User loginAnarchist LibraryAnarchist Events
|
Smack A White Boy: March 21 Radical People of Color Anti-War (distr)Action
In addition, we argue that the current anti-war movement is rendered irrelevant by its refusal to address the critical component of white supremacy. The racist anti-war movement is devoid of any self-critical process to acknowledge or address how white supremacy contributes to the oppression of people of color within the movement, so how could it possibly have an analysis of how white supremacy oppresses people of color around the world? Essentially, how can one speak of ending oppression while engaging in the same or similar (in principle) oppressive behavior one claims to oppose? Aside from providing one the opportunity to pat oneself on the back, what purpose is served, or more explicitly, how are activists supporting the people of occupied Iraq and occupied Palestine by marching on the offices of warmongering corporations on a Saturday when no one is there? Given this reality, if we as people of color maintain our continued involvement in their spectacle of “resistance,” outside of our disruption of this spectacle, it will further empower their smug entitlement and white supremacy. Rather, we encourage unity between people of color in order to create nodes of actual resistance led by people of color. Therefore, on Saturday, March 21, 2009 in Washington, D.C., radical people of color will stand in solidarity with the people of Iraq and Palestine in our common struggle against white supremacy, colonialism, imperialism, and oppression in all its forms and make our presence felt outside of what is conventionally allowed by the racist anti-war movement. This will be a space of unity, empowerment, and self-determination wherein it will be made explicitly clear that we will no longer be marginalized, tokenized, and ultimately silenced by those who claim to speak in our names or in the names of our family and friends fighting for liberation around the world. Meet us at 12 noon at 23rd St. & Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, D.C.. Look for the brown and black f(l)ags. Bring your voice! Bring your rage! Bring da noise! A Brownie A Day Keeps Whitey Away, |
PollNews commentsRecent blog posts
SearchCheck out the monthly Anarchist News Digest. |
The hard truth is that the
The hard truth is that the pentagon is running a RaHoWa ( Racial Holy War ) Even as it uses some PoC as puppets and front-persons. ( Rice, Powell and now Oblah-blah ) Those anarchists who want to run as useful idiots for Marxist anti-capitalism are really missing the mark imo. The main enemy is not some fucking disembodied spook called 'capital'. Its the mutha-fucking president in his WHITE house and his mutha-fuckin' KKK pentagon. His god and his state first... and by any means necessary ( including some separatism ) - later for fucking capitalism.
Can we please get some consensus on this - the revolutionary fucking subject?
I'm so fucking tired of hearing some lame tired 'revolutionary' bs from alleged 'anti-capitalist' anarchs who are all just fucking neo-marxist morons and tools as far as I can see. ( Hi Rowan)
Coward. Use your name. Are
Coward. Use your name. Are you the same idiot who was supporting imperialism? Or are you in the habit of attacking people with the use of anonymous sock puppets.
Rowan Duffy
Hey Duffman, it's got to be
Hey Duffman, it's got to be the same clown. The usage of "neo-Marxist" as a generic catch-all epithet and the anti- (counter?) revolutionary content of his posts is the giveaway. So he can now add racist to his stellar qualities. His quasi-third position shit should be increasingly annoying to just about every semi-intelligent person here.
Rowan, APoC, et al. I would
Rowan, APoC, et al.
I would be happy to get to DC to be smacked by you all! I'll set up a mobile "smack a white boy for the revolution" booth. we can raise money for the war chest that way. $1 per smack, or more? help me out here.
in reality i'm not "white," but i'm a mixed blood that physically appears "white" (even if that is not how i identify), so it should work just fine.
but as a PoRM (person of mixed race - just made that up. why do we love acronyms so much?), i just want to say that i love the APoC rhetoric almost as much as i love how uncomfortable and reactionary it makes many other anarchists.
quit pushing those buttons, you damn darkies!
piece,
-Dirty Hands (aka colored white kid)
This is fascist bullshit.
This is fascist bullshit. You want a fucking movement huh? What does your skin color have to do with it. Yes people are racists. I think the classic song by Minor Threat can handle this one. I'm guilty of being white. Fuck anything that has to do with your skin color. I stand for unity, if you think you are somehow creating unity when you say "Smack A White Boy", i hope you are fucking joking. All races need to join together if you want any for of change. Fuck this bullshit. I think people, all colors that is, really want to use there skin color as an excuse. I always said, you are only different if you see yourself as different. Obviously if you pride yourself on being black or white or yellow, you are not being true to equality. I am not saying you should not be proud of who you are, but don;t be a fucking fool. This bullshit has got to end, i have always had a problem with the Anarchist People of Color. What a total oxymoron. FUCK OFF! Equality for all, rename you bullshit organization simply to "D.C.Anarchists" or you might as well throw on a KKK uniform. FUCKING SCUM!
Exactly
Exactly
I completely agree, but I
I completely agree, but I would be careful of simply claiming that we work on a system of "equality." This can mean many things and, by some definitions, can even be a kind of fascism. Just like when these "Anarchists of Color" claim to be fighting "oppression"...
i mean, isn't "Smack a White
i mean, isn't "Smack a White Boy" kinda a reference to Dead Prez lyrics?
they have a lot of "kill whitey" type lyrics, but if you've ever hung out with those kids (which i did at the DNC), they're well aware of the issues surrounding division, factionalism, and unity, as well as the nature of race within revolutionary movements.
the point of "kill whitey" rhetoric isn't so much literal and divisive as it is cultural, i think. this might not ALWAYS be the case, but i think that quite often, it is.
most APoC folks i've met are inflammatory in rhetoric only, and are quite nice people who would smack a racist person of color just as quickly as they would smack a white boy.
i think the rhetoric is just meant to push buttons and get people to examine their own race privilege (which we should be doing anyways).
i find that all too often anarchists want to just skip right over the race issue because "this is about unity, not race." i've seen people of color try to confront race issues within the movement only to be shot down and accused of trying to sow the seeds of racial division and factionalism. this is bullshit. we need to "deal with our shit," as we so often say.
the fact that so many people get so pissed about APoC rhetoric speaks to how much we HAVEN'T dealt with our shit, otherwise APoC wouldn't feel the need to exist or release statements like this one.
nah, dead prez is fucking
nah, dead prez is fucking dumb. They rock the essentialism and all that leftist drivel.
I listen to Dead Prez all
I listen to Dead Prez all the time.
:)
"I listen to Dead Prez all
"I listen to Dead Prez all the time."
ha, me too eyedea! i actually like them quite a bit, tunes like "assassination" and all the various anti-cop tunes. the black nationalist stuff and the maoist stuff the comes up can get on my last nerve but dead prez does have some good beats and when they are not on that shit (or occasionally homophobia) some very good lyrics too.
-lord rambler
Hahaha...That's dope,
Hahaha...That's dope, rambler. To be honest, I don't mind their nationalist lyrics. Not saying I support nationalism (you know how I roll..lolz), I obviously don't, but I just don't let it bother me. The homophobia too, that's something I put up with on a daily basis. They are one of the better groups among the independents (I think they're indy, I might be wrong), and they have big hearts. I respect their music and them as people. Of course, if I ever took them on in a debate I wouldn't go easy on them. I just can't get myself to hate leftists, no matter how hard I try.
:D
Oh yeah, and I can't stop
Oh yeah, and I can't stop listening to their song "Walk Like a Warrior" lately. "Assassination" is a def song too. I used to bang "It's Bigger than Hiphop" everyday, but I'm stuck on "Warrior" for some reason. I've been giving it a break with the Hiphop for the past couple of days (or I've been trying to, lol); getting back into Rock n roll, blues, punk etc. I've been listening to a lot of Hendrix and Bob Dylan too (emphasis on Hendrix). I tried John Coltrane, but I'm so used to rap lyrics over jazz beats I'm having trouble digging straight jazz. I just need to chill to it for awhile; I'll find a 'Trane track that I'll end up loving. I can guarantee it.
;p
Hey White Kids Fucken
Hey White Kids
Fucken chill for a minute. Just because race is socially constructed- ie, doesn't exist, per se- it does exist in a social context. race is a set of concrete relationships that play out in interactions, and more importantly, in the economy. Racism is a real form of oppression and any kind of revolutionary will understand that part of getting free is recognizing oppression and fucking dealing with it. As long as we pretend that race doesn't exist, it will continue to make our lives hell. We can't leave it behind like we all want to until we neutralize it.
(P)Color blindness is the position of liberals. Ignoring race and racism, in its structural and individual forms within society as well as within "our movement" ensures that we will perpetuate the forms of oppression that already exist.
(P)Sure a call like this should make white people uncomfortable, but really only someone who is oppressed can make the revolutionary changes in their own situation. As the dogmatists used to say, only the working class can free the working class, and also people of color should be in the driver's seat for their own liberation (including from you). We all want to Make Total Destroy, but NEED TO DEAL WITH OUR SHIT LIKE ADULTS. So don't get so defensive, and remember yer privelege.
(P) Does this make sense to you? I'm not trying to open up a flame war or the kind of defensive dogmatism that this site is known for. I'm posting because we need to have a real conversation about this.
Zanzara
Makes sense to me. Thank
Makes sense to me. Thank you!
i agree totally with this
i agree totally with this call (as a white kid).
i really urge everyone to read this: http://mmcisaac.faculty.asu.edu/emc598ge/Unpacking.html
White people need to understand their privilege.
Telling me to remember my
Telling me to remember my privilege seems like more of a liberal guilt tactic than the "colorblindness" you oppose. (By the way, I am partly color-blind and I am tired of you colorists reaffirming the existence of color. It is time I smack a colored!) Seriously, though, what "oppression" are we being liberated from simply by reasserting the "revolutionary struggle" of colored people? It seems like building one social construction upon another. And we see this fight against "oppression" with only more oppression. When slaves coming to the New World mutinied against their captors on the ships, they weren't concerned with enslaving the white man, but taking back freedom. Replacing one slavery with another and building a hierarchy of oppression is not in the least bit radical. To call such actions "racist" is to be bogged down in the same discourse that darkies want us to be in. It is overtly authoritarian.
Yes, yes, but isn't free
Yes, yes, but isn't free dissociation a part of voluntary cooperation? Let's not forget that regardless of what "type" of anarchist you are, there are certain principles that form anarchist thought. I'm not a big fan of the affirmation of racial categories, but APoC (both the organization and people which identify as such) have the conscious ability to dissociate with anyone they want for whatever reason they see fit (just as anyone else). As far as I can tell, their dissociation from the "white" majority among anarchists isn't creating an oppressive environment for me or any other "white" anarchist. So don't be so harsh on them for using "button pushing" language. Not that I'm condemning those who are critical of APoC; in fact, I encourage being critical of APoC, it's just another political organization after all. I do however agree with albertos point about this ridiculous white guilt that APoC expect us crackers to carry around all day. I suppose it's a form of exchange:
"Us "colored" people get beat down by "white" supremacy all day long, so we expect you whiteys to constantly be paranoid about whether or not you're indulging in your racial privilege all day long. Support APoC!!"
Fuck you. I have enough to deal with in my shit life, why should I have to try so hard to grieve over your shit life? Dachau comes in all flavors and colors. Race has a very real part to play in this society, it has led to the deaths of millions and it imposes misery on so many more, I realize this. But don't tell me to flagellate myself for some silly righteousness! I will reject your racial morality just as I try to reject all morality!! Give me ethics or give me death! [<--- Lulz!]
Lol! I got to using the word Dachau because I remembered reading Soledad Brother; now I use it constantly; how ironic...
Together we must find ways
Together we must find ways of eliminating these subtle manifestations of racism embedded so deeply within the fabric of American society. The responsibility for eliminating institutional racism rests with white America. There is nothing nonwhite individuals can do on their own to prevent or eliminate institutional racism. And by doing nothing; good, non-racist, white people are providing institutional cover for the actions of racist individuals.
I completly agree with you!I
I completly agree with you!I feel that this racist mindset is a systemic symptom that is derived from traditionalist propaganda perpetuated by ignorance and a shallow comprehension of reality.To go further would involve a critique of Western culture,its anthropocentric imperialistic traditions and systems,the arrogance of Aryan egotistical emperorship.
Well I just checked out
Well I just checked out this,what you anons and eyedea say, is cool,from what I gloss over,the latter posts,its the exact thing we see you dig,it gets personal,like anon said this mindset,that doesnt see the equality of all life,,,I mean even animals as far as respecting their right to non-judgement,you know what i mean?Its only an outer shell,we all got souls and feelings and mothers,fathers,brothers,sisters who we love,whats the big deal about being alive.All this nihilis shit,Im nihil in this place,whats that,my family member die all the time,I'm doin it now.Cool out.
"We all want to Make Total
"We all want to Make Total Destroy, but NEED TO DEAL WITH OUR SHIT LIKE ADULTS. So don't get so defensive, and remember yer privelege."
"Remember my privilege" for what purpose? How does "remembering my privilege" bring us any closer to anarchy? Seems to me that the "privilege" rhetoric that exists in so many radical scenes is just leftist moralism masquerading as something "revolutionary." I'm all for self-critism, but not when it stems from guilt politics.
The problem stems from those
The problem stems from those who are unable to see privilege because they are from it. Here in Ireland we have the problem of protestants from the north refusing to acknowledge their privilege. This notion of equivocation between all forms of oppression is totally regressive.
There is a difference coming from a middle class background and coming from an upper middle class background and that difference is reified in those paths that are open to you because of your situation.
If you are a colonised people (black?), subjugated by some external force, you will harbour a disposition against it. To say that this disposition represents an antagonistic form unnecessarily is a rejection of the direct experience that people encounter.
Imperialism exists as a form of oppression and we must fight against it. We can't assume that all forms of government or governance are equivalent.
It is only through our self emancipation that we can help to emancipate each other, but if we are being subjugated by a military (or police) force we have to find avenues by which to break this.
In the US fully 1/3 of the black male populace between 18 and 35 is in corrections. This is an internal colonisation. To deal with it will take heroic efforts. People talking about color blindness and guilt politics are part of the problem. The solution is something that engages those who are systematically repressed and oppressed. How that takes place from the broader movement is a question we have yet to solve. However, it is not a question of left moralism. It's a question of real practical reality.
If you feel guilty about your privilege than tough. You don't have a choice. Your skin is a benefit. You don't get to chose your skin, but you benefit or deficit regardless of it. Failure to acknowledge that is not just ignorance, it's racist.
Rowan Duffy
"Imperialism exists as a
"Imperialism exists as a form of oppression and we must fight against it. We can't assume that all forms of government or governance are equivalent."
http://www.anarchymag.org/node/28
If you feel guilty about your privilege than tough."
I don't feel guilty. My point is precisely that I refuse to be made to feel that way by people who use guilt to silence divergent opinions within the radical community.
You don't get to chose your skin, but you benefit or deficit regardless of it.
I never questioned whether or not I should acknowledge it. What I questioned was the purpose of acknowledging it. Is it to foster a greater understanding of power dynamics so that we can attack them more effectively or is it to contribute to a catalogue of "oppressions" so that people can point to in order to differentiate between "victims" and "perpetrators"? If it is the former, then great. If it is the latter, then this is nothing more than counterproductive moralizing.
Failure to acknowledge that is not just ignorance, it's racist.
I reject your value judgment.
"If it is the former, then
"If it is the former, then great. If it is the latter, then this is nothing more than counterproductive moralizing."
Bah. Reverse this.
Or not. Must be my dyslexia.
Or not. Must be my dyslexia.
As far as I'm concerned, you
As far as I'm concerned, you don't have to acknowledge it, challenge it, question it, etc. Smashing racism will ultimately depend on us POC organizing ourselves, increasing our power, and asserting our power to end our oppression. It's not a white struggle at all.
You might want to work on figuring out how you contribute and benefit from it, however, and then figure out what you can do about it, else you might be in for a rude awakening when it comes time for anti-racist revolution.
"You might want to work on
"You might want to work on figuring out how you contribute and benefit from it, however, and then figure out what you can do about it, else you might be in for a rude awakening when it comes time for anti-racist revolution."
You're assuming that I haven't already thought about this. My point isn't that it's not worth thinking about, but that, if we ARE going to think about it, let's clarify our reasons WHY it's worth thinking about. The fact is, there are just as many negatives to "white privilege" as there are positives. This implies that it is neither something to feel guilty about or proud of. It is a STRATEGIC consideration because it informs how we will go about attacking the structures of domination. I recommend checking out Wolfi Landstreicher's article, "A Question of Privilege":
http://www.geocities.com/kk_abacus/vb/wd8priv.html
"Hey White Kids Fucken chill
"Hey White Kids
Fucken chill for a minute. Just because race is socially constructed- ie, doesn't exist, per se- it does exist in a social context. race is a set of concrete relationships that play out in interactions, and more importantly, in the economy. Racism is a real form of oppression and any kind of revolutionary will understand that part of getting free is recognizing oppression and fucking dealing with it. As long as we pretend that race doesn't exist, it will continue to make our lives hell. We can't leave it behind like we all want to until we neutralize it.
(P)Color blindness is the position of liberals. Ignoring race and racism, in its structural and individual forms within society as well as within "our movement" ensures that we will perpetuate the forms of oppression that already exist.
(P)Sure a call like this should make white people uncomfortable, but really only someone who is oppressed can make the revolutionary changes in their own situation. As the dogmatists used to say, only the working class can free the working class, and also people of color should be in the driver's seat for their own liberation (including from you). We all want to Make Total Destroy, but NEED TO DEAL WITH OUR SHIT LIKE ADULTS. So don't get so defensive, and remember yer privelege.
(P) Does this make sense to you? I'm not trying to open up a flame war or the kind of defensive dogmatism that this site is known for. I'm posting because we need to have a real conversation about this."
Zanzara
for starters, one doesn't have to be white to be critical of APOC, in fact someone of berber descent was recently posting critiques of APOC here (and on anti-politics), so starting your post off with "hey white kids" is making assumptions (age and race). i whole heartedly agree with you that race plays out in society despite its very existence being a fabrication (to perpetuate racist forms of oppression and milk them for what profit can be made, of course). thing is this: neither me nor most of the others critical of APOC are ignoring this reality. what most of us are pissed about is the idea that being considered "white" by society makes our own interests the same as that of the masters, no matter what class we come from (yeah, we all know the black poor are criminalized via propaganda but this does not mean that the poor white experiences no oppression at all, including the more severe forms, it just means that oppression plays out differently for differently categorized races according to this societies categories). i don't even think someones economic upbringing in society automatically puts them on the same side as the dominant class (though it may make it more or less likely) so i am not going to give much clout to this either.
race is an issue to deal with, of course, to my knowledge no one is saying it isn't, not here at any rate (in case you didn't notice this is not exactly a multiculturalist liberal or leftist site for the most part, so your comment on liberal color blindness as a way to white wash everything -pun definitely intended- is kinda needless here). i, however, do not think it is productive to deal with race by talking about how one of these invented categories is just so evil and so identified with the master class. it might be that just as most middle class kids are going to wind up playing their middle class role many white people are patriotic and jingoist (but it is not as if this is something that can only be ever said of white people, just that the dominant culture happens to be very european at this point in history). so what? many does not mean all from either background wind up identifying with the values they were fed and playing their role, and vilifying language and guilt complexs don't tend to deal with shit, dealing with shit deals with shit (and yes that is a vague statement, necessarily so because life is not neat and tidy and easily categorized and dealt with as so many politicians like to think).
-lord rambler
"So don't get so defensive,
"So don't get so defensive, and remember yer privelege."
We all have our privileges. Racial, Class, Geographical. Everyone here has the privilege of living in Europe or the Americas. We all have the privilege of internet access. There is no way in hell a black person living in the U.S can claim to speak for a black person in the Congo any more than I can. Similarly I can't speak for someone living in Scotland even though my family came from there 5 generations ago. My experiences and social situation is totally different from some one in Scotland and our both being white doesn't change that.
Remember your privilege.
""So don't get so defensive,
""So don't get so defensive, and remember yer privelege."
We all have our privileges. Racial, Class, Geographical. Everyone here has the privilege of living in Europe or the Americas. We all have the privilege of internet access. There is no way in hell a black person living in the U.S can claim to speak for a black person in the Congo any more than I can. Similarly I can't speak for someone living in Scotland even though my family came from there 5 generations ago. My experiences and social situation is totally different from some one in Scotland and our both being white doesn't change that.
Remember your privilege."
yup. and as a matter of full disclosure: i do not know shit about irish resistance, nor it's history and i am of irish descent. sure, i know the british did some scandalous shit to "our people", put our heads on pikes for intimidation and what not, but i know little or nothing of the history (and i am more focused on the here and now unless a link can be found, other than many of my people assimilating). still, doesn't mean i hate those "brithish bastards" and their "limey privilege" or something.
-lord rambler
I am not a kid. I am not
I am not a kid. I am not guilty of being white.
So.........?
If some dickhead says he's
If some dickhead says he's gonna smack me, the last thing I'm gonna do is "chill".
P.S. I'll remember that privilege when I got money to pay my fucking rent!
Maybe all races can join
Maybe all races can join together in a color-blind manner after the colonialism and imperialism that keeps people of color stops. Maybe all races can join together in a color-blind manner after there's a legal system which is color blind, and the "Justice" system is no longer "Just us."
Maybe all races can join together in a color blind manner when driving while black or flying while brown doesn't result in being pulled over, strip searched, or shot at or killed. Maybe we can join together when racist cops are off the street.
Until that day, POC have issues that we need to deal with as a people, and forming our networks and ties is part of that. Don't get upset when we have POC gatherings or calls. You have overwhelmingly white (and all-white) gatherings all the time. I've seen them.
d
I think it's really easy to
I think it's really easy to say all these things when you are in a position of privilege. Of course you can ignore YOUR "color" because you're white. You will never know what it feels like to be a person of color day in and day out, inside and outside of radical movements. So if I were you I'd keep my mouth shut and stop making a fool of myself and quit trying to suppress people of color empowering themselves.
This is a total guilt trip.
This is a total guilt trip. I'm not "suppressing" anyone. We all have keyboards and an internet connection and, thus, are perfectly capable of contributing our opinions to this website.
"radical people of color
"radical people of color will stand in solidarity with the people of Iraq and Palestine"
What does this mean? Why do you want to stand in solidarity with nations?
i think it said the PEOPLE
i think it said the PEOPLE of those nations, not the nation-state constructs themselves, or the governments that "represent" them.
And yet using the terms of
And yet using the terms of citizenship implicitly acknowledges the legitimacy of those nation-state constructs as useful definitions. Saying "people of Iraq and Palestine" only makes sense in the context of other nation-states, political boundaries (and never mind that the boundaries of those two -- and plenty of others -- were created by the colonialists), and the false unification of nationalism over and against class alliances. If there's some issue with the occupation of Iraq by the militaries of the US and the UK, then you can easily say "the people under the occupation of the US and UK"; for the Israeli occupation, you can just as easily say "the people under the Israeli occupation" (and I like this one even better since it acknowledges that Muslim and Christian citizens of Israel may consider themsleves under occupation, and that even many Jews consider themselves under that occupation). For anti-statists, such potentially clumsy language is outweighed by the more accurate and provocative position of undermining the legitimacy of all nation-states. As an American I consider myself to be under the occupation of the US government, so why shouldn't we extend our solidarity and comradeship to other people who are similarly under the occupation of their governments? When you only call attention to the issue of "foreign" occupation, you are implicitly making that kind of occupation/domination more onerous. Leave the identity of citizen out of anarchist discourse please.
i agree but in a world where
i agree but in a world where people only understand nationalism it's just the easiest way to get across who you're talking about. i mean, how many words would it take to say "the people of Iraq and Palestine" if you were going to try to use anti-colonial/de-colonial terminology? and how many people would know who the fuck you're trying to talk about?
just to be clear, i agree with your points. it's just that when i tell someone across the world that i'm from "Occupied Turtle Island" they never know what i mean until i explain that i mean America. so in the end i still resort to nation-state constructs to locate myself geographically.
This furthering the
This furthering the intellectual laziness of your brand of anarchism.
*sigh* You're white, aren't
*sigh*
You're white, aren't you? Otherwise you wouldn't be making this irritating argument.
So what do you want to call these people? Ottomans? Phoenicians? Arabs? Middle-easterners?
The conflict is occurring in an area. There are people in that area. What is this area called? This is geography, so you don't have to turn into some extended politically correct debate on how exactly to label land-masses and the people that live on it.
Or how about West Asia? East of Africa?
"Palestine" and "Iraq" in this context are not being used as names of nation-states, but they are being used to identify the area in which the people inhabit.
Another stellar example of
Another stellar example of that intellectual laziness, this time mixed with a heavy dose of pomposity and know-nothingism. Well done!
The fact is that the various people who inhabit a particular nation-state are only unified through their citizenship within whatever political system dominates that area. In the previously French colony now called Algeria, to take one example, there are several distinct ethnic groups that comprise its citizens: Arabs, Tuareg, Berber. Calling them all Algerians has a leveling effect on their self-identity, reducing all of them to citizens of the state of Algeria.
Similarly with the inhabitants of the US. We're all "Americans" because we're citizens of this country, but ethnically we're comprised of hundreds of distinct groups.
Palestine and Iraq are only meaningful labels for nation-states, and Iraqi and Palestinian are only accurate labels for citizens of those polities (whether the polity is recognized internationally by other states or not).
Really you're just being obtuse. And I'm Berber, what's it to you?
Dunash
You know, they *did* say
You know, they *did* say "people of". They did not call them Iraqis and Palestinians. So that write there shoots your smart-ass-wannabe argument down, smartass.
Oh, and I'm North African, but not Berber, what's it to you?
"You're white, aren't you?
"You're white, aren't you? Otherwise you wouldn't be making this irritating argument."
Excuse me?
"The people of Iraq" includes police, business owners, etc. It is a nationalist term devoid of any substance.
"A Brownie A Day Keeps
"A Brownie A Day Keeps Whitey Away" Divisive, counterproductive bullshit. Racism needs to be addressed not emphasized by defining ourselves by it. If individuals get too involved in identity politics, I believe they run the risk of crossing over into the national anarchist clique. What is the difference of defining oneself as a white anarchist and a black anarchist? In the end, it only serves to reinforce racial identity and a racist approach to the plight of humanity. I don't know how to end racism. I associate with the people I meet. I never think of them in terms of race. I think of them in terms of who they are. Is it my fault that many of my friends happen to be white? Is it a fault to have friends of a particular color? Couldn't it have to do with the culture I was raised in? Or the geography? People of color make up a small minority in my community. I have friends of a variety of ethnic backgrounds, but all have some European blood in them. Does it really matter? Racism is bollocks in all of its forms. I'm not saying that anyone should ignore the race issue, but to approach it in such a reactionary and angry way only causes division. Also, what is with the 'f(l)ags'? Is this whole post a bit of a joke? Divisive crap in my eyes. If an individual feels marginalized take the reigns, but for dog's sake do it in the name of yourself, your beliefs, not the friggin color of your skin.
Word. Please don't smack the
Word. Please don't smack the white boy homes - he might turn into a no-neck, side-of-beef like Henry Rollins and run over yo mama in GTA 4. First we kill all the RICH OLD WHITE GUYS! Seen.
Two national-anarchists go
Two national-anarchists go into a bar. One, the slumlord, Bill White orders a drink. The other one whose a First-Nations national anarchist is to young to drink yet so he goes to school and massacres a few members of his class. Meanwhile, Bill, back in the bar thinks about starting up a new website for Gay Nazi's like himself.
This has been a public service announcement. Don't be a fool - we know it sucks but stay in school.
Racial exclusionism is lame.
Racial exclusionism is lame. And you act like non-white people have never oppressed each other.
and it's worth
and it's worth deconstructing just exactly what me mean by "white."
are we divided into a dichotomy of whites and people of color? of course not! i identify as neither (and both).
as stated, i appear "white," but this is not true to my heritage. my heritage, however, does not change the fact that my privilege is based upon my appearance, rather than my actual cultural and ethnic heritage.
it obviously isn't about skin color, right? i mean, why do nazis not consider jews to be "white"? (yeah, i know, to them it's about aryan or ango-saxon identity, which is still absurd and twisted all to hell).
regardless, i think "white" most often refers to the dominant culture that happens to be "white" skinned and anglo-saxon/aryan in origin. but it also pays to remember that the same dominator culture destroyed the indigenous cultures and peoples of europe before they did it in the americas (oh wait, what word should i use so i don't legitimize nationalism?) and the rest of the world, who for all intents and purposes of physical appearance, were also "white."