I research different cultures a lot, and a common comparison to British culture is Japanese culture, for its focus on politeness and etiquette. However, dig deeper and you’ll find that whilst there are similarities, the fundamental operating systems of the two are highly distinct.
In Japan, the fundamental core of politeness seems to be deference; the communication that one is aware of their position in the hierarchy, has the requisite degree of respect for those above them and more experienced, and is ready to fulfil their position in whatever system is in place. In other words, the goal of Japanese politeness is fundamentally to say “I know my place”, albeit usually in a less oppressive way than it can sound.
British politeness is different however, and the difference is most notable when you look at the classic 18th and 19th century ‘gentleman culture’. These days it’s masked by differences in language - people will hear the (autistic) Duke of Wellington criticise Napoleon’s “ungentlemanly manners and poor breeding” and think this is just standard aristocratic snobbery, similar to how the French would (and arguably still do) sneer at people for their choices in clothes, food, media etc. However, look at the context of the remarks however, and you’ll find that they aren’t in response to him not angling his cutlery correctly or whatever, but instead to him having hurled a bunch of abuse at his generals and staff and cancelled his planned birthday presents for his brother who had just lost Spain. This was effectively Wellington saying that this was a massive dick move, and his remarks about Napoleon’s ‘poor breeding’ was his way of saying that Napoleon was essentially a colossal bellend (which frankly he was). You’ll find the same in most other areas of British society at the time, where calls for ‘manners’ were really just a way of telling people to be nice, and this feeds through to the modern day. Unlike Japanese principles of deference, fundamentally British systems of politeness are constructed so as to be able to communicate what is needed to be communicated without causing any unnecessary offence - in other words, to not be a prick.
It’s funny how many of the people you describe would likely spend so much time banging on about supposed ‘British values’ when they seem to have forgotten the core one of politeness. I’ll join you in wishing the British-Somali lad all the best, and have no doubts that if he were still around today, Wellington would most certainly join us in telling the haters to f*** off back to France where they belong.
Whilst we're discussing tribes and stereotypes, may I politely (I know my place) disagree with your characterisation of the French? The France you seem to be referring to is the middle/professional class as portrayed in French media (which is itself a pretty inaccurate generalisation, like all movies & TV).
I spend half my time in an ex-mining & textile area in the Pyrenees. The history and life there was hard - it's a bit like the Welsh valleys or parts of the north east of England. They are not "beautiful" people in the classic French mold. They don't have the cash for expensive clothes or sojourns on the riviera. They are honest, open, rural, resourceful people finding new ways of making a living now the mines & factories have closed.
The point is, you seem to deal in generalisations - of the British, the Japanese and the French.
In a discussion about how some people use colour as a generic marker for poverty or violence or stupidity, I find that somewhat ironic.
Very few groups are as homogeneous as the appear from the outside. Maybe more focus on the individual human being would be more appropriate here?
I agree with you that putting modern-day French snobs on the same page as Napoleon is a unhelpful stretch. My personal experience is that folks both in Paris and in the provinces are non-judgemental. Kindness is a virtue in most areas of French society.
Where I disagree is in dealing with generalisations. If you want to look at collective patterns of behaviour, then you can't focus on the individual human.
I would however try to get away from the anecdotal (Wellington et al) and attempt to use more sociological criteriteria such as low/high trust, rule adherence, etc. Japan in this vein is a mid-trust, high sticking to rules society, while folks in France trust each other even less, and in contrast don't believe in living by the book. Hence a certain anarchy in F. that may come across as rough and foreign in British eyes.
It's not just a matter of language. I'm all for an accessible approach rather than an overly academic description.
Isn't the point here that the people bullying this individual see an image, and then make a while bunch of cultural assumptions based on their generalisations - why does this Somali sound English (spoiler: he's English)? Why does he like trap, is he a gangsta (spoiler: no he just does what his mates do)? etc.
Our willingness to use stereotypes and generalisations is false because in truth there are far more differences between individuals within a society than there are between societies themselves. Sure, you'll find some averages that vary around the mean when viewed collectively, but that disguises the subtitles within groups.
Why is the X-Factor a global phenomen? Is it that global society is all the same? No, it's because in most societies *someone* dreams of being pop star.
I'm not saying that there are no differences, or that generalisations have no value, but I am saying use them with care as they are the origins of most prejudices (in the literal sense of "judging in advance").
Denying the existence of an identifiable ethnic group with a distinct history, culture, language, particular lands, and blood descendants is the rhetoric of genocide and ethnic cleansing. Something my family is intimately familiar with.
English/Anglo is a biologically identifiable ethnic group, of which he is obviously not part of. The very fact that you have to specify him as being “Somali” and not just plain English is proof of just how hopelessly illogical your reasoning is. You are like a fish which pretends that water doesn’t exist. Delusional.
We use generalizations because they’re a useful survival mechanism on both individual and group scales. Turns out, certain ethnic groups are consistently criminally violent, whether they find themselves in Britain, generous Scandinavian welfare states and the rest of the EU, or elsewhere (such as China).
The reality is ultimately the colourblind individualist will be rightfully subjugated by the prejudiced collectivist. Simple and readily observable game theory. You get to decide whether to stick your head in the sand and pretend everything is fine, or unapologetically play ‘the game’ like everyone other group.
Claiming there is more difference between individuals in a group than between entire ethnic groups does not deconstruct the validity and existence of identifiably different ethnicities —groups need not be perfectly discrete to form statistically significant and physically observable clusters.
Furthermore, it’s silly in its own right. Some ethnic groups don’t differ in average height more than 5cm, yet I’m sure there’s a Slav who is 3ft shorter than me. Utterly meaningless relationship between these differences, because ultimately I am still a closer genetic-relation to that 3ft-shorter Slav compared to anyone from any other ethnic group, regardless of their height.
If you truly believe what you say, I invite you to book a plane ticket to Somalia —make sure to take note of all the “subtleties” you encounter, including their interest in X-Factor (or lack thereof).
I'm afraid you definition of English is both outdated and incorrect. Do you mean Celtic? Anglo-Saxon? Norse? The Picts? The Beaker people? England has in fact only been occupied for the last approx 10k years (due to the ice age), and almost all those original inhabitants were replaced first with the WHG (Western Hunter Gatherers), then the Celts and more recently Romans, Angles, Frisians and Danes and Vikings.
The point here is populations change. A child of migrants maybe be a citizen of the UK, and should be afforded the same rights. Anything else is simple discrimination. The bulk of the children of West Indian migrants (themselves British citizens) are British, and follow the fine tradition of people coming to these islands and making a life for themselves.
It's your view of genetic history=national group which is obvious false. Genes don't determine your nationality - that's a learnt behaviour (just ask any "British" child brought up abroad). As I detailed above, for the bulk of the UK population, it's not even true - practically none of us are genetically "British", unless you pick an arbitrary start date. And whatever date you pick, someone will pick a different one.
Your racism or ethnocentrism will resist the explanation above, but facts are facts, no matter how much you find them irritating
You are an utter lunatic to believe that Wellington would be perfectly on board with the English being a minority ethnic group in their own capital city, and several others. No, I’m sure this fine Somalian here with his gangland tunes and lazy garb is a truly refined character, unlike the boorish, ill-mannered Napoleon.
Let me know when the Africans, Pakistanis, and Arabs finally assimilate into these British values of “politeness”, and abandon their chauvinistic, violent cultures and religions. I wonder how many more rape gangs, bombings, stabbings, public calls to prayer until they run out of steam and call it quits.
Or is this just another one-way street where blacks can impose themselves however they please, exhibit a disproportionate propensity for violent crime, and the whites who notice this and start becoming fed up are expected to constantly turn the other asscheek and be “polite”? Fucking parasite. If Wellington was around today, he would send you craven dogs to the gallows.
Humans first reach their conclusions ("them tribe not my tribe! Them tribe bad!)
Then they find the justifications. "Them tribe dance funny! Them tribe dance too good! Them tribe cultural appropriation!" It doesn't matter. Any stick to beat a dog.
He doesn’t belong here. We have enough domestic ticfuckingtoc retards without important any more. I’m not buying your faux pathological empathy. If just the odd one or two washing up on our shores, it would be no problem. It not that. This is existential to our culture. That’s why it resonates. The punters get it. The smothering infertile mothers and over educated children who’ve been indoctrinated by a degenerate academic don’t. If this carries on unrestrained it will be Pick Your Side.
I am conflicted about immigration but I think this has nothing to do with that and you are mistakenly flattering a bunch of morons in whose minds it is more acceptable to trash someone doing something low class if the person doing it isn’t white.
Sure, it’s related to immigration. People notice when random strangers who aren’t part of our society, possibly with different cultural norms turn up on their doorstep, then do weird shit. What’s your conflict? Why is unrestricted immigration beneficial? How is this going to work out for all of us that live here? Some of these people are broken, but they’re not our problem. We’ve got enough to deal with already. Don’t know if you’ve noticed, but we too are broken. So maybe now would be a good time to pause and rebuild. I’m thinking our old 4 nation family is already under severe strain.
this boy was born in the UK, what do you want him to do exactly? he is doing a tiktok dance to a trap song, a perfectly western thing to do, nothing criminal or foreign about it. Your issue is he looks poor and unattractive. Why do you have a right to pick on him?
“Dancing to a trap song is perfectly Western” Hahahahahah
Apparently, there is absolutely nothing that looks criminal or foreign about the African dancing to gangland tunes, in England.
No, you’re correct. Hip hop has actually been deeply ingrained into the broader European cultures over the centuries, and *Somalis* are known to have been the historically dominant ethnic group in *England*. When people think of England, their first thought is that of a group of blacks gathered around a speaker. Because nothing screams “Rule Britannia” like second-generation Jamaican immigrants rapping over mixed trap beats.
What’s bizarre is reading this drivel and knowing that not even you believe it. It would be funny if your motives weren’t so transparently insidious.
This comment thread perfectly illustrates why immigration is a literal disease. Part of it directly kills you, another part works to cripple the immune system to facilitate the killing.
"There was a time when left-wingers would share videos of ‘white trash’ as proof that red neck white Americans and Ukip voting Britons are stupid and of lesser genetic stock."
I don't think anyone implied that those people were of lesser genetic stock. That's not a very leftwing idea. Rather, the implication was that their political views and class status made them less insightful and less worthy of shaping policy than the 'educated' elites. When was this time? Was it long in the past? From my perspective we are still in that time. From my vantage point in the United States I can say that a tremendous amount of the discourse on the left and in professional circles centers around the intellectual and ethical inferiority of Trump supporters, or people on the right generally. I suspect the same thing is the case in Canada, Great Britain, Germany... everywhere.
People are going to be mocked online. People are cruel, and ignorant. The only group which is allowed to be mocked because of their beliefs in the context of powerful institutions in my country are Trump supporters, and the only groups toward which one is allowed to express blanket hostility are white people and men. Do you know how many reels I see every day mocking these groups, simply because of their identities?
This lad is posting stupid shit online. Getting mocked and derided is part of the risk of that. I suspect that his virality has more to do with his ridiculous appearance (although I could be wrong). Notwithstanding the mismanagement of urban areas (which has been profound-the managerial class has completely destroyed communities, both urban AND rural, in different ways) this individual lives in a free society in which he's entitled to special consideration. Fat chicks, trans-identified men who don't pass, ghetto dwellers, angry customers, entitled women... all of these groups are ripe opportunities for online mockery, because they are misfits and because they tend to aggravate people and because (despite the enforced 'compassion' for arbitrary groups) they are all less valued by society, for different reasons. If you're a member of one of these categories perhaps you should just not post videos of yourself online. If you do you might end up the target of the mockery of millions. That is the world that we have built.
He is not just mocked, he is being racially abused. The boy was born in the UK, and people are asking to deport him. Mockery based on snobbism is wrong, no matter who the victim, but the right online is now making racism acceptable again.
Your empathy is admirable as is empathy more generally but not as a limitless good (or an asymmetric function) which gives way to an inability to register the concerns of a large percentage of the population who view mass migration as existential issue, which it obviously is in ways the left would understand if we were talking about Palestinians instead of the English.
It is beyond comical to lay blame for “racism” at the feet of the right, after many decades of your ilk more than happily extracting collective racial guilt from pliable Brits. All the while importing aggressively clannish foreigners whose children, regardless of birth place, remain **foreigners** —and they conceive of themselves as such, unsurprisingly so, despite your impotent insistence to them being something they’re biologically not, and never will be.
Only now are you starting to feel nervous, when the brow-beating doesn’t impart the same sting, or extract the same head-hung acquiescence from the stupidly tolerant English.
Racism throughout the *entire* West -in the real world (not Twitter)- manifests itself asymmetrically: Whites are dehumanized through pathologization of their group identity, stripped of the inherent right to native historical lands which is redistributed to anyone and everyone on earth (“b-but he was born here!”) , and subversively shamed into behaving as ‘colourblind’ individualists —exactly as you are doing now. Meanwhile, the group identity of every foreign demographic is *more* than positively reinforced, regardless of historical (and ongoing) atrocities, regardless of their ostensible responsibility to entirely culturally assimilate, and are instead encouraged to pursue their own collective ethnoreligious agendas. I eagerly await your justification of all this as understandable revenge for colonization.
And while the government ignores scores of victims (woeful understatement) and runs cover for foreign rape-gangs operating out of ethnic ghettos, carries water for a strangely white-washed “Welsh choir boy” Rwandan mass-stabber who’s on record stating his desire for White genocide in England, and all the while importing more of the above —you seriously want to sit here and gaslight people into believing that we were all past racial prejudice, and it’s only just now the right is trying to fan the flames?
To conceive of you as a craven, dishonest, self-serving parasite would be incredibly generous.
"the only groups toward which one is allowed to express blanket hostility are white people and men. Do you know how many reels I see every day mocking these groups, simply because of their identities?"
Then you write:
"Fat chicks, trans-identified men who don't pass, ghetto dwellers, angry customers, entitled women... all of these groups are ripe opportunities for online mockery, because they are misfits and because they tend to aggravate people and because (despite the enforced 'compassion' for arbitrary groups) they are all less valued by society, for different reasons. If you're a member of one of these categories perhaps you should just not post videos of yourself online. If you do you might end up the target of the mockery of millions. That is the world that we have built."
While I think your sentiment is fair, I think the initial Yookay Aesthetics post was the juxtaposition what and who was being filmed against the backdrop of an English village with thatched roofs.
What was being filmed was a guy doing a TikTok dance to a trap song while wearing Western sports clothes. Millions of English white boys do the same. His crime was soing it while being visibly Somali and not attractive. I am not going to put it forward for a Content Creator of the Year award but I don't see why we need to forget the basic principle of live and let live and don't punch down uneccesariyl and don't expose people who are weaker than you, in material and social resources, to undue harm they have done nothing to desrve. I was referring to the sharing of his video on GBnews, a national tv channel, as example of why veterans are embarassed of their country and the post by the right wing journalist saying ' I am a pretty blonde English woman and I beg you to deport these people'.
Gee, I wonder why someone might react viscerally to a video of a foreigner —belonging to a consistently and disproportionately violent out-group— dancing along to a music genre that colloquially signals and affirms gang culture.
What’s next? “White boys also stab people! White boys also drive trucks into crowds of people! White boys also set off bombs at public venues!”…?
Just live and let live, guys! Please, stick your heads in the sand and ignore the ever-worsening conditions around you. So what if your hometown resembles Karachi? What are you, *racist*? Are you implying that you might (gasp) be entitled to live amongst your own, to the exclusion of others who seek to impose their *own* people and culture upon your land? Oh, the humanity!
But the English are world famous for being unattractive. "as a pretty blonde English woman" --- oxymoron. I'm willing to bet this Somali man has better teeth, larger, brighter eyes, smoother, less blemished and more youthful looking (melanin tends to do that) skin, and thicker, healthier, more full-bodied (even while balding in front) hair than she does.
I understand there may be an "immigration crisis" in the UK right now, but that doesn't mean the English should overstep their bounds and get gassed up about their looks when the rest of the world knows they are, on average, unattractive.
I research different cultures a lot, and a common comparison to British culture is Japanese culture, for its focus on politeness and etiquette. However, dig deeper and you’ll find that whilst there are similarities, the fundamental operating systems of the two are highly distinct.
In Japan, the fundamental core of politeness seems to be deference; the communication that one is aware of their position in the hierarchy, has the requisite degree of respect for those above them and more experienced, and is ready to fulfil their position in whatever system is in place. In other words, the goal of Japanese politeness is fundamentally to say “I know my place”, albeit usually in a less oppressive way than it can sound.
British politeness is different however, and the difference is most notable when you look at the classic 18th and 19th century ‘gentleman culture’. These days it’s masked by differences in language - people will hear the (autistic) Duke of Wellington criticise Napoleon’s “ungentlemanly manners and poor breeding” and think this is just standard aristocratic snobbery, similar to how the French would (and arguably still do) sneer at people for their choices in clothes, food, media etc. However, look at the context of the remarks however, and you’ll find that they aren’t in response to him not angling his cutlery correctly or whatever, but instead to him having hurled a bunch of abuse at his generals and staff and cancelled his planned birthday presents for his brother who had just lost Spain. This was effectively Wellington saying that this was a massive dick move, and his remarks about Napoleon’s ‘poor breeding’ was his way of saying that Napoleon was essentially a colossal bellend (which frankly he was). You’ll find the same in most other areas of British society at the time, where calls for ‘manners’ were really just a way of telling people to be nice, and this feeds through to the modern day. Unlike Japanese principles of deference, fundamentally British systems of politeness are constructed so as to be able to communicate what is needed to be communicated without causing any unnecessary offence - in other words, to not be a prick.
It’s funny how many of the people you describe would likely spend so much time banging on about supposed ‘British values’ when they seem to have forgotten the core one of politeness. I’ll join you in wishing the British-Somali lad all the best, and have no doubts that if he were still around today, Wellington would most certainly join us in telling the haters to f*** off back to France where they belong.
Whilst we're discussing tribes and stereotypes, may I politely (I know my place) disagree with your characterisation of the French? The France you seem to be referring to is the middle/professional class as portrayed in French media (which is itself a pretty inaccurate generalisation, like all movies & TV).
I spend half my time in an ex-mining & textile area in the Pyrenees. The history and life there was hard - it's a bit like the Welsh valleys or parts of the north east of England. They are not "beautiful" people in the classic French mold. They don't have the cash for expensive clothes or sojourns on the riviera. They are honest, open, rural, resourceful people finding new ways of making a living now the mines & factories have closed.
The point is, you seem to deal in generalisations - of the British, the Japanese and the French.
In a discussion about how some people use colour as a generic marker for poverty or violence or stupidity, I find that somewhat ironic.
Very few groups are as homogeneous as the appear from the outside. Maybe more focus on the individual human being would be more appropriate here?
I agree with you that putting modern-day French snobs on the same page as Napoleon is a unhelpful stretch. My personal experience is that folks both in Paris and in the provinces are non-judgemental. Kindness is a virtue in most areas of French society.
Where I disagree is in dealing with generalisations. If you want to look at collective patterns of behaviour, then you can't focus on the individual human.
I would however try to get away from the anecdotal (Wellington et al) and attempt to use more sociological criteriteria such as low/high trust, rule adherence, etc. Japan in this vein is a mid-trust, high sticking to rules society, while folks in France trust each other even less, and in contrast don't believe in living by the book. Hence a certain anarchy in F. that may come across as rough and foreign in British eyes.
It's not just a matter of language. I'm all for an accessible approach rather than an overly academic description.
Isn't the point here that the people bullying this individual see an image, and then make a while bunch of cultural assumptions based on their generalisations - why does this Somali sound English (spoiler: he's English)? Why does he like trap, is he a gangsta (spoiler: no he just does what his mates do)? etc.
Our willingness to use stereotypes and generalisations is false because in truth there are far more differences between individuals within a society than there are between societies themselves. Sure, you'll find some averages that vary around the mean when viewed collectively, but that disguises the subtitles within groups.
Why is the X-Factor a global phenomen? Is it that global society is all the same? No, it's because in most societies *someone* dreams of being pop star.
I'm not saying that there are no differences, or that generalisations have no value, but I am saying use them with care as they are the origins of most prejudices (in the literal sense of "judging in advance").
Denying the existence of an identifiable ethnic group with a distinct history, culture, language, particular lands, and blood descendants is the rhetoric of genocide and ethnic cleansing. Something my family is intimately familiar with.
English/Anglo is a biologically identifiable ethnic group, of which he is obviously not part of. The very fact that you have to specify him as being “Somali” and not just plain English is proof of just how hopelessly illogical your reasoning is. You are like a fish which pretends that water doesn’t exist. Delusional.
We use generalizations because they’re a useful survival mechanism on both individual and group scales. Turns out, certain ethnic groups are consistently criminally violent, whether they find themselves in Britain, generous Scandinavian welfare states and the rest of the EU, or elsewhere (such as China).
The reality is ultimately the colourblind individualist will be rightfully subjugated by the prejudiced collectivist. Simple and readily observable game theory. You get to decide whether to stick your head in the sand and pretend everything is fine, or unapologetically play ‘the game’ like everyone other group.
Claiming there is more difference between individuals in a group than between entire ethnic groups does not deconstruct the validity and existence of identifiably different ethnicities —groups need not be perfectly discrete to form statistically significant and physically observable clusters.
Furthermore, it’s silly in its own right. Some ethnic groups don’t differ in average height more than 5cm, yet I’m sure there’s a Slav who is 3ft shorter than me. Utterly meaningless relationship between these differences, because ultimately I am still a closer genetic-relation to that 3ft-shorter Slav compared to anyone from any other ethnic group, regardless of their height.
If you truly believe what you say, I invite you to book a plane ticket to Somalia —make sure to take note of all the “subtleties” you encounter, including their interest in X-Factor (or lack thereof).
I'm afraid you definition of English is both outdated and incorrect. Do you mean Celtic? Anglo-Saxon? Norse? The Picts? The Beaker people? England has in fact only been occupied for the last approx 10k years (due to the ice age), and almost all those original inhabitants were replaced first with the WHG (Western Hunter Gatherers), then the Celts and more recently Romans, Angles, Frisians and Danes and Vikings.
The point here is populations change. A child of migrants maybe be a citizen of the UK, and should be afforded the same rights. Anything else is simple discrimination. The bulk of the children of West Indian migrants (themselves British citizens) are British, and follow the fine tradition of people coming to these islands and making a life for themselves.
It's your view of genetic history=national group which is obvious false. Genes don't determine your nationality - that's a learnt behaviour (just ask any "British" child brought up abroad). As I detailed above, for the bulk of the UK population, it's not even true - practically none of us are genetically "British", unless you pick an arbitrary start date. And whatever date you pick, someone will pick a different one.
Your racism or ethnocentrism will resist the explanation above, but facts are facts, no matter how much you find them irritating
You are an utter lunatic to believe that Wellington would be perfectly on board with the English being a minority ethnic group in their own capital city, and several others. No, I’m sure this fine Somalian here with his gangland tunes and lazy garb is a truly refined character, unlike the boorish, ill-mannered Napoleon.
Let me know when the Africans, Pakistanis, and Arabs finally assimilate into these British values of “politeness”, and abandon their chauvinistic, violent cultures and religions. I wonder how many more rape gangs, bombings, stabbings, public calls to prayer until they run out of steam and call it quits.
Or is this just another one-way street where blacks can impose themselves however they please, exhibit a disproportionate propensity for violent crime, and the whites who notice this and start becoming fed up are expected to constantly turn the other asscheek and be “polite”? Fucking parasite. If Wellington was around today, he would send you craven dogs to the gallows.
Humans first reach their conclusions ("them tribe not my tribe! Them tribe bad!)
Then they find the justifications. "Them tribe dance funny! Them tribe dance too good! Them tribe cultural appropriation!" It doesn't matter. Any stick to beat a dog.
wise cat
Chirrup!
I try, but it’s hard when everything is going to shit
I would offer a purr of comfort, but I have none, unless you want soothing lies.
so sad :( he sounds so sweet. people are so cruel
it’s racist bullying
sometimes I think mankind is beyond redemption
He doesn’t belong here. We have enough domestic ticfuckingtoc retards without important any more. I’m not buying your faux pathological empathy. If just the odd one or two washing up on our shores, it would be no problem. It not that. This is existential to our culture. That’s why it resonates. The punters get it. The smothering infertile mothers and over educated children who’ve been indoctrinated by a degenerate academic don’t. If this carries on unrestrained it will be Pick Your Side.
I am conflicted about immigration but I think this has nothing to do with that and you are mistakenly flattering a bunch of morons in whose minds it is more acceptable to trash someone doing something low class if the person doing it isn’t white.
Sure, it’s related to immigration. People notice when random strangers who aren’t part of our society, possibly with different cultural norms turn up on their doorstep, then do weird shit. What’s your conflict? Why is unrestricted immigration beneficial? How is this going to work out for all of us that live here? Some of these people are broken, but they’re not our problem. We’ve got enough to deal with already. Don’t know if you’ve noticed, but we too are broken. So maybe now would be a good time to pause and rebuild. I’m thinking our old 4 nation family is already under severe strain.
this boy was born in the UK, what do you want him to do exactly? he is doing a tiktok dance to a trap song, a perfectly western thing to do, nothing criminal or foreign about it. Your issue is he looks poor and unattractive. Why do you have a right to pick on him?
“Dancing to a trap song is perfectly Western” Hahahahahah
Apparently, there is absolutely nothing that looks criminal or foreign about the African dancing to gangland tunes, in England.
No, you’re correct. Hip hop has actually been deeply ingrained into the broader European cultures over the centuries, and *Somalis* are known to have been the historically dominant ethnic group in *England*. When people think of England, their first thought is that of a group of blacks gathered around a speaker. Because nothing screams “Rule Britannia” like second-generation Jamaican immigrants rapping over mixed trap beats.
What’s bizarre is reading this drivel and knowing that not even you believe it. It would be funny if your motives weren’t so transparently insidious.
This comment thread perfectly illustrates why immigration is a literal disease. Part of it directly kills you, another part works to cripple the immune system to facilitate the killing.
By the way
I’m good for you seems like a bold claim
"There was a time when left-wingers would share videos of ‘white trash’ as proof that red neck white Americans and Ukip voting Britons are stupid and of lesser genetic stock."
I don't think anyone implied that those people were of lesser genetic stock. That's not a very leftwing idea. Rather, the implication was that their political views and class status made them less insightful and less worthy of shaping policy than the 'educated' elites. When was this time? Was it long in the past? From my perspective we are still in that time. From my vantage point in the United States I can say that a tremendous amount of the discourse on the left and in professional circles centers around the intellectual and ethical inferiority of Trump supporters, or people on the right generally. I suspect the same thing is the case in Canada, Great Britain, Germany... everywhere.
People are going to be mocked online. People are cruel, and ignorant. The only group which is allowed to be mocked because of their beliefs in the context of powerful institutions in my country are Trump supporters, and the only groups toward which one is allowed to express blanket hostility are white people and men. Do you know how many reels I see every day mocking these groups, simply because of their identities?
This lad is posting stupid shit online. Getting mocked and derided is part of the risk of that. I suspect that his virality has more to do with his ridiculous appearance (although I could be wrong). Notwithstanding the mismanagement of urban areas (which has been profound-the managerial class has completely destroyed communities, both urban AND rural, in different ways) this individual lives in a free society in which he's entitled to special consideration. Fat chicks, trans-identified men who don't pass, ghetto dwellers, angry customers, entitled women... all of these groups are ripe opportunities for online mockery, because they are misfits and because they tend to aggravate people and because (despite the enforced 'compassion' for arbitrary groups) they are all less valued by society, for different reasons. If you're a member of one of these categories perhaps you should just not post videos of yourself online. If you do you might end up the target of the mockery of millions. That is the world that we have built.
https://jmpolemic.substack.com/p/the-scapegoat
He is not just mocked, he is being racially abused. The boy was born in the UK, and people are asking to deport him. Mockery based on snobbism is wrong, no matter who the victim, but the right online is now making racism acceptable again.
Your empathy is admirable as is empathy more generally but not as a limitless good (or an asymmetric function) which gives way to an inability to register the concerns of a large percentage of the population who view mass migration as existential issue, which it obviously is in ways the left would understand if we were talking about Palestinians instead of the English.
It is beyond comical to lay blame for “racism” at the feet of the right, after many decades of your ilk more than happily extracting collective racial guilt from pliable Brits. All the while importing aggressively clannish foreigners whose children, regardless of birth place, remain **foreigners** —and they conceive of themselves as such, unsurprisingly so, despite your impotent insistence to them being something they’re biologically not, and never will be.
Only now are you starting to feel nervous, when the brow-beating doesn’t impart the same sting, or extract the same head-hung acquiescence from the stupidly tolerant English.
Racism throughout the *entire* West -in the real world (not Twitter)- manifests itself asymmetrically: Whites are dehumanized through pathologization of their group identity, stripped of the inherent right to native historical lands which is redistributed to anyone and everyone on earth (“b-but he was born here!”) , and subversively shamed into behaving as ‘colourblind’ individualists —exactly as you are doing now. Meanwhile, the group identity of every foreign demographic is *more* than positively reinforced, regardless of historical (and ongoing) atrocities, regardless of their ostensible responsibility to entirely culturally assimilate, and are instead encouraged to pursue their own collective ethnoreligious agendas. I eagerly await your justification of all this as understandable revenge for colonization.
And while the government ignores scores of victims (woeful understatement) and runs cover for foreign rape-gangs operating out of ethnic ghettos, carries water for a strangely white-washed “Welsh choir boy” Rwandan mass-stabber who’s on record stating his desire for White genocide in England, and all the while importing more of the above —you seriously want to sit here and gaslight people into believing that we were all past racial prejudice, and it’s only just now the right is trying to fan the flames?
To conceive of you as a craven, dishonest, self-serving parasite would be incredibly generous.
First you write:
"the only groups toward which one is allowed to express blanket hostility are white people and men. Do you know how many reels I see every day mocking these groups, simply because of their identities?"
Then you write:
"Fat chicks, trans-identified men who don't pass, ghetto dwellers, angry customers, entitled women... all of these groups are ripe opportunities for online mockery, because they are misfits and because they tend to aggravate people and because (despite the enforced 'compassion' for arbitrary groups) they are all less valued by society, for different reasons. If you're a member of one of these categories perhaps you should just not post videos of yourself online. If you do you might end up the target of the mockery of millions. That is the world that we have built."
While I think your sentiment is fair, I think the initial Yookay Aesthetics post was the juxtaposition what and who was being filmed against the backdrop of an English village with thatched roofs.
What was being filmed was a guy doing a TikTok dance to a trap song while wearing Western sports clothes. Millions of English white boys do the same. His crime was soing it while being visibly Somali and not attractive. I am not going to put it forward for a Content Creator of the Year award but I don't see why we need to forget the basic principle of live and let live and don't punch down uneccesariyl and don't expose people who are weaker than you, in material and social resources, to undue harm they have done nothing to desrve. I was referring to the sharing of his video on GBnews, a national tv channel, as example of why veterans are embarassed of their country and the post by the right wing journalist saying ' I am a pretty blonde English woman and I beg you to deport these people'.
Gee, I wonder why someone might react viscerally to a video of a foreigner —belonging to a consistently and disproportionately violent out-group— dancing along to a music genre that colloquially signals and affirms gang culture.
What’s next? “White boys also stab people! White boys also drive trucks into crowds of people! White boys also set off bombs at public venues!”…?
Just live and let live, guys! Please, stick your heads in the sand and ignore the ever-worsening conditions around you. So what if your hometown resembles Karachi? What are you, *racist*? Are you implying that you might (gasp) be entitled to live amongst your own, to the exclusion of others who seek to impose their *own* people and culture upon your land? Oh, the humanity!
But the English are world famous for being unattractive. "as a pretty blonde English woman" --- oxymoron. I'm willing to bet this Somali man has better teeth, larger, brighter eyes, smoother, less blemished and more youthful looking (melanin tends to do that) skin, and thicker, healthier, more full-bodied (even while balding in front) hair than she does.
I understand there may be an "immigration crisis" in the UK right now, but that doesn't mean the English should overstep their bounds and get gassed up about their looks when the rest of the world knows they are, on average, unattractive.
Wait you don't want to fuck brown/black people????
I want to be your biggest enemy! Until you liked me anyway.....