Topic: Why do white people complain a lot?
Anonymous A started this discussion 11 years ago #43,842
I, as a white man, can confirm this.
FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 9 minutes later[^] [v] #578,967
Because of non-whites.
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 13 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #578,969
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 15 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #578,970
FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI replied with this 11 years ago, 8 minutes later, 23 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #578,976
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 13 minutes later, 36 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #578,978
Because the lawn........
The fucking lawn........
The fucking lawn........
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 4 hours later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,032
Because most white people live empty consumerist lives and therefor have nothing to really talk about. Complaining substitutes that.
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 46 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,033
Because niggers
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,034
They complain because the privileges they've always taken for granted are now being accorded to everyone else. In their petty, vindictive, entitled little minds, this equates to being deprived of their rights.
The Owl !KThEOwLwbU joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 52 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,036
Anonymous E replied with this 11 years ago, 55 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,038
kook !!mCVqftDha joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,039
Anonymous E replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,042
@previous (kook !!mCVqftDha)
I doubt its a communist. A communist would be smart enough to realize that the underclasses are also made up of white people.
I doubt its a communist. A communist would be smart enough to realize that the underclasses are also made up of white people.
Anonymous G replied with this 11 years ago, 24 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,053
@579,034 (G)
1. The right to vote.
2. The right to live wherever they choose.
3. The right to due process.
4. The right to decide what happens to their own bodies.
5. The right to eat wherever they choose.
6. The right to join formerly exclusive institutions and organizations.
7. The right to ascend to any business/governmental position based on personal merit.
@previous (E)
> A communist would be smart enough to realize that the underclasses are also made up of white people.
I'm actually a socialist, and I'd like to point out that historically speaking, it's always been White Elitists who decided that certain white "underclasses" (eg, Jews, Polish immigrants, "trailer trash", the Irish etc) weren't fit to join them.
1. The right to vote.
2. The right to live wherever they choose.
3. The right to due process.
4. The right to decide what happens to their own bodies.
5. The right to eat wherever they choose.
6. The right to join formerly exclusive institutions and organizations.
7. The right to ascend to any business/governmental position based on personal merit.
@previous (E)
> A communist would be smart enough to realize that the underclasses are also made up of white people.
I'm actually a socialist, and I'd like to point out that historically speaking, it's always been White Elitists who decided that certain white "underclasses" (eg, Jews, Polish immigrants, "trailer trash", the Irish etc) weren't fit to join them.
(Edited 6 minutes later.)
Anonymous E replied with this 11 years ago, 10 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,058
@previous (G)
yeah but you have to admit that any capitalist society has a underclass that is indiscriminating when it comes to race and geneder. Although its true that races and genders may may be targeted by elitists, a capitalist system does not.
yeah but you have to admit that any capitalist society has a underclass that is indiscriminating when it comes to race and geneder. Although its true that races and genders may may be targeted by elitists, a capitalist system does not.
kook !!mCVqftDha replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,061
kook !!mCVqftDha double-posted this 11 years ago, 39 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,062
Anonymous E replied with this 11 years ago, 45 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,063
kook !!mCVqftDha replied with this 11 years ago, 10 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,065
Anonymous E replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,066
kook !!mCVqftDha replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,067
kook !!mCVqftDha double-posted this 11 years ago, 56 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,068
kook !!mCVqftDha triple-posted this 11 years ago, 46 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,069
Anonymous G replied with this 11 years ago, 14 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,072
@previous (kook !!mCVqftDha)
Legally, all American citizens have had all of those rights since the 1970s (some of them were established earlier of course). That seems like a pretty late date to me, but I won't debate the matter. Instead, I'd question whether those rights function as well in reality as they do on paper.
Legally, all American citizens have had all of those rights since the 1970s (some of them were established earlier of course). That seems like a pretty late date to me, but I won't debate the matter. Instead, I'd question whether those rights function as well in reality as they do on paper.
Anonymous G double-posted this 11 years ago, 4 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,075
@579,058 (E)
If I understood the OP correctly, we weren't discussing ideologies or economic systems. I simply mentioned that I was a socialist because Anon E (correctly) surmised that I'm not a communist.
If I understood the OP correctly, we weren't discussing ideologies or economic systems. I simply mentioned that I was a socialist because Anon E (correctly) surmised that I'm not a communist.
kook !!mCVqftDha replied with this 11 years ago, 38 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,076
Anonymous E replied with this 11 years ago, 5 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,078
@previous (kook !!mCVqftDha)
Now your a terrorist kook. Everybody knows that in a society where you have been raised as the underclass, there is no language for your problems or common proper understanding of them. Its like living with an abusie husband that always has an answer or excuse for the way he treats you, then when the wife tells him to stop being so abusive he goes what what? You hit me first etc....
Now your a terrorist kook. Everybody knows that in a society where you have been raised as the underclass, there is no language for your problems or common proper understanding of them. Its like living with an abusie husband that always has an answer or excuse for the way he treats you, then when the wife tells him to stop being so abusive he goes what what? You hit me first etc....
Anonymous G replied with this 11 years ago, 20 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,079
@579,076 (kook !!mCVqftDha)
Based on what little I know of you, Kook, you treat everyone the same in your position as nurse/caregiver. Have you ever known a co-worker whose prejudices affected the level of care they afforded their patients?
Based on what little I know of you, Kook, you treat everyone the same in your position as nurse/caregiver. Have you ever known a co-worker whose prejudices affected the level of care they afforded their patients?
kook !!mCVqftDha replied with this 11 years ago, 1 hour later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,111
kook !!mCVqftDha double-posted this 11 years ago, 23 seconds later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,112
Anonymous G replied with this 11 years ago, 1 hour later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,143
kook !!mCVqftDha replied with this 11 years ago, 5 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,146
Dead !Pool..v42s joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,149
hater !JGlOo5d1iU joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 24 seconds later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,150
@579,146 (kook !!mCVqftDha)
Well, if you don't like Islamic beliefs, it's not really prejudiced to dislike Muslims. It's rational and reasonable and based on things they believe, not who they are.
Well, if you don't like Islamic beliefs, it's not really prejudiced to dislike Muslims. It's rational and reasonable and based on things they believe, not who they are.
kook !!mCVqftDha replied with this 11 years ago, 12 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,158
@previous (hater !JGlOo5d1iU)
But you still have to treat them like every other patient. Most of my coworkers are American blacks and so many of them hate island blacks, and treat them shitty
But you still have to treat them like every other patient. Most of my coworkers are American blacks and so many of them hate island blacks, and treat them shitty
(Edited 16 seconds later.)
Anonymous G replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,159
@579,146 (kook !!mCVqftDha)
Sounds like a lot of prejudices. The point I'm trying to make is that we pass laws to prevent prejudice against minorities, but that doesn't eliminate the reasons which necessitate the passing of those laws. For example, you can pass a law against anti-gay hatespeech, but it won't stop various people from hating gays. And for that reason, homophobes will claim that the government is restricting their right to express hatred of gays and lesbians.
Sounds like a lot of prejudices. The point I'm trying to make is that we pass laws to prevent prejudice against minorities, but that doesn't eliminate the reasons which necessitate the passing of those laws. For example, you can pass a law against anti-gay hatespeech, but it won't stop various people from hating gays. And for that reason, homophobes will claim that the government is restricting their right to express hatred of gays and lesbians.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
kook !!mCVqftDha replied with this 11 years ago, 4 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,162
Anonymous G replied with this 11 years ago, 23 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,165
@previous (kook !!mCVqftDha)
Then, let's take it one step further: white Anglo-Saxons have traditionally occupied position of power in the United States, and when various minorities begin to "intrude" on those positions, they don't want share their slice of the cake. The complaints really begin when the federal government passes laws carving up the cake into equal sections. Basically, the whites believe they deserve more of the cake because they're better than all the kikes, niggers, spics and chinks who weren't invited to the party in the first place.
Then, let's take it one step further: white Anglo-Saxons have traditionally occupied position of power in the United States, and when various minorities begin to "intrude" on those positions, they don't want share their slice of the cake. The complaints really begin when the federal government passes laws carving up the cake into equal sections. Basically, the whites believe they deserve more of the cake because they're better than all the kikes, niggers, spics and chinks who weren't invited to the party in the first place.
hater !JGlOo5d1iU replied with this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,167
@previous (G)
That's ridiculous, both kikes and chinks outperform whites. How can we say we are more deserving than them?
That's ridiculous, both kikes and chinks outperform whites. How can we say we are more deserving than them?
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,169
Anonymous G replied with this 11 years ago, 5 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,171
@579,167 (hater !JGlOo5d1iU)
The sane way that a school bully thinks he deserves more than the hard-working nerd who gets near perfect grades.
The sane way that a school bully thinks he deserves more than the hard-working nerd who gets near perfect grades.
kook !!mCVqftDha replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,172
@579,165 (G)
Yes I understand the concept. But I still want to know why you listed all of those rights that you said that black people dont have.
Yes I understand the concept. But I still want to know why you listed all of those rights that you said that black people dont have.
hater !JGlOo5d1iU replied with this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,173
@579,169 (A)
We won world conquest. In areas where whites are a minority I'm sure they do get offended. I guarentee there are plenty of japanophiles in japan who get offended daily.
We won world conquest. In areas where whites are a minority I'm sure they do get offended. I guarentee there are plenty of japanophiles in japan who get offended daily.
Anonymous G replied with this 11 years ago, 7 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,177
@579,172 (kook !!mCVqftDha)
Because its not really about race, Kook; the whites just happen to be the kids who owned the cake and resent having to share it around. The granting of full civil rights is a comparatively recent event, and even then, the laws weren't universally enforced until the late 1980s. In my humble opinion, if you're a white Anglo Saxon, you're automatically granted a slice of the cake. However, if you're non-white - or gay, or Jewish, or Muslim or whatever - you have to fight for a fair share...and even if you win, the whites will not only complain that you didn't deserve it, they'll try to take it back from you.
Because its not really about race, Kook; the whites just happen to be the kids who owned the cake and resent having to share it around. The granting of full civil rights is a comparatively recent event, and even then, the laws weren't universally enforced until the late 1980s. In my humble opinion, if you're a white Anglo Saxon, you're automatically granted a slice of the cake. However, if you're non-white - or gay, or Jewish, or Muslim or whatever - you have to fight for a fair share...and even if you win, the whites will not only complain that you didn't deserve it, they'll try to take it back from you.
(Edited 24 seconds later.)
Anonymous G double-posted this 11 years ago, 4 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,179
@579,173 (hater !JGlOo5d1iU)
Yeah, the Japan word "gaijin" doesn't just mean "foreigner" -- it's the equivalent of the N-word, and is applied to outsiders of all color (although whites are commonly referred to as "sukebe gaijin").
Yeah, the Japan word "gaijin" doesn't just mean "foreigner" -- it's the equivalent of the N-word, and is applied to outsiders of all color (although whites are commonly referred to as "sukebe gaijin").
hater !JGlOo5d1iU replied with this 11 years ago, 16 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #579,186
@previous (G)
The men are really threatened by our large penises. They even make fun of women who date whites as wanting big cock. They have a word for it that I can't recall.
The men are really threatened by our large penises. They even make fun of women who date whites as wanting big cock. They have a word for it that I can't recall.