the white law group

Why Are Middle Easterners Considered White On The US Census?

In 1923, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that Middle Easterners were Caucasian, but were not “white” because most laypeople did not consider them as such. This case was being brought to court because Middle Easterners were being treated as “coloreds” and not “Caucasian/Whites” in US states with segregation laws. If a group was considered “Caucasian/White” they had access to better facilities, better schools, and sometimes entire towns which kept out “coloreds.” The 1923 ruling basically said that Middle Easterners could be legally discriminated against. They could be considered “coloreds.”

The U.S. Supreme Court changed its mind in 1946, relabelling them “white.” And through today, Middle Easterners check the box next to “white” on the US Census.


December 6th 1865: 13th Amendment ratified

On this day in 1865, the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was ratified by the states, formally banning slavery in the United States. Ratification does not require unanimous approval, and some states rejected the amendment; Mississippi only ratified the 13th Amendment in 2013, 148 years after the amendment’s passage. The 13th amendment marks the first of the three so-called ‘Reconstruction’ amendments, which secured civil and voting rights for African-Americans after the Civil War. The amendment was proposed by the Lincoln administration following the 1863 Emancipation Proclamation - which was a temporary war measure abolishing slavery in the Confederacy - to assert that the ban on slavery was to be permanent. Lincoln did not initially intend to free the slaves, and always prioritised saving the Union, but emancipation became intriscially tied to Union victory. This was due to the actions of slaves, who fled to Union lines and tried to enlist in the army. The Reconstruction period that followed the American Civil War was largely a contest over the implications of the 13th Amendment and the emancipation of four million slaves. Radicals in Congress pushed for equality of the law and opportunity, while white Southerners, with assistance from violent groups like the Ku Klux Klan, sought to maintain racial subordination and white supremacy. Reconstruction ultimately failed to truly implement freedom for African-Americans, and it was not until the Civil Rights Movement one hundred years later that America again tried to come to terms with the legacy of emancipation.

anonymous asked:

Why is Antifa mostly middle class white brain-washed university kids who hate their own race? If you're not racist, why are there not more "POC" as you put it (when they come together against the white man they're POC, but without a common enemy they inevitably fight turf wars) in your movement? Sure whites are the majority, but even in places like London and Washington DC its mostly nons. Dont you see minorities dont want you? I suggest you take pride in your race, you're still whites you know.

Oh man.  Take a minute and go get a grownup to sit beside you and explain the more-difficult concepts we’re about to lay down here.  OK?  Let’s begin!

1) Why is Antifa mostly middle class white brain-washed university kids who hate their own race?

First of all, thanks for erasing the very real contributions that racialized people and people of all classes make every single day towards combatting fascism and racism based on your bullshit presumptions that you’ve pulled out of thin fucking air.  You’re a real social scientist, you are.  

Insofar as anti-fascists appear to be more educated than bigoted swine like you, there is a lot of research that shows that postsecondary education tends to reduce levels of prejudice in students.  There’s probably two reasons for this: a) learning new ideas about the world leads to people not being so small-minded and ignorant; and b) being away from one’s home and attending college with people who aren’t like you or everyone you grew up with tends to open one’s mind about the commonalities shared by all people, which are more important and meaningful than what shade their fucking skin is or where their great-great-great grandparents grew up.

You want a good case study of this?  Derek Black.  Yes, that Derek Black. 

2) If you’re not racist, why are there not more “POC” as you put it…in your movement?

If you bothered to read this blog or have someone read it to you, you’d know that we almost always use the term “racialized” not “POC.”  Why?  Because racialized describes something that’s done to people - which is that they are categorized and discriminated against based on a made-up list of every-changing criteria (Religion?  Language? Hair color?  Nose shape?  Skin color?  Some of the above for some groups, but other things for other groups?) that slots them into a less-dominant social group.  Race isn’t something that people are, it’s something that is done to people.

Insofar as you can claim that anti-fascism is a “white” movement, maybe that has to do with a lot of the more-recent wave of anti-fascism coming from the punk and skinhead subcultures.  Or maybe it has to do with things like “white” people having more privilege and cultural capital with gives them the time and resources to engage in militant political action without having to worry as much about the consequences of taking such action.  Or maybe it has to do with the fact that racism is a system that was created by “white” people and that benefits “white” people, so it’s up to “white” people to eliminate it.  Or maybe it’s a combination of those things.

(when they come together against the white man they’re POC, but without a common enemy they inevitably fight turf wars)

You’ve got to be fucking kidding.  Do you have any idea of what the history of Europe has been like?  Hundreds upon hundreds of “turf wars” going back as far as recorded history; forty-two armed conflicts and full-on wars have erupted in Europe in just the last fifty years.  As you were busy behind your little keyboard pretending that it’s just racialized people that “inevitably fight turf wars” there is an ongoing war in the Donbass, in other parts of Ukraine, and armed groups still operating in Northern Ireland and the Basque country.  GTFO with that bullshit, son.

Sure whites are the majority
Uh, WHAT???  

Global population: 7.4 billion

Now, take a look at the population sizes of the 50 most-populous countries.  Get a calculator and add up the populations of the countries on that list that you don’t think are “white.”  We think the number you’ll get is about five billion people.  Which means that two out of every three people on the planet aren’t “white.”   

even in places like London and Washington DC its mostly nons. 

Well, DC’s stats show that it’s two-thirds racialized, true.  But London is still 59% “white.”  Unless you’re an old-school racist and don’t believe that the Irish are “white.”  Which is a nice segue to the last bit of your message: 

I suggest you take pride in your race, you’re still whites you know.

We are, are we?  How do you figure that?  Assuming that you’re “white,” how can you prove it?

Genetics won’t work because there are no genetic markers that are found exclusively in one “race.”  This is why pretty much every geneticist and biological anthropologist in the world rejects race as a valid way to categorize humans.  

Is it based on the race of our forebears?  Well, what race were they and how did you determine that?  What race would someone with a white mom and a black dad belong to?  What about a black grandma?  A black great-great-grandfather?  And how do you decide in a logical, consistent, scientifically-valid way what the borders and determinants are?  
Is it where are ancestors are from?  Bad news there - human beings have traveled around a lot over the centuries!  Again, how far back do we go to determine that someone belongs to a given race?  Parents?  Grandparents?  Great-great-great grandparents?  What rationale do you use to decide how far back to go?  And what geographic borders mark “white places” from “non-white places?”   Is Portugal white?  Then what about Morocco?  Is Greece white?  Turkey?  Russia?  Kazakhstan?  How do you decide in a logical, scientifically-valid way which geographic regions are where white people come from and which ones are not?  

Is it simply whether someone “looks” white?  What are the determinants of that?  How curly or dark can your hair be and you still get to be in the “white” club?  Can people with brown eyes be white?  How dark can your skin be before you’re not white?  Eye shape?  Nose size?
Are Jews white?  Are Catholics white?  Are Muslims white? Can you be white if you only speak Spanish?  

Here’s the other problem you’ve got with your “white pride.”  You’ve taken dozens and dozens of unique and distinct cultures - each with its own history, language, geography, customs, etc. (and many of which have been sworn enemies of each other - see our list above of European conflicts) - and you’ve lumped them all together as “white,” erasing centuries of what exactly made them unique and distinct and interesting in the first place.  Your “pride” turns out to be the most disrespectful thing you can do to explore or celebrate actual culture.

There is no white language.  There are no white traditions.  There is no white homeland.  It’s made-up bullshit.  You’re proud of made-up bullshit that you personally had no say in.  That’s pretty sad, don’t you think?

Anon, here is historical fact: there was no such thing as “white people” until about 500 years ago.  That’s when European rulers got scared that the working-class Europeans working on their colonies would rebel and unite with the slaves and the aboriginals who had been displaced when their land and resources were stolen.  To stop those rebellions, they invented the concept of the “white” race, the “black” race, etc.  The first time the word “white” was used to describe a group of people in a law was the 1691 Virginia law prohibiting interracial marriage.    

Instead of being proud of being working-class and seeing that you have the same wants, needs, and interests as millions of other working-class people no matter what color they are, you’ve turned away from that to build your identity on made-up nonsense that the wealthiest people in the world use to divide us and stop us from threatening their continued dominance over our lives.

You’re not a proud white person, Anon.  You’re a traitor to your class.

On Progressive Politics: It’s the Strategy, Stupid

The second CNN and FOX News called the election for Donald Trump, the engines that power the cottage industry of political second-guessing were fired up.  Within minutes, a steady stream of simplistic hot takes began flying off the assembly line.  This was especially true in the progressive areas of politics and punditry.  Headlines like, “What The Democrats Got Wrong,” and “Progressives Need To Completely Reevaluate” were put together like a game of Mad Libs. Not wanting to be left out of the buzz of the twenty-four-hour news cycle, many elected Democratic officials jumped in and manned a station hoping to be promoted to pundit manager when the dust settled from the inevitable finger pointing and layoffs.  The most common response from these opportunistic progressives has been, “Democrats need to learn how to talk to and attract working white class voters.” Senator Bernie Sanders has been one of the most adamant proponents of this strategy.  He and every single progressive taking this tack are pushing a defective product.  Don’t buy it!  The problem is not the product or the message.  The problem is too many progressives are complete idiots when it comes to politics and political strategy.

The recent past, the present, and the future of the Democratic Party does not rest the “white working class.”  Full stop.  The second you think it is, the second you adopt a strategy based on this premise, you have planned to fail.  There is no such thing as “the white working class.”  There is the working class, which Democrats should cater to, make strategy base on.  Once they try and slice off a subset of the base to focus their efforts, Democrats have failed the broader whole.  The problem isn’t Democrats have “abandoned” the white working class.  The problem is the white working class has abandoned the Democratic Party.  The Democratic Party hasn’t won the “white working class” vote in a presidential election since 1964. The reason why 1964 was the demarcation line for the white working class vote is the same reason it is folly to chase their vote today. This doesn’t mean the Democratic Party shouldn’t go things for the white working class.  They should help but only in the context of helping the working class in general.  

The reason the white working class abandoned the Democratic Party was because the Democratic Party embraced the Civil Rights Act in 1964.  Period. Stop searching for deeper, more subtle or more complex reasons.  The answer is very straightforward-racism.  If your plan to “win over the white working class” doesn’t somehow have a strategy to get the white working class to be less racist, you’re pissing into the wind. A significant portion of the Democratic base fully understands this, but there are a lot of self-identifying progressives who won’t/can’t seem to get this through their heads.  For hundreds of reasons, a good chunk of the white working class has been convinced that the reason they don’t have the economic success they either expected or felt owed to them is because of “those people.”  The “undeserving black/woman/Hispanic/immigrant” person getting the job some good, hard-working white person like them was supposed to get, should have got.  This belief has become part of the white working class lore and no amount of evidence, no argument is going to convince them otherwise. Chasing the votes of these people is a fool’s errand.

There is no “white working class.”  There is the working class.  Every single member of the working class is affected by the economic policies of the right and the left.  When the right imposes their supply side economic tax cuts for the wealthy, every single member of the working class suffers.  When the right refuses to raise the minimum wage, it affects every single working class worker regardless of race.  When the power of unions are dramatically curtailed, wages, pensions, and economic security are harmed for everyone.  The same is true for progressive policies.  When Democrats push raising the minimum wage, childcare assistance, healthcare reform…they are doing it for EVERYONE.  White workers who don’t get their health insurance through the Obamacare exchanges but through their company benefit from ACA.  The problem isn’t the Democratic Party isn’t catering to the white working class.  The problem is for too many of the white working class there are non-whites in the group.  

Just look at the white working class backlash towards the Affordable Care Act.  It doesn’t matter that more whites benefit from the law than any other group, the Tea Party came to power largely as a reaction against the law.  A reaction based on the law was a socialist takeover of healthcare being crammed down the throat of good, hard working (read, “white) Americans to pay for medical care for lazy moochers (read “blacks) and illegal immigrants.  From Medicaid to Medicare to private insurance, ACA helps the white working class and they turned against it like a rabid dog because “those people” would get and benefit from it.  Republicans knew exactly how to incite opposition to ACA-label it with the name of the black president, Obamacare, and tell the base their hard earned tax dollars were going to be paying for the healthcare of lazy welfare moochers and illegal immigrants.  There have been dozens of surveys done that show Republican voters like what Obamacare does when it isn’t called, “Obamacare” and hate it when it is.  If Republicans repealed the law and replaced it with the same exact thing, Republican voters would be touting how great it is for the white working class.

The strategy being pushed from inside and outside the Democratic Party that they need to pander to the white working class is flat out wrong and flat out stupid.  The only way the white workers who’ve abandoned the Democratic Party since 1964 come back is if the Democratic Party abandons their non-white base.  To not recognize this is what would need to be done in order to win back the white working class is ignoring history.  To recognize it and push for it anyway is moral and political malfeasance.

If you believe in equality, you can’t throw the most vulnerable groups under the equality bus in order to pander to white working class voters who left your party largely because of these groups.  You can’t abandon a core principle just because some pundits and political demagogues think you should. You don’t walk back years of progress because some politicians get panicky over losing an election.  You shouldn’t listen to people who don’t have your best interests at heart when determining political strategy.  You sure as hell don’t listen to people who didn’t vote about what you need to do.

For all the Strum und Drang over why Democrats lost the election, what is lost is they got the majority of the votes by 2.5 million and counting.  The majority of the country didn’t turn away from the ideas and policies of the Democratic Party.  The way the electoral college is set up, less populated states get a bigger say in the final outcome than more populated ones.  Swing states like Wisconsin, Ohio, Florida, and North Carolina successfully implemented voter suppression laws that negatively impacted traditionally Democratic voting blocs.  Gerrymandered districts in these same states and others are responsible for a Republican-led House of Representatives even though Democratic candidates won a majority of the votes.  None of these factors have anything to do with Democratic policies or reaching out to the white working class.  They are the product of a political party on its demographic deathbed doing everything it can to hold onto power for as long as possible.  A smart political strategy would be to address these issues, not focus on a lost cause.

This doesn’t mean the Democratic Party can’t do a better job of messaging or getting out the vote.  They certainly can and should.  However, these can be done without a complete overhaul.  The 2016 Democratic Party platform was the most progressive in generations.  What the Democratic Party stands for isn’t the problem.  The problem is too many progressives don’t understand political strategy worth a damn. Against the current form of the Republican Party, Democrats should win the presidency, control Congress, and be in charge of the majority of state legislatures.  They don’t because far too many progressives either don’t vote or vote for candidates who have no chance of winning.   Their political game, their political priorities SUCK!

Nothing infuriates me more than when progressives’ political goals are poorly prioritized.  If the top goal for progressives right now in today’s political climate is not, Keep Conservatives Out Of Office, then their strategy is fundamentally flawed.  I don’t care what stopgap methods have to be employed.  I don’t care if the candidate you elect only votes with you 80% of the time.  I don’t care if you think there is a better candidate out there you wished had run or had won the primary.  I don’t fucking care.  If your actions are not guided by the goal of keeping conservatives out of office, you are part of the problem which makes you culpable for the consequences.

Every single time a progressive doesn’t vote or votes for a third-party candidate that has absolutely zero chance of winning, they are allowing conservatives to gain and retain power. They are allowing people who don’t believe in governing, who believe the government is the problem, to be in charge of the government.  You might as well hire John Wayne Gacy to entertain your kid’s birthday party or Susan Smith take your kids for a drive to the lake.  Some progressives try to rationalize and justify not doing everything they can to push conservatives into the dustbin of American political history.  Every single argument they make is flimsy and based on some idealistic set of circumstances that don’t and won’t exist in the real world.  Meanwhile, as progressives have been throwing their respective hissy fits, conservatives have consolidated power in ways not seen since just before the Great Depression.  As much as people try and convince you the reason behind all of this is because of flawed Democratic ideas and policies, it isn’t.  The problem is too many progressives are too damn stubborn and too damn impractical. I’m convinced, “The perfect is the enemy of the good,” was coined with progressives in mind.

Whether you agree with it or not, whether you like it or not, American politics at almost all levels of government is binary.  There are two choices.  Wishing it to be different, complaining it isn’t different, will not make it different.  Knowing this reality, it is imperative to deal with the cards you’ve been dealt at any given time and play them to the best of your abilities.  If you win enough, then, and only then, can you begin to change the system and rules.  To whine about the system not being fair when you don’t have the base and ability to change it will get you nowhere fast and keeps conservatives in power.  This isn’t smart.  In fact, it is outright stupid.

This political strategy stupidity has never been more apparent than this past campaign and election season.  A lot of Republicans deeply distrusted and honestly hated Donald Trump.  Yet, they rallied around and voted for him when it counted.  Why?  Because, for all the faults of conservative ideology, getting and keeping power is their number one priority.  They know they cannot get their policies enacted if they don’t have power.  This isn’t a complex strategy.  Yet, somehow it completely alludes a lot of progressives.  They want to believe in loftier things like the perfect policy and the perfect candidate than deal with the nitty gritty reality of politics.  To paraphrase, “You don’t bring a pumpkin spiced latte to a gunfight.”

Thanks to progressive purity, not focusing on the primary goal of keeping conservatives out of power, and a host of other ridiculous reasons here are just some of the consequences:

A know-nothing, bigoted, sexist, narcissist as President.
A white nationalist as Chief policy advisor to the President.
An anti-public education billionaire to run the Department of Education.
A Putin admiring, conspiracy theory spouting, bat-shit crazy ex-general to be in charge of national security.
A Senator who was deemed too racist to be appointed a federal judge as Attorney General.
NASA climate change research to be ended.
Person with zero foreign policy experience as UN Ambassador.
JP Morgan CEO as possible Treasury Secretary.
Climate denier as possible head of the EPA.
Billionaire Wilber Ross who specialized in bankrupting businesses as Commerce Secretary.
Representative from Kansas who has written op-eds calling for increased spying on U.S. citizens to run the CIA.
Ben Carson who said he isn’t qualified to run a cabinet office as HUD Director.
A former Goldman Sachs exec and someone who foreclosed on tens of thousands of people after the mortgage crisis has been named to head the Treasury.
An anti-gay, anti-ACA wingnut has been named to head Health and Human Services.
Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell’s wife whose family owns a large shipping business to be Transportation Secretary.

Before all is said and done, this administration is going to have the most billionaires and millionaires in it and also be the least qualified in American History.  Thank goodness progressives were bitching about email servers, paid speeches to Wall St. that went to a foundation that helps millions of needy people, “not feeling motivated,” and something or another that was said twenty-five years ago.  Any political or moral compass that calculated the pros and cons of a Trump and a Hillary presidency and comes up with “no real difference” or “hers would be worse,” was/is seriously fucked up.  Anyone with this fucked up a political and moral compass should never be listened to. A lot of the people who shouldn’t be listened to are the voices on the left right now talking about completely retooling the Democratic Party from scratch.  Don’t listen to them.

The political reality is the Democratic Party has the numbers on it side. It has the policies.  What it doesn’t have is the power and the voters willing to get off their petulant progressive asses and vote in every single election on every level for the most progressive candidate that has a real chance at winning.  Because this hasn’t been the strategy for a variety of dumbass reasons, progressives have allowed conservatives to not just take power but roll back rights and services that makes unseating them much more difficult than it ever needed to be.  The more control of government they have, the more they make government unworkable for most people which increases discouragement with the system.  The more discouragement with the system there is, the more people stay home on election day.  The more people stay home on election day, the longer conservatives remain in power to continue this cycle.  Watching progressives do exactly what conservatives want them to do is maddening.  Conservatives have been Br'er Rabbiting progressives.  “Protest us, hate us, but please, progressives, whatever you do, don’t sit out elections.”  And, like Br'er Fox, progressives do exactly this.  It is in-fucking-furiating.

It is frustrating watching progressives who play right into conservatives’ hands by not voting or voting third-party and then not recognize or admit they are responsible in any way for the shitty government they have.  They come up with a million different excuses, “I have to vote my conscience,” “The lesser of two evils is still, evil,” “I voted for Jill Stein so whatever happens isn’t my fault,” “The candidate didn’t create any enthusiasm in me.” Sorry, but your Jiminy Cricket conscience needs to be taken out back and torched under a magnifying glass with the noonday sun.  Voting is an individual right but a SOCIAL responsibility.  If you aren’t thinking about what is best for society when you vote, you’re doing it wrong.  If you think someone who has devoted their life to making other people’s lives better, helped children get healthcare, helped create a foundation that has benefited millions of the poor and needy around the world is evil, you are seriously definitionally challenged. If you think voting for someone who has absolutely no chance of winning but by doing so takes votes away from someone who does isn’t connected to the outcome, you don’t understand basic cause and effect.  If preventing millions of people from getting their health insurance stripped from them, making sure women’s rights aren’t rolled back to the 1800s, stopping the mass deportation of millions who have lived nowhere but in the U.S., having the environment bent over a log and Deliverance sooied by corporations, stopping the social safety nets the poor, needy, and elderly rely on just to survive from being gutted…if making sure these things and many, many, many more don’t “motivate” and “enthuse” you, you are the fucking problem, not a candidate, not a platform, not a political party, YOU. “I know you are a really qualified neurosurgeon, but I don’t find your personality very exciting.  I’ll pass on the emergency brain surgery or opt for the guy who graduated last in his class from Trinidad School of Medicine and Animal Husbandry.”

Progressives walked away from President Obama and the Democrats in 2010 for petty, pissy, petulant reasons and millions of people have and are going to suffer from it.  Not so much the petty, pissy, petulant, progressives, but that really is the point isn’t it?  People who tell me they are the defenders of the poor, of minorities, of the powerless, of women, sat on their asses in 2010, 2012, 2014, and this year allowing the people they claim to care about with all their patchouli loving hearts to be put directly in harm’s way.  This was and is a horrible political strategy.  More importantly, this is horrible ethical principles.  

Progressives have no one to blame but themselves for the lack of a progressive government and policies.  No one.  They bitch and moan about not having FDR-like progress but refuse to give Democratic Presidents FDR-like majorities in Congress.  They bitch and moan about the government failing them but they don’t do anything about making sure the party that hates and wants the government to fail from getting and wielding power.  They pursue idealistic policy ideas without building the political infrastructure necessary to implement them.  Too many have a fucked up political and moral calculus where they think a candidate who supports their causes 75% of the time is the same as one who supports them 0% of the time.  Most of all, too damn many progressives refuse to acknowledge their role in all of this and make any changes.  If you claim to be a progressive and your top priority isn’t keeping conservatives out of government, then you are as much the problem as conservatives for the government we have.  I emphatically said this same thing after the 2010 midterms.  I said it again in 2014 when progressives stayed home and let the GOP take the Senate.  I’m pretty sure, I’m going to say the same thing again in a few years.  

I keep being told I’m not supposed to be critical of my fellow progressives.  I’m not supposed to say anything that hurts their feelings because they’re “part of my team.”  Really?  Have you ever been on a competitive team?  You think players don’t go off on other players when they screw up, don’t follow the game plan?  Damn right they do.  Society, politics is a team game.  When things don’t go the way you think they should, you don’t take your ball, go home, and bitch about it.  You stay, fight, and learn some valuable lessons.  If you are such a hothouse, precious orchid you can’t handle criticism, then don’t play the game.  What you don’t get to do is decide you don’t want to play the game but bitch about how it is being played.  No sideline kibitzing is allowed.  What won’t be tolerated, what won’t go unanswered are people on the team not working towards the same goal, not supporting their teammates, intentionally undermining the team.   My motto is, “If you aren’t part of the solution, you’re part of the problem.  Don’t be part of the fucking problem.”  This applies to progressives, as well.  The problem right now in America is conservative ideology, conservative power, conservative policies.  Period.  Full…fucking…stop.  You are either helping end these or you are part of the problem.  Don’t be part of the fucking problem.  Get out and vote for Democratic candidates in local, state, and federal elections.  I don’t care if they don’t meet your purity standards.  You don’t have the luxury of being picky when you don’t have power.  Once you get the power and have healthy majorities, then, and only then, can you start weeding out the less progressive members and replace them with more progressive ones.  Anything that doesn’t adhere to this strategy is nothing but noise and not worth thinking about, let alone pursuing.

Take the “Democrats need to find a way to understand and talk to Trump voters, even the racist ones,” tripe being pushed from all corners.  Would I like to have racists change their racist minds?  Yes.  Do I think trying to do so is a good use of time and energy, a good political strategy? Not…one…damn…bit.  I want revenge.  Not revenge in the literal, physical sense.  I want to show the racists they are and have always been wrong.  To quote George Herbert, “Living well is the best revenge.”  I want progressives to be smart, built a political infrastructure, get power, enact progressive policies, improve everyone’s, including the racist ones.  I want racists to know their lives are better because of the policies of progressives.  I don’t care if they’ll ever admit they were wrong or not.  I don’t care if they kick and scream as they are dragged into the 21st Century.  I don’t care if they ever change their racist little minds. As long as they are politically marginalized and can’t impose their racist views on others, I’ll be happy.  If this isn’t motivational, if this doesn’t get you enthused to do something, to get out and vote, then you are every bit the problem as them.

[*Editor’s Note: This topic is directly linked to the recent Democratic Party primaries the general election, Hillary Clinton, and how people perceived her.  Instead of writing one really long article, I decided to break it up into two.  Look for the companion piece the next week or two.]

Repeal of anti-miscegenation laws by US state.

In the United States, anti-miscegenation laws (also known as miscegenation laws) were state laws passed by individual states to prohibit miscegenation, nowadays more commonly referred to as interracial marriage and interracial sex. Typically defining miscegenation as a felony, these laws prohibited the solemnization of weddings between persons of different races and prohibited the officiating of such ceremonies. Sometimes, the individuals attempting to marry would not be held guilty of miscegenation itself, but felony charges of adultery or fornication would be brought against them instead. All anti-miscegenation laws banned the marriage of whites and non-white groups, primarily blacks, but often also Native Americans and Asians.

I think Glenn had gone insane, completely insane in recent years. Probably because of the alcohol. But whatever it was, he did us a lot of damage this weekend. He killed Christians. The whole thing was completely insane. His brain has rotted.

-Don Black, former KKK member and founder of Stormfront speaking on the shooter of the Jewish Center in an interview with (source)

Ah yes, he’s “insane” to this KKK member because he “killed christians” instead of us dirty jews. amirite?

why is the fucking media interviewing kkk members and the founder of stormfront? why are they perpetuating this narrative this guy was a “lone wolf” and stressing that he fell out of white supremacist circles? why are they buying white supremacists’ tripe about insanity being the reason behind Miller’s murders (instead of racism and white pride “activism”). and, worst yet posting this racist’s statements that, “tragically”, goyim were killed instead of the intended target. do they fucking hate us this much? that because dirty jews weren’t killed it’s making kkk “look bad"disgusting - at least at the end they have a statement from the Southern Poverty Law Center saying stormfront and white supremacist groups is the source of our country’s domestic terror

anonymous asked:

for the benefit of those of us who lack a PHD in history, could you explain what is meant by "ahistorical"? one of the reasons I like medievalPOC so much is that they always try to "translate" things into a kind of language that people can understand even if they couldn't afford a degree/have learning disabilities/ESOL. and it's really hard to even understand your side of the argument because of that. or should history be kept only to people with the power and resources to get degrees?

No worries – I described something similar awhile back! I don’t actually have a PhD in history yet. But I’m going to be studying for one in art history. (I’m first gen, worked two jobs during school, have a load of debt, and completely understand how hard it is to gain traction.)

Ahistorical just means - not true to history, lacking the history’s context, or “perspective”. Historians often try to understand how things happened in the kind of world they happened in. For example, the world before the internet was really different than after the internet became widespread and used by most people. 

So we might write about the average person’s experience differently before and after the boom of internet use by the average person. Certain things would be different: like how people found information, or communicated with friends, or even how language changes to “chatspeak”. 

Another example: In the 19th century, when the US received a high influx of immigrants from Europe, many of whom were Eastern European, or non Anglo-Saxon – quite a few of those people were explicitly told they were not white. This is why you have things like the persecution of Jews, Italians, Slavs, Irish, etc in the 19th century. Today, we (Americans) do not distinguish all of these groups as not-white in our laws, hiring practices, and so on. An Irish man in the 1800’s would be treated completely differently than someone Irish today. 

In fact, much of “western” racial ideas in the 19th century had to do with phrenology - a fancy word meaning what your skull looked like. A fake “science” which told people what a civilized head looked like. “Caucasian” came out on top. 

Race was often determined like this!: 

[Wiki: Scientific Racism]

Concepts of race are often time and place specific. 

Here are earlier questions I wrote out: 

  • Can I apply modern terms to non-modern societies in history? (Something specific to here and now applied to something specific to the past, or a different place.)
  • Are these terms accurate if they are based on modern ideas? (Is there a better term for what I mean? Can I use both words to describe the difference between then and now?)
  • If they are not accurate to the ideas of the time then what terms would be? What were the concepts of terminology like in that moment in history at that specific place?