Chris Matthews: Only Whites Can Be Racists.....

[DA60]

I could care less what Chris Matthews says about anything.

 

[Penderyn]

I'll never understand why a white person would be an anti-white racist.

How can anyone be a racist who isn't off his head, since there are no such things as 'races'?

 

[Cyrylek]

The classic "liberal think" on the race bigotry issue (racism) adds an implied "power" requirement. Since only whites have this "power", only whites may be considered racist.

Yeah, the "liberals" are so used to delegating all higher forms of human thought - from compassion to planning for future - to the imaginary super-brain of the State, they started forgetting that actual concepts and attitudes reside in actual brains of individuals.

If, for example, a black thug attacks a Korean shopkeeper for being an Asian (not unheard of in California) - how is it not "racism"? And yes, the thug has all the "power" needed for his criminal action: no swarms of black helicopters are required to crack someone's skull).

 

[Cyrylek]

Over the years I have come to see that the Republicans usually care about people as individuals and not much about group rights. The Democrats are the opposite, they tend to be indifferent about individuals but genuinely care about the well being of groups.

Yes, Democrats (rather, the socialists now dominating the party) are collectivists; they operate with group abstractions, and have difficulty with individual, real people.

Unfortunately the same is true for a large part of the Republican coalition: the "social conservatives" are just as collectivist, to say nothing about the anti-immigration crowd.

My grandmother liked to repeat the old French (?) proverb: "All people can be divided into two groups: those who divide people into groups, and those who don't".

 

[Penderyn]

Yeah, the "liberals" are so used to delegating all higher forms of human thought - from compassion to planning for future - to the imaginary super-brain of the State, they started forgetting that actual concepts and attitudes reside in actual brains individual people.

If, for example, a black thug attacks a Korean shopkeeper for being an Asian (not unheard of in California) - how is it not "racism"? And yes, the thug has all the "power" needed for his criminal action: no swarms of black helicopters are required to crack someone's skull).

Two people, one off his head, are involved in a brawl: what has that to do with anything other than the two people? Your antiquated thinking is making you talk nonsense so as to victimise 'black' people. Don't you ever get bored with this archaic drivel?

 

[polgara]

Over the years I have come to see that the Republicans usually care about people as individuals and not much about group rights. The Democrats are the opposite, they tend to be indifferent about individuals but genuinely care about the well being of groups.

:agree: But it seems that only certain groups are favored...those that tend to agree with their philosophy. The rest are on their own.

Out till later. Got lots of work to do around here! ...sigh...

 

[Penderyn]

Yes, Democrats (rather, the socialists now dominating the party) are collectivists; they operate with group abstractions, and have difficulty with individual, real people.

Unfortunately the same is true for a large part of the Republican coalition: the "social conservatives" are just as collectivist, to say nothing about the anti-immigration crowd.

My grandmother liked to repeat the old French (?) proverb: "All people can be divided into two groups: those who divide people into groups, and those who don't".

So any old muck nutters believe is 'real'? Grow up!

 

[Perotista]

Yes, Democrats (rather, the socialists now dominating the party) are collectivists; they operate with group abstractions, and have difficulty with individual, real people.

Unfortunately the same is true for a large part of the Republican coalition: the "social conservatives" are just as collectivist, to say nothing about the anti-immigration crowd.

My grandmother liked to repeat the old French (?) proverb: "All people can be divided into two groups: those who divide people into groups, and those who don't".

Your grandmother was a wise woman.

 

[Cyrylek]

Two people, one off his head, are involved in a brawl: what has that to do with anything other than the two people? Your antiquated thinking is making you talk nonsense so as to victimise 'black' people. Don't you ever get bored with this archaic drivel?

I don't victimize anyone. If someone is attacked because of his or her race, it is racism in action. You say race doesn't exist? I agree. It doesn't exist for me. For the thug it does exist, most obviously. Yes, racism is a violent addiction to a group abstraction. It doesn't mean racism itself is a fantasy.

Just like the mass murdering Communists in Russia and China were committing their crimes in the name of another group abstraction - "class". "Class" being even less real than "race" does not make those millions of victims any less dead.

 

[Cyrylek]

So any old muck nutters believe is 'real'? Grow up!

You don't believe that individuals are real?

 

[Penderyn]

I don't victimize anyone. If someone is attacked because of his or her race, it is racism in action. You say race doesn't exist? I agree. It doesn't exist for me. For the thug it does exist, most obviously. Yes, racism is a violent addiction to a group abstraction. It doesn't mean racism itself is a fantasy.

Just like the mass murdering Communists in Russia and China were committing their crimes in the name another group abstraction - "class". "Class" being even less real than "race" does not make those millions of victims any less dead.

If a paraglegic throws a cup at me, that is a statement about paraplegics? American Extremists really are weird. Class is a fact, whatever people do with it. 'Race' is a nutty fantasy. Your gang can breed with 'black' people and very, very often did. Talk sense!

 

[Penderyn]

You don't believe that individuals are real?

I believe archaic drivel is drivel, whoever believes it.

 

[Cyrylek]

If a paraglegic throws a cup at me, that is a statement about paraplegics?

No. But if you throw a cup at a paraplegic because you think paraplegics are disgusting, it is a statement about you.

Class is a fact, whatever people do with it. 'Race' is a nutty fantasy.

Ahhh - I get it. You are afraid of facing your own collectivist madness, so you are doing what the psychologists call "transference": classes are real, not momentary arbitrary snapshots of fluid economic stratification; but races - collection of (mostly meaningless, I agree) biological attributes (like skin color, facial parameters, etc) that persist for many generations are a nutty fantasy. Interesting.

 

[Cyrylek]

I believe archaic drivel is drivel, whoever believes it.

You avoided the question. You state that "classes" are real (which sounds like utter drivel to me). Are individual people at least as real as "classes"? Are ideas in their heads a part of that "reality", or are they just meat puppets acting for unfathomable reasons?

 

[Lopan017]

Every group has prejudices.:agree

 

[rocket88]

Fair point. The Dems have had a lot of practice with "divide and conquer" politics and have become very effective at telling specific low-information audiences how they have been victimized by "the system." Republicans have yet to come up with an effective counter strategy.

So blacks and latinos are "low-information audiences?"

 

[pbrauer]

The latest pearl of shouted "wisdom" from the most loathsome member of MSNBC's news-challenged lineup:

"Actually, Rushbo, racism is the belief that one race -- whites -- should rule all others. Get your definitions straight!"

Over to you, Merriam-Webster: Racism - noun - 1: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race. 2 : racial prejudice or discrimination. The best part of the clip is the confident, smirking nature of Matthew's little lecture. Get your definitions straight, Rushbo! Racism is the exclusive province of whites. Isn't it fun to be so much smarter and more sophisticated than those igorant knuckle-draggers on the Right, audience? What an ass. And I bet most of his viewers nodded right along. Question: How might Spittle McTingles describe these remarks?

Mr. Barry used the occasion of a victory party Tuesday to make this ignorant observation: “We’ve got to do something about these Asians coming in, opening up businesses, those dirty shops. They ought to go, I’ll just say that right now, you know.”

That would be a bigoted statement from an African-American politician (D) about getting rid of the "dirty" Asian shops that apparently bother him. No white people, so no racism -- right Chris?

First, his show airs twice in a three-hour span. The same show. Second, for years, Matthews masqueraded as a centrist newsman. He occasionally still claims to be one. So he was either subduing his bias that whole time, or he's gotten in touch with his inner hack to conform to the network's editorial bent. Neither explanation reflects particularly well on him.....snip~

Chris Matthews: Only Whites Can Be Racists - Guy Benson

My, my, my,.....the Games people play? Thoughts?

What Matthews said is pretty shocking, but I've watched him enough to know he doesn't believe that only whites can be racists. IMO, he didn't say it for shock value, he just left out two words which were -- "for example." putting them in it would read like this:

"Actually, Rushbo, racism is the belief that one race, for example: whites, should rule all others. Get your definitions straight!"​

That said, he can say some pretty stupid things.

 

[rocket88]

Over the years I have come to see that the Republicans usually care about people as individuals and not much about group rights. The Democrats are the opposite, they tend to be indifferent about individuals but genuinely care about the well being of groups.

Unless you're talking about a group they don't like, such as gays. Then it's all about the "homosexual agenda" like they all have the same one. Or anyone who disagrees with them also all get lumped into "The Leftists."

So they're all about their own individuality. If you're not one of them, you're just a gay leftist.

 

[Diogenes]

Over the years I have come to see that the Republicans usually care about people as individuals and not much about group rights. The Democrats are the opposite, they tend to be indifferent about individuals but genuinely care about the well being of groups.

Yep. I think Mussolini was the first politician to formalize "group rights" in society.

 

[Diogenes]

So blacks and latinos are "low-information audiences?"

The ones who vote to remain on the liberal plantation are. Those who choose to think for themselves and leave - Thomas Sowell, Herman Cain, Ben Carson, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz - are treated very badly by the plantation masters and wannabes like Mathews.

 

[Perotista]

Unless you're talking about a group they don't like, such as gays. Then it's all about the "homosexual agenda" like they all have the same one. Or anyone who disagrees with them also all get lumped into "The Leftists."

So they're all about their own individuality. If you're not one of them, you're just a gay leftist.

Perhaps I should have said individual rights vs. group rights. The constitution guaranteed individual rights although several later amendments pertained to rights of groups to correct the injustice not corrected by the framers.

 

[Perotista]

Yep. I think Mussolini was the first politician to formalize "group rights" in society.

Groups have been with us since the dawn of time and group rights and the denial of rights to certain groups has also been with us. I think the founders and framers looking at individual as an individual and not as part of a group might have been the first to do so. Although not all individuals were seen as individuals.

 

[Gathomas88]

The latest pearl of shouted "wisdom" from the most loathsome member of MSNBC's news-challenged lineup:

"Actually, Rushbo, racism is the belief that one race -- whites -- should rule all others. Get your definitions straight!"

Over to you, Merriam-Webster: Racism - noun - 1: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race. 2 : racial prejudice or discrimination. The best part of the clip is the confident, smirking nature of Matthew's little lecture. Get your definitions straight, Rushbo! Racism is the exclusive province of whites. Isn't it fun to be so much smarter and more sophisticated than those igorant knuckle-draggers on the Right, audience? What an ass. And I bet most of his viewers nodded right along. Question: How might Spittle McTingles describe these remarks?

Mr. Barry used the occasion of a victory party Tuesday to make this ignorant observation: “We’ve got to do something about these Asians coming in, opening up businesses, those dirty shops. They ought to go, I’ll just say that right now, you know.”

That would be a bigoted statement from an African-American politician (D) about getting rid of the "dirty" Asian shops that apparently bother him. No white people, so no racism -- right Chris?

First, his show airs twice in a three-hour span. The same show. Second, for years, Matthews masqueraded as a centrist newsman. He occasionally still claims to be one. So he was either subduing his bias that whole time, or he's gotten in touch with his inner hack to conform to the network's editorial bent. Neither explanation reflects particularly well on him.....snip~

Chris Matthews: Only Whites Can Be Racists - Guy Benson


My, my, my,.....the Games people play? Thoughts?

Yet another attempt by the "agenda setters" on the Far Left to ignore common sense and objective reality in favor of ideological fantasy and bigoted preconceived notions.

Why am I not surprised? :roll:

Well we all know that stupidity is measured in Matthews, in honor of such a stupid person. Like, if you ask someone: How stupid are you? He'll probably say: I'm 0.5 Matthews stupid.

Seriously... who takes this guy serious anymore. Does he even have a fan base or just people who look at him like Kim Kardashian. A loser who is interesting to watch to know how low humanity can sink.

I actually saw him on an episode of Jeopardy not too long ago. He was hilariously outclassed by every one of his opponents in terms of overall knowledge and intellectual ability.

I really felt kind of embarrassed for him. :lol:

So blacks and latinos are "low-information audiences?"

A certain demographic of blacks and latinos can be said to belong to such an audience, yes. However, they are hardly alone in this.

 

[CanadaJohn]

Chris Matthews is the idiot's Bill Maher - equally loathsome, yet not even close to being as clever and smooth.

 

[Cyrylek]

Yep. I think Mussolini was the first politician to formalize "group rights" in society.

I think the first politician to do so was the first politician, whoever he was.