all 17 comments

[–]jet199 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Frankly the idea that the Irish weren't regarded as white is nonsense blown up by plastic Paddys in the US who want to larp as oppressed. Just because a group weren't liked doesn't mean they weren't considered white. Calling white people non white was just an insult at the time. It was also done in Canada with the French called non white as a way to call them white trash. The same was done in the UK to the working class.

[–]UncleWillard56 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I'd argue that Irish isn't a race, but an ethnicity.

[–]jet199 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Depends how fine you want to split hairs.

[–]UncleWillard56 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

True. I'd also argue that the Irish (by that I mean actually Irish, not Americans with Irish heritage) were oppressed and colonized. Hell, they were the test case for Viking, English and French colonization.

[–]NeoRail 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

The best counter-argument is to point out the totally dishonest nature of the claim. If there's no such thing as white people then how come everyone knows exactly who these white people are when it comes to affirmative action, state-enforced discrimination, critical race theory, postcolonialism etc? The people who argue this stuff are not even remotely interested in a serious examination of race, they just use arguments of this type for the purpose of gaslighting. That's all this is. You can argue with rational and courteous individuals, but you would be an utter fool to argue with someone trying to gaslight you.

[–]Nombre27 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Spectrum fallacy.

Previously people had a greater and more explicit sense of their ethnic identity. Just because that's morphed over time doesn't negate the existence of those groups.

[–]Nasser[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

The counter they could have to this is that this spectrum could morph to one human race.

[–]Nombre27 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

If that's the case then why ought not complain about White privilege or blame things on Whites then. If there's just one race then what is White and how can that social construct be at fault if we're all the same?

[–]Nasser[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

They have a counter to this stating the european elites who "created" race used it to oppress nonwhites, create a caste system and attached benefits to it which apparently still lingers (such a shame we can't wield this supposed privilege to stop our race's replacement). The blame point is good

[–]Nombre27 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This just leads them to be hypocrites though, e.g. two wrongs don't make a right, why are you being hypocritical?, practice what you preach, etc.

If you got to that point with someone, you might as well just be explicit and ask them why they seem to hate White people? If they want everyone to get along, then why are they singling a group out. It's pretty easy to tangent this point to if colonization is bad because of the oppressiveness and destruction of one groups culture, then how can you rightly push for that same thing in a different country?

They're utilizing a double standard and not being consistent. Hammer those points and don't let them escape the question.

[–]FoxySDTWhite Nationalist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Just ask them to provide evidence of this. If there really was some conspiracy by European elites to create race then there should be some correspondence or some other written record of it.

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

What references to the existence of race do we have prior to the 15th century?

Average Intelligence.

Literally compare how each continent developed on its own before the races met each other.

Sub-Saharan Africa and Native Americans lived in the Bronze Ages and didn't invent the Wheel.

East Asians were very intelligent, having discovered gun powder first and could construct buildings with more than two floors.

However, only the European Race had the necessary drive to explore the four corners of the Earth, while innovating on the gun technology the Asians had started.

Today, these differences still manifest.

White IQ = 100. East Asians = 105. Blacks = 85. Hispanics/Mixed = 89.

Who does best in school? This chart speaks for itself.

[–]jet199 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The Jews do best at school.

[–]FoxySDTWhite Nationalist 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Here is one good article on "X weren't considered white" myth

There is a lot more to say about this than I'm willing to write here so I'll just link this paper

Second, no boundary separated SEEs[Southern & Eastern Europeans] from whites; SEEs were not widely recognized as nonwhite, nor was such a boundary institutionalized. In fact, where white was a meaningful category, SEEs were virtually always included within it. To be sure, a fairly bright boundary separated SEEs from northern and western Europeans (NWEs) for a time. This boundary was based on religion, national origin, citizenship status, and even intra-European racial categories. It was not, however, based on whiteness or non whiteness. ... The crucial point we emphasize, however, is that the SEE story suggests the remarkable stability of the white-nonwhite boundary, not, as is sometimes assumed, its fluidity.

This one looked at census classifications and found no evidence of this myth

In this paper, we question the now widely held belief that some non-Anglo-Saxon European immigrant groups such as the Irish, Italians, and Jews became white in historical America. We have found no evidence to support the “becoming white” thesis in terms of change in the official racial classifications of these groups in the record of social institutions such as U.S. censuses, naturalization laws, and court cases. Non-Anglo-Saxon European groups arrived in America as whites, and there was no need for them to be reclassified as whites.

This paper found that 19% of male British immigrants married Irish wife and 15% of British female immigrants married Irish husband. Not exactly a behavior from people who supposedly consider Irish to be non-white or inferior

As for Ben Franklin, the one quote he made about Germans you never find them citing is this one. Wonder why.

"Yet I am not for refusing entirely to admit them into our Colonies: all that seems to be necessary is, to distribute them more equally, mix them with the English, establish English Schools where they are now too thick settled, and take some care to prevent the practice lately fallen into by some of the Ship Owners, of sweeping the German Goals to make up the number of their Passengers. I say I am not against the Admission of Germans in general, for they have their Virtues, their industry and frugality is exemplary; They are excellent husbandmen and contribute greatly to the improvement of a Country."

[–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

[–]UncleWillard56 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Being white?

[–]Fonched 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

From what I've looked into ton this argument, I say there was some discrimination but I don't know if these groups were ever widely cast out of whiteness politically. The examples of, say Irish and Italians being placed in a non-white group were usually at the behest of several small companies. Here is also a good thread on this subject.

I'm not sure if what Ben Franklin said was serious or a sign that his views on racial identity were popular, but he did group only Europeans as "swarthy", while everyone else in Asia and Africa was "tawny".