alive today weren't born or old enough to understand political speeches during the 1930' and early 40's. So the only people who can really talk about it are those who have studied the history of Nazism and WWII, those who have read Mein Kampf and analysed Nazi speeches and propaganda. I did all this in history class.

First of all, racism as defined by the Nazis is the dominance of a chosen race (or ethnicity if you will, in modern term, as race is a wider concept to modern ethnologists) over the rest of human society. I have never heard any major far-right party in today's Europe, be it the Front National, the AfD or the FPO, make any truly racist claim or define any racist ideology in the way the Nazi did. Nobody is saying today that the French or the Germans, or even the Europeans as a whole are superior to other 'races' and should dominate the world, and enslave or exterminate other lowly races. This was a natural thing to say in early 20th century Europe, but this way of thinking has completely vanished in Western society.

The only countries where some people still think in term of country = race are places like Japan, Korea or (Han) China, partly because of their ethnic homogeneity, and partly because they never experienced the stigma and shame of Nazism directly and didn't have their school curricula designed to stigmatise such thinking in the aftermath of WWII. The Japanese did pretty much the same as the Germans during WWII. Yet, because there was hardly any stigmatisation of racist ideals in schools after WWII, it was not uncommon for Japanese people in the 1980's to claim that the reason for the exceptional success of their economy was their own racial superiority, just like in the early 20th century. That myth collapsed with the bubble economy in 1990, from which Japan hasn't really recovered ever since. Then came the Koreans who followed exactly in the footsteps of the Japanese claiming that Koreans were superior and that explained their miracle economy. The Chinese are getting there too. Once again, until the bubble collapses... A strong economy make people arrogant. That's basic human psychology.

However, just thinking that one's ethnic group is better than others does not constitute racism in itself. Humans are all naturally endowed with the capacity of egocentrism and tribal affiliation, and therefore also ethnocentrism. Denying this is denying human nature. Education can make people more open-minded, but the natural state of most people is to identify first with their family and ethnic group, especially in ethnically homogeneous countries.

Xenophobia is defined as the fear of other people who are different from us. That is also a natural human state of mind, inherited from the tribal lifestyle of hunter-gatherers. Once again modern education is designed to overwrite that so that people can live peacefully in a multiethnic and multicultural society.

The real problem of modern Western society is to accommodate immigrants from countries that have not yet adopted this modern openmindedness and tolerance about life in a multiethnic and multicultural society, and want to destroy that society. The biggest single cause to the failed integration of such immigration, the root of their psychological resistance to tolerance and openness to modernity and to people different from them is by all accounts (radical) Islam. This is really the reason for the rise of far-right parties in Europe today. What they say is simple enough to understand. "We have tried for several generations to accommodate Muslim immigrants, but many of them refuse to integrate, reject our tolerant values, burn cars, shoot on crowds and prefer to become suicide bombers than to adopt modern Western multicultural values." How do you face such a problem? Be tougher on crime, ban radical Islam and better control immigration from Muslim countries. That sound reasonable and mature. That has absolutely nothing to do with true racism as defined by the Nazis. Nobody is saying that superior Europeans should enslave or exterminate other races! What is called extreme right today is very mild in comparison of the extreme right of the 1930's! That would have been a very moderate stance at the time.
 
Racism doesn't mean anything other than showing disdain or partiality based upon nothing more than the colour of one's skin - race. It is prejudice "of race" (in either a negative or positive light) as opposed to prejudice of nationality, etc.
 
But if prejudice of race is called "racism" I still do not know what prejudice of nationality is called. Tell me please.
 
Racism doesn't mean anything other than showing disdain or partiality based upon nothing more than the colour of one's skin - race. It is prejudice "of race" (in either a negative or positive light) as opposed to prejudice of nationality, etc.

Yes and no. I agree that racism is prejudice against other races or ethnicities, and that the term shouldn't be used for other kinds of prejudices, e.g. against other religions. No historian talks of racism during the wars of religions in the Renaissance, nor even during the crusades, so there is no reason to use the term for clashes between Western and Islamic societies.

Where I disagree with you is when you say that racism is 'nothing more than disdain'. If that was the case then racism wouldn't be a big issue and it would be a relatively common state of mind throughout human history around the world. That's not at all what this is about. The term racism emerged in late 19th and early 20th century Western society when European powers and the US dominated the world and other ethnic groups through the colonial empires and great technological superiority. It was easy at the time to assume that this technological military and political superiority was the result of a genetic superiority. In other words, 'White people' were superior to other races. Hitler and the Nazis built on this idea and refined it to claim that the truly superior people were Germanic people, and that all other races should be subdued by the master race. Now that is not just disdain. That is truly believing in one's ethnic superiority over all other humans in the world and actively seeking to subdue, enslave or exterminate those other people. It's not just a difference of intensity, it goes much further than disdain, intolerance or hatred, and it resulted in WWII and the Holocaust, totalling some 60 million deaths! So please do not say that racism is just disdain or intolerance of others. It is far worse than that! Fortunately racism has been almost completely eradicated from political life nowadays.
 
But if prejudice of race is called "racism" I still do not know what prejudice of nationality is called. Tell me please.

What is prejudice of nationality? Can you give me an example?
 
Maciamo: "No historian talks of racism during the wars of religions in the Renaissance, nor even during the crusades, so there is no reason to use the term for clashes between Western and Islamic societies."

Of course not.Religion is not race.Neither atheism.
 
The word racism really became popularised by the Nazi and became stigmatised in Western society after WWII. The stigma is still strong but most people today use the word far too lightly for anything to do with xenophobia or intolerance of other cultures, lifestyles or even religions. In most cases that isn't racism at all. The problem is that almost everybody alive today weren't born or old enough to understand political speeches during the 1930' and early 40's. So the only people who can really talk about it are those who have studied the history of Nazism and WWII, those who have read Mein Kampf and analysed Nazi speeches and propaganda. I did all this in history class.

First of all, racism as defined by the Nazis is the dominance of a chosen race (or ethnicity if you will, in modern term, as race is a wider concept to modern ethnologists) over the rest of human society. I have never heard any major far-right party in today's Europe, be it the Front National, the AfD or the FPO, make any truly racist claim or define any racist ideology in the way the Nazi did. Nobody is saying today that the French or the Germans, or even the Europeans as a whole are superior to other 'races' and should dominate the world, and enslave or exterminate other lowly races. This was a natural thing to say in early 20th century Europe, but this way of thinking has completely vanished in Western society.

The only countries where some people still think in term of country = race are places like Japan, Korea or (Han) China, partly because of their ethnic homogeneity, and partly because they never experienced the stigma and shame of Nazism directly and didn't have their school curricula designed to stigmatise such thinking in the aftermath of WWII. The Japanese did pretty much the same as the Germans during WWII. Yet, because there was hardly any stigmatisation of racist ideals in schools after WWII, it was not uncommon for Japanese people in the 1980's to claim that the reason for the exceptional success of their economy was their own racial superiority, just like in the early 20th century. That myth collapsed with the bubble economy in 1990, from which Japan hasn't really recovered ever since. Then came the Koreans who followed exactly in the footsteps of the Japanese claiming that Koreans were superior and that explained their miracle economy. The Chinese are getting there too. Once again, until the bubble collapses... A strong economy make people arrogant. That's basic human psychology.

However, just thinking that one's ethnic group is better than others does not constitute racism in itself. Humans are all naturally endowed with the capacity of egocentrism and tribal affiliation, and therefore also ethnocentrism. Denying this is denying human nature. Education can make people more open-minded, but the natural state of most people is to identify first with their family and ethnic group, especially in ethnically homogeneous countries.

Xenophobia is defined as the fear of other people who are different from us. That is also a natural human state of mind, inherited from the tribal lifestyle of hunter-gatherers. Once again modern education is designed to overwrite that so that people can live peacefully in a multiethnic and multicultural society.

The real problem of modern Western society is to accommodate immigrants from countries that have not yet adopted this modern openmindedness and tolerance about life in a multiethnic and multicultural society, and want to destroy that society. The biggest single cause to the failed integration of such immigration, the root of their psychological resistance to tolerance and openness to modernity and to people different from them is by all accounts (radical) Islam. This is really the reason for the rise of far-right parties in Europe today. What they say is simple enough to understand. "We have tried for several generations to accommodate Muslim immigrants, but many of them refuse to integrate, reject our tolerant values, burn cars, shoot on crowds and prefer to become suicide bombers than to adopt modern Western multicultural values." How do you face such a problem? Be tougher on crime, ban radical Islam and better control immigration from Muslim countries. That sound reasonable and mature. That has absolutely nothing to do with true racism as defined by the Nazis. Nobody is saying that superior Europeans should enslave or exterminate other races! What is called extreme right today is very mild in comparison of the extreme right of the 1930's! That would have been a very moderate stance at the time.

Very well said, I agree with all of what you wrote.
 
Maciamo: "No historian talks of racism during the wars of religions in the Renaissance, nor even during the crusades, so there is no reason to use the term for clashes between Western and Islamic societies."

Of course not.Religion is not race.Neither atheism.

Exactly. But it needed to be mentioned as too many people use the term racism when talking about Islamophobia.
 
Yes and no. I agree that racism is prejudice against other races or ethnicities, and that the term shouldn't be used for other kinds of prejudices, e.g. against other religions. No historian talks of racism during the wars of religions in the Renaissance, nor even during the crusades, so there is no reason to use the term for clashes between Western and Islamic societies.



Where I disagree with you is when you say that racism is 'nothing more than disdain'. If that was the case then racism wouldn't be a big issue and it would be a relatively common state of mind throughout human history around the world. That's not at all what this is about. The term racism emerged in late 19th and early 20th century Western society when European powers and the US dominated the world and other ethnic groups through the colonial empires and great technological superiority. It was easy at the time to assume that this technological military and political superiority was the result of a genetic superiority. In other words, 'White people' were superior to other races. Hitler and the Nazis built on this idea and refined it to claim that the truly superior people were Germanic people, and that all other races should be subdued by the master race. Now that is not just disdain. That is truly believing in one's ethnic superiority over all other humans in the world and actively seeking to subdue, enslave or exterminate those other people. It's not just a difference of intensity, it goes much further than disdain, intolerance or hatred, and it resulted in WWII and the Holocaust, totalling some 60 million deaths! So please do not say that racism is just disdain or intolerance of others. It is far worse than that! Fortunately racism has been almost completely eradicated from political life nowadays.

Well, as I said "Racism doesn't mean anything other than showing disdain or partiality based upon nothing more than the colour of one's skin - race. It is prejudice "of race" (in either a negative or positive light) as opposed to prejudice of nationality, etc."

That "Disdain or partiality" is not a racist event. You can study and explain the reasons behind racist notions (as you've just done) but it boils down to those two. It is equally racist to feel FOR EXAMPLE that black people are more honest, congenial, etc than your own race of people. But in the end to be a racist is only to harbour such emotions based merely upon race/colour. To act them out with deeds is something else. "Showing" disdain (as I wrote), may have been misleading.

I think the examples you use (the most widespread notion of racism) is as much partiality towards white as much as disdain for non-whites. But again racists may or may not act out their racial frustration with deeds.
 
What is prejudice of nationality? Can you give me an example?
An example from a white man's perspective?

"I can not abide Nigerians, Gambians, or Jamaicans - they disgust me. But I simply adore Kenyans, Botswanans and Bahamans - some of the nicest people on the earth."
 
Maciamo: "No historian talks of racism during the wars of religions in the Renaissance, nor even during the crusades, so there is no reason to use the term for clashes between Western and Islamic societies."

Of course not.Religion is not race.Neither atheism.

(y)
 
Isn't a lot of exemple quote here racialism more than racism ? For me, racism is clearly a concept put in an absurd theater piece. I understand xenophobia, the fear of the difference. I understand racialism, the elitization of a race against an other ( for this point, the state has to be multiracial in the beginning, wich is not a reality for all the world ). But racism, i have to say, goes nowhere for me. I like to take the American History X movie as an exemple, if you don't understand the hate, that another people can have for a global race or ethne, you just never lived something to make you feel that feeling. I also think that put resurgence of xenophobia of islam, evern if its right, is minimized the voluntee of a lot of people, to lieve in a stratified world, with rules, with everything in is own place. Because if we take Africa as an exemple, wich is Gold, we see two things, SSA africa, no demographic problems, but the highest poverty of the world, or north africa ( beginning in Sahel ) or Muslim africa, we see that all those country have a demography of 1 women for 5 men. All that make migration of africans evident, in the present and in the future, but those fact, are only arrose by feelings, we have the power of the reason to change the perspective, to not be stuck in the " natural " process, to be gods ourselves. But no, people just let things happened without conscience, without reason, for feelings, for instincts...
 
Well, as I said "Racism doesn't mean anything other than showing disdain or partiality based upon nothing more than the colour of one's skin - race. It is prejudice "of race" (in either a negative or positive light) as opposed to prejudice of nationality, etc."

That "Disdain or partiality" is not a racist event. You can study and explain the reasons behind racist notions (as you've just done) but it boils down to those two. It is equally racist to feel FOR EXAMPLE that black people are more honest, congenial, etc than your own race of people. But in the end to be a racist is only to harbour such emotions based merely upon race/colour. To act them out with deeds is something else. "Showing" disdain (as I wrote), may have been misleading.

I think the examples you use (the most widespread notion of racism) is as much partiality towards white as much as disdain for non-whites. But again racists may or may not act out their racial frustration with deeds.

There I have to strongly disagree. You are saying that racism is the belief that humans differ in their ability between races or ethnicities. That is not at all what racism is about. Racism is about prejudice, discrimination and the superiority of one race over others. Yet, it is a scientific fact that all humans differ in their physical and mental abilities, temperament, health predispositions (e.g. resistance to diseases), and so on. We aren't clones. We are all different. It is also a fact that some genetic traits are more common or even exclusive to some races or ethnic groups. Sickle-cell disease is found only in people with African ancestry. Hemochromatosis is typical of North Europeans. Only people with East Asian ancestry have the ALDH2 gene mutation that causes the so-called Asian flush after drinking alcohol. It is not racist to say so. It is just a fact. Likewise it isn't racist to say that West African have in average better genes for sprinting, East African make better long-distance runners and East/North Asians better gymnasts because they are more supple. That's just the way it is. Humans weren't all created equal like the Bible says, and only religious people would claim otherwise. Acknowledging the diversity of genetic variants among the big human family isn't racism. It is just the opposite. It is recognising our differences and accepting that nobody is perfect and that there isn't a single race that is genetically superior to all others.
 
An example from a white man's perspective?

"I can not abide Nigerians, Gambians, or Jamaicans - they disgust me. But I simply adore Kenyans, Botswanans and Bahamans - some of the nicest people on the earth."

That sounds like a person's opinion based on personal experiences with people from those countries. This kind of generalisations is also deeply rooted in human nature all over the world. Once again it is education that can overcome such primitive urges to simplify reality. But experience has shown me that it is delusional to expect all people to think or behave rationally or even reasonably most of the time. Humans aren't robots.
 
There I have to strongly disagree. You are saying that racism is the belief that humans differ in their ability between races or ethnicities. That is not at all what racism is about. Racism is about prejudice, discrimination and the superiority of one race over others. Yet, it is a scientific fact that all humans differ in their physical and mental abilities, temperament, health predispositions (e.g. resistance to diseases), and so on. We aren't clones. We are all different. It is also a fact that some genetic traits are more common or even exclusive to some races or ethnic groups. Sickle-cell disease is found only in people with African ancestry. Hemochromatosis is typical of North Europeans. Only people with East Asian ancestry have the ALDH2 gene mutation that causes the so-called Asian flush after drinking alcohol. It is not racist to say so. It is just a fact. Likewise it isn't racist to say that West African have in average better genes for sprinting, East African make better long-distance runners and East/North Asians better gymnasts because they are more supple. That's just the way it is. Humans weren't all created equal like the Bible says, and only religious people would claim otherwise. Acknowledging the diversity of genetic variants among the big human family isn't racism. It is just the opposite. It is recognising our differences and accepting that nobody is perfect and that there isn't a single race that is genetically superior to all others.
No, I didn't even mention "ability".
 

This thread has been viewed 21540 times.

Back
Top