Supremacists & Segregationalists...is there a Difference?

[ptsdkid]

Not every member of stormfront.com is a supremacist, (many are White Pride Nationalists, there is a difference). It has been repeatedly proven that segregationalists are non racists (racially neutral)--since they choose not to expose and or engage themselves to potential racially inclined firestorms. Since the segregationalist prefers being racially passive....doesn't that make it an impossibility for him to become a supremacist? Therefore, the only logical answer to the poll would be to place a 'YES' vote when asked if there is a difference between a sumpremacist and a segregationalist. If I were to see a 'NO' vote, then I would assume that this poll would be open for debate. Without a 'NO' vote, I will have to assume that no one here will ever have a reason call me a racist or supremacist again. At that point, I will have to entertain the idea of inviting all of you over to my house in my segregated neighborhood for tea and crumpets. Mind you, none of my 3 ex-wives will be there to help me make the tea.

 

[talloulou]

Not every member of stormfront.com is a supremacist, (many are White Pride Nationalists, there is a difference). It has been repeatedly proven that segregationalists are non racists (racially neutral)--since they choose not to expose and or engage themselves to potential racially inclined firestorms. Since the segregationalist prefers being racially passive....doesn't that make it an impossibility for him to become a supremacist? Therefore, the only logical answer to the poll would be to place a 'YES' vote when asked if there is a difference between a sumpremacist and a segregationalist. If I were to see a 'NO' vote, then I would assume that this poll would be open for debate. Without a 'NO' vote, I will have to assume that no one here will ever have a reason call me a racist or supremacist again. At that point, I will have to entertain the idea of inviting all of you over to my house in my segregated neighborhood for tea and crumpets. Mind you, none of my 3 ex-wives will be there to help me make the tea.

A segregationalist is absolutely 100% without question a racist. A person who believes people should be sorted by something as arbitrary as skin color or nationality. You can argue maybe that you are not a supremacist, however, I personally would find your argument weak and somewhat hard to believe.

Still, the idea that you are in fact a racist is in in my mind undeniable. You want to seperate and sort humans by skin color or nationality and so right there that is an expressed intolerance for those unlike yourself. You will not tolerate them in what you believe is your "area" and how that could be viewed as anything but racist is beyond me.

Would you invite me to tea regardless of the color skin I might have? If so then really what in God's name is the point in desiring that all your neighbors be lilly white? And how in the world can you think you're not racist? If you are white and you would invite a person with different skin color to your house for tea then it just shows you're inconsistent and illogical with your beliefs. The idea that you'd host a person of color in your home but not want said person for a neighbor is ignorant, goofy, and perhaps less racist than some but still more racist than what most find acceptable.

Furthermore announcing yourself boldly as a segregationalist is hardly "racially passive" whatever the heck that's supposed to mean.

 

[Doremus Jessup]

Do segregationalists think that they are somehow better than others, or are they just too afraid of anything different that they like to hide?

 

[ptsdkid]

A segregationalist is absolutely 100% without question a racist. A person who believes people should be sorted by something as arbitrary as skin color or nationality. You can argue maybe that you are not a supremacist, however, I personally would find your argument weak and somewhat hard to believe.

***First of all, thank you for responding to this post. Looks like its been a bomb so far. I can understand that, not many people feel comfortable talking about racism. You seem to have been the first to actually give an honest description of what you see is as a segregationalist. Let me show you why you are wrong in believing segregationists are 100% or even 1% racist.
I lived on the periphery of Roxbury-Mission Hills (the black neighborhoods) and of South Boston (the White-Irish neighborhood) during the desegregation/bussing tragedy of 1973-4. Forced bussing is the correct term in defining how and why the forcing of black kids to ride busses with white kids to school turned into a total failure. Before the bussing plan there was zero racism in both the black and white neighborhoods. During and after the bussing there was utter chaos leading to fights between the kids and their parents. Rocks were thrown at the busses and racism ran wild in Boston up and until they put a stop to that desegregation/forced bussing policy. People were hospitalized from racial stabbings, and some chose to move completely out of the Boston vicinity. Black kids were forced to attend school with the white kids. Believe me, the tension was so great that no one learned a damn thing.


Still, the idea that you are in fact a racist is in in my mind undeniable. You want to seperate and sort humans by skin color or nationality and so right there that is an expressed intolerance for those unlike yourself. You will not tolerate them in what you believe is your "area" and how that could be viewed as anything but racist is beyond me.

***You still don't get it. I have no control of who lives where, or what color skinned people may move into my neighborhood. Tell me Tallo, if you were to consider moving soon, would you be more apt to search for a home in the heart of Harlem, or someplace more suitable or comfortable to your living style? You see, just because I choose to live in a somewhat lilly white neighborhood, should in no way give reason to think that I'm a racist. The two just don't add up. You may want to experiment with racial socialization by giving a shot at living in Harlem, but because I prefer not do doesn't mean that I'm a racist or that I have a supremacist viewpoint. With your logic, one could or might assume that the people living in Harlem are racists or supremacists because they choose to stay segregated. See how that doesn't make sense? If a Black, a Chineese, a Frenchman, an Eskimo, etc decide to move into my neighborhood--then that's their pleasure. I'm not going to call them racist because they made a decision to live elsewhere.

Would you invite me to tea regardless of the color skin I might have? If so then really what in God's name is the point in desiring that all your neighbors be lilly white? And how in the world can you think you're not racist?

***There you go again. Where did I ever say that I desired all my neighbors have white skin? You seem to be hung up on this skin color issue. My offer still stands for tea, and I don't care if your skin color is purple.


If you are white and you would invite a person with different skin color to your house for tea then it just shows you're inconsistent and illogical with your beliefs. The idea that you'd host a person of color in your home but not want said person for a neighbor is ignorant, goofy, and perhaps less racist than some but still more racist than what most find acceptable.

***You see, where did I ever say I didn't want a person of color as my neighbor? My neighbors get to choose where they live, not I.

Furthermore announcing yourself boldly as a segregationalist is hardly "racially passive" whatever the heck that's supposed to mean.

***Again, racially passive means that I don't think about racism, nor do I plan to step into the middle of a potentially racist scenario.

 

[talloulou]

***Again, racially passive means that I don't think about racism, nor do I plan to step into the middle of a potentially racist scenario.

Well when you say you're a segregationalist what does that mean? If you're saying you wouldn't try to stop a "non-white" person from moving into your neighborhood and you wouldn't give them a hard time, and you wouldn't up and move just because they moved in then I'm not sure you actually are a segregationalist. If you are not actively trying to encourage your neighborhood to be or remain all one color than what do you think makes you a segregationalist?

I lived in big large cities where there are poor neighborhoods that I would not want to live in because doing so would mean I was poor. However every middle class neighborhood I have ever lived in was shared with people of various skin colors and nationalities so I know that "poverty" is what makes many neighborhoods bad and not necessarily the skin color of those who live there. That being said I have strived my whole life not to be poor vs. striving to seperate myself from people of various nationalities or skin color. The neighborhood where I live right now is a good mixture of native american, latino, asian, and white people. We have no problems.

If your neighborhood is good and you have various types of people living there and everything is fine why would you desire "segregation" and if you've lived near others who are different from you without a problem then what would be the purpose of proclaiming yourself a segregationalist?

And as far as school buses and what not kids get into it. I'm sure race maybe was a factor. I'm equally sure that the haves and have not thing was probably also a factor. Depending on the situation and where you lived I'm sure the experience was quite harrowing however I think concluding from that situation that we should encourage segregation is sort of lame.

I spent a lot of time in Philly. Now there are tons of neighborhoods I wouldn't want to live in there and someone might look at some of those neighborhoods and decide I didn't want to live there because of the skin color of the majority of folks who do live there but that wouldn't be true. There were African Americans that lived in my neighborhood in Philly and I'm sure they too wouldn't want to live in the neighborhoods that I wouldn't even want to drive through.

 

[Southern Belle]

I...think I understand what Kid means! O_O (and I'm abit scared that I do, but it does make sense because I've felt the same way in certain situations)

By now you guys probably know my school story so I'll just skip it and say that the half a year I spent in a private school was a LOT better then when I was in the public school system! It was because the teachers and students were all white. There was one black girl who went there and we were friends and we hung out and there was 0 racial tension.

Now consider that and then think about my little neighborhood. Most people who live here are white and it's nice. In the last few years a few black people have moved over here and they are nice normal people, and there is no tension again.

I think what Kid means is, he'd perfer a predominatly white area because it is just more comfortable with the way they act and live. But anyone who wants to live that was as well is welcome no matter who they are. I think that is what racially passive means.

I think I got it right, not everyone's comfortable being around every type of person, that's just how it is, everyone's different and has different comfort...stuff. ^^ But what do you do when you are uncomfortable around something? You try not to go around it, but you don't cry about it. It's like on TV. I don't want to have bad channels that you pay for so I don't buy them, but I don't obsess with them and send them letters saying how trashy they are and they need to be taken off the air, only crybabies do that, I just stay away. I think it's kinda like that...

But now I feel kinda icky for some reason...I don't hate anyone for their skin color and I hope y'all understand what I mean, this issue is one of those surprisingly gray ones, seriously...not black and white...

 

[talloulou]

I guess I wouldn't consider someone a segregationalist unless they actively promoted or encouraged segregation. So in my mind someone who accepts neighbors of various skin color and has them over for tea isn't really a segregationalist. Someone who lives in a neighborhood where the folks refuse to sell their houses to people of different skin colors would be a segregationalist. Genuine promoters and activists for segregation are most definitely racist.

I think ptsdkid is just a benignly entertaining goofball and not really a card carrying member of the klan or an actual segregationalist. Plus he strikes me as the type of guy who'd take whatever woman he was lucky enough to get which doesn't coincide too well with segregation.

 

[Southern Belle]

I guess I wouldn't consider someone a segregationalist unless they actively promoted or encouraged segregation. So in my mind someone who accepts neighbors of various skin color and has them over for tea isn't really a segregationalist. Someone who lives in a neighborhood where the folks refuse to sell their houses to people of different skin colors would be a segregationalist. Genuine promoters and activists for segregation are most definitely racist.

I think ptsdkid is just a benignly entertaining goofball and not really a card carrying member of the klan or an actual segregationalist. Plus he strikes me as the type of guy who'd take whatever woman he was lucky enough to get which doesn't coincide too well with segregation.

Yeah Segregation is not a word used in every day conversation, but banning people from moving in is nasty and mean. I don't think I'm one, at least not consciously, but it sounds like that's what he feels like. I think actually refusing to let someone live somewhere is more supremacist then just perferring a comfortable way of life that happens to be best achivied around people of a certain race (be they yours or another) If you like how they live, and they're friendly, it's all good.

But on the same token if you're forced to be around certain people and they torture you and you're miserable there's no shame in trying to get away from them...

 

[ptsdkid]

I guess I wouldn't consider someone a segregationalist unless they actively promoted or encouraged segregation. So in my mind someone who accepts neighbors of various skin color and has them over for tea isn't really a segregationalist. Someone who lives in a neighborhood where the folks refuse to sell their houses to people of different skin colors would be a segregationalist. Genuine promoters and activists for segregation are most definitely racist.

I think ptsdkid is just a benignly entertaining goofball and not really a card carrying member of the klan or an actual segregationalist. Plus he strikes me as the type of guy who'd take whatever woman he was lucky enough to get which doesn't coincide too well with segregation.

***Looks like it took another woman to get you to see the light. Southern Belle nailed it in every aspect. I choose to segregate my life and lifestyle from those entities I see as being dangerous, racist, anomalous, and threatening to my very existence. But that doesn't mean that I live in a cave--that I won't leave the neighborhood on occasion to search for a colorful looking hooker.
I am a little bit hurt that you won't accept my invite for tea. I sure hope that Southern Belle sees me as someone a little less goofy than you do. What do you say Belle, looking to hook up with a sincere and compassionate Yankee?

 

[Skip]

I choose to segregate my life and lifestyle from those entities I see as being dangerous, racist, anomalous, and threatening to my very existence.

:roll: If you say so.

That just seems self-defeating.

 

[Gibberish]

Segregationalism is founded on the belief of Supremism. You wish to segregate yourself from those other races and nationalities that you feel would diminish your life. You feel those other races/nationalities are beneath you in lifestyle, compassion, and pretty much everything else.

I answered No, there is no difference.

 

[Southern Belle]

***Looks like it took another woman to get you to see the light. Southern Belle nailed it in every aspect. I choose to segregate my life and lifestyle from those entities I see as being dangerous, racist, anomalous, and threatening to my very existence. But that doesn't mean that I live in a cave--that I won't leave the neighborhood on occasion to search for a colorful looking hooker.
I am a little bit hurt that you won't accept my invite for tea. I sure hope that Southern Belle sees me as someone a little less goofy than you do. What do you say Belle, looking to hook up with a sincere and compassionate Yankee?

I don't agree with you on everything, but I can see a bit what you mean on a couple of issues. (or halfway at least) But I'm taken, thanks, lol. :2wave:

 

[MrFungus420]

Segregrationists are nothing more than supremecists who are too cowardly to admit it.

They try to couch it in politically correct terms in an attempt to hide.

Even so, it still slips through:

I choose to segregate my life and lifestyle from those entities I see as being dangerous, racist, anomalous, and threatening to my very existence.

It's an amazing confluence, the stupidity to be racist and the cowardice to not be able to admit it.

Supremecists, segregationists , Nazis and the KKK are all cut from the same cloth

 

[ptsdkid]

:roll: If you say so.

That just seems self-defeating.

***Self defeating? How so?

 

[ptsdkid]

Segregationalism is founded on the belief of Supremism. You wish to segregate yourself from those other races and nationalities that you feel would diminish your life. You feel those other races/nationalities are beneath you in lifestyle, compassion, and pretty much everything else.

I answered No, there is no difference.

***How in the world can segregationalism be founded on the belief of supremacism? I'm a segregationist, yet I have no inkling to being a supremacist. In fact, being supreme over anyone has never entered my mind. I don't feel other races/naionalities are beneath me at all. I simply choose to live with whomever and wherever I please. I think that's called freedom of choice.

 

[ptsdkid]

Segregrationists are nothing more than supremecists who are too cowardly to admit it.

They try to couch it in politically correct terms in an attempt to hide.

Even so, it still slips through:



It's an amazing confluence, the stupidity to be racist and the cowardice to not be able to admit it.

Supremecists, segregationists , Nazis and the KKK are all cut from the same cloth

***I see there is no hope for you. Nuff said.

 

[talloulou]

***Looks like it took another woman to get you to see the light. Southern Belle nailed it in every aspect. I choose to segregate my life and lifestyle from those entities I see as being dangerous, racist, anomalous, and threatening to my very existence. But that doesn't mean that I live in a cave--that I won't leave the neighborhood on occasion to search for a colorful looking hooker.
I am a little bit hurt that you won't accept my invite for tea. I sure hope that Southern Belle sees me as someone a little less goofy than you do. What do you say Belle, looking to hook up with a sincere and compassionate Yankee?

Sounds to me like you're more "afraid" of strangers that look a certain way vs. being a segregationalist. Sorry I insulted you with goofy. But your goofy posts are some of the most entertaining around if that makes you feel any better. I don't think you can really be a segregationalist whilst sleeping with "colorful" women that's like being a closeted homosexual that attacks other homosexuals in public. But perhaps I'm still defining segregation differently than you do.

 

[Gibberish]

***How in the world can segregationalism be founded on the belief of supremacism? I'm a segregationist, yet I have no inkling to being a supremacist. In fact, being supreme over anyone has never entered my mind. I don't feel other races/naionalities are beneath me at all. I simply choose to live with whomever and wherever I please. I think that's called freedom of choice.

You make it sound like you are choosing to live in one city vs another for no apparent reasons. If where and with whom you choose to live is based on race or nationality then you have supremest intension's. You choose to NOT live around those of a specific race because you feel they will corrupt your lifestyle and your well-being.

 

[1069]

Not every member of stormfront.com is a supremacist, (many are White Pride Nationalists, there is a difference). It has been repeatedly proven that segregationalists are non racists (racially neutral)--since they choose not to expose and or engage themselves to potential racially inclined firestorms. Since the segregationalist prefers being racially passive....doesn't that make it an impossibility for him to become a supremacist? Therefore, the only logical answer to the poll would be to place a 'YES' vote when asked if there is a difference between a sumpremacist and a segregationalist. If I were to see a 'NO' vote, then I would assume that this poll would be open for debate. Without a 'NO' vote, I will have to assume that no one here will ever have a reason call me a racist or supremacist again. At that point, I will have to entertain the idea of inviting all of you over to my house in my segregated neighborhood for tea and crumpets. Mind you, none of my 3 ex-wives will be there to help me make the tea.

It's wrong, and it's hurtful, and it causes others (of all races, including your own) to respond negatively to you, even when you are being innocuous (ie, mentioning your military service, or some mistreatment you suffered as a child).
Your sexist comments/threads are also hurtful and wrong, and have much the same effect.

If you feel strong enough to go through life without friends, without sympathy, without support, and without the compassion and goodwill of others- or if your fellow racists are the only support network you feel you'll ever need- then by all means, continue on this path.

Be warned, however, that by doing so, you incur the animosity of all right-thinking people, and it's not so easy for most people to set that animosity aside and support you, even at times when you need and deserve support.
Do you understand what I'm saying?

There are natural consequences- well nigh unavoidable ones- to your beliefs and professions; they are not pleasant. Only you can decide, however, whether you are willing to live with them (as the social price one must pay in order to be a "Segregationalist"), or whether you wish to change.
Is it worth it, is it worth social ostracism, to continue to cling to these racist beliefs/convictions?
It probably all depends on how much of your self-esteem is invested in this "segregationalist" thing.

 

[ptsdkid]

You make it sound like you are choosing to live in one city vs another for no apparent reasons. If where and with whom you choose to live is based on race or nationality then you have supremest intension's. You choose to NOT live around those of a specific race because you feel they will corrupt your lifestyle and your well-being.

***We keep going around in circles here. Do you suppose the fine people living in Harlem...live there because they based their decision on race or nationality? Be honest here.

 

[ptsdkid]

It's wrong, and it's hurtful, and it causes others (of all races, including your own) to respond negatively to you, even when you are being innocuous (ie, mentioning your military service, or some mistreatment you suffered as a child).
Your sexist comments/threads are also hurtful and wrong, and have much the same effect.

***Exactly what is wrong and hurtful that causes others to respond negatively to me? I'm just keeping it real here. This is a debate forum, chances for heated disagreements may arise from time to time. You may find find relief over on a chit-chat forum.
Sexist comments? Oh really! What exactly does that '69' represent in the '1069'?
The very essence of politics and 'Debate Politics' borders on being sexist. Wouldn't you agree that far more men are involved in the general discourse of politics? This is where yours truly comes into play. You may notice that many of my postings either include the word 'women' in the title, or they bring focus to women's issues. My overriding love for you women compels me to put you on top of the pedestal. How and what you do on top is up to you, but you have to realize that you've become fair game for the vultures below. Think of yourselves as being in Hillary's position. Are you up for the task?


If you feel strong enough to go through life without friends, without sympathy, without support, and without the compassion and goodwill of others- or if your fellow racists are the only support network you feel you'll ever need- then by all means, continue on this path.

***Wow, a lot of assumptions there, with none of them anywhere close to being true. You and I could possibly be friends if you would just open up your mind a bit. Compassion and goodwill is what I'm all about. My invite for tea is still open.


Be warned, however, that by doing so, you incur the animosity of all right-thinking people, and it's not so easy for most people to set that animosity aside and support you, even at times when you need and deserve support.
Do you understand what I'm saying?

***NO!



There are natural consequences- well nigh unavoidable ones- to your beliefs and professions; they are not pleasant. Only you can decide, however, whether you are willing to live with them (as the social price one must pay in order to be a "Segregationalist"), or whether you wish to change.
Is it worth it, is it worth social ostracism, to continue to cling to these racist beliefs/convictions?
It probably all depends on how much of your self-esteem is invested in this "segregationalist" thing.

***Social price one must pay? Again, where in anything that I've said here concerning my choice of a living arrangement--that I hinted at having racist beliefs/convictions? I just don't see where you're coming from. A seer you are not.

 

[Gibberish]

***We keep going around in circles here. Do you suppose the fine people living in Harlem...live there because they based their decision on race or nationality? Be honest here.

Not comparable to your ideology. You choose to live in a race specific area because you feel you are better then other races. Those other races (the minorities) live in race specific areas to not have to deal with your hateful ideology.

Harlem was specifically transitioned into a Black haven because of white supremacist ideology. This ideology is not yet dead so many who have lived through this disgraceful time in our history feel most comfortable in communities like Harlem.

Black specific communities are alive because of White supremest driven segregation.

 

[ptsdkid]

Not comparable to your ideology. You choose to live in a race specific area because you feel you are better then other races. Those other races (the minorities) live in race specific areas to not have to deal with your hateful ideology.

***Thank you for telling me why I chose to live in my neighborhood. Evidently you have a difficult time in comprehending what I've said here. No more running circles for me. You choose to be ignorant..that's your business.

 

[Gibberish]

***Thank you for telling me why I chose to live in my neighborhood. Evidently you have a difficult time in comprehending what I've said here. No more running circles for me. You choose to be ignorant..that's your business.

Personal assaults aside, What ciricles? I have never changed my stance, we just have differing opinions. I would say it's more of a back and forth then circles. Back and forth being the main platform of debate.

Let me clarify my thoughts in a simple paragraph:

If the segregationist wishes to be segregated from other races/nationalities for reasons that they feel those other races/nationalities will diminish (not to be confused with oppress) the segregationists way of life then the segregationists is indeed a supremest.

 

[ptsdkid]

Let me clarify my thoughts in a simple paragraph:

If the segregationists wishes to be segregated from other races/nationalities for reasons that they feel those other races/nationalities will diminish (not to be confused with oppression) the segregationists way of life then the segregationists is indeed a supremest.

***That entire paragraph is based on the word 'if'--where you would be posing a hypothetical or an assumption on why people choose to be segregationists. You can't prove anything, or have a legitimate argument while using the word 'if'.