Let us know when a minority group advocating the destruction of the white race has a national speaking tour so we can protest.
Jay wrote:Generally, not in reference to Milo, what a lot of (white) people take issue with is that when a minority group advocates the destruction of the white race, or calls for reparations, or the expansion of affirmative action so that they can take power based on the color of their skin, it's treated as just them venting frustration and not a threat. If a white person were to do it, it would be an outrage and we'd have protest marches etc. Yes, I understand that the power dynamic is not equal, but it doesn't make it any less hateful.
People on the right look at the left as being exclusionary. They're incredibly focused on racial and minority status, with any combination not of the majority elevated above the majority. This is a problem. If you watched the election, Clinton spent a lot of her time talking about policy. If you read right wing news, they didn't care about policy, they spent their time scaring white people into not giving power to the loonies on campus who want to put white males in chains. It played a huge role in why the democrats lost. Milo getting banned from speaking on campuses played directly into that narrative and gave it teeth.
People on the right don't want to recognize the institutional racism, even though some are active in promoting that institutional racism. The right (only using this for consistency sake in response to jay; not a fan of using generic group terms when talking about certain elements within that group) is the group most focused on racial and minority status - old white men were the ones making the biggest fuss about Obama the black president, not college poli sci majors.
You even mention this yourself - Clinton talked about policy, scared old white men talked about what her policy would mean to the core American demographic. It's not the fault of the people on the left promoting inclusion that the right miscasts their aspersions as wanting "to put white males in chains".
Jay, you're actually part of this problem - you constantly talk about SJW and college liberals policy as if they are some sort of standard bearer for Democratic/liberal policy in the US. I'm not stupid enough to equate what Richard Spencer wants with what the Republican Party at-large wants, so why are you so dumb that you do the opposite?
@ Uzi: of course - that's the disconnect - liberal ideology is that racial inequality is class inequality is economic inequality. American conservatives take that (a classic liberal concern for economic equality) to mean that liberals are too concerned with pandering to black people. No, it's just that historically, minorities and immigrants are exposed to the greatest economic inequality. The difference is American conservatives pander to dumb white people in the middle of America, whereas liberals pander to the poor immigrants in cities.