Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.cnn.com.
#3691 May 7, 2014
I would like to know who invented the certainly defamatory term "white supremacist" and why?
And then, why, specifically, would Mr. Terreblanche have been a "supremacist" as opposed to say, a "separatist"?
By separatist, I mean someone who for example prefers a FEDERAL form of government, ensuring self-government without interference from other cultures and races, i.e., to stave off the GENOCIDE by attrition of one's own race and people.
In Canada, we formed a FEDERAL government in 1867 to give 10 different majority WHITE groups the right to exclusive self-government, each on their own constitutional soil under their own respective and exclusive provincial legislatures.
These different groups of WHITE PEOPLE did not call each other "supremacists"! But they were all WHITE people who preferred to live separately from each other to preserve their own respective laws and cultures.
Why does the word "separatist" therefore (which describes people who want to live SEPARATELY as to laws, custom and culture) suddenly morph to mean some kind of nasty "supremacist" when it comes to a desire for SEPARATENESS by whites in a country where the other races are some other color?
It's still SEPARATISM! Unless someone is trying to malign specifically WHITE people for wanting their own self-government and for their own determination to continue existing, by resisting the genocide that may ensue from outside interference.
Otherwise, why not call the BLACK races "supremacist" who attack and kill white people in Africa, just because they are white? Do you normally attack and kill people whom you consider to be your equals? Or your inferiors? The "supremacism" seems to be on the side of those doing the racially-based killing.
Then, if you take a look at the UN and its double standards, you can ask yourself why the UN insists upon protecting "aboriginal" peoples in various western nations, by affirming that they have a guaranteed right to their "identity", "culture", "customs", "self-government" and "territory". By aboriginals, the UN means, in the case of Canada, Iroquois, Mohawk, Cree Indian, Eskimo, etc. Why do such peoples have the guaranteed right to protect their own existence, without being called "supremacist", but when WHITE people protect white existence, white people -- and only white people -- are readily defamed?
Add your comments below
|Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08)||2 min||the deplorable Jo...||1,442,387|
|Why does my hair turn gold in the light?||9 min||Jan Pawel||7|
|This forum heavily needs moderation||10 min||Jan Pawel||34|
|do all black women want mixed babies?||12 min||Jan Pawel||29|
|Black Women Deserve Better!||13 min||Jan Pawel||2|
|Americans' Respect for Police Surges||15 min||Jan Pawel||4|
|White woman finds LOVE in Jamaica||16 min||Jan Pawel||6|
|the moors were black africans not arabs!!! (Jun '08)||1 hr||Curious Me||49,837|
|It's OVER!||1 hr||DobyBringsTheBadNews||46|
|Was slavery a completely BAD institution?||1 hr||Jan Pawel||186|
Find what you want!
Search African-American Forum Now
Copyright © 2016 Topix LLC