Opinion of American White History Month

[bedstuy]

Whiteness is a fairly new concept developed as a means to support slavery, racism, religious intolerance and domination of non-whites.  We should talk about that history but we certainly shouldn't celebrate it.  Black history month and similar events are a means of empowering people who have had their history erased and cultures dominated by Europeans.  There's no equivalence here.

Also, people who are proud of "white history" or being white are all racist anti-Semitic losers who nothing else to be proud of.   

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Also, people who are proud of "white history" or being white are all racist anti-Semitic losers who nothing else to be proud of.   

Basically.

[courts]

Whiteness is a fairly new concept developed as a means to support slavery, racism, religious intolerance and domination of non-whites.  We should talk about that history but we certainly shouldn't celebrate it.  Black history month and similar events are a means of empowering people who have had their history erased and cultures dominated by Europeans. There's no equivalence here.

obviously my perspective on this is very right wing but i at least agree with this.

the irony here is that white pride is based on the same logic as 'gay pride' or 'black pride' and pretty self consciously so. i.e. that if you're not proud of what you are by default you're ashamed. ditto for 'white  nationalism': it was a conscious attempt to create a mirror image of 60s era black radicalism.  that if one group gets to engage in racial politicking why not us. you even have people now like metzger insisting they are actually left wing.part of the problem i have with that is that again, race is not a cultural heritage. its not like being german or french or any number of things. its a counterfeit. blacks have black pride in part because they can't even figure out what their ancestry was in a lot of cases and/or are highly mixed... and the same applies for 'white americans.'

You must be logged in to read this quote.

again very similar dynamic to 'black nationalism' in terms of simplistic victimization narratives. antisemitism is even common in both groups and based on the same logic: i.e. jews are disproportionately represented in positions of power (jewish privilege), jews are keeping the white man (or black man...) down, etc. its racist, but its from a position of weakness. you see similar behavior from the north koreans with their own racial theories: pure, vulnerable north koreans have to be kept safe from savage foreigners that would brutalize and exploit them.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

White History Month is every month.

My point, and I celebrate it every day of the year.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

I oppose all months, but we have white history month 11 months out of the year anyway.

[Link]

Whiteness is a fairly new concept developed as a means to support slavery, racism, religious intolerance and domination of non-whites.  We should talk about that history but we certainly shouldn't celebrate it.  Black history month and similar events are a means of empowering people who have had their history erased and cultures dominated by Europeans. There's no equivalence here.

obviously my perspective on this is very right wing but i at least agree with this.

the irony here is that white pride is based on the same logic as 'gay pride' or 'black pride' and pretty self consciously so. i.e. that if you're not proud of what you are by default you're ashamed. ditto for 'white  nationalism': it was a conscious attempt to create a mirror image of 60s era black radicalism.  that if one group gets to engage in racial politicking why not us. you even have people now like metzger insisting they are actually left wing.part of the problem i have with that is that again, race is not a cultural heritage. its not like being german or french or any number of things. its a counterfeit. blacks have black pride in part because they can't even figure out what their ancestry was in a lot of cases and/or are highly mixed... and the same applies for 'white americans.'

That's a very strange and skewed version of reality.  The "months" were created to provide recognition for under recognized minorities.  I don't see white males as a minority or under recognized.  The "months" are a corrective mechanism.  In an ideal world you wouldn't need them.

[bedstuy]

White History Month is every month.

My point, and I celebrate it every day of the year.

I don't understand this sentiment.  "White" as a category is a fairly recent invention.  Nobody before 1600 considered themselves "white."  And if you just take the whole of human history, most people in history have been what we call "non-white."  So to say that is completely ahistorical. 

And if you just take say, English history, the fact that people there had a certain skin tone is basically an irrelevant, banal fact.  Nobody at the battle of Agincourt was thinking about race.  Race didn't matter for most white people, except when it came to justifying the maltreatment of blacks, Asians, Jews, Catholics and native people.  So, to celebrate being "white" is offensive and tantamount to celebrating racism and some of the worst crimes ever committed in human history.

[Goldwater]

I oppose all months, but we have white history month 11 months out of the year anyway.

You oppose all months? That must make it hard to read your calendar.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

I guess I'll be bearing the brunt of the torches and pitchforks, but I think it's a perfectly natural reaction to what people might percieve as the "singling out" of non-white groups. I know it's not what black people are intending when they celebrate black history month, but I do think it nurtures a feeling amongst whites that we ought to be ashamed of our group's heritage. Forgive me for using the terms "us" and "them," but what's implied in the existence of "their" history month is that "ours" is hegemonic and immoral. For one, I can't blame anyone for wanting to press against those implications, and, secondly, I don't think "mainstream" history is any more hegemonic than having a special month dedicated to one group's "special" history. It's this type of separation that breeds racism.

So I agree that there should be no special months at all. But there's no way I can feel justified in pointing fingers at the people who want a white history month. Their pleas may be insensitive, but I totally get where they're coming from. This whole situation is kind of like sectarianism, and it's a giant loop in which everyone is culpable. That's why I think we should come together instead. It just makes sense. Forgive me.

[Wake Me Up When The Hard Border Ends]

Why don't we combine all of these racial history months into one year long celebration? I've even got the perfect name for it! History class!

[courts]

Whiteness is a fairly new concept developed as a means to support slavery, racism, religious intolerance and domination of non-whites.  We should talk about that history but we certainly shouldn't celebrate it.  Black history month and similar events are a means of empowering people who have had their history erased and cultures dominated by Europeans. There's no equivalence here.

obviously my perspective on this is very right wing but i at least agree with this.

the irony here is that white pride is based on the same logic as 'gay pride' or 'black pride' and pretty self consciously so. i.e. that if you're not proud of what you are by default you're ashamed. ditto for 'white  nationalism': it was a conscious attempt to create a mirror image of 60s era black radicalism.  that if one group gets to engage in racial politicking why not us. you even have people now like metzger insisting they are actually left wing.part of the problem i have with that is that again, race is not a cultural heritage. its not like being german or french or any number of things. its a counterfeit. blacks have black pride in part because they can't even figure out what their ancestry was in a lot of cases and/or are highly mixed... and the same applies for 'white americans.'

That's a very strange and skewed version of reality.  The "months" were created to provide recognition for under recognized minorities.  I don't see white males as a minority or under recognized.  The "months" are a corrective mechanism.  In an ideal world you wouldn't need them.

my point was that 'whiteness' has to some extent come about because 'white americans' are 1) a mess of different ethnic backgrounds and 2)frequently totally clueless about their own heritage. many white people could not tell you anything about their family tree, the customs of their ancestors,old languages, etc. in that respect they're not tremendously different from a lot of 'black americans.' to say nothing about the treatment of groups like poor scots-irish ('white trash' etc.).

plus the us has always had a sense of rootlessness just because of the frontier and its individual states histories as former colonies and all that. even before the current era of 'multiculturalism' and 'individualism' this country had a reputation for lacking much of a unique culture. for being kind of derivative or a hodgepodge.

[AmericanforAmerica]

@OP
Liberals like you are the real racists. It's obvious to me that there simply should be no history month. It's that simple. Keep it classy, lib.

[PJ]

@OP
Liberals like you are the real racists. It's obvious to me that there simply should be no history month. It's that simple. Keep it classy, lib.

You're new here. Hi.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

@OP
Liberals like you are the real racists. It's obvious to me that there simply should be no history month. It's that simple. Keep it classy, lib.

Uh oh, did someone wander out of the Fox News comments section?

[Lief 🗽]

The only people who think "white history" or "white culture" exist are white supremacists or fools who have been conned by white supremacists.

[free my dawg]

@OP
Liberals like you are the real racists. It's obvious to me that there simply should be no history month. It's that simple. Keep it classy, lib.

sup

[PJ]

@OP
Liberals like you are the real racists. It's obvious to me that there simply should be no history month. It's that simple. Keep it classy, lib.

Uh oh, did someone wander out of the Fox News comments section?

Who were they referring to? Or who were you referring to if FOX poster if reading?

[Indy Texas]

I guess I'll be bearing the brunt of the torches and pitchforks, but I think it's a perfectly natural reaction to what people might percieve as the "singling out" of non-white groups. I know it's not what black people are intending when they celebrate black history month, but I do think it nurtures a feeling amongst whites that we ought to be ashamed of our group's heritage. Forgive me for using the terms "us" and "them," but what's implied in the existence of "their" history month is that "ours" is hegemonic and immoral. For one, I can't blame anyone for wanting to press against those implications, and, secondly, I don't think "mainstream" history is any more hegemonic than having a special month dedicated to one group's "special" history. It's this type of separation that breeds racism.

So I agree that there should be no special months at all. But there's no way I can feel justified in pointing fingers at the people who want a white history month. Their pleas may be insensitive, but I totally get where they're coming from. This whole situation is kind of like sectarianism, and it's a giant loop in which everyone is culpable. That's why I think we should come together instead. It just makes sense. Forgive me.

Except that white people have no shared heritage as a broad group. African-Americans do.

I'm a white American. My mother's family settled in Virginia in the 17th century, having come here from England and Germany. My father's family immigrated from the Middle East in the early 20th century. What "heritage" do I share with all white Americans collectively? I share nothing with Italian-Americans; not a drop of Lombard blood in me and not a Catholic. I share nothing with the French Huguenots or the Acadians. I share nothing with Scandinavians or Scots.

Do you see what I mean? It makes sense to have a German-American heritage month, or an English-American one or Scandinavian or Lebanese or whatever. But what the hell would "white heritage month" entail?

My guess is it would be dominated by the Scots-Irish types who would just make it into a giant bacchanal of God 'n Guns 'n 'Murrica 'n frying as many different kinds of foods as possible. Nothing wrong with that but I and many other white people would prefer not to be included in such things.