So to continue again with a more interesting topic: the actual topic of this thread ;)
I suggest that in respect to the post-WW2 White European that he has fallen into different forms and manifestations of personal powerlessness. His identity is not his own. Meaning, other people have lines of interest by which they assert themselves into it.
But lets first establish if there's something like this "White European" as an actual entity. Already I explained why there's no actual "European" before the Great Wars. For now I'll ignore the color code because I haven't seen the case being made yet of being relevant in a scientific, biological sense. What's left is the powerlessness of the modern, post-war human. Which is a concept I can work with but we have to look at alternative views on the same topic. As well the topic of "freedom" is related as well just like the rise of individualism and the various liberation movements. This is not just "whiteness" or some continental effect. Perhaps it's a weird pendulum swing after the trauma at the center of a continent in flames?
This has been allowed. I would use as an example 'the brown end of the bromance' and his entire presence within, as I say, Western categories. What is he doing here? In fact, he has no business here.
Everyone came from somewhere at some point, ethnically. The Turks, the Ottomans and the Moors have a central place in European history. The details of local history
can be illuminating, like the large first waves of immigration into the Netherlands: Turks and Moroccans, as result of invitations
from the Dutch, simply because we needed the labor. Then there are the various colonial elements, like Suriname and Indonesia, which have a long, rich historical explanation on why we have large communities of those here (without any issues I must add). It's just one example how simplistic, blank statements just do not fit historical realities. They can become lie
. And yet there's indeed a problem with the ideology underlying SJW, anti-racism and multi-culturism. But the origination of that might be a whole different story which I'll try to explore later if there are any takers.
What I have noticed is that any turn of the conversation back to the question and the issue of 'identity' and power and self-definition immediately provokes an intense reaction. Sirens go off. The guilt-squad scrambles. In many environments the police will be called, metaphorically and also actually. Why is that?
It's really more close to religious sentiment here which you are facing. But what you "noticed" might have been circumstantial. And it's pretty prevalent in certain (social) media but I don't consider that to reflect the common view of people with or without education.
What I take from this is that 'asserting' and 'announcing' (as you have termed it) is essential. I do not mean street violence though, I am speaking of the inner platform of solidity and certainty. But prior to being able to do that one must have organized the material inside oneself: not an easy feat!
Here we agree but my research points in a different direction: that people desire to assert and announce in reaction
to certain horizons shifting, "earthquakes of meaning". Something is sought and craved not because it would be actually lost
but because a need is felt in these particular times. Do you understand this difference in perspective?
That is where AWM has a great deal of work to do (IMHO). Yet what I said then still seems to me a fair and necessary statement: his position can be worked and improved and I hope that it will be.
Well I read his Facebook page and know his background, town, dead-end job, hobbies and interactions. Believe me, it's really mediocre pretense. He demonstrates the possible truth of my analysis (that he needs
strong language and position in his uncertain dead-end situation and region) and less that of yours, as having some actual potential for movement.
But in comparison Dan's (the one who banned him) and yours too these represent dead-ends. You are powerless men. You are coopted, feminized men whose masculinity is a charade. Sorry, but this is the truth. No one of you has any real sense of what masculinity can be and I dare say should be.
Fair enough as you seem to be looking for some channeled aggression, libido, some creative overflowing in language, skill, humor and "brothers in arms" sentiment. Or whatever your feel masculinity is exactly. Beats me!
Therefor the statement that I made, and which you would never be able to say yourself (because you are completely coopted Diebert!) is actually the beginning of everything necessary.
No I sliced your statement open and showed you the guts and its dysfunction and shortcoming. And why it would not work and why it would cause the reactions but not for the reasons you claim. In other words I owned
you and dominated. Still you want to be the "man". For that, at a forum, you need to come with more quality, more depth and more capacity. And not with hair pulling, screaming, demands for rights and acknowledgment or "wanting to be heard" kind of assertions.
I think you are very wrong about the general 'Europe' you speak of.
You think but I know
as core European, a tall blond Teutonic knight and having pointed you to all relevant definitions of it.
For all that the definition is resisted and ridiculed, it only seems to be made more meaningful.
Yes thanks for demonstrating and summarizing the "Backfire Effect" again to everyone.
It is not skin color precisely and yet this is some part of it. How to define it? How to describe it?
I'm all ears but it's time to give some more substance and not "just asking questions"
Here's a start: "light skin is a naturally occurring human skin color, which has little eumelanin pigmentation and which has been adapted to environments of low UV radiation. There is a correlation between the geographic distribution of UV radiation and the distribution of skin pigmentation around the world". Would this, location, geography and such have any relevance to developments? You know, a "larger body", a well, a context for actual human bodies, both simple and complex, to function in? Location, location?