• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Am I allowed to be a proud white person?

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
Actually most cultures were doing pretty well until colonisers came along. There are tribes throughout the world that have existed for who knows how long without any interference. The Orthodox Jewish culture has also done quite well. The Native Americans and Aborigines were doing quite well without outside contact. The Inuit people were doing just fine.

What does 'just fine' mean?
 

Rival

Si m'ait Dieus
Staff member
Premium Member
Why do you see culture in such a static and defensive way?
Where is this static, unchanging culture you speak of?
I never said it was static; cultures evolve naturally, but we have different ways of life that are consistent with our overall values. Generally, for example, Far Eastern cultures tend to have values towards communalism, manners, social ritual, whereas European ones and Anglophone ones tend to value individualism. There's plenty of room for change in these vague concepts.

What does 'just fine' mean?
That they were doing just fine? Lol. These cultures have been around for a very long time and didn't need any foreign influence for any reason. No one seems to accuse them of being stagnant or racist.
 

SA Huguenot

Well-Known Member
The point was lost on you.

That's okay.
I never had a slave, and dont want one. They are too expensive.
I do not even have someone cleaning my house, or making food. Or washing.
This I do myself.
As for assuming I oppressed any man in South Africa, this never happened.
I am a employer of people, creating work for people in businuss.
In the West they call this Capitalism and Job Creation.
In South Africa they call this oppressing people because the socialists are to damn lazy to understand you need to work to eat.
All they do is to sit and demand money from the intelligent who are not lazy, and who accumelated an estate through hard work, sweat, and self discipline.

As for you even implying that I should be shot by a man fighting slave owners, should be reminded that your connotation of me to a slave owner is totally bias.
Why the hatred?
Are you so against someone who is white that you would suggest such extreems?
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
In the sense of what I call Proud is a word chosen not at idolizing myself, but a word to describe that the intend of those that hate me for being White, telling me that I should be ashamed of being white.
Well, the hell with anyone who demands of me to be ashamed of my people who were the most outstanding Christian Huegeneuts and Protestants in history, who were persecuted for believing in Jesus and the Bible.
Now, lllow me to rephrase my intent with the word I chose, which you deliberately forced into a filthy conotation.
I am not ashamed of being White!
I am not ashamed of being a White descendand of the people who settled here in Africa and made it the greatest country in Africa.
I am not ashamed of my white children.
I am not ashamed of my white grand chidren.

I would completely agree that we don't have to be ashamed of how much melanin our skin has.

Now, it isn't that I forced you into a filthy connotation.. I know that writing thoughts down can be difficult (in as much as I have made the same mistake in trying to convey a thought) - but it is how it came across
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
And who took the land?
If one buys the land, does it belong to you?
If people then make war and you retaliate and fight for your land, does it still belong to you?
Well, in this case the Afrikaner did nothing wrong, and should gain self determination.
What about the Muslim horders that stole North Africa?
Or the Australians who settled in New Holland?
Or the Dutch, German, French, Portuguese, Spanish, and English who took North and South America?

Furthermore, why does the Colored people hold he White Americans accountable for something their ancestors did 150 years ago?
And, why does the Coloured people not realise, they are setlers in the USA also?
Good points. Just tying to understand why they would attack. I don't know your history.

Certainly every country has done it to someone. And if you bought the land, then it is yours to live in. If someone attacked my home, I would defend it.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
Me too, I have a lot of Black friends, but their culture is so far removed from mine that I do not get the same experience of socialising as I do when I am with my own people.
So, you are actually saying that I should do my own life short not to enjoy the gathering with people I like to be with, and replace my friends with colored people to demonstrate that I am not Racist?
Since when did socializing with your own people become racist?
What about the Jews, Greeks, Polish, Germans with their folk gatherings, family come togethers, cultural dances and entertainment.
They are all allowed to be Greek, Jewish, german, etc, but if I do that I am a racist?
Come on pal, why do you force not to have me living a free life?

that is true. Culture can make a difference in a relationship. But your children may be able to be a cross-culture children and want to marry someone with more melanin than us? I have a cross-culture marriage.

Let me say that I never said your were racist but rather some statements could be understood as racist

for an example:

Am I allowed to teach my children to rather marry with Whites?

That statement could be viewed as racist. As I mentioned before, we are still marrying a person and not a color.

And maybe " I do not get the same experience of socializing as I do when I am with my own people." isn't the best way to say it. "My own people" has a separation tone to it. Certainly it is true that you will fellowship with people who are of like mind. I may not have as much communion with a certain group of people as with others.. but notice I didn't use "my own people". It is natural for Latin people to congregate together--but it isn't a them or us type of situation.

I hope I am not coming across in a condemnation way. Trying to convey a thought.
 

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
Do you know that England only removed their racist legislation in 1972?
Wasn't aware... but that's good to hear.
And the USA in the late 60's.
Was aware of this, and yes, the lateness of it isn't anything to be proud of, I understand this.
South africa did so in 1983.
Yes, so I would expect that your country is even further entrenched in the "racism" paradigm. You're not as far along the path of figuring out what things look like without discriminatory legislation on the books. What point are you trying to make with this?
Are the White Afrikaners more racist than the Whites in England or the USA?
No. What makes you think I felt that they might be?
What about the Islamic countries that does not allow any foreign person to become a citizen.
These guys are likely buttheads as well. Again - what is your point?
Do they have the right to do this, and why dont the USA or even South Africa have this right?
There are no "rights" in the grand scheme. There's what the ruling majority, or "mob" or legislative bodies are willing to put up with at any given time, and there's what they/we are not willing to put up with. At the moment (and having its most effective start not too long ago - as you pointed out) the world is sort of "waking up" and informing its global citizenry that racism of any kind, and fostering racial divides is simply not going to be seen as productive/good/worthwhile. That's why you're getting slapped about in this thread, and told you are being racist. Anyone doing so is doing so because they don't find it expedient or wise to hold on to racial bigotry, and they are trying to get you in the same boat - so we can all sail away to what is hopefully a brighter future.
Are one racist when you want to be an aotonomous country with your own nation and culture?
Not necessarily. But if it is to the purposeful exclusion of peoples based solely on their race, then yes - yes, that is racist. The word "racist" has a definition. If something meets the criteria to fall within the scope of the word's definition, then what is there to do but call the thing by the word you know represents it? It is racist.
 

ADigitalArtist

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
I think you are wrong.
The Jews are a good example of what you dont know.
4000 years of history and culture, today the most wealthy businussmen, most educated, and most scientificly minded.
This they did not gain by just forsaking their culture, never.
Every Saturday they come together in religion and culture and support each other, making plans for their future generation.
This is not racism at all!
Now why destroy something as beautifull as this for ....lets say....
LBGQ Black Lives matter, and all these terrible undisciplined looters and excuses for human beings.
As an outsider, If I have to decide if the Jews, Greeks, Japanese, Chinese, or any other culture on earth should abolish their culture and take up the socialist stupidity going on in the USA under these ulsta left rubbish who loot and destroy under the name of demonstrating for some black man murdered by a cop, I would say:
Jews, Please remain as you are for 4000 years more.
and Please take over the west to prevent the socialist filth in destroying civilisation.
I would rather choose the Japs to rule the USA than China. Even if the Americans fought for their freedom to preserve democracy.
Let's not pretend that Judaism is monocultured or that some of the most financially successful or socially successful Jews are practicing, let alone orthodox. Judaism has had a number of both religious and cultural revolutions and absolutely do not represent an uninterrupted line of single beliefs. Let's also not pretend that they're aren't Jews who are both lgbtq are part of the black lives matter movement. Because there definitely are.
This is part of the problem with tribalism. The reduction to the absurd to fit everyone in mostly arbitrary boxes.

I could go on about how Japan is a heck of a lot more socialist than the USA, and has even been having sympathetic BLM protesting, but I don't think that's actually relevant. Civil rights struggles are not bipartisan or even quad partisan, though authoritarian traditionalists are extremely slow on the uptake of providing human rights historically.
 

ADigitalArtist

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
That they were doing just fine? Lol. These cultures have been around for a very long time and didn't need any foreign influence for any reason. No one seems to accuse them of being stagnant or racist.
That's a really big 'they.' These cultures weren't monoculture either, there was tons of trade and integration with other cultures (especially Native American people), paradigm shifts, revolutions, in fighting, and quite a lot of intermarrying between tribes. The tribes that were the most xenophobic and self isolating *did* tend to stagnate and die out. Or, had large cultural or religious revolutions (or other types of schisms).

And part of the reason colonialism was so incredibly awful is because it *was* trying to set up a monoculture, instead of a secular multicultural nation which neither forces integration (within reason e.g. human sacrifice isn't okay just because a culture allows it) nor forbids it (criminalizing segregation laws or bans on interracial marriage, and socially stigmatizing xenophobic behavior.)
 

Rival

Si m'ait Dieus
Staff member
Premium Member
That's a really big 'they.' These cultures weren't monoculture either, there was tons of trade and integration with other cultures (especially Native American people), paradigm shifts, revolutions, in fighting, and quite a lot of intermarrying between tribes. The tribes that were the most xenophobic and self isolating *did* tend to stagnate and die out. Or, had large cultural or religious revolutions (or other types of schisms).

And part of the reason colonialism was so incredibly awful is because it *was* trying to set up a monoculture, instead of a secular multicultural nation which neither forces integration (within reason e.g. human sacrifice isn't okay just because a culture allows it) nor forbids it (criminalizing segregation laws or bans on interracial marriage, and socially stigmatizing xenophobic behavior.)
Israel was 12 tribes. There's a huge difference between some peoplegroups of essentially the same background mixing, than say an English culture meeting a Japanese culture.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
I'm proud to be White only because I am one.

If people want to call me privileged for whatever reason go for it, even though I have yet to experience that so-called privilege that they're talking about.

Many white people haven't. The majority, in regards to racism and color-of-skin issues, of whites have outside perspective but not treated harshly for their skin pigment. Which being a privilege white person is alright. I know some privileged people like straights who feel because they are allies, they should be part of the LGBTQ not realizing it isn't a club but a group of minorities coming together based on their experiences of not being straight. So, ignorance is a bliss?
 

ADigitalArtist

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Israel was 12 tribes. There's a huge difference between some peoplegroups of essentially the same background mixing, than say an English culture meeting a Japanese culture.
It's definitely not 12 tribes anymore (if it ever was.) Consider for a moment the amount of cultural variety that went into Fiddler on the Roof, a play created in part by three Jewish men, who ranged from Polish orthodox to a non practicing Bronx Jew who wrote about the struggle between holding onto tradition so arbitrary the people no longer remembered why they had them to balancing family happiness when it conflicted with those traditional roles. That's a lot of varying beliefs and cultural background (as well as ethnic background) for people under one identity.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
"Chocolate City"??? LOL! Back when I a little kid, in Oklahoma City during the 1950s, folks in my neighborhood called that "N-town".
First blacks I went to school with were classmates in 7th grade, ... all the way out in Hawthorne, Nevada. I count myself blessed, because my classmates were as amiable as I was.

1950s, N-town, wow.
 

Rival

Si m'ait Dieus
Staff member
Premium Member
It's definitely not 12 tribes anymore (if it ever was.) Consider for a moment the amount of cultural variety that went into Fiddler on the Roof, a play created in part by three Jewish men, who ranged from Polish orthodox to a non practicing Bronx Jew who wrote about the struggle between holding onto tradition so arbitrary the people no longer remembered why they had them to balancing family happiness when it conflicted with those traditional roles. That's a lot of varying beliefs and cultural background (as well as ethnic background) for people under one identity.
I think I'd put it simply as I prefer a salad bowl approach to a melting pot one. That's what I'm trying to get at here.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
I think I'd put it simply as I prefer a salad bowl approach to a melting pot one. That's what I'm trying to get at here.
Melting pots suck and they are terrible when you are composed of a metal that is fundamentally incompatible with the metals already in that mix.
 

ADigitalArtist

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
I think I'd put it simply as I prefer a salad bowl approach to a melting pot one. That's what I'm trying to get at here.
I agree. A melting pot is essentially creating a monoculture. But as stridently as I'm against melting pots I'm also against segregationist and antimiscegenation. I see both as diametrically opposite extremes. 'You can't join us because of the color of your skin, or national origin' should be condemned, imo.
Edit: and no, not just for white people. Blood quantum style ethnic identities are receiving lots of pushback and I agree.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
I can only hope your statement intend the thought that you also can't just paint every person "racist" just because of the shortage of melanin one has
I wonder if this is the right time to make just one small observation: you can trace your ancestry to 1549 or whatever the year you mentioned, but is that year so important? If we could actually do it, and all of traced our ancestries back many thousands of years, we would find that each and every one of, of every race on earth, has ancestors who had no such shortage of melanin. We are ALL descended from Africans.
 
Top