Thread: Al Jazeera English: VIDEO: White Power USA

Originally Posted by SealLion

Having an ethnic mix of people is a good thing as it dispels false ideas of racism even when that government may be incorrectly targeted by fringe groups charging the opposite.

i would say that ethnic mixing is simply a natural process when different ethnic groups of people live in a community, but it is also not something that is naturally quite prevalent, since it is more likely that people will prefer bonding with those that they have something in common with (ethnicity, race, interests, life views, religion,...), inherently none of these are good or bad, its just a natural 'way of things'

imo people shouldn't be ashamed of their ethnicity, race, nationality,...these are some things (among many) that basically define some aspects of a person - on the other hand this gives no basis/validity to claims of some kind of supremacy (difference, sure, but not supremacy)

considering this video, none of the claims by those interviewed were substantiated with any evidence whatsoever, they essentially gave their own opinions of the situation or about their current president

there have been some serious questions stated in the video (cheap labor immigration, moving factories in foreign countries for the same reasons,...) but again, this is government/corporate policy to allow such actions - they should be held accountable, instead of bashing on racial basis - the interesting thing about it is that it suits the real culprits to keep this inter/anti racial agenda going, obscuring the real issues - it also helps justifying/propagating the domestic terrorist threat agenda

Originally Posted by Nobody

But remember to consider that a "sharp rise" in numbers isn't all that hard to do when you don't have many participating members to begin with. That's the only reassuring fact I take in all of this.

a bit hard to define what a sharp rise is, especially when no numbers are presented, eh?

generally, it can be said that whenever the mainstream elected government doesn't rise up to its task, many (voters) will feel being played/betrayed and some will turn to more extremist views & organizations, thus increasing their numbers

However, I do think that their issues with U.S. immigration is pure propaganda. I've heard the arguments, and typically they boil down to "they're stealing our jobs".

unfortunately this is reality, it happens all over the world and could be (optimistic view) attributed to corporate decisions (ever-reducing production costs or ever-increasing profit tendencies), as usa citizens have some minimum wage standards they are used to (or that they can tolerate) - on the other hand (mass) immigrants are mostly lured towards the least attractive working positions and they agree to work for much lower wages or with less benefits (so the 'go to school' argument won't help for those particular job positions) - now if the government isn't active in regulating immigration, one could assume they are actually silently supporting it (which has many implications or side effects)

2) Harsher legislation should be put in place to punish the people who employ illegal immigrants, rather than the immigrants themselves. If they are unable to find work illegally, there's not much of a reason to be here.

the first part is correct - still there will be immigrants (but at least not on a mass scale) simply because usa has better living standards compared to their own homeland (who can blame people for wanting to live better, right?)

Further, I've come to recognize almost any movement that bases it's ideology upon "patriotism" is just another movement trying to turn heads.

well, every (political) movement is trying to address those aspects of society that are to some extent common or 'universally' accepted (the bait, aka populism) and as we saw in the video itself, one of the party 'leaders' admitted that after the new members arrive, they are then gradually introduced (indoctrinated) to more controversial content/viewpoints or they are simply used to work on the margins, without knowing the core intentions of the movement (pyramid structure analogy)

Since 9/11, fringe groups (and even many republicans) have been more frequently slinging out "patriotic" speeches in an effort to gain some teary-eyed support in the name of our country. But it's all hogwash. It's just an excuse to hate.

patriotism in itself is again nothing to be condemned, but its meaning can be abused/misinterpreted/labeled (essentially it means love for one's country/homeland, nothing wrong with that - and its not even connected to race in this basic definition)

Originally Posted by SealLion

The idea of blaming the US prez is due to rascism.

i would say that the fact obama has different racial background is used by the establishment to: keep the racial tensions high & to have a reason to stick it on (label them) his critics - this tactics is not new, think about it: if anyone criticizes the jewish elements of society (regardless of the topic of dispute) he is automatically labeled as anti-semite - attacks on personal/racial basis have been previously used to divert attention from the real issues, another method is the 'forced choice' or 'pick-a-side' (either you are with us or against us)

when Jimmy Carter claimed that much of the opposition to the president has arisen because he is black.

such statements coming from previous highly positioned members of the establishment should be taken with 'a grain of salt' since they are very likely to be on the same page as the current government

ofc this doesn't mean that there is no racial motivated opposition, rather that the racial argument is being over-used to cover up discussion on other problems

after anti-government demonstrations over health that have been almost exclusively white, and after the increasingly aggressive tone on rightwing talk shows.

so the real issue here is health reform, but this media reporter for some reason doesn't discuss that topic, instead he chooses to talk about percentage of white demonstrators & aggressiveness of right-wing talk shows

But to deny them media coverage is probably one of the most effective means of limiting their exposure.

now, from a democratic standpoint, if they are a legal organization, no media network should deny them coverage, because that would mean they are being censored/discriminated - thats democracy - allowing freedom of speech for everyone, regardless of what someone else thinks about their arguments/opinions/agenda - and finally let the public (and the individual) decide what they are going to support, if anything at all

Without exposure, there is no funding support.
Without funding, there is no growth of such racist groups.
Without growth, they wither away.

you know, imo these extremist groups wouldn't get much attention/support in a decent society/democracy, simply because they are extremist, since the majority tends to be moderate (in 'normal' situations)

their funding can probably be traced to organizations & groups interested in promoting the racial conflict, i wouldn't be surprised if they have substantial connections to the intelligence agencies

even regardless of the above, its probably not logical to expect them to wither away as there will always be some supporters for an extremist cause, but like said before, in a decent society they would have their freedoms (same as everyone else) and still exist on the society's margins due to the very nature of their standpoints/opinions

the only occasions when extremist groups can get more support are extreme (abnormal) events/situations in the society, but it is up to the government to avoid actions/decisions that can lead towards/cause such situations, so strange as it may sound, the presence of extremist groups can even act as sort of a regulator/boundary, in that the government (better behaves, or else...) shouldn't take things too far as there will be trouble coming from the extremist sides and that the majority will then start leaning towards these sides too