Talk:White Power/Archive 1

This article is not neutral
'''There have already been a similar discussion on this page, but the distinction between the concepts of black and white power on Wikipedia is NOT neutral. The same goes for White pride and black pride. This post will be half clarification of the problems and half debate of them. I do realize that Wikipedia is not a discussion forum, and I will act hererafter.

No matter what group is dominant or what group is the majority, there should not be a such cultural distinction as we see here. To counter the justification of Wikipedias distinction that White Pride and White Power are typically more often with racist motivation than other variants, it shall be mentioned that the very movements that started Black Pride and Black Power had racialist/racist motivations; such as black supremacy or racist hatred directed towards whites. This includes most of the bigger movements that I mention in this post, but are not limited to them.

Numerous surveys have showed that whites are not statistically more racist than blacks, only its the definition of racism that is wrong. It has been established that many people actually believe that the definition of racism is when a white person discriminates any other ethnicity - and there by there is no such thing as racism directed at whites. By this definitions, only whites can be racist, and naturally whites would be the most racist.

The recent problems with black supremacy (Kamau Kambon) in USA, have emphasized how alive the race problems are, and how actual the racial double standard actually is - in a totally opposite direction then previously believed so. Similar scandals where whites have called for lynching or extermination of blacks today (in these cases, getting media interest before discrimination have proven much more difficult) have made much more impact, and in this relation it is worth mentioning that there does not exist a white relligion with millions of members or supporters, with the official belief that all blacks are devils and should die (read: Nation of Islam), and relligiously integrated racism on such a scale have proven impossible with the white population.

Am I trying to say, that blacks that say Black Pride or Power are worse then people who say White Power/Pride? No. I am simply saying that the opposite is not worse then blacks doing so. Black Pride or Power is as racist as White Pride or Power. Whether it is even racist is also a matter of debate, but since only White Power is considered racist, there are more blacks using Black power, this indicating a high degree of Black racism.

Wikipedia is no discussion forum, and I am only saying these things so we can see what the problems are with this article - that this article is based on the non-neutral American racist double-standards. Why do they have to be a part of Wikipedia? Why is those standards neutral, when they in fact are considered racist in other countries?

Do something. This article suffers from influence of the affirmative action of the american society directed towards its black minority - accepting black racism, taking extremely seriously white racism, or even nominating non-racist white movements or terms racist, even though there are similar (they ARE similar) black movements or terms.

The term  power/pride, simply states that one believes in owns ethnicitys power, or that one is proud of ones own ethnicity or culture. Some racists then use these terms or maybe just because of affirmative action, the definitions change. That is not right, and it is not justification of a double standard, and if people think it is, then thats subjective and not Wikipedias concern.

This subject deals with racial pride and "racial" power, rather then anything else. So some racists use these terms, and so the american society has political correctness from the whites and affirmative action, but should we therefore change the very definition of things and bow down for this racist double standard? I think not, at least that is not Wikipedian policy (abolish racism and stay neutral).''' 85.82.195.131 19:43, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

added cleanup tag
Various issues here. I linked here from NSBM, but am not sure if the page refers to the White Power movement, slogan, or musical scene. Sadly (or perhaps not) I know next to nothing about these scenes so can't really clean it up myself. Any volunteers? illWill 23:16, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

sadly! having read this piece of "intelectual" knowledge. not knowing anything abt white power movement you shouldn't have written it. let me know if you want to discuss: marcindojnik@yahoo.com
 * He didn't write it. He said that he linked here from another page, and couldn't clean it up because he didn't know much about the scenes. Burnthetown 07:51, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Revamping?
Suggesting eliminating 'contemporary issues' as well as elaborating more on white power itself. Also, what the heck is with the reference to some Korean milk commercial...? Burnthetown 20:07, 9 March 2006 (UTC) white man from brasil- we love you!!

White power
In Spain, the term "poder blanco" as used by the Ultrasur and other skinheads has a double meaning - not only connoting white supremacy, but also referring to Real Madrid football club, whose official color is white.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.118.48.186 (talk • contribs)

This isn't right
White power equals Fascist and racist but Black Power equals self-determination. Oh yeah makes sense to me!
 * This isn't the place to comment on that sort of thing. This is not a message board for the topic, it's a page to discuss changes to the article.  Ungovernable Force  Got something to say? 05:46, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Not everyone who is White Power is a Nazi. youll find many White Nationalist are anti-Nazi/fascist. The Neo-Fascist infobox should be removed.


 * Where will you find these many white power followers and white nationalists who are anti-Nazi or anti-fascist? You certainly won't find them in anti-fascist groups like the Anti-Nazi League, Anti-Fascist Action, Red Action, Anti-Racist Action, RASH or Skinheads Against Racial Prejudice (unlesss they're spies).Spylab 14:45, 8 October 2006 (UTC)Spylab


 * I remember when the introductions for Black power and White Power were excactly the same as each other except for the words "Black" and "White". That made a lot more sense and was a lot more neutral. I support neither movement so no bias here.

It should look more like these articles do

White Supremacy compared to Black Supremacy.

Except without the assumption of racism on either part.


 * The White power movement should not be described as the same as the Black power movement, because despite the similar names, they have represented different types of beliefs and actions. The Black power movement was defensive, and the white power movement was oppressive. That's not bias; that's the historical reality. To deny that in the name of "neutrality" would be engaging in historical revisionism.Spylab 06:37, 9 October 2006 (UTC)Spylab
 * Agreed. In our culture at least, whites are the majority and have the greatest amount of political, economic and social power. For whites to call for more power is clearly offensive in nature, as opposed to an oppressed group (eg: blacks, chicanos, natives) trying to gain an equal ammount of power, which is defensive. There is a clear difference. This isn't to say that some people who support black power and such don't want to have control over the other races, but this is the exception, not the rule. Whites already have power, why do they need more? That's why the two movements are treated differently.  Ungovernable Force  Got something to say? 06:48, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

I completely dissagree. Whites are only a tiny minority on the planet (9%), which means they are soon going to lose their "political, economic and social power". I would say they have already lost it. "Affirmative Action" exists in most White countries, for example it's always cool to be black. The fact that the Black Power movement is considered "defensive" is part of Affirmative Action. White Power is an opposition to "Affirmative Action" and "Black Power". White Power is not offensive, it's clearly defensive. Mitsos 09:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

While I realise that this is not a message/comment board, I think you guys shouldn't get worked up about it. It's just colour. That's all that is.

The phrase itself is NOT racist.
Just saying it is not racist. It can be said to show pride at being white. Unless it is said to bash other races or is said while doing something racist then it is. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.201.174.176 (talk) 22:06, 28 March 2007 (UTC).

...And why would you be proud of being white? I'm pretty sure you did nothing to 'achieve' your white status, you just got born that way. Black Pride is a movement against feeling ashamed for the color of one's skin, against the cultural stigma that a black-skinned person is inferior. Kagechikara 22:54, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Just by being white today you must defend the color of your skin.The white population is decreasing while all other races are increasing.It's not so 'cool' to be 'white' anymore in mainstream media which influences just about everyone who watches CNN or Fox or MTV,it is all the same.

Black Power, on the other hand, is considered cool, and was never even considered racist. It's a shame that White Power was EVER considered racist. If one is racist then the other must be, because the say the same thing only one says it about whites and the other about blacks. And if thats true, then if one is racist, the other one can't. Just because blacks still feel they are oppressed, it ok to say that. And in reality, whites are accually oppressed. The White people need to be proud! Tornwarrior88 18:05, 8 August 2007 (UTC)


 * What do you mean it's not cool to be white anymore? At least in America, white people are generally healthier, live longer and make more money than minorities. Certainly there are valid criticisms of any racial "power" movement (see affirmative action for example), but simply having a contest of whose race is better is pretty lame. What do you mean that 'whites are accually[sic] oppressed'? There are some things that have to be given up for the sake of a truly multicultural society, but not being guaranteed a spot at the front of the bus seems like a small price. --69.159.228.177 17:48, 22 August 2007 (UTC)