Comments by "Awesome Avenger" (@awesomeavenger2810) on "Why did a black man hug a neo-Nazi skinhead? - BBC News" video.

  1. He is.
    16
  2. Racism is unacceptable whoever it is aimed at. If you think the colour of someone's skin is a measure of their character, then that by definition is racism. And as we are all individuals rather than a collective (based on skin colour or any other definition), if racism is justifiable for one individual, it cannot be argued that it is not acceptable to all.
    14
  3. So you want a race to the bottom?
    3
  4. Yes, that comment was the other side of the problem. This is the result of playing identity politics with skin colour. Difficult to imagine someone can be that deluded as to think others can't play it too.
    3
  5. Who suddenly defined racism as 'systematic to upholding power and privilege'? That's not what racism is at all. It has nothing to do with power and privilege. Sounds like someone trying to co-opt a word for their own political gain.
    1
  6. Once again, that is not what racism is at all. Racism is and has always been part of the human condition. It is based on the fear of the 'other'. It is a way of thinking that is common to all peoples. And not some Marxist bullshit conspiracy theory dreamt up in order to make political capital out of a negative trait. What research would you suggest I do? Take a course in the humanities, perhaps? Fear of the unknown is a survival mechanism, that has largely been made redundant in the western world. But it still persists. For your crackpot political theory (and it is a political theory) to make any sense, you would have to ignore the fact that privilege exists in all cultures, even in the most homogenous of cultures, and always has and always will, without the need for Marxist oppression politics. Racism also exists in the most homogenous of societies. Therefore, neither of these are particular to white cultures. Furthermore, racist views are held by individuals, not power structures. Individuals are responsible for their actions and words, not the system, or the 'privileged'. Essentially, your theory abdicates personal responsibility for an individuals thoughts and behaviour onto others. And because this is a Marxist-driven theory, that responsibility is laid at the feet of the more successful in society. Your theory is basically scapegoating. You know what scapegoating is, yes? It's an old Jewish ritual where the sins of a community were cast out onto a goat. And that goat was then sent off into the wilderness. Basically, an act of abdicating responsibility for your sins onto something (or someone) else. So best rethink your worthless parroted theory. Because it might sound pretty cool in an echo chamber, but anyone with half a brain can see it for what it is.
    1
  7. S B ''...it makes me laugh when people who benefit from this system fight so hard to keep it alive without even knowing!'' That would be the Marxist theory of false consciousness. Do you people ever think up anything new? Or is it just the same relentless diatribe of worthless political gobshite conspiracies? Simply repeating a baseless and discredited claim, doesn't make it any less false. Get some new material.
    1
  8. False consciousness: A term used by sociologists and expounded by some Marxists for the way in which material, ideological, and institutional processes in capitalist society mislead members of the proletariat and other class actors. These processes are thought to hide the true relations between classes and the real state of affairs regarding the exploitation suffered by the proletariat -Wiki
    1
  9. S B Been there done that. I'm one step ahead of you. I can predict exactly how you will argue your ideology. It's nothing new, after all.
    1
  10. This is what happens when you play identity politics with race.
    1