Yes, we should have promoted the “white racism is dead” argument more while it was still true. Soon we’re going to have to switch to: “white people eliminated racism almost completely, and bent over backwards to uplift black people, but nothing worked, and black people just behaved worse and worse, so now white people are giving up and accepting the reality.”

I think anti-racism has truly peaked. White people will never be less racist than they are right now.

The only problem with “the standard liberal argument” — about images created by the media — is not the form of the argument, but rather that all their premises happen to be false…liberals assume that racist Whites control the media…
That’s not the only problem, although it’s a major one.

She does conflate White supremacy according to the Derb’s definition (“a society in which key decisions are made by white Europeans”) with “stereotypical” White supremacy, which is largely a product of the media. Yes, “the standard liberal argument” — but wait, there’s more!

The only problem with “the standard liberal argument” — about images created by the media — is not the form of the argument, but rather that all their premises happen to be false, liberalism basically being an inversion of reality.

Standard example: liberals assume that racist Whites control the media (false) and that Whites are just as criminal as Blacks (false), then count the number of times Black criminals appear on the news, thus proving that the racist Whites who control the media are blah blah blah negative images blah blah.

I agree it’s likely that “the stereotype of white supremacists is indeed based on observations (amplified by the media) of those people who are easily identifiable as white supremacists.” But it is important to weigh the two factors: observations and amplification.

The standard example again: the media downplay rather than amplify Black and Hispanic criminality, but they (in general) wildly exaggerate White racism.

I find it interesting how very few observations I have of “those people,” the White supremacists (yes, including the Internet, after I control for… the Internet), and how very very very few observations I had when I was younger. Yet I knew, just like “everybody knows,” that all of them fit the stereotype. There just could not possibly be a White supremacist who wasn’t stupid and hateful.

(Derbyshire: “researchers were not able to locate anybody who believes that a stereotype is true of all members of the stereotyped group” — but what about stereotypes forced upon us?)

Anyway, I don’t know what your own experiences with identifiable White supremacists have been, but if I set aside the media narrative, and fiction like American History X, I’m left with this: White people marching around.

Or this: White people essentially trying to defend themselves against a race war they see as inevitable (as do I), getting arrested on bullshit charges and then mischaracterized as — but I said I would set aside the media narrative, so never mind that.

What are those guys like, when they’re not posing for mugshots? I bet they’re not so bad after all. They’re certainly motivated.

It is true that “the vast majority of white supremacists are white supremacists in complete secret who it is impossible for normal people to observe.” And the closet h8ters are surely smarter, less hateful, and less impulsive, too.

Genuine racist ads by Dr. Seuss (warning, some anti-racism cartoons also included at the end):
http://www.businessinsider.com/before-dr-seuss-was-famous-he-drew-these-sad-racist-ads-2012-3#flit-was-a-brand-of-insect-repellent-1

Racist WW2 propaganda by Dr. Seuss (warning, anti-racism one at the end again):
http://www.who-sucks.com/people/dr-seuss-sucks-7-racist-cartoons-from-the-doctor

Dr. Seuss was in fact an advertising cartoonist, then a political cartoonist, before he wrote childrens books. He was a hardcore liberal. But back then you could get away with things that are outrageously racist by modern standards.

Hitherto I was sure white supremacy always meant Whites reigning supreme over other races. I’m against that.

Actually, it does make a whole lot of sense. Which I acknowledge is extremely unusual, to the point of being practically unheard of, for an anti-racism rant, particularly by one whose brain is in the process of breaking and is about to resort to snark.

I’ll translate the argument for you:

“People like Derbyshire, Kanizawa, and Unamused made the insightful and compelling argument that all stereotypes exist for a simple reason: because they are honest observations. This simple rule was illustrated well by Derbyshire’s article on “the talk”, in which he explained to his son that avoiding mobs of black people is wise because the stereotype of them frequently committing violent crime was based on honest observations of black mobs.

Therefore, since there is a stereotype that white supremacists are ugly, stupid, violent, hateful, tattooed, working-class thugs and criminals with no self-control, one can safely assume that white supremacists really are like that. And it is therefore illogical for him to complain about white supremacists getting a bad rap, or to suggest they are not like that.”

Which is a fair point. And since they have gone to the trouble of actually making an intelligent comment, and since I’m not an anti-racism activist, I’ll respond with rational argument of my own, rather than sarcasm, anger, and attacks.

We could use the standard liberal argument in this case of “It’s all just an image created by the media, with no basis in reality, to demonise white supremacists.” Of course, the problem with that argument is that there are many different negative stereotypes they could have chosen. Why didn’t they portray white supremacists as creepy effeminate AIDS-infected pedophiles? Or cannibals? Or suicide bombers who make their women wear burqas? Or as extraverted primative spear-carrying child-like people in loincloths with sharpened teeth? Or four-eyed nerds? Or clumsy bumbling fools?

The simple answer is that the stereotype of white supremacists is indeed based on observations (amplified by the media) of those people who are easily identifiable as white supremacists. That kind of white supremacist does exist. However, the vast majority of white supremacists are white supremacists in complete secret who it is impossible for normal people to observe. White supremacists who are smart, not particularly hateful, and have impulse control, usually disguise themselves as normal white people so as not to be fired, demonised, and attacked. If they all came out of the closet, the stereotype would quickly change.

And historical white supremacists never get included in the stereotype because people are completely unaware that almost all white people throughout history, including the most celebrated heroes and inventors, even the ones who supported black people, firmly believed in the superiority of white-run countries.

If nobody can observe most of the group in question, then stereotypes are formed on the unrepresentative subset that can be observed, and can become exagerated without people noticing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-7vpabBoLM